Church: The Change Within Part I
As a minister for 55 years and a pastor for 53 years I love churches and those who comprise memberships. To be a critic of something I love so much is an impossibility. To pretend today’s churches don’t have a major challenge would be to evidence a lack of observation, however. The challenges are multiple and complex.
On relates to age groups. To simplify the issue let’s just divide the body into two parts each having multiple sub-parts.
One is the older membership. Members are checking out of churches in the older age group. Likewise, younger people are staying out or dropping out. Many of the members of the older group have given their lives, devotion, and financial resources to purchase land, build buildings, and develop ministries.
The younger group consists of a smaller number of their demographic body than previous generations. Many are uncertain they want to be a part of organized Christianity though studies show a greater interest among them for things spiritual. To survive the church must reach a larger segment of this body. Faced with this challenge some churches are indirectly if not directly marginalizing the older group giving them the impression they aren’t needed and don’t count. To question this approach is often represented as questioning the will of God.
In a drive to reach the unchurched some churches are un churching the churched. This is increasingly resulting in the older generation giving up and giving in but not giving to the church. That in itself is a challenge. The younger members being attracted are not the givers the older generation proved to be.
New churches begun as contemporary ones are growing using techniques, methods, and messages that attract the younger generation. Established churches that try to sideline their older membership and change their church lifestyle are finding it challenging.
Organizations that study church growth say that a church prospers using either traditional or contemporary styles of worship. The form they are started with attracts people who like that form. To change the form is to take away the very thing that attracted the people. They begin to look elsewhere to find what they had.
Those same bodies that study church growth agree that to change a church’s style has rarely ever worked. Some persons find an exception to the rule and represent it as the norm. They set themselves up for failure by discounting the facts.
In spite of the rush to change some traditional churches have stayed with what worked and by doing it tastefully have prospered. This is even true of liturgical congregations. Many of them are attracting young people by doing what they have always done with quality and good taste. Many youth find their formality appealing.
Churches have a challenge. To prosper they must respect their history in charting their future. There are wonderful examples of churches reaching all age groups. Neither needs to be forfeited.
Creation: Intelligent Design Part II
Dr. Anthony Flew has taught at Oxford and other leading universities. For half a century he has been considered the world’s foremost atheist. The man revered as the world’s smartest atheist has written numerous articles and books arguing against the existence of God. He has long been the darling of atheistic philosophy. His devotees are many.
Flew is no longer an atheist. I don’t want to misrepresent him. Neither has he become a Christian or a proponent of Biblical theology. However, recently he announced he must “go where the evidence leads” and that is to a Creator of enormous intelligence and power. When first reported some atheists tried to blow it off as a false report. Flew has confirmed his atheism is a thing of the past. He affirmed that his former arguments for atheism are obsolete in light of new evidence. Of some of his own writing he said it has become “out of date,” a “historical relic.”
His reason for a change is described by him in this simple way. “I think that the most impressive arguments for God’s existence are those that are supported by recent scientific discoveries.” He further explains this conclusion is a result of new knowledge of cell complexity and genetic coding. In light of this he said, “It now seems to me that the findings of more than 50 years of DNA research have provided materials for a new and enormously powerful argument to design.”
“It has become inordinately difficult,” says Flew, “even to begin to think about constructing a naturalistic theory of the evolution of that first reproducing organism.” He expanded on this by continuing to say, “The enormous complexities by which the results were achieved look to me like the work of intelligence.”
He reached his conclusions apart from the Bible. He admits being impressed by some scientists who correlate Genesis 1 with scientific knowledge. This has prompted him to say, ”That this biblical account might be scientifically accurate raises the possibility that it is revelation.”
Flew is among the growing number of former skeptics who now see in science evidence compatible with what many who believe in the Bible to be a reality. That is not to misrepresent such persons as believing in the Bible but believing that which parallels what the Bible postulates based on scientific evidence apart from the Bible.
Those who believe the Bible is revelation find certain texts meaningful, such as:
“Since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities —-His eternal power and divine nature —- have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made” (Romans 1:20).
The Psalmist sang, “How many are your works, O Lord! In wisdom you made them all” (Psalm 104:24). Meaning, “You designed them intelligently.”
When there two opposing thoughts one has to be correct and the other not. In the laboratory, if not the court room, the pendulum is swinging in favor of intelligent design. If there is scientific evidence of intelligent design what is to be feared by letting the evidence in the science room? If it isn’t students are deprived of data on which to make a scientific decision.
When science and religion are compatible does the science have to be discarded simply because the two are independently parallel?
Creation: Intelligent Design Part I
There is a concept from which youth must be protected. Persons who try to share it are trashed in an effort to expunge this dangerous concept from young minds. Courts, certain editorial boards, and various special interest groups are aligned in shielding young minds from this ideology.
A growing number of scientists and scholars are offering support to sharing the principle called Intelligent Design. Having analyzed observable data they have concluded it is a plausible concept. To this ever expanding cadre of academicians it is a matter of scientific observation of complex cells, organs, and systems that reveal a design indicating intelligence therein. Many proponents are not religious persons. They have reached their conclusion based on scientific observation apart from any religious premise.
That is a concept considered so threatening to some they not only want to stifle freedom of speech but freedom of thought on the topic. It appears proponents of random evolution feel the concept is so indefensible it must be propped up by court order and spread by indoctrination of it and it alone with no dissenting discussion.
After all if the poster boy of evolution, Dr. Anthony Flew of Cambridge University, could be persuaded the evidence of intelligent design is so strong as to change his mind some high school students might also come to believe in it. Evidently evolutionary inquisitors think that would be opprobrious.
Flew had the integrity to say, “It now seems to me that findings of more than 50 years of DNA research have provided materials for a new and enormously powerful argument to design.” He expanded, “What I think DNA material has done is show that intelligence must have been involved in getting these extraordinarily diverse elements together.”
Unfortunately there was a historical period when people of faith sought to stifle scientific knowledge. Now it is people of science who seek to gag their own evidence.
Where there is design there is a designer. Consider a certain kind of watch. There is a big hand on it. Every time it goes around the face of the watch one time a mid-sized hand goes around one-twelfth of the surface. There is a little second hand that hustles even more. Every time the big hand goes around one time it makes sixty trips around its dial. Those hands work that way every time. Take the back off the watch and the design that enables it to perform like clockwork is observable. It was designed to do so. The logical conclusion is there is a designer who produced the watch.
The elemental observation of the earth rotating on its axis and traveling in its orb reveals there is a design to the process. It is so exact the position of the earth can be determined far in advance. Such a design indicates a designer. That designer certainly had intelligence. Intelligence itself indicates an intelligent source. This cudgel isn’t likely to end soon.
Israel/Egypt Travel 2006
Time machines do exist. Sunday morning I had breakfast in Cairo and dinner that night in Marietta.
Saturday night we dined and watched a stunning sound and light show recount the history of ancient Egypt at the Great Pyramids in Giza. Thus concluded a fifteen day visit to Israel and Egypt. We traveled on six different planes, four boats, camels, horse drawn carriages, busses, a tram, desert jeeps, and walked a lot. Counting our own we traveled on four continents, drove over the Mountains of Sinai, and through a tunnel under the Suez Canal.
We sailed the Nile for four days visiting temples at Aswan, Philae, Kalabsha, Edfu, Komo Ombo, Luxor, Karnac, Isis, and Memphis. A number of the 62 Egyptian Pyramids arrested our attention. The Step Pyramid of Sakkara, the oldest stone structure on earth, evidences early genius. The tombs in the Valley of the Kings, the Necropolis of the Princes, and the Cairo Museum are captivating.
We ate off the ground in an ageless cave in the Ramone Crater in the Negev and enjoyed fine dining at the Mena House by the pyramids, one of the top ten most romantic hotels in the world.
This was our 31st visit to Israel and 8th to Egypt. Every trip is a learning experience and an inspirational upper. Some of the things I learned in Egypt were the Sahara Desert really was once a forest and all female rulers during the Greek period in Egypt were called Cleopatra. Cleopatra VII, the friend of Mark Anthony, was the last.
Some questioned our sanity in going. Security is tight —- at the Atlanta Airport. Therefore, it is not unreasonable that it is in Israel and Egypt. It is not however imposing or alarming.
Nearly one half of the population of Egypt makes a living off tourism. Therefore President Mubarak has rounded up all known suspected terrorists. Tourists are treated like celebrities. A police car preceded us and another followed with sirens on to open the road for the bus. An armed safety officer wearing a business suit sat in the jump seat on the bus. Egypt has a tourist police force that wears uniforms very much like our sailors. They only purpose is to accommodate tourists.
Israel has perhaps the best internal security of any country. With all we have heard in the last five years about suicide bombers not one tourist has been involved. They also value the worth of tourism to their economy. It is the second leading source of income.
One of the most interesting things I have learned from visiting Israel relates to the hometown of Jesus, Nazareth. In the time of Christ the historian Josephus listed 240 towns and villages in the region of Galilee. Tiberius having a population of about 10,000 was the largest. Most, however, had a population of between 200 and 300. Nazareth was so small and inconsequential it wasn’t even listed. It was about 300 yards long and dwellings consisted mostly of caves.
If you know anything about gossip imagine an unmarried pregnant teenager in Nazareth. Everybody would have known. It increases ones compassion for Mary and respect for Joseph.
Travel is educational. Most of all it educates you to the blessings of home. We have much for which to be thankful.
Intermittent Explosive Disorder
In recent correspondence a friend told of how two usually civil friends erupted in a “cat fight” at their bridge club.
Later came the story of two persons who verbally engaged in egregious behavior at a meeting of their civic club.
Then came the question, “What is going on? Is there an epidemic of some sort of “people rage’ like “road rage’?” The answer is “yes.”
That same day I read an article originating in New Orleans regarding a diagnostic term getting increased use there. It is “Intermittent Explosive Disorder” (IED). It is used to describe normally compatible persons who, out of character, suddenly become explode. The aggression may be physical but is most often verbal.
It is caused by undue stress. In the area impacted by Hurricane Katrina such stress is common. It has resulted in increased incidents of explosive conduct by rational people.
Susan Howell is a professor at the University of New Orleans and a reputable pollster. Throughout March and April she and her staff interviewed 470 people in and around New Orleans. They found people in the area are having trouble sleeping. Nearly 2/3 say they are stressed over what is going to happen in the next few years. Twenty percent say they feel tired, irritable, sad, that they have difficulty concentrating and that everything is an effort. Summarily those are signs of stress.
At best the poll is skewed. The pollsters used conventional phone lines and many of the residents hardest hit still don’t have phone service. Had they been included the depression rate would have likely been considerably higher.
Our entire culture is stressed. Social, economic, business, political, and family pressures are at an all time high nationally. Those who are “news junkies” don’t help themselves in that the accumulative effect of events not directly involving them bring pressure on them.
Being made aware of this condition might well cause a reader to recall a recent incident where they nearly boiled over. If so it is good to realize this and pre-prepare for such a moment concluding in advance the proper response when next tempted to erupt. Plan a cooling down attitude and a positive reaction. A predetermined rational response to the conditions that might precipitate aggression can mentally help control potential rage.
It is also wise to realize other persons are experiencing similar pressures and therefore avoid a tendency toward retaliation. Tit-for-tat responses produce road rage. You never know what is going on in the life of the other person. You can be the “ice man or woman” to help chill out a potentially explosive situation. It takes character to “walkaway” from mounting unnecessary hostility.
Self-control means you are in control. If you aren’t someone else is. That means the other person wins by controlling you. Don’t let another’s intemperance control your temper.
For years I carried in my wallet a little note given me as a teen by my mother that still works. It reads, “A soft answer turns away anger.” Try it.
Follow the wise council of Barney Fife, “Nip it. Just nip it.”