An interesting note: I have been a part of the Assemlies of God for quite some time and it is interesting how that although it has been one of the fastest growing denominations in America, America does not have the largest membership. I only use this as an example as to the growth of the church in other continents. Today we are sending American missionaries to Europe, meanwhile other nations are already sending missionaries to America.

What I see in the article and nearly all the blog responses is a need to determine the definition of “Evangelicalism”. Is it a name that people/organizations attach to themselves in the hope that it will focus their followers to bring in people? Or, is it something that people outside ascribe to followers of Christ who have a desire to share Jesus with non-followers. To be a Christian – in the first century was a derisive word to describe Christ followers.

Any church (regardless of denomination) that grows will be fervent worshippers (irregardless of musical style), passionate evangelists, diligent followers of Christ’s precepts, ministers to the hurting, and mentors (I should say disciples, but not sure if that word has much meaning anymore) to seekers of Jesus (the lost and the found). Any growing church – whether it is 75 or 15,000 will have those characteristics. The emphasis of any of these articles – to me – is not to chastise but to encourage the whole body. I read some of this and feel there is a level of haughtiness associated with a particular notion of Christianity.

Cultural Christianity ceased to be relevant in the first century and is still irrelevant today. The church will always have ebbs and flows in the political, economic and even cultural power it has because of the inherent tendencies of man. I don’t care about strength in those areas as a programmed effort. If we ministers do our job, the outflow is the communities, states and nations are changed from the inside out, not through policies. While we do not support policies that are ungodly and should never approve public policies that are, our warfare is not against flesh and blood. The strength of The Church – The Bride – lies in one man or group of people who will follow Jesus wholeheartedly. Not in mass organization or mega anything. But to think that mega churches “should” fail before the “real” church becomes effective again is dillusional. We should never become disillusioned with THE CHURCH or our NATION or whatever. It is made up of people who falter and fall. Our expectancy should never be that people will “get it” one day. Our expectancy is that all fall short of the glory of God, but that He loved us and sent His son…to be a propitiation for our sin. Run the race set before us and don’t get side tracked. If I can influence or have the opportunity to influence a person in Asia, or Ohio or Siberia, I should share the Gospel. The time is not for us to shake off the dust from our shoes.

Asian Christians can be effective in mission work to the U.S., but they will still have to effectively communicate to the lost. I see a lot of Catholics and Orthodox churches as being the stalwarts against radical Islam because of their numbers and their organizational structure. Cultural disruptions will always cause people to seek relevant messages. Economic or war problems are massive influences for people to get their lives morally right. The church (The Bride) of my generation is called to be relevant to my generation and mentoring the generation behind me and the one behind it. I have to seek the Lord and get His plan and lay hold of that call to reach my community. I can not close my door and say they have it wrong, or “I can’t touch that person because I would then become unclean”. That is sinful.

Everyone of our national awakenings were full of people who reckoned that this life had less to give than the one to come (meaning eternal life with Jesus). I don’t know how have much of that in my life right now, but I do recognize that I need to continually stoke up my relationship with the Lord. I need to discipline my life and through that others are more likely to see Christ in me. I am the key – you are the key – my wife is the key, but the key simply starts with one and not the establishment of a new order.

A message is only relevant when people speak it. If I don’t speak, then no one will hear, If I don’t go…How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher? A message has to be relevant…it has to be relevant. Positivism, negativism, socialism, capitalism…I don’t care… “I resolved to know nothing while I was with you except Jesus Christ and him crucified”…but Paul got to know those people and his style was different in every city he went to. While he preached Jesus and Him crucified in every city, it was directed in a way that people heard it – it was relevant. Make use of every opportunity that is presented…

Blessings and Aloha from Hilo

[quote]America needs revival, and I do not mean spuratic emotionalism. A spiritual decline is nothing new for any nation, including America. We have seen revivals in the past, I do not think it is presumptuous to think that He can do it again.
[/quote]

To this I would add a quotation I found many years ago in an issue of the Our Daily Bread devotional booklet that said:

[quote]“No Revival is more to be desired than that of systematic, personal Bible study!”[/quote]

The truth of God is found not in any denomination or church or religious organization, but in the Bibl:, for Christians, this includes particularly the New Testament, yet not to omit the Old Testament.

Read the Bible intensively and repeatedly by book. Start with the Gospel of John. Read three chapters a day to finish the book once a week, and do this for a month. Then move to some of the New Testament epistles or letters, starting with the little five-chapter book of 1 John hidden near the end of the New Testament. This book is so short you could read it once a day for an entire month. But at least read a chapter a day to finish it once a week. Do this for a month or more until you can literally think through the entire content with your eyes shut.

Follow this reading with some of Paul’s shorter letters, 1 Timothy and 2 Timothy, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians. Then tackle the longest of his letters, the book of Romans, reading two chapters a day each week day and three chapters on each day of the weekend to finish it once a week, and do this for a month or more.

Then study the Bible by verses. To do this you need the right Bible study tools. Get them.

To study a single verse, use Nelson’s Cross Reference Guide to the Bible, and look up all the verses that are given for any verse that particularly strikes your attention during your normal Bible reading. You will find this resource demonstrates that the Bible explains itself far more than you ever realized. Looking up the references for a verse will repeatedly confirm and emphasize the truths of the verse you are studying with each reference you read.

A careful study of the Gospel of John ought to convince you of the importance of winning others to Christ.

If everyone who names the name of Christ followed this simple procedure we would see not an “Evangelical Collapse,” but an “Evangelical Revival,” and a Bible-based one at that.

Good for you! It wasn’t posted for an atheist to debate the assumptions. I threw this out there to see if anyone knew enough about the research to provide a helpful response. Studies such as this can be helpful and they have their place, but to suggest that they are conclusive is a failure to recognize an infinite number of factors.

One of the contributions of the decline is related to the passing of its older members. Depending on the details it can make a difference considering the baby boom generation.

America needs revival, and I do not mean spuratic emotionalism. A spiritual decline is nothing new for any nation, including America. We have seen revivals in the past, I do not think it is presumptuous to think that He can do it again.

I think that Os Guiness also makes an ineresting observation in regards to the impact of modernity on church life. This is something that is seldomly looked at.

Don’t knock it until you have done it. I did it (as an “apostle”) for a week in October.

After my wife of 40 years threw me out (I’m “crazy,” you understand)I gave away what I had (on me) and planted myself on the street with nowhere to go. Then Father became very real to me, and it was the most incredible experience I have ever had.

But I just couldn’t maintain; the sheer intensity of became more than I could bear. So I’ve settled down in Vietnam.

(My wife is right, of course.)

Well, academics in general aren’t all that influential these days. Most people in our society would prefer to watch Britney Spears sing some vacuous ditty than read a book that discusses serious ideas, especially a work of philosophy.

But who cares about what is influential or not? Modern Western society is so shallow that all kinds of mindless drivel is influential. What counts is truth and the pursuit of truth. I find it interesting that those who still embrace Positivism either don’t know or don’t care that those who actually study epistemology have long abandoned Positivism as logically untenable. Much of modern atheism assumes an epistemology that to some extent is for most philosophers what literal, six-day creationism is for most scientists. In short, the atheism of men such as Myers and Dawkins is just another form of intellectually bankrupt fundamentalism.

bwl

Pretty much, yeah.

I’m trying to think of a less-influential modern profession than “philosophers”. But I can’t come up with anything.

So you’re saying I don’t understand something that doesn’t yet exist? If the article says something is collapsing, then that thing must already exist.

Whatever the case, I am picking up that you are dissatisfied with the general state of the contemporary church and that the ideal pursuit should be to teach the simple truths Christ taught.

Can I infer, then, that theology needs to be discarded, as does doctrine since Jesus didn’t teach these? Don’t need the Nicene Creed, either. The Sacraments are unnecessary, too.

You actually think Jesus walked around for a few years, spoke in riddles, told his followers to spread the message and died on a Cross but didn’t want 2000 years of believers to wonder “why” and “how”? He wants us to emulate that 3 year period and never develop the ideas he shared? I’d say even St Paul failed your test, then.