guitar
Now we have a place to start. You would not violate scripture to reach the lost with the gospel. Good. Would you then agree we should not violate principles as well as commands and prohibitions?
Seeker Sensitive: Is It Biblical?
Discussion in '2006 Archive' started by MikeinGhana, Nov 27, 2005.
Page 12 of 16
-
-
-
-
-
-
I've been called much worse that HoG, so feel free :rolleyes:
First of all, look to the Presbyterian church as a whole. Most of them claim to be seeker sensitive, yet where is their stance on homosexuality? (Ironically, on one site I looked at, there was an article condoning the homosexual lifestyle, unter the pretense of "judge not", on the same page as an article that said we can't be soft on sin.)
Most ecumenical movements are seeker sensitive and many of them welcome practicing homosexuals with open arms.
There are more, if you care. It all depends on what you call "seeker sensitive". Personally, I think you should simply preach the truth and those who are seeking will want to hear it. Be sensitive to that.
As a personal note, here in town, about 70% of the churches are seeker sensitive, and it runs the gamut from Baptist to Pentecostal to Catholic. The one thing they all have in common is that they provide great entertainment and fill their pews. Many of them fill them with those practice all sorts of abominations, and they remain happy because these churches don't dare tell the truth or they will run off their biggest contributors.
I have attended two of them. One of them had a service that lasted an hour and 45 minutes, and he never so much as opened the Bible. Although, he did mention the book of Matthew once. The other one preached a sermon on how we should accept everyone as they are, because God made them that way, and to tell them they're living in sin is hateful.
I want nothing to do with it.
I had a friend who left another seeker sensitive church recently. The first shock came when they had a faith healer come in. Not a single one of the posters in the church mentioned the Lord, neither did the faith healer. The final straw came when he went to a PDL Bible study, and was informed that he was not permitted to bring his Bible, as that would be "disruptive".
So, define "seeker sensitive". What are the boundaries? -
I am troubled by people who say they do not violate scripture to win the lost, yet, they promote the flesh, imitate the world and its philosophy, ignore clear cut principles of worhsip, all in order to attract them into the church. I do not get it. Please do not judge my committment to win people to Christ. I have lived in a third world country for twelve years to reach a people who most Americans do not even know exist.
-
-
BTW, this does not mean that I am opposed to every form of entertainment inside the building. Is the gym there for fellowship or to entertain the lost masses? Is the football party for fellowship or is that the only way you can get them in the building? What's in the heart? -
-
Just one example, how do you get "seeker-sensitivity" past Romans 12:2? "Do not be conformed to this present world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind ..." NET
The Amplified reads: "Do not be conformed to this world (this age), [fashioned after and adapted to its external, superficial customs]". Strong's defines 'conformed' as "... to fashion alike, that is, conform to the same pattern (figuratively): - conform to, fashion self according to."
The Complete WordStudy Dictionary goes even further when it says: "... To fashion alike, conform to the same pattern OUTWARDLY (emphasis mine) ... And again: " ... An expanded rendering might read, 'Stop being molded by the external and fleeting fashions of this age ..."
[ December 25, 2005, 10:58 PM: Message edited by: IveyLeaguer ] -
That said I very much empathize with the frustrations presented by the reality that present culture considers the gospel to be simpleton, irrelevant, and foolish.
But to cloak and/or alter the message so that it won't appear that way to an unsaved, spoiled, generation is not the answer. -
Obviously this thread struck a "sensitive" (pun intended, get it?)nerve. I do believe the church is ministering in another culture and will need to minister in yet another culture very soon, if things go at the speed they have been moving. Are we to adopt other methods while not bending our principles? If we change our methods are we in truth bending our principles? Can we do that and still be biblical?
-
What IS important is the Word of God. If you in ANY WAY alter the Word of God, and many thousands of Christian "leaders" are doing exactly that, our Lord says some very bad things are going to happen to you. I grieve, literally, every day for the millions who are following these "leaders". But we knew it was going to happen. Or at least we should have known.
A method is OK only if it satisfies the letter, intent, and the Spirit of scripture. Unfortunately, when tested by that standard, the Seeker movement and other postmodern movements fail miserably.
Also, it is worth noting that the "leaders" of major counterfeit movements on the other side of the spectrum such as Word of Faith (with its prosperity gospel), and Latter Rain (with its self-appointed Apostles), made the same foundational error as Hybels, Warren, and others. They simply twisted "THE MESSAGE" of the Holy Scriptures into the "SHAPE" they wanted ... (puns intended). -
-
Check this site out about Church Membership Covenants, which are required in Seeker Sensitive churches:
http://www.newswithviews.com/PaulProctor/proctor3.htm
Rick Warren, pastor of Saddleback Community Church in Lake Forest, California recently came out with an article in the Baptist Press recommending pastors and congregations adopt church membership covenants as a way of compelling their flock to become more involved in and committed to the ministry of their church. Although, on the surface such covenants might seem practical, here’s what Jesus Christ had to say about making covenants with men.
"Again, ye have heard that it hath been said by them of old time, Thou shalt not forswear thyself, but shalt perform unto the Lord thine oaths: But I say unto you, SWEAR NOT AT ALL; neither by heaven; for it is God's throne: "- Matthew 5:33-34 (emphasis added). -
Amazing. This verse has nothing to do with covenants; it has to do with proper respect for God and his creation.
Baptists have had a long tradition of church covenants, dating back to 1640 in this country, and didn't consider it blasphemous. Not too long ago, having a church covenant was the norm for Baptist churches.
Covenants among men are nothing unusual. A mortgage is a covenant; a loan agreement is a covenant; signing hospital forms for treatment is a covenant. None are forbidden. -
It might be helpful to read the entire article from the link I posted instead of making presuppositions. -
Who made presuppositions?
Paul said: "So, why is it now necessary to sign a contract guaranteeing our commitment to serve in His church? Because faith isn’t required, that’s why. It’s only when you set out to fill your church with the faith-LESS that guarantees become necessary."
Again, there is a strong Baptist tradition of covenanting, whether Paul knows it or accepts it (apparently both are true in his case), and it never had to do with accepting a "faith-less" membership. -
After doing the PDL program our former church started these membership covenants...bad news indeed.
It went south from there.
These were sooo unbiblical. Many of the doctrinaly strong left, the backbone, those that the church was increased with.
It is now a church of socialites. No meat, all milk and even more compromises. Don't tell me it isn't a dangerous heresy that is spreading like a liberal disease through the churches.
We witnessed many changes that it brought.
My question is this...if you know that R.W. 's mentor is Rober Schuller....would that not be a red flag?
Page 12 of 16