No probs – didn’t mean to sound grumpy at all.

I’m not sure how to take your comment about “missing the point.” Are you saying this because of something I said, or just because I haven’t responded to your first comment? Unless I’m missing something, I don’t think you necessarily missed the point. Actually, I think everyone so far, including you, Kevin, SelahV, and Kevin Peacock are in line with what I am trying to say.

In answer to your question, “Where does our duty in this regard really lie?”, I think Kevin #1′s two points are a good place to start:

1. Be critical only in cases where there is a clear abuse of Scripture or lack of integrity.
2. Not make a career out of bashing other ministries.

In the secular context where I serve, secular people don’t attend Christian meetings, sit and listen for someone to preach to them, read Christian literature, or listen to Christian radio or TV. Most of the old methods of vocational evangelists simply don’t work here — they don’t find an audience. We can lament the fact or simply recognize that the methodology may need to change according to the context.

Our church went through the Rick Warren study. do you know the single most outstanding thing I remember about it? “One more for Jesus, just one more for Jesus.” I do a pittance for Jesus in my writing ministry. But I need a heart broken for the lost that I had when I first became a Christian. We must pray that we all have a heart broken for the lost. We must find that someone whom God has placed in our direct lives and pray fervently for them, that the Holy Spirit so moves in their lives and uses us that we cannot sleep, eat or rest till they know the Lord Jesus. Then we need to take the time out of our busy schedules and mentor and disciple that person so they will know how to go out and “Win one more for Jesus.”

I don’t know a diddly-doodle about Willow Creek. But I do know I’m not doing my part. selahV

While I agree there is no “silver bullet,” I think the fact that you have done “FAITH, Share Jesus Without Fear, Heaven’s Gates & Hell’s Flames, Power Team, Home Groups, Upward Sports, Contagious Christian, lifestyle evangelism, Purpose Driven, Angel Food, service ministries to every conceivable group, and about a dozen other efforts” is evidence that you have not buried the talents God has given you, but rather are willing to take risks and do what is within your reach to be “all things to all men so that by all possible means [you] might save some.” In the long run, some of these methods may show greater results than others. And, I believe that, in general, it is a good idea, in the interest of good stewardship, to evaluate the results, and spend more time and resources on methods that give better results. But, sometimes, I have seen how God blesses our efforts, even if our methods are not the best, just because we are willing, in faith, to launch out and do something.

Blessings!

None of these trends, movements or programs over the past 30 years has stemmed the tide: seeker sensitive, worship style change, FAITH, Purpose Driven, emergent, neo-reformation, technology audio visual revolution, house church / small groups. Every new thing is touted as THE thing, and it’s not.

While I’m not sure that the evangelistic meetings of days gone by are the answer, you can’t dispute the fact that when we were doing those there was growth. The greatest growth our church has experienced was from prayer, fasting, and revival meetings. We doubled in size in one year. Since then we’ve done FAITH, Share Jesus Without Fear, Heaven’s Gates & Hell’s Flames, Power Team, Home Groups, Upward Sports, Contagious Christian, lifestyle evangelism, Purpose Driven, Angel Food, service ministries to every conceivable group, and about a dozen other efforts.

Anectodally, the evangelists are right. Right now our church is growing. The only thing we’ve done differently is to dedicate one day a week to pray specifically for our church to grow. If that’s not Simple Church, I don’t know what is.

We all have a huge human tendency to want to be right.

If I’m right and someone disagrees with me, that means that the someone must be wrong.

If someone wrong and yet a lot of people agree with that someone, that means that a lot of people are wrong.

If I’m right and a lot of people are wrong, I need to tell those people that they are wrong.

Since we’re talking about matters of the salvation of the eternal soul of man, it’s very important that I help those people understand that they are wrong. I cannot be passive. I would be shirking my duty to do so.

Since these people do not have the fruit that I regard as an essential proof of salvation (this basically means that they don’t agree with me), they are unsaved. I consider this within my Biblically given authority to “tell a tree by its fruits”.

Since they are unsaved, I must help them be saved.

Since they believe something which is a lie that encourages them to believe they are saved when they are not, I must convince them of the lie. This requires argument. I do not believe that the Holy Spirit is capable of doing this without my intervention, even though He somehow (supposedly) revealed the truth to me.

Since they were deceived by a certain individual, I must convince them that the individual is a liar. He may say true things, but if he says untrue things about ANYTHING, he is a liar and the listener must be convinced to no longer listen.

Thus, I argue, criticize, and condemn. My purpose is to lead the listener to true salvation, because, remember, he is unsaved based on my conclusions above.

All this progression of behavior is based on the first presumption, which says “I am right.”

By the very definition of “I believe”, I am establishing what I regard as truth. My entire perspective changes based on that.

All the above, by the way, is a rhetorical explanation of lifestyle based on belief.

If I believe that only Fundamentalists are going to Heaven, it’s easy to criticize Billy Graham because, according to that, he’s not even saved. In fact, I would consider him a deceptive agent of Satan because he teaches that non-Fundamentalists can go to Heaven. Anyone who “follows Billy Graham” or to some, is “supposedly saved under his ministry”, is deceived, if you follow the presupposition that Ecumentalists cannot be saved since they don’t agree that only Fundamentalists can be saved.

Thus, the conclusion that Mark Driscoll is not even a Christian, since he doesn’t practice confrontational evangelism (or whatever particular issue I might choose). Since he’s not a Christian (I hypothetically conclude), I don’t even have to regard him as a brother, and I am actually instructed by the Bible to separate myself from him and to warn those who would be deceived by him.

To someone who doesn’t know me and is reading this, I bet I sound like a real weirdo in the above statements. Please note that this is simply an explanation of a thought path that most of us unconsciously follow to some degree or another. These are not “my thoughts” or beliefs.

In a lot of words, what I’m trying to say is that we justify a lot of attacks on Christian leaders and organizations by saying we’re trying to keep people from being deceived.

Where does our duty in this regard really lie?

GREAT POST!!!