Shepherding In a Revival

This week I posted a reminder on my Facebook page - a reminder that it was 20 years ago that the Body of Christ experienced a major, worldwide, church-transforming visitation of God's Spirit. Historically these kinds of spiritual awakenings happen about once every 20-40 years. Every generation needs its own revival and we have a generation on the scene (the "Millennials") who have not experienced their own corporate encounter with God in this way. 

I suppose it's necessary to define "revival." Here's the one I have always preferred: "Revival is a sovereign move of God's Spirit that results in permanent change in the church." Individuals, local churches, and even regions, experience "revival" from time to time. Worldwide, Body of Christ transforming revivals only happen once in a generation.

After posting that reminder, along with the suggestion that it might be time for us to begin interceding for the next generational visitation, a friend of mine in Portland reminded me that revivals can be messy. Here is what he wrote:

"While we desperately need the holy spirit moving in our midst, as someone in their late teens during this 'outpouring' 20 years ago, there was as much damage and confusion during this season too. No public discernment from leadership, if it was weird it seemed to have the approval and the more bizarre was apparently more anointed. So many in my generation have shut the door and are closed off to the holy spirit moving because of no strong voices of discernment in Portland. I know people who were genuinely touched and ministered to by the spirit, but I know even more who left confused and disillusioned even walking away from the church."

Since I was there, participating in providing pastoral leadership during the revival, it seems important that I communicate the questions and struggles we experienced during that time. I remember asking us: When is some kind of spiritual experience the result of the activity of the Holy Spirit, a human learned (or stimulated response), or a combination of both? If most experiences are in fact both Spirit and spirit, when do they become genuinely distracting if not problematic? Is it possible to be so careful about nothing being "in the flesh" that we quench the Spirit? The bigger questions for me were: If someone has a unique experience with the Spirit, what does it mean? Why did that happen? Was it just charismatic entertainment for bored Christians? And even more importantly, if the church is experiencing a generational visitation of God's Spirit, how might the church be permanently changed as a result? What differences should we be able to observe on the other side of the "wave"?

Since I taught "Church History" at Portland Bible College at the time my referents were historical revivals. I was especially helped by the writings of Jonathan Edwards. Edwards was a prominent pastoral leader in what became known as the Great Awakening (1734-1739), a revival so powerful in its effect it changed not only Body of Christ worldwide but also the American colonies. During those years Edwards thought long and hard about the true nature and purpose of revival. He published "The Distinguishing Marks of a Work of the Holy Spirit" in 1741, in which he discussed "the bodily effects" of an unusual move the Spirit. In fact, the "swoonings, outcries and convulsions" described by Edwards were a common phenomena of all such visitations, in Edwards past and in all future revivals. It was simply true (and easily understood) that the Holy Spirit could move on someone in a way that might overpower the human emotions and body. However, they were incidental and not the marks of revival. 

But at the end of that period some of those who had participated in the revival spun off into bizarre conclusions and practices. Some had concluded that these "bodily effects" were to be permanent experiences in the church, others that they were a mark of salvation, that if you didn't periodically swoon, you were either "hard to receive" or perhaps not among the elect at all. Some began to practice "free love" and form new, unorthodox sectarian groups. As a result, in 1746, Edwards published his famous work, "Religious Affections," in which he taught that the permanent result of revival was to be the rule of God's love, pure and holy, in every part of life, individually and corporately.

So while we pray for revival, it is essential that we pray for discernment. But even importantly, that we pray for the grace to embrace all the ways in which God needs to transform his Kingdom community. There is no question that the church, including the American church, needs revival. And we are desperate to see a new generation have their own encounter with the Living God. Will it be messy? Probably. But if we keep focused on the work of the Holy Spirit among us, measured by the truth of God's Word, accessing wisdom from past revivals, I believe we will be able to receive the grace God has for us and move forward into God's preferred future for his people. 

Obsessed With Jesus

There seems to be so many concerns and crises all around us these days. It's easy to get worried and distracted about so many things. It sounds like the story of Mary and Martha: "You are worried and upset about many things" (Luke 10:41). It seems like all we hear is bad news. We live in the midst of paralyzing conflict and hostility.

Being aware of concerns is one thing; becoming obsessed with a concern is something else. Earlier today Lynda (my wife) reminded me of a mutual friend back in the Jesus People days. The Vietnam War was on and young people our age were being drafted and forced to fight in a war they were convinced was pointless (if not illegal and unjust). Our friend was a committed follower of Jesus, but over time became so obsessed with the war that she eventually stopped following Jesus. A concern had become a distraction and finally an obsession. 

We have so many opportunities to obsess over serious concerns these days:

• Obsess over terrorists
• Obsess over racial discrimination and injustice
• Obsess over the safety and security of the modern state of Israel
• Obsess over global warming
• Obsess over pornography
• Obsess over the shrinking middle class and economic injustice
• Obsess over unequal opportunities in education
• Obsess over the immorality of abortion
• Obsess over the immorality of homosexual behaviors (including marriage)
• Obsess over human trafficking and the sexual exploitation of children
• Obsess over a broken judicial system
• Obsess over a broken political system
• Obsess over the divorce rate
• Obsess over the political "right"
• Obsess over the political "left"

These obsessions have their merit. And everyone who has an obsessions insists that we share it - or there is something seriously wrong with us! And there's really no end to it. Just when we feel safe, the media will identify yet another reason to obsess and be filled with fear. (Except in Washington and Colorado where they have found an alternative obsession.)

All these reasons to worry have brought to mind the fascinating store of Jesus and three of his disciples on the Mount of Transfiguration. You may recall that Peter, James and John accompanied Jesus up onto a high mountain, and while they were there, the glory of the Lord covered them and the divine identity of Jesus was more fully revealed. Not only that, Moses and Elijah appeared and had a discussion with Jesus "about his departure," i.e., his coming death in Jerusalem. When it looked like they were about to leave, Peter suggested they build three shelters - for Jesus, Moses and Elijah. (Maybe in that way they would agree to stick around a little longer.) Surely this situation called for focused attention, for significant effort. If they took their focus off of this situation they would lose a perfectly good opportunity to be with three very important (and obviously heavenly) men.

I love what the story records next. (1) A voice spoke out of the cloud of glory saying, "This is my son whom I have chosen; listen to him." The Father is very clear in defining their focus for them. They are not to be distracted by the bright lights and the important people. Their priority is to listen to Jesus. (2) Immediately afterward, "they found that Jesus was alone" (Luke 9:28-36). When the excitement of the moment had passed, the only one left was Jesus. 

It is so important to find a correct focus for this brief life of ours. If that focus is to be Jesus, then we are dependent on him to give us his perspective on other issues he may want us to address and work for. It's not up to us to define the priorities of our lives. We are simply to "listen to him."

The same holds true for the church. Jesus defined our mission, our role in the world, very clearly. We are to "preach the Gospel" and to "make disciples." Yet there are so many causes clamoring for our attention. As a result, we run the risk of moving away from our role as an embassy of the Kingdom of God in the world and becoming absorbed by the most recent political or social movement. While the Holy Spirit might define a specific mission for a local church in a specific community, for the church to remain salt and light, those assignments must never lose sight of The Assignment. In the end, we will not be judged by whether or not we came down on the right side of a political issue but by whether or not we were faithful to point the world toward the righteous rule of King Jesus!

It Happens In Every Generation

Recently I had a conversation with a young friend of mine that began with the statement, "I've decided to not call myself a 'Christian.'" He said he had looked up the word "Christian" in wikipedia and found this definition: "It is used as a label to identify people who associate with the cultural aspects of Christianity, irrespective of personal religious beliefs or practices." While he has a clear commitment to Jesus, he didn't want to be identified with all of the religious trappings. And so he's decided to call himself a "believer." I told him the early believers simply called themselves "disciples." They were the personal apprentices of Jesus, participating in his kingdom mission on earth.

I've found this to be a fairly common conversation with a "millennial." People have been grinding their teeth about the obvious lack of religious commitment on the part of those born between 1981 and 2001. A fairly large chunk of them have chosen to not identify with "Christianity," to declare that their religious affiliation is "none." Their willingness to identify with the institutional aspects of the church is waning. They declare that they are "spiritual" but not "religious." And so we worry that they may end up abandoning Jesus. But is that what is really happening?

From 1967 to 1972 young members of my "Baby Boomer" generation decided to follow Jesus. We were "Jesus People" or "Jesus Freaks." We declared that our faith was not at all about religion but was about relationship. We reacted to the religious expressions of our parents' generation, and we worked to pioneer new expressions of the church (many of which have since become institutionalized). Sound familiar?

And then came the young people we called "Gen X" or more rudely, "Baby Busters." They were the "fatherless generation." They seemed to be a reactionary generation, "Gen X" itself being an anti-label label. They were irreligious, casting aside anything that might be "traditional," transforming Sunday morning worship services into rock-and-roll concerts. Some began to call them the "lost generation." Leaders among them referred to themselves as the "Joshua generation." One generation reacting to that of their parents, exploring their own expressions and experiences of faith.

In a recent issue of Christianity Today, yet another article about millennials told the story of Dietrich Bonhoeffer (one of my earliest influences as a Jesus Freak) as a youth pastor in his generation. It appears as though a youth movement in Europe had a resulted in a generation that just left home, wandering aimlessly around the countryside, trying to "find themselves." This youth movement began in 1880 and continued into the next generation, resulting in the need for pastoral leaders to reflect on the best way to provide leadership to this bunch of hippies. The answer was, tell them about Jesus. Present the opportunity to follow Jesus and to accept the mission of representing Jesus in all of life.

And so it's simply true: It happens in every generation. In fact, it's always been true that the church is a one-generation church. Every generation needs it's own understanding of Jesus and his mission on the earth. Every generation needs it own expression of faith. Every generation needs its own revival. God has always worked generationally. God has a distinct plan and purpose for each generation, including the millennial generation. 

So for those who are wringing their hands about this generation abandoning Christianity, just tell them about Jesus, the Jesus mission and the Jesus community. I have found that, as a generation, authenticity and community are more important to them than they were for our generation. They are positioned to be another "great generation," in our nation and in the church. And try not to mess it up with a lot of religiousity and churchiosity. 

Who Is Really In Control?

Recently I read the story of an Army Chaplain who had lost his faith. He served the troops in Iraq shortly after the invasion of 2003, witnessing the horrors of war. When he got home he discovered that his marriage had exploded in his absence. He concluded that God, who could have prevented any or all of this, was cruel and immoral, that God was not love, that God did not care. And so he gave up any real faith in God or a desire to serve God.

The story brought up the old question of "theodicy" and the sovereignty of God. What does is really mean when we say that God is control? And what difference does it make?

For some, the sovereignty of God amounts to little more than philosophical determinism. It's just really a matter of fate. What will be will be. Human free will and choice are illusions. Everything that happens is simply a matter of God's sovereign will. Therefore, we are not really accountable - no matter what we do, we will in the end live out God's irresistible plan for our lives.

For others, God himself is still learning, growing. Nothing is pre-determined. The future is what we make of it. Although God has overall authority in God's creation, he has set it up so that he is not (and can not be) in control of the details along the way - just final destinations. 

The problem for us - as is often the truth - is that the Bible can be used to justify both of these positions. Since the Bible is not a collection of philosophical principles but rather the story of God's purpose for and interaction with God's creation, you can't settle a philosophical argument with Scripture. 

The fact is this: When the Bible says that "God is love," it teaches us that God is a personal, relational, dynamic, interactive God. The divine characteristic of "love" determines everything God does and the way God does it. We are not pieces on God's chessboard, and we are not living in self-determined chaos. Or as Albert Einstein once said, "God does not play dice with the world." At the very least, the sovereignty of God means that God has the first word and God has the last word, and that God personally and relationally oversees the process in between. And yes, we do make real choices along the way. 

Which brings up the subject of "faith." You would think our understanding of faith would be fairly simple, but it is one of the most debated ideas in Christianity. Your perspective on the sovereignty of God will literally determine how you define "faith," and how that works out in your life. For some, faith is simple trust and acceptance of God's sovereign will. For others, faith is the metaphysical force God uses to work, and by learning the proper ways of saying things (and perhaps visualizing things), we can use that same force to get God to work in the way that seems best. 

The fact is this: faith is the ability to trust God, no matter what. Faith also involves the powerful, dynamic, personal ability to discern God's will in a situation, and by agreeing with God, see God's will actually accomplished. Faith is a human response, but faith is also the gift of God. However, faith is never a process we initiate or control. Faith is always our response to God's initiative. There is not a magic method guaranteed to work every time. We may have our favorite methods (of prayer, confession, etc.), but the sovereignty of God means that God always has the last word. God alone gets to choose when it works and when it does not work. Any attempt on the part of human beings to be in control of the process is magic, not faith. If God is not in control, then God is not God.

So my question for the Army chaplain is this: What would you have God do? Do you want God to reprogram the minds of the political leaders so that we could never go to war? Would you want God do simply destroy all the enemies of the American Army? What if God placed an angelic shield over all of the American troops so that bullets and bombs simply bounced off of them? If all of God's works and all of God's methods are relational, designed to facilitate opportunities for men and women to be reconciled to him, and for the reconciled to grow in Christllikeness, what would be the best way for God to work in a situation? 

Fortunately, the end of the story for our Army chaplain includes his own healing, restoration with a new family, and a return to Christian vocational ministry. In the end, he learned something new about God and something new about faith. It reminds me of Psalm 73. Read it and share your thoughts with me.

Community Shepherds

Recently I had a discussion with my dad about his community work with community leaders. Dad is a retired pastor who loves the local church and local pastors. After telling me about all the community leaders who were effectively representing God's Kingdom in their sphere of influence, he expressed disappointment that local pastors seemed to be preoccupied with the typical three concerns of "buildings, bodies and budgets." They were more focused on maintaining their authority in their local congregations and with competing with other congregations than they were providing redemptive leadership in the community.

As we shared and prayed together I remembered the ministry and message of the Old Testament prophets. They were faithful, in the context of God's covenant, to remind the local leaders of their responsibilities before God. In the words of Dr. King, it was their responsibility to "speak truth to power." And they didn't just address their message to the local priests but to all kinds and levels of local leadership:

• They addressed their message to Kings, to civil, governmental leaders (e.g., Isaiah 7 & Jeremiah 13).
• The prophets spoke to the Wise or Sages, to the local educators and counselors (e.g., Jeremiah 8 & Hosea 14).
• The prophets were faithful to deliver the word of the Lord to Priests, to local religious leaders (e.g., Isaiah 28 & Ezekiel 22).
• They also called False Prophets to account, those who only spoke what those in power wanted to hear in order to gain influence for themselves (e.g., Isaiah 44 & Jeremiah 50).

What strikes me as significant in these prophetic passages is the fact that God (and God's prophets) did not consider one kind of leadership more significant than another. All were governing with God's delegated authority. All were equally accountable to God for the nature and results of their leadership.

In fact, the prophets used one word to describe all community leaders: Shepherd. The Lord viewed every leader as someone God had appointed to shepherd - to lead, feed, guard and care for God's sheep. The Kings were to faithfully shepherd God's people (Micah 7:14). Even the future Persian Emperor, Cyrus, was referred to by God as a "shepherd" (Isaiah 44:28). God's view of God's own leadership was that of a shepherd (Jeremiah 31:10; Ezekiel 34:16). All leaders were judged by how effectively they shepherded the flock God had assigned to them (Ezekiel 34:2-10). If people and communities thrived under a leader's governance, it showed they had shepherded well. If people and communities suffered as a result of a leader's influence (usually because they were using their authority to benefit themselves), they were judged by God (Zechariah 11:17).

In my conversation with my dad my conclusion was simple: God requires all local leaders - civil, educational, business and religious - to faithfully shepherd the citizens of that community. While it might be frustrating getting local pastors to see the big picture, when the mayor and the superintendent of schools, and even local business people, lawyers and judges, are all committed to being faithful shepherds as representatives of King Jesus in the community, there is much to celebrate! In fact, if local pastors spent more time exercising a redemptive influence in the broader community among the other community leaders, their prayer to see God's kingdom come, on earth as it is in heaven, might come closer to fulfillment! Well done, Dad!

A Worm With Wings?

I have often been fascinated by the question of the extent to which a "redeemed" human being is different from an "unredeemed" human. On the one hand, it is clear that the life of someone who has been restored to a relationship with the Father-Creator, of someone who has reconnected heart-to-heart with God, is fundamentally different. Living out a love-relationship with God through Christ is not just "sin management." In fact, an atheist can learn the disciplines that will make him or her a "better person." It's easy to conclude that our full redemption must wait until this sinful body is no longer a barrier. But if that was bottom line, why not advocate for pastor-assisted suicide?

That makes the words of Paul in Romans 12:1-3 even more interesting. The core of his message is this: "Do not conform to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind" (verse 2). On the negative side, Paul tells us to not pattern our mind and character after the tendencies of this present age. In fact, our natural tendency is to do this very thing. Our default response is to discover current trends and adopt and adapt them. We so quickly and easily conform to current cultural values, perspectives and thought patterns. Instead, we are to be "transformed." Some of you are aware that the word behind this word is metamorphoo, the word that is the basis for the English metamorphosis. And that obviously brings up the story of the butterfly.

Have you ever wondered about the process, the one we call metamorphosis, that results in a butterfly? Is a butterfly really just a worm with wings? How different is the butterfly from the original caterpillar? So I googled it - and here's what I found: a caterpillar undergoes a "complete metamorphosis." The original "larva" is very different from the adult butterfly. It actually eats different kinds of food. The caterpillar grows very quickly and sheds its skin 4 or 5 times, but it still isn't a butterfly. Eventually the caterpillar stops growing and surrounds itself with a cocoon. Inside of the cocoon, the caterpillar releases special enzymes that literally dissolve the larval tissues. Special cells that were always present but dormant in the caterpillar now begin to grow, forming legs and wings and eyes. At the right time the full-grown butterfly emerges to fly and reproduce. The butterfly is clearly related to the caterpillar, sharing all the original DNA. But it is a very different creature. Metamorphoo literally means another form. 

So what does it mean to be transformed? The dynamic presence and influence of the Holy Spirit on and in a human person does not make them less human. In fact, it makes them more human. You see, humans were created to be more like butterflies than like caterpillars. But a process of metamorphosis, of transformation, must take place. The result is related to the original but is fundamentally different.

Paul goes on to say that we are to be transformed "by the renewing of your mind." "Renew" means "to be new again." The process of transformation takes place significantly in our minds. Our thinking must become new again. Our mental perspectives and attitudes must conform to the thought patterns of God as revealed in Scripture. And in so doing, our lives will be a growing demonstration of God's "good, pleasing and perfect will" (verse 3). 

The process of human transformation is not just a matter of mental gymnastics. Paul begins this section by urging us to "offer your bodies as a living sacrifice" (verse 1). Our entire concrete selves are involved in redemption and in transformation. The very act of presenting our entire selves to God is an act of worship, the core of our commitment to and service of God. 

So is real transformation possible? If it isn't, Paul was messing with us by just bring it up. Transformation is the logical outcome of a restored connection to the heart of the Father. But transformation is so much more than sin management. We are destined to be so much more than a worm with wings. It is so much more than living by a list of external "dos" and "don'ts." A transformed life is very different from its former life. It shares the same DNA, but the original human "stuff" has now been metamorphozed into a beautiful butterfly.

Individuals can be transformed. And organizations can be transformed. Sometimes the biggest obstacle to real transformation can be a fear of change. And let there be no doubt about it: transformation will involve profound change. The result will bear little resemblance to the original. But the new found ability to fly will make it all worthwhile. 

What Does a Fruitful Life Look Like?

I don't mind saying that this year has been a season of an unprecedented (and sometimes challenging) time of growth for me. Have you ever wondered whether or not you will ever reach an age when you will have matured enough and you can just coast? (Spiritual retirement?) That thought is obviously foolish. In fact, I think this mortal adventure we're having is really Pre-School in the light of eternity, even for the most spiritually developed. It almost seems like every year takes my spiritual schooling for a new level - sometimes involving a proverbial "tool shed" experience.


There are several passages of Scripture that have been the focus of my reflection, repentance and reformation this year. One of the most important is the Parable of the Talents in Matthew 25:14-30. I know! Everyone is very familiar with that passage! What can be so challenging? After all, haven't I taught, written and preached on that passage any number of times? Well, yes. But I find a new perspective on that ancient story is literally changing the focus of my life.


In a word: I find I have been identifying myself with the One-Bag Servant. 


This servant is known for one thing: digging a hole in the ground and burying the Master's bag of gold. Later, when called to account, this servant confesses that he was afraid of losing any of his Master's gold. He thought he would be in hot water if, when the Master returned, he was able to return less than what had been given to him. And he succeeded. He didn't lose anything that had been entrusted to him. The Master's investment in his life was in tact.


Maybe we should pause to describe how much a "talent" was worth in those days. A "talent" (Greek talanton) was equivalent to 20 years of wages. That's why some translations render this word a "bag of gold." A One-Bag Servant was a very wealthy man! (The Five-Bag Servant was given 100 years of wages.) In other words, every servant in God's Kingdom has been given great wealth to invest. The Master had "entrusted his wealth" to his servants.


So what was the Master expecting of his servants? I would think not losing any of his wealth would have been a good thing. What strikes me is the difference between the attitudes of the Five-Bag and the Two-Bag Servants and the One-Bag Servant. Jesus remarked that Mr. Five and Mr. Two "went at once and put his money to work." These two servants were known for (1) the urgency and immediacy of their response, and (2) their diligence in finding ways to make their bags of gold "work." And as a a result, they doubled the Master's investment. A 100% ROI! These servants were diligent, creative, faithful masters of enterprise. They were successful entrepreneurs, dedicated to the productive use of all the Master had entrusted to them. 

And what was the Master's response to their productivity? "Well done, good and faithful servant! You have been faithful with a few things; I will put you in charge of many things. Come and share your Master's happiness." The Master (Jesus) characterized these two investors as "good and faithful." They had dedicated themselves to the good productivity of the Master's investment, and they had been faithful in carrying it out. As a result, they were to share in the Master's deep joy, a joy being experienced in the context of the servants' good faithfulness. I'm amazed that the Master remarked on the fact that he had put them in charge of a few things; even the great wealth being entrusted to them did not compare to the wealth to be entrusted to them (to manage) as a result of their faithfulness. 

So it was more than just the need to not lose the Master's investment. When Mr. One presented the Master's investment in tact, he made a fairly harsh statement. "I knew that you are a hard man, harvesting where you have not sown and gathering where you have not scattered seed." The word "hard" (Greek skleros) literally means grasping, harsh, cruel, merciless, exploiting the labor of others. One commentator noted, "“He is virtually calling his master a vicious tyrant, a capitalist who takes for himself the harvest that others worked so hard on. In other words, he takes what he wants without caring who gets hurt in the process" (Grand Osborne, Matthew). He didn't think his Master needed his help increasing his wealth. After all, wasn't he wealthy enough already? He should be happy just getting his entire investment back!

But no! The master characterizes this servant as "wicked and lazy," the exact opposite of "good and faithful." He used his fear of the Master as an excuse, but in reality, he was just lazy. He reasoning was dishonest and irresponsible. At the very least, his commitment to being a faithful servant-investor would have led him to deposit his bag in the bank to earn interest. Instead, he was satisfied with just not losing anything. As a result, his one bag was taken away from him and given to Mr. Five - who was now Mr. Ten. 

The lesson rings loudly and clearly in my mind! The Master is looking for more than a level of faithful stewardship that protects his investment in our lives from loss. The Master is looking for - is committed to - a high level of productivity from our lives. He has given us all a very wealthy deposit - not just to enjoy or feel good about, but to multiply for the Master's use. That requires us to be honest about and appreciate the valuable gifts and resources he has put into our hands. Our response is then to begin immediately to explore effective ways to put that treasure to work so that it will achieve it's productive potential.

I'm reflecting on what that might mean for me. What does that mean for you?