As I indicated in a previous post, when encountering the purpose-driven, seeker-sensitive methodology in churches, I wrestle with the temptation to think that something is wrong with me. I confess to allowing fear and doubt access to my mind, wondering if there is something so deficient in my Christianity that I experience such revulsion with this new ecclesiology. So, discovering others who regard this movement with similar misgivings is comforting. Especially when they capture the issue with such eloquent simplicity. Well-known pastor-teacher John MacArthur put it this way in his book Ashamed of the Gospel:
“Many in the church today believe that the only way to reach the world is to give the unchurched multitudes what they want…. Subtly the overriding goal is church attendance and worldly acceptability rather than a transformed life. Preaching the Word and boldly confronting sin are seen as archaic, ineffectual means of winning the world. After all, those things actually drive most people away. Why not entice people into the fold by offering what they want, creating a friendly, comfortable environment, and catering to the very desires that constitute their strongest urges? As if we might get them to accept Jesus by somehow making Him more likable or making His message less offensive. That kind of thinking badly skews the mission of the church.
The Great Commission is not a marketing manifesto. Evangelism does not require salesmen, but prophets. It is the Word of God, not any earthly enticement, that plants the seed for the new birth (1 Peter 1:23). We gain nothing but God’s displeasure if we seek to remove the offense of the cross.
Something is wrong with a philosophy that relegates God and His Word to a subordinate role in the church. It is clearly unbiblical to elevate entertainment over biblical preaching and worship in the church service. Sadly, some actually believe that their salesmanship can bring people into the kingdom more effectively than a sovereign God—a philosophy that has opened the door to worldliness in the church.”
I am cheered to learn that the entire protestant landscape has not been deceived into imbibing the Hybels/Warren kool-aid. That doesn’t make it any easier for those of us who are bereft of alternatives in our own communities, yet it gives us reason for hope. God has not abandoned His sheep; He will respond to their cries for proper shepherds. May we depend on Him and seek His guidance to discern them when they come.
—From John MacArthur, Ashamed of The Gospel: When the Church Becomes Like the World (Wheaton, ILL: Crossway Books, 2001).
Hat-tip, OldTruth.com
3 responses so far ↓
Eclectic Christian // July 7, 2008 at 6:31 pm
Greetings from an “almost went to Regent but couldn’t afford it, so went to Canadian Theological Seminary instead”, and fellow traveller in Southern Africa.
I stumbled across your blog, and must admit that I haven’t read much of it yet, but I did want to comment that the “kool-aid” you mention is a reference to Jim Jones cult, and the fact that everyone was forced to drink “kool-aid”. So what you have done in effect is equate Hybels and Warren to a cult.
I know that Hybels is very commited to preaching the gospel, but he wants to communicate it in terms that the world understands. For me, this is what being seeker sensitive is all about. I have seen it done very well and I have seen it done badly.
It is very very hard for a congregation to make this transition, and often many people are left unhappy. It is for this reason that “seeker-sensitive” has become a swear word. But these same people need to ask themselves “what were we doing to reach out to our neighbours for Christ before these changes?”
Being seeker-sensitive doesn’t mean that you have to give up the gospel. But it does mean that you have to touch others with the gospel in ways they understand and to which they can respond.
kmduffy // July 9, 2008 at 2:10 am
Glad to have your visit, Eclectic. Sorry to correct your interpretation, but the kool-aid reference actually predates the Jonestown Massacre; it comes from the ’60’s antics of Ken Keasy and the Merry Pranksters, who laced kool-aid with hallucinogenics. “Drinking the kool-aid” took one to an alternate reality; the phrase was popularized by Tom Wolfe’s book, “The Electric Kool-Aid Acid Test. ” That it bears some resemblance to the Jonestown incident is coincidental. Your comment that it equated Hybels and Warren with Jones’ cult is sheer eisegesis. At any rate, if seeker-sensitivity was only about politeness and interpretation, it would not pose the challenges it does for those who possess a reformed orthodox theology. Instead, it appears to be something of a Trojan Horse. To that extent, it is more than worrisome.
Thanks again for the visit and the comment. Blessings!
Eclectic Christian // July 17, 2008 at 12:14 pm
Hi kmduffy,
Thanks for the updated info. I haven’t been here for a few days. Despite what you said about Tom Wolfe etc., I think you will find that if you google the term “drinking the kool-aid” that most people would have understood the term in the way that I did. So yes, my exegesis was in fact eisegesis, because I missed your original intent. However most readers would have interpreted it the same way and drawn the same comparison.
I think the comments of the following post are interesting related to one of the largest seeker sensitive churches in canada, because it shows the difference between how outside people view seeker sensitive churches versus how they view themselves.
Here is the link: http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/recommendation-and-review-the-end-of-religion-by-bruxy-cavey
Leave a Comment