The message of Jesus from the beginning of his ministry was:

..."Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.” Matthew 4:17 (NASB)

it still has to be the message today.

I never said the gospel message wasn’t offensive. We on this “seeker sensitive” boat have never said many of the words that are placed in our mouths.

I only implied we need not be offensive for the sake of being offensive. That we need not seek out the opportunity to be “offensive” but rather, the opportunity to share Christ’s good news. Paul tailored his presentation of the Gospel to each audience he addressed. So did Jesus… he told stories they’d relate to. They were culturally sensitive.

It seems like people on the more “fundamentalist side” (Sorry… can’t think of another word...) seem to want to say you can either minister to real or felt needs OR you can preach the gospel.

Some of us are saying you must do both. Some find that position untenable. I find it mandated by scripture.

And MG, my question was quite valid. I know and interact with too many people (especially young people) for whom the kind of Gospel presentation that WOTM prescribes as the only valid kind is ineffective and does not communicate the Gospel effectively.

Okay, back to sleep…

Kirk, you are right on target. I’m fed up with hearing simple “feel good” messages and nothing about the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus. I would hate to have to answer God as a pastor when called to explain the dribble I “preached” to my congregation week after week and never telling the simple steps to salvation from a sinner’s hell.

I heard Dr Mac Brunson from his pulpit at the First Baptist Church in Jacksonville, FL, say the following statement:

Life, death and eternity and worlds unknown may hang on the preaching and hearing of one sermon.

You said it, brother Mac, and God bless you for taking a courageous stand and preaching the uncompromised saving Gospel of our Lord Jesus.

Peter,
It is nice to know you have some disdain for words being put in your mouth, now take that feeling and allow it to guide you to stop doing that to others for you are quite proficient at it.

Now to the matter at hand, what is it that a lost person needs Peter? Wendi? Mark?
They need to be “born again”, not to have their felt needs met in the hopes that they might somehow entertain the thought of asking Jesus to come into their heart since He’s at the door knocking, begging them to allow Him, the King of kings and Lord of lords, to come in and make their life run smoother. How does a church come to the belief that felt-needs are to be used to “draw men” to the Lord, when men are described by such clearly hopeless conditions as slaves to unrighteousness (who become slave to righteousness by the grace and mercy of God), blind (by the god of this world) or dead in trespasses and sins (dead men cannot resuscitate themselves and haven’t the ability to respond but must be regenerated by Almighty God, a process that is clearly laid out in Eph. 1 and 2).

The real shame of all this discussion is all the “leaders” going around touting numbers and blessings of God who are consistently seeing revolving numbers of people flowing in and out of their churches with some sticking around and participating in what’s going on, but many if not most of them having little or no clear evidence that the Creator God has become a major influence in their life. When pastors claim a song by U2 led people to the Lord, and go out and post in the blogosphere the numbers they can claim weekly, when the fact is no one has the authority to declare someone saved but the Holy Spirit is the only One laid out in Scripture with the responsibility to do such a thing.
2 Cor. 5 calls those who are “in Christ” new creatures, which would indicate a radical transformation in their life from one of hatred towards God to one of loving God, one who hates commandments and commands and now embraces them with a transformed perspective recognizing as Jesus said, “His yoke is easy and His burden is light”, obedience IS better than sacrifice and to follow God’s commands leads to a life of greater peace and joy vs. the weightiness of dealing with sins destructive forces, a radically different view of God’s word - once having no concern for it the new heart has a willingness to submit to God’s word and know it having a desire to better know the One in Whom they now believe and to Whom they now serve.
1 John lays out a pretty detailed account of what would be the characteristics of a genuine Believer that we may know that we have eternal life, yet there are many who dismiss out of hand the purpose and the intent of this invaluable epistle from John.
As Believers we are called by Paul to “examine ourselves” to see if we are in the faith. What Kirk has done is simply to call the pastors to examine their efforts to see if they do honor God or if they have modified their methods to honor man at the expense of a Sovereign, Just and Holy God who will hold teachers accountable for what they teach and whom they influence.
And Peter to your final comment about those whom you know who say the WOTM gospel is ineffective, 1 Cor. 1:17, 18 says For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel, not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of no effect. For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. The fact that you know some who say that only shows, well it really shows us nothing that would lead you to believe a watered down, softened message is going to be of greater effectiveness than the truth from God’s word.
There will come a day when judgment will come for all, blessed are those who heed God’s gracious warning in His most Holy word.

I’ve got to say that the tone of this discussion is turning sour.

Let me give my little perspective on the “old” vs. “new” methods of preaching the gospel.  I’m 48 years old, saved for the past 15.  If the older communication tools and nuancing of words wo so special why do we have church after church filled with people who claim the Lord as their Savior for the past 40-60 years spending more time in gossip than reaching their lost neighbors?  Why do we have church after church who really believe that the Great Commission is fulfilled if they give money to overseas missions while their communities rot away?  Why do we have church after church filled with such a lack of love for one another?  Why do we have church after church filled with those who grasp onto God’s money as if it’s their own and give such a small portion of God’s money back to Him for His work?  Why do we have church after church filled with people who cannot seem to forgive one another and rather “kill” one another with words than truly see the “plank” in their own eyes?

Why is the church in this country so ineffective at reaching out to their communities if the generations “saved” under the gospel preached in the 50’s, 60’s, and 70’s was so “right?”

If this “real” salvation experience is what some want to go back to I say that it is God Himself who is asking His church to re-consider what it is to be saved.  It is God Himself who has brought us a post-Christian generation so finally we can stop fooling ourselves about who is saved and who isn’t.  The old church culture of America is DEAD and maybe that’s a good thing if it produced the lazy (and self-righteous) believers that it did. 

Maybe God is going to have His church reduced in size but the lesson may be that a small “genuine” church will outstrip, outevangelize, outbless, and generally outserve a larger bloated self-righteous and false one.  If the “old” methods produced the church of America today that I say “Amen” to those moving in what I consider to be a more biblical and Godly direction.

MG,

I am pretty sure (I am SUPER-careful with my wording) that I put now owrds in anyone’s mouth.

One thing… They will know we are his followers because of our great love for one another… Ministering to “felt needs” is an EXCELLENT way of showing we are His followers.

Your paragraph that begins “The real shame of all this discussion is...” is a little generalized. It sure doesn’t describe my church.

Phil is right . . . this discussion is deteriorating.

MG – your comments to Peter are both uncalled for and off base.  If you read through just a few of the discussions of which he’s been a part, and you’ll see that Peter is one of the few of us who is really good at NOT doing that. 

JWS . . . if life, death, eternity and worlds unknown hang on the preaching and hearing of one sermon, why did it take God incarnate three years of preaching sermons to get His point across (and they still had a low “get-it” factor)?

The real shame is actually this comment by MG . . .

“The real shame of all this discussion is ALL the “leaders” going around touting numbers and blessings of God who are CONSISTENTLY seeing revolving numbers of people flowing in and out of their churches with some sticking around and participating in what’s going on, but many if not MOST of them having little or no clear evidence that the Creator God has become a major influence in their life.”

With all due respect, you have no way of knowing this, and for that reason it is arrogant and just plain wrong (sinful) for you to accuse in this way.  It is divisive to the unity of the universal body of Christ.  How many one-on-one, heart-to-heart discussions have you had with people who got saved the seeker churches you are so good at criticizing?  Until you’ve talked deeply with MOST of the people who make up numbers of people reached by these churches, you have no right to claim that MOST of them have “no clear evidence of influence by the Creator God.”

This is what bugs me the most about this discussion and those of you who bash the seeker, post-modern, emerging church folks.  You criticize people you’ve never met, for the books they wrote that you’ve never read, or preaching sermons you’ve never heard, accusing them of developing shallow Christians – though you’ve never spoken to one of their members about their faith.  You have neither the right nor the information needed to say what you say . . . yet you go on saying it. 

Got to get off that soap box now, I’m getting mad at my own self.

Wendi

The bible is filled with testimonials of people’s experiences.  Testimonials and experiences are not opponents of truth.  Over 400,000 churches in this country and over half will not lead anyone to Christ.  These are not seeker churches; they are not emergent churches they are simply churches who have forgotten to invite people to the feast.  Of the ones that do lead someone to Christ, it averages 1 per 100 in attendance.  The average church is less than 100 people so you do the math.  This is not about style or content of presentation it is about a lack of presentation.  WOTM, 4 laws, steps to peace, three story… The bottom line is not our style or method.  It is the simple fact we don’t do everything possible to reach people for Christ. 

Instead we debate if Jesus talked about hell, is it a real place, did he talk about heaven, is the gospel the whole story of creation to restoration, should we light candles and burn incense or sing hymns.  Screwtape could not have scripted some of our conversations much better. 

I am not referring specifically to MMI but to the church as a whole.  I believe in truth, God’s truth as found in the word.  It is also my conviction we dishonor the truth when we use it to make ourselves or our methods superior to others and their methods.  Satan has the largest youth ministry in everyone of our cities, he has the larges congregation in everyone of our cities.  He is the enemy, let’s go fight him. 

Sorry for the soapbox, but this is my passion and Phil you are right on the money.

Thanks Leonard!

This is so funny.  We’re going to “put down” the local “seeker sensitive” church because a few people felt they were teaching a “watered down” gospel and we’re supposed to go “oooohhh?”

Maybe those people aren’t really concerned about other’s salvations?  I see it all the time - people want “deep” preaching and many times (I didn’t say all the time) what that means is studying the proper names of all the Kings and studying Greek and Hebrew and not being concerned about whether the poor, the blind, the weak, and the uneducated actually hear the GOSPEL - which is WE ARE ALL SINNERS AND JESUS DIED FOR US ALL.  That is a Gospel of hope and a Gospel of love and a Gospel of mercy.  Paul says that this a Gospel of righteousness versus self-righteousness (see Romans 1.)

Now if you claim these dissatisfied people from the “seeker sensitive” church we in fact new believers then you should be praising God that there was a local church to you that’s actually saving people so they could then transfer to your high and deep level of teaching!  Don’t put that church down - thank them!  Their people walking out the back door may be the best opportunity for growth in those churches that are saving so few (please don’t tell me that churches don’t save but God does - I know that but it seems that in His wisdom He has decided to work through His churches.)

Why don’t you copy the signs of the seeker sensitive church and then when you get them in I’m certain they would never think of leaving your church to go to another! 

Forgive my sarcasm but I can’t take it when pastors or leaders will use the dissatisfaction of the few to draw a condemning conclusion on the whole assembly!  That’s what you did - like it or not.

Glen, no disrespect but we are discussing the topic - whether Kirk is right when he says that certain growing churches are growing without the full counsel of God!  Those are his words - not mine.  I had the opportunity to listen to his dissaster of an effort to do an apologetic on ABC.com and between him and Ray Comfort they did the Christian apologetic a disservice.  It was such a shame that they didn’t even have an answer to people and all of this hullabaloo about proving God WITHOUT THE BIBLE!  This was his advertisement (which I liked by the way) and he failed miserably.  All he ever mentioned was Intelligent Design without bringing any other evidence (there is great scientific and mathamatical evidence to the existence of God by the way.) All I’m saying is that we are actually dialoging with what Kirk said.

He didn’t say that people weren’t being asked to come to salvation - he said that they weren’t being asked in the “right way.” Period.

And what I’m saying is that if the “right way” produced the majority of our church today - then the “right” way wasn’t so right after all.  Period.

NOW ... how’s about some of the older churches being more honest and seeking help from the growing churches about how they are doing it?

AND ... how’s about some of the older churches lend the growing churches a hand (if they feel qualified to do so) and giving them a hint on how they produced so many true disciples of Christ?  Hmmmm ....

The HS will direct a Minister, an Evangelist, a Believer if they will listen, on what to say to those who are lost.  There is not “one” way to preach the gospel.  The Scripture account is filled with account after account of how God used men and women to spread his word.  While Kirk has a point, it isn’t the ONLY point, and while God might be using him to reach some according to his gifting, he is not the Judge of how God is using the gifts of others to reach the lost. 

In this discussion I am reminded of the Apostle’s words:
Who are you to judge the servant of another? To his own master he stands or falls; and he will stand, for the Lord is able to make him stand. Romans 14:4 (NASB)

Where are we getting this information from that seeker sensitive churches are not preaching about repentence, the cross of Jesus, and the need of a righteousness that can only come from faith in Jesus Christ? I have not heard anyone claim that repentence is not part of salvation - if I missed that then I apologize.  Who claimed this?  Please point it out - I would like to know.

Additionally why are some using an assumption that those saved under a different communication style that was more common in the past has led us to a church culture of true obedience?  Please tell me your kidding.

Are we actually putting our blinders on to the condition of God’s church in the U.S.?

I am so saddened by this conversation, its tenor, its undocumented, unverified, and therefore false assumptions, its seeming dripping of self-righteousness and pride.

Wasn’t it the great evangelist and theologian Paul who said that he becomes ALL things to ALL men so that he may win a few?  It’s hard to imagine an effective argument against that call for us to be “missional” in our ministry so that we can engage people with the Gospel.  ALL people.  In EVERY way.  ALWAYS truthful. 

Jesus was a missionary in that He left heaven and became the definition of relevant in His ministering to the world.  Paul was a missionary that became relevant to his audience.  In fact the entire Gospel of Matthew is written to a Jewish culture whereas the Gospel of Luke is written more for a Gentile/Greek culture.  There are definite differences that historically are acknowledged to be there to minister to the different cultures that those Gospels were intended for.  Yet their truths never waiver and Jesus is lifted up high.  People are getting the gift of eternal life by coming to know God and one He sent. 

By the way ... no one is going to argue that some people who are saved at seeker sensitive churches aren’t really “saved.” But who believes for a minute that there aren’t a huge of amount of church goers in the old mainline churches who aren’t saved as well?  Wasn’t it those churches that didn’t speak up against slavery and wasn’t it those churches that didn’t speak up against racial discrimination?  Wasn’t it those churches that didn’t say “boo” about the atrocities of Hitler?  Wasn’t it those churches who raised the Baby Boomers?  Wasn’t it those churches who refused to work together in their communities to promote the Gospel if there was the slightest difference in any doctrine?

I was saved at a Billy Graham Crusade.  Do we really think that EVERYONE who goes down to accept the Lord remains true to the faith?  Puhleeese ...

We need to get real otherwise we fool ourselves. This is Pharisee-ism pure and simple. 

I pastor a church of 250-300.  We have had 33 people saved this year.  You bet I count - so did the book of Acts!  People in my church (and the jury is still out as to whether we will survive) are excited that for the fist time sinners in jeans, shorts, etc. feel comfortable and welcome.  Their questions are answered.  Their concerns and felt needs addressed with the Gospel.  But if someone is seeing people saved by another methodology or word set then I say AMEN because salvation can only come from God and I love watching God work through so many different methods throughout the centuries.

Praise God.

MG, are you a Pastor or Minister?

I ask because of your argumentative tone.  Your tone does not seem to be one of Mercy or Grace (MG) and your e-mail address seems to be from some type of “Health and Wellness” multilevel marketing corporation.

I am not in full-time ministry, but most of the people you are addressing/criticizing here are, and they know what they are talking about.  They are out there working to further the Kingdom of God.

There are so many who are consumed with policing what others are doing in their attempts to serve God, but if all you’re doing is criticizing what others are doing are you really serving the Kingdom?  Many of us would be well served by time spent in prayer humbly seeking God’s will for our lives.  I doubt whether God’s direction is going to be to spend your life attacking others who are trying to serve God.