How can he be sure it’s not a deformation?
Posted: May 3rd, 2009 | Author: James Duncan | Tags: Doctrine, Reformation | 20 Comments »This kind of talk makes us non-NewSpringers very nervous.
We’re not seeing revival…I believe this is the beginning of a new reformation!!! The church has been a sleeping giant for too long!!!
Perhaps Noble would explain exactly what he’s reforming. Without a clear explanation, some of us suspect it may just be a deformation.
Similar Posts:
- Perceptive points on parsing Pastor Perry
- Don’t take my word, take Noble’s: Reformation is coming
- Reformers vs. Deformers
- We retort. You decide.
- Going beyond ridicule
I believe Luther, Zwingli, Calvin, and the rest of our Protestant fathers just rolled over (and, perhaps, vomited in their mouths) in their graves…
Such a shame they (the Reformers) can’t Tweet!
From Ace’s preceeding tweet, there’s plenty of people who’ve “received Christ” recently at NS. My question is, do those 1,000 know what they’ve been saved from and they’ve been saved to?
Does that matter??? It’s all about the NUMBERS, don’t you know?!?!?!
Given that they had the altar call before the Word was preached, I’m sure your concerns are totally unfounded, Twit.
That’s how it happened in Acts, right?
I find this language odd. Why isn’t it revival? Is that word too “old” or too “churchy”? I imagine the terms here are a poor choice of words which twitter seems to attract. But, for the moment let’s take Ace seriously and consider the language.
Three things:
1) Can you imagine MLuther in the early days announcing the reformation? It took many years for it to be called a reformation, but by then it was clear what he and his contemporaries sought to achieve, and the reformation really got underway only once it was clear that the church was not responding to criticisms.
2) Why does Ace get to decide what 1000 conversions is? Did God give him a vision of reformation? And if so, why doesn’t he share it with others (people, pastors, churches)? Is this reformation only at NS or is NS taking part in a wider reformation? What exactly needs to be reformed? Or perhaps he just means NS is undergoing a reformation of its practices, theology, focus, and vision. And if that’s the case, he really ought to share that with his congregation. No one I know who goes to NS knows they are apart of a reformation, so why is Ace keeping the details a secret?
3) I invite you all to PP entry for April 28th. After I read the ANoble quote, I offered some advice: “Ace, here’s my advice: stop worrying about all the wrong things other churches are doing, and concentrate on your vision. With this in mind, I dare you to go 1 month without mentioning the problem(s) with other churches. 4 sermons. 4 Sundays.” I admit, I have not listened to yesterday’s sermon so I can’t comment on whether he took my advice, but this tweet seems like a good indication that Ace does not heed his own advice. He still is worried about other churches. It does appear he has an unhealthy obsession with other churches. Maybe a NS-er can alert the PP readers whether Ace made derogatory comments about other churches yesterday, or if he just does so on twitter.
@Tommy,
Actually, Clayton King preached yesterday. I think he does believe God gave him a vision of a reformation and it is a part of a wider reformation within the church. I don’t think he is going after churches, but rather the individual souls within the churches. A church with the best worship, giving, and preaching in the world is pretty pointless without the people being right with God. There is no ulterior motive here. Perry wants to see people live a full live in Christ. Perry is a simple man–he’ll tell you that. He has no grand scheme going here. That is the clash that y’all will always have with him because there is a over-analyzing of the situation. His vision is to bring people to Jesus. He does it how he believes God shows him too through the Bible. It’s as simple as that.
Tommy, at great risk of minimizing God’s role in the Reformation and insulting the Reformers, might I suggest that one difference is that God does revivals and famous men do reformations.
B.Rink, I think you’ve done it. I think you’ve distilled the essence of the new reformation in this line:
This is one of the fault lines, and one that has been a theme of many of my posts. Perry’s movement is away from the institutional church and towards the individual’s own experience of salvation. Although he criticizes the institutional church, he’s not really out to fix it, just replace it or render it irrelevant.
But what is institutional church? I would say Newspring is a form of institutional church. It has worship. Takes offering. Preaches the Word of God. I think it is actually redefining what institutional church is. There is not a replacement for institutional church Biblically and I think churches like Newspring are seeing what the institutional church can do with some changes. They are testing the edges of what institutional church is–not much unlike Reformation days.
BRink: You wrote: “Perry wants to see people live a full live in Christ. Perry is a simple man–he’ll tell you that. He has no grand scheme going here.”
One major problem: other pastors who want to see people live a full life in Christ don’t drop tweets like Ace’s yesterday, promoting their churches and labeling their experiences as the beginning of a reformation. Literally thousands (if not millions) of churches are interested in making disciples, but only a few are calling for a reformation, and even fewer are claiming reformation is taking place in their place of worship. And even fewer still tweet about it.
I see two options on how to read Ace’s talk of reformation compared with B.Rink’s interpretation of it:
Option 1) Ace is talking about reformation, but he shouldn’t be. After all, if B.Rink is correct then his pastor is mistaken (or worse), and shouldn’t even utter the word reformation. In other words Ace is either confused or he’s misleading his followers.
Option 2) Ace is talking about reformation, but we should ignore him. After all, B.Rink, if you don’t think Ace is wanting a reformation, then you haven’t been paying attention to him. It comes up a lot. If you choose this option then Ace’s isn’t the one who’s confused … B.Rink is.
So, there it is: Option A. we really should ignore Ace’s big talk of grand plans since they really aren’t all that grand (if this is the case why should we pay attention to him at all?), or Option B. B.Rink who attends NS weekly and seems to pretty knowledgeable about NS is thoroughly confused about what his pastor’s vision is.
Either Ace has a vision problem or B.Rink has a hearing problem. Anyone want to hazard a guess as to which is the correct diagnosis?
B.Rink: You wrote: “I think churches like Newspring are seeing what the institutional church can do with some changes. They are testing the edges of what institutional church is–not much unlike Reformation days.”
What changes? What edges? What basis for the changes?
B.Rink, you say that we’re overanalyzing the situation, and that PN’s too simple to withstand much analysis (on that we agree, at least). Why is that a problem? According to your standards, the Bereans overanalyzed Paul.
2 Peter 2:1 talks of false teachers whose teachings are so underanalyzed that they appear in the church as if by secret. Obviously the teaching is not a secret, but the followers are so anesthetized that they don’t know they’re being sold heresies.
Your approach to PN is quite useful–if you’re Perry Noble. He only works if you don’t think about what he’s saying.
Effective, but very dangerous.
I love these either/or, option A/B things. It paints things in such great shades of black and white. I think what happens in these discussions is that we end up talking about several things, but bring them into one overall point. Where did I say Perry wasn’t looking for a reformation? He says it in the post. I’m not disputing that. My comment on the grand scheme is more to the overall point that Newspring is trying to bring down institutional Christianity. He is following God’s lead as he sees it. I think that answers the second comment too. The basis is following where they believe God is leading them.
What is exactly wrong with Perry promoting his church or calling for reformation? Why shouldn’t he be excited about 300 people coming into the Body of Christ? That was the basis for the tweet. It seems like we are arguing from the point that every church in the world is perfect and does not need such reformation. Newspring is a lone wolf that is making up problems with the perfect church. It’s just ridiculous.
Reformation is a big, big word. It has only happened once in all of human history, and it set off ecclesiastical and political convulsions that rumble through the world to this day. One should not start reformations casually. Either PN is using it without knowing what the reformation is, or he is serious about what he’s saying.
The Reformation began with a list of grievances against the Catholic church. The reason it’s a big problem is that PN has not enunciated what he thinks is wrong with the current church.
The more he uses language like this, the more he can legitimately be asked if he’s preaching a new Gospel.
Throwing the R word around should set off very loud alarms.
I can understand that concern, but obviously, I believe it to be a false notion. I think he preaches the Gospel more effectively than any church I’ve been in and I have been to different denominations/churches from coast-to-coast. I realize my word is not going to be taken, but I’m just saying what I’m seeing from an insider perspective.
B.Rink: I’m sorry you don’t like A/B options. So far though, it’s been Ace who likes to paint in shades of black and white. PP responds in language he can understand. Ace is not one to moderate his view. It appears NS needs people sold out to their vision, and if not they can leave (See recent examples: TMorgan and congregational enemas, and one from 2005: Dustin Willis). So, if you don’t like stark contrasts, you can begin with your pastor and his leadership team.
On the other had, as you probably now know, I do like contrasts. But I really prefer the simple either/or question. So here’s one: which is it, should we take his call for reformation seriously or should we ignore him because he’s confused, mistaken, ignorant, and unaware of history and the development of Christianity?
If he’s serious, then you should welcome the attention. After all, as a spearhead for reformation in the 21st century he’ll be in many seminary textbooks (not that he’d ever know that). If he’s not serious, then someone should tell him to avoid using reformation for propaganda purposes when all he really means is evangelism and as an attention-getting device.
Also, I still want to know about these changes and edges.
Maybe you know more than I, but didn’t Dustin leave to start a church in Columbia in 2005? He was a cool guy. I really don’t know the situation so that’s news to me. I think the changes are use of the culture to preach to the culture via videos, skits, or secular music as illustrations of the sermon. All of these things that are being brought up on this site. They are on the edge obviously because they stir controversy, but they also can be justified by NS Bibilically.
To the question, you should take it seriously. You should study it, but not from the perspective you are currently. You should try to see it in the best possible light. Look to see if it could possibly be a move of God that maybe just can not be explained away by men. I know I cannot fully explain it away myself because we wouldn’t be on comment 18 already.
I have to agree with B. Wink, Dustin Willis went to Columbia to start a very good church down there, Midtown Fellowhip. He was also going to school at USC to get a masters I think. So leaving Newpsring was a good thing considering all the wonderful things Midtown is doing.
The party line is that Dustin Willis left NS to start Midtown Fellowship. But as a friend of mine once said: there’s more than one way to fire someone. He was forced out because of the “vision” thing. In 3-4 years, the party line will be that TMorgan left to go … But we all know that he was “let go” or “dismissed” or “fired.” Take your pick: he was paid not to come to work. That is a firing. That is what happened to DWillis. Ask Ace for an honest and direct answer.