The above sermon will shake you to the core. Tope didn’t mention those who have recently been denying hell by name, but his disagreement with them could not have been clearer. This is a compassionate yet very direct sermon on a painful but important subject. It was my delight to pray with someone at the end who wanted to become a Christian, and I know there were others. But perhaps the real targets were people like me. People who theologically believe this teaching but don’t live as though it was true. I urge you for the second time in two weeks to watch a sermon by my pastor. If you want to download it, visit the Jubilee Church London site.

The above sermon was one of Tope’s finest. It had me squirming in my seat from the first sentence. You will do well to listen. You will do well to pray as I have today, “God give me opportunities to put this into practice.” May God use this sermon to wake many of us up to evangelism. Downloads and more sermons available on the Jubilee site.

Mark Driscoll is at his very best in the following clip. Ever wondered how family and mission entwine, especially in a growing church where you don’t know anyone? Ever wished for more intimacy and a greater relational feel in your church? Ever felt neglected and rejected in your church? Ever felt like your church was not your home? Watch this clip and be prepared to be blown away. I love the way he begins: Family is a category of relationship that the world knows nothing about. What’s better than friends? Family. It’s a huge painful annoying mess, family is awkward, trying and hard, but you love the family, and you serve the family, and you don’t give up on family. This sermon speaks about our need to find a way to contribute to our church. commit to it, and connect to a small group. Christians must change from being consumers to being active participants in the mission of God. When you are contributing to something, you will feel connected to it.

The full sermon this clip comes from is available from the Mars Hill Website.

Richard Cunningham interviewed Rebecca Manley Pippet from Salt Shaker Ministries one evening at New Word Alive about evangelism in place of a sermon.

She spoke about how “torpedo evangelism” was not helpful. She gave the example of a woman who quite literally threw a gospel tract at her once.

People are afraid of evangelism.

We are afraid of offending. Becky’s recommendation is to try beginning the conversation by telling the person, “Look, I want to tell you about Jesus, but I am afraid I will offend you, would you tell me if it feels like I am coming on too strong?”

We are afraid of not being able to answer the questions. We don’t have to be able to answer all the questions, and should be confident enough to say, “I don’t know” if we don’t.

We are afraid that people will discover we are not perfect. But in fact, being real is attractive. We should be willing to let people know who we are, warts and all, and point to Jesus, not us.

How do we do it? Jesus was in the world and radically different but radically identified. Jesus loved people and listened to them. We mustn’t become so identified we become identical.

There are often three phases to successful personal evangelism: cultivate curiosity, proclaim the gospel, then reap the harvest.

We need to learn to use language which intrigues people, e.g. find their likely objection and mention it before them.

Becky is a very inspirational communicator, and at the end of the talk the vast majority of people responded by standing to indicate that they wanted to recommit themselves to sharing the gospel.

I received another email (see the first), which I have permission to share anonymously. It shows that I was not entirely right. I still believe, however, that for most people leading our evangelism with creationism is not the best way. I think that stories like this tell us that we must treat every inquirer as an individual, and what might be helpful for one person might not be for another:

My email may be one of so few that your point (I am convinced that very few unsaved people will be converted to Christianity by arguing with them to convert them from an evolutionist to a creationist) is proved or not, but thought it worth sharing none the less.

Brought up in a completely non-Christian environment and subject to all the usual media / school output of evolution as fact. It seemed plain as day to me (as an A Level student) that evolution removed any need for God. That didn’t mean I’d ever fully understood how a fish that jumped out of the sea ever came to be anything other than a dead fish no matter how many times fish did it. However, I was astonished to find people who believed in a creation which led to me reading a booklet written by a friend’s mum.

I was equally astonished to find the book making sense and creation suddenly seemed to make a lot more sense than evolution. Hand on heart this was a massive factor in my ongoing wrestling with ‘who is this Jesus and what does it mean to be in relationship with him’. This was not least in the area of the reliability of the Bible. I laughed out loud when reading Genesis first time – not chapters 1 – 3, but the the ages of the people in the following chapters. But within a few months of my ‘creation conversion’ the final step came along.

I have never gone back on my unbelief in evolution though I don’t make an issue of it now as I first did. The change came while at a seminary when arguing about this issue with a friend (curiously my seminary took quite a strong stand for evolution and holding a different view felt as abnormal as you’d expect it to feel in a ‘normal’ college). In the argument I said ‘Well if evolution’s not true then I’m not a Christian’ which was a poor attempt in winning the argument. The words stayed with me and led to me accepting there were other views.

I still think it’s an important issue and one that people (perhaps students more than others) still want to engage with particularly with Professor Dawkins prominence and incredible influence on the media. Also, non-evolution creation doesn’t seem to require the same theological somersaults that theistic evolution requires when it comes to sin & death. However there is so much material these days and some of it’s so technical that there just isn’t time to find clarity for most of us.

Where I would hang my ‘if that’s not true them I’m not a Christian’ hat these days is much more to do with Jesus, and especially the resurrection (1 Cor 15:15-19).

UPDATE – To avoid confusion, please note that this post should not be interpreted as as reflecting my personal views on the subject of creation and evolution. I was simply noting that people who believe in God have different opinions on this matter, and that in a number of cases, to focus on this issue in our initial evangelism is not wise.

Many Christians will not agree with the perspective on evolution expressed by the scientists featured in the Test of FAITH project. But if the DVD I viewed late last year is anything to go by, this tour will be thought-provoking and interesting. Indeed, the evening, as well as the materials connected with the DVD, promise to explore the range of different Christian responses to various aspects of modern science.

I am convinced that very few unsaved people will be converted to Christianity by arguing with them to convert them from an evolutionist to a creationist. Thus, an evening like this may help you build bridges to atheist friends by pointing out that it is possible for people to believe in God and Darwin. Personally I would argue that in most conversations the evolutionary issue is not the root one, but rather our rebellion against God. Telling someone, “So you think creationism is crazy, well get this, I believe that a crucified corpse rose again three days later and now rules the universe and demands your obedience,” should succeed in changing the subject!

Here is how the tour is described:

We are putting on a nationwide tour that will resource, encourage and help pastors, youth workers and leaders of all kinds to answer the questions they face.

We are aiming this tour at the church leaders of today and tomorrow – including youth leaders and small group leaders, as well as those involved in evangelism and outreach. The question of whether science and faith are incompatible is not going to go away, and the Church needs to be ready to give an answer. This tour will enable that to happen.

The tour dates are as follows:

• Aberdeen School of Christian Studies (1 March)
• Holy Trinity, St Andrews (2 March)
• LST, Northwood (9 March)
• Trinity College, Bristol (10 March)
• St. John’s Nottingham (11 March)
• Cliff College, Sheffield (21 April)
• ICC, Glasgow (27 April)
• LICC, London (19 May).

Further details can be found on www.testoffaith.com

For media inquiries, please contact Dr Ruth Bancewicz: rmb67@cam.ac.uk.

Well, this blogger is back, and as you can tell from the title of this post having an identity crisis. In fact, I should warn you that I am still not in fact fully back blogging. Until my book is actually ready to submit to my publishers, I plan on continuing to mostly limit my posting to Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays, and this post like the following was written a while back.

I have been thinking for some while about definitions. I have always been happy to first of all label myself as a Christian. There is of course a lot of confusion about how we can define what is a Christian. With Billions of people holding to that name, it has loosely come to mean any “follower of Jesus”. As much as I might want to resist that and instill all kinds of content into my personal definition of Christianity, I live in a world that has defined the word very very broadly. As a result, for a form of shorthand it is helpful to use other words to define what we believe.

For most of my life, the words I have used most to describe my set of beliefs have been “Charismatic” and “Evangelical”. The meaning of “charismatic” is fairly straightforward, ie a belief in the continuation of spiritual gifts, though I do not hesitate to say that much of what happens under that label fills me with dread and revulsion. I especially resist the tendency of many charismatics to devalue the word of God, instead I really do “want it all“!

The word “evangelical” , however, seems to rapidly be becoming less clear. It was once used as a clear alternative to “liberal”. I remember meeting people in years gone by who were dismissive of us “evangelicals” and much happier to use the label “liberal” of themselves. Liberals were seen as more culturally relevant, as thinkers, as modern, and as somehow “fairer” and less “bigotted”.

The Evangelical movement once seemed to be a small minority within the church, but one that clearly stood for something. There was obviously disagreement within the movement – you could have charismatic and non-charismatic, baptist and pedobaptist, anglican and free-church, calvinist and arminians. But we all stood together and saw ourselves consciously as one movement. We read the same books, we sometimes even attended the same conferences.

The liberal movement I knew of in my youth basically died and faded away. Evangelicalism rose and became ascendent. The churches that beleived in the gospel in a dogmatic and clear way were growing. Those that rejected traditional teachings shrunk to almost nothing so that the old liberal majority suddenly seemed to have practically disappeared. For a while it almost seemed as if evangelicalism had won the day, at least in England. Evangelicals had the biggest churches, the biggest conferences, the biggest book and music sales, and even started radio and TV stations. Evangelicalism became big business.

Now, however, a new insidious tendency has arisen within this broad family. It seems to have really begun only in the last few years. Within the camp people are challenging doctrines we once all held dear and assumed were part of the definition of being evangelical. Interestingly most of the time these people only challenge one such aspect, and are very reluctant to accept the label “liberal”. I call them the neo-liberals, because at root I do not see any difference between their thinking and that of the old liberals. We might argue that liberalism was about the accomodation of theology to modern thinking. Neoliberalism is about the accomodation of theology to post modern thought. One of its key distinctives, however, is a reluctance to accept previously accepted definitions of terms and instead to redefine them to be more inclusive. So for example, rather than Steve Chalke derriding evangelicalism and separating from its institutions on the grounds they are outmoded for believing in Penal Substitution, he is working from within to redefine evangelicalism to include people who hold to his perspective. The real shame falls upon those who still claim to be orthodox and yet do not believe that doctrine is important enough to take a stand over. Are we expected to simply roll over and accept that Evangelicalism is now so broad a concept it is no longer meaningful?

The following passasge on Parableman demonstrates the problem exactly. He is trying to explain exactly what are the boundaries to modern day evangelicalism and is clearly struggling!

[Those who have some liberal views but can still be defined as evangelical] would include people who reject the substitutionary element of the atonement but retain a penal element … who support open theism but insist that God has a plan and will win in the end. . ., who are universalists of the sort that they’re convinced everyone who goes to hell will eventually repent and follow Christ once they see the consequences of not doing so, and thus evangelism is still urgent, and hell is still real but just not eternally populated . . .who are inclusivists of the sort where Christ’s sacrifice in fact atones for some in other religions because general revelation teaches them that God must provide a solution to the sin problem and trust him to do so (e.g. the C.S. Lewis view), that a homosexual lifestyle is morally ok but who feel the need to reinterpret scripture to defend such a view . . .rather than saying the Bible includes an immoral prohibition. . .

I think actual denial of inerrancy is harder to maintain while being an evangelical. The Fuller Theological Seminary model makes an effort by still insisting that scripture is infallible on any moral teaching or theology within its pages. (Some at Fuller don’t actually follow this. I know of one who thinks Paul was a complementarian but insists that we shouldn’t be, and I think that moves out of the range of evangelicalism.) But I think you can say that there are errors in dates and place names in the Bible and still count as being within evangelicalism, just on the fringes. Once you start explicitly questioning the plain moral and theological teaching of scripture without trying to reinterpret it so that you at least believe scripture teaches your view, it’s hard for me to see that as even on the fringes of evangelicalism. That’s just theological liberalism in its most plain form.

So I’m certainly open to finding liberalizing tendencies within evangelicalism. . . one can be an evangelical and hold such views. It’s a separate matter whether someone is a Christian but not an evangelical. I’m not saying here that one must be an evangelical to be a Christian. I know plenty of people whom I would not consider evangelicals but who do lay claim to being more broadly Christian. . . Some evangelicals want to restrict the term ‘Christian’ so that it only applies to evangelicals, but it’s linguistically inappropriate to do that given what the term has come to mean. READ MORE

If we accept Jeremy’s perspective (and it does seem to be rather becomming mainstream) then maybe we need another word to identify ourselves with. “Reformed” is really too restrictive as it tends to mean “Calvinist” and so excludes evangelical arminians such as Wesley. One could try and stress the five solas rather than the five points, but that probably wont do for our Arminian brothers. So, what word then? It seems to me we have only two viable alternatives short of creating a new word or concept. The term “born again” is one, but since that is more about a religious conversion experience and less about certain theological content as useful as that word is, I am not sure it is helpful in bringing definition to the movement that is rapidly emerging. That is not to say that I don’t value the concept incredibly highly. In fact, I think Piper’s book on this subject, Finally Alive is his most important volume yet!

The only other term I can come up with is “Conservative Evangelical“. For me this is ironic, as throughout most of my Christian life I was defined as clearly not belonging to that group. Conservatives were by definition it seemed not charismatic, and I would have held them in as much suspicion as they would no doubt have held me. But, as the bridges have been built, and the neoliberal assaults have unfolded, I do think that bible-believing people from many different backgrounds have been finding that we have more in common with each other than we previously realised. The internet and conferences such as Together For The Gospel, The Gospel Coalition, and New Word Alive have all been a major force for that discovery. As a result, for example, yesterday, we had Hugh Palmer of All Souls preach for us at Jubilee Church. 

I only just recently discovered that videos from Billy Graham are available free online. I had a look at the following sermon from 1958 and it was really heartwarming. O may God raise up preachers like Billy again! Billy will soon be 90 years old and some people have set up a site for people to send their stories of how Billy’s preaching touched them.

I’ve been sharing a number of quotes from Spurgeon’s The Soul Winner. Today I thought I’d share one which is quite striking. It argues that since conversion is a miracle, it is by a trail of such miracles we can know if someone is called to preach.

“A new and heavenly mind must be created by omnipotence, or the man must abide in death. You see, then, that we have before us a mighty work, for which we are of ourselves totally incapable. No minister living can save a soul; nor can all of us together, nor all the saints on earth or in heaven, work regeneration in a single person. The whole business on our part is the height of absurdity unless we regard ourselves as used by the Holy Ghost, and filled with His power. On the other hand, the marvels of regeneration which attend our ministry are the best seals and witnesses of our commission. Whereas the apostles could appeal to the miracles of Christ, and to those which they wrought in His name, we appeal to the miracles of the Holy Ghost, which are as divine and as real as those of our Lord Himself. These miracles are the creation of a new life in the human bosom, and the total change of the whole being of those upon whom the Spirit descends.”

— C.H. Spurgeon

The audio of this message can be downloaded, or you can listen to it right here:

More posts from this conference can be found on my TOAM08 label page. You can also download the mp3s of this week’s talks by subscribing to the new Newfrontiers podcast, which will be an easy way for you to get access to the mp3s for free.

Mark Driscoll began by thanking us again for having him, thanking us for the trust placed in him as someone we didn’t know, but who had a reputation for being proactive, for the reception and the new friendships, and specifically once again for Terry Virgo and Tope Koleoso, and for what he has learned.

Having been gracious, he then said, “And now I will hurt you . . .” with a twinkle in his eye. He says that he wants us to go beyond our goal of 1,000 churches and grow more quickly.

Our movement leader is Jesus. He interjected about his view of the apostolic. He briefly stated that he did believe in “capital A” Apostles whose job it was to write the New Testament. He also believes in “small a” apostles whose job it is to lead movements and church planting drives. And he believes in them for today. He also believes that Terry Virgo has such a gift and is therefore a modern-day apostle. Pointing at the crowd, he said, “This is good evidence” — meaning the movement of 600 plus churches represented in this room. Feel free to read one of my previous posts about modern day apostles if this all seems a bit strange to you.

Mark explained that the church exists because of Jesus’ desire to reach the ends of the earth. Paul was a leader under Jesus in this movement of Christ, and was responsible for the drive to the Gentiles. Paul completely ignored the rural areas and focused entirely on the cities. Mark strongly urged those of us in Newfrontiers to hear this if we want to grow faster.

If you plant a church in a rural area you will never reach the city. If you plant a church in the city you will also reach the rural areas. Everything hinges on the well-being of the cities. Cities are strategically important for two reasons. First, there are more people there, and second, culture emanates/flows from the city. City is upstream, and suburban and rural areas are downstream. The river flows one way. Culture does not come from the rural areas into the city. The only way to change culture is to transform the city.

Both Christian and non-Christian movements have always emanated from cities. It’s not the number of people, it’s the type of people. But today most cities are non-Christian and the rural areas are more Christian. So Christians become frustrated with the culture — films, music, books, art, etc. The only way to affect that is to be in the city. The key to actual change is to get upstream. We need to lead politicians, artists, musicians, etc. to Jesus. It’s not about getting a lot of people to make a difference. The degree of influence is not about the number of people, but their place upstream.

Christianity starts as an urban church planting movement. He described how he would go into a city and plant a church that could reproduce and plant out into the rural areas. Mark told us to pool our best leaders and resources into the key areas. Chief on that list is London. The world passes through London. Cities like Cape Town and Sydney and other such cities also need strong churches which will reproduce and plant more churches.

Early Christianity was a city-based movement. By 300 A.D. half of the cities of the empire were Christian while 90 per cent were still pagan. Pagan probably comes from a word which meant someone living on a farm. Urban church planting in strategic areas can become a center for a movement of its own. Multiple churches, multiple networks, multiple styles, but one mission—to obey the Great Commission.

Puritans were a movement. They were also very young—teens and 20′s. Methodism, the charismatic renewal—bigger than one denomination or network or one man. Young people tend to be at the center, at least early-on. By bringing in the students suggests that God was telling Terry, “I am planning more renewal.”

Spurgeon, Moody, Billy Graham, and others were all very young when called to ministry. What young people lack in wisdom they make up in zeal. If the older ones can make the transition from player to coach, they will do well.

Anglicanism isn’t having mass conversions right now because they are too busy fighting over who you can have sex with.

With a renewal movement going on, new churches are planted. New ways of doing things, new music, new styles, new ways of reaching out. Church planting requires new wineskins. The goal is not to plant churches, but to have converts such that it becomes necessary to plant churches.

Most movements are unaware of the scale of their influence.

Out of the movement comes supporting organizations—new songs, new books to write, etc.

Most movements come into being because of the coming of new technology. The Reformation was only possible because of the printing press. Evangelists like Billy Graham were only able to do what they did because of the newly invented amplified speaker systems, etc. The Internet is now spawning a new movement in form. We can preach the gospel to the nations with a click of a button.

Mark wants Newfrontiers to still exist when we are all dead, and to still be loving Jesus and planting churches.

Movements start as a simple organization that sees a need and a few friends club together. They come together to meet that need. God raises up a leader who the people recognize as the visible face, the one who God has called to lead them. The organization then grows and becomes a movement. Big interest is generated. More people come. The crowds grow. There is passion, purpose, mission, expansion. It can be fast and furious. Mistakes are made. Theology needs to be clarified. It can be a messy time, some people don’t fit.

During the time of growth there is pressure to become an institution. There no longer is courage, but rather a fear of failure. Founders and friends occupy all the positions of leadership. Those who have been there a long time have all the senior roles, and there is no room for the young. As soon as that happens the young guys leave to start another movement. The young guys of the past are in danger of becoming the old guys that they never used to like in the first place.

The question for every movement is — Will every seat always be filled by the founders and friends? Only this will stop it becoming an institution. Institutions guard previous change, they don’t pioneer new change. They stop listening to anyone outside of the network they’re in. They only read books by, sing songs by, listen to teaching by people from inside their movement. A movement needs humility and discernment to listen to people from outside the movement.

Driscoll was shocked to be here. He sees how willing Newfrontiers is to bring in people from outside of Newfrontiers, bringing a gift to us. You receive it and consider it. That is one of the key ways a movement can avoid becoming an institution.

Once you have an institution, the next step is to become a museum. The remnant that is left behind exists solely to tell the story. In one generation a movement can transition to being an institution and then a museum.

Mark then outlined seven ways a movement can get off-track. He acknowledged that most of this was taken from Larry Osbourne.

Doctrinally
An example of this is Vineyard. It started well, but then drifted and compromised on ecclesiology, introduced women elders, etc. and became too loose. A movement can also become too tight. A healthy movement does not debate doctrines such as the atonement, the Bible, heaven, hell, etc., but should be free to discuss secondary issues. The key is to define what you need agreement on in order to be in the movement and what you can safely differ on.

Relationships
Mark has some concern for us here. People can love their circles of friendship so much that they are unwilling to break up their circles of leadership to make more room. It’s like Peter saying, “Let’s build tents.” Mission can become their friendship and not the Great Commission. It’s not that you shouldn’t have friends. But you tend to gravitate towards your friends. This affinity and love can exclude those who are new. This can be especially true in working teams. It might suddenly be time to break up a team for the mission. Again, Mark expressed a bit of concern for us over this.

There is a bit of relational resistance, and we should really be planting at least 70-100 churches a year from a base of 200 churches like Newfrontiers has in the UK. (Ed. There are another 400 or so worldwide.)

Organizationally
This is another concern Mark has for Newfrontiers. Everything is done initially through relationships and verbally. As time goes on, things must be written down, articulated, and defined. They move from the spoken to the written. If you are unwilling to make those adjustments you can become an institution. If the reason you don’t want policies, etc. is that you don’t want to become an institution, what you will become is a very poorly organized institution.

Organizational Pride
Some movements will not sing songs unless they have been written by them; they won’t read books that have not been written by them; nor will they listen to those from outside. Mark stated that he has no concern whatsoever about Newfrontiers on this front. There are times that every movement outgrows the counsel of their leadership and need wisdom from outside. He commends Newfrontiers for being so open to outsiders teaching them.

Chasing Potential Rather Than Calling
Movements can chase too many things at once. For example, Vineyard started as a church-planting movement and then became a renewal movement. They were involved in so many other groups that they didn’t really plant churches any more. Focus on the primary calling of the movement. Mark said that so far he hears that our primary goal is church planting, but 10 to12 churches a year is too few for a movement our size if we are truly pursuing this with all of our heart. He wondered what other things we were pursuing that were diverting our energies.

Movements Stagnate Because of Lack of Publishing
There is a need to do much, much more publishing. What is your doctrine of the Holy Spirit? What is your doctrine of church planting? What is your ecclesiology? Some of these things still need to be cleaned up. Actually he feels Newfrontiers is doing better than Acts 29 on some of these points. Websites, blogging, vodcasting, etc. More statements to safeguard the movement.

Mark warned us that the next point would be his most painful point, and he wasn’t wrong. By the time he had finished with us, I don’t think there was a dry eye in the hall.

Movements Get Off-Course Because They Fail to Simultaneously Honor the Founder and the Future
Some movements so honor the founder that they shipwreck the future. Some so honor the future that they shipwreck their founder. This is the defining issue for our movement. It will determine whether our movement a one-generation movement or many. At this moment do you believe that as a movement you would tend to honor your future or your founder? Which way do you feel Newfrontiers is heading?

For the first time in the history of a Newfrontiers conference, Mark proposed a vote. We don’t vote, but went along with it just this once. Of those who were bold enough to raise a hand, 80 percent said that they felt our tendency as a movement would be towards honoring our founding leader rather than running after the future.

Driscoll agreed with those who responded that we tend to honor our founder, and we should do so! We love Terry Virgo and we should honor him. Mark said that he was only just getting to know Terry, but that he also loves him. He is a great man. He truly loves Jesus, the Scriptures, his family,and Newfrontiers. And we love him. The question is, How can we best honor him? We can do that by making sure that Newfrontiers remains a movement with a future and builds on Terry’s life work.

Mark then explained that he felt that God had given him a prophetic word for us as a movement, and for Terry in particular. This was remarkable in a way because he had said repeatedly during the week that this was an area in which he was learning from us. In his own church he had said that although he believes in gifts, they don’t use them. For someone who said he had no real models of gifts, he was about to share one that packed a heavy punch.

Looking down at Terry, who was sitting on the front row watching, he said that God had said that Newfrontiers is like a daughter to you, Terry. You have birthed it, held it, guarded it, cared for it, tended to it, prayed for it, loved it. You have been an amazing father to them.

He felt God said that, while not in the immediate future, there will come a day when you will need to walk her down the aisle and marry her to a great man so she will have children.

Driscoll urged us to pray for Terry as he is to make that transition at some point in the future. God will tell him. Be ready for it when it comes. Regularly pray for him. He asked us to commit to pray daily about this point. He said we should ask that Terry would have absolute certainty when it is time to walk it down the aisle, certainty about which man or men he should entrust her to. He looked at the crowd and declared, “You think of it a lot, but speak of it very little, because you love Terry. And you don’t want to dishonor him.”

Driscoll also warned us that we must not swing towards being all about the future. But it is the epicenter of whether we will continue to be healthy or begin to die. Pray for Terry Virgo. Pray for him every day that God will reveal to him when and how and who so that this will remain a movement. London is full of museums. We don’t need another one. We don’t need some of you to be just telling the stories in thirty years’ time. We want the praises of Jesus to still be sung.

Rick Warren once spoke on movements. He said there are six phases of renewal:

It begins and ends with personal renewal.
You keep meeting with Jesus. He is alive! Be filled with the Spirit, meeting him in the Scriptures, be overwhelmed with the grace of God. Be scandalized with the gospel. Personal renewal, enthusiasm, joy.

Next there is relational renewal
Love of God in your heart is shared. Concern for the well-being of others. Captures something of your heart. Improves marriages, children. Circle of influence. Life of Jesus by the Spirit flowing through you to extend the grace of God to others. People show up early and stay late, and they are talking. They love to sing together because they are a people. This is what happens in Newfrontiers. Personal, which leads to relational, and shows up when we sing. Again Driscoll spoke of being impressed by our worship.

Missional renewal is the next phase
As we are connected to Jesus and love one another, our heart expands. We want new churches to get planted right now. We are people of God. The Word of God and the Spirit of God sustains us and we have to get that out.

Leads to cultural renewal
Be passionate about living as a city within the city. Cultural change in our churches will then spill out to the community. Infiltrates the culture of the cities. Culture here in Newfrontiers, according to Mark, is beautiful, but it needs to multiply.

Structural renewal then needed
The way we do things is going to need to change. More systems, more policies. 70-100 plants a year at least. The measure of life in this room should squeeze out many more than ten children a year!

Institutional renewal is the ultimate goal
Changing Christian organizations that are dead. Do not give up on churches, networks, museums, colleges, even Anglicanism. We could be a source of renewal. Pour life into a dead seminary, a dead church, etc. How refreshing it is to be around renewed people! This could be a gift to the whole body of Christ. In joy, giving them hope that change is possible. He said that for the entire time he has been with us, he has been happy, which is very unusual for him. He feels his spirit has been renewed through being here. We should pray for the dead and dying places where the light of the gospel is dimming or has been snuffed out altogether. Bring hope where there is hopelessness. In Acts 29, their church planters are from many different movements and denominations. It begins with Jesus and ends with everything. Young men, you need to step up. If he asks, Who are the young leaders here? don’t point to men years older than Driscoll.

One prayer is for a bunch of 20 year old guys with hope who will plant churches and preach the gospel with hope. Be looking at all times for men in their 20′s. They will be arrogant, foolish, impetuous, critical, disorganized, and they will be perfect for the task God has for them!

At the end of this talk, we did something that in my memory we have never done in the 30 years I have been attending Newfrontiers conferences — we all stood as one man in a standing ovation to this fatherly yet direct, loving yet firm, respectful yet critical, emotive yet rational, talk.

Terry Virgo then stood at the microphone and said that there have been times in our movement that were historic moments. He spoke about the way Kreingsak changed us in the past, and when Simon Petit spoke on the poor that also changed us. He said that he knew God told him to invite Mark Driscoll, but that when he did, he had no idea he would feel “taken apart” by him.

Terry then closed with a simple prayer in which he thanked God for his care for us as a movement. He also thanked God for Mark Driscoll, who he called one of God’s most remarkable servants. He thanked God for the high privilege of having Mark Driscoll on this platform, and spoke of how we really are a FAMILY on a journey, with a God who is continualy expressing his love for us.

I recently posted what I trust will be a series which will be about sermons that have changed my life. It is way too early for me to claim that this past Sunday’s talk by my pastor and dear friend, Tope Koleoso, will be one of those. But I could do a lot worse than allow myself to be shaped by a talk like this. I have previously shared a list of talks Tope has given that are available online, but much as I loved those talks, I believe this may be the best sermon I have ever heard him preach.

I don’t want to give too much away because I want to encourage you to listen to this talk. He weaved such well-remembered verses as “Go into all the world …”, “I am not ashamed of the gospel …” “How will they hear …” and “The harvest is plentiful, but the workers are few …” into a compelling tapestry that felt fresh and deeply impacting without condemning. He acknowledged that it IS easier to mix with people who are in your own “tribe”— your Judea as it were.

He challenged us that if we are not going beyond that, if all our friends are still very similar to us, we haven’t yet allowed the gospel to have its full impact on us. He laid down the challenge that the gospel has two calls to it. There is a call to come, to receive from God. But then there is a call to go. In that going we are called to worship God and to be a witness. He spoke of our mission to reach the world one person at a time. He also spoke of our message. He explained that our message was nothing more complicated than a person—Jesus. We are to teach his cross, his resurrection, the call to repentance, and a promise of forgiveness. Still, today some demand signs and wonders, and others clever reasoning and wisdom, but we preach Jesus and him crucified. Tope also spoke of our methods and our motivation of love. My favorite line in the whole talk was, “If you want Jesus to go with you, go and make disciples.”

I was profoundly moved by this talk. What was also exciting is that, once again this Sunday, a number of people made a response to the gospel. We are in the middle of a prolonged season where we have been seeing such responses on a weekly basis. Please pray for us that such things continue, and that as a church this sermon may indeed help to turn our focus outward and that we will see many more genuinely saved. The message is available to download or listen to here:

In the second part of this interview with Ed Stetzer we turned our attention to discussing church planting.

The Evangelical Alliance released this announcement last week:

“The retiring General Director of the Evangelical Alliance will bring his passion for justice for the poor to two new roles as he joins Tony Blair’s Faith Foundation and becomes the first International Director of Micah Challenge . . .”

Mr Edwards, a British immigrant from Jamaica, is an honorary Canon of St Paul’s Cathedral. He was a probation officer for fourteen years, and the senior pastor of Mile End New Testament Church of God for ten years.

The announcement continues . . .

He has been appointed as a member of the International Religious Advisory Council to the Faith Foundation, which will give advice and help to Tony Blair on the Foundation’s work and plans.

Mr Edwards said:

“I am honoured to be part of this Foundation, which aims to demonstrate the power faith has for good in the modern world.”

Mr Edwards has been closely involved with Micah Challenge International—a Christian campaign challenging governments around the world to meet the Millennium Development Goals by 2015—since its inception in 2000.

“I am really looking forward to getting stuck in and leading this global coalition into an exciting phase of mobilising and campaigning towards 2015 . . .”

Read the entire story . . .

The following interview was recorded using iChat and, as I claim at the beginning, I don’t believe you can achieve this kind of good quality with a PC over normal broadband lines across the Atlantic, at least as far as I know.

Ed, still being computer-challenged (i.e. he actually uses a Microsoft windoze machine!) therefore had to borrow a friend’s Mac for this. As far as I’m aware, this is the first Christian iChat interview recorded and then shared online. If anyone knows of someone who has beat me to it, do let me know and I will correct my mistake here. To record, I used a program called Screen Flow, which actually does what it says it will do on the tin!

Oddly enough, I sat on a plane recently with someone who said he did this all the time for his leading video blog about technology, so I don’t think it’s the first time it has ever been done for a blog—just for a Christian one. Here, then, is part 1. You know the drill by now—more to come tomorrow. In fact, although each segment is short, there are quite a few coming, so sit back, make yourself a coffee or tea, and enjoy!

For more information about Ed, see EdStetzer.com, which is a fantastic blog to which I’ve just awarded a Warnie. Ed has also recently brought out a new book, which looks quite interesting.