An amateur looks at Love Wins

At the end of February a pastor from Michigan named Rob Bell released a promo video for his soon-to-be-released book, Love Wins, and a firestorm of controversy erupted in the online evangelical world. The next month the book came out, and the controversy continued. From the end of February until about mid-April it seemed everything Christianity-related I read online had to do with Bell's book. In a nutshell, Bell's book is (as his subtitle suggests) A Book About Heaven, Hell, and the Fate of Every Person who Ever Lived. In this book Bell is seen by many as having taken a step toward (if not a canonball-sized plunge into) universalism - the idea that in the end, all people will be saved. Though the controversy is now "old news," I just recently had a chance to read the book, and I wanted to share my thoughts.

When I began reading, I started taking notes on just about every sentence on every page, but I soon realized that this was taking a ridiculous amount of time, and it was completely unnecessary. Many others have posted detailed reviews of this book and have done so much more eloquently and intelligently than I would ever be able to (I can provide links to enough blog posts, articles, and broadcasts to keep you busy for the rest of the calendar year, if you're so inclined). And so, I settled in and finished the book within a couple of days (the book will NOT take you that long if you just sit down and knock it out in one swipe - a couple of hours maybe). I thought I'd provide you with my overall reactions, which could very well be longer than you're willing to read from a nobody like myself.

THE GOOD
Bell's book has forced Christians to examine their theologies about heaven and hell more closely. This is good because often these ideas -- especially hell -- are more or less avoided. Also, Bell emphasizes in parts of his book that we should be careful when we describe heaven as a distant location of wonderfulness where all Baptists (or Calvinists, or Presbyterians, etc.) will someday go, as if it's some pie-in-the-sky place and we're all just waiting around here to die so we can get there. If this is what we believe, we don't have any real obligation to working on problems in our lives on this planet. Also, if we truly believe this, why don't we just all kill ourselves so we can get to heaven sooner?

And unfortunately, that's about it for the good.

THE BAD
Let's see... where to start.

There are many notes I jotted down while reading that won't make their way to this "review," but I'd like to start with the opening pages of Bell's second chapter in which he basically ridicules a painting that his grandmother had hanging in her house while little Rob was growing up. It's a painting that depicts the "cross as a bridge" image that you've probably seen a million times. There's a great chasm with hell at the bottom. On one side of the chasm is humankind, and on the other side is God (often depicted as popular ideas of heaven with shiny streets and angels and harps). The only way from one side to the other is to take the cross-shaped bridge. Bell rails against this image, saying it makes us think heaven is somewhere else that we need to get to, and it's dangerous for us to think in those terms. Ironically, this "artist" (or so he is described by most of his defenders, and perhaps even himself?) doesn't seem to understand that oftentimes paintings are metaphorical. I'm guessing that neither the painter of this image, nor Rob's grandmother, really believe that there is some physical place where we have to go and walk across a cross, and if we don't step carefully we'll fall to our eternal damnation in a fiery furnace. But the image, according to the Bible, is pretty accurate. There is a gap between people and God. A huge gap, called sin, that can never be crossed with anything man-made. The only way to bridge that gap is with the cross of Christ. What's wrong with metaphorical paintings that have assisted missionaries and evangelists for years, Rob?

Bell argues that when Jesus talks about "hell," he uses the word "gehenna," which refers, basically, to the town garbage dump outside of Jerusalem where there was an ongoing fire that consumed the city's trash. He also tells us that when Matthew writes about the sheep and the goats, and that the goats will "go away to eternal punishment" (Matt. 25:46), the Greek words there would more accurately be translated "go away to an intense period of pruning." This allows Bell to argue that punishment in hell is only meant to bring people around to Jesus, and that it won't last forever. I'll leave it to other experts to explain to you why Bell must not have done very well in his exegesis classes in seminary, but if you'd like, just read a few good commentaries on these verses and you'll find out that Bell's version just doesn't work. None of the major English translations in existence supports his theory. Is there a Western-world conspiracy that wants everyone to believe Hell is forever, Rob? Or is it possible that your lone voice is the one that's mistaken?

Kevin DeYoung's review of Bell's book goes into much more detail about this point, but I did notice that sin, for Rob, seems to be almost exclusively about horizontal injustices. He regularly talks about rape and war and oppression and abuse and other things people to do other people. Flowing from this is Rob's insistence that "hell" is what we experience here on earth because of these sins. "Hell" is finding out your daughter has been repeatedly sexually abused over the years by a relative. "Hell" is the teenagers in Africa who have had their limbs cut off in the midst of civil unrest.  Missing from his theology seems to be any notion of the idea that sin is also against God. It's vertical. And it must be atoned for. That is what Jesus' death did. Bell's theologies of sin, hell, and especially his Christology are sorely lacking.

When the Love Wins promo video was released, the big controversial question was, "Is Rob Bell a universalist?" After reading this book, I would say that although Bell tends to be as slippery as an eel, and does his best to avoid any single label, "universalist" in any meaningful sense of the term seems fairly accurate. Bell does emphatically say that Jesus is THE ONLY way, but then he says that anywhere people find hope and forgiveness - that's Jesus. No matter your beliefs, Bell seems to think that if you have some bit of joy, hope, forgiveness (or any other touchy-feely abstract noun) in your life, that's Jesus, and so even though you didn't know that's what its name was, you've been saved by Jesus. Some might call this inclusivism instead of universalism. Perhaps that's more accurate, but it seems like a semantic battle now. For all practical purposes, Bell is quite a few paces down Universalist Road. A rose by any other name may smell as sweet, but calling my bike a rose won't make it so.

Sometimes I wonder if Bell understands syntax when it comes to sentences. He LOVES John 3:16. I guess I should say, he LOVES John 3:16a: "For God so loved the world that he gave is only begotten son..." but that's where the love stops. Bell even describes that part as "beautiful." But, he argues, "millions have been taught that if they don't believe..." and then he launches into a rant about how God instantly becomes a vindictive monster to people who don't believe. I wonder if Bell has read the rest of the verse and chooses to ignore it, of if he just never got that far. To help him out, it goes like this: "...that whoever believes in Him will not perish but have eternal life." The inverse of the argument isn't true, Rob? Maybe he thinks there's an omitted part that says, "...and whoever does NOT believe in Him will also not perish, but have eternal life -- because we here at Bible Writers, Incorporated are very open and loving and affirming, and it'd be unloving of us to deny anyone eternal life."

In Bell's paradigm, I honestly see very little need for evangelism and missions within the Christian faith. In fact, the one time I remember Bell mentioning missions, it's only say that he hears stories all the time about missionaries who tell the stories of Jesus, and the native peoples say, "That's Jesus? But we've been telling those stories for years" (again confirming my "pretty close to universalism" beliefs about Bell). Bell talks about the importance of following God in this life, but the reasons for it seem to be mostly, "because it's just better, and you'll feel more fulfilled." It feels like someone trying to convince me to cheer for the Steelers, because they win a lot of Super Bowls, and they're a well-run franchise that doesn't disappoint nearly as often as other teams, so I'll just enjoy football more if I convert. Unfortunately, I enjoy being a Cowboys fan, and since, in the end, it doesn't really matter what I choose (I'll always be able to change my mind after I die when I realize that the Steelers really were the better team), I'll stick with my 'Boys. I'm enjoying it just fine. It reads to me like Bell basically says, "Jesus is NOT the mean judgmental guy you hear about from the Westboro Baptist Church weirdos. Now that you are aware of that, I can't really give you a solid reason why you need to follow him right now. Just keep him in the back of your mind so that when you die and it comes time for you to change your mind, you won't have to be 'pruned' for very long before you realize Jesus is the right way."

My last point: None of this would be that big of a deal if Rob Bell were truly just seeking answers and trying to provoke thought, but he's teaching this stuff to millions of followers. He preaches at a megachurch, he writes very popular books, and he speaks at conferences and gives interviews around the world. His influence is huge, and that's why this is important to combat. Bell loves to play the "I'm just a pastor" card, but when we're talking about millions who look to you as a spiritual advisor in their lives, false teaching carries some dire consequences.

I understand that this post reads largely as some rant against a guy I don't like, and I'm sorry for that. But, honestly, I've never had a real problem with Bell before I read this book (I thought he might be slightly "out there" regarding a few things he's said and written, but I didn't have a problem for the most part with what he and his church has been teaching to tons of people). Now that's changed.

Read Kevin DeYoung's lengthy review for the most thorough exposition of the flaws in Bell's book.

For listening and watching

I lived in Des Moines for about five months with a college friend of mine while I was engaged. While I was there my friend and I attended Lutheran Church of Hope off and on. I came across two videos they posted on facebook from their Easter service last weekend, and I wanted to share them with you (can't embed them, so I have to make you click on the links).

The first is probably my new favorite video/song, and you can check it out HERE.

The second is of Simon Estes, a world-renowned singer, performing one of my long-time favorites, "Were You There?"

Dealing with Disappointment in the church

As you know, it's not uncommon for me to link to Kevin DeYoung's blog when he posts things I think are particularly good.

He's just finished up a 3-part series on disappointment in the church (Part 1, Part 2, Part 3).

None of them is too long, so check it out.

The Office (but not the TV show)

Guess what happened today at work. Too slow.

I found out that I'm going to get an office.

It's not because I'm being promoted or getting a raise or anything. It's because there's an empty office in the church office area, and my supervisor thought it'd be a good idea if I (in charge of compiling and counting and entering monetary contributions each week) weren't sitting at the very front of the office in front of a couple of huge windows while I count money every week. A valid point.

But I'm really excited. I'm very much an "I love having my own space for my own things that I can set up my own way for my own purposes" kind of guy.

Apologies... it's just another link

Sorry to keep posting just to direct you elsewhere, but I really thought THIS post (again, from Kevin DeYoung) was worth pointing out. It deals a little bit with women and ministry, but not so much in a "this is what I believe" way... more like a "it's an interesting division in the church" way.

At some point I just might stop linking to DeYoung's blog, so it'd be worth your while to subscribe to it on your own. I haven't read his books yet (though I've wanted to quite badly), but he's definitely one of my favorite bloggers.

A phone call

I work at Centennial Covenant Church.

A phone conversation I just had...

Me: Centennial Covenant, this is Jake, how may I help you?
Man on phone: David! Jack Green, how are you?
Me: No, I'm sorry, this is JAKE, did you need to talk to David?
Man: No, I need to talk with Steve.
Me: He's not in yet this morning [sidenote: the office doesn't open until 9am, and rarely is there anyone other than me in the office before that time... and this call was at 8:20], would you like his voicemail?
Man: (pause) Well, um, is David there?
Me: No, he's not in yet either.
Man: (longer pause) Um, I'm sorry, I didn't catch who I'm speaking with.
Me: This is Jake Rohde.
Man: Oh, you're the guy who just started a little while ago.
Me: Yep [sidenote: it was in mid-March).
Man: With the little baby.
Me: Oh, no, you're thinking of Chris Durkin. [another seminary student, friend of mine, has an almost one-year old, and another due in December, started working as an intern here a couple of weeks ago]
Man: Oh, okay. Well, I'm supposed to have a meeting with Steve tonight and I want to make sure he's coming.
Me: Here, let me give you his cell phone number.

Two stories

At church I'm in charge of entering the week's contributions into our computer system. Any checks that are not for the general fund have something written in the memo line that tell me where that money goes. This week at church a brief presentation was given by a pastor from a Kenyan church with whom our church has been partnering for years. The church in Kenya runs an orphanage called the Shangalia Orphanage, but the church has a different name that I can't remember. They meet in a shack on land that they do not own, and they're trying to raise support so that they can purchase the land and the building where they meet. So this week I got a lot of checks labeled "Kenya church project," "Kenya land project," or just "Kenya Church." My favorite was from someone, apparently a bit confused, who wrote, "Shangalia Land." I laughed because it sounds like a fictional fantasy world you'd find in a video game, or near HonnaLee.
(That's the end of this story)

The other night Elizabeth and I went to a Rockies-Giants game at Coors Field. We had free tickets, and we debated skipping out on the game because it was supposed to rain all night long. We decided to go anyway, and fortunately for us the rain stopped right as the game started, and not another drop fell all night long.

The game lasted 5 hours and went 14 innings. The Giants had scored a run in the first inning. The Rockies tied it in the 5th. Then no one scored... for a long time. It was still 1-1 heading into the 14th inning, and by now most of the fans had disappeared from the stadium. After the Giants scored 3 runs in the top half of the inning, another mass exodus of fans left the place pretty sparsely populated. With a 4-1 deficit to overcome, the Rockies loaded the bases. Their pitcher (the 5th or 6th of the night) came to the plate. This guy hadn't had an at-bat all year (and for all I know, never in his professional career). The Giants pitcher walked him on 5 pitches. A run scored. Now the Rockies are down 4-2. Rockies outfielder Ryan Spilborghs was up. He hit a grand slam.

We made fun of all the people that had left the game early.
(That's the end of that story)

Things My Teenager Will Not Do on Sunday Mornings:

1. Wear a t-shirt to church that reads, "Most of the people who drive me nuts are in my family."
2. (If I have a girl) Wear shorts that are so short that not even a public school's dress code would allow them.
3. Wear anything grungier than what they wear to school.
4. Skip the service to hang out with friends in the foyer (or anywhere else).
5. Have a cell phone at church.
6. Have an iPod at church.

This list was inspired by some observations I made at church yesterday.

McLaren and me (not quite as catchy as McGee & Me)

I'm nearing the end of reading A Generous Orthodoxy by Brian McLaren. I've never really written a book review before, and you're kidding yourself if that's what you think this is... but I thought I'd share some first impressions and thoughts about what I've read so far.

I chose to read this particular book on the emergent church because a) I already own it & it's just been sitting on my shelf for more than a year now, and 2) from what I've heard and read it's been touted as the definitive manifesto for today's emergent church (can "definitive" and "emergent church" be together in one sentence and not be an oxymoron?), and so I figured that if I'm going to graduate from an evangelical seminary there might be some people I come across in whatever ministry God points me to who assume I know something about the emergent church and I'd like not to disappoint them. So here we go.

First of all let me say that McLaren is an engaging writer, and it's not at all hard for me to see how he's published a dozen+ books, most of which sell quite well. He has a clear passion to move Christianity beyond liberal vs. conservative bickering, and his viewpoint largely seems to have grown out of a reaction to ultra-right wing conservative fundamentalist Christians who you're likely to see on television a lot (not often being painted in a positive light at all).

As is made clear in McLaren's subtitle (visible in the above picture), his desire is to essentially take the best from all of the pockets of Christianity and mold them into a kind of open-minded, tolerant community of believers who follow the teachings of Jesus. In multiple places throughout the book McLaren tells his audience that it's important to stick to the fundamentals of the faith, which he clearly defines as loving God, and loving your neighbor (with everyone on the planet falling to the "neighbor" category). One of the big problems he has with many Christians today is that they've expanded the fundamentals to include things like the inspiration and inerrancy of scripture, and penal substitutionary atonement. McLaren, however, seems to believe that if we simply love God and love other people then Christianity is much more likely to connect to our postmodern culture, and we will be able to take the world for Christ.

If I were to summarize McLaren's position as I understand it (I'm about 80% of the way through the book) I would say that he believes that following the teachings of Jesus is what's most important (and primarily the love God & others command), and therefore we need to love everyone, be in community with everyone, let the Holy Spirit guide our direction through experience, and be pacifists (or at least pacifist sympathizers with the hope and goal of bringing the world to a place where everyone is a pacifist). On the flip side he would argue that we need to grow out of our in/out theology where there are some who are "in" or "born again" who are going to heaven and everyone else is "out" and therefore going to hell. McLaren relates a story in which his college-age son admits that he's struggling spiritually. He goes on, "Dad, if Christianity is true then nearly everyone I love is going to be tortured in the fires of hell forever. And if it's not true, then life has no meaning. I just wish there were a better option." McLaren tells us that when he heard his son say those things his heart broke as he realized that that is the picture of Christianity his son, and probably most Christians, have. It seems that the goal of this book is largely to correct such thinking.

From what I've learned about the emergent church before and outside of reading this book, McLaren's theology and teachings in A Generous Orthodoxy are very much represtentative of them.

And it's too bad.

Completely lacking from McLaren's theology is anything about the harder parts of the Bible. The only time I have come across the word "atonement" in the whole book is when, as I mentioned above, he is pointing out how conservative evangelicals have broadened the definition of "fundamentals" to include it. I do think McLaren's right about a lot of things: The Christianity that most people see on television which says you must vote republican, fight against gun control laws, homosexuality, and abortion, support wars, and tell all your non-Christian friends that they're going to hell is probably not what Jesus meant when he sent his disciples out as witnesses, but McLaren's theology, I believe, could accurately be described as dangerous, bordering on devastating. The Gospel message is NOT, as McLaren would apparently have you believe, that we can all get along in a God-loving community if we stick to the teachings of Jesus. It's that Jesus was crucified in your place on the cross as a sacrifice for sin and that he rose again the third day, conquering death forever. Why doesn't the emergent church ever want to get into the hard stuff? I'm guessing that in all his books, you'll never hear McLaren talk about the reality of sin and its impact on the human race (unless it's the "sin" of intolerance, which creates an unappealing "in vs. out" mentality).

In fact, it seems to me that if Jesus never was crucified or resurrected or if he never ascended to heaven... McLaren's theology would not be threatened at all. Without the atonement Jesus was still a good teacher who gave us good standards to live by, so let's all focus on those and try to get along.

(When I bring my book to work with me, my coworker will ask, "Is McLaren annoying you yet?" For the first almost half of the book my answer was, "Not really." As it's become clearer and clearer that his bottom line is essentially, "Let's all be nice to each other," my answer has changed. There is real truth, Mr. McLaren.)

Webmaster... but not really

Over the next days, weeks, months, and maybe years I'm going to become the primary caretaker of our church's website. I'm really excited about it. If you're interested, I'd encourage you to take a look at centcov.org and report back to me with your input. For a while now I've thought that it could use some sprucing up, and I've got plenty of ideas. The changes might be extremely slow for awhile. At this point I've been given permission to update information and content on the site, but I have in mind some fairly radical design changes and different strategies to really make it a more useful tool for ministry. I don't know if/when I'll be able to really get going on it and make significant changes, but if you take a look at the site now then over time I'll probably ask you to take a look again... and tell me how you think things are coming!

Scum of the Earth

Last night Elizabeth and I attended Scum of the Earth Church in Denver. This was my fourth visit to Scum, Elizabeth's third. We go occasionally because we have a couple of friends who are pastors there and they often invite us when they are preaching. Actually, that's mostly why we used to go. Now we go largely because we love it.

Scum is a very special church. It's made up of a very ecclectic group of mostly young people. Many of them struggle or have struggled with different kinds of addictions. Many have been hurt by Christians/churches in the past. It's largely a group of people that you probably wouldn't expect to see in your church on a Sunday morning.

Scum meets on Sunday nights in a very old building that was a church a long time ago, but most recently served as the house of an artist in Denver who essentially used the building as his canvas. The walls, railings, stairs and other fixtures are all painted funky colors. In some places there are collages of photos all over the ceilling. The bathrooms have wacky tiles and sea shells and mermaids on the walls. If there was one word to describe the building where Scum meets I think I would choose funky.

Anyway, we've come to really love visiting Scum. I've come to realize that the way a church is between Monday and Saturday really tends to dictate what the church is like on Sunday, and if that's true, then Scum is a vibrant, loving community of people who meet regularly with one another to share burdens and triumphs, to get to know one another, to be released from the bondage of any number of troubles, and to love each other. Pastors at Scum have to raise financial support because the church is comprised largely of low- to no-income people.

Last night my friend Josh Cook gave a talk on "Healthy Single Sexuality." In my opinion, it was on healthy sexuality in general (because it was every bit as relevant for married people as it was for singles). It was a fantastic message. When I'm listening to sermons I tend to look around at the crowd and be curious, seeing who's here and who's sitting where. Last night I realized about 3/4 of the way through Josh's sermon that I hadn't shifted my view from Josh the whole night. I'm not sure I'd even blinked! Maybe that's weird, but it illustrates how captivated I was the whole time.

The church's web site is scumoftheearth.net and Josh's sermon will probably be posted there before long, if you're interested (at least I think they post audio of their sermons on their site).

Just wanted to let you all know that it's a really great church, and we'll probably continue to visit as long as we live in the area.

Is Ecclesiologist a word? Cuz I think I want to be one when I grow up

My semester's over, by the way.

On Friday afternoon I realized that my little final assignment for my last class that was due on Saturday night was actually a very BIG final assignment, and it was due on Friday night. I freaked out for a few minutes. The I did my assignment in an hour or two (it should have taken me about 12-15 hours) and turned it in. It won't get that good of a grade.

But I'm done now.

So, for a little while now I've been in the process of discovering what I think might be a fairly major passion of mine. But it's hard to describe. I really like the idea of helping churches to improve as communities of people who obey the Word and follow Christ. I feel like "church consulting" is kind of what I'm trying to describe, but I think that phrase seems very much like a secular businessperson trying to turn churches into profitable business that can simply grow attendance and bring in money -- and that's NOT what I'm talking about. I'm talking about learning as best as I can how churches can be most effective for the Kingdom of God, and then helping them to learn and implement ideas that come from it.

More recently, I've become extremely interested in the use of web-based technology as a part of the mission of the church. It was sparked when I came to the conclusion that my church's website could probably be much more user-friendly, and could include much more content and have a better layout. I just don't think that it's being used that much for anything right now, and that could change quite a bit. The use of facebook, twitter, blogs, and other programs on church websites obviously have both positives and negatives, but I've been learning an awful lot about those pros and cons, and if you avoid the cons and stick to the pros I think they can really be integrated into the mission of the church.

So if I designed my own job (which, while somewhat farfetched, isn't completely pie-in-the-sky, given the fact that 10 years ago facebook didn't exist, and 10 years before that the internet didn't... so the job I end up having someday might not even exist yet) it would be some kind of blending of the two exciting things I wrote about above. Using the internet and its tools to assist churches in growing into biblically-based Christ-following communities. So there you go.

On a sidenote, I've also recently discovered something called Google Analytics. Using this tool you can embed an html code into your website and track how people are using your site and where they're coming from. It'll track number of visits, number of new visitors, where your visitors have linked from, how long they tend to stay on your site, which pages of your site they view the most and the longest, where in the world (geographically) your visitors are, and much more. I've only begun to realize the niftiness of Analytics. I'm using it to track info right here on my blog, but a little unpopular blog that's read exclusively by close friends and family isn't the ideal site to use with Analytics. A church website, which has multiple pages and a lot more traffic, would be ideal (in my opinion). Anyway, it's cool. Ask me about it, if you're interested in learning more!

The Mississippi Squirrel Revival

This was one of my favorite songs as a kid, and now thanks to youtube I can share it with all of you. And no, I'm not a hick. Just a kid from a small town in rural Iowa.

The point of the Gospel

If you ever want to subscribe to the podcast of a fantastic preacher, check out Matt Chandler.

Aside from that, though, this video clip is just penetrating. Watch it.

Don't rush marriage. (this advice has nothing to do with my relationship with Elizabeth!)

Single people get trampled on in conservative evangelical churches in America.

Seriously. We treat singles like lesser beings. "Are you dating anyone?" "Have you found that special someone?" "How can someone as nice as you not be married yet?" Each of these is all too common among Christians (and, I suppose I should say, in society at large). We don't generally want to hire pastors who are single. We don't want council members or elders or deacons (or whatever other high offices you've got in your church) who are single. If you're single and female, forget about heading up a ministry of any kind. Find yourself a man and then you'll be valuable. Let's make sure our church hosts 26 marriage conferences/retreats/workshops this year (once every other week sounds about right), but we don't need to do anything special for singles. They obviously don't have any relationships important enough to care about.

And our "singles ministries"? That's where young single people go who are desperately trying not to be single anymore. It's a great place to meet nice young members of the opposite sex who are Christians and might be interested in marrying me someday. And in many cases the church's general attitude toward the singles ministry seems to be, "Well, if they all hook up with each other, then we won't have to bother with a singles ministry anymore -- they'll be able to join all of our couples ministries!"

Don't get me wrong. I think marriage is fantastic, and I think it's extremely important that the church do everything it can to help marriages succeed through whatever Biblically based programs it can get its hands on. I know women who have a deep longing to be a wife and a mother someday, and men who desperately want a woman with whom they can share their life and grow in Christlikeness. I have no problem with that.

But why do people in the church feel like it's their responsibility to check-in with singles every week and find out if they're dating anyone yet? How Biblical is that attitude? Where does inspired scripture say, "Make sure you're married by age 25 (or as soon as humanly possible thereafter), because until you have a spouse you're only a fraction of what you could be"?

Jesus was single.

And Paul spent seemingly half of 1 Corinthians (okay, maybe not that much) trying to convince his readers that singleness has its benefits. He told them not to be so concerned with a change of status (and this applies to any kind of status, not just marital status). You're single? Stay that way! You only make $20 grand a year? Don't worry about it. He tells them that married people will face a whole bunch of troubles, and if he can spare them from those troubles he'd be happy to. He points out that single people have a wonderful opportunity to be concerned only about the Lord's affairs -- not having to devote attention to a wife and family. Paul doesn't have a problem with marriage, but he has an awful lot more good things to say to single people than most of us seem to.

Why aren't our churches empowering that group of people that could easily have the potential to make an unparalleled impact for the Kingdom?

Speedo Guy

Church (part II)

Last night I attended Scum of the Earth Church (SOTEC) in Denver for the first time. I was invited by my former boss, who is one of the church's pastors, and her boyfriend, another of the church's pastors who was preaching last night.

SOTEC meets in a super funky building that used to be a church and then was home to an artist of some kind and is now a church again. The artist who used to live there used basically the whole building his art studio. There's random glass and tile mosaics on the floors and on the walls of the bathrooms, and different paintings and designs on the walls, and photograph collages and other artsy fartsy kinds of things. It's a totally cool building that completely fits SOTEC's congregation. It's made up of 20- and 30-somethings, for the most part, but there are also plenty of older people. When worship began last night there were two gentlemen sitting behind me who seemed to either be high, be drunk, or have some kind of mental disability (it very well could have been a combination). At one point they started crying and repeating the words we were singing to each other. We would sing, "God is faithful," and the men would affirm to themselves, "He is SO faithful! God is faithful to us, isn't he? And you know Jesus, he's our savior!" It was cool. These men, in just about any other church I've ever been to, would have been scolded in the minds of everyone around them for being inappropriate and distracting, but not at Scum. There, they're just loved.

It was also the only church I've ever attended where upon leaving I saw a couple of shopping carts holding the earthly possessions of a couple of the attendees. In my one visit to SOTEC, I got the feeling that they truly take care of the "least of these." Cool.

(This post could also be much longer... but it won't be. I'll probably refer to this stuff in the future.)

Church (part I)

This is the first of two (probably very long) posts about my church-going experiences yesterday. I attended two services at two different churches that were very similar in some ways, and radically different in other ways.

(For the record, I've been writing these posts in my head for hours, trying to make them organized, but I fear I've failed. Also, I wrote all of part I last night and then lost it because my computer malfunctioned -- so this is actually a rewrite.)

NEW HOPE BAPTIST CHURCH

New Hope is a predominantly african-american church in Denver. When I say "predominantly african-american," I mean that Elizabeth and I were two of about four white people in the 500+-person congregation. All the men at New Hope wear suits with ties. The women wear dresses and hats of all shapes, sizes, and colors. The church reminded me of southern baptist churches in the movies (for some reason, Forrest Gump comes to mind), with the choir dressed in robes and the whole church swaying with the music, clapping along, and freely shouting out exclamations at all points of the service ("Amen!" and "Preach it!" were two of the most common).

The people at New Hope were exceedingly friendly. Many of them seemed genuinely happy to have us there. One large, exuberant woman gave us a warm hug and demanded that we return. The preacher was tremendously animated. He raised his voice so often and for so long that I can't quite figure out how he didn't go hoarse. 

A few of my observations:

I've never felt like such a minority as I did in church yesterday morning. No one did anything to suggest that they had a problem with their white visitors, but it was so evident that we were the "different" ones. It was kinda weird. A bit of insight, perhaps, into what blacks must often feel in a white-majority world.

This church seemed to have a better understanding of corporate worship than many of the churches I've regularly attended over the years. No one is ever worried about being thought of as "weird" if they worship in whatever way they feel led. Some stood, some clapped, some sang, some shouted, some frequently stood up in the middle of the sermon just to give a few claps of encouragement for whatever the preacher had just said... and it was all just fine. Everyone there seemed to care much more about gathering with fellow believers to praise God than whether or not they were going to miss the second half of the football game if the preacher ran long.

(When I wrote this post last night, before it got eaten by cyberspace, it was much longer. Sorry if you feel short-changed.)

Part II will follow, telling a little about my OTHER church-going experience yesterday.