A Conversation about Brian McLaren’s A New Kind of Christianity

Responding to Brian McLaren’s Question # 6: The Church Question

Welcome: You’re reading Part 8 of my blog series responding to Brian McLaren’s book A New Kind of Christianity (read Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5, Part 6, and Part 7). Many have engaged Brian’s thinking by focusing on a systematic theology response (visit here for a boatload of links). My focus is on pastoral theology or practical theology. As a pastor, counselor, and professor who equips the church for biblical counseling and spiritual formation, I’m asking: “What difference does our response to each question make for how we care like Christ (biblical counseling) and for how we live like Christ (spiritual formation)?”

What Is the Church Here For?

In addressing the church issue, Brian asks a series of important questions. “Around what grand endeavor can we rally? What one great danger do people need to be saved from and, more positively, what one great purpose do they need to be saved for? Around what melody can we harmonize without trying to homogenize?” (p. 164).

In response, Brian believes that we must “rethink our core mission” (p. 165). Brian’s rethinking is motivated by his belief that the church has lost touch with “normal” people and that preachers have forgotten how to speak their language. He’s also motivated by his perception that the church is living within an isolated or withdrawn religious subculture, or spiritual country club.

I’m not sure what churches Brian is visiting, but I agree with him—I wouldn’t applaud those churches either. I find it ironic that Brian uses the “spiritual country club” imagery for the churches he’s against. It seems to me that an exorbitant percentage of young Emergent church leaders are all coincidentally called to minister in churches filled with cool, trendy, well-educated, philosophically-inclined, upwardly-mobile, suburban, white-collar types. Isn’t God calling any young Emergent leaders to minister to blue-collar, high-school-educated, rural, or urban people?

A Church Of Biblical Counseling

Brian also seems to think that only he and his fellow Emergent church leaders are ministering in the mess and muck of life, and that only they are speaking the language of the people. The truth is, non-Emergent churches are in the trenches, on the front lines providing ministries based upon truth and love.

Faith Baptist Church in Lafayette, Indiana, under the direction of Pastor Steve Viars, is a prime example. They’re staunchly conservative Evangelical in theology and cutting-edge in ministry practice and outreach. They’re a church of biblical counseling, not just a church with biblical counseling. Their biblical counseling ministry is not just within their congregation, it is to their community.

Every week over 100 community members receive free biblical counseling from Faith Biblical Counseling Ministries. Their waiting list is seemingly endless. Someone must believe they are speaking their language.

As part of Faith Community Ministries, the church built a community center…not for the congregation, but for the…community. The list of need-meeting ministries is amazing, such as Big Brothers/Big Sisters, Community Blood Drives, Community Foster Car, Habitat for Humanity, Red Cross Disaster Shelter, Court Appointed Special Advocates, Clothing Closet, Food Pantry, etc. As part of this ministry, Faith also built a state-of-the-art outdoor skate board park. Many of these “Skaters” end up in church…with their skate boards and their torn jeans to hear exegetical, expository, biblical preaching every Sunday. These young Skaters believe Faith is speaking their language.

Faith’s Vision of Hope residential treatment center offers faith-based treatment for girls age 14-28 who are struggling with unplanned pregnancy, alcohol or drug abuse, eating disorders, or self-harm. State agencies and the court system regularly refer girls to Vision of Hope—with the full knowledge that the program is based upon biblical counseling. Someone realizes they are speaking their language.

Faith Bible Seminary combines the traditional M.Div. emphasis in theology, the original languages, and pastoral training within a mentoring environment in partnership with area local churches. Students gain first-hand experience with Faith Biblical Counseling, Vision of Hope, and other unique ministries. They have no problem attracting students nor do their graduates have any problem finding local church placement. People know they are speaking their language.

Spiritual Formation in Truth and Love

Brian offer’s his view of the new core mission of the church. We’re called to focus on communities that form Christlike people living as agents of transformation. “The church exists to form Christlike people, people of Christlike love. It exists to save them from the danger of wasting their lives” (p. 164). The meaning of those words depends upon how Brian answered his previous five questions. As Mike Wittmer notes:

“Brian’s shallow evaluation of our problem (no Fall, original sin, total depravity, or hell) produces a shallow understanding of salvation (love as much as you can and let God’s judgment burn your bad stuff away) which produces a shallow view of the church (it exists merely to stop people from wasting their lives).”

Brian wants to know, “How does spiritual formation in the way of Jesus differ from religious education in the way of Christianity?”(p. 170). Great question! Of course, to answer this we must go back to Who Jesus is and why He came. If Jesus is a community organizer Who came to usher in the “sacred ecosystem” (p. 165), then formation in Jesus looks like one thing. But if Jesus is the God-man Who came in Holy Love to justify, regenerate, reconcile, and redeem sinners, then it looks like quite another thing.

Brian traces the church’s problem to knowledge without love. I don’t know anyone who would argue that we should only have love or only have knowledge. But Brian seems to minimize the role of knowledge—truth, doctrine, theology. The same Paul he quotes in 1 Corinthians also says in Philippians 1:9-11 that our love must abound in knowledge and depth of insight. Paul is not pitting love against knowledge. Paul is saying that truth or love alone are never enough. Brian says the church should be a school of love (p. 170). I would say, and I believe it’s a crucial difference, that the church should be a school where love abounds in knowledge and depth of insight.

Brian also says that we need to be Spirit-saturated people. I agree. Of course, we have to ask and answer the question, “How does the Spirit saturate us?” In what ways and under what condition(s) does the Spirit enter a person’s life? I would say, through rebirth, through salvation—through justification, regeneration, reconciliation, and redemption. (See my response to Question # 5.)

Brian’s view of the Fall, of Christ, and of the Gospel all seem to call into question salvation as justification, regeneration, reconciliation, and redemption. In this chapter, Brian furthers states that the goal of the church is to save people from wasting their lives. That’s quite different from saving them from sin, depravity, and alienation from God. So, without salvation, how does the Spirit saturate a person?

I believe the Bible teaches that the goal of the church is to introduce people to Christ Who saves them. They are thus justified, regenerated, reconciled, redeemed, and indwelt by the Spirit and thus they are empowered to be formed into the image of Christ. Then, as new creations in Christ, together as the Body of Christ, we minister to one another (biblical counseling and spiritual formation) so that our inner lives increasingly reflect the inner life of Christ and so that our outer lives increasingly sacrificially minister Christ’s grace to hurting and hardened people. That’s certainly not a wasted life.

The Rest of the Story

In our next post, we respond to Brian’s answer to the sex question. He asks, “Can we find a way to address human sexuality without fighting about it?” What does biblical counseling have to say about addressing human sexuality?

Join the Conversation

What is the purpose of the church and how is it accomplished?

Tags: A New Kind of Christianity, Church, Emergent, Faith Baptist, McLaren, Viars

A Conversation about Brian McLaren’s A New Kind of Christianity

Responding to Brian McLaren’s Question # 4: The Jesus Question

Welcome: You’re reading “Part 6” of my blog series responding to Brian McLaren’s book A New Kind of Christianity (read Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, and Part 5). Many have engaged Brian’s thinking by focusing on a systematic theology response (visit here for a boatload of links). My focus is on pastoral theology or practical theology. As a pastor, counselor, and professor who equips the church for biblical counseling and spiritual formation, I’m asking: “What difference does our response to each question make for how we care like Christ (biblical counseling) and for how we live like Christ (spiritual formation)?”

Jesus: A Community Organizer

Early on, Brian asked, “What are the deep problems the original Christian story was trying to solve?” For Brian, the deepest problem is not original sin and relational separation from God. He says the “Fall” is not a fall into sin, depravity, and alienation. Rather, Genesis 3 narrates a “compassionate coming-of-age story” (p. 49). Specifically, Genesis depicts humanity’s movement from hunter-gathering to agriculturalist and city-dweller (p. 50).

It’s against this backdrop that Brian asks, “Who is Jesus and why is he important?” Brian’s clear on who Jesus is not. In the Gospel according to Brian, Jesus did not come to address and remedy the Fall so that we could avoid eternal condemnation due to original sin (p. 128). By eternal life, Jesus is not promising life after death or life in eternal heaven instead of eternal hell (p. 130).

In two chapters, covering sixteen pages, and using over 8,000 words, Brian never once calls Jesus God; never calls Him Savior, and never mentions His crucifixion, death, burial, and resurrection in a salvation-from-sin context. However, Brian does save enough words to talk about “his loyal critics” eight times.

When Brian quotes John 1:29 about Jesus being the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world, he interprets it to mean not the sacrificial lamb of Leviticus, but the lamb slain in Exodus to liberate people from oppression. The one time Brian mentions Jesus’ death and resurrection, he makes it mean liberation from physical oppression, not from spiritual condemnation. “Jesus and his message have everything to do with poverty, slavery, and a ‘social agenda’” (p. 135). Everything? Really?

For Brian, Jesus came to save us from the sin of oppression, not to save us from the oppression of sin. Read that again. Slowly.

In Brian’s new kind of Christianity, Jesus is our example who models the way of peace. He is a liberator of the oppressed. He is not our Savior from Sin. Jesus is…a community organizer.

Is this a new kind of Christianity or is it the old kind of liberalism? H. Richard Niebuhr aptly described it in 1959, explaining that liberals believe that, “A God without wrath brought men without sin into a kingdom without judgment through the ministrations of a Christ without a cross.”

Practical Implication # 1 for Biblical Counseling: Our Greatest Problem Is the Oppression of Sin, Not the Sin of Oppression

Of course, the ultimate practical implication is clear—we’re going to die in our sins with this “Jesus.” I’m struggling to write anything else in today’s blog post. What’s left to say? However, my self-chosen task is to respond with a biblical counseling perspective to Brian’s handling of each of his questions. So I shall continue.

In my book Beyond the Suffering: Embracing the Legacy of African American Soul Care and Spiritual Direction, I quote ex-enslaved African American Pastor James W. C. Pennington. Reflecting on his conversion, he seamlessly expresses his understanding of suffering and of sin. Without minimizing for a moment the evils of slavery, he maximizes for all eternity the horrors of his own enslavement to sin and Satan.

“I was a lost sinner and a slave to Satan; and soon I saw that I must make another escape from another tyrant. I did not by any means forget my fellow-bondmen, of whom I had been sorrowing so deeply, and travailing in spirit so earnestly; but I now saw that while man had been injuring me, I had been offending God; and that unless I ceased to offend him, I could not expect to have his sympathy in my wrongs; and moreover, that I could not be instrumental in eliciting his powerful aid in behalf of those for whom I mourned so deeply.”

Our deepest problem is not our emotional woundedness for which we need a therapist. Our deepest problem is not our societal oppression for which we need a community organizer. Our deepest problem is sin—our personal, willful, relational, stubborn, spiritual rebellion against God for which we need a Savior.

Practical Implication # 2 for Biblical Counseling: Even in Facing Suffering (Being Sinned Against), Our Greatest Need is a Suffering Savior

Let’s be clear. Christians should be concerned about social issues, social justice, the needs of the poor and the oppressed. But that’s not the social gospel. The social gospel is no gospel at all—it removes the need for a Savior from sin because it removes sin. Christians practice a Gospel-Centered concern for social issues, believing that our ultimate problem is sin and that those rescued from the sin problem gratefully share the good news of salvation from sin and compassionately meet the needs of the hurting, suffering, wounded, and oppressed.

Let’s also be clear that truly biblical counseling deals both with the sins we have committed (practical implication # 1), and with the evils we have suffered (practical implication # 2). As I frequently say, we live in a fallen world and it often falls on us. That’s why I wrote God’s Healing for Life’s Losses: How to Find Hope When You’re Hurting.

However, even in a biblical sufferology (a biblical theology of suffering), our greatest need is a crucified, resurrected Savior. The Apostle Paul did not want the believers in Corinth to be ignorant of the suffering he endured in Asia Minor. So he candidly shared his heart, explaining that he despaired of life and felt the sentence of death (2 Corinthians 1:8-9a).

Paul doesn’t stop there. He continued. “But this happen to us so that we might not rely upon ourselves, but upon God who raises the dead” (2 Corinthians 1:9b). The casket of suffering draws us to the empty tomb of our resurrected Savior.

Do we really want to help the oppressed? Do we have deep compassion and empathy for the suffering? Do we have hearts that long to comfort the hurting? Then for goodness sake, don’t practice identity theft on Jesus! Don’t make His eternal existence, life, crucifixion, death, burial, resurrection, ascension, present intercession, and future return simply be about “Jesus meek and mild” the community organizer!

Rev. Pennington got it right. The enslaved, the hurting, the wounded, and the oppressed first and foremost need a Savior from sin. Then they can find healing hope by celebrating the resurrection of their loving, forgiving, reconciling, redeeming Savior. Biblical counseling deals thoroughly with suffering and with sin through a Christ-centered focused on Jesus the God-man. “For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are—yet was without sin. Let us then approach the throne of grace with confidence, so that we may receive mercy and find grace to help us in our time of need” (Hebrews 4:15-16).

The Rest of the Story

In our next post, we explore the gospel question. Brian asks, “What is the gospel?” We’ll respond to his gospel presentation through the lens of biblical counseling and spiritual formation.

Join the Conversation

What difference does Jesus make for biblical counseling and spiritual formation?

Tags: A New Kind of Christianity, Biblical Counseling, Brian McLaren, Jesus, McLaren

A Conversation about Brian McLaren’s A New Kind of Christianity

Responding to Brian McLaren’s Question # 2: The Authority Question

Welcome: You’re reading “Part 4” of my blog series responding to Brian McLaren’s book A New Kind of Christianity (read Part 1 here, Part 2 here, and Part 3 here). Many have engaged Brian’s thinking by focusing on a systematic theology response (visit here for a boatload of links). My focus is on pastoral theology or practical theology. As a pastor, counselor, and professor who equips the church for biblical counseling and spiritual formation, I’m asking: “What difference does our response to each question make for how we care like Christ (biblical counseling) and for how we live like Christ (spiritual formation)?”

The Question of the Bible’s Sufficiency

Brian’s second question is the authority question. How should we understand the Bible? He’s asking, What is the Bible and what is it for? He feels a moral obligation to revisit how we view the Bible.

In defending his revisioning of Scripture, Brian again resorts to caricature. He speaks of preachers passionately decrying psychology because they see the only relevant biblical categories being disobedience and demon possession (p. 68). Well, many of us decry secular psychological assumptions that seek to understand the creature apart from the Creator. However, many of us have spent our lives developing a biblical psychology—a robust understanding of people, problems, and solutions derived from a Bible that we cherish as sufficient, authoritative, relevant, and profound. (See my Soul Physicians for one example.)

He says we’re steering our ship by wrestling with biblical passages in a simple “thou shalt not” way, and thus paralyzed in solving major life-and-death issues (p. 69). Well, many of us have been in the trenches wrestling with real people with real problem, thinking deeply with them about how God’s story intersects with their story. (See my Spiritual Friends for one example.)

Brian further claims that the Bible “offers us no clear categories for many of our most significant and vexing socioethical quandaries” (p. 68). Wow. Some of us talk about the sufficiency, authority, relevancy, and profundity of Scripture for biblical counseling and spiritual formation. Brian presents the insufficiency, incapacity, irrelevance, and shallowness of Scripture for life and ministry.

Read with confidence and applied with wisdom, the Bible offers us categories for thinking about everything we need for daily life and godly living (2 Peter 1:3; Hebrews 4:12-16; 2 Timothy 3:16-17; Philippians 1:9-11; Colossians 2:3-10). I’m baffled as I attempt to visualize a pastoral counseling session from Brian’s perspective of the Bible. In Spiritual Friends I offer 1,000s of sample “spiritual conversations” and “scriptural explorations” all based upon the sufficiency, authority, relevancy, and profundity of God’s Word. What would Brian offer (WWBO)?

WWBO: What Would Brian Offer?

Reading the three chapters in which Brian shares his view of Scripture, I felt like I was watching an episode of American Idol. If Simon Cowell was responding, he might have said, “Sorry, Brian, but that was a mess.” I could almost hear Randy Jackson saying, “Listen dude. Yo dawg. For me for you; I just didn’t get it. It was pitchy and karaoke.”

Brian’s Bible is filled with internal inconsistencies (p. 81) because his Bible is neither authoritative nor inspired (pp. 82-83). His Bible was never intended to provide answers to deep questions, but rather to stimulate conversations without any final direction (p. 92).

Why? Because for Brian the God of the Bible (using Job as an example) is “not the actual God necessarily, but the imagined God, the author’s best sense of God, the fictional character playing God for the sake of this dramatic work of art” (p. 94). Try telling that to the person in the midst of horrible life suffering. Try telling that to the person in need of empowered wisdom to break the chains of a besetting sin.

WWJS: What Would Jesus Say?

Brian sees the Bible through evolutionary lenses. In each generation, it was the current best attempt to conceptualize who God is, who we are, how we relate to God and to one another. We need to come to the Bible with more enlightened eyes, more evolved insight—according to Brian.

Brian also says that he wants us to return to the place where we look at the Bible through Jesus’ eyes. He says he is “a follower of Jesus and a devoted student of the Bible” (p. 83). Taking him at his word, I want us to ask together, “What would Jesus say?” Did Jesus see the Bible the way Brian sees it?

Jesus tells us that “Man does not live on bread alone, but on every word that comes from the mouth of God” (Matthew 4:4). In the midst of personal suffering, trials, and temptations, Jesus clung to and exhorted us to cling to the sufficient, authoritative, relevant, and profound Word of God.

Jesus said, “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished” (Matthew 5:17-18). In the midst of a sermon on personal, social ethics Jesus related Old Testament truth to daily life, in so doing teaching us to trust in the sufficiency, authority, relevancy, and profundity of Scripture for life, ministry, and relationships today.

Clearly, we can all misinterpret and misapply Scripture. No one should claim that their interpretation or application is inspired or inerrant. However, that’s infinitely different from claiming that the Bible itself is not inspired or inerrant. That’s why we must interpret and apply the Bible humbly in community. Humbly—but with confidence that God’s Word provides the wisdom we need to love God and others. Without that humble confidence in the sufficiency, authority, relevancy, and profundity of Scripture we have no basis for biblical counseling and spiritual formation.

The Rest of the Story

In our next post, we explore the God question. Brian asks, “Is God violent?” We respond to his response—through the lens of biblical counseling and spiritual formation.

Join the Conversation

What view of and use of the Bible do you follow as you minister God’s Word to hurting and hardened, suffering and sinning people?

Tags: A New Kind of Christianity, Biblical Counseling, Brian McLaren, McLaren, Sufficiency of Scripture

A Conversation about Brian McLaren’s A New Kind of Christianity

Responding to Brian McLaren’s Question # 1: The Narrative Question

Welcome: You’re reading “Part 3” of my blog series responding to Brian McLaren’s book A New Kind of Christianity (read Part 1 here and Part 2 here). Many have engaged Brian’s thinking by focusing on a systematic theology response (visit here to see a boatload of links). My focus is on “pastoral theology” or “practical theology.” As a pastor, counselor, and professor who equips the church for biblical counseling and spiritual formation, I’m asking: “What difference does our response to each question make for how we care like Christ (biblical counseling) and for how we live like Christ (spiritual formation)?”

What’s the Big Idea?

Brian’s first question asks, What is the overarching story line of the Bible? He’s asking what are the deep problems that the original Christian story was trying to solve? What’s the big picture?

Brian claims that the traditional answer to these questions are radically informed by what he calls the Greco-Roman narrative, and thus in turn influenced by Platonic thought and Roman imperialism. That he doesn’t lend any historical support to this major contention is problematic. Much worse, however, is the straw man he fashions. One can’t even say it’s a caricature or a stereotype. That would imply that the version he presents as the traditional Christian meta-narrative is anywhere near what anyone actually teaches.

What Brian’s addressing is the “CFR Narrative”—the Creation, Fall, Redemption story line of the Bible. One hardly recognizes it in Brian’s hands. I’ve authored two books on church history and studied church history for 25 years. I’ve never once read anyone’s view of the CFR Narrative that sounds the least bit like Brian’s straw man. In fact, let’s all agree. Brian, the Greco-Roman narrative is not Christian. You detest that view. So do I.

The CCFRC Narrative

Now that we’re in agreement with Brian that the Greco-Roman narrative fails the Christian test, let’s do what we came here to do. Let’s ask, “What difference does our response to the narrative question make for how we care like Christ (biblical counseling) and for how we live like Christ (spiritual formation)?”

The CFR narrative, as actually taught in historic Christianity, is really the CCFRC narrative.

*Community: The eternal community of Oneness shared by the Trinity.

*Creation: God’s original design of the universe and of the nature of human nature.

*Fall: Humanity’s fall into sin.

*Redemption: God’s solution to humanity’s problem—salvation in Christ.

*Consummation: Eternity future.

These five meta-narrative themes, plus two core questions about truth and ministry, provide us with life’s seven ultimate questions. By addressing these seven questions, we offer a biblical counseling and spiritual formation response to Brian’s narrative question.

Life’s Seven Ultimate Questions

In our post-modern generation shaped by relativism, even the Church is filled with differing views on the largest issues of life and ministry. The question that defines us more than any other is: “Upon what do we base our life and ministry?” Here are seven truths that must shape the way we see life and ministry. They teach us what makes biblical ministry truly biblical.

1. Question 1: “What is truth? Where do I find answers?”

Answer 1—The Word: “God’s Word is sufficient, authoritative, profound, and relevant.”

All that we need for life and godliness we find in Scripture (the written Word). In Christ are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge (the Living Word). We live and breathe every nano-second not by bread alone, but by the Word of God. Therefore, in life and ministry every question is ultimately a God-question and every answer is fundamentally a God-answer.

2. Question 2: “Who is God?”

Answer 2—Community/The Creator: “God is Trinitarian.”

God is not the “alone with the alone.” The God of the Universe is, always has been, and always will be Three-in-One, communitarian, Trinitarian. Before God created, He related. Thus God created us not out of need, but graciously from the overflow of infinite Trinitarian fellowship. Reality is relational because God is Trinitarian. Therefore, in life and ministry our purpose is to enjoy and glorify God as we combine Scripture and soul, truth and love.

3. Question 3: “Who am I”?

Answer 3—Creation: “We are created with dignity by God in the image of Christ.”

I am not an accident. I am fearfully and wonderfully made with the purpose of worshipful fellowship with the God of the universe and sacrificial one-another fellowship with my fellow human beings. Together we are to enjoy God by glorifying Him forever as we fulfill our calling as stewards of His universe. Therefore, in life and ministry our goal is to reflect increasingly the inner life of Christ.

4. Question 4: “What went wrong?”

Answer 4—Fall: “We sinfully and foolishly choose god-substitutes over God.”

The only explanation for sin and suffering is humanity’s fall into rebellion initiated by Adam and Eve and continued to this day by every person who ever lived. We sinfully forsake and attempt to replace God because we have lost our awe of God and chosen to love false gods. Therefore, in life and ministry we must recognize and confess that our core problem is spiritual adultery.

5. Question 5: “Can we change? How do people change?”

Answer 5—Redemption: “We must apply our complete salvation to our daily sanctification.”

Our only hope for change is our acceptance by faith of God’s grace in Christ. Those who are new creations in Christ can change because they have already been changed. Justification (our new pardon), reconciliation (our new peace), regeneration (our new purity), and redemption (our new power) provide the four-fold basis for daily growth into the image of Christ. Therefore, in life and ministry our identity in Christ is foundational to our transformation in Christ.

6. Question 6—“Where am I headed? What is my destiny?”

Answer 6—Consummation/Glorification: “Heaven is my final home.”

For those who enter into eternal relationship with God in Christ, our destiny is endless relationship and purpose—sacred communion within God’s holy and happy family. The biblical answer to the question of ultimate destiny ought to impact drastically how we live today—our future destiny impacts our present reality. Therefore, in life and ministry, reading the end of the story makes all the difference in how we respond to present suffering and how we overcome besetting sins.

7. Question 7—“Can I help? How can I help?”

Answer 7—Sanctification/Ministry: “We dispense God’s cure for the soul—grace.”

Grace is God’s prescription for our disgrace—the disgrace of sin and the disgrace of suffering. Grace is God’s medicine of choice for our sinful and suffering world. God calls us to be dispensers of His grace which sustains and heals us in our suffering, which reconciles and guides us in our sin, and which moves us toward sanctification in Christ. Therefore, in life and ministry we must be dispensers of grace.

The Life of the Soul through the Lens of the Scriptures

These seven biblical categories are essential for seeing the life of the soul through the lens of the Scriptures. The biblical meta-narrative is absolutely vital because these relevant biblical categories address life’s seven ultimate questions that every honest person asks.

Rather than being some Greco-Roman invention based upon some contrived Platonic and imperialistic concepts, the biblical CCFRC Narrative offers God’s authoritative wisdom for how we minister to one another for His glory. Omit these and we have no “practical theology,” no “pastoral theology.” That’s what we lose if we accept Brian’s straw man attack on the historic CFR Narrative.

The Rest of the Story

In our next post, we’ll respond to Brian’s second question, the authority question: How should the Bible be understood? We’ll ask that question through the lens of biblical counseling and spiritual formation.

Join the Conversation

What is the Bible’s meta-narrative and what difference does it make in real life?

Tags: A New Kind of Christianity, Biblical Counseling, Brian McLaren, McLaren, Spiritual Formation

A Conversation about Brian McLaren’s A New Kind of Christianity

Brian McLaren, I Accept Your Invitation

Welcome: You’re reading “Part 1” of my blog series responding to Brian McLaren’s book A New Kind of Christianity. Many people have engaged Brian’s thinking—most focusing on a systematic theology response (you can visit here to see a boatload of links). I’m thankful for their foundational responses. My focus is on “pastoral theology” or “practical theology.” As a pastor, counselor, and professor who equips the church for biblical counseling and spiritual formation, I’m accepting Brian’s invitation to interact about the implications of his views for the everyday life of one-another Christianity—the “personal ministry of the Word.” My posts will be periodic so I can intelligently, carefully, fairly, and thoroughly engage Brian’s thinking.

Brian’s Invitation

Throughout A New Kind of Christianity Brian invites conversation. He calls it an invitation for discussion not a “debate that creates hate” (p. 17). Using a sports’ analogy, Brian writes about his views, “They are offered as a gentle serve or lob; their primary goal is to start the interplay, to get things rolling, to invite reply” (p. 23). Brian also notes concerning those who may disagree with him that, “We welcome their charitable critique” (p. 25). In summary he says, “This quest must instead work more like a wedding proposal, an invitation. It must be about free conversation, not forced conversion” (p. 27).

To this generic invite, Brian adds a very specific invitation to pastors and counselors. When I read the following words, my ears perked up higher than Mr. Spock from Star Trek.

“This Greco-Roman framing may help explain why Christian pastors and counselors have such a hard time convincing Christians that God actually loves them” (p. 266).

Game On

Until reading that quote, my plan was to let the “theologians” converse with Brian. Of course, theology intimately relates to everyday life, so I should have been willing to join the conversation from the get-go. But when I read that quote, it was “Game on.” Brian had served up his “gentle lob” and I would volley back.

This is why the specific emphasis of my tennis match, er, conversation, with Brian focuses on:

What are the implications of A New Kind of Christianity for “the personal ministry of the Word”—biblical counseling, spiritual formation, pastoral counseling, pastoral care, Christian counseling, one another ministry, soul care, spiritual direction, spiritual friendship, and personal discipleship?

Call it whatever you want. I’ve spent the past quarter-century in the trenches of pastoral ministry comforting grieving parishioners, counseling struggling Christians, equipping lay people, pastors, and professional Christian counselors for “the personal ministry of the Word.”

Brian’s “ten questions” deserve a “pastoral ministry response.” Game on.

A Few Ground Rules

Any good tennis match must have a few ground rules (even in post-modern tennis—sorry, I couldn’t resist!). Any healthy conversation ought to include some communication skills and relational competencies. I’ll “basically” let Brian set those ground rules.

Ground Rule # 1: Q and R (Sorta’)

Brian asks not for Q/A, but for Q/R. Q/A, of course, equals Question and Answer. Brian says he thinks most questions aren’t suited for a simple answer (I’m not sure any questions are suited for a simple answer…). So he prefers Q/R: Question and Response—stimulating, open-ended, conversations starters.

So here’s my intention:

To engage Brian in stimulating Q/R about how his ten questions relate to the personal ministry of the Word (biblical counseling, spiritual formation, pastoral care, small groups, personal discipleship, soul care, spiritual direction, spiritual friendship, one another ministry, etc.).

Now, that said, I will try to do not just what Brian said, but what Brian did. As much as Brian likes to focus on “responses,” his book is filled with his answers to his ten questions. That’s not a critique. It’s an observation. And…it set’s the ground rules fairly so that we’re both playing by the same norms. Yes, I will give my answers. And I’ll give them in the form I often tell my students, “This is my current best attempt to respond to this question.” So…please be charitable when you read not only “responses” from me, but also “answers.” I want to be like Brian.

Ground Rule # 2: “Charitable” (Faithful Are the Wounds of a Friend)

Brian repeatedly asks that people who respond to him do so charitably. I want to do that. In fact, I hope I do it more consistently than it felt like, to me, Brian did it.

I don’t have the time or space in this first post to share the many examples of Brian’s less-than-charitable interactions throughout the book, but I will share a few samplers…to set the ground rules. Brian starts the book by illustrating his innocent speaking engagement being bothered by four people placing leaflets on car windshields talking about Brian as a “known heretic” (p. 1). He responds by asking the rhetorical question, “How did a mild-manner guy like me get into so much trouble” (p. 2)?

Now, now. Is that any way to start a friendly conversation? So…those who disagree or have different responses from Brian are illustrative of heresy hunters. Brian and those with views like him are innocent mild-manner guys. I know, it’s subtle (well, kind of). I know, Brian didn’t say everyone who disagrees is a “heresy hunter.” He didn’t say everyone who agrees with him is a good guy. But… come on… is that really an open-ended invitation to a charitable conversation?

But that’s topped by the page where Brian introduces the first five questions. The illustration now changes from parking lot heresy hunters to evil guards at a concentration camp (p. 31).

And who are these concentration camp guards? They are pastors (who disagree with Brian).

For Brian, the reason others are not on his quest is because they’ve been locked in a closet, cell, or concentration camp by guards (pastors) motivated by a desire to keep people under their control by making them fearful of the real world. These guards (pastors) are like Satan masquerading as an angel of light. “We see our guards not as guards at all, but as pleasant custodians in clerical robes or casual suits. They’ve been to graduate school (seminary) where many of them mastered the techniques of friendly manipulation…” (p. 31, parenthesis added).

Brian, come clean. That’s not a shout out, is it? That’s a bit of an introductory dig. We’ve been dissed, right? Is this really how we want to invite charitable conversation?

So…now…if I “respond” to Brian with any difference of opinion, that puts me in the camp (remember, he said “many of them” not a few) of those manipulative pastors who seek to control their congregations through fear (techniques learned in “graduate school”—where do pastors go for graduate school?—seminary). So I’m in a double-bind because I’ve pastored three churches and I now equip pastors at a seminary.

The examples could go on and on. These are simply two of Brian’s somewhat subtle illustrative introductions. Read the book and you’ll stumble upon a batch of specific less-than-charitable statements about those who disagree with Brian.

They don’t feel like a “gentle lob” in tennis. They come across like the gauntlet being laid down in a jousting match, like an En Garde” in fencing, like a “glove slap” in a duel, or like a Klingon Bat’leth line-up (you have to be a Star Trek fan).

I’m going to try to follow Brian’s ground rules of charitable conversation, but hopefully more as a friendly tennis match than as, “I challenge you to a duel!” Perhaps the imagery from Proverbs fits best, “Faithful are the wounds of a friend” (Proverbs 27:6). Some of Brian’s words are biting, wounding, sarcastic, in-your-face (yep, mild-mannered Brian). I’ll try to take them as faithful wounds from a friend (believing the best about Brian’s intentions). So…when I’m a tad playful, or sarcastic, or telling-it-like-it-is, please allow me the benefit of the doubt, also.

The Rest of the Story

In “Part 2,” I’ll further explain my focus—what I’m calling “the personal ministry of the Word.” In relationship to Brian’s ten questions, I’ll introduce two themes—the sufficiency of Scripture and progressive sanctification—as they relate to “biblical counseling” and “spiritual formation.”

Join the Conversation

What implications do you see for “the personal ministry of the Word” from Brian’s ten questions in A New Kind of Christianity?

Tags: A New Kind of Christianity, Biblical Counseling, Brian McLaren, Christianity, McLaren, Spiritual Formation

6 Views on Brian McLaren’s A New Kind of Christianity

Brian McLaren’s book, A New Kind of Christianity: Ten Questions That Are Transforming the Faith, is causing quite the stir on the Net. I’ve collated links to several reviews.

Tim Challies

Tim Challies has penned a strong (speaking the truth in love) general response at his site. It’s well worth reading.

Mike Wittmer

For a detailed, point-by-point, loving, logical, and theological response, I encourage you to visit Mike Wittmer’s site. Mike has posted responses to each of Brian’s ten questions. 

*The Introduction

*Question 1: What Is the Overarching Story Line of the Bible?

*Question 2: How Should the Bible Be Understood?

*Interlude: The Defining Issue—The Creation/Fall/Redemption Narrative

*Question 3: Is God Violent?

*Question 4: Who Is Jesus and Why Is He Important?

*Question 5, Part 1: What Is the Gospel?

*Question 5, Part 2: What Is the Gospel?

*Question 6: What Do We Do about the Church?

*Question 7: Can We Find a Way to Address Human Sexuality?

*Questions 8-9: Can We Find a Better Way of Viewing the Future? and How Should Followers of Jesus Relate to People of Other Religions?

*Question 10: How Can We Translate Our Quest into Action?

Kevin DeYoung

Kevin DeYoung, over at his Gospel Coalition blog, DeYoung, Restless, and Reformed has a two-part post. He’s also updated and expanded his response to the book in PDF format.

*Christianity and McLarenism, Part 1

*Christianity and McLarenism, Part 2

*Christianity and McLarenism, in PDF.

Scot McKnight

Christianity Today has posted a review by Scot McKnight, professor at North Park University. McKnight has been relatively sympathetic to some of McLaren’s past writings. However this review states that the book is not so much revolutionary, but evolutionary. You can read it here.  

Panel from Southern Baptist Theological Seminary

A panel of professors from the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in this post calls the book “a fresh take on an old lie.”

You can view the video of the entire panel discussion here.

My Take (Bob Kellemen)

I’ve posted a multi-part series with a different slant on the book. What are the implications of McLaren’s ten questions for the personal ministry of the Word? Or, put another way, What is a biblical counseling and spiritual formation response to McLaren’s take on the ten questions?    

*Introduction: Brian McLaren, I Accept Your Invitation

*Overview: A Biblical Counseling Response to Brian McLaren

*Question 1: The Narrative Question

*Question 2: The Authority Question 

*Question 3: The God Question

*Question 4: The Jesus Question

*Question 5: The Gospel Question

*Question 6: The Church Question

*Question 7: The Sex Question

*Question 8: The Future Question

*Question 9: The Pluralism Question

*Question 10: The What Now Question 

*Conclusion: The Final Word and the Word After That

*Final Recap: Links

*Free Resource # 1: I’ve collated my entire blog series into a Word Document. Visit: A Conversation about Brian McLaren’s A New Kind of Christianity

*Free Resource # 2: I’ve interacted with some of these issues in another free Word Document. Visit: Just Where Did the Emergent Idea of Salvation Emerge From? 

Join the Conversation

What are your thoughts on McLaren’s book, Challies’ review, Wittmer’s reviews, McKnight’s review, the SBTS review, and my series?

Tags: A New Kind of Christianity, Book Review, Brian McLaren, DeYoung, Gospel Coalition, Kevin DeYoung, Mike Wittmer, Tim Challies

Recently Moody Press released Why We’re Not Emergent: By Two Guys Who Should Be. The “Emergent Church” (EC) is a name given to a loosely knit “group” of Christians who see the church emerging out of its tryst with modernism and emerging into and beyond the post-modern era. Because of its very post-modern way of thinking/being, definitions become nebulous. If you want to learn more, read the book. I highly recommend it.

Salvation and Eternal Life

My thoughts today relate to one aspect of emergent thinking: salvation and eternal life. As is true with much in the EC, they tend to throw the proverbial baby out with the bath water.

Listen to what one EC leader, Spencer Brooks, says about salvation. “I am discovering to my wonder, joy, and amazement that I have mistakenly placed the emphasis of the good news on the eternal. In the Gospels . . . people could become a part of the Kingdom of God . . . not a heavenly dwelling but the place where God is King.”

Let that quote percolate in your mind while we read what another EC leader, Brian McLaren, shares about the kingdom versus salvation. He claims that the stuff of our evangelistic tracts—“God’s grace, God’s forgiveness . . . the free gift of salvation”—is, at best, only a “footnote to a gospel that is much richer, grander, and more alive, a gospel that calls you to become a disciple and to disciple others, in authentic community, for the good of the world.”

Come Let Us Dialogue Together

I could dissect these quotes (excuse me, in the EC, people don’t dissect, they dialogue and converse—so I could converse about these quotes) from many perspectives. However, given my passion for church history and given the EC’s hatred for modernity, here’s the point. The EC would have us believe that the church’s focus on salvation as something you get in the future rather than as something you are now is a result of Enlightenment modernism.

I have news for them . . . long before the Enlightenment, Christians focused on both—salvation as a future gift and as a present reality. Again, I could share much more about this both/and focus. But since the EC denigrates the focus on salvation-equals-eternal life, and since they claim this is a thoroughly modern facet of Christianity (and, therefore, evil to its core—bad, really, really bad), dialogue with me as we briefly focus on their historical fallacy.

Historical Fallacy

As many of you know, I have studied church history for over a quarter century. The church fathers, the desert mothers, the medieval scholastics and the medieval mystics, the Reformers and the Counter-Reformers, men and women, black and white and brown all lived today in light of tomorrow. They all emphasized salvation as the future hope that sustains us now. Yes, the Kingdom had already broken in. Yes, they wanted to live differently now. But, they only survived and thrived because they remembered the future—salvation as their future, eternal hope.

Writing Sacred Friendships: Listening to the Voices of Feminine Soul Care-Givers and Spiritual Directors, my co-author, Susan Ellis, and I have over 1,000 pages of research notes. More than 1/3 of those pages highlight salvation as our future, eternal, heavenly hope. Now, it is possible, I suppose, that all of these godly women, living pre-Enlightenment, could have all gotten it wrong all the time. But that’s not really the point. The EC folks insist that salvation as eternal life later and not only or primarily as eternal life now, is modern. That is, it started in the 1700s with the Enlightenment.

Hmm. Someone should tell the female martyrs of the first and second centuries, like Perpetua, that they were impacted by a movement that did not start for another 1,500 years! Someone should tell the desert mothers of the second through fourth centuries that they were influenced by a movement that did not start for another 1,300 years! Someone should tell the women of the Reformation that they were infected by a movement that did not start for another 100 years!

Before we contextualize the nature of these women’s eternal hope, dialogue with me about another group of historical believers who also focused on salvation as eternal hope. Many of you know that I co-authored with my African American friend, Karole Edwards, Beyond the Suffering: Embracing the Legacy of African American Soul Care and Spiritual Direction. Granted, some of these African American believers lived after the Enlightenment (though some lived before it). However, historically there is no evidence that enslaved African American Christians had any exposure to Enlightenment thinking. But guess what? These non-Enlightenment African American believers highlighted salvation as a future eternal hope.

Situational Pomposity

Now, let’s contextualize this motif of salvation as future eternal hope. In letter after letter, in journal entry after journal entry, in martyrdom report after report, in repeated conversion narratives, in repeated slave narratives—in other words—everywhere, suffering women and African Americans looked to their future eternal salvation as their only hope to survive and be sustained through the horrible abuse they were enduring.

Now, here’s the point. The leadership of the Emergent Church is predominantly lily white, upper class, affluent, well-to-do, country-club-like, and male. In terms of their experience of life, they have had it made in the shade. They have lived the good life. So, it is so easy for them to say, “Thinking about salvation as future eternal life is selfish, shallow, and modern!”

Well, historically it is hardly modern.

And personally, experientially—it is hardly shallow.

Instead, for the oppressed, the suffering, and the persecuted it is pre-modern and it is deep. It reaches from before the dawn of time into time to give all those who are currently oppressed a future hope so they can draw a line in the sand of retreat, so they can survive, and, yes, through Christ’s grace, so they can thrive.

Biblical Sanity

Eternal life for the great masses of persecuted and suffering Christians has always been both/and. It has always been salvation later and the strength to live for Christ now in light of the future hope.

Isn’t it fascinating that this emergent idea of salvation only as a now thing did not emerge from an oppressed people. It is easy for those living a life of ease to say that “the free gift of salvation” is only “a footnote to a gospel that is much richer.” Oh yeah? Take some time to read the plethora of primary sources where pre-modern, non-Enlightenment Christians clung to the biblical view of salvation as an eternal future that gives hope for today.

So perhaps when you mix one part life-of-ease and one part historical-inaccuracy (and one part diminishing-original-sin . . . but that’s a blog for another day) you bake a fluffy cake that claims it is sinfully modern and shallow to emphasize the Gospel as focusing on eternal salvation later. But let the yeast of suffering and history infiltrate that mix, and your cake crumbles.

Applying Church History to Ministry

What has motivated my twenty-five-year study of church history? My passion for relating truth to life. I want to learn from that great cloud of witnesses how they applied God’s truth to human relationships.

Guess what? With suffering people 100% of the time soul physicians helped them to find healing hope by looking candidly at misery now in light of a future where there will be no more tears.

The EC in all things claims to want to be relevant. Relevance has been elevated by the EC to God-like status.

Okay, someone explain to me how in the world it is relevant to suffering people to jettison an other-worldly, future-worldly perspective?

The EC also claims that in all things they want to express concern for the least of these. In fact, they correctly define one aspect of kingdom living as active compassion on the least of these.

Okay, someone explain to me how in the world it is compassionate when the “most of these” (the affluent) jettison an other-worldly, future-worldly perspective that for 2,000 years has been the only perspective which has brought sustaining comfort and healing hope to “the least of these”?

Truth Really Does Matter

You see, truth really does matter. Historical truth matters. Biblical truth matters. I have no qualms with the EC folks reminding me that salvation ought to impact how I live today. I agree 100%.

But I have big problems with anyone telling me, and telling suffering Christians that our future salvation, our eternal life are the crumbs off the table. I’m sorry, but those “crumbs” have nourished hurting hearts and hungry souls since the Cross.

Take away “God’s grace, God’s forgiveness, and the free gift of salvation” and you rob and abuse every sinner who ever lived—which is every person who ever lived except our Savior—the one who promised us eternal life for now and for forever.

I’ve been asked frequently, “Bob, what do you think of Brian McLaren’s latest book, ‘The Secret of Jesus’?” Here’s my response/review.

As an English major, genre is rightly extremely important to author Brian McLaren. Before interpreting any book, a reader must understand the book’s nature, purpose, and audience. Such is certainly true with “The Secret Message of Jesus.”

Once a reader understands McLaren’s intended audience and purpose with that audience, McLaren’s consistent emphasis on the “newness” of his interpretation begins to make more sense. Here’s his message (stop now if you don’t like the end of the story being ruined by a reviewer): Jesus was a revolutionary who spoke not only about life in heaven later, but also about life on earth now, and not only about individual life now, but about corporate life, societal life, national, political life.

Here’s the thing. I kept reading and thinking, “Yeah, so, how is that novel?” In the Evangelical circles in which I travel, this is simply not the “neo” or hidden message that McLaren makes it out to be. Yes, in these circles Jesus offering eternal life in heaven is an oft repeated refrain. However, equally vital in these circles is the fact that Jesus has a message for us today—a message about how we live together individually and corporately.

So, the secret message of Jesus is not nearly so secret even in the conservative Evangelical circles that McLaren is prone to critique. In fact, in the Eastern Orthodox Church, in Mainline Protestant Churches, in the Catholic Church, in Charismatic Churches, in African American Churches, and even in Conservative Protestant Churches, Jesus is often preached as a Revolutionary whose message mandates societal change now. The Gospel, in these groups, has both individual-salvific and a socio-political ramifications.

Undoubtedly, McLaren disagrees with my assessment, especially of Evangelicals, as the message of this book and most of his recent works makes plain. Perhaps that’s one reason why some Evangelicals feel a tad confused and even unfairly judged by McLaren. He doesn’t like their myopic, judgmental, exclusivistic ways (as he perceives them). However, it does feel a bit attacking to be called such, especially if you have, in fact, been trying to humbly live the beautiful, magical God life in all its fullness just as much as McLaren has. . . . Perhaps they haven’t missed the point quite as much as McLaren suggests. Perhaps, instead, they have pursued the point in mysterious, subtle ways in their homes, churches, neighborhoods, and places of employments—in ways that gentler eyes might see if they had eyes to see. . . .

So, what gives? Why the build up about a new, secret understanding of Jesus? “It’s the audience!” McLaren wants to reach a secular, educated, somewhat liberal audience that has been turned off by their image of Jesus either as an other-worldly Savior or a this-world Pharisaical Judge. McLaren wants to entice these folks to reconsider the stereotype of Jesus that has offended them. I applaud his efforts. And, I encourage readers and reviewers to read McLaren’s message in this light. Otherwise, you will likely be scratching your head with me wondering why this message seems much less secretive than McLaren stresses.

As for the message itself, as always Brian McLaren uses his English major writing skills quite well. “The Secret Message of Jesus” is a page-turner. Even though his message will not be novel to many who will end up reading this book, the author does present it in a captivating way.

As example of his fluid writing style, consider chapter 7 (“The Demonstration of the Message”). I have never read a more engaging, thought-provoking, and enlightening discussion of “miracles” (signs to signify and wonders to make us wonder) and their relationship to the kingdom, then I read in this chapter.

Chapter 18 (“The Borders of the Kingdom”) is another penetrating, helpful, insightful, and practical chapter. I won’t spoil this one for you, but if you’ve ever wondered about the exclusive message of the kingdom (“Repent!”), the inclusive message of the kingdom (“All you who are thirsty and sick, come and drink and be healed”), and how this seeming paradox relates, then read this chapter.

What, then, is this radical “kingdom now” message of Jesus? It has current application individually and societally. Individually, according to McLaren, it focuses on an “interactive relationship with God” through Christ. This is why, in McLaren’s eyes, Jesus spoke in parables. He wanted to use cryptic images to spark our imaginations and prompt our curiosity so that we would humbly engage God, and be engaged by God, in dialogue about how to live the God life.

Corporately, the message is a scandalous call to changing planet Earth now. CEOs cut their mega-salaries and hike the salaries of entry level workers. Corporations care more about product safety than profit margins. Politicians wonder more about how their policies impact world peace than how their sound bites affect poll numbers. Soccer moms care less about their daughters’ playing time and more about being a playful secret agent of the kingdom.

Hmm. In a sense, isn’t this Charles M. Sheldon’s “In His Steps”? We individually ask, “What would Jesus do?” Our individual responses light a candle that causes an epidemic of “passing it on” to others, eventually resulting in world-wide change as the kingdom reign of Christ becomes a practical reality.

One area that many will likely struggle with, both conservative Evangelicals and liberal seekers, is McLaren’s attempted descriptions of heaven. Since the “kingdom of heaven” for McLaren is this-worldly, he must address the obvious question, “What then of the future heaven, of future life?” In chapter five, McLaren briefly discusses the phrase “eternal life” making it about entering now into the abundant kingdom life that Jesus inaugurated. In chapter twenty, he focuses on the eternal, after-life heaven. He tells us what it is not: harps, clouds, ethereal, disembodied. This is vital. But, he does not really tell us what it is. If this is intended to entice seekers, based upon a multitude of conversations with intellectual seekers, I doubt that it will allure them.

For those interested in a thoroughly biblical, captivating, and motivational view of the after life, I highly recommend Randy Alcorn’s opus, “Heaven” (a one-word title, but a 500-page masterpiece). “Heaven” makes heaven, well, very earthy. Alcorn’s descriptions so powerfully portray the next life that they change the way we live this life. In fact, his application is similar to McLaren’s: live now for the least of these.

Whereas “Heaven” is Alcorn’s epic about the next world, “The Secret Message” is McLaren’s classic about this world. He says it best in chapter 9 (“You Can’t Keep a Secret”). “Jesus was master of making the music of life—not just with wood and string, tuners and frets, but with skin and bone, smile and laughter, shout and whisper, time and space, food and drink. He invited the disciples to learn to make beautiful life-music in his secret revolutionary kingdom-of-God way. He helped each of them learn the disciplines and skill of living in the kingdom of God” (p. 77). Much like Dallas Willard, McLaren is reminding us that kingdom-living then and now involves interacting with and imitating the life of Jesus. (For in-depth, theological, and practical discussions of kingdom living now, read Willard: “The Spirit of the Disciplines,” “The Divine Conspiracy,” and “Renovation of the Heart.”) Though possibly not quite so secretive as suggested, the message is well worth knowing, living, and sharing.

Yes, know, live, and share the message of the kingdom of God. It is, as McLaren poetically recounts, the dream of God, the revolution of God, the mission of God, the party of God, the network of God, and the dance of God. Who in their right mind would choose to evade such an invitation?

Tags: Biblical Counseling, Christian Counseling, Church, Discipleship, Equipping, Kellemen, Ministry, Pastors, RPM Ministries, Soul Care, Spiritual Direction, Spiritual Formation