Orginally published on Tuesday, October 04, 2005 at 1:00 PM
by Todd Rhoades
As many of you know, I just returned from the Innovative Church Conference at Granger Community Church (near South Bend, IN). Granger is a remarkable church. While I’m sure they don’t like labels, they would be very ‘seeker-sensitive’ in their format, often using current cultural themes during their weekend services to communicate with unbelievers. There is much written on the internet (particularly now with blogs) about the seeker-sensitive movement; and much of it is ill-informed in my opinion. At the conference, Granger met this criticism head on. They even showed a video clip from a local church pastor preaching against their church (naming them by name) and saying that the folks at Granger "do not serve the same God as we do". What arrogance. Enough of this "seeker sensitive = watered down" mentality. It just simply isn’t true. (I’m sure there are some cases this could be true… but many of the seeker/culturally driven models are getting the work done WITH the talk of sin, blood, punishment, etc.)
Here's a definition of the 'seeker-sensitive' church from the "Arrows Astray" website. God bless Randy (the writer). He is my brother in Christ, I'm sure, but I think he's bought a line from others who reiterate the anti-seeker-sensitive talking points. Randy writes:
What is the seeker-friendly movement? It is a philosophy of church growth that seeks to discover what characteristics the unconverted would like in a church to induce them to attend, then seeks to fashion the church to please their carnal desires.
Yes, the seeker-sensitive church does make changes to make people feel comfortable in a situation that many people are not normally comfortable in. But to say that seeker targeted churches fashion their services for the purpose of helping sinners enjoy their sin?... that's downright crazy.
Here's an example. I know nothing about car maintenance. So, it's pretty natural that I don't feel extremely comfortable talking to my auto mechanic. Once he starts talking about 'valve covers' or 'differentials', I'm lost. But worse than being lost, I'm uncomfortable. Actually, beyond uncomfortable, I feel totally stupid because I don't know what he's talking about. I don't speak his language. That doesn't change the fact that the valve covers or differentials are a valid part of the car. It doesn't change their purpose or how they work, or the truth of their existance. I would much rather go to a mechanic that treats me with respect where I'm at in my auto maintenance journey than someone who is going to take pride in knowing more about car engines than me. Someone who will help me understand, from my viewpoint, what my car's problem is.
The same things shows itself in the seeker-sensitive model. People who have never darkened the door of a church are nervous. What are the pictures of angels doing on the wall? What's the infactuation with doves? Where did they get this organ music?
Why SHOULDN'T we talk in a different language? Why would we WANT to make people feel uncomfortable? Why WOULDN'T we want to meet these people where they're at? Really, we'd be silly not to.
That doesn't mean that our message changes. I'm afraid that most seeker-sensitive opponents have never stepped foot in one. Most go off of information they've heard from others. Granger, for example has meaty 40-minute messages that would be on par in scope and depth with most 'non-seeker' churches. There is mention of sin. There is mention of commitment. There is mention for their need for Christ. I know. I've actually been there. A few weeks ago, they baptized over 400 new believers in Christ.
Randy continues:
There are, of course, different degrees to which churches are willing to compromise the truth of Christianity to accomplish this end.
Again, here is the accusation: Seeker-sensitive = compromising the truth. Sorry, but that doesn't have to be so. Just because a church is welcoming and inviting to an unbeliever doesn't mean that the church and it's leadership has compromised the Word. That's a huge accusation; and made almost 100% of the time because of the church's music, size, and outward image. And if it's repeated enough, people (at least in the Christian community) start to believe it.
Some seek to retain at least an external appearance of historic Christianity, while others seem to have totally abandoned it.
"External appearance" probably because Randy hasn't ever entered one. (My guess). "Seem to" admits that he's just not sure.
The problem is, once a person has embraced the basic philosophy that drives this movement, there is really no stopping place on the road to adopting pagan religion.
OK... honestly, you lost me there. That's the same leap the local pastor who spoke against Granger made: "The people there don't serve the same God as we do". In other words, 'they're pagan'.
The focus is Jesus, guys. The goal is introducing people to Jesus. If someone introduces people to Jesus in a different way, using a different method then you do, it doesn't mean they're pagan, or that they serve a different different God. It means they use a different method. That's all.
You see folks, anyway you look at it, it's still a valve cover. But the way you describe a valve cover (and what it does; and why I need a new one) makes a world of difference in whether or not I heed your advice.
It seems to me the same is true in the way we tell people about Jesus.
Todd
This post has been viewed 2555 times so far.
TRACKBACKS: (0)
There are 107 Comments:
Brian,
Thank you kindly for the clarification and may the Lord Bless you and the work of your calling to minister.
John
At the risk of incurring the “wrath” of Todd, I wish to echo that wish for God’s blessing, back to you. May his working in and through you see no end until that day when you are face to face with Jesus!
Take care, brother!
Brian
http://www.livingwaters.com/listenwatch.shtml
When it comes to judging churches, I always think back to one of my seminary classes. The five classicial functions of the church:
1. Evangelism
2. Ministry
3. Discipleship
4. Fellowship
5. Worship
They are all important, and none should be over-emphasized or de-emphasized, as that is when dsyfunction enters the picture.
Also look to see how God judges the churches-- he gave us a hint in Revelation in his letters to the seven churches.
...Bernie
I have served in two seeker-sensitive church settings and the accusation of “Christianity Lite” has been leveled in both settings. Frankly I have to agree. It is not the fact that we use contemporary music and language that seekers can understand, its that we use the Bible like a collection of “wise sayings” rather than the Word of God. Our messages are topical almost all the time and that has helped to produce an environment where our teaching is disconnected from the Biblical text. The Bible we use is not one that records God’s interaction with REAL human beings in REAL history. Rather its just a source for points for a helpful “take it or leave it” type message. We are trying to address this reality but honestly I don’t think our leadership really gets it. We have very superficial teaching. Let me be clear: I do not think it has to be this way. I firmly believe we can teach the deep things of Scripture while being seeker sensitive. I’m just not sure why we’re not doing it.
Honestly, I don’t think it’s the seeker SENSITIVE model that most people have a problem with. There’s nothing wrong with removing “christian-eze” from the message, (saying payment for sin instead of propitiation) but there is something wrong with not talking about the payment at all. That’s where I believe the difference between a watered-down seeker sensitive and a relevant bible teaching seeker sensitive. What IS wrong is what might be more appropriatly called seeker DRIVEN. When we allow the world to dictate what the church is.
Labels are easy to use and convenient ways to understand a movement, but all seeker sensitive churches are not equally effective. I know of a seeker sensitive church that refrains from much scripture us. that’s not right. Our gospel IS offensive… it tells us we’re sinners. Jesus received a lot of opposition and did himself say that some things were difficult to understatnd. If this is the offense we want to take away (the gospel), then we’re sinning. If the “offense” we want to remove is the uncomfort of newness, anticipation, and excitement, etc then we’re removing the stumbling block that could keep from adding to our brothers (or sisters!)
I believe what it REALLY boils down to is method. Our methods can (and should) change to stay current. This is the same reason why we have the NIV and NASB instead of just the KJV. We have to use different language. Paul said, “I have become all things to all men, so that I may by all means save some”. To the illiterate, I have become understandable. To the eloquent, I need to be poetic. To the skeptic I need to be a philosopher… etc.....
We all do this. Some of us use lifestyle evangelism, some of us use apologetics, some door to door evangelism, motorcycle ministries, children’s programs, purpose driven methods… doubtful that we use all of the methods, but certain one’s work in our own situations. .... all thing to all men.... <ending in salvation of some>
hi, i have tried marijuana b4 and i stopped it about a year ago, it all started when me and my bestfriend first started smoking ciggirettes, then marijuana she became so addicted to it and then started doing ecstacy,coke and heroin. she ended up dying from an over dose and from that day on i have neva done it again. yvette rest in peace
pass drug test
Regards, Richardson
Page 5 of 5 pages
« First < 3 4 5