Book Review: Raised with Christ by Adrian Warnock

Here are some more points (that were too much to share in Tweets along the way) that stood out to me from Adrian Warnock's book, Raised with Christ.

I appreciate how Warnock establishes that while Christianity requires faith to believe in the miraculous act of the resurrection, it is still a reasonable faith that also requires a softened heart and an alert mind at the same time. (ch. 2)
We use both to review the Biblical account of the resurrection and subsequent events.

In chapter 3, Warnock makes it clear how the examination of the evidence surrounding the resurrection naturally leads to certain conclusions. It is evident that the belief in resurrection was a part of true Christianity from the earliest moments, not a later addition. Since it was immediately proclaimed among the disciples and within the Gospels, it could have been just as quickly disproved if it had been false.

A great summary of the third chapter is Spurgeon's quote that demolishes the idea of lying disciples: "The resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead is one of the best attested facts on record." 

Warnock succinctly deals with the objections that the disciples or authorities may have stolen the body of Jesus, the disciples made up the resurrection story, the body was stolen, the disciples went to the wrong tomb, Jesus never actually died on the cross, the eyewitnesses were all hallucinating, etc. It also lists some of the extra-biblical references that support claims of a bodily resurrection, and makes me more intrigued by N.T. Wright's work on this subject.

After establishing an historical basis for the event of the resurrection, Warnock moves into the spiritual and practical implications of the resurrection throughout the rest of the book. One of his first tasks is to put emphasis on the idea that there needs to be attention given to both the Cross and the Resurrection, not one without the other. Warnock poses the question, Could it be that the resurrection has been neglected since its meaning is not nearly as controversial as other doctrines, like the meaning and effects of the death on the cross? From Warnock's writing, I learned that the term synecdoche refers to how the Bible may be talking about death and resurrection together sometimes when only seeming to refer to one or the other.

Overall, while I may not be 100% on board with every argument made in the book, I believe it achieved its primary purpose of re-focusing me on the power and effects of the resurrection. If this event really took place in miraculous fashion as proclaimed by followers of Jesus, then it truly does changes EVERYTHING!

What Must I Do for God? (part 2)

Let's get back to the original question: What must I do for God?
Now, I have claimed that a plausible answer to that question is, nothing but receive.

We've heard from Steve McVey and Devern Fromke in part 1.

How about walking further back in time.

Enter Watchman Nee, a Christian who made a huge impact on Communist China in the first half of the 20th century.

He said the following: 

"Grace means that God does something for me; law means that I do something for God. God has certain holy and righteous demands which He places upon me: that is law. Now if law means that God requires something of me for their fulfillment, then deliverance from law means that He no longer requires that from me, but Himself provides it. Law implies that God requires me to do something for Him; deliverance from law implies that He exempts me from doing it, and that in grace He does it Himself. I need do nothing for God: that is deliverance from law."

Hmm...there is that answer again. "I need do nothing for God." Nothing?!

How about one more perspective, that of Hannah Whitall Smith. For her input, we'll go even further back to the 19th century. I finally got around to reading one of her books, The Christian's Secret of a Happy Life.

She opens the first part of this book with these words: (highlights added)

In introducing this subject of the life and walk of faith, I desire, at the very outset, to
clear away one misunderstanding which very commonly arises in reference to the
teaching of it, and which effectually hinders a clear apprehension of such teaching. This

Hannah Whitall Smith

misunderstanding comes from the fact that the two sides of the subject are rarely kept in view at the same time. People see distinctly the way in which one side is presented, and, dwelling exclusively upon this, without even a thought of any other, it is no wonder that distorted views of the whole matter are the legitimate consequence.
Now there are two very decided and distinct sides to this subject, and, like all other subjects, it cannot be fully understood unless both of these sides are kept constantly in view. I refer, of course, to God’s side and man’s side; or, in other words, to God’s part in the work of sanctification, and man’s part. These are very distinct and even contrastive, but are not contradictory; though, to a cursory observer, they sometimes look so.   ...I would like to state as clearly as I can what I judge to be the two distinct sides in this matter; and to show how the looking at one without seeing the other, will be sure to create wrong impressions and views of the truth. To state it in brief, I would just say that man’s part is to trust and God’s part is to work; and it can be seen at a glance how contrastive these two parts are, and yet not necessarily contradictory.


Is that a hard pill to swallow? "Man's part is to trust and God's part is to work." 

So some Christians through the ages have taught that God does the work in our lives and we simply receive and trust in Him to do it. So what? That doesn't necessarily make it true?

What if I feel that the Bible paints a different picture? Couldn't these people be wrong, possibly even heretical?

Well, I think Smith is on to something by stating from the very beginning that both sides need to be recognized. Let's think of some Scriptural illustrations of how the two sides are presented and ask some rhetorical questions.

Could the clay do some of the molding at times rather than the Potter?

Are branches able to accomplish very much apart from the vine? (see John 15)

Is it possible for seeds to become great trees by working hard and putting forth "their share" of the effort, and not by simply receiving the water and sunlight and nutrients from the soil?  (see Mark 4)

The obvious answer to all of the above is NO WAY! I believe most people will honestly say they accept these truths. It is clear that God can do things that we cannot do, even when it comes to our own spiritual growth, and especially when it comes to meeting His own perfect standards. But it is not a matter of whether we say we believe it; the bigger issue is whether we live like we believe it. 

Rather than accepting these ideas as starting points and moving on from them too quickly, my encouragement would be to stay and rest in these truths. I know I am at a place where I need to seriously and patiently consider what all of this means in my life.

It is always the Potter who does the molding. Always! The clay simply yields.
Problems arise when I confuse myself as the Potter instead of the clay!

Branches separated from the vine or root can do nothing! When connected to the Vine or root, they simply produce what naturally flows from the Vine.
Trying to do things for God instead of letting Him live through me is just as silly as me walking down the street giving advice to tree branches on what they should do next to help their growth!

Seeds have everything inside them from the beginning to define what they will become. Gardeners don't have to wonder if the sunflower seeds they planted might somehow produce tomatoes, unless they have the wrong seeds in the first place. They just have to focus on preparing the soil. Nature will take care of the rest.

Our job, then, is to trust and receive as we abide in Christ.

Don't get me wrong. I still wrestle with how simplistic this all sounds. It even seems somewhat irresponsible. I wonder how to make sense of certain passages that appear to contradict these truths, and I know that it is just as easy to find Christians who preach messages that conflict with those of the believers I've quoted in these posts.

However, just because I may not comprehend it fully, I cannot dismiss it. I cannot ignore the reality of grace. Abundant, relentless grace! 

I cannot pretend that this exchange did not occur even though John 6 records it:

28 Then they asked him, “What must we do to do the works God requires?”

29 Jesus answered, “The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent.”

The formula for faith, then, is that I work for God by believing that He works in me.
After all, this is the mystery of God, the hope of glory (Colossians 1:27).

What Must I Do for God? (part 1)

Question: What must I do for God?
Answer: Nothing!

How does that answer sit with you? 

All right, let me qualify it just a bit. More precisely, nothing except trust and receive Him.

Does that sound any better to you?

Probably not, if you are anything like I have been for years. You see that answer and wonder if it cheapens grace. You wonder where is the Christian responsibility. You wonder if such a "shallow" view of faith can be real. Of course, we have more to do than just receive from Him, you contend. Of course, we have to obey. We must serve. We ought to do good works. We should produce fruit.

You may even complain and question, Who are these "low-standard, anything goes" Christians who expect God to do all the work? What kind of relationship works when only one side does all the giving and the other side does nothing but receive? That doesn't sound very fair, does it?

Am I right? Are those some of the thoughts going through your mind?

I recently tweeted a bunch of insights from Steve McVey's book, Grace Walk (1995), which stirred the pot a little. I believe this sentence from page 129 captures the purpose and main point of the whole book: "If contemporary Christians spent as much time developing loving intimacy with Christ as they spend in defining proper Christian behavior, the world would be a different place."


Take a minute to review some of the other statements from Grace Walk:

• "In the natural world, trying harder is commendable and often effective. But God's ways aren't our ways. Sometimes they seem to be opposite from ours. In the spiritual world, trying harder is detrimental."  (p. 17)

• "We sometimes try to live for Him when He wants to live His life through us."  (p. 37)

• "Resting in Christ is the sole responsibility of the Christian. Everything else flows out of that."  (p. 39)

• "The Christian life is not about Christ. It IS Christ!"  (p. 71)

• "Self-effort is the essence of legalism. It is pointless to pray for God to help you live for him. That may be your goal, but it isn't His."  (p. 89)

• "God's life just naturally flows out of Christians who are abiding in Him."  (p. 106)

• "God's will is not primarily a path, but a Person named Jesus Christ. As we abide in Him, it is impossible to miss the will of God."  (p. 145)

In the book, Steve McVey distinguished between a "changed" life and an "exchanged" life. It is one thing to believe that we have a life that God alters in some ways. It is quite another thing to wrestle with the Biblical teachings about dying to sin and self, and being "born again" to a new life guided by the Spirit. The clear message is that the Source of the new life is Jesus Christ. It is a different life. It is a divine life, though still expressed in a physical, imperfect body.

DeVern Fromke

This is a good time to introduce DeVern Fromke. He wrote a book 30 years prior to McVey's, called No Other Foundation. (I think the book is out of print, but you can find more info about Fromke and his other writings here.) I recently read this book and was struck by the following portion from a chapter entitled, "Why Does Humanity Exist?":

My concept of life had become distorted because I had been thinking, "There is love and faith and power and holiness in the Bible, and I'm sure God will kind of impart it to me somehow, so that I will become a loving person, a believing person, a powerful person." I could not see for the life of me but that I should become something.

This, then, was the first and greatest problem: a misunderstanding of what life is. I think we all start there. It is really a product of the fall: We interpret life as something that we live ourselves; so that even when we become born again of God's Spirit, and saved through the Grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, we still interpret life as something we are living right now. We have a job to do, a home to run, and so we seek to live a life in contact with God through Jesus Christ, so we can get assistance and guidance and leadership from Him.

I had to discover that this was not life at all, rather that life is a total reverse of it. Life is not an assistance or addition; it is a replacement. There is only one Person who really lives in the whole universe, and that is the living God Himself. He is the One who is the Three, who is self-giving love. He is the One who is the love of the universe. And we humans exist that we may be means by which He expresses Himself. Humanity itself exists to express Deity.

Hold on! It gets even better! He later adds:

So God created persons to express His own Person by them. The basic purpose of us human beings therefore should be to become the vessels that contain Him. That means our permanent habit has to become receptivity rather than activity.

...If you look at nature, you see that a tree does not produce one leaf by activity. Vegetation receives. It has sunlight and moisture poured on it. What it receives it uses, but activity is only a product of receptivity. Thus did I begin to learn the basic secret of life.


(To be continued...)

"The Bible Says..." (Book Review: Scripture and the Authority of God)

I am almost done with N.T. Wright's book, Scripture and the Authority of God (HarperCollins, 2013). Some of it is a little "heady" for me, but necessarily so. I don't feel qualified to "review" the book, but I would like to share a couple of important take-aways, at the risk of oversimplifying a few points.

First, the entire lens of seeing the "authority of scripture" as shorthand for the "authority of God through scripture" is helpful. This position is one Wright uses throughout the book. To me, the Bible is not authoritative unto itself. It is what God and the church do with the Bible that demonstrates authority and divine inspiration. Without that authority, the scriptures become writings to be studied while missing out on true revelation.

N.T. Wright

Second, Wright reminds us that the glory in John 1 comes not from the idea that "the Word was written down," but the pronouncement that "the Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us." It is important to keep in mind that the "Word of God" that brings salvation and changes lives is none other than Jesus Himself, who literally moved into our world. Again, going back to the first point, the Bible is a resource of words that the Word may use to transform people's hearts and minds only when the authority of God through His Holy Spirit is at work.

The Bible does not equal "God with us" unless we are receiving the revelation of Jesus Christ (aka. Immanuel). In fact, Bible study could indeed be one of the least spiritual acts in which some people participate, misleading us into thinking we are growing closer to God through head knowledge when we are actually distancing ourselves through self-reliance (see John 5:16-47).

I'm glad I stuck it out and will finish the whole book this morning. It was interesting to consider how believers have wrestled with approaches to Scripture throughout the centuries, which Wright summarizes succinctly. I also found the chapter devoted to a case study on the topic of the Sabbath eye-opening, especially as he compared its relationship to time with the Temple's relationship to space. Ultimately, we end up with Jesus fulfilling Sabbath rest, in my opinion, but Wright got to deeper concepts that I had not considered before. For those interested, below are more viewpoints about Sabbath and/or N.T. Wright's perspective. Note that I am merely sharing, not promoting or opposing, these:

• Rethinking the Sabbath (Frank Viola)
• Blog review (Anabaptist Redux)

Only Human vs. Human Enough

Here is another insight from The Incomparable Christ by J. Oswald Sanders, from the Moody Classics series.

Sanders writes, "We must be careful to distinguish between 'human nature' and 'sinful nature.' They are not synonymous" (p. 112). He reinforces this point by reiterating that Jesus was fully human and yet without sin. 

Being human is part of the original design that God declared good. Theologians have sometimes picked up on this theme and submitted that part of the sanctifying work in people's lives is not to make us less human (more "robotic"), but actually more human; more fully alive, with our emotions and intellect and all parts of ourselves being touched by God.

While it is obvious that part of being human is making mistakes, to say, "I'm only human" when we are faced with the fact that we have made bad choices or willfully disobeyed God or hurt another person, is probably a very poor way of avoiding responsibility for our actions, both naturally and supernaturally.

The fact is that our human nature is what God made us to be. It is good. So, attributing our sin to it is bad theology and anthropology. It quickly can become, God, why did you make me this way? Now, we have fallen into the same trap as Adam and Eve and every blamer and excuse maker in history. We actually dismiss our evil as God's fault.

However, we have a "satanic intrusion" (as Sanders describes it) that is our sinful nature. You may hear the apostle Paul talk about the sin living inside him or doing things he does not want to do (Romans 7), but you don't really hear the excuse from New Testament writers, "Well, I'm only human."

Knowing all of this doesn't solve much of anything for us. We are still left to wrestle with the reality that there is a force at work against us. Simply, we do sin in our humanity. The only point is to be careful what we believe as a result of that fact. We can quickly get into a pattern of all kinds of faulty thinking about God and ourselves if we are not careful to keep that distinction between the human and sinful natures that Sanders mentioned. Once those mindsets take hold, they distort the meaning, and reduce the power, of grace and mercy and love.

Sanders concedes that we are left with a mystery when we consider how we have two natures, and even more, how Christ depended on his anointing from the Spirit rather than his own deity for power in ministry (p. 114). It is mysterious, but it is extremely important and practical for us to realize this truth. Jesus did not have to escape His humanity to perform miracles or love perfectly. Neither do we have to escape ours!

No longer should we say, "I am only human" (insulting the Creator's craftmanship). Instead, we can say, "I am human enough to respond to God and submit to His Spirit and carry out His will today."

Jesus Manifesto (Book Review)

Jesus Manifesto (Thomas Nelson, 2010), written by Leonard Sweet and Frank Viola is an exceptional book. I could bring up little details here and there that make this book great, but I will just sum it up by saying that this book contains the information I would want passed on to my children. That is about the best endorsement I could give any book!

The section on "The Two Trees" is especially enlightening, one of those "worth the price of the book" pieces of writing. The authors point out that Christians go astray when we try to live by the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil instead of the Tree of Life as God intended.

The following three statements from different parts of the book combine to form what I see as the whole point of the book. "The center and circumference of the Christian life is none other than the person of Christ" (p. 1 - opening line). "In all religions and philosophies of the world, a follower can follow the teachings of its founder without having a relationship with that founder. But not so with Jesus Christ" (p. 82). "What the Father was to Jesus Christ, Jesus Christ is to you. He's your indwelling Lord" (p. 128).

I recommend this book for anyone exploring Christianity. It is filled with great quotes and insights. More importantly, it gets to the heart of the issue and distinguishes following Jesus from the Christian religion. Religion is not the aim. Jesus brings abundant life, and religion cannot compare with that.

My Simple Church Guide

For those of you that can't handle a church group not having a manual to address all the "big rocks" like doctrine and evangelism and leadership, here you go. This is what ours would look like.

Our Theology & Beliefs

• Jesus is All.
• Be willing to unlearn some things so that you can learn new insights.

Evangelism & Outreach

• Ask and answer one question: Who is Jesus to you?

Discipleship & Ministry

• Let the answer to the question in the previous section dictate how you live.

Church & Fellowship

• Keep it simple!

Leadership & Service

• The Holy Spirit is the Leader. Everyone else follows as they share in His gifts. 

Organization & Policies

• This section is not applicable due to no buildings, budgets, or big shots. 

There you go!

Should Christians Follow the Bible or Jesus? (part 2)

Isn't this picture so sweet? 
Could you not see this on the wall of a children's worship room in a church building? 
It has everything, doesn't it? The good old commandments of the law and friendly Jesus, together forever?
The best of both worlds, the "total package", everything we're supposed to teach our children? Isn't that how it is supposed to work?


My last post claimed that we should choose Jesus over the Old Testament (Law, covenant). Here is a little more explanation of my position.

It is hard to imagine how the New Testament could be any more explicit that followers of Jesus are not to look to the law for guidance regarding salvation. Think of Paul, who wrote much of the New Testament, being able to boast in his knowledge of the law as a Jew, stating that we are dead to the law through the body of Christ (Romans 7). He also added, "What the law was powerless to do...God did by sending his own Son..." (Romans 8:3). Moreover, Paul writes to the church of Corinth about this former "ministry" that came with a fading glory that keeps a veil over hearts and dull minds and brought only condemnation, and contrasts it with Jesus who brings hope and righteousness and removes the veil (2 Corinthians 3).

Could we consider the multiple times Jesus says, "You have heard..., but I tell you...", or how many times Jesus publicly, deliberately violated the Sabbath rules just to make a theological point? Think about Jesus asking the people what Moses taught about divorce just to turn around and tell them that Moses only did that because of their hard hearts. In fact, Jesus clarified that what Moses wrote is not how we are to view divorce at all. (Mark 10)

Perhaps, nowhere is the Bible more direct about this point than in the book of Hebrews. The old covenant is labeled "inferior", "outdated", "obsolete" (depending on translations), and there are entire sections of this letter devoted to illustrating how it did nothing but find fault in people and could do nothing to cleanse or redeem anyone! Hebrews is equally as clear that Jesus is the new priest over a "new covenant established on better promises" (Hebrews 8:6).

These are only a few examples. So, what do we tell our kids about the Bible? Marc, would you really tell your children to ignore the Old Testament? Well, I've already addressed that in my previous post. However, here is what I will tell my daughters. If something you read in the Old Testament (or anywhere for that matter) points you to Jesus, then embrace it. If what you read points you to a rule or law, which will either condemn you or fill you with pride because law-keeping is a human effort that compares one person's "works" with another's, then disregard it. Our standard is never the law, but always Christ. Because of that, we are always dependent upon God's awesome grace.

The value in the Old Testament is that it does indeed point us to Christ and reveal Him over and over, so be on the lookout for Jesus at all times.

Should Christians Follow the Bible or Jesus?

I used to think that the whole Bible was put together to be a complete guide for us. I taught this same view to many others over the years. Sure, I still highly value all Scripture. In particular, the Old Testament has significant insights into God and human nature, tremendous and rich history, a huge volume of examples and "non-examples" of what to say and do, and foundational context to understand the New Testament. But I simply don't think I can support seeing it as a source of direction and authority for how Christians are to live.

With some simple church friends, we recently took a journey through the Old Testament, tracing the story of the Hebrews throughout the centuries. My daughter is working on a website that chronicles some of the lessons from this time that we all spent together. To say that the Old Testament is not important to me or my family would be grossly mischaracterizing what I am saying about Scripture. It is an essential narrative to His-story.

But...it is not essential for salvation. It is not essential to know how to follow Jesus. It is not essential for obedience to Christ, nor is it a pathway for life for the believer. The genuine follower today needs only to be obsessed with one thing - Jesus of Nazareth!

If I had to choose between my daughter knowing all the laws and commands of Moses and Israelite history inside and out, or knowing nothing but Jesus Christ and Him crucified, it would be a no-brainer! (1 Corinthians 2)

Kids in the Kingdom

Since the point of this blog is to explore ways to impact the next generation by radically reforming the institutions of public education and the organized church, the main question that I hope to keep always before me is, What is best for kids?

To answer this question, we need to consider children as whole people that have spiritual, physical, intellectual, emotional, and social dimensions. You can check out my "Faith Like a Child" series on this blog to see what the Bible says about the spiritual capacity of children.

Here are those posts:
Faith Like a Child (part 1)
Faith Like a Child (part 2)
Faith Like a Child (part 3)
Faith Like a Child (part 4)
Faith Like a Child (part 5)
Faith Like a Child (part 6)
Faith Like a Child (part 7)

It is important to us that disciples of all ages can fully participate in the mission. Therefore, it is critical that children understand the essentials of our practices without "watering down" their meaning and power.

A child does not receive a "junior-sized" Holy Spirit, but the Bible teaches that children have tremendous spiritual insight and often receive profound Kingdom truths more easily than adults. Simultaneously, a child's human development requires that the gospel is presented in its simplest form in terms of the language and imagery we use. Therefore, we process our core practices in "kid-friendly" terms because we want to pass on essential truths to the next generation form the earliest moments possible.

Here are the child-friendly, essential truths of our mission (what we call our "Cores for Kids"):

• Jesus teaches us that praying helps us get close to God!
• Jesus teaches us that we can worship God by doing good everywhere we go!
• Jesus teaches us that baptism is a way we can show we want to follow Him with our whole heart!
• Jesus teaches us to obey Him and be like Him by loving God and others!

Teaching (Core Practice #4)

Intro Note: I have already written about our Plan on a Page, which lays out the four core practices that we consider the marks of discipleship according to the New Testament. In that document, we try to capture the "irreducible minimum standards" of our mission. 

Basically, I contend that there are many things you could not do and still be a Christian, or follower of Jesus. For example, you could not "go to church" or participate in a youth group or listen to Christian radio stations or become a missionary in a foreign land or tithe or...okay, you get it...and yet still be an authentic, sincere, passionate follower of Jesus. These examples may all be good things, but they are not the marks of true discipleship that Jesus gives us in the Bible. They are not the "make-or-break", non-negotiables of the Christian faith used to identify people as real believers.

Then, what are the non-negotiables?


The fourth and final one is TEACHING.

 If we are going to call ourselves disciples, then we must respond to the Great Commission, which calls us to teach new disciples everything that Jesus has commanded us. Discipleship is holding to these teachings. There is a long list of things we could teach each other that would be helpful in our faith, but Jesus has a special way of boiling it all down to the absolute most important teachings. He also makes it clear in Scripture how the world will be able to tell if we are truly His disciples.

Ultimately, everything comes down to obeying Jesus' command to love. This is the greatest command for us to obey. Obedience is expressed through the fruit of the Spirit and leads to freedom.

What is critical to teach children is that being a disciple means obeying and acting like Jesus, especially by loving God and loving others. 


The guiding question for a disciple or church could be, Are people being set free and becoming more like Jesus?

Baptizing (Core Practice #3)

Intro Note: I have already written about our Plan on a Page, which lays out the four core practices that we consider the marks of discipleship according to the New Testament. In that document, we try to capture the "irreducible minimum standards" of our mission. 

Basically, I contend that there are many things you could not do and still be a Christian, or follower of Jesus. For example, you could not "go to church" or participate in a youth group or listen to Christian radio stations or become a missionary in a foreign land or tithe or...okay, you get it...and yet still be an authentic, sincere, passionate follower of Jesus. These examples may all be good things, but they are not the marks of true discipleship that Jesus gives us in the Bible. They are not the "make-or-break", non-negotiables of the Christian faith used to identify people as real believers.

Then, what are the non-negotiables?

The third one is BAPTIZING.

Let me start this one with what we teach children. We are baptized as a way of showing we understand that Jesus died and rose back to life to wash away our sins and give us power to live a new way of following Him. I respect that this is a topic about which parents can have strong feelings.

Baptism is one of the topics that has challenged me as I read through the New Testament objectively. It is possible to defend just about any position concerning baptism, depending on which verse people quote and what context they use it in. I am not going to dive into that debate here. Simply, we define this practice as uniting with Jesus in a new life.

Regardless of what you believe about baptism, there is no way to dismiss the significance of this act in the New Testament. The early church's immediate and automatic response to the gospel was baptism. 

Anyone who encountered Jesus could be baptized and baptize others.

I want to be clear that I am not saying that going into water is what "saves" a person, but I also can't dismiss the obvious importance of baptism as evidenced by the repeated emphasis on it throughout the New Testament. I just have to re-state it again: The early church's immediate and automatic response to the gospel was baptism. It was the Bible's equivalent to what the "sinner's prayer" or "altar call" has become in our part of the world over the past two centuries.

The guiding question for a disciple or church could be, Are we bringing people to salvation in Christ?

My wife baptizing me

(You can read my baptism story here.)

Going (Core Practice #2)

Intro Note: I have already written about our Plan on a Page, which lays out the four core practices that we consider the marks of discipleship according to the New Testament. In that document, we try to capture the "irreducible minimum standards" of our mission. 

Basically, I contend that there are many things you could not do and still be a Christian, or follower of Jesus. For example, you could not "go to church" or participate in a youth group or listen to Christian radio stations or become a missionary in a foreign land or tithe or...okay, you get it...and yet still be an authentic, sincere, passionate follower of Jesus. These examples may all be good things, but they are not the marks of true discipleship that Jesus gives us in the Bible. They are not the "make-or-break", non-negotiables of the Christian faith used to identify people as real believers.

Then, what are the non-negotiables?

The second one is GOING.

The idea here is to do good everywhere God sends us, individually and corporately. Although it's a little cliche, I like to say that our mandate is to choose what is right, and change what isn't.

The Great Commission tells all disciples to go and make disciples. Our identity in Christ is as a "sent" people. We are described in the Bible as ambassadors, reconcilers, and apostles.

The key is to see this practice as service in our everyday, real life contexts. We find ourselves in the mission field in our normal, daily lives in the marketplace, work, and home. This is one of the reasons the term "organic church" is used, because God plants us in all kinds of soil and we can organically respond to our natural surroundings. 

What is important to stress to children is that Jesus taught us to worship God by doing good everywhere we go. It is how we praise Him.


The guiding question for a disciple or church could be, Are we doing good works that help people and glorify God?

Praying (Core Practice #1)

Intro Note: I have already written about our Plan on a Page, which lays out the four core practices that we consider the marks of discipleship according to the New Testament. In that document, we try to capture the "irreducible minimum standards" of our mission. 

Basically, I contend that there are many things you could not do and still be a Christian, or follower of Jesus. For example, you could not "go to church" or participate in a youth group or listen to Christian radio stations or become a missionary in a foreign land or tithe or...okay, you get it...and yet still be an authentic, sincere, passionate follower of Jesus. These examples may all be good things, but they are not the marks of true discipleship that Jesus gives us in the Bible. They are not the "make-or-break", non-negotiables of the Christian faith used to identify people as real believers.

Then, what are the non-negotiables?

The first one is PRAYING.

There are many things you can decide not to do and still be in tight with Jesus, but deciding to avoid talking to Him or listening to Him is a deal breaker. This one falls into the common sense category. Trying to be right with God without ever praying is like marrying someone with the condition that you never communicate after the vows are exchanged. It doesn't work.

Another reason I would consider this essential is that Jesus commanded, taught, and modeled prayer for us. So far, these are the obvious reasons why prayer is important. 

There is one more truth, though, that needs to be highlighted in describing the necessity of prayer. It is, quite literally, how disciples are made. There is an illusion that people are persuaded into the kingdom of God, but it is probably more accurate to say that people are prayed into the kingdom. Receiving God's grace in Jesus is not a matter of the wisdom of the world, but is the response when are minds are "set on things above."

One of the interesting ironies of the gospel is that it cannot be shared by human means because it is SPIRIT-ual. The only way to make sense of the gospel or understand wisdom of the Spirit is to have Him reveal it to you. Prayer opens a channel for that to happen. It is how we know His mind, heart, and will.

What is critical to teach children is that prayer is how Jesus taught us to connect with God. We don't water down the message about prayer, but rather keep it simple because children can actually lead us in this area and have powerful relationships with God through prayer.

The final point about prayer is that it is a great example of the freedom we have in Christ. Prayer is not regulated. There is no requirement for a person to pray in a certain posture, at a certain volume, with certain words, at certain times, or in certain places. A conversation with God can be had anywhere. In fact, that is what is so great. I can talk to God or listen to Him at home, at my work, in my car, on the sidewalk, during a meeting, in a class, when I am alone, when I am nervous or happy or sad or confused, or even while I am at my computer typing the words to a blog. Thank you, Lord!

The guiding question for a disciple or church could be, Are we seeing prayers being answered?

Plan on a Page

With our mission clearly set to Be a Movement Making Disciples That Make Disciples, it is time to shift to the plan to carry out this mission. In keeping with our theme of staying simple, a church's or ministry's plan does not have to be a complicated book full of rules and regulations if we intend to let Jesus build and run His own church. While we strive to communicate our mission in a minute or less, we also strive to capture all the essential aspects of our disciple-making plan on no more than one page.

Why a "Plan on a Page"?
I am coming from an institutional church (IC) background as part of a denomination. We had a pretty thick and comprehensive manual for our church policies, government, doctrines, sacraments, etc. There were rules and regulations from how to run a board meeting to acquiring property to membership requirements and dozens of other issues. There is nothing inherently wrong with all that. Organizations need many of those things in place to function, but one can get away from the fact that so many policies and guidelines have to be put in effect for the purpose of exclusion. It is often important for organizations to define what they are not willing to do or support, so the list gets longer and longer and longer. For them, it is necessary to identify who is in and who is out.

But I want to be sure that we are focused on simple, reproducible, non-negotiable norms for all disciples. Some people refer to them as the "irreducible minimum" standards of what characterize a group or movement. Our "Plan on a Page" is the how of our mission and consists of the core practices that will define us.

I cannot stress enough just how important this document is because of what it implies. There are only four components that we recognize as absolutely mandatory to fulfill the Great Commission that Jesus set out. By even creating this document and making the claim that this is all that is necessary to be part of the genuine church, it quickly becomes our doctrinal statement, too. All four items are relevant to ALL followers and are not reserved for selected individuals, such as pastors or priests. In fact, each of the following actions can be carried out by any disciple, anywhere and at any time.


Summary of what is on our Plan on a Page:

Our plan is to carry out four practices to make disciples that make disciples.

PRAYING - Because it is how Jesus taught us to learn to care about what God cares about

GOING - So that we can be doing good everywhere God sends us

BAPTIZING - Letting people know that Jesus washes away our sins and we want to follow Him wholeheartedly

TEACHING - Obeying and spreading Jesus' command to love

My understanding of what the church is and how it works has gone from a 399-page manual to something much simpler. In fact, it takes 397 less pages for us to convey the both the mission and plan that direct our simple church! I trust that puts my paradigm shift in perspective.