Archive for the ‘Humble Orthodoxy’ Category

Posted on November 1, 2007 - by Stephen Murray

The Quest for Authenticity

Its no secret that I’m often quite fed up with many contemporary expressions of the church. My big issue is authenticity or lack thereof. I want authenticity, I want to be involved in living breathing communities committed to the Gospel in a fresh but authentic manner.

I want to meet with Christians who ‘let it all hang out’ so to speak. I want to meet Christians who understand that they are rebellious sinners, who understand the broken nature of this world – but that also live with the tension of being instruments of proclamation and blessing. I want to meet Christians who want a real Jesus, not a soft sissy who loves everyone so much that he’s lost his moral compass and can’t judge sin for what it really is. At the same time I want to meet Christians who realize that Jesus isn’t just handing out ‘get out of hell free’ tickets but is actively teaching what it means to love and live like residents of the New Creation. I want to meet Christians who struggle to die to self everyday and acknowledge it. I want to meet Christians who know what God’s will is for this planet and don’t run around all day long chasing ‘peaces and fleeces’. I want to meet Christians who take what God has said in scripture both seriously and with humility and don’t use it as a power tool to make their own selfish and megalomaniac alterations on society. I want to meet Christians who love outside of church and home group meeting times. I want to meet Christians who think past guitars and drums when I mention the word ‘worship’. I want to meet Christians who fail but are big enough to run back to the Cross of Jesus and beg for real mercy. I want to meet Christians who know that if they don’t have Jesus then they have nothing – and this is worth fighting tooth and nail for.
I want to meet these people and live with them. I want to see others be transformed and become these people. I want to see myself transformed and become ‘these people’.

Posted on October 24, 2007 - by Stephen Murray

Why I DON’T Want to be Involved in Church Planting

(Following on from my last church planting post – this a list of reasons as to why I’m absolutely terrified about getting into church planting…)

I’m terrified that my work ethic is pathetic and that church planting requires people who work to the max.

I’m terrified that my life will on be on display to an entire body of Christians – I don’t want to let them down.

I’m terrified of the responsibility of having to teach the Bible with the deepest integrity every single week.

I’m terrified of displaying authentic orthopraxy.

I’m terrified of loving people, especially those who tick me off.

I’m terrified of all the massive social concerns our country faces.

I’m terrified of working with other Christians who don’t agree with me.

I’m terrified of trying to balance out a humble orthodoxy.

I’m terrified of the possible limits to which my body, mind and emotions will be stretched.

I’m terrified of building my own empire.

Posted on October 15, 2007 - by Anthony

Keller and the risks of being an Evangelical

Darryl over at DashHouse.com has put some notes together of Keller who recently spoke at the EMA in London.  Keller spoke on the risks of being an Evangelical in an age where the term has lost its meaning in so many ways.  Here are some excerpts:

• Evangelicalism used to occupy the middle ground between fundamentalism and liberalism. It was orthodox, pro-scholarship, and facing the world. Recently, evangelicalism has become more hostile and condemning of culture. A younger generation has given up on evangelicalism as a middle ground and are looking for a new consensus. This group goes by a number of names, such as post-evangelicals or the emerging church.
• A new gospel is being preached about the Kingdom of God and Jesus Christ overcoming the evil powers forces of injustice in the world. [Update: This version of the gospel rarely talks about personal sin and God's wrath.] The pendulum has swung the other way.
• To respond, evangelicals must understand and practice biblical repentance as a result of believing the gospel. This will allow evangelicals to admit their sins, even if they disagree with 80% of the criticisms from the post-evangelicals, and even if the remaining 20% is expressed poorly. To the degree that we understand the gospel, we will be able to freely admit our shortcomings as an evangelical movement.
• Don’t ever think that we can respond to legitimate criticisms of our practice by defending our doctrine. In defending our doctrines, we have not responded to the criticisms of our practices. Orthopraxy is part of orthodoxy.
• It is necessary to draw boundaries. What really matters is how we treat the people on the other side of those boundaries. People are watching. We’re going to win the younger leaders if we are the most gracious, kind, and the least self-righteous in controversy. The truth will ultimately lose if we hold the right doctrines, but do so with nasty attitudes and a lack of love.
• We need to approach the controversies with a repentant heart corporately and say, “Despite all the bad things that are being said here, there’s a core of truth here and we need to deal with it.”

Amazing insights, if you want to be challenged as a thinking Christian get hold of Keller’s stuff where ever you can find it.  Sell you car if you need to.  Actually, you can download most of his stuff off other sites (Redeemer Presby) so don’t sell you car…that would be silly.

Posted on September 19, 2007 - by Stephen Murray

The Exegesis of Humble Orthodoxy

“Within the church, not least in home Bible studies and discussion groups and the like, when some interpretation of screwball proportions is advanced, leaders are more and more likely to say something soothing such as, ‘That’s an interesting insight, Charles. Does anyone else have anything to contribute?’ It has become out of vogue for the leader to ask Charles how or where he finds his so-called ‘insight’ in the text, or to get others in the group to criticize Charles, in the hope of bringing the entire group to a common view of what the text means. Within my own discipline, one comes across more and more books with titles such as The Open Text, Reading Sacred Texts Through American Eyes, The Liberating Exegesis. But the question sooner or later becomes this: How can Scripture ever reform us if by our ‘liberating exegesis’ we are invariably able to make it say what is comfortable to us, if we are always able to domesticate it in line with the predilections of our own interpretative community? The challenges we face are deep and complicated.”- D.A. Carson

In our humble orthodoxy are we exegeting the text with humility and openess in order to be faithful and acknowledge all perspectives or are we doing it to avoid having to listen to the demands of God?