In this article posted at The Expositor, Nathan White of Strange Baptist Fire writes about the evils of Christmas plays in the church. Here are his three basic premises from the piece

• What can be better for our souls than the preached Word?
• What can be better for those outside of Christ than the clear proclamation of the gospel through the preached Word?
• If preaching was completely sufficient to minister and save in scripture, who are we to say that it is now supplemented, at times, by better things? Has market research replaced biblical revelation?

In classic ODM style, he accuses –well, just read this

“It certainly must be noted that drama in worship is most often employed by seeker-sensitive, Arminian ministries, in an apparent attempt to evangelize…But it must be emphasized that the preaching of the word, the very proclamation of Jesus Christ, is simply not good enough, according to this logic, to attract a wide audience, and so the Christmas play is employed to bring in those who wouldn’t otherwise darken the door. Christmas plays do not offend, they do not divide households, they are generally warm and fuzzy at a very family-oriented time of year, and so they provide a great impetus for the numbers-driven mindset.“ (emphasis mine)

He then makes a pretty weighty statement to backup

“drama in worship, without a doubt, *is* a violation of scripture…God, through scripture, has left drama completely out of His Word and instruction to His Church, and that for an important reason.“

There are so many flaws in this article; I really don’t know where to begin. I am not quite sure how one can say that the reenactment of the word of God is any less powerful than talking about the word of God from the pulpit. We are not talking about a production of The Sound of Music, we are talking about a Christmas pageant. There are so many Christmas shows that often hit you over the head with the scriptures, and are very blatant in their message. I always find it ironic that these pastors complain about arts in the church, but unless they get up and simply read straight from the scriptures and say nothing but the scriptures, they too are using an artistic way to preach the scriptures. They decide how to word ideas and concepts, they choose illustrations, and they craft how we perceive the scriptures every Sunday. It is arrogant to say that only what they are doing is preaching the Word of God, when 75% of the words they give are their own.

Do we labels something as bad or heretical if it does not offend or divide households? That notion is completely asinine, but is all too common among the ODMs. If it brings people together to enjoy the story of Christmas, then it must be wrong. If no one leaves the place offended, someone messed up. And, to argue that something is inappropriate for worship simply because it is not mentioned in the scriptures is not exactly the best logic. Most hymns would be out of the question if we are going to go down that route. But, did Jesus not tell stories as a means to communicate biblical truth? It seems to me that story-telling is one of the most important elements in theatre arts.

As an actor, it is strange to hear someone say that I cannot worship God with the talents he has given me. I have been using theatre arts as a means to present the truth for years. Many of my friends have come to Christ through shows that we have produced that speak clearly the word of God. I am always puzzled as to why the church today is do hesitant when it comes to the arts. It is ok for a man to give a 45 minute monologue about the scriptures, but to present it in theatrical form or paint it is simply out of the question. We live in a world where a television show is worth a million words, a painting is worth a thousand, and words are only worth pennies. Maybe it is time we rethink how present the Word (please note that nowhere did I say rethink the Word itself).

In last week’s sermon at Mars Hill Bible Church, Steve Carter used and discussed a diagram which I believe falls at the center of many of the issues we tend to discuss, and where we tend to disagree with many ODM’s. He also uses this as a framework to discuss how we get along with one another and how to deal with the tension which often arises at family gatherings this time of year.

To the left is a diagram which represents a hierarchy of values, where:

A = Absolutes (cross-cultural truths)

C = Convictions (cultural truths and values systems)

P = Preferences (what we like)

The Absolutes are those things which are true in all cultures, and are defined as such within scripture – often written in the Torah and reaffirmed in the gospels and/or the epistles. Such things would include: forbidding murder, theft, adultery, etc.

The Convictions are values which are based upon a person’s convictions, apart from absolutes, or on cultural norms. People who hold these convictions, unless they are conscious of their origin, often mistake these for being absolutes. Paul addresses these types of values in his discussions on meat and idols in I Corinthians 8 and Romans 14:

Therefore let us stop passing judgment on one another. Instead, make up your mind not to put any stumbling block or obstacle in your brother’s way. As one who is in the Lord Jesus, I am fully convinced that no food is unclean in itself. But if anyone regards something as unclean, then for him it is unclean. If your brother is distressed because of what you eat, you are no longer acting in love. Do not by your eating destroy your brother for whom Christ died. Do not allow what you consider good to be spoken of as evil. For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking, but of righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit, because anyone who serves Christ in this way is pleasing to God and approved by men.

Finally, there are Preferences – things that we like and personally approve of, which are typically based on tradition or simply personal likes and dislikes.

The Conflict

Where problem arise is when we fail to discern one from another. A few weeks ago, a writer asked how it is we might identify false prophets, and one of the most basic tests would be teaching that things which are Absolutes are simply Preferences – moving the lines upward. Conversely, the way to identify legalists and modern-day pharisees is to observe those who seek to make things which are Convictions or Preferences into Absolutes, and to then expect these to be enforced.

It is this second group – those who cannot discern that their convictions are not absolutes, or that their preferences are not Convictions or Absolutes – are the ones Paul refers to as the “weaker” brothers – they do not understand their freedom in Christ, and they seek to control others with that “weakness”.

In a perfect world, there would only be Absolutes and Preferences, but our own short-sightedness and the history of the church in our society have falsely created these convictions, which we now have to live with – striving always to discern what convictions we have and properly diagnosing them as either A or P – all the while, living in a way which does not fall for the conviction without flaunting this in a way that dishonors the body of Christ. It requires love and sacrifice to bring others to recognize the unbiblical boundaries they have placed upon the body without harming their walk with God.

With convictions, it is incumbent on the stronger brothers – those who properly discern the differences between A, C, and P in a situation – to not lead their “weaker” brothers into sin by flaunting their freedom in Christ. As Paul notes, “if anyone regards something as unclean, then for him it is unclean”, and so for him to go against that conviction would be going into sin. So, abstaining from the particular conviction while in the presence of the weaker brother is required, out of love for them.
With preferences, though, there is no such stricture, and liberty on the part of the ‘weaker’ brother is warranted, out of love.

It’s a Wired, Wired World

Where this becomes much more difficult in practice is in a world that is no longer constrained by the immediate physical confines of where one lives. Without a modicum of love, the stronger brother is at the whim of the ‘weakest’ brother in the world, and constantly open to being falsely accused of “false prophet-hood” by weaker brothers who are convicted that their convictions and preferences be enforced on all brothers as “truth”.

Conversely, the stronger brother can end up flaunting his or her freedom and unlovingly ridicule the weaker brother for their faulty pride in non-absolute “absolutes”. They can also become a bad witness for Christ when they flaunt their freedom in front of a world which wrongly believes that certain convictions define part of what it is to be a Christian.

So where does this bring us in our conversations? Just a few examples:

“Dirty” words? Conviction.

Music Style? Preference.

Abstaining from Adultery? Absolute.

Yoga? Conviction.

Abstaining from homosexual practice? Absolute.

Location of worship (movie theater, cathedral, pub, box-building)? Preference.

Alcohol? Conviction.

Faith-based righteousness? Absolute.

Abstinence from “secular” media? Conviction.

Sharing Sermons? Preference.

Systematic Theology? Conviction.

Abstinence from celebrating Halloween? Conviction.

Women in leadership positions in the church? Conviction, I believe…*

Diagnosing where practice falls – Absolute, Conviction or Preference – is just the first step, but it seems to be the most important one, as our action should spring from this. We already regognize where the ODM’s we come into most frequent contact with tend to completely lack discernment – with ones like CR?N, AM and TP being unable to discern convictions from absolutes, and others, like SoL, being completely unable to discern their own preferences from absolutes.

Thus, our challenge in some of these matters is a) to discern the truth; b) to correct distortions of the truth which lead others down the paths to false convictions and permanent “weaker brother” status; c) to address our own behavior where we might be flaunting freedoms; d) to defend those falsely accused of heresy for violation of of a weaker brother’s conviction, while allowing for constructive criticism if they are flaunting a freedom; and especially e) to do these things in love…

Blessings,

Chris

*This one is actually a good discussion, as it requires discernment to determine whether Paul’s writing was specifically to a church regarding cultural practice (convictions) or a brand new absolute. I believe that there are a number of scriptural clues which point to this being a ‘conviction’, but I also believe that there is enough cultural/traditional enforcement that this freedom be handled carefully, in a manner that does not dishonor those who disagree.

In this post Ingrid claims that Barna’s research which shows hostility by unbelievers to Christianity is due to the seeker type antics by some churches. It is their antics that turn the community against Christianity. What? How many times has she and others claimed that these mega-church antics are placating unbelievers and hence the reason for their growth? So I guess when you want the seekers to be blamed for placating you can, and when people are turned off you can blame them for that also. You don’t need logic for posts, just a blog.

But the continuing thread in all these type of posts is that there is never – I said NEVER – any self examination that results in even a wisp of a thought that they may have played a negative role in anything. You see, when a store clerk is rude you take it to the manager because your money means something and like the karate instructor said “mercy is for the weak”. There it is, they have it completely right and all the clowns and Elvis impersonators provide an easy shield from allowing God’s Spirit to reveal the powerlessness and self righteousness of their own entrenchment.

There is not enough blame to go around according to some.

At the very outset of this post I want to openly and before the “Sanhedrin” proclaim my belief in the importance of doctrine. Doctrine is just another way of saying truth and Paul tells us the Scriptures are profitable for doctrine so without doctrine we can get deceived quickly. Being grounded in the Word means not only quoting verses but comparing Scripture with Scripture and coming to a fuller and more complete knowledge of God’s truth. It takes perseverance and time to study to approve ourselves as workmen in God’s Word and it has a reward inherent in the pursuit itself. It is not enough to know the first principles of Christ, we must be diligent about learning the Word both by faithful teachers and in our personal study. It is part of the difference between being a babe in Christ and moving on to maturity.

Studying doctrine is not just for the preacher or Bible college students, it is for every and all believers. Sadly it is evident that many if not most believers do not take that admonition seriously and the result is a baby church that is tossed to and fro by every wind of doctrine. To be versed in the Scriptures and what they teach is what brings a believer into maturity and it protects us from deception. Studying and learning God’s truths is a wonderful journey of revelation and faith that feeds the spirit and opens passageways of glory that we could never know with the limited power of our own minds.

Just as a believer who is lazy in his Bible study is shallow and venerable to error, so is the believer who makes doctrine his place of devotion and becomes vulnerable to settling for a form of knowledge as worship. There is a wonderful mystery available for every believer where God can take the truths we have learned with our minds and infuse them into our spirits and hearts and incorporate them into our devotion to the Savior. Many people live their Christian life looking through the eyes of their particular doctrine or systematic theology and have been robbed of the blessing of a broken and contrite heart of worship before God. And many Christians are more interested in debating doctrine than sharing Jesus.

Read more…

Earlier today, CRN.Info writer Nathan made the following comment on a separate thread:

When I was a youth pastor, I always told my kids that if the bible was ever to be turned into a good movie, it would have to be at least R-rated. I think (mainly thru bible colleges and seminaries — I have been to both) we tame down the scriptures to suit a congregation that really doesn’t live in the real world.

The other day I did a talk on loving those who are different than us. One of our more “sheltered” ladies in the church came up to me and said “I homeschool my kids so they don’t have to hear words like ‘gay’ or ‘homosexual’” I think most of Christianity is “home schooled” so they don’t have to hear the reality of the scriptures or the reality of life.

[...]

Apparently, in an effort to demonstrate that he still has no clue what a straw man is, an ODM blogger has decided to attack Nathan by adding a parenthetical straw man fallacy to Nathan’s comment.

The other day I did a talk on loving those who are different than us. One of our more “sheltered” ladies in the church came up to me and said “I homeschool my kids so they don’t have to hear words like ‘gay’ or ‘homosexual’” I think most of Christianity is “home schooled” so they [note: he doesn’t include himself in “Christianity”] don’t have to hear the reality of the scriptures or the reality of life. [note his, emphasis mine]

My daughter (who is in second grade) has been disecting sentences for her grammar class the past couple of weeks, and even she could point out that subject of the clause in question was “most of Christianity” and not simply “Christianity”, and that Nathan was excluding himself from the actual subject of the clause. This is a classbook example of what passes for “research” at ODM sites like this one. It is also a prime example of why they can’t be trusted to give advice on “discernment”, particularly when they can’t discern at the level of a second grader when blinded by an opportunity to take a potshot.

Rather humorously, once again proving that in ODM lingo “love is hate“, the same writer ironically refers to CRN.Info as a “Christian hate site”. I hear Pravda has openings for writers. Perhaps this ODM writer would be better suited there, rather than writing for a publication in the guise of Christianity…

ADDED NOTE FROM NATHAN:

Ken says: Neighbour has said he doesn’t know what a futurist is

Nathan: I know what a futurist is, I never said that I didn’t. I wrote “I have yet to figure out what a furturist is.” Ken calls McManus that in this post. Again… it would be great to have some “research” here.

Normally, I don’t link to specific sermons I listen to online, but I’m going to make an exception today. The verse we quote in our masthead, Matthew 23:23, and it is at the center of the Mars Hill Bible Church sermon this past week. You can listen to it below for the next 12 weeks…

Grace and peace,

Chris

 

 Camels and Gnats: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

…As demonstrated by CR?N this afternoon.

Apparently one of the mysterious “editors” (hiding behind anonymity, of course), is completely blind and obtuse to logic and contextual criticism. Whoever the “editor” is, also must have missed Humor Day two weeks ago (see my link midway down the thread), along with the post on my website nearly a month ago.

In an article entitled, Emerging Church Pastor Bob Hyatt Does Something Dum Dum Dum Da Dum!, the cowardly* “editor” attempts (unsuccessfully, I might add) to paint pastor Bob Hyatt as a hypocrite.

[Hyatt] is also one of the most vocal critics who have been whining about the Emergent-See Po-Motivators For Emerging Christians posters put out by Pyromaniacs, which satirize the Emergent Church, supposedly being offensive and mean-spirited.

Well, Hyatt has now indeed done something rather foolish in linking this video at his Bob.Blog. You see this South Park production actually is mean-spirited and offensive to those of the Mormon “faith tradition” thereby exposing his own Hip Hip Hip Hy-pocrisy!

Where to even begin?

1) Hyatt’s criticism (far above whining, which you would think might be recognized on CR?N in the same way one recognizes one’s own face when looking into a mirror) of the “Characture of a charactures” from John MacArthur’s chief supplicant and water-carrier at Team Pyro has consistently been that (as noted above) the ‘posters’ don’t characterize actual belief of most (if not all) ECM churches. Instead, they snarky stabs at inaccurate characatures created by the very same author(s) of the posters. Above all else, they are public displays of Christians being nasty to other Christians.

2) Most ECM and Fundamentalists recognize that Mormonism is a cult that puts on a public face as being connected to Christianity. Criticism of Mormonism, and giving a pretty accurate account of the origins of this pseudo-religion, aren’t even in the same ballpark as criticizing the strawmen you have created to represent other brothers and sisters in Christ.

3) I could go on, but I think that the silly, morally tone-deaf post from the downwardly-spiraling CR?N shows just how spiritually obtuse these “discernment” folks can be…

_______________

*Before anyone suggests that “cowardly” is name-calling, I would note that it is an adjective describing an act in which a person writes something offensive on a Christian website about another Christian, but is too afraid (for whatever reason) to attach his/her name to their childish rantings. “Cowardly” is a mild start to describe such behavior.

ya know, when I first started interacting with the ODMs I really could understand their logic behind what they were doing. It’s the basic idea that certain key leaders (ie. Bell, McManus, McLaren) were leading large groups of people astray and so they felt they needed to publicly address the epidemic on a large and international scale. I understood their logic, but obviously completely disagreed with what they believed or how they did it. Well, now I am reading more and more articles that have nothing to do with key leaders in the church, but small hometown churches that they disagree with. These websites are turning from a pharasee supreme court to a full blown witch hunt. Sometimes I wonder how many websites they have to go thru in order to make their headline quota for the day. It doesn’t matter how small or uninfluential the ministry or minister is. If they can comb through the web and find it, they are their next Christian human sacrifice on the web. And then when they are called on the carpet by a big name publication like Christianity Today, they write article after article in an attempt to defend their ways.

So I suggest two things:

1. pray for these small churches that are doing innovative things with the timeless message of Jesus Christ. Pray that they would find their success and identity in Jesus Christ and that attempts to stop their ministry would be hindered
2. write these pastors. These ODMs usually post the websites of these churches to make an example of them. Turn a wrong into a right and email the staff an encouraging thought. I cannot tell you how many times I have done this and started meaningful relationships with pastors all over the world

CR?N goes after a Christian group that krumps. I watched the video and I don’t see anything that’s wrong with this. Am I missing something? Is it because a guy has his shirt off? Is it the term “bangin”, which has multiple meanings, just like “hot” and “phat”?

Honestly, I’m about as whitebread as it comes, but I thought the dance was kinda cool.

According to the Union Tribune article, krump is an acronym for Kingdom Radically Uplifting Mighty Praise. The relatively new dance form with Christian roots originated in South Los Angeles as an alternative to gang violence.

This is a one of the most disturbing comment from a critic. One gets the feeling that the critic would rather punch a homosexual in the face instead of showing them the love of Christ. AIDS is our disease, not a gay disease.

Zachary,
I don’t know where you’ve been for the last 25 years but I remember very distinctly where AIDS came from and when it all started in the early 1980’s. The first reported cases of AIDS came from the homosexuals and for years it was exclusively the domain of homosexuals, transmitted through sodomy. The disease exploded in numbers due to the horrifying and revolting promiscuity of homosexual males where they can have hundreds of partners over the course of a year’s time. This is why the disease began spreading like wildfire. By the mid to late 1980’s the disease had spread to hemophiliacs who were infected by the criminal negligence of the homosexuals who then donated blood for money to the blood banks of this country. From the hemophiliacs it then spread to IV drug users, many of whom were also homosexuals. Then because of re-used needles hetero drug users were infected. From there women were infected by their drug-using hetero partners and now, it’s also in the hetero community. AIDS is a horrifying disease, caused and spread by the sin of sexual promiscuity. Millions of innocent people were infected as a result of the sexual sin of its origination.

Don’t you ever come on this blog and spread foolish propaganda that AIDS isn’t a “gay disease”. Sir, it isn’t anymore because the “gay” individuals, living in moral revolt against God’s laws, began this disease and continue to spread it, all the while trying to lump it in with cancer and heart disease. Just another disease. Hogwash.

I would suggest you do some research on the etiology of HIV in the West. A good place to start would be www.familyresearchinst.org with researcher Dr. Paul Cameron, the same medical researcher who coined the term “Second-hand cigarette smoke” when he testified before congress on the issue.

http://www.sliceoflaodicea.com/?p=637#comments

Thanks Zachary Forrest y Salazar