Ministry Matters: Shane Raynor

AUDIO: Tattoos and Faith

Fri, 24 May 2013 18:23:00 GMT

By Shane Raynor

In this episode of Ministry Matters Radio, we discuss tattoos and spirituality and we consider the question, "Should a Christian get a tattoo?" Guests are Kim Goad and Janet Bostwick Kusiak, authors of Inked: Choosing God's Mark to Transform Your Life.

For a free study guide to use with Inked, visit InkedByGod.com.

Listen or Subscribe: iTunes | BlogTalkRadio | RSS | Hipcast

VIDEO: Who You Are in the Heavenly Realm (Converge Episode 4)

Thu, 16 May 2013 13:22:00 GMT

By Shane Raynor

Grace Biskie, David Dorn, and Matt O'Reilly join Shane Raynor to discuss Ephesians 2, grace, access to God, the blood of Christ and more.

BLOG: Knowing Who You Are in Christ

Wed, 15 May 2013 15:51:00 GMT

By Shane Raynor

I’ve come to the conclusion that many of the issues and problems we face as Christians are preventable (or at least more easily solved) if we understand who we are as believers. Sometimes we forget that we’re both physical and spiritual beings. As far as everyday life goes, we have a childhood and adolescence to try to figure out who we are—granted, some of us are forced to grow up more quickly than others and, in some cases we spend a lifetime trying to answer basic identity questions—but by and large, we know it's all part of the typical human experience. But with spirituality, we like to make it more complicated.

In the real world, the people who seem to be most fulfilled are the ones who have a comfortable sense of their identity. They know who they are as individuals, and they also understand how they connect with their community.

The spiritual part of us is similar, but based on my observation, there’s a whole lot less understanding in the church about how being a Christian radically changes who we are as individuals. In recent years, we’ve been hearing the buzzword “community” a lot. In our churches, we encourage people to join small groups (almost to the point of being annoying), we tout the benefits of community, and we lament our society’s alleged preoccupation with individualism.

But it’s my conviction that we can’t connect properly to a community if we don’t have a solid grasp of who we are as individuals.

When I was a kid, my time playing alone in the backyard was just as valuable to my emotional development, if not more so, than my time with other kids. It’s when my creativity flourished, and even today, as much as I love hanging out with other people, I reach a point where I need time alone to process everything. I do my best writing when no one else is around, yet, if I get writer’s block, one good spiritual conversation with a friend opens up the floodgate of ideas. (I’m about 60%/40% Extrovert to Introvert on the Myers-Briggs scale.)

As Christians, we’re in some kind of relationship with at least three different groups. Other believers, nonchristians, and what I refer to as the heavenly or spiritual realm—God, Satan, angels, demons, etc. The very fact that we have faith in Jesus affects how we relate to all these beings.

We make the decision to follow Christ as individuals, and we become part of a community of believers. But we’re still individuals—we don’t join some collective blob. The church isn’t the Borg.

I’ve put together a four week Bible study called Who You Are in Christ. It’s part of the Converge Bible Studies series that I’m editing for Abingdon Press. In the course of the study, I explore how Christians relate to the spiritual realm, other believers, and the rest of the world. I also take a look at how self-image affects our faith.

In the next several weeks, I’ll be writing more here on these topics, and we’ll be discussing them during Converge podcasts too.

Grab your Bible and a copy of Who You Are in Christ and let's dig into Scripture.

Buy Who You Are in Christ at Ministry Matters, Cokesbury, Amazon, Barnes & Noble, CBD, iTunes, and Google Play.

AUDIO: Too Old for Ordination?

Mon, 13 May 2013 10:31:00 GMT

By Shane Raynor

The bigger question is not if it's okay to discourage people over 45 from going through the ordination process, but rather, why aren't we discouraging everyone from going through it?

Listen or Subscribe: iTunes | Audioboo | Soundcloud | RSS

Views expressed here are not necessarily those of Ministry Matters, UMPH, or any related organization or agency.

AUDIO: A Methodist and a Muslim Burial

Sun, 12 May 2013 02:03:00 GMT

By Shane Raynor

A United Methodist woman in Virginia has placed herself in the middle of a controversy involving the burial of Boston bombing suspect Tamerlan Tsarnaev. Martha Mullen seems to be making the charge that no one wanted to bury Tsarnaev because he was Muslim, but the evidence simply doesn't support her claim.

Listen or Subscribe: iTunes | Audioboo | Soundcloud | RSS

Views expressed here are not necessarily those of Ministry Matters, UMPH, or any related organization or agency.

VIDEO: Mary Magdalene (Converge Episode 3)

Wed, 08 May 2013 02:43:00 GMT

By Shane Raynor

Was Mary Magdalene really a prostitute or does she owe her bad reputation to a 6th century Pope? Was she the first apostle? Jessica Kelley, Curtis Zackery, and Eric Van Meter join Shane Raynor to discuss these questions and more.

The Converge Podcast is also available at iTunes, or you can subscribe with any RSS reader or podcatcher.

VIDEO: The Woman at the Well (Converge Episode 2)

Sun, 28 Apr 2013 15:16:00 GMT

By Shane Raynor

Grace Biskie, Adam Thomas, Joseph Yoo, and Clifton Stringer join Shane Raynor to discuss the account of Jesus and the Samaritan woman at the well in John 4.

The Converge Podcast is also available at iTunes, or you can subscribe with any RSS reader or podcatcher.

VIDEO: Deborah (Converge Episode 1)

Wed, 24 Apr 2013 04:01:00 GMT

By Shane Raynor

David Dorn and Clay Morgan join Shane Raynor to discuss Judges 4, which tells the story of Deborah, Barak, and Jael. Also check out Chapter 1 in James A. Harnish's Women of the Bible, the first book in the Converge Bible Study series from Abingdon Press.

The Converge Podcast is also available at iTunes, or you can subscribe with any RSS reader or podcatcher.

BLOG: Meet Deborah

Tue, 09 Apr 2013 16:14:00 GMT

By Shane Raynor

In addition to writing and editing for Ministry Matters, I’m also editing a new series of Bible studies for Abingdon Press called Converge. Converge titles are four week topical studies for groups and individuals with Scripture passages and questions included in the print and electronic editions. Companion resources are available on Ministry Matters, and as each title releases we’re going to spend a few weeks on Ministry Matters and Google+ dealing with that particular book’s Bible passages and topic(s).

Our first release is Women of the Bible by James Harnish, senior pastor of Hyde Park United Methodist Church in Tampa. Jim is the author of a number of popular books, including the best selling membership and discipleship program for churches, A Disciple’s Path.

Converge is a topical series, so when Jim and I were discussing ideas for a four week Bible study, I initially wondered if Women of the Bible would be a good fit for Converge since it seemed to be more of a character study. But it turned out to be a great choice, and I’m quite proud of it being our first release. Women of the Bible deals with four remarkable women from Scripture, and the first week jumps right into the action with Deborah.

I don’t know how familiar you are with Deborah, but even if you’ve read her story before, you should check it out again. While I was editing Women of the Bible, I read it a number of times, and each time I went through the text, I picked up something new. It’s pretty impressive to me that right in the middle of a patriarchal society, a female leader emerges and the Bible doesn’t even seem to make a big deal about it.

Remember, it’s the 12th century B.C. we’re talking about. Deborah was a national leader and prophet, and Judges tells us she sat under Deborah’s palm tree and settled disputes for the Israelites. (I’m betting they didn’t name trees after everyone, so this was big.)

I’d really like to know the back story. How did Deborah rise to her position of authority? And what did her husband Lappidoth think about all this? Jim Harnish writes that we don’t know much about Lappidoth except that he married above himself. How supportive was he of his wife? Did he endure teasing from his buddies for being married to such a powerful woman? Remember, several thousand years before Margaret Thatcher and Indira Gandhi broke through the glass ceiling, Deborah led a nation into battle.

I’m blown away by all this, but the author of Judges seems almost indifferent, writing as if this sort of thing occurred regularly. It didn’t. The Bible tends to do that. The things we think should be a big deal don’t always come across as a big deal in Scripture. (The converse of that is true as well.) The Bible was ahead of its time in so many ways, and it still has an astounding number of things to say to contemporary culture.

We’re doing a podcast next week on Ministry Matters and Google+ about Deborah. If you have any questions, comments, or ideas, leave them here or send them my way. In the meantime, follow our MM page on Google+, and join the Bible community while you’re there.

BLOG: Why You Need a Second Office

Tue, 19 Mar 2013 15:57:00 GMT

By Shane Raynor

A few years ago, I read a book by a youth ministry guru (I forget which one) who called Taco Bell his second office. He’d take his laptop there, work for a couple of hours, have meetings with parents and students, and presumably get hopped up on the free Mountain Dew refills. He never explicitly said why he did that, but I figured it out for myself later on.

I have a few second offices myself. But since I long ago passed the age of accountability for consuming unlimited soft drinks, my preferred location is now a coffee shop. When I’m in Nashville, that’s usually Dunn Bros. or Panera, but when I’m on the road I generally default to Starbucks. A couple of weeks ago, I was in Columbus, Ohio, and I spent several hours in Starbucks with my laptop. I was surprised at the amount of items I was able to check off my to-do list. It reinforced for me how important it is to have a “second office” and use it on a regular basis.

I like my office space at work, but it’s in the middle of what some of my colleagues and I affectionately refer to as Cubeland. If you’re in a working environment where you can’t isolate yourself from the world when you need to get things done, then you know what Cubeland is like. In Cubeland, there’s usually an abundance of people—well-meaning people—who will distract you with lots of good, important, and urgent things. The problem is, it’s easy to spend your day putting out fires and not dealing with the things that matter most. That’s why it’s good to get out of Cubeland occasionally so you can really get things done. When I’m in a coffee shop, I can be surrounded by a couple dozen people, but by and large, they leave me alone so I can work. I may have to deal with a little noise, but I don’t usually get pulled into a vortex of activity like I do at the office.

Sometimes a change of scenery is a good thing, especially if you do any kind of writing or other creative work. (The sea of beige that is my cubicle just doesn’t inspire me the way it once did.) Coffee shops can be great places to stimulate creativity. There’s something about getting out of your everyday environment and surrounding yourself with people you don’t know that generates ideas. At least that’s been my experience. Watching customer-employee interactions and eavesdropping on other people’s conversations at nearby tables can provide lots of inspiration, especially for writers. And I’ve gotten into a few good discussions there myself.

When I was in college, if I needed to get some serious studying done, I’d head to the library or student center. In my mind, I was on a mission, and I wasn’t coming back to the dorm until I accomplished what I set out to do. Work quality and efficiency is affected in a big way by the way we think. Sometimes going to a new place to do work helps us develop the appropriate mindset to get stuff done. When I take my laptop to a coffee shop, I know I’m going to accomplish something. And even if I don’t, the energy boost I get from the caffeine certainly doesn’t hurt my productivity.

Probably the biggest reason to find a second office is the positive outlook it gives us when we associate that place with working. I’m a coffee addict and I enjoy relaxing in a coffee shop and consuming caffeinated beverages. So when I take my laptop there to write, I’m associating work with the coffee house experience, which actually makes writing more fun for me. It’s largely a mental thing, but isn’t that really how a lot of things are?

If you don’t have a second office, you should get one. But remember to buy coffee and a pastry while you’re there.

Because it’s a lousy witness to mooch free wi-fi and occupy a table without paying rent.

BLOG: Two Sundays in One

Wed, 13 Mar 2013 14:49:00 GMT

By Shane Raynor

The Christian calendar certainly seems schizophrenic this time of year. Consider the fact that we’re in the middle of Lent—the forty days when believers prepare for Holy Week and the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Lent is considered a fairly serious time—one of repentance, prayer, introspection, and self-denial.

But there's some fine print—Sundays during Lent don’t count. That’s right, we don’t really observe Lent on Sundays because they are “mini-Easters." (Although it should be noted that Jesus didn’t experience any such “mini-Easters” during his forty days in the wilderness.)

Depending on how your church observes Palm Sunday (aka Passion Sunday, Sunday of the Passion, and Palm Sunday of the Passion of Our Lord), the day and the tone will either seem a little out of place for the season, or like a liturgical roller coaster.

Some churches do the Palm and Passion readings in one service. Others effectively observe Palm Sunday during the morning services and Passion Sunday in the evening, and the rest save the Passion readings for later in Holy Week. Some congregations from chatter on Facebook and Twitter are moving away from “Palm” Sunday and toward “Passion” Sunday because of decreased attendance and interest in Holy Thursday and Good Friday services in recent years.

If you do try to pull off both Palm and Passion readings in one service, be sure to transition well. You’ll be juxtaposing the the imagery of Psalm 118 with Psalm 31. “This is the day that the LORD has made; let us rejoice and be glad in it” vs. “my life is spent with sorrow, and my years with sighing; my strength fails because of my misery, and my bones waste away.” And the triumphal entry of Christ followed by his crucifixion five days later is a major gear shift for one service. But there’s probably not a more effective way of pointing out the irony of that welcome than covering everything in a single worship experience.

BLOG: When Churches Compete, Everyone Wins

Tue, 29 Jan 2013 18:56:11 GMT

By Shane Raynor

If your church wants to be better, maybe it should start competing with other churches.

Judging from the reactions I get from some church people after I say that, you’d think I’d suggested adding Justin Bieber to the Holy Trinity.

Some of us have become afraid of the word competition. We think the concept is worldly, even evil. But competition doesn’t need to be a bad thing. At its best, competition can make everyone stronger.

In the church world, fear of competition comes largely from a misconception commonly heard in economics discussions. Some of us think that the number of potential church members in a community make up a pie and that the size of that pie is fixed. Each church gets a piece of that pie, and the only way to get a bigger piece is to take pie from the other churches.

This simply isn’t so. Here’s why.

In the business world, if a product has reached market saturation, then the pie analogy starts to have some validity. Theoretically, once there are no new customers for a particular type of product, competing vendors are forced to go after each other’s customers to increase their market share.

But Christianity is nowhere near market saturation, so churches don’t need to compete for the same people. The reality of course is that a congregation that is effective at attracting the unchurched is also going to occasionally steal a few sheep from the church down the street. This is normal and it need not be taken personally. There’s a big difference between directly targeting another church’s members and attracting them while trying to reach a different group. Remember, people in the pews often have the same hang-ups about church as the ones who aren’t already part of a congregation—they just haven’t figured out how to escape yet. There’s no way to attract one group without appealing to the other.

So what’s the point of competing if it isn’t to destroy the competition? Well, for one, to raise the bar and improve everyone’s game. Competition can be friendly. Consider one-on-one basketball. Although you want to win every time you play, if you have half a brain you also want your friend’s game to improve as well. Why? Because that pushes you to continue raise the level of your game.

Playing against scrubs is good for your ego, but it won’t make you a better basketball player.

Remember, as iron sharpens iron, so one person sharpens another (Proverbs 27:17). Congregations sharpen each other too. As long as there aren’t any serious alternatives to your church, you can get away with sparse ministry offerings, mediocre sermons, and subpar music—for a season. But when NewChurchPlant.tv comes to town with top notch everything, sooner or later it’s going to hit you that the playing field has changed. Actually it was changing all along—the competing church just made it obvious.

There are at least a couple of strategies churches can use as they pursue friendly competition with other congregations. One is the “do it better than the other church” strategy. If the other church’s pastor has great sermons, your sermons will be masterpieces. If their band is really good, yours will be better, and so on. Another strategy is to do what the other church isn’t doing. No congregation can be all things to all people. No matter how successful a church is at reaching the masses, there are always going to be opportunities for other congregations to reach different souls. Some people don’t like rock worship bands. Others don’t like lectionary preaching. Some don’t care for small groups. Others aren’t keen on Sunday School. Every church with strengths also has a few weaknesses. You can capitalize on those weaknesses by making them your church’s strengths.

In 1 Corinthians 9:24, Paul writes, “Don’t you know that all the runners in the stadium run, but only one gets the prize? So run to win.” (CEB) The next verse tells us, “The runners do this to get a crown of leaves that shrivel up and die, but we do it to receive a crown that never dies.” In this passage the Christian life is compared and contrasted with an actual footrace. Our prize is not temporary, it’s eternal. And it’s not finite, it’s infinite. The paradox is, although there’s more than enough of a crown to go around, we’re still supposed to run to win. And since we’re all in the same race, we’re competing with each other, even though we’re ultimately on the same team. Perhaps God is pleased when we try to outdo one another—but in a holy way.

Church is like that too—we’re all working together for the same kingdom, but we’re doing it in competition so we can push the entire body of Christ toward excellence.

Subscribe to Shane's free weekly email update, which includes his latest articles, blog posts, and social media content.

BLOG: Saeed Abedini, Religious Freedom, and President Obama

Mon, 28 Jan 2013 23:01:58 GMT

By Shane Raynor

Last Friday during a press briefing, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney read a statement of “deep concern” over the detainment of U.S. pastor Saeed Abedini in Iran. The White House joined the State Department condemning Iran for its “continued violation of the universal right of freedom of religion.”

The question about Abedini was the last one of the 45 minute briefing, and Carney took only a couple of minutes to answer it, so this certainly wasn’t at the top of the press’s agenda for the day. Still, for Christians concerned about the sparse media coverage of religious persecution, it was a hopeful sign.

The universal right of freedom of religion. We know our country believes in it, but it sure is nice to hear it officially from the White House. And considering the amount of support the current administration gives to so-called “rights” that aren’t explicitly in the U.S. constitution (e.g. abortion and universal health care), Jay Carney invoking a freedom that’s actually in the Bill of Rights was a refreshing throwback to a time when our nation seemed much less divided than it is now.

It’s much easier to condemn human rights violations when it’s our enemies who are doing the violating, but we’ve not been as good at calling out our allies in the Middle East who regularly do the same thing. In Saudi Arabia and Egypt, for example, Muslims who convert to Christianity face harsh prison sentences, and in some cases, death. Earlier this month, an Egyptian woman and her seven children were sentenced to 15 years in prison for converting to Christianity. But we don’t hear much about this from our government or from the news media. And this virtual silence on the issue didn’t start during the Obama administration—it goes back at least to the George H.W. Bush administration and before.

The Saeed Abedini case is more significant than most because Abedini is an American citizen. He converted to Christianity from Islam 13 years ago in Iran, and he and his wife became active in the underground house church movement there. They moved to the U.S. in 2005 to escape persecution, but Abedini returned to Iran in 2009 to visit family and was arrested. He was released when he agreed to end his involvement with the house church movement. Abedini became a U.S. citizen in 2010 and last year he returned to Iran to visit his family and to help build an orphanage. He was arrested in September and has been incarcerated in the notorious Evin Prison since then. On Sunday he was sentenced to eight years in prison for allegedly threatening Iran’s national security through his involvement with the house church movement.

With this case, President Obama has a huge opportunity to build trust with some of the Christians who didn’t support his reelection bid in November. It’s no secret that the president is viewed with suspicion by many in the community of faith—his views on abortion are at odds with the views of most evangelicals, and the announcement last year of his support for same-sex marriage intensified the distrust. It also arguably dampened the enthusiasm of some of the president’s own Christian base. Add to that the recent conflicts between the administration and religious organizations over health care, and it becomes clear that President Obama could stand to improve his image within the Christian community.

But what could the White House do to go beyond the statement of concern we heard about last Friday? Well, the United States doesn’t have formal diplomatic relations with Iran, but the president could use his bully pulpit and the worldwide influence of the United States government to put pressure on the Iranian government to release Pastor Abedini. But this is even bigger than Abedini. He's the current face of religious persecution, but people are harassed for their faith every day in many parts the world. A few speeches from prominent American politicians would help shine a much-needed spotlight on the issue of religious freedom and persecution. President Obama stands to gain a lot with very little risk. Frankly I can’t understand why he’s not running with this issue.

I suspect that if Saeed Abedini were a mainline pastor trying to establish a family planning clinic in Iran (rather than an independent evangelical building an orphanage) his current situation would be getting a lot more press coverage. But whether or not that’s the case, I’m grateful for the fact that we’ve heard as much about him as we have. Many others around the world are in similar situations and we’ve never even heard their names.

Please remember this courageous pastor and his family in your prayers.

Subscribe to Shane's free weekly email update, which includes his latest articles, blog posts, and social media content.

BLOG: Divided Country, Divided Church

Tue, 22 Jan 2013 19:46:44 GMT

By Shane Raynor

Monday morning before President Obama was sworn in, Mark Driscoll, pastor of Mars Hill Church in Seattle, sent the following tweet: “Praying for our president, who today will place his hand on a Bible he does not believe to take an oath to a God he likely does not know.”

Shaun King, founder and CEO of HopeMob and former pastor of Courageous Church, called out Driscoll on Twitter using some not-so-charitable words, but he later apologized for losing his cool and using inappropriate language. Shaun, however, maintained his conviction that Driscoll was out of line sending the tweet in the first place, as were the 3,200+ people who retweeted the sentiment. Shaun eventually showed humility, but to my knowledge, Driscoll still hasn’t apologized for what he said.

Tuesday morning, Adam Hamilton, pastor of Church of the Resurrection near Kansas City, gave a moving sermon at the Presidential Inaugural Prayer Service calling on President Obama to cast a vision that would unify the country. He also cited ways his own congregation has bridged the partisan divide within their own church in order to serve their community. During the sermon, Adam seemed to come across as a voice of reason to the nation, and I even got a real sense that his words were edifying the president.

The question is, how did we get to the point where so many Christians seem to be making politics a test of orthodoxy? What happened to giving people the benefit of the doubt? Why would a prominent pastor publicly question the faith of the President of the United States—and on Twitter of all places? I’m not saying we shouldn’t hold our leaders to a high standard—especially the ones who claim the name of Jesus Christ—but isn’t doing it on a social network under the guise of offering prayer way too cynical?

I’m no fan of some of President Obama’s policies, but his predecessor and I didn’t see eye to eye on everything either. I watched for eight years as George W. Bush’s political opponents, even some of the Christian ones, vilified him mercilessly. President Bush could do nothing right in their eyes, and I heard many Christians question his faith over the course of his presidency. When President Obama was elected four years ago, I had hopes that he might be treated differently. Oh, I knew the Rush Limbaughs and Sean Hannitys of the world wouldn’t show him any mercy, but I expected the average, garden variety conservative evangelical to do better.

I was wrong. It hasn’t happened. There have been some glimmers of hope, like this one, but they’ve been few and far between. Not only does it seem like we’ve become two Americas, we’ve become two churches as well— not because of theology, but because of politics. How sad is that?

But the President is pro-choice, you say.

I hear you. That’s one of the issues where I sharply disagree with him. But think about it—aren’t we more likely to do more to reduce the number of abortions if we work together in those areas where we do agree? What good is defending the purity of our pro-life stance by refusing to associate with anyone who doesn’t see things our way? There’s a lot of talk in church circles these days about numbers and accountability. At the end of the day, do you think God is going to hold us more accountable for the unborn babies we could have saved or for remaining rigid in both our position and our methodology?

So I have a challenge for believers of every political persuasion. Stop assuming the worst about others. If someone claims Christ as their Savior, extend them the same benefit of the doubt that you’d want extended to you. And when a fellow believer holds a view that you find absolutely abhorrent, instead of grandstanding or taking your ball and going home, address the disagreement together as both friends and brothers or sisters in Christ. And pray for all of your political leaders, including the President—not in a condescending way, but with humility.

On Monday, after reading Mark Driscoll’s tweet and Shaun King’s reaction to it, I tweeted this: “Tired of political division between Christians. Aren't the body & blood of Christ more powerful than allegiance to political parties?”

The answer to that question is yes. And Christians have an opportunity over the next four years to set an example for the nation by coming together to do God’s work. We don’t have to like each other’s politics, but we do have to love and respect each other. It's one of the responsibilities that comes with being part of God's family.

Subscribe to Shane's free weekly email update, which includes his latest articles, blog posts, and social media content.

BLOG: Why Churches Should Be Starting More Schools

Sat, 12 Jan 2013 21:10:36 GMT

By Shane Raynor

I got into a really interesting discussion with a pastor online today about God and public schools. We talked about Adam Hamilton’s blog post a few days ago, and Adam’s views on God and public schools. While I agree with many of Adam’s points, and I greatly admire the work his church is doing to help some of the public schools in his area, I believe Adam is looking at the public education system, at least partly, through rose-colored glasses.

Before I go any further, let me clarify that I don’t endorse mandatory prayers and religious instruction in public schools. But in many cases, the religiously neutral public schools that Adam Hamilton envisions aren’t always so neutral—some are actually hostile toward religion. You see, religion is closely related to worldview, and if you don’t allow religion to play any role in education, then the worldview that is shaped in schools, whether intentionally or not, is going to skew toward atheism.

The argument, of course, is that it’s the job of parents and churches to teach religion, not the public schools. I agree with that (to a point) but in practicality, churches have at most two or three hours a week with kids, while schools have over ten times that amount. Even if you assume an hour a day of religious instruction in the home, you’re still looking at a 3:1 or 4:1 ratio in favor of schools. Now in a world where it’s really possible for schools to be religiously neutral, those ratios might work, but what about a world like ours where religious values are increasingly challenged in the classroom? And what about lower income parents who work multiple jobs and don’t have the time or energy to give their children as much religious instruction as they’d like?

It amazes me that many in our country have become so fired up over alleged government “intrusion” into health care, yet we’ve allowed the government to maintain a virtual monopoly over the education system for years. Think about that for a moment. We don’t want the government to have too much say about how we care for our bodies, but most of us have no problem letting government-run schools shape our kids’ minds every day. Granted, public education isn’t a monopoly if you’re wealthy and can afford a private school, but for everyone else, that’s what it is—a monopoly.

Don’t misunderstand me. There are many good, hard-working teachers and administrators in the public schools. But the system is flawed. The Establishment Clause in the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution has been so broadly interpreted in recent years that even the generic non-sectarian Judeo-Christian civil religion of years past is now taboo in the classroom. We expect educators to teach our kids about values and rights, but we tie their hands so they can’t even mention the one who gave us those values or created us with those rights. It’s very difficult to shape values without bringing God into the picture. And if you think schools aren’t a place where values and morals are shaped, you’re kidding yourself.

Education is the new civil right, and I believe that in the years ahead, more people are going to see the need for bringing competition and choice into the education system. If America truly wants to be a land of equal opportunity, then we need to make it possible for lower income parents to send their children to the same schools wealthier families have access to. The most efficient way to do this is with vouchers. Under a voucher system, some parents would choose to send their children to private religious schools, and some would choose non-religious private schools. Some would choose traditional public schools, while others would choose charter schools and other non-traditional public schools. Some would choose to homeschool their kids. But no one would be forced to spend 7 hours a day in a failing school or in a school that teaches values that ignore or oppose the values taught at home or in their family’s religious community. And many public schools would improve if they were required to actually compete for public funding.

Nowadays we hear a lot about church planting. New churches are exciting, and they’re certainly needed. The more the merrier! But we also need more congregations that are interested in planting and subsidizing schools, especially in areas where the public schools are failing. It’s not fair to lower income kids to make them wait for their schools to be fixed, and we can’t afford to wait for politicians to see the light on school choice. Christians can act now and take the lead on fixing the education problems in this country. And we can do it by starting new schools.

Wouldn’t it be great if that became as hip as church planting?

Subscribe to Shane's free weekly email update, which includes his latest articles, blog posts, and social media content.

BLOG: Christians and the Law

Tue, 01 Jan 2013 17:05:00 GMT

By Shane Raynor

I was reading the first few verses of Psalm 119 this morning and started thinking about the Christian's relationship to the Old Testament Law.

When I was working in youth ministry, our church ran an after-school youth basketball ministry on Wednesdays. It grew quite popular, and soon the "church" kids were outnumbered by the new kids. At the beginning of the school year, we seemed to have more discipline problems, partly because of typical boundary testing by teenagers, and partly because the relationship dynamics had shifted. There were so many kids we didn't know yet!

One year, things got out of hand the first couple of weeks of school so we decided to "lay down the law". We made a big sign to display in the gym with all the rules. No cussing. No disrespecting church property. No extended hugs or touching. We had about 10 or 12 rules. I'm embarrassed to say we even printed them in red letters.

I hated that sign, and I arranged for it to "disappear" within a few weeks. I didn't like the atmosphere it created. It's not that the rules were bad. But in a way, we were sending the message to the nonchristian kids with that sign that being Christian is based on performance and not on grace.

That's what happens when Christians try to keep the law. It's not that God's rules are bad. In fact, they're good. God didn't give them to us arbitrarily, they're for our own benefit. But because of our sin, attempting to follow the law can't get us to heaven or into the presence of God—only the blood of Jesus Christ can do that. But the cool thing is, when we receive Christ, we're under his blood and we're no longer slaves to following the law.

Does that mean we throw God's law out the window? Absolutely not! We couldn't if we wanted to! It's written on our hearts! But we're no longer bound by it. We don't have to worry anymore if we're good enough.

Back to the basketball ministry, the interesting thing was, each year as we developed relationships with those high school kids, we found we didn't need to hang up a sign with all the rules. For the most part, the kids did what was right, and the veteran kids helped coach the newer ones. We had problems from time to time, but we always tried to handle those issues with both firmness and grace.

Galatians 3:10-11 reads: "All those who rely on the works of the Law are under a curse, because it is written, 'Everyone is cursed who does not keep on doing all the things that have been written in the Law scroll.' But since no one is made righteous by the Law as far as God is concerned, it is clear that 'the righteous one will live on the basis of faith'." (CEB)

What's your take on Christians and the Law?

BLOG: 5 Tips for Preaching and Teaching on the End Times

Fri, 21 Dec 2012 19:06:15 GMT

By Shane Raynor

I suppose there’s always the chance that the apocalypse could happen later today, but unless there’s a dramatic turn of events, it looks like the Mayans got it wrong. Or more accurately, someone interpreting the Mayan calendar got it wrong. Either way, if you’re teaching or preaching this weekend, I hope you didn’t blow off preparing just because you thought today was going to be the end of the last act.

As Christians, we shouldn’t really be using “end of the world” language anyway, because we don’t believe there’s an end to this story. Our eschatology is built around the return of Jesus Christ, a new heaven, and a new earth. No doubt there will be times of trial as those events draw closer, but this weekend probably isn’t going to be the time.

Unless I’m wrong.

The end times will always fascinate people, Christian and nonchristian alike, and widespread interest will continue to see a natural ebb and flow. A sermon series on the last days, for example, may not create much buzz next week, but once people’s fatigue from the Mayan apocalypse-that-wasn’t wears off, some event or group of events will spark people’s imaginations all over again. So eschatology isn’t something you should avoid. Besides, it’s fun to speculate about the end times.

If you do get bold and decide to do a message series or teaching unit on the end times, here are a few things you should keep in mind:

Keep your teaching balanced. Use a variety of material from different thinkers. Rapture, no-rapture, pre-trib, post-trib. (It’s especially fun doing this because some self-appointed watchdog is almost guaranteed to get a little bent out of shape when you suggest the possibility that the other viewpoint might be valid.)

Don’t promote fear when teaching about the end times. Teaching people a healthy fear of God is fine, but teaching them to live in fear of the future isn’t what Christianity is about. Teachers and preachers should aim to encourage believers—not scare them—even when dealing with difficult topics. Don’t hold back hard truths, but do attempt to deliver your message in a way that builds up and offers hope to others.

Stay positive and keep it fun. Eschatology is serious business, but don’t take it (or yourself) too seriously. People enjoy discussing Bible prophecy and the last days for the same reason they enjoy talking about life in outer space, conspiracy theories, time travel, and the nature of the afterlife. It’s serious stuff, but it’s fun. Don’t let all the seriousness take away all the fun.

Don’t set dates. Jesus was pretty clear on this, but in case you didn’t get the Messiah’s memo, “Nobody knows when that day or hour will come, not the heavenly angels and not the Son. Only the Father knows” (Matthew 24:36 CEB). I suppose it’s okay to speculate, but the more you do it, the dumber you’re going to look when things don’t happen the way you said they would.

Use extrabiblical material. Relax, I’m not suggesting that you give equal weight to the Bible and a Hollywood disaster movie. But there’s nothing wrong with bringing in contemporary film and literature, or even other ancient texts as a jumping off point or to enhance a Bible-based discussion or presentation. The end of the world has often captured imaginations outside the Judeo-Christian tradition, and exploring those ideas can offer valuable perspective when studying the Bible.

If it’s done well, a good end times message series or Bible study at your church can really mix things up—in a good way. It’s interesting, relevant, and has the potential for controversy—almost always a winning combination for congregations that are willing to take risks.

BLOG: The Return of Christ

Mon, 03 Dec 2012 15:31:36 GMT

By Shane Raynor

With all the uncertainty surrounding the 2012 phenomenon, it seems a little more fitting this year to actually focus on the second advent of Jesus Christ during... well... Advent. Virtually every Christian denomination believes in the return of Christ, although there’s disagreement on the details. Even Muslims believe that Jesus (Isa) will return to earth near the end of time (although Islam has very different beliefs than Christianity about who Jesus is.)

The Second Coming has fascinated believers since the first generation of Christians. Many of them believed that Jesus would return during the first century. No doubt there was much eschatological rethinking as the years went by, and Christ’s prohibition against date-setting likely began to be understood in a much broader sense.

The Nicene Creed, which was adopted by the first ecumenical council in 325 AD, clearly states a belief in a future return of Christ: "He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead, and his kingdom will have no end."

The Bible, however, doesn’t give as many details as some of us would like concerning how and when that’s going to happen. Oh there’s a good bit of information there, but there are also a lot of dots to connect. And boy have people throughout history tried to connect them. Throughout church history, date-setters have shown up from time to time, predicting the days or years of Christ’s return, only to find themselves (and those who believed them) disappointed.

The most widely known occurrence of this in recent years was the prediction of May 21, 2011 by radio evangelist Harold Camping. Archbishop James Ussher in the 1650’s predicted 1997, and even 19th century Methodist theologian Adam Clarke speculated in his Bible commentary that 2015 might be the year. There have also been many other predictions.

Some Christians believe that Jesus will return to collect believers (an event commonly known as the Rapture), then return with them after a period of great tribulation to judge the world and to reign over it. Some believe the rapture will take place before this tribulation, some believe it will happen in the middle of it, and others predict it will happen at the end. (Of course, in order for that to work out, believers would be caught up to meet Jesus, then everyone would immediately come back down to earth. To me, that view doesn’t seem to make a lot of sense.) Other Christians don’t believe in a rapture, but rather in a single return of Christ at the end of the age.

Whatever you believe about an intervening rapture, the return of Christ appears to have at least four main characteristics, according to Scripture:

We don’t know when it will be, and many people won’t see it coming. Matthew 24:44 says,”Therefore, you also should be prepared, because the Human One will come at a time you don’t know.” According to Matthew 24:36, “Nobody knows when that day or hour will come, not the heavenly angels and not the Son. Only the Father knows.” Date-setters over the years have done eschatological gymnastics and created all kinds of loopholes to explain why they really do know when Jesus will return. They’ve been wrong so far. (We don’t know yet about Adam Clarke. But, to be fair, he didn’t claim to be setting a rigid date when he wrote that.)
It will be a worldwide event. “Every eye will see him, including those who pierced him, and all the tribes of the earth will mourn because of him,” according to Revelation 1:7. Matthew 24:30 says, “Then the sign of the Human One will appear in the sky. At that time all the tribes of the earth will be full of sadness, and they will see the Human One coming in the heavenly clouds with power and great splendor.” I sometimes try to imagine how this would play out if it happened today. A couple of hundred years ago, every eye seeing one event would have been hard to picture. Today we have satellite television, the internet, and mobile phones. People have the ability now to watch monumental events in real time.
It will be instantaneous. No one knows exactly how it will all really unfold, but when it does, don't blink. It will be instantaneous. According to Matthew 24:27, “Just as the lightning flashes from the east to the west, so it will be with the coming of the Human One.”
There will be clues that the time is getting closer. “There will be signs in the sun, moon, and stars. On the earth, there will be dismay among nations in their confusion over the roaring of the sea and surging waves. The planets and other heavenly bodies will be shaken, causing people to faint from fear and foreboding of what is coming upon the world. Then they will see the Human One coming on a cloud with power and great splendor. Now when these things begin to happen, stand up straight and raise your heads, because your redemption is near. (Luke 21:25-28)” This language is somewhat cryptic, and I caution anyone against using it to read too much into world events. Still, Jesus must’ve said it for a reason. So we watch, wonder, and wait.

Will we be the generation that witnesses the return of Jesus? I can't answer that. But whether we are or not, we're told to be prepared for it, because we never know what the next minute will bring—Christ could come back, or we could make an unexpected exit (either by rapture or the old fashioned way—by dying.) Either way, our perspectives are going to be radically different once it takes place.

BLOG: Eyes on Israel

Tue, 20 Nov 2012 18:42:23 GMT

By Shane Raynor

Last week, Kim Kardashian found out just how fired up people can get when someone dares to bring up the subject of Israel. On Friday, she tweeted to her 16+ million followers, “Praying for everyone in Israel.” She was deluged with responses, mostly negative, including some death threats. Although she tried to calm the waters with a follow-up tweet, the vitriol kept coming. Eventually she deleted both tweets. Kim Kardashian isn’t an expert on Middle Eastern affairs, so her naïveté is understandable. But how could a tweet about prayer create such a firestorm?

Well, for one, just recognizing Israel’s existence is enough to push many people over the edge. At around 8,000 square miles, the state of Israel has roughly the same land area as the state of New Jersey, and since it came into existence in 1948, Israel has been a hot spot of tension and conflict for political and religious groups worldwide. Almost no one is neutral when it comes to Israel. Or so it seems.

Israel’s existence has created unusual alliances. Both religious and secular Jews who are pro-Israel have been joined by many American evangelicals and other Christian groups in the United States in building a political climate in America that, for all practical purposes, strongly supports the Jewish state unconditionally. On the other side, there are other Christian groups, often mainline and progressive, that have been more critical of a no-holds-barred pro-Israeli stance.

Then there’s the whole end times thing. Many Christians, especially evangelical dispensationalists, believe that the creation of the state of Israel in 1948 and its subsequent capture of Jerusalem in 1967 are signs that we’re living in the last days. (Of course, when you’re talking about almost two thousand years since the Roman Siege of Jerusalem and the destruction of the Second Temple, “last days” is a relative term.) Some argue that people who hold rigidly to this “we’re in the last days” eschatology have created such a formidable movement that some unfolding events may really be self-fulfilling prophecies. As these end times “experts” have gained influence over the years, some have compared them to spectators at a football game who decided to join the game and influence the outcome.

On the other side there are believers who have rightly pointed out the plight of Arab citizens of Israel, including many Palestinian Christians who feel trapped in the middle of all the tension. War and conflict always have their costs, and innocent people sometimes suffer and die. When that happens, no matter how great the cause may be, it’s a tragedy.

Unfortunately, many people think they have to be pro-Israel or anti-Israel, no qualification, end of discussion. Others recognize the need for a third point-of-view (the seeing gray approach) that recognizes valid claims on both sides. But I believe it’s hard to be completely impartial on this. So I won’t be.

I generally support Israel for a number of reasons, but not without exception. Israel gets things wrong sometimes. And at the end of the day, it’s largely a secular nation (although it’s officially a “Jewish and Democratic state”). But it’s America's most loyal ally in the Middle East, and although it’s not one and the same with ancient Israel and Judah, we can’t overlook the fact that its very existence is extraordinary. It’s the world’s only Jewish state—over 75% of its population claims a Jewish identity. And most Jews in the world live either in Israel or the United States in almost equal numbers (5.3 million in the U.S., 5.7 million in Israel). Even if we don’t consider the significance of its geographical boundaries, the fact that Israel is the world’s only Jewish nation with a plurality of the world’s Jews living there is a big deal.

In Genesis 12:3, God told Abraham: “I will bless those who bless you, those who curse you I will curse; all the families of earth will be blessed because of you.” Christians, of course, read this verse through the lens of the cross. But it’s undeniable that God blessed the world through the Jewish people with a Jewish Messiah. And although Christians are the children of a new covenant, we should maintain a special respect for the Jewish people because God still has a special relationship with them. That doesn’t mean we don’t need to share Christ with Jews, but it does mean that we should take God’s covenant with Abraham seriously. I believe that extreme replacement theology (i.e. the church is Israel now) has been responsible (at least indirectly) for much anti-semitism in the church throughout history.

The current headline at the ABC News website reads “Hopes Rise for Gaza Ceasefire”. Let’s pray for peace in Israel. For such a small piece of real estate, it sure does get a lot of the world’s attention. And deep down, we know there’s something very special about this little country.

Keep watching, and keep praying.

BLOG: Advent Apocalypse

Tue, 13 Nov 2012 18:46:08 GMT

By Shane Raynor

Advent is one of my favorite times on the church calendar. But when I was growing up, it was little more than the Christmas pre-season, a countdown to the birth of Jesus... and the cool benefits for kids that came with commemorating that event... time off from school, presents, and lots of food. The real meaning of Advent would escape me until I got older.

Advent is sometimes misunderstood. Most people with a traditional church background understand that it’s observed the four Sundays before Christmas, but we don’t always understand the significance of the season. And churches that use the Lectionary are sometimes caught off guard by the passages that reference the second coming of Christ. (“We haven’t even celebrated the first coming yet!”)

And that’s the point. Contrary to what you may have heard, Advent is much more than the beginning of the Christian year. It’s also the end of the Christian year. It’s a beautiful season of hope and mystery where we simultaneously commemorate the first coming of Christ and wait with expectation for the second. I didn’t really understand that for the longest time. I’d hear the haunting songs of Advent (when we weren’t sneaking in early Christmas carols) and I tried to put myself in the shoes of the people living before the birth of Christ. But it’s hard to really get into the groove of that, especially when you know how everything turns out.

The cool thing about Advent is that we’re waiting for Christ too, and we’re dealing with an element of uncertainty the same way people were 2,000 years ago. We don’t know when it’s going to be! And we don’t even know exactly how everything’s going to go down. I sometimes get amused when people get dogmatic about certain end times theories. A few years ago, Tim LaHaye and Jerry Jenkins shattered sales records with their apocalyptic fiction series Left Behind, and with the success of that series came an increased interest in eschatology and the end times. Hal Lindsey had created similar buzz a generation before with his Zondervan bestseller The Late Great Planet Earth.

But it turns out, many people aren’t very flexible or generous when it comes to end times orthodoxy. Mention the Left Behind series in most mainline circles (and even in some other Christian groups) and your comment will likely be met with derision. "Only people who don’t understand the Bible could believe in something as ridiculous as the rapture!" And this attitude goes the other way too. In 2005, after Tyndale had released the first book in a fiction trilogy with an alternative viewpoint, Tim LaHaye blasted his publisher: "They are going to take the money we made for them and promote this nonsense."

The truth is, we don’t know every detail of what the end times will bring, or when everything will take place. Odds are, we won’t even be the generation that sees it all unfold. (Not from our current vantage point anyway.) I love talking about different end times theories, and I try hard to be patient with people who think they have everything all figured out. Some of us may concede that we don’t have all the answers, but we’re way too sure that the other guy doesn’t have any of the answers.

No matter what your favorite end times theory is, two things are certain. One is that we’re all going to enter eternity at some point, and for most of us, we’re going to do it the old fashioned way—by dying! The second is that Christians can always face uncertainty with hope. That’s what the season of Advent is about—hope. Hope gives us confidence that God is going to work everything out in the end. Hope is the reason many churches have switched their Advent colors from purple to blue in recent years. Purple is a color that generally represents penitence and fasting (think Lent), while blue symbolizes hope. No doubt many disagree with this, and if you spend much time around liturgical purists, you’ll see how seriously people take this stuff. Personally, I’m partial to blue because I think it helps differentiate the tone of the season from Lent.

Over the next few weeks, I’ll be looking at how the Advent season relates to the end times. With the 2012 phenomenon and all the speculation surrounding December 21 this year, it seems like as good a time as any. It should be fun and informative.

Just don’t stop making your mortgage payments yet.

BLOG: Facing the Reality of Evil

Wed, 31 Oct 2012 21:22:26 GMT

By Shane Raynor

This post marks the official end of the Supernatural October series. I say official end because—although it’s October 31— I didn’t get around to all the topics I had planned to cover. So I’ll probably be writing about many of the leftover topics at some point in the near future. The fact is, I barely scratched the surface with this three week “tour of evil.” The downside to doing a single-focus blog series within a limited window of time is that there’s very little time write about anything else. So I’ll definitely be blogging more about evil and the supernatural in the future, just not all at once!

I posted this series because I believe there’s a need for churches to address these topics in a balanced yet authoritative way. Most Christians don’t mind pointing out society's evils from 40,000 feet up but we don’t like zooming in, getting personal, and considering the possibility that there’s a supernatural, spiritual component to them. We don’t particularly like the notion that sometimes we must address the evil we can’t see if we’re going to effectively fight the evil we can see.

There are two kingdoms at war against each other—a kingdom of darkness and a kingdom of light. When Jesus came on the scene in Mark 1:15 saying, “Now is the time! Here comes God’s kingdom! Change your hearts and lives and trust this good news,” this war between good and evil escalated. It continues to intensify today, although we’re reminded to view it through the lens of Ephesians 6:12: “We aren’t fighting against human enemies but against rulers, authorities, forces of cosmic darkness, and spiritual powers of evil in the heavens (CEB).” If we don’t use the principle in this verse to keep ourselves in check, we’ll often find ourselves in one of two uncomfortable positions: fighting against people or refusing to acknowledge and confront evil.

It’s my conviction that one major reason the church seems to be losing so much ground with the next generation is we’re not training young believers how to do basic spiritual warfare. Many times we’ve presented the doctrines of the Gospel without demonstrating how the Gospel works in real life. In the meantime, Christian kids are bombarded with the same problems other kids experience: depression, stress, temptation, an over-sexualized culture, dysfunctional families, drugs, alcohol—the list goes on and on.

I’m bored with powerless Christianity that doesn’t make bringing in God’s kingdom its top priority. And I'm tired of religion that tries too hard to be respectable. A gospel that helps us avoid hell in eternity but doesn’t provide any real resources to fight the hell we face now isn’t much of a gospel.

I’ll continue blogging about good vs evil and other compelling topics in the months ahead. In a couple of weeks, I’ll be doing a short series on Bible prophecy and the end times. I’m looking forward to your feedback.

Read additional posts from this series.

BLOG: Do Vampires Exist?

Mon, 29 Oct 2012 18:06:58 GMT

By Shane Raynor

Warning: Some may find this post unsettling.

Of all the topics I’ve written about for Supernatural October, this is the one that almost didn’t happen. Most people think vampires are make believe—and to a degree they’re right. But while researching this subject, some of the information I found made me so uncomfortable that I had to stop a couple of times and pick it up again later. (I found this somewhat odd, because I've researched topics in the past that were equally unpleasant and graphic without being affected in such a negative way.) I’ll spare you some of the more specific details, but it turns out there’s an actual “vampire” subculture that exists among young people (and probably other age groups), and depending upon their level of involvement, some of the stuff that goes on is rather disturbing. I’m not referring to the goth subculture, although there may be some overlap. The goth subculture is arguably more about fashion, music, and expression than about being an alternative lifestyle or spirituality. (Simply put, all goths aren’t vampires, and all vampires aren’t goths.) But I’m getting ahead of myself—let’s back up.

A vampire is technically defined as a being that feeds on the life force of living creatures, especially humans. So how do modern day “vampires” relate to the blood-sucking immortal beings of fiction and folklore? Well, other the whole drinking blood thing (in some cases), not a lot. But as with many beings from fiction and folklore, vampires are in some ways rooted in reality. Yes, apparently there are actual people who claim to be vampires and drink human blood. However, characteristics like immortality, superhuman strength, undeadness, and aversion to garlic and sunlight are more than likely just products of the imagination.

What concerns me most about the existence of real self-proclaimed vampires is the fact that some of them actually ingest blood from “donors”. (Murdering one’s “prey” is apparently considered the stuff of fiction nowadays.) I doubt the practice of drinking human blood is widespread, but there’s enough detailed information about it on the internet (including how-tos) to make me think that it’s not isolated. Some demonolgists and experts on the occult will tell you that when actual blood is part of a ritual or religious practice, it can become a doorway for demonic activity in the lives of participants. There are probably several theories why this is the case, but apparently in the spiritual realm, there’s power in blood. Christians, of course, know about the power in the blood of Jesus Christ to atone for sins, and we’re also aware of the Jewish animal sacrifices that ultimately pointed to the crucifixion of Jesus. But sacrifices exist in other religions, and throughout history, various pagan and satanic religions have even encouraged human sacrifices.

When people start messing around with blood, it’s usually not a good sign. Go ahead, call me superstitious, but I promise you, it’s bad news.

Some claim there are other kinds of vampires that don’t drink blood. They feed on life force or spiritual energy and are called psionic vampires, psychic vampires, or energy vampires. Now admittedly this sounds like something straight out of science fiction. (Specifically I’m thinking of the Wraith from Stargate Atlantis.) But whether there’s much truth to this or not, there are kids out there who are convinced they are feeding off other people’s energy, and they’ve published elaborate websites with tutorials for people to learn how to do it. Now if this were just the overactive imaginations of teenagers and college kids, I’d say there’s probably not much harm done. The problem is, I’m not sure what kind of supernatural evil they’re (knowingly or unknowingly) opening a door to. I've read accounts of cases where exorcists have encountered demons that—get this— drain energy from their victims. These spirits are referred to as —you guessed it— energy vampires. If such beings do exist, then it’s not such a leap to consider that they might work through people, especially impressionable youth experimenting with the dark side of spirituality.

Some of this, of course, is speculation. You may not buy any of it. I've observed that those who’ve actually experienced the supernatural tend to be more open-minded about it, while those who haven’t are generally more skeptical. That’s understandable.

Do vampires exist? Well, probably not the ones that sleep in coffins or the ones from young adult fiction that look like Robert Pattinson and Ashley Greene. But the interesting thing about legends is there’s often a reason for them. Vampire-like creatures have existed in literature from around the world dating back to ancient times. Do the physical vampires of our imaginations actually find their origins in spiritual beings that have possibly existed for millennia, and continue to exist today? No one can prove it one way or the other, but it certainly makes for an intriguing discussion.

Supernatural October Series: For the rest of the month, I’ll be blogging about topics like ghosts, demons, exorcism, spiritual warfare, death, hell, witchcraft, Satanism, the occult, psychics, vampires, and Halloween. If you have any ideas or experiences you’d like to share, send a message to feedback@ministrymatters.com.

Read additional posts from this series.

BLOG: Curses and Blessings

Thu, 25 Oct 2012 01:19:26 GMT

By Shane Raynor

Earlier this week, I wrote about the increasing popularity of witchcraft and how the desire for power is a reason some people begin experimenting with witchcraft and the occult. But no discussion of power, spirituality, good, and evil is complete without addressing the role words play in the spiritual dimension.

When I was working in youth ministry, I reminded everyone on a regular basis how powerful our words are, especially when spoken. This isn’t just superstition—even secular counselors and positive thinking gurus have figured this out on the natural level. Words can affect attitudes and mindsets. They can evoke either hope or fear, encouragement or discouragement.

But words also affect things in the spiritual realm, which influences the physical one. This is nothing new to most Christians. We know that the invisible affects the visible. We’re told in the Bible that faith is the reality of what we hope for, the proof of what we don’t see (Hebrews 11:1 CEB). And 2 Corinthians 5:7 makes it clear that a Christian lives by faith, not sight. We know there’s a whole world of activity beyond what we can detect with our five senses. How much that world impacts this one is a topic for debate, but I suspect it’s more than most of us realize.

So why are words so powerful? I think it may have something to do with the fact that human beings are made in the image of God, who created everything that exists using spoken words. When you truly begin to understand how important your words are, I believe several things will happen:

Your everyday speech will become much more positive in general.
Things like prayers, blessings, responsive readings, and other spoken worship elements will take on a much deeper meaning for you.
You’ll notice that negative people really begin to drive you crazy.

Many people involved in witchcraft and the occult sadly understand the power of words more than the average western Christian. Words and rituals are also a significant part of New Age and eastern religions, while mainstream western Christianity has downplayed the connection between the words we say and the spiritual realm. Although most Christians believe in prayer, the idea of any kind of supernatural power in things like blessings, curses, and proclamations seems antiquated to the contemporary rational mind.

The parallels between certain elements of Christianity and of other belief systems can be rather fascinating. Consider, for example, the concept of blessings and curses. A curse is defined as a solemn utterance to invoke a supernatural power to inflict harm or punishment on someone or something. In a less formal sense, it can be considered to be an expression of a wish that misfortune, evil, or doom befall a person, place, group of people, or thing. We think of curses as formal spells or incantations spoken by witches, Satanists, or others involved in evil on some level. But Christians have the power to curse too, and unfortunately, many of us use that power for evil rather than for good. Often when we cut others down, offer insults, predict negative outcomes, or repeat discouraging remarks, we’re actually cursing. When we say things like, “You’ll never amount to anything,” or “You’re going to turn out just like your mom/dad,” we’re cursing others. When we say negative things about ourselves, that’s cursing too. Imprecatory prayers are another form of cursing, and should never be taken lightly. Whether formal or informal, the Bible considers curses to be a serious matter. Many believe that curses can produce negative consequences and impact families, groups of people, nations, and places for generations.

But there are times when cursing may be a positive thing, for example when we curse things like poverty, sickness, injustice, or war. We honestly don’t know in every situation exactly how our words will affect the course of events. So when it comes to negative speech, being careful about what we say is always a good idea.

The flip side of the power to curse is the power to bless. The Old Testament patriarchs understood the power of blessing. For example, Esau cried like a baby because his brother Jacob deceitfully took Esau’s blessing from their father Isaac. When we bless someone, we invoke divine favor upon them. We can bless people with grace, peace, healing, freedom and other good things we want them to experience in the name of Christ. Charles Kraft says there are about 300 references to blessing in scripture, and he believes there would be many more examples if blessing hadn’t been so universally practiced by those with a Jewish worldview.

Christians have the authority to bless others whenever we want. We also have the amazing privilege of speaking the word of God into people’s lives. I don’t understand exactly how God works to empower our words in the spiritual realm, but I do know that our words carry a lot of weight there. We should take care that the words we speak are constructive to the kingdom of God and destructive to the kingdom of darkness, not the other way around.

Read additional posts from this series.

BLOG: Witchcraft and Christianity

Mon, 22 Oct 2012 19:43:55 GMT

By Shane Raynor

I developed a fascination with witchcraft and magic when I was a little kid. Although the Harry Potter series wouldn’t come along for another generation, there were other works of fiction that certainly captured my imagination. I remember in second grade deciding that I was going figure out if witchcraft was real or not, and if it was, I was determined to learn how to do it. So I consulted what I thought was the authority on everything, the Encyclopedia Brittanica.

I was excited to find out that witches and warlocks really existed, although I was beginning to discover they weren’t as sanitized and innocuous as the ones portrayed on Bewitched and in Saturday morning cartoons. But one detail from that article scared the heck out of me—there was a historical reference about witches of earlier centuries selling their souls to the devil. Whoa, I thought, this was serious business.

Now I was brought up in a fairly middle of the road Christian household—nothing too radical, but we did believe in the existence of the devil. One of the first Bible passages I ever read on my own was Christ’s temptation by Satan in the wilderness, and it significantly affected my views of good and evil. I apparently had enough sense to know that if the devil was involved in witchcraft, I needed to stay away from it. I was an inquisitive child with the ability to read well above my grade level, so virtually nothing in the library would’ve been off limits to me. If I hadn’t discovered that red flag in the encyclopedia article early on, I wonder what kind of trouble I might’ve have gotten myself into.

It’s thirty-three years later and we’re living in a world that’s a lot more intense. Witchcraft is much more prevalent in pop culture now. It’s portrayed as darker, riskier, and dare I say —sexier—than the more “innocent” witchcraft of my youth. Today, the kids that are captivated by the witchcraft and wizardry of the fairly benign Harry Potter fiction series have all sort of options to graduate to when they get older— in both fiction and nonfiction. And some of it can actually get dangerous, especially when the line between fantasy and reality becomes blurred.

A statistic released by Barna Research a few years ago suggested that approximately three out of four American teenagers have had at least one significant experience with psychic phenomena or witchcraft beyond the reading of horoscopes. This is alarming for a number of reasons, a major one being that witchcraft and the occult are considered to be a huge potential gateway for demonic activity in the lives of those who participate in these kinds of activities.

So what’s with the rise of interest in witchcraft among youth? Is there a correlation between this and the much hyped trend of young people losing interest in Christianity and leaving the church? How should churches respond to witchcraft?

To answer those questions, we must consider the reasons people are attracted to witchcraft in the first place.

We like power. Some of us seem to want it more than others, but most of us do want power on some level: power over others, power over nature, power over what we perceive to be evil, even power over our circumstances. People like to feel empowered, and no one relishes the thought of being powerless, because that would make us vulnerable. Who wants to be a victim? Empowerment can take many forms, including the notion that witchcraft is an escape from the perceived “dos and don’ts” of Christianity. One of the primary tenets of Wicca, for example, essentially says to do what you want as long as you don’t hurt anyone else. Some people get involved with sorcery and witchcraft thinking they’re doing a good thing, believing that only “black magic” is truly evil. Many, however, who are initially attracted to the allegedly more “innocent” forms of witchcraft (like Wicca) may be more attracted to darker elements of witchcraft when they realize that more malevolent forms better feed their desire to control others.

Churches can counter this by teaching about the reality of supernatural power with an emphasis on the supremacy of God’s power over the power of evil. Christians who ignore the supernatural and write it off as superstition can’t easily reach people who have had legitimate supernatural experiences, because they’re essentially portraying the Christian faith as spiritually powerless and one-dimensional.

Rituals and tradition are cool. As much as American Christianity loves its rock worship bands, sermon series, and movie clips, we may be missing something when we lose all the traditional stuff. It turns out a lot of young people actually like feeling a connection with people of other eras. Rituals and rites that sometimes seem archaic and out of place in the 21st century have a certain amount of cachet (both spiritual and psychological) that plenty of well-meaning church leaders sometimes discount when they’re trying to be relevant and reach more people. Things like “Catholic style” communion, responsive readings, blessings, anointing people with oil, and traditional prayers from prayer books.

A few years ago, I read the story of a person who led Bible studies in a juvenile detention center. He brought in paperback Bibles with appealing full-cover colors only to find out that many youth wanted a Bible that looked like their grandmother’s Bible. Go figure. Those who practice witchcraft often recognize the spiritual power in ritual more than some Christians do. The trend in many Christian churches has unfortunately been to strip Christian practice of elements that are perceived as being ancient, out of touch, or rote. Those who are drawn to witchcraft, on the other hand, seem to embrace rituals and ancient elements.

We want legitimate experiences, and we’re attracted to mystery. If your church promotes a doctrine-centered faith that lacks any discernible experience of power, don’t be surprised if your young people start jumping ship. Flawed as it is, witchcraft is experience-based and it recognizes the existence of a spiritual dimension beyond what we can see. And it doesn’t feel the need to try to explain everything, become super-relevant to today’s culture, or even to “fit in”. There are elements of secrecy and rebellion in the practice of witchcraft that likely attract people too. Although Christianity should avoid promoting rebellion and secrecy in general, one has to wonder if we haven’t gotten so caught up in our desire to be accepted by mainstream society and viewed as respectable that we’ve lost that subversive, counter-cultural edge that made the early church grow so quickly in the first place.

There will probably always be some kids who rebel against the faith of their upbringing, and wander off into the dark territory of witchcraft and the occult. But there’s no need for the church to give them reasons to leave. Christianity that’s too domesticated, too predictable, and too safe is also going to be seen by many as too boring. These are some of the problems we need to address if we’re going to capture the imagination and ignite the wonder of this generation.

Read additional posts from this series.

BLOG: Examining Hell

Thu, 18 Oct 2012 18:47:53 GMT

By Shane Raynor

A poll taken in 2009 showed that 59% of Americans believe in hell, while 74% believe in heaven. The idea of conscious torment and punishment in the afterlife, especially of a never-ending nature, doesn't sit well with most people. But if a literal hell is a present or future reality for anyone, we can't afford to not explore the topic. This post isn't intended to be a comprehensive treatment of hell, but rather a look into some of the more fascinating and controversial ideas and theories about it.

There seems to be two concepts in the Bible of punishment/destruction for the unredeemed. One is Sheol/Hades which is portrayed to be the current holding place for the unredeemed dead. (Before Christ's resurrection, the righteous dead went to a separate part of Sheol known as Paradise, or Abraham's Bosom. Many Christians now believe such a place is no longer necessary and that spirits and souls of the dead in Christ go immediately to heaven to be with God.) The other is Gehenna, which is the ultimate destination of the wicked after the final judgment, and a place of either total destruction and end of consciousness (according to annihilationists) or eternal punishment (according to traditionalists.) Technically, the final hell may not even be open for business yet. But the current "hell", Sheol, is no picnic. It's likely a place of spiritual darkness cut off from God and the righteous.

Hell (Sheol/Hades) may actually be in an earthly dimension that's somehow connected to ours. That's my favorite theory anyway. It could explain why Saul and the witch of Endor were able to contact Samuel, who was in the righteous part of Sheol. (Remember, this was before Christ's resurrection.) It could also explain many hauntings today, including the stories of encountered spirits who seem to be miserable, confused, and under some sort of judgment already. Apparently it's sometimes possible to contact the dead in Sheol, although the Bible explicitly forbids such activity. Scripture refers to Sheol/Hades as being under the earth, and many religions and mythologies have a region of the dead known as an underworld, netherworld, or something similar.

Apparently, there are different levels of hell (Sheol/Hades). 2 Peter 2:4 talks about fallen angels that have been cast into the "lowest level of the underworld". (Tartarus is the name of this region. It's believed to be a pit or abyss at the bottom of, or underneath Sheol.) There's speculation concerning which evil angels are there and whether they are able to interact with anyone in our dimension or in other parts of Sheol under certain circumstances.

Universalism is a nice idea, but it doesn't really make sense. Universalism is the theological view that all people will eventually be saved. The main problem I have with it is that it seems to disregard the reality and importance of human free will. Real freedom of choice means that some people are going to choose darkness over light. The reality is that some will be lost, because if everyone is forced to go to heaven, it can't really be heaven. As hard as it is to imagine, there are people who don't want to be with God for all eternity. We should never write anyone off, but it's apparent that not everyone will accept salvation. God wants all people to be saved and come to a knowledge of the truth, but he doesn't force it on anyone. If there's a heaven, there must be a hell.

If a person dies without redemption, there doesn't appear to be another chance for repentance and faith in Christ. That's why it's crucial to share the Gospel with everyone we can right now. Of course, it's important to understand that we don't have all the pieces of the puzzle. We don't know, for example, exactly how God's mercy and justice unfold for those who haven't had the opportunity to accept or reject the Gospel of Jesus Christ. But based on scripture, we can assume that it's infinitely more advantageous for people to hear and be able to respond to the Gospel now. There should always be a sense of urgency for Christians to share the Good News of Jesus, because it impacts people's eternity as well as their present life.

Heaven and hell are fascinating topics, but as we explore them, we must be willing to speculate some, because the Bible hasn't made everything about the afterlife completely clear. We don't even know on what level time exists in the spiritual realm. Perhaps it doesn't exist at all, or maybe there's some kind of time dilation that happens between here and the spiritual dimension. People sometimes use the Bible to create rigid doctrines of the afterlife without considering how it might be affected by our understanding of time. Some, for example, believe that Hebrews 9:27 [People are destined to die once and then face judgment (CEB)] precludes the notion that some ghosts are the unredeemed dead. But if you allow for space-time variables and a broader understanding of the meaning of judgment (both temporal and eternal) a belief in ghosts can be consistent with scripture. But if ghosts are the unredeemed dead, their final destination seems inevitable.

Question: Do you believe hell exists? Why or why not?

Read additional posts from this series.

BLOG: Exorcism and the Church

Tue, 16 Oct 2012 21:15:55 GMT

By Shane Raynor

After publishing a few posts in the Supernatural October series, I’ve noticed a little trend. People seem to be more interested in ghosts than demons. Most Christians don’t like to talk about demons because either they think evil spirits don’t exist, or they’re afraid they'll run into one if they delve too deeply into the topic. Perhaps many of them believe that demons aren’t something “thinking Christians” should really concern themselves with.

But what if demons are more common than many of us realize? What if some of our problems, addictions, and besetting sins are directly influenced by evil spiritual forces? Mental and psychological problems are a reality that a lot of people face, but what if there’s more to it in some cases?

Most psychologists and mental health professionals don’t recognize the existence of actual demonic influence at any level, whether oppression or possession. I actually don’t find this surprising. Based on my observations, many people aren’t convinced of the existence of supernatural phenomena until they have a firsthand experience. When a person participates in a legitimate deliverance or exorcism, however, and sees the changes that take place afterwards, it becomes difficult to completely ignore the spiritual part of the equation.

The New Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible defines exorcism as the supernatural expulsion of harmful spirits or demons from afflicted (possessed) persons or places. However, people sometimes use the word deliverance when they mean exorcism, and vice versa. Deliverance is a much broader broader term. Deliverance is being set free from some kind of evil or bondage. It can involve a number of things, including prayer, counseling, and in more intense cases, the rite or process known as exorcism. All exorcisms involve deliverance, but all deliverances don’t necessarily involve exorcism.

Various denominations and churches deal with exorcism and deliverance in different ways. Many people think of exorcism as a “Catholic thing”, but it’s not unusual to see deliverance ministries in other churches, especially charismatic and Pentecostal congregations. The Roman Catholic Church is typically very cautious about approving an exorcism, and will usually exhaust other possibilities before resorting to it. But according to this article from the ABC News archives, the Catholic Church had ten official exorcists throughout the United States in 2001. That's nine more than they had ten years earlier. According to this 2011 U.S. Catholic article, the number had reached 30 by last year. And National Catholic Register reported last month that the number is now up to 60. (NCR's article cites the rise in occult and new age involvement as the reason for needing more exorcists.)

Mainstream evangelical and mainline churches have historically shunned the ministries of deliverance and exorcism, but that needs to change. I mentioned in an earlier post that young people are fascinated by things like witchcraft and the occult in part because the church has sanitized mystery and the supernatural right out of the Christian faith. They're attracted to the dark side out of curiosity, and some of them become heavily involved in it. But what begins as innocent experimentation often turns into spiritual bondage. The big scandal is that many of the churches that bored them away in the first place don't have any idea how to get them free from evil. Some churches may not even recognize the need for anyone to be liberated! And because most establishment churches have avoided getting involved in supernatural ministries, the exorcism and deliverance landscape has become a religious Wild West with few standards and little accountability.

I predict that there will be much more interest in deliverance, exorcism, and spiritual warfare in mainline and mainstream evangelical churches in the years ahead. If these churches want to be truly effective in building the Kingdom of God, they're not going to have a choice.

If you'd like to learn more about evil, exorcism, deliverance, and spiritual warfare, here are some good books on the topics:

Victory over the Darkness by Neil T. Anderson
I Give You Authority by Charles H. Kraft
Deliverance from Evil Spirits by Francis MacNutt
The Bondage Breaker by Neil T. Anderson
They Shall Expel Demons by Derek Prince
Defeating Dark Angels by Charles H. Kraft

Supernatural October Series: For the rest of the month, I’ll be blogging about topics like ghosts, demons, exorcism, spiritual warfare, death, Hell, witchcraft, Satanism, the occult, psychics, vampires, and Halloween. If you have any ideas or experiences you’d like to share, send a message to feedback@ministrymatters.com.

Read additional posts from this series.

BLOG: What Are Demons?

Mon, 15 Oct 2012 20:34:03 GMT

By Shane Raynor

In the twenty-first century Western world, believing in demons or evil spirits seems almost quaint and superstitious. Malevolent supernatural beings are thought by some to only exist in legends, ancient religious texts, mythology, Hollywood horror flicks, and paranormal fiction. But plenty of people believe in these entities, and various religions acknowledge the existence of evil spirits. So what exactly are these beings we call demons?

One theory is that demons are the fallen angels that followed Satan (Lucifer) in his rebellion against God. This view seems to be the most popular in Christian circles, especially among evangelicals. Others believe that demons are the disembodied spirits of a pre-Adamic race of beings under some kind of judgment by God. Some entertain the idea that evil spirits are the spirits of the Nephilim, the offspring of angels and humans mentioned in Genesis 6. Finally, there’s the view that some of these evil beings are the spirits of unredeemed human dead which have reached a certain level of depravity. There are probably other theories, but these are the ones that seem to be the most popular.

I’m not sure it’s helpful to get too caught up in nomenclature, because it’s quite probable that there’s more than one type of evil spirit. The Bible sometimes uses other terms instead of demon, like unclean spirit, or evil spirit. In certain parts of the New Testament, for example, we read about principalities and powers, and in others we read about depraved entities that seem to crave a body to inhabit, to the point of being willing to possess an animal rather than remain disembodied. This leads me to believe that perhaps many of the ordinary demons encountered in exorcisms aren’t fallen angels at all, but some other category of evil spirit. I can’t figure out why an angel of any level, even in a fallen state, would want to inhabit a physical body that badly. But it’s quite conceivable that a disembodied evil being would want a body to occupy, especially if this enabled the spirit to commit sinful acts that would be impossible for a non-physical being. As Christians, we believe so much in transformation and redemption that it’s hard for us to really grasp the depraved nature of an evil spirit.

The evil spiritual forces that interact with humanity could actually include many different categories of malicious beings, including fallen angels, evil human spirits, and the other possibilities I mentioned earlier. Perhaps some of these spirits influence events more on a cosmic level (e.g. principalities and powers, high ranking fallen angels) while others cause problems at ground level (lower level angels and/or other classes of spirits that harass, oppress and “possess” individuals).

If we believe that evil spirits are real, that opens the door to a number of questions:

In what ways can unclean spirits influence people?
What makes a spirit evil?
What does it mean to be possessed by an evil spirit?
Can Christians be demon-possessed?
What is an exorcism?
What’s the difference between mental illness and demon possession?
What is spiritual warfare?

I’ll be addressing these questions and others in follow-up posts over the next several days. I’m no expert on the subject of evil, but I’ve occasionally encountered situations that have led me to research this topic quite thoroughly over the years. I believe the church desperately needs balance in this area. Some Christians think they see demons everywhere. Others don’t believe evil spirits exist at all. The reality is somewhere in the middle.

Read additional posts from this series.

BLOG: Christians and Ghost Hunting

Fri, 12 Oct 2012 23:39:07 GMT

By Shane Raynor

If you aren’t familiar with the phenomenon of ghost hunting, you haven’t surfed through your basic cable channel lineup in a few years. Yes, the medium that brought you Jersey Shore and Honey Boo Boo also promotes the paranormal each week with shows like Ghost Hunters, Ghost Adventures, and The Haunted.

Be afraid, be very afraid.

I generally take reality shows with a grain of salt, but ghost hunters, also known as paranormal investigators, aren’t limited to television. Groups and societies that specialize in investigating paranormal claims are popping up all over the world. There’s probably at least one of them in your city. Some even claim to be Christian-based.

Ghost hunters use technology and fringe science as they attempt to prove or disprove alleged hauntings of houses and other locations. Some also use occult methods and they bring in psychics, mediums, and channelers to assist with their investigations. I’m guessing that real-life ghost hunting is nowhere near as fast-paced and exciting as the reality shows depict it to be. That's because in the real world, there’s no one to edit out all the boring stuff. And some ghost hunters get more than they signed up for. I’ve heard accounts of people experiencing demonic oppression and/or possession after taking part in paranormal investigations. Stirring up trouble in the spiritual realm is never something that should be taken lightly.

That brings us to the question of whether Christians should even be involved in paranormal research and investigations. Before I attempt to answer that, I’ll go out on a limb and say that some of what we see on paranormal reality shows is probably hokum. A portion of the “evidence” they uncover is likely exaggerated, and some of it could even be manufactured. Some shows are probably more trustworthy than others, but none of them can survive without ratings, and it’s hard to get ratings if something exciting isn’t happening on screen.

But assuming that some paranormal events and phenomena are real (and I do), how should Christians respond to it? It depends. I don’t think it’s a good idea to go ghost hunting in places like cemeteries or abandoned buildings for the adventure of it. But a Christian’s purpose is connected to the purpose of Jesus Christ: to destroy the works of the devil (1 John 3:8). So when there's a situation where someone is being tormented or harassed by a spiritual entity (whether human or demonic), I believe Christians have the authority to step in and confront it. For example, if a family is dealing with paranormal activity in their house, and they need help getting rid of it, then that’s fair game. But there’s always some degree of risk when you confront evil, especially if you don’t know exactly what you’re doing. If you do get involved in any kind of ministry that deals directly with evil, be prepared to pray and learn as much as you can about spiritual warfare.

Some of the methods paranormal investigators use are dangerous. Christians should not be collaborating with psychics or other occult practitioners. And attempting to communicate with the dead in any way, especially to get information or satisfy curiosity should be avoided. Leviticus 19:31 is fairly plain: "Do not resort to dead spirits or inquire of spirits of divination—you will be made unclean by them; I am the Lord your God" (CEB).

Deuteronomy 18:10-12 puts it this way:

There must not be anyone among you who passes his son or daughter through fire; who practices divination, is a sign reader, fortune-teller, sorcerer, or spell caster; who converses with ghosts or spirits or communicates with the dead. All who do these things are detestable to the Lord! (Deuteronomy 18:10-12 CEB)

There are good reasons for these warnings, one being that attempts to consult the dead could open the door to powerful demonic activity.

Ghost hunters often use technological tools to help them with their investigations, but some of these methods seem to me to be little more than high tech séances and Ouija boards. EVP (electronic voice phenomena) recorders, ghost/spirit boxes (modified radios that allegedly can be manipulated by spirits), and electronic speech synthesis devices like the Ovilus should be avoided by Christians. EMF (electromagnetic field) meters probably aren't an issue, provided they aren’t used to gain information from spirits.

There may be a place for Christians in the world of paranormal investigation, but no one should get involved just for the thrill of it. Many of us will likely encounter the supernatural, both good and evil, at various points in our lives, but our fascination with it should be grounded in who we are in Christ. In Luke 10, Jesus had this to say to the 72 followers he’d sent out who came back with their minds blown because demons had actually submitted to them:

I saw Satan fall from heaven like lightning. Look, I have given you authority to crush snakes and scorpions underfoot. I have given you authority over all the power of the enemy. Nothing will harm you. Nevertheless, don’t rejoice because the spirits submit to you. Rejoice instead that your names are written in heaven (Luke 10:18-20 CEB).

The spiritual war between good and evil is real, but getting actively involved with it just for the thrill factor or the entertainment value is never a good idea.

Read additional posts from this series.

BLOG: Are Ghosts Real?

Thu, 11 Oct 2012 21:11:08 GMT

By Shane Raynor

When I was a youth worker, I’d occasionally get asked the question, “Are ghosts real?”

How would you answer that question? Keep in mind, if you say no, you could be unintentionally sending the message that you don’t believe in the supernatural at all. You'd also run the risk of cutting off conversation about the topic, because some people won’t even talk to about something if they feel like you might look down on them for disagreeing with you. But if you say yes, you could appear to be giving tacit approval to necromancy and other occult practices explicitly prohibited by the Bible.

Besides, you may not even know whether or not you actually believe in ghosts.

I usually answer with something along the lines of, “Great question. I don’t know for sure, what do you think?” Most of the time, that response opens the door to an exciting conversation.

Merriam Webster defines ghost as “a disembodied soul; especially: the soul of a dead person believed to be an inhabitant of the unseen world or to appear to the living in bodily likeness.” The next definition given is “spirit, demon”.

Apparently, ghost can mean several things. Most people, however, are referring to the disembodied soul and/or spirit of a dead person when they use the term.

As you might expect, Christians are in disagreement about the existence of ghosts. And those who do believe in ghosts disagree about what they are. The more I research the subject of ghosts, the more it challenges my pre-established views about them. Like many Christians, I sometimes try too hard make my experiences fit my theology. For example, if I read the Bible and take a rigid view that it’s completely impossible for any person who has died to interact with the living in any way, and the evidence appears to suggest otherwise, then I'm forced to take the view that either (1) the apparent evidence was imagined, or (2) the alleged “ghost” is really some other kind of entity (perhaps a demon) that is masquerading as a dead human being.

Once we start connecting those kinds of dots, the theological gymnastics can become almost comical. I've found that being too dogmatic about issues that aren’t at the heart of the gospel can cause us to paint ourselves into corners. That's not a good thing.

I’m going to throw a few of my own thoughts out there for your consideration. You may disagree with some of them. (I may even disagree with some of them by next week!)

Some of the paranormal encounters we hear about are probably real. Others originate with charlatans or people with overactive imaginations. As one of my colleagues told me the other day, “Some people are crazy, but everyone isn't crazy.” This doesn’t necessarily mean that ghosts are disembodied human spirits, but some of the alleged experiences people are having are likely genuine.
I believe that some of the entities that appear to interact with our reality (e.g. beings that haunt buildings) could be the unredeemed dead. If Sheol (or Hades) is in a dimension that exists parallel to earth, who’s to say that some of the people there aren’t somehow interacting in both dimensions? That could explain why alleged paranormal experiences are so fleeting and mysterious. Perhaps these spirits are operating outside of normal parameters, or going “in and out of phase”. Whatever’s going on, I don’t think it’s normal operating procedure or we’d probably see a lot more paranormal activity. Scripture indicates that those who die in Christ go to be with him, and frankly I have a hard time imagining why someone would stick around haunting an old building or trying to communicate with loved ones (even if they could) when they have access to God’s presence and heaven. But I could easily see an unredeemed person trying to avoid hell and the underworld as long as possible, even if only on a partial level. Remember, the final judgment hasn’t happened yet.
Some people pull out Hebrews 9:27 to try to prove that the dead can’t interact with people on earth after they die. “People are destined to die once and then face judgment. (Hebrews 9:27 CEB).” But I don’t read that into this verse at all. The whole point of this passage from Hebrews is that Jesus died once for the sins of humanity, and that after we die, we apparently don’t get another shot if we’ve rejected Christ. It’s not trying to establish a time frame for judgment. Besides, time itself may operate quite differently outside of our physical reality and understanding of space-time. I’ve not found any scriptures that absolutely preclude the possibility of the dead interacting with our world. But there are scriptures that prohibit us from attempting to communicate with the deceased.

I’ve been getting some interesting emails since I started this series. Keep them coming! In the next several days, I'll be writing about ghost hunting and necromancy (the practice of communicating or attempting to communicate with the dead.)

Question: Do you believe in ghosts? Why or why not?

Read additional posts from this series.

BLOG: What Is the Spiritual Realm?

Wed, 10 Oct 2012 03:24:06 GMT

By Shane Raynor

The Bible tells us that “faith is the reality of what we hope for, the proof of what we don’t see” (Hebrews 11:1 CEB). It also says, “We don’t focus on the things that can be seen but on the things that can’t be seen. The things that can be seen don’t last, but the things that can’t be seen are eternal” (2 Corinthians 4:18 CEB).

It appears that the old saying “seeing is believing” just doesn’t cut it in the kingdom of God.

There’s a reality that’s visible, and one that’s invisible. In the physical world, there are three spatial dimensions that you can see. (Time is sometimes referred to as the fourth dimension, but it’s somewhat different from the others.) Some theories in physics suggest that there could be ten or more spatial dimensions.

I believe the spiritual realm could possibly be found in some of these hidden dimensions. But that’s just conjecture. The point is, there’s a lot going on out there that you just can’t see. Somewhere you’ll find angels, demons, and the souls and spirits of people who have died. Some of those entities seem to be able to interact with our world as well as their own, in some cases simultaneously. Could it be possible that the spiritual realm exists parallel to the physical? Are there invisible dimensions right here along with the ones we can see? If so, that would explain a lot.

Human beings also have visible and invisible components. The Bible refers to each of us having a body, a soul, and a spirit. The visible part (the body) is fairly easy to understand, but the invisible part consists of both the soul and the spirit. It’s not easy to tell where the dividing line is between the two. (Hebrews 4:12 seems to make this point.) I generally think of the soul as consisting of things like the intellect, will, and emotions. The spirit, on the other hand, is the part of us that’s equipped to perceive and interact with the spiritual realm, and to commune with God himself. Perhaps it also includes things like conscience or intuition.

The point to all this is that a discussion of spiritual and supernatural topics should start with the understanding that humans are both physical and spiritual beings. We live between two worlds, and we’re caught in the middle of a war between two kingdoms. The challenge for the church is to teach believers how to navigate all these intersections.

Question: Why is it so hard to believe in things we can’t see?

Over the next several weeks in the Supernatural October series, I’ll be blogging about topics like ghosts, demons, exorcism, spiritual warfare, death, Hell, witchcraft, Satanism, the occult, psychics, vampires, and Halloween. If you have any ideas or experiences you’d like to share, send a message to feedback@ministrymatters.com.

Read additional posts from this series.

BLOG: Evangelism and the Paranormal

Mon, 08 Oct 2012 20:28:07 GMT

By Shane Raynor

Between now and Halloween, I’m going to be publishing a series of blog posts called Supernatural October. The supernatural and the paranormal are uncomfortable subjects for most congregations. I’ve observed that many liberal and conservative churches, both non-denominational and mainline, have hangups about anything they can’t easily explain. Some Christians take the position that things like demons and ghosts are figments of the imagination. They don’t deal with these topics at all because they don’t take them seriously. Others believe in paranormal phenomena on some level, but they avoid the subjects of evil and the supernatural either out of fear or because they just don’t think it’s appropriate for a church to “go there”.

I believe the church is missing a big evangelism opportunity when we don’t talk about these things.

There’s a reason young people are fascinated by ghosts, witchcraft, the occult, and vampires. Humans are spiritual beings, therefore we are naturally drawn to spiritual experiences. Unfortunately, some of us have focused so much on the intellectual and doctrinal sides of Christianity that we’ve ignored the spiritual dimension. Because spirituality is so subjective, unpredictable, and sometimes uncomfortable, we’ve essentially sanitized the mystery right out of our faith. Instead of owning the spiritual realm, some of us have run from it. That's part of the reason some young people are going elsewhere. Unfortunately, too many of them are going to dangerous places.

Some churches rightly teach young Christians to avoid things like witchcraft and the occult, but they don’t give them a truly Christian outlet to explore spiritual things. From my experience, even some Pentecostal and charismatic churches seem to be long on doctrine and short on legitimate experience. And the way some well-meaning Christians embellish tales of supernatural events, it’s almost embarrassing. (Peter Böhler told John Welsey to “preach faith till you have it”, not “tell stories till they happen!”)

People need a safe place to ask questions about the supernatural, and the church is the best place I know of. But we must go deeper than simply admonishing people to avoid the topics altogether.

Many people experiment with the dark side of the supernatural because no one has shown them how to explore the good side. Ultimately, some of us just want some kind of proof that there’s more to our existence than what we can see. Churches that are willing to take some risks in this area will reach new people—of that I'm confident. We should be prepared to help people explore the other side of the supernatural: things like spiritual gifts, prayer, healing, prophecy, and the presence of God. But we don't have to define everything so rigidly. A little mystery is a good thing.

Over the next several weeks, I’ll be looking at topics like ghosts, demons, exorcism, spiritual warfare, death, Hell, witchcraft, the occult, psychics, vampires, and Halloween. I realize this isn’t standard Ministry Matters fare, but I also know that church and ministry leaders sometimes get questions on these subjects. I’m not an expert on any of this, but I enjoy exploring difficult topics, especially those dealing with good vs. evil. It should be an interesting series.

If you have any ideas or experiences you’d like to share, send a message to feedback@ministrymatters.com.

Read additional posts from this series.

BLOG: Ministry Multiplication

Fri, 05 Oct 2012 19:08:58 GMT

By Shane Raynor

Practically anyone who has done any form of Christian ministry has run into walls or reached extended plateaus at some point. Many times these obstacles happen early on as we struggle to get a ministry off the ground. Obstacles come in many forms: stress, burnout, Catch-22 cycles (we need x before y can happen, but we need y before we can get x), the dwindling effect (a sudden ministry recession), capacity issues, lack of vision, or creative staleness. There are probably many more.

I’ve concluded that some of these problems happen when we don’t embrace the concept of ministry multiplication. When we multiply a ministry, we're extending the reach of that ministry beyond what we could achieve on our own. It’s one of the really cool things about being part of the Body of Christ.

Consider this: As a human being, you can only exist physically in one place at a time, and you only have so much time to get things done. No matter how efficient you become, your direct impact on the world, on the kingdom of God, and on eternity is limited by your finiteness. God is infinite, but by yourself, you’re not. Yes, you have the infinite God living inside of you in the person of the Holy Spirit, but that God has the annoying habit of insisting that his work is done through many believers, not just one or a few. As much as you might like to get around this peculiar way God likes to do things, you’re probably going to hit one of those walls I mentioned earlier if you try.

If you want to see your ministry really take off, your best course of action is to embrace God’s vision for the church and spend a portion of your time investing in the leadership potential of other people. This will probably make you a little uncomfortable, especially if your usual modus operandi is doing everything by yourself. When you trust other people, things can start getting crazy and unpredictable! In the short term, it will probably seem as if you’re not getting as much accomplished. But the long term dividends are worth the sacrifice.

When you embrace a culture of ministry multiplication, you’ll notice at least four benefits:

You won’t experience stress and burnout nearly as much as before. That’s because everything doesn’t depend on you anymore. Suppose you’re teaching a Bible class in your congregation, for example. You probably have a certain number of hours per week that you can devote to teaching. But what happens when you start to see a measure of success with this ministry? The more people you start to reach, the more pressure you’re going to feel to raise the bar. You’re either going to feel the need to start a second class, or to extend the reach of the first class. And as people’s lives change, the class will probably begin to become a burden. (And don’t even think about taking a week or two off without feeling a little guilt.)

But what if you were to cut back your ministry time by 20% and you used that time to raise up more good teachers? And what if you trained them to do the same thing? Well, for one, you would share the stress and responsibility of leadership with others. One way to give your burdens to Christ is to spread them out over the Body of Christ. Getting others involved raises the quality of both your life and your ministry. Moses would tell you the same thing. He was on the verge of burnout trying to solve everyone else’s problems in Exodus 18 when his father-in-law Jethro taught him how important multiplying ministry really is.

Your ministry is more likely to experience exponential growth. This means that not only is the ministry growing, its rate of growth is growing too! When I make training others a key part of my ministry and teach them to do the same thing, it’s doesn’t take long before that ministry increases tenfold or more. More lives can be impacted in a few years using this principle than I could possibly impact in a couple of lifetimes by myself. And speaking of lifetimes, this principle also means that

Your ministry is more likely to continue after you’re gone. Sometimes, even after you’ve invested years in a calling, God will move you to some other area of ministry. And even if he doesn’t, you’re not going to live forever, not in your current form anyway. But you can affect eternity on a massive scale by choosing now to invest your time in raising up other people to continue (and adapt) the ministries that you start. It’s crucial, however, to understand that the Kingdom of God is much bigger than your personal ministry or vision. As new people bring their gifts and ideas and combine them with yours, your spiritual DNA may still be there, but the expression of ministry itself may evolve into something that looks completely different. If you’re a perfectionist or a control freak, you’re going to have to figure out a way to get over it if you want your work for the kingdom to reach its full potential and keep going after you move on to another assignment.

Your ministry will be better because of other people. The Kingdom of God is like pieces of a puzzle. I’ve discovered that nobody gets all the pieces. We get different ones, so we have to compare notes and work together. No one gets every spiritual gift to use whenever they need it, and no one gets all the information and answers they need to do God’s work all the time. God doesn’t usually tell any one person everything they need to know. We have to work as a team. The sooner we figure that out, the sooner we find ourselves on the road to doing big things for God. And training others to lead is not a one way street. It’s practically impossible to invest in someone else without learning from them and reaping benefits yourself. This is part of the beauty and genius of God’s kingdom design.

Multiplying ministry is not duplicating or replicating ministry— it’s reproducing it. When humans physically reproduce, we don’t create exact copies of ourselves. In the same way, when it comes to spiritual things, we’re not trying to clone ourselves or our ministries, we’re trying to expand God’s kingdom. There’s a big difference between the two. Once we truly realize that, we'll begin see how important it is to raise up new people to lead.

BLOG: Supernatural October Series

Fri, 05 Oct 2012 16:36:11 GMT

By Shane Raynor

During the month of October, I’ll be looking at topics like ghosts, demons, exorcism, spiritual warfare, death, Hell, witchcraft, the occult, Satanism, psychics, vampires, and Halloween.

Posts in Series:

Evangelism and the Paranormal
What Is the Spiritual Realm?
Are Ghosts Real?
Christians and Ghost Hunting
What Are Demons?
Exorcism and the Church
Examining Hell
Witchcraft and Christianity
Curses and Blessings
Do Vampires Exist?
Facing the Reality of Evil

I realize this isn’t standard Ministry Matters fare, but I also know that church and ministry leaders sometimes get questions on these subjects. I’m not an expert on any of this, but I enjoy exploring difficult topics, especially those dealing with good vs. evil. If you have any ideas or experiences you’d like to share, send a message to feedback@ministrymatters.com.

BLOG: Reaching New People with Bible Studies and Programs

Tue, 04 Sep 2012 13:17:46 GMT

By Shane Raynor

There was a time when people chose their churches based largely on denomination, location, beliefs, or family ties. But with the rise of the internet and the proliferation of church plants, churches are increasingly viewed as both providers of content and services and as communities of believers. These days, not only are families feeling the pressure to keep up with the Joneses, congregations must now keep pace with Jones Avenue Community Church.

Of course, in the grand scheme of things, Christian churches aren’t truly competing against each other. The Kingdom of God is, after all, really only one kingdom and Christianity’s competitors are technically worldliness and belief systems that oppose the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Still, the reality of Christianity’s internal competition can’t be ignored. That’s because every church that wants to grow is targeting the unchurched, which includes both Christians and nonchristians.

But these kinds of churches also attract the already churched. It’s unavoidable. For all the talk of sheep stealing, poaching, and bad blood that exists between established churches and church plants, it’s practically impossible to create a marketing message that appeals to the unchurched but excludes the churched, especially the dissatisfied churched.

People choose churches for a number of reasons, but most of them probably pick one and remain there because it meets one or more of their perceived needs. In the West, it’s generally expected that churches provide a good number of activity and ministry offerings. But no church can be all things to all people, so increasingly churches are having to make tough choices about where to focus their resources. Where “broadcasting” no longer works work, congregations are “narrowcasting”. Specialization and niche are two marketing terms that have now come to the forefront of the church growth movement.

That’s where programs, classes, Bible studies and the like come into the picture. But I’m not talking about your parents’ or grandparents’ Bible studies. No, these programs and studies are more finite and focused. That means they don’t go on forever in the same form, and they usually stick with one topic or book of the Bible. The more practical, the better. People sign up, take the class or attend the program, then they move on to another one. It adds another layer of purpose and accomplishment to church involvement.

This isn't completely new. There was a time when Sunday school, not the main weekend worship service, was the main entry point into a congregation. But years ago, Sunday school was pronounced dead by some in the church growth movement. Small groups, we were told, were what the cool, growing churches were doing, not traditional Christian education. But that prediction may have been premature. What’s interesting is that small groups have some of the same weaknesses as traditional Sunday school. Both models lack defined entry and exit points for participants. The perceived default commitment is perpetual for both (or the other extreme, non-existent), and neither general classes nor groups can usually be marketed effectively because they don’t really change that often. Targeted classes and programs, on the other hand, can be marketed in a number of creative ways because they’re more like events.

Many churches are already successfully marketing their sermon series using ads, postcards, billboards, and doorhangers. These marketing methods can easily translate to programs, classes, and groups. Topical or specialty groups with a scheduled beginning and end are the easiest to market, because they have a finite commitment and give participants a sense of completion when they’re done. The Sunday school format and name may have fallen out of favor, but learning in a class setting has not. Many churches are rediscovering Sunday School, albeit with modifications. And the buzz now is that the church growth gurus are realizing that small groups don’t appeal to everyone. It turns out that some people don’t care to be intimate and share personal things with a group of people from church right away. Imagine that. Perhaps for some Christians, organic intimacy that starts in a class setting works better than the rushed intimacy of a small group. Smart churches will consider this and offer both classes and groups.

No matter what size a congregation is, niche Bible studies and programs can help increase the standing of a congregation in the eyes of those searching for a church home. Such programs can be points of entry for those in a community who aren’t necessarily looking for a church but want to improve their lives in some way. For example, churches that have robust recovery groups and 12 step programs provide a valuable experience for both the church community and those who live nearby. No doubt, many people have become more deeply involved in the life of a church after participating in a recovery group there first. The key is to offer choices, but to prioritize quality over quantity. Better two Bible studies or programs that are well executed than five that are thrown together for the sake of offering variety.

BLOG: Reasons Not to Write Sermons from Scratch

Fri, 24 Aug 2012 13:43:46 GMT

By Shane Raynor

I typically enjoy teaching more than preaching, but occasionally I do get asked to speak at worship services or other events. On those occasions, I’ve generally logged many hours studying my selected scripture text from every angle, doing word studies, reading commentaries, and writing the actual sermon. If you also consider the time I spend editing and practicing the message, it’s no wonder that I’m usually tightly wound by the time I stand up to deliver it. I can’t imagine why pastors would put themselves through such an ordeal week after week.

Recently I was part of a team at work that had the opportunity to put together our monthly employee worship service. I was asked to deliver the sermon. The group decided early on that we’d put together the service using elements from the This Sunday section of Ministry Matters.

Before I proceed further, I need to make a confession. I help assemble the This Sunday elements for Ministry Matters week after week, but until we began putting together this worship service, I had never really considered using someone else’s sermon to help me write mine. (There was that one time I reworked an old George Whitefield sermon, but that was more a novelty than anything else.)

I’ve usually insisted on writing my own stuff from scratch. That’s what you’re supposed to do when you preach, right?

So I pulled a sermon from Ministry Matters and reworked it a little, leaving the main points intact, but abbreviating it to fit the time allocated for my message. Then I replaced the original author’s stories with some of my own, and tweaked the message here and there. I created a bullet point outline and ran over it a couple of times so I’d be able to deliver my message without having to look down at my notes too often. I didn’t invest a ridiculous amount of time preparing—which was actually something I found to be quite refreshing.

In short, it went well. I was much more relaxed than usual, and people seemed to notice. It was such a positive experience for me that I resolved to use a similar approach with future sermons and speeches. I had spent a fraction of the time I normally spend on sermons, and the return on my investment seemed to be greater than usual.

Here are a few things I learned from my experience of using a sermon that I didn’t create from scratch:

There are better ways for pastors to spend their time than starting with a blank sermon canvas week after week. I learned this lesson with curriculum as a youth minister and now it’s finally sinking in for me with preaching. Starting with someone else’s sermon and making it your own simply gives you more bang for your buck and frees up time to do more important things. Like hanging out with your family, visiting parishioners, praying, or counseling. The uncomfortable truth is, many pastors just aren’t gifted writers or preachers. So why do churches put pressure on them to try to be both?

I’m a writer by trade. It’s what I do and I’m fairly good at it. I’m not nearly as good at speaking in public. But here’s what I discovered. When I allow myself to spend less time obsessing over creating the perfect sermon, I’m able to spend more time working on improving my delivery. And when I invest less time on my message, the fate of the planet doesn’t seem to be riding on how the message goes. That means I’m able to relax and have more fun with it. Listeners notice things like that.

Starting with someone else’s sermon really helps get your ego out of the way. Writers and preachers are really artists and performers, two groups of people that are notorious for having fragile egos. The problem is, when we spend so much time crafting the perfect sermon—if it doesn’t set the house on fire—it’s easy to take things personally. That’s probably not such a temptation when we build on someone else’s work. When you’re not so attached to something, it’s easier to see the big picture.

Some pastors are cautious about using other people’s sermons as building blocks because of concerns about plagiarism. But that doesn’t have to be an issue. In the same way we credit worship songs to their composers, we can give credit to the authors of sermons. An acknowledgement of original sources in the sermon itself, in the church bulletin, or as part of the message’s on-screen graphics package are sufficient to let your listeners know you didn't do everything on your own.

If you think about it, it’s kind of silly for the hundreds of thousands (perhaps millions) of pastors worldwide to reinvent the wheel and write their sermons from scratch week after week. In reality, most sermons probably aren’t as good as their preacher thinks they are. Can you imagine what the quality of music would be like in your church if your choir director or worship leader had to write all the songs your congregation sings every week?

With today’s technology, the best writers and preachers worldwide could easily share their sermons and collaborate with pastors, who could then mold and tweak those sermons for use in their particular setting. Not only would it be another way for the body of Christ to work together, we'd all be much more efficient in the process!

If you sampled some of the desserts at your last church potluck, you may have noticed that everyone doesn’t have a gift for baking cakes from scratch. Some cooks would be better off using cake mix, and others would do better to simply buy their desserts ready-made at the bakery. It’s the same with preaching, although most of us have a hard time admitting it. Some of us need to just face the fact that building a sermon based on someone else’s sermon often produces a better finished product than what we could come up with all by ourselves. And it’s a lot less stressful.

There's much more to pastoring than preaching, although in today's Christian culture, you wouldn't think so. Preaching is probably the most high profile thing most lead pastors do. But with the rise of satellite churches and other trends, plus the economic need for churches to do more with less, many pastors are finding that spending half their work week or more writing a message just isn't practical anymore. More and more of them are looking for help with the process, and one way they find that help is through using sermons that others have already put together to provide inspiration.

BLOG: Where's Your Worship Service Going?

Thu, 16 Aug 2012 13:18:08 GMT

By Shane Raynor

The difference between a worship service that works and one that doesn’t isn’t only about substance and style—it’s about where participants find themselves at the end of it. Worship is a multi-dimensional activity—it’s something we’re able to do with our body, our soul, and our spirit. Powerful worship experiences engage all three of these parts of the individual.

The most effective worship planners learn how to make a service flow when they put together components and transitions. But making it flow is one thing—making it flow to a particular place is something else entirely. It’s like the difference between a river or stream and a recirculating fountain. Does the water actually go to a specific place or does it become part of a never-ending cycle that continually goes nowhere?

In many churches, the lead pastor is the primary planner of the worship service. Particularly in smaller congregations, there simply isn’t a lot of time to put together a top notch experience. Some planners understand the advantages of having a specific topic or theme for each service. But it’s surprising how many don’t. I’ve worshipped in congregations where I left the service with a good understanding of what I just experienced and how it all fit together, and others that felt like a hodgepodge of disjointed religious activities. Make no mistake, theme is a big deal for setting the intellectual tone of the service.

But just as important are the emotional and spiritual components of worship. For example, services should usually culminate with some type of opportunity for participants to respond. This doesn’t have to be a traditional invitation or “altar call”, nor does it need to be a one-size-fits-all response, but there should be an overall sense of “Where do we go from here?” Much has been written about churches that overdo emotionalism to produce certain outcomes in a worship service. That’s certainly a danger, but downplaying the emotional part of worship altogether is an opposite error of the same magnitude. The same can be said for relying too much on intellectual worship.

After choosing a theme, worship planners should figure out what their desired outcome for a worship service looks like. In other words, what do you want to be happening with participants as they leave the service? This question should be approached with fear and trembling. Here are some caveats to keep in mind:

This desired outcome can’t be the same for everyone. People are in different places spiritually, and everyone won’t get the same thing out of the worship service or respond in the same way.
What God wants to happen during a worship service and what we want to happen are often two very different things. And many times, God doesn’t tell us everything (or much of anything!) before everything goes down.
Planning worship is an unusual animal, because while worship itself should be focused on God, planning worship, by necessity, must consider the human part of the equation.
The spiritual element of worship is the hardest part to plan for. There’s no way to figure out ahead of time exactly what the spiritual atmosphere of the worship space will be at any given time. This is where consecration, prayer, prayer teams, choosing worship elements (especially invocations and calls to worship), fasting, and even spiritual warfare become very important. Finding someone with a high level of spiritual sensitivity to help with worship planning can be invaluable. You can have an impact on the spiritual atmosphere of a service, but there’s almost always a degree of unpredictability. If there isn’t, you’re either doing it wrong, or your services have slipped into autopilot.

Is your worship service a seamless experience with a sense of direction and purpose or is it more like a punch list of loosely related spiritual content that’s pieced together? Is there a sense that everyone’s checking off items as you move through the order of worship, or are transitions smooth and intentional? These are important questions to consider, especially if your worship attendance or the quality of spiritual life in your church seems to be hitting a wall.

ARTICLE: Discipline and Accountability in a Church Shopper's Market

Mon, 30 Jul 2012 17:07:02 GMT

By Shane Raynor

I grew up in The United Methodist Church, but I wasn’t confirmed until high school. It was about that time that I first encountered The Book of Discipline. I’m not sure what I thought it was at first, but based on the title, I’m sure I didn’t realize that it was a book of church law and doctrine. It sounded more to me like something that was written by James Dobson. I figured that a book called The Book of Discipline would be about discipline, and that was the last thing this teenager wanted to read. I’d already had enough discipline, thank you very much. I was at the age where I was tired of being told what to do. I certainly didn’t want to give the church that kind of authority over me!

As it turns out, I never outgrew not wanting to receive discipline. Most people don’t. We like making our own decisions, calling all the shots, and we don’t want anyone else pointing out the things we need to improve. The Bible even acknowledges that discipline isn’t a particularly pleasant experience: “No discipline is fun while it lasts, but it seems painful at the time. Later, however, it yields the peaceful fruit of righteousness for those who have been trained by it” (Hebrews 12:11 CEB).

So it appears that biblical discipline isn’t mostly about being punished or kept in line. It’s about being trained. Not trained like a dog or a seal, but trained like an athlete. Of course the Merriam-Webster Dictionary doesn’t do an especially good job of advancing this understanding of discipline. The first definition it offers is “punishment.” The second is “instruction (obsolete).” Third we find a “field of study,” then “training that corrects, molds, or perfects the mental faculties or moral character”. Farther down there’s “self control” and “a rule or system of rules governing conduct or activity.” In a sense, church discipline is all of these things, just not in that order.

Discipline is both positive and negative in the sense that it can both shape us and correct us. And discipline includes both corporate and private accountability—private when we discipline ourselves and corporate when we receive correction and instruction from others. The word discipline shares English, French, and Latin roots with disciple. Both are related to the idea of being a student. Anyone who has ever taught children or youth really gets this connection. Effective education finds the right balance of instructing and correcting students. It also involves group learning and individual learning. And ideally there’s accountability for both teachers and students.

But therein lies the rub. School is mandatory, church isn’t.

Voluntary Accountability

When we’re kids, they make us go to school. And there are usually teachers and parents holding us accountable for both attending school and getting something out of it. Depending on our circumstances, our parents may even have a choice about where to send us to school, but we don’t usually get to decide for ourselves. As far as we’re concerned, there is no choice. As we get more mature, we learn to discipline and motivate ourselves, and with that come more choices (elective courses and extracurricular activities in high school, schools and majors in college). But we never lose the accountability. We know there are rewards when we stay the course and consequences when we don’t.

But how do we get that kind of system to work with an organization like the church, where membership is voluntary? And how do we administer discipline in a way that values both justice and mercy? How do we effectively hold each other accountable without showing favoritism, becoming authoritarian, or promoting exclusivity?

American culture in particular is accustomed to the principle of voting with our feet. Put simply, if we don’t like something, we can leave. Gone are the days when there’s only one church in town. Centuries ago, even decades ago, things were different, but nowadays unless someone is living in a remote area or in a country where Christianity is a minority religion, they can switch churches as often as they want. Most Americans probably have at least a half dozen churches within a few miles' drive; many have even more. And with so many choices, it’s a buyer’s market. To play on a financial services commercial, when churches compete, you win. (Or do you?)

Sometimes the things we need the most aren’t the things we seek out. For example, you won’t find many churches advertising that they’ll hold you accountable. That’s because people associate accountability with pressure, and pressure with stress. Who wants to be stressed out when they go to church? Schools can emphasize a rigorous curriculum, and we find that attractive (or at least students’ parents do). Coaches and personal trainers can have a reputation for being tough as long as they’re effective and get results. But churches usually avoid the subjects of discipline and accountability. You see, somewhere along the way we bought into the notion that faith is mostly a private matter. People seem to want the benefits of religion without the accountability, and we tend to accommodate that mindset rather than risk losing folks to the church across the street.

Enforcing Discipline

For a church, there’s a healthy tension between maintaining certain moral standards for its members and being as inclusive as possible. Groucho Marx famously said, “I wouldn’t want to belong to any club that would have me as a member.” That’s a joke, but it illustrates a point. At the very least, people who choose to officially join a church should be willing to subscribe to a minimal amount of core beliefs established by the organization. That’s the point of membership—a level of commitment beyond just attending. But setting any kind of standard for membership means being willing to enforce that standard. That’s where discipline comes in. But discipline can be controversial, especially if a church is perceived to have crossed a line.

For example, Mars Hill Church, a prominent congregation in Seattle, experienced major backlash last year after a former member publicized the church’s disciplinary process. Pastor Mark Driscoll was accused by many of employing a cultlike leadership style. Mars Hill is a nondenominational church, so there isn’t a larger body that holds the local congregation accountable for how it disciplines members.

That’s not the case with The United Methodist Church. We give our pastors a certain amount of freedom and autonomy on matters of membership. (The Judicial Council affirmed this in 2005 with Decision 1032, which determined that a pastor has the authority to determine readiness for membership). But there are also district superintendents, bishops, and a last resort system of resolving conflicts known as a church trial. We even have an appeals process with jurisdictional committees and a Judicial Council, the “supreme court” of the denomination.

Many people probably don’t even realize that there is such a thing as a church trial. They happen occasionally in the UMC, which, like the United States government, consists of three branches—the legislative, executive, and judicial branches. Church trials make some of us uncomfortable, but the truth is they are part of the package when you try to run a denomination like a republic. Without the executive and judicial branches, denominational legislation would have no teeth. Church trials aren’t an embarrassment, and they shouldn’t be a cause for fear. If anything, we should probably have a few more of them.

We’ve seen trials happen a few times over the years with clergy, but laypeople can be tried as well. And while most recent church trials have been sex related, it should be noted that both laypeople and clergy can be tried for other offenses too, including the dissemination of doctrines contrary to the established standards of doctrine of the denomination. But realistically, how many church members are going to stick around long enough to be dragged into ecclesiastical court? Probably not many, which is why you don’t usually see laypeople on trial in The United Methodist Church.

Even clergy trials are rare, but they do happen. Most recently, Rev. Amy DeLong of the Wisconsin Annual Conference was put on trial for being “a self-avowed practicing homosexual” and for officiating at a same-sex union. DeLong was acquitted on the first charge, but found guilty on the second. And for the first time in two decades, that specific conviction didn’t result in defrocking or suspension. Instead, the trial court (jury) sentenced DeLong to a detailed process of restoration. While this sentence was criticized by many for being too light, it serves to demonstrate how unpredictable jury trials can be, especially when the jury is made up of your peers. In The United Methodist Church, getting an all-clergy jury to convict a fellow clergyperson and assign them a harsh sentence is understandably difficult. A lay trial would probably present similar difficulties.

Doing Right

The word justice is used a lot in mainline church circles, but it’s one of those terms that means different things depending on who’s using it. My favorite definition for justice is doing the right thing. As a church and as individual Christians, we always want to do what’s right in God’s eyes. That means doing what’s best for both individuals and the entire group when possible. It’s a good thing for a group of Christians to set reasonable standards for those in the group as long as those standards are applied in a fair and consistent way. Moral and ethical rules, after all, are designed to protect everyone in the community. But in doing so, we must avoid the temptation of rigid legalism. There are cases where mercy triumphs over justice, but the only way to navigate those waters is through the help of the Holy Spirit. Otherwise, we risk falling into the opposite error of legalism: lawlessness that abandons not only discipline, but discipleship itself.

ARTICLE: 5 Outreach Ideas for Advent

Wed, 25 Jul 2012 20:44:27 GMT

By Shane Raynor

For the Western secular world, the Christmas season starts right after the Thanksgiving Day meal and ends on Christmas Day. Then we set our sights on the New Year.

But that’s not how the Christian calendar works.

For starters, there’s Advent, a puzzle to many, even those of us who grew up going to church. I think I first realized that Advent even existed sometime during my middle school years. (I grew up in a fairly middle of the road United Methodist congregation.) I didn’t quite get it at the time. In my mind, Advent was a preview before the coming main attraction of Christmas. My church sang Christmas carols and hymns the entire month of December. The whole season was festive and for all practical purposes, it was the religious version of the holiday season going on outside the church walls... a blurry “Chrisvent” if you will.

It’s like that in many congregations.

To remedy that, some liturgical purists have insisted on a rigid separation of seasons. To some extent, they have a point. It’s not Christmas until the Christmas Eve service, they tell us. Advent should be darker, a little more somber. Some Christians have even made Advent a season of fasting, preparation, and introspection. Basically Lent-Lite—or “Lentvent”.

No wonder so many people don’t show up at church until Christmas Eve.

Outside the church, aside from a few novelty Advent calendars, most people just aren’t exposed to Advent. If they are, it doesn’t go much deeper than a “countdown to Christmas”. So with that in mind, let’s consider this question. How can a church simultaneously (1) take advantage of the window of opportunity the month of December offers the church for reaching new people, and (2) avoid rushing the Christmas season itself?

We seasoned churchgoers know that Advent is the beginning of the church year. But that’s only partly true. It’s also the end of the church year. We begin Advent looking to the future and end Advent looking to the past in a strange futuristic kind of way. That’s why during Advent most of us read scriptures looking forward to both the first and second comings of Christ. You see, a church year really has no more of a defined beginning or end than eternity itself has a beginning or end. We like to think it does only because it makes it easier for us to plan! The Christian faith has always been about the past, present, and future! The cool thing about Advent is that it can happen on all three levels.

Here are some ideas for using this season of expectation as a window of opportunity for engaging everyday humanity with the person of Jesus Christ. You may already be doing some of these things for the flock, but hopefully this will help you see the potential of using some of these activities for evangelism.

Do a seasonal Advent Bible study.

I’m not talking about simply doing a predictable Christmas countdown study for the hard-core faithful like you did last year. Find a study that combines both the first and second advents of Christ, and make it a churchwide thing. (A good lectionary-based study should do this.) But be prepared to take it up a notch. Curriculum writers can be a fairly safe, humdrum bunch. Bring the mystery back into Advent. Look back on the first coming, but look ahead to the second. You can only commemorate the expectation of the first coming— you can’t authentically recreate the emotion and excitement that was there. But Christ’s showing up in the present and ultimately returning in triumph in the future brings a sense of the unknown into our faith. Capitalize on that! People love mystery. Do this study in both classroom and small group settings. Make it invitation-friendly. If you use it for existing small groups, don’t advertise the study as “our established group will be doing this”. Market it like you would a new study! People need an on-ramp to help them join an existing group. For best results, avoid the terms “Advent” or “study” in your marketing campaign.

Preach a sermon series about the end times.

And frame it in such a way that you can transition to the Christmas story after four weeks. Focus on hope, expectation, freedom from bondage, anticipation and mystery as opposed to the gloom, doom, and judgment normally associated with end times series. Advertise the heck out of your series and encourage people to invite their friends and neighbors. Many churches won’t really touch eschatology this time of year (beyond the obligatory Lectionary readings) so this is an opportunity to do something different and make an impact with a broader audience. Many people are fascinated with prophecy and end times, so Advent is a good opportunity to grab their attention. If possible, coordinate your series with an Advent Bible study.

A week or two before Thanksgiving, pass out free Advent calendars in your community, and use them as an opportunity to visit door to door.

Include some literature about your church and several upcoming events, and be prepared to invite your neighbors to a “non-churchy” event. But unless you feel the direct leading of the Holy Spirit, avoid the temptation at this time to proselytize or to initiate theological discussions beyond the subject of Advent and Christmas or and how to use an Advent calendar. If your budget allows, pass out calendars that come with chocolate. Almost everyone likes chocolate. Confections carry a disarming quality.

Create a church-wide calendar of outreach events for each day during Advent.

Do direct mailings and visit house to house to get the word out. This will require some creativity, and depending on the size of your church, you may not have the resources to do something each day. If so, plan at least one major activity for each of the four weeks of the season. (This year, Advent is actually closer to three full weeks.) Get different groups within your church to take ownership of the different activities so people don’t experience burnout. The point here is to get your entire congregation into the outreach mindset rather than the “inwardly-focused” mode some churches tend to slide into during the holiday season. You can take almost any outreach idea from any part of the year (except for maybe a pool party) and adapt it for the Advent season. Cookouts (weather permitting), potlucks, carnivals, movie-nights, food drives, toy drives, bake sales, parties, seasonal VBS-type events, etc. are all fair game. Remember to focus on building anticipation, expectation, and hope before Christmas rather than on Christmas itself. Remember, there’s another entire season for doing that!

Do a drive-by prayer event.

This isn’t a direct outreach activity, but it lays the groundwork for successful evangelism, and for your upcoming Christmas services. In fact, if you only do one of these five activities, make this one the one! Organize groups of people to drive or walk through neighborhoods near your church and pray for the people in those communities. This is a great opportunity for bonding with others in your congregation (and for looking at Christmas lights.) It can work on a supernatural level to help open up people to be receptive to the Gospel. It also helps church members get out of the church bubble mindset and gets them thinking about the larger community.

Advent is a mysterious time of year, and that sense of mystery can be used as a tool to speak to regular people. The season provides a perfect window for outreach that’s substantially bigger than the usual Christmas evangelism window. You see, in spite of what we say, most of us don’t want our faith to be nice, simple, and easy to figure out. We love mystery, hope, expectation, and drama.

We should embrace this part of our faith rather than running from it. It’s not a weakness, it’s a strength.

BLOG: Unleashing Scripture

Tue, 17 Jul 2012 21:04:58 GMT

By Shane Raynor

In some congregations, the public reading of scripture may be one of the most underdeveloped parts of the worship service. It’s not that we don’t read the Bible in church. Many churches, especially those that are more liturgical, read it a lot. And we pray it and sing it too. But what kind of power are we experiencing when we do?

Well, some of that depends on how we look at the Bible. From my experience, the significance of expectation is often overlooked by Christians. Sometimes we don’t see the power of God because we don’t expect to see it. The problem with the Bible, frankly, is that many of us have taken the mystery out of it. On one end of the theological spectrum, there’s a tendency to pick the Bible apart, relegating it to a place on the bookshelf with classical literature and various religious texts. On the other end, extreme reverence for scripture almost makes the Bible into a god itself, putting a de facto leash on the actual God who inspired it: a God we’ve handicapped with the limitation of not being able to speak outside of the bible's pages.

So if you usually gravitate toward either of these extremes (and many of us do), listening to someone read the Bible in church either becomes a mundane jaunt through a quaint little myth or the final word of the living God who might as well be dead because we’re afraid for him to speak apart from scripture. A pre-programmed divine artificial intelligence, if you will. A celestial Siri.

But what if we really saw the Bible as the two-edged sword of Hebrews 4:12? The word of God energized by the breath (Spirit) of God that changes us? What if that’s how we were reading scripture? What if we began to look at public Bible readings as some of the most dangerous and powerful parts of our worship services?

One big hindrance to this idea, unfortunately, has been our refusal to think in multiple dimensions. You see, in any given worship service, things are happening on several levels. Worship is intellectual, emotional, and spiritual. So is scripture reading.

On the intellectual level, the Bible educates us. It informs us. That scripture reading before the sermon is almost like a briefing—it should lay the groundwork for us to pass on important information. That’s why it’s important to be judicious when we choose scripture passages for a worship service. If we don't engage the mind, oftentimes people’s emotional and spiritual parts won’t be engaged either. The mind, after all, is in a sense, the gateway to the rest of us.

So don’t cram a scripture passage indiscriminately into any part of the service. Have a strategy. Create dilemmas. Make a mess that you’ll have to clean up during the sermon. If you use the lectionary, don’t just do it so you can say you did. Use it in a way that blows your listeners’ minds.

But you can’t stop with the intellect. People are emotional creatures. They’re not content with God just blowing their minds—they want to be moved! That two-edged sword of Hebrews 4:12 “penetrates to the point that it separates the soul from the spirit and the joints from the marrow. It’s able to judge the heart’s thoughts and intentions” (CEB). Wow. I’m not sure I can define where the soul ends and the spirit begins. But God can. And when we present his word to people, he knows what each person needs from it. The power of God’s word can do what we can’t because God knows things about us that we don’t know.

Remember, we’re talking about the word of God. God speaking. That’s not just limited to words in the Bible. It’s also the voice that inspired the Bible. And the voice that inspires us when we read it. God speaks all over the place—it’s hardly ever as simple as words on a page.

Churches are about instilling and nurturing faith (belief). And ultimately, people should experience some opportunities at church to believe what God has said. That’s biblical faith. But how can they believe something if they haven’t heard it? Scripture is a good place to begin. It exposes people to what God has already said so hopefully they’ll learn how to hear what God is saying. And it’s our job to present scripture in such a way that they’ll really listen to what they hear.

The Bible says that God “gives life to the dead and calls things that don’t exist into existence” (Romans 4:17 CEB). The word of God is a creative force. Although everyone in a church service won’t be impacted the same way by God’s word every time, if we’re faithful, expectant, and innovative in the ways we present scripture, someone (hopefully many someones) will be changed by it.

What needs to be called into existence in your faith community? How can tools like scripture reading and prayer help make it happen?

If the public reading of scripture has become a weak part of our church services, it isn’t God’s fault, it’s ours. Like Communion, public Bible reading can be an overlooked part of worship— full of power that’s waiting to be activated and unleashed.

We should make it our business to realize its potential.

BLOG: When Christianity Gets Boring

Mon, 09 Jul 2012 16:57:11 GMT

By Shane Raynor

I’ve been noticing a lot of articles and blog posts lately on the topic of young people leaving the church. The church definitely has a problem, but the biggest issue here isn’t a generational one. This is about power. You may not hear it in so many words, but the ultimate question on a lot minds is, “Does Christianity work?”

What do I mean by that? Well, pick your poison. Everyone’s not on the same page when it comes to the benefits of a belief system. The question takes a lot of forms.

Will Christianity get me to heaven?
Will it make me feel better?
Will it make me a good person?
Will it make my life matter?
Will it get me life after death?
Will it make my life more exciting?
Will it set me free from x?
Will it bring my family together?
Will it help me get rid of guilt?
Will it help me deal with y?
Will it save me?
Is it superior to other belief systems and religions?

You can probably think of other variations, but it all comes down to “Does Christianity make a unique difference?” Whether your church is into rock worship bands or smells and bells (or both!) that’s the question you’ve got to answer. And if you aren’t convinced that Christianity does make a difference, nonbelievers won’t be convinced either. Not for long anyway.

Part of my job is watching church trends. Marketing. Social networking. Provocative sermon series. Church plants. The missional movement. Leadership. Blah blah blah. You’d think I’d be blown away, but when I look at the big picture, I find that it’s actually pretty boring. We’re always looking for the next big thing, but by the time enough of us get on the same page, it’s yesterday’s news.

Please don’t misunderstand me. I’m not advocating rigid traditionalism with no innovation. The fact is, tradition can be as spiritually powerless as chasing the latest church trends. Christians have spent a lot of time figuring out how to get people to church, but we haven’t always done a lot to establish them in the faith once they’re there. That's partly because we’ve largely reduced faith to activities and programs or to creeds and doctrinal statements. And many of us are chasing a Christianity that’s a figment of our imaginations. We’re looking for the faith of the church fathers, the faith of Luther, of Calvin, of Wesley... sadly some of us would actually settle for a Christianity that’s a snapshot from somewhere in time rather than explore the infinite God of the now!

What do you do when a growing part of Christianity is afraid of absolutes while another part is terrified of any kind of spiritual advancement or theological experimentation?

Make no mistake. Young people aren’t leaving church because of the liberals or the conservatives or church views on sexuality or even because of hypocrisy.

They’re leaving because they think it’s boring.

And since the power and presence and person of God are anything but boring, that tells me we have a disconnect between experiencing God and experiencing church. Sure, marketing, methods, music, style, and doctrine are important, but without ever-deepening, boundary-stretching experiences of God, a significant portion of Christianity will continue to relegate itself to jumping from one trend or gimmick to the next. And that kind of faith is a real yawner.

So what can we do to change things?

BLOG: Contributor or Consumer?

Thu, 21 Jun 2012 21:18:13 GMT

By Shane Raynor

I learned a lesson about worship a few years ago when I accompanied a group of high school students to a denomination sponsored youth retreat. The church I attended at the time was part of a conference known for its excellent youth ministry. The guest speakers and worship bands they brought in were almost always second to none. I enjoyed leaving the familiar surroundings of my own church, whose worship had become “old hat” to me. Since I worked mostly with young people, I was sometimes too critical when the rest of my congregation didn’t prioritize things the same way I did. I had made up my mind that the traditional and blended styles of my church were no match for the modern worship style I experienced at camps and retreats. And because this style suited my taste more, I figured most of the youth felt the same way.

That assumption was probably true to some extent, because I usually did hear complaints from kids along the lines of, “Why can’t our church’s services be more like this?” But one weekend I experienced something that helped me see things from a different perspective.

It was the opening worship session the first evening of a mid-winter retreat. The band was well into the first song and some of the kids who had been to these things before had moved up front and were really getting into it.

That’s when I noticed them.

A group of teenagers behind the other kids looked horrified. I think they were probably praying for the floor to open up so they could escape. I wondered why they didn't think the service was as great as I thought it was. So for the rest of the weekend, I found myself thinking about these kids and what they were experiencing.

Worship suddenly wasn’t about me. I desperately wanted this group of kids, some who probably weren’t even Christians yet, to experience God. It's as if I somehow glimpsed God's desire to see more people worshiping him. My measuring standard for what makes a good worship service was no longer what I was experiencing but what the entire group was experiencing, especially the ones who looked like they didn’t really want to be there. Instead of the worship segment being my own show with the band and the crowd serving as extras, I now saw it more as a community activity. I wasn’t able to shut everyone else out like I had done before. The more I experienced God, the more I wanted everyone else to experience him.

So I found myself praying for others before and during worship that entire weekend. And I went into the services thinking more about what I could give than what I would get for myself. Sure I wanted a touch from God and a goosebump experience, but now I seemed to want it even more for everyone else. That weekend I wasn’t just looking at the worship experience as a consumer. I suddenly had the mindset of a contributor.

This epiphany, however, didn’t mean I would lower my expectations for excellence in worship. If anything, I felt a need to raise standards. The difference was that my personal taste wasn’t the driving factor. I wanted worship to be more accessible so more people could worship.

I’d like to be able to say that I never slip back into consumer mode, but that wouldn’t be true. I still sometimes make snap judgments of worship services based on selfish reasons. But when my attitude is right, I get a lot of satisfaction simply knowing that other people are having a positive worship experience. There’s something about seeing God touch someone else that touches me.

It’s where community becomes something real to me and not just another trendy Christian word.

BLOG: Dallas 2012: 5 Things the Church Can Learn

Fri, 15 Jun 2012 19:04:29 GMT

By Shane Raynor

This week I did something I don’t typically do. I watched a soap opera.

TNT recently resurrected the 80’s prime time serial Dallas and the new show aired its two hour premiere Wednesday night. I watched partly for the nostalgia of it. I grew up in the 70’s and 80’s, and the original Dallas was appointment viewing in my house. J.R. Ewing was shot when I was 7 years old and I remember it as vividly as I remember the Reagan assassination attempt that happened a year later. Dallas jumped the shark in later seasons and became a bit of a cheese-fest, but in the first few years of its run, it was one of the most-watched television shows in the world. We viewed it as a family and Friday was the only day of the week that I was allowed to stay awake past 9:00.

I was a little skeptical about whether the new Dallas could recapture the magic of the old one. Twenty-first century reboots and continuations of classic shows have by and large been disastrous. (One exception is the updated Battlestar Galactica of 2004, which surpassed the original in almost every way.)

My first impression was that Dallas 2012 really worked. Most of the professional critics seem to agree. After a little analysis, I’ve figured out a few reasons why. Church growth gurus and Christian trend watchers should take note because what’s really interesting is how easily these qualities translate to the church world.

Continuity

The new show uses and builds upon the original show’s mythology. The producers and writers decided to do a continuation rather than a total reboot, which was smart. (Really, can you picture anyone other than Larry Hagman playing J.R. Ewing?) By adhering to the canon established by the first Dallas series, the new one is much more likely to gain the trust and support of viewers of the original series. This provides a built in fan base for the new show. If done correctly, this is easier than building an audience from scratch. Churches should be the same way. While much has been made in recent decades of congregations that run from tradition, I believe some of the more effective churches find creative ways to establish obvious links to the historic Christian faith.

Balance

Of the eight main actors on the updated show, three are from the old Dallas, four are over 40 years old and four are under 40. That’s almost a perfect balance between young and old and between new and established. This pretty much guarantees richer storylines than you’d see on a show with a relatively homogeneous group of players. It also means that almost anyone should be able to find someone to relate to. Churches should consider this carefully. When people are “channel surfing” for a church home and they stop on your congregation, will they find a character they can relate to or will they get the message that your group isn’t for people like them?

Faster Pace, More Plot Twists, and Seamless Transitions

Generations X and Y are the ADD generations. If you don’t believe it, compare a television show or music video from the 1980’s with one from 2012 and count the number of times the camera shot changes. Apparently we are much more easily bored these days than we were 25 or 30 years ago. Cinematographers for the new Dallas understand this well. Gone are the long dramatic pauses, slow pans, and drawn out establishing shots of the 80’s version. Like most shows on now, if you blink, you’ll probably miss something important. And it seems to me that there’s a lot more going on at any one moment in this show than in the old one. Watching it is almost like drinking from a fire hose. But the multiple plots and fast pace are accompanied by smooth transitions. This makes for a solid viewing experience. So much so that the commercials seem downright intrusive. What if our church services were so engaging that we didn’t check our watches or cell phone clocks until the very end wondering where the time had gone? Television has adapted to those with short attention spans and to the easily bored. Has church? Do we make every second count?

Authenticity

The original Dallas was mostly filmed in California, not Texas, especially in the program’s later years. The new one, on the other hand, is filmed entirely in and around Dallas. (What a concept!) This adds a greater depth of realism to the show, both for the actors and the viewers. (For example, in the original series, many of the exterior scenes were done as close-ups to avoid getting palm trees in the camera shot.) Realism is a good thing. With the proliferation of HD televisions and the huge amount of entertainment choices, it’s getting more challenging for viewers to suspend their disbelief so they can really enjoy a story. With church, we’re dealing with a skeptical world that’s not as impressed by window-dressing it used to be. People are looking for a healthy amount of optimism and idealism, but they also want authenticity.

Flexibility

When Dallas premiered in 1978, there were no DVRs and very few VCRs. If you wanted to watch Dallas, you could do it whenever you wanted as long as it was Friday night at 9:00 Eastern! It’s not like that now. You can catch the show several times a week on TNT. (Cable channels like showing stuff over and over again.) You can also watch the show on demand on cable, satellite, and the internet. Appointment viewing is largely a relic of the past because entertainment choices (even the really good ones) have been forced to work around our schedules. This has been a huge paradigm shift, but the church world hasn’t fully caught on. The 10:00 Sunday School 11:00 church service in one location model is vanishing quickly. This generation expects multisite choices, multiple services, online options, and other innovations. Hollywood gets it—but does the church?

I’m not suggesting that the church take all of its cues from the entertainment industry, but we’d be fools not to take note when Hollywood reaches people and impacts culture successfully. Because TV and film are a business, they are forced to do things more efficiently and offer products that bring positive responses from their audiences. This isn’t always a good thing, but for good or for ill, it does set trends and expectations for the culture at large. At the very least, we should use their findings as market research and decide what needs and wants they’re meeting that the church could address in a healthier way.

And if we improve our methods and become more effective in the process, that's definitely a positive thing.

BLOG: God the Micromanager

Wed, 30 May 2012 19:43:33 GMT

By Shane Raynor

At the risk of starting a theological debate, I’d like to ask why so many of us seem to be buying into the philosophy of fatalism. Most people seem to say they don’t believe that all events are predetermined, but then they go and drop a bomb like this one:

Everything happens for a reason.

Well, duh. Of course everything happens for a reason. (Sometimes the reason is we didn’t use our brain.) But that’s not exactly what they mean. When someone says, “Everything happens for a reason,” they usually mean that it’s part of God’s master plan. In other words, he wrote the script a long time ago and we’re just acting it out.

Usually people use this line when they’re trying to make us feel better after something bad happens.

“Sorry your house burned down. But I guess everything happens for a reason. Sometimes we don’t understand why...”

Could it be that the house burned down because the wiring was faulty? Or maybe rebellious Junior was smoking behind your back and got a little careless as he was getting rid of the evidence. Perhaps the cat knocked over one of your scented candles. You know, the ones you left burning when you went to your weekly Bible study.

Would it disappoint you terribly if you discovered that your house fire wasn’t part of God’s master plan from the beginning of time? Could it be that God doesn’t micromanage things to that degree?

We recognize God’s omniscience, and rightfully so. And we know he knows the future. The problem is, we say those things, but we think of them in our terms. To us, knowing the future is the equivalent of watching a movie we’ve seen before. When we think of God knowing the future, we think of a linear timeline, and we imagine God processing things the way we do. We may say stuff along the lines of, “God is outside time,” but truth be told, we haven’t a clue as to what that means. God is basically a big version of us with superpowers. And that's where we go wrong.

Suppose the whole concept of time is just too much for us to grasp? Trillions of events and choices happen on a daily basis and those things shape time as we know it. Yet God in his omnipotence and omniscience is still more than able to accomplish whatever he wants. I heard someone say once that God can win every hand, even if he only has a pair of 2’s. That seems much more impressive to me than a god who is a control freak.

I have no idea how God’s foreknowledge affects actual outcomes and events. But I do know two things: God values human free will and he trusts his people with expanding his kingdom. The fact that good things happen even when human beings mess up indicates that God is actively involved, but it also shows he’s not a micromanager. He’s neither the God of the Deist nor some celestial screenwriter who forces everyone to stick to some unalterable script.

Thank God for that.

BLOG: Handling Worship Distractions

Fri, 11 May 2012 19:54:46 GMT

By Shane Raynor

Are you easily distracted during Sunday worship? People who have ADHD or those who find it hard to focus in a school or work setting will often have similar struggles during prayer or worship times. Here are a few things I’ve found distracting during church services over the years, especially during worship segments:

The guy who sings off key.
The woman who doesn’t sing off key but sings louder than everyone else.
Crying babies.
The worship leader who talks too much.
The guy who says the word just too much when he prays. Or the one who says Father God before each sentence of his prayer.
People who arrive late. I’ve often found myself having a conversation (with myself) about how the church is practically empty even though we’ve already started and what would we do if no one else showed up this week... blah, blah, blah...you get the idea.
The woman who never sets her cell phone to vibrate until it rings at least once.
The person in front of me who’s texting, especially when they don’t hold their phone so I can read what they’re sending.
Kids fidgeting.
Adults fidgeting.
Typos in the worship Powerpoint slides.
Typos in the bulletin.
The guy who who raises his hands during every song.
People who stare at me when I raise my hands.
The people who never raise their hands unless we’re singing “Here I Am, Lord”.
Anyone who punches me and tries to continue a conversation during the opening song. This distracts me during movies too.
The wasp flying around the ceiling. How did he get in?

There’s no easy answer for handling distractions during worship. (Mean mugging the ones causing the distractions usually isn't very effective.) What I have figured out is that if I take the pressure off myself to focus (and the accompanying guilt that I feel when I can't), then I start taking pressure off of everyone else not to distract me in the first place. In other words, if I focus too much on whether or not I'm focusing on God, then I'm not really focusing on God to begin with, I'm being self-centered. True Christian worship is always more about God than it is about us.

The second thing I try to remember is that group worship is not my private prayer and worship time. I don't get to have God all to myself. I have to share him with others in the group, even the ones who don't have the right political views, those who don't use the right Bible translation, the theological eggheads, the people who read the fluffy books from the Christian celebrity I don't care for, people who don't talk to me, and the garden variety hypocrites. Group worship is not simply worshiping God by myself with other people in the room who happen to be doing the same thing. I believe that's one of the mistakes we sometimes make with modern praise worship services. Worshiping with a group means sometimes interacting with the group, not tuning them out so that it's "just me and God."

Perhaps a reason we often have such impossible expectations for group worship is we're not getting enough quality time by ourselves with God. I've found that if my own private prayer/worship times are consistent and healthy, I'm bothered much less by distractions when I get to church.

What things distract you during Sunday worship? How do you handle distractions?

BLOG: Money and Guilt Trips

Mon, 07 May 2012 20:05:14 GMT

By Shane Raynor

Several years ago, I was preaching to a group of teenagers about stewardship and I unfortunately played the “feel guilty for spending money” card. I referenced the World Vision gift catalog, found out how much money it took to feed a village for a week (or buy a chicken, dig a well, supply diapers, provide health care for a needy child, build a school, etc.), then I proceeded to compare these amounts to the stuff teenagers love to spend money on. Things like music, cell phones, clothes, fast food, and video games. I even made a visual presentation that would have made the toughest dictator in the world cry. My goal was to get the youth to show concern for people other than themselves.

What on earth was I thinking?

My intentions were good, but I’m afraid I sent the wrong message that day. I essentially told these kids (whether I meant to or not) that spending money on themselves was selfish, especially when there are so many people in the world who are much worse off.

While all of us probably could (and should) simplify our lives so we can give more to the Kingdom, once we start heading down the road I was on at that youth group meeting, we risk putting people in bondage.

Besides, how do we define how much money is too much to spend on something?

Take my denomination, The United Methodist Church, for example. For the last two weeks, we held a quadrennial worldwide conference in Florida that by some estimates cost up to $10 million. As the conference moved along and frustrations mounted, I noticed people on Twitter criticizing how much money we were spending on the event. “How many hungry people could we feed with that money?” some wondered. Or how much could we have sent to help wipe out malaria, save the environment, provide microloans in the developing world, insert your favorite cause here.

Good questions, but I have a couple of others. Like... How many meals could you provide for the hungry if you got rid of your iPhone? Or your car. Or your Netflix membership. How much money could you save by downgrading your wardrobe from Banana Republic to Gap, or from Gap to Old Navy, or from Old Navy to Target ...to Walmart to Goodwill....

Remember what happened when the woman in Mark 14 poured the expensive perfume on Jesus?

Some grew angry. They said to each other, "Why waste the perfume? This perfume could have been sold for almost a year’s pay and the money given to the poor." And they scolded her. Jesus said, "Leave her alone. Why do you make trouble for her? She has done a good thing for me." Mark 14:4-6 CEB

Do you get where I’m going with this? What some consider extravagant, we may see as basic or essential. That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be better stewards, but we need to frame the discussion around our freedom in Christ, not around guilt.

We must never put a yoke on others that we can’t even handle ourselves.

BLOG: A Virtual General Conference?

Mon, 30 Apr 2012 20:47:11 GMT

By Shane Raynor

The other day I commented on how much time and money United Methodists spend on General Conference every four years, and I wondered aloud why we aren’t trying to move toward a virtual GC.

We’re already streaming it live and the delegates are even communicating with each other on Twitter. Couldn’t we spend some of the millions of dollars we already spend on GC to customize a state of the art teleconferencing system and add voting functions?

But then it hit me why it wouldn’t fly, even if we could get the technology to work reliably for every delegate. (And truthfully, we’re twenty years away from that, especially in some areas of the world. I can’t even get a decent cell phone signal in parts of downtown Nashville.)

It wouldn’t work because a virtual General Conference would get rid of most of what people like about GC and keep the things they don’t like. I’ve never been a GC delegate, but I’ll tell you this much: hanging out with friends from around the connection and worshiping with a worldwide group of Methodists would definitely be more fun than all the long sessions, early mornings, late nights, and droning speeches.

Do you seriously believe that anyone would sit in front of their computer monitor and put up with two weeks of committees and parliamentary procedure? I’d do it in person but not over the internet. When delegates are at a conference, they’re a captive audience. When they’re in their living rooms on their laptops, not so much.

The idea of moving some of the legislative committee and subcommittee work to the internet and cutting back General Conference to a week, however, has some merit. The first week is sort of like a pre-game show anyway. Couldn’t all the committees hash out legislation on GoToMeeting? Or maybe we should do away with the committees altogether. Bishop Will Willimon wondered in an interview last week why a church that already has too many rules and laws wants to create more. Good question.

In the end, General Conference probably won’t change much. It’s an institution. It’s the United Methodist Oscars. Most of us complain about it, but there are many die-hard Methodists who enjoy it and look forward to it. As dysfunctional as it is, we’d miss it on some level if it didn’t happen. It’s the one time where representatives from the worldwide United Methodist Church get together in one place.

I’m just glad it only happens once every four years.

VIDEO: Interview: Bishop Will Willimon

Mon, 30 Apr 2012 10:14:40 GMT

By Shane Raynor

This is my complete interview with William H. Willimon, United Methodist bishop and author of Bishop: The Art of Questioning Authority by an Authority in Question.

BLOG: For Breaking News, Go to Twitter

Fri, 27 Apr 2012 18:00:15 GMT

By Shane Raynor

Those who aren’t United Methodist probably have trouble understanding why some of the ones who are UM get so wrapped up in this whole General Conference thing. For one thing, it only comes around every four years. It’s kind of like the Olympics. Well, not really. NBC doesn’t pay ridiculous amounts of money to put our General Conference on the air. We have to settle for a Livestream feed on the Internet which, more often than not, shows color bars. (Couldn’t we at least get a roving reporter with a cell phone cam fishing for sensational quotes between sessions?)

Eight years ago, I remember going to the UMNS website to get breaking news about GC2004. There must have been a lot of demand on the servers during that GC because I remember the site being down a lot. In those days we relied mostly on UMNS articles and the occasional mainstream news story to find out what was happening. Today we have all kinds of news sources and blogs with GC updates, but my favorite way of keeping track of what’s happening is Twitter.

I realized the power of Twitter as a news source on the Sunday night when Osama Bin Laden’s death was made public. CNN had announced an unusual White House news conference that would happen later in the evening. I changed the TV to Fox News Channel and Geraldo Rivera was saying the same. (If anyone was going to let the cat out of the bag prematurely, I figured it would be Geraldo, but not this time.) So I signed on to Twitter, and Bin Laden’s death was already trending. Television news had been scooped by the masses—what’s not to love about that?

Anytime you put power in many hands, it’s bound to get messy. That’s the nature of democracy and freedom. And there are few things as free and as democratic as Twitter. You obviously can’t believe everything you read there, but as long as you understand the limitations of the source and verify the information, you can learn a lot. And you can learn it before a reporter can write the first paragraph of their news story. It’s amazing how much can be said in 140 characters.

But Twitter won’t replace traditional news sources. It isn’t meant to. It will, however, help make in-depth reporting and analysis more important than ever. People will always want to go somewhere to find out more.

I glance at the #GC2012 Twitter feed from time to time while I’m working. I’m not that interested in every little detail of GC, but it’s fun finding out what’s happening in the legislative committees in real time. And the cool thing about Twitter is you can see every side of the story if you read enough tweets. Even sides you don’t want to see and sides you didn’t know existed. Plus you get the information and the emotion—unfiltered.

It’s a wild west, no doubt, but that’s the beauty of it.

BLOG: How Long Should You Preach?

Wed, 25 Apr 2012 21:06:53 GMT

By Shane Raynor

If you preach on a regular basis, you probably have guidelines for how long your sermons should be. You may not always have a choice in the matter—sometimes, especially when you’re speaking somewhere else, you’re given a time slot and you have to fill it. But if you’re a senior pastor or regular preaching pastor, you likely have major influence over the structure and length of your church’s worship services. That means you decide how long you’re going to speak and what needs to be cut or added to the rest of the service to make it happen.

When it comes to sermon length, I’ve observed three kinds of preachers:

Short and sweet: These are the preachers who never go beyond the fifteen minute mark. Ever. Perhaps it’s because they’re from traditions that don’t encourage lengthy preaching. Maybe it's the way their homiletics professors taught them in seminary. Or it’s possible they realize that preaching isn’t their strong suit and they’re trying to spare everyone the agony of a long sermon. Whatever the reason, listeners who aren’t used to such short sermons will probably be in denial that they’ve just heard a real sermon. (If a visitor’s face lights up with delight as they exclaim, “That’s it?”, it’s a bad sign.)

Half hour or less: Preachers who speak for 20 to 30 minutes are fairly common. That’s because really good speakers will find that a 20 or 25 minute sermon leaves the audience wanting more. Not so good speakers will realize that they probably couldn’t keep the congregation awake longer than 20 or 25 minutes anyway, so they don’t dare venture into second half hour territory. Some probably shouldn’t even go into second quarter hour territory.

Half hour plus: Back in the 80’s and 90’s, Domino’s Pizza had a guarantee on pizza delivery that went something like this: If you don’t get your pizza within thirty minutes, it’s free. Domino’s discontinued the guarantee when drivers were having too many car accidents trying to make the half hour deadline. Sometimes I think churches should have a similar guarantee: If the sermon stinks and goes over a half hour, you get your tithe back. I kid, of course, but in all seriousness, only the most gifted and interesting preachers should preach over 30 minutes. And even they should proceed with much caution. Are you one of those preachers? If you have to ask, probably not yet.

So how long should your sermons be? It depends.

Do you preach from a manuscript? You should keep it to 15 minutes or less. Seriously, if people can tell you are reading (even if you only look down every few seconds), they will get bored quickly. Unless you’re really good at delivering a manuscript sermon (and I’ve met few preachers who are) keep it short. If you want to go longer, preach from an outline or train yourself to speak without notes.

Does your sermon have one big idea? (Not three—one!) If you had to condense your sermon down to a Tweet (140 characters or less) or an elevator pitch, could you do it? Is there one main thing people should get from it? Then you should feel free to take 20 or 25 minutes. If not, keep your sermon to 15 minutes or less, because it’s probably too complicated. Taking more time is just going to confuse everyone.

Are there a lot of young people in your audience? Unless you’re a crackerjack speaker (worthy of an HBO special or a gig at a Christian conference), keep your sermon to 15 or 20 minutes tops. Hint: Watch the teenagers while you’re preaching to see how you’re doing. They’ll be more honest with their body language than their parents will be. Some will even tell you to your face later if you were boring.

Do you spend a lot of time planning your sermon but speak with a minimum amount of notes? Then by all means, approach the 25-30 minute mark. If you walk around and make eye contact and experiment with voice inflection for effect, you’re probably one of those preachers who can pull it off. I’ve observed that people generally prefer hearing a well-prepared sermon, but they want it to be delivered as if it were being preached extemporaneously. It’s one of the great paradoxes of church life.

Do you use PowerPoint for every sermon and have slides for nearly everything, including your jokes? If you do, stop it. You don’t even get 15 minutes. Powerpoint is most effective when used sparingly. It’s not meant to carry the whole sermon or serve as a teleprompter for the speaker. PowerPoint isn’t what it used to be. Boring teachers and college professors have truly killed it for the rest of us.

So should you ever go over 30 minutes? Sure, but only if you’re already preaching for 25-30 minutes and people are regularly showering you with compliments like, “I don’t know where the time goes when you preach!” or “You have me on the edge of my seat every week with your sermons!” Or if you’re in a church tradition that has trained the congregation to expect longer discourses. But even then, you’d better learn how to deliver the goods. Otherwise, keep it shorter.

With most preachers, less is more. Even the best speakers should constantly be working to learn how to say more in less time. We’re in a short attention span world now whether we want to admit it or not.

Questions: Are you coasting with your preaching or are you spending time regularly learning how to make more efficient use of time in your sermons? Are you preaching the right amount of time or are you speaking past your ability to hold the attention of your congregation?

BLOG: Working in the Cloud

Thu, 19 Apr 2012 18:58:51 GMT

By Shane Raynor

When I came to Ministry Matters in 2010, I set two major goals as I was acquiring tools to help me do my job. First, I wanted to go as “paperless” as possible. It's not that I was trying to make some kind of environmental statement (although being green is certainly an added benefit). I just get overwhelmed quickly by stacks of stuff on my desk!

My second goal was to do as much work “in the cloud” as I could so I wasn’t tied to a particular computer or location.

If I could work toward these goals, I figured I’d bring a couple of important things to my job—simplicity and flexibility. The idea was for me to keep productivity and creativity levels high while keeping stress levels low.

I’ll write about going paperless in another post, but first I want to share some of my experiences with cloud computing.

Cloud computing, if you’re not familiar with the term, is loosely defined as using computer services through the internet, usually through a web browser. Rather than running software or storing files on your local computer, you do everything online. If you’ve used Gmail, Hotmail, or Yahoo! Mail, for example, you’ve already used cloud computing.

The biggest advantage to the cloud is that I’m able to work from almost any device (phone, tablet, PC, or netbook) anywhere that I have an internet connection. This is huge for me. If I need to complete a project before the end of the day, instead of sticking around the office I can leave on time, beat the traffic, relax a little, then finish up at home. If I’m traveling, I can do work from the airport or hotel using my laptop. And if I’m waiting somewhere, I can access almost everything from my smartphone and work during the downtime. I’ve even written and edited articles using my phone while visiting a coffeehouse or riding a bus.

My company uses Microsoft Outlook for email, but I prefer using Gmail, so I have two email accounts. Gmail's search functionality is superior and I love the user interface. Outlook sometimes makes me want to punch the wall of my cubicle. But even so, I can still access my Outlook account from any computer through a web browser, and I also have it set up to sync with the email program on my phone. You have to really discipline your workaholic tendencies if you’re going to take your email with you everywhere. It isn’t always easy—it requires setting priorities and being able to discern what really deserves your attention when you aren’t in the office. I don’t obligate myself to read or respond to email after hours, and most of my regular email contacts know this. But I’ve found that it’s nice keeping in contact with the office in case something big does come up. Like anything else, you have to set boundaries to make it work.

Here are some of the cloud programs I use on a regular basis:

Gmail: I already mentioned this one—it’s my favorite email client, bar none.
Google Docs: I use this instead of Microsoft Word, Powerpoint, and Excel. It’s free and you can open and edit Microsoft files inside Google Docs. I do run across an occasional formatting issue, but nothing major. You can also collaborate on documents with others using Google Docs and see each other’s changes in real time.
I also use a smartphone app called Documents to Go. This one isn’t free, but it’s worth every penny if you need a powerful way to access and edit your Google Docs with your phone. You probably won’t be doing a lot of heavy lifting with this app, but it’s nice to be able to if you want.
Another good alternative is Zoho, which offers similar features to Google Docs, as well as tons of productivity and business applications for managing projects and collaborating with others.
Evernote: This is my personal assistant and my other brain. I use it to save ideas, lists, sound files, photos, and various documents. I also use it to take notes during meetings. There’s a smartphone app, desktop client, and web-based version and they all sync together nicely. It’s free, but there’s also a paid version that gives you more functionality, the ability to create and upload bigger files, and the ability to collaborate.
Dropbox: I have this program on all my devices. It essentially creates folders that are shared across your devices. So if I put a file in a Dropbox folder on my desktop PC, I can get to that file easily on my phone, netbook, laptop, or tablet. I can also create folders that I make accessible to whomever I choose. It’s free too, but for a few bucks a month I can get additional storage space.
WeVideo: I was skeptical at first about doing video editing in the cloud, but I love this service. It's great picking up where I've left off on a project without having to somehow get the file to my other computers. To really get all the bells and whistles with WeVideo, I recommend getting a paid account, but the free account will let you try it and see if it’s for you.
Amazon: This isn't work-related, but I'll share it anyway because it's in the cloud. When I buy music, I buy it from Amazon because I can download it anytime I want or use their free cloud player no matter what device I’m using.

I've been able to use many cloud applications to replace some of the more traditional software programs typically used in the company I work for. Have you used any of these applications for work? What are some of your favorite cloud applications that I didn't mention?

BLOG: Biblical Checks and Balances

Wed, 18 Apr 2012 19:45:13 GMT

By Shane Raynor

Once you were alienated from God and you were enemies with him in your minds, which was shown by your evil actions. But now he has reconciled you by his physical body through death, to present you before God as a people who are holy, faultless, and without blame. But you need to remain well established and rooted in faith and not shift away from the hope given in the good news that you heard. (Colossians 1:21-23a CEB, emphasis mine)

I saw a quote on Twitter a while back that went something like this: “If you watch what you think, you won’t have to watch what you say.” Sin begins in our minds, and culminates with our actions and the chain reaction of consequences that results from those actions. So even if we could “be good” without being cleansed by Jesus, we’d still be enemies of God, because our sin originates on the inside of the cup. Thankfully, because of Christ’s death on the cross, we’re reconciled to God and we don’t have to be his enemies anymore.

Did you notice this passage has a second but?

Part 1: Once you were God’s enemy… (bad news)

BUT…

Part 2: Now he has reconciled you through the death of Jesus (good news)

BUT…

Part 3: You need to remain established, rooted in faith, and not shift… (this one’s open-ended)

The first sentence in the passage puts us in a hopeless predicament. Then the first but gives us a way out of the darkness. Jesus has done something for us that we can’t do for ourselves. But the second but brings the ball back to our court. It tells us that Jesus paid the price, however, we have to appropriate the power of what he did on the cross by connecting (and staying connected) to the vine. Our faith should be an active faith, not a passive one.

We leave out parts 1, 2 or 3 at our peril. Omitting part 1 denies the need for parts 2 or 3. Omitting part 2 leads us into the error of works salvation, and leaving out part 3 makes Christianity nothing more than cheap grace and fire insurance.

The Word of God is full of checks and balances to keep us from wandering into theological extremism– this passage is just one example.

BLOG: Losing the Offering Plate

Tue, 17 Apr 2012 19:01:11 GMT

By Shane Raynor

Change is a buzzword in church circles. Even some traditional congregations have added modern worship music, practical sermon series, 21st century marketing concepts, theater style seating, and small groups in recent years. But the last thing some churches want to touch is the traditional offering with the passing of collection plates and baskets. If Social Security is the third rail of American politics, taking an offering could be the third rail of the church. Anywhere money and church mix is a potential hotspot for controversy, and some churches are probably slow to change the way they do the offering because they’re afraid donations will decrease. The bigger risk, however, could be continuing to do things the old way.

If your church is still relying on passing the collection plate, here are some reasons you might want to rethink that:

Many people don’t use cash and checks anymore. I haven’t written an actual check in ten years. I do all my bill-paying online, including tithing. However, doing that has required some set-up on my part, and I’m not sure most people would or could go through the trouble. To facilitate giving, some churches are setting up giving kiosks in their main lobby or narthex. These are equipped with machines that accept debit and credit cards. Think self checkout stations in the supermarket. This supplements online giving opportunities churches may offer. The major upside to kiosks is that people can donate while they’re at church, which is when more of us are generally inspired to give.

Some people believe the negative stereotypes about churches and money. I talked to a friend recently who visited a new church. “How did you like it?” I asked. “The service was good except for one thing. They asked for money too much. The pastor kept passing the plate until the people had given a certain amount.” What a horror story. While most churches don’t approach that level of tackiness, you’d probably be surprised at how some practices we consider to be innocuous are actually perceived by visitors.

Passing the plate puts people on the spot. A few years ago, I was helping a fellow finance committee member count the Sunday offering. As he straightened a stack of dollar bills, he remarked, “People need to be educated about tithing. They think this place is the dollar movie theater.” I found the comment amusing (if rather harsh) but it made me think about why people give what they give. I’m sure there are some who only have a dollar to give, but I wonder how many put a dollar or two in so they won’t look like they’re giving nothing. We certainly shouldn’t think that way, but I’ll admit, since I give online and not during the church service, I sometimes wonder if people think I don’t give at all. (That’s assuming anyone even notices or cares. But when you’re in any kind of leadership, you’d be amazed at the conclusions people jump to.) The bottom line is, the offering is an awkward time for some people—second only to “pass the peace/greet everyone around you” time.

Someone could get the idea that church has a cover charge. Don’t laugh. When people are looking for reasons not to go to church, not wanting to feel pressure to give comes in just under not wanting to be judged and not having the proper “church attire”. Most churches are really good about telling visitors not to feel compelled to give, but passing around offering plates still creates a potentially uncomfortable situation. With church, there are two types of uncomfortable—"good" uncomfortable and "bad" uncomfortable. This is bad uncomfortable.

Getting rid of the collection plates doesn’t mean getting rid of offering time. People need to have opportunities to give to God and invest in your church’s ministry. It’s an important part of worship. The main idea here is to create alternative ways for people to give—such as the kiosks I mentioned earlier, strategically placed (and securely mounted and locked) offering baskets or boxes, and an easy-to use online giving option. A mobile giving app is another idea that offers both convenience and immediacy for the giver. If your church has weekly communion or prayer time, people can bring offerings to the altar rail (or equivalent) too.

Even if you choose to retain the collection plate, pushing alternative ways of donating gives people who don’t use the plate permission to be more comfortable in your church. And that’s a definite win for everyone.

BLOG: 5 Lessons from 'Caine's Arcade'

Sun, 15 Apr 2012 20:37:12 GMT

By Shane Raynor

The newest celebrity on the Internet is a nine year old kid from East Los Angeles. If you haven't heard of Caine Monroy, he's the star of a short film by Nirvan Mullick that has gone viral on YouTube and Vimeo. Since "Caine's Arcade" was posted last week, it has been viewed around 4 million times between the two video sharing sites. And a college fund the filmmaker set up for Caine now has over $151,000 in it.

If you haven't seen the video yet, watch it below, then scroll down and I'll tell you why I think "Caine's Arcade" has struck a chord, and I'll also share a few lessons I believe we can learn from this kid.

On The Fox Report newscast last night, someone mentioned that this video has been making grown men cry. Perhaps it's because it connects so many of us to our childhoods. I remember being Caine's age and building vending machines out of cardboard boxes. You probably remember doing something similar when you were a kid. If you did, this video will make you feel like a kid again, at least for a few minutes.

But there's more to this story than stirring up nostalgia and sentimentality—there are some simple lessons in the video that we can benefit from if we'll pay attention:

A positive attitude pays off. Caine Monroy sets up a "business" where there there is little foot traffic, and until the filmmaker comes along, he has no customers. But day after day, he doesn't get discouraged, and he doesn't give up. In fact, he keeps building games for his arcade. Because of his positive attitude and perseverance, this kid is probably going to do something huge someday.

Sometimes you need to learn to work with what little you have before you're given more. Creative people are going to find a way to make things. And in some way, most of us are creative. Caine creates his games from used cardboard boxes and odds and ends in his dad's used auto parts store. His industriousness and resourcefulness are pretty impressive.

Sometimes you have to be persistent. His father's auto parts store isn't in a great part of town anyway, and most of the business is done on eBay, so there aren't many potential customers for Caine. But he keeps asking people to play his games, and he doesn't give up because people say no.

Fathers are important. Caine's dad is quietly supportive. He gives him space to build his arcade (partly to keep the kid occupied, granted) and he encourages him. But I also get the impression that this man doesn't coddle his son. In the film, Caine's dad doesn't try to protect him from disappointment or failure. The fact is, just being there for his kid is the biggest thing a father can do. I wonder how much of Caine's work ethic and positive attitude comes from watching his dad constantly reinventing a declining auto parts store.

We need to recover our childhood wonder. Somewhere between the ages of 10 and 30, many of us forget how to dream the way a kid dreams. And it's a shame. Cynicism has taken its toll on our culture, which is part of the reason so many of us fall into a pessimistic existence. We don't dream as big, and we stop believing we can do great things. Instead of really living life, we settle for just getting through it. When I watched this video, I thought about when Jesus said to become like children. The wonder, the excitement, the simple belief that we can accomplish huge things—that's part of what we need to rediscover.

This video is about one kid, but there are kids everywhere like Caine who need encouragement. I was a latchkey kid in the 80's and I thought I was forced to grow up fast, but I didn't have anything on kids today. Too many of them are already losing hope by the time they reach middle school, and it's heartbreaking.

"Caine's Arcade" is a reminder of the good things that can still happen in America.

BLOG: Is Mass Evangelism Dead?

Thu, 12 Apr 2012 20:50:08 GMT

By Shane Raynor

I’ve come to the realization that mass evangelism is becoming increasingly less effective. I know that’s not exactly an earth-shattering revelation. It has become fairly obvious, at least here in the United States. In 1994 I attended my first open air evangelistic crusade in Raleigh, NC—the evangelist was Franklin Graham, and his father Billy made a special appearance on the final night of the event. It was huge! Over 20,000 people attended. If you’re Gen-X or older, you know the routine. There was opening music from a Christian rock band. (Franklin was considered much edgier than his dad back in the day.) Then there was a stirring sermon with an invitation to come down to pray with a counselor and commit your life to Christ. Many people became Christians or renewed their commitments to Jesus. Baptist, Methodist, Pentecostal, and Catholic churches (and every other Christian denomination) came together to make sure the event was a success. For this wide-eyed college student, it was a pretty awesome sight to behold.

Times have changed. You don’t see big crusades as much nowadays. 21st century ministries and churches rely more on festivals, concerts, and community outreach extravaganzas to reach the lost. And even those events aren’t as explicitly evangelistic as their predecessors were a generation ago. While many churches still do some form of the altar call, more seem to be moving toward relational and small group evangelism as the primary strategies for bringing people to Christ.

Why is that? The Gospel certainly isn’t less true than it was in the heydays of John Wesley, Charles Finney, or Billy Graham. And we know people generally aren’t less sinful now or less in need of mercy and grace. Has wholesale evangelism really become less effective, or are we just doing it wrong?

I think it’s some of both, but it’s definitely harder nowadays to get through to a lot of people, so one on one evangelism has become critical. I’ve come up with a few reasons why I believe that’s the case.

There’s too much noise. In 2012, everywhere we go, there’s a screen with virtually an infinite amount of entertainment and information choices competing for our attention. And many of us tend to gravitate toward the people and ideas we’re most comfortable with. As society has become increasingly unchurched, the odds of a nonbeliever wandering into a gospel crusade or church are much smaller now. And unless they’re up at 6am flipping through basic cable channels, the likelihood of bumping into Joyce Meyer is less also. Truth be told, evangelism has always been about relationships. The Franklin Graham crusade in the 90’s relied on people bringing their nonchristian friends and relatives to make it work. But back then, you could often see results by dragging someone to an event and letting someone else preach the Gospel to them. It’s not as easy now, partly because—

People are more cynical and skeptical. This is closely related to the noise factor. When more people are saying different things, their perceived “authority” gets diluted. Consider how this has played out in the television news industry. In 1994 there were the three big network newscasts and CNN. While some would say those outlets often exhibited an ideological or partisan bias, most people viewed them as somewhat authoritative. I’ve even heard the three network news anchors of earlier eras half-jokingly referred to as “the voice of God”. Now that there are two additional big cable news channels and many other specialty channels, people can choose their news and opinion to match their own political views. But not without a price. When the news can be served any way you want it, people start losing faith in the news. It’s the same with religion. When it comes to finding out more about Jesus, many nonchristians are more likely to respond to someone they know well and respect than some stranger or televangelist.

We’re in an age of personalization. Companies like Facebook and Google target ads to individuals now. Broadcasting was the way to reach people in the past; today it’s narrowcasting. A principle for evangelism applies here: knowing people is a key to reaching them. The better you know someone, the easier it is to have an impact on the decisions they make. (Yes, there are exceptions. It’s still quite difficult to evangelize family members. But that’s another discussion altogether.) Bottom line: We’re more likely to be effective witnessing to someone in our circle of influence than to complete strangers.

People need follow-up. John Wesley and the early Methodist movement understood this—but many of us don’t. That’s where the Methodist class meetings originated, and it’s part of the reasoning behind the church small group movement today. But without the personal factor of friends inviting friends and holding each other accountable, the odds of new converts falling through the cracks increase tremendously. No one would deliver a baby (or many babies) and leave them alone without care and nourishment. Yet we somehow manage to do that very thing in the spiritual realm every day with new believers.

Finally, there’s the prayer factor. From my observations, prayers that are more specific seem to be more effective and get the most defined answers. This is true for prayers related to evangelism and personal growth as well. There’s a big difference between praying for generic “people” to come to Christ and praying for “my friend John” to come to Christ. For one, we’re going to be more passionate about praying for individuals, and even more so when we’re close to them. Passion is a key to prayer. I’m convinced that even when mass evangelism has been successful in the past, much of that fruit can be attributed to people praying for individuals.

Mass evangelism won’t go away, it will evolve. But one-size fits all evangelism is long gone (if it ever really existed at all). Now more than ever, we can’t depend on celebrity preachers, our own pastors, or even viral online videos to do most of our evangelism for us. Some plant, some water, and God makes the seeds grow. And then some get to see the harvest. Truthfully, evangelism has always been a group effort anyway. It’s just becoming more apparent in the 21st century.

BLOG: Getting over the 2:30 Wall

Wed, 11 Apr 2012 17:07:34 GMT

By Shane Raynor

You’ve probably seen the commercials for 5-Hour Energy, the energy shot that supposedly helps you overcome the "2:30 feeling". I know the 2:30 feeling well. But for me, it doesn’t come only with tiredness and lack of energy. Usually it’s accompanied by confusion and anxiety. There are times when I experience it at such a level that I literally can’t get anything done. It’s as if I’m seized by a creative paralysis. I’ve exhibited symptoms of ADHD since childhood (before it was even called that) so I’ve always had to work hard at keeping myself focused. But this was turning into something bigger than that. A few months ago, I finally reached the point where I felt like I might need to get professional help. But I’m a stubborn guy, and I love thinking through things and solving problems, so I decided to work through it myself. I’ve given out a lot of advice over the years. Why does it seem like it’s easier to help other people with their issues than it is to deal with my own?

Whenever I run into a problem that makes absolutely no sense to me, I assume that at least part of it might be spiritual. So in late 2011 I started taking a “spiritual inventory”. But I didn’t stop there. I began to look analytically at every area of my life— including sleep, nutrition, exercise, and prayer—and I discovered some big problems.

My prayer life had become less consistent than it had been in the past. My diet was horrible. I wasn’t exercising regularly and my desk job was taking a toll on my health. I realized I had to do some things differently.

Over the last few months, I’ve gradually introduced some bold changes to my routine. Here are some of the biggest ones:

I changed the way I ate. No, I didn’t make dramatic changes all at once, but I started tracking all the food I was consuming on a daily basis. It’s amazing how simply writing down what you eat makes you eat healthier. (Tracking your spending helps you waste less money too. It’s the same principle.) I used the program at Weight Watchers Online. (You don’t have to go to meetings with this version of WW.) SparkPeople is a free alternative to Weight Watchers that is similar in its approach. I increased my protein and fiber intake and lowered my consumption of sugar. (Goodbye sugar highs and crashes!) I also added some basic nutritional supplements. As of this writing, I’ve lost 46 pounds with six more to go to reach goal. I weigh the same now as I weighed my freshman year of college. It doesn’t take a genius to figure out that I’m feeling more energetic now partly because I’m not dragging around an extra 46 pounds.
I changed my sleeping habits. Honestly, I believe I’m wired to be a night owl. But that wasn’t working for me and I finally faced the truth. So I did the unthinkable. I started going to bed at 8 or 9 and started getting up at 3 or 4. Now I begin the day with Bible reading and prayer, then I get a jump start on the rest of my day by reading, brainstorming, and writing. I’ve found that by front-loading my days like this, I’m getting enough sleep and I’m not tired in the afternoons. I also am able to hit the ground running when I get to work instead of figuring out everything after I get there.
I ditched the caffeine. I’ve actually done this before and somehow I always seem to gradually go back to it. But this time I think I’m going to stay on the wagon. You see, I was probably drinking a pot or two of coffee per day! But I had trouble sleeping because of the caffeine in my system, and the "2:30 wall" was partly a result of my body (and brain) crashing. I didn’t give caffeine up cold turkey, however. I weaned myself off of it over the course of about a week. (Caffeine withdrawal headaches are the worst!) Now I’m falling asleep quickly at night and I don't experience the afternoon crashes anymore.
At work, I replaced my conventional desk with a stand-up desk. I’m not sure everyone would like doing this, but I love it. My creativity and productivity have increased dramatically, and I seem to be full of energy all day. I have a whiteboard in my office that I use to brainstorm, and I walk back and forth to use it often. I also like to pace when I think, so I’ve made sure I have room to do that. Supposedly we burn more calories standing than sitting, so that’s another plus.
I’m more active. I’ve built more exercise into my routine, and I take a couple of quick workday breaks (one mid-morning and one during lunch) to do a few laps around the walking track. I often get ideas there for blog posts and articles so I keep my smartphone with me and keep track of everything using Evernote. (I don’t care how good you think your memory is, record every idea you get somewhere.)
I pray in the morning and throughout the day. I can’t overstate how important spending time with God has been in helping me make all these changes. I once did my praying mostly at night, but I’ve got to admit, for me, going into God's presence and looking forward to the day ahead has been more effective than reviewing my day with him at night. It grounds me and gives me the right mindset to tackle everything I need to. I’m also learning the value of praying throughout the day and getting God involved in the creative process as I write.

I’m still figuring this thing out, but I’m pleased to say that I haven’t experienced the afternoon crashes for a while now. I’m full of energy, sleeping well, and my productivity at work has grown by leaps and bounds. I’m also more upbeat.

If you’ve been struggling with the same problem I was dealing with, I encourage you to take your own “inventory” and gradually make some changes that will work for you. I’m pretty good at holding myself accountable once I set my mind to something, but that may be more difficult for you, so I certainly recommend getting accountability if you need it—from a friend, counselor, pastor, life coach, doctor—whoever you need to bring in to help you.

What steps have worked for you when you’ve struggled with problems like depression, anxiety, and lack of energy?

BLOG: Christians and 'Christ Followers'

Tue, 10 Apr 2012 18:25:20 GMT

By Shane Raynor

Lately I’ve noticed more than a few people, especially on social networks, referring to themselves as “Christ follower”, “Jesus follower”, or some other variation of Christian. It intrigued me at first and actually seemed kind of cool. Now I feel like it’s beginning to approach shopworn status.

There are several reasons someone might have for choosing to forgo the Christian label:

Negative associations: Christianity often gets a bad rap in our culture—sometimes deservedly so—but many times it’s because of an inordinate amount of negative publicity given to people identifying themselves as Christians but who come across as anything but Christlike. Some Christians don’t want to be seen as “guilty by association” so they shun the label.
Confusion: A Christian is someone who has a relationship with God through Jesus Christ. That’s how I define the word. But there’s not always a common understanding on what the word Christian means. For example, some use Christian as a term for evangelical or Protestant. When I worked in youth ministry, some of the teens in my youth group who had Catholic backgrounds thought this way. I had to explain on more than one occasion that both Catholics and Protestants can be Christians. Others consider themselves Christians if anyone in their family has ever been Christian—it’s viewed as a heritage thing. So people who avoid calling themselves Christians may choose some other term because they feel it better expresses what they're trying to say.
Word fatigue: Sometimes words are used (or misused) so much that we stop thinking about what they really mean. At that point, we take a mental shortcut and “think what we always think” rather than approaching words with fresh eyes. When someone uses the word Christian, I ask myself what they might mean by it, but there are probably some who don’t ask anything, they just assume they know. Using a less common term is more likely to catch people off guard and make them wonder what it is you're really trying to get across.
A desire to be taken more seriously: Perhaps some Christians want to let people know that they’re not just “nominal” Christians. Let’s face it, when practically anyone is allowed to use a name, the “brand” can get diluted. There’s a fascinating article out today from the Associated Press that talks about generic brand names. Did you know that aspirin, escalator, and heroin were once trademarked brand names, but they lost their trademarks because the names fell into common usage? Now, the companies owning the trademarks to Kleenex®, Band-Aid®, Xerox®, and the iPad® are having to figure out how to maintain the ubiquity of their brands without their trademarks being deemed “too generic”. Since anyone who wants to call themselves a Christian can do so, there’s technically no quality control for the brand. Maybe that’s why many believers run from the word.

When people call themselves Christ followers, my first instinct is to be a smart aleck and ask them which Christ they follow! (Christ is the same as messiah. And there are plenty of “messiahs” out there to follow.) Plus, I always feel like they’re playing that old party game Taboo, the one where you get buzzed (not that kind of buzzed) if you use a word from the list of forbidden words on the game card. And frankly “Christ follower” sounds both archaic and sci-fi—like something Teal’c might say on Stargate SG-1. I’m really not trying to be too critical—as I mentioned before, people have legitimate reasons to use different terms if they want, but I generally stick with the old school terminology. I’ve avoided using alternative terms for Christian mostly because I don’t think there is any single word that gets the same idea across with as much simplicity and clarity. I just say that I’m a Christian, explain it when necessary, and let the chips fall where they may. It is what it is.

BLOG: Avoiding Unnecessary Mistakes

Mon, 09 Apr 2012 15:44:43 GMT

By Shane Raynor

Have you ever given advice to someone knowing they were going to do the exact opposite of what you were telling them to do?

It happens to me a lot, although I guess it’s fitting. I’ve certainly ignored my fair share of good advice and faced the consequences. But as I’ve matured in my faith, I’ve discovered a simple truth. It’s usually less painful to learn from other people’s mistakes than it is to learn from your own.

Ultimately, it’s a faith issue. You see, faith is really the same as belief—not just belief on an intellectual level—an active belief. When we ask someone for their advice and don’t take it, we’re essentially saying, “I don’t believe you.” Or maybe we do believe them on some level, but not enough to take heed to what they have to say. And many times, we know the bad things that will probably happen but we still do our own thing anyway.

It’s more difficult in the short term to believe someone else’s wisdom, but it’s usually a lot less trouble in the long run. I don’t necessarily buy the notion that the only lessons that stick with us are the ones we learn for ourselves. Certainly we remember those lessons better, and we get a little more “street cred” when talking to others about certain issues, but why would we insist on going through problems when we don’t have to?

Christianity is not built on the premise, “Seeing is believing.” (Sorry, Thomas.) That’s the way the rest of the world operates. We Christians are in our element when we’re required to believe something before we see it. In John 20, Thomas refused to believe Jesus was alive unless he saw Jesus for himself and touched his wounds. Thomas was eventually satisfied and came to believe, but it wasn’t exactly a leap of faith for him. It’s easy to believe Jesus is alive when he’s physically standing right in front of you!

Biblical faith is defined in Hebrews 11:1: “Faith is the reality of what we hope for, the proof of what we don’t see.” (CEB) At the risk of oversimplifying it, faith is believing God—or taking God’s word for it. But if only it were that easy. Trouble is, God doesn’t just speak to us through Scripture and through the Holy Spirit. Often he uses other Christians, occasionally he uses an unsuspecting nonbeliever, and sometimes he speaks to us through the ones we really don’t want to listen to: our relatives!

That leads me to another point—the closer we are to people, it seems like the less we want to listen to them. That’s why I like to also get advice from solid, reputable Christians I don’t know very well. And it’s why I read tons of books. I’ve avoided making many mistakes by reading about the mistakes others have made. Books are a relatively low-cost way of learning at someone else’s expense!

Jesus told Thomas, “Happy are those who don’t see and yet believe.” Many translations also use the word blessed. When we exercise Biblical faith (believing before we see) we move heaven and receive blessings. I’m going to add my own corollary to what Jesus said... Happy and blessed are those who come to a place where they’re able to learn from the mistakes of others. We’re not meant to learn everything through our own successes and failures! Christianity has a group component! We’re supposed to build on what those who came before us learned and on what we learn from Christians around us. That’s how we reach new heights in Christ!

Do we seriously need to duplicate the same mistakes Christians make all over the planet, generation after generation? How inefficient is that?

BLOG: 4 Good Things about the Call to Action

Mon, 02 Apr 2012 14:57:31 GMT

By Shane Raynor

When Adam Hamilton, Mike Slaughter, Rudy Rasmus, and many other United Methodist Church leaders recently signed their names on an open letter in support of the Call to Action legislation, it got my attention. If you aren’t familiar with this proposal, it essentially restructures The United Methodist Church’s governing boards and agencies to help the denomination run more efficiently and (hopefully) become more effective at bringing people to Christ and making real disciples. It also deals with clergy accountability, and one of the major changes it would make is ending guaranteed appointment for pastors. There are other proposed changes too, including the redirection of up to $60 million in church funds over four years to developing future United Methodist leaders. I won’t go into all the details—you can read more here. But I will share a few thoughts and observations:

Change is good.

In a denomination not known for changing quickly, you’ve got to give props to those who crafted this proposal. Its recommended changes are pretty dramatic. Is it perfect? No. I’m sure most of us would tweak a few things here and there if we could. But more than anything I’ve seen, it seems to “get it." Communication, ministry, and the way we must do church to reach the world are all changing. Even the rate of change is changing! When you only get one shot in four years to reorganize things, any changes that will make a noticeable impact are going to seem like a shock to the system. Is it risky? Perhaps a little, but reward usually only comes with risk. The bigger risk is doing nothing.

Accountability is good.

Some of us are uncomfortable with the idea of using metrics and vital indicators to evaluate clergy, but the reality is, numbers tell a story. Whether it’s baptisms, professions of faith, weekly attendance, offerings, or some other figure, statistics help churches gauge what’s going on in their ministries. Numbers don’t always tell the whole story, but if kept accurately and consistently, they tell a big part of it. And numbers provide a more objective way to evaluate clergy than what we currently have. The proposed end of the guaranteed appointment system seems like a positive step for accountability, although I’m not sure it will be well received without some kind of tradeoff. Many pastors see guaranteed appointment as a “perk” to offset the perceived disadvantages of being part of the itinerancy. The problem is, guaranteed appointment has become (to some) like teacher tenure or “immunity from getting voted off the island”. But systems for evaluating job performance have been ubiquitous in the private sector for years. The same pressure hasn’t existed to the same degree in the public and nonprofit sectors—but in a tight economy where productivity and efficiency matter more and more, that’s quickly changing. If it’s done fairly and consistently, I believe implementing the proposed accountability system will make The United Methodist Church stronger.

Consolidation is good.

I’ve been United Methodist my whole life, and I work for a church agency (the United Methodist Publishing House, which enthusiastically gives me a platform to share my opinions on these matters but doesn’t necessarily endorse what I write.) Yet I’ll admit, even with my UM background, I don’t understand every role and function of every agency we have. But I do know that simplifying an organization every so often is a good thing. Many churches already do it regularly at the local level. Every now and then you have to figure out where you’re duplicating efforts and get everyone on the same page. And sometimes you have to ask honest questions about the amount of leadership and bureaucracy you have. Is the system helping or hindering ministry? Even if you don’t shrink staff at all, streamlining systems and structures makes an organization more productive because it potentially frees up people and resources so the organization can do more things (or do what it’s already doing even better).

Reevaluating spending is good.

With my personal finances, I analyze my spending patterns occasionally and I look for ways to save money. I find areas in my budget where I spend too much money and figure out how I can move that cash to something that’s more of an investment for the future. I also adjust goals from time to time. What was important to me five years ago may not be as important to me today. It’s not a formal process, but I do think about my budget on a regular basis. Perhaps you do the same thing. Now if we’re that thorough with our own money, shouldn’t we at least have the same attitude about money from the offering plate? As a denomination, we’ve decided that planting churches and developing young leaders are going to be high priorities. Part of the Call to Action proposal redirects some church funds to those priorities. That doesn’t seem unreasonable to me, although I understand how controversial it might be, especially if an area that has a decrease in funding is one you’re passionate about. But in these tough economic times, most of us are having to learn to do more with less—the church is no exception. I don’t see that changing for a while, and increasing apportionment percentages isn’t a real option. For every existing budget item to get at least the same size piece of pie, we need to grow the pie. When the church grows again, the pie will get bigger.

I find it fascinating how our church’s struggles with budgets, priorities, and accountability seem to parallel similar debates taking place right now in our federal government. I’m confident, however, that The United Methodist Church will handle business in a much more civil, mature, and efficient fashion than Washington has dealt with its issues. As for the Call to Action legislation, there’s much I like about it, but I’m keeping an open mind and examining the other ideas too. Those of us who aren’t delegates have an important role in the 2012 General Conference—prayer. Let’s not take the responsibility lightly—let’s pray that God will give the delegates the wisdom they need to make good decisions later this month in Tampa.

ARTICLE: Control Freak: 5 Ways to Stop Being One

Wed, 28 Mar 2012 21:28:52 GMT

By Shane Raynor

Whether you’re a pastor, parent, teacher, youth minister—or you’re an employer or manager in the marketplace—you’re in leadership. You’re influencing people at some level. Even if you’re someone’s “boss” in a work setting, you probably understand that the most effective leaders are the ones who can get people to go places without forcing them. Think back to your days in school. Good teachers could be strict and run a tight ship, but the great teachers were the ones who made you actually want to learn, even on your own. It’s the difference between lighting a fire under someone and lighting one inside them.

People have free will. Most of us like making decisions for ourselves and we don’t like being told what to do. Even when we must submit to and/or obey authority, we want to at least be heard. We want to make a contribution. We want some ownership in the things we do. Real leaders understand this very human tendency and figure out how to make it work in their favor. Are you a micromanager? Do you want to put your hands in everything? Micromanager is actually just another way of saying control freak (it’s just a more polite way to say it!)

True leaders don’t need to control other people. They don’t need to micromanage them. This lesson has taken a while for me to learn. Many of the mistakes I’ve made in ministry, work, and life have been the result of me trying to control how other people behave. There are two big problems with this approach to dealing with others—it doesn’t usually work well and it causes a ridiculous amount of stress! We were never designed to carry this type of burden.

If you’re tired feeling “out of control” because you always want to be in control, here are a few ideas to help you break the control addiction and resist that temptation to micromanage:

Pray for the people you lead. This isn’t the "if all else fails" option, it’s the first thing you should do, and not just because of all the cool ways God gets involved in situations when you pray for people. When you regularly bring others before God in prayer, you’re admitting that there’s a line between you and others where your influence ends. Anything beyond it is an attempt to control or manipulate them. Prayer recognizes this and helps change your attitude about how you deal with others. But be careful. Sometimes we think it’s okay to pray for God to control others for us. But God respects human free will more than we do, so those kinds of prayers usually go nowhere fast.

Equip people, but let them fight their own battles. Whether it’s a work or ministry setting, it’s important to let people face their own obstacles and have the opportunity to make mistakes. Dealing with obstacles successfully gives them more confidence when they face the same kind of obstacles again, and it builds them up to face even bigger ones. That’s how people grow. When they make mistakes, they’ll learn a lot more from their mistakes than they’ll learn from hearing you tell them about yours. When I worked in youth ministry, I was quite protective of my students. I didn’t want to see any of them get caught up in alcohol, drugs, or premarital sex. I’m ashamed to say I became rather preachy and overbearing. Finally, one kid told me, “Shane, you can’t make our decisions for us. Your job is to teach us and give us advice. It’s up to us to use what you give us. We have to learn from our own mistakes the same way you learned from yours.” He was right. Of course, we can’t just let someone drive off a cliff, but in most situations, we could probably afford let go a little and trust people to use the knowledge and tools we’ve given them.

Give people choices. Even if the choices are limited, people like having a say in the projects they’re involved in and the things that affect their lives. Remember being a kid and eating in the school cafeteria? Even when your choice was shoe leather salisbury steak or burnt lasagna, at least you had a choice! And the food was a little more bearable because of it. Having choices boosts morale. Instead of telling people what they should do, you’re inviting them to collaborate with you. Giving people this kind of ownership in ministry or work projects can be a little risky, but as the leader you’re still setting the parameters for the outcome to a degree. And the dividends you get back by giving up a little control are well worth the risk.

Ask guided questions. The lessons we remember most are usually the ones we learn for ourselves. Instead of telling people what to think (or telling them what you think) try to get them to think through things for themselves by asking the right questions. It’s like the difference between copying the answer for a math problem and actually working through the problem to get the answer. You know the answer both ways, but you know much more when you find it on your own. Whether it’s something that has a definite right answer or simply a matter of personal opinion, asking questions gives others opportunities to be involved in the thinking and decision making process.

Be positive. You’ll be a better leader for doing it. Sometimes leaders see short term gains by being negative or invoking fear, but there’s usually some collateral damage—group morale, enthusiasm, loyalty, and respect for the leader to name a few. It’s much more effective to lead with hope and optimism, and a lot more fun, too.

The Bible says, “Where the Lord’s Spirit is, there is freedom.” Galatians 5 lists the fruit of the Spirit, one of which is self-control. You’ll notice that one of the main indicators of the Holy Spirit’s work in our lives is self-control, not controlling other people. Controlling ourselves is difficult enough—controlling others is next to impossible. The best leaders figure out how to influence without manipulating and how to manage the big picture without smothering their people on the details.

BLOG: Political Questions for Christians

Tue, 20 Mar 2012 20:34:31 GMT

By Shane Raynor

I’ve not been watching the battle for the United States Republican presidential nomination as closely as I did in previous election cycles, but I’ve seen enough to draw the conclusion that, barring some cataclysmic event in the GOP, Mitt Romney will be the party’s nominee. Republicans, after all, tend to nominate the person who’s “next in line” or a party “brand name”.

The big question on my mind is just how much of a role religion will play in the general election if Romney becomes the nominee. If that happens, this will be the scenario: the incumbent will be from a theologically liberal Christian tradition and the challenger will be from a quasi-Christian church.

Some will consider the label “quasi-Christian” offensive, but the fact is most Christian denominations don’t recognize the LDS Church as a legitimate part of historical Christianity. And the Latter-day Saints actually make it a practice to proselytize active Catholics and Protestants. So really, the LDS Church itself is as responsible as anyone for its exclusion from mainstream Christianity. But since faith is ultimately a personal matter, membership in the Mormon church doesn’t necessarily disqualify an individual from being a Christian. And attending or belonging to a mainstream Christian church isn’t what makes someone a Christian.

Both Mitt Romney and President Obama have both openly confessed a personal faith in Jesus Christ—as did George W. Bush, Bill Clinton, George Bush the elder, Ronald Reagan, Jimmy Carter... the list goes on. But anyone can say they’re a Christian, and considering how religious the United States electorate is (compared to other Western nations), declaring oneself not a Christian probably wouldn’t be considered too wise politically.

Whether you’re someone who takes President Obama and Governor Romney at their word or you doubt the Christian faith of one or both candidates, here are some questions and ideas to consider as 2012 moves along:

If given the choice between a Christian candidate and a nonchristian one, should Christians vote for the candidate closer to their own political views or for the one they feel is more likely to have a personal relationship with God through Jesus Christ?
Is electing a president more similar to appointing or calling a pastor or to hiring the CEO of a company?
Is it better to elect someone who’s currently “wrong” on many of the issues but will bring God into their decision-making process or someone who seems to have the issues figured out but has no Christian faith?
How much more seriously would you evaluate candidates’ faith and character if there were no political parties?
Are you letting your faith shape your political views or is it the other way around?
Is it reasonable to expect Christian government officials not to let their faith play a role in how they approach their duties?
Can a serious Christian isolate their faith from their professional or political life? Would that even be desirable if they could?
Who are you more uncomfortable around (or suspicious of)—those who share your faith but not your political views or those who share your political views but not your faith? The answer to this question could be an indicator of how much your political ideology may have become an idol for you.
Both political parties share some common goals, but they often disagree on how to go about achieving those goals. Most people want better education, less sickness, and a higher standard of living for more people. And practically no one wants people in poverty. That’s important to remember in our polarized society where political orthodoxy unfortunately seems to trump religious orthodoxy, even among many Christians.

The best way to change your mindset and get above the political fray is to commit to praying for both President Obama and Governor Romney regularly between now and Election Day. Prayer not only shapes and changes history, it has a way of changing the attitudes of those who pray. When you’re praying for someone consistently, even your enemy, it becomes much more difficult to speak of them in an attacking or disrespectful way.

We’re told in Scripture to seek God’s kingdom first, but when it comes to bringing in God’s kingdom, politics only gets us so far. This will be an extremely important election but we should take heart. No matter who wins, God will still be God.

So exercise the freedom to get involved in the political process this year and vote your conscience, but don’t forget who you are. And don’t forget that you have Christian brothers and sisters in the other political party.

BLOG: Positive Christians

Mon, 12 Mar 2012 19:54:56 GMT

By Shane Raynor

Once upon a time I was addicted to cable news. I also enjoyed watching Bill Maher’s show (the old one on ABC), and I regularly listened to talk radio (both right and left). Even in the Christian world, I thrived for years on intense theological debates—and for a period of time I listened to a lot of Christian radio—including a show called The Bible Answer Man.

But something happened.

As I've grown in my faith, my outlook has changed. Now when I watch TV news, I generally skip commentary and debate shows and I can't stand more than a few minutes of even the hard news. I avoid Bill Maher like the plague (he’s gotten really bitter and cynical). I don’t discuss theology with most people (arguing bores me), and I’m no longer impressed by churches or ministries that spend most of their time focusing on the wrong doctrines other people believe.

Let’s be clear... it’s important to stay informed, even when there’s bad news. And a healthy dose of skepticism (not cynicism) can be useful. Discussing theology can be both positive and stimulating (especially when you're discussing theories and possibilities). Cults aren’t good, and bad doctrine isn’t either, and we definitely need teachers to explain why. Unpleasant things shouldn't be swept under the rug. And not all conflict is unhealthy.

But if negativity and disagreement aren’t kept in the proper perspective, they can pollute our outlook, affect our faith, and change who we are— for the worse.

This is actually a problem with our culture that has invaded the church. Consider the current political climate, for example. Conventional wisdom says that you can’t win an election without “going negative.” And the statistics seem to back that up. We’ve conditioned ourselves as a people to respond more to negativity than positivity—and we’re paying a price for it. People seem to trust other people less now, and in some cases I believe that’s contributed to a cycle of self-fulfilling prophecies and “living down” to others’ expectations.

How do you approach relationships? When you interact with other believers, what do you see first, their potential or their rough edges? Do you consider it more important to get rid of their bad qualities or to help them develop their good qualities? It’s not an either/or proposition—but your own outlook and frame of reference says a lot about who you are. Do you approach life as an optimist or a pessimist? (If you say you’re a realist, you’re probably a pessimist who’s in denial.)

At its core, Christianity is good news. The Bible says that God works all things together for good for the ones who love him. Even the most solemn day on the Christian calendar is called Good Friday. Where there’s pain and sickness, Christians see opportunities for healing. Where there’s sin, we see opportunities for grace, mercy, repentance, and redemption. And we’re told to deal with enemies and haters by loving them. Positivity is in our DNA.

In fact, Christians should be so hopeful and optimistic that we make the rest of the world crazy trying to figure out why we're like that.

What’s stopping us?

ARTICLE: Is a Critical Spirit Hindering Your Ministry?

Fri, 24 Feb 2012 16:17:54 GMT

By Shane Raynor

One of the the big obstacles to Christian unity and spiritual power in the church is something I’ve observed to be an ever-increasing critical spirit. (I’m not referring to an actual spiritual being here, but rather an inclination or tendency of a person or group.) I’m as guilty as anyone. Recently I read an article published on Ministry Matters, and I didn’t make it past the first paragraph before I announced to everyone within earshot, “This guy has gone off the rails! What is he thinking?” I almost stopped reading because I figured there was nothing in the rest of the article that could possibly benefit me.

Isn’t it easy to do that? We write people off because of their politics, their theology, the way they interpret the Bible, their denomination, their book publisher... I’m not even sure why we do it. Perhaps it’s arrogance—or perhaps it’s a modern strain of doctrinal puritanism. Of course, we justify it with the excuse that we’re keeping ourselves from being led astray.

I grew up United Methodist, but I developed an early appreciation for other traditions. In high school I began working at a nondenominational Christian bookstore, and I read everything I could get my hands on. Evangelical authors, classic authors, charismatic authors, and of course, the “safe” mainline authors (sometimes too safe!) As a result, my theology became quite multi-faceted—and continues to evolve that way to this day.

The problem with shutting out voices that disagree with you is that you run out of people to listen to after a while and you stop growing! Seriously, what good is reading books by people with whom you’re inclined to agree on practically everything? Surrounding yourself with "yes men" is a telltale sign of insecurity. Confident Christians stretch themselves on a regular basis—intellectually and spiritually.

But listening to people who challenge you isn’t enough. If you’re only interacting with someone so you can shoot them down or you’re reading books with a red pen in hand and no highlighter, you’ve missed the point entirely. When I read a book or an article by someone I’m inclined to be “suspicious” of, I try to go into it with the attitude, “What might God be saying to me through this? What can I learn?” Usually I find something, whether the author is liberal or conservative, Protestant or Catholic, high church or low church. Often I’m surprised at how God reveals himself to my theological rivals and to garden variety “heretics”.

I’m not suggesting that everyone is right or that there’s no absolute truth. What I am suggesting is that sticking exclusively with your own Christian tribe is not only boring, it may keep you from experiencing everything God has for you. Theological inbreeding produces weak Christianity. There’s a biological principle called heterosis, or hybrid vigor, that says that any biological quality of a hybrid offspring will have improved or increased function. Could this principle apply in some way to theology as well? If so, it could help explain the continuing decline of rigid denominationalism and the rise of nondenominational and interdenominational churches.

A few months ago I noticed I wasn’t as excited about reading as I used to be. No matter whose books I was reading, I just couldn’t get pumped up anymore. Everything seemed to either bore me or raise my blood pressure. I thought back to my high school and college days and remembered the wonder and excitement that once pervaded my Christian life. What had changed? Then I realized—I wasn’t running out of good things to read because I had become too “spiritually advanced”. I was in this rut because of my attitude. I had become unteachable. So I began to repent, and now I’m noticing that the wonder is returning. I’m even reading and re-reading books that I blew off before.

The devil specializes in putting up walls that keep us from fulfilling our purpose and reaching our potential in ministry. But sometimes we build those walls ourselves. If your ministry has stalled in some way or you’re in a spiritual rut, take a good look at your spirit and your attitude. Are you truly teachable or do you default to being critical and cynical? Ask those in your inner circle to help you do an honest assessment, then be willing to make positive changes.

BLOG: Bring in Your Kingdom

Mon, 20 Feb 2012 19:35:40 GMT

By Shane Raynor

The scripture passage accompanying today’s Upper Room devotional is Matthew 6:5-15, which includes the Lord’s Prayer. Those of us who grew up in traditional churches probably have this prayer memorized and could rattle it off with no difficulty. But while Bible memorization, (especially prayers!), is a positive thing, the familiarity can sometimes make it too easy to not think about what we’re saying, especially when we’re speaking a form of English that’s dated.

As I was reading today’s selection from the Common English Bible, verse 10 jumped off the page and smacked me:

Bring in your kingdom so that your will is done on earth as it’s done in heaven.

How easy it is to jump right over “Thy kingdom come” or “Your kingdom come” in the more traditionally worded prayer. But when I saw the words “Bring in your kingdom”, I realized that I’m actually asking God to do something pretty big!

What is this kingdom Jesus speaks of?

I have a few ideas about what I think it is, and you may have some thoughts as well. But I’m betting both of us are thinking too small. Christians talk a good game, but the church has a long way to go before most people would accuse of us helping bring in God’s kingdom.

That’s not meant to belittle the good things many Christians are doing.

But how much of what we do is mostly “passing out Band-Aids until Jesus comes back”?

When’s the last time most of us saw someone healed? What about an exorcism? (Do we still do those?) Do we know who the church’s modern day prophets are? (I mean besides the outspoken Christians who coincidentally happen to agree with us on most issues.) Is there an obvious spiritual dimension to what we do for God, or have we taken some of the positive things the secular world already does and just stamped “Jesus” on them?

Where’s the supernatural component to our ministries? Are there things happening that can only be explained by God’s power? Are we looking at our worship services, small groups, Sunday School classes, soup kitchens, and youth groups through spiritual eyes? Do we pay attention to what’s going behind the scenes? Do we understand that there’s an invisible realm which has a direct impact on the visible one?

When we pray to God, “Bring in your kingdom,” does it occur to us that that when we ask for one kingdom to be brought in, we’re praying for an opposing kingdom to be pushed out of the way?

Someone doesn’t like it when we do that. The Bible says that “God’s son appeared for this purpose: to destroy the works of the devil.” (1 John 3:8 CEB). When God’s kingdom is brought in, the devil’s kingdom is destroyed.

That’s exciting stuff! And it should be the norm for every Christian.

So the next time you pray that line from the Lord’s Prayer, understand the magnitude of what you’re asking for. And if you’re praying with an attitude of expectancy, get ready for big things to start happening.

BLOG: Pastor Visibility: Why Less is More

Wed, 15 Feb 2012 19:13:56 GMT

By Shane Raynor

I’ve attended churches where the pastor is a highly visible presence in the worship service from beginning to end. I’ve also been to churches where you’d probably have a difficult time figuring out who the lead pastor is until well into the service. So I’ll just throw a question out there for consideration: How visible should a pastor be during the main weekend service? My observations and instincts are telling me that less is more. I’ll share a few reasons why:

Strong personalities who try to dominate the service risk giving the congregation “pastor fatigue.” If your pastor is doing most of the prayers, leading the entire service, and preaching, people will be tempted to reach for their mental remotes and change the channel. Most growing churches have figured this out. Think about some of the larger “sermon-centric” churches you’ve been to. In many cases, I’m betting you didn’t even see the pastor until it was time for the message. That’s because pastors usually seem fresher and more effective during preaching if the congregation hasn’t already been watching and listening to them for 20 or 30 minutes. An unwritten rule in the entertainment industry is to “leave ‘em wanting more.” Some think it’s sacrilegious to draw parallels between the church and show business, but this principle applies to church too. No matter how talented a pastor is, there’s always a risk of having too much of a good thing.

Most pastors work better as part of an ensemble. Have you ever seen actors who are great in supporting roles but can’t carry a film by themselves to save their life? There are pastors like that too. And when they try to insert themselves into too many parts of the worship service, they come across as boring and insecure. In an episode of The Big Bang Theory, Sheldon’s friend Amy is helping him process the hard truth that he’s really not the nucleus of his group of friends—that distinction goes to his roommate Leonard. Their neighbor (and Leonard's ex-girlfriend) Penny interrupts their conversation with, “A lot of people think I’m fun to be around.” Amy replies, “Don’t be needy, bestie. That’s probably part of what chased Leonard away.” Ouch. Now there’s a life lesson—and it’s from a sitcom of all places. Don’t be needy, pastors. You don’t want to chase away your congregation.

Some pastors don’t have the gift of preaching. Yet many of them still insist on preaching week after week. Don’t misunderstand me—these pastors might be adequate preachers, but they’re not necessarily the most effective preachers. If that’s the case in your church, perhaps it would be judicious to train some gifted lay preachers (or associate pastors) to help carry the load. And it would free the lead pastor to develop areas of their ministry where they are more gifted. And even pastors who do have a big preaching gift need to give up the pulpit a few Sundays a year to get refreshed and give others in the church the opportunity to explore and develop their preaching or teaching gifts.

Too much pastor visibility sends the wrong message. The most effective churches train laypeople to do the bulk of their ministry. Some pastors would even tell you that they want more laypeople involved in the church’s ministries—but their services on Sunday mornings suggest otherwise. In setting a tone for how a church functions, perception can quickly become reality. If the congregation sees a variety of church members praying, taking the offering, reading scripture—even preaching—then they’re more likely to feel that they have permission to get involved in ministry on some level. But if they see a one-man or one-woman “show” every weekend, they’re probably going to treat Christianity like a spectator sport or rock concert. We can’t underestimate the power of personality in today’s culture, but placing too much emphasis on personality can be deadly for a church.

Pastors need opportunities to worship as part of the community. I noticed last Sunday that the pastor of my church was worshiping in a seat halfway to the back of the sanctuary. He didn’t go up front until it was time to deliver the sermon. This accomplished at least two things—it allowed him an opportunity to worship God without feeling like he was “under the spotlight” and for those who did notice him, it reinforced the fact that pastors are “regular people” just like everyone else, not “super-Christians.”

Can you think of other reasons why some pastors might do well to make themselves more scarce during the worship service? Can you think of reasons why lower visiblity might not be a good idea?

BLOG: Risky Bible Reading

Mon, 13 Feb 2012 18:19:08 GMT

By Shane Raynor

One of the best ways to get out of a spiritual or emotional rut is listening to what God has to say about your situation. Recognizing the voice of God isn’t always easy, however, so one way to start hearing him is hanging out in the Bible and reading it with an open, prayerful attitude. Devotional books or magazines, including The Upper Room and Daily Bible Study, are great for this purpose. If you want to learn to hear what God is saying now, start by listening to what he’s already said.

I recommend using some kind of resource as a road map to avoid the “Where Do I Start” syndrome. I don’t care for detailed reading plans—I prefer something with smaller chunks of scripture. One year Bible reading plans certainly have benefits, but I find that I rush through the readings if I’m checking passages off a list. And when I get a day or more behind, I either go faster to catch up or I “hit the reset button.” Either way, I feel like I failed somehow— or I feel like I’m defeating the purpose of reading scripture. To me, digging deeper (both spiritually and intellectually) is what makes Bible study exciting. Shorter Bible passages seem to work better for deep study.

With a devotional Bible study plan, I can give myself permission to read more than is required or miss a day without guilt. I usually read the passage that’s laid out for me using a Bible with cross references—that way I can explore a topic or theme as much or as little as I feel led to. Sometimes the devotional scripture passage is just a starting point and I end up in a totally different place and on another topic entirely.

I went through a phase when I didn’t use devotional resources at all—I thought they were too “fluffy” and didn’t go deep enough. But I realize now that it’s quite possible to take just one Bible verse and go places with it I never imagined. It should be noted that scripture is inspired by the Holy Spirit on at least two levels. It was inspired when the original authors wrote it and it’s inspired by the same Spirit when we read it.

Let that sink in for a minute.

God knows what he meant then and he knows what you and I need to get from scripture now.

Sometimes I get outlandish ideas from the Bible that wouldn’t work well for doctrinal purposes but they speak to me in my particular situation. I’ve even seen the Spirit use scripture out of context on occasion. (Please don’t tell the hermeneutics police.)

When the living Spirit uses the living Word, things get unpredictable and go off script sometimes. As important as creeds, systematic theologies, and doctrinal statements are, they are always much smaller than the God they point to.

We should of course “test the spirits to see if they are from God”, get input from other Christians, and avoid unilaterally projecting novel interpretations of scripture and “strange teachings” onto other believers in an authoritative way. The church needs checks and balances to keep us from going off the deep end. But we also need to recapture an adventurous theological spirit that understands we still have a lot to learn about how the Kingdom of God works.

BLOG: How Not to Speak for God

Wed, 25 Jan 2012 18:39:57 GMT

By Shane Raynor

Whether you’re a pastor, a teacher, or a "regular" Christian, God probably uses you to speak for him from time to time. You may not even realize he’s doing it. Since we often either don’t listen or can’t process it whenever he speaks to us directly (see Exodus 20:19), God uses other believers to speak into our lives and situations. It’s like a checks and balances system to keep us from deceiving ourselves.

In the Old Testament, God usually spoke through priests and prophets. Even under the New Covenant, we have pastors, priests, ministers, teachers and modern-day prophetic voices who communicate God’s word to us on a number of levels. But this is an age where the Holy Spirit is freely available to all God’s people, not just to a few chosen. So whether or not you’re in a special ministry role or have the spiritual gift of prophecy, you should look for opportunities to communicate to others what God is saying.

In Old Testament times, prophets showed up to bring a new word from God that could affect both the nation of Israel and people’s private lives. When Moses was talking about prophets who would succeed him, he said that God told him: “Any prophet who arrogantly speaks a word in my name that I haven’t commanded him to speak, or who speaks in the name of other gods—that prophet must die.” (Deuteronomy 18:20 CEB).

Most of us aren’t in the office of prophet, and thankfully we’re no longer under the old covenant—talk about pressure! But God still uses people to speak for him, and he still takes it quite seriously. So there are a couple of principles you can grab and apply from this passage when you’re communicating the word of God.

Specifically, there are things you’ll want to avoid:

Don’t speak arrogantly. Don’t be presumptuous when you speak. Don’t be insolent. Don’t show disrespect, either to God or to the people you’re talking to. No one likes a know-it-all, and no one wants to be talked down to. Don’t get a big head because you have a word from God— he’s even spoken through a donkey on at least one occasion. (See Numbers 22:22-35.)

Don’t say something is a word from God when it’s not. Watch how you present information—if you’re not sure about what you're saying, perhaps you should give a disclaimer. Speaking in God's name is a big deal, even if the situation isn't a formal one. The word name in the Deuteronomy passage can mean honor, fame, or reputation. So when you're perceived by others to be speaking for God, you’re not only putting your reputation on the line, but God’s reputation too. So unless God leads you to do it kicking and screaming, you might consider omitting “This is what God says...” If what you say is truly from God, it will become evident to people over time.

Don’t speak in the name of other gods. We know there’s really only one God, but there are plenty of idols in our lives. When you’re attempting to share God’s word, make sure what you’re saying isn’t coming from your personal political and economic views and that you’re not emphasizing your own pet theologies. Watch everything else you say too. If people hear foolishness coming out of your mouth most of the time, how will they know to listen when you actually tell them something that might be from God?

Prophets speak on behalf of God to people, and occasionally, on behalf of individuals or a group of people to God. (See “prophet” in The CEB Bible Dictionary). Most of us probably don’t speak much for God in a formal capacity or come anywhere close to occupying a modern day “office of prophet”. Most Christian traditions don’t even have such a thing—not officially anyway. God, however, still uses people to get his message out, and when you’re the messenger (on whatever level), it’s imperative to take what you’re communicating seriously, verify it, and share it with an appropriate attitude.

BLOG: Being Salt

Fri, 06 Jan 2012 15:57:58 GMT

By Shane Raynor

Salt doesn’t get as much respect as it used to. It has become so ubiquitous in modern times, especially in processed foods, that most of us probably get way more sodium than we need. With some people, too much salt has become a serious health issue.

Still, if you’ve had the misfortune of eating McDonald’s french fries with no salt at all (not even added by the restaurant), you realize how important it really is! McDonald’s fries sans the salt are a culinary disaster of the first order.

In the ancient world, just like today, salt served two basic purposes: seasoning and preserving food. Jesus probably had that in mind when he used a salt metaphor in the middle of the Sermon on the Mount:

You are the salt of the earth. But if salt loses its saltiness, how will it become salty again? It’s good for nothing except to be thrown away and trampled under people’s feet. (Matthew 5:13 CEB)

Jesus was speaking here to his disciples (see verse 1), not just to the original 12, but to his expanded group of followers. We, of course, understand these words to be meant for us as well. But what exactly was Jesus talking about when he said we’re the salt of the earth? I believe he was referring to seasoning and preserving.

Effective seasoning brings out the taste in prepared food. Using the McDonald’s fries analogy, it’s obviously not the salt by itself that makes french fries good, or else we’d skip the potatoes altogether and have salt by itself. No, salt wakes up the flavor that’s already in the fries. It brings out the best in what would otherwise be bland potatoes. I believe Christians who are salt learn how to bring out the best in other people. That’s why it bothers me when I see people who wear Christ’s name having the opposite effect. Unfortunately, some Christians even seem to get pleasure from antagonizing other people. As believers we should bless other people, gently challenge them at times, help them discover their potential and help reveal Jesus to them. That’s salt in action.

Salt also keeps food from spoiling. It’s my belief that believers in the world, when we’re living up to our calling, bring blessings to everyone around us, whether they’re Christian or not. Our very prayers for nonbelievers help bring down the blessings of God in their lives. And if we get into the business of doing the things Jesus did, we bring hope to all people. I believe it’s both the Holy Spirit indwelling Christians and the active, powerful prayers of the saints that play a big role in keeping all hell from breaking loose in the world today. If people wonder why mercy and grace seem more commonplace now than they did in the Old Testament, there’s no doubt in my mind that it’s because of the blood of Christ. But I believe that it’s the body of Christ (the church) applying that blood in prayer, praying for the world, ministering in the world and engaging the world that helps bring a level of mercy and grace to the world as a whole. In the same way God in the Bible dealt with entire groups of people more benevolently because of the faith of a few, God’s kindness overflows through Christians for the rest of the world today.

So go be salt. There’s no one else in the world besides you who reaches the same exact people in the places where you have the potential of reaching them each day. Make it your prayer that God will use you to bring out the best in everyone else, and that God will also use you as a window for him to pour out blessings on other people. This is the kind of Christianity that has the potential of shaking things up… in a good way.

BLOG: The Spiritual Dimension

Fri, 30 Dec 2011 15:15:32 GMT

By Shane Raynor

I occasionally hear frustration from those who think that some groups within Christianity aren’t intellectual enough. Others complain that certain groups are too intellectual. There are entire ministries built around Christian apologetics, some attempting to refute evolution, others trying to reconcile Christianity with evolution, some attempting to dispel the notion that Christians aren’t intellectual, others wearing anti-intellectualism as a badge of honor. I don’t always see a lot of balance in these ministries, because like many specialty groups, they tend to emphasize one area at the expense of others, even when the areas aren’t necessarily in opposition.

Our intellects are part of who we are, and we obviously need to make provision for our minds. But we also must realize that many spiritual things simply can’t be explained or perceived intellectually. That’s because our spirituality, in a sense, is part of a different dimension than our intellect and our emotions. Sometimes Christians perceive something spiritually, yet it seems so natural to them that they just can’t understand why no one else seems to “get it”, especially non-Christians. The reason is that they can’t get it. It doesn’t mean they’re intellectually slow, it means they aren’t able to tune in to that particular frequency. Sometimes the Holy Spirit reveals something to you or to me in a particular passage of Scripture, and it makes perfect sense to us until we try to explain it to someone else. Then we get frustrated because either we can’t communicate what was revealed to us, or we can’t get someone else to see it for themselves. I believe many incidents like this can be explained by spiritual elements that exist in the revelation.

In 1 Corinthians 2:14, Paul tells us that “people who are unspiritual don’t accept the things from God’s Spirit. They are foolishness to them and can’t be understood, because they can only be comprehended in a spiritual way. (CEB)” By “don’t accept”, I don’t get the feeling the original wording here is so strong that it means an active rejection. It’s more along the lines of not being equipped to process spiritual things—because it’s just an impossibility for someone who hasn’t been regenerated by the Holy Spirit to grasp certain spiritual concepts. That doesn’t mean God can’t speak to people who aren’t Christian—God speaks to people in their thoughts, emotions, or even audibly if he chooses to do so. I’m referring spiritual revelation here, the kind Peter experienced when he suddenly realized and told Jesus, “You are the Christ, the son of the living God.”

Spiritual elements can be mysterious. Have you ever heard the worship leader who wasn’t a good singer help usher in God’s presence in a powerful way while the virtuoso guitar player with the perfect voice couldn’t quite pull it off? I think there’s something going on there in the spiritual dimension that’s spilling over into the natural and we’re somehow able to discern it. Have you ever wondered why a particular church service might seem dead to one person but spiritually powerful to another? Something spiritual is probably going on that just can’t be explained intellectually. One person is possibly seeing into that other dimension while the other one isn’t. Theologian Adam Clarke said that the “natural man” can neither apprehend nor comprehend the spiritual things of God. Even Christians aren’t always going to be on the same spiritual levels with each other at certain times.

Wise Christians soon figure out that they can’t use natural tools to accomplish supernatural tasks, and they learn when spiritual revelation needs to happen. Human persuasion and intellectual arguments have their place, but there are times when the Holy Spirit and prayer have to be part of a situation to get the job done.

ARTICLE: 4 Keys to Practicing Your Faith

Wed, 28 Dec 2011 20:47:17 GMT

By Shane Raynor

The word practice means several things. In the religious sense, it means to follow or observe habitually or customarily. In the military or athletic sense it means to train or drill. In the talent or skill sense, practice describes the act of performing or doing something repeatedly in order to acquire skill or proficiency. And finally, the word also means to exercise or pursue as a profession, art or occupation. So the same person can practice Christianity, basketball, violin, and law. (But probably not all simultaneously!)

When we talk about practicing our faith, by default we think of practice in a religious way, but what if we brought in the athletic/military definition of the word and applied it to Christianity? It seems that the Bible has beaten us to the punch because the New Testament is full of references that speak of faith using war and athletic imagery. Ephesians 6:12 tells us that “We aren’t fighting against human enemies but against rulers, authorities, forces of cosmic darkness, and spiritual powers of evil in the heavens. (CEB)” In Philippians 3 , Paul pictures himself in a race where the goal he’s pursuing is “the prize of God’s upward call in Christ Jesus. (CEB)”

Using these models for faith, what exactly is it that you’re supposed to do repeatedly in order to gain skill and proficiency? I believe it’s the spiritual disciplines: prayer, Bible study, fasting, and Communion. The more you do these things, the bigger difference they’ll make in your life. In sports, the teams who win are usually the ones that practice the most often. So the more you make spiritual disciplines a consistent part of your faith routine, the more effective you’ll become as a Christian. Practice your faith often.

Practice with a team. In basketball, solo drills will improve your game, but doing drills with others will improve it even more. There are a couple of reasons for this. One is efficiency. You simply cover more ground when you have someone there to help you. Have you ever tried to practice shooting alone? You spend half your time and energy getting your own rebounds. (This has its place, too, but if it’s the only way you ever practice shooting, you won’t learn how to react quickly like you do when someone’s passing to you rapid fire.) Also, we usually push ourselves harder and see more fruit when someone else is there to push us. Proverbs 27:17 reminds us that “as iron sharpens iron, one person sharpens another (TNIV).” Prayer, fasting, Bible study and worship alone are a big deal. But if you aren’t doing these things corporately too, you’re missing major opportunities for improving your Christian game.

Practice both offense and defense. Spiritual disciplines are the practice, but the game is real life. When the phone rings in the middle of the night and a fellow believer needs your advice (or maybe you’re in your own crisis), you’ll find that all that Bible reading pays off, because God somehow brings the necessary verses to mind just when you need them. In basketball, you have to be able to turn on a dime and go from playing offense to playing defense in less than a second. Life is the same way. One minute you’re gaining so much ground for the Kingdom of God that you feel invincible—the next minute you’re licking your wounds wondering what the hell just happened to you. As you pray and study, it’s helpful to prepare for both scenarios. God is much bigger than Satan, but you have to remind yourself that the enemy is real.

Get a good coach. While it’s important to have peers to help you practice, there’s no substitute for spiritual mentors. Getting guidance from people who have “been there before” helps you make sure that your entire spiritual growth strategy doesn’t turn into a case of “the blind leading the blind.” A mentor will help you see possibilities for improvement that you didn’t even know existed.

Sports provides so many helpful metaphors for the Christian life. But principles that may be obvious for a physical activity aren’t always as easy to recognize in the spiritual realm.

What are some ways you’ve practiced your faith that remind you of something you’ve experienced in the world of sports?

BLOG: Mobile Ministry Matters

Wed, 14 Dec 2011 19:39:55 GMT

By Shane Raynor

The number of people consuming online content using mobile devices is on the rise—and it doesn’t look like the trend will be changing in the near future. We now have an endless number of content sources and an ever-increasing number of ways to get the content. I follow most blogs, for example, through Google Reader, which I can access from my desktop computer, tablet, laptop, or phone. And since Google Reader is in the cloud, I can always pick up my reading where I left off, regardless of which device I’m using. Pretty nifty.

Google has released a new app for Android, iPhone, and iPad called Currents. Currents optimizes content from your favorite publications and delivers everything to you in a swipable magazine format. We're making Ministry Matters articles, blogs, and the most popular This Sunday components available through Google Currents. The new app is free and you can test it out (and get Ministry Matters) by going here using your mobile device. It’s less than a week old, and Google will no doubt be updating the app along the way to improve the user experience, but I’m impressed so far. In addition to MM, I’ve already subscribed to some of my favorite news sites in Currents.

In other tech news, we’ve made improvements to our RSS feeds. (Think of RSS as Really Simple Syndication). If you use Google Reader, Flipboard, Pulse, or some other newsreader/aggregator, you can subscribe to the Ministry Matters feed(s) of your choice and everything new will be pushed to you automatically. I love subscribing to content this way, because I get it as soon as it publishes—which means I don’t have to worry about missing anything important if I don’t make it to my favorite sites as much as I’d like.

NOTE: Google isn't listing us in the Currents directory yet so don't try to find us in the search. Once you get Currents installed, just visit this link and you'll see the Ministry Matters icon in your library.

Are you using a mobile device to read content from Ministry Matters? What apps are you using? Do you have ideas about how we can make everything more accessible? Send them to us at feedback@ministrymatters.com.

ARTICLE: How to Teach with Authority

Thu, 08 Dec 2011 19:34:10 GMT

By Shane Raynor

There was something about the way Jesus taught that was different from the way other teachers did it at the time. In the Gospel of Mark, when Jesus went to the synagogue in Capernaum to teach, we read, “The people were amazed by his teaching, for he was teaching them with authority, not like the legal experts” (Mark 1:22 CEB). Jesus’ teaching not only impressed the people of Capernaum, it amazed them. And it was because he taught with authority. So whatever authority is, if it caused the teachings of Jesus to have that much of an impact on everyone, then I want to learn how to teach with authority. You should too.

What exactly is authority, and why do you need it to be a more effective teacher? The word itself can mean a number of things, but in the Biblical sense, it refers to jurisdiction, influence, and/or power of choice. Leadership expert John Maxwell has defined leadership as influence. So ultimately, if authority is influence and leadership is influence, then demonstrating authority is showing leadership and demonstrating leadership is showing authority. The two are inseparable. Also, there are generally two types of authority, intrinsic and delegated. In plain language, this means you either have authority because of who you are or because of who or what you represent. Ultimately, since all authority comes from God, a Christian’s authority is the delegated type. Jesus had authority because he was the Son of God. Christians have authority because of our relationship with Jesus.

If you regularly teach others, and you want this authority to be evident in your teaching, here are some things you should do:

Teach from personal experience. People want to know if all the things you teach actually work both in practice and in theory. There’s even an old saying in some religious circles that demonstrates this idea: “A person with an experience is never at the mercy of a person with an argument.” Although experience doesn’t trump scripture, it can certainly be powerful and persuasive.

Teach practically. How many angels can dance on the head of a pin? Honestly, most people couldn’t care less. Sure, we all talk about these kinds of things from time to time, but when the rubber meets the road, most people want to know how to have a deeper walk with God, and how to make this Christianity stuff work. When you teach, persuade people and empower them. Don’t dwell on topics of little consequence.

Teach Biblically. The authority of the written word of God is necessary to give real authority to your teaching. Appealing to theologians, poets, and contemporary authors will add variety to what you say, but that won’t give it authority. Since Christian authority is delegated, appealing to the Word of God recognizes the source of that authority. If you’re speaking in a higher authority’s name, never underestimate the power and authority that comes with using their own words.

Ask guided questions. We’ve already established that authority is influence, and asking the right questions when you teach will ensure that your talks have their intended effect on listeners. Ask questions that take students to where you want them to go, but give them enough room to figure out at least part of the principle by themselves. Most of us learn best when we arrive at a truth at least partly on our own rather than simply having information imparted to us. Using the guided question approach avoids rigid indoctrination on one end of the spectrum and “pooling of ignorance” discussions on the other.

Make Jesus the center of your teaching. The foundation of Christianity is Jesus himself, not a creed, denomination, or a set of doctrines. Teaching that is authoritative and effective at expanding the Kingdom of God will by definition be Christ-centered. Is Jesus the foundation of your teaching and preaching, or more of an afterthought?

Pray. Jesus already had authority based on who he was, yet he still found it necessary to pray often to the God the Father. If you’re going to teach with delegated authority, doesn’t it make sense to meet as often as you can with the source of that authority to make sure your purpose and will are lined up with his? I’ve found that prayer time is even more important than preparation time when it comes to teaching the word of God.

In a world that seems to be increasingly persuaded that spiritual truth is subjective, teaching with authority will likely set you apart from many other teachers and preachers. The keys to doing it effectively are maintaining humility and remembering where your authority ultimately comes from.

What are some other ways you can be more authoritative when you teach?

ARTICLE: Multitasking in Ministry: Don't Do It

Tue, 29 Nov 2011 19:24:54 GMT

By Shane Raynor

I’m a firm believer that most people who volunteer in churches should serve in only one ministry area. And if possible, paid ministry staff should try to do the same thing. I learned this the hard way when I tried to juggle the positions of youth worker and church treasurer for a couple of years. To make a long story short, I burned out. That’s why I feel churches should put a rule in place to prevent people from doing more than one ministry at a time.

Here’s a truth that many people don’t want to accept. Human beings can’t multitask. Some folks think they can, but multitasking is not what they’re really doing. What people think is multitasking really isn’t multitasking at all... it’s just switching back and forth from one task to another very quickly. This is multitasking in the classical sense—things you do simultaneously—like listening to music and studying, or watching TV while you read. While many boast about mastering this type of multitasking, in reality doing two things at once can almost never be done as efficiently as doing them separately.

For this piece, I’m going to expand the definition of multitasking to cover longer periods of time. In the church, I believe we’re multitasking whenever our attention is divided by two or more different interests, even if we’re not working on both jobs at a given moment. People who are in ministry of any kind know that the actual ministry activity itself is only part of the whole picture. Depending on the ministry, there may be prep time involved, and there should definitely be prayer time. Because of their importance and “on the edge” nature, many ministries may require more time for prayer than anything else! Time is finite, and common sense says that taking on a second area of work is going to take time away from the first. Leaders and ministry workers who have to focus their ministry time in two or more different places are ultimately shortchanging all the areas they serve.

A desire for excellence is another good reason not to multitask. If you want mediocrity in your church, there’s one surefire way to get it: just let your small group leaders and Sunday school teachers also lead youth group and serve on the church board. The saying, “jack of all trades, master of none” was never truer than it is in the local church. In this day and age, specialization is a key to excellence. We're told that in today’s soft job market, being able to multitask is essential. That’s true. But being able to do something in a pinch and doing it on a regular basis are two different things. Why do people shop at category killer stores like Office Max and Best Buy? Because they offer better experiences for office supplies and electronics than Walmart and Target. They do one thing and they do it well. Learn how to create a culture of specialization in your church. Train your staff and your volunteers to do one thing and to be better at it than anyone else.

When your church or ministry becomes a place where everyone finds their best fit and sticks to one major ministry role, you’ll gain a new appreciation for what it means to be the body of Christ.

What are your experiences with “ministry multitasking”?

BLOG: Order and Chaos

Tue, 15 Nov 2011 20:05:51 GMT

By Shane Raynor

I was talking to someone the other day about spiritual struggles. This person is an athlete, and he has always found physical discipline to be much easier than spiritual and mental discipline. As I thought about what kind of advice I might be able give him, I asked him if he was regularly running and working out.

“Not so much,” he answered, “I guess I’ve let myself go a little.”

“You need order in your life—some routine,” I said, “Start somewhere—anywhere— and it will spill over into other areas of your life.”

The next day, I decided to take my own advice and add more structure to my sometimes hit-or-miss prayer and Bible reading routine. I started using The Grace-Filled Life, a devotional by Maxie Dunnam. The first devotion, appropriately, is about Genesis 1. Here’s a sentence that really grabbed my imagination: "God speaks, and everything changes at once—from nothing to everything, from chaos to order."

Did you catch that? God brought order from chaos by speaking.

Order is a good thing. Dictionary.com defines it as a condition in which each thing is properly disposed with reference to other things and to its purpose; methodical or harmonious arrangement.

Order helps us get things done. It gives us an anchor so we’re able to deal with the bigger problems we face. The truth is, if we’re unable to manage the everyday details of our lives, how are we going to deal with crises when they erupt? And how will we help anyone else with their issues?

Popular Bible teacher Joyce Meyer has said, “How are you going to face the devil when you can’t face a sink full of dirty dishes?”

She has a point.

If you need help bringing order to your life, a great place to start is the Bible. Find a devotional or plan to help you read and study God’s word in a methodical way. You’ll generally want to avoid making a practice of just opening up Scripture and reading “wherever”.

God speaks in other ways, too. Make a habit of praying, and learn how to listen to God when you pray. Surround yourself with people who know how to hear from God, who aren’t negative, and who regularly speak encouragement to you. Negative people are a dime a dozen—don’t give them access to your life.

When God’s word is spoken, listened to, and applied, things go from chaos to order.

Creating order doesn’t need to be confining. The word of God brings order, but Scripture tells us that “where the Lord’s spirit is, there is freedom” (2 Corinthians 3:17 CEB). Freedom and order aren’t opposed to each other—they work together.

If you want to experience freedom, make changes to create more order in your life. Starting small is okay—you can even tackle one thing at a time if that’s what works best for you. Soon you’ll discover that organizing your life will actually set you free to do some of the bigger things that God’s calling you to do.

BLOG: Mayberry Church Discipline

Tue, 08 Nov 2011 18:22:15 GMT

By Shane Raynor

One of my all time favorite episodes of The Andy Griffith Show is titled, “Opie the Birdman”. 7-year old Opie brings home a slingshot, and in spite of Andy’s warnings to be careful with it, he manages to accidentally kill a mother bird, leaving three orphan baby birds with no one to take care of them. After a little shrewd parenting by Andy, Opie raises the birds, then eventually lets them go when they’re old enough to take care of themselves. Apparently I’m not the only one who liked the episode—Andy Griffith and Ron Howard both say it was their favorite too.

But what does an episode like this have to do with the church? Well, if you look at discipleship and pastoring as analogous to parenthood, then plenty. If you get a chance sometime, watch the episode, because I believe there are four lessons you can pick up about leadership and discipleship.

You can inform your flock about the danger of sin, but you should give them freedom to make their own decisions. I learned this the hard way when I was in youth ministry. You can’t be with the people you minister to 24/7, and you can’t make their decisions for them. Even if you could, you wouldn’t be a pastor or mentor, you’d be a puppeteer. That’s not Christianity. Andy could have taken the slingshot from Opie immediately, but without some freedom to take responsibility and make mistakes, Opie might never have learned a couple of valuable lessons.
When you need to confront someone about sin, don’t try to do the work of the Holy Spirit and the person’s own conscience. Andy could tell that Opie had killed the bird because it was obvious that it was already bothering Opie. When Opie asked if he was going to get spanked, Andy told him no, then opened the window and told Opie to listen to the sound of the baby birds crying for their mother. Some people might think it harsh to put a 7 year old through such an experience, but rather than use physical punishment or a lecture, Andy allowed Opie’s own conscience to teach him the lesson. Kids forget spankings and talks pretty quickly, but they don’t forget it when their consciences deal with them.
Teach people that being forgiven doesn’t necessarily mean the natural consequences of our sin go away. When Opie apologized, Andy told him that saying sorry wouldn’t change the fact that the baby birds were now orphans. Opie even referenced this the next day when he decided to raise the birds himself. When we hurt others and make messes, God freely forgives us, but sometimes we have to fix the problems we’ve created.
Support people when they take responsibility for their sin. This means putting your money where your mouth is. Andy didn’t remain angry at Opie—he offered encouragement to his son as took on the task of bringing up three baby birds. And when the neighbor’s cat became an issue, Andy even helped Opie get a cage. At the end of the show, it was Andy who encouraged Opie to take the most important step in raising birds—knowing when it was time to let them fly away and be on their own. Pastors and mentors aren’t there just to dish out advice—sometimes we have to be there to help with the details.

In an age where there’s a church on every other corner, pastors have to take a creative approach when it comes to discipline and accountability for church members. A heavy-handed approach is neither effective nor scriptural. A “live and let live” approach, on the other hand, might seem easy, but I don’t believe it’s good for Christians to have no accountability whatsoever. Effective discipleship requires it. Once again, there’s a middle ground that’s probably best. It’s amazing how an old classic sitcom can help you make sense of spiritual stuff.

Related Post: Mayberry Style Leadership

BLOG: Self-Control

Mon, 24 Oct 2011 17:27:54 GMT

By Shane Raynor

I’m becoming convinced that lack of self-control is a big reason why many of us live defeated Christian lives, so I’ve put together a few facts and ideas about this “last but not least” fruit of the Spirit from Galatians 5.

Self-control is a fruit of the Spirit, not a gift of the Spirit. Gifts are free… fruit must be grown. There’s not a “spiritual supermarket” where you can buy it, and in most cases, I don’t think that praying for self-control to fall out of the sky is very effective. To grow fruit in the natural realm, you have to plant the right seeds and put some work into it. The spiritual realm is no different in that regard.
Developing self control is not as hard as one might think. The fruit of the Spirit grows when we cooperate with the Holy Spirit’s work in transforming us. Self-control doesn’t come easily, but it’s definitely within reach. Unfortunately, many Christians tend to overemphasize teaching about depravity at the expense of teaching about personal holiness.
The idea of self-control scares us. When you start telling people that self-control is not just a possibility but an expectation, they sometimes freak out a little. Paul blew Felix’s mind so much teaching about it (and a couple of other hard topics) that Felix sent him away so he could absorb it all: "After several days, Felix came with his wife Drusilla, who was Jewish, and summoned Paul. He listened to him talk about faith in Christ Jesus. When he spoke about upright behavior, self-control, and the coming judgment, Felix became fearful and said, 'Go away for now! When I have time, I’ll send for you.'" (Acts 24:24-25 CEB)
Self-control is not the same as letting God control you. I’ve heard people say, "Give God control of your life," but I’m not sure that’s what God wants. God isn’t a dictator who pushes a magic button to take over our free will. I think he’d prefer that we voluntarily bring our lives and purposes into agreement with what he wants to accomplish. God gives us the power we need and he expects us to master our flesh, our appetites, our passions, and even our tongues!
We shouldn’t try to control anyone but ourselves. I have a tendency to be a control freak, but God has been helping me get away from that. I’ve done a lot of mentoring, and I’ve found that when I try to push my advice on someone too strongly, it can have disastrous consequences. When God has anointed (or appointed) you to do something, you should figure out where your anointing ends and never cross into "unauthorized" territory. Guilt trips and lectures can easily become manipulation, and although our counseling efforts may be offered with the best intentions, we should guard against attempting to usurp someone else’s free will. Even when we give advice, we must allow people to make their own decisions.

What specific things can we do to develop self-control?

BLOG: Megachurches Do It Better

Tue, 18 Oct 2011 19:39:03 GMT

By Shane Raynor

There’s a photo going around Facebook and Google+ showing what’s supposed to be a megachurch auditorium, complete with cushioned theater seats, lights, big TV screens and fancy windows. The caption reads, “Megachurch: Because This Is More Important Than Feeding the Starving."

The person who created this graphic probably meant well, but their idea that somehow megachurches are morally inferior to smaller churches because they have larger, more elaborate buildings, is a misguided one.

The fact is, most megachurches run more efficiently than smaller churches, which frees up more money for service and mission. Take the largest congregation in the U.S., for example, Lakewood Church in Houston. In 2005, Lakewood moved into the Compaq Center, a former sports arena. The church paid $75 million to renovate the space, and then paid just under $12 million in advance for 30 years of rent. At the time, there were critics who complained that Lakewood was being too extravagant with its building plans.

But consider that Lakewood Church averages about 43,000 people per week at its weekend services. That comes out to around $1750 per person for the renovations and 76¢ per person per month for rent. If a church of 300 reached this level of efficiency, they’d be spending a little over half a million bucks on their building followed by $228 a month for rent or mortgage.

That sounds like a lot of bang for the buck, by anyone’s standard.

But rather than applauding megachurches for their efficiency and stewardship, some of us prefer taking shots at them. It’s the old “would Jesus buy a Lexus” debate revisited. The problem is, when we start down that road, sooner or later the standards we use to judge others end up being used against us. How can I condemn the big television screens in a megachurch when I have a high definition TV in my own house? Are the cushioned theater chairs and fancy lights in large churches less virtuous than the cushioned pews and stained glass in small ones? Not really. In fact, considering that the large church probably spent less per capita, the reverse might actually be closer to the truth.

Megachurches probably spend less on clergy salaries per member than small churches, and because of their size, their clergy and other staff are more than likely able to specialize in a particular area of ministry. That means pastors can spend time doing one thing really well rather than being the ecclesial jacks-of-all-trades that many smaller churches have come to expect.

Larger churches have the resources to offer more ministries to meet the needs of communities. From sports leagues to soup kitchens to homeless ministries to schools to recovery groups, megachurches generally provide more options with more flexibility than smaller congregations. And I suspect they plant more churches too.

So who is it that’s really beating this anti-megachurch drum? Leaders of smaller churches? I'm not sure. But here’s something to consider. Instead of “punching upwards”, maybe we should all just aspire to make our own churches bigger. Small churches do certain things well, but when it comes to efficiency, large churches usually do it better.

It seems to me we need more big churches, not fewer.

BLOG: Cult is a Four-Letter Word

Wed, 12 Oct 2011 15:56:43 GMT

By Shane Raynor

People don’t talk about politics or religion in polite company. At least that’s what an adult told me when I was in middle school. I had no idea what "polite company" meant, but I did know that I loved talking about both politics and religion, so I reasoned that perhaps impolite company was the place I preferred to be.

Recently the press has been discussing politics and religion—a lot—especially since the pastor who introduced presidential candidate Rick Perry last week told reporters that Mormonism is a cult.

Talk about your four-letter words.

Cult is one of those terms that means different things to different people. Even the dictionary gets a little confused about cults. Take these definitions from Merriam-Webster, for example:

cult: n. a system of religious beliefs and ritual; also : its body of adherents

Well according to that standard, anybody who formally believes anything is in a cult. Folks like Billy Graham, the Pope, you, me—even Mark Driscoll. (I always knew Mars Hill was a little weird.)

Considering that the guy who used the cult label is pastor of a 10,000 member megachurch that likely adheres to a belief system, this probably isn't what he meant by cult.

So let’s try another definition.

cult: n. formal religious veneration : worship

If I’m reading this correctly, Merriam-Webster considers cult and worship to be synonyms. Hmmm. How was your church’s cult service this week? Has your congregation’s cult leader released a CD yet?

I don’t think that one works either.

cult: n. a religion regarded as unorthodox or spurious; also : its body of adherents

“A religion regarded as unorthodox or spurious...” Problem is, the dictionary doesn’t tell us who’s doing the regarding. That’s an important detail to leave out. Mitt Romney doesn’t regard Mormonism as a cult. Neither do the 14 million plus Latter-day Saints worldwide. But many Christians consider Mormon beliefs to be unorthodox. (That’s a less inflammatory way of saying someone believes the wrong things.) By the way, Mormons don’t think traditional Christians are very orthodox either.

Was Robert Jeffress right? Is Mormonism a cult? It depends on whom you ask, and which definition you use.

Nowadays, when most of us think of cults, we picture small groups of people with crazy beliefs and magnetic, authoritative leaders. (Think Jim Jones and David Koresh.) With millions of members and almost 200 years under their belt, Mormons have at least made it to sect status by now.

The theology of the LDS Church differs significantly from traditional Christian beliefs, but it's not really accurate to call it a cult.

BLOG: Don't Give 'em What They Want

Mon, 10 Oct 2011 18:55:18 GMT

By Shane Raynor

In the West, it’s hard to grow a church without catering to people’s wants and felt needs. We preach super practical sermon series, we offer small groups that are designed to appeal to individual interests, and we serve gourmet coffee in the narthex. (That’s the lobby for those of you who don’t know churchspeak, or your congregation meets at the neighborhood cineplex.)

We try our hardest to stay on top of church trends so we don’t lose market share in our community to the local megachurch and its charismatic pastor. The best way to get people to show up is to give them what they want, right?

Then there are the churches that do the complete opposite. These churches are stuck in the 1950’s, and it’s usually for one of two reasons—either they don’t get that times and methods have changed, or they’re intentionally bucking the perceived consumerism trend by protecting their traditions. Some of these congregations even seem to wear this elitist attitude as a badge of honor. (“We don’t care if we grow. We like being small!”)

“People may say they want to worship with a certain style of music, but what they need is a little culture and more theological depth in their music.”

“People may say they like topical preaching and sermon series, but preaching from the lectionary is what’s best for them!”

“People may say they want more home group Bible study options, but what will happen to Sunday school if we do that?”

“People may say they want to use the DVD’s from Beth Moore for their study group, but they obviously don’t understand that our denomination doesn’t agree with all of her theology.”

What we have here are the classic “give them what they want” and “give them what they need” philosophies. Burgers and fries vs. Brussels sprouts.

Steve Jobs, founder of Apple Computer, had an interesting opinion about giving consumers what they want. He didn’t let that sort of thinking drive him because he assumed that consumers either didn’t know what they really wanted, or he thought that by the time he had figured out how to give it to them, they would have moved on to wanting something else anyway.

People who run businesses giving consumers what they want spend their entire careers being reactive instead of proactive.

Instead of giving people what they already wanted, Jobs instead showed them what was possible. Then he convinced them that they wanted it.

When news of the first generation iPhone broke, I couldn’t wrap my mind around it. I thought my Blackberry was the best thing since sliced bread, and I couldn’t imagine a touchscreen phone without a physical keyboard. I figured it would be an expensive toy purchased only by the most loyal Apple fans.

At least I was right about the expensive part.

Now I own an Android, but I can’t deny that the iPhone is the major reason for my phone’s existence. I would have never even wanted a touchscreen smartphone if I hadn’t seen the iPhone in action. Now my new phone helps me to be much more productive than my old phone ever did. And it’s a lot more fun to use.

Sorry, Blackberry.

There’s a lesson here for the church. Instead of trying so hard to give people what they think they want, or what we think they need, maybe we should focus more on showing them what’s possible. And we should do that with as much excellence and creativity as we can muster.

What if we stretched ourselves musically, theologically, intellectually, spiritually, and homiletically? Instead of aiming for the lowest common denominator, suppose we pushed the limits of our thinking and did church in a way that didn’t cater to current wants or perceived needs, but in the end, actually ended up being what people both wanted and needed?

BLOG: Era of the iPhone

Wed, 05 Oct 2011 16:03:00 GMT

By Shane Raynor

I’m a little embarrassed to admit that I spent part of my lunch hour yesterday reading updates from a Wall Street Journal reporter who was live-blogging the Apple press conference.

I’m not even an Apple fan. I actually prefer using a PC—and my smartphone is an Android.

Still, there’s something fascinating about Apple and its rabid fan base.

All sorts of rumors were circulating this week about the possible release of the iPhone 5—turns out it’s only going to be the 4S—and the possibility of number three mobile carrier Sprint getting an exclusive on the new phone (they’re not, apparently.) Even so, Sprint will finally be offering the coveted device, and Apple will likely gain millions of customers from their fold.

When it comes to technology, I’m definitely not a Luddite, but I’m not an early adopter either. I like to stay ahead of the curve—but not to the point that I’m obsessing over the latest gadgets. For me, it’s all about efficiency. If I can get more work done and make my life easier, then new technology is worth the investment. Otherwise, it’s only a toy and I probably don’t need it yet. (When is my phone upgrade coming up again?)

With more and more people buying smartphones, Christians have the opportunity to communicate God’s word to more people now than ever before. Churches can broadcast their services, Bible studies, sermons, or whatever else they want to share with their members and potential visitors.

The big temptation for churches is using technology for the sake of the technology itself—to be in the “club” with the “cutting-edge” churches. But as images get sharper, sounds get richer, and video gets more “high-def”, mediocre content will start to seem even worse than it really is.

Put another way, the days of posting half-baked sermons and poorly edited worship services are coming to a close.

Not that your church does that. But plenty do.

Practically everyone has a smartphone now, so that means everyone has their own bullhorn. It also means there’s a lot of noise out there. Content has to reach a certain level of quality to get noticed, and even that’s not a guarantee. The cream rises to the top.

Will all the people rushing to get the latest iPhone think that what your church has to say is worth using up part of the bandwidth on their metered data plan?

BLOG: Degrees of God's Presence

Mon, 03 Oct 2011 21:02:34 GMT

By Shane Raynor

The presence of God is an interesting thing. On one hand, we know that God is everywhere. But his presence certainly seems more intense at certain times and in certain places. Many of us have been to worship services where God’s presence seems to manifest in a powerful way. Does that mean God isn’t there at other times? Not at all. But it does suggest that there are levels or degrees of God’s presence.

Think of it on a personal level. Christians pray to be filled with the Holy Spirit, but we also acknowledge the ongoing, indwelling Spirit. The Holy Spirit never leaves us, but there are times when he’s there in a more obvious, powerful way. This tells me two things: (1) We should never take the presence of God for granted, and (2) If some of God’s presence is a good thing, more is even better!

I hesitate to speak of God’s presence as if it’s quantifiable—because doing so makes the Holy Spirit seem like an impersonal force. But if we use terms like “filled” or “power” when referring to God’s spirit (which scripture does), such misconceptions are a real possibility.

Moses didn’t take God’s presence for granted. In Exodus 33, God promised to send a messenger ahead of the Israelites, but Moses insisted on God himself going with them. (You either have to be really crazy or really confident about where you stand with God before you start insisting that he do something.) Moses wasn’t talking about God’s omnipresence here, he was referring to God’s manifest presence—Moses knew that God being with them would make all the difference.

You’d think if there was anyone who wouldn’t have to ask God to come along, it would be the leader of his chosen people. God initially balks at going with the Israelites, but something happens between Exodus 33:5 and 33:14 to change his mind. Moses pleads with God in the tent of meeting and by the end of the exchange, God tells Moses, “I’ll go myself, and I’ll help you... I’ll do exactly what you’ve asked because you have my special approval, and I know you by name.”

Think about your last Bible study, youth group, worship service, or staff meeting. Did you earnestly pray for God to show up or did you just take for granted that he’d be there? (“He’s God. He’s everywhere!”) Sometimes it takes determination to move beyond the idea of the omnipresence of God so we can experience his special presence. It’s the point where we go from casually inviting God to be with us to being desperate for him to show up.

BLOG: Not-So-Great Expectations

Mon, 26 Sep 2011 15:02:44 GMT

By Shane Raynor

Have you ever noticed that some people become negative when the conversation turns to spiritual matters? I’m an optimist, and I like to encourage people to stretch themselves spiritually. On one hand, I think we should be satisfied with Christ, but I don’t think we should ever be content to stay exactly where we are in our relationship with him. When it comes to God, we should always want more. So I sometimes clash with people who set their sights low and try to project those low expectations onto others. You know who I’m talking about. In fact, we’ve all probably been one of those people from time to time. They’re the ones who can give you all the reasons why God won’t answer your prayer, or why the Bible doesn’t mean that, or why healing probably won’t happen (but let’s pray anyway, just in case!) Some in popular culture would call these people haters. This term, of course, is slang but is defined at Urban Dictionary as follows: One who either verbally and/or physically inhibits another individual’s game or mode of operation primarily due to jealousy, envy, animosity, bitterness, resentment, and contempt.

That about says it all. Spiritual haters often think they’re satisfied with their level of spirituality, but they tend to be easily threatened by other people’s experiences, especially if those experiences deviate from what the haters perceive as “the norm”. Let’s go to the basketball court for an example. If you’ve ever played pick-up basketball at a park, you know that there are players who are really good and players like me who aren’t so good. That doesn’t mean that one player is worth more than another, it just means that because of a combination of natural talent and experience, the players are at different playing levels. The really good players consistently try to improve their game, hopefully while exercising humility. The players who need more improvement usually go one of two ways: they either try to learn from the better players (and make a habit of playing with them often), or they “trash talk” and disparage the better players.

Most of us don’t have a problem giving other people props in the world, but when we get into the church and start talking about things like prayer, wisdom or Biblical insight, we are offended at the idea that one person might be more skilled or gifted than someone else. (You mean some people actually get more results praying than others? That’s not fair!) The truth is, people are at different levels spiritually. We all know people who have gone further than us in certain areas, and others who haven’t made it to where we are. Instead of trying to learn from those who are more advanced, some of us choose instead to treat them with contempt. We attack their theology and nit-pick. We point out their character flaws. We won’t even admit that they’ve gone beyond us spiritually somehow. Most trash-talkers on a basketball court are usually blind to the fact that the person they’re insulting is actually better at basketball than they are!

So what’s my point? Simply that we shouldn’t let other people keep us from reaching new spiritual heights. Don’t make it a habit to hang out with someone who consistently kills your dreams, peddles mediocre spirituality as normative or defends the status quo as acceptable. Ephesians 3:20 tells us that God "is able to do far beyond all that we could ask or imagine by his power at work within us”. Some of us aren’t even asking God to do the great things we can imagine, let alone the things we can’t! Negativity is abundant in the church and people who don’t believe God are a dime a dozen. (There is such a thing as being realistic and rational to a fault.) Not only should we aim to be people of great faith, we should surround ourselves with Christians who build us up, not ones who tear us down.

That is, if we actually want to improve our game.

BLOG: Extremists and Moderates

Wed, 21 Sep 2011 20:31:45 GMT

By Shane Raynor

Brian McLaren writes that most extremists are the last ones to know that they’re extremists. I guess it’s a lot like having bad breath or body odor. By the time you figure it out, everyone else already knows.

Brian goes on to discuss what he sees as an unhealthy dichotomy that has developed between moderates and extremists (both liberal and conservative). He feels there should be a third way.

Ah, that ever-elusive third way. Some would argue that such an animal doesn’t exist. They’d say that any kind of third way is either the best of both worlds, or the worst of both, but nothing new.

You know what I think? I think Brian overthinks these things.

Granted, extremist is almost never used today in a positive way. The first defintion for extremist that pops up on a Google search is: “A person who holds extreme or fanatical political or religious views, esp. one who resorts to or advocates extreme action.”

Great. Now we have to check to see whether extreme is defined in a positive or negative way. (I love how dictionaries make you look up a second word to define the first one you looked up.) Dictionary.com offers five definitions:

of a character or kind farthest removed from the ordinary or average: extreme measures.
utmost or exceedingly great in degree: extreme joy.
farthest from the center or middle; outermost; endmost: the extreme limits of a town.
farthest, utmost, or very far in any direction: an object at the extreme point of vision.
exceeding the bounds of moderation: extreme fashions.

Call me crazy, but based on most of these defintions, is being extreme always a bad thing? Come on... who truly wants to be an ordinary Christian? Or an ordinary basketball player? Or an ordinary writer?

I’m not even crazy about Ordinary Time.

Don’t we all want to be extraordinary?

And is exceeding the bounds of moderation a bad thing? Sure, moderate means calm or temperate, but it also means mediocre. Another defintion of moderate is average, or less than average in quality.

I don’t know anyone who wants to be considered average or mediocre.

But moderate can also mean balanced. I don’t mind being called balanced—that’s a compliment.

The 18th century Christian leader John Wesley was accused of being an extremist, but they used a different word back then: enthusiast.

enthusiast

a person filled with or motivated by enthusiasm; fanatic
archaic a religious visionary, esp one whose zeal for religion is extravagant or unbalanced

On one hand, we think of fanaticism as a bad thing. Yet we generally see enthusiasm as positive. It seems to me that there’s not a heck of a lot of distance between between enthusiastic and fanatical—between good extreme and bad.

Some of it is in the eye of the beholder.

Perhaps Brian McLaren has it wrong. Instead of looking for a third way, maybe we need to just appreciate both extremists and moderates as necessary parts of the Body of Christ. Without visionaries and enthusiasts pushing the envelope, we’d probably miss some prophetic words and moves of God. And without moderates reining them in, who knows how many more solid Christians would wander into heresy?

Opposite “extremists” tend to balance each other out, and moderates keep them in check. As messy as that gets, isn’t it the way God probably designed things to work in the church?

BLOG: The SpongeBob Effect

Tue, 13 Sep 2011 19:29:56 GMT

By Shane Raynor

The American Academy of Pediatrics told us this week that SpongeBob Squarepants may be contributing to Attention Deficit Disorder in kids. They didn’t say it in those exact words, but that’s what their recent study with four year-olds seems to suggest. Apparently, watching a nine minute clip of the hit Nickelodeon cartoon negatively affects their attention spans.

This doesn’t surprise me, because watching Sponge Bob affects my attention span.

More and more, our culture is becoming one where it’s harder and harder to hold people’s interest. This trend has been developing since the early days of television, but the rise of the VCR in the 1980’s and the availability of on-demand kids programming for busy parents were the factors that really brought us to the spot where we currently find ourselves.

More to the point, almost everything is visual now, and if your church or ministry hasn’t jumped on that train, it’s not just the kids you’re going to lose, but the adults too.

Remember Barney the purple dinosaur? His first fans are turning 20 next year. The first generation of toddlers to really experience television as a babysitter have now become young adults, and they’ve brought their shorter attention spans with them from their teenage years.

Of course everyone isn’t equally affected by television, and some of us watched more of it growing up than others. But I can’t help but think that our fast-paced multimedia world is having a negative impact on our ability to sit down and do things like read the Bible, pray, or listen to a sermon that’s more than 10 or 15 minutes long. And it’s only getting faster. Check out a music video from the 1980’s and then watch one from today. Count the time between camera angle changes, wipes, fades and cuts. You’ll probably notice that it’s gotten a lot shorter.

I worked in youth ministry for much of the 2000’s. Many of the kids I ministered to hated to read, especially the boys, so motivating them to explore the Bible on their own wasn’t usually easy. Getting them to stay focused for even a 15 or 20 minute talk was sometimes next to impossible. But the reality is that this generation still needs to read and hear the word of God as much as previous ones needed to.

So how should the church be responding to what I believe could be a crisis?

I wish there was an obvious answer. Probably the most effective way would involve a combination of meeting people where they are while simultaneously taking them to another level.

Perhaps a combined strategy of innovation and conditioning.

Having our senses bombarded with noise and visuals can be addictive. I’m discovering that this week. Every now and then I do a total “TV fast” for a few days to focus on studying Scripture and learning to listen to God better. The first night I nearly drove myself crazy trying to read my Bible! I’ve grown so accustomed to reading with cable news or music going in the background that I was having trouble concentrating because of the silence! The second day went much better, and I expect I’ll find it even easier as the week moves along. The human brain can do some amazing things... overcoming media withdrawal isn’t such a tall order—but at first it’s definitely a shock to the system.

The church should be using cutting edge media to reach people—especially to get their attention. Like it or not, that’s the language the world speaks and we need to be able to speak it too. But it’s important to gradually teach Christians to be able to sit still, to pray, and to read. God can speak through flashing visuals while we’re responding to text messages and listening to an iPod. But from my experience, he’s more likely to speak when all that stuff is turned off.

If upcoming generations never really learn how to function with everything turned off, and they aren’t able to be engaged by written words with nothing other than their imaginations to assist them, we’ve got a big problem.

BLOG: Don't Just Pray—Get Moving

Tue, 06 Sep 2011 20:19:22 GMT

By Shane Raynor

Elvis Presley used to sing, “A little less conversation, a little more action please.” Politicians have used this song (slightly out of context) over the years in their campaigns, and their message is clear. You can't just talk, you have to be willing to move forward.

I was reading over this week’s lectionary passages and when I came to the Old Testament reading I decided to jump back to the beginning of Exodus 14. Pharaoh and his army were chasing the Israelites, and when the Israelites realized it, they became scared and started giving Moses grief.

They said to Moses, "Weren’t there enough graves in Egypt that you took us away to die in the desert? What have you done to us by bringing us out of Egypt like this? Didn’t we tell you the same thing in Egypt? ‘Leave us alone! Let us work for the Egyptians!’ It would have been better for us to work for the Egyptians than to die in the desert." (Exodus 14:11-12 CEB)

It’s easy to criticize the Israelites for their whining because we know how the story ended. (I’d like to think that I’d have been one of the calmer ones in the group, waiting for God to do his thing. But somehow I doubt it.) Moses did his best to reassure everyone, although he didn’t seem certain about what was going to happen either.

Moses said to the people, "Don’t be afraid. Stand your ground, and watch the LORD rescue you today. The Egyptians you see today you will never ever see again. The LORD will fight for you. You just keep still."(Exodus 14:13-14 CEB)

Then Moses prayed. But scripture doesn’t tell us what he said. The narrative goes from Moses telling the people to keep still, to this: "Then the LORD said to Moses, 'Why do you cry out to me? Tell the Israelites to get moving.'" (Exodus 14:15 CEB)

But didn’t Moses just tell everyone to keep still? Now God is saying to get moving.

I wonder what it was that Moses prayed. Was he asking for help or was he telling God about everyone’s complaints? Whatever it was, the LORD bluntly told Moses that it was time to do more than pray—it was time for action.

Perhaps Moses was praying after he had his answer, or maybe he was waiting to receive more information than he needed to move forward. I do the same thing. It's easy to overspiritualize prayer, especially when we use it as an excuse to put off doing what we know we need to do. I call this prayer paralysis. Maybe that's not what was going on with Moses, but it is clear that it was time for him to do something. Take note that God pushed back the sea, but not until Moses had stetched out his hand over it. God could have done it automatically—but he didn't.

Be still, but get moving.

Pray, but be ready to put legs on your prayers.

BLOG: Mayberry Style Leadership

Thu, 18 Aug 2011 16:19:20 GMT

By Shane Raynor

As a kid I loved reruns of The Andy Griffith Show, which was considered required after school viewing in the small North Carolina town where I grew up. People liked the show (and they still do) because it reminded them of a simpler, more innocent time in their lives. That, and the show was just plain funny.

At the time, I mentally divided the show into two eras, the black and white episodes and the color episodes, which also happened to be, respectively, the ones with Andy’s deputy Barney Fife (portrayed by Don Knotts) and the ones without him. Most people today consider the black and white episodes to be the funniest, and some folks won’t even watch the color episodes. A few years ago, a few television stations that were running the show in syndication even took the unusual step of “decolorizing” the color episodes because they didn’t want ratings to drop when they aired them. I enjoyed both groups of episodes, but almost considered them two separate shows—I found it practically impossible to compare them as apples to apples.

The more I think about it, however, the more I realize that The Andy Griffith Show was really three shows, not two, and the differences between the show’s eras had less to do with Barney and Technicolor than with Andy himself. I’ve come to the conclusion that Andy Griffith portrayed three different Andy Taylors over the course of the show’s run:

Season 1: The lovable and funny Southern rustic
Seasons 2-5: The good-natured, wise sheriff surrounded by wacky supporting characters, a sage-like figure
Seasons 6-8: The more solemn, somewhat irritable sheriff who seemed worn out by the rest of the town’s antics

While each “era” of Andy had its ups and downs, the show really seemed hit its sweet spot during Seasons 2-5. This was somewhat by design, as Andy Griffith realized after the first season that he could only get so much mileage out of the “aw shucks” country shtick. He found that he could actually be funnier by not being quite as funny. Here’s why: The real chemistry on the show was when Andy played straight man to the rest of the cast—the voice of reason, the parental figure. Andy’s character didn’t create his own messes, he got everyone else out of theirs, and it made for hilarious television.

But then later on, with the departure of Don Knotts and changes in the writing team, Andy became almost too serious. The chemistry wasn’t there anymore. Ratings were as high as ever and the show still possessed a certain charm, but looking back, most Andy Griffith Show purists recognize that something was missing in the last three seasons. Andy Griffith eventually became bored and left the show at the end of the eighth season, and the rest of the cast continued the show under the title Mayberry, R.F.D. (the fourth era!)

There are leadership lessons to be learned here. Imagine that The Andy Griffith Show is a church, and Andy Griffith is the pastor. Season 1 represents a church whose pastor tries to go beyond his calling or gifting to fit a certain expectation. Seasons 2-5 would portray a pastor who has realized that the healthiest church is one that has an ensemble cast where everyone’s strengths come together and offset everyone’s weaknesses, rather than a vehicle to propel one “star” forward. Finally, the later seasons represent a pastor who is either coasting on past successes or has become burned out or cynical. This pastor’s church might go on for years, but it’s going to die (get canceled!) sooner or later, or become irrelevant or impotent, which is essentially the same as dying.

The most effective church is the one that finds its seasons 2-5 (wise leadership with teamwork mentality and a good staff chemistry) and stays there.

BLOG: Changing God's Mind

Mon, 08 Aug 2011 18:06:05 GMT

By Shane Raynor

One of the most puzzling passages in the Bible to me is the account of the encounter Jesus has with the Canaanite woman in Matthew 15. Here are the basic details of the situation: A very bold non-Jewish woman is desperate to have her daughter delivered from demonization, so she directly asks Jesus to do it. When he appears to ignore her, she keeps pushing. Finally the disciples ask Jesus to make her go away. The woman specifically asks Jesus to help her. He tells her that he has been sent only to the Jewish people, and then adds this jaw-dropper:

“It is not good to take the children’s bread and toss it to dogs.”

So what has God said to you lately?

Seriously, how would you respond to something like that? While his statement is clearly metaphorical, it’s hard to get around the idea that he called the woman, her family and all Gentiles… well... dogs. The woman was likely used to hearing this sort of thing, as it was how Gentiles were referred to by Jews in that culture. Perhaps Jesus used that harsh language to make a big point, and by his actions that followed, he actually planted a seed for a change of Jewish attitudes that would be further realized when Peter had his vision of the animals on the sheet later in Acts 10. Don’t misunderstand—Jesus was still sent to the Jews first—but God appears to have used this episode to give a sneak preview of his plan to save all people groups through Christ.

The bigger issue in play here is the woman’s boldness, and her apparent success at changing Jesus’ mind. What’s that? You think Jesus was testing her all along and knew he would end up healing her daughter? Perhaps, but that’s assuming the Holy Spirit had revealed that much information to Jesus up to this point. (Remember, as a human being Jesus had set aside certain attributes of his deity and was operating under the power of the Holy Spirit.) The great scandal of this passage is Jesus’ apparent reluctance in the beginning to do something to help the Gentile daughter. Can you imagine what cable news channels would have done with this story if they had existed back in the day?

The ultimate takeaway for this passage is that Jesus responded to the woman’s faith, and that faith seemed to somehow override his original intention. This is good news for us, because faith is where the ball is really in our court. Someone once said that faith is the currency of heaven. I think they were on to something.

God is approachable (only because of the blood of Jesus) and he still responds to faith today. I believe there are times when he changes his mind (or at least the course of events) in response to our prayers. Anyone who downplays this notion risks making prayer nothing more than a spiritual formation exercise for personal growth—nice thought, but no thanks. We should want to grow closer to God, but ultimately, we when we pray, we want his kingdom to come and his will to be done. That’s not always automatic, so our prayers play a big part.

Sometimes God delays an answer to prayer to see what kind of faith we really have. That’s what was essentially going on in the encounter with the Canaanite woman. She wouldn’t take no for an answer. She wasn’t thinking about spirituality on some deep level, she was trying to get help for her daughter who was vexed by a demon. She was willing to buck protocol and risk humiliating herself to get Jesus to help her. She was desperate, and in her desperation she found the faith she needed to approach Jesus, and Jesus responded to it.

When we’re desperate enough to refuse to take no for an answer, that’s when God will sometimes change his mind. Just ask the Canaanite woman. Or Abraham.

BLOG: Real Heart Faith

Tue, 02 Aug 2011 00:43:49 GMT

By Shane Raynor

The things we say and do matter as much as the things we think and feel. Understanding this concept can help us unlock the mystery of what faith really is. The apparent tension between faith and works pops up throughout both scripture and church history. Romans 10 is a passage that deals with faith in a concise and straightforward way—Paul really gets down to brass tacks:

If you confess with your mouth "Jesus is Lord" and in your heart you have faith that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. Trusting with the heart leads to righteousness, and confessing with the mouth leads to salvation. (Romans 10:9-10 CEB)

This passage illustrates the connection between our words and our beliefs, and it can perhaps be interpreted in light of another scripture that deals with the same topic: “What fills the heart comes out of the mouth.” (Matthew 12:34 CEB)

In scripture, particularly the New Testament, the words faith and belief are often used interchangeably, and it’s important to purge any “Disneyfied” ideas about faith and belief in order to understand the biblical meaning of the words. Faith isn’t the same thing as hope, and it isn’t just mentally agreeing with certain doctrines. Real biblical faith involves your mind, emotions, and will. You exercise faith with your intellect, feelings, and actions. If any of these areas are neglected, it could be a sign of a faith that’s weak or dysfunctional.

Where did I get this definition? Well, the Bible is full of references to the human heart—and it’s obvious that it isn’t talking about the blood-pumping organ with the same name. According to Strong’s Dictionary, the Hebrew word often translated heart in the Old Testament, leb, is used to refer to “the feelings, the will and even the intellect”. The Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew Lexicon has a similar definition: “inner man, mind, will, heart, understanding”. (The word can also mean “the seat of emotions and passions” and “the seat of courage”.) In the New Testament, the Greek word generally translated heart is kardia, and according to Thayer’s Greek Lexicon it means “the soul or mind, as it is the fountain and seat of the thoughts, passions, desires, appetites, affections, purposes, endeavours”. A secondary definition is “the seat of the will and character”.

When I put all of that together, I come up with mind, emotions, and will. In other words, you use your heart to think, feel, and decide. And Paul says in Romans 10 that salvation depends on having faith in your heart. You exercise faith with your whole heart. And according to Matthew 12:34, if this heart faith is genuine, you’re going to talk about it.

Such a balanced, fully developed view of faith no doubt bedevils those of us who like to stress only one part of it. It’s quite tempting to oversimplify faith and make it only about doctrine, only about feelings and emotions, or only about actions. There are churches and denominations that have grown up around the particular element of faith they like to emphasize. But biblical faith must include all three.

BLOG: How to Wrestle God (and Win)

Mon, 25 Jul 2011 19:51:32 GMT

By Shane Raynor

If you’re going to wrestle with God, you may as well put up a good fight.

That’s what Jacob did in Genesis 32. And it’s one of those mysterious passages in the Old Testament that I love. Everybody who preaches or teaches about this story seems to have a different opinion of what’s going on. But two things are pretty clear—this was a huge event in Jacob’s life, and he wasn’t the same afterward.

Jacob was about to meet his estranged brother Esau, and he was scared spitless. He had previously taken Esau’s birthright and cheated him out of his father’s blessing, so Jacob probably expected Esau to be more than a little sore. And when he heard that Esau was heading his way with 400 men, Jacob knew his chickens were most likely coming home to roost.

So he did some quick maneuvering and split his group up into two camps. Then he begged God to save him from his brother, and sent servants ahead to meet Esau with gifts of livestock. (I guess he figured it was better to lose part of his wealth and stay alive than lose his life.)

After what looks like an unsuccessful attempt to get some sleep, Jacob decides it’s time to really get serious. He gets up during the night and moves everyone and everything to the other side of the Jabbock River, then he goes back to be alone. And that’s when God shows up.

“Jacob stayed apart by himself, and a man wrestled with him until dawn broke.” (Genesis 32:24 CEB)

But this was no ordinary man. Some believe it was an angel, others that it was God taking human form. There’s speculation in some commentaries that this stranger is the preincarnate Christ. It’s not clear what was going on exactly, but at the end of this passage, Jacob seems to believe he had encountered something more than an angel. I believe God himself was wrestling with Jacob, and that there was a real physical conflict happening.

But there was a spiritual conflict going on here too. Jacob was essentially in a battle of wills with God.

Let’s face it, God could have physically annihilated Jacob with half a thought if he’d wanted to. But Jacob’s will would be a bit harder to break. God created us with free will and he allows us to make choices. The wrestling match that went on that night was first and foremost about getting Jacob’s heart where it needed to be, not about defeating him physically.

Finally God both wounded and healed Jacob with a single touch.

“The man said, ‘Let me go because the dawn is breaking.’ But Jacob said, ‘I won’t let you go until you bless me.’” (Genesis 32:26 CEB)

For the Christian who reads this Old Testament account, it’s a picture of real spiritual prayer. Jacob’s tenacity was pretty remarkable. God obviously wanted to bless Jacob, but he made him really ask for it. I suppose God could have showed up in some vision and given Jacob the same blessing, but he knew Jacob wasn’t prepared to receive it before the wrestling match.

Jacob knew the value of a blessing, so much so that he had cheated to get a big one from his father Isaac. But he wasn’t going to be able to fake his way into getting this blessing. Unlike his earthly dad, God wasn’t nearly blind. On the contrary, God could see into the deepest parts of Jacob’s heart.

This blessing wouldn’t even come with honest sweat. It only came when Jacob was running on empty, but still refused to let go. (The name of the river in this passage actually means “emptying”. Coincidence?)

That blessing became the most important thing to Jacob, and he got it. A lot happened to Jacob that night. His heart changed, his walk changed—he even got a new name, Israel. And a few hours later, he would patch things up with his brother.

Note that Jacob didn’t run from God, he engaged him. There’s nothing wrong with wrestling with God, because sometimes it’s the struggle that gets us to the place where he can change us.

But at some point, we realize that there’s only one way to win in a struggle against God.

Lose.

Then don’t let go.

BLOG: The Ministry Formerly Known as Crusade

Wed, 20 Jul 2011 20:18:42 GMT

By Shane Raynor

If it didn’t have all the medieval military baggage attached to it, crusade would actually be a pretty cool word. It means “marked by the cross.” But I understand why the parachurch ministry Campus Crusade for Christ is dumping it—the same reason Billy Graham’s organization has moved away from it in recent years. It doesn’t do much for cross-cultural relations, especially in the Muslim world.

Going forward, Campus Crusade’s official moniker will be one of its informal nicknames: Cru.

Campus Crusade didn’t change its name only for cross-cultural concerns—the organization expanded its ministries beyond college and university campuses years ago, so the old name really didn’t tell the whole story.

But neither does Cru.

The bad news is, they’re going to have to build a new brand from scratch in the mind of the public. But that could also be good news, depending on what kind of reputation Campus Crusade already has in different parts of the country. Sometimes it’s good to start with a clean slate.

When I was in college, I was involved with InterVarsity Christian Fellowship, and because of the word Varsity, a lot of people thought we were an athletic organization. We’d shorten the name occasionally to IV or IVCF, but people didn’t know what those meant either.

Then there’s the United Methodist campus ministry, Wesley Foundation. It sounds more like a fundraising charity than a college fellowship group, so most people I know just call it “the Wesley” or some local shortened variation. Short form names are all the rage, especially with the Twitter generation.

Will Campus Crusade’s new short form name catch on? Probably. But I doubt they'll turn down a check made out to the old name.

It’s a little like IHOP. I’m old enough to remember when the restaurant chain was referred to by its long form name, International House of Pancakes. I guess people got tired of saying that, so “IHOP” was born. The company probably figured they’d just go along with everyone else and make it official. And IHOP has a lot more than pancakes on its menu now, so it’s a win-win.

There’s also DQ, KFC, and FedEx. Most Dairy Queens also serve hot food now, most of which is decidedly non-dairy. And Kentucky Fried Chicken changed its name to KFC in 1991, then brought the old name and logo back as a variation in 2007. If you go to their website today, neither name can be found at the top of the page, only a likeness of KFC founder Colonel Sanders. Perhaps the chain is taking a cue from Prince and wants to be known by a symbol now, not a name.

And is there anyone on the planet who still calls FedEx by the name Federal Express?

Names are a big deal, especially when you’re establishing a brand. But when a brand outgrows its name or the name becomes misleading, it’s time to consider changing it. With Campus Crusade, it was a little bit of both.

Question: What can established churches and denominations learn from businesses and organizations that have changed their names or re-branded themselves in recent years?

BLOG: Mark Driscoll and Social Media

Thu, 14 Jul 2011 19:20:39 GMT

By Shane Raynor

When Mark Driscoll put his foot in his mouth on Facebook last week, it was the status update heard around the world. Rachel Held Evans quickly labeled him a bully and encouraged people to contact Mars Hill Church to request that Driscoll be held accountable by the church’s elders.

Apparently it worked--Mark responded, not with an apology, but with a something closer to a concession--that perhaps he should handle sensitive issues more judiciously and in a more appropriate forum than Twitter or Facebook. He even mentioned his executive elders “sitting him down” for a talk.

I received some feedback about the incident--dubbed Effemigate by a few of the blogs-- and while most people were in agreement with Rachel, some criticized her for her tone. It occurred to me that Rachel actually resorted to bullying Mark to remedy the situation. (Bullying means intimidating or making one’s way aggressively.) That’s not a swipe at her--some would argue that if you buy into her charge that Driscoll was being a bully, then it’s necessary to intimidate the bully in return. Fight fire with fire. "Stand up to him" is how Rachel put it. Call it what you want, she got results. (It worked for me in middle school too. I actually became friends with a long-time nemesis by beating him up.)

But I don’t buy her argument that Driscoll was a bully. I didn’t find his original comment to be the big deal so many made it out to be. It’s not like he approached the Don Imus level of reckless. But he did learn a lesson about the power of social media. Once you put something out there, you can’t take it back even if you want to.

In this age of instant push-button publishing, there are hardly any barriers to keep us from sharing our thoughts with the world as soon as we think them. That’s both exhilarating and terrifying, because if we fire something off from our smartphone before we’ve given it enough thought, we can create major problems for ourselves and others. And sometimes it’s not what we say, but how we say it that gets us into trouble.

Driscoll eventually deleted his original post, but not before it was immortalized in blog posts and screen captures. Still, in the grand scheme of things, this incident didn’t amount to much more than a little row.

I'm sure Congressman Anthony Weiner would be more than happy to trade scandals with Mark Driscoll.

BLOG: Receiving God's Word

Mon, 11 Jul 2011 20:22:27 GMT

By Shane Raynor

In Matthew 13:3-9, Jesus speaks of a person scattering seed that falls in four places: on a path, on rocks, among thorns and on good soil. Some people interpret this parable to be specifically about evangelism, but I believe there’s more to it than that. At its most basic level, the parable is about hearing God’s word. That being the case, we can apply some of the principles we find here to any situation where the word of God is being communicated.

Most of us probably call this the parable of the sower, but a better name might be the parable of the soils, because soil is essentially the focus of Jesus’ message here. (The new CEB actually uses Parable of the Soils in some of its headings.) Note that there’s no big to-do here about sowing methods. The sower simply scatters seed, and seems to scatter it somewhat indiscriminately, not overly concerned about getting it all on the “good” soil. And interestingly enough, the first type of soil mentioned has several factors contributing to its lack of suitability. Let’s take a look at that soil in the first three gospels:

As he was scattering it, some fell on the path where it was crushed, and the birds in the sky came and ate it. (Luke 8:5)
As he was scattering seed, some fell on the path, and birds came and ate it. (Matthew 13:4)
As he was scattering seed, some fell on the path; and the birds came and ate it. (Mark 4:4)

Now let’s look at Jesus’ explanation in the same three gospels:

The seed on the path are those who hear, but then the devil comes and steals the word from their hearts so that they won’t believe and be saved. (Luke 8:12)
Whenever people hear the word about the kingdom and don’t understand it, the evil one comes and carries off what was planted in their hearts. This is the seed that was sown on the path. (Matthew 13:19)
This is the meaning of the seed that fell on the path: When the word is scattered and people hear it, right away Satan comes and steals the word that was planted in them. (Mark 4:15)

Here are my observations and takeaways:

Paths are not plowed ground. No good crop can come from ground that hasn’t been prepared for planting. On a personal level, we are responsible for making sure our hearts are ready to receive (and understand) God’s word. We are also accountable for helping other believers do this. Worship, prayer, conviction (brought by the Holy Spirit) and repentance all play significant roles in preparing our hearts to receive what God has to tell us.
Other people will sometimes trample our hearts and the word of God. If the soil in this parable represents our heart, then we need to consider the possibility. Our interactions and relationships with other people (on whatever level) can soften or harden our heart. This is why scripture tells us how important it is to guard our heart. If plowed ground represents a heart that’s sensitive to leading of the Holy Spirit, then a hardened path represents a hard heart that has been desensitized.
Giving the wrong people inappropriate levels of access to our lives can literally make it difficult for us to receive the word of God. The word will be crushed before it has a chance to take root, and even if it grows a little, what comes up will be quickly trampled down. The devil can easily steal the word of God from someone whose heart is hard. When we don’t keep our heart prepared to hear from God, we make it easy for Satan to take God’s word from us. The sad part is, we usually don’t even realize what happened, because God’s word never even penetrated our heart. Sometimes when we hear the word of God, we make the mistake of reasoning with the devil instead of receiving it right away.

Questions to Consider:

How can you better prepare your heart to receive God’s word this week?
Who (or what) in your life might be helping to harden your heart?
Who is crushing the word of God?
How can you begin to surround yourself with people who will build you up instead of tear you down?
What specific choices can you make that will help keep the enemy from stealing God’s word from you?

BLOG: Don't Do Ministry Without It

Thu, 07 Jul 2011 16:04:22 GMT

By Shane Raynor

One of the most helpful tools I’ve ever used for ministry is a little philosophy that Methodist movement founder John Wesley picked up from a Moravian friend, missionary Peter Böhler. The year was 1738, and Wesley had not yet experienced his famous Aldersgate conversion. He was burned out and somehow couldn’t grasp the concept of justification by faith alone. He told himself, “How can you preach to others if you don’t have faith yourself?” John asked Peter if he should stop preaching. Böhler replied, “By no mean.”

Then Wesley asked, “But what can I preach?”

Böhler answered, “Preach faith till you have it; and then, because you have it, you will preach faith.”

John took Peter’s advice, and although Wesley wasn’t even sure of his own salvation, he shared the Gospel with a guy on death row named Clifford. Thus began a long ministry of stepping beyond the bounds of his perceived faith to do extraordinary works for God. I believe this idea of “preaching faith till we have it” is one of the major keys to experiencing power in our ministries even today.

The author of Hebrews writes that “faith is the reality of what we hope for, the proof of what we don’t see.” (Hebrews 11:1 CEB), and in Romans 4:17, Paul tells that God “gives life to the dead and calls things that don’t exist into existence (CEB).” Real Biblical faith cannot be based on empirical evidence or even on feelings. It must be based only upon what God has said or revealed. According to 2 Corinthians 5:7, “we live by faith and not by sight.” I believe we could substitute “feelings” for sight and that verse would be equally true. The Bible is saying that when it comes to the things of God, we often must believe things before we see them. I realize that this may seem counterintuitive, because many of us grew up hearing the mantra, “Seeing is believing.” Indeed, that’s the way the world generally operates. But in the Kingdom of God, the converse is true. First we believe, then we see. “Preach faith until you have it,” is essentially derived from Hebrews 11:1 and 2 Corinthians 5:7. Peter Böhler wasn’t pulling it out of thin air.

The Böhler Principle can revolutionize the way we do ministry, because it sets us free from the idea that we can only teach something up to the level we’ve personally experienced. This realization has been especially liberating to me as I’ve taught others about prayer and fasting. Although I’ve learned much about prayer, both from personal experience and second-hand, I’ve struggled with discipline and consistency in my prayer life. The temptation is for me to avoid teaching on the topic at all until I “get it together”, or to feel that I don’t have authority to teach beyond my own point of “mastery”. “Preach faith till you have it,” turns that fear on its head.

One of the most significant things about Peter Böhler’s radical idea is that it places the teacher in the role of student. Once a teacher or mentor understands that they are also teaching themselves (or more accurately being used by God to teach themselves), they are less likely to “hold back” or feel inhibited when they minister to others. As a result, teaching will become more about stretching faith boundaries and less about simply imparting information.

“Preaching faith till we have it,” doesn’t make us hypocrites, as long as we do it in the right spirit, and not in a pretentious way. On the contrary, it makes us fellow disciples with flaws that others can relate to. Think about it-- no one wants to be instructed by someone who isn’t secure enough to risk letting their student’s faith surpass their own. And that’s what sometimes happens when we explore new frontiers with the people we minister to.

“Preach faith till you have it; and then, because you have it, you will preach faith.” John Wesley listened to his friend and built a ministry that’s still changing the world over two centuries later. Shouldn't we take the same advice?

AUDIO: Interview w/ Jon Acuff

Wed, 06 Jul 2011 18:58:57 GMT

By Shane Raynor

Do you know what your "dream job" is? Have you ever thought about leaving your day job to chase that dream? Jon Acuff has some thoughts on the subject. After graduating from college, Jon held eight full time jobs in eight years. He's now a blogger, speaker, best-selling author, and member of the Dave Ramsey team.

This is my recent interview with the best selling author of Stuff Christians Like. His latest book, Quitter: Closing the Gap Between Your Day Job and Your Dream Job is now available, and has already made the Wall Street Journal's business bestseller list.

Jon is headlining the Quitter Conference, a one day event, July 30 in Nashville.

ARTICLE: Unconventional Author Takes Bible Beyond Christian Club

Thu, 30 Jun 2011 15:14:01 GMT

By Shane Raynor

I've been a Stephen Miller fan since the late 90's. He writes Bible reference books that are unlike any you've ever seen, and his latest title, The Complete Visual Bible, is in my opinion his best so far. I recently interviewed Stephen about his writing and his unique style.

You're known for Bible reference books that take a different approach from most titles in that genre. What is your mission as a writer? What are you hoping to accomplish?

Just one thing. Get people into the Bible to read it for themselves.

I want them to make up their own minds about what it says, instead of trusting other people to do their thinking for them. That’s one reason I don’t preach at readers in my books. The other is that I’m not a preacher. Never wanted to be. Ever. In a million years.

You wrote in the introduction to The Complete Visual Bible that your books take you a year to complete. Walk me through the process of a Stephen Miller book from your first idea through publication.

Looking over my shoulder at where I’ve been makes me tired. Looking ahead is what’s energizing. But let me see if I can backtrack a bit on The Complete Visual Bible.

The idea. I’ve worked with Barbour Publishing long enough now that they don’t ask me to write the 40-page book proposals I used to write, complete with samples of what goes in the book. Instead, I give them a list of book ideas that interest me. They pick the one that most interests them. And we’re off to the races—in a one-year marathon.

The writing. I wrote my way through the Bible, from Genesis to Revelation. I was at my desk each weekday by around 8 a.m. Thirty-minute lunch break at noon, with the Kansas City Star newspaper and a national TV news station running in the background. Back at it until around 4 p.m., though much later on some days. And there’s occasional work on weekends.

I researched and then wrote each one-page or two-page feature in the book—a bit like you’d write magazine articles. So this particular book is one heaping helping of magazine-style articles.

After writing each article, I’d do the art research and most of the acquisition for that piece. I avoided the normal stock photo companies because their images show up so often in other Bible reference books. It’s a lot more trouble getting unique art from individual photographers and artists all over the world. (I had to wait on one photo of a camel race until the photographer in Pakistan got back from the Himalayas. He said he’d send me the photo when he got back. I asked him not to fall off the mountain. Jinxed myself. I went mountain biking a few weeks later with my son: Whistler Mountain, where the 2010 Olympic skiing events were held. I found Canadian medical care accommodating. I recommend their self-service morphine.) I think the extra effort in searching out good art is worth it. I end up with lots of images that have never been published before. I also make most my own maps, with the help of NASA data and some super geeky cartography software, which is a royal pain.

Reviewing the work of others. I’m always nervous when I get back the edited pages and then the designed pages. The copy editing focuses mainly on matters of style and fact-checking. I don’t need to worry much anymore about editors making the writing sound starch formal, dirt dry, and ugly as all get out. Used to be a problem with other publishers. Especially denominational publishers. More than anything those editors want to keep the Boss happy. And I’m not talking about God. Here’s the way to keep bureaucratic bosses happy: don’t draw attention. And here’s the way to keep from drawing attention: be boring.

Design is always a problem. We always end up having to cut my guts out: words and pictures and maps. That’s okay with me. Each two-page canvas needs to look gorgeous. And sometimes we simply have too many words or too many images to pull that off. So we have to pull something out. My guts. It’s time-consuming, and a tad painful if we’re killing a map I spent 2 days creating.

The give and take at this stage can get a bit testy at times, especially on my end. I have to work on phrasing myself less bluntly. Take it from me, “Gag me green,” is not a good thing to say to a designer.

Fortunately for everyone, Barbour has some excellent designers working on these complex projects. And they are complex, perhaps the most time-intensive books Barbour does at the moment.

You've said that your target audience includes the unchurched, those who aren't familiar with the Bible, atheists, and agnostics. How do these books make it into the hands of your intended audience?

Most of those folks wouldn’t be caught carcass dead in a Christian bookstore. Lucky for me Barbour Publishing has some excellent resources for getting my books out to where the people are: drugstores, rest stops, restaurant gift shops, and discount stores like Wal-Mart. They’re also available online at sites like Amazon.

Tell me about some of the challenges of presenting the Bible in fresh ways to a new audience.

I probably shouldn’t tell you too much. It could get me in trouble.

I get pressure from just about everyone in the Christian book publishing world to make my books more acceptable to the traditional Christian market. I have to fight that battle from time to time. When you target people outside the Christian Club—and that’s what Christianity is to many outsiders—you approach the Bible stories and teachings differently than if you’re writing for insiders. You start by asking the tough questions they ask, and by making the seemingly irreverent observations they do.

Example. The Song of Songs is a book about sex. You’ve got two youngsters juiced up on hormones talking the talk. The gent essentially says, “Hey babe, I’m going to climb you like a tree. And you know what I’m going to do to those dates hanging there!”

Let me tell you, that gets the attention of readers outside the Christian Club. Some of them will actually crack open a Bible to see if that’s really in there. But tell me, how on earth am I going to write that in a way that gets the attention of those readers, without offending some longtime Christians? Beats me.

So I’ve stopped worrying about offending them. I put them out of my mind when I’m writing. Instead, I think about non-Christians and newbies when I write—people like my neighbors. After all, when Jesus gave his commission to the disciples he didn’t say, “Hey guys, go talk among yourselves.”

There are plenty of people writing for the traditional Christian crowd. They don’t need me doing it, too.

One thing I’ve discovered though is that if you can write a Bible reference book that’s interesting enough to engage non-Christians, you’re going to pick up a lot of Christians who have been bored out of their gourd by traditional Bible study books.

How do you deal with writer's block?

I don’t get writer’s block. That’s for fiction writers.

I was reading your books back in the "black and white days" before they looked like slick, colorful magazines. Besides the obvious visual component, what has changed about your books in the past 10 or 15 years?

Yeah, some of those black and white books are still out there. If I were the editor, I’d retire them. It’s not a black and white world anymore.

In recent years I’ve been allowed to add my personality to the writing. Barbour lets me write like I talk. Most other publishers I’ve worked with have wanted the writing more formal. Even Reader’s Digest Books, known for its easy-reading style, wanted nothing to do with humor, wise cracks, and the kind of attitude you might expect in a magazine article. At least they didn’t want them in their Bible reference books.

Even Barbour had an internal discussion about that when I submitted my first book to them: Who’s Who and Where’s Where in the Bible. Thankfully, the editor backed me up. The sales of that book pretty much gave us all the green light for more of the same. That book won the Christian Retailing award as the non-fiction book of the year. Actually, it tied for first with a book about Billy Graham, who’s no pushover.

You leave a lot of questions and controversies unanswered-- or you present multiple views and let the readers decide. Why do you use this approach?

Personally, I’ve had it up to here with preachers telling me what to think—in their sermons, and in their sermons repackaged as books.

My own pastor is a rare exception to the rule—rare at least in the history of my pastors. My distaste for this all started when I was in grade school—first grade as I recall. My pastor wrote a note for me, excusing me from square dancing in gym class—on religious grounds. I still can’t dance. I went to a wedding over the weekend, and it bums me out that I don’t have any idea how to get my groove on. Heck, even one of my former pastors was shaking it up with his Mrs. and their kids. He’s another exception to the rule. Obviously.

Many of the controversies I skip don’t have any clear-cut direction in the Bible. Abortion, for example. The Bible doesn’t talk about it, though people were practicing it at the time.

It really irritates some Christians when I say that. In fact, I lost a book deal because I refused to take a position on that topic—and I had already written the book on contract. (They lost their advance, too. Ain’t no way I was going to give it back when they knew from the beginning that my position was not to take a position.)

The editor and a sales guy tried to convince me that the Bible talks about abortion because it forbids murder. But every murder I know about in the Bible is of a breathing person. And there’s that controversial passage about a man purposely injuring a pregnant woman and having to pay only a fine if the baby dies. But if the woman dies, he pays with his life.

There are Christians on both sides of most tough issues. I prefer to let readers hear from both sides so they can make up their own minds.

Do you ever hear from your critics? If so, what are their biggest issues with your books?

Surprisingly, I get very little criticism thrown at me. When it comes, it’s often unpredictable. And sometimes weird. Like the fellow who said the Holocaust never happened, and that Jesus had blue eyes.

I always write people back—once. Not twice or more. I told him that my dad fought in General George Patton’s army during World War II, and that he knew otherwise about the Holocaust.

Some folks catch mistakes I’ve made, or they tell me about phrasing that confused them. I love those kinds of emails. We get the mistakes corrected before the next printing.

You've mentioned that you teach the Bible in your church. How does your research as an author contribute to your teaching? How does your ministry at church help your writing?

Question 1. Well, it helped last Sunday when the discussion leader couldn’t pronounce Zerubbabel. It’s (zuh ROO bub bull). But, sadly, I wasn’t able to help another Sunday School teacher several years ago when he pronounced Yahweh YAH-whoo. Once that came out of his mouth, he was beyond help. He’s one reason I often include phonetic pronunciations in my books. For the record, it’s YAH way.

In my writing, I try to pull out interesting background facts. I do that in my teaching, too.

I’ll even take a stab at paraphrasing the Bible for the class. Proverbs is especially fun. I still remember the class’s reaction when I gave them the handout that read: “If you build a fire in your pants, what makes you think you won’t get burned?” (Proverbs 6:27, my paraphrase). One lady couldn’t believe it was in the Bible, so she cracked it open to see for herself. That’s exactly what I’m hoping readers will do.

Question 2. As for the flip side of your question, leading Bible study classes helps me stay focused on the kinds of questions people are asking about the Bible and Christianity. Even longtime Christians seem pretty doggone unfamiliar with Bible stories I’ve heard all my life. So when I write, I don’t take for granted that my readers know much of anything I’m writing about. A journalism prof of mine once told me to write news that way: “Pretend your readers are from Mars.” Good advice, I think, though probably more than half of my readers are from Venus.

How do you decide which photos and images to use in your books? How time-consuming is it to acquire these images?

I have one phrase I repeat over and over to myself when I’m looking for images: “Artfully informative.” I want the image to be visually strong enough to vacuum the reader’s eyeballs into the page. And I want the image to say something about the topic.

The art research and acquisition part of my job is incredibly time consuming. Some images can take hours to find, days to track down, and months to get. It’s my fault. I want the best images available. I don’t want to get outdone by some other hardworking grunt illustrating a competing book. I want the readers to find their best stuff in my books. If that’s pride, I’ll take a little of the Lord’s grace right about now.

You've carved out quite a niche for yourself in Christian publishing. Who would you say is your "competition"?

I’m not sure there’s anyone out there just yet with my combo of lavishly illustrated, light-hearted Bible reference books. They’ll come in time. But I hope I’ll always be my own snowflake.

In the meantime, I feel a lot of pressure from myself to make each book better than the one before. The Complete Visual Bible is a tough book to follow. But I’m doing the best I can.

Every day when I’m working on something, I remind myself that it’s important to do it well. There’s always a temptation to rush forward—to become an Early Settler, a writer who settles too early on something less than excellent. Deadlines can do that to you. So can procrastination.

What are your goals and strategies for expanding your ministry and the reach of your books?

I guess I should probably develop some strategies, huh. It’s just that I love writing. The other stuff is a chore. Still, I’m toying with doing some freebie videos related to ideas in my book. And I should probably get out and speak more. But that’s the flip side of the coin from the monk-like work of writing.

I do have a nice web site, though, thanks to my son. He co-owns an online marketing company. I’m glad we put that kid through college. That was a good strategy.

Your books have sold a lot of copies, but you've done it under the radar, so to speak. How did you manage to pull that off?

Yeah, well I’m forwarding this question to Barbour’s marketing department.

In fairness to them, they’re trying. But there’s only so much you can do with a writer who looks like a hound dog.

Have you ever considered moving beyond print into multimedia?

Barbour is working on turning The Complete Guide to the Bible into a iPad format. And we’ve talked about multimedia, which is something you need to plan for from the get-go. That’ll be even more complex than the complex print books I’m doing now. You add video of Bible lands. Audio of words tough to pronounce. Instructional clips for Bible study teachers. Maybe pictures of my kids.

Or not.

The market seems headed into multimedia. But at the moment I don’t think anyone knows the best way to get from here to there. It’ll come. I’d like to be there when it does.

Tell me about your next project.

I have two books in the pipeline at the moment.

Coming out in the spring of 2012 is Bible Snapshots. It’s like a bunch of books in one. It has “Bible: Fast Pass,” which is an overview of the entire Bible along with articles about how we got the Bible, how to shop for a Bible, and how to study the Bible. There’s a “Christianity: Fast Pass,” which has articles about the Christian faith. There’s even a section for atheists: “10 Tough Questions Atheists Ask.” I don’t preach there. Somebody else can do that. I just give some of the answers Bible experts give to questions atheists raise. They’re legit questions that deserve honest answers, even if the answer is “Dogged if I know. But in God I trust.”

There are a bunch of other sections, too, like the “Bible Survival Guide.” The subtitle pretty much explains that section: “When life gets dicey and faith runs thin: Bible advice, encouragement, and hope.”

That book is already at the design studio.

The book I’m writing at the moment is an illustrated Bible dictionary.

So one of my first thoughts each morning is about which entry I’ll be writing as I sip my after-breakfast coffee, since I’m writing from A to Z.

“Delilah” is a good reason to get up.

“Demon,” not so much. But there’s the coffee.

BLOG: Moving God

Wed, 29 Jun 2011 18:19:26 GMT

By Shane Raynor

What kinds of things do you pray for? Only the impossible stuff? Things over which you have absolutely no control? What about requests that are “safe”?

The things we pray for probably more than anything else are impacted by our views on what’s actually happening during prayer. Why do we pray? To change God’s mind, to get results from heaven, or to grow in our faith and get closer to God?

As my own understanding of prayer has developed, I’ve found it helpful to read Biblical accounts of how people interacted with God using prayer. One in particular caught my eye yesterday.

Genesis 25:19-34 tells us the familiar story of Jacob and Esau, the fraternal twins who were such opposites that they didn’t even get along in the womb. Nothing about their lives was smooth sailing, even their conceptions.

Isaac didn’t get married until he was 40, and at some point it became apparent that Rebekah was having trouble getting pregnant. God had already promised Isaac's father Abraham that he would have more descendants than there were stars in the sky or grains of sand on the beach. And Isaac no doubt knew that God’s promise was going to be fulfilled through him. I’m not sure whether Isaac thought the pressure was on him or on God to make sure the promise was fulfilled, but he apparently decided he was going to do more than just sit on his duff and wait.

Isaac knew better than to try to “help God out” by getting a female slave to be a surrogate mother. (It probably took Sarah and Abraham a while to live down that little episode.) So Isaac did what we often do when things are beyond our pay grade. He prayed.

“Isaac prayed to the LORD for his wife, since she was unable to have children. The LORD was moved by his prayer, and his wife Rebekah became pregnant.” (Genesis 25:21 CEB)

We aren’t given every detail here. Isaac was 60 when Jacob and Esau were born, so we know that he and Rebekah had been childless for 20 years. But we don’t know when Isaac started praying or how many times he had to pray before God took action. All we know for sure is that Isaac’s intercession moved God and brought fulfillment of the promise.

Isaac wasn’t just praying in vain-- this passage portrays his prayers as pivotal. He knew what God had promised-- and still he prayed anyway. This is part of a seemingly paradoxical pattern in the Bible where God makes a promise but requires the beneficiary in some way to take possession of what’s promised.

The LORD was moved by Isaac’s prayer, and there’s no reason to think that he isn’t moved by prayer today. We can’t presume that we’ll get everything we want when we pray, and we also can’t take for granted that the will of God will be done automatically if we don’t pray.

James 5:16 says that “the prayer of the righteous person is powerful in what it can achieve.” Some translations use the words effectual or effective in this verse. The main idea is that the people of God can pray and get results.

Prayers can move God.

BLOG: Politicians and Private Morality

Tue, 28 Jun 2011 00:53:02 GMT

By Shane Raynor

I’ve been checking out a recent survey from Public Religion Research Institute that indicates a greater willingness by Americans to give political figures a pass for sexual misdeeds than financial ones. Stated another way, more of us are tougher on bribe recipients and tax cheats than we are on philanderers and adulterers, both real and virtual. Over 90% of Americans think bribery is a serious problem for a politician, and more than 80% think the same about cheating on taxes. But that number falls to two-thirds for sex with a prostitute, two-thirds for “sexting” a non-spouse, and 72% (or 69%) for adultery (depending on whether the politician is male or female, respectively). Over 75% said that lying to cover up moral failings or sexual misdeeds was serious.

I was surprised by some of these numbers at first, but as I analyzed them, I thought of several possible explanations for the survey results:

We relate easier to sexual sin than financial impropriety. Most of us at some point have probably been tempted to some degree by an affair or other sexual sin, and we tend to cut others more slack when we can see ourselves in their shoes. Hypocrisy is practically an unpardonable sin in American culture, so we’re more likely to take a “live and let live” approach when political figures struggle with the type of private sins that more of us are vulnerable to ourselves.

We’re more likely to hold people accountable for transgressions that are perceived to be against us. When Arnold Schwarzenegger cheated on his wife, for example, most of us likely didn’t take that as personally as we would have if he’d taken a bribe. A bribe would have been widely viewed as a betrayal of public trust, while an affair was considered a betrayal of the covenant with his spouse alone.

We try to separate a person’s character from their job performance. But this makes no sense. If a public figure isn’t faithful to his or her spouse, how can we trust them to be faithful to an oath of office? Is it realistic to expect people to be more loyal to their employer than they are to their husband or wife? As taxpayers, we’re the ones who “hire” politicians. Knowing that a politician has commited adultery, yet still trusting that same person to be politically honest is naive at best.

Bill Maher, host of HBO’s Real Time, has ridiculed the American public for judging the private sex lives of its politicians. I’ve seen the same sentiment in other places, most notably in parts of the European press. As a celebrity, Maher likely views the line between someone’s personal life and public life as virtually sacrosanct -- certainly more defined than the average citizen might see it-- and that has probably had an impact on his views. And since we’re living in a reality where nearly everyone has a cell phone camera, perhaps more of us are beginning to recognize a need to clearly define such a line. Maybe we’re becoming more willing to look the other way when a politician fails in his or her personal life because, in a world that’s becoming less and less private, we subconsciously want to protect our own privacy.

That kind of empathy from voters isn’t wise, but it’s understandable.

BLOG: Evangelicalism: Getting Our Game Back

Thu, 23 Jun 2011 20:38:39 GMT

By Shane Raynor

If you believe the secular press, evangelicalism is on its way out. Even the late Michael Spencer predicted a major breakdown of the evangelical movement two years ago in his essay “The Coming Evangelical Collapse”. This week, Religion News Service distributed an article titled “Evangelicals See Declining Influence in U.S.” which ran prominently on the Christian Century and Huffington Post websites, among others. So is evangelicalism falling out of favor, or does the press have it completely wrong?

From my perspective, evangelicalism is doing fine, but the term evangelical has seen better days. I see no evidence that the core elements of evangelical theology (conversion, evangelism, Biblical authority, and the centrality of the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ) are in decline. The word evangelical, however, is now a loaded term in American culture, because it has unfortunately become associated with conservative politics and the Republican party in recent years. That’s not meant to be a swipe at the GOP or at political conservatives-- because it would be just as unhealthy for the word evangelical to carry widespread liberal or Democratic connotations.

In any event, whether you believe the evangelical movement is on the decline or not, you’d probably concede that evangelical Christians could do more to avoid bad PR and inaccurate characterizations. In public perception, we’ve fallen off our game-- but the good news is it’s not terribly difficult to get our game back. Here are some ideas on how we can do it:

Major on the majors. Remember those four elements of evangelical theology I mentioned? Those are generally what unite evangelical Christians-- not political parties, economic schools of thought, preferred Bible translations, evangelism strategies, or opinions on social issues. Those elements should certainly be shaped by our theology, but they aren’t central to our faith. So let’s stop making such a big deal about them.

Focus on the grassroots. Society is transformed only when people are transformed. It’s not the other way around! Injustices and evils in the world are symptoms of what’s going on in the human heart. When evangelical Christians focus too much on electing the right politicians or passing the right laws, we’re emphasizing externals instead of changing hearts. That never produces lasting transformation. Social and political activism have their place. But some things have to change from the bottom up-- and from the inside out.

Be optimistic. No one likes hanging around negative people. Evangelical Christians should be known for spreading hope, not fear or pessimism. Finding and highlighting the potential in our society is never as easy as pointing out the things that are wrong, but it’s much more effective. As much as anything else, I believe this is where we’ve lost our way.

Stop whining. I’m not sure exactly when, but at some point, evangelical Christians developed a victim mentality. We complain that we’re portrayed unfairly by Hollywood and the news media, we think the government is out to get us, and we blow controversies like the “War on Christmas” out of proportion. People who are always complaining or making excuses don’t attract other people. Unfair things happen, and Christians do sometimes get the short end of the stick, but playing the victim card rarely solves the problem.

If you must label yourself evangelical, use it as an adjective, not a noun. This is such a small thing, but I believe it impacts our thinking about our identity. If we refer to ourselves as evangelical Christians, not evangelicals, we’re acknowledging that our identity is first and foremost found in being a Christian, not in a particular label or brand of Christianity. I actually try to avoid labels and modifiers altogether, not because I’m trying to hide my theology, but because I don’t like drawing lines unnecessarily. Labels mean different things to different people, and I’ve discovered that many who reject the evangelical label don’t necessarily reject evangelical theology. So I simply use the term “Christian” whenever possible.

Question: Do you think the evangelical movement has lost its focus? If so, what steps should be taken to recover it?

ARTICLE: 5 Keys to Denominational Survival

Wed, 22 Jun 2011 18:24:29 GMT

By Shane Raynor

USA Today reported last week on the decline of the Southern Baptist denomination. Last year, Southern Baptist churches baptized around 5% fewer people than in the preceding year. Their total membership numbers also dropped for the fourth year in a row.

So much for the theory that conservative evangelical churches and denominations are immune to net membership losses. I still believe that evangelical congregations are more likely to grow, but clearly there’s more going on here than just theology.

Every denomination does things a little differently, so it’s difficult to write a one size fits all prescription for reversing negative trends for every kind of church. But there are some steps churches can take to survive.

1. Stop trying to survive. The sooner you face the fact that the Kingdom of God won’t grind to a halt if your denomination vanishes, the better off you’ll be. Even your theological distinctives will survive without you if they’re worth their salt. Self-preservation mode is a dangerous place for any Christian group to be, because it means that the organization has gone from being a movement to being an institution. Institutions don’t capture people’s imaginations-- movements do.

2. Cut bureaucracy. In business, there are cost centers and there are profit centers. A profit center is a unit or department that contributes to the overall financial results of a company. A cost center is a department that doesn’t produce direct profit and adds to the costs of running a company. Cost centers are created for the sake of the profit centers, not the other way around! If a cost center isn’t indirectly creating more profit than it’s spending, a smart company reduces the size of that cost center or eliminates it altogether. But in the church, we’re afraid to do this, partly because we don’t want to be responsible for good people losing their jobs.

The reality is that a leaner bureaucracy would create more opportunities for ministry (and even some ministry jobs) at the local level, which is where church growth actually happens. It’s not the local church’s responsibility to worry about saving jobs at a church agency. It’s the church agency’s job to do everything it can to help the local church grow, and to do it in the most efficient way possible. When that’s the priority, all the boats should rise.

3. Get rid of national marketing. It doesn’t work well, especially if brand consistency is non-existent within your church. Instead of running expensive, inefficient national campaigns, denominational communications agencies should focus their energy on adapting successful local church campaigns for use by like-minded churches in other markets. There are innovative, growing churches in every denomination, and it makes much more sense using field-tested marketing from the trenches than trying to use a top-down, one size fits all approach.

4. Rethink and simplify the ordination process. As a member of the United Methodist Church, I’m thinking about my denomination here, but I’m pretty sure there are other denominations that would benefit from this advice. Four years of college and several additional years of seminary followed by a grinding mill of boards and committees is overkill. Yes, I know it’s supposed to weed out the unsuitable candidates, but I suspect it weeds out just as many good candidates. Some megachurches, multi-site churches, and church associations are developing alternative tracks to ordination. If denominations don’t address the red tape and problems with their ordination processes, they’ll continue to lose gifted potential pastors to nondenominational churches.

5. Plant more churches, especially in cities. More people live in cities than in rural areas, yet for some denominations, most of their buildings and resources aren’t in urban areas. Mike Slaughter, pastor of Ginghamsburg Church, correctly points out that the United Methodist Church, for example, is essentially sending pastors to buildings rather than to people. Good stewardship of Kingdom resources means using those resources to plant and nurture new churches rather than keeping the dying ones on life support. And churches should be planted where the people are. That’s common sense.

What prescriptions do you suggest for stimulating denominational growth? And does it matter whether denominations are growing or dying anyway?

BLOG: Church Trial

Wed, 22 Jun 2011 00:52:45 GMT

By Shane Raynor

The Casey Anthony trial is getting non-stop coverage right now, but there’s another trial taking place in Wisconsin that’s getting a different kind of national attention. Amy DeLong, a United Methodist pastor, is facing two charges of violating church law--for officiating at a same sex union and for being a “self-avowed, practicing homosexual." Clergy members can have their ordination revoked in the United Methodist Church if convicted on either charge.

Many people probably don’t even realize that there’s such a thing as a church trial. They happen occasionally in the United Methodist Church, which, like the United States government, consists of three branches--the legislative, executive, and judicial branches.

But some United Methodists who probably don’t have a problem with the legislative and executive branches are beside themselves over the prospect of a church trial. Prominent United Methodist blogger Dan Dick, for example, had this to say about the DeLong trial:

...a child of God, a sister-in-Christ, and a member of the family of humankind is going through a stressful and excruciating process of having not only her conduct, but her very personhood judged by the church she feels called to serve. I don’t care what an individual might feel about sexual orientation and the vagaries of human sexuality in general. I care little at the moment about the legalism of the Book of Discipline and a church that runs its most important business by parliamentary procedure law rather than Spirit-filled grace.

The fact is, church trials are part of the package when you try to run a denomination like a republic--so let’s not try to paint this trial as another Inquisition. Without the judicial branch, General Conference legislation would have no teeth, and bishops would probably have too much power (or perhaps too little!) Church trials aren’t an embarrassment, and they shouldn’t be a cause for fear. If anything, the United Methodist Church and other denominations should probably have a few more of them. The problem is, these trials only seem to happen (or we only hear about them) when it’s something related to sex or sexuality. There are plenty of other chargeable offenses in the Book of Discipline, including heresy. And laypeople can be tried too. (How many of you knew that?)

The United Methodist Book of Discipline says that “church trials are to be regarded as an expedient of last resort.” I agree, and I believe that’s been the approach in this case. Everything I’ve read seems to indicate that the denomination has looked the other way for years instead of dealing with Rev. DeLong’s violations. News sources say she told denominational officials about being in a same-sex relationship a number of years ago, and it’s been two years since she performed the same-sex union. Since Rev. DeLong has admitted to both violations, the only way she can be acquitted is through jury nullification. But that would set a terrible precedent and undermine our entire United Methodist system.

A minority of United Methodists disagree with church law on this issue--I understand that. But if you disagree with church law, you should work to change it in the appropriate venue--General Conference--not the judicial branch. No matter where you stand on the issue of homosexuality, this is an open and shut case. A court is no place for activism.

Dan Dick writes that the United Methodist Church “runs its most important business by parliamentary procedure law rather than Spirit-filled grace." But it’s unreasonable to think that the Holy Spirit can move through Bishops and General Conference delegates but not through a jury. The United Methodist system is far from perfect, but it works fairly well if each branch of government is running the way it should. That means if we throw out one part, we may as well throw out all of it.

BLOG: Christians and the Pledge

Mon, 20 Jun 2011 20:55:22 GMT

By Shane Raynor

The Pledge of Allegiance is back in the news again. This time it’s because the NBC television network cut the words “under God, indivisible” from a presentation during its coverage of the U.S. Open over the weekend. The negative feedback was so strong that NBC was forced to apologize to viewers during tournament coverage the same day. It seems pretty obvious that the words were left out intentionally, but we don’t know exactly who was responsible for the omission. Was it a decision of the network or one or two employees?

There are people who don’t like the Pledge for a lot of different reasons. Jehovah’s Witnesses say it’s idolatrous. Some atheists like Michael Newdow don’t like the reference to God. Religious left leader Barry Lynn isn’t an atheist, but he’s no fan of “under God” because he says it violates the Establishment Clause in the Constitution. Federal Courts, however, have disagreed with Dr. Newdow and Rev. Lynn, including the liberal Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

Frankly I’m usually suspicious of people who have a major beef against the Pledge of Allegiance. More often than not, they seem to have an ax to grind against God or against the United States. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not into blind patriotism, but the America-bashing and revisionist history gets tiring. I believe that in spite of all our faults and sins, God has played a major role in the history of our country. We were founded on basic principles of freedom. Those principles are linked to America’s religious heritage-- even though we’ve learned some painful lessons over the years about what “liberty and justice for all” really means.

But my own Christian faith won’t allow me to get completely comfortable with the Pledge of Allegiance, and I say that as a patriot. Here’s why: I don’t like pledging unconditional allegiance to anyone or anything other than Jesus Christ. I wouldn’t mind pledging conditional allegiance, but that’s not the way the Pledge of Allegiance is written. Anyone who takes the power of their words seriously should examine it carefully. It’s kind of like a blank check. I don’t write blank checks.

When I share my misgivings about pledging allegiance, some folks no doubt view me as a traitor (or something close to it!) Yet what many people don’t realize is that the Pledge of Allegiance didn’t even appear on the scene until 1892, and it was actually written by a socialist. The pledge itself has been changed at least four times, with the latest change happening in 1954. Since the republic managed to survive for over 100 years without the Pledge of Allegiance, I don’t feel we should use it today as a litmus test for patriotism. I’m a huge fan of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. But the Pledge? Not so much. Pressuring people in a free society to say things just makes me uneasy.

Question: What do you think of the Pledge of Allegiance? Should Christians recite it?

Ministry Matters: Shane Raynor

AUDIO: Tattoos and Faith

VIDEO: Who You Are in the Heavenly Realm (Converge Episode 4)

Related Links:

BLOG: Knowing Who You Are in Christ

AUDIO: Too Old for Ordination?

AUDIO: A Methodist and a Muslim Burial

VIDEO: Mary Magdalene (Converge Episode 3)

VIDEO: The Woman at the Well (Converge Episode 2)

VIDEO: Deborah (Converge Episode 1)

BLOG: Meet Deborah

BLOG: Why You Need a Second Office

BLOG: Two Sundays in One

BLOG: When Churches Compete, Everyone Wins

BLOG: Saeed Abedini, Religious Freedom, and President Obama

BLOG: Divided Country, Divided Church

BLOG: Why Churches Should Be Starting More Schools

BLOG: Christians and the Law

BLOG: 5 Tips for Preaching and Teaching on the End Times

BLOG: The Return of Christ

BLOG: Eyes on Israel

BLOG: Advent Apocalypse

BLOG: Facing the Reality of Evil

BLOG: Do Vampires Exist?

BLOG: Curses and Blessings

BLOG: Witchcraft and Christianity

BLOG: Examining Hell

BLOG: Exorcism and the Church

BLOG: What Are Demons?

BLOG: Christians and Ghost Hunting

BLOG: Are Ghosts Real?

BLOG: What Is the Spiritual Realm?

BLOG: Evangelism and the Paranormal

BLOG: Ministry Multiplication

BLOG: Supernatural October Series

BLOG: Reaching New People with Bible Studies and Programs

BLOG: Reasons Not to Write Sermons from Scratch

BLOG: Where's Your Worship Service Going?

ARTICLE: Discipline and Accountability in a Church Shopper's Market

Voluntary Accountability

Enforcing Discipline

Doing Right

ARTICLE: 5 Outreach Ideas for Advent

Do a seasonal Advent Bible study.

Preach a sermon series about the end times.

A week or two before Thanksgiving, pass out free Advent calendars in your community, and use them as an opportunity to visit door to door.

Create a church-wide calendar of outreach events for each day during Advent.

Do a drive-by prayer event.

BLOG: Unleashing Scripture

BLOG: When Christianity Gets Boring

BLOG: Contributor or Consumer?

BLOG: Dallas 2012: 5 Things the Church Can Learn

Continuity

Balance

Faster Pace, More Plot Twists, and Seamless Transitions

Authenticity

Flexibility

BLOG: God the Micromanager

BLOG: Handling Worship Distractions

BLOG: Money and Guilt Trips

BLOG: A Virtual General Conference?

VIDEO: Interview: Bishop Will Willimon

BLOG: For Breaking News, Go to Twitter

BLOG: How Long Should You Preach?

BLOG: Working in the Cloud

BLOG: Biblical Checks and Balances

BLOG: Losing the Offering Plate

BLOG: 5 Lessons from 'Caine's Arcade'

BLOG: Is Mass Evangelism Dead?

BLOG: Getting over the 2:30 Wall

BLOG: Christians and 'Christ Followers'

BLOG: Avoiding Unnecessary Mistakes

BLOG: 4 Good Things about the Call to Action

Change is good.

Accountability is good.

Consolidation is good.

Reevaluating spending is good.

ARTICLE: Control Freak: 5 Ways to Stop Being One

BLOG: Political Questions for Christians

BLOG: Positive Christians