"Follow Me!"

Could you imagine hearing these words from a stranger and dropping your every belonging and willingly following Him?

I really do not know where to start but to say that lately I have had this one idea or thought that I just cannot seem to shake. Well, this thought has to do with commitment. I know that commitment can be a frightening word to some; actually, the idea of committing to something is very difficult for most and is a very frightening thing to encounter. However, the opposite extreme is equally frightening.

What I am referring to is the idea that instead of committing to anything, we have become a society (church) that is unwilling to commit or surrender our desires.

We justify this by "signing on" to a particular “cause” or “charity” but heaven forbid they ask for some time or commitment. I have come to a realization as to why we do not commit. We simply do not demand commitment.

It is easy to get someone to wear a fashionable bracelet and to get a few bucks for charity, because we can get the tax deduction. I have been listening to a Christian radio station on the internet, and they are a “listener supported” radio station and every time they advertise to help support them, they make a point to note that your giving is tax-deductible. Now, tax-deductions are a good thing, but I have become saddened that one of the methods to get people to “support” them is to encourage that the gift is tax-deductible. As believers, the idea of reaching the lost should be enough to give to them, whether we get a deduction or not.

Currently in the news, they have been showing the evictions of the Jews in the Gaza Strip. Now, my particular opinion is not important on that whole ordeal, but it made me think about our (Western) convictions and commitments. Many of the Jews would stay in the Synagogue or in their homes until they were physically removed.

That is commitment!

When I was a child, there was a part of the Church service called the “Invitation.” It usually followed the “Sermon” and was followed by the “Offering.” I know that immediately, the mental image is the Billy Graham Crusade that calls for masses of people to come a pray a simple prayer. Well, I understand that, but at this particular church, they changed it to be called the “Call to Commitment.” They believed, as I do now, that we have almost made it too simple to call people to come and “make a decision” to pray for salvation.

I believe that we have quenched the Spirit of God. We have followed the example of the “causes” to simply ask people to “sign-on” with what we are doing, rather than demanding a commitment, not to the church itself, but to God Himself.

I know that this sounds cynical, but it is reality.

The story that comes to mind is in Matthew 19, where Jesus is walking and a young man calls out, “Rabbi! Rabbi! What must I do to have eternal life?”

Jesus replied, “Follow the law – honor your mother & father, do not murder, do not steal, do not commit adultery, do not give false testimony and love your neighbor.”

The young man said, “I have done these.”

Jesus commanded, “Sell your possessions and come follow me.”

The young man went away saddened.

Now, how come we do not have calls to commitment in the church like this anymore? Is it because we need their tithe? Or, do we not want to make people uncomfortable?

What is it?

Also, I fear that many in the church do not have a real relationship with God through Jesus Christ as we think or even expect. We have made it based on a “Romans Road” salvation plan. Now, do not get me wrong on some of these things. There have been times of great revival in our country with Crusades and Tent Meetings, but I just think there is more to it than the preaching of the Gospel and expecting people to pray silently in their chairs.

We must, as Jesus did, demand commitment.

Jesus looked out to Peter in the boat and said, “Come Follow Me!” Peter immediately left everything and followed Him. In a similar way Jesus called Zebedee’s sons.

The response was a simple “yes” or “no,” but the commitment was enormous. All of the disciples except for John were killed because of their unyielding commitment to Jesus. My desire is that I could live like this and that I would teach this kind of surrender to my children.

Likewise, I pray that the church will decide to make disciples and followers of Jesus rather than being so focused on the show. We must demand commitment. I know that this is not an easy thing, but we must. If we do not, then we have failed in making Disciples as Christ commanded us to do.

Identity

I look down at my wrist and see the “Livestrong” wristband which marks some sense of identity. I see everywhere that there are all different colors now for these wristbands. They are used to identify someone to a particualr "cause" or purpose, such as Cancer awareness like my wristband or for the elimination of poverty like the "One" wristbands (which I also have).



It seems that everyone just wants to be identified with something of “cause” or purpose. Well, then I began to ponder on the phrase, “The ‘Cause’ of Christ.” I know that if you have been attending a church anywhere, you surely have heard this phrase before. If not, then please just bear with me.

Is following Jesus really something that should be put into the same category of the cause for cancer, abuse, poverty, missing children, or any other “cause” that we want to identify with?

I am struggling with calling it a "cause" for Christ, rather it seems to me that we are not called by Jesus to live a cause, rather we are commanded to surrender and follow Him in such a way that we live our lives for Him alone. That is not a “feel-good” cause or stance. I would venture to say that Peter did not die a martyrs death for a cause, rather he died for his belief in Jesus as the Christ, Son of the Living God.

If we were to examine our lives and live in such a way that we were in complete surrender, then the above mentioned causes would be parts of our lives as a whole.

In a similar vain, I recall my childhood striving to obtain a fake ID. I know you are all perfect and would have never done such a thing, but nevertheless, I did. I wanted to be identified as someone who was older and more responsible in order to purchase smokeless tobacco; only to discover that I was not carded because of my appearance. I guess I appeared older than most and was able to simply make the purchases.




However, lately in the church it seems that no one wants the identity of “Christian.” Now, I know that this may seem odd, but it is true. I have had people tell me that they would prefer to be called a “Christ-follower” “Believer” or “Fill in the denomination name.” Yes, the last is true I have had people who would rather be identified as a Baptist than a Christian. On the other hand, I have had people, including myself who did not want to be identified with certain denomination or group. Yet we seem to be quick to identify with being Democrat or Republican. It is easy to take on the identity of organizations or parties, but why do we shy away from being called, “Christian?”

Better still, I have noticed a title or identity that we rarely use anymore – “God-Fearing.” Yet, this is probably one of the most powerful names that could be given. That is another topic for another day.

Back to my story, I realized that my appearance was what allowed me to do things that others could not. It gave me a sense of power or authority that no one else had. Well, this is also true for “Christians.”

We are God’s Ambassadors.

Wow, now you want to talk about a cool identity. We are given the same authority and power as God Himself. We do not need a card or a wristband; rather we need a submitted heart and a humble spirit to God. Once this is done, others will notice our appearance and not question our identity. They will recognize that we are “set-apart.”

Like the Apostle Paul, our identity must be the cross of Christ. As he says, "I am Crucified with Christ, it is no longer I but Christ who lives in me."

"Emerging Evangelism"

I understand that the title can be seen as an oxymoron, but I have been struggling with the notion of the "Emerging" church vs. the "Evangelical" church.

Depending on the audience, both of these names have a negative meaning. The word "Emerging" has been made synonymous with "post-modernism" "Seeker-sensitive" "Purpose-Driven" etc., and the word "Evangelical" has been made synonymous with "fundamental" "Traditional" "Institutional" etc..

On the other side of the same coin, these can both be viewed in very positive lights as well. The "Emerging" church is "community" "service" & "fresh." Similarly, the "Evangelical" church is "bold" "grounded" & "secure." I understand that these opinions are strictly my own, but nonetheless, they seem somewhat accurate in the minds of most.

So, the debate rages between others; however, this debate is being fought inside me.

I wrestle with "right" or "wrong." My fear is that we forfeit one for the other, so currently I am curious to know if we can have both. We forfeit the "secure community." We eliminate the "grounded" theology for "fresh" ideas that have no basis in the scripture. Similarly, we surrender the ability to reach others in a "fresh" way because it shakes the "secure" understanding of how things have been done in the past.

So, I will wrestle with this simple question, "Can we have an Emerging Evangelism?"