Men?

I was recently reading a few articles on biblical manhood and thinking about some recent events in my ministry context. To make a long story short, it often feels like men are generally labelled as abrasive and lack care and understanding. I don't want to get into a Wild at Heart debate, but i would like to hear your thoughts on masculinity in ministry:

How did God make men in particular suited for ministry and leadership?

What aspects of manliness can be "redeemed" and what aspects must be subdued?

What does manly ministry look like?

That should give us some good food for thought.

Je-WHO?-vah

Today I had two sweet little old ladies come to my door toting New World Translations of the Holy Scriptures. I was working in my basement when my son came down and informed me that we had "friends" upstairs sharing the gospel with mommy. Imagine my excitement.

So I came upstairs and introduced myself. When I asked them who they were with they proudly announced that were Jehovah's Witnesses.

"Really" I said. "You know your leaders predicted the end of the world 14 times incorrectly, right?"
Cute Little Old Ladies: "That is not true - they never gave a precise date!"
Me: "Your translation is a terrible knock-off of the 1611 King James Bible. Did you know the authors didn't know Greek, Hebrew or Aramaic?"
Cute Little Old Ladies: "According to Jeopardy, the New World Translation IS the most accurate translation in the world."
Amber: "Huh, well if it was an answer on Jeopardy..."
Me: "Ladies, we worship Jesus here - that's the fundamental difference between us."
Cute Little Old Ladies: "Colossians says that Jesus is the firstborn of all creation. Isn't that interesting?"
Me: "Yeah, almost as interesting as the next verse which says that by him all things were created in heaven AND on earth. Oh, and that ALL things were created through him and for him."
Cute Little Old Ladies: "Well, we best be going now..."
Me: "So we're clear, what you believe is a deception. You are deceived and you are deceivers. You believe in a works based righteousness and unless you repent and turn to Jesus for forgiveness, annihilation will be the least of your worries."

***SLAM***

So I've had a fairly robust history with Jehovah's Witnesses, and as you can see from the footnotes of my conversation above, I'm not exactly extending the olive branch when they show up. Here's why:

II John vs. 9-11 say "Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works."

Now, these verses refer to false teachers that hold to a view of eschatology that does not include a bodily return of Christ - not to Jehovah's witnesses. I looked for the verses about Jehovah's Witnesses when I was in college, but could not find any.  :)  But John's admonishment is that people who depart from a right view of Christ so zealously as to teach contrary to the gospel of salvation by Grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone are void of God. John doesn't even want his audience (the elect lady and her children) to let these guys into their house.

So my logic is this: I hear John's pastoral voice warning me to protect the sheep (Remember that my 4 year old son thought the J-Dubbs were preaching the gospel to his mommy.) but I also hear Jesus' example of presenting himself to his enemies. I guess I balance it by bringing a hard gospel axe to the root of their deception as hard as I can swing. They aren't invited in, but I'll engage with them as far as they'll let me. I want Jesus to demonstrate his power to them and ultimately bring them to repentance and faith - but I also want my children to learn to identify false teachers and know that it is a no nonsense affair. I will warmly share the love of Christ with the broken-hearted - but I will also present Christ the stumbling block  to those who need their heart broken, first.

So tell us about a time the J-Dubbs visited your house. What do you think is the best policy for balancing gospel invitation with gospel warning?

Question

Here's a dilemma that i think Ole will understand, and a question to go with it. While the neo-Calvinism movement has brought with it a healthy desire for sound doctrine among SOME college students, i would still say that on the whole the theological accuity of college age people continues to decline. Now i believe in theological training for college age people, but the dilemma is this: Who do we teach and how do we teach them? We are debating on "dumbing down" some of our training so it is accessible to more students. I don't like catering to ignorance, but if training is above the heads of half the students recieving it, is it worthwhile? But if we dumb down teaching and training, it certianly won't be as challenging to our more astute friends. If this is a trend, how can we step in the gap and continue to be as helpful as possible? How do you do it in Duluth, my flannely friend?

New Season... New Episodes...

Sometimes bloggers have to put down their coffee, pull on some real-life pants, throw on some dark aviators, and brave the bright, shiny, real world for a few months. That pretty well explains where we've been here at Flannel Pilgrims - but we now return to our regularly scheduled program!

If you're just tuning in, allow me to bring you up to date:

We are a couple of Christian dudes who work on the University Campus with a para-church organization. This blog will cover a wide range of topics including but not limited to: Poking fun at Christian culture, church/para-church relationships, the gospel, ministry methodology, theology, the latest viral youtube video, facial hair, zombies, our faith heroes, conferences we attend, books we read, making fun of your denomination, making fun of our denomination (bet you can't guess it!), occasional devotional thoughts.

We love Jesus - we think He's in charge. We'll try to blog accordingly - we ask you to comment accordingly.
Thumbs up - Let's do this!

-The Flannel Pilgrims

Lakewood Church...

The Scene from the pulpit at Lakewood Church, captured from Joel Osteen's helmet-cam....

These quotes make me nervous

We will definitely return to the parachurch questions that have been raised. They are important and i think we have only begun looking at them!
But for now, i'm being bothered by some things that i would like input on. I've heard a few quotes at seminary the past few days several times each. The first comes from a book "Almost Christian" which states that most young Christians in America have basically traded true Christianity for a new religion/worldview called "moralistic, therapeutic deism." Another quote i have heard a lot the past few days is that most Christians in America hold to some form of "Christocentric universalism." We just may not realize this to be the case because the fundamentalist minority voice is so loud.
Do you think this is true? If it is, what does it mean for the future?

We Love Hurting People

Here at Flannel Pilgrims we bring you time and time again great quotes from our collection of silly church marquees... Enjoy!

And the parachurch DEFINITELY can't survive without the church.

As was said in an earlier post, there is a nasty tendency for parachurch organizations to cut themselves off from the church and attempt to function as a separate entity. Since these organizations are not coming out from the local church and aren't really working alongside the church, i would say they shouldn't be called parachurch in the true sense of the word.

But first things first. I've been asked for a more clear definition of what constitutes a local church and what constitutes a parachurch.

For starters, read this sermon by John Piper for some more insight. I think he makes some good points. A local church is comprised of Christians who have appointed leadership. Those leaders guard the church and the ministries of the church. They also administer the sacraments and work with other means of grace such as fellowship and teaching of the Word.

Those are not functions of a parachurch. Parachurch ministries work within the auspices of a local church, but are specialized to do a specific task. The specific task of our organization is to engage the campus we work on with the gospel of Jesus Christ. We do our minsitry among non-Christians, while the church is comprised of Christians. Our ministry is guarded by the local church, and the church works through us to reach the campus with the gospel. If the local church can say "Yes, we are doing evangelism on campus and we are doing it through InterVarsity Christian Fellowship," i feel like i'm doing my job.

Our Christian students are church members who have a mission field on campus, just like other church members have a mission field at work or in their neighborhood. It's not too different. These students are part of the ongoing ministry of the church and are encouraged to be in discipleship relationships, attend small groups, Sunday school, and other church activities like any other member. The difference is, we've taken on the task of training and encouraging these students to make the most of their opportunity to share the light of the gospel.

What about parachurch orgs who don't come out from and work alongside the church? I would call them "amputated ministries." If ministries make an effort not to work within the realm of the local church i have lots of questions, but i'll save it for another day. My guess is someone will bring it up in a comment!

Couldn't help it.

We inerrupt our regularly scheduled programming to bring you this brief intermission:

Here is a great parody of Rob Bell done by our friends CanonWired on youtube. The link can be found here. Both funny and true.

The church can't survive without the parachurch

Well, my blogging friend has asked me to draw first blood. The two topics he's chosen are the two most important to my vocational mission and are very near and dear to me, but the topic that most people really honed in on in my last blog was church/parachurch relationships. This topic is a bit touchy, though it has been beated to death in the past few years.

I won't hold my cards too closely here since you've probably read half the stuff off the old blog: Ole and i work for a parachurch ministry. I struggled with parachurch ministry for a while, even while working for one, until a conversation with John Piper made me start rethinking parachurch structure.

I think the model for parachurch ministry we have working in our organization is a good one, though we are still learning.

There is a nasty tendency for parachurch organizations to attempt to function outside of the auspices and authority of the local church. Even in my own organization this runs rampant, and too often ministries attempt to be a separate entity from the church. This in effect stops being a true parachurch and starts being something else. The Greek work para means "out from" or "alongside." I think it is significant to note that a parachurch must be serving alongside the church or it becomes something other than a parachurch. For me, I place all of my personal ministry under the authority of the elders in my church and i am accountable to them. We also have requirements for our leaders regarding local church involvement. One of my greatest tasks in ministry is to get students into local churches and discipleship relationships in those churches.

With good working relationships with the local church, we get to focus our ministry on being a missional branch of the local church, engaging the campus with the gospel of Jesus Christ. Along the way, i've spent an awful lot of time making the church take on the role of making disciples and teaching college-age students. Students involved in our ministry have an incredibly high rate of local church involvement after college because of the values and love for the local church instilled in them in our minsitry.

The title of this post is that the church needs the parachurch. This comes from a realization that, for example, the apostle Paul's missionary journeys, church small groups, prayer meetings, and outreach events are all parachurch ministries. John Frame goes so far as to say that each congregation is in fact a parachurch ministry if we have a right understanding of the Church. When we try to separate church/parachurch and pretend we can have a ministry that is a separate entity from the local church we get into trouble. For me, the parachurch is the most strategic place i can be in order to serve the local church and the universal Church. I love the local church, so i work in the parachurch. Who agrees? Disagrees? Do you think in a perfect world we wouldn't have the parachurch? How can we work on better church/parachurch relationships?

Steady..... Steady..... FIRE!!!!!!!

Alright... We (the authors of this illustrious blog) have decided that it's time to take aim at some of our content that we have at least some measure both of care and perhaps even what some might mistake as expertise. At any rate... we're going to be launching a series of posts in two main areas that we think are pretty important:
1. Evangelism theory/strategy
2. Church/Para-church (how should they be understood and how should they work together)

I'd really like to launch one of these out right now, but I am heading out for a trip for the next few days and will be unnabloggable. Therefore, I set this intro out to draw my comrade into making the first post. So, your move Andy... You can pick one of those two and start... when I get back I'll take the other and launch a thread on it. Go!

Open Letter to Phil Zuckerman

Dear Phil,

I recently read your article Why Evangelicals Hate Jesus. You seem to know an awful lot about what Jesus taught, but I wonder if you've nailed it as squarely as you and your audience might think. In your post you say "Jesus unambiguously preached mercy and forgiveness." I don't necessarily disagree. But I would add that Jesus' message is not adequately summed up by "unambiguous mercy and forgiveness". Jesus preached about a coming Kingdom in which he was the one who would rule and reign and warned about God's wrath toward sin. It appears you missed that part. Or did you?

I think you leverage Jesus' teachings to custom fit them to your political persuasion. Which is either irony or a really witty way for you to make your point! If it's the latter then kudos! Perhaps you've exposed (in part) the bible-contortion-tactics used by some evangelicals to justify touting Jesus as a white, middle-class, Republican. But... I think it may be more likely that the former is true. And that you yourself have started with your own paradigm, and read Jesus' teachings into that paradigm - trimming off the "excess" that won't fit.


 You see Phil, Jesus' message was indeed unambiguous; his message clearly communicated that he was "the way, and the truth, and the life." and that "No one comes to the Father except through me." Yes Phil, I'd say Jesus was crystal clear in his message that he preached. The thrust of Jesus' message was not primarily about being nice to each other, but rather that people would turn from sin and embrace him (Jesus) as the only way to be restored to God.

NOT THAT HE DIDN'T teach about how we are to treat our neighbor. He totally did! But I'm afraid you've caricatured his message by stuffing it neatly into the lemon-yellow sweater-vest of Social Justice free of any offense. You DO remember that Jesus was crucified, right? He wasn't (contrary to popular belief) crucified for telling people to be nice to each other. You have rightly identified SOME of the teachings of Jesus - but you've committed a grave error by lifting them in part from a larger whole and weaving it into your own atheistically motivated, politically charged sucker punch aimed at evangelicals (a group I assume you have ample motive to discredit). 

I guess I'd like for you to consider doing a little more homework in the future, Phil. Jesus' words about mercy and forgiveness were not untied from his claim to be the SOURCE of that mercy and forgiveness. To separate Jesus' teaching from his person is to miss the point, at high cost. Jesus' desire is not JUST social justice (especially a social justice which takes a form which you favor for a myriad of reasons OTHER than altruism) - Jesus' message is primarily about how people can escape the coming wrath of God against sin. He offers himself as a ransom to pay our debt to God. A debt that we are powerless to pay, Phil. So Christians do indeed love Jesus, dearly. But not as you suppose  because "Through his magical grace, and by shedding his precious blood, Jesus saves Evangelicals from everlasting torture in hell, and guarantees them a premium, luxury villa in heaven" ONLY. We love Jesus because he's worthy of love, more worthy than anything else in the world. Villas in heaven wouldn't be enough incentive for me to write this letter to you, Phil. Only the joy of telling you about a God who came down to earth to die for his enemies like you, and like me. The only incentive that could move me is the scandal of Grace to undeserving sinners, and the possibility that you might actually be sorry for scorning the One Who made you. It's worth writing this if by reading it you might consider Jesus' ACTUAL words, and turn to him for forgiveness, which is ACTUALLY what people need. Why don't you do a "shock jock" piece on that? It is far more interesting than an atheist's musing at Christians not supporting his political positions... That one has been so overplayed.

Warmly,
Luke Olson 

Our Only Hope vs. One of Our Greatest Idols

"My Kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my disciples would have been fighting..." -Jesus

It is a well-known fact that many Jews a few thousand years ago were looking for the Messiah to be a political power-house that would set up an authoritative earthly government. Instead he laid down his life for his followers and made it clear that his authority was never going to take the form of earthly power.

So let me be clear right off the bat that i believe in churches and church members being "political" in a sense. We must care for the people in the places God has put us, and one way of doing that is through government. However, our government action must stem from a right view of God's Kingdom. As a favorite artist put it; "My first allegiance is not to a flag, a country, or a man... It's to a King and a Kingdom."

What really concerns me is that most of the church members i know talk and act as if more of our hope is in our earthly government rather than in our King and His Kingdom. Much of our action as a congregation is political activism and protesting. Often the "success" of the American church is judged by what appears to be a Christian influence over government more than by any other measure.

I just finished a huge paper on the history of this issue, and i know that there are a million different views to take on it, but my question for this week is simple-

What does it look like for a church to act as if our One True Hope is the Kingdom of God made manifest in Jesus Christ, rather than in a "savior on Capitol Hill?"

Have fun with this one!

I saw this the other day

How to Hate in Love (part 2)

Well, Ole promised me that our next post will be entirely silly. But first we want to follow up that last post with part 2. We showed a picture of Christians protecting a group of Muslims as they prayed and asked about the actions of those Christians. You can read the discussion below. I'd like to give you this interesting video of Penn from "Penn and Teller." He is an outspoken athiest talking about his meeting with a Christan evangelist.

How might we bring this into our discussion below? Here's another thought: This quote is from a missionary to Muslim people in Iran- "God's affectionate nature is denied in Islam and God's promise-keeping nature is denied in Islam. I do not mean to judge myself better than others, but as Daniel T. Niles says 'Christianity is just one beggar telling another where to find bread.'"

What do you think??? We have Muslim friends that we hope will chime in on this as well!

How to Hate in Love (Part 1)

We try to maintain a fair amount of tongue-in-cheek silliness here at Flannel Pilgrims on most days. However, sometimes a topic comes along that requires us to keep our tongue-in-check. This MIGHT be one of those times.

I was handed a picture, and a story a few days ago. The picture (above) is supposedly of Egyptian Christians during a Muslim prayer time in the midst of the protests happening in Egypt. The Christians (according to the story) protected the Muslims during their prayer. Popular opinion seems to be that this is a great illustration of unity and love, and that opinion seems to be shared by followers of Jesus and followers of "insert your god here" alike. 

So the question I asked was: Is it possible to love a person and still hate some of their thoughts/beliefs/practices?

I have some thoughts of my own (That may surprise some of you!). But, I would REALLY like to see the general response to the first question before opining. Can you hate something ABOUT a person and still love them? How does that work? Does it work? What does Jesus have to say about love and hate? What examples have you seen that have exemplified Jesus' teachings in this area? What examples were NOT GOOD? Talk amongst yourselves... I'll respond in a few days. (Please review the rules to the right before posting a comment)

IS THERE ROOM IN THIS POCKET FOR A LITTLE SPARE CHAN?

I was at the Desiring God Conference for Pastors this week (despite NOT being a Pastor) and I had the privilege of hearing Francis Chan speak on "Prayer as a Way of Walking in Love". I came into the conference with an unexplainable skepticism about Chan, despite listening to his talk on Humility at the DG Conference - which was great.

You should listen to Chan's message from the Pastor's Conference - it is yummy. His passion manifested itself in a 5 minute tiraid of wild hand gesticulations (and can I just add that that man's hands are disproportionately enormous?) and "crazy" gushing commendations of his God. I appreciated (and was thoroughly entertained by) his antics. His style stands in sharp contrast to the usual decorum represented among the DGPC speakers. During the panel Chan sat next to Beeke - President of Puritan Reformed Seminary - the photo-negative image of Chan. Beeke wore a suit and built his talks after the fashion of the Puritans - even including objections and their rebuttals. Chan was dressed comfortably and spoke colloquially - walking us through a series of his own life experiences - which are WAY more interesting than mine, go figure.

I was slain by Beeke's talks - particularly his talk on Family Worship. Good luck listening to that without curling up into the fetal position and crying. I appreciated Beeke and his words - he stands amid the throng of excellent speakers I've come to expect when I go to DGPC.

What surprised me was how much I enjoyed Francis Chan's message. He showed a GENUINE commitment to the Christian Hedonism which marks so many of the DGPC speakers. Francis Chan is the real deal. I don't know about you, but that excites me - because he is VERY DIFFERENT in context from the usual suspects at DG, but he still "gets it". I need go no further. That is the sum of my thoughts on Chan - who I think has secured his place among "The Big Guys". (Not at all to suggest that he was less than a big deal with his own ministry and his publication of "Crazy Love").

As you listen to these talks, or if you were there... Please comment on what YOU think. Talk amongst yourselves...

Crunch Time

I was listening to Christian radio the other day. I don't do this often, but I guess I was in one of those moods where I just wanted something that was going to be safe, uplifting, and encouraging- which is a motto of theirs. But that's another post for another day. The program I was listening to was making a big deal of a potential Super Bowl commercial in which the priests of a Catholic Church serve Doritos and Pepsi in an effort to increase church attendance.

Here is a link to a page with the video.

The program wasn't even Catholic. The thing that I really found interesting was that their concern was how the church was being portrayed to the world through this commercial, not the defilement of the sacrament of communion. Then they called for Christians everywhere to boycott Doritos and Pepsi in response. What do you think? Is this an appropriate response? Let's keep in mind that the video 1. Was not made by Doritos but by a consumer for a contest and 2. It did not make the finalist list and will not be aired during the Super Bowl.

Tolkien: A Practical Joke

So I am a huge fan of J.R.R. Tolkien - author of The Lord of The Rings Trilogy and wider Middle Earth mythology. I appreciate this man's mastery of the English language and have become a better student and thinker because of his work. But, he was NOT ALWAYS using his love of language for academic pursuits! I thought I would share a joke that Tolkien came up with as a student at Oxford around 1913. 

One day a friend of Tolkien's purchased a pair of silk gloves for his lady. He was foolish enough to send the gloves along with the following love letter with his friends (Tolkien and the gang). They switched the gloves with a pair of ladies underwear along the way. Imagine her surprise when receiving the "gift" with THIS letter...

 
Dear Velma:

This little token is to remind you that I haven't forgotten your birthday. I didn't choose it because I thought you needed them, or because you haven't been in the habit of wearing them, or because we go out evenings. Had it not been for my sister I would have gotten long ones but she says they are wearing the short ones-with one button. They are a very delicate color, I know, but the lady clerk showed me a pair she had worn for three weeks, and they were scarcely soiled at all. How I wish I might put them on you for the first time! No doubt many other gentlemen's hands will touch them before I get a chance to see you again, but I hope you will think of me every time you put them on. I had the lady clerk try them on and they looked very neat on her. I did not know the exact size, but I should be capable of judging nearer than anyone else. When you put them on for the first time put a little powder in them and they will slip on easier. When you remove them blow in them before laying them away as they will naturally be a little damp from wearing. Hoping that you will accept them in the same spirit in which they are given and that you will wear them to the dance Friday night, I remain

Lovingly yours:-
John

P.S. Note the number of times I will kiss the back of them in the coming year!

For the Love of Life

It's really difficult to come up with the perfect first blog post. It sets the tone for the rest of the blog, right? I don't want it to be too silly, but it can't be entirely serious. I want it to be worth reading, but not too much to wade through. So far i've decided against posting a spoof of an article i just read titled "Why People Homeschool" and a juxtaposition of the favorite Christian worship songs "Dance in the River" and "A Mighty Fortress is our God." What's that you say? You wanted to see the homeschooling post? Well, maybe it will make an appearance if Luke , my blogging counterpart, allows it. Don't tell him, but i recently looked under the tarps in his garage that were hiding several boxes labeled "homeschooling supplies." We'll see how it goes.
My wife and i had an interesting exchange yesterday that inspires the rest of this entry. To make a long story short, i had a long week and was just looking forward to something that looked like a day off. On top of it, my pastor's sermon included the phrase "you should be depressed!" I was. And then my wife "volunteered" me to fix someone's car during the Packer game. Yes, the Packer game! To use "Christian-ese," my heart was not in the right place. For those of you who don't know what i am talking about, you know your heart is not in the right place when your wife starts using bible verses against you. Actually, i started it. I told her that i just really wanted to enjoy life right now, and fixing a car was not on my list of life-enjoying experiences at the moment. I implied this idea from Psalm 34 and 1 Peter 3:10. But my wife trumped me by using John 12:25, where Jesus says "whoever loves his life will lose it." 

 "Dueling verses" episodes usually end in a standstill for us, but this time i decided to go with Jesus and my wife, who seem to always end up on the same team. And i still got to watch the game. But there is still this lingering question, what exactly did Jesus mean? I usually tend to enjoy life. I mean, that's kind of why we're doing this blog, after all, for enjoyment and edification. It would seem that God would want us to love life according to 1 Peter 3:10, but what's the basis for Jesus' comment? I have a few thoughts, but i really want to hear yours first...

Welcome to Flannel Pilgrims!!!

So what do you do when you don't have time to write books, and Facebook status updates just simply will not allow for enough social expression? You Blog. You enlist the help of your articulate friends (so that Blog quality doesn't flat-line) and you Blog your heart out until one day someone says "Hey, are you Luke Olson?". I'll be like, "Yeah." And they'll say "Dude, I saw your name on Andy Lickel's Blog - Flannel Pilgrims! Isn't he awesome?" And I will have arrived...

"What is this Blog about?" you ask. The Flannel Pilgrims are a a group of Christians who want to provide Social Commentary, Ministry Theory, Christian Culture Critique, and Critique of the Christian Culture Critics - all in a spirit which strikes a balance between satire and seriousness. We want you to laugh. We don't even mind if you laugh AT us! (We will probably be laughing at you - AND at ourselves). No topic is really off-limits to us - and we hope that a wide audience will find us amusing if not helpful!

So without further adieu - Welcome to the Flannel Pilgrims Blog. We hope you enjoy reading our posts as much as we enjoy deleting yours! ;)