Posted on 11/30/2016 2:41:47 PM PST by SeekAndFind
A Canadian study has found that Mainline Protestant churches that have both modern worship services and teach a literal interpretation of the Bible grow faster.
(Photo: Reuters/John Gress)A parishioner cries as he signs a song of worship in the 7,000-seat Willow Creek Community church during a Sunday service in South Barrington, Illinois, November 20, 2005. Institutions like Willow Creek and Houston's Lakewood Church, each drawing 20,000 or more on a weekend, offer not just a vast, shared attraction but a path that tries to link individuals on a faith-sustaining one-to-one level beyond the crowd, observers and worshipers say.
The Canadian researchers who authored the study, "Theology Matters: Comparing the Traits of Growing and Declining Mainline Protestant Church Attendees and Clergy," surveyed 2,225 churchgoers in Ontario, Canada, and interviewed 29 clergy and 195 congregants. The study will be published in next month's issue of the Review of Religious Research.
"This study was important because it quantified empirically something that evangelical renewalists have been saying for decades — theology matters," said the Rev. Tom Lambrecht, vice president and general manager of Good News Magazine, a United Methodist publication, in an interview with The Christian Post.
Lambrecht, who served for 29 years as a United Methodist minister in Wisconsin, told CP that people who are interested in the things of God "want spiritual substance, not just a feel-good message or the opportunity to engage in community service." The Church, he said, has to to be distinct from and offer more than local civic associations and charities.
A solidly Orthodox Gospel that motivates churches to adapt their worship life and ministries to engage the next generation more effectively will be one where the message remains the same, but the means of delivery look different.
The study also showed that services at growing "churches featured contemporary worship with drums and guitars, while declining churches favoured traditional styles of worship with organ and choir."
"The use of contemporary Christian worship music is an example of that adaptation," Lambrecht said. "It has been around for over 40 years, yet some churches still resist making that adaptation." He added, however, that he's seen examples of churches that have more traditional styles of worship that are also yielding growth.
Pastor John Daffern who leads a Southern Baptist congregation in Columbus, Mississippi, calls himself "an apologist for the modern church."
(Photo: Chris Ellis Photograhpy)Josh Daffern, pastor of MTV Church in Columbus, Mississippi.
"I pastor a church that fits that mold," said Daffern, who leads MTV Church, in a recent interview with CP after he read some of the study's findings.
"We are theologically conservative, according to that study, and yet we are unashamedly modern and we are in a sustained period of growth in our church, and that is in direct contrast to many of the Mainline churches and even some evangelical churches.
"And I think the wisdom of that study is the two parts. There does need to be a modern sense of an expression of the faith while at the same time a conservative, Orthodox view of Christianity," he added.
Daffern said he believes that what church growth comes down to is how man-made controls are applied and both liberals and conservatives do that in their own way.
"For those who would say that we want to liberalize the tenets of Christianity and pick and choose which parts we are comfortable with and which parts we aren't, that's man exerting control over the theology," Daffern said.
"In the same way, a conservative theology yet a traditional approach is still trying to exert man-made control over religion, but it's not over the theology but over the cultural expression," which amounts to an approach which he describes as leaders saying, "Hey, we're going to stick to the Bible but we're going to pretend that it is the 1950s or the 1960s."
Those man-made controls rob the supernatural aspect out of Christian faith, he asserted.
Lead researcher of the study, David Haskell, said in an interview with The Guardian earlier this month that Christians who rely on a fairly literal interpretation of the Bible, "are profoundly convinced of [the] life-saving, life-altering benefits that only their faith can provide, [and] they are motivated by emotions of compassion and concern to recruit family, friends and acquaintances into their faith and into their church."
The study also found that only half of the clergy interviewed who are presiding over declining churches agreed that it was "very important to encourage non-Christians to become Christians," whereas every member of the clergy in a growing church felt that way.
A whopping 93 percent of clergy and 83 percent of worshipers from growing churches believed in the literal bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ, compared to 67 percent of worshipers and 56 percent of clergy from declining churches. One hundred percent of clergy and 90 percent of worshipers from growing churches believe God does miracles in response to prayer, whereas only 44 percent of clergy and 80 percent of worshipers from declining churches say so.
"One of the reasons that people are drawn to modern churches is because people don't want to be part of a monument." Daffern asserted. "They want to be part of a movement. One of the greatest beauties of Christianity is that it is living and active."
"In my world, as a Southern Baptist pastor, I tend to deal with churches that have a conservative view of the Bible yet a very traditional mindset, often times it is monument to a bygone era of what they imagine to be the golden age' of Christianity in America."
Such churches are perfectly poised to come back were the 1950s ever to return, he mused.
However, the problem with some more modern churches, he added, is that people sometimes make the modern expression itself an idol of sorts.
"But the key is to be modern enough while not being a mere imitation of everything else around in culture."
Or are you jealous of the witness gifts of God?
You’d probably have been verklempt at Solomon, who was a trillionaire in our modern money.
A lot or a little... at the Lord’s choosing... both have meanings. The Lord can do astounding things with a little. And the Lord can bestow a lot. The ultimate question is, what ends up being DONE with the riches (or with the poverty).
I hear ya!
Pew-sitters who think that they're being "Bereans" don't always get everything 100% right, either.
That is a healthy conversation, and I am a big fan. The old Pope v. Galileo squabble was unhealthy, and I’m glad the Church finally backed down.
They only have a duty to attempt to be Berean (i.e. square it with the scripture). God will refine. It’s not the peanut gallery’s cheap critics’ place to do that.
I do every night, but thanks.
And that’s why I would tend to affirm the preaching approach of the preacher of the SBC affiliated church where I go. He puts the scripture right up on the screen as we go. It’s already an exercise in Berean-ness. It’s a way of thinking about things. What does the whole bible say about this, or that, or the other? And sometimes I’ve caught important things that were omitted, and that’s fine, it doesn’t mean the preacher is an utter dork. Everybody makes mistakes. Sometimes I’m reminded of things that I have omitted from my understanding of theology too.
That’s a motivational speaker, not a preacher.
If a preacher isn’t motivational, he’s failing a biblical criterion already.
Here is an interpretation from the point of view of a Physicist, Mathematician, and Computer programmer. ;-)
The main problem with a “young earth” is that it requires that God lied about the things that can be discovered from observing the universe He created. The problem with the “Big Bang” is that it requires infinities in the created universe.
There are two creation stories in Genesis for a reason. The first describes the creation of the universe out of nothing from the beginning. This includes the creation of all the “types” and their initial instantiations. There is no “which came first, the chicken or the egg?” problem because the Creator of the Universe created a “type of chicken” that reproduces with eggs.
The second describes the creation of Adam and Eve who start the Creator of the Universe’s salvation plan for the creatures that He created. So we can have an “old” universe and a “young” salvation plan at the same time. We will first focus on the creation of the universe out of nothing from the beginning over what we would measure as a long time.
This concept is supported by the Scriptures, and is also supported by the writings of the Hebrew sages:
“According to the master Kabbalists, Rabbi Isaac of Acco, when counting the years of these [7000 year] cycles, one must not use an ordinary physical year, but rather, a divine year. The Midrash says that each divine day is a thousand years, basing this on the verse, “A thousand years in Your sight are as but yesterday” (Psalms 90: 4). Since each year contains 365 1/4 days, a divine year would be 365,250 years long. According to this, each cycle of seven thousand divine years would consist of 2,556,750,000 earthly years. This figure of two-and-a-half billion years is very close to the scientific estimate as to the length of time that life has existed on earth. If we assume that the seventh cycle began with the Biblical account of creation, then this would have occurred when the universe was 15,340,500,000 years old. This is very close to the scientific estimate that the expansion of the universe began some fifteen billion years ago.”
Kaplan, Aryeh (2004-03-15). Sefer Yetzirah: The Book of Creation in Theory and Practice (Kindle Locations 3552-3559). Red Wheel Weiser. Kindle Edition.
‘During the six days of creation described in the first chapter, G-d did not actually create the world, but rather, created the ingredients which would allow the world to develop. It thus refers to the creation of all matter, along with space and time. It was during these six days that G-d brought the universe into being from absolute nothingness. After these six days of creation, G-d allowed the universe to develop by itself, renewing His creation each seven thousand divine years or 2.5 billion earthly years. All the laws of nature and the properties of matter had been fixed for all time, as it is written, “He has established them forever; He has made a decree which shall not be transgressed” (Psalms 148: 6). It is similarly written, “Whatever G-d decrees shall be forever; nothing shall be added to it, and nothing shall be taken away” (Ecclesiastes 3: 14). ‘
Kaplan, Aryeh (2004-03-15). Sefer Yetzirah: The Book of Creation in Theory and Practice (Kindle Locations 3564-3572). Red Wheel Weiser. Kindle Edition.
Rabbi Acco made this calculation, based on the Torah, sometime between 1250 AD and 1340 AD more than 300 years before Sir Isaac Newton was born, and at least 600 years before Edwin Hubble proposed his theory of the expanding universe. The reason aligning the start of the seventh cycle of divine years with the second creation story is based on the rabbinical analysis described in Sefer Yetzirah: The Book of Creation in Theory and Practice. Suffice it to say, but the rabbis could not have been adjusting their analysis to conform the yet to be determined modern scientific value!
So this is our first measurement. More than 600 years ago, the Holy Scriptures, as analyzed by people who really cared about finding the truth in them, reveal the age of the universe we can observe today.
In the twentieth century AD, it became obvious that energy and energy states were quantized and could be emitted or absorbed only in discrete units. However, the theories and equations that were developed regarded space and time as continuous and thus infinitely divisible. As a result of not having a minimum space-time unit all of these theories postulate infinities within the physical universe that have not been observed.
The current “Standard Model” for Quantum Mechanics compensates for this through a process called “renormalization” in which one subtracts a big infinity from a smaller infinity to get a measured answer. The “Big Bang Theory” says the universe started as a singularity, then the laws of physics were suspended for a while as everything expanded at faster than the speed of light. “Here the magic happens” is clearly only a “scientific” theory because it is proposed by “scientists.”
But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased. (Daniel 12:4)
Since we are near the time of the end, knowledge has increased! The Unified Field Theory proposed by Burkhard Heim (1925-2001) is a completely discrete theory that is based on the quantization of areas in multiple dimensions. It treats the universe as an accounting system, which is clearly in consonance with the Holy Scriptures, as we shall see. Originally proposed with six dimensions; it was later expanded into 12 dimensions to fully account for Quantum Mechanics. Heim calculated the mass values of the elemental particles using the 6-dimensional formulation and six experimentally measured fundamental constants, such as the speed of light in a vacuum, and arrived at values that were in good (!) agreement with observations.
Burkhard Heim arrived at a description of “the beginning” from the currently observed universe using logic and mathematics. He described the process he used in a presentation to the scientists at Messerschmitt-Bölkow-Blohm (MBB) in Ottoburnn, Germany on November 25, 1976. An annotated transcript of the presentation and an English translation was produced by Olar Posdzech, Jim Graham, John Reed and Wilfried Kugel between 2000 and 2009. In this presentation, Heim derived the fundamental quantum of area which he called a “metron”.
In 1992, Tamar Auerbach explained the cosmology of Heim’s Theory as follows:
“In Heim’s theory both the metronic size, t, and the largest diameter D depend on the age of the universe. The dependence is such that D is expanding and t is contracting, so that D was smaller in the past and t was larger. It stands to reason that at one time in the distant past the surface area of a sphere of diameter D in our 3-dimensional world was equal to the size of t. This instant marks the origin of the universe and of time.
The mathematical relation between D and t is not simple, so that 3 different values of D are found to satisfy the criterion that the area of a sphere of diameter D be equal to t at the beginning of time. Evidently, the universe started as a trinity of spheres, whose diameters turn out to be (in meters):
D1 = 0.90992 m, D2 = 1.06426 m, D3 = 3.70121 m.
This trinity of spheres has important bearings on the structure of elementary particles.
From the first moment the universe began to expand, though at a slower rate than is presently predicted on the basis of the red shift of distant galaxies. Heim’s theory results in a present age of the universe approximately equal to 5.45 x 10^107 years, and a diameter D of about 6.37 x 10^109 light years. During most of its existence the universe consisted of an empty metronic lattice, whose metrons kept getting smaller as the universe grew larger.
Eventually, metrons became small enough for matter to come into existence. This may have occurred some 15-40 billion (10^9) years ago, at which time matter was created throughout the volume of the universe. Hence, according to Heim matter did not originate very soon after a “big bang” explosion but more uniformly in scattered “fire-cracker” like bursts, perhaps of galactic proportions. Spontaneous uniform creation of matter, coupled with the partly attractive and partly repulsive force of gravity mentioned in Section 3 resulted in the observed large-scale galactic structure of the universe. Creation of matter continues to this day, though on a very much reduced scale.”
Heim’s Theory of Elementary Particle Structures, T. Auerbach and Illobrand von Ludwiger published by the Journal of Scientific Exploration, Vol. 6, No. 3, pp. 217-231, 1992
Heim’s Theory then starts in an analogous way to the way the Hebrew Sages explain it:
And He created His universe with three books (Sepharim), with text (Sepher) with number (Sephar) and with communication (Sippur).
Kaplan, Aryeh (2004-03-15). Sefer Yetzirah: The Book of Creation in Theory and Practice (Kindle Locations 445-449). Red Wheel Weiser. Kindle Edition.
Now the Sefer Yetzirah is said to be part of the oral Torah, but we don’t know for sure, so it should be treated as commentary. So we must look for a pattern in the Torah that matches Heim’s Theory in order to consider Heim’s theory a match for the first creation story. The amazing thing is that the Torah’s description of the creation of the Nation of Israel fits the pattern of these three spheres (books) and the organization of the dimensions used in Extended Heim Theory.
If we simply number the 12 sons of Jacob in the order they were born, we get the following:
x1 Gen 29:32 So Leah conceived and bore a son, and she called his name Reuben; for she said, “The LORD has surely seen my affliction. Now therefore, my husband will love me.”
x2 Gen 29:33 Then she conceived again and bore a son, and said, “Because the LORD has heard that I am unloved, He has therefore given me this son also.” And she called his name Simeon.
x3 Gen 29:34 She conceived again and bore a son, and said, “Now this time my husband will become attached to me, because I have borne him three sons.” Therefore his name was called Levi.
x4 Gen 29:35 And she conceived again and bore a son, and said, “Now I will praise Yahweh.” Therefore she called his name Judah. Then she stopped bearing.
x5 Gen 30:6 Then Rachel said, “God has judged my case; and He has also heard my voice and given me a son.” Therefore she called his name Dan.
x6 Gen 30:8 Rachel said, “With great wrestlings I have wrestled with my sister, and indeed I have prevailed.” So she called him Naphtali.
x7 Gen 30:11 Then Leah said, “A troop comes!” So she called his name Gad.
x8 Gen 30:13 Then Leah said, “I am happy, for the daughters will call me blessed.” So she called his name Asher.
x9 Gen 30:18 Leah said, “God has given me my hire [wages] because I have given my maid to my husband.” So she called his name Issachar.
x10 Gen 30:20b Leah said, “...now my husband will dwell with me, because I have borne him six sons.” So she called his name Zebulun.
x11 Gen 30:24 So she [Rebecca] called his name Joseph, and said, “The LORD shall add to me another son.”
x12 Gen 35:18 As her soul was departing (for she died), she [Rebecca] called his name Ben-Oni [son of my sorrow]; but his father called him Ben-Jamin.
There probably is some significance to the names themselves, but at this point I have only looked at the birth order and grouping related to the dimensions used in Extended Heim Theory.
Leah’s first three sons, Reuben, Simion, and Levi, represent the R3 (x,y,z) Spatial Dimensions. Her fourth son, Judah, represents T! (t) Time. Note that this associates the genealogy of Jesus with time!
Rachel’s maid, Bihah, two sons, Dan and Naphtali, represent S2 (x5, x6) the Structure dimensions. These are the dimensions that provide the electromagnetic force. Heim’s initial theory used only these six dimensions.
Leah’s maid, Zilpha, responds with two sons, Gad and Asher, who represent I2 (x7,x8) the Information dimensions.
The next four dimensions are called the God Dimensions because these dimensions contains structures that steer the events of the other dimensions. They are associated with Jacob’s two wives. Leah’s last two sons, Issachar and Zebulun, and Rachel’s two sons, Joseph and Benjamin represent G4 (x9,x10,x11,x12).
Once I recognized this pattern, it was apparent that the Three Spheres (Books) were symbolized by Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.
What are the chances of this happening if the Holy Scriptures are not the Word of YHWH, the True and Living God, Creator of the Universe?
I decline to get into deep debates over symbolism, because sometimes things look like symbols to me that other people don’t get.
The point is, that we can count on the scriptures to give us a guide without awkwardly having to footnote it with scientific explanation. Science came later. If science has a problem, it’s up to science to solve it (and general relativity can, even if it isn’t the only way).
Re : Post #12
*[Note: In no way am I endorsing “modern” methods of worship that violate the literal word of the Bible or deny God/Jesus, just modern worship music and less formal/stilted/dated language/conversation when appropriate.]*
Regarding KJV/Anglicans - Our Founders envisioned a free Republic, and they understood the arbitrary nature and travesty of King James establishing himself by law as de facto caliph in A.D. 1611.
The Anglican Church was founded as a State Institution and as such, all subordinates of the King in all his territories were then members of the Church of England, not by choice; but by royal ordinance.
Being visionaries, the Founders recognized the need to guarantee our freedom to worship our Creator independently, and they were also men who publicly invoked God’s help every time they assembled. They did not foresee, nor would they have allowed, the formation of a society that might possibly enact laws forbidding Bibles and prayer.
God Bless America, MAGA!
That would have been a worse evil than the evil of lacking a designated nanny church.
You’re addressing the wrong guy. Im amazed at the covetousness on FR... If someone is blessed financially by God, why critisize them? Many went after Rave Ramsey the same way.
If you read Scripture, you will find the command to raise our hands.
Science, i.e., Kurt Friedrich Gödel, has “proven” that we can’t know all the answers, and also that there has to be a “God” who created everything and is “Good”. So the only way to know what is going on is for the Creator of the Universe to have given us a record that we can read. The record would have to be self-validating, as the Hebrew Bible (Tanakh) is.
In addition, all the “laws of nature” that we can discover literally fall apart if there aren’t boundary conditions. So it is literally true that “God holds the whole world in His hand”.
So the Bible is the revelation of the boundary conditions for the Universe and all the events in it. That means that any civilization that forbids the studying of the Bible as part of “science” will be forever lost.
It’s spiritually right, anyhow. A science that doesn’t care about spiritual things will find it is like a ship without a sail or a compass or a map or orders.
Spirituality drives the movement of humanity. Even that of atheists, although they deny what they manifestly behave as though they believe.
I don’t believe that the liberal churches are growing for even one minute.
Oh ok, I apologize... thought you meant the covetousness accused of the richer megapastors.
They should never be called liberal. If they were liberal, there would be no problem, as God would bless them with more and more to be liberal with.
They’re illiberal. They say not my skin in this game, only your skin.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.