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...