I Had No Idea

“A person with a felony record can become an attorney, but is barred for life from becoming a security guard at a mall.”*

There is a joke in there somewhere, but knowing I might get sued by someone unqualified to be a mall security guard is preventing me from telling it.

*Miriam Aukerman, “Criminal Convictions as a Barrier to Employment” in Michigan Bar Journal, Nov 2008, p. 33; MCL 338.1056; MCL 338.1067.

Ethnicity, Belief about Jesus, and the Makeup of Churches

Consider the following two statements:

1. Jesus died and came back to life.
2. Believing in Jesus makes a positive difference in a person’s life.

Now, consider this:

[20-29 year old] African-Americans have stronger agreement with both statements about Jesus than any other racial or ethnic group. Almost all African-American young adults (98 percent) agree that Jesus died and came back to life, and eight out of nine agree that believing in Jesus makes a positive difference in a person’s life. [My note: That’s over 20 points higher than the average.] On the other hand, only 59 percent of Anglos believe in the resurrection. Hispanics were similar to the total group, as 70 percent agreed that Jesus returned to life. Agreement that believing in Jesus made a positive difference in a person’s life was 75 percent for each of the non-African-American groups (Ed Stetzer, Lost and Found, pp. 28-29).

Here’s my question: Since 98 percent of young African-Americans say that they agree with us on these two very basic and foundational premises of Christianity, why are churches so seemingly underrepresented by young African-Americans?

It would seem that these would be right “in our wheelhouse” so to speak because we do not have to convince them of the truth of the resurrection or the impact of Jesus on a person’s life.

I think there are several reasons for consideration (anecdotal and observational, rather than scientific).

First, there is the influence of culture. African-Americans are typically brought in a more religious setting than non-African-Americans. It is part of their culture. They know the religious terminology. Most of them have grandmothers who took them to church, and talked to them about God. It’s particularly interesting to me to think of the number of people that I have talked to personally who claim to go to church, but don’t know the name of it, or where it is (aside from “that church over there”).

In my experience in my community, most African-Americans that I talk to claim to go to church and can actually identify the church that they claim to go to. Non-African-Americans are less likely to claim to attend church, and much less likely to be able to identify the church that they attend. Nonetheless, African-American culture seems more religiously knowledgeable and inclined than other cultures. 

Second, there is the influence of education. Stetzer reports that among young adult with college experience, “belief in the resurrection drops from 92 percent among the less educated (high school or less) to 63 percent among those with some college or a degree” (p. 31).

If it is true that African-Americans are less likely to have some college experience, it stands to reason that fewer of them have been talked out their received traditions. That is to say that they claim belief, but perhaps only because no one has talked them out of it yet. That’s not intended as any kind of slight. Remember, the percentages of all ethnic groups go down after some college experience. So those who have attended college are more likely to abandon belief in the resurrection, no matter their ethnicity.

It would be interesting to know the numbers broken down by ethnicity and education.

Whatever the case, it strikes me that perhaps at least some of this is our church culture. Before the “progressives” cheer and the “conservatives” tune out, let me say, I am not sure how important that is to worry about.

I think our church culture needs to reflect the gospel in our community. We do not necessarily need to reflect the community in our gospel. We need to understand our community culture, and minister inside of that culture as much as possible.

Of course we should not adapt the sinful elements of culture. But we should remember that we have no cultural mandate. We have a gospel mandate. And therefore, our entire community is our mandate.

Race Maps

Here are some interesting maps of some US cities color-coded by race. I recognized the top one as Detroit as soon as I saw it. The north red-blue dividing line is probably the famed 8 Mile Road. The pocket of red in the middle of the picture is probably the New Center Area and Wayne State University area. The pocket of orange in the center, just below the middle of the picture is Mexicantown. Our church is located just to the right of the blue section at the bottom of the map.

The data used to make this map is ten years old, but it is interesting nonetheless, not just in terms of racial grouping but also in terms of population density. My suspicion is that 30-40 years ago, this map would be more similar to the NYC map in terms of population density.

Here's a page with some information about the various neighborhoods in Detroit.

I wonder how this type of data might be useful for church planting. It seems that certain types of people are often best able to reach certain types of people. It seems to me that willingness is important, but it is not the sum total of a call to a particular location. I think there is a place for churches to steer people into places of ministry that they might best be suited for.

Obviously, there are some dangers with that. We don't have a heirarchy of bishops that assigns men to places of ministry. But we do have churches, knowledgeable pastors, and community residents who should be able to assess background, gifts, desires, and abilities to help guide young men (or older men) into ministry situations that best fit his ministry skills and heart.

The fact that someone feels called to a particular area is a start, but it is not the end. I have seen some good men fail at church planting because they were doing something that they apparently were not gifted to do, or perhaps doing it in an area to which they were not well-suited. This leads to great frustration, wasted money and effort, and sometimes abandonment of ministry altogether.

I think the local church's role in ordaining and commissioning pastors should be taken very seriously. How all that works out in a particular local church is obviously up to that church. But I would call us to consider the idea.

No Half-Jesus

Jesus will not be divided. People have tried. Even those closest to him.

In Mark 8:27-33, Peter tried to divide Jesus. After Peter proclaimed Jesus to be the Christ—the Messiah, the King—Jesus prophesied of his own death that would make him the Savior.

Peter’s immediate response is to divide Jesus by trying to prevent Jesus from going to the cross. You see, Peter liked a King Jesus, one with great miracles, great teaching, and great power; he didn’t like a Savior Jesus, one who would be rejected and die.

Jesus called him Satan for this division because Jesus will not be divided. Peter, by trying to have a half-Jesus, was acting as a tool of Satan.

Interestingly, in the very next verses, Jesus now calls the crowd to him. He is no longer speaking only to his disciples, the already committed. He is now speaking to everyone. 

To this crowd, he warns them against accepting him as Savior but not as Lord. These are people who want the Savior Jesus but do not want the King Jesus. They want to live as their own master, while pretending to trust in someone else as Jesus. They want Jesus on the cross, but they do not want to pick up their own cross.

To these, Jesus says, “If you are going to follow me, then you are going to have to follow me. To fail to deny yourself and take up the cross is to lose your existence—your life, your soul, the very thing you are trying to save.” And that life is lost at the return of Christ when Jesus is ashamed of you.

I think it very difficult to make the case that Jesus is saying merely that he will be embarrassed by one of his children at his second coming. I think he is saying what he says in Matthew 7 and other places: “Depart from me. I never knew you.” Or Matthew 10:33 where Jesus says, “I will deny him before my Father in heaven.”

You can pretend that Jesus is calling on those already committed to take some extra step of commitment to discipleship. But I think it hard to reconcile that with the fact that Jesus is speaking to the crowd, not the core. And I think it hard to reconcile that with the fact that Jesus ties eternity to it. And I think it hard to reconcile with the fact that the Bible, the New Testament which is our final rule of faith and practice, has no apparent use for a distinction between salvation and discipleship, between the saved and the disciples. And if Jesus had no room for that, either in his own ministry or in his early church, then we must question why there are some who pretend to know more than Jesus did.

You see, Jesus will not be divided. He will not be a King without being a Savior. And he will not be a Savior without being a King.

Yes, it’s a hard saying.

But it’s Jesus’ saying.

And we have no right to say anything else.

Rainer on Millennials and Leaders

No, this isn’t about eschatology. It is about those who were born between 1980 and 2000. They are called the Millennials.

Thom Rainer at Lifeway recently gave four characteristics that Millennials desire in leaders, and he didn’t just make them up like many people who talk about this generation do. These are the results of surveys that ask questions. Here are the four:

1. Mentoring
2. Gentle spirit
3. Transparency and authenticity
4. Integrity

If you want to influence the younger generation, this is what they (the people you are trying to influence) say you need to be and do in order to get them to listen to you.

I think this list is not just true of Millennials in general. I think this list is true of the so-called “young fundamentalists,” many of whom are Millennials raised in “fundamentalism” (in quotes because much of what they are departing from bears no resemblance to biblical fundamentalism).

I think the this list demonstrates why the tactics of some who are desperately trying to influence these young people won’t work.

They do not have a gentle spirit. They are combative, arrogant, and cross. They routinely and vitriolically attack those who disagree with them, even over minor matters. They use strong language. They have an abrasive attitude, and it’s not about ideas but about people. They are just plain rude at times. They claim they are standing for the truth, but the truth is that they are too often contradicting the truth by their attitude. To quote a friend of mine, it makes me glad to be a fundamentalist so I can separate from them.

They are not transparent and authentic. They speak boldly about others, littering the world with their dogmatic statements, even when they aren’t accurate. They just don’t tell the truth sometimes. And they won’t be honest about themselves, even when the truth is obvious to everyone else. They are a lot about show and a little about substance. They will quickly shut down conversations if it threatens them. They are about self-promotion and winning silly little battles and missing the big war.

They do not have integrity. They say things that are clearly not true, or they shade the truth in a particular way while not admitting that there is another side. They run to extremes, and stay there even when challenged. They complain about others while doing the very thing they complain about.

Few, if any, would say, “I want to be like that person.” And that’s why they have little to no influence. I believe that you will never have a positive influence on people who do not want to be like you.

And they will not like me saying this.

Finally, I think this list begins with what real ministry is all about—mentoring. It is why the cyber world and blogs are not the places that young fundamentalists (or young Christian leaders in general) will be created or held onto, or trained, or influenced. Because mentorship is face-to-face, person-to-person. It won’t take place on a blog defending this or attacking that. It won’t take place through demagoguery or intimidation.

Sure, today’s generation is more connected than ever before. They will read widely on the internet, but chances are they won’t read deeply. They live life in soundbytes—tweets and facebook status updates. Email is old to them. Texting is the way the communicate. The use blog readers and news readers in order to skim the first line or two to see if they are interested enough to read on (which is why many will never see the end of much that is written, including this).

But true leadership and mentorship will take place large through side-by-side ministry partnership (otherwise know as biblical fellowship).  It will be face-to-face exchanges across coffee with no holds barred and no comment unchallengeable.

Oh, to be sure, there will be a few select voices in cyberspace that will be heard by many. And most will probably agree to some degree and disagree to another.

And in young fundamentalism, that’s okay. There’s no need to be monolithic. There’s no compulsion to do what someone else does, or draw lines exactly where someone else draws them.

And in young fundamentalism, disagreement will be expressed, just like it is in “old fundamentalism” … with some rancor, some anger, some bad arguments, and some bad interpretation of arguments.

But I suppose we should expect a certain amount of immaturity from the younger crowd. It’s the old guys who should be past that. Too often they’re not. And they do not have the decency to shut up.