With Regrets

Regrets. All of us have plenty. Things I wish I would have done; things I did but shouldn’t have; some thoughtless, some ignorant, some with the best of intentions but turned out bad. What possible good would it do now for me to retrace painful memories? I do it for you. I would regret it if I didn’t.

I regret being inconsiderate of the feelings of others. Did you ever laugh anyone to scorn? Did you ever think someone was so brainless or did something so stupid that you derided them to the point of shame? I am embarrassed to admit it (and it was when I was much younger!) but I have. When I got laughed to scorn a few years later, I realized how much it hurt.

I regret not hugging my Dad more. I spoke at his twenty-fifth pastoral anniversary and hugged him then. It wasn’t as embarrassing as I thought it would be.

I regret not telling my Mother I loved her more. She knew I did, but it would have made her feel so much better had I told her. Now that I love hearing it from my kids and granddaughter, I understand. She suffers from Alzheimer’s these days, so she can’t fully appreciate what I say to her. It would have been better years ago when she would have reveled in my expressions.

I regret not asking more questions. I rubbed shoulders with the best and brightest in many fields. Lost opportunities rarely come back around for a second chance.

I regret not learning Greek from my grandfather. He taught me the Greek alphabet and a few scriptures and phrases, but I couldn’t really communicate. The longer he is gone, the more chagrined I am at my failure to learn from the source.

I regret not getting recipes from my Mother’s cooking. Now, I can only reminisce about the tastes and smells of her kitchen. The Greek roast and the white cake with hard fudge frosting will never be a part of my children’s experience.

I regret not staying in touch with my relatives more. Having recently connected with some of my cousins after fifty years of silence, I see the tremendous value of relationships and communication. These are the things that increase the quality of life. I believe that the more quality of life that people have, the less disparaging of life they would be.

I regret not keeping up with my school mates lives. I thought myself too busy to take the time, and I didn’t think they would want to be bothered. Wrong on both counts. Every one enjoys hearing from a voice from the past, if only for a few minutes. I have tried to find them but have been largely unsuccessful.

I regret not reading more great books. Whenever I hear or read references to Melville, Tolstoy or Milton, I hear an echo coming from a cavernous empty room where the knowledge could have been stored.

I regret not writing down my family’s history while my grandparents were still alive. They knew names, dates and fascinating tidbits of knowledge that would have enriched my life. Besides, they would have been so pleased at my interest in their lives.

I regret not cherishing my mementos more. I didn’t know how important they were to the documentation of my life. Each paper, card, certificate, trophy or medal becomes a launching point for the re-emergence of vivid memories obscured by the passing years.

I regret not keeping my belongings more organized throughout my life. I always told myself that I would get around to it. I never have. (You already knew that, didn’t you?) Organization confers significance onto the details of life. Why do we think that the later years of life are more important that the first years? Those who pore over our collections after we’re dead and gone may attach much greater meaning to our younger years than our older ones.

I regret not disciplining my self to live on 75 to 80% of my income. I could have used the rest to save or give away. All of us have money regrets, but few of us have ever done much about it.

I regret being satisfied with my dreams and failing to make good on my visions. I have been obsessed with the “if onlys” of life that never materialized. Instead, I wish it would have done more with the “I haves.”

Of course, life is not all regrets. I am rich in so many ways (except, perhaps, monetarily), but life and God have been extremely good to me. Next time I’ll share the things for which I have no regrets.

The Emergent Church: A Working Definition for the UPCI

These notes were presented at the UPCI General Board Meeting March 3-5. They give a brief overview of the Emergent Church movement, mostly in the language of its proponents. I supply these notes to familiarize the Ohio District ministers with this relatively new movement and to provide a basic guide to its resources. I strongly urge our ministers to educate themselves on the emergent church. A strange hybrid of philosophy and orthopraxy, it presents a growing threat to Apostolic faith and doctrine.

“The Emerging Church movement seeks to revitalize the Christian church beyond what it sees as the confines of modernity, so that it can effectively engage people in a postmodern age. Critics allege, however, that this movement’s relativizing of faith has led many of its adherents outside of the bounds of orthodoxy. Emerging churches are communities that practice the way of Jesus within postmodern cultures. This definition encompasses nine practices. Emerging churches:

(1) identify with the life of Jesus,

(2) transform the secular realm, and

(3) live highly communal lives. Because of these three activities, they

(4) welcome the stranger,

(5) serve with generosity,

(6) participate as producers,

(7) create as created beings,

(8) lead as a body, and

(9) take part in spiritual activities.”

(Eddie Gibbs and Ryan Bolger, in their book, Emerging Churches: Creating Christian Community in Postmodern Cultures (Baker Academic, 2005))

“This thing is radically Jesus-oriented. It is definitely communal; it’s post-denominational; it’s post-Protestant; and it is largely based in virtual reality as opposed to bricks and mortar and organizes itself on the Net. It is deeply concerned with theologies of religion that get rid of Christian particularity or exclusivism. Wherever it’s going, there’s every reason right now to rejoice that God is doing a new thing amongst us, and it’s called emergent Christianity.” Michael Freeman freemanm@reporternews.com; Saturday, February 14, 2009; Abilene Online ReporterNews.

Primary Developers/Unofficial Leaders

Rob Bell Rob Bell is the Founding Pastor of Mars Hill Bible Church. He graduated from Wheaton College in Wheaton, Illinois, and Fuller Theological Seminary in Pasadena, California. He and his wife Kristen have two boys and live in Grand Rapids, Michigan. He is the author of Velvet Elvis and Sex God, and is a coauthor of Jesus Wants to Save Christians. He is also featured in the first series of spiritual short films called NOOMA.

Brian McClaren McLaren is an author, speaker, pastor, and networker among innovative Christian leaders, thinkers, and activists. Born in 1956, he graduated from University of Maryland with degrees in English (BA, summa cum laude, 1978, and MA, in 1981). In 2004, he was awarded a Doctor of Divinity Degree (honoris causa) from Carey Theological Seminary in Vancouver, BC, Canada.

Brian has been active in networking and mentoring church planters and pastors since the mid 1980’s, and has assisted in the development of several new churches. He is a popular conference speaker and a frequent guest lecturer at seminaries and denominational gatherings, nationally and internationally. His public speaking covers a broad range of topics including postmodern thought and culture, Biblical studies, Christian leadership, global mission, evangelism and spiritual formation, worship, inter-religious dialogue, and the relation of faith to ecology, public policy, social justice, and global crises.

Doug Pagitt Pagitt is an author in the Emerging Church movement and head pastor of Solomon’s Porch in South Minneapolis. He was born and raised in the Minneapolis area and is a graduate of Bethel College (1988 - Anthropology), and Bethel Seminary (1992 - MA in Theology). He has been the pastor of Solomon’s Porch, a holistic, missional Christian community in Minneapolis, since its inception in January 2000.

Pagitt is also a Senior Fellow with Emergent Village: a generative friendship of missional church leaders around the world and a leading architect of the emergent church discussion. Brian McLaren told author Robert Lanham that Pagitt coined the term Emerging Church at a leadership retreat in the late 1990s. However, one should remain skeptical of that claim, for the term “Emergent Church” has been around since at least 1981, and the term emergence, popular in philosophy, systems theory and science, has been around for decades.

Dan Kimball Kimball is a pastor, author and leading voice in the Emerging Church movement. Kimball has made popular phrases such as “Vintage Faith” and “Vintage Christianity” which are used to express the desire to be returning to the historical, spiritual, and “raw” missional values of the original Christian Church and teachings of Jesus.

In addition to being one of the earliest members of the Emerging Church Movement, Kimball is one of its more conservative members. Much of Kimball’s writings question the existing forms of church and their effectiveness in an increasingly post-Christian culture. However, he stresses that while change in the church is needed, the historical doctrines of the Christian faith do not need to change. Much of his writings focus on ways that methods of worship, preaching, church structure, evangelism and leadership need to change in order to be missional in a post-Christian or postmodern culture.

Leonard Sweet Currently the E. Stanley Jones Professor of Evangelism at Drew University, Madison, NJ and a Visiting Distinguished Professor at George Fox University, Portland, Oregon, Len has been Vice President of Academic Affairs and Dean of the Theological School at Drew University for five years,

Author of more than one hundred articles, over six hundred published sermons, and dozens of books, Len is the primary contributor (along with his wife Karen Elizabeth Rennie) to the web-based preaching resource, www.preachingplus.com. For nine years he and his wife wrote Homiletics, which became under their watch the premier preaching resource in North America. His best-selling book FaithQuakes (1994), selected as one of the “10 best religion books” and “10 must-read books” of 1994 has been succeeded by a new best-seller SoulTsunami: Sink or Swim in New Millennium Culture (1999).

Mike Yaconelli (1942-2003) - writer, theologian, and satirist. Co-Founder of Youth Specialties, a training organization for Christian youth leaders; and The Wittenburg Door (sometimes just The Door), a satirical magazine. Quote: “Jump first; Fear later.” Yaconelli was also pastor of a small church in Yreka, CA - “the slowest growing church in America” as he called it. He and wife Karla used to share their time between Yreka and the Youth Specialties offices in El Cajon, CA. He wrote a number of books for youth leaders; and was a well-received Christian conference speaker. He was a regular at the Greenbelt Christian festival in the UK. Mike was killed in an automobile accident in 2003.

Erwin McManus.  McManus is an author, lecturer, pastor and leader in the emerging church movement. McManus is the lead pastor of Mosaic Church, a Christian community in Los Angeles, California. He made his name first by speaking on Post-modernism (postmodernity, Postmodern Christianity), but also communicates on culture, change, creativity, and leadership. McManus was named by Church Report in January 2007 as one of the “50 Most Influential Christians in America.”

Tony Jones.  Tony is the author of The New Christians: Dispatches from the Emergent Frontier and is theologian-in-residence at Solomon’s Porch in Minneapolis. A doctoral fellow in practical theology at Princeton Theological Seminary, he is the author of many books on Christian ministry and spirituality, and he is a sought after speaker and consultant in the areas of emerging church, postmodernism, and Christian spirituality. Tony has three children and lives in Edina, Minnesota

Andy Stanley Senior pastor of North Point Community Church, Buckhead Church, Browns Bridge Community Church. He also founded North Point Ministries, which is a worldwide Christian organization.

Related Influencers

• Richard Foster
• Mark Driscoll
• Rick Warren
• Dallas Willard
• Eckhart Tolle

Critics of the Emergent Church Movement

D. A. Carson Carson is research professor of New Testament at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School in Deerfield, Illinois. He has been at Trinity since 1978. Dr. Carson received the Bachelor of Science in chemistry from McGill University, the Master of Divinity from Central Baptist Seminary in Toronto, and the Doctor of Philosophy in New Testament from Cambridge University. Dr. Carson’s areas of expertise include biblical theology, the historical Jesus, postmodernism, pluralism, Greek grammar, Johannine theology, Pauline theology, and questions of suffering and evil. He is a member of the Tyndale Fellowship for Biblical Research, the Society of Biblical Literature, the Evangelical Theological Society, the Canadian Society of Biblical Studies, and the Institute for Biblical Research.

Kevin DeYoung, Ted Kluck Co-Authors of “Why We’re Not Emergent (By Two Guys Who Should Be). An critical and insightful analysis of the emergent church movement.

Significant Books and Literature on the Emergent Church Movement

1. Brian McLaren; A Generous Orthodoxy; Everything Must Change; Reinventing Your Church (re-published as The Church on the Other Side).
2. Rob Bell; Velvet Elvis
3. Donald Miller; Blue Like Jazz
4. George Barna; Revolution
5. Eddie Gibbs and Ryan K. Bolger. Emerging Churches: Creating Christian Community in Postmodern Cultures.
6. Dan Kimball. The Emerging Church: Vintage Christianity for New Generations
7. Andy Crouch. “The Emergent Mystique,” Christianity Today, Nov. 1, 2004
8. Peter Rollins. How (Not) to Speak of God.
9. Ray S. Anderson. An Emergent Theology for Emerging Churches
10. D. A. Carson. Becoming Conversant with the Emerging Church: Understanding a Movement and Its Implications.
11. Spencer Burke & Colleen Pepper; Making Sense of Church: Eavesdropping on Emergent Conversations about God, Community, and Culture
12. Mark Driscoll and Gerry Breshears; Death By Love.
13. William Young The Shack Part Two.

More Books on The Emergent Church

1. The New Conspirators, Creating the Future One Mustard Seed at a Time, by Tom Sine.
2. The New Christians: Dispatches from the Emergent Frontier, by Tony Jones
3. The Irresistible Revolution, by Shane Claibourne.
4. The Great Emergence; by Phyllis Tickle:
5. The Tangible Kingdom: Creating Incarnational Community: Hugh Halter and Matt Smay
6. Rising From the Ashes: Rethinking Church, by Becky Garrison.
7. The Emerging Church by Bruce Larson and Ralph Osborne (1970)
8. The Shaping of Things to Come, Alan Hirsh co-written with Mike Frost

Key Concepts

Postmodern Philosophy

“This new era has been characterized by a rejection of absolute truths and grand narratives explaining the progressive evolution of society. At the same time it has brought to the surface a multitude of different perspectives on society and an appreciation of different cultures. It has highlighted globalization on the one hand and localization on the other, the celebration of difference and the search for commonality.” Theopedia

“Postmodernism is post because it is denies the existence of any ultimate principles, and it lacks the optimism of there being a scientific, philosophical, or religious truth which will explain everything for everybody - a characteristic of the so-called modern mind. The paradox of the postmodern position is that, in placing all principles under the scrutiny of its skepticism, it must realize that even its own principles are not beyond questioning.” www.pbs.org

Holistic

Emerging church proponents emphasize a holistic emphasis of redeeming society and creation too. This emphasis translates into something quite similar to the social gospel (which fundamentally alters the gospel from personal redemption to merely social reformation) and, for some, environmentalism. McKnight, who considers himself part of the emerging church movement, explains that leaders in the movement are left-leaning in their politics for social justice. While he does not want to deny the need for personal redemption, he praises Walter Rauschenbusch’s original vision for the social gospel.

Deconstructive

First, deconstruction not only accepts but embraces the category of difference. In part this is attractive to ET because they (we) are embedded within a late modern generation that is open to difference in ways that (so it appears to us) our evangelical “parent” churches were not. Many of these traditional churches focused on sameness: we must all behave according to the same rules, sing the same songs, look at the world the same way, and affirm precisely the same propositions. The deconstructive embrace of the significance of differentiation (differance, deference, etc.) gives ET a language for what they have already experienced: liberation from a constricting obsession with sameness.

Second, deconstructive epistemology (or hermeneutics) calls for humility within the search for knowledge. Now, my point is not that all deconstructive philosophers are humble and (say) analytic philosophers are not. My point is that the “method” of deconstruction is self-reflective in a way that promotes an ongoing interrogation of the way in which one is holding on to one’s knowledge. It challenges arrogant claims to have grasped final, neutral, universal truth. Many ET were raised in churches within the American evangelical sub-culture, wherein theological reflection was anything but humble. In fact, it wasn’t even reflection; it was declaration. Insofar as Derrida (and others) share epistemic qualities such as humility with the Christian apophatic tradition, the former can inspire ET to retrieve the latter. As we continue longing to know and be known by God, deconstruction can alleviate some of our modernist anxiety by helping us accept our finitude; we are not God, but this is OK and we can all take a deep breath and humbly follow in the way of Jesus without pretending like we know everything. After all, even he didn’t know everything!)

Structure

The style and structure of emerging congregations are unique. Iron railings, candles, dim lighting, and prayer stations were so ubiquitous early in the movement that today they’ve almost become clichés. Most emerging congregations have a relatively flat leadership style. Pastors are not usually called pastors (if there is a pastor at all), and many groups, such as Tribe in Los Angeles, prefer to meet “in the round” when they gather for worship—a physical representation of their flat leadership structure and egalitarian values

The house church movement, which has been partly influenced by the Jesus Movement of the 1960s and 70s, is considered to be a “cousin” of the emerging church movement because of its lack of structure.

Sample Church Names of Emergent Churches: Solomon’s Porch, House of Mercy, The Rock, Jacob’s Ladder, Circle of Hope, Ikon, Vintage Faith, New Beginnings, Mosaic, Scum of the Earth, The Journey Church

Terminology used by the Emergent Church

1. Authentic- Real, not hypocritical, unpretentious. Non-secretive, unguarded.
2. Becoming - the transformation from the modern to the post modern, emerging view of knowing truth.
3. Christian conversation, the - the Christian based series of stories, myths, experiences, etc. that are offered for acceptance or rejection.
4. Conversation - a flowing, non-precise communication made possible by linguistic commonalities. Give and take based on people’s opinions, experiences, and feelings. It is an internalized, non-objective feeling that is often discussed or the focal point of meaning. A non-ending process.
5. Coherantism - belief system that adheres to itself, making sense of the whole when its many parts are interrelated.
6. Contextual - sensitive to the cultural and historical context
7. Deconstruction - removing the stale, modernistic, absolutism that has permeated interpretation of scripture, God, and truth
8. Emergent Village - an organization headed by Tony Jones, Ph.D.
9. Emerging - intellectual and/or spiritual movement away from traditionalist, rational, truths.
10. Growing - development of the individual in concert with God in the working of God’s plans for the world.
11. Missional - making the emerging conversation part of the social culture as it relates to temporal needs: housing, clothing, environment, etc.
12. Myth - The stories believed by people that may or may not be factual.
13. Narrative - Non systematic, non linear approach to knowing, a rejection of the absolute codification of spiritual truths.
14. Orthopraxy – correct practice as opposed to correct beliefs.
15. Reimagine - to reinterpret a long-standing truth.
16. Story - myth, procession of myths strung together by conversation. A lesson with a value statement. If one story doesn’t work for you, try another. The Christian resurrection is a story.
17. Story of God, the - The procession of myths and narratives dealing with God as found in the Bible or other religious works.
18. Story of Jesus, the - The procession of myths and narratives dealing with Jesus as found in the Bible.
19. Tribe - a localized culture with inherent morals, myths, stories, and customs that differ from one another. Therefore, which tribe’s position is true?

Proactive Holiness

Pro·ac·tive or pro-ac·tive (prō-āk’tĭv) adj. Acting in advance to deal with an expected difficulty; anticipatory: proactive steps to prevent terrorism.

The continued assault on Biblical holiness has caused many of us who believe in a conservative lifestyle to reflect on our beliefs. Faithfulness to the Word of God must guide us in this exercise. If we venture outside of the Bible and look to cultural underpinnings for our guide, we will soon find ourselves adrift with no anchor, rudder or sail. The answer is to rethink the reasons why we live the way we do. Even in a cultural minefield, we can relate the scriptural mandates to living in the twenty-first century.

Holiness-minded people have been accused of being reactionary, that is, of adopting certain rules and regulations as an answer to perceived human problems or transgressions. In addition, religious conservatives are said to be locked in a time warp, living in denial of the sweeping cultural changes that have occurred in society. This has supposedly marginalized the holiness movement to a place of irrelevance to this generation. It is said that if we do not change, we will eventually cease to exist.

Yet, an examination of the immorality and sinfulness of today confirms that it looks pretty much like it has always looked throughout the centuries. It may be redefined, repackaged and relabeled, and it may appear new and improved from the older version of sin. If anything, it is only more toxic and more dangerous today than it was in the past. Holiness, however, stands out as a polar opposite of worldliness. It is a constant, visible reminder of the kind of lifestyle taught by the scriptures. The Bible does not leave holiness issues in nebulous metaphors, subject to as many varying interpretations as there are people who interpret them. The concept of holiness has many concrete, practical applications.

Too many see holiness as a collection of random, unrelated rules. Some even fail to see the connection between accepted guidelines and the very concept of holiness. Not only is this view misinformed, it shows a gross failure to understand the nature of God. One, small column cannot address the issue, but the basic points are these: Holiness is a purposeful, proactive strategy to living a righteous life. It is purposeful because it seeks to emulate the clear, scriptural model of holiness. It is anticipatory because it understands the potential problems that we face in the flesh, the world and the devil. It is preventative because it cultivates spiritual virtues and habits in the inner man. It is strategic because it acts in measured ways and means to achieve the desired result.

Why do we dress the way we do? Because the human heart and mind is subject to lustful impulses and is highly suggestible. Why do we behave the way we do? Because, our Adamic nature is always contrary to the plan of God in our lives. What is the purpose for a holiness lifestyle? It is the result of a profound respect we have for the holiness of God. Established scriptural principles that define God for us simultaneously demand certain behaviors from us. We cannot embrace a holy God without a sincere response of holiness on our part. We cannot manage our lives and deal with our bodies if we conform to the world instead of being transformed by the renewing of our minds. Those who abandon holiness virtues and guidelines do so out of frustration and weariness rather than a new, illuminated understanding of God. Thus, instead of disproving the case for holiness, they actually make the case.

We can identify a number of Biblical proactive strategies that help a believer to secure a righteous lifestyle. The following statements are mandates to define the way we live. They are purposeful, anticipatory, preventative and strategic. They correspond to real questions and real situations that we encounter in serious discipleship.

• Neither give place to the devil. (Ephesians 4:27)
• Flee youthful lusts. (1 Timothy 2:22)
• Thy Word have I hid in my heart that I might not sin against thee. (Psalm 119:11)
• Mortify the deeds of the body. (Romans 8:13)
• Walk in the Spirit. (Galatians 5:16)
• Walk circumspectly, not as fools. (Ephesians 5:15)
• Be sober, be vigilant. (1 Peter 5:8)
• Make not provision for the flesh. (Romans 13:14)

Beyond these few references, the scriptures overflow with imperatives designed to help us achieve holiness in our lives. Postmodern philosophy notwithstanding, we must focus on the timeless teachings of the Word of God if we are to be Bible Christians. When we live for God according to His Word, we reap the joy and peace of oneness with God.

Evangelical Collapse and Pentecostal Revival

“The coming evangelical collapse,” a recent bombshell article in the Christian Science Monitor, has stirred fundamental Christians in a way that nothing has for a long time. The author, Michael Spencer, points to the increasing secularization of Christian positions and dogma as the underlying reason for this major shift in the religious world. He believes that succumbing to the pressure within denominations and churches to buy into the cultural agenda has driven the final nail in the coffin. He says, “Evangelicalism doesn’t need a bailout. Much of it needs a funeral.”

Those of us who adhere to basic Bible beliefs have chronicled the liberal trend in mainline Christianity for decades. What we didn’t necessarily see was that the trend couldn’t last forever. Eventually, a tipping point had to be reached. Now, it can be seen with greater clarity than ever. The landscape of traditional Christianity is about to undergo vast changes. Spencer says, “This collapse will herald the arrival of an anti-Christian chapter of the post-Christian West. Intolerance of Christianity will rise to levels many of us have not believed possible in our lifetimes, and public policy will become hostile toward evangelical Christianity, seeing it as the opponent of the common good. Millions of Evangelicals will quit. Thousands of ministries will end. Christian media will be reduced, if not eliminated. Many Christian schools will go into rapid decline. I’m convinced the grace and mission of God will reach to the ends of the earth. But the end of evangelicalism as we know it is close.”

Remarkably, however, the author predicts that Pentecostalism may be the last best hope for the evangelical movement. He says, “The ascendency of Charismatic-Pentecostal-influenced worship around the world can be a major positive for the evangelical movement if reformation can reach those churches and if it is joined with the calling, training, and mentoring of leaders. If American churches come under more of the influence of the movement of the Holy Spirit in Africa and Asia, this will be a good thing.” This article which has drawn a tidal wave of attention creates an unprecedented opportunity for the Apostolic church to move into the vacuum left by the declining church movement. We must take full advantage of the moment and act with swiftness and force.

While the Apostolic church has shown support for conservative values in our culture such as anti-abortion and anti-gay convictions, we have refused to turn these beliefs into crusades. We know that the only real hope for transforming the culture is not through political or financial policy, but through a genuine salvation experience and by falling in love with Jesus Christ. This is why we emphasize doctrine and discipleship over everything else. Even our children and young people know the basics of the Apostolic faith—repentance, baptism in Jesus’ name, receiving the Holy Ghost, the oneness of God, holiness—and we strive to keep these truths in the forefront of our evangelistic thrust and pulpit offerings.

It is time for all Apostolics to renew our commitment to our doctrines and practices. If we lose them, we will soon follow the rest of the evangelicals down the road to eventual demise. Let us endure the criticisms to be more relevant. Let us resist the pressure to be more in tune with the secular world. Let us dismiss the calls for us to disconnect from our past. Apostolic truths are not only timeless; they may also prove to be the reason why we remain a viable force in a postmodern world.

Crazy

What I am about to say is not for the purpose of generating sympathy or pity for me. It is only to help me sort things out in a coherent way so I can make it make sense. Okay, here it is. I’ve been going through a lot of junk lately. Analyst that I am, I can’t just go through things without peeling the layers back and examine why it’s all happening. I stare down the facts at hand and then I look at the actions that caused the facts to be what they are. What were the motives behind the actions? What and why were my responses to the facts, acts and motives? Could I have changed anything? If I had responded differently to the actions, could I have avoided some of the junk? Should I have asked for help sooner than I did? Should I have exercised greater, more intelligent insight than I did? Is all of this making me crazy?

As you might expect, such questioning ends up being futile. The facts are what they are and they can’t be changed. I am at fault for some things; innocent for other things; and much of what happened was beyond my control. Having depleted my arsenal of questions, solutions, strategies and suggestions, I am left to the distasteful job of damage control. Much of the damage control is in the realm of personal, private interaction with people. A huge portion of it, however, lies in the realm of common, human experiences. Ultimately, the personal stuff won’t matter nearly as much as the larger impact the junk has upon my thinking, my philosophy, my attitude, my capacity for leadership and my life.

You don’t need to know the personal facts. They are probably pretty similar to the hard times you’ve been through in your own life. It might be helpful, though, for you to know how I am choosing to deal with it all. Mind you, I am not executing the plan with any sort of perfection. I often speak when I should be quiet, permit my mind to travel down too many dead-end streets and retrace my footsteps in monotonous repetition. Yet, there are some stark guidelines that keep me from disaster. I share them with you in case you need to reflect on some things you may be going through.

• I cannot forget who I am.
• I cannot live others lives for them.
• I cannot suspend the law of sowing and reaping in the lives of others.
• I cannot negate my life’s calling because of circumstances beyond my control.
• I cannot abandon my personal duties and responsibilities.
• If I fail in one area, I do not have to fail in all areas.
• I must not judge myself by someone else’s failure.
• If I make one bad decision, I do not have to let it become a pattern.
• Things always seem worse than they actually are.
• If things can get worse, they probably will. I have to adjust to the developments.
• If things cannot get worse, then they will get better. I cannot despair.
• If permitted, one heartache can overshadow a thousand joys. I must keep everything in proportion.
• I cannot stop loving people even if they disappoint me.
• I cannot stop loving people because I have been crushed by one.
• People who love me will probably continue to love me.
• People who stop loving me undoubtedly have other problems as well.
• God’s love for me is constant and undiminished.
• The more intense the problems become, the more I am driven into the arms of God.
• The safest place for me to be is in God’s arms.

HOW TO READ A DIFFICULT BOOK

by Mortimer J. Adler, Ph.D.

---

Dear Dr. Adler,

To tell you the truth, I find the so-called great books very difficult to read. I am willing to take your word for it that they are great. But how am I to appreciate the them if they are too hard for me to read? Can you give me some helpful hints on how to read a hard book?

---

THE MOST IMPORTANT RULE about reading is one that I have told my great books seminars again and again: In reading a difficult book for the first time, read the book through without stopping. Pay attention to what you can understand, and don’t be stopped by what you can’t immediately grasp on this way. Read the book through undeterred by the paragraphs, footnotes, arguments, and references that escape you. If you stop at any of these stumbling blocks, if you let yourself get stalled, you are lost. In most cases you won’t be able to puzzle the thing out by sticking to it. You have better chance of understanding it on a second reading, but that requires you to read the book through for the first time.

This is the most practical method I know to break the crust of a book, to get the feel and general sense of it, and to come to terms with its structure as quickly and as easily as possible. The longer you delay in getting some sense of the over-all plan of a book, the longer you are in understanding it. You simply must have some grasp of the whole before you can see the parts in their true perspective — or often in any perspective at all.

Shakespeare was spoiled for generations of high-school students who were forced to go through Julius Caesar, Hamlet, or Macbeth scene by scene, to look up all the words that were new to them, and to study all the scholarly footnotes. As a result, they never actually read the play. Instead they were dragged through it, bit by bit, over a period of many weeks. By the time they got to the end of the play, they had surely forgotten the beginning. They should have been encouraged to read the play in one sitting. Only then would they have understood enough of it to make it possible for them to understand more.

What you understand by reading a book through to the end — even if it is only fifty per cent or less will help you later in making the additional effort to go back to places you passed by on your first reading. Actually you will be proceeding like any traveler in unknown parts. Having been over the terrain once, you will be able to explore it again from points you could not have known about before. You will be less likely to mistake the side roads for the main highway. You won’t be deceived by the shadows at high noon because you will remember how they looked at sunset.And the mental map you have fashioned will show better how the valleys and mountains are all part of one landscape.

There is nothing magical about a first quick reading. It cannot work wonders and should certainly never be thought of as a substitute for the careful reading that a good book deserves. But a first quick reading makes the careful study much easier.

This practice helps you to keep alert in going at a book. How many times have you daydreamed your way through pages and pages only to wake up with no idea of the ground you have been over? That can’t help happening if you let yourself drift passively through a book. No one even understands much that way. You must have a way of getting a general thread to hold onto.

A good reader is active in his efforts to understand. Any book is a problem, a puzzle. The reader’s attitude is that of a detective looking for clues to its basic ideas and alert for anything that will make them clearer. The rule about a first quick reading helps to sustain this attitude. If you follow it, you will be surprised how much time you will save, how much more you will grasp, and how much easier it will be.

Weighted Decisions

Human conflicts are the stuff of history. Arabs versus Jews, Greeks versus Turks, Sunni versus Shiites, Hutu versus Tutsis, blacks versus whites, Hatfields versus McCoys, Democrats versus Republicans, communists versus capitalists, labor versus management, for starters, all illustrate the propensity of human beings to be at odds or at war with each other. Fighting appears to be the norm, with peace hardly more than a breather between battles. Taking of spoil or power grabs, reasons usually cited for wars, need not be the case. Generational strife exists on a level by itself. Hatred, retribution, reclaiming honor, proving superiority and other intangible goals of conflict provide adequate reason for the fight.

How is it that combatants in a war, opponents in a debate, dogmatists in different religions or partisans in the political realm gravitate toward such rigidly held views? How can people believe things so totally different from each other? How can they embrace ideas so diametrically opposed to each other? How can many of them espouse their beliefs to the point of sacrifice, destruction or death?

 Eric Hoffer addressed this issue in “The True Believer” nearly six decades ago. A sampling of quotes from his book illustrates how he viewed from the standpoint of the fanatic.

“Members of the fanatic group are taught to have a common hatred, a single foe, a devil. “The ideal devil is a foreigner….Hitler—the foremost authority on devils—found it easy to brand the German Jews as foreigners.” (pp. 92-93).

“Hatred becomes a habit. (p. 146)

When situations reach a state of extreme polarization, meaningful dialogue dies. In its place, raw, irrational emotionalism takes over. I have no solutions to offer, but if we are to resolve at least some of our conflicts, we need to understand how we got so far apart in the first place. Problems don’t just happen, suddenly appearing on the horizon out of nowhere with full grown incisors, claws and a venomous vocabulary. Most problems begin small and evolve in increments to a toxic state. The increments along the journey materialize out of the type, frequency and the impact level of each event. The farther apart the parties to the dispute grow, the greater the intensity and the higher the velocity with which they separate in opposite directions. Eventually, brothers and sisters won’t talk to each other, parents and children hate each other, husbands and wives stubbornly cling to irreconcilable differences, bosses and employees stab each other in the back and entire groups of people escalate their adversarial relationship into a virtual business and way of life.

As conflicts worsen, each incident tends to feed off of a corresponding incident in the enemy camp. The original cause may no longer even be remembered, or it pales in comparison to some subsequent act of retaliation. When a conflict deteriorates to all out war, all the energy gets channeled into evening the score, destroying the enemy or ginning up animosity against the other side. Honor, pride, hatred, anger and the whole gamut of emotions permeate the relationship, often cementing the opposing positions into permanent mindsets. The Palestinian-Israeli conflict is a classic example. The generations are raised such that to be Palestinian is to be anti-Israeli. As mentioned earlier, many other examples exist throughout history.

When conflicts reach flashpoint, even the suggestion that the two enemies sit down across from each other and seek a level of understanding of their problem sparks outrage. Their bitterness becomes so intense that it equates to their personal, tribal or national identity. History teaches us, however, that both sides invariably lose. Hatred simply recycles back into each succeeding generation, and into an eternal war.

Weighting Decisions

So, how do two parties begin to disagree so profoundly in the first place? If we can cast it in terms of rational thought, it has to do with a process I call “weighting decisions.” In Matthew 23:23, Jesus said, “Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.” The scribes and Pharisees ascribed certain weight, or importance, to paying tithes of insignificant substances like mint, anise and cumin. At the same time, they did not weight decisions regarding the law, judgment, mercy and faith with any sense of proportion.

This establishes two principles in the economy of God. First, God compares all things to each other and rates their importance accordingly. Second, he judges us with regard to our priority lists. When we ascribe more importance to something that God considers less important, we displease God. The irony of this error of the scribes and Pharisees is that they thought they were currying God’s favor by their insistence on minutiae. Actually, they were insulting God by perverting the law, denying righteous judgment, refusing to show mercy and sabotaging faith. God is not impressed with pinching pennies when we fritter away dollars.

Even more ominous in the Pharisees reasoning process was that they may have thought their meticulous tithing compensated for giving short shrift to weightier matters. Put another way, they may have been trying to bribe God to ignore their evil treatment of others by duly noting the good that they were doing for God. Their decisions were an affront to the righteousness and justice of God.

Common sense, reasoning, wisdom and balanced judgment seem to be in play into all our dealings in this life. We place a weighted value on every decision we make. Depending upon our beliefs, convictions, desires and motives, we rate these decisions on a sliding scale of importance. For the sake of illustration, let us say we measure everything on a scale of 1-100, with one being least in importance and one hundred being the greatest. This enables us to apply a moral measure to the act of lying by assigning a value to it in terms of the scale. To some people, telling a lie represents an unspeakable act for which there is no excuse. Therefore, they rate the decision to lie from 90 to 100 points in the negative. To someone schooled in the humanistic values clarification model (based on a 1972 book by Simon, Howe & Kirschenbaum, a widely-used text for secondary schools), a lie may rank only 1 to 10 points negative. The question is not “did you lie to me?” That is a given. Rather, the question is “why did you lie to me”, “how offensive is a lie to you?”, or “how important is lying in the entire scheme of things?”

Jesus was very sensitive to judgmentalism. He said, “Judge not, that ye be not judged. ² For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again. ³ And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye? ⁴ Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye? ⁵ Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother’s eye.” Matthew 7:3-5. In other words, get a sense of proportion to your own faults before you view of the faults of others.

On the positive side, some people believe unswerving loyalty is an absolute necessity in determining one’s integrity. They might rate a person’s loyalty at 90 to 100 points positive. Others dismiss blind loyalty as an unrealistic absolute. They think that loyalty which does not take into account mitigating circumstances is worth little or nothing. They rate the loyalty factor from 1-10. Something that one person believes is a quality worth dying for may only be worth a shrug of the shoulder to another. This weighting variation pushes people into opposite corners of an issue.

Two opposing philosophies underlie weighting decisions. First, some believe that established, absolute standards exist which govern all decisions. Sometimes, as in the field of bioethics or in the adjudication of legal matters, we arrive at the outcome after great deliberation. In the process, several issues compete for dominance in both the intellectual and the social context. But even in such cases, the fixed nature of the baselines allows us to work our way through the maze with a measure of certainty.

The second philosophy rejects pre-determined absolutes. It holds that each individual decision must be a function of a practical outcome, not obeisance to any so-called spiritual law. Those hold this view use protocols, standards, rules, manners and laws in a fluid, flexible way, always emphasizing the result to be superior to the process. Thus, the “how” is always subject to the “what.” When it is determined that the “what” needs to be done, the “how” to reach the conclusion has no moral or ethical quantifier. If the goal is achieved, then the process becomes a moot point.

With regard to human conflicts, lying about an event may be preferred to telling the truth if lying leads to a desired result. Another example involves clannish behavior. If a clan member commits a crime, others in the clan often excuse it, even though they condemn a non-clan member to death for the same crime. A race that claims superiority over another race may tolerate injustice against the enemy while refusing to reciprocate the privilege. Egregious acts like genocide or the holocaust committed by Hitler’s Germany find warped justification in the minds of the perpetrators. The euphemism “ethnic cleansing” implies that wiping out an entire ethnic group somehow has a positive benefit to the world.

To a thinking person, something seems wrong with this picture. Are we right to use differing standards to evaluate the treatment of human beings or to weigh decisions? I think not. Standard measurements serve a universal purpose. Imagine a carpenter having an assortment of different scales in his tool box. He could measure any given space or length by the ruler of his choice. If the length to be measured was too short for the 12 inch scale, he could just find a shorter scale and get his measurement from that. Or, suppose a doctor’s office had several scales to measure the weight of her patients. If a patient’s goal was to weigh 110 lbs., the doctor could just direct him or her to the scale that would produce the desired measurement.

Many of the things we measure—like beauty, success, wealth and happiness—have different definitions depending upon the person or group making the judgment. The 1970’s classic song by Ray Stevens is the quintessential expression of this thought:

“Everything Is Beautiful”

Everything is beautiful in its own way

Like a starry summer night

Or a snow covered winter’s day

And everybody’s beautiful in their own way

And under God’s heaven

The world’s gonna find a way.

There is none so blind as he who will not see

We must not close our minds

We must let our thoughts be free

For every hour that passes by

You know the world gets a little bit older

It’s time to realize that beauty lies

In the eyes of the beholder.

We shouldn’t care about the length of his hair

Or the color of the skin

Don’t worry about what shows from without

But the love that lives within

And we gonna get it all together now

Everything gonna work out fine

Just take a little time to look on the good side my friend

And straighten it out in your mind

(c) Copyright 1970 by Ahab Music Co., performed by Ray Stevens.

But the heady, cultural mythology expressed in this song has little practical application. The sentiment may be magnanimous, but the way it plays out in real life would undoubtedly produce a result that would choke even Ray Stevens. His country music background represents a narrowing slice of Americana values. With increasing connectivity between nations and regions due to both technological advances and rapid transportation, the distance between cultures is shrinking as well. Sensitivities have been magnified to the point of paranoia for fear of offending ethnic groups. The rise of political correctness underscores this trend.

All of man’s moral and ethical dilemmas have been measured against scales of all sizes. Variations in the scales exist from nation to nation, culture to culture and from era to era. Yet, we may still identify many cross-cultural baselines of behavior, despite the wide disparities. Certain social structures like family, village and government still retain their dominance in all cultures. Intangible values like love, honor and respect are also shared. Even though these norms are loose guidelines, we can still arrive at a useful insight into moral decision-making. The heart of the process comes down to values of importance. People must assign the same or similar values to each decision if they want to live in harmony with each other. Otherwise, conflict is inevitable. The wider the disparity, the more volatile the conflict.

If a modicum of agreement in positive values cannot be reached, there must at least be an avoidance of negative values for peaceful coexistence. In other words, if I know that a certain word or action on my part antagonizes someone, I can and should restrain myself in that area. That does not mean failure to do right things according to my value system. It does mean I should not do wrong things according to the other party’s value system. If I cannot bring pleasure, I do not have to cause pain. If I do not believe that you have the right value system, I am not obligated to affirm it. At the same time, I have no right to harm or kill you because of your beliefs.

No amount of logic, analysis or rational thought will supersede the personal values inherent in a decision-maker’s psyche. Algorithms may be neatly graphed out to show the most efficient pathway to follow or demonstrate the most beneficial conclusion to an issue. Narratives may be shared that predicts an all but certain outcome. People of enormous influence and power may be brought into the process to inveigh for or against an action. It does not matter. To use an old adage, people will cut off their nose to spite their face if self-mutilation best represents their identified values.

Overlaying this theory on present day conflicts brings some interesting issues to light. Nations cannot negotiate peace with other nations whose core value is the intent to kill or destroy all who disagree with them. Faith communities cannot live side by side if one religious group believes that infidels should convert or die. Financial contracts cannot be drawn if the consumer does not place the same value on prompt payments that the contractor does. Marriages cannot survive if one spouse believes that adultery is wrong and the other does not. Colleges and universities cannot operate if students scorn good grades and credible work. The military cannot maintain a viable status if new recruits laugh at their drill instructors who give them orders. Industries will fail across the board if employees do not assign the same values to hard work and honest character.

In conclusion, there appears to be only three avenues to a conflict resolution: education, transformation or coercion. If a person or group can be educated to the point of understanding and tolerance of those who differ from them, conflicts can fade away. If a change of heart through a spiritual transformation can happen, then it paves the way for love and forgiveness to grow. This is the only way that the wounds of the past can heal. If these two paths will not work, the only remaining path is coercion. One group will have to subjugate another group by warfare, enslavement or genocide. Coercion, however, only sows the seeds of future conflicts. Somewhere in the world, all three paths are being followed. The best way to judge between them is to compare the results.

I am reminded of the words of the Apostle Paul in 2 Corinthians 5:17-21: “Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new. ¹⁸ And all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation; ¹⁹ To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed^c unto us the word of reconciliation. ²⁰ Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us: we pray you in Christ’s stead, be ye reconciled to God. ²¹ For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.”

Transformation, not mere education nor coercion will lead us to true peace.

---

^c committed…: Gr. put in us

Fred Kinzie- 2007 Inductee

Early Sunday morning, February 8, 2009, Fred Kinzie, my father-in-law, entered heaven’s paradise, although he had many previous glimpses.  I’m sure he stopped and looked down the long walls and up the storied corners to see if they were straight.  He may have even tried to count the number of angels circling around the throne.  With his compulsion to know the facts and details, one would think him austere.  Just the opposite.  He was the most magnanimous, generous, forgiving soul who walked in shoe leather.  He assumed legendary status among us long ago, and much of what our church and our entire organization is today reflects his influence, values and force of personality.

In 2007, the United Pentecostal Church, International, inducted Fred Kinzie into the Order of the Faith.  Here is his story in his own words.

Reverend Fred Kinzie Biography

A news item in the February 7th 1914, issue of the Bremen, Indiana newspaper, “The Inquirer” stated: “If you noticed a fluctuation in the stockmarket this past week it was probably due to the birth of a son, Frederick E. to Mr. & Mrs. William Kinzie on February 4.”

Our nation was emerging from the horse and buggy era to the Model T Ford at the time I came on the scene. I’ve lived through six wars, the cold war plus the Great Depression. All of these events made a profound impression on our lives. At the time of this writing I’m93 years old.

When I was five years old our family moved to a farm near Lapaz, Indiana. There, playing with the next door neighborhood kids, I met Vera Berger who later became my wife. We both graduated from Lapaz High School and in 1934 married. On December 16, 2006 she went on to meet the Lord. It is impossible to convey what she meant to me and thousands of others we ministered to later.

We began life together as farmers fully expecting to do that the rest of our lives. In 1936 things dramatically changed when we yielded our lives to the Lord Jesus Christ and received the baptism of the Holy Ghost. We became active in the Plymouth, Indiana ‘Old Time Religion Tabernacle’ ch urch pastored by Walter D. Mangun. I became an elder and Vera ministered asa musician in the church. We led many ofour neighbors and friends to the Lord, including two girls, Pat and Pam McQueen whose father’s farm adjoined ours. During that time I was superintendent of a non-denominational Sunday school for three years. The girls attended there and we taught them in our classes.

In 1941 I felt the call to the ministry. Fearful and lacking confidence I was indecisive, vacillating between ‘yes and no.’ In the winter of 1944 we took time off from the farm to help Evangelist Earl Gamblin, preaching and singing in meetings in Miami and Pensacola, Florida. Suddenly, rheumatic fever began its throbbing pain in me while driving betwen the two cities and I ended up in a hospital in Pensacola, Florida with a sever case. Gripped by extreme suffering, our future in the ministry was resolved in that hospital room. Finally, in earnest prayer I committed myself to the ministry asking the Lord, ‘to heal me and get me out of the hospital.’ That day Vera wrote letters home informing our folks we were leaving the farm. The next morning I was a healed man. Only God knows what that healing did for us. It poured strength, courage, confidence and the ‘get up and go’ into us. There is no way to adequately measure the importance of that experience in our lives.

Two months later in July 1944, we began evangelizing. The girls Pat and Pam McQueen went with us making a musical team. We sang, preached, and were known as the Kinzie Evangelistic Party throughout the United States and Canada. We did that for the next nine years. In 1950 we added another member to the party with the birth of our daughter, Cassandra. We were honored to be a part of the merger Conference in 1945. I was also privileged to attend fifty-seven consecutive General Conferences.

Many opportunities to pastor churches from California to Florida, and a number in between, were offered us while traveling, but the Lord impressed me to ‘keep on doing what you’re doing.’ None of those churches were in the will of God except Toledo, Ohio. My call to Toledo was so definite that doubts never crossed our minds. We came in May, 1953, built three church buildings during our pastorate, moving twice. The privilege of pastoring the Toledo church has been greatly rewarding. Many ministers have gone out from here to pastor or become missionaries.

Thirty years later we turned the church over to our son-in-law, J. Mark Jordan and family. They added a beautiful sanctuary and a commodius Family Life Center. The church continues on a spiritual course, awaiting the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ. I serve as pastor emeritus.

After retiring I began writing. Four books were published by Word Aflame Press and many articles printed in the Pentecostal Herald and District magazines.