Another Blogger
Posted on July 7th, 2006 by catalyst into the Uncategorized categoryThe pastor's at City Bible are starting to come around to the blog idea, and here is an interesting blog from Marc Estes titled: Why I Need Church
God intends for (church) to provide the following needs:
- An environment of spiritual growth.
- An atmosphere of God’s presence.
- A place to belong to a genuine community.
- A family to help meet your needs.
- A place of covering and protection.
- A place for accountability and safety.
- A place for wisdom, direction, and counsel.
- A place to make a difference.
- An opportunity to pour your life into others.
- A safe atmosphere to raise families.
- A place to give of finances, time, and energy
RSS feed for posts
July 7th, 2006 at 7:59 am
I was fine with the list until he added that last one. Couldn’t skip that one, now, could he?
Also, this “blog” seems rather pretentious with all the photos of him looking “cool” in various locations. This site is more of an excuse for him to pimp his books than anything.
July 7th, 2006 at 8:03 am
I agree. This almost sounds like a paid advertisement.
July 7th, 2006 at 8:05 am
The photos are great. (I chuckled quite a bit) And I agree, I think the blog is just a marketing tool to sell his books.
July 7th, 2006 at 9:47 am
Thanks for the post. I’d love to get your thoughts on my new site and get some feeback. www.marcestes.com
Marc
July 7th, 2006 at 10:13 am
Well, I think the site looks good. I actually check out quite a few websites written by pastors, and I think yours is similar to most others. And I think the pictures make you look younger, which is probably nice.
Here’s the deal though: It’s kind of boring. The blog, the pics, the site; while all nice and well done are a little dull.
And if it was any other pastor, I wouldn’t be surprised. But you’re better than that.
Before coming to City Bible, you used be much more radical and interesting.
I suggest you find that guy, and have that guy write on your blog. The guy who used to eat dog-food during his sermons.
At least I think it’d make your site more interesting, and you would probably attract more readers.
July 7th, 2006 at 11:15 am
Would love to see those bullets defended with scripture, but since that would be laborious, how about just:
* Atmosphere of God’s presence - defend that statement in light of Acts 7:48, Acts 17:24, and Matthew 23:38 - you see, the Bible says God is NOT in your building.
* A place of covering and protection - defend that statement in light of “I am THE way, THE truth and THE life. NO MAN comes to the Father except THRU ME”, and 1 John 2:27 … would also be curious if Marc has ever read Frank Viola’s book “Who is your Covering?” ( http://www.ptmin.org/covering_sample.htm )
* A place for accountability - would love to see Marc address that wonderful accountability in terms of the affair RP has written about previously. Near as I can tell, that’s still a dirty little secret swept under the CBC carpet by the very leadership that professes an environment of accountability. Perhaps there is a scriptural defense for selective accountability?
* A place to give of finances, time, and energy - I’m just surprised that wasn’t #1.
But long as we’re on the giving subject - how is it that giving only seems to count only when it is in the context of the religious institution, and *not* the guy who is helping his elderly neighbors? Marc has defined *the church* as the “place to give” in that statement … just curious why he would encourage people to give to an institution, and not to their neighbors (the world) as Christ said in the great commission? More simply: what part of “go out” is so hard to understand, and why in lieu of reiterating Christ’s command to “go out” do preachers always call the people back in to do their giving? Commentary on the great commission and Hebrews 13:13-14 would be appreciated.
…
July 7th, 2006 at 1:12 pm
Who cares what this guy has to say? I mean, really.
What I’ve seen of him gives me absolutely no inclination to see, hear, think, read or know anything else about or from him. The church is obviously NOT “a place,” and since he’s a leader at CBC, I must presume that his ideas about church are diametrically opposed to mine. Is he influential in people’s lives? I really hope not.
Is that too harsh? Please tell me if so.
July 7th, 2006 at 1:38 pm
Wow, the vitriol.
Let’s set aside the personality for a moment. His list is what a local church should be. I could definitely add to the list, but I will refrain.
The sad thing is that while most churches would espouse a list similar to this, in practice they are far from it. People do what they believe. For most churches, their “doing” shows that they “believe” the following:
maintain the building or build larger
pay the officers of the organization well
curry favor among those who have power
keep the masses in line
I do not know what the “doings” of CBC are in detail. Jesus said you will know them by their fruit, not what they believe.
Arcane thought, “Funny how Jesus was only mad at the mature fruit tree that wouldn’t bear.”
July 7th, 2006 at 2:19 pm
From the Blog:
I’m curious about this statement Marc - you appear to find fault with those who have a relationship with God ‘in the yard’ and ‘in the woods’ … while I am certain you trumpet Jesus who had a relationship with God while ‘in the wilderness’. Jesus isn’t the only one who grew through a wilderness experience: Abraham, Moses, David, Elijah, John - all spent time in the wilderness.
What’s the difference between those Biblical ‘patriarchs’ and the guys ‘in the woods/yard’, Marc?
July 7th, 2006 at 3:47 pm
Why are so-called “fundamentalists” handling this whole church thing from the top down…..i.e., viewing “church” as it is and trying to modify it to be more like what Jesus said it should be (or alternatively, argue for why *our* church is already everything Jesus said it should be)?
Maybe I’ve read a different Bible than everyone else my whole life, but as far as I can tell, church as it exists right now is not even identifiable anywhere in scripture. The notion of “services”, the infrastructure, who belongs, all that stuff…..it’s not even close, it bears no resemblance. As far as I can tell, about the only thing that “church” as we know it has in common with anything that anyone who ever knew Jesus personally called “church” is the name. It’s only the same word, but with a different definition (kind of like how when I say “pants” in the US, it means something innocuous, but if I start talking about “pants” in Britain, I’m getting pretty personal…..).
Marc’s grasping at straws like everyone else, as far as I can see. These structures that are called churches are houses of cards from a truly “fundamentalist” standpoint. Now, I’m not saying that’s a bad thing from my perspective….I don’t really care. I’m just saying that we’re all fooling ourselves if we think we’re recreating the “early church” by following this or any other list of bulleted points. We’d have to burn the whole thing down and start over from right after the bit about tongues of fire, it seems to me.
Probably, at some point, it will be necessary to face up to the fact that HUMANITY (and, more specifically, western culture) has made church the way it is. We’ve put it together, we’ve imposed our own opinions and preferences and culture onto it, and all that was probably inevitable anyway. Marc’s list is just another example of that, for better or for worse. It’s one dude’s opinion. So, if that works for you, great. Any alternative is just going to be another dude’s opinion, and that’s fine by me, too. But, I’m not going to get my knickers all up in a knot over some dude’s list of bullet points RE: What God’s Holy Church Should Really Be….anyone with Microsoft Word and a working vocabulary in Christian-ese could do just as well, be just as convincing, and probably get just as close to “the ideal”.
Sorry, Marc…..I think you were better off with the dog food, too.
July 7th, 2006 at 4:09 pm
What are the chances we can get a reposting of Johnpaul’s critique of Marc’s book Jesus Today? I was trying to find it in the archives but it seams to be missing.
July 7th, 2006 at 9:57 pm
From his biography:
“People recognize him by name. In the drive-thru lane at Starbucks. At the gym. At the department store.”
What is with these people’s obsession with Starbucks? Is there something I’m missing?
Gosh!
July 8th, 2006 at 12:10 am
Marc’s list completely confuses me. I do not recognize the Church of the Scripture in that list. This is the Church that I see in the Bible.
Bible interpretation 101: Law of first mention.
What is the “Church?” First mention: Matt. 16:15-19
Jesus asked His disciples, “Who do you say that I am.” Peter replied, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” Jesus then told them that this revelation came the Father, and that upon this foundation (of the revelation of Jesus Christ) He would build/build up the ones who have been called out from their place of origin (the “church”), and the gates of hell would not be able to overpower it. Jesus further said that the authority of heaven would be given to these “called-out” ones.
Here are the Scriptures that describe those called to follow Him:
John 3:16: They have opened their hearts to the love of God, and have believed in His Son Jesus Christ for forgiveness of sins. They live in the joy of life with God like Adam did.
Rev. ch. 4-5: The revelation of Jesus Christ is deep in their hearts, and they know His incomparable beauty and great worth. Nothing else holds their affections.
Matt. 13:45-46: They realize the great treasure of knowing the Lord, and give absolutely everything to follow Him. (also Phil. 3)
Matt. 16:24: They set aside their own desires even to the point of their own life, to follow Jesus and do His will.
Matt. 5:3-10 They are poor in spirit, they mourn, they are humble, they hunger and thirst for righteousness, they are merciful, they are pure in heart, they are peacemakers, and they are persecuted for being righteous.
Matt. ch. 5-7: They live a lifestyle that exhibits their faith, including fasting and prayer.
Matt. 10:7-8: They tell others that God’s kingdom is close, they heal the sick, they raise the dead, they cast out demons, they give freely what they have received (Acts 3).
Acts 2:41-47: The apostle’s teaching becomes their lifestyle, they meet together and they pray. They are not interested in hoarding possessions, but share freely with those in need. They visit each other, and are happy, living simple lives and praising God.
Rev. 14:4: These are the ones that follow the Lamb wherever He goes.
Rev. 19:6-9: They know they are set apart for One, the Lord Jesus Christ, and they prepare for His coming.
THIS is the Biblical definition of Church. It is HIS church, and HE is the focus and the reward, WORTHY of everything we have to follow Him.
Now in that paradigm, I look at Marc’s list, and sorry…. but it looks like an invitation to join the Y … yeah, even improving your image to boot.
A quote from Marc’s blog:
This again just shows that the entity of the Church has replaced the Lord Jesus Christ as the focus and object of devotion in the lives of its members.
Seek FIRST His place of rule, and all these things, this nice little list … well, they just happen naturally.
July 8th, 2006 at 8:24 am
Jiminy,
Not even the word “church” is the same, unless Jesus spoke middle English to those hebrew and aramaic speaking Israelites He was sent to redeem (and 1000 years before the english word ‘church’ came to be). Heck, His name isn’t even Jesus (the Hebrew messiah anglo-fied), it’s english transliteratation from Hebrew is something like ‘Yashua’ (since the Hebrew language doesn’t record vowels, His name is probably Y’Sh. This culture speaks of ‘church’ and ‘Jesus’ with such confidence, yet it is SO wrong. I wonder how He puts up with our vacuous ignorance?
In context of the first use of the word ‘church’ in our english scriptures, perhaps we ought to look at what He is “building” … as in “upon THIS rock (presumably a 1st person reference to Himself, rather than a 3rd person reference to Peter) I will build MY church” … and so the word “church” is the name for whatever it is that He is building.
Fast forward in scripture to 1 Peter 2:4-9 or so, and what is it He is building? A living temple, from us as living stones. So it’s a living assembly that He is building. Fast forward again to Revelation 21:2 and Revelation 21:9-10, and there is the assembly He has been working on - called the ‘New Jerusalem’. See also Galatians 6:16, which basically says that all who are IN Christ and walk by faith, are the Israel of God.
So perhaps everywhere our english scriptures use the word ‘church’, it should instead focus on that assembly that He is building, which is the ‘New Jerusalem’. In my way of thinking, using “New Jerusalem” is far better than “church”, because the focus is upon His work which is spiritual and eternal, and not upon the carnal works of man to build a physical “church” in this temporal world. What man builds WILL BE TORCHED on the day of the Lord (1 Corinthians 3:11-15). His ‘Church’ will survive the fire; man’s ‘church’ will not.
So, how does sound “upon THIS rock (Isaiah 28:16) I will build MY New Jerusalem (Revelation 21:2)”
….
pdxWrn (Lydia):
Do you suppose the ‘Starbucks’ reference is both an inside joke, AND a fleshly attempt to sound upscale/hip and culturally relevant? Either way, it’s the flesh speaking. They wouldn’t mention Starbucks if it wasn’t popular with the upper moblie business types that CBC tries to attract. Perhaps CBC-type sheep are better attracted by the aroma of Starbucks, than the aroma of Christ (2 Corinthians 2:14-16). Christ has been sold for many things, but coffee? And bitter coffee at that?
Me being from Seattle and moving to the rural midwest where coffee still comes from a can, the coffee subject is a joke. Once in awhile, KK and me buy a cup from a local mom and pop espresso bar - it was there we stumbled on one we like real well, called ‘Golden Pecan’ from http://www.klatchroasting.com/ … it’s nicely balanced and tasty. KK loves it so I have 10 lbs delivered every 2 months or so, out of So. Cal. It’s a shameless promotion I know - but really, Klatch Roasting beats the pants off Starbucks.
Jack
July 8th, 2006 at 8:52 am
And quoting Rick Warren ….?? The wannabe guru of the New Age post-modern Christianity? I always suspected that CBC leadership was enamored with Rick Warren, what with all his programs (like Celebrate Recovery — which is inferred on the CBC website as being their own thing), and big numbers.
Well, I guess if that’s what they want, then they will get the fruit of it.
July 8th, 2006 at 9:03 am
All that has been said here is true. (I’m not sure about the coffee, but I trust Jack).
However, that leaves us once again with our response to the situation. The church universal is one thing. But, the new testament was written to local churches. So, even in that day, there were similar issues to deal with, money being high upon the list.
I see the choices as:
1. leave
2. stay and be complacent
3. stay and be an example
4. stay and stir up trouble
I tend to vacillate between 3 and 4 depending on how pissed I get.
I know I am part of the church universal. I have no struggle with that. EVER! My struggles, and hence most of my growth come from dealing with the people and situations inside my local church. I don’t like it, but until the Lord leads me out, or they throw me out, I continue to be God’s little blessing to them.
For so many reasons, church is often the low-spiritual point of my week. But, I keep praying, speaking, encouraging, etc. while I am there. Sometimes I am surprised. Usually, it’s just business.
July 8th, 2006 at 9:45 am
Don, it’s good coffee, trust me.
The snickerdoodle isn’t bad either.
Can I ask - have you ever moved the complacent out of their complacency (#2) through being an example (#3) or a trouble-maker (#4)? I tried those, but only ever got lumped.
Speaking only about my experience, only by leaving (#1) did I have an effect on a few people who eventually left or are planning to leave. And how that came about was, when they went through difficult times, and the church ‘family’ (building / club) they so valued ignored them (like one plagued) and I helped them (out of love / brotherhood), did they come to see the difference between the false and the true. And they had to see my continued growth and fruit production - while their minister howled from the puplit about us ‘back-sliders’ and how we were falling into error by leaving the church family, it was disproven by the growth of Christ in me, evidenced through articles, music, ministry - through those things, Christ showed their minister to be a liar and manipulator. That is, at least for those who cared enough to weigh the evidence.
When I first started writing articles, it was for that churches monthly newsletter. It started with “Who Bakes Your Bread” (?) … and “How Did You Know” … and eventually they were printed in the local newspaper, because the 27 local ministers couldn’t get it together enough to write a weekly column for the paper - but after I started writing articles, they coordinated their effort and effectively crowded me out - since I’m not a card-carrying minister. :rolleyes: Anyway - 2-3 people said they appreciated my short articles in the newletter, that they were spiritual and refreshing, and not at all like the pastor’s articles which always talked aobut cars and dogs and other childhood memories. The majority of people said nothing (not that I expected feedback) with several of the back-hallway bullies and committee leaders challenging me over the articles asking - honestly - “by what authority do you write these articles” and “what part of these articles are written as a result of your speaking in tongues, [because] that part has to be removed” and “we have our pastor and do not want to hear from you”.
Realistically, IF I was there for anyones sake, it was for mine, because I needed to deal with my love of religion, I needed my face rubbed in religious carnality before I could see spiritual truth, I needed to be crucified / stoned. Another reason I may have been there, was as a witness to the truth as a precursor to judgment. Or perhaps for those 2-3 people who were affected by His words through me. God is complex, and so I was silly to think there was a single purpose for any of it. I’m just glad to be out of there. It’s hard to grow when you are regularly having to dig yourself out from under a pile of rocks, hurled by the religious types who don’t really want the presence of Christ in their midst.
KK and I stayed until the release came; and when it did, His words were a real shock: GET OUT OF THE WAY AND LET IT FAIL. Suffice it to say, the door did not hit me in the ass.
A number of songs were birthed in my church experience (crucifixion).
Slumbering saints
With carnal minds
Amazing Grace
But still they’re blind
Touched by God
Then led away
Stripped and bound
Religion’s prey
And they lie
In her grave
…
July 8th, 2006 at 6:21 pm
I can appreciate where you are at. I also appreciated your email. We have walked similar paths
I am not at the point of giving up yet. I haven’t been cornered yet. I haven’t been thrown out. But, as I have said in previous posts, it will not surprise me if it happens.
I think my main struggle with being without “church” is related to my primary calling and talent as a teacher. It is pretty tough to teach without a pupil. But, this gives me pause to think.
Our church is of a very “Word of Faith”/charismatic stereotype. We do the worship thing, then the offering thing, the prayer line thing, and the preaching prosperity thing. However, when it comes to teaching the rudimentary beliefs of our faith, we are sorely lacking. There is a form of daycare we call Sunday School, but there is nothing for our teenagers 12-18 other than youth group. Hence, we have a lot of kids in trouble.
I meet with the pastor in 10 days to discuss with him this problem and look at designing a “program” for the kids (12-18) that will build a foundation of faith in them. Crap, many of these kids don’t even know basic Bible stories but they know about the tithe and that if you have enough faith you can get what you want out of Daddy God.
I know this sounds very religious. There is more to it than I have explained. But, we are at a crossroads. If I am not able to be part of the solution to a tragedy I see before my eyes, I gotta go. We’ll see what happens.
Our pastor is in trouble. He is in the middle of a building project that has stalled, congregation has dropped attendance by half, staff has had to cut salaries, elders and long time families are leaving. God’s got him by the short hairs. I can’t wait to see what happens here. Much like CBC, the church is run by the pastor so there is little chance he would be run off as in a denominational setting. He’s a good guy. He’s just heard, “Thus saith the Lord,” a few too many times.
God, why can’t these things be more simple!
July 9th, 2006 at 6:20 am
Jack,
Thank you for your thorough answer to my somewhat rhetorical Starbucks question. It’s just so embarrssing how predictable and superficial these people are.
BTW, my middle name is Marie!
July 9th, 2006 at 7:40 am
Lydia, so awhile back you were being funny about your middle name being ‘Dubya’?
re: Starbucks … you might be on to something with that name-dropping observation. I mean - CBC drops ‘Starbucks’ at every opportunity and they’ve attracted yuppie-types. (Does anyone use the word yuppie out there anymore?)
Out here, people could care less about Starbucks. If you visited a church here, chances are you would hear a lot about John Deere. Accordingly, they have attracted a lot of corn and soybean farmers.
Forty miles east of here, on IL Rte. 40, there’s a church where they talk a lot about bacon, and they have attracted a number of hog farmers.
Perhaps we could test the theory of name-dropping, by encoding Frank’s sermons with short repetitive subliminal messages. Imagine name dropping:
Harley Davidson
Christopher Lowell
Free beer
…
July 9th, 2006 at 8:06 am
You’re right - it does sound ‘religious’ … if you try to bail him out through a religious program (no matter how well intentioned), you will likely interfere with God’s work in the pastor … which from the sound of things, is to humble him and render him broken before God.
Rather than designing a program (see Does God Still Knock Over Towers of Babel?), might I suggest just listening to him and praying? And praying privately that the pastor will be moved to repent of vain works (Hebrews 6:1) and putting God’s children back under the curse of the law through preaching the tithe (Galatians 3:10)?
July 9th, 2006 at 1:05 pm
Mmmm….Bacon.
July 9th, 2006 at 1:07 pm
Great idea, Jack!