The Gospel Coalition

Francis Schaeffer cried for the culture.

Bob Kauflin writes about “Must-Have Worship Hits” and what this means for Christian worship.

A well-written and thought-provoking article by Nathan Finn describing the Varieties of Southern Baptist Conservatism.

#1 Post on Kingdom People this week: The Baptist Diocese

Today, I’m picking up where I left off yesterday regarding my thoughts on youth worship. 

1. Participation in Worship
 In many youth groups, the worship services include half an hour or more of worship songs and then twenty minutes or less of Bible teaching. Prayer typically occupies less than 2 minutes of a worship service. This type of service appeals to many people, especially to those who are good singers. But it can unintentionally lead to an over-emphasis on the worship band and the singers up front. Not only that, in seeking to sound good, the worship band can unintentionally give the impression of superiority. Young people who are not musically talented do not feel they participate in worship.

Youth worship services should feature more variety in worship expression. A half-hour of singing is too much for anyone. Just watch to see who is still singing after 25 minutes. Usually, it’s just the worship band and a handful of hoarse teenagers. Another reason why many teenagers don’t sing in worship is because the band usually plays too loud and the teens can’t hear themselves anyway.

It is special to hear each other singing. I understand why some worship leaders tell the worshippers to “close their eyes and forget about everyone else.” They want the worshippers to close out distractions and focus solely on God. But if corporate worship is all about me and God alone together, I can do that at home. Give me a Chris Tomlin CD and lock me in a closet with my Bible and I can worship for an hour.

But there is something special when we are together singing and praising God – as a community of believers, as people who are focused on glorying God and building up each other. I don’t want to close my eyes and think only about God when I’m at church; I want to see how God’s working in the lives of my brothers and sisters. I love to see others singing and praising Him, praying to Him, and hearing the Word.

Teens today are more isolated than ever before, even with their Ipods, and instant messengers. They are enclosed most of the time, fragmented from society and longing for real relationships. Let’s not give them more of the same in our worship service. This is the opportunity for them to connect with God and with each other.

2. Music Style
 When people ask me what I think about worship, they almost always are referring to musical style. I like so many forms of worship that I hesitate even to answer that question. I enjoy contemporary Christian music and prefer a worship band over an organ and piano. Most teenagers are the same way.

Musical preference should not be the defining factor in a worship service. Some kids like rap – does that mean we should do rap in worship? Some kids like country – should we then do southern gospel? Everyone prefers one style over another. The key is to transcend these preferences and to offer something that appeals to most everyone there (without becoming bland) and to focus on God and not the style of music.

I’ll have some more thoughts on youth worship tomorrow…

written by Trevin Wax. © 2007 Kingdom People Blog

With the exception of seeing a youth group sold out for Christ on mission, nothing quite excites me more than seeing a passionate group of teenagers having a genuine experience with God in worship. A youth worship service should be a place where the teenagers hear from and respond to God. Worship leaders should work to root the youth group in God’s work in the past, move the teens to celebrate His work in the present, and equip them for the ministry in the future. The question after a youth worship service would not be “Did you like it?” but “How did God speak to you?”

1. Word-centered
 Above all, a youth worship service should be centered on God’s Word. I am not referring only to the preaching part of the service. All the service should be grounded in the Word. This means that our choice of songs, our speech, our actions, and the sermon should be rich in teaching the Word. Hearing the Word preached, responding to God in prayer, giving our tithes and offerings, greeting one another, singing praise – all of these things constitute worship.

2. God as Transcendent and Immanent
 Our worship services communicate to others what God is like. A worship service that is cold and impersonal will communicate to outsiders a god who is distant and irrelevant. One can think of some liturgical churches where the only thing that matters is ritual and tradition to the exclusion of any new form or method. The god presented by these services is far away and impersonal, never impinging on our way of life.

On the other hand, a worship service that concentrates solely on God’s nearness and his love for us can communicate a god who is our best buddy, a coach on life’s journey, a loving grandfather who would never hurt a fly. One can think of some contemporary churches where all that matters is innovation and sentimentality to the exclusion of any doctrine of biblical depth. The god presented by these services is close and personal, but he is so much like us that he doesn’t impinge on our way of life either.

Then, there’s the God of the Bible. He is not the distant, impersonal god shouting down commandments from afar. Neither is he the touchy-feely sentimental god who simply offers love and no justice. He is both transcendent and immanent – near and far, merciful and just, holy and righteous. Our worship services should reflect God as He is, not God as we would like Him to be. This means that a balanced worship service will present the God who is holy, just, and perfectly righteous as well as the God who is loving, caring, and forgiving.

Most evangelical services lean towards the immanent side of the spectrum. We emphasize God’s closeness, His love and care, probably as a corrective to the dry, ritualistic services that present God as distant and unapproachable. It would be better to steer a middle course through these.

We have almost lost the concept of awe in worship, and youth worship reflects this loss as well. When young people see God for who He is and are genuinely in awe of His majesty, they are transformed. I have seen this in the lives of young people in Louisville, since I have been in seminary. Furthermore, young people today hunger for this type of worship. Just think of some of the most popular worship songs right now: “Agnus Dei,” “Holy is the Lord,” and “How Great is Our God.”

I’ll have some more thoughts coming tomorrow…

written by Trevin Wax. © 2007 Kingdom People Blog

The question of Jesus’ death is haunting to modern ears today. Any attempt to pin blame on the Jews for being complicit in Jesus’ death will cause people to call you anti-Semitic (though the fact that Christians worship a God who came in Jewish flesh is hard to totally ignore). Many people don’t even think about the historical reasons Jesus died, whether or not it was the Romans or Jews. They automatically think of the theological reasons for his death, mainly their sins. But the question remains: Who put Jesus on the cross?

THE ROMANS
 The Romans killed Jesus by actually being the people who put Jesus on the cross. Pontius Pilate, acting under the authority of Caesar, committed Jesus to crucifixion. The Romans scourged him, tortured and beat him, and crucified him. In the most important historical sense, the Romans (I believe representing all of the pagan peoples of the world) were responsible for Jesus’ death.

THE JEWISH LEADERS
 The Jews were God’s chosen people, the ones God commissioned to be a light to the pagan nations around them. They were to be the light of the world and the salt of the earth. But more times than not, they failed at this task. Though the Romans were the ones who actually, officially, put Jesus on the cross, the Jewish leaders were the ones who handed Jesus over to Rome and demanded his execution. Many of the Jewish leaders believed Jesus to be a threat to their traditions. Ironically, the very people who were called to lead the world to God joined forces with the pagans to crucify God’s Son.

I must mention, however, that saying the Jewish leaders had a hand in Jesus’ death does not implicate the entire Jewish nation. Nor should this be a reason for anti-Jewish rhetoric. After all, most all of the early Christians were Jews, not to mention Jesus Himself.

ALL OF US
 Because historically, the Romans (representing all the Gentile nations) and the Jews (God’s chosen people) put Jesus on the cross, we can then move to the theological implication that the whole world killed Jesus. We all killed Jesus. In a real sense, we were all there in the crowd yelling “Crucify Him!” His death was to pay for our sins. We are like Barrabas. Jesus dies and Barrabas goes free. Jesus dies, and we go free. Though we are the ones deserving death, the sentence for our sin, Jesus takes our punishment upon himself. He goes to the cross in our place. Our rebellion against God, beginning with Adam in the Garden of Eden and continuing to the present, put Jesus on the cross.

GOD
 There’s one more person responsible for Jesus’ death. And this is the most important answer. Who killed Jesus? The Romans, The Jews, We all did… but here’s the clincher. God killed Jesus. I know that might sound harsh and it is, indeed, hard to wrap your mind around. But it’s true. God the Father sacrificed his Son. He killed his Son in order to spare us His righteous wrath.

Now don’t think this is a picture of some vindictive God up there throwing down lightning bolts. He’s not a God who enjoyed seeing Jesus suffer. He does not delight in the wages of sin. God killed Jesus because this is what it would take for sin to be forgiven. This is what it would take for death to be no more. This is what it would take for God to remain just and holy in dealing with sin and loving and merciful in accepting sinners.

written by Trevin Wax  © 2007 Kingdom People blog

“As My Father has loved Me, so have I loved you.”
- Jesus, to the disciples (John 15:9)

On the night of His betrayal, Jesus told the disciples that He had loved them in the same way He Himself had been loved by His Father. Yet, the love in Jesus’ heart for His followers superceded a simple sentimental feeling of affection toward the twelve with whom He had traveled for three years. Likewise, the Father’s love for the Son went much deeper than sentiment. The Father’s love ultimately took Jesus to the cross.

We often mistakenly think that the statement “God wants what is best for me” refers to what we think is best for ourselves and His kingdom. Instead, what God considers best for us may greatly differ from the mindset we have.

God the Father knew that His Son must become the sacrifice for the sin of the world in order that the world might be saved through Him. His love led Jesus to Golgotha, because from the heavenly perspective, only the blood of His innocent Son could satisfy the requirement of justice towards a sinful world.

In the same way, Jesus loves us with the love of His Father – a bigger and more complex love than that of our devotion to Him. Jesus wants what is ultimately best for us and His kingdom, although the times of trial may confuse us and even bring us to doubt His loving care. God’s love actively chooses the best for each person from the kingdom perspective, not from our limited human way of thinking.

When we go through certain inexplicable circumstances that force us to question our faith in God’s love for us, we must remember that His all surpassing knowledge is higher than our finite opinion of what lies in our best interest. We may not always understand the Father’s plan, but we can continue to bask in the love He showed us supremely when He gave His Son to die in our place.

written by Trevin Wax. © 2007 Kingdom People Blog

Soul of Christ, sanctify me,
Body of Christ, save me,
Blood of Christ, refresh me,
Water from the side of Christ, wash me,
Passion of Christ, strengthen me,
O good Jesus, hear me,
Within your wounds, hide me,
Let me never be separated from you,
From the powers of darkness, defend me,
In the hour of my death, call me,
And bid me come with you,
That with your saints I may praise you
For ever and ever. Amen.

- Brother Roger of Taize

With all the hoopla over my blog posts regarding Paul Negrut and the plagiarism issue, I forgot to announce on this blog something important.I have begun a Romanian version of this blog, Oamenii Împărăţiei (Kingdom People), which I pray will be a helpful website for my Romanian friends and brothers and sisters in Christ. Several articles from this blog have already been translated and posted there, including “Thoughts Upon My Ordination,” and the “Baptist Press Article on Paul Negrut and Plagiarism“.

Currently, I’m running a series on the Beatitudes over at the Romanian “Kingdom People,” but soon, I hope that all of my posts from “Kingdom People” in English will have their Romanian equivalent at the Romanian site. We’ve got a ways to go before then, but that’s the goal.

If there are any Romanian friends that would be willing to help me translate some of my previous blog posts for inclusion on the new blog, I’d be most grateful.

“Weary with the conflicts of the world, one goes into the Church to seek refreshment for the soul. And what does one find? Alas, too often, one finds only the turmoil of the world. The preacher comes forward, not out of a secret place of meditation and power, not with the authority of God’s Word permeating his message, not with human wisdom pushed far into the background by the glory of the Cross, but with human opinions about the social problems of the hour or easy solutions to the vast problem of sin. Such is the sermon… Sad indeed is the heart of the man who has come seeking peace.”

- J. Gresham Machen, Christianity and Liberalism

1. Before you make a judgment about Mohler based on the media scandal, check out his comments about the possibility of a “gay gene” in their context. Here is his follow-up post, correcting some of the misconceptions. See also his comments on the segregation of church members by age, and what this is doing to families. 

2. Scot McKnight provides a good review of Rob Bell’s book Sex God. Click here and here for the review.

3. Richard Land says he’ll sit out a Guiliani-Clinton race and offers several good reasons for doing so. But he may not have to. Fred Thompson might be running.

4. Phil Vischer, creator of VeggieTales, talks about the rise, peak, and downfall of his media empire.

The mega-church model in the U.S. is changing. The Walmart-styled church that sought to bring thousands to one central location has transformed into the fast-food franchise model, the McChurch that serves a ”brand” of church services in several different locations. Big churches are spreading out over the city, becoming one church, three (or four or ten) locations.

So, does the multi-site model look more like Walmart or KFC? Actually, it looks most like the model of the Episcopalian diocese. The Senior Pastor is the “bishop,” pastoring the main church in the region. The ”mini-churches” that bear the brand name (and logo) of the main church have pastors who are under the authority of the senior pastor. Thus, the birth of the Baptist parish.

Historically, Southern Baptists have planted churches, not franchised them. When a church grows to a certain size, a significant group within the church relocates and plants a church in a different part of town. The mother church might support the baby church financially for a time, but the baby church eventually becomes autonomous, connected to the main church through denominational ties, but with its own authority and autonomy.

Today, mother churches are deciding to leave the umbilical cords intact. The multi-site strategy doesn’t plant autonomous churches. Some of the bigger churches are actually moving into neighborhoods and absorbing smaller churches. Much like a big bank comes in and buys out a smalltown bank, big churches are beginning to “buy out” smaller ones.

I’m not seeking to demean pastors and churches that going multi-site. There are pastors and churches I respect that are strongly in favor of this idea (Mark Driscoll, Highview Baptist & Southeast Christian in Louisville). 

But I hear very few people asking pertinent questions the ecclesiology behind this new movement. Is the idea of a parish or diocese biblical? Maybe. Maybe not. It certainly is not Baptist, at least not historically. So, here are some questions I have regarding the multi-site phenomenon. (I am actually curious to better understand this movement and would love to hear how multi-site pastors would answer these.)

1. What happens to the structure of authority if one of the smaller churches becomes bigger than the church that’s “in charge?”
2. What keeps these brandname churches from becoming a “mini-denomination” within the major denomination? What authority do these churches have at the associational level? Are they recognized as one big church? Or several small churches united under one umbrella?
3. Why do the megachurches desire to replicate themselves and not plant free churches? Is it a control thing? Is it just easier? Why is a churchplant not as attractive as the franchise model?
4. How does church discipline work in these churches?
5. Do the smaller churches have certain rights? If they disagree with the policies or direction of the main church, can they become autonomous?
6. Would their fight for independence cause them to lose their property?

These are just some of the questions I have. The multi-site revolution is just beginning, so many of these issues have not yet come up. When they do, will we have a biblically sustainable ecclesiology to fall back on?

written by Trevin Wax. © 2007 Kingdom People Blog