Epicenter Conversations

I missed class this week but I had a good excuse with a new baby at home and a toddler recovering from croup.

Here is photographic evidence. And, just to keep this post germane to our current topic of discussion, yes Landon was circumsized and the tough little dude slept right through it.



Would one or more of you who were at our Epicenter class this weekend be willing to post some of the thoughts inspired by the conversation?

A clash of cultures led to the Jerusalem Council's decision recorded in Acts 15. In our multicultural world where modern and postmodern world views overlap, liberal and conservative viewpoints collide, and numerous spiritual paths diverge, the potential culture clashes seem almost limitless and infinitely more complex than the Jew vs. Gentile issue faced by the early church.

So, how do we relate to the story of Acts 15? Is it even worthwhile to ask (as I sort of did in the last post) how would we update these recommendations for our current situation? I think it is worthwhile and here is why...

In his book Believing, Behaving, Belonging: Finding New Love for the Church, Richard Rice writes the following.

"Community is the most important element of Christian existence. Believing, behaving, and belonging are all essential to the Christian life, but belonging is more important, more fundamental than the others. Moreover, because the Church is the creation of the Holy Spirit, it provides a fellowship that cannot be found anywhere else."

This could be an overcorrection to the neglected importance of community in our churches. However, the point I think is well made that belonging is fundamental to what it means to be a community of believers. Therefore, a focus on belonging is important particularly for those newly introduced to our community. Instead, the focus in Adventist circles tends to be on believing and behaving and when those are taken care of the belonging is automatic because there are limited options for Second advent anticipating, Sabbath keeping, vegetarian, non-jewelry wearing, oh and also Jesus following people. (I apologize for my inaccurate stereotyping and cynicism. I am attempting to describe an unfortunately familiar extreme to make a point.)

And, the point is this. We have taken belonging for granted because it tends to just happen in the Adventist community.

Getting back to Acts 15... the recommendations to avoid meat offered to idols, strangled meat and blood, and sexual immorality were all important for belonging in a community where Gentile and Jewish converts could coexist. I believe this was the primary concern of the Jerusalem Council. I also believe maintaining community and a sense of belonging where people from differing world views can coexist should be a primary concern for us today.

One difference I see between the early church's situation and our own is that at that time there seems to have been an assumption that the community was already formed and it just needed to be maintained. Therefore, there were a few negative recommendations to that end. I am afraid that our individualistic society's natural sense of community is so stunted that many positive statements such as, "Focus on the good in one another," would instead be required. Or, perhaps just two would suffice, "Love the Lord your God with all your heart and all your soul and all your strength and all your mind and Love your neighbor as yourself," if we really understood them and took them to heart.

Another difference is that the early church was dealing with a very specific issue of Judaizers attempting to convince new Gentile converts that they needed to be circumcised and then keep the entire law of Moses. If you've ever seen a grown man circumcised (done today under general anesthesia) you can much better appreciate the Gentile's immense relief when the council's four recommendations were made! On the other hand, when I think of issues of diversity in our current context they seem very broad and rather nebulous whether it is race relations, liberal vs. conservative (whatever those titles mean), interdenominational interaction, or interfaith dialogue.

Help! What do you think the Holy Spirit would have us say to address issues of diversity?

As we prepare to study the Council of Jerusalem which met to deal with the problem of Judaizers telling new Gentile converts that they needed to be circumcised in order to join the community of believers, here is an interesting quote regarding the Council's decision which was -- "Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God: But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and [from] fornication, and [from] things strangled, and [from] blood. For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day." (Acts 15:19-21)

Bruce Metzger writes in Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament regarding Acts 15:20:

"The occasion for issuing the Apostolic Decree, it should be observed, was to settle the question whether Gentile converts to Christianity should be required to submit to the rite of circumcision and fulfill other Mosaic statutes. The Council decided that such observance was not required for salvation; at the same time, however, in order to avoid giving unnecessary offense to Jewish Christians (and to Jews contemplating becoming Christians), the Council asked Gentile converts to make certain concessions for prudential reasons, abstaining from those acts that would offend Jewish scruples and hinder social intercourse, including joint participation in the Lord's Supper."

This reminds me of Yung's comment when we were studying the Old Covenant that the 10 commandments were really about forming and maintaining community. Could the Jerusalem Council's decision be about the same thing?

As we get ready to dig into this interesting chapter, here are some questions I would like to consider for this coming weekend:

What are the concessions we would ask a convert to Adventism to make and why are they important?

Are the concessions to become Adventist different from the concessions of becoming a follower of Christ? Why or why not and if so how?

How would these basic concessions compare with the 28 Fundamental Beliefs?

Can one differ on one or more of the 28 Fundamental Beliefs and remain a part of the Adventist Community?

Finally, what question would you like to discuss regarding Acts 15?

If you want to get the conversation going early, or if you cannot attend our class this weekend, post your response here!

I just wanted to post a thought in response to Carmen, regarding "one to one" study verses public evangelism.   I think relationships is key to any form of evangelism that is done. In public evangelism, if the audience doesn't connect with a church members, or if Bible Studies are not personally delivered and a relationship started with the student, neither if very effective. This, I believe, is why many people say that public evangelism doesn't work. Relationships are not being formed, and few members invite friends. DBS wasn't very effective until we began hand delivering them and getting to know the students. However the idea of relationships is easier to talk about than to do. How many people are really willing to go out and invest their time and energy in facilitating relationships? How many of us even really know our neighbors well enough to share with them? Luke and I have been cultivating our relationships with our DBS students going on 2 years, and we are just beginning to see them exploring these truths in a more in depth and committed way. We are so happy, but it's a long haul! We've spent most every Sabbath afternoon for 2 years (unless we go out of town), hosted the Shawn Boonstra series in our home (which included coming up with children's programing for 1 1/2 hours, 5 nights a week, for 4 weeks), stopped by to visit, and  invited them over. We even had a cook out especially for one of our students to prove to that you can be a meat eating Adventist! (the chicken was very tasty!) I don't regret any of it, but I don't think I realised the personal investment of time and energy it would take! Of course with these relationships we start from scratch so it does takes longer, but fortunately we start off on spiritual footing so there isn't the difficulty of transitioning into spiritual things. I have more difficulty in moving my friends into spiritual conversation. I don't think I come across as having "all the truth" but when I study with anyone my direction of thought will be that what I've learned up to this point is truth. I think people are looking for solid answers. Although post moderns might say "what's good for you is good for you, and what's good for me is good for me," and may really believe there is no absolute truth, I think most people respect someone who believes in absolute truth even if they don't agree. Hopefully my belief in the absolute truth of the Bible, lovingly and humbly expressed, will unsettle them enough to at least consider the possibility of an absolute truth and begin to ask question which may lead to exploring God's word.

Hi Brent,

I thought I’d break into the Blog talk with my thoughts regarding some of the things we discussed this past weekend in Sabbath School.

Sometimes I think I see in the church a want for something new and fresh, an attitude of, “We need to move on,” or, “We need to progress beyond our limited view of Bible truth.” There seems to be a general disinterest and indifference to “the same OLD message,” while those who weren’t born into it have grasped it with joy! They’re thrilled with a NEW and beautiful vision of God and His plans for the future!

I agree that evangelism has been done wrongly at times, or made us uncomfortable at the least. I agree that different methods need to be tried. But I don’t see a need to throw out the message just because the methods seem ineffective. At this time I haven’t seen the fruits of souls won by any alternative idea floated around. I’m all for new methods that win souls, but I just haven't seen any implemented yet.

I could agree with the idea of “just loving people” into the church, but I haven’t met anyone who became Adventist that way. I’m willing to consider the idea of “dialoging” people into the church, but I haven’t met anyone who’s joined our church that way either. So until the “ideas” grow feet and start bringing people into the truth, I guess I’ll keep supporting public evangelism, because that’s what brought in most of the people I know.

Labels: Epicenter, evangelism

I didn't share these thoughts during Sabbath School yesterday because I couldn't get my thoughts together in a concise manner. Here's the last point I wanted to make.

If I've heard correctly in class, there's a general feeling that our emphasis, when it comes to evangelism, should be along the lines of “we need to respect (or is that accept?) everyone’s beliefs and lifestyles,” and that to point out truth or sin is not being nice! Our society today values “nice” and it’s not nice to believe that we have truths that other people need to hear; that’s arrogance on our part. To tell others these truths might threaten their world view, or their beliefs, and who are we to do that! I think this keeps us from evangelizing, which is what Satan wants when it comes to exposing his deceptions in these last days.

I respect people that have different beliefs, but that doesn’t mean I agree with them or should legitimize their belief systems. Am I acting in Christian love in withholding truths they need to know to inherit eternal life just to be nice and be considered open minded? I don't believe that “all paths lead to God.” Of course we don't have all the truth, but we have a lot that's worth telling! We have a responsiblity before God to tell what we know and warn people of what's coming.

Fellow Christians of other denominations are in as much danger, if not MORE, from the deceptions that are coming on the world as are non-Christians when it comes to salvation. When Satan works miracles or demons impersonate angels, won’t Christians be the first ones to herald that this is from God? Is it “sheep stealing” to warn Christians also?

I won't be in Sabbath School this coming Sabbath, but I'd be interested in reading other people's thoughts in response to my posts. Thanks, Brent for all the effort you put into our class.

Labels: evangelism, religion

Here's another thought (and there will be one more).

Most Adventists seem to have a basic knowledge of our history and a basic knowledge of prophecy. But it seem to me that most misunderstandings and mistakes in understanding our church and Ellen White’s writings come from not knowing our history and the circumstances surrounding her testimonies. It helps to understand them in the context of what the issues were at the time.

In our class there appear to be two ideas about preaching Christ to the world. One is presenting the 3 Angels’ messages and prophecy, and the second is presenting God’s love and the revelation of His character. These same issues have been around in our history. The reason Ellen White was so excited about the 1888 message of righteousness by faith is because she saw that Christ and His love and redeeming power were being left out of our prophetic message. When W.W. Prescott preached a series in Melbourne Australia while she lived there, a new terminology was born, it was called “Christology.” Here’s an excerpt from a biography of W.W. Prescott by Gilbert Valentine:

“Prescott even managed to turn traditional Adventist Saturday-Sunday polemic into a remarkable gospel presentation. Several weeks after the presentation on the Sabbath doctrine the seasoned but awed W.C. White was still marveling at what the professor had done. Prescott had preached ‘With clearness and power that exceeds anything I have ever heard in my life,’ he reported. He said Prescott had presented Adventist teaching ‘with freshness and brightness’ never seen before. White recalled that he had not even once heard the professor preach ‘what we are accustomed to call doctrinal sermons’ on ‘the old lines’…..He longed to see ‘every one’ of the ministers emulate Prescott in ‘preaching Christ and Him crucified.’ Ellen White too was ecstatic over Prescott’s sermons….She saw in Prescott’s Christ-centered evangelism a pattern for the whole church.” (pp. 114-115)

This is in reference to Prescott preaching the 3 Angels’ messages in a Christ-centered way--not just doctrinal, but everything leading to Christ. I think that is the balance between preaching the 3 Angels’ messages that we’ve been called to warn the world with AND lifting up God and His true character to the world. There’s nothing new under the sun--evangelism being Christ-centered is old ground, not a new idea.

I think we see both ideas together in Revelation itself. After all it's called "The Revelation of JESUS CHRIST" not, the beast, the antichrist, the papacy, etc.
So evangelism without Christ being lift up strongly misses the focal point of the book of Revelation. However, Rev 1:3 says, "Blessed is he who reads and those who hear the words of THIS prophecy, and KEEP those things which are written in it; for the time is near." To abandon preaching the prophetic message we know, I believe, is to abandon a message God has for the time we are living in.

I have never really thought I would like to live in New York before. But, after hearing about Samir Selmanovic's Faith House Project, I would love to be there. This is exactly the kind of community I and a few other friends (including one very vocal atheist) have dreamt of. Here is a link to Samir's blog.

Faith House Manhattan


How's that for evangelism?

Labels: evangelism, religion

This coming weekend we will be covering Acts chapters 12 and 13.

This past weekend we took a look over our shoulder at our journey through Acts so far. We did this in light of our discussion on evangelism. At it's heart, I think we agree that evangelism is sharing the gospel. The issue then is our definition of 'gospel'. Is the gospel a pure, propositional truth that we need sell? Or, is the gospel an interactive, local, relational experience that we get to share? (Just the phrasing of my questions reveals my personal bias.)

Our survey of Acts demonstrates an intriguing concept. Perhaps this separation between the spoken propositional truth and the relational experience is a false dichotomy. We looked at several examples in Acts where both public proclamation and personal meeting of needs in a community either both functioned to expand God's kingdom or where the opportunity to meet another's needs led to the right time to explain a deep truth (e.g. Peter and John heal the lame man at the temple and then have an opportunity to tell a large group of people about Jesus and the healing and refreshing found in God's kingdom.) Therefore in Acts, the two views of the gospel merge into one cohesive local gospel which is both experienced and proclaimed as the opportunity arises.

This is different from every evangelistic series I have been a part. Unfortunately, the order has been reversed with the proclamation of timeless truth followed by a hope that somehow the newly converted will find their needs met in whatever community happens to be more or less available. In addition, there was no consideration given to the community or the local context and needs. Instead a universal presentation was made intended to convince all listeners of timeless, placeless truth.

Here is a link to Ryan Bell's blog Intersections where he highlights a video about an Adventist missional community in the Pittsburgh suburb of Carnegie that has found a way to restore the order. They are attempting to meet the needs of the community which then led to a unique opportunity to speak before the city council. Here is a link to his post.

A Tangible Example of Missional Engagement

I find this story both inspiring and discouraging. It's inspiring because it offers a tangible glimpse into how evangelism can be an integral merging of the experience and proclamation of the good news that the Kingdom of God is here. And yet, it's discouraging because it reveals my own inadequate understanding and poor experience in how the Gospel could and should make an impact here in Birmingham.

Also, Carmen sent me a link to the first chapter of Reimagining Evangelism by Rick Richardson. His ideas have my own wheels turning. What is the goal with evangelism? Is it to save people or to share what we know of God's character and let them know why we are saved? The evangelism he imagines just might appeal to me. (It of course helps that he references one of my favorite movie series) How about you? Below is a link to his book.

Reimagining Evangelism

Labels: Acts, Epicenter, evangelism, religion

The New Year seems as good a time as any to restart the Epicenter Blog. The same information which was posted on the class discussion board regarding Epicenter and thoughts more or less related to Epicenter topics will be posted here. This format will be more of a monologue and not as conducive to conversation as the message board was; but, it should be cleaner and easier to follow. As always, if something on the blog inspires you, please leave a comment and share your thoughts.

Here are some pictures from our Holiday Season.