Earlier today I was stuck in traffic and sitting in front of a church. While sitting there I noticed that there were signs posted on each side of the entrance to the church's parking lot. The welcoming message this church wanted the world to see, "NO TRESPASSING."
Made me wonder how many of our churches have similar "signs" but just aren't so blunt about it? Do people see your church as a place where they are welcomed or where they feel like they aren't allowed to trespass?
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
Monday, August 24, 2009
Adoption Legislation
I had previously posted the following on my other blog, raymersadoption.blogspot.com, but believe it is important to put here as well for those who may not see it on the other blog.
I know that lately when you hear anything about legislation it is all about health care but I'd like to take a moment to alert you to some legislation that has been introduced and is now in committee that needs your support. These bills will be helpful to orphans, adoptive parents and to children who are adopted. The following is from the Center of Adoption Policy. Please read and then please contact your representatives letting them know that you support this legislation.
July 15, 2009. Legislation: CAP Supports Three New Bills Before Congress. CAP Supports the Foreign Adopted Children Equality (FACE) Act (S. 1359; H.R. 3110). This bill will give U.S. citizenship to internationally adopted children as of their adoption, rather than, as now, when each child comes to the United States. It will restore citizenship to internationally adopted children who were not covered under the Child Citizenship Act or whose position was jeopardized by the 1996 Immigration Act. It would also confer on foreign born internationally adopted children of U.S. parents all the rights of biologically born children of U.S. parents, including the right to become president.
CAP Supports the Families for Orphans Act (H.R. 3070) which is designed, in the words of the bill itself, "To encourage the development and implementation of a comprehensive, global strategy for the preservation and reunification of families and the provision of permanent parental care for orphans, and for other purposes." This legislation will create a new U.S. diplomatic and economic initiative to support existing families and to provide permanency for unparented children. It will replace the current decentralized and sometimes contradictory, government efforts with a consistent, pro-active approach led by a State Department Office of Orphan Policy, Diplomacy and Development. For the first time the development of a continuing strategy to ensure that all children grown up in permanent, loving families of their own would be part of the State Department's responsibilities.
CAP Supports S. 1376 which will allow adoptive parents to obtain their child's immunizations in the United States after travel, which is standard international adoption procedure for Hague countries. It also conforms the age requirements for siblings adopted internationally to a consistent standard.
To contact your representatives and senators, please go to http://www.house.gov/house/MemberWWW_by_State.shtml or http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm.
I know that lately when you hear anything about legislation it is all about health care but I'd like to take a moment to alert you to some legislation that has been introduced and is now in committee that needs your support. These bills will be helpful to orphans, adoptive parents and to children who are adopted. The following is from the Center of Adoption Policy. Please read and then please contact your representatives letting them know that you support this legislation.
July 15, 2009. Legislation: CAP Supports Three New Bills Before Congress. CAP Supports the Foreign Adopted Children Equality (FACE) Act (S. 1359; H.R. 3110). This bill will give U.S. citizenship to internationally adopted children as of their adoption, rather than, as now, when each child comes to the United States. It will restore citizenship to internationally adopted children who were not covered under the Child Citizenship Act or whose position was jeopardized by the 1996 Immigration Act. It would also confer on foreign born internationally adopted children of U.S. parents all the rights of biologically born children of U.S. parents, including the right to become president.
CAP Supports the Families for Orphans Act (H.R. 3070) which is designed, in the words of the bill itself, "To encourage the development and implementation of a comprehensive, global strategy for the preservation and reunification of families and the provision of permanent parental care for orphans, and for other purposes." This legislation will create a new U.S. diplomatic and economic initiative to support existing families and to provide permanency for unparented children. It will replace the current decentralized and sometimes contradictory, government efforts with a consistent, pro-active approach led by a State Department Office of Orphan Policy, Diplomacy and Development. For the first time the development of a continuing strategy to ensure that all children grown up in permanent, loving families of their own would be part of the State Department's responsibilities.
CAP Supports S. 1376 which will allow adoptive parents to obtain their child's immunizations in the United States after travel, which is standard international adoption procedure for Hague countries. It also conforms the age requirements for siblings adopted internationally to a consistent standard.
To contact your representatives and senators, please go to http://www.house.gov/house/MemberWWW_by_State.shtml or http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm.
Friday, July 17, 2009
Orphans, Adoption, and Money
So my family is not the richest family in the world. By American standards we are down right poor. However, we are wealthy enough that even with 4 children in our home, we could give a good life to another child. At this very moment we know of a 13 year old boy who needs a good home. In the country that he lives he has another year in the orphanage and then he is on his own. He is quickly running out of time.
Again, we could afford to give him a home but we can not afford the adoption. This is not a problem just for us, it is a problem for many who would like to provide a good home to a child but simply can not afford the adoption itself. The problem is further complicated when you consider that much of the cost of adoptions is (at least it is meant too) for the cost of caring for children in orphanages and foster care. This money is therefore needed. However, the cost of adoption prevents people from adopting the children. Of course, if the children were adopted then there would not be a need to fund the orphanages. And so the vicious cycle continues. Orphanages need funding but the funding of them prevents people from adopting.
Please understand that I'm not delusional and believe that all the money for adoption goes to the orphanages but that is the going justification for the extreme cost. Nevertheless, without going into greater detail of where every dime spent on an adoption goes, it does seem clear that if the cost could be drastically reduced than more people would be willing to adopt. And if more children were adopted than there would be less need for funding of orphanages.
Ideally, it would be great to close them all. We unfortunately do not live in an ideal world. So, until we do and until every child has a home, what can we do to truly make adoption available to every family that has the means to support a child but doesn't have the means to adopt them? Naturally, there are grants available from wonderful organizations. As great as these are (and we are extremely grateful for the grant we received from Caroline's Promise) they are generally a drop in a very big bucket. Can we do more? Can we find a better, more efficient way for adoptions? Can we impress upon governments (including our own) to cut the cost of adoptions? Can we do something for that 13 year old who is running out of time? I do not have the answers to these questions but I pray that we can find them. I pray we find them soon.
Again, we could afford to give him a home but we can not afford the adoption. This is not a problem just for us, it is a problem for many who would like to provide a good home to a child but simply can not afford the adoption itself. The problem is further complicated when you consider that much of the cost of adoptions is (at least it is meant too) for the cost of caring for children in orphanages and foster care. This money is therefore needed. However, the cost of adoption prevents people from adopting the children. Of course, if the children were adopted then there would not be a need to fund the orphanages. And so the vicious cycle continues. Orphanages need funding but the funding of them prevents people from adopting.
Please understand that I'm not delusional and believe that all the money for adoption goes to the orphanages but that is the going justification for the extreme cost. Nevertheless, without going into greater detail of where every dime spent on an adoption goes, it does seem clear that if the cost could be drastically reduced than more people would be willing to adopt. And if more children were adopted than there would be less need for funding of orphanages.
Ideally, it would be great to close them all. We unfortunately do not live in an ideal world. So, until we do and until every child has a home, what can we do to truly make adoption available to every family that has the means to support a child but doesn't have the means to adopt them? Naturally, there are grants available from wonderful organizations. As great as these are (and we are extremely grateful for the grant we received from Caroline's Promise) they are generally a drop in a very big bucket. Can we do more? Can we find a better, more efficient way for adoptions? Can we impress upon governments (including our own) to cut the cost of adoptions? Can we do something for that 13 year old who is running out of time? I do not have the answers to these questions but I pray that we can find them. I pray we find them soon.
Friday, July 10, 2009
Wednesday, June 10, 2009
Why do they make this issue?
I'm confused, Adam Lambert, the American Idol runner-up officially announced that he is gay. I am confused as to why this is headline news? After all, the same media that feels this is headline news also regularly tells us that we aren't supposed to care about one's sexual orientation. So then why do they care enough to report this as though it is something we should be caring about? I just don't get it.
Thursday, May 07, 2009
Deconstruction of the Mega-Church Growth Plan
The following is a paper that I had to write for a class. Some who knew I was writing it asked to read it so here it is. Enjoy?
THE DECONSTRUCTION OF THE MEGA-CHURCH GROWTH PLAN
INTRODUCTION
In the interest of integrity it should be noted that this paper is being written from the viewpoint of a disgruntled, depressed, and frustrated small church pastor. It is written from the viewpoint of one who constantly finds himself at yet another church growth conference or reading yet another church growth book and thinking, “This will not work at my church because I’m not at a mega-church or on the way to being one.” The purpose of this paper is demonstrate that current church growth models deal more with the growth of local individual churches then with the growth of the Kingdom of God and in turn propose a church growth plan that seeks to bring the Kingdom of God to all people.
The paper will examine current church growth models in order to show that they fall short of the Biblical ideal. The church growth models encourage competition, homogeneous structures of social class, and consumerist mentalities. This examination is necessary to understand the proposal that is made in which the church grows by seeking the people, reaching out to all, and building mature believers.
THE DECONSTRUCTION OF THE MEGA-CHURCH GROWTH PLAN
THE GOAL IS TO GROW
It does not really matter who you go to hear at a conference or whose book you choose to read, most any church growth plan that is talked about today is a variant of the now famous Saddleback Church model found in Rick Warren’s Purpose Driven Church. The model or models basically follow this pattern: define your church purpose, find a target group, attract the target group, move the crowd into connecting into small groups or cell groups, use these groups to grow mature and ministering people which will then be used to attract more of the target group.
This model has been successfully used to grow many churches and is perhaps responsible for the North American church having any growth at all as the majority of churches in North America are actually in stagnation or decline. So not everything said here is a rebuke against this movement that began with Warren. The rebuke that is here is more about the concept of church growth in general and specifically with the idea of growth being the goal. The rebuke is a reflection of a disgruntled pastor who feels that with every church growth conference and book that once again he has been told how to take a declining, neighborhood store and to turn it into a big box retailer. The bottom line is numbers and numbers just is not enough.
When you take out the justification that growing numbers is one of the few tangible ways to determine if the church is reaching people, you quickly find that in the end church growth stresses the numbers more than the people. It is just hard to remove the stress of numbers from the perhaps sincere desire of pastors and churches to reach people to be growing followers of Christ. Pastors want numbers. Church members insist on numbers. The pastor’s performance becomes based on numbers. The easiest way to see if a pastor is being successful is to look at his numbers. Rarely on a resume will a pastor list that he spent a year discipling 8 people who really grew in their walk with Christ. More often you will find that he took a church of 100 people and grew it to 200.
With this great emphasis on numbers the focus of the current church growth models becomes the part in which we strive to attract a crowd. Here is also where problems arise for the growth of the Kingdom. Say there are 3 churches in a mid-size town. They take the current growth models and they devise a purpose and a target audience. Because they want to reach the greatest number of people the three churches study the demographics and design their own version of the now famous “Saddleback Sam.” However, because the churches all use the same demographics they all have similar targets.
Now the competition begins. The competition is pretty fierce too because again, the pastors’ success in based on the numbers. They all work to have better nurseries, better playgrounds, better video and audio, better buildings, etc. Millions of dollars are spent doing their best to attract the crowd (the issue of, is attracting a crowd a negative or a positive thing, will be addressed later). At the end of the day, the one who is best able to have the better attraction is the one who “wins.” Competition is born and co-operation dies. A single church may grow, in large part to transfer growth, while other churches in the area continue to decline and die.
BUILDING HOMOGENEOUS CHURCHES BUILT ON SOCIAL CONTEXT NOT FAITH
A second troubling issue with the current growth models is that in the targeting of a certain type of people churches are building themselves to be homogeneous units of the same social type of people. Obviously, every church will say that they are open to everyone. Every church that takes this approach will say that they are merely being effective in their outreach efforts.
However, by taking a look at the three churches used in the previous example a clear problem arises. If all three churches, using the same demographic information to design their target, build a similar profile of their respective target audience, then there will certainly be a lot of people in this town who no one is trying to reach. Perhaps even worse are that few churches, particularly of the mega-church variety that work on the current church model, would intentionally try to reach those people who are both demographically and socially on the fringes of society.
Sadly, this seems to be an anti-Biblical approach. Again, the argument for churches following this approach is most likely that they are simply being most effective with their time and resources. However, as will be seen later, the church has been given a model of effectiveness that does not call for isolation of any group.
BEGINS WITH A CONSUMERIST MENTALITY
One more issue that is seen in this current model of church growth is that it begins with and therefore re-enforces the American model of consumerism. A church finds a target audience and then begins to market itself to reach that audience. Again the idea here is to reach or to attract the largest crowd possible. The easy way to attract a crowd is to give the crowd what they want. In America you would certainly never hear of a church that meets in a dark, cold basement.
Churches spend billions on recreation centers, nurseries, comfortable seating, and landscaping. Millions more are spent on fancy advertising. This in and of itself is not necessarily a bad thing. However, when one comes to church they should come to learn, to grow, and to change. They should come to glorify Christ not to simply be comfortable and to be with their social group. The church’s action, in its approach to reach its target audience, makes the first impression that the consumers and their desires are the priority of the church.
Naturally, the objection will be raised that the church is simply meeting the needs of the people. This would be true if the church was feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, visiting the sick and those in prison. However, multi-million dollar audio visual equipment is not reaching the needs of anyone.
Another objection would be that without that multi-million dollar audio-visual system the church would not be able to reach anyone. The culture demands that we use such equipment. However, is it not the case that the church change culture and not necessarily condone the values and priorities of it? The church should be a place that expects more of people then simply being “good” people who “enjoy” a good show on Sunday morning.
MEMBERS BECOME CHURCH EVANGELIZERS NOT CHRIST DISCIPLERS
A final assessment of the current church growth models draws the conclusion that the members of a church built on this premise calls the members to be evangelizers of their local church and not Christ Disciplers. In the goal to gain more numbers people are constantly encourage to partner with the church in bringing people to the church to hear the message. At first sight, this looks like straight up good evangelism. But look at it again. The evangelism is “come to my church where there will be lots of stuff that you will like, where you will feel comfortable, where there are people just like you.”
An objection here would be that the church is recognizing that evangelism is difficult for most people therefore this approach is making it easier for people to invite their friends and family to church. But is this what we are called to do, make evangelism easy? Are we not called to simply go and teach? The current growth models state that the teaching is done in the preaching at the worship service and at the small groups that people become connected to but the crowd must be attracted first. This would all be good if the Reveal project from Willow Creek had not revealed that this was not taking place.
The Reveal project showed that people in this type of growth model were indeed being attracted, they were even making connections to small groups, they were involved at least in part to some sort of ministry but they were not growing spiritually. They were not growing as disciples.
It seems that with so much of the emphasis being on the attraction of people to the primary worship service that the discipleship and teaching aspect gets put on the back burner. Again, the goal is to get numbers. The members are encouraged to connect in these small groups to feel a greater connection to their church in order to be more encouraged to get more people (and by this it is meant more people like them) to attend. The people are evangelizing their church. It is all about their church. It is not about disciples discipling disciples.
INTO THE HIGHWAYS AND THE HEDGES
Once again in needs to be stated that if it was not for the current church growth models it is almost a given that the church in North America would be at a far greater declining rate. However, as has been shown there are flaws to the model or at the very least, there are questions that need some answers. In this next section, a proposal will be made of a church growth model that is solely based on Scripture and seeks to answer some of the issues in the current model.
KINGDOM GROWTH VERSUS CHURCH GROWTH
To move beyond the problem of local church centric growth and Kingdom growth a review of the events at Pentecost will be helpful. Here in Acts 2 Scripture records that nearly three thousand were added to the Church that day. Many see this as another reason to emphasis numbers. However, this is not to be a reflection of three thousand people joining a local congregation in Jerusalem. This is three thousand in the Kingdom of God. A closer look at this Pentecost day reveals that those who joined the Kingdom that day were from all over. The celebration was that God’s Kingdom grew and that it would be spread throughout by all of these new believers.
This emphasis must change and it will have to change with the heart of the people. The leadership of the church through prayer and teaching will need to move their people into being more concerned with the growth of the Kingdom everywhere then they are simply about their local institution. The goal would be to find and make disciples wherever they may be found. The goal would be to see that the Word of God is spread throughout the world.
NOT ATTRACTION – GOING AND FINDING
This model of Kingdom growth would also call for a replacement of the value of attracting a crowd with the emphasis on going and finding a crowd. Luke 14:23 instructs us to go into the highways and into the hedges. The ministry of Jesus was walking into the streets. Paul would go out into the marketplaces. Somewhere in the history of the church that thought turned from going to where the crowds are to building something that the crowds might come to. A change has to take place.
This would mean that the church would spend its time and money focused on training and teaching its people to be out where the lost already are. Countless times it is said that the number one factor in another person coming to Christ and the Church is by way of a personal relationship. Currently we use these factors to get people to a church but when we look at Paul we see that he simply used his relationships to spread the Gospel. Getting people into an organized church is wonderful but the emphasis must be to get people into the Kingdom.
This type of relationship building, of going to the people to meet their needs there would greatly free up money and resources in the church that are now used in building attractions. It would also mean that people would have to release themselves from the feeling that they want something for their money. The Biblical idea of the collection in church is to supply for those in need. Imagine people meeting in a lowly rented room with bad sound and no video to worship the Lord. Imagine them not caring about this because they have grown to understand that the money they give to the church is there to assist those less fortunate. That it is not about them.
Going out would also be a greater incarnation of the Great Commission. It may be a bit trite but the Great Commission does say “go” not “attract.” This is the heart of evangelism. Evangelism was never meant to be a system of attracting people but of going and meeting the real needs of the people, where they are, in order to be able to gain their ear and their attention so that they may hear the Good News.
REACHING OUT TO THOSE NOT LIKE YOU
This emphasis on going to the people where they are also allows the church to not focus on a target. The reason a target audience is needed in the come and see approach because you are asking people to come to one church. However, the going to the people approach allows any number of people to go to as many as they can. Imagine a church of 50 and all 50 are encouraged to bring one person with them to this church. The church has a target audience of cowboys. When the 50 go out to find a cowboy to bring they first have to find a cowboy and then get the cowboy to come.
Now imagine another church with 50 people who simply go with no target in mind. They go to everyone and anyone and instead of just inviting them to a church they invite them to dinner. They build a relationship. They build a relationship with anyone for they have been trained and taught that they are to become all things to all people (I Corinthians 9:20-22).
Who would reach more people? The church only trying to attract the cowboys or the church that is going to everyone and anyone? The answer to that may be unclear. However, it seems clear that this is the mission of the church and is in line with a more Biblical approach. Scripture speaks often that there is neither Jew nor Gentile that there is neither rich nor poor. That the church is to be a place not of homogeneous social structure but of a homogenous faith.
Furthermore, Scripture is quite clear that the church is to be a father to the fatherless (Psalm 82:3 NAS), a protector of the widows and the orphans (James 1:27), to be there for the sick, to clothe the naked, and to feed the hungry (Matthew 25). If the Church is building itself on the profile of demographics then these groups will most certainly always be missed. The reality is that these groups simply do not show up as large statistical features on demographic reports. Never the less, this is the churches mission. Reaching these people will necessitate that the church go to them. To go to them in the highways, the undergrounds, the orphanages, the prisons, the ghettos, the slums, the trailer parks, the hospitals, alleys, the crack houses, whore houses, migrant farm camps, and the homeless shelter. Interestingly enough these are not the people that churches try to attract but these are the people that Jesus went to, met with, and declared that they were blessed for the Kingdom of God is available to them (Matthew 4:24 – 5:3).
Some may object at this point claiming that this is why there are a variety of churches. The number of churches allows for greater diversity. First off, this diversity usually involves doctrinal issues and worship style differences. Secondly, this is a negative view of the church and not a Biblical view. Again, the church is to be a place where all that separates us no longer does and the faith that binds us is greater than any earthly social context. There is a great sin in the church that is enhanced by the idea of finding a target audience. The sin of separation, not from sin but from one another.
Let this sin be replaced by a heart for all people. Let the emphasis be on going directly to them, where they are, meeting their real needs and sharing the real Christ with them. Let it no longer be the case that the church says, “If we build it, they will come.”
DISCIPLINE, ACCOUNTABILITY, AND MATURE DISCIPLES
Finally, this growth plan does rely on the small group system. It is necessary to have groups where the disciples intimately know one another. The intimacy is necessary for the disciples to grow. In this system the disciples will come together to not only study the Scriptures but will use the group to hold one another accountable to the commands of Christ. Accountability will also include discipline as described in Scripture (Matthew 18:15).
Church discipline is most likely not a subject that one would expect to hear in a church growth strategy. Never the less, it seems quite clear that church discipline is a Biblical expectation. Discipline is not for the purpose of removing people from the church. It is for the purpose of restoring people into greater fellowship and for making them stronger in their faith (Galatians 6:1).
Going back to the Reveal report from Willow Creek it was learned that people even in small groups are not growing spiritually. Could it be that people have the expectation of joining a small group to be connected in good fellowship? That they also join to perhaps learn some Scripture? That they may even do some ministry within the group? But to what extent do the members of this group intentionally plan to grow spiritually, to deal with the sins they struggle with, and to hold one another accountable with love and humility in order that they may grow in their walk with the Lord.
The growth potential for the church is in the strengthening of the current membership of the church. They would be growing spiritually and would be filled with the courage to embrace the Biblical mandate to go to all peoples. Churches would not simply be asking their members to invite people to an attraction. Churches would be expecting their members to be growing, not into local church evangelizers, but makers of disciples of the Kingdom of God. The active discipline would let members know that the church truly has high, but wonderful, expectations for their disciples of Christ.
CONCLUSION
In looking at the proposed strategy for church growth a few things should become abundantly clear. This proposal is asking for churches to set aside the idea that they are building structures to attract people to come and join. Churches are being asked to set aside the idea that churches are best when the people in them are similar in social context. Churches are being asked to not target for members that will most likely “fit” in.
The strategy proposed here is really quite simple. Go! Go to everyone and anyone. Go to the forgotten, the abused, the down trodden, the diseased, the depressed, the pushed around, the broken, the poor, the rich, the wise, the foolish, the outcast, and the in-crowd. Use the resources to meet the needs of the people. The resources, specifically the money, are not going to be used to build a place that is attractive but to practically meet the needs of the people.
Another important part of this strategy is getting people to know that their efforts are to build God’s Kingdom and not a particular local church. It is important to understand that this strategy is less about a particular program for a church as it is a matter of the transformation of the people of the Church into a co-operative, universal fellowship that works to builds God’s Kingdom.
Finally this strategy calls for the accountability and discipline of the members. Again this is done with love and with the purpose of personal growth.
The current growth models have succeeded in growing large churches with many people attending. However, it has been shown that this does not always translate into the most Biblical picture of a church and it certainly does not translate into people who are growing spiritually. It is the hope that by following these few simple Biblical guidelines a dramatic and wonderful change can take place in the life of the North American church and for the Church around the world. Let us reach all – not just those like us because they like what we have to offer them.
To God be the glory.
THE DECONSTRUCTION OF THE MEGA-CHURCH GROWTH PLAN
INTRODUCTION
In the interest of integrity it should be noted that this paper is being written from the viewpoint of a disgruntled, depressed, and frustrated small church pastor. It is written from the viewpoint of one who constantly finds himself at yet another church growth conference or reading yet another church growth book and thinking, “This will not work at my church because I’m not at a mega-church or on the way to being one.” The purpose of this paper is demonstrate that current church growth models deal more with the growth of local individual churches then with the growth of the Kingdom of God and in turn propose a church growth plan that seeks to bring the Kingdom of God to all people.
The paper will examine current church growth models in order to show that they fall short of the Biblical ideal. The church growth models encourage competition, homogeneous structures of social class, and consumerist mentalities. This examination is necessary to understand the proposal that is made in which the church grows by seeking the people, reaching out to all, and building mature believers.
THE DECONSTRUCTION OF THE MEGA-CHURCH GROWTH PLAN
THE GOAL IS TO GROW
It does not really matter who you go to hear at a conference or whose book you choose to read, most any church growth plan that is talked about today is a variant of the now famous Saddleback Church model found in Rick Warren’s Purpose Driven Church. The model or models basically follow this pattern: define your church purpose, find a target group, attract the target group, move the crowd into connecting into small groups or cell groups, use these groups to grow mature and ministering people which will then be used to attract more of the target group.
This model has been successfully used to grow many churches and is perhaps responsible for the North American church having any growth at all as the majority of churches in North America are actually in stagnation or decline. So not everything said here is a rebuke against this movement that began with Warren. The rebuke that is here is more about the concept of church growth in general and specifically with the idea of growth being the goal. The rebuke is a reflection of a disgruntled pastor who feels that with every church growth conference and book that once again he has been told how to take a declining, neighborhood store and to turn it into a big box retailer. The bottom line is numbers and numbers just is not enough.
When you take out the justification that growing numbers is one of the few tangible ways to determine if the church is reaching people, you quickly find that in the end church growth stresses the numbers more than the people. It is just hard to remove the stress of numbers from the perhaps sincere desire of pastors and churches to reach people to be growing followers of Christ. Pastors want numbers. Church members insist on numbers. The pastor’s performance becomes based on numbers. The easiest way to see if a pastor is being successful is to look at his numbers. Rarely on a resume will a pastor list that he spent a year discipling 8 people who really grew in their walk with Christ. More often you will find that he took a church of 100 people and grew it to 200.
With this great emphasis on numbers the focus of the current church growth models becomes the part in which we strive to attract a crowd. Here is also where problems arise for the growth of the Kingdom. Say there are 3 churches in a mid-size town. They take the current growth models and they devise a purpose and a target audience. Because they want to reach the greatest number of people the three churches study the demographics and design their own version of the now famous “Saddleback Sam.” However, because the churches all use the same demographics they all have similar targets.
Now the competition begins. The competition is pretty fierce too because again, the pastors’ success in based on the numbers. They all work to have better nurseries, better playgrounds, better video and audio, better buildings, etc. Millions of dollars are spent doing their best to attract the crowd (the issue of, is attracting a crowd a negative or a positive thing, will be addressed later). At the end of the day, the one who is best able to have the better attraction is the one who “wins.” Competition is born and co-operation dies. A single church may grow, in large part to transfer growth, while other churches in the area continue to decline and die.
BUILDING HOMOGENEOUS CHURCHES BUILT ON SOCIAL CONTEXT NOT FAITH
A second troubling issue with the current growth models is that in the targeting of a certain type of people churches are building themselves to be homogeneous units of the same social type of people. Obviously, every church will say that they are open to everyone. Every church that takes this approach will say that they are merely being effective in their outreach efforts.
However, by taking a look at the three churches used in the previous example a clear problem arises. If all three churches, using the same demographic information to design their target, build a similar profile of their respective target audience, then there will certainly be a lot of people in this town who no one is trying to reach. Perhaps even worse are that few churches, particularly of the mega-church variety that work on the current church model, would intentionally try to reach those people who are both demographically and socially on the fringes of society.
Sadly, this seems to be an anti-Biblical approach. Again, the argument for churches following this approach is most likely that they are simply being most effective with their time and resources. However, as will be seen later, the church has been given a model of effectiveness that does not call for isolation of any group.
BEGINS WITH A CONSUMERIST MENTALITY
One more issue that is seen in this current model of church growth is that it begins with and therefore re-enforces the American model of consumerism. A church finds a target audience and then begins to market itself to reach that audience. Again the idea here is to reach or to attract the largest crowd possible. The easy way to attract a crowd is to give the crowd what they want. In America you would certainly never hear of a church that meets in a dark, cold basement.
Churches spend billions on recreation centers, nurseries, comfortable seating, and landscaping. Millions more are spent on fancy advertising. This in and of itself is not necessarily a bad thing. However, when one comes to church they should come to learn, to grow, and to change. They should come to glorify Christ not to simply be comfortable and to be with their social group. The church’s action, in its approach to reach its target audience, makes the first impression that the consumers and their desires are the priority of the church.
Naturally, the objection will be raised that the church is simply meeting the needs of the people. This would be true if the church was feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, visiting the sick and those in prison. However, multi-million dollar audio visual equipment is not reaching the needs of anyone.
Another objection would be that without that multi-million dollar audio-visual system the church would not be able to reach anyone. The culture demands that we use such equipment. However, is it not the case that the church change culture and not necessarily condone the values and priorities of it? The church should be a place that expects more of people then simply being “good” people who “enjoy” a good show on Sunday morning.
MEMBERS BECOME CHURCH EVANGELIZERS NOT CHRIST DISCIPLERS
A final assessment of the current church growth models draws the conclusion that the members of a church built on this premise calls the members to be evangelizers of their local church and not Christ Disciplers. In the goal to gain more numbers people are constantly encourage to partner with the church in bringing people to the church to hear the message. At first sight, this looks like straight up good evangelism. But look at it again. The evangelism is “come to my church where there will be lots of stuff that you will like, where you will feel comfortable, where there are people just like you.”
An objection here would be that the church is recognizing that evangelism is difficult for most people therefore this approach is making it easier for people to invite their friends and family to church. But is this what we are called to do, make evangelism easy? Are we not called to simply go and teach? The current growth models state that the teaching is done in the preaching at the worship service and at the small groups that people become connected to but the crowd must be attracted first. This would all be good if the Reveal project from Willow Creek had not revealed that this was not taking place.
The Reveal project showed that people in this type of growth model were indeed being attracted, they were even making connections to small groups, they were involved at least in part to some sort of ministry but they were not growing spiritually. They were not growing as disciples.
It seems that with so much of the emphasis being on the attraction of people to the primary worship service that the discipleship and teaching aspect gets put on the back burner. Again, the goal is to get numbers. The members are encouraged to connect in these small groups to feel a greater connection to their church in order to be more encouraged to get more people (and by this it is meant more people like them) to attend. The people are evangelizing their church. It is all about their church. It is not about disciples discipling disciples.
INTO THE HIGHWAYS AND THE HEDGES
Once again in needs to be stated that if it was not for the current church growth models it is almost a given that the church in North America would be at a far greater declining rate. However, as has been shown there are flaws to the model or at the very least, there are questions that need some answers. In this next section, a proposal will be made of a church growth model that is solely based on Scripture and seeks to answer some of the issues in the current model.
KINGDOM GROWTH VERSUS CHURCH GROWTH
To move beyond the problem of local church centric growth and Kingdom growth a review of the events at Pentecost will be helpful. Here in Acts 2 Scripture records that nearly three thousand were added to the Church that day. Many see this as another reason to emphasis numbers. However, this is not to be a reflection of three thousand people joining a local congregation in Jerusalem. This is three thousand in the Kingdom of God. A closer look at this Pentecost day reveals that those who joined the Kingdom that day were from all over. The celebration was that God’s Kingdom grew and that it would be spread throughout by all of these new believers.
This emphasis must change and it will have to change with the heart of the people. The leadership of the church through prayer and teaching will need to move their people into being more concerned with the growth of the Kingdom everywhere then they are simply about their local institution. The goal would be to find and make disciples wherever they may be found. The goal would be to see that the Word of God is spread throughout the world.
NOT ATTRACTION – GOING AND FINDING
This model of Kingdom growth would also call for a replacement of the value of attracting a crowd with the emphasis on going and finding a crowd. Luke 14:23 instructs us to go into the highways and into the hedges. The ministry of Jesus was walking into the streets. Paul would go out into the marketplaces. Somewhere in the history of the church that thought turned from going to where the crowds are to building something that the crowds might come to. A change has to take place.
This would mean that the church would spend its time and money focused on training and teaching its people to be out where the lost already are. Countless times it is said that the number one factor in another person coming to Christ and the Church is by way of a personal relationship. Currently we use these factors to get people to a church but when we look at Paul we see that he simply used his relationships to spread the Gospel. Getting people into an organized church is wonderful but the emphasis must be to get people into the Kingdom.
This type of relationship building, of going to the people to meet their needs there would greatly free up money and resources in the church that are now used in building attractions. It would also mean that people would have to release themselves from the feeling that they want something for their money. The Biblical idea of the collection in church is to supply for those in need. Imagine people meeting in a lowly rented room with bad sound and no video to worship the Lord. Imagine them not caring about this because they have grown to understand that the money they give to the church is there to assist those less fortunate. That it is not about them.
Going out would also be a greater incarnation of the Great Commission. It may be a bit trite but the Great Commission does say “go” not “attract.” This is the heart of evangelism. Evangelism was never meant to be a system of attracting people but of going and meeting the real needs of the people, where they are, in order to be able to gain their ear and their attention so that they may hear the Good News.
REACHING OUT TO THOSE NOT LIKE YOU
This emphasis on going to the people where they are also allows the church to not focus on a target. The reason a target audience is needed in the come and see approach because you are asking people to come to one church. However, the going to the people approach allows any number of people to go to as many as they can. Imagine a church of 50 and all 50 are encouraged to bring one person with them to this church. The church has a target audience of cowboys. When the 50 go out to find a cowboy to bring they first have to find a cowboy and then get the cowboy to come.
Now imagine another church with 50 people who simply go with no target in mind. They go to everyone and anyone and instead of just inviting them to a church they invite them to dinner. They build a relationship. They build a relationship with anyone for they have been trained and taught that they are to become all things to all people (I Corinthians 9:20-22).
Who would reach more people? The church only trying to attract the cowboys or the church that is going to everyone and anyone? The answer to that may be unclear. However, it seems clear that this is the mission of the church and is in line with a more Biblical approach. Scripture speaks often that there is neither Jew nor Gentile that there is neither rich nor poor. That the church is to be a place not of homogeneous social structure but of a homogenous faith.
Furthermore, Scripture is quite clear that the church is to be a father to the fatherless (Psalm 82:3 NAS), a protector of the widows and the orphans (James 1:27), to be there for the sick, to clothe the naked, and to feed the hungry (Matthew 25). If the Church is building itself on the profile of demographics then these groups will most certainly always be missed. The reality is that these groups simply do not show up as large statistical features on demographic reports. Never the less, this is the churches mission. Reaching these people will necessitate that the church go to them. To go to them in the highways, the undergrounds, the orphanages, the prisons, the ghettos, the slums, the trailer parks, the hospitals, alleys, the crack houses, whore houses, migrant farm camps, and the homeless shelter. Interestingly enough these are not the people that churches try to attract but these are the people that Jesus went to, met with, and declared that they were blessed for the Kingdom of God is available to them (Matthew 4:24 – 5:3).
Some may object at this point claiming that this is why there are a variety of churches. The number of churches allows for greater diversity. First off, this diversity usually involves doctrinal issues and worship style differences. Secondly, this is a negative view of the church and not a Biblical view. Again, the church is to be a place where all that separates us no longer does and the faith that binds us is greater than any earthly social context. There is a great sin in the church that is enhanced by the idea of finding a target audience. The sin of separation, not from sin but from one another.
Let this sin be replaced by a heart for all people. Let the emphasis be on going directly to them, where they are, meeting their real needs and sharing the real Christ with them. Let it no longer be the case that the church says, “If we build it, they will come.”
DISCIPLINE, ACCOUNTABILITY, AND MATURE DISCIPLES
Finally, this growth plan does rely on the small group system. It is necessary to have groups where the disciples intimately know one another. The intimacy is necessary for the disciples to grow. In this system the disciples will come together to not only study the Scriptures but will use the group to hold one another accountable to the commands of Christ. Accountability will also include discipline as described in Scripture (Matthew 18:15).
Church discipline is most likely not a subject that one would expect to hear in a church growth strategy. Never the less, it seems quite clear that church discipline is a Biblical expectation. Discipline is not for the purpose of removing people from the church. It is for the purpose of restoring people into greater fellowship and for making them stronger in their faith (Galatians 6:1).
Going back to the Reveal report from Willow Creek it was learned that people even in small groups are not growing spiritually. Could it be that people have the expectation of joining a small group to be connected in good fellowship? That they also join to perhaps learn some Scripture? That they may even do some ministry within the group? But to what extent do the members of this group intentionally plan to grow spiritually, to deal with the sins they struggle with, and to hold one another accountable with love and humility in order that they may grow in their walk with the Lord.
The growth potential for the church is in the strengthening of the current membership of the church. They would be growing spiritually and would be filled with the courage to embrace the Biblical mandate to go to all peoples. Churches would not simply be asking their members to invite people to an attraction. Churches would be expecting their members to be growing, not into local church evangelizers, but makers of disciples of the Kingdom of God. The active discipline would let members know that the church truly has high, but wonderful, expectations for their disciples of Christ.
CONCLUSION
In looking at the proposed strategy for church growth a few things should become abundantly clear. This proposal is asking for churches to set aside the idea that they are building structures to attract people to come and join. Churches are being asked to set aside the idea that churches are best when the people in them are similar in social context. Churches are being asked to not target for members that will most likely “fit” in.
The strategy proposed here is really quite simple. Go! Go to everyone and anyone. Go to the forgotten, the abused, the down trodden, the diseased, the depressed, the pushed around, the broken, the poor, the rich, the wise, the foolish, the outcast, and the in-crowd. Use the resources to meet the needs of the people. The resources, specifically the money, are not going to be used to build a place that is attractive but to practically meet the needs of the people.
Another important part of this strategy is getting people to know that their efforts are to build God’s Kingdom and not a particular local church. It is important to understand that this strategy is less about a particular program for a church as it is a matter of the transformation of the people of the Church into a co-operative, universal fellowship that works to builds God’s Kingdom.
Finally this strategy calls for the accountability and discipline of the members. Again this is done with love and with the purpose of personal growth.
The current growth models have succeeded in growing large churches with many people attending. However, it has been shown that this does not always translate into the most Biblical picture of a church and it certainly does not translate into people who are growing spiritually. It is the hope that by following these few simple Biblical guidelines a dramatic and wonderful change can take place in the life of the North American church and for the Church around the world. Let us reach all – not just those like us because they like what we have to offer them.
To God be the glory.
Thursday, April 23, 2009
What do you say? How do you respond?
I wish I could take credit for writing this but it actually comes from the book, Jesus Wants to Save Christians, by Rob Bell:
“Imagine the average youth group in the average church on the average Sunday. Imagine visiting this youth group and having the pastor say to you, ‘I just can’t get my kids interested in Jesus. Do you have any suggestions?’
How do you respond?
To begin with, the church has a youth group. This is a brand-new idea in church history. A luxury. Everybody in the church doesn’t meet all together? All of the babies and older folks and men and women and widows and students aren’t in the same room, but they’ve gone to separate rooms?
And there are resources for this? People and organizational structures and a budget? Let’s imagine that in this case, this pastor, this youth pastor, is paid a salary for his or her work. A church with enough resources to pay someone to oversee the students? Once again, this is brand new, almost unheard of in most of the churches in the world, and in church history, a brand-new invention.
This salary can be paid and this building can be built because people in the congregation have surplus. They have fed themselves and their children and bought clothes and houses, and now, after these expenses, there is still money available. And this money is given in an act of generosity to the church, which disperses it to various places, among them the bank account of the pastor.
In many, if not most, of the churches in the world, immediate needs simply don’t allow for such luxuries – too many people are hungry, too many don’t have a roof, too many are sick – and so any surplus is spent immediately on the basic needs staring them right in the face, people dying here, right now, today.
But this particular church is blessed, and we should be clear about this – it is blessing. It is good. It is fortunate that this particular church doesn’t have those issues. This church has enough resources to hire a pastor who had the resources to get training to gather these students in the student room to teach them about the way of Jesus. Many Christians around the world would simply stand in awe of the kind of blessing.
And the students in this church, these are good kids. They are from families who just want to see their kids become good Christians.
Imagine just how much is available to them. They have more at their finger-tips than any generation in the history of the world – more information, more entertainment, more ideas, more ways to kill time, more options.
Many of them own more than one pair of shoes.
There are even some among them who have eaten at least one meal every day of their lives.
So we are talking about a miniscule minority of kids in the world.
At the exit off the highway near their church is a Best Buy and a Chili’s and a Circuit City and a McDonald’s and a Wal-Mart and a Bed, Bath and Beyond, much like the other towns in their state and in their country. The music they listen to is distributed by one of the five major corporations, which also own the movie studios that create the movies they watch, which are also connected to the corporations that create the food they eat and the commercials they watch, which also have significant ties to the clothes they wear and the cell phones they own, and the ring tone on their cell phones, the one by the artist who is signed to the record label that is owned by the same company that owns the cell phone company and the advertising agency that announced the artist’s new album, which is owned by the same company that owns the beverage company in whose advertisement the artist appeared, drinking that particular beverage, singing the song that is now a ring tone on the students’ phones that they purchased at the mall across the street from the Olive Garden next door to the Home Depot on the other side of the Starbucks.
And so each week they gather to hear a talk from the pastor.
Their pastor tells them about the Jesus revolution.
About Jesus resisting the system.
About the blood of the cross.
About many of the first Christians getting arrested.
About Jesus having dinner with prostitutes and tax collectors.
About people sharing their possessions.
About Jesus telling a man to sell everything.
About the uniqueness of their story in the larger story of redemption.
How do children of the empire understand the Savior who was killed by an empire?
How does a twelve-year-old who has never had hunger pangs that lasted more than an hour understand a story about a twelve-year-old providing fish and bread for thousands of chronically hungry people?
How do kids who are surrounded by more abundance than in any other generation in the history of humanity take seriously a Messiah who said, ‘I have been anointed to preach good news to the poor’?
How do they fathom that half the world is too poor to feed its kids when their church just spent two years raising money to build an addition to their building?
They gather, they sing, they hear a talk from the pastor, and then they get back in the car with their parent and they go home; the garage door opens up, the car goes in, and the garage door goes down.
This is the revolution?
This is what Jesus had in mine?
And so the youth pastor turns to you and says, again, ‘I just can’t get my students engaged with Jesus. Do you have any suggestions?’
What do you say?
How do you respond?”
“Imagine the average youth group in the average church on the average Sunday. Imagine visiting this youth group and having the pastor say to you, ‘I just can’t get my kids interested in Jesus. Do you have any suggestions?’
How do you respond?
To begin with, the church has a youth group. This is a brand-new idea in church history. A luxury. Everybody in the church doesn’t meet all together? All of the babies and older folks and men and women and widows and students aren’t in the same room, but they’ve gone to separate rooms?
And there are resources for this? People and organizational structures and a budget? Let’s imagine that in this case, this pastor, this youth pastor, is paid a salary for his or her work. A church with enough resources to pay someone to oversee the students? Once again, this is brand new, almost unheard of in most of the churches in the world, and in church history, a brand-new invention.
This salary can be paid and this building can be built because people in the congregation have surplus. They have fed themselves and their children and bought clothes and houses, and now, after these expenses, there is still money available. And this money is given in an act of generosity to the church, which disperses it to various places, among them the bank account of the pastor.
In many, if not most, of the churches in the world, immediate needs simply don’t allow for such luxuries – too many people are hungry, too many don’t have a roof, too many are sick – and so any surplus is spent immediately on the basic needs staring them right in the face, people dying here, right now, today.
But this particular church is blessed, and we should be clear about this – it is blessing. It is good. It is fortunate that this particular church doesn’t have those issues. This church has enough resources to hire a pastor who had the resources to get training to gather these students in the student room to teach them about the way of Jesus. Many Christians around the world would simply stand in awe of the kind of blessing.
And the students in this church, these are good kids. They are from families who just want to see their kids become good Christians.
Imagine just how much is available to them. They have more at their finger-tips than any generation in the history of the world – more information, more entertainment, more ideas, more ways to kill time, more options.
Many of them own more than one pair of shoes.
There are even some among them who have eaten at least one meal every day of their lives.
So we are talking about a miniscule minority of kids in the world.
At the exit off the highway near their church is a Best Buy and a Chili’s and a Circuit City and a McDonald’s and a Wal-Mart and a Bed, Bath and Beyond, much like the other towns in their state and in their country. The music they listen to is distributed by one of the five major corporations, which also own the movie studios that create the movies they watch, which are also connected to the corporations that create the food they eat and the commercials they watch, which also have significant ties to the clothes they wear and the cell phones they own, and the ring tone on their cell phones, the one by the artist who is signed to the record label that is owned by the same company that owns the cell phone company and the advertising agency that announced the artist’s new album, which is owned by the same company that owns the beverage company in whose advertisement the artist appeared, drinking that particular beverage, singing the song that is now a ring tone on the students’ phones that they purchased at the mall across the street from the Olive Garden next door to the Home Depot on the other side of the Starbucks.
And so each week they gather to hear a talk from the pastor.
Their pastor tells them about the Jesus revolution.
About Jesus resisting the system.
About the blood of the cross.
About many of the first Christians getting arrested.
About Jesus having dinner with prostitutes and tax collectors.
About people sharing their possessions.
About Jesus telling a man to sell everything.
About the uniqueness of their story in the larger story of redemption.
How do children of the empire understand the Savior who was killed by an empire?
How does a twelve-year-old who has never had hunger pangs that lasted more than an hour understand a story about a twelve-year-old providing fish and bread for thousands of chronically hungry people?
How do kids who are surrounded by more abundance than in any other generation in the history of humanity take seriously a Messiah who said, ‘I have been anointed to preach good news to the poor’?
How do they fathom that half the world is too poor to feed its kids when their church just spent two years raising money to build an addition to their building?
They gather, they sing, they hear a talk from the pastor, and then they get back in the car with their parent and they go home; the garage door opens up, the car goes in, and the garage door goes down.
This is the revolution?
This is what Jesus had in mine?
And so the youth pastor turns to you and says, again, ‘I just can’t get my students engaged with Jesus. Do you have any suggestions?’
What do you say?
How do you respond?”
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
Sunday, December 21, 2008
Saturday, April 26, 2008
Adoption, fatherhood, attachment, and miles apart.
My wife and I are currently in the process of adopting 2 boys from Ethiopia. When adopting you are required to read several books on the issues that can be faced we adopting. A major issue is bonding and attachment with the children. The bonding process, particularly with older children can take some time and will take a lot of effort. These children, although they may know mentally that you are there new parents, may not immediately bond with you as mom and dad.
Another issue is one that my wife and I are facing now. We just recently received information on the boys. We basically know their names, their ages, and we have seen one picture of them. Still, it will be months before we are able to bring them home. In our hearts these boys are our boys and yet they are miles from home and there is no way we can communicate with them. It is heartbreaking.
I bring all this up, because as we have gone through this adoption process I have grown to understand more and more of what scripture means when it speaks of us being adopted into God's family (see Ephesians 1:5). As I reflect on our own experiences with adoption and reflect on the theological nature of adoption from God's perspective I see Him more as that Father who longs to bond with His children but our fears and our mistrust often gets in the way of our bonding with Him.
As we wait to bring our children home I am beginning to understand how, even as we are His adopted children, from His perspective there are times where He must feel that we are miles away. I believe being a father has helped me to understand God better in the love that I have for my children. Now, I see the heartbreak of knowing your children and yet having them so far away. It has made me wonder how often the Father's heart breaks over His children not being home and not being in communication with Him?
In short, I believe this adoption process has opened my eyes to just how much the Father wants to bring His children home, to bond with them, to keep them safe, and to let them know that they are loved. I'd say, if you want a real lesson in what God has done by adopting you, then perhaps you should consider adopting.
"Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world." James 1:27
Another issue is one that my wife and I are facing now. We just recently received information on the boys. We basically know their names, their ages, and we have seen one picture of them. Still, it will be months before we are able to bring them home. In our hearts these boys are our boys and yet they are miles from home and there is no way we can communicate with them. It is heartbreaking.
I bring all this up, because as we have gone through this adoption process I have grown to understand more and more of what scripture means when it speaks of us being adopted into God's family (see Ephesians 1:5). As I reflect on our own experiences with adoption and reflect on the theological nature of adoption from God's perspective I see Him more as that Father who longs to bond with His children but our fears and our mistrust often gets in the way of our bonding with Him.
As we wait to bring our children home I am beginning to understand how, even as we are His adopted children, from His perspective there are times where He must feel that we are miles away. I believe being a father has helped me to understand God better in the love that I have for my children. Now, I see the heartbreak of knowing your children and yet having them so far away. It has made me wonder how often the Father's heart breaks over His children not being home and not being in communication with Him?
In short, I believe this adoption process has opened my eyes to just how much the Father wants to bring His children home, to bond with them, to keep them safe, and to let them know that they are loved. I'd say, if you want a real lesson in what God has done by adopting you, then perhaps you should consider adopting.
"Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world." James 1:27
Monday, March 10, 2008
My Favorite Teacher!
Many, many moons ago (23 years to be exact) I was a young man in the 6th grade. I had several teachers before then and had many more since. I even married a teacher. However, no teacher that I ever had compared to my favorite - my 6th grade teacher. Yes, even my wife knows that she is not my favorite teacher.
This past week, through a little internet searching (isn't the internet just amazing?) I was able to track down my favorite teacher. I must say that I was quite shocked to discover that she was still teaching 6th grade at the same elementary school. I was even able to e-mail her and she, as true to her nature that made her my favorite, responded back. As my wife now likes to tell people, I am "giddy" over having found my favorite teacher.
Even though I have several memories of my 6th grade year, I find it hard to say here is the one or two things that made Mrs. Findley my favorite. The fact of the matter is that it was her overall attitude. She made you feel special and made you feel that she was there because she enjoyed being there. It wasn't just a job. She made things fun. She never seemed to takes things to seriously. Even when I got in trouble once for writing a note in class that said something derogatory toward another student I had to sit out of recess but I wasn't made to feel like I was necessarily bad or stupid. I was just a kid who had written something stupid.
On the last day of school we had lined up to head to the buses for one last time. As we walked past our respective teachers some students, mostly girls, hugged and thanked their teachers. Me, being a macho man didn't want to seem silly in front of the other guys so I calmly walked past Mrs. Findley like it was just any other day. I always regretted that I never said thank you and for letting her know that she really meant a lot to me. Well, it took nearly 23 years but I was finally able to let her know that she was indeed my favorite teacher.
This whole experience has me thinking of others that I failed to say something to. It was really shear luck that I was able to find my favorite 6th grade teacher. What if that had not happened? I'd still be living with that regret. Perhaps this should be a lesson for us all. Take advantage of the time that we have. Tell those who are important to us just what they do mean to our lives. 23 years later I am still learning from my 6th grade teacher.
This past week, through a little internet searching (isn't the internet just amazing?) I was able to track down my favorite teacher. I must say that I was quite shocked to discover that she was still teaching 6th grade at the same elementary school. I was even able to e-mail her and she, as true to her nature that made her my favorite, responded back. As my wife now likes to tell people, I am "giddy" over having found my favorite teacher.
Even though I have several memories of my 6th grade year, I find it hard to say here is the one or two things that made Mrs. Findley my favorite. The fact of the matter is that it was her overall attitude. She made you feel special and made you feel that she was there because she enjoyed being there. It wasn't just a job. She made things fun. She never seemed to takes things to seriously. Even when I got in trouble once for writing a note in class that said something derogatory toward another student I had to sit out of recess but I wasn't made to feel like I was necessarily bad or stupid. I was just a kid who had written something stupid.
On the last day of school we had lined up to head to the buses for one last time. As we walked past our respective teachers some students, mostly girls, hugged and thanked their teachers. Me, being a macho man didn't want to seem silly in front of the other guys so I calmly walked past Mrs. Findley like it was just any other day. I always regretted that I never said thank you and for letting her know that she really meant a lot to me. Well, it took nearly 23 years but I was finally able to let her know that she was indeed my favorite teacher.
This whole experience has me thinking of others that I failed to say something to. It was really shear luck that I was able to find my favorite 6th grade teacher. What if that had not happened? I'd still be living with that regret. Perhaps this should be a lesson for us all. Take advantage of the time that we have. Tell those who are important to us just what they do mean to our lives. 23 years later I am still learning from my 6th grade teacher.
Monday, February 04, 2008
Numbers
It is often said that numbers don’t lie. However, the numbers can be misleading especially if Baptists are doing the counting. Now we all are fully aware of the notorious church membership rolls with people on them who have not been in a church in years. However, if we look at the figures of the latest annual church profile report I think we can get a pretty good look at the state of our Baptist churches.
The first thing we should do when looking at these figures is to throw out the total membership number of just over 16 million. The number is flawed and virtually worthless. A more accurate figure can be found looking at the primary worship attendance figures. According to the church profile this number is a little more than 6 million. Now it is true that we have people who regularly attend our worship services who are not members but I think it is safe to say that the 10 million members who are not attending the primary worship service are members in record keeping only and might as well be considered non-members (and most likely lost).
Now then, let’s assume that the 6 million attending worship is a more accurate figure of membership. We can they figure in, based on Barna research that nearly 2/3of those regularly attending worship services are in fact not saved. If we subtract that 2/3 from the 6 million we surprisingly come up with just over 2 million people. This just happens to be the number of people reported to be involved in discipleship training.
So what are we then left with? Well, the real core of the Southern Baptist Convention is just over 2 million. We have 4 million who are regularly attending worship services but most likely either need to be saved or at the very least need to get involved in discipleship training. Fortunately, they are already inside and simply need to be moved to get more involved. That leaves 10 million on our rolls that really should simply be considered part of the larger world population that is simply lost. We can either view this as a 10 million-member loss and be disheartened or we can realize that this is the truth of our convention and get to work at getting a real membership total of 16 million and beyond.
Another issue to look at is that of baptisms. If we assume that the 2 million involved in discipleship training are those people who are primarily responsible for the work that allowed for the 387,947 baptisms last year. That brings the ratio number of baptisms to membership to 1 baptism per 5 to 6 members. This number is much more encouraging than the 1 to 42 ratio when based on the membership number of 16 million. This suggest that if we could get the 4 million others who are already attending our worship services into discipleship training chances are very likely that we could easily see the magical number of 1 million baptisms in a year.
I believe that the thing we should take away from this look at the numbers is the importance of discipleship training. The next questions we need to answer then are:
1) What exactly constitutes discipleship training?
2) How do we best do discipleship training?
3) How can we get those current 4 million not involved in discipleship training involved and how do we get new baptized members involved?
Well, I don’t have all the answers to those questions but hopefully we can work together to get them answered. God bless you all and remember to live today knowing that it is in His Kingdom that you live.
The first thing we should do when looking at these figures is to throw out the total membership number of just over 16 million. The number is flawed and virtually worthless. A more accurate figure can be found looking at the primary worship attendance figures. According to the church profile this number is a little more than 6 million. Now it is true that we have people who regularly attend our worship services who are not members but I think it is safe to say that the 10 million members who are not attending the primary worship service are members in record keeping only and might as well be considered non-members (and most likely lost).
Now then, let’s assume that the 6 million attending worship is a more accurate figure of membership. We can they figure in, based on Barna research that nearly 2/3of those regularly attending worship services are in fact not saved. If we subtract that 2/3 from the 6 million we surprisingly come up with just over 2 million people. This just happens to be the number of people reported to be involved in discipleship training.
So what are we then left with? Well, the real core of the Southern Baptist Convention is just over 2 million. We have 4 million who are regularly attending worship services but most likely either need to be saved or at the very least need to get involved in discipleship training. Fortunately, they are already inside and simply need to be moved to get more involved. That leaves 10 million on our rolls that really should simply be considered part of the larger world population that is simply lost. We can either view this as a 10 million-member loss and be disheartened or we can realize that this is the truth of our convention and get to work at getting a real membership total of 16 million and beyond.
Another issue to look at is that of baptisms. If we assume that the 2 million involved in discipleship training are those people who are primarily responsible for the work that allowed for the 387,947 baptisms last year. That brings the ratio number of baptisms to membership to 1 baptism per 5 to 6 members. This number is much more encouraging than the 1 to 42 ratio when based on the membership number of 16 million. This suggest that if we could get the 4 million others who are already attending our worship services into discipleship training chances are very likely that we could easily see the magical number of 1 million baptisms in a year.
I believe that the thing we should take away from this look at the numbers is the importance of discipleship training. The next questions we need to answer then are:
1) What exactly constitutes discipleship training?
2) How do we best do discipleship training?
3) How can we get those current 4 million not involved in discipleship training involved and how do we get new baptized members involved?
Well, I don’t have all the answers to those questions but hopefully we can work together to get them answered. God bless you all and remember to live today knowing that it is in His Kingdom that you live.
Wednesday, January 30, 2008
Hanging Rock State Park, North Carolina
The following are pictures from a hike that Dottie and I took at Hanging Rock State Park in North Carolina. We hiked the Hanging Rock Trail to the top of Hanging Rock.
It is an amazing hike.
It is an amazing hike.
Monday, January 28, 2008
The age of Adam?
The following was my response to a discussion that I was part of on the age of Adam. The Bible records Adam's age at 930 years. In this discussion we were trying to determine if Adam's age was counted from the moment he was created or the moment was expelled from the Garden of Eden. Here is where my thoughts went on this issue:
In our ongoing discussion about the age of Adam, I would like to provide you with something to ponder. Let me begin by telling you that the responses I am receiving seem to fall in one of three categories. People believe either that the 930 years of Adam’s life represent his time from his creation to his death, or they simply admit that they do not know, or they show a complete disinterest.
Now let me add something to the question. As you recall I wanted to know whether the 930 years represented Adam’s life from creation or from after the fall. I then asked a follow up question that asked how much time Adam (and Eve) spent in the Garden of Eden before the fall (curiously this question received no real response). Again for those who answered the first question the consensus was that the 930 was from Adam’s creation. I would now like to propose the possibility that the 930 years were in fact the number of years that Adam lived after the fall.
It seems that in the realm of time two events must occur. One, something must begin and two, something must end. The measuring of time is contingent upon that measurement having a fulfilled destiny. When measuring the time of one’s existence that measurement is based on one’s existence beginning and ending. Even the mid-measurements (such as birthday’s) are contingent upon the very fact that sometime in the future there will be and endpoint.
To further illustrate this point let us look at the nature of time in an everlasting state. In an everlasting environment where one neither physically ages nor dies, the very concept of measuring time becomes irrelevant. Surely, no one believes that when we get to Heaven we will track the number of years we have been there. What would be the point? If something never ends then its time frame is non-existent. You may have a starting point but if there is no end, then why count the days at all.
Remember the movie Groundhog Day. Bill Murray’s character woke up everyday to find that he was reliving Groundhog Day over and over. Even though he was living, he was not aging and he was not going to die. Once he figured out what was going on he realized that even though the same events were constantly occurring around him he could act differently every day. Now imagine if everyone else knew that they were living everyday without regards to aging or dying. Would anyone in this situation be counting his or her days? What would be the point? Would not they just be living life to its ultimate fulfillment? Perhaps they would take the time to master the piano as Bill Murray’s character did? After all, they would have ALL the time in the world to do whatever they wanted to do. The point of all this is to show that time is not a factor when time does not end.
Now imagine, Adam and Eve in paradise. A paradise where time is not a factor because there is no end to paradise and no death has yet come to Adam and Eve. It would seem that life as we know it, a life where death is a factor is fundamentally different from life without death. Imagine if everyone began life in paradise and then everyone fell from paradise. Where would we begin to count their days? We do not sit around and say that Paul is now nearly 2000 years old. We do not say it because it is not true. The Apostle Paul may have died nearly 2000 years ago but he has not continued to age in Heaven. For Paul time is no more. Now put that scenario in reverse. Before the fall, time simply was not a factor. The world may be twirling in space and the plants and trees may be growing. Nevertheless, Adam and Eve were waking everyday to another day where they were not getting older and they certainly were not marking the passage of time to their deaths.
Naturally, someone will ask about the days. After all, we know that at least 7 were counted. I do not want to get into a discussion about whether they were 7 literal days or figurative. Although that is an important issue, for our discussion here it is not important. However you may view the 7 days of creation the fact remains that by the time Adam and Eve came on the scene there was a sun and moon and the earth was rotating and that means that there were days and nights. The question we have to ask is would 2 people whose lives were never going to end bother to count those days? Furthermore, once they had fallen and had begun to age, it seems quite conceivable that they would begin to count their days. It seems very likely that Adam would remember that it has been 12 moons since he was thrown from the glories of paradise. It further seems plausible that Adam would count his days from this point forward. Perhaps not even Adam knew exactly how long he was in the Garden.
I cannot say for sure that this little theory of mine is correct. I can say that whether it is correct or not it in no way takes away from the integrity of Scripture. For if this theory is correct it does not mean the Bible was wrong in the 930 years it simply means that the Bible in its own calculation of the 930 took in to account the very nature of measuring time as well as the fundamental differences of a life with death and a life that is everlasting.
Now then, many of you maybe wondering why should we even be concerning ourselves with this issue. First, it is important because any knowledge that we can gain about Scripture is worthy of pursuit. Secondly, it is important because I believe it provides us with insight into exactly what paradise and therefore what Heaven is like. I often believe that as Christians we limit our view of life to the days that we count and not to those that we will live in the everlasting. This look into Adam’s age gives us a look into the difference of life with Christ and life without Christ. With Christ one is free to live life to its fullest without regard to aging and the ever present approach of death. Life without Christ is being bound to the rat race that forces one to struggle with trying to do everything before their inevitable death. Life without Christ is a constant battle to cheat death. Unfortunately, death cannot be cheated forever. You may get lucky and be able to count your days for many, many years but sooner or later death will find you. Without Christ this will always be a fact. With Christ though, death is merely a shift in life from one with aging, pain, and disappointment to one that allows for freedom, creativity, and fulfillment in Paradise. So imagine, if you were Adam or Eve, and you spent your days not worrying about how many had passed and how many were left, how would you change the way you lived?
In our ongoing discussion about the age of Adam, I would like to provide you with something to ponder. Let me begin by telling you that the responses I am receiving seem to fall in one of three categories. People believe either that the 930 years of Adam’s life represent his time from his creation to his death, or they simply admit that they do not know, or they show a complete disinterest.
Now let me add something to the question. As you recall I wanted to know whether the 930 years represented Adam’s life from creation or from after the fall. I then asked a follow up question that asked how much time Adam (and Eve) spent in the Garden of Eden before the fall (curiously this question received no real response). Again for those who answered the first question the consensus was that the 930 was from Adam’s creation. I would now like to propose the possibility that the 930 years were in fact the number of years that Adam lived after the fall.
It seems that in the realm of time two events must occur. One, something must begin and two, something must end. The measuring of time is contingent upon that measurement having a fulfilled destiny. When measuring the time of one’s existence that measurement is based on one’s existence beginning and ending. Even the mid-measurements (such as birthday’s) are contingent upon the very fact that sometime in the future there will be and endpoint.
To further illustrate this point let us look at the nature of time in an everlasting state. In an everlasting environment where one neither physically ages nor dies, the very concept of measuring time becomes irrelevant. Surely, no one believes that when we get to Heaven we will track the number of years we have been there. What would be the point? If something never ends then its time frame is non-existent. You may have a starting point but if there is no end, then why count the days at all.
Remember the movie Groundhog Day. Bill Murray’s character woke up everyday to find that he was reliving Groundhog Day over and over. Even though he was living, he was not aging and he was not going to die. Once he figured out what was going on he realized that even though the same events were constantly occurring around him he could act differently every day. Now imagine if everyone else knew that they were living everyday without regards to aging or dying. Would anyone in this situation be counting his or her days? What would be the point? Would not they just be living life to its ultimate fulfillment? Perhaps they would take the time to master the piano as Bill Murray’s character did? After all, they would have ALL the time in the world to do whatever they wanted to do. The point of all this is to show that time is not a factor when time does not end.
Now imagine, Adam and Eve in paradise. A paradise where time is not a factor because there is no end to paradise and no death has yet come to Adam and Eve. It would seem that life as we know it, a life where death is a factor is fundamentally different from life without death. Imagine if everyone began life in paradise and then everyone fell from paradise. Where would we begin to count their days? We do not sit around and say that Paul is now nearly 2000 years old. We do not say it because it is not true. The Apostle Paul may have died nearly 2000 years ago but he has not continued to age in Heaven. For Paul time is no more. Now put that scenario in reverse. Before the fall, time simply was not a factor. The world may be twirling in space and the plants and trees may be growing. Nevertheless, Adam and Eve were waking everyday to another day where they were not getting older and they certainly were not marking the passage of time to their deaths.
Naturally, someone will ask about the days. After all, we know that at least 7 were counted. I do not want to get into a discussion about whether they were 7 literal days or figurative. Although that is an important issue, for our discussion here it is not important. However you may view the 7 days of creation the fact remains that by the time Adam and Eve came on the scene there was a sun and moon and the earth was rotating and that means that there were days and nights. The question we have to ask is would 2 people whose lives were never going to end bother to count those days? Furthermore, once they had fallen and had begun to age, it seems quite conceivable that they would begin to count their days. It seems very likely that Adam would remember that it has been 12 moons since he was thrown from the glories of paradise. It further seems plausible that Adam would count his days from this point forward. Perhaps not even Adam knew exactly how long he was in the Garden.
I cannot say for sure that this little theory of mine is correct. I can say that whether it is correct or not it in no way takes away from the integrity of Scripture. For if this theory is correct it does not mean the Bible was wrong in the 930 years it simply means that the Bible in its own calculation of the 930 took in to account the very nature of measuring time as well as the fundamental differences of a life with death and a life that is everlasting.
Now then, many of you maybe wondering why should we even be concerning ourselves with this issue. First, it is important because any knowledge that we can gain about Scripture is worthy of pursuit. Secondly, it is important because I believe it provides us with insight into exactly what paradise and therefore what Heaven is like. I often believe that as Christians we limit our view of life to the days that we count and not to those that we will live in the everlasting. This look into Adam’s age gives us a look into the difference of life with Christ and life without Christ. With Christ one is free to live life to its fullest without regard to aging and the ever present approach of death. Life without Christ is being bound to the rat race that forces one to struggle with trying to do everything before their inevitable death. Life without Christ is a constant battle to cheat death. Unfortunately, death cannot be cheated forever. You may get lucky and be able to count your days for many, many years but sooner or later death will find you. Without Christ this will always be a fact. With Christ though, death is merely a shift in life from one with aging, pain, and disappointment to one that allows for freedom, creativity, and fulfillment in Paradise. So imagine, if you were Adam or Eve, and you spent your days not worrying about how many had passed and how many were left, how would you change the way you lived?
Sunday, January 20, 2008
Christian Books?
I am currently reading a book that I was asked to read and evaluate. So far I believe that there are some things in the book that are worth whiled. However, there are some other things about the book that I find troubling.
The book is a popular book written by two popular Christian writers. It is a non-fiction book that, if it were not a Christian book, would be found in either women’s issues or in the self help section of a secular bookstore.
The book is primarily a look into the psychological workings of a woman’s heart and her desires. The problem I have with the book is in its theology and in its use of Scripture. If the writers were to eliminate their use of Scripture and many of the more theological areas it would be a decent enough book that could sit proudly next to anything written by Dr. Phil. Furthermore, the more psychological aspects of the book do not seem to be contrary to any teachings of Scripture. Oddly enough, the writers do not say anything that is contrary to Scripture other than in the areas where they directly use Scripture or where they attempt to make theological claims.
To be fair, I would guess that the majority of Christian’s reading this book would not notice the improper use of Scripture nor the questionable theology. Being that this is the case the book would probably do little harm to people’s theology and again the psychology seems to be very enlightening. However, as I read this book I think of many other books out there that have the same problem. It seems that we are willing to give a pass to many authors because they are Christian and because for the most part what they write is helpful and insightful. But should we give them a pass or should we expect more?
Again, nothing these writers say in their psychology is contrary to Scripture and had they either taken the time to study more or to seek the advice of a more astute theologian they could have found Scripture that would have been more suited to the points they were trying to make. It simply was not necessary for them to slightly bend Scripture to make their points. More than likely it was just easier.
Am I saying that no one but trained theologians can write a Christian book? Certainly not. What I am suggesting is that we as a Christian community demand that if someone is going to write a book, which by it’s very nature carries an air of authority, and if we then are going to promote that book in our churches as one useful for personal and for group study, which gives further approval to that which is written in the book, than the writer of the book either needs to be as well versed in theology and in Scriptural interpretation as they are in their own personal field of expertise or they need to seek the guidance of someone who is. I am also suggesting that we as a Christian community put more thought and concern in the books and studies we recommend to our congregations. Far too often, we simply recommend the latest, hottest Christian book because it is the latest and hottest book without ever really examining the contents. Perhaps the best thing we can do is stop buying the latest, hottest self-help, put my marriage back together, help me raise my kids, and show me my purpose in life books and go back to the one book we claim to have all authority on our lives.
The book is a popular book written by two popular Christian writers. It is a non-fiction book that, if it were not a Christian book, would be found in either women’s issues or in the self help section of a secular bookstore.
The book is primarily a look into the psychological workings of a woman’s heart and her desires. The problem I have with the book is in its theology and in its use of Scripture. If the writers were to eliminate their use of Scripture and many of the more theological areas it would be a decent enough book that could sit proudly next to anything written by Dr. Phil. Furthermore, the more psychological aspects of the book do not seem to be contrary to any teachings of Scripture. Oddly enough, the writers do not say anything that is contrary to Scripture other than in the areas where they directly use Scripture or where they attempt to make theological claims.
To be fair, I would guess that the majority of Christian’s reading this book would not notice the improper use of Scripture nor the questionable theology. Being that this is the case the book would probably do little harm to people’s theology and again the psychology seems to be very enlightening. However, as I read this book I think of many other books out there that have the same problem. It seems that we are willing to give a pass to many authors because they are Christian and because for the most part what they write is helpful and insightful. But should we give them a pass or should we expect more?
Again, nothing these writers say in their psychology is contrary to Scripture and had they either taken the time to study more or to seek the advice of a more astute theologian they could have found Scripture that would have been more suited to the points they were trying to make. It simply was not necessary for them to slightly bend Scripture to make their points. More than likely it was just easier.
Am I saying that no one but trained theologians can write a Christian book? Certainly not. What I am suggesting is that we as a Christian community demand that if someone is going to write a book, which by it’s very nature carries an air of authority, and if we then are going to promote that book in our churches as one useful for personal and for group study, which gives further approval to that which is written in the book, than the writer of the book either needs to be as well versed in theology and in Scriptural interpretation as they are in their own personal field of expertise or they need to seek the guidance of someone who is. I am also suggesting that we as a Christian community put more thought and concern in the books and studies we recommend to our congregations. Far too often, we simply recommend the latest, hottest Christian book because it is the latest and hottest book without ever really examining the contents. Perhaps the best thing we can do is stop buying the latest, hottest self-help, put my marriage back together, help me raise my kids, and show me my purpose in life books and go back to the one book we claim to have all authority on our lives.
Thursday, January 17, 2008
Stone Mt. State Park
Here is a slideshow of pics from my overnight camping trip to Stone Mt. State Park in North Carolina. It was a wonderful trip. Other then a couple of rock climbers, the park rangers, and the deer, I had the whole park to myself. It was quiet and beautiful.
Tuesday, January 15, 2008
Bear Face Mt., Shenandoah National Park - July 30, 2007
This is a slideshow of a hiking trip I and Jer-bo took to Bear Face Mt. in Shenandoah National Park last July. Somehow these hikes are always better in picture after you have forgotten the exhaustion and the pain in your feet, knees, and your legs in general.
Saturday, July 01, 2006
Vacation June 2006
Stop 1: Fort Frederica in Georgia- Joshua practiced gun drills as part of the British Army and the rest of us learned more about gun drills than we ever wanted to know.
Stop 2: Congaree Swamp National Park in South Carolina- Notice the tree smiling behind the kids. It was quite hot and the kids were not impressed with the boardwalk. There were, however, some very well trained turtles that knew stupid tourists were the best way to get fed. (Of course, we were not the stupid tourists.) 
Stop 3: 96 National Battlefield in South Carolina- Joshua had just got hit in the eye with Dottie's ring and is therefore not too happy. The battlefield is named 96 because it was a trading post that was 96 miles from Cherokee territory.
Stop 4: Carl Sandburg National Historic Site in North Carolina- The kids enjoyed hearing the Rootabaga Stories on the way to his home. A big part of his home was the farm. His wife raised award winning goats. They were cute but they kept trying to eat Dottie's purse.
Stop 5: Cowpens National Battlefield in South Carolina- Another Revolutionary War site where to the chagrin of the kids we saw yet another cannon.
Stop 6: King's Mountain National Military Park in South Carolina- This was actually a very nice park that had a nice trail going up the mountain. In this picture, Joshua appears to be in a thoughtful mood but really he was just watching a bug.
Stop 7: Guilford County Courthouse in North Carolina- This bird was the most exciting part of this stop. There were also a couple people in period dress that Joshua asked way too many questions. I'm pretty sure the man was thrilled when we finally dragged him away.
Stop 8: Mount Airy, North Carolina AKA Mayberry- A personal highlight was seeing the town that inspired the best TV show ever. I was thrilled to be thrown in the Mayberry Jail, to eat the famous pork chop sandwich at the Snappy Lunch Cafe, and to get my haircut at Floyd's Barbershop. Joshua was simply amazed that there is a Taco Bell in Mayberry (Of course we didn't eat there because I hate Taco Bell). Hannah simply enjoyed being able to watch the Disney Channel in the hotel room (I hate cable TV too).
Stop 9: Blue Ridge Parkway in North Carolina and Virginia- Above is the Mabry Mill. Below, is one of the many overlooks on the parkway. We weren't planning on going on the parkway but it was a wonderful 80 mile side trip that took us within an hour of Jeremy and Deandra's (sorry, we didn't stop by, Jerbo, but we were thinking about you).
Stop 10: Interstate 81- It is tradition that we break down at least once every vacation and this vacation was no different. This time the problem was the belt. We were blessed that our hotel was around the corner from a Meineke and the total bill was only $85 and only put us off schedule by about 30 minutes.
Stop 11: Andrew Johnson National Historic Site in Tennessee - The kids just love learning about dead presidents.
Stop 12: Cumberland Gap National Historical Park in Tennessee, Kentucky, and Virginia - A beautiful park. Above is a picture of Gap Creek. This was one of JoTo's favorite places as we all played in the creek or as Joshua referred to it "the place with the rocks and water." Below is the actual gap. This is the very spot where travelers, including Daniel Boone, crossed into the promise land of Kentuck. I was impressed by this but the kids were more concerned with the hill we had to climb to get here (sadly, us Floridians don't see many hills and they tire us out rather quickly).
Still in the gap, Dottie's and Joto's first hiking injuries.
The Henseley Settlement- This is also in Cumberland Gap. This is on top of the mountain where the Henseleys and the Gibbons lived from the early 1900's until around 1960. They never had electricity, running water, or a road to the settlement. This was just how they liked it because it kept unwanted visitors (specifically the law looking for moonshiners) out.
Skylight Cave - Just a little hike (ok, maybe it wasn't that little but then again that whole
Florida thing came into play) and we find ourselves at this small cave also at Cumberland Gap. Once again lots of moaning about the hike but once we reached the cave the kids thought it was pretty cool.
Stop 13: The original KFC in Kentucky (of course!) It was the most expensive meal up to this point on our trip.
Stop 14: Yahoo Falls in Big South Fork National Recreation Area, Kentucky- To quote Hannah, "This is better than Mt. Rushmore!" It was really cool. We stayed here for quite a while and would recommend it as a place to go to.
Stop 15: Blue Heron Mining Company also in Big South Fork- This is an old mining town that the park service has built these skeleton structures representing different buildings that were in the town. The picture above is of the church that would have been there. Each building has displays along with recordings from people who actually lived in the mining town talking about life growing up in these harsh conditions of Appalachian coal mining.
Last Stop: Chattanooga, TN- We did not take one picture while we were there. The kids played with their cousins and Dottie and I went out for her birthday. The entire time we were out on our date, I kept running to the bathroom to blow my nose. Apparently, I'm more allergic to cats than my wife or son. JoTo took a tumble on the treadmill (or training wheel as he called it) after his cousin continued to make it go faster and faster. JoTo says it was a hundred miles per hour. Of course, he took no blame for being on something he shouldn't have been on but there will forever be some of his skin embedded in that treadmill.
Well, it was just a little over a week, a little over 2000 miles, and the gas, well let's not talk about the price of gas these days, but it was a great little vacation. The kids can't wait to go see some more cannons and some trees. They just haven't learned to fully appreciate nature and history but I'll learn 'em.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)