 |
|
Jumping to Conclusions Will Get You Nowhere…
Here's an interesting posting that just makes no sense to me (even though it references MMI to make its point). Dwayna Liz writes: "...if your church is not on "America's Most Innovative List" where does that leave you? Does one strive to make man's list or God's? Lest we forget, there is a big difference between the two! If you would like to strive to be on "the list" they vow to keep you up to date in "the contest" with "Free Updates"." (She then links to MMI's email sign-up verbage). Read on...
She quotes from our email sign-up page… “Each Monday Morning, we’ll send you the newest church leadership headlines straight to your in-box! It’s all free and you can unsubscribe at any time! Join over 12,000 other pastors who receive MMI updates each week! We respect your privacy.”
After all, the “new meaning to discipleship” for innovation is not found in the Bible, so the free updates are needed to define the term “disciple.” It is simply a “life product”. No “road of the cross” is necessary.
Way to jump to conclusions, Dwayna. Don’t think I ever said anything about subscribing to my MMI weekly email is a prerequisite for defining a ‘disciple’. Nor do I ever make the claim that subscribing to ‘the list’ will keep you up to date on ‘the contest’.
Anyone understand the point she’s trying to make, ‘cause it’s lost on me. :(
Todd
- - - - - - - - - -
This post has been viewed 246 times and was added on February 19, 2008 by Todd Rhoades. Filed under: Miscellaneous For What It's Worth Share this post with a friend right now! View reactions to this post at other blogs... You can really help us out by subscribing to our free RSS feed with your favorite feed reader, or here at Bloglines. Also, you can add us to your favorites at Technorati.
It's easy...
Link to this URL
- - - - - - - - - - There are 17 Comments:
I'm Todd Rhoades... the MMI guy. I'm also on the team at Leadership Network (although that doesn't mean that they endorse everything I write here). In my past life, I was the founder and developer of a website named ChurchStaffing.com.
MondayMorningInsight.com | PO Box 446 | Bryan, OH 43506 |
-
Posted by bishopdave
Tuesday, February 19, 2008 at 10:19 AM
-
Posted by
Tuesday, February 19, 2008 at 11:03 AM
-
Posted by Bart
Tuesday, February 19, 2008 at 11:46 AM
-
Posted by RevJeff
Tuesday, February 19, 2008 at 12:06 PM
-
Posted by RevJeff
Tuesday, February 19, 2008 at 12:09 PM
-
Posted by Brian
Tuesday, February 19, 2008 at 12:17 PM
-
Posted by
Tuesday, February 19, 2008 at 12:28 PM
-
Posted by
Tuesday, February 19, 2008 at 2:02 PM
-
Posted by Peter Hamm
Tuesday, February 19, 2008 at 9:17 PM
-
Posted by
Tuesday, February 19, 2008 at 10:31 PM
-
Posted by
Wednesday, February 20, 2008 at 2:01 AM
-
Posted by
Wednesday, February 20, 2008 at 7:42 AM
-
Posted by
Wednesday, February 20, 2008 at 10:49 AM
-
Posted by Peter Hamm
Wednesday, February 20, 2008 at 11:22 AM
-
Posted by
Wednesday, February 20, 2008 at 11:48 AM
-
Posted by
Wednesday, February 20, 2008 at 11:49 AM
-
Posted by
Wednesday, February 20, 2008 at 11:56 AM
Post Your Comments:The point she’s trying to make: They made a list, Todd mentioned the list, Todd is them.
Don’t know if it explains anything, but she’s a big fan of John Mac according to her testimony on her website.
i think she just doesn’t get that the section at the top of the screen is for MMI updates, not updates on the “contest”. If it were for updates on the “contest”, then I could see where someone would get snarky about it - since we aren’t in a competition to see who can be the most innovative. Just my take on it - she’s just confused.
I might disagree wtih some of her conclusions about MMI, but she raises an interesting point. Why do we do the things we do? Are we implimenting programs just to be innovative? Is that our goal? As an example the small rural church in the middle of Nebraska who’s 35 members are all over 70 does not need a web site and podcasts. To do so might be an example of what she is talking about. Doing something not based on need or the goal of introducing others to Christ, but as a way to look cool, be innovative, and it is what everyone (read large churches) tell us we need to do.
Personally, I have been in this contest thing for a long time and I am just finding out that (discipleship) is not a “way of the cross” thing!?!?!?!?!
I am so going to be more liberal and hip and give license to myself for illicit behaviors. AND, I am also going to quit listening to JM every morning on the AM side of the dial so I don’t have to feel guilty about my sin!
Oh yeah, I was going to ask what it means if we are “like-minded dominionists?” Is that hip, or should I be insulted?
Bart,
The point of innovation is to reach as many people as possible in an ever-changing culture.
While I’m sure there are plenty of churches and organizations that are just trying to be trendy, I think those listed in the “most innovated” reports are those who are actually making an impact for Christ and His kingdom.
We’re a small church in a town of 25,000, and I’m willing to look at almost anything that will help us get the message of Christ out to a greater amount of people in our area.
So I look at these smaller (and bigger) churches to see if there is anything I can use in our context.
My guess is that the target of the Nebraska church is those who are UNDER 70, and who would be more likely to look at podcasts and such - and therefore it would behoove them to use that technology. I’d have to read the article again (I’m not at my desk right now...) to make sure, though.
Brian L
I understand Dwayna’s position and could perhaps elaborate.
Her frustration appears to be directed to the call to “innovate”. The big thing being touted right now is how preachers, pastors, and churches can innovate, innovate, innovate.
With this focus on innovation, a list has come out that praises and shows the most innovative churches around. This list, in her eyes, would appear to highlight the approval of men in the activities of churches, rather than God. We are praising the innovation instead of the glory of God.
I agree with her secondary statement. I cannot find much of a Biblical precedence for innovation to be a modus operandi in churches. Same goes for being relevant.
“Go into the world and be relevant and innovating.” Nope, that isn’t there. “For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son so that we can innovate and be relevant.” My Bible’s missing that one, too.
--
CS
Where does the Bible say that we have to spread the message of God’s grace and forgiveness using a certain method? (Read: “We’ve always done it that way”, or “It was good enough for my great-great-great grandfather...")
Why can’t we innovate to reach people for Christ? When did innovation become such a derogatory term? As long as we’re faithful to the message of the cross, the shed blood of Jesus, and the total and complete forgiveness of sins, the method we use to spread that message can constantly change.
God blessed us with creativity so we can reach out to those who need to know of Jesus’ love and connect with them in terms they understand. Paul said “I have become all things to all men so that by all possible means I might save some.” (I Cor 9:22) Was that not innovation on his part at that time in history?
If we find something that works in our area to reach the lost, why wouldn’t we share that with other churches? Conversely, if we’re not growing, we need to take a look at why we’re not growing and talk with those churches who are making a difference in their communities and find out what “innovations” they have put into place. Then figure out how can we adapt those methods to our own church so we can be more effective in spreading the gospel.
I agree that innovation for innovation’s sake is wrong, but innovation to reach out while keeping true to the gospel can reach thousands. We’re supposed to be on the same team, so let’s remember who the enemy really is and focus on victory for the kingdom of God.
Sorry, but I think celebrating innovation is a good thing. Just because we innovate doesn’t mean we don’t have the Gospel and it doesn’t mean we don’t preach it. We do!
This is a lame pot shot.
I have been thinking of an innovative and relevant way to say this. I have been in ministry for a long time and in all those years rarely do I meet people who innovate for human reasons. I am not saying it doesn’t happen, I just don’t think it is as common as people make it out to be. I think that she is grasping at straws.
CS the bible does not say to drive a ford to church either but I do...Well I sometimes have to push it but you get what I mean. Your argument is straw and kind of weak here.
I would say that innovation and vision go hand in hand. People not willing to change and try new things, don’t have a lot of vision. And vision is what moves us forward to outward growth and evangelism and yes, discipleship. And that means a growing church!
Yes, I want to know what is innovative and reaching our rapidly changing culture.
And so what if we DO have a contest? What’s the big deal? It’s fun. It makes us think. And we’re thinking about ministry for pete’s sake and furthering the kingdom.
And what does the word innovative mean? New ideas? Horrror of Horrors!
I think there are plenty of real issues to write about. Why pick on this?
I really want to tell people like this to stop worrying about the petty stuff and put the same effort into the great commission and to encouraging the brethren, rather than taking their time tearing them down.
Contest? What Contest - darn it I am always the last one to know about these things!!!
But honestly - I would say that the enemy has won the contest on this one. Look at the amount of time already wasted -
a. by someone who has nothing better to do than be a watchdog for Jesus.
b. by those who wasted time reading her blog
c. by those who read this whole string
d. by those who responded
e. by me who is bothering to type this.
Jan’s comment -
‘I really want to tell people like this to stop worrying about the petty stuff and put the same effort into the great commission and to encouraging the brethren, rather than taking their time tearing them down.”
RIGHT ON!!!!
That is what I ask many of my legalist friends…
“you are sitting here arguing with me about pre & post while those in your own community are spiritually dying - GET REAL!!!!!’
I hear many Scholars and Theologians shouting down from their ivory towers to do this and do that - but rarely do I see them get of the pedestal and reach a hand out…
lets get to the person who loves other people the way God loves them and they will do whatever they can to share Christ with them - do you want to call that innovation? Ok…
How bout we just call it obedience?
Put me on whatever list you want to - I don’t care… and why is it wrong to say to a person, a church, an organization - “Hey - praise God - you are reaching more people for Christ.” Lets all celebrate!
As a friend of mine wrote -
“Some, to be sure, are preaching Christ even from envy and strife, but some also from good will; the latter do it out of love, knowing that I am appointed for the defense of the gospel; the former proclaim Christ out of selfish ambition, rather than from pure motives, thinking to cause me distress in my imprisonment.
What then? Only that in every way, whether in pretense or in truth, Christ is proclaimed; and in this I rejoice, yes, and I will rejoice.”
(Philippians 1:15-18)
Geez - I have already wasted to much time on “foolish controversies”
If I win a contest will someone let me know?
Perhaps I should have been more clear in my stance on “not finding innovation or relevancy in the Bible.” I shall expound upon this.
We are called to preach the Gospel and to go and make disciples of all peoples. And, yes, we can use some creative elements in doing so. And, yes, it does help to know about the culture when going into the mission field. However, what I have been seeing in churches are two major faults: innovation and relevancy at the sacrifice of the Gospel, and making sinful culture a part of the worship services.
There is a sort of “innovation for the sake of innovation” in many preachers’ mindsets. They use millions of dollars and countless man hours to put on elaborate stage productions, complete with pyrotechnics, motorcycles jumping over the nave, and a sound and light system to rival most concerts, but don’t preach the core of the Gospel.
Likewise, while pastors once used a pop culture reference to expound upon a point in Scripture, now we see sermon series dedicated to pop culture, with Scripture being used to accompany it. In the past, a pastor might bring up a verse and use something that happened in the 1980s to describe it. Now, we have series on the 1980s and cherry-picked verses to highlight Billy Idol, Atari, and the fall of Communism.
This is why innovation and relevancy are being shunned, and why I would make a sweeping statement about not being able to find things in the Bible about innovation or relevancy.
--
CS
CS,
If you are shunning innovation and relevancy, as you say, I think perhaps there are better forums on the internet.
As much as I like our exchanges, this forum is all about preaching the Gospel to a lost world in innovative and relevant ways, something you seem not too keen on. Is this really the best use of your time?
I might disagree with you on where to draw a line, but I work in a church that does a LOT (too much, I think in your opinion) to bring a relevant and culturally up-to-date presentation. I know many people, both through this forum and other places, who do something similar. I just don’t see the watering-down of the Gospel among them that you do.
I think that most of us would agree that watering down the gospel for the sake of innovation is wrong.
If that’s the target you are trying to hit , I think this is the wrong direction.
P.S. When does contest start?
Jan, you won, the prize can be picked up at Lukewarm bible fellowship between the hours of 3am and 3:15 am every fifth Wednesday in February. Congrats, I can’t wait until you give your acceptance speech. Make sure you include all seven points of the Gospel in Romans 3 so as not to be innovative and relevant.
Page 1 of 1 pages