What Is It About That Pastor?

Subscribe

Suggest a Place of Worship

Categories

website by BKTHD

Unfortunately, when my father passed away a few years back, he wasn’t attending church regularly.  So when the time came to coordinate funeral services, his children collectively decided it was best if the pastor of my brothers’ church say a few words.   Joe and Jon both attended an Assemblies of God service every Sunday so it seemed to only make sense.

Hebrews 13:7

Hebrews 13:7

As anyone can imagine, the days after my father passing were filled with little to no joy at all.  However, I can specifically remember one ray of sunshine in my otherwise cloudy day.  It was when I asked my family why we chose Pastor Kyle to lead the services and my oldest brother Joe, through bloodshot watery eyes lifted up his head toward his baby sister and said, “Well, Jess.  It’s because Jon has a man-crush on Pastor Kyle.”   


Completely and totally shocked at my ability to find any humor at all in the day, I let out a full on belly laugh and can still smile about that comment to this very day.  It’s one of those had to be there moments but boy, it tickled me.

With further discussion both Jon and Joe told me how much they loved their pastor.  They told me about his comforting words after he heard dad died, his ability to captivate an audience with his charismatic nature, and his willingness to all but stand on his head if it would somehow benefit the spiritual health of the congregation.  I distinctly remember thinking to myself, “Man-- I want a pastor like that.” 

After a few years had passed I was discussing church doctrine with Jon and he said something rather interesting, he said, “You know Jess, I have to stop myself sometimes and make doubly sure that I love the doctrine of the Pentecostal church, and not just Pastor Kyle.” 

Of course as the words came out of his mouth, it took every ounce of self-control I had to keep my composure while listening to his very serious concern as opposed to blurting out  with roaring laughter “You have a man crush on Pastor Kyle!” but that’s beside the point.

Jon was actually touching on something incredibly important.

Do we pick a church based on the people, the pastor, or the building or do we pick a church based on God?

Here are a couple of things to consider:

Did you settle in where you are because there were lots of people your age or you thought it would be a good place to recruit for social hour?   

Did you pick your church based on it’s proximity to your home?

Did you pick your church because it had a really beautiful building?

Because your parents and grandparents went to that specific denomination?

Because you love contemporary music and the ability to wear jeans?

Or did you pick your church based on the fact that it best represented the truth in God’s Word?

As I go around town searching for that church home, I’ve decided I’m going to do my best to stay true to where the Spirit leads.  I’m not going to pick one based on my own wants and desires. 

I won’t even pick a church because I think the pastor is the MOST AWESOME PASTOR in the WHOLE WIDE WORLD (although you know very well you are PB!) No, I will not. 

I’m going to pick a church that sums up their entire ministry in just two words: Jesus only.

 

Share this post

31 Comments

  • Tony York

    Tony York August 24, 2010

    Jessica,

    These are important topics to discuss because I believe that God gifts us in order to edify His church.  That should mean that He has a place for us and it may not be where we would want to be.

    My family (based on my decision to do so) left our previous church home of 7 years and began the search for a new church back in January of this year.  We have visited several churches and I posted several articles about our church hunt earlier in the year.  My wife and kids have not been happy with the process because they have been pulled away from what was familiar and comfortable.

    It has been one of the hardest things that I have had to do when it comes matters of faith.  We need much prayer as we continue to seek the place that God wants us. 

    We have been attending a small church for several months because we have friends that attend there but I don’t believe that is where we are supposed to be. 

    As we have searched, I have had the forefront several hopes for our new church home.

    1.  That they are close to where we live.  It will be much easier to impact our community if the church body that we are part of is actually a part of the community that we live in. 

    2.  That the church be sold out on Christ in both grace and truth. 

    3.  That we can plug in and be servants.

    On the fringe, I am also concerned with the fellowship aspect of the church.  Specifically, are there others that fit our family dynamic within the body.  This may sound like a superficial aspect but try plugging into a group of 60’s/70’s aged group of grandparents when you are raising teenage kids.  While there is a kindred fellowship in Christ, there is a difference in life station that impedes the fellowship aspect of person-to-person.

    It would be so much easier if there was a big, glowing arrow pointing down on the body of Christ that we are supposed to join.

  • Jessica

    Jessica August 24, 2010

    Hi Tony!  I’m glad you mention the age issue.  I felt very much like you but am starting to drastically change my tune and here’s why…

    For several weeks I’ve been hanging out with people ranging from a 75 year old woman, to a 45 year old man (I’m 29).  While these are people who I otherwise would never talk to outside of church, I now have more fun fellowshipping with them than friends I’ve had for ages.  It was fascinating to me that I could care less about their age, race, or socio-economic status. I mean, this grandma is like my new BFF because I’m just attracted to the Spirit of God that illuminates through her. 

    So I get where you’re coming from (and that you’re also not superficial at all) but mention that only because recently I have decided age won’t be a factor for me and I’m surprised by this since it was very important to me for a while.

    I do imagine however that this is difficult when you’re thinking about your children having fellowship with other children.  I think it’s important for them to have strong influences so if church only has blue hairs, I can see how that may pose a problem and is a bit of a different situation.

  • Tony York

    Tony York August 24, 2010

    There is no doubt that we enjoy and cherish the fellowship that we have with older members of the congregation.  Some of our dearest friends are couples who are old enough to be our parents and who have been like grandparents to my children.  That is one of the many beautiful aspects of fellow shipping with those who have been walking the walk for a longer time than we have ourselves.

    The community that we have been attending has a huge issue with gentrification. 75% of the congregation is in the 65+ age group.  This is a small church so it won’t be many years from now when there won’t be much of a congregation unless younger families join.  However, therein lies the other side of the gentrification issue - they are used to doing things a certain way and many have become pew sitters so it can be easy for the younger generations to feel left out or marginalized.

    One would think that a healthy church body would be composed of a reflective cultural cross-section for age, sex, economical, race and many other factors that can be found it the community.  If it is not, then what is causing the segregation?

    ... man.. I do carry on .. don’t I? smile

  • JamesBrett

    JamesBrett August 24, 2010

    “Did you pick your church based on it’s proximity to your home?”

    i’m going to echo something tony mentioned—though i can’t say i speak for both of us (i may feel more or less strongly).  nevertheless, i want to say that i think this one’s actually pretty important.

    we’ve traditionally acted as if church is a given, and then the church decides what their mission is.  but really, we’ve been given a mission by God, and the church only exists to serve that purpose.  the church is a means, rather than an end.

    so, to me, it would make sense that we ought to all be members of churches in our own communities, close to where we live.  because that’s the community we ought to be living Christ into.  it would strike me as really odd for people to go to church a 30-minute drive from their homes, because it seems really unlikely they’d shop, send their kids to school, or really spend any amount of time in that place.  so how would they expect to serve those people?

  • Jessica

    Jessica August 24, 2010

    “really, we’ve been given a mission by God, and the church only exists to serve that purpose.”

    I couldn’t agree more, but why should that matter if our church is in proximity to our home?

    Oh, you mean because we can enjoy our community more if it’s Christ-centered?  I guess that’s a good way to look at it so our families can enjoy the benefit of a strong community of believers.  Something i hadn’t considered.

    Tony you said: “If it is not, then what is causing the segregation?”

    As embarrassed as I am to say it…People like me.  I was always concerned with finding friends at church so I wanted to attend services with other 30 year old white chicks.

  • Zee

    Zee August 24, 2010

    good question you pose, Jess.

    my mom and i came to Church at approximately the same time my current pastor did (back then he was just a tour guide and an engineer). we were among the first believers converted in the first Nazarene Church in Ukraine (waaaaaaay back in ‘91 after the USSR fell apart and faith was finally allowed)... over the years, my pastor became my pastor and there were times when i really had to ask myself those questions above. “Am I in this Church because of pastor Vova or I am here because…why?” and to be completely honest, sometimes there were times when indeed I did not want to leave because of his sermons… they made sense (they still do)... but i guess these days, i have realized that i just feel at home in my Church… even with all the fights or something that we have sometimes. we are still one true family. and that’s amazing… and it’s there that i truly learn about Him…

  • JamesBrett

    JamesBrett August 24, 2010

    jessica, that’s not what i meant—but i don’t blame you.  i said it poorly.  what i meant to say was more like this:

    if my task as a christian is to glorify God in such a way that my actions and service lead others to do the same, then christianity is lived out in the day to day—not on sunday mornings.  so if i’m going to live in one community (ie. shop, go to the y, eat at restaurants, send my kids to school, etc, there), then it seems that community is where i would be glorifying God and serving others.

    but i’m not asked to do that alone.  i’m expected to be a part of a congregation whose mission is to be the body of Christ into a community.  so it seems odd to me that some people might join a church 30 minutes away, because they’re joining a body of believers whose mission is to reach out to that community—the one 30 minutes from them, which they do not live in (all that shopping and going to the y stuff). 

    so i would be doing all my living in my community, but attending a church that is located in, and serves, another community.  it seems to me in this situation we’re choosing a church because of what it does for us, rather than what it does in our community.

  • Jessica

    Jessica August 24, 2010

    OH…..I had a feeling I was missing it.  Now, I’m pickin’ up what you’re puttin’ down.  Okay, yes.  That makes total sense to me.

  • Zee

    Zee August 24, 2010

    James:

    i had to grin when i’ve read your comment about the Church’s proximity to home… my Church is located roughly 30 minutes from my home (and that’s pretty close! there are a few people from our Church who come from another town, close to Kyiv). however, I guess that comes from the fact that i live in a big city so the ride takes that long (even if the roads are clear)...

    *shrug* there’s a Church on my street where I live… yet i’ve read one of their booklets (they are supposedly Christian Orthodox, but more “progressive” ones) and i do not want to be there - don’t want to have anything in common with Christians who say that all the other Churches are wrong (yes, they are talking about Christian Churches, not other religions) and ONLY their Church knows the TRUE way to God. bleh…

    nothing personal, just thought that it was fun to observe diff cultures at work… i mean, for Ukrainians (at least in Kyiv), 30 minutes’ worth of way is quite close…

  • Tony York

    Tony York August 24, 2010

    Zee,

    I can’t speak for Brett, but I have an inkling that he and I would both say that church embodies the idea of true believers.  So, in my case, if there were a Kingdom Hall of Jehovah Witnesses closer than what I believe is a scripturally correct church, I would still have to drive to the scripturally correct church because the other one is false and is therefore disqualified.

    However, that being said, there could be pause to wonder if one has to travel a distance to church that maybe one should consider starting a christian community in their neighborhood. 

    I could go on an on for this topic.. but then, that would just be wordy of me. smile

  • JamesBrett

    JamesBrett August 24, 2010

    zee, did you say the more “progressive” orthodox church is the one that believes all others are wrong?

    and i don’t think my ideas on proximity to church are binding or even necessarily useful in every place and to every person.  i just figure in the states, it ought not be too difficult to find a spiritual community who is serving your larger community.

  • Zee

    Zee August 24, 2010

    Tony: yep, i agree.

    if one has to travel a distance to church that maybe one should consider starting a christian community in their neighborhood - i thought about that idea too. but i guess we don’t really have the same idea of communities over here, in Kyiv. *shrug* but that’s a valid point.

  • Zee

    Zee August 24, 2010

    Brett:

    well, all i meant by “progressive” is that they meet in a usual building without all those frescoes and domes and tons of gold and a priest who is dressed in everything black… on the other thought, that’s what the believers in the very beginning did - so i guess they are “regressive”...

    another point in their lil brochure was that “the foundation of our Church goes all the way back to Jesus Christ Himself” O_o

  • JamesBrett

    JamesBrett August 24, 2010

    zee, some (many?) in my denomination have tried to claim that for us as well—the going back to 33 a.d. and the establishment of the church on pentecost.  pretty silly, i think.  but i love ‘em anyway.  i’m off to bed.  goodnight, all.

    oh, and how did it go, jess?  the interview thing?

  • Zee

    Zee August 24, 2010

    Brett: well, for me it’s quite obvious that if a denomination is a Christian one, their teaching comes from Christ… i guess i don’t get the separation thing among Christian Churches… *sigh*... my mind’s rambling, so i better call it a night too… almost Wednesday here.

  • Scott

    Scott August 24, 2010

    If a church has a large number of older members, in order to gain younger members—somebody has to be first. Why not be that first and work to reach more? That is a truly exciting thought, building a youth group from the ground up rather than expecting the church to already have the group in place. Which is more servant oriented?

    Ask not what your church can do for you, ask what you can do for God…

  • Tony York

    Tony York August 24, 2010

    Scott,

    I had started to address that specific point but I didn’t want to open what could be a can of worms. I think there are times that it is appropriate and right to stick around and begin a ministry.  However, there are times that the church in question is in that position because of an issue that needs to be addressed.  Is it a newcomer’s place to challenge the mindset of the existing congregation?

    The American church is a fickle organism. 

    I don’t necessarily agree with 2 assumptions that you have made in your comment.  I don’t believe that the church was meant to have segregated functions to split adult versus youth groups.  I would go as far as to say that youth ministries may have done more harm than good.  I have been part of a youth ministry within a large church so I know some of how this works.  I am not saying that they are all bad, but I don’t believe they accomplish what they set out to do.  I would be happy to discuss further if you like.

    Also, I do believe that there is both a measure of what the church is ‘to do for God’ as well as how they are to serve each other.  So there is an aspect of what the church body provides to me and my family when it comes to discipleship, fellowship, and servanthood opportunities.

    I tried to point out earlier that a church which does not represent a healthy cross-section of the people group that they serve, probably has some issues to work through.  That may not be the case in every situation and I can’t speak to every situation.

    I can only answer for my current situation and I do not feel lead by God to stay and create a ministry.  I am open to doing that if God is behind it and we may be lead to a church where He will guide us to that role.

    I hope you will pray that God will provide us wisdom and guidance in that area.

  • Scott

    Scott August 25, 2010

    Actually, Tony, I do agree with you about youth groups, I just could not think of another way to put it. The problem is that I have seen how it is for very small, older congregations and yes, some within the church do get fossilized in their ways. I know of a particular church that the pastor took down a supposed “picture” of Jesus Christ after he had been there for five years and church members left!

    However, I do not like to see the mentality I am running into out there as I knock on doors and pass out tracts, of people wanting to know what the church will do for them. People want to be entertained and they want to hear rock music with “Christian” lyrics and pastors with hip haircuts and blue jeans, and Creative Arts Pastors and Spiritual Formations Pastors http://www.crosspoint.tv/nashville/about/staff.html, and dark auditoriums with lights and smoke and televised preaching and Starbucks and ATMs. How can people in these dark auditoriums read their Bibles???

    The problem is that the Gospel message of Jesus Christ gets blurred or not even preached.

    I will pray for you, Tony, for wisdom for you and your family, about your church situation. Our thinking is similar in terms of youth groups and I understand the desire to have your children to be able to interact with others their age.

  • Tony York

    Tony York August 25, 2010

    Scott,

    I appreciate your comments and your prayers.  And I completely understand your position when it comes to running into the wave of entertain-me-culture.  I am conflicted by much of what is considered worship in our churches today and how we go about conducting that worship. 

    But isn’t that the other side of the coin from the fossilized group? Aren’t they both guilty of basically the same thing - ‘I want church my way’?

    Not to get too much into church missiology, I am a big proponent of the church body be servants to each other and to their communities. There are a lot of things that we do that are spritz and no substance.  I would lump some of the things you mentioned above as well as tracts into that category. 

    If we want to engage our communities, we need to give them a reason to hear us by getting involved in their lives.  I think witnessing/evangelism is great and necessary but if it is divorced from real life how-can-I-serve-you love, then it can come across as disingenuous.  I would ask people to look at the churches of the New Testament and ask the question of what attracted people to Christ.  It wasn’t big hair, smoke, and electric guitars.. but neither was it handing out tracts.

    I am not talking about a social awareness type program but real, where-the-rubber-meets-the-road sacrificial love for those around us.

    By the way, I am very familiar with Pete Wilson’s church in that I have been following his blog for several years now and have visited him and his team at Cross Point church in Nashville.  I love Pete dearly.  That doesn’t mean I agree with him on all points and I am sure that he doesn’t agree with me on all points.  What I have witnessed on his blog and in person has been authentic.  I can’t discount the man or his heart for God. 

    I will pray for you and your church, Scott.  It is my prayers that God will open hearts in your community who will be hungry for God. I pray that your body of Christ will be enthusiastic about feeding those who are hungry.

  • Jessica

    Jessica August 25, 2010

    James-the interview went well other than the fact that you could tell I was incredibly nervous:)  I’ll upload a link to it some time today.  Thanks for asking:)

  • Scott

    Scott August 26, 2010

    Tony,
    I absolutely agree that we need to help those that need help—food, money, gasoline, clothing, etc.
    But what was it that brought people to know Jesus Christ as Saviour? The teaching and preaching of His Word. Many people followed Jesus Christ around because of the miracles He performed, but they were only done to verify what He had been saying.

    It is God’s Word that will bring true change in people’s lives. We can feed them and clothe them and they will be fine for a day—Preach the Word of God and show them their need for Jesus Christ as Saviour and their eternity will be taken care of (if they accept Him). The ideal programs will incorporate both feeding them physically and feeding them spiritually.

    As Pete Wilson, I watched his Easter message for this year. He began to give the Gospel message in an interesting way with the use of a white board, but he did not complete it. He left off repentance, he left off what people need to be saved from and what they need to be saved to. He briefly talked about sin, but did not give the whole Gospel message of Jesus Christ. That is where the problem is with him—its great that he may be demonstrating God’s Love and speaking about it, but there is more in the Bible than just that one aspect of God.

  • JamesBrett

    JamesBrett August 26, 2010

    scott, here are some of my thoughts on your ideas:

    “Many people followed Jesus Christ around because of the miracles He performed, but they were only done to verify what He had been saying.”

    there’s no scriptural backing for this statement—maybe if you replace ‘only’ with ‘often’ or ‘sometimes.’  but then, that wouldn’t prove your point as well.  of the top of my head, i can think of at least one passage in which it’s explicitly stated that Jesus healed out of compassion.  i do agree that some of the purpose of miracles was to verify that Jesus was indeed the Christ.  but i think some (maybe all?) were also because Jesus loves people.  i also think the miracles were a pointer to what the fullness of the kingdom will be like (no sickness or death, etc).

    “[Pete] briefly talked about sin, but did not give the whole Gospel message of Jesus Christ.”

    scott, i can’t say that i’ve ever heard any preacher give the whole gospel message of Christ in a sermon.  it’s an incredibly large concept, and i think we’ve done a lot of harm to the way of christianity by pretending it’s something small and short that can be shared in a couple of minutes at the end of a sermon.  [i’m in the middle of a series in which i’m attempting to explain the gospel message more fully right now on my blog—‘attempting’ being the key word.  the more i study it, the larger it gets.  i mean there’s hundreds of ideas that are contained in the concept of the “good news” of Jesus Christ.]

  • Scott

    Scott August 27, 2010

    Brett, first, I apologize that I was calling you “James.” I had missed your correct first name when I had scanned your blog.

    Of course, Jesus Christ healed people out of love and compassion for them and yes the Bible tells us that. But often, when in front of crowds, as described in the Bible, what came first: the preaching or the healing?
    Matthew 4:23 And Jesus went about all Galilee, teaching in their synagogues, and preaching the gospel of the kingdom, and healing all manner of sickness and all manner of disease among the people.

    Even at the Feeding of the 5000, Jesus preached first, then fed.
    Luke 9:11 And the people, when they knew it, followed him: and he received them, and spake unto them of the kingdom of God, and healed them that had need of healing.

    When Jesus Christ healed the man with the withered hand, He taught first and, then to prove His point, He healed the man. The same thing with the man lowered through the roof.

    As for your response about Pete Wilson, Sometimes, Brett, it seems like I say “blue” and you say, “No, it is cyan.” If you have looked at the website I reference, and look at the salvation page, it is more than “1,2,3, repeat after me.” No, the Gospel is not something that can be fully taught in just a few moments—however, Paul summed it up nicely in 1 Corinthians 15:1-4. Paul also more fully explained it in his fourteen epistles. And, somehow, I think you knew what I meant…
    My complaint, is that on Easter Sunday, a day with more visitors than usual, the Gospel was not given at Cross Point Church.
    I realize that teaching has to be done first in order to reach that lost soul (Matthew 28:19, 20). And it should not expect to be accomplished in a few moments, but the rudiments can be given in the few moments and on a day like Resurrection Sunday, should be more fully expounded upon.

    As you are doing your series (which I have not viewed yet), I hope you do include references to the Book of Joel and even Nahum, because those little books include a portion of the whole Gospel message. I am not a fan of “easy believe-ism” or Jack Hyles and “Hyles-caust.”

  • jessica gavin

    jessica gavin August 27, 2010

    Sometimes i call you brett, other times james. is that okay?  i always forget which one is which.  I know I asked you this once but what is your preference?

  • Danny Mack

    Danny Mack August 27, 2010

    Zee said:

    “...don’t want to have anything in common with Christians who say that all the other Churches are wrong (yes, they are talking about Christian Churches, not other religions) and ONLY their Church knows the TRUE way to God….”

    Isn’t THAT the definition of a church???  I wasn’t aware of any that say, “These are our beliefs, maybe we’re right, maybe we’re wrong; maybe other churches have a better grasp on the truth…”

  • Zee

    Zee August 27, 2010

    Danny:

    no, that is NOT the definition of Church. that is theology and beliefs, but the Church is a gathering of believers.

    and i am not talking about “maybe we’re right, maybe we’re wrong, maybe another church has a better grasp on it.” at least among the Christians, can’t we be less focused on minor things and more focused on the major things? we fight about everything - women in Church, what to wear to Church on Sundays, what music to listen to, where to live, which college to go to… THOSE ARE MINOR THINGS!!!

    *ahem* sorry… this is a sore subject and the separation among brothers and sisters bothers me a lot.

  • JamesBrett

    JamesBrett August 27, 2010

    scott, i’m sorry if i come across as generally disagreeable.  especially if i come across as if i’m disagreeable simply for the sake of disagreeing.  i truly mean that.

    i think most of our disagreements begin with statements you make which i believe to be untrue, and so i say as much.  it seems that you generally then don’t defend that statement, but either some larger argument or a different (but similar) one.

    for instance, you said, ““Many people followed Jesus Christ around because of the miracles He performed, but THEY WERE ONLY DONE to verify what He had been saying.”  (my emphasis)

    i suggested this was an untrue statement and can point to scriptures to demonstrate as much.  but i then went on to agree with you that often (not only or always) Jesus did indeed do miracles to verify something he’d said.  i agree to a large extent with you, but am merely seeking to hold you accountable to the words you say—especially when they claim something as truth from the word of God.

    your response was that preaching often came before the healings (when in front of large crowds).  and you attempted to prove to me that that preaching is indeed important (as much as or more than serving).  that’s fine, but i wasn’t disagreeing with you on your entire argument.  rather i was only questioning one portion of it.  i believe that teaching of some sort must be necessarily linked to service and love.  i just don’t think the statement you used to reach that conclusion (or to prove it) is a true one.

  • JamesBrett

    JamesBrett August 27, 2010

    scott, as for the pete wilson and the gospel scenario, i should say first that you just happened to catch me on a day that i was frustrated with our rather closed view of the good news (having just written about it on my blog).  i’m sorry, i may have overreacted.  indeed i am passionate about this subject right now, and fear that my passion will come across as anger.  i hope it doesn’t.

    basically my view of the gospel is that there are that there are hundreds of concepts and ideas in the bible that are good news to non-christians.  and, no, i don’t think paul summarized them well in 1 corinthians 15. 

    [(warning: this paragraph is my best understanding of the mentioned text, but i’m not certain of its accuracy.)  i think paul is actually suggesting that overcoming death is the chiefest of all the good news.  because a guy dying and being raised again in itself is not good news.  rather, it is in Jesus’ case because he defeated death once and for all on our behalf.  that’s why paul goes on to name all the people Jesus appeared to after being raised—he’s proving the resurrection part of it all.  resurrection is what the rest of the chapter is going to be about.  he’s not defining the gospel.  he’s saying that power over death is the best part of it.]

    nearly every time Jesus preached the gospel, it is referred to as the gospel of the kingdom.  and he had not yet died and been resurrected, so that can’t be what he was preaching all those times.  he was preaching that the kingdom was near.

    i’m not suggesting the death, burial, and resurrection aren’t good news.  i’m only suggesting they’re not all the good news.  they are crucial and vital to everything that is christianity.  Jesus ushered in the kingdom by dying and being raised again.  he demonstrated the kingdom in that way as well.

    but it does frustrate me when we think people haven’t preached the “gospel” because they didn’t focus on the part of it that we wanted them to focus on.  paul didn’t say that about Jesus’ kingdom-preaching gospel, and i’m guessing Jesus is perfectly fine with the way paul spoke of the good news.

    i’m just wondering if you went to a church and the pastor preached the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ without mentioning the kingdom… would you be upset? 

    and i just can’t imagine that on easter day, pete wilson didn’t share some good news with the people in attendance where he was preaching.  i think he just didn’t say the parts you wanted to hear.  what is it exactly that you wanted him to say?

  • JamesBrett

    JamesBrett August 27, 2010

    and, everyone, i go by brett.  i suppose jamesbrett was a poor choice of screen name.  james is my first name, and i’ve started signing important documents and the like james brett harrison, and i just kind of liked jamesbrett for a screen name.  but it does cause confusion.

    for the record, though, i don’t care about being called james.  it’s not big deal.

  • Scott

    Scott August 27, 2010

    Brett,
    I retract the only portion of my original statement and I apologize for making it. I would contend that when Jesus Christ healed the man with the withered hand (Luke 6) and when He healed the man with the palsy that had been lowered through the roof (Matt 9), the healings were done out of compassion for the men and the faith exhibited, but also to show that Jesus Christ is who He says he is. I will try to be more careful with my word choice.

  • Scott

    Scott September 05, 2010

    Brett, you said: and i just can’t imagine that on easter day, pete wilson didn’t share some good news with the people in attendance where he was preaching.  i think he just didn’t say the parts you wanted to hear.  what is it exactly that you wanted him to say?

    I would have liked to have heard Pete Wilson talk about repentance. I would have liked to have heard explain sin better and what it is. I would have liked to have him explain what being “born again” means. I would have liked to have had him explain why a person needs to be saved; and what that person needs to be saved from; and what that person needs to be saved to.

    He spoke about the Love of God but did not go much further. It is not about the parts I wanted to hear, it is about the parts that that congregation needed to hear.

Add Your Comment

Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.