Okay, now raise your right hand.  I will not bash the Mega church, I will celebrate their creativity so help me God, in Jesus name Amen. 

The writer says:  “The mega-church culture is one that’s always trying to incrementally improve on itself,” Morgan said. “There’s definitely a culture of trying to do anything you can do to make things bigger and better than the year before.”

I know dozens of Mega-church pastors and none of them think this way.  What they are is risk takers asking this question; “How can I tell people about Christ?” This article reminds me to pray more passionately for other churches this season and to pray for sticking power.  I am going to pray that those who give their hearts to Christ will truly stick with it.

This article is a great example of how the dialectic thought process is being used in the church though possibly unaware because we as a society have been so thoughoughly brainwashed with this thinking process.

Quote: “With a reliance on marketing strategies borrowed from the business world, church leaders have proudly incorporated elements such as”.  ----Here we see the diapractic being used to appeal to comon ground through the utility use of “things” in lieu of truth of proclamation of God’s Word. Whenever these “things” become the draw, the message will suffer. If Willowcreek would advertise that God’s truth will be proclaimed through the Word they will lose their appeal , even if they were to use the utilities of a culture in rebellion.

Quote: “The megachurch culture is one that’s always trying to incrementally improve on itself,” Morgan said. “There’s definitely a culture of trying to do anything you can do to make things bigger and better than the year before.” . ------- This is the dialectic process of “life long learning” where truth is never attainable in a absolute sense, thus we are always gaining knowledge but never coming to the truth. We see this also in UN and educational , socio/psycho,and business terms such as “sustainable growth, concensus , unity through diversity, purpose driven, vision casting, and imaging.= thereby always appealing to the “heart “which is translated ,"feelings".

Quote: “People will enjoy the artistic aspects,” said Cally Parkinson, Willow Creek’s communications director. “But they’ll come back for the teaching. That’s what really touches their hearts.” ------- here we see the “facillitator” appealing to emotion of enjoying the “artistic aspects” , {which is dependent on how artistic is defined}and that which “touches the heart,” {feelings over facts}. The heart is desperately wicked declares the Lord, yet what touches their heart is the preaching. Again God says that the natural heart is an enmity against God , is hostile towards God and does not , nor cannot understand the things of God , for it is spiritually inempt and unable to. Notice that God’s Word or the name Jesus Christ was not once used throughout this article by either Hybels or his spokesperson. So are we to assume that Christ crucified is going to be taught, or just that Jesus was born? The article doesnt say, nor did it intend to. It s appeal is to an entertainment aspect of our hearts desire to be satiated with pleasure. In fact two thirds of the whole program will be dedicated to this cause. One can get up and leave after the entertainment if the message is confrontational , as the Gospel is to be. The laid back atmosphere will make that possible without anyone being the wiser, though seriously, I doubt that this will be the case anyways.

Leonard,

Your statement:
You {Fred} state that the gospel is intended to be confrontational, I disagree.  I think the gospel can be very confrontational because of it’s message and nature, but the truth of the matter is Jesus did not come into the world to condemn the world.  Do you know why?  We were already condemned.

You are correct that Jesus did not come to condemn the world as you said, we were already condemned. But He also said He did not come to bring peace but a sword. This sword is the Sword of Truth., This sword divides falsehood from truth. It can not be watered down. I admit I have never been to Willowcreek, but I do know that my old Seeker Sensitive church was modeled after it to the tee. The leaders constantly attended Willowcreeks agendas and conferences bring back and inplementing Willowcreeks programs.

I never had any intention of appearing intelligent for the sake of appearance. But I do know much of the S/S and PDL movements and of the dialectical thought process to know that this process is precisley what Willowcreek and others are using within their churches. That it may be unknown to you and others {this thinking process} and that many are deceived in the practice of it , as I stated at the beginning of my first post, does not suggest that I impugn the cognitive abilities of well studied and read people. Quite the opposite Leonard. The process uses these cognitive , wellstudied and read abilities for the advancement of the agenda at hand, which is peace and unity over truth. I do not have the time to expound on this here, in this forum, but would highly suggest to you and all readers to do a search on the dialectical thinking process or search the term “diaprax {theory and practice} and see for yourselves why the church is doing what it is doing today and what the ramifications are going to be. There is an agenda out there in the political, educational, socio/pyscho realm and now it includes the religious realm that is diabolical in nature. The “thou shaltnots” {didactic} are replaced with possibility/potential thinking through group concensus by dialoguing (dialectics} and put into practice {praxis}. It seems right to man. It makes sense to our reason , but our reason is fallen. Just a note that one of Hybels mentors was possibility thinker Robert Schuller.

My intent is not to bash anyone but to warn of the sinfulness of our cultural thinking process. We are placing feelings,unity and community over truth. When one does this he/she is seen as devisive and meanspirited. Anyone not joining in this dialectic process is to be alienated and marginalised. He/she becomes the enemy of the concensus. This is brainwashing.

Amen Paul.

I also have not a shadow of a doubt that salvation through Jesus Christ alone is presented through Willow Creek’s programming and that they reach people.

Would I do the things the same way?  Probably not.  But who am I to criticize what God is using to reach people?

I would like to respond to the comments given above. I have never denied that people may be saved at Willow Creek. God can save people in the midst of anything for it is the Holy Spirit’s work not the work of a cultural exhibit or application of the message. The issue at hand is not salvation but obedience. The “thou shalt nots” were not replaced by the Beatitudes. Jesus did not come to do away with the law, but to obey the law in it’s entirety. Jesus said if we love Him we will obey Him and the law He gave us for our own good. We are to be aware of the wiles of Satan and the world. This is not only a suggestion , but one of command. It is for our own good. When we blindly and uncritically assume that what we “feel” is right we have started on what CH Spurgeon defined as the downgrade slide. This is done , as I asserted , by the dialogueing with truth. When we do this we assert our own opinions, fleshly desires , our “want and ought do be able to’s” over the express commands of the law, which are to be understood in conjuction with, not in isolation of other commands. We need wisdom, not what seems to be right to man.

We live in a society today that obhors law, but law is what keeps our fleshly desires in check. We, as a society , have the childish attitude; “You aren’t the boss of me!” We do not want to do what our fathers {authorities} tell us to do. We rebel. The CGM and the Emergent movements do the same thing. We do not want to do what daddy {traditional culture, law based culture} told us to do. We want our own way, a way that meets our self felt needs which by the way , are sinful by nature. This attitude permeates all our life and our decision making. It is rebellion to traditional thinking {didactic} and swears allegiance to a dialogueing / feeling way of thinking {dialectic}. {There is a way that seems right to man but leads to destruction} This way of thinking is what will and is ushering the one world, new community , pluralistic , all that matter is peace attitude that pervades our world.

At one time our culture realised abortion or homosexuality as wrong. Sure there were those that rebelled against the express commands of the Father, the thou shall nots, but they knew they were wrong and stayed out of view. Evil is practiced in the dark and woe when it is practiced in the light and good {law} is called evil and evil {dialectic, the I want to} is called good. This didactic thinking in this example is the thesis or the position parameter. It is given by God through Law. It is patriarchial in structure. In man’s sinful nature , he “wants” to assume a antithesis of this “thou shall not. He “reasons that it would be good to do this for what ever reason and he justifies it within his own mind. There may even be some “good” reasoning involved as there usually is. But this reasoning will always appeal to feelings / opinion, ("I" do not want to bring up a child in this world, etc) not to the expressed law of the authority. So the individual / society feels guilty and to alleviate his guilt he must bring others into a dialogue to question the validity of this law and to allow others to express their opinions and thoughts. Since the heart is deceitful above all things ,others will capitualate to this, for we all have this same rebellion in us. So we reach a consensus , an agreement that the law needs to be “fixed” or synthesized with each position. So we have middle ground and all involved are at peace and “happy"--they have realtionship / community.

Now this synthesis becomes the new thesis but still there are those that take the opposite position or the antithesis. Again , to acheve unity through this diversity, we must in the name of peace {some say Christ} reach another consensus through dialogueing {dialectic} so we synthesize the position again and reach a new thesis or position of “truth”. Some will not budge on their position or thesis ,so they must be margenlized or made to appear divisive , mean spirited or stuck in their ways. They are cast out for they hold to truth over and above “relationship or community. But there is no real koinia or community unless it is based on truth and obedience to the law. So the old “patriarchial “ standard , do as I say or else, is relaced with a matriarchial society , {how does this make you feel}. Thus the acceptance in my example of homsexuality and abortion. The attitude is this-- “well ,you have to see it from their point of view “ or “if that is the way they truly feel, then”. It is feeling over facts, community over Law.

This is what the churches of the CGM {dialectic} try to achieve and it is what they appeal to. This is why they grow and why the world flocks in to join them. This is not saying that none are saved , for Jesus can save someone in a tavern if He so chooses. But I assert that this appeal to the community by consensus or popular opinion {cultural felt needs} is capituating to our lust of the eyes , pride of life, and desires of the heart. This is wrong, not that I feel it is , but because it is. It is disobedience to the law.

Agreed, Peter… Not that we don’t like lively discussion, Fred; but we’ve already had full-blown discussions here of the seeker sensitive movement and the like; check the archives, you’ll find them in numerous places here.  But to go down that road again only detracts from our main areas of discussion here… areas that you, as Peter said, are strongly opposed to.

Todd

Fred Stated: [But there is no real koinia or community unless it is based on truth and obedience to the law.]
Peter Stated: I disagree. REAL community is based on agape love.

Fred Responds > Yes and “if you love Me you will obey Me as I too Obey the Father, for I do nothing that the Father does not tell Me to do”.---- It is called obedience to the Father’s will and that will is known through obedience to the Word and that Word is Law for law is truth ---"Thy Word is Truth” and obedience to this truth will set you free. This is love , that we obey the Father

This community of believers is based not on some feely /unity love that man thinks is love , but on what God says it is and that is obedience, for in that obedience is love. For if we obey the commands of God , then we are in His will and are loving the Lord with all our heart , minds and soul. Any other way is not of God.

Todd ,

You are correct when you state that you understand English and that is how you received the truth, in a language you understood. You have no real choice in this matter for culture dictates language. The rest that you are referring to is personal preference not culture relevancy. It is personal relevancy. Let me explain.

Because our culture values something , be it musical forms, dress forms or what have you does not make that right , good or God-honoring. God gave language and which language you use is not important , unless the language is used contrary to the will of God, such as the language of rebellion. God gave music and we have freedom to use it with wisdom and in a God -Honoring way. but not all music comes from the direct will of God. I know rock music was created to express rebellion to a culture that it had come to disdain. I was raised in it. You say” that The church must change it’s delivery style constantly WITHOUT changing it’s method. “ I assert that the style has become the message thus the importance placed on change. Change is the driving force . This change is what is used to facillitate a mode of thinking and to keep everything and everyone in a state of flux.

We must base everything on the Scriptures. Where do you get the Scriptural proof that the church must change its delivery style? Paul told Timothy to hold fast to his teachings and IMITATE him, as he imitates Christ. The OT is full of exhortations to obey the authorities as is the NT. Great importance was placed on age contrary to our culture of youth and rebellion. Yet we live in a culture that says old is bad and tradition of our fathers must be abolished in the name of progress. God has a reason for all this wisdom that He gives.  But now we wish to justify our actions even in the church by screaming cultural relativity and relevancy. This is nothing more than compromise , deception whether committed willfully or accepted unknowingly. “My people perish for lack of knowledge”. We are people that are so good at justifying ourselves. But God is the only one who justifies and in Him only is our justification.

Do you know that we are the first culture that hold to the idea of cultural relevancy as strongly as we do, though I admit, there were strands of it in the past , but they were the ones that were marginalised? Why is that? Because we have been coached to love our culture , our loves, our present times so much that we can not see the forest because of the trees. We are a society trying to see ourselves while our noses are presssed up against the mirror. We love the moment far to much and believe that the Bible says live and let live and that Jesus said , “all you need is love” when it was the spiritualist Beatles that said that. Of course love was not defined in God’s way.

Style dictates and establishes the message. Ask any strip tease establishment if it matters what kind of music is played. The message stands apart from style, but style does not stand apart from the message. The message is the Word itself not the style. In fact stlye can hinder {and does} the fullness of the Word.

I am NOT against contemporary music, use of technology, casual dress, though I do assertt that we do not use wisdom here either. We will dress up to see a new girlfriend or a president , job prospect, but when it comes to the King of the Universe , we want casual. This is just a lack of respect because we have been taught that it is unimportant. Our culture still has all the higher forms /styles available but we come to value the mundane , the popular , the average. We would rather have twinky than the meal just because our parents want us to have the meal, because they love us and know best. But we like the twinky because it is sweet, tickles our fancy and hey !all the other are eating it.

My complaint is not the forms in themselves. It is the importance placed on them, the celebration of the forms and the churches capitualtion to the “self felt need” that a selfish culture has made us believe we need. We need nothing but the Word and that Word is to be preached by language and then lived out in love and love is desiring the highest , the best , the beautiful anf the good for the one loved and those attributes are the attributes og God and they are not subjective to our whims but absolutes. We may not grasp this in its entirety and therefore we must , in love , allow for some freedom, but when this freedom is dictated by cultural captivity and then called relevance, I must speak out. It does matter and what “is” is not defined by us , contrary to BIll Clinton. God is the I AM and He IS . He dictates the church and His word says that we are to be a contrast to the world. That , my brother, we are not today. The contrast is more than just we believe and they dont. It is because we believe that everything is brand new, different from, separated to ahigher calling. We can not go by what we feel we should do. Aarons sons did that and you know happened.

Fred

[We must base everything on the Scriptures.] Then let’s get rid of the hymns (especially those whose melodies were taken from secular songs for sure), the flannelgraph, the Sunday Schools, the Organ, the Piano, choirs, 3-point sermons, all church buildings, After-church socials, apple pie, and Chevrolet. They’re not in the scriptures. No… but seriously, I get what you are saying, but consider that we who are “culturally relevant” believe we ARE basing these things on scriptures, especially “being the greek to the greek and the jew to the jew”. Look at how Paul changes the way he even tells his story based on who his audience is!

[Do you know that we are the first culture that hold to the idea of cultural relevancy as strongly as we do] I think every culture has been culturally relevant to itself. They great hymn-writers wrote in the idiom of their day, sometimes creating the same kind of controversy we’ve seen in recent days.

[ I assert that the style has become the message] I, and others here, I think, respectfully disagree…

Fred,

I had a great, very long response all typed for you; then hit the wrong button and accidently deleted it.

Needless to say, we disagree here; and we’ll both see eye to eye on the other side.

God’s blessings to you.

Todd

Peter states: Ahh… but Jesus changed even that. Because now, Loving God and Loving Others (capitalized on purpose) are inseperable. Can’t do one without the other.

We deliver the Gospel message in a culturally relevant way because we Love Christ and we Love our neighbor as ourselves, and want to tell him the good news about Jesus in a way he’ll understand it.

Peter , you are wrong here . Jesus did not change anything.  If we love God with all our heart , minds and soul and we obey the commandments (the 10} and thus show love to others It is not changed or new. I have already explained that being culturally relevant does not entail what you are asserting. We are not always being relevant but capitualing to and calling it that. Tell me Peter, what is so hard to understand in the way I would present the gospel that one could not understand? I say just what the Word says. Tell me , do you agree that we as a society think dialectiaclly as opposed to didactic? Tell me . would people still come to church if there was no music or if they were required to dress in a certain manner as they are to a wedding, etc.? The real point is not whether they understand or not but whether they are getting what they want.

To all. thanks for taking the time to read my posts and I appreciated all of yours . This is my last post on this subject, {i hope,lol)

I used to think just like most of you and attended a GCM church , and even went through the PDL movement. I was always fasinated by why we were all fighting about these things.. Since I am somewhat of a history and church history buff , I also knew that this was really nothing new, just more pronounced in this age. I began to research , speak to others , listen to others, and read the Scriptures and pray for wisdom about all this. I especially read Spurgeon, the Puritans and cultural ananlysts such as Francis Shaffer, Nancy Pearcy, Horton, David Wells , Vieth, Ravi Zaccharias etc. I read the philosophers of the last 300 years , though not extensively , enough to grasp the gist of their applications.

I am convinced that the way most of us think today is because of the philosophy we embrace. The church too has embraced these philosophies and has synthesised them with the Bible. This happened before with Aquinas and others and in America on the heals of the 17 18 and 19th century philosophers , the American Revolution as well as the French and Communistic {Marxist} ideology. The major shift was, as I have previously asserted, in the way of thinking from didactic to dialectic. For those that thirst for truth, i would suggest that you also try to look into this and see for yourself if this is not so. On the web there are many resources to help you along in this quest.  I believe that you will find that this thinking is a deceptive thinking {dialectic} and that it is subtle and devious. Life is short and blessed is the man who walks not in the counsel of the ungodly, nor stands in the path of sinners, nor sits in the seat of the scornful . But his delight is in the law of the Lord and on His law he meditates day and night..

You see walking , standing , sitting all denote modes of attaining wisdom and knowledge. When we live or walk by the counsel of the philosophers of the world we are missing out on truth. When we agree with tthe world , then we disobey God. And when we stand or take sides with something that is against Gods law we are in disobedince. But when our only love is to obey God with all our heart mind and soul ,then His law , which is contrary to mans inclinations , will make us wise to life and the wiles of Satan.We will flourish and proper in the Lord.

Man’s inclinations are like anything else that is on an “incline nation” Take a wagon on an incline. Without the law of brake mechanisms it will follow its natural law , gravity , and end up in a heap pile below. Man is like this too. We either follow Gods law or we follow the natural law of mans own devices {his feelings and desires , his ought to’s and want to’s ) and eventually end up in chaos or like in this metaphor , the heap pile.

Anyways , my prayer is that all of you will open your eyes to this truth. God bless each and everyone of you and may you heed the admonition of Psalm 1.

Fred writes [ Jesus did not change anything.]

I think you live with a kind of legalism, based on all that I’ve read from you, that I feel as if I have “become enlightened above.”

Before Jesus - law and prophets unfulfilled… After Jesus - law and prophets fulfilled. He changed it all with regard to our friendship with God.  Took 10 commandments and distilled them into 2. And your inference that any ministry model that has any human creativity involved is “disobedience” just doesn’t scan with me scripturally. (That is the inevitable result of your statements...)

But I will leave it there, sorta like you have, since this is not a theology discussion forum.

Blessings!