Archive for the ‘seeker-sensitive’ Category

Paul wants seeker-sensitive lives, not seeker-sensitive services

June 20, 2011

(on Warren’s use of 1 Cor.10:32) Paul wants seeker-sensitive lives, not seeker-sensitive services.

Paul Alexander

Advertisements

Jesus was not seeker sensitive

June 20, 2011

(speaking of Warren’s seeker sensitive model) It is better to say that when Jesus sensed that crowds were showing up to get their felt needs met, he left and preached elsewhere (Mark 1:35-39). Jesus did not view Himself as having come for the purpose of meeting felt needs. He would not be viewed as a sensational miracle worker, or a source of physical blessing, that people could manipulate for their own ends. His purpose in coming was to preach the gospel (cf. Mark 1:14-15). He actually rebuked the crowds for coming to hear Him just because he met their felt needs (John 6:26), which contradicts the Purpose Driven assumption that it does not matter why people come to Christ.

Paul Alexander

God is our problem

August 9, 2010

The problem with the seeker sensitive movement is this: God isn’t the solution to our problems – He is our problem!

A majority of 52 percent of born-againers reject the idea of original sin outright

January 26, 2010

Their (the seeker-sensitive church’s) way of doing church assumes the (Pelagian) view that human beings are not inherently sinful. A majority of 52 percent of born-againers in fact reject the idea of original sin outright. In their disposition to God and his Word, it is assumed, (post)moderns are neutral. That being so, they can be seduced into making the purchase of faith as though it were any other kind of purchase. That all of this is deliberately undoctrinal is seen as the key ingredient to success. Is this not how America has always succeeded, by being pragmatic?

David F. Wells, The Courage to be Protestant, IVP, 2008, p.57


It is noteworthy that most ‘born again’ believers are, in fact, by their denial of original sin, declared heretics (according to scripture and the councils of the church) and outside Christ’s body the church, and under the wrath of God, still being in their sins. For example:

Second Council of Orange 529AD

CANON 2. If anyone asserts that Adam’s sin affected him alone and not his descendants also, or at least if he declares that it is only the death of the body which is the punishment for sin, and not also that sin, which is the death of the soul, passed through one man to the whole human race, he does injustice to God and contradicts the Apostle, who says, “Therefore as sin came into the world through one man and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all men sinned” (Rom. 5:12).

Further, the Canon goes on to say in conclusion:

CONCLUSION. And thus according to the passages of holy scripture quoted above or the interpretations of the ancient Fathers we must, under the blessing of God, preach and believe as follows. The sin of the first man has so impaired and weakened free will that no one thereafter can either love God as he ought or believe in God or do good for God’s sake, unless the grace of divine mercy has preceded him.

Note the use of ‘must’ (above) – i.e. without belief in this scriptural doctrine a man is outside the church of Christ. And note also the phrase: “divine mercy has preceded him” – God takes the initiative in salvation and good works – always has, always will.

Running to and from God at the same time

September 8, 2009

The religious and moral life of man is man’s achievement, but also God’s wrestling with him; it manifests a receptivity to God, but at the same time an inexcusable disobedience and blindness to God…Man seeks God and at the same time flees from Him in His seeking, because his self-assertive self-centredness of will, his root- sin, always breaks through.

Hendrik Kraemer, The Christian Message, p.112

Counter Cultural Church

October 28, 2008

‘Our Christianity has the appearance of being an adjunct or an appendix to the rest of our lives instead of being the main theme and the moving force in our existence. . . . We seem to have a real horror of being different. Hence all our attempts and endeavours to popularise the church and make it appeal to people. We seem to be trying to tell people that their joining a church will not make them so very different after all.’

The man who comes to church or chapel because he likes the minister as a man is of no value at all, and the minister who attempts to get men there by means of that subterfuge is for the time being guilty of lowering the standard of the truth which he claims to believe. For this gospel is the gospel of salvation propounded by the Son of God himself. We must not hawk it about the world, or offer special inducements and attractions, as if we were shopkeepers announcing an exceptional bargain sale.

“The world expects the Christian to be different and looks to him for something different, and therein it often shows an insight into life that regular church-goers often lack. The churches organise whistdrives, fetes, dramas, bazaars and things of that sort, so as to attract people. We are becoming almost as wily as the devil himself, but we are really very bad at it; all our attempts are hopeless failures and the world laughs at us. Now, when the world persecutes the church, she is performing her real mission, but when the world laughs at her she has lost her soul. And the world today is laughing at the church, laughing at her attempts to be nice and to make people feel at home. My friends, if you feel at home in any church without believing in Christ as your personal Saviour, then that church is no church at all, but a place of entertainment or a social club. For the truth of Christianity and the preaching of the gospel should make a church intolerable and uncomfortable to all except those who believe, and even they should go away feeling chastened and humbled.” (Quoted in ‘Dr. Martyn Lloyd Jones – The First Forty Years 1899-1939’ by Iain H. Murray, pp.141-142 )