This is the first I’ve heard of Skye Jethani, though he seems to be a pretty important figure in the church planting / pastoral conference world. You can check out his blog here. He seems to have a pretty good perspective on things. Here is his video from The Nines online conference from last week:
Skye summarizes his speach with three main points:
Your legitimacy does not come from the impact of your ministry.
If outcomes are in God’s hands, and not yours, you must stop judging the legitimacy of your ministry by the tangible outcomes of the ministry. You must also stop judging other ministries by the tangible outcomes as well.
If our identity is truly rooted in Christ, we will defy the expectations of our culture.
Listen to this eight minute clip. Jethani really makes some great points.
Great night w a great man of God. Thx Pastor Joel 4 your humility & msg of hope. Love & honor!
Now it seems Pastor Furtick has added Joel Osteen to his growing list of spiritual mentors. Maybe, you say, this was just a nice photo op, and Steven doesn’t really know much about Osteen. Nope. Here’s a post defending Osteen from Furtick’s blog. A few selected quotes:
But to all of you mean spirited name callers who have made a career of condemning celebrity preachers: Who the heck do you think you are to criticize a man who is impacting a city like Pastor Joel is impacting Houston?
Since when is “impacting a city” the final litmus test of God’s approval? One could easily argue Truman had a large impact on Nagasaki.
…Osteen preaches to 40,000 people weekly…
You couldn’t get 40,000 people to come hear you preach if you gave away free Escalades at the door.
Once again, we get the SCOREBOARD argument, and a slam at smaller congregations. And regardless of what Osteen may be preaching, it’s all fine because he draws a large crowd.
…If you’re concerned about a lack of cross centered preaching, then preach the cross yourself instead of wasting valuable time opining about how someone else should do it better.
Which goes completely against Jesus and Paul’s many admonishments to be on the lookout for false teachers.
…Don’t hurl insults at someone with a big church simply because you can’t make your church grow, and although you’d never admit it, you’re jealous.
That’s right… most of the time the motive isn’t defense of the Gospel… it’s jealousy and presumption.
And of course, the strawman argument that the only people who may have a problem with Osteen are jealous pastors. We couldn’t possibly be concerned Christians following the biblical call to “test all things”.
…You know, I think it’s absolutely essential that Christians think critically about what is being taught in Christian pulpits. We must preserve sound doctrine. We must guard against erroneous theologies.
This is a hilarious way to end a post that is scolding us for doing just what he says we must do. But, to follow Steven’s advice here and think critically about what’s being taught, here’s a clip of Osteen you should watch. Is this what Steven calls sound doctrine?
First, note the new signature. On a few occasions now, readers have mixed up James Duncan and myself. While this is much more damaging to his reputation than to mine, a little clarity never hurt.
Now, I’d like to open a discussion about mega-churches. Let me make it clear that I have never heard James Duncan speak against mega-churches. These views are mine and mine alone. He is certainly capable of agreeing or disagreeing with any of these thoughts, as are each of you. I will attempt to put forward a scriptural view of what Church is, and how it should look. However, admitting that some of this is grey area, I am open to correction.
Two straw-men that must be burnt before we can engage in any authentic discussion on this matter:
There is no concrete cut-off number where a church has become too large. It would be impossible to pinpoint such a number. Thus, forcing me to do so would effectively change the point of this discussion and kill any other argument that I may be able to make.
To insinuate that large attendance of a particular church is necessary for the sake of thousands of salvations, is to completely misunderstand the nature of salvation, the purpose of church, and the power of the Almighty God. If God can save souls at a certain mega-church, he can also do so at a small rural congregation, or even in some open field in China where there is no established church of any size in sight.
For the sake of this discussion, we’ll use Hartford Institute’s definition for a mega-church, which it gives in it’s simplest terms as a Protestant congregation of two thousand or more regular attenders. Again, don’t get caught up in a specific number, but it will help if we all work from the same definition.
With all this in mind, I will now try to answer:
What is Wrong With a Mega-Church?
It usurps the shepherd/sheep relationship that a pastor is to have with his congregation. We’ve seen here where some pastors have been down-right scornful with members of their flock who would hope for their pastor to care about them specifically. True, one man cannot faithfully minister to 10,000 people, but a pastor’s heart should be to care for his sheep. Here’s what Andy Stanley said in a 2006 interview with Leadership Journal: “Should we stop talking about pastors as “shepherds”?
Absolutely. That word needs to go away. Jesus talked about shepherds because there was one over there in a pasture he could point to. But to bring in that imagery today and say, “Pastor, you’re the shepherd of the flock,” no. I’ve never seen a flock. I’ve never spent five minutes with a shepherd. It was culturally relevant in the time of Jesus, but it’s not culturally relevant any more.
Nothing works in our culture with that model except this sense of the gentle, pastoral care. Obviously that is a face of church ministry, but that’s not leadership.
I think most of us understand that you can’t just throw out biblical terms because they are problematic to our methodology, but that’s exactly what Stanley has done, as have hundreds of other “pastors” who see him as a mentor. We must change our methodology to fit scripture, even if that means not packing thousands of seats with people you have no intention of ministering to. It only makes sense that a pastor should not be over a congregation that is too large for him to meet their needs. Of course, some of this physical work is delegated to deacons, but if a pastor is to be held accountable for all the sheep entrusted to him, he needs to have a relationship with them. Some pastors may be able to faithfully attend to 1000 or more members. Some may only be able to care for 20 or 30, but if a person is going to church and not being ministered to, they are actually just attending a performance.
It fuels the cult-of-personality, celebrity pastor driven congregation. The majority of these mega-churches are headed by charismatic, purpose-driven leaders. These guys are very driven towards their goals. I would assume that most of these guys could be just as successful running any business as they have been in running a church. That leads me to ask, is this why thousands of people are showing up on Sunday morning? I don’t recall Paul, when giving instructions to the churches he planted, asking, “Who among you has the most charismatic personalty? Who is the most fashionably dressed? Who has the most clever wit?”. No, the things he looked for in church leaders (listed in 1 Timothy 3:1-7 ) all dealt with character and righteousness.
It raises questions about the motivation for a pastor to have such a church. As in, why do you need 12,000 people in your church, 11, 500 of whom you will never have any contact whatsoever? Are you the only minister in your town capable of delivering the Gospel? Isn’t it possible that a large majority of these peoples could be more effective elsewhere, where there attendance will be much more noticeable? Is it a pride issue? Does it make you feel powerful to know their are thousands of souls hanging on your every word? One could assume that a congregation of 12,000 probably pays better than a congregation of 500. Is that an issue?
It makes it impossible for all attendees to be involved in worship in any meaningful way. The real worship will have to be performed by those on stage, while thousands of others watch from the seats. 1 Corinthians 14:26 paints a picture of all members being vitally involved in a worship service. This is completely impossible at a mega-church. The ministry is then left to the professionals, while the normal people sit and watch. This is also in contrast with Ephesians 5:19. I could also argue that this is against the Priesthood of Believers described in 1 Peter 2:9.
I’m going to stop here for now. If there is sufficient discussion, I may do a series on this, but this should be plenty to get us started.
Last Sunday, Elevation passed out the flyer you see on the right, listing 12 Faith confessions to be stated aloud daily by each member. I thought I’d post them here for examination:
I am fully forgiven and free from all shame and condemnation.
I act in audacious faith to change the world in my generation.
I have no fear or anxiety, I trust the lord with all my heart.
I am able to fulfill the calling God has placed on my life.
I am fully funded to do everything God has called me to do.
I have no insecurity, because I see myself the way God sees me.
I am a faithful spouse and a Godly parent; Our family is blessed
I am completely whole physically, mentally, and emotionally.
I am increasing in influence and favor for the Kingdom of God.
I am enabled to walk in the sacrificial love of Christ.
I have the wisdom of the Lord concerning every decision I make.
I am protected from all harm and evil in Jesus’ name.
When did Furtick turn into a self-esteem coach? Notice the first word of each of these sentences. I agree that these sentences confess faith, but the faith seems to be more aimed at affirming the individual rather than professing the Truth about God.
For the most part, these are all “safe” in regards to scriptural accuracy, but have clearly bent the ideas towards empowering humans. It’s no wonder Elevation draws enormous crowds, when this is their statement of faith.
Now, let’s address a few of these specifically:
I am fully forgiven and free from all shame and condemnation.
True. Romans 8:1 says there is no condemnation for those that are in Christ. However, when one considers the make-up of Furtick’s normal audience, I wouldn’t be so sure that all of them can confidently make this statement.
I am able to fulfill the calling God has placed on my life.
I am fully funded to do everything God has called me to do.
Good. This should eliminate any need for fund-raisers at Elevation…Woops. Didn’t see this.
I have no insecurity, because I see myself the way God sees me.
Paul considered himself the King of Sinners, yet was pretty successful in ministry. I’d stop wasting time trying to elevate my own self-view, and start trying to see God for who He is.
I am completely whole physically, mentally, and emotionally.
I made a comment in the When to Stop Eating thread that I think deserves a little more thought. Last weekend, Elevation had their grand opening for their first permanent site. It drew their largest attendance yet. As Furtick reports:
Over 7000 people at Elevation this weekend! Over 500 salvations! Eph. 3:20! Thank you Jesus!
500 salvations is a huge number, and praise be to God for those souls. Even though it seems unbelievable, I know through Christ anything is possible. I wouldn’t question the legitimacy of those conversions, but apparently Steven does:
We’ve seen over 5000 people indicate that they placed their faith in Christ in the last 3 ½ years through our weekend worship experiences. While we can’t make any assertions about which of these conversion experiences were genuine, we’re so thankful that God has allowed us to scatter so much seed and see such an evident harvest in our city. He will separate the wheat from the chaff. We’ll just keep sowing the Gospel and celebrating the life change we can see.
Nevertheless, I’ll assume those 5,000 converts are real for now. Just a quick glance at the figure in the first quote vs. the figure in the second quote stopped me in my tracks.If Elevation’s largest attendance ever was 7,000, and they have had over 5,000 people saved in the last 3 years, that would mean that at least 70% of Furtick’s audience are new believers.
So as Senior Pastor to such a congregation, what is Steven teaching these infants and toddlers in Christ?
Here he teaches that too much bible study is a bad thing, and we should avoid learning about things like the doctrines of Grace. Gotta be careful about Spiritual Obesity.
I am sure he borrowed the idea from his mentor Perry Noble, who probably borrowed it from Rick Warren. Here’s a quote from Warren on the topic:
“The last thing many believers need is to go to another Bible study. They already know far more than they are putting into practice. What they need are serving experiences in which they can exercise their spiritual muscles.”
Why do these guys have such a disdain for bible study? It has to be one of the following:
They don’t believe it is powerful. Surely if these pastors thought the Word of God held any power, they would encourage their members to study it as much as possible. It would make their job easier. We’ve seen how they don’t want to give individual attention to members, so at least leading them to God’s word would ensure they were being fed.
They don’t believe it is God’s word. If studying the Bible is listening to God, then it is impossible to study too much. If God has chosen to reveal himself to us through this book, then we should spend as much time as possible learning about him.
They believe there is a better method for hearing God. This is particularly bothersome, considering their dependence on personal revelation.
They find it threatening. They are afraid that Christians well-versed in Scripture will start raising questions about things going on in the church.
The next figure to address is the 500 salvations from last weekend. That is 500 brand new converts, thrown into this world where the pastor doesn’t care about their needs, they are told to feed themselves, and directed away from Bible study. 500 people. That’s an entire church…all with no guidance. The church I serve is in a town with a total population of 600.
You have to question what is being done to care for these 500 brand new believers. Have they hired new staff to look out for these guys? Have they made any changes to ensure this group is cared for? Again, you have enough people to be considered a pretty large church here. That’s scary.
Just finished reading a book by Al Mohler called He is Not Silent. Very good book that I’d recommend to anyone involved in ministry, even though it is effectually written for pastors. One particular thing that stands out to me is the three levels of doctrine defined by Mohler as:
Level 1 – Essentials of the Faith. This level includes things like the virgin birth, the Trinity, the Resurrection, and the deity of Christ. If we don’t get these right, we can’t really consider ourselves Christians.
Level 2 – There is room within level two for disagreement, but these are serious enough that we couldn’t really worship together on a regular basis if we did not agree. Things included in this group may be infant baptism, charismatic gifts, and position on predestination.
Level 3 – These are non-essential to the Faith. It doesn’t mean they aren’t important or shouldn’t be discussed. It simply means we won’t have to break fellowship over a disagreement. One thing that pops in to my mind on this level would be eschatology.
The reason I bring this up is because it seems like some here only recognize Level 1 and Level 3. You either push to call someone a heretic, or you don’t think it’s worth making a fuss about. That makes discussion particularly tough for me, because I would say most of the disagreements that I share on this site fall into Level 2. I’m not saying the person in error can’t be a Christian. I’m not calling them a heretic or a false prophet. However, for the most part, I’m not nit-picking either. I’m pointing out (sometimes in a light-hearted manner) things that I consider to be very serious issues. I point them out because I think these issues need to be addressed by each individual believer, and sadly, some modern leaders seem to want them swept under a rug.
I want to hear from you. Which issues fall into each level for you? Is this completely subjective, or is there a biblical standard to follow? Does it matter at all, or is it enough for one to confess belief in Jesus?
Noble’s sermon from last Sunday apparently moved a few people here, so I decided to give it a listen…
You didn’t honestly think I was gonna listen and not comment, did you? Here’s what he has to say:
Jesus called it the Great Comission, not the Great Suggestion.
Sure about that one, Perry?
I’m too concerned about the people living in the environment to be concerned about saving the envirionment.
Does this even make sense to anyone? First, I think when God gave man dominion over the creatures of the earth (Gen. 1:26), he expected us to take care of them. Also, (Gen. 1:31) when he looked at all he had made and thought it was very good, I think that shows that God cares about the environment.
Plus, just plain common sense would say that if you really care about a person living in an environment, you would want to do your best to make sure the environment was safe for them.
If you’re a church shopper, I want to help you. You say” I’m looking for a church that meets my needs”. You see, I could give a crap about your needs. No, you don’t understand how much I don’t care.
Perry has apparently found some new definition for Pastor that I haven’t seen. The word translated as pastor, is also translated as shepherd. They mean the same thing. In other words, a pastor’s job is to care for God’s sheep. Consider this passage from John 17:
15When they had finished eating, Jesus said to Simon Peter, “Simon son of John, do you truly love me more than these?”
”Yes, Lord,” he said, “you know that I love you.”
Jesus said, “Feed my lambs.” 16Again Jesus said, “Simon son of John, do you truly love me?”
He answered, “Yes, Lord, you know that I love you.”
Jesus said, “Take care of my sheep.”
17 The third time he said to him, “Simon son of John, do you love me?”
Peter was hurt because Jesus asked him the third time, “Do you love me?” He said, “Lord, you know all things; you know that I love you.”
Jesus said, “Feed my sheep.”
Isn’t it odd that Jesus made it clear to Peter, that if he loved Him, Peter would take care of His sheep? Do we see this kind of concern anywhere in Perry’s ministry? Has he even read this passage of Scripture before?
I’m sick and tired of, “I just want a small church. We’re not gonna reach anyone, but we’re gonna study the Bible and love each other.” That would be great…but it’s not commissioned in Scripture.
I’m sure you’d never hear a church say “We’re not gonna reach anyone.”
There is plenty of scriptural evidence that we should love one another and study God’s word.
In the church world today, we’re not fisher’s of men, we’re keepers of the aquarium.
Actually, a keeper of the aquarium isn’t a bad image for the biblical picture of a pastor.
It’s our commission to piss church people off as often as possible, because that is a way to make sure we are preaching the gospel.
I have nothing to even say about this. One of you with the special decoder ring will have to tell me what he’s talking about here. And please, point me to the passage of Scripture where he gets this idea.
Or at least that’s how Steven referred to it when greeting attenders last week. You see, Steven said he was tired of hearing that Elevation was a one-man show, so he decided to have all the volunteers take the week off…
First, let me stop here for a moment. This is disingenuous to begin with. Steven knows that no one is accusing him of showing up early, greeting visitors, setting up equipment, and increasing the potential of breaking a sweat. The “one-man show” critique is aimed at the fact that all the “vision” for the church is birthed in Steven’s head. In fact, he said himself that if you go against his vision, you are fighting God.
Anyway, no volunteers showed up and apparently it was a nightmare. Here is what the executive pastor had to say, via Steven’s Blog:
The worship leader carried a powered speaker out on stage and delivered an acoustic set without a band…. The only sign we had up was “Elevation Church is meeting today”. We intentionally printed crooked black and white programs with the song lyrics and scriptures. Pastor carried a rickety music stand on stage to preach from with no fancy bumper or video playing in the background.
He goes on to call it “the most unimpressive worship experience ever.”
This clearly begs the question, who are you trying to impress?
I can understand if you want to impress God, but do you really think God gets bummed out because the programs weren’t printed in color?
It seems more that Elevation’s goal is to impress (entertain) people. Particularly sinners. If that’s the case, then perhaps, yes, the un-believers in attendance were slightly disappointed at the lack of loud music and over-produced video clips. Then again, I’m sure not all un-believers are fans of loud music and MTV style video editing.
This is really the crux of my argument with Elevation, Newspring, and the hundreds of other churches like them that join the bandwagon everyday. Elevation is saying they had a terrible week…worst ever…because there weren’t elaborate programs, a band, flashy videos, and a proper podium for Steven to preach from. Every other week, regardless of criticism, they always shout, “look at all the people that were saved!”. Were people saved this week? If so, even if it was just one soul, how is that the worst week ever?
If people weren’t saved…why not? What if there was an energy crisis? Would Elevation still be a viable ministry, or can God only use them when all their gadgets are up and functioning?
The priorities here are so far out of line, it is actually scary. For the record: There is nothing wrong with color bulletins, bands, videos, or podiums. When these things are used as tools of worship, they can be very effective. However, when your worship actually depends on these things, that should be a wake-up call that something is wrong.
Here’s the sad thing about the whole deal: I watched the service. If they were truly trying to deliver an experience far worse than other Elevation services…they failed miserably. It seemed like every other Elevation service to me:
One Bible verse, and a great deal of effort to make it fit the situation.
Here we see Furtick once again slamming other Pastors…something he tells the rest of us not to do:
I am saying that the way we train pastors in our country prepares them to be more like Mister Rogers than Joshua. Or Jesus.
And most pastors who are formally trained graduate with a Ph.D in pomp and prissiness, with no clue how to engage the enemy, draw first blood, and strategically occupy a city with the rule of the Kingdom of God.
Because of the perception of Pastoral ministry we’ve perpetuated, the sharpest and highest potential young leaders in our country go on to do other things with their lives.
After all, who wants to give the best years of their lives to keeping a committee of angry white deacons happy about the carpet color and the type of flowers in the vestibule?
Why did Steven feel the need to attend seminary if MOST pastors who are formally trained end up with a Phd in “pomp and prissiness”? I’m not even sure what that means, but I’m fairly certain that it is an insult aimed at most pastors. Doesn’t Furtick display himself here as THE one with THE answers? The implication is that, unlike most pastors, Steven knows how to engage the enemy, draw first blood, and strategically occupy a city. Can you show me anywhere in scripture where it says a pastor is required to do those things?
Is this really the reason why all our sharpest leaders choose to do something else? Is Steven inferring here that if we marketed the job of pastor a little better, bright young leaders would come from all around to get in on the action? Where does God’s will fit in to that description? Is there no such thing as a call to ministry, or is the pastoral role just a place to exercise leadership skills?
And…more lame attacks on the carpet color. I’m really tired of that urban legend. I’ve been hearing about churches splitting over carpet colors my whole life, but I’ve never actually found an instant of that happening. Kinda like the kid who ate Pop Rocks while drinking Pepsi and blew up his stomach.
While he does take a moment to congratulate himself, he ends well:
I have said, and will say, some dumb things. I’ve said some inaccurate things. Sometimes, I’ve said accurate things in dumb ways. If it every sounds like I’m schizophrenic because I say one thing in August and another thing in November, it’s because I’m learning. I’m progressing. I know it’s uncomfortable to watch me change clothes right in front of you. But at least I’m fresh.Be patient with me. I’m not preaching, teaching, blogging and tweeting because I think I’ve got it figured out. But I figure our church owes it to you to figure it out in front of you. To learn out loud.
We’re bound to hit some bad notes. But at least we’ll have ‘em recorded for playback. Should make some fun blooper reels.
I appreciate what he says here, but I do wish he displayed that humility a little more often. He has to understand, that people DO think he has it all figured out. Therefore, what he says and how he carries himself in the public eye is quite important. So far, he has done a good job of making himself out to be the young, brash, anti-authority, flamboyant pastor that feels he is above questioning from the common public. If he actually believes what he wrote above, he must make a change in the way he and his church are presented.
I’m not holding my breath…but it would be a nice start.
I’m probably jumping in a little over my head with this topic, but some discussion came up a few days ago, and I think it is worth a deeper look.
I have been in churches all over the country across all denominational lines, and have seen the gospel invitation presented in many different ways.
I have seen very challenging invitations where individuals were challenged to step forward in front of a large crowd and profess faith in Christ.
At Newspring and Elevation, there is a box on the program that you can check if you want to profess faith.
I’ve also been in churches that didn’t offer any type of gospel invitation at all.
Let’s take a few pro’s and con’s for each of these methods:
The churches that rarely, if ever, give an invitation: These churches operate on the belief that the church service is for believers, and thus, there is no use for an invitation. While I understand the idea, and agree that church should be largely geared towards believers, it may be bordering on fatalism to assume that there will never be unbelievers in your service. While I don’t think that there has to be an evangelistic push every week, I do think it necessary to sometimes give people an opportunity to respond to a Gospel message.
The “Turnstile” type invitation: These require little if any commitment. Quite often, there is a spot in the bulletin where you can check if you have become a Christian. Other times, they may do the “every eye closed, every head bowed” routine. Now, if SCOREBOARD is the only argument you will accept, I guess you win. It only makes sense that the less commitment you require, the more response you will get.
It seems to me, that the Biblical model requires a little more commitment. In Acts, it appears that people responded to an invitation by being Baptized. You have to remember that these people were living in a hostile environment for Christians. To step forward in front of peers and be submersed in water would have brought a lot of attention, and the majority of that would have probably been negative.
I will fully admit that all of this is “gray area” as far as Scripture is concerned. My opinion would lean more towards an invitation that asks for a little more commitment, but I would really like to hear different points of view on it.
By the way, someone mentioned Paul Washer in the comments a couple of days ago. Here are his thoughts on the matter:
How could we have such a low view of the gospel of Jesus Christ that we have to manipulate men psychologically to get them to come down and pray a prayer? …How many times have I heard evangelists say, “It’ll only take five minutes.“? No my dear friend, it will take your life–all of it!
Some churches are like mushroom farms: the people are kept in the dark and fed manure.
Here again we see that Furtick’s rules for bashing churches only applies to Elevation and his personal friends. He can say preachers are feeding their people manure all he likes, but remember, if we don’t personally know someone, we can only pray for them…or just shut up all together.
This blog is mine alone and does not necessarily–or very often–represent the thinking or sentiments of anyone who disagrees with me, my wife, my employer, my friends, my family, my pastor, my brother, my church and, almost certainly, God. After I hit the Publish button, it doesn’t always even reflect my own thinking. It does seem to often reflect the thinking of Tommy F, Twit Conway and some guy in Minnesota, however.
