Bill Hybels Responds to “Reveal” Criticism
- Posted on June 09, 2008
- Viewed 1407 times
- (100) comments
Go, Bill!
You can watch a video of the interview here, or read some other commentary on this interview from Dave Ferguson or Tony Morgan.
A couple of things for your input:
1. What did you think of Bill’s response? Clear? Will it have an impact? Was it necessary?
2. It seems that much of the push-back seems to come initially from Christianity Today. Is there a rub between CT and WC? Or is CT just looking for a scoop to get more readers? Any thoughts?
A couple of weeks ago, Christianity Today ran an article entitled, "Willow Creek's Huge Shift" (subtitled Influential Mega Church Moves Away from Seeker Sensitive Services). Here's how the article started: “After modeling a seeker-sensitive approach to church growth for three decades, Willow Creek now plans to gear its weekend services toward mature believers seeking to grow their faith." Recently, Jim Millado sat down with Bill Hybels so that he could respond. It seems that from Bill's perspective, enough was enough, and it was time to set the record straight. Here are a few comments from Hybels on the situation (and on other reports that have come out from Reveal). You can also watch the video of the interview...
"I think it was an unfortunate article that was written without a proper understanding of what we’re actually doing these days. I mean, we have had the same one sentence mission statement for 32 years. We’re trying to turn irreligious people into fully devoted followers of Christ. We have never been more committed to either side of that mission statement. Some of the changes we’re making right now around Willow are to increase our evangelistic effectiveness. One of our big three strategic plan initiatives right now is raising the risk level as we point people to faith in Christ."
You might remember the first blog post that got all this controversy started was from Christianity Today's Out of Ur Blog. Their initial blog post was titled, "Willow Creek Repents". Hybels responded to that blog post as well: "I think every evangelical knows that’s kind of a loaded up term, and I think someone wanted to get some action on a blog, and I think it was very unfortunate and quite disingenuous to title the article that way. But such as it is, I will be the first to say we learn and grow at Willow. We make no apologies for wanting to get better at leading this church."
Comments
if you want a Globally Recognized Avatar (the images next to your profile) get them here. Once you sign up, your picture will displayed on any website that supports gravitars.
Wendi on Mon, June 09, 2008
Perhaps I’m responding prematurely, because I don’t have time right now to listen to the whole interview. But based on what I read:
1. Bill was clear that WC is still about reaching lost people, being a “seeker” church if you will. He was not clear about what the Reveal study was and was not, so unless there is much more there (again, I didn’t listen to the interview), I’m sorry that he didn’t elaborate because not doing so makes him sound a bit defensive.
2. No, it won’t make an impact. Those who appreciate WC (like me) understood what they have come to realize, have always appreciated their commitment to learning, growing and changing their ministry methods and focus as needed. Detractors will never listen to anything that affirms anything related to WC. Heck, most don’t even believe that those who have found Jesus over the years at WC are “real Christians.”
3.vI have found CT to objectively report everything that’s on the landscape. They have run many, many articles by BH and other WC staff in Leadership Journal. It surprises me that the “Out or Ur” post was titled “Willow Creek Repents.” I agree with BH, perhaps they were looking for something that would get activity on the blog.
Wendi
Peter Hamm on Mon, June 09, 2008
GREAT response, Bill! THANK YOU! CRYSTAL clear.
As one who read the study carefully, followed the news from Willow on it, and whose church is now part of the study, none of this is a surprise, as this is what the study and what Willow has been saying about this all along.
I suspect that we will find out just how many people will actually be impacted in the next day or two as the comments appear on this space.
Kevin Bussey on Mon, June 09, 2008
I thought it was a clear and powerful response. Not powerful because he was mad but because he made it clear what their purpose is. Their purpose is to make followers of Christ. What more do the Church Police want?
Sam on Mon, June 09, 2008
Maybe the “church police” have this crazy idea that the Bible being followed when it comes to “doing church”.
Maybe they think that a church should not be designed around the “felt needs” of the lost.
Maybe they think that Hybels had ample time to clarify his position and wonders why the response took so long.
Maybe they think that the solution shouldnt be taking yet another survey and rolling out another book and “product” to be sold and implemented in WCA churches.
Maybe they see the effect of 32 years of seeker sensitive churches have produced. Youth are leaving the church in droves after they leave the church, biblical illiteracy, false converts, psycho-babble self help sermons, etc.
Just a few guesses though…...
Kevin Bussey on Mon, June 09, 2008
Sam,
Do you know for a fact that Willow isn’t preaching Jesus? I know people whose lives have been changed for Christ because of what God did through Willow, Saddleback and other churches. Maybe if the Church Police spent time sharing Jesus instead of nit-picking their own we wouldn’t see people leaving in droves. Just a thought.
Peter Hamm on Mon, June 09, 2008
Sam,
I think you’ve proven the limitations of the impact this statement will have. If I may indulge myself…
[Maybe the “church police” have this crazy idea that the Bible being followed when it comes to “doing church”.]
I have visited Willow and similar churches and serve in a similar church. We follow the Bible. So does Willow. It still mystifies me that people assume they and we don’t.
[Maybe they think that a church should not be designed around the “felt needs” of the lost.] Willow is designed around the great commission, and designed around the mission to turn irreligious people into fully devoted followers of Christ. They minister to “felt needs” just like Jesus did when he fed the hungry and healed the hurting.
[Maybe they think that Hybels had ample time to clarify his position and wonders why the response took so long.] Did you read the REVEAL study? I did. There was nothing to clarify. Bill is being extra-gracious with this, a re-telling of what has already been told.
[Maybe they think that the solution shouldnt be taking yet another survey and rolling out another book and “product” to be sold and implemented in WCA churches.] I will pay good money for anything that helps me follow Jesus in my church leadership role and reach people and change lives better. It’s money well spent. And to think that prayer and seeking God was not part of this whole process is to make an assumption based on (obviously) a lack of knowledge of what really has happened with REVEAL.
[Maybe they see the effect of 32 years of seeker sensitive churches have produced. Youth are leaving the church in droves after they leave the church, biblical illiteracy, false converts, psycho-babble self help sermons, etc.] I wish you could see our seeker-sensitive church with so many youth that I’ve personally discipled who are becoming great men and women of God, people who are reading the Bible every day and learning about God more all the time, people who are true converts who are making a serious, noticeable difference for Christ in their town and in their world. We had very low attendance at one of our services in February which is my proudest “attendance” figure of the whole year… Why? Because over 10% of our church was on mission trips… at the SAME TIME! And that’s just that one week! I’ve seen the kind of Christ-followers that are part of Willow that make me very pleased to be associated with them in any way, even if only as a member of the association.
You speak of what, I suspect, you do not know, Sam.
Sam on Mon, June 09, 2008
Can you provide me with Biblical support that the Church gathering together for worship should be designed to “attract” the lost or centered around the “felt needs” of the unchurched? After Jesus fed the masses with the loaves and fishes, they returned the next day to again have their “felt needs” met and Jesus hit them with some hard teachings and many of them left even to the point of Jesus asking his disciples if they wanted to leave too. The church was designed to edify the believers and equip them to go out and evangelize. It was not designed in and of itself as an evangelism method mimicking the lost world.
As an aside, can you also provide me with scripture that supports Hybels meeting with the group soulfource?
Peter Hamm on Mon, June 09, 2008
Sam,
Can you provide me with Scripture which shows that we should criticize and condemn a church based on what we read on the internet and hear on the radio, when in fact they are churning out people who are sold out to follow Jesus?
[The church was designed to edify the believers and equip them to go out and evangelize.] That’s what Willow and churches like mine do. I’m SO sorry that you can’t see that. We were commissioned (the WHOLE church) to make disciples as we go. That’s what we are doing. Again, it mystifies that you can’t see that.
Sam on Mon, June 09, 2008
Peter, just to correct one of your assertions. people making a difference in their community or going on missions trips does not equate them to being “true converts”. Lost people go in mission trips. Lost people make a difference in their community also. One of the dangers of “seeker sensitive” churches is that these lost people actually believe they are saved because after they raised their hand, walked the aisle, or signed the commitment card they were never truly discipled and tested to see if they displayed fruits of their conversion. They just became another number that the “seeker sensitive” church could claim that they saved.
Sam on Mon, June 09, 2008
Nice pragmatic, nonresponsive, evasive answer. Where is your scriptural support for designing a church around the lost? It mystifies me that you can blatantly disregard scriptural and cling to a man centered “the ends justify the means” mentality.
I agree that we are to evangelize and make disciples but not in the context of the local church meeting together for worship.We are to go out into the world and evangelize. AND Willow Creek has admitted that it is doing a poor job at discipleship.
Peter Hamm on Mon, June 09, 2008
And Sam, to correct your assumption.
I KNOW these people, you do not. I can see the fruit of the Spirit in their lives, and you can not. And they do these things because they love and follow Jesus and want everybody else to, too. Period.
The church is not designed around the lost, Sam. It’s designed around Jesus. And Jesus commanded us to make disciples. And that’s what we do.
You make it clear from your statements, Sam, that you have no real knowledge of what a church like ours does. (and we are very much like Willow, unashamedly.)
I have no more time to argue with you (busy week of planning, equipping, encouraging, exhorting, and just plain living life as a pastor to people who love Jesus and to others who are trying to figure it all out, if you will), because you are not listening to me, and you are unable to admit that it’s even possible, it seems, that the people who come to know Christ in a church like Willow or a church like mine are genuine converts. You seem more interested in arguing over semantics that mean nothing, meaningless debates about words and geneologies. I’m truly sorry, because I believe you are much poorer for that.
Sam on Mon, June 09, 2008
Peter, still cant provide me with that scriptural support? Let me know when you find it. I am interested in biblical support for your position which is far from meaningless. It is not a matter of semantics. It is a matter of being faithful to what we are biblically called to do.
I acknowledge that there are true converts within WCA churches. But there are also false converts that are deluded into believing they are saved because the church has done very little to instruct them on “working out your salvation”. Narrow is the way…not wide.
I am sorry i have taken your time away from commenting on every story that is posted here. Carry on.
Kevin Bussey on Mon, June 09, 2008
Sam,
Where is your Scriptural Support for criticizing other ministries?
Philippians 1:15-18
It is true that some preach Christ out of envy and rivalry, but others out of goodwill. The latter do so in love, knowing that I am put here for the defense of the gospel. The former preach Christ out of selfish ambition, not sincerely, supposing that they can stir up trouble for me while I am in chains. But what does it matter? The important thing is that in every way, whether from false motives or true, Christ is preached. And because of this I rejoice.
Wendi on Mon, June 09, 2008
Sam,
If feeling passionate enough to reach the least and the lost by sacrificing time and resources to go out of my comfort zone on a mission trip isn’t evidence of conversion fruit . . . what on earth do you use to measure fruit. Of course lost people go on mission trips. Lost people sit in your church every week (well, maybe your church doesn’t welcome lost people, so this may not apply to your church). You have a lot of _____ to challenge Peter, with whom, I assume, you’ve never even had a conversation, that the people he is in relationship with and has discipled aren’t really Christians. WAAAAY out of line.
Can you provide us with biblical support for?
• Owning a church building
• Having a choir
• A sound system
• Pews
• A monthly church newsletter
• Adult Sunday school classes
These are ridiculous questions intended to point out the ridiculousness of your positions, which of course you won’t get. Here’s a couple of real questions?
How many WC or other SS false Christians who raised their hand, signed a card, walked an isle have you met and subsequently “converted” through your correct biblical methods and tested to prove their conversion through fruits? If you don’t have first hand evidence of the accusations you make – you have no business making them.
Here’s another, have any of your “converts” ever fallen away from their faith? I presume the answer is yes (unless you are more effective than Jesus)? Ah, proof positive that you must be using unbiblical methods for church and evangelism.
Sorry for the sarcasm, but sometimes the statements by people like you sicken me, and this morning was one of those times.
Wendi
Eric Joppa on Mon, June 09, 2008
Sam,
I was lurking around when bob went off on you last week for the same stuff you are doing now. While I am sad for his anger and the way he attacked, I think he was right on the money with you.
You are obviously here just to pick a fight. Not only that, but your arguments are asinine, lacking merit of any research and your knowledge of scripture, to me, is suspect given how you are so willing to discount so obvious an impact for the kingdom of God.
What if Sam, YOU are not a TRUE CONVERT? I will not be so rude and obnoxious to make assumptions about you salvation. But I will say this, you sure as heck don’t sound like Jesus to me.
Page 1 of 7 pages 1 2 3 > Last »
Post a Comment