Welcome to De-Commissioned, a place for former members of the Great Commission movement (aka GCM, GCC, GCAC, GCI, the Blitz) to discuss problems they've experienced in the association's practices and theology.

You may read and post, but some features are restricted to registered members. Please consider registering to gain full access! Registration is free and only takes a few moments to complete.
De-Commissioned Forum
March 29, 2024, 04:46:33 am *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
  Home   Forum   Help Search Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 [3]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Are You Cool Enough?  (Read 56860 times)
Genevieve
Veteran (100-299 Posts)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 126



« Reply #40 on: March 17, 2007, 11:56:00 am »

Totally. Agreed.
Logged
nateswinton
Veteran (100-299 Posts)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 264



« Reply #41 on: March 17, 2007, 11:56:12 am »

Sweet! Cheesy
Logged
tjlyttle
Obscure Poster (1-14 Posts)
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 12



WWW
« Reply #42 on: March 17, 2007, 11:56:50 am »

Hey Everyone. My name is TJ, but my nickname is “Teege”. Im Nate’s friend, I don’t know you guys, but I am pretty awesome.

(I’m also pretty sarcastic)

This relevancy issue is one that almost makes me nauseous. I think it is that way because for several years I pursued trying to be “relevant”. A lot of our churches are pursuing relevance, and to be quite honest, the result is that a lot of people are becoming sell-outs. What I mean is that people are so relevant to our culture that they no longer are able to partner with Jesus in what He is trying to do. When I read the gospels, heres what I see:

1NOW THE tax collectors and [notorious and [a]especially wicked] sinners were all coming near to [Jesus] to listen to Him.

2And the Pharisees and the scribes kept muttering and indignantly complaining, saying, This man accepts and receives and welcomes [preeminently wicked] sinners and eats with them.
-Luke 15:1-2 (AMP)

The aim to be culturally relevant is to get the church to intersect with “sinners”. But what often happens is that the church becomes so diluted that we start sinning instead of calling sinners to Jesus. We need more than just “relevance”. Heres what Paul has to say about it:

25For the foolishness of God is wiser than man’s wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than man’s strength.

26Brothers, think of what you were when you were called. Not many of you were wise by human standards; not many were influential; not many were of noble birth. 27But God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise; God chose the weak things of the world to shame the strong.

-1st Corinthians 1:25-27

If God consistently chooses the weak things of this world, why are we still pretending to be strong or influential. What really influences people is not our hairstyle, our clothing, our vocabulary which includes words like “organic”, or other hip words. It’s Jesus living inside of us. And I think this is what has been taught to many of us, that we have to dress up in order to be influential. It’s a lie. You don’t have to change your appearance for God to use you, you just have to be willing to follow Him.

Heres the deal, if someone decides to try and be relevant by fitting into a particular culture, they may have some success, but cultural fads come and go. Whats relevant today will be outdated tomorrow. However, If someone decides to allow Jesus to change them from the inside, they will most likely find themselves surrounded by people who need the love of Christ. And that won’t be taken away from them. People were really attracted to Jesus, and people will be attracted to Jesus living inside of us if we let God lead us.
Logged
Anonymous #99
Guest

« Reply #43 on: March 17, 2007, 11:57:01 am »

At my GCM church it WAS high school every time you entered the cafeteria after the service. “Are the cool core people going to notice me today?” Followed later by… “Am I going to get to be seen talking to the cool core people today?” (So I can be seen as more valuble to the church). And so on…

I am so embarrassed to have been part of GCM.
Logged
Genevieve
Veteran (100-299 Posts)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 126



« Reply #44 on: March 17, 2007, 11:57:14 am »

Teege,
Right on. It makes me ill too.

Anonymous #99,
Wow, I’m glad you’re not there anymore. It’s easy to get sucked into that, so don’t beat yourself up about it. I think a lot of us did or believed things in GC we’re embarrassed about. Hmm, maybe that’s a post…
Logged
snoopy
Guest

« Reply #45 on: March 17, 2007, 11:57:39 am »

Nate,



Being all things to all men so that by all possible means I may win some is a better verse to use to prove their point than the man looks at the outward appearance verse that Bertrand pointed out was a favorite of GCM.



However, I key in on ALL things to ALL men so that by ALL POSSIBLE MEANS I may win some.



What I saw happening was SOME things to SOME men so that by SOME POSSIBLE MEANS I may win some.



What jumped out at me was that the marketing scheme was to reach the 18-35 year old cool and artsy people. The nerdy book lovin’ unsaved 19 year olds are just as unsaved as the tatooed and pierced unsaved 19 year olds, but it didn’t seem like anyone cared about them. And, forget about the 65 year old unsaved people. No one from our church even thought ever about a way of sharing the gospel with them. In fact, the loud music sent them running.



I will leave you with an example of one of the worst things I remember. While in college, my daughter would occasionally have lunch with the children of one of our pastors. Our daughter must have dressed cool enough to be allowed to eat with them. She was also involved in a non GCM campus ministry (Intervarsity) on occasion and tried to introduce her IV christian friends to her GCM christian friends.



It was communicated to her that the IV friends didn’t dress cool enough (they wore sweatshirts and jeans) and because of that they didn’t want to sit at the same table with them because it might blow their witness to be hanging out with uncooly dressed Christian kids. That is just sick. My daughter chose to have lunch with the “uncooly” dressed Christian kids.



Therefore, as we have opportunity, let us do good to all people, especially to those who belong to the family of believers. Gal. 6:10
Logged
snoopy
Guest

« Reply #46 on: March 17, 2007, 11:58:12 am »

Minister to the gothically inclined. (see above)

Minister to the tatooed. (has assorted tattoes with a heavenly message)

Disability advisor (won’t go there)

Homeschooled through high school liason. (advises students–But you can’t write in pink pen on college exams!)

Ambassador to radical feminists. (buzz cut)

Undercover Catholic converter (crosses self).



Sorry I have been getting carried away.



And underneath it all they’re just your typical dad who likes football and grilling. Or a mom who likes Michael W. Smith.




Agatha,



This is brilliant. But I am worried. Will anyone be allowed to minister to the football lovin’ outdoor grillin’ dads? Maybe the Goth Christians can get a football jersey and “Grill Sargeant” apron and minister to the suburban dad. And, maybe the tatooed Christian indie music lovin’ moms can have their tatooes removed and pick up Michael W. Smith’s latest offering for the sake of the Gospel.



But, please, don’t make me have to minister to the nerdy people. I’m sure that’s not my calling. Or, the poor. Or, the mentally ill. Or, anyone who remotely looks or acts like Napoleon Dynamite. I hate moon boots.
Logged
AgathaL'Orange
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1182



« Reply #47 on: March 17, 2007, 11:58:25 am »

That’s okay, I’ve got the Napoleon Dynamite crowd covered. Yesssssssss! I’m working on my evangelistic dance as we speak.
Logged

Glad to be free.
sistanchrist
Regular (15-99 Posts)
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 47



« Reply #48 on: March 17, 2007, 11:58:39 am »

I am thankful that this is not a struggle that all GCM churches have, the church I left, the main reason I was so attracted to it, is that while we had an incredibly cool trendy pastor, the congregation ranged form the punk, to the tatooed, to the hair dyed, to the pierced to the plan jane sweat shirt and jeans, you could come as you are. But the acceptance stopped there, see the rest of my posts for the details on that. The diversity in apperance, did quickly die out once that pastor left on a church plant. I also think that part of that pastor’s work in GCM was outside of the GCM DNA looking back at it now.
Logged
Brigitte von Langerhausen
Guest

« Reply #49 on: March 17, 2007, 11:59:08 am »

Agatha said…

Minister to the gothically inclined. (see above)

Minister to the tatooed. (has assorted tattoes with a heavenly message)

Disability advisor (won’t go there)

Homeschooled through high school liason. (advises students–But you can’t write in pink pen on college exams!)

Ambassador to radical feminists. (buzz cut)

Undercover Catholic converter (crosses self).



Sorry I have been getting carried away.



And underneath it all they’re just your typical dad who likes football and grilling. Or a mom who likes Michael W. Smith



Agatha also said…

That’s okay, I’ve got the Napoleon Dynamite crowd covered. Yesssssssss! I’m working on my evangelistic dance as we speak.



Brigitte says…

If only you knew the “real” Agatha. I am privied to the true identities of Agatha, Bertrand, Gene, and Genevieve and I must say I was SOOOO jealous of their fun names that I had to make up my own. I appreciate Agatha’s sense of humor and ability to keep things light in an otherwise intense situation. She has an amazing gift of carrying the weight of the world while making it look like she has has ownly a down feather stuck to her coat… The latter is very true of Bertrand as well.



In regard to “cool” pastors. This is very much an issue at other evangelical churches. If you want to pull “WWJD” I think that when Jesus was in the company of tax collectors he dressed, ate, drank, acted the same as he always did, obviously he recognized by others who knew him in other more upstanding circles. After all, isn’t He the same yesterday, today, and tomorrow? If a pastor changes the way he looks, okay, but….. I don’t think anyone should ever be pressured (or even made to feel pressure) to be “cool”. If Jesus were here in the flesh, I would see him going to punk concert with a future disciple in his 1980’s styled polo shirt, belted Levi 550’s (relaxed fit/tapered leg) and shiny white leather New Balance sneakers, vs. more “appropriate” attire for the occasion. Be who you are, dress who you are, give people credit, they know when your personality doesn’t match your appearance.
Logged
AgathaL'Orange
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1182



« Reply #50 on: March 17, 2007, 11:59:29 am »

Thanks for the kind words, Bridg…

I can’t picture what Jesus would wear today. Kind of fun to think about though.
Logged

Glad to be free.
hope
Guest

« Reply #51 on: March 17, 2007, 11:59:42 am »

Dear- Gene Prince, Genevieve Jones, Agatha L’Orange, and Bertrand Baggersly



I’m still curious to hear what is your take on 1 Corinthians 9:19-23. What do you think is the relevant application of it in the modern world?



And I also don’t see how a pastor’s attempt to reach the typical American college student is any different than Hudson Taylor’s attempt to reach the Chinese.



Please enlighten me?
Logged
hope
Guest

« Reply #52 on: March 17, 2007, 11:59:53 am »

Dear Genevieve-



You wrote:



“I love makeovers as much as the next person (What Not to Wear is one of my favorites), but I don’t think it was something he asked for. It seemed like a prerequisite for taking the next step in leadership.”



I am wary of two phrases you use here: “I don’t THINK” and “it SEEMED”. Did you ever think to ask the new pastor up front what his convictions were on the subject?



Did you consider that these thoughts were just lies of the enemy- another attempt on his part to cast dispersions upon your Christian fellowship?
Logged
hope
Guest

« Reply #53 on: March 17, 2007, 12:00:11 pm »

“In the church I was in, the leaders (small group and pastors alike) that were most respected and imitated were the cool ones. Others who might have had more wisdom, love, and grace were often overlooked.”



this statement appears to be based more on perception than on fact.
Logged
AgathaL'Orange
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1182



« Reply #54 on: March 17, 2007, 12:00:58 pm »

1 Corinthians 9:19-23
Here’s what Paul said he did to reach the lost.

1. became a servant— this is what we are all to be anyway
2. became as a Jew—Paul was already a Jew and had even been a Pharisee, and had all the Jewish prerequisites (circumcision, Jewish body of knowledge, and could easily know all the Jewish “problems” with Christianity)
3. became as one under the law—Paul had extensive training under the law
4. became without law—Paul was now a Christian and could relate to those who were not Jews as well.
5. became weak— again a set of behaviors (like servant)… perhaps even having his “ailment/problem/issue” that he asked God to remove from him three times would help him relate to this. In addition he was very weak politically as a Christian. So he toned it down a little
What I am trying to say is that it sounds like he drew on all facets of himself (that he had already) in order to relate to different people that he was trying to reach.

How that applies today… we all use our giftedness, our backgrounds our existing personalities to build up the Body.

But note this!
One thing he also had was a lot of Bible knowledge, and extensive training in the Hebrew version of seminary. The man was learned and he had some answers. I’m thinking of Acts 17 where Paul discusses Jewish history, prophecy and scriptures for three days to show that Christ is the one they were to follow. Or how he held his own among the Stoic and Epicureans. He then goes on to make the “Unknown God” speech. My point is that Paul was a man of intellect and he had answers. And didn’t the Bible also say, “Study to show yourself approved unto God…. rightly dividing the Word of truth?”
As to what we all believe, if I had to guess I would say:
1. I think what Genevieve is saying is that she felt like her leader had to change himself to work with people. We’ve heard this story from others as well. She felt that he changed and perhaps she liked who he was before and missed that guy.
2. What Gene seems to be saying is that he feels that it adds to the “fakery” in evangelicalism in we are always changing ourselves, our worship and everything else to reach the world. He bellieves that Christianity stands on its own. Maybe this is why the emergent church is so popular. They LOVE resurecting the doctrines and practices of old… What’s old is new now. They go into the seeker sensitive church and say “This just doesn’t seem like church.” And they love their historic props of worship… creeds, icons, candles, chants. When I go to someone for answers, I am not looking for someone who would fit in at MTV (not that they wouldn’t have the answers), but I look for someone who has the answers. Honestly how they look isn’t really a prerequisite. And I stand behind the statement that it is insulting to our audience to think that they are so shallow that we have to change everything to make ourselves more winsome. Cause quite frankly we’ll never match up to Hollywood or any music scene in coolness. And people are going to notice that. And then we just come off looking as though our message is less important than the package.
3. Bertrand doesn’t have a problem with people being more hip to reach others, but does have a problem with making it a scriptural issue. He feels that the scripture doesn’t entirely back it up.
4. And my personal belief is this:
Why is there so much emphasis on appearance and lifestyle, when what one really needs as a pastor is to have the answers people are looking for? And I mean a deep understanding of the answers. Someone told me recently that the church is dying. Every generation it’s dying. My belief is that we absolutely need to clutch on to the essentials of the faith. The history of the church. The doctrines, the creeds, and the truth. This is so much more important than how we package our message. And I wonder if Genevieve’s leader had received this extensive training in the Word, in interpretation, in interpretations given throughout history… Seminary.

I personally don’t have a problem with anyone being more “hip” to reach out to others or even cause you just want to look nicer or makeover yourself or whatever. I honestly don’t. I try to be fashionable if I can simply because I have no desire to draw attention to myself for being completely not with it.
But the fact of the matter is, that at least two of us left because we needed answers about Christianity that no one could give. Why? Because there has been so much focus on relevance and simply getting the gospel out that no one knew much beyond that. And this is a church! Not a parachurch organization. GCM is a place that administers baptism and communion. Those who adminster these need to have a deeper understanding of this.

As we’ve said before, GCLI, LTI, does not an “answer man/pastor/teacher” make. Seminary isn’t the only answer, but it sure as heck would be a start.
I don’t think anything that Genevieve was saying would be a “lie of the enemy.” But of course this is defense number 2 (after slander) for anyone who disagrees. Again what I hear Genevieve saying is that she liked her leader before and she felt like he changed. And that change, happened to coincide with an appointment in the church. She missed the “old” leader. What about the other members of the church? See the “I want to be your friend” post. We’ve all felt at one time or another that the GCM churches we were a part of were so intent on reaching the lost that they lost some primary functions of the church. Again this is why I think GCM would be 5000% better if it were a parachurch organization and if they steered people to churches that were already there and “livened” up those churches rather than trying to be a church. If you’re a church than be a CHURCH!

And about Hudson Taylor. I think that the equivalent would be if someone from a remote tribe in Papua New Guinea came to America to witness to us. His wife would be topless. He would be wearing a little “covering” (blush) of some sort. And when he walked down the street everyone would be gaping and giggling. Not exactly the same as the difference between regular old dad and the “uber hipster.”

Not that I would mind being an “uber hipster” mind you. If I had the eye, I’d do it too. I think the point here is that emphasis needs to be less about the package and more about the integrity of the message. And hey, some of us like our leaders nerdy.
Logged

Glad to be free.
G_Prince
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 417



« Reply #55 on: March 17, 2007, 12:01:23 pm »

Hope said-this statement appears to be based more on perception than on fact.

How would we go about gathering fact on this topic?

“Dear pastor, You were a major dork last week, I mean I almost left the church because of it, but after a trip to the mall I have to say YOU’RE STYL’IN!(cue the Ricco Suave music). However it seems like you’re a completely different person, and frankly it’s a bit frightening. Are you selling out to reach the hipsterly inclined?

Unfortunately I think perception is the best we can do.

The most frightening aspect about this entire topic is how I saw people change inside. One of my pastors went through a total transformation. He spoke different, acted different, and used a younger and completely new set of vocabulary (Rad!) I felt like I knew him one week and than literally the next, had no clue who this person was. This may sound weird, but it was like he was possessed by GCM.
Logged

Here's an easy way to find out if you're in a cult. If you find yourself asking the question, "am I in a cult?" the answer is yes. -Stephen Colbert
Genevieve
Veteran (100-299 Posts)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 126



« Reply #56 on: March 17, 2007, 12:01:36 pm »

Hope,
You’re right. It is a perception. I don’t want to come out and claim I know a person inside and out or that I know for sure something was happening. That’s just how it seemed. If I had asked him, I’m sure I would’ve gotten the same answer you gave, which gives the official answer, but it seemed like more was going on.

Also, this was, of course, after being in the group for several years and seeing/feeling similar things. This was just one example (and the one at the end, which I do know for a fact was why this other pastor was asked to not speak on Sundays.)

No, I don’t think there’s anything wrong with changing your appearance to reach the world. His motives were good. I just think it’s sad/bad that he felt like he needed to put on a facade to reach people for Christ.

About it being a lie from the enemy, of course, neither of us can prove it one way or the other. We could also think of it as insight from the Holy Spirit, and neither of us could prove that either. The fact that other people have felt similar things leads me to believe that this emphasis on coolness did in fact happen and others have been hurt and/or turned away by it.

Like I and others have said, too, this trying to be cool isn’t just a GCM thing. It happens all over.

I’m having a hard time saying this in a clear way, but please believe me that it wasn’t the fact that he changed the way he looked to reach people that bothered me. I think that’s a good, sacrificial, though possibly misguided thing to do.

It was more that it didn’t seem to be his idea. He had been working with the college group for years and years by now. I think it was telling that this change happened right when he was trying to fill the shoes of a very cool pastor who had been adored by the group.

It seemed like he was trying to take on someone else’s personality and persona.

On a related note, I was trying to get at that it seems like the “cool” leaders are most respected/trusted/followed, even if they’re not the most godly (see example at the end). And that definitely seems wrong.

I hope this helps.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  


Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC
SimplePortal 2.1.1