Why Churches Suck

Joe over at the evangelical outpost has a nice post on his struggle with attending church. Here’s my outline of what is wrong with most churches. But let me first say this – almost all of the problems in a local church are the fault of the local leadership, not the congregation.

1. Church Leadership Perpetuate Spiritual Infancy by Failing to Help Members Grow
This, IMHO, is the biggest problem with churches. They perpetuate spiritual infancy by:

• Always Preaching to Sinners About Getting Saved
  How many times can saved people hear the "everyone is a sinner and must repent" message before they get tired of being "beat down?" And who wants to bring their friends and neighbors to a hell fire and brimstone church anyway? I’m not saying we should shy away from the gospel. What I am saying is that it is the goodness of God that leads men to repentance, not the wagging finger of a shouting preacher. And Sunday services should be to teach Christians how to grow as spiritual people and disciples of Christ. I understand the Seeker Sensitive idea, that Sundays should be for visitors, while you may have a "believers service" midweek for more indepth teaching – that’s cool, as long as your Sunday service isn’t just about SIN all the time.
• Failure to Allow Lay Leadership to Share in the Work of the Church
  Do they not know that their job is "equipping of the saints for the work of ministry?" This weird separation of "we are the ministers, you are the people" is unbiblical and keeps people from serving God with their gifts. Even in churches where they let lay members lead ministries, many of these churches have little infrastructure in place to train and support lay leaders.
• Failure to Call People to Discipleship and Leadership
  If leaders don't tell people that Jesus calls them to follow, and to grow up into those who can teach others, they just don't do it. My favorite passage with respect to this is Hebrews 5:12-14:

In fact, though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need someone to teach you the elementary truths of God's word all over again. You need milk, not solid food! Anyone who lives on milk, being still an infant, is not acquainted with the teaching about righteousness. But solid food is for the mature, who by constant use have trained themselves to distinguish good from evil.

2. They Have Song Leaders Instead of Worship Leaders
As a former Charismatic worship leader, and current member of the worship team at my current SBC church, I have to say that many churches think that if they just make their worship contemporary, and get some excitement going, that their worship is real and dynamic. So how come people exhibit such lame participation in such worship? Because it is song leading, not worship leading. The congregation doesn’t need good eye contact and smiles from the worship team, they need a group of people who get lost in worship, whose hearts and eyes are looking upwards. The congregation will then follow.

One small aside about non-charismatic churches doing contemporary worship. I think many, if not most of them have a tepid anointing on worship because their doctrines overemphasize everything being done "decently and in order," but what they really mean is "we are afraid of emotionalism, and don’t believe in speaking in tongues or fainting because of the Holy Spirit in our church. In fact, even if the Holy Spirit does work in that way, we don’t want that here." While I understand their fear of fanaticism, they would do well to remember that the charismatic movement birthed contemporary worship. They seem to want the fruit of this movement (reinvigorated worship) without the spirit that birthed it.

One further note about contemporary worship. Every time there is a true spiritual awakening, people without church backgrounds become Christians, and when they then start to worship, they worship using the musical language they know – they don’t start singing in the style of the 1800’s. This is why the Salvation Army was initially a pariah to the churches – their converts were playing brass band music, which was not church music. But they couldn’t deny the powerful spirit upon the converts. If we want real anointing on our worship, we just don't need a new wineskin (contemporary music), we need new wine (revival in our spirits).

3. The Main Pastor / Teacher Is A Poor Teacher
I have left churches where the main teacher handled scripture sloppily, used trite aphorisms to make his point, and otherwise showed that he had not spent the time to really teach properly. I believe it was Chuck Swindoll, the excellent bible teacher, who said something like (my paraphrase, can’t find the reference):

The bible is like a tarnished brass rail that a man is hired to polish. The poor teacher is like the man who rubs the railing a few times and calls it polished. He reads the scriptures superficially, gets a good point, perhaps even a true point from his reading, and teaches that. However, he has not spent the time to determine what the true meaning of the passage is. You see, all scriptures has specific intended meaning. The good teacher is like the man who rubs the rail repeatedly until the true brilliance of the brass is revealed. The good teacher studies and meditates on a passage until the specific intended meaning shines forth.

4. The Main Pastor is only a Preacher and Not a Teacher
Someone once said that the difference between teachers and preachers is this: one is telling, the other is yelling. This is close to the truth – better said, teachers instruct, while preachers motivate. Some people are great motivators, but really do not do any systematic teaching very well. And that’s OK – but for a church to really be growing, you need someone who is a teacher, not just a preacher. Even better, someone who does both. If you have only a preacher, you’re motivated but have no instruction on how to do a good job at the tasks you are motivated to accomplish – if you only have a teacher, you probably are well educated but do little of what you are taught because you aren’t motivated to action.

5. The Church Leadership Has Bad or Unbalanced Doctrine
Nothing kills people like bad doctrine – be it religiously controlling or hopelessly humanistic and liberal. The former produces Pharisees, the latter nice people with none of God’s power to transform and save people.

6. The Leadership Isn’t Interested in Seeking God
Without an earnest desire to do God’s will, without regular prayer, fasting, study of God’s word, personal holiness and obedience, church leadership will never produce a vibrant spiritual community.

7. They Fail to Create True Community – Poor or No Small Groups
In small churches, there may be some community, but in a group larger than about 10 people, you are only going to get mostly superficial relationships. If a church only emphasizes church attendance, or emphasizes it over small group involvement, or has a poor network of small groups, they are fooling themselves if they think they are really helping people.

And if the church is big, but lacks small group fellowship, you can bet that it means only one thing – cult of personality. Everyone comes to see the great preacher, or the great music, but they go home and hardly know anyone else in the church. Even in churches that have small groups, if they have a weak small group philosophy and follow-through on that philosophy, they will suck at creating true community.

Feed the Children and the Tsunami Victims

One of my weaknesses when it comes to TV, is informercials. But not just the Ronco type, but the Feed the Children type - I think part of me just wants to do something more meaningful than write requirements for web software. So last night, I was watching the latest Feed the Children plea for help, and about half way through, my wife and I look at each other teary-eyed, and she's giving me this, "Well, aren't we going to do anything?" look.

"Honey," I complained, "We're still getting out of debt." Scoldingly, she looks at me and says "we'll hardly miss ten dollars a month for six months." What could I say? FTC has comitted to helping the Tsunami victims for a 6 month period, so we joined on. No, we won't get a picture of some kid we are sponsoring - just a little satisfaction that we are part of telling these people that they are not forgotten (even if they do disappear from the news).

Scientists Question Asteroid Extinction of Dinosaurs

As a former biochemist and young-earth-creationist sympathizer, I love to see science (as well as archaeology) discover something new that undermines previous conclusions and supports creationist claims.

Of note is the recent controversial claim by scientists in The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences that the Chicxulub asteroid, formerly thought to have caused the extinction of Dinosaurs, predates that event by 300K years. They further state that probably, another asteroid plus a bunch of volcanic action probably did the job. Check out the easy to read redux in National Geographic.

As it turns out, this controversy has been going on since the 1980's, and creationists have argued that a global flood caused the extinction, of which volcanic eruptions was a part. In fact, some scientists already admit that water was involved, but they go to great lengths to deny a global flood. For instance, they mention possible tsunamis and such:

‘The enormous area covered by Morrison sediments and the general thinness of the sedimentary sheet (being in most areas less than 100m in thickness) indicate that the sediments were distributed by widespread, flowing water.’
- Dobson, P., Behrensmeyer, A.K., Bakker, R.T. and McIntosh, J.S., Taphonomy and paleoecology of the dinosaur beds of the Jurassic Morrison Formation, Paleobiology 6(2):228, 1980.

To me, this is more evidence that science has not controverted biblical claims, including the worldwide flood of Noah, and that the creationist model fits the data as well or better than the other claims of evolutionary biology, geology, and astronomy.

Here's a very nice (long ) creationist article about the extinction of the dinosaurs, with over 200 references in the bibliography!

Turning Your Church Website Into A Ministry Tool

So, I just joined a church, and while checking out its website, I got all geared up to make it better. So I sent a letter to one of the pastors. We'll see how long it is before I get smacked! Heh. Anyway, check out my letter. Feel free to add your own analysis of the site.
----------------------------------
Pastor,

I recently completed the 101 class with my wife, and am currently part of Ken H.'s small group, and am joining the worship team.

However, as I listed on my 101 submission form, by day I am a Business Systems Analyst, specializing in web applications and web site design and usability.

ANALYSIS OF CURRENT SITE

I am not sure who is in charge of the current southwinds web site, but I would love to help serve that team with my expertise. My initial superficial review of the site revealed the following items/areas that could be improved:

• main site logo disappears on internal pages (only shows on first page)
• left and footer navigation is inconsistent and overlaps
• contact information is hard to find since it is on the "how to find us" page
• staff email is advertised as being on the site, but is not
• second level left navigation area is mostly blank, and is in an atypical location
• weekend message topics are a bit out of date, and the name is confusing - are they future topics? If they are past topics, are they really useful without transcripts or audio available online?

I don't want to step on anyone's turf, because I know when it comes to web sites and other creative endeavors, people have put their best into them and appreciate gentle criticism at best. However, feel free to pass my email on to whomever should read it.

EXPANSION OF THE SITE FOR MINISTRY

There are many opportunities for ministry via the web site, including the following:

1. Removing common errors on the site.
It would be good to do a quick review of the following items to make sure we are not making common mistakes.

2. Do a quick mission statement and user task evaluation for the site.
We should decide who our target users are (truth-seekers, church-seekers, current members), decide how our site can meet their needs (what tasks they are coming to our site for), and then we can design our site architecture around those needs. These needs are already partly met on the site, but they could be expanded to include (some of these are already present)

• directions to church
• statement of faith
• contact information, including staff email
• upcoming sermons
• past sermon audio / transcripts
• staff blogs (more on that below)
• bible study materials for members
• list of small groups

3. Add timely sermon transcripts or audio.
The tape and audio ministry people could look into converting the recorded sermons, or directly recording them into a digital medium (since we have Macs in the back, I'm almost sure we could record directly to .mpg or .mov files) which would allow us to offer them on the site. See the following site for a good example: http://www.npc-dublin.org/Sermons.htm

4. Staff Blogs
Christian blogging is taking off, and church staff can really connect with the increasing number of people searching for truth in cyberspace. See this great article from Leadership Journal. Also, siteorganic.com has a good "rate your web ministry" survey.

5. Other uses for our site / internet in ministry

• men's accountability
• up to date events calendars
• effective small group follow-up

I'm sure this is an overwhelming amount of information, but I'd love to be part of a team brainstorming about how the web site can contribute to the churche's goals of ministry. It's not just an online business card anymore! :D

Apologetics Sites

Here's a list of my favorite Christian apologetics sites:

CREATION SCIENCE

• Access Research Network (ARN) - more scholarly creation science site, with original research and a "peer-reviewed" journal
• Answers in Genesis - one of the bigger Creation Science organizations
• Center for Scientific Creation - this is a one man site, which basically contains the contents of his excellent Creation Science book. I like it because he uses extensive scientific footnoting of articles he cites
• Ideacenter.org - very well designed site for Intelligent Design stuff
• Institute for Creation Research (ICR) - probably my favorite place for well written and documented Creation Science articles
• International Society for Complexity, Information, and Design (ISCID) - another society with membership, and its own journal for researcing Intelligent Design
• Talk.origins - archives from the talk.origins newsgroup. This is the best place for anti-creation science arguments
• Trueorigin.org - A rebuttal site for talk.origins

APOLOGETICS

• Apologetics.org - a semi-brainy site hosted by the Intl C.S. Lewis Society. Some creation science and standard apologetics, plus print materials
• Apologetics Press - not too many articles, but what is there is excellent
• ChristianAnswers.net - kind of a soup to nuts site, including creation, social issues, child rearing, movie reviews, plus standard apologetics
• Christian Apolgotics and Research Ministries (CARM) - very nice site covering classic apologetics, creation science, and issues.
• Discovery Institute - a think tank that covers intelligent design, bioethics, economics, technology and culture. This is a big site with lots of cool content - including the Center for Science and Culture
• Godandscience.org - mostly about science, but also some issue papers
• Leadership U - science, theology, humanities
• Stand to Reason - a world view site, which takes Christian positions on isssues and current events

How Christians Should Treat Gays

Recently, the Wardrobe Door started a series where they invite someone from a group outside of Christianity to answer the question "how could Christians better communicate and reach out to your group?" The first post is from a gay individual, and it is thought provoking. Here is my response to that article (you should read the article first!)

I'm sure you'll get lots of feedback on this, from bible thumpers to the other extreme. I'm a born-again Christian, with gay friends and family, but feel that homosexuality is a developmental gender identity disorder which can be healed through therapy.

I think, however, that there are some important takeaways from the thoughtful posting by Louis:

1. Gays feel attacked and beaten down by Christians

We need to address this with acts of compassion. I recently saw a program about a missionary woman who lives in Afghanistan. She has started a home for widows, of which there are many, in order to help keep them from starving, and to teach them marketable skills. She does not preach much at all, but when they ask for prayer, she tells them that she prays in the name of Jesus, and she asks if that is ok. They see her compassion in action. Her best friend is a muslim woman, whom she hopes will one day receive Jesus - but until that time, she is comitted to serving these women. Perhaps we need to do that with the gay community.

2. Deeply Listen

Seems like this act of kindness might do more than anything. It means seek to understand first - it might even involve reading some pro-gay theology or lifestyle books.

3. Refuse Judgementalism, but Speak Truth

I don't think we can omit the clear teaching of scripture regarding the sinfulness of homosexuality and maintain that we are being true to the spirit of Jesus. My favorite example is when the woman caught in adultery was taken to Jesus. Even though the "law" said she should be stoned, Jesus didn't call for it. He wanted mercy, and after saying to her accusers "he who is without sin, cast the first stone," he turned to her and said TWO things. (1) neither do I condemn you, and (2) go and sin no more. We must not abandon the biblical view that sin is to be identified and forsaken.

I heard a preacher recently say, regarding the relationship between love and truth, "Most preachers preach TRUTH, TRUTH, TRUTH, TRUTH, LOVE, but my conviction is that Jesus wants me to preach LOVE, LOVE, LOVE, LOVE, TRUTH." That's a great admonition to us all.

4. Biblical Objections to Homosexuality May Only Refer to Pagan Rituals and Sexual Exploitation

This is an interesting perspective, and worthy of scholarly investigation and discussion. I don't think it is a good interpretation of scripture, but perhaps we should hear the arguments first.

5. Christians Should Know How it Feels to be Persecuted and Marginalized

Now, some Xians may say "Christians have been persecuted for their faith since the beginning, and we know what it feels like to be persecuted, even in the US." I say, while negative media attention in the U.S. might seem like persecution, very few of us in the U.S. have suffered any personal attacks by strangers, public derision, or any other serious persecution for our faith, unless we are one of the few who has been courageous enough to get out on the front lines of our culture war by putting our own reputations on the line through open-air preaching, publications, or other overtly public acts. We would do well to realize that most gays would be softer to Christianity if they weren't always having to defend themselves on every side.

Dangers in the Search for Truth

A friend of mine told me today that the thing that really bugs him about religious people is that they never want to critically evaluate what they believe, and turn a blind eye to contradictions in their scriptures or the teachings of their spiritual organization.

I agree, many people are not critical and don't want to be. However, not all people with faith "turn a blind eye." For instance, I left my faith for many years, for intellectual, emotional, and spiritual reasons, and I am just now returning to faith (hence the blog name, When You Return). I am not blind to the apparent contradictions of scripture, or complex reasoning that people must sometimes use to harmonize scriptures. However, as a fellow seeker, I offer the following observations and cautions:

1. The Limits of Reason
While reason may help you to identify a trustworthy source of faith, reason has its limits in the quest for spiritual truth, and we must also use the faculties of our heart and conscience in the quest.

2. Living with Mystery
You will never eliminate all questions - in my favorite book of all time, Further Along the Road Less Traveled, M. Scott Peck has a whole chapter discussing that if we want to be on the spiritual journey, we must become comfortable with mystery - some things will always be beyond our understanding, and we should learn to enjoy it like a sailor on the sea who can not see all the way to the bottom.

3. Focusing on What You Can Know
One of my favorite sayings regarding reading the bible goes like this:

Many things in the Bible I cannot understand; many things in the Bible I only think I understand; but there are many things in the Bible I cannot misunderstand.

My list of lingering questions shrinks and grows, but my list of things I am sure of grows steadily, and based on those things, I move forwards. I don't let my list of questions hold me back from what I do believe. Sometimes, I can not move forward until I get a question answered, but often, what I do believe allows me to "doubt my doubts" for the time-being. Often, those issues clear up in time by themselves.

4. God Offends the Mind to Reveal the Heart
Jesus often taught in parables, which surprisingly, were very accessible to the common people, but to the intellectual and religious theologians, it was confusing. He did this so that the proud and fault-finding would not see, but the humble would. Don't ask why, but the scriptures do say that God resists the proud and gives grace to the humble. So be careful. Check it out in Matthew 13:10-17.

5. Apparent Contradictions Often Hide Profound Truths
Because most profound truths appear in paradoxical pairs, often, what looks like a contradiction is actually hiding the balanced, profound truth. So don't miss it. There are many such pairs that seem contradictory, but the profound relationship between them, once seen, is masterful. This includes the relationships between mercy and truth, predestination and free will, and faith and works.

6. Look to Find Truth, Not to Disbelieve
We must be looking for truth, rather than looking to find fault. If we look for reasons to disbelieve, we will always find them. I am not saying that we should ignore our doubts or questions, but I am saying that the best reason to search is to find the truth, not to prove that others are wrong.

What is the One True Faith?

One of my coworkers asked this question, and gave the answer "The one that promotes absolute Love, Respect and Care for all of My creations, and by all I am referring to Omni-ALL not just humans."

I find this too simplistic. Not only does this ignore the biblical perspective that man is of more worth than plants and animals (see What is the Purpose of Life), one important word is missing from the above sentence : TRUTH. One of my favorite aphorisms is such:

Love without truth is sentimentality
Truth without love is brutality.

The question then becomes, if we are to implement truth with love (justice and mercy, as some sayings go), whose truth?

Not all systems are of equal value, and some must be classified as bad or evil.

Some systems of belief run counter to natural law, sometimes called "self-evident truths." For example, any faith system that classifies certain races as morally superior to others, or some humans as of lesser value than others, probably runs counter to natural law. Hence the phrase "we hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal."

As a further example, some relgious systems regard the weak, usually women, children, the elderly and the sick, as inferior, perhaps not even worthy to partake in the spiritual life of our communities. Such a system, again, is in my view, bad, evil, wrong, and counter to natural law.

There are other criteria by which one may evaluate a faith, which may include:

• Life, Health, and Peace: Do their principles lead to health and vitality in living things, or to death and destruction? (Note that there may be spiritual justifications for war, including establishing justice, freedom, or limiting future suffering by destroying evil men and organizations).
• Societal Justice, Order and Freedom: Do their principles translate well into societal structures and public policy?
• Internal Transformation: Do they follow the principles of free will, and transformation from the inside out rather than the external rule of law and conformance to outer tradition without the creation of the inner qualities of spirituality?
• Trustworthy Canon: Does the faith's authoritative documentation stand up believably against science, history, archeology, as well as the laws of internal logic and hermeneutical principle?

So, is there one true faith? My answer is, there could be. While all enduring faiths share some common, self-evident truths, when it comes to revealed truths (what happens after we die? What is god like?), they certainly do disagree, and can not all be correct, except in the anti-reasonal mind of the person who believes that logical opposites can both exist in some ethereal plane of existence, which has little to do with reality or truth. So either all are wrong, or some, or ONE may be correct about these revealed truths. How to determine which is believable or true is what epistemology (how we know what is true) is all about.

What is the Purpose of Life?

Purpose can be defined as "the application of one's self, with its talents, to a noble task." This begs the question, what are the available noble tasks here on earth? And what makes a task noble? I submit that we must pursue an ethic that promotes life and happiness for all living beings.

ARE ALL LIVING BEINGS OF EQUAL VALUE?
Is a bacteria as important as a human? What about a plant? An insect? Practically speaking, we can not preserve all life. We are in an ecosystem in which all living things eat one another. And some beings have higher levels of self-awareness, memory, and sensory experience, including pain and joy.

We must determine some principles for prioritizing the value of life. Some people choose vegetarianism, and draw the line at only eating plant life and not harming sentient creatures. This is a noble and healthy way to live, but I note that the rest of nature does not obey this law - there are plenty of carnivores out there.

The classic Christian contention is that

• Man is the most valuable of all of God's creation, the apex of God's creation, being made in His image and likeness (Genesis 1:26-27)
• The rest of creation is valuable, but subject to man, that is, here to please man. God's only command was that man be a good steward, i.e. take good care of the earth. (Genesis 1:28-29)

Based on these principles, I argue thus - the greatest purpose you can dedicate yourself to is the relief of suffering of mankind, and man's happiness. And the second greatest purpose, like the first, is to aid in the responsible care of creation.

OBJECTIONS TO PUTTING MAN FIRST

1. Isn't such anthropocentrism just self-serving?

As the son of an animal rights activist, I know the voice that asks "Isn't it just a little convenient that we put ourselves at the top of the list of who is valuable? That seems very self serving." Many good (and bad ;) theologians and philosophers have discussed whether man is just an animal, or whether or not he has some intrinsic worth greater than animals. However, I believe the balanced biblical answer is:

• Man is more valuable than animals because, being made in the image of God, he has an eternal soul, a moral conscience, and responsibility before a God to whom he must give an account. Animals are not such
• If we believe that animals are of lesser value than man, that does not give us the right to be cruel, careless, inhumane, or exploitative of animals. We must also give an account to God about how we used His resources while here.

2. If you want to make all sentient beings happy, why are you not promoting vegetarianism?

That is the subject of another essay, but let me summarize the biblical position thus:

• Right Motive: The value of vegetarianism comes in your motive. If you are a vegetarian because you feel it is a compassionate and thrifty use of resources, and in being vegetarian you help provide more food for others, while being kind to the environment, I believe that such actions are noble and pleasing to God.
• Wrong Motive: If you are a vegetarian because you think that what you do or do not eat makes you more spiritual or righteous, Jesus warned that this is not actually true - he argued that it is not what or how you eat, but how you think in your heart that determines your spirituality (Matthew 15:10-15)
• Abstaining from Meat Not Essential to Spirituality: Paul the Apostle argued that whether or not to eat meat is not central to Christian spirituality. He argued that such non-essential matters should be left up to the individual conscience. The person who feels he should not eat meat should not do it, and should not judge the person who feels that he can. The person who feels that he can eat meat should not flaunt his eating of meat, but exercise restraint and respect for the person who feels that he can not by not eating meat around that person. However, Paul also argued that the person who feels he can not eat meat is actually the weaker in faith, lacking freedom in something that is not essential (Romans 14).

3. Isn't saving the environment and animals noble enough a cause?

The short answer is, yes. If you feel a strong passion for these, you have a biblical mandate to back you up. However, your motive and end goals are what most important to God. If you are actually "worshipping the creation rather than the creator," or harboring resentment against God or the failures of mankind, you may not be on the path to spiritual wellness. The proper motive, that of pleasing God, being a good steward of resources, obeying what you feel is your calling, and maintaining a good heart towards God and man, is important in the pursuit of Christian or spiritual environmentalism and animal welfare.

THE BIBLICAL HIERARCHY OF PURPOSE

The Book The Purpose Driven Life has now sold over 10 Million copies, and shows no signs of slowing down (as of this writing, it has spent 98 weeks on the New York Times bestseller list, and is #2 in its category). Despite my dislike of the overly simplistic and wordy delivery style of the book, its summation and organization of the biblical model for a life of purpose are excellent. They include five purposes, which build on each other:

• Worship – to know and love God, and to receive God's love
• Fellowship – to "love your neighbor as yourself," and to have deep, meaningful relationships with others, esp. including those with whom you share faith and spirit. The best way to accomplish this is through membership in a spiritual community.
• Discipleship – in a Christian context, this means growing spiritually by becoming more like Christ. In other contexts, this might be genericized to following spiritual disciplines or applying yourself to spiritual growth.
• Ministry – this is your contribution to the spiritual welfare of others who share your faith - contributing to your spiritual community. In order to be effective in this step (and the next), you must take time to determine your own gifts, talents, passions, and compassion (to whom does your heart go out to?).
• Mission – Many agree that meaning is only possible if you can take part in a Mission that is larger than you – i.e. contribute to a greater task. Your specific, organized outreach to those who are "outside" of your faith and knowledge is your mission, in which you use your specific gifts, passions, and experience.

CONCLUSION

The following have been said about purpose:

• Purpose is the application of one's self and talents to a noble task
• The biblical priorities are caring for mankind and creation
• The biblical steps for determining your purpose are to put God first, develop healthy relationships with others, develop spiritual disciplines, begin to help others in your spiritual community grow, and serve those who are in need using your specific gifts, talents, and passions.

What is the Meaning of Life?

Meaning, like truth, has both objective and subjective components. Over the centuries, wise men, spiritualists, and philosophers have observed the human condition and concluded that certain principles and practices lead to relative ruin and unhappiness, while others lead to meaning and satisfaction. This is why we have the concept of a "wasted life." Those who like to say there is no such thing as a wasted life should consider starving children or oppressed peoples.

So, we might ask, what principles and practices for human living lead to satisfaction and meaning? To start, here's a nice list that describes our primary task, that of LOVE:

Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres. Love never fails.

- 1 Corinthians 13:4-8

And here's a nice set of principles to go by as well:

Finally, brothers, whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable--if anything is excellent or praiseworthy--think about such things.

- Philippians 4:8

One of my favorite authors and authorities on the objective principles that direct us towards objectively meaningful pursuits, Stephen Covey (arguably a modern day wiseman).

Principles are like lighthouses. They are natural laws that cannot be broken. As Cecil B. deMille observed…in the Ten Commandments, "It is impossible for us to break the law. We can only break ourselves against the law."… "Objective reality" [is composed of] principles that govern human growth and happiness - natural laws that are woven into the fabric of every civilized society throughout history and comprise the roots of every family and institution that has endured and prospered.

The reality of such principles or natural laws becomes obvious to anyone who thinks deeply and examines the cycles of social history. These principles surface time and time again, and the degree to which people in a society recognize and live in harmony with them moves them toward either survival and stability or disintegration and destruction.

The principles are not esoteric, mysterious, or "religious" ideas….These principles are part of most every major enduring religion, as well as enduring social philosophies and ethical systems. They are self-evident and can easily be validated by any individual….One way to quickly grasp the self-evident nature of principles is to simply consider the absurdity of attempting to live an effective life based on their opposites.

- The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People, pp. 33-35.

In Covey's even more excellent book, First Things First, he identifies many principles and arenas that we should be observing and endeavoring in, in order to succeed in a meaningful, satisfying life – note that these principles are applicable to all humans as a rule, not just "good for some people." Without going into detail, he gives an overview of four areas in which we must develop proper perspectives and habits in order to find meaning and satisfaction. They are:

• To Love – to develop into healthy individuals, and to share ourselves and receive others
• To Live – to not waste our precious commodities of time and personal potential and resources, but to channel them into worthwhile pursuits.
• To Learn – to continue growing in mind and spirit
• To Leave a Legacy – to invest ourselves into people and institutions that have ongoing value.

In summary, the meaning of life is well defined through objective, self-evident principles and practices that lead to meaning. Life's activities are not just meaningful because I decide to assign meaning to them.

However, there is a subjective component to meaning. Some things may not have "objective meaning," but for me, they may have meaning. For instance, watching baseball might not have objective meaning to all mankind, but to me, because I used to play baseball, watching it does have meaning (positive or negative). So in this context, you can say that things only have meaning if I give them meaning for myself.

There is a danger, however, in the subjective assignment of meaning – if I fail to assign meaning to things that have objective meaning, or assign meaning to things that do not have objective meaning, I may miss out on meaning, or be controlled by things that are meaningless, respectively. The more our subjective mental map of meaning aligns with the objective map, the more successful, meaningful, and free we really are. It's not that assigning meaning to watching baseball is harmful, but if it assumes supreme meaning for me, I may be hurting myself and other by missing what is actually meaningful.

Is Man Basically Good or Evil?

by Seeker

If a man asks you this question, beware! He is most likely just looking for an argument. In fact, a question like this is just begging for fruitless, heated discussion. Allow me, however, to presume to answer this question once and for all, and prepare you with the biblical answer. The answer is…man is BOTH good and evil. However, before we examine the biblical viewpoint, there is one more point to be made about this question, and that is - this is a bad question.

Why This Is A Bad Question
Firstly, the question is formed in such as way as to only offer you two solutions, when in fact, there are more than two solutions. In logic, this error is known as bifurcation. Secondly, this question is overly vague, and allows for plenty of misunderstanding. What to we mean by “good”? “Evil?” What do we mean by “basically”? Until we define these terms, and reformulate the question in a way that allows for more than two polar opposite answers, we are wasting our time.

Why This is a Good Question
As humans mature, we eventually begin to ask the big questions, those of meaning. We begin to ask the questions that collectively have been called “world view” questions. The question that begins this discussion might be better broken into two, asked in this way: “What is the nature of man?” and “What is wrong with man and society?” These are just two of the succinct set of questions one answers when developing a world view. As with any scientific or psychological model, the better our model matches the known facts, the closer it describes things as they actually are.

Truth as Paradox
In his series of bestselling books on the spiritual life, author and psychologist M. Scott Peck described his spiritual journey over the course of many years. In his book Further Along the Road Less Traveled, Peck declares that many profound truths appear in paradoxical pairs. For instance, he asks, should we be independent or dependent? On first blush, these two concepts may seem to be mutually exclusive, but the truth, of course, is that we need to exercise both qualities, sometimes simultaneously. To tout the virtues of one or the other side of this paradoxical pair, Peck argues, is a type of “heresy.” Many other truths exist in paradoxical pairs, such as the relationships between mercy and truth, faith and good works as evidence of faith, and predestination and free will. In each case, correct doctrine requires that both exist in cooperation, rather than in exclusion to one other. Paradox also applies to the question of man’s goodness.

Made in the Image of God
The bible teaches that man and woman were made in God’s image.

Then God said, "Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth." So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. - Genesis 1:26:27, NKJV

Over the centuries, theologians have argued about what the terms “in Our image,” and “likeness,” mean, but all agree that man was made with attributes that make him like God. Many other biblical passages express awe at God’s amazing creation, which of course, includes man himself.

I thank you, High God--you're breathtaking! Body and soul, I am marvelously made! I worship in adoration--what a creation! - Psalm 139:14, The Message

Just as we can look at the sky, or plant life, or magnificent mountains, and experience awe at the majesty and beauty of creation, we should be able to look at our fellow humans, their bodies, souls, and spirits, and be awestruck at how intricate and beautiful their design and potential are.

Spiritually Fallen
The other biblical view of mankind however, is that man is spiritually fallen.

Behold, this is the only reason for it that I have found: God made man upright, but they have sought out many devices for evil. - Ecclesiastes 7:29, Amplified Bible

In fact, most of us have been made very aware by Christian fundamentalists in our day that man is fallen and in need of God’s redemption. They quote many of the verses below, which taken in context, mean pretty much what they seem to say:

Basically, all of us, whether insiders or outsiders, start out in identical conditions, which is to say that we all start out as sinners. - Romans 3:9, The Message

There is no one righteous, not even one; there is no one who understands, no one who seeks God. All have turned away, they have together become worthless; there is no one who does good, not even one.
- Romans 3:10-12, NIV

…through one man (Adam) sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned.
- Romans 5, 12, NKJV

From this vantage point, the bible views man as fallen and separated from God, then presses man’s need for God, and for the redemption that Jesus effectuated on the cross.

HOW DIFFERENT PHILOSOPHIES BALANCE THESE TWO VIEWS

Humanism: Man is Divine but not Fallen
Many individuals have chosen to believe that man is made in the image of God, and that all evils are a result of our difficult external circumstances. Under the right circumstances, they say, all men would be kind and loving, and even unselfish. In the “nature or nurture” discussion, humanists err on the side of nurture when it comes to human evil.

Acting on this philosophy, they have done much good for mankind. They focus on a human’s natural potential, they aim to create external circumstances that lead to health and happiness for all humans, and they help us to appreciate the beauty hidden in each of us. Running on this one rail of truth, they have made many happy. But, as discussed previously, truth is not a monorail – there is a paradoxical partner to the truths of man’s beauty and divine nature.

Fundamentalism: Man is Fallen but not Beautiful or Divine
A fundamentalist might agree with the statement “man is made in the image of God,” but to them, that image has been so marred by sin, that it is unusable. They emphasize that a person can not lift themselves up out of their moral guilt and flawed nature without God. And for many people, this has been good news. See "People are Basically Good" - Proof to the Contrary - this article, at an otherwise respectable Christian apologetics site, is typical of the one-sided Fundamentalist view of man.

One of the founding principles of the highly successful Alcoholics Anonymous program is that in order to kick addictions, we must depend on a power higher than ourselves. To those who have tried to change unsuccessfully, or those who recognize the deep levels of depravity to which they have sunk, a rosy humanist message extolling their own inner beauty and ability to change sound like hollow, foolish statements. But through emphasis on God’s ability to change a person, to imbue them with a spirit that can help them do right, and through the message of God’s justice and forgiveness, many people have been dragged from the brink of death.

However, because fundamentalists have a mistrust, even hatred for the natural abilities of humanity, they often damage the souls of the very people they try to help by teaching that we should reject all things that smack of human endeavor or ability. This can include disparagement of one’s natural abilities and interests, and in extreme cases, of the sciences (which rely on man’s mental abilities, which are “corrupted by sin”), the arts, and even of any encouragement of individualism and personality.

The Balanced Biblical View: Man is Divine and Fallen
Of course, adopting both of these positions allows one to gain the benefits of both – we can enjoy ourselves and one another as beautiful creations of God. We can develop and employ our abilities and gifts without guilt, and enjoy our own souls and bodies as God’s gift. On the other hand, in our inevitable times of weakness and moral failure, we can avail ourselves of the freedom that truth, admission of guilt, repentance, and faith towards God provide. We can offer hope to the most broken and frail, knowing that there is a power greater than us both available to forgive, love, and heal - all necessary components of true redemption.

Pastoral Letter of Encouragement

Recently, I sent a letter of encouragement to my local pastor. Now you get to enjoy it too.
--------------------------
Dear Mike,

Just wanted to send you a quick note of encouragement and thanks. My wife and I have been attending your church now for about 8 months, and we are very pleased to enjoy the teaching of both yourself and the assistant pastor. The consistent quality of your preaching clearly demonstrates your commitment to clarity, practicality, and balance. I especially appreciate the fact that you consistently and gently challenge us to make practical and real changes in our walk with God, and you are not afraid to ask us to honestly evaluate our priorities in light of the challenging value system presented in the Bible.

As an encouragement, I want to ask you to please continue your current level of teaching, and persist like a patient farmer. Solid, consistent biblical teaching will provide the rich soil in which all of the other ministries of the church can take root.

At first, it will result in people being willing, even proud to bring friends and neighbors to church because the pulpit lacks some of the obvious faults of many churches, namely egoism, hype, unbalanced and incomplete teaching, guilt and fear-manipulation, lack of practical application, and fanaticism. Next, members will begin to mature, and start to seek positions in existing ministries. Lastly, mature members will create and lead ministries and make your job change into one of developing leaders! I am sure you have seen this process going on for some time already here at Southwinds.

With this last point in mind, I myself am seeking for ways to become equipped as a lay leader, and perhaps one day enjoy the work of full time biblical teaching / worship ministry, whether as a pastor/teacher, or as the leader of a para-church ministry. This points up the issue that we may need structures to train our future leaders – that should not be left to seminaries alone, but to local churches (in my humble opinion ;).

Again, let me encourage you to continue to prepare your messages with intellectual rigor, with repeated practice so that you can preach with power from your heart rather than having to refer too often to notes, with prayer so that you preach with faith and anointing, and with fearlessness proclaiming the gospel, for in it the power of God is revealed. I believe that you already show evidence of doing all of these things.

On a personal note, I am a reader and a thinker, and somewhat demanding when it comes to listening to teachers. However, I was impressed by your recent mention of Henri Nouwen, since many Christians are not familiar with his wonderful perspectives. Many preachers I have encountered are intellectual slouches, and haven't really displayed much theological depth or breadth in their teaching or conversation. And if they *have* read, often they have not ventured beyond their denomination's narrow reading list, let alone outside of theology into other useful disciplines such as psychology, philosophy, sociology, and the physical sciences. While I understand that we all have limited time and must focus on our priorities, I appreciate and trust a man who has read outside of the often narrow rubric of contemporary denominational and parochial Christianity, and who, motivated by his own questions and personal interests, has become well read.

Thank you again for your hard work, and may God give you faith to continue to excel and enjoy the fruits of your labors.

Welcome to WYR

Have you suffered a loss of your faith, or injury from abusive, cult-like church authorities? Unsure what to believe? Asking yourself if there is any healing or truth out there? Me too.

I grew up an agnostic scientist, but converted to born-again, charismatic Christianity at age 21. However, the group I was involved with was a controlling, cult-like organization. After 5 damaging years, I left and began healing within some healthier Christian organizations. But I began to leave the faith.

I spent the next 5-10 years healing myself using psychology (inner child and gender identity work), humanistic and new-age spirituality, yoga, Buddhism, and believe it or not, books of balanced, mature Christian doctrine.

However, after much searching, I am returning to the Christian faith because its truth is compelling, and its description of a personal, loving god is superior to all I have tasted.

Though I have returned to what some might call a conservative or "literal" Christianity, I am no longer quick to judge or argue, or to hold fanatical, unbalanced positions.

The best scripture I can think that describes my experience is the one where Jesus predicts Peter's denial, but comforts him with these words: "When you have returned, strengthen your brothers." I have returned, and am much gentler because of it. May mercy and truth fill us both.