Eugenio Duarte Elected!

Congratulations to Eugenio Duarte, the first General Superintendent from outside the US! We are praying for you as you take on these new duties and lead our Church.

More information Eugenio Duarte at: http://africonnection.blogspot.com/2009/06/african-lives-2-eugenio-duarte.html

What's the point

Do the messages on the various boards and sites strike anyone else as completely absurd? I understand that I'm probably about to get added to someone's prayer list for saying this, but God have mercy. This kind of thing is as bad as my six year old and four year old arguing over who gets to play the Wii.

I'm with those who see no point in trying to keep a conversation going at this point. It is useless. It is like one group is speaking French and the other is speaking German. I struggle with the path to take in this kind of situation because as a person committed to non-violence I see this language of "battle" on either side as completely outside of how things should work. I don't want to try to fix blame but let's just say it:

We are like two sides who eat at the same table (the Lord's table) then pick up our AK-47's and start shooting in the Church. The honest truth is that the people who will be hurt the most are the people who are just there looking for God. I'm not going to stop trying to educate people about what is going on, but if someone wants to kill me because I'm a heritic or drive me out of the Church, fine.

My kids will grow to see their Papa as a man who when folks start fighting and shooting people in the Church would rather die than pick up a gun and shoot back. To the Concerned Nazarenes, you and your group go ahead. If what you are doing is of God then none of us would ever be able to stop you. If not, then you and your group will end up like a NASCAR race where the whole field is involved in an inevitable pile-up.

If you want to fight, stop acting like you are on some crusade about it. The smell from that kind of activity is nauseating. Plus history shows what happens when folks go crusading.

The advice of one of my professors comes to mind. "Beware when you think you are riding in on a white stallion to save the Church. You may look down and discover you are riding an albino jackass."

An Open Letter to the CN's from a friend

Greetings,

Let me start by saying I am a Concerned Nazarene Pastor. I have been watching the conversation between the Concerned Nazarenes and “Why the Concerned Nazarene’s May Be Missing the Point” for the past several months. In that time I have also ventured over to The No Goofy Zone, Reformed Nazarene a few other sites trying to figure out what we “the Concerned Nazarenes” are hoping to accomplish. I know “Concerned Nazarenes” are against a lot of people and a lot of things and that originally there was a petition, to have the Generals make a statement about the emerging church.
I would love to see them address this, and while they are at it I would love to see a statement from them about a theology of worship for the Church of the Nazarene. As I think about it, there are a lot of things I am really concerned about. I am concerned about the church growth movement’s influence on the church. I am concerned that individualism, consumerism, and nationalism may have shaped our worship practices more than Scripture, Tradition, and Reason. I am concerned about the divide between the adherents to the American Holiness movements understanding of Sanctification and those who follow John Wesleyan’s understanding. I am concerned that as a denomination we will educate, and ordain women as elders, but all too often won’t hire them. I am concerned about the Nazarene Pastors who have no retirement and others with no health insurance. Needless to say I am a concerned about a lot, but now I hesitate to use the moniker.
Recently, with all the talk about “the DVD” campaign I can only assume (and I know what happens when I assume), but I can only assume that the agenda of the Concerned Nazarenes is to split churches and have pastors, educators, and administrators removed. Is this correct? I don’t get the feeling that this group really wants to dialog with those who aren’t already in agreement with them.

I hear a lot about how they are praying for those who are “Blinded, Confused, Lacking Discernment, etc.” Well as one of “those people” I have been praying too. My prayer: “God Help Us.” Now let me say I appreciate those people who practice the Matthew 18 principle of Church Discipline. I appreciate those people who love me enough, who care enough about me to call me on my garbage. I appreciate those who literally believe the words of Galatians 6:1 “ Brothers, if someone is caught in a sin, you who are spiritual should restore him gently.”

I am concerned that none of this has happened in my case. Now let me explain, I am a Nazarene Pastor, I was ordained an elder by Dr. Diehl. I pastor a small church of 150 or so in Alaska. I am a graduate of Northwest Nazarene University where I fell in love with Jesus and came to Christ under the preaching of Rev. Gene Schandorff and his series on James. I later graduated from NNU, married, and worked in the church as an associate until I went to Nazarene Theological Seminary and took classes with Dr. Boone, Dr. Bratcher, Dr. Lohdal, Dr. Weigelt, Dr. Freeborn, Dr. Noble, Dr. Bassett, and many, many others who helped me fall in love with Christ’s Church.
After graduating I worked in the church for several more years as an associate and began my D. Min. at Northern Baptist Theological Seminary working closely with Dr. Webber, (a friend who has already joined the communion of the saints). Specifically, I chose to work with Dr. Webber to address the apathy in Worship in the Church of the Nazarene (here I am thinking about more than simple music preferences). Now, as a Sr. Pastor, and after working with several pastors from my current district I am writing my dissertation which addresses some ways to deal with this apathy. Needless to say, I care deeply about the church and how and whom she worships, With that concern, I signed Dr. Webbers, “A Call to an Ancient Future Evangelicalism.”

Since signing that document, I was lumped in with all things emergent, church growth, Catholic, Spiritual Formations, etc. (AKA Bad, very bad). Never once has anyone asked me what I believe, and yes I believe Jesus is the only way. Never once has someone contacted me with their concerns with an attempt to restore me. Instead, I and my church were listed on several internet sites (here is one example). Now in complete fairness I don’t know who wrote the original article or who posted it but it has been reproduced in many places and it has been a stumbling block to a few in my church who googled our church’s website and came across the article. I even received an unsigned e-mail encouraging me to resign before being judged a heretic.

So again I ask what is the Goal of the Concerned Nazarenes? I don’t believe its restoration of people like me. I don’t think you really even care about me, at least not enough to actually talk to me. So what do you hope to accomplish? Do you wish to divide our denomination, to attack the reputations of women and men who have given their lives for Christ and His Church, to confuse people? Is your goal to mass produce a DVD, and have 5 minutes of fame at General Assembly? I really wish I were coming to GA just so I could meet you and to hear your heart. Someone once said, “the Church doesn’t belong to its pastor, The Church doesn’t belong to its people, but it belongs to God who purchased it with the blood of Jesus Christ therefore we should look to Him for all that we are to do.” I will be looking to him, I pray you would do the same and if you would ever like to speak to me and not just about me my e-mail is bthomasak at gmail dot com.

If I didn’t believe that Jesus was in charge, I would really be concerned.

God Help Us,

Rev. Brian R. Thomas

A History Lesson for the Concerned Nazarenes

According to the Concerned Nazarene's press release (published on Eric Barger's site) immediately before the 2009 General assembly a crisis looms.

Let's take a look at a brief excerpt:

At the center of the discord is the inerrancy of the Bible. Traditionalists claim that a new “emergent” movement within the denomination is questioning the church’s long-held view that the Bible is completely without error from cover to cover.

If left unchallenged, traditionalists say, the emergent movement could undermine the core doctrines and practices of the Nazarene church – a denomination with conservative holiness roots.

“This General Assembly will be pivotal in the history of the Church of the Nazarene,” predicted Joe Staniforth, a Nazarene pastor from Brownsville, Texas. “Some Nazarene theologians have been questioning the validity of our signature doctrine. Well, this is D-Day.”

Is the total inerrancy of the Scriptures really a signature doctrine of the Church of the Nazarene? The simple answer is no. After looking through my collections of the Manual of the Church of the Nazarene dating back to 1898, what follows below is a brief history of what we have said about the Bible. Nowhere is the total inerrancy of the Scriptures mentioned. When the Concerned Nazarenes claim to represent a "traditional" view, they are revising history. Let us be clear. They do not represent traditional Nazarene values. While I will not condemn them for believing in the way (bible inerrant in all matters), they do not represent the mainstream and any claims they make to representing the mainstream are false. If we have been thinking the wrong thing about the Scriptures, we have been doing it for over 100 years.

If you notice any typos below, please contact me so that I can correct them. Also, if you have a Manual from a year I don't mention below, would you email that info as well?

Year	Article of Faith on the Bible
1898	"We believe: 2nd. In the inspiration of the Holy Scriptures as found in the Old and New Testaments, and that they contain all truth necessary to faith and practice."
1903	"We believe: 2nd. In the inspiration of the Holy Scriptures as found in the Old and New Testaments, and that they contain all truth necessary to faith and practice." This version also contains a more complete statement of belief (which eventally becomes the article of faith): "THE HOLY SCRIPTURES By the Holy Scriptures we understand those books of the Old and New Testaments, usually accounted canonical, of whose authority there was never any doubt in the Church. These books, known as the Bible, contain all teaching necessary for salvation—the revealed will of God to man.
1905	"We, therefore, deem belief in the following brief statements sufficient. 2nd. In the Divine inspiration of the Holy Scriptures, as found in the Old and New Testaments, and that they contain all truth necessary to faith and Christian living." "THE HOLY SCRIPTURES By the Holy Scriptures we understand the canonical books of the Old and New Testaments, given by Divine inspiration, containing the will of God concerning us in all things necessary to our salvation; so that whatever is not contained therein, nor can be proved thereby, is not to be enjoined as an article of faith." This version also contains an expanded statement about the Old Testament, omitted here for space.
1905-6	Same as 1905.
1907	"We, therefore, deem belief in the following brief statements sufficient: 2nd. In the Divine inspiration of the Holy Scriptures, as found in the Old and New Testaments, and that they contain all truth necessary to faith and Christian living." "THE HOLY SCRIPTURES By the Holy Scriptures we understand the canonical books of the Old and New Testaments, given by Divine inspiration, revealing the will of God concerning us in all things necessary to our salvation; so that whatever is not contained therein, and cannot be proved thereby, is not to be enjoined as an article of faith." This version also contains an expanded statement about the Old Testament, omitted here for space.
1908	"We, therefore, deem belief in the following brief statements sufficient: 2nd. In the Divine inspiration of the Holy Scriptures, as found in the Old and New Testaments, and that they contain all truth necessary to faith and Christian living." "The Holy Scriptures By the Holy Scriptures we understand the canonical books of the Old and New Testaments, given by Divine inspiration, revealing the will of God concerning us in all things necessary to our salvation; so that whatever is not contained therein, and cannot be proved thereby, is not to be enjoined as an article of faith." This version also contains an expanded statement about the Old Testament, omitted here for space.
1915	"THE HOLY SCRIPTURES By the Holy Scriptures we understand the sixty-six books of the Old and New Testaments, given by Divine inspiration, revealing the will of God concerning us in all things necessary to our salvation; so that whatever is not contained therein is not to be enjoined as an article of faith." In this version, the brief statement comes second: "We, therefore, deem belief in the following brief statements sufficient: Second. In the Divine inspiration of the Old and New Testament Scriptures, and that they contain all truth necessary to faith and Christian living."
1919	Same as 1915
1923	Same as 1915 except the first statement is numbered as article "IV." Also the section that contains the shorter statement is clearly part of a membership rite.
1936	"IV. The Holy Scriptures We believe in the plenary inspiration of the Holy Scriptures by which we understand the sixty-six books of the Old and New Testaments, given by Divine inspiration, revealing the will of God concerning us in all things necessary to our salvation; so that whatever is not contained therein is not to be enjoined as an article of faith." "We, therefore, deem belief in the following brief statements sufficient: Second. In the plenary inspiration of the Old and New Testament Scriptures, and that they contain all truth necessary to faith and Christian living."
1952	"IV. The Holy Scriptures We believe in the plenary inspiration of the Holy Scriptures, by which we understand the sixty-six books of the Old and New Testaments given by Divine inspiration, revealing the will of God concerning us in all things necessary to our salvation, so that whatever is not contained therein is not to be enjoined as an article of faith." "We, therefore, deem belief in the following brief statements to be sufficient: That the Old and New Testament Scriptures, given by plenary inspiration, contain all truth necessary to faith and Christian living."
1956	"IV. The Holy Scriptures We believe in the plenary inspiration of the Holy Scriptures, by which we understand the sixty-six books of the Old and New Testaments given by Divine inspiration, inerrantly revealing the will of God concerning us in all things necessary to our salvation, so that whatever is not contained therein is not to be enjoined as an article of faith." "We, therefore, deem belief in the following brief statements to be sufficient: That the Old and New Testament Scriptures, given by plenary inspiration, contain all truth necessary to faith and Christian living."
1960	Same as 1956
1964	Same as 1956 with the addition of the words "We believe:" after sufficient in the second statement.
1972	Same as 1964
1976	Same as 1964 with a minor change in the numbering of the Agreed statement of belief.
1980	The same as 1976 with the addition of the mention of these texts: Luke 24:44-47 John 10:35 1 Corinthians 15:3-4 2 Timothy 3:15-17 1 Peter 1:10-12 2 Peter 1:20-21
1985	Same as 1980
1989	Same as 1980
1997	Same as 1980 with "sixty-six" replaced by "66"
2005	Same as 1997

Can we get together for a Bible study?

The following post is an open letter from a dear friend, who for reasons related to his employment wishes to remain anonymous.

Dear brothers and sisters,

First, I would like to thank you for your concern. You are genuinely worried that people will fall away from Christ if they are allowed to question the absolute truths you hold so dear. I am deeply touched that you would be worried enough about my eternal destiny to start a web page, a DVD "ministry" and a nationwide campaign just to make sure I stay saved.

You are doing your best to defend a specific traditional systematic theology and traditional values. And you are backing up your beliefs by quoting from the Bible. Thanks for clarifying those beliefs and telling us where you get them.

My goal, since the time I was saved as a child, has been to get closer to God, to know His word, and to hear His voice. (Oddly enough, the emergent/emerging leaders whose books I’ve read claim to have the same goals).

In my desire to grow closer to the Lord, I dove into His word. I read chapter after chapter and book after book. The beauty and majesty of the Psalms overwhelmed me. The wisdom of the Proverbs guided me. But most of all, the patient and loving teachings of Jesus drew me in. I wanted to be more like him.

In the Bible, I found confirmation of all the traditional beliefs I have been taught in Sunday School. I found the verses (which you quote so eloquently) convincing enough to affirm my beliefs (the same beliefs you hold to be absolute truth).

But I wasn’t content to stay at that level. I still wanted to get closer to God. I wanted to be so close that I could hear his voice. So I read the Bible again and again and again. Each time I found new insights and ideas.

Occasionally I found things that confused me. Usually my Pastor could explain them to me. But there have been quite a few things I’ve run across that have me stumped.

These things that I found weren’t just difficult. They challenged my beliefs.

Here are a few of them:

• Is God good, just, merciful, loving and kind? 1 John 4:7-8
• Or does God lie sometimes to get His way? 1 Kings 22:23
• Should we love our enemies? Matthew 5:43-48
• Or should we kill our enemies? 1 Samuel 15:2-3
• Does God love everyone and want to save them all? 2 Peter 3:9
• Or does God harden some people’s hearts so he has an excuse to kill them? Exodus 7:3
• Does God tempt people? Genesis 22:1
• Or not? James 1:13
• Do we continue to sin after becoming Christians? 1 John 1:10
• Or not? 1 John 3:9
• Is Israel God’s special people? Deuteronomy 32:7-9
• Or not? Amos 9:7
• Is God unchanging? Malachi 3:6
• Or does He sometimes feel regret for what He’s done and undo it? Genesis 6:6
• Is the entire Bible, from cover to cover, really saying what God wants it to say? 2 Tim 3:16
• Or has it been changed against God’s will? Jeremiah 7:22, Jeremiah 8:7-8
• Is there one God? James 2:19
• Or is there a Divine Council with many gods? Psalm 82:6

These words from the Bible caused me grief.

Dear brothers and sister, I now have two choices if I want to honestly address those passages of scripture:

1. I could say that the traditional beliefs (which you call absolute truths) I have been taught are not expansive enough to contain all that the Bible says about God and His world. If I do that, I would be questioning the absolute truth claims you hold so dear. OR...
   
2. I could go back to the Bible and find “explanations” for the difficulties. But then I would be questioning the clear meaning of the inerrant word you hold so dear. For example, perhaps we could say the gods in the Divine Council (Psalm 82:6) are really angels. Unfortunately, that is not what the text says. It calls them Elohim (The generic word for God). To make this verse fit with my beliefs would require that I assert that the clear meaning of the Biblical text is wrong.

By saying that I can’t have a dialogue or discussion where I question the “absolute truth” or the “inerrant word of God,” you have placed me in a position where no matter what I say gets me condemned as a heretic or a tool of Satan.

So, now I am stuck. Which has more authority? The absolute truth claims you make about God? Or the inerrant Bible you hold so dear? So what am I to do with this dilemma? Which horn do I take?

Let me restate some assumptions I think I share with many postmodern or emergent folks (I realize these aren't necessarily equivalent terms).

• We want to be Godly.
• We want to grow closer to God.
• We want to be like Christ.

But when we try to talk about or think through these difficult issues, which were raised by your absolute truth claims and your inerrant Bible, we are labeled Satanic.

My brothers and sisters, I propose that we sit together and read the Bible. We can talk through these things together. If the Bible is our authority, then we should allow it to modify our beliefs. If our beliefs are absolute truth, then they should modify the way we read scripture. Perhaps there is a way between the horns of this dilemma.

Maybe we need to do a little of both. Only together as God's people can we wrestle through these things and find a solution that helps us grow closer to God and closer to each other.

Lord, guide us as we seek to be more like you. Amen