The gospel of Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever.

In Rethinking the Gospel, I shared briefly on the content of the gospel . . . as envisioned in the New Testament.

However, I believe the way that the gospel is presented should differ depending on the people with whom we share it.

This requires sensitivity to the Spirit and attention to the person’s heart. Jesus Christ didn’t present Himself the same way to everyone.

To some, He warned. To others, He rebuked. To some, He showed compassion and mercy. To some, He asked questions or told parables, etc.

Just examine the way He interacted with various people, and you’ll see monumental differences. In a much overlooked text, Jude describes it like this: Continue Reading…

“There was given me a thorn in the flesh . . . ”

~ 2 Corinthians 12:7

For generations, Bible commentators have offered countless theories as to what Paul’s thorn in the flesh was. The most popular range from various and sundry illnesses (malaria, epilepsy, ophthalmia, etc.) to haunting guilt for persecuting the church to a sexual addiction that Paul never got victory over.

I’ve never found any of these common theories to be persuasive or satisfactory.

To my mind, if we take the text just as it is written and compare it with other texts that use similar language . . . and then step back to take a fresh look at the New Testament narrative in its chronological sequence . . . an entirely different picture emerges. One that I personally find compelling.

Let’s look first at the text carefully:  Continue Reading…

Why the Christian Right Won’t Adopt Me

1. Like F.F. Bruce, I believe words like “plenary” and “inerrant” are unnecessary when speaking about the truthfulness of Scripture.
2. I don’t believe the Bible clearly addresses the question of the eternal destiny of those who have never heard or understood the gospel of Jesus Christ.
3. I don’t believe Scripture answers every question posed to it. And there are many questions, including theological ones, which are shrouded in mystery.
4. I believe that racism and sexism are serious problems in the USA and shouldn’t be viewed as “lesser” than other moral evils.
5. I believe that slander, hatred, greed, and fits of rage are just as sinful as fornication and stealing (so did Paul – 1 Corinthians 6:10-11; Galatians 5:19-21).
6. I don’t know whether to whistle or wind my watch, to laugh or cry at The American Patriot’s Bible.
7. I believe that God loves the poor and taking care of them should be just as high a priority as other social issues, if not more. Continue Reading…

I’m often asked the question, “What is your position on 1 Timothy 2 and 1 Corinthians 14 where Paul seems to argue that a woman cannot speak or teach in a church meeting?”

Some years ago, I wrote a 20-page essay answering this question. It was originally slated to be a chapter in my book Reimagining Church, but the publisher said it couldn’t fit the page count. So a footnote was added in the book directing people to read the chapter online.

Over the last two decades, several good books have been published which have tackled the subject. But many Christians struggle with finding time to read. In such cases, a short essay consolidating the issues is easier fodder.

In my essay, Reimagining a Woman’s Role in the Church, I list a series of recommended books at the end which weigh deeper into the subject. Nevertheless, the essay covers the waterfront on the matter in a very small space. Continue Reading…

Several years after I began following the Lord, having had a taste of present-day Christianity from various and sundry stripes and flavors, a cry was birthed in my heart that wouldn’t be silenced.

That cry was the provocation of why I began writing the books I’ve penned. And it’s what led me into the ministry (service) to the body of Christ that I have today.

This same heart-cry is shared by many (if not most) of the people who read my books and a fair number who read this blog.

This song gives voice to that cry.

Here are the lyrics, but listen to the song as well:

Lord, I groan. Lord, I kneel. I’m crying out for something real.

‘Cause I know deep in my soul there must be more . . .

Lord, I’m tired. Yes, I’m weak. I need your power to work in me.

But I can’t let go. I keep hanging’ on ’cause there must be more . . .

The song is by David Ruis. Listen to it . . . just reading the lyrics doesn’t communicate the pathos.

What other songs can you share with us that reflect a particular cry of your heart?

There’s been a lot of buzz on the Web lately that’s captured in the phrase: “God has given Christianity a masculine feel.”

I am deliberately not mentioning who made this statement as it doesn’t matter. In fact, I think discussions are far better off when we clear away the clutter of human personality and focus on the ideas themselves.

Consequently, we shall not wax on (or wax off) about this minister vs. that minister and who said what. Instead, we will stick to the topic at hand. (The Blog Manager agrees, and she moderates comments. Take that as a hint.)

I don’t doubt that there is “masculinity” (or whatever you wish to call it) in the Christian faith.

God is our Father. Jesus was and is a man . . . “the Man in the glory” as the hymn goes. Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob were males. And there’s the biblical line of “sonship.”

Okay, fine. I get it.

But . . . God’s ultimate passion is for a girl.

His relentless desire is for a woman. Continue Reading…

In 1979, I attended my first Christian conference. I was just a young kid at the time. The conference was called Jesus ’79, and I still remember some of the speakers (Tony Campolo was one of them).

I’ve been to countless Christian conferences since as an attendee and then as a speaker.

To be frank (and I am ), in all the years that I’ve attended Christian conferences, the most appealing part for me was in getting to know the people outside of scheduled sessions. Fellowship, connecting, building new relationships, and networking were the highlights.

With few exceptions, the speaking generally didn’t impress me. Only those speakers who knew how to unveil Jesus Christ made an impression.

I’ve often said that the difference between good preachers and great preachers is that good preachers leave you saying, “What an excellent sermon,” while great preachers leave you saying, “Wow, what a Christ!”

Fast forward to five years ago.

In 2007, some of my close friends and I were persuaded by a number of people to begin holding a different kind of conference. And so Threshold was born. Our first event launched in 2009. Continue Reading…

Yesterday I wrote about my visit to Leonard Sweet’s crib in Orcas Island to share at his Spring advance.

One of the questions we discussed was, “Is there a coming Revival? And if so, what will it look like, how will the body of Christ respond, and who will it affect?”

I thought I’d post some of what I said in my answer to the question and ask a related question so all of you can weigh-in.

The Charismatics often define revival differently than do other Christians. Namely, Charismatics regard one of the characteristics of a revival to be signs and wonders.

Consequently, they typically count as “revivals” the Azusa street revival in 1906-1909 in Southern California, the Latter Rain revival of 1948 in Canada, and the 1994 revival beginning in Lakeland, Florida, moving to Toronto, Canada; Melbourne, Florida; and then Pensacola, Florida.

(The latter was dubbed “The Toronto Blessing.” I was present in the early meetings in Lakeland when it first broke out. I also visited the church in Melbourne, Florida to which it had spread. A decade later, I visited the same church in Melbourne, and it had become a hollow shell. But that’s another story for another day.)

I’m defining revival here in the classic sense. It’s when scores and scores of people get converted to Jesus Christ in a short time-span (usually four years). And this massive conversion phenomenon covers more than a few cities. It typically embraces an entire nation and sometimes other nations.

With respect to the United States, there have been two revivals in the 20^th century. Both were undeniable. Continue Reading…

“I am prepared to go anywhere . . . provided it be forward.”

~ David Livingston

Today we complete our series on beyond evangelical. Some of you asked me to compile all the posts in the series into an eBook. I’ve decided to take you up on the suggestion.

Here are four things you’ll want to know about the upcoming book:

1. It will contain all seven posts in the “beyond evangelical” series.
2. It will contain new chapters that have never been published anywhere.
3. It will contain several previously published posts that are related to the subject.
4. It will release in June (God willing).

As I’ve established throughout this series, those who have moved beyond evangelical (which is short for beyond evangelicalism) are neither on the Christian left nor on the Christian right.

They are neither fundamentalist nor emergent.

They are neither postmodern nor modern.

They are neither pietistic nor activist.

They are neither legalistic nor libertine.

Those who have moved beyond evangelical embrace elements of each theological/political position, yet they have gone beyond them. Continue Reading…

 ”Evangelicalism is like a swimming bath: most noise at the shallow end.”

~ J. Blanchard

We are at the point in our beyond evangelical series that I’m ready to post an essay entitled “The Uneasy Conscience of Modern Evangelicalism” by my friend Hal Miller.

Read it carefully. It’s a mind blower. I make a few important comments at the end.

–

Every form of Christianity tries to be faithful in its time. The problem comes in trying to discern when its time has passed.

Forty years ago, Carl F. H. Henry made that discernment in The Uneasy Conscience of Modern Fundamentalism. In his eyes, fundamentalism had become trapped in a mire of antagonism toward the world around it. Fundamentalism had become closed to the world and therefore irrelevant to the world. Its time had passed.

Back when the movement began in the early twentieth century, fundamentalism saw itself as an ark of refuge from the intellectual floods of the modern age. Critical study of the Bible was making it seem more and more a human book—perhaps a merely human book. Nineteenth century science had cast doubt on the Christian account of reality.

True, Christianity had survived the new astronomy of the sixteenth century and the new physics of the seventeenth century with renewed vigor. But when Darwin’s new biology came into vogue, some Christians began to wonder whether things had gone too far; the fundamentalists gathered up some gopher wood and started building. Continue Reading…