[Ed Dantes]

I noticed that one of the FF's on the board had this as a signature... Made me think for awhile about it. Does anyone have any opinions?

[LUconn]

I disagree.

[PAmedic]

I don't know

[Sly Fox]

I was waiting for this discussion to occur. I am very anxious to hear the explanation. I have some ideas what he might be implying by the sig. But I'd love to hear it clearly stated by Spidey.

[Hold My Own]

Tally enters stage right in 3.......2.......1.......

[PeterParker]

You ask and I deliver. Okay, at the bequest of a PM from Sly, I will explain the sig (although I was hoping many would ruminate about it and through an exchange of ideas amongst themselves, arrive at the general idea themselves.) Now that it's generated discussion, I'll have to come up with another one to raise the eyebrows of the ones that notice that kind of thing...

First, let me be the first one to say that, even though I mention this, I do not exclude myself from the pointed call-out. I am challenged myself concerning this point: (also, one shouldn't respond if they don't take the time to read the reference links which provide vital reference to the points noted below...)


The tag was intended to use hyperbole to cause one to take a step back from the impulsive emotional response one might initially have when reading it and mull it over a bit. It really hit me when watching an ABC Primetime program that highlighted the blight of Camden, New Jersey and how broken the situations are there (which merely serves as a metaphor for anywhere poor usa.) They highlighted these kids situations from the poorer areas (some who were merely struggling to have electricity by buying a propane tank to heat the house for a bit during the night in the dead of winter.) Alot of these kids were well spoken, trying to stay out of the more base elements that plagued the neighborhood and trying to be the first in their families to graduate from their dilapidated high schools.


The kicker was that Primetime then highlighted kids from the more affluent areas, which was only 5 or so miles away, who admitted that they took it for granted that they had it so well but were largely unaware of how bad it was for their fellow man 5 miles away. When the "suburban" kids saw the life conditions of their counterparts trying to get through the same life mileposts as they were and working to try to be successful, some of the suburban kids had empathy and wanted to know what they could do to help. The thought that occurred to me was not, "Oh, those kids just don't get it and should feel guilty for having it so good," rather it was why did it take an ABC Primetime special to get these suburban kids and parents, let alone the suburban church, to become aware of the plight of their fellow man so close to home and to prompt them to hopefully enact changes within their suburban mindset (or suburban church paradigm) to take action.


I get the words tracing through my brain, "Unto Judea (your vicinity), Samaria (outside of your vicinity/or "places you'd rather not trod" outside of your vicinity) and to the uttermost part of the earth" to help the poor, the widow, the fatherless among you. Yes, this refers to making disciples, but it seems apropos to apply to the principle and command to help those who are truly behind the 8-ball in life. Give the message, yes, but the message becomes a bit hollow coming from the mouths who won't accompany it with tangible action. After all JC most often met the emotional or physical need before giving his message to the broken.

Reference: This link stood out to me from a quick google search on this topic:

1. http://oneinjesus.info/2007/02/26/sodom ... ns-part-1/


It seems that the suburban church (not all, but many) have embraced the "uttermost part of the earth" category, but have overlooked the Samaria category, and when it has embraced the Judea category it is to help out its own, which in the major planned communities of suburbia, constitutes helping the "I drive two marquee brand new cars, am heavily leveraged in debt to have it, can't afford my $3000 per month mortgage, and really must sacrifice to make ends meet this month" people within their church, not those who are truly up against the fence in life.

The answer to the first one is to downsize your life if you are up against it, that's a choice; for many in the second scenario, it wasn't their choice (and please don't throw out the drivel that the poor are poor because they made bad decisions and that's why the poor are where they are, that lacks of intellectual honesty and wreaks of simple-mindeness. Many who end up where they are are there due to life circumstances beyond their control (birth, opportunity, abuse, divorce etc.) especially the kids; thus, except for the grace of God, and the fact that yours & my folks and ourselves (if you find yourself in a non-poor situation) had access to some type of opportunity and lived in a particular place of opportunity, there go you and I.


If you look at the modern american housing landscape, and look at the development of the suburban and now exurban phenomenon you'll notice a prevalent movement in these communities to become increasingly more isolated, physically, geographically, sociologically, etc. Due to the fact that many of these suburban communities have become very large and tend to link together one after the other to form a large mass of the same thing, these neighborhoods, most of which are routinely way above the average median price for a home, even for the working middle class, tend to assimilate the exact same type of people in a more cookie cutter kaleidoscope (especially in light of the housing boom of the last couple of years since this was the main type of housing and communities that were contructed)

For reference:

1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suburb

2. http://www.answers.com/topic/exurb

3. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_flight


Having said that, alot of the planned, suburban mega-communities, are increasingly at the very high end from a financial perspective, which attracts the more affluent or people who pretend to be affluent by taking on large sums of debt to keep up with the jones' so to speak. Many of these communities are so big that churches that are within very close proximity essentially serve these communities fostering a lack of diverse types of people (socioeconomically, not necessarily racially.) Some of these churches tend to lose focus on their true mission, and become like country clubs (infatuated with themselves and their constituents), focusing on creating more and more stuff to entertain their constituents, instead of places of refuge for the broken, downtrodden, etc. Even if a person who was truly poor or downtrodden were to darken the steps of these types of churches, how would they not immediately feel alien in such an environment.

One example, from what I have observed from these types of churches that I have attended in the past, is that if these churches do sponsor mission trips, they are almost viewed as a vacation outlet for some that go; and, from a genuineness standpoint, it seems on face value to be a bit disenguine for a guy living in a $350,000 house without many wants, to go to sub-sahara Africa, let alone the more underpriviliged areas 10 miles away from him, and tell that guy why should keep trusting god and read his Bible if that same "vacation missionary" isn't trying to figure out a way he can facilitate helping in a more tangible manner.

(Don't misunderstand me, I do not feel that Christians, especially Christians in a free market society, should intentionally be destitute, or that they shouldn't be able to enjoy the fruits of their labor, in fact, just the opposite. I feel that "free market society christians" have a responsibility to utilize the unique situation and privilige that God has afforded them to be in and heed the parable of the talents as a metaphor to smartly manage their money within the "free market paradigm" so that the abundance of resource return might help them take care of themselves reasonably, create a stable and productive national economy/society, and foster a situation in which they can go further in helping those who find themselves in a disadvantaged position. However, it just seems the overriding focus of many a suburban church does not reflect this balance.)


I'm reminded of the plight of the masses in Victorian England (check your literature/history survey textbooks.) The financially well off worked hard to keep up appearances in their public social lifes, especially their church lives, and would routinely take walks into the areas of the poor and underprivileged to drop a little bit of money here and there for those in the streets to scramble over. The kicker was that they did this not out of any genuine moral obligation, but as an exercise to boost their reputation among their social class counterparts and to feel good about themselves (quite self-serving.)


Before one responds with an emotionally charged counterpunch to my observations, ask the following questions of your church: (if you're church is doing this, great, you wouldn't be offended at the sig then.)


1. What does my church do to help the poor weekly, even daily (that's one of the main groups JC hung around with the most.) (And I'm not talking about the let me stroke a check to this organization that helps kids somewhere far away from me; I'm talking tangible things to those in your "Samaria", you know the places I'm talking about, the places we all see on the news, and one breathes a sigh of relief and thinks to oneself, thank God I don't live there...which by the way, occurs to me as a bit "praying pharisee." Again, I do not exclude myself from the pointed finger.)

2. Does my church offer opportunities within their resources to help the underprivileged regain their life footing or is it merely a Christmas offering to help three or four families once a year, or buy some gifts off a tree once a year? (Those are nice to do, but isn't it a bit Victorian)

3. How about some educational remedial programs for free by the professionals in your congregation? How about some financial money management programs for free from the professionals in your congregation? How about a fostering a program that creates many individual groups of people to adopt the grocery bill each month for particular families ($25 from 10 people can cover a lot of groceries, which may just allow that single mom to pay for a community college class to become qualified for a better job in which case she won't need that grocery bill taken care of anymore and the group can apply its help to someone else. If you're church has 500 attenders, that's 50 families you can directly help in their daily lives which in turn makes your message more genuine)

4. How much has your church spent on an extra project (building, cafe, paintball park, I don't know, whatever crazy things churches are falling over themselves these days to "have to have" to impact the culture) that was not completely necessary to worship? Compare that with how much your church spent helping those who are really struggling to survive, not the ones who need help covering their $3000 a month mortgage.


The last point of observation the sig seeks to stimulate is the lack of a kaleidoscope of life experiences, socioeconomic status, white collar/blue collar, racially vibrant, and internationally diverse some suburban churches exhibit. The richness of experience one has access to when among a variety of people provides great access to learning about life through others life experiences. When all of the people in a congregation reflect a cookie cutter mold, the group has a tendency to become victim of a homogenous mentality that doesn't provide access to a wealth or richness of alternate experiences.

This is one of the things I liked about my LU experience, the group of friends I had over my years there cut across all lines of life experience and ethnicities, and it was rather unremarkable to us that we would all be a part of a circle of friends (which was always the case for me prior to my LU days, but I have come to learn in my professional life is still a hangup for many people who still embrace archaic notions. I also learned from discussing with friends I work with who went to other "secular" schools how they did not feel that same inclusion phenomenon. Most notably was my friend who went to Ohio State who admitted he didn't have that same experience as I explained during his college days (2003 grad) which is why he was hoping to attend an HBCU school for his masters degree...and this is a smart dude in the mathematics field.)


I'm not saying that LU was devoid of people who kept to what they were familiar with so to speak; but my experience was not that way...also it would be great to see churches cross-pollinating with one another instead of operating like competing franchises for customers and see that they are complementary to one another in objective.

[Sly Fox]

The first half of that post caught me completely off guard. To be honest I was expecting a diatribe on the perils of the suburban mega church that has exploded across America the past few years.

To be honest, I disagree with the blogger's interpretation of Sodom. But that doesn't mean I'm not in agreement with the basic premise of Spidey's first few paragraphs. Most suburban churches aren't doing enough to support the less privileged members of their own immediate neighbors ... much less 5 miles away. I don't feel its fair to brush all suburban mega churches with the same broad brush stroke with generalization. But for the sake of argument, I'll play along. And frankly the large urban churches have an even poorer record in recent years in regard to this issue in my humble opinion.

I know you qualified your statements, but the implied premise is that the exurban flight is the source of the issue. As someone of lower middle class background now living in one of the areas under discussion I feel somewhat compelled to point out some of the obvious. I believe it is legitimate concern to want to move your family somewhere removed from rampant crime. That may sound simple but when you first have children it becomes an overriding concern.

I am anxious to see some others weigh in on this subject on a Sunday morning. I feel the church does need to work harder to remember what our purpose in Jerusalem is supposed to be.

Very thought provoking, PP.

[TallyW]

I come from a unique background in that I was raised on welfare but now I live and Pastor a church where an entry level home goes for 200k or more. Our area isn't quite true suburbia but enough that it isn't inner-city.

I will say that we can't be hard on families who long for safety as Sly points out. The reality is that the idea of only whites wanting to be around other white people isn't unique to Caucasians... It's a phenomenon that sweeps across all races. If you speak to some of the folks on this board who are in cross-cultural marriages, they can enlighten you on the distinctness of cultures and how that bleeds over into church-life. It's not only suburban churches that have this problem is what I'm saying...

Each church has a unique culture and style. For the African American church the bond of church is much more... there is a bond extending from slavery and oppression that keeps the coals for God hot... I attend predominately African American churches from time to time and the theme is always freedom and conquering obstacles... The songs are victorious chants and the celebration has meaning... it's a culture-rich experience.

The reason I point this out is that the tone must not be racial b/c seperation happens by choice on many occasions and I'm glad PP took time to point that it's more socio-economic than racial.

As one questions what the church does for the poor and downtrodden it's a valid question. I would argue that it's safe to say that after Luther and friend's Reformation we began to see two branches of Christianity... the Social Gospel and the Evangelistic Gospel... As PP points out the Evangelistic Gospel was/is spending the bulk of their resources on seeing people come to a saving knowledge of Christ. The Social Gospel Churches however also need to be discussed as they are the opposite side of the pendulum. In our country today we don't have a problem simply with Suburbia killing the church, we have a problem of extremism. Either churches focus on Evangelism like crazy... (hence the stuff PP mentions about Paint-ball and other events) OR the church is focused on Social Justice to the extreme... where most of the time and energy is spent on the food pantry and shelter ministries. When your church drifts to EITHER side... you suffer from Truth Decay (Old Cheesy line but it fits). Christ wasn't only about meeting needs and handing out food. In fact he said "You will always have the poor among you." But as PP points out he most certainly did meet material needs prior to many spiritual encounters.

So what do I believe is the solution? Balanced obedience.
Jesus' message was that his word must be our manna. He and subsequently his church should meet the physical needs as well as the Spiritual. One without the other makes for a dysfunctional church.

I also wouldn't get on suburban churches too hard by painting with a broad brush... there are plenty that make a serious difference. One such mega church is Granger Community (I am well aware of more but this is just a point of mine). Granger spends a Ton of money on inner-city work, finance programs and homeless initiatives... One other to look at is Elevation Church near Charlotte, NC. They are a brand new 1yr old church running 1,600 people and in their first year they gave over $100,000 to the top 5 charities in Charlotte that meet needs for the underprivileged.

One last piece of food for thought... Don't beat up churches who send a lot to the foreign mission field. Frankly speaking if a person was to choose which continent they'd want to be poor, it'd be in the USA. Poor here is based on a spreadsheet taking into account housing/children/salary, etc. Poor in other countries as the term is used means you will likely die within days if charity didn't provide your next meal. Lets be careful to beat up on those who feel led to give to their brothers and sisters around the world.

I know my post has a few different lines of thought... but this is a more complex issue than pointing fingers at any one group. As PP said, it's for all of us to consider as we are all a part of the "Church" and play roles right where we are.

[PeterParker]

Again, my point was merely to raise discussion and to cause one to question with a more intense statement for lack of a better word. The points I put out there are merely observations that I am still assimilating and determining how I feel about them as well...also, notice that I said some, not all, of the suburban church. The three word sig was purposely meant to be succinct and thought provoking.


For the record, I have no problems with people wanting to flee crime infested areas for safety and a better life (that's just comon sense and the advantages of having a competitive free market society which promotes the idea of bettering your situation), I was referring to the rising upper middle/upper class where the houses are routinely $500,000 and up and people are way over extended to have it, thus they complain that they don't have enough to help anybody else out (which is logically disenguine; they just don't want to adjust their lifestyle to a more reasonable one in order to part with even a couple bucks or just a few minutes of time to share their skill set with someone who could really use the help.) I put the suburban/exurban/white flight (which is generally accepted now as referring to affluent flight regardless of racial identity) links in just to paint the picture of how people are cocooning themselves more and more; and often there is an accompanying attitude that is prevalent among suburbanites that looks down on those from disadvantaged areas.


It just seems that the balance has swung way to the other side, where people are walling themselves in more and more and cocooning themselves from the reality around them, while they increasingly isolate themselves from those JC spent the much of his time with. My point is that as the well off cocoon themselves more and more, their "problems" they bring to church as financial prayer requests become incresingly disenguine and disconnected from reality.


Simply, my point is that people move up and forget about the others who are still hurting; so I asked myself the cold hard questions why am I, my church, and others not placing a higher priority on finding ways to fulfill the command to take care of the poor who are in close proximity to us reasonably within the bounty that a person, who calls himself a christian must, if he is intellectually honest with himself, attribute to the benevolence or grace of God anyway.


The mega church thing you pointed out is a component as many suburban churches operate like large business entities, or like franchises, trying to compete with one another to have the coolest, latest things to lure people in so they can beat their quarterly numbers year over year. The mega church (even with its micromanaging structure to try to retain that intimate feel) can start to lose its soul and focus as its easy to get distracted by all of the extraneous stuff that is brought on on the altar of attaining "success" in its peers eyes, which let's be honest, during the 80's and 90's was qualified in warm bodies in the seats, not necessarily the maturation of disciples...


As far as the Sodom comparison, I'm not sure how I feel about his final conclusion, but one would be hard pressed to deny the premise of the verses he points out, do call out "christians" to help the poor and it seems from a quick scripture keyword search, that God has some strong words for all of us when we neglect that. For example, the phrase in Ezekiel 16:49, "she and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned. They did not help the poor and needy," stood out to me that it wouldn't be a stretch to attribute that description to Many Churhes USA (not all, but more than a few.)


So the question becomes is it growth for growth's sake so that the "industry review of quarterly profits, er, attendance" show X church as the biggest and best; or is it the quantifying of a church's effectiveness in the maturation of disciples? Of course, you've gotta have people in the seats to create disciples, but when the focus of a church's success becomes squarely planted on being the biggest or the most entertaining to lure people through the doors, something is out of balance

[Sly Fox]

I'd love to save the mega church discussion for another thread and focus on the purpose of this one ... taking care of the less fortunate directly around us. If we are all to be honest, on a personal level most of us don't do a very good job applying that principle to our own lives. Sometimes we use the church as a crutch ... we tithe to a church that does some nice things thus we are off the hook. Frankly that's not enough in my opinion. And I am guilty of this myself.

But at the church level, I agree with Tally that we need to continue our evangelistic outreach while doing more on the social front. Its a rare church that successfully does both.

[PeterParker]

Tally, I posted my second post before I had a chance to read yours. I agree with your points...that balance is necessary between the two types of gospel focus.


As for beating up foreign missionaries, my intent was not to disparage those who feel it is their calling to go overseas; my point was that it is easy for people to exact empathy for people who are far away, and overlook the ones struggling in their own backyard. My "vacation missionary" tag was more to point out the "swooping" in of some giddy church people who have never been out of the country as a way to see the world and then returning to their country of origin never following up with those they were with, whether that is America, Canada, England, etc.

(In some of these trips that are offered, I've seen where the itinerary spends as much or more time sight seeing as they do in actual mission work. Again, I'm not saying that one shouldn't take advantage of some of the time to see some of the inspiring landscape God created, or some of the modern marvels man has fashioned, just that motive should always be evaluated.)


Secondly, since I felt my post was getting to long, I didn't cover this point you brought up in more detail:

Tally said: Each church has a unique culture and style. For the African American church the bond of church is much more... there is a bond extending from slavery and oppression that keeps the coals for God hot... I attend predominately African American churches from time to time and the theme is always freedom and conquering obstacles... The songs are victorious chants and the celebration has meaning... it's a culture-rich experience.

To clarify, when I look out at the landscape, I see a lack of cross pollination between church styles. By cross pollination, I mean XYZ Baptist Church and ABC Gospel Church who have differing worship styles, linking up outside of their respective entities to work together on some of these issues or just meeting up for fellowship together, since in the end everyone is part of the same team so to speak.

It just seems the business model of franchising has seeped into the church landscape and is at play, all "selling the same" main product but each trying to package it in a way to lure people to their "store." (The well I'm a Ford person, or I'm a Honda person, etc.) I'm all for a variety of types of churches, otherwise it would get boring fast as there would be one Model T and you could only get it in one color a la Henry Ford. It would just be great to see more instances of a group of Bible believing churches with vastly different styles (even so bold as different denominations) finding times to cross pollinate in fellowship and pool resources in working together to attend to some of the issues we've raised here among others.

[PeterParker]

I'd love to save the mega church discussion for another thread and focus on the purpose of this one ... taking care of the less fortunate directly around us. If we are all to be honest, on a personal level most of us don't do a very good job applying that principle to our own lives. Sometimes we use the church as a crutch ... we tithe to a church that does some nice things thus we are off the hook. Frankly that's not enough in my opinion. And I am guilty of this myself.

But at the church level, I agree with Tally that we need to continue our evangelistic outreach while doing more on the social front. Its a rare church that successfully does both.

I feel you on that, it made me uncomfortable with the statement, hence why I put it up. I would submit that free market society christians also tend to let themselves off the hook so to speak because of the air of righteous indignation of "Well, uncle sam is already taking money away from me each paycheck to redistribute to the needy, and I see some of those "needy" gaming the system. They just need to help themselves; they already get enough of my hard earned money."


I watched a Charlie Rose segment, where he interviewed Warren, from Saddleback Church, who was lamenting this lack of concern prevalent in many churches, or as Tally put it the balance of focus. He had some very interesting things to say; I actually think I referenced the transcript on here before in a post. I'll see if I can find a transcript online to link of the transcript.

[TallyW]

PP... rest your fingers so others can jump in It's a great topic and discussion...

[4everfsu]

First of all I have not read all the conversations here because I don't like to read long articles but I got enough of the jest. Why must we wait on the church to help when we can help in our own way on our own time, for example you may know a family that needs tires on their car, good christian family but very poor going thru a hard time, why not buy them tires. I am using that as an example. To be honest this family wanted to drive missionaries around for a conference but for safety reason was afraid too and too proud to ask for help. I know a man who bought them the tires but wanted to remain nameless. I think we can tithe and still help out on our own when we can and when God leads us too. Just my 2 cents worth. I think waiting for the church to get involved to help people can be more a crutch and hinderance when it comes to feeding them, etc.

[magnolialeague]

Suburbia is a failed religion of self-indulgence that is wating to be toppled. It pleasures are ephemeral and its contributions are fleeting.

[Schfourteenteen]

It still bothers me sort of that when a church is mentioned, we often treat it as a building, and well, not us. It seems as if we forget to include ourselves in this bit as well. We say our church doesnt do this, and our church doesnt do that, but what is a church made of? people. We wait for our churches to start something when in fact its our job to help each other and minister to each other.

[SubGod22]

It still bothers me sort of that when a church is mentioned, we often treat it as a building, and well, not us. It seems as if we forget to include ourselves in this bit as well. We say our church doesnt do this, and our church doesnt do that, but what is a church made of? people. We wait for our churches to start something when in fact its our job to help each other and minister to each other.

Well said. This has been a point of emphasis at my church. We have a number of groups that focus on different aspects of whatever and have a number of outreach programs. Our church has been growing quite well with young families and college aged students over the past couple of years and doesn't seem to be slowing down. We have ministries for about anything I can think of and we do a number of things to make everyone feel welcome. I'm probably getting sidetracked here.

I haven't read every word on this thread as there's some long articles and posts that I tend to jus scan through. My church is near the southeast edge of Wichita and is made up mostly of those who live in the surrounding communities. Most of those who live in Wichita are students at one of the colleges. We're mostly white but have a number of people from other races and nationalities. I believe we currently have 49 countries represented. Again, a lot of that is thanks to the international students at WSU.

I also agree with what someone else posted about how a lot of races seem to stick to thier own kind within churches. I wish there was a better way I could phrase that but it's late and I'm not working at 100%. I know we have churches that are mostly, if not all, white, black, Vietnamese, Laosian, Mexican........... I wish there was something we could do to get more diversity amongst churches like that. Or at least get some kind of interaction amongst all the different churches so we could all have a more diverse experience and get different reads on eachother. We all come from different backgrounds and experiences and it's great when you have those who can share those with you. I think it only helps to grow each of us.

My church does have pretty good interaction with other AG churches but not near as much with some of the others. I'm not sure which end that falls on or if it's both. It seems like the only time there any decent interaction amongst the different churches is when the local Christian radio station has a concert going on locally. Maybe I'm hoping for too much there. I may have drifted off topic here and I apologize for that. I need sleep.