Since the lid has fallen off of my box of pseudo-fundamentalism (so called because the fundamentals that were taught were neither biblical nor historical such as KJV-onlyism, dress standards, and absolute pastoral authority to name a few), I have talked to others jokingly about my slide down that slippery slope. The more I look at it and think about it, those warnings were right. It didn't take but one of my stubborn, inbred presuppositions shattering to send me straight down that slippery slope. Now I guess I'm somewhere at the bottom and considered a disappointing compromiser to certain of the brethren.
So, what is this 'slope' that they don't want you to slide down? Is it really a compromise of your 'convictions' or is it something entirely different. Oh, I believe that they are right in that you will slide down very fast once you start, but my contention is that it is a very good thing and very far from anything that will damage true biblical conviction.
The slippery slope that they want you to avoid so that you will remain a good 'fundamentalist' is the slippery slope of hard questions and thinking. I know it sounds too simple, but that is exactly what sends you straight down, at a good clip, that slippery slope. That is exactly what happened to me. It all started when I began to ask some questions about KJVOism and thinking biblically on the subject. Soon thereafter, I was no longer KJVO. When I realized the shallow scholarship and un-biblical reasoning for that, I began to question everything else and...voila...I'm not just sliding, but I'm in near free-fall down the slippery slope toward an intimate, vibrant, growing and real relationship with Christ with an intense desire to be truly biblical.
I'm no longer KJVO, my wife wears pants (I feel kind of silly even saying that), I love contemporary worship music, I wear jeans when I speak, I don't go door-to-door soul-winning, I'm not pre-trib or pre-mil, and the list goes on. Yet, I'm growing. I'm jealous for the glory of my Jesus and my desire is to be intensely biblical in all that I do. I can truly say that I love Jesus more today than at any other point in my life. I now realize that I don't have all the answers, but I also realize that I don't have to. I love and pray for other Christians from other denominations who don't believe just like I do. We laugh together, eat together, hang out together, talk together, cry together, pray together, and in some cases go to church together, and that's not only o.k., but it is beautiful and it is right! My life is no longer about whether someone agrees with me on every single point, but it's about glorifying God and making Him famous. I've found I have much more in common with true Christians than not in common. I've found beautiful freedom to glorify my God in my skin with my gifts and talents that He's given me.
Oh, I'm at the bottom of slope so to speak, but it's a glorious place of questioning, thinking, talking, and loving. It's a place of growing closer and closer to Jesus and loving His children more and more. It's a place of unity and solidarity where people can be themselves and where they can be real. I may be down the 'slippery slope', but I've got to tell you, the view from down here is amazing! It's no longer the four walls of the cardboard box of legalism, but it's the glorious freedom in Christ that transcends space and time.
So, in the nearly immortal words of Bob Barker, let me invite you to 'come on down'! You'll never be the same once you begin the slide!
Trevor
11 comments:
what you want to be careful of and maybe reconsider is that the taboos of IFBX are based on real dangers. Since most of us did not learn how to think, we just react by what doesn't look or feel right.
The CCM music industry and most of what is produced is disgustingly man centered, and since you're trying to be dogmatically God-centered, then embracing their stuff really looks like a contradiction.
Wearing jeans when you preach is not a sin, but we live in a culture that takes nothing serious anymore. What you wear communicates something about the occassion. I wear a suit and tie (most of the time) because i want my listeners to know that what they are not at the Giants game, or the movies, they are at the exposition of God's word, and that is the most important,serious event that they could even attend.
We don't generally wear jeans to weddings do we? No, it's inappropriate. If you view of preaching is higher than the IFBX view (and if you're an expositor, then I believe it is) then you should dress for the occassion.
I don't know your heart, but if your're dressing down when you preach as a reaction against the IFBX, it's wrong, if it's an attempt to be cool, hip, stylin' or relevant, then it's wrong,if it's so that you can follow the seeker sensitive nonsense or be like the purpose driven cult, then that's wrong too.
Other than that, I agree with what you're saying. IFBX is a house of cards. They are so afraid of removing one of them because if you do, most of them fall down.
Hey man, I really appreciate your comments.
Let me step in and respond to a couple of things that raise questions for me.
I believe you see things in Trevor’s post that simply are not there. He in no way endorses the CCM movement as a whole. He mentions Contemporary worship music. Pretty big difference. There is very little, if any, “man-centered” music in the albums of Matt Redman, Chris Tomlin, Charlie Hall, Eoghan Heaslip, Tim Hughes, Watermark or Jeff Deyo, to name a few.
Let me give an example that may shed some light here. My wife and I recently had someone pay for a cruise for us and we spent a week with Charles Stanley, Greater Vision and Legacy Five. I noticed on your blog a ringing endorsement of these two musical groups. I must say, I found the exact opposite to be true. I was SO “disgusted” by the shallowness of their songs, the showmanship, the superficiality of what they did, and the lack of awe of a Holy God. I was SO longing to be led in worship by Matt Redman (a contemporary worship writer who, in my humble opinion, has more depth of theology and awe of God in his pinkie than every “Southern Gospel” group in history rolled into one.) Now, in their defense, maybe they were in “cruise mode,” but I was SICK and tired of their fluffy emptiness by the second song. Why do I mention that? To point out that some of this is preference/culture/experience. I’m afraid I could no more be led to worship by those guys and all of their quartet glitz than you could by Chris Tomlin and his band. We are ALL in different places in this area. There is wonderful liberty. May CHRIST be lifted up! I believe you would be the first to admit that there is much “junk” in the “Southern Gospel” genre as I (and Trevor, I believe) would quickly admit there is much “junk” in the CCM world. I believe, though, we have to look outside our preferences and realize some would rather listen to fingernails on a chalkboard than the cavorting triviality of “Southern Gospel.” I assume you may well feel the same about what I listen to. You’ll have to excuse my indulgences in expressing how I feel about the genre. That should never, however, lead me to assume that you are not fully worshiping with those four guys prancing in suits! LOL
While on music… I also noticed you like Steve Green… He’s a personal friend of mine. I love his stuff. If you own his latest album “Always,” you will find a sampling of what we’re describing. He basically does all Contemporary Worship music including Chris Tomlin’s “Indescribable.” If you like it, we’re not too far away.
On the second subject of Trevor’s post that you latch on to, the dress issue, a couple of thoughts…
I cringe just a little to hear some of your arguments here, as they seem like warmed over re-hashes of all of the stuff of my youth. Surely you’re the first to acknowledge that you are only expressing your opinion. Period. You don’t quote a Bible verse nor a clear biblical principle, because there is none that can be directly applied. You appeal to your logic; you appeal to societal norms and expectations, but you can’t appeal to Scripture. That alone should cause you serious pause, but you seem to approach this situation pretty dogmatically.
In my experience in the years on the mission field, I have found that usually only the hard core IFBX guys stuck with the ties. Why? Because they don’t wear them, period. Most missionaries have the common sense to not force a cultural aspect of the American church on people in the mission field. I believe that herein lie some of our differences in this area.
Allow me to list some of the reasons why my church has deliberately chosen to adopt a “casual dress” approach.
1. The people we are reaching
The people we are reaching don’t wear ties. Period. Not for weddings, not for funerals. They are not a part of the wardrobe. For a couple of years, I beat my head against that wall, even going so far as to buy ties for them and request that anyone teaching wear one. One day, the stupidity of what I was doing dawned on me. By God’s grace, I was able to lose the dress jacket, then the tie, then the dress shirt… (the slippery slope, ) and here I am today. I reject the notion of setting up a new standard of “spirituality” for church dress. Your people may be different. God bless you. I have a sneaking suspicion that in post-modern America, more people fit into the demographic I describe than what you realize. I am NOT against your tie, but for the people we are reaching, this is absolutely the leading from the Holy Spirit for us.
2. Refuting legalism
There are not a ton of IFBX churches where we are. The two that are here place the same un-biblical, unhealthy and Pharisaical emphasis on the whole “dress” issue as the churches of my past. We DO have MANY Hispanic Pentecostal churches who are even worse. They scream from the pulpits about “dressing a certain way for church,” etc. By making the choice we have made, we have visibly distanced ourselves from this nonsense and provided an oasis in an area that desperately needs a place where truth is clearly proclaimed without all of the baggage. We have been able to minister to many people who have been ravaged by legalism. I believe with ALL of my heart that when anything that is a preference of man (this CLEARLY is) becomes a distraction from the Christ, it is time to de-emphasize that area and put the spotlight back where it belongs. This may not be the case where you are, but it is ABSOLUTELY the leading of the Holy Spirit for us.
3. The unsaved
While I clearly reject many of the tenants of a “seeker sensitive” mentality, (it’s not about us, it’s about Him) all of us factor the comfort of those who come to some extent. Before you deny this remember your air conditioner, your helpful ushers, your padded pews, and your nursery to name a few. If an unsaved person walks into your church, to some extent, you absolutely want them comfortable. Now, consider a situation in which you walk into a church and everyone is wearing the assigned neon green uniform. Can you really get your mind off the fact that you stick out like a sore thumb long enough to grasp what is being said? You think this is a bad comparison? You’re dead wrong, at least where I am. Is it any less intimidating/ different to find everyone in clothes they never wear and you don’t own any of? This may not be the case where you are. It is for us. I could share the testimony of dozens who have come and given their lives to Christ and are serving Him in our church who will point to this characteristic of our church in being a key to them being open to the message. They looked around and saw normal people, not churchified hypocrites. This to me is reason enough to forever say goodbye to formal church wear.
Now before you come with all of the arguments about how you act how you dress, I agree. Our worship is more intense and more real. People don’t act like mummies. They don’t act all formal. They are themselves, and they feast on the Word of God. I’m not saying the opposite would be true of your people. If your tie is not foreign to them, so be it. It is however, SIMPLY a preference.
The other thought… you mention an attempt to be in style as a possible reason for dressing down. Surely you remember the utter nonsense of the preening and suit styles and new wardrobes ALL of the time by the big-shots in our movement. There are few more carnal, style driven, fad conscious people groups anywhere than the preachers from my past. It is absolutely sickening, and I believe you know exactly what I’m talking about. The excesses, the foolishness. The fancy suits and alligator wing-tips. No, my friend, when I got rid of that incredible strain on our budget and went to wearing my normal wardrobe to church, my concern wasn’t style. I do believe you rightly identify, however, one of the major downfalls of the whole “dress up for church mentality,” even if that was not your desire.
I don’t want to broad brush. There are many good people, including you, who dress formally for church. I would simply beg you to make sure you are not being dogmatic in an area that has no scriptural support whatsoever. It is absolutely, strictly opinion. In fact, my contention would be that the examples in the ministry of Christ and the early church reflect a normalcy of wardrobe and no formalism.
I think Will's post shows me how far away from the IFBx movement I have come. Standards that address music, dress, movies (whether in or out of church) really have no basis in Scripture. At best they are opinion based applications of Biblical truth. For example, what is modest to one pastor is not modest to another pastor. What is rock music to one pastor is worship music for another pastor. I am not suggesting that people should not have standards in these areas. I do have quite strict standards in all of these areas. What IFBx's fear is freedom. Freedom for people to make their own decision. Freedom to follow the Holy Spirit. They do not trust that God through the power of His Holy Spirit can really transform sinners into saints. Instead they have to assist by providing extra-Biblical standards (such as "what we wear to weddings..."). It comes down to a firm belief and commitment that God will complete the work that He has started in His children.
Dang guys...I wasn't trying to step on anyone's liberty and cram legalism down your throat. When I wrote that post, i was pressed for time and couldn't make it real touchy feely. In fact the first time i tried to submit a longer post, it got deleted!
I have come from the same mold as you and all of what you say about the man centeredness in southern gospel, wearing expensive suits etc. is all warrented.
I'm glad to hear the reasons for your decisions on dress issue explained with good reason, but I may remind you, your reasonings are not backed up with scripture either. It is opinion, but opinions are not automatically equally valid until they've been examined by the reasoning they have been formed.
As for the CCM music, I've heard Tomlin, Redman, and a few others who I agree have great stuff. I am not trying to put them down.
What i was trying to tell you is that if you want to convince other IFBXers to re-think their stuff...you're going to have to become all things to all men just like you do with those who you're trying to reach in your community.
Shock and awe will only turn them completely off. I agree with you more than you probably realize, but if I'm going to reach out to my IFBXer friends and get them to rethink their positions, i can't do it listening to Casting Crowns, carrying an NIV and wearing jeans and a T-shirt to church.
Maybe that's not really your goal. That's fine. That's where I am coming from. I have not officially committed ecclesiastical separation from the IFBXers because I want to influence them to wake up - that's part of my reasoning for holding on to some of the taboos although I don't mind them being broken.
Tony summed up my thoughts in his blog post and in this response.
RB,
I appreciate and share your desire to build bridges between where we are and where we were. We all have the desire to reach our IFB friends with this wonderful freedom and there are certain questioning people that you can influence carefully over time, but the xers simply will not be capitulated. There is enough about you right now that they cannot stand. The fact that you are Calvinistic is the end. Let alone not being KJVO. They are not interested in someone looking like them and singing like them and even having good reasons to do so. They are not looking for someone that is a moderate go-between. They are only interested in someone following their every mantra, and that is simply not you (praise the Lord!). I appreciate your desire, but the way to reach them is not to try and fool them into thinking that you are just like them. They simply don't care. Be yourself. That's the beauty of being fearfully and wonderfully made and uniquely gifted.
Just a thought! Thanks for yours.
Ahhh..
Did we punce on you too hard, brother?
No harm intended! :)
Like you say, we probably have more in common than we realize!
I echo what Trevor just said. I tried for years to "build bridges" back to the movement I came from with the idea of being a "moderate" that would still appeal to them since I was technically still one of them and as a whole still towed the line. One day I finally made the same decision Trevor describes. Ther is NO building bridges! It didn't matter that I still "preached" out of the KJV, I was already a heretic, why not use a version that my teenagers could understand? So, honestly, no, I'm not trying to "build bridges!"
Your point is well taken, and our desire is not to be "in their face" with shock and awe, however, I am not under the illusion that IFB lite will appeal to any of the true "believers."
"IFB light," as you well know is HATED perhaps more than "outright liberalism" because as they say, the lie that is closest to the truth is the most dangerous. This is why they have to hate the NKJV with the passion they do.
Really, our goal is to encourage the thinker. To bless the person harboring questions - The one who mentally is already taking steps. We have two goals: To encourage them in their pilgrimage and to assure them that the answer is not throwing off the authority of the Holy Spirit and the Word along with the totalitarianism of IFBX.
Make any sense?
Trevor Tony,
Thanks for the follow up. That makes perfect sense and I guess I am probably despised more than I realize or care to admit. Of course, nobody would tell you that to your face...(well some would)...but what I find is, that there are reasonable guys in the IFBX movement who feel trapped, don't know anything else, really think that there is nothing better on the outside since everyone else is labeled a liberal. They are KJVO, but they know something isn't right with their "movement" (although it's not moving anywhere or anything).
I have been able to influence a few of them to see the man centeredness of their gospel, soul winning, preaching, etc. and have really seen some guys make some real metamorphasis. If I was "way out there" as they may see some other guys like my friend Pastor Josh, they wouldn't even listen to me, read my crazy blog, or anything. Because I don't come out as a full fledged 5-pointer (which i'm genuinely not) they are curious. Since I hold to a majority text is best position, but not an inspired KJV position, they are curious. If that doesn't work for you, no problem.
Who knows, one day I may just give up on any hope for fundamentalism too. But I have found that there are a lot of good fundies who are in the BJU, IBC, FBF circles that are more normal than you think.
But don't get me wrong, I am not one to jump from one camp and become a clone of another!
I'll also add, I've been able to influence our church which has 50+ years of IFB history to rethink the KJVO position to a more reasonable and informed one. I have had great liberty to preach on election when it comes up in the text and get people to realize that you can believe the Bible about these things without wearing the Calvinist label. We were able to get books by MacArthur, Sproul, and Piper without any fuss in our bookstore too.
That wouldn't have been possible if i would have changed the style of service, changed our Bible version, spiked and highlighted my hair, brought in the CCM and thrown out the hymns, and all the other stuff that Rick Warren tells us that we have to do to be a success like him.
Oh no... now you've crossed a line! Don't mess with my spiked hair!!! Lol!
No, seriously, God bless you! I'm happy for where you are and what the Lord is doing. The same is true where I am, the Lord has allowed our church to slowly transition over nine years through nothing but Bible. We have at times made some changes, and when we have we have asked Biblical questions. There did come a point in which some people left. The truth is, they are much happier where they are and we are able to accomplish what we believe God is calling us to.
Man, believe me, I know that there are many solid guys within the "movement." Remember, my parents were missionareies, so we travelled, and I raised my own support through BIMI and met many hundreds of pastors. I'm not against them! I believe you're seeing more and more of an exodus from the movement. Some will attempt some sort of triangulation, some will feel the freedom to break ties more publicly. May Christ be glorified in all of it.
You HAVE to stay off of my spiked hair!!!! :)
I would give anything to have hair to spike!
Excellent stuff, guys.
Keep up the good work!
Post a Comment