Todd:

Sorry for calling you “Dave” above.  I was looking at the name signed on the comment before mine.  My bad.

--Jim B.
http://www.OldTruth.com

It is so disappointing to see Christians attack a ministry they do not understand or fully believe in. The “Seeker Sensitive Movement” is reaching the unchurched without comprimising the Word of God by attempting to meet peoples needs. As ministers of the Lord we need to be more sensitive of where people are and try and meet those needes without comprimising God’s Word or our ministry. The Vineyard I believe is a good example of provining a ministry that reaches people where they are at.
Let us Christians work together for the purpose of promoting Jesus to an unsaved world by what ever method works in our spiritual dead society.
Dr. Pare

Why did Jesus preach in the synagogue (which was considered church during His life) to reach the lost and proclaim Who He was to a congregation which you could classify as lost and seeking? I believe we should follow His examples.  Thanks Todd for all your hard work finding these interesting articles and thanks to those who have responded. The insights and dialog has been educational!

I might as well add a thing or two here. Not being a know it all, but evidently many do not even know their church history.
How come people flocked by the thousands to hear men like Charles Spurgeon
and Johnathan Edwards, or even George White-
field?
Did these men have some kind of method that reached out to non-believers?
Absolutely not. These men had a God centered message and not a man centered one.
Read the Psalms. David spoke the same thing. God centered preaching.
For all of you who do not know it, the church taught for the past 2000 years that God does the saving and man is unable to save himself. You can serve Big Macs in between Sunday School and men will still not be saved unless God saves them.
We are not saved by our own wills. Sure the gospel goes out externally but without regeneration or being born again men cannot be saved. Did you birth yourself the first time? I think not. Neither can a man birth himself the second time.
The Bible says that God doeth according to His will with the armies of heaven, and among the inhabitants of the earth....Dan. 4:35 It also says that we are born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God John 1:13; So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that showeth mercy. Rom. 9:16 Many will say here, but man’s will is free, that’s ridiculous. Adam’s sin effected us all and caused a sin nature to come on us all thru natural generation. Men only,will, what there sinful nature desires. They do not seek God. Without regeneration you will not seek God. Faith does not come first. You were not born with saving faith. Faith is a fruit of the spirit Galatians 5:22
The Bible says that God has given to every man a measure of faith Rom. 12:3 This every man is only the believer. 2 Thess. 3:2 says for all men have not faith.... Watch this.
Ephesians 2:8 says For by grace are you saved by faith; and that not of your selves: it is the gift of God. What was the gift of God? One rule of english is to remove what is in comas to understand the scripture better. Eph. 2:8 For by grace are you saved thru faith; it is the gift of God… The gift is saving faith. First comes regeneneration , then faith. God births those he has chosen from the foundation of the world, Eph 1:4, into the kingdom giving them the Spirit and the fruits and then they reach out by faith and receive it. It is God’ s choice. Jacob have I loved but Esua have I hated Rom 9:13 God chose Jacob while he was still in the womb having done no good or evil. God did not choose us because he looked into the future and seen what we were going to do with the gospel. We would have done nothing we were dead Eph 2:1,5. God chose us according to then good pleasure of His will. Eph. 1:5
Now concerning men seeking God before their new birth is ludicrous. Some one has not studied the scriptures very well. Men seek the benefits of God, love , joy, peace...etc.But there is no natural man that seeks God.Romans 3:11
We cannot will our ownselves saved. Natural men receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him : neither can he know them..
1 Cor. 2:14; For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness.. 1 Cor 1:18...Natural man is ignorant of God and blind Eph.4:18 not only that but he is dead Eph. 2:1,5
You can believe me or reject this it does not matter. But this is what the church taught all thru the history of it. In 1618-1619 a heresy was presented to the church called Arminianism. This was voted down by the Synod of Dort. But most churches hold to this false doctrine even today. That Adam’s fall did not effect us totally and we are still capable of reaching out to God with faith ,which is our contribution to salvation and conditional election, that man is elected upon the condition that he comes to Christ on his own. This doctrine also taught universal atonement or that Jesus died for all and resisteble grace or God’s grace can be resisted and the final thing it taught was that man can fall and lose salvation.
The true church all the way up thru the Reformation taught T.u.l.i.p. Man is totally inable to save himself, unconditional election or God has unconditionally elected some to salvation,
limited atonement { not that it’s limited in power because there is enough power in Christ blood to save all but Christ only died for His elect John 10:11,15. Jesus even said that he died for His sheep. Irresistable grace in other words if you are the elect you cannot resist God’s grace it will effectively save you, God uses resurrecting power and creating power to save a sinner Eph 1:19, 2 Cor. 4:6. It doesn’t take God years to save a man. No man can come to Jesus unless God draws him
John 6:44 Search this word out thru the New Testament. It means to drag by force. Except with God, he does not drag us by force. When he saves us and sets us free from our sinful nature, we run to the alter and fall before Him willing to do what he bids.  Finally the church believed in the Perseverance of the saints. God will persevere in them to salvation and none will be lost John 10:28, Phil. 1:6, For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of His good pleasure. Phil. 2:13
This is what the church taught all thru the confessions and creeds. If you say man can come to God of his own free will, then you have no part in the faith according to the Council of Orange in 529 A.D. To go to Arminianism { which is what most of the church is teaching now} is to go back to Rome. Most churches now tell people that if they will come in and say a prayer and sign a card then they will be saved. This is a lie and this is why the church is full of unsaved people.

So if no natural man is seeking God according to Romans 3 : 11, then why do we need seeker -sensitive churches to help the seeker that does not exist. They are maybe seeking a church but they are not seeking God, only His benefits.

This is the gospel according to Jesus and Paul, that God has predestined an elect people to save. Jesus said he laid down His life for His sheep. He prayed for them and them alone, not the world. John 17:9 Paul preached predestination or a doctrine that taught that God has predetermined my destiny. God gives some mercy and others judgement. God is not obligated to save anyone. He does no one wrong for all deserve judgement.
Beloved, when I gave all deligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me ,that I write unto you and exhort you that you should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.
For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.  Jude 3,4
Wherefore come out from among them and be you seperate saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing and I will receive you 2 Cor. 6:17

Anyone want to comment on how a natural man is supposed to seek God, when the Bible plainly declares that he doesn’t?
If not I am going to turn off my computer.

In response to Jim B.’s call for a private debate, Todd writes,

Thanks for your email, Jim.  I really don’t have any interest in doing a one-on-one debate… That’s not my thing.  But I would enjoy (as I do now) discussing this openly at the blog with myself and the hundreds of other people who read daily.  That’s cool.

I agree… The extremes are not good on either side.  I don’t think I use the extremes to disqualify the mainstream though.  I never did say that I think the seeker model if the ultimate model.  It’s not perfect by far.  It has many flaws.  IT’S ONLY A MODEL.  But I do get tired of some people taking things to the extreme and throwing the baby out with the bath water.  Today’s post came directly from rebutting one such ‘seeker’ definition. 

I think I understand both sides of the coin.  I understand the no one is really a ‘seeker’… God is the seeker.  And I understand that no one comes to salvation without the HS drawing him.  But I also think that God expects us to do our part as well.  This whole issue, to me, is where a person draws the line between our involvement and God’s involvement.  It’s something that’s been debated for years and years. 

Let’s continue at the blog if you wish, in an informal fashion.  I am by no means a spokesman for the seeker model.  If that’s what you’re looking for, you’ll find much better and popular proponents than I. 

Todd

Seeker-sensitive stinks? Right?
If God were not seeker-sensitive, not one of us would know Jesus....The Father would have banged us with the Bible (Pent., of course) and it would have been “my way or the highway.” Reminds me of a story about a servant who owed his master a great deal of money but begged for mercy, was given it and then turned around and beat up on some guy who owed the servant a dime.  Sorry, but I can’t remember who told me that story.
Probably one of those Nazarene’s with His group of misfits trying to sell a “life-application” curriculum.  Give me a break!

Somehow I suspect that we’re all missing the essence of evangelism.  It is simply to express by word and action and relationship the good news of reconciliation between God and man and between man and man.  (Forgive my gender use, but it just sounded awkward to say “human").  All of this dialogue that is barnyard deep in cricism of one another is simply a misrepresentation of that good news.  Can we just grow up a little bit and begin to encourage one another in faith and good works?  Neither a self-giving God or a self-serving world are impressed with such debates. 

One mark of immaturity is the desperate need to force others to our way of thinking or to defend our viewpoint from others who are trying to do exactly the same thing to us.  This “spirited” debate sure seems something quite different from the Spirit that birthed the Body when they were all of one mind in one place.  Must we tear one another down to build ourself and our position up.  I don’t think that works, brothers and sisters; it just illustrates how small we are when we are servants of a critical or defensive spirit.  Any evidence of Jesus just gets lost in the smoke of that kind of battle. 

Personally, I’m convinced that the entire church culture that engages in this kind of reparte is guilty; there are no good guys.  We are all sinning and coming short of God’s beauty.  And although I enjoy a fun and respectful “exchange of ideas” as much as the next person, the sentiments on this post lead me to believe we should turn our attention to more important matters.

KD asks:

“Why did Jesus preach in the synagogue (which was considered church during His life) to reach the lost and proclaim Who He was to a congregation which you could classify as lost and seeking?”

Primarily two reasons:

1) Because the temple/synagogue were where a majority of religiously-devout Jews were located (for He was called to the Jews).  So, in order to reach them, He had to go there.

2) More importantly, Jesus taught in the Temple/synogogue in order to show the people the vast difference between the Kingdom of God and the religious order that was dominated by the professionals of that time, the Pharisees and Sadducees, and that a time was coming when not in Jerusalem nor on the mountain of Samaria would the true worshippers of God worship, but rather in spirit and in truth.

Jesus’ appearance in the Temple/synagogue was simply a declaration that things were changing from what the religious elites never understood: that the Spirit of God was never meant to be housed in a building but rather reign in the hearts of men and that these “living stones” would make a spiritual house for the indwelling of the Lord.

However, today’s method of emphasizing the building instead of the people being the Church is nothing more than the embracing of a long-held tradition that has lost its shine.

What’s interesting is that while many claim that the seeker-sensitive, emerging church, multi-site fads are just METHODS, they each emphasize buildings, land, budgets, and professionals.

What’s “new” about that?

randy said:

“Here’s the point - If God is blessing it(seeker sensitive),I’m not criticizing it.”

If “blessing” is equated with large numbers of satisfied “customers,” then Wal-Mart must be the most blessed organization on earth!

The ability to fill pews does not necessarily mean an organization is blessed but rather very good at marketing their “product.”

I enjoyed reading your article and thought you handled the criticism well.  To carry the idea of meeting people where they are at just a little further, we need go no further than to study the Apostle Paul’s approach.  When entering the city and discovering a people who not only worshipped numerous pagan gods but were quite sincere and perhaps even zealous in their efforts not to leave any gods out, Paul seized on their position of wanting to honour the “unknown god”.  He then delivered a stirring address in which he revealed Jesus to be the “unknown god”.  He met the people where they were.

I think the problem with watering down in big churches is that they are afraid of saying anything negative.  1 Tim 3 says that Scripture is useful for correcting and rebuking, but it seems the big churches only use it for preaching the gospel.  Correcting and rebuking can do serious harm to the size of the church (mortal sin!), and it doesn’t feel good.  That’s watered down.  Yes, it can be overdone, but it can also be underdone, too!  Because it’s so “underdone,” that’s how false gospels, like the “health and wealth gospel,” can so easily sneak into the mainstream.  Ear ticklers don’t want to touch it, and that includes Billy Graham.  Just my opinion…

,,,Bernie
http://www.oneplace.com/ministries/247/

I think this is a great discussion and very needed today in the church.  I agree completely with James that the issue here is discipleship.  This is anecdotal, but I recently had a long conversation about depth with our pastor in a SS church and recommended that we develop a method for discipleship and growth - that growth should occur not just numerically (breadth), but also in depth for each new believer.  The response was that he has struggled with what discipleship really is.  I was beside myself - didn’t Jesus say, go therefore and make DISCIPLES?  Didn’t he say to teach them to observe ALL that I commanded you?  I have also seen some churches do SS impressively well with a paradox of experiences, where new people are made to feel comfortable and then are confronted directly and without apologies with the truths of scripture - and then butttressed with lots of opportunities for more advanced discipleship.  I think this comes down to the heart of that particular congregation and leader.

My larger concern though, is that the church has a felt need to imitate the methods of the world to impact it.  In history, the church has always been the birthplace of the greatest, most innovative musicians, artists, poets, writers, etc.  People were drawn to the church or at least to the glory of the art of believers because she pushed the culture into new methods of expression.  We have whole periods that are defined principally by the style of church musicians or artists.

I think the church needs to reclaim her position as a cultural innovator, particularly within the arts, but really within every expression of how we do things.  We should be so distinct from the world, yet so much more progressive than the world that the world is drawn to our message.

I sound like a one issue messenger here, so, I want to be clear that I think a key ingredient to that is being true to the whole message of scripture - not just encouraging sermons about how to be a better person or be more successful, but rather what it is to be righteous, holy, blameless, patient, kind, filled with joy, etc.