Critique & Review of "Velvet Elvis"

Recently the staff at The Bible Church of Little Rock suggested a review the book "Velvet Elvis" by Rob Bell would be beneficial to our church family. We did so recently on a Sunday evening. = If anyone is interested the MP3 is available from the Sermon Downloads section of BCLR's website: http://www.bclr.org = Blessings, = Pat Howell

On Educating Our Children

Education: Secular School, Christian School, or Home School?

=

I recently received this information which was apparently pulled from the following website: http://www.exodusmandate.org/. It was posted in part, as an argument against Christian children attending public schools.

=

"The research data on the success of the public schools in indoctrinating Christian youth with humanistic or neo-pagan worldviews is overwhelming. The Nehemiah Institute's worldview PEERS test shows that 83-percent of the children from committed Christian families in public schools adopt a secular humanist or Marxist socialist worldview.

=

At the SBC's 2002 annual meeting, the Southern Baptist Council on Family Life reported, among other disturbing things, that 88-percent of the children raised in evangelical homes leave church at age 18.

=

Barna Research reports that only 9-percent of born-again teens believe in moral absolutes, and more than half believe that Jesus sinned while He was on earth. We believe the fact that 80-percent of Christian families send their children to public schools is a prime reason for this lost legacy.

=

A Response:

=

We (my wife, actually) home-schooled our two girls for all but one grade with our youngest and with the exception of kindergarten, 6th and 10th grade for my eldest daughter. I went through the public school system as an unbeliever. I have served in pastoral ministry in three churches that had Christian schools—and was Senior Pastor at one of them.

=

Both of my girls took Junior College courses at a secular school while in their high school years, and both graduated from a very solid, theologically sound Christian College.

=

My elder daughter is now in grad school at a secular university, likely headed toward a PhD in Literary Theory, English Literature, or Philosophy. She also teaches two undergrad courses in argumentation and while being in a very secular, liberal, academic environment requiring carefulness on her part, she is having great opportunity to challenge the beliefs and worldview of her students in the classroom. Admittedly, she is not proclaiming the gospel in the classroom, but she obliterating the philosophic and cultural presuppositions of many of her students. And that’s a good thing.

=

Regarding Barna’s research and that of others, I am reminded of Mark Twain’s comments about statistics. But more significantly, if those statistics are indeed accurate I would attribute them more to deficiency’s in the evangelical church and family, than to the effectiveness of the educational system. Acclimation to typical evangelical church culture is ostensibly much easier to achieve than is developing mature, discerning (not judgmental) Christians.

=

Just as attending an evangelical church does not necessarily result in one being either a Christian, or a mature Christian, so attending a public school does not necessarily mean one will become a raging secularist. Neither does attending a Christian school necessarily result in the profound embrace of a Biblical worldview and the ability to both articulate and live according to it. Each individual situation will present advantages and/or challenges, but there is no panacea that blankets the discussion.

=

It could be that the chickens of the evangelical church’s occupation with politics, with our insulation or isolation from the culture, with the satisfaction of outward appearances, and shallow theological understandings have come home to roost. The current, and the next generation of young people often—but thankfully not at all always—seem ill-prepared by the church and/or Christian school, and/or home-school to become stable, mature, engaged believers who can function in the world, and minister to it while not being of it. There is much more to this issue than the means of education.

=

How one chooses to educate their kids is the parent’s choice. And the children’s age and particular understandings, and abilities are crucial considerations when choosing the means of their education. Protection while they are defenseless is critical. But regardless of the means and/or place of education, parents must own the responsibility to model genuine spiritual maturity and theological and philosophical discernment as they engage lost people and the culture in which they live—then hopefully, the children will embrace both orthodoxy and orthopraxy—as a result of their parents teaching and example.

=

Could Pogo be correct? Maybe we need to examine what it is we want to achieve and how we are going about it, and make the necessary corrections while we can.

=

Pat Howell

Can't We Do Better?

With the rise of the emergent church as a reaction (in part) to a cold, deadish, theologically correct but soulishly austere kind of evangelicalism, there is a definite diminution of the priority of Biblical theology. Not surprisingly but tragically, the reaction of many evangelical’s to this development is pendulum-like. Without question, Biblically orthodox theology IS the foundation for the church. And for the record, I embrace and teach an exegetical theology that is systematically expressed.

=

Moreover, my ambition is to preach expositorily recognizing that my responsibility is to be both faithful to the text and to edify my hearers. If I do not communicate the authoritative, transcendent, and profound nature of God’s truth, I have failed. If my hearers do not understand what I’m saying, if I am esoteric, arrogant, harsh, confusing, overly technical, or simply boring, and if my content comes across in any way as unrelated to their everyday lives, I have failed.

=

But a critical distinction must be made. Theological acuity is not an acceptable substitute for genuine, mature, Christ-likeness and the fruit of the Spirit in one’s life—especially the preacher/teacher/leader. Should not theological depth lead first to humility and then to a more profound worship experience? THEN to ministry and the proclamation and defense of the faith once delivered to the saints? Some preaching seems to suggest that the preacher is the author of truth and not God—some fail to recognize that authority in the pulpit is derived, not innate. Some preaching, rather than being borne of humility and worship appears be self-righteous. Spurgeon once observed that some preachers “preach about hell as though they are glad people are going there.” Truth is like nitro-glycerin. When properly handled, truth accomplishes its intended purpose. When mishandled, all manner of confusion and destruction result.

=

I am aware —in my own experience and by observation—that knowledge of the truth alone engenders pride and condescension (that means looking down on people :-). But knowledge of the Holy One cultivates humility. And when expressed in love, such knowledge builds up and draws people toward Christ, or at least the truth is presented clearly enough for the non-elect to reject it. This is critically important—for it should be the truth that is rejected and not a sad and misleading caricature of Christ, the Scriptures, or the Church. (For those to whom it may matter, I am a Schaefferian pre-suppositionalist and a Calvinist who recognizes that God uses means to accomplish His sovereign will).

=

Are there churches that are theologically faithful, spiritually vibrant, and culturally attuned so that they speak the Truth in a language that contemporary people understand? Are there churches that do not require jumping through cultural hoops in order to worship and hear Biblical truth that is preached in a clear and compelling manner? (Or is there a numbing solace in the notions that bring a superficial balm to what is really a deep wound? Hearts are hard; Times are Difficult; We’re in the Last Days; People do not want the Truth—(when was that Truth wanting era again?). Maybe, we’re the problem. As Pogo said, “We have met the enemy, and he is us.”

=

Generally, traditional church music, almost formal attire, vocabulary and nomenclature, and whole of a churchy ambiance are uncomfortably foreign to most people unfamiliar with the typical evangelical church and increasingly unpopular amongst the evangelical population in general. I affirm that the church is for Believers and not bound to appeal to the unsaved, but my point is this: Many evangelical’s are culturally obtuse and thus disconnected from those they are commanded to reach. So whether in or outside of the church, how are we doing at actually reaching people with the gospel?

=

However, there is another matter requiring thoughtful consideration. I fear that we will—or perhaps better—are losing the next generation of the church—those who are looking forward and not backward. These who as a result of our ministry and emphasises may be confusing Evangelical Church Culture with Biblical Christianity. Those who want to know God and yes—experience—Him, as spoken of so often by the likes of David, Paul, and Jesus, Himself. Form and function are necessary considerations, but they are poor substitutes for spiritual vitality borne of walking in the Spirit.

=

Is it possible that many American Christians endure or tolerate their church services, rather than find them compelling and meaningful to their souls? What kind of a church loses people to places like Mars Hill—be it Michigan or Seattle? And yes, I know there is a difference between those two churches and am glad for it. But know this about me. As I write this piece, I have not read or heard anything by Driscoll or anyone from his circles. The only Emergent piece I have read is Velvet Elvis and that for a critique on a Sunday evening for our church.

=

My frustrations are borne of my own experience of being a Christian and in Evangelical/Fundamental circles since 1975, not because I read some trendy book or have embraced some trendy movement. (My one caveat is that the years I spent at Grace Community Church were a wonderful exception to this experience. I chuckle when I hear folks describe Grace as legalistic. Grace is a great example of how a traditionally oriented church provides excellence in worship and ministry. But, when I hear someone say Grace is legalistic, I know immediately that this person has never been exposed to real legalism in a church).

=

Nevertheless, I perceive that we are on the cusp of an era and opportunity to proclaim and teach the timeless truths of Scripture to this and coming generations—and we should be mindful that some cultural trappings may actually retard our ability to evangelize and edify.

=

People are coming FROM somewhere to attend churches that are very different from the church’s they left. It is unfortunate that people leave one church for another—but there must be reasons why people are motivated—and in some cases eager—to do so. On the other end of the spectrum, I recently read of a church being recommended as “good” because it was conservative—i.e., they use the KJV and its “skirts only.” Puullllleeeeaaaaasssssssse.

=

We train missionaries to be culturally astute but then blithely ignore our own culture in American churches and pulpits—deriding such attention to culture as capitulation to the world. What’s up with that? But really, we do not ignore culture at all. We seek to preserve our own—regardless of how archaic it may be. We sanctify "our" way—as opposed to "their" way.

=

I understand and affirm that there are reasonable preferences that can be maintained to the blessing of those who prefer them. And, I recognize that what is contemporary today—will become passé at some point. Fine. Then the onus will be on us/or that generation to embrace change when it is required and not preserve their fading culture. (Culture changes mind you—not the foundations of Biblical theology).

=

Culture changes, but Biblically the old adage is true. “If it’s new, it ain’t true.” But culture is something different altogether. There is nothing wrong with a church being traditional, but perhaps we should be mindful that what is now traditional was once contemporary. Let's just be careful that it is the Truth that we seek to proclaim and not the perpetuation of a preferred cultural era with all its attendant features. (It is curiously humorous that today “Emergent and Emerging Church” folks refer to the “Church Growth” folks as the older generation that is out of touch with the culture). [And often clothed in polyester, I might add].

=

Professing Christians are a funny bunch, aren’t we?

=

As the world observes us, what must they think?

=

There are reasons why many evangelical churches are NOT reaching people with the gospel. There are reasons why people are leaving traditional churches for more contemporary churches. I do not advocate a diminution of the priority of theology in any way—but being contemporary in preference and/or practice does NOT necessitate a slide down the slippery slope to theological liberalism and apostasy.

=

Our position must be one of both/and—theologically faithful and ministerially effective in a contemporary context. I mean for example, all music was contemporary at one point, wasn’t it? HOWEVER, there is so much more to this issue than music. We do not do well building real relationships with lost people—and perhaps with one another as well. We are virtually isolated or at least well insulated from the culture and as a result, we are almost unable to converse with people. We are uncomfortable and tense because we fear that we cannot relate to them in any way—this is certainly a fallacy and may perhaps be attributed to a somewhat charitable perspective regarding our own fallen humanness.

=

Or perhaps it is an unrecognized cultural elitism, or ignorance, or simply fear. But certainly, we can improve on this, can’t we?

=

I am SO past traditional church culture.

=

I SO desire to be faithful to the authority and perspicuity of Scripture.

=

I SO desire that the world sees more of Christ in the church and less politics, less hostility, less indifference and less disconnection from the world in which we live.

It is possible to be a growing, mature, stable, Christian in the world and not be of the world. But isolation is not the answer. Preservation of a decades old culture is not the answer. HOWEVER, neither is cultural integration at the expense of Biblical truth and genuine sanctification.

=

Surely, we can do better, can’t we?

Pat Howell