TheDeSocios.com

It is no secret that I am a big fan of Tim Keller and Mark Driscoll, but its going to sound a bit over the top when say that guys like Tim Keller and Mark Driscoll can be seen as reflecting men like Paul(the Apostle, not the Beatle). It might be noted that all three men(not the beatle) would dislike any praise in their direction, simply point to Jesus, the one who has given them what they have.

Whether the praise is accepted or not, its still true. In 1 Corinthians 9:20-23 Paul gives what pastors today might call his philosophy of ministry. Paul states that to “the Jews I became as a Jew”, and so on. This is a remarkable statement in the fact that with, the help of Acts, we can see what Paul saw as the acceptable way of ministering. In Acts 17:23-32 we see what Paul citing the pagan poets of the day and speaking about his analysis of the state of Athens, at the time.
It seems simple enough that what Paul lays down in 1 Corinthians 9 is a example of how one should speak to the culture around you.
Paul was simply using language and ideas that the Greeks could follow. When he preached in the synagogue he does the same thing.
Even today no Pastor would be in a church for very long if he could not use language and ideas that his people could follow.

So why say that Keller and Driscoll and other men are following in the footsteps of Paul? I say this because these men, just like Paul, are speaking to their audience in a manor that is fitting for that audience. But even more than just knowing who their audience is, like Paul these men seek to know as much about their audience as they can. These men, just like Paul, are diagnosis the audience before they speak. They are asking questions like: what do these people value above all else? What are their habits? How do they see themselves in the world? What do these people fear? This last question of fear is what Paul deals with at the Areopagus. Paul saw that these people were afraid of their gods, and that this fear had cause them to make sure they didn’t offend even a god that they did not know. Yet in the end Paul was not praised by everyone for his actions, infact Luke does not say that the whole crowd was converted, but simply that “some men joined him and believed”.

Call it what you will(knowing the audience, being relevant, exegeting the culture, being missional) Paul, did do these things, not to be praised among men, not to make sure his ministry legacy would last but for the sake of the gospel and so that he might “share with [the converts] in [the Gospel's] blessings.”

Let us Pray that more men are like Paul, and ultimately like the one Paul followed.

I am a big Tim Keller fan, and I am also a very big Mark Driscoll fan. Recently in talking to friends at church we have started to talk about the fact that Marshill gives away all there media and take special care to give it away from of copyrights so that it can be given to others. On the other hand Redeemer charges 2$ for every sermon.
If I had the option of Driscoll or Keller I’m not sure who I would chose to listen to, but that question doesn’t matter because I can’t chose to listen to Keller or Driscoll unless I have a paid subscription to Redeemer.

What about other churches? How do your churches see their online content? Is a church’s online media for Christians who miss service, and need a catch up; or is it more like a mix that that they are hoping people will pass around and copy.

And I wonder how many people actually download the sermons from most churches.

They’ll never stand at my door step without being welcome into my house. This was a quote from a New Orleans resident speaking about the Mormon church.
Could Christians see mercy not as something that is secondary, but primary?

While I was watching a special on the Mormon Church they spoke of how the Mormon church was one of the first on the scene. How sad a state is this. Rodney Stark in his book The Rise of Christianity compared the early Christian church to the modern Mormon church. Here is the sad part it seems to be true.This program said that 50,000 young Mormons are sent out as missionaries every year. These missionaries are young people, 19 years of age, who dedicate two years of their life to the expansion of their beliefs. Is this good? – NO. Its frightening. This group is selling a lie and yet they are selling it as much as then can. Young people are giving two years of their life to dedicated missions. How many Christians are dedicating their lives to missions.
Even more startling a question do 50,000 young Christians share their faith with even one person in a year, let alone spend two years in the expansion of the true Gospel.

So I’m trying to go through the process of ordination in the PCA, it involves coming undercare, then interning for a year, and then passing a number of exam. But there seem to be some problems, and I might be stuck having to wait another 6 months until I can start the process. I was talking to my dad the other day, and we were joking around about stuff as we normally do, and I said that if Paul had been presbyterian, we would be missing several books of the bible, because he never would have had the permission, or time to plant those churches. I’m not saying I hate the presbyterian system, but sometimes I feel the weight of red tape. I wonder if we have focused so much on reforming certain aspect of the church, such as worship that we have not addressed biblical church government. I believe that the plurality of elders is biblical, but I do wonder if some of the rules set up for the ordering of certain denominations have been put to the refiners fire in the same way other parts of our system of doctrine have been. The Westminster Confession of Faith say “God alone is Lord of the conscience, and hath left it free from the doctrines and commandments of men, which are, in any thing, contrary to His Word; or beside it, if matters of faith, or worship.” This would seem to apply to the ordering of the church, wouldn’t it?

Semper Reformanda

I hope this post doesn’t get me in trouble.

So its been two months and I thought I would finally sit down and write something about our recent church decisions. Starting last summer I felt increasing pressure about whether or not I could stay in the RPCNA, the Reformed Presbyterian Church of North America. The root of my problems stemmed from an uncertainty over accappella psalmody, a belief which the denomination considered an essential distinctive. I had entered seminary with a clear understanding of why I held the position but as I thought on it more and more, and as I went through classes that dealt with the topic my views slowly started to change. I ended up holding to accappella psalmody with the understanding that I was all together unconvinced, but did not want to leave my denomination, one that my father was an elder in, and one that had sent me to seminary. I felt very alone. I thought that I might be able to remain RP if I was not forced on the issue. I also thought that I had time to think about the matter more. That took me through my first year of seminary.
Summer came and my thought focused on more important issues.
The topic came up again at Presbytery over the summer where a student was asked if he thought that it was a sin to sing anything other than a psalm unaccompanied. This question really bothered me, because I knew that if asked, I could not say that singing hymns with instruments was a sin.
I was forced to take a closer looked at what I believed, and started to question if I should pursue ordination in the RPCNA. It did not bring my call to the pastorate in question just my denomination.
At the same time that I was questioning my denominational beliefs I was also being exposed to the thoughts of Mark Driscoll. I was fascinated with the notion that a church could both hold fast to the truth that God had given, and at the same time be very creative in how they interacted with their community. As I looked around at the RP church I did not see this happening.

These two things began our quest.

Of course I knew of other “Generic” presbyterian churches, but was not sure that they were the place I should be looking. A pastor that I once knew inappropriately called the PCA and the OPC generic in a plea to keep the RPCNA distinct. We started our investigation at steel city church, a church I would feel comfortable calling emergent. We visited the church for three weeks. What we saw was people proclaiming faith and a good vision for church planting being set forth, but what we did not see was any sort of comprehensive explanation of their theology, or their organization of the church. What I ended up feel was that the church was seeking to please the Lord but had not really fleshed it out in any substantial ways. Even after receiving their membership manual we struggled with understanding what they stood for. We left unsatisfied.

My second year of seminary started and I was still undercare of the RPCNA.
As a student undercare I was instructed that I was responsible to read the Westminster Confession of Faith, and the Testimony of the RPCNA, their second subordinate standard.
Because of my recent thinking I took this very seriously, although I admit I was not excited to work through two standards which I saw as outdated. When I finished I had written five pages outlining my objections, yet I only question one line of the WCF, and four and a half pages were written about my disagreements with the RP Testimony.
In fact I came to deeply admire the WCF, and it was this fact that ended our search. I felt that I needed to be in a denomination that held to the WCF, and at the same time one that did not shy away from engaging the lost around them.

So this is how we moved to a generic presbyterian church.
I say “generic” with my tongue firmly planted in my cheek-Her we go PCA, Here we go!