Vol. 39, No. 9   

Several polls show that relatively few believers today faithfully practice any of the spiritual disciplines. One might assume, if we include Bible reading and prayer among those disciplines, the percentages would rise, and they do. But, the fact is, if one spends a minimum of only thirty minutes  each day reading the Bible and in prayer, that small amount of daily devotion and commitment to those two disciplines alone puts one in an even smaller percentage of believers in America.
 
Our tendency, due in part, perhaps, to the brevity of the more popular devotional resources, is to spend only a few minutes (under five) each day in Bible reading and prayer. Further, if any time is devoted to the actual study of the Bible each week, that time is also relatively brief and, worse, shallow, in the sense that most believers do not bother to use a Bible concordance, nor a Bible atlas. Bible dictionaries are more commonly used, but most such tools, if owned, remain on the shelf. The vast majority of believers do not even know how to use a concordance, even fewer know how to go about doing an actual word study. Why is this? Those who have sought to discover an answer say the problem is the vast majority of believers are not really motivated. Whether that is the answer or not, it is generally agreed that a primary element in spiritual growth is the believer's willingness or motivation to daily spend time in prayer, Bible reading, and Bible study.

Regardless of where we might draw the line in terms of how much time is needed for these disciplines, according to George Barna, only 9% of adults in America identify prayer as their most spiritually "fulfilling" activity, and only 7% identify "Bible reading" as their most fulfilling spiritual activity. In the Barna Update for November 29, 2004, entitled "Americans Describe Sources of Spiritual Fulfillment and Frustration," it was reported that the most common activity bringing "spiritual satisfaction" to those who participated in the survey was attending church services and events. But, that "effort" was named by only 23%.
 
In the same study, 12% reported spending time with their family was the activity that produced the greatest spiritual satisfaction, while the same percentage reported a wide variety of creative and leisure endeavors as their greatest source of spiritual fulfillment. Those "endeavors" ranged from music and art to participating in/viewing sports, to secluded meditation, enjoying nature, and hobbies.

In the same study, only 3% mentioned the maintenance or enjoyment of their relationship with God as their greatest source of spiritual fulfillment, and only 1% identified their relationship with other believers as their greatest source of spiritual fulfillment. This implies the Christian faith is not very exciting. But it gets worse. Amazingly, a similar small or marginal number identified leading an unbeliever to Christ as their major source of spiritual satisfaction. We can rationalize and argue this is because relatively few Christians regularly share Christ with their non-Christian friends. But what lies behind this? Could it be that the vast majority of Christians, including evangelicals, don't share their faith because there is nothing in their relationship with Christ which motivates or excites them to do so?

One of the most interesting aspects of Barna's study was the discovery that 46% of the public is satisfied with their spiritual state and do not seek any change. Two-thirds (67%) of atheists and agnostics are satisfied with their unbelief and doubt, 58% of adherents to non-Christian faiths are satisfied with where they are at, but only 13% of evangelical Christians are satisfied, which, in light of how their lifestyles line up with non-Christians, is a good sign. 

Barna also found that evangelicals were three times more likely than any other adults to say that reading or "knowing" the Bible gave them their greatest spiritual satisfaction. Interestingly, church size greatly affected the responses given. Adults attending churches of one hundred or fewer members were the least likely to identify church parti-cipation or prayer as the activity providing them their greatest spiritual satisfaction, while those attending churches of five hundred or more were 50% more likely to mention prayer as their chief source of spiritual fulfillment. In light of Willow Creek's Reveal study (Reveal: Where Are You?, Willow Creek Association, 2007), this may make Bill Hybels and his team feel a little better, but not much.
 
 
Reveal: Where Are You?, surveyed Willow Creek and six other American churches, analyzing thousands of responses and more than 100 inter-views. The study "revealed" that while the church has been meeting the spiritual needs of "seekers," those who describe themselves as "exploring Christianity" or "growing in Christ," it was much less successful at doing so with those who described themselves as being "close to Christ" or "Christ-centered." In fact, one-fourth of the last two groups indicated they were either "stalled" in their spiritual growth and/or "dissatisfied" with the church's seeker-sensitive orientation. Willow Creek's response is that these people should not look to the church for assistance with their spiritual growth, but to themselves and "beyond the church."

This response has been criticized as being a "low view" of the church, and not in line with the apostle Paul, who, it is said, viewed spiritual growth as not being found "beyond the church, but only in its midst. Do personal spiritual practices or disciplines take place separate from the ongoing life of the church? (See Christianity Today, March 2008, "What Reveal Reveals.").

After reflecting on his study's findings, George Barna questions "people's commitment to faith development." What Barna says is helpful, but he does not address the fact that today's spiritual "fulfillment" often does not line up with spiritual fulfillment in the Bibe. He writes,

Americans are busy people and have no qualms about admitting that they find it difficult to successfully juggle all the pieces of their life. However, when close to half of all adults say there is nothing they would change about their spiritual life in order to optimize their faith fulfillment, and another quarter gives general answers such as going to church more often or having more time to integrate spiritual activities into their life, one could easily conclude that most Americans have no plan for spiritual advancement and are not exerting much effort to grow their faith (George Barna, "Americans Describe Sources of Spiritual Fulfillment and Frustration," November 29, 2004, available on the Internet at http://www.barna.org).

Basically, this lack of motivation and interest in spiritual growth is what is frightening about the Willow Creek Reveal study, regardless of where one places the responsibility for such growth.
George Barna has repeatedly observed that most Americans, both churched and unchurched, are not well- instructed in the content of the Bible. This weakness has been the subject of many articles and books, but perhaps none as quotable and publicized than David F. Wells' No Place for Truth or Whatever Happened to Evangelical Theology? (Eerdmans, 1993). Barna continues:

It is curious how few adults seem to have criteria that help them evaluate their spiritual standing and development...For instance, the people who do not pray showed the least inclination to increase their prayer activity. Individuals who are not actively serving needy people were lowest in desiring to be more active in helping other people. Adults who lack biblical perspectives on various principles we tested were also the people least likely to desire greater Bible knowledge (George Barna, "Americans Describe Sources of Spiritual Fulfillment and Frustration," November 29, 2004, available on the Internet at http://www.barna.org).

After three decades of modeling the seeker-sensitive approach to church growth, Willow Creek is now planning to gear its weekend worship services toward mature believers who are seeking to grow in the faith. For many years they were "encouraged" to do this by their critics.
Gradually, an increasing number of evangelical institutions and churches are becoming aware of the fact that what passes for Christianity is often not nearly the same as biblical or New Testament Christianity. Indeed, in a "Perspectives" article dated February 2008, David Kinnaman, of The Barna Group, writes:

While those outside of Christianity may not always perceive us accurately, those of us on the "inside" of the faith also have dangerous assumptions that undo our witness. Here are three unexpected, yet fascinating insights we learned. First, most non-Christians in America today have a great deal of experience in Christian churches and with Christians. Most non-Christians are actually de-churched individuals.

Second, the negative perceptions are often just as common among young Christians as they are among young non-Christians. This means that whether we want to admit it or not, these are not merely image issues for outsiders, but issues of real substance with which young churchgoers wrestle.

Third, we were surprised to find how often young non-Christians communicated nuance and profound insight. They frequently mentioned that their negative views of Christians were confounded by someone who provided an entirely different, vibrant picture of what it means to be a Christian. One insightful comment was this: "I know all you Christians are not bad because I have had a few conversations with Christians I respect. Basically, I respect them because they respect me" (David Kinnaman, "Avoiding unChristian Preaching," February 2008, at http://www.barna.org).

Kinnaman goes on to say that today, in the first decade of the 21st century, "if it is harder to be a Christian, it is also more difficult than ever to teach and preach" (see above). How true! The challenge is to communicate both God's grace and judgment. "How does a teacher of the Bible help point people toward a holy God, without creating the opposite effect of putting up false barriers to Him?" asks Kinnaman. His article is worth reading in its entirety, but near the end Kinnaman offers four suggestions that go beyond simply being content with examining numbers and statistics:

1.    I believe one of the most important roles for biblical communicators is to help people see their own myopia. Jesus was just as concerned with self-righteousness as He was with unrighteousness. Grace and truth seek to accomplish the same thing: bringing our lives into alignment with God. One person does not need "just truth" and another "just grace." Every soul needs full doses of grace and truth. Your preaching and teaching should deliver both elements with potency.

In other words, don't go off the deep end with grace to the degree that you are unwilling to confront seekers as sinners. But don't go off the opposite end with truth and set up legalistic hoops through which the seeker must jump in order to become a Christian.

2.    A related theme is self-absorption. People can't see themselves clearly and they also can't empathize with how other people see the world (cf. Luke 6:41-42). Consequently, the church often perpetuates us-versus-them thinking, even though it is the only place in the universe where such categories should not exist. Christians need to be cultivating hearts for outsiders, just like Jesus did - pursuing and rescuing and restoring the broken parts of our world. Are you motivating people to fear the world and to condemn it? Or, are you helping them catch a vision to lay down their own lives - figuratively and literally - to save people?

3.    In reorienting people's perspectives, it is important for people to feel the weight of their everyday conversations and mundane relational choices. How do their words and attitudes affect the people around them? This is especially important when people's interactions with Christians often create barriers to experiencing and understanding Jesus. Did you know, for instance, that one of the most common reasons that people become unchurched is because of the hypocrisy and pretentiousness of churchgoers? We need to help people understand the consequences of their unChristian behaviors, but also communicate that Jesus still loves us, despite our flaws.

Along this line, we recommend Dave Burchett's When Bad Christians Happen to Good People: Where We Have Failed Each Other and How to Reverse the Damage (Waterbrook, 2002).

4.    One of the remarkable themes of the New Testament that seems too rare is the insider-outsider dynamic. This is hard for Americans - a very Christianized people with a rich Christian tradition - to fully comprehend. But Paul, living in a clearly non-Christian context, never seems to defend his rights as a Christian. Instead, Paul seems to accept a sinful and broken world, while holding the people of Christ to account...He calls the Christian community to high standards and yet reaffirms that these standards do not apply to those outside Christianity...Since your preaching is heard by both Christians and non-Christians, you are both a leader of Christians as well as a missionary to unbelievers. Finding that right balance is incredibly difficult, but it can be done, with the help of the Holy Spirit.

5.    Keep in mind that your decisions as a teacher ought to be courageous. This includes the courage to tell the bold truth as well as the courage to exhibit unhindered grace....Sometimes God is most honored when we make religious insiders uncomfortable. Are you making your best disciples squirm under the weight of truth and grace? David Kinnaman, "Avoiding unChristian Preaching," February 2008, available on the Internet at http://www.barna.org).

Although he appears to lean toward grace, it is interesting that in the last sentence in his article, Kinnaman refers to striking this balance for today's pastors as a "new and uncharted challenge" in terms of today's ministry contexts. Why is this balance so difficult? Because in worship and teaching contexts where there are likely to be both seekers and believers, it takes some effort in the same sermon or the same study to challenge and interest both believers and non-believers.

This challenge becomes even more difficult when we remember that non-believers may be subdivided into numerous groups, from those who, in repentance and faith, are almost ready to commit themselves to Christ, to those seekers who have little more than a partial knowledge of the gospel (see James F. Engel, Contemporary Christian Communications: Its Theory and Practice, Thomas Nelson, 1979, 82-84). Then, too, there are various "levels" of discipleship, ranging from what might be termed the fleshly or immature believer to the believer who is living in the fullness of Christ and the Spirit, but yet has much more grace to grow into. These basic divisions do not take into consideration theological and other presumptions and prejudices that are inherent in both believers and non-believers, nor the latitudinal degree of acceptance or rejection of certain biblical truths, which would make any kind of schematic or abstract charting of these different "audiences" or groups rather complex.
And let's not forget what some would term "spiritual brainwashing" and manipulation. This is the result of an imbalanced gospel being proclaimed or affirmed. James Engel, quoting Em Griffin, writes:

Manipulation occurs when use is made of "Any persuasive effort which restricts another's freedom to choose for or against Jesus Christ" (Em Griffin, The Mind Changers, Tyndale, 1976, 28).

One form of manipulation, and a disturbingly common one, is the use of outright deception. That's right - deception is not the exclusive property of the advertiser or salesman. What about evangelists who present only the positive side of the gospel without articulating the moral and ethical demands? "Accept Jesus and you will be happy," so the refrain goes. In and of itself, such a claim is not false, but it is only a half truth. People are attracted to the Savior for the wrong reasons, and it is small wonder that North American churches seem to be full of relatively contented [self-satisfied] believers, going on with the "American way of life" as usual. They have never really heard anything to the contrary. False and misleading advertising is governed by the Federal Trade Commission and state regulatory agencies. Who ever raises a voice against false and misleading evangelism?

  Another form of manipulation lies in the whole set of devices employed to induce someone to "come forward" or undertake some other type of coerced overt behavior. The choir sings "Just As I Am" for the fourteenth time; the evangelist says, "This may be the last chance you have"; counselors rise in large numbers giving the impression of a mass movement; friends use subtle pressure on the non-believer, and so on. Yes, people can be induced to act, but what does it all mean in the long run if this is an action they would not have taken of their own free will without the use of such devices?

Every reader could give glaring examples of methods used, to be quite frank, to "close the sale." We would scream quite loudly if business were to do the same thing, but somehow the end presumably justifies such means in evangelism. Or does it? We had better consider the words of the apostle Paul on this point:

...we use no clever tricks, no dishonest manipulation of the Word of God. We speak the plain truth....For it is Christ Jesus the Lord whom we preach, not ourselves; we are your servants for Jesus' sake....This priceless treasure we hold, so to speak, in common earthware - to show that the splendid power of it belongs to God and not us (2 Cor. 4:2-7, Phillips).

To cite Paul words once again, "...our exhortation does not come from error or impurity or by way of deceit; but just as we have been approved by God to be entrusted with the gospel, so we speak, not as pleasing men but God..." (1 Thess. 2:3-4, NASB).

We are justified to make use of any insight from the behavioral sciences, persuasion, advertising, and so on; but every action will be judged by these righteous biblical standards. The end clearly does not justify audience manipulation when God's Word is used as the guideline (James F. Engel, Contemporary Christian Communications, 1979, 202-203; see also 1 Cor. 2:1-5).

One could easily draw the conclusion that today this is even more of a problem, perhaps more so than it was almost thirty years ago in 1979, when Engel's words were published, simply because of the amount of religious television that exists. We have noted in previous issues of this Bulletin that those who have made studies of Christian conversion also have offered alarming reports of the fact that many, otherwise sincere, conversions to Christ, are in reality, not true conversions. This is not because of a miscount by crusade officials or eager evangelists, but because of the use of manipulative persuasive techniques, theological misconceptions and poor assumptions being made.
 
We have suggested for many years that the three core chapters, "How We Form and Sustain False Beliefs," found in David Myers' The Inflated Self (Seabury, 1980), deserve to be printed alone or together with other straightforward teaching on why heretical beliefs are often so much more easily accepted and believed, and how Satan, ever since Genesis 3, often takes the very Word of God and puts it into an entirely different, but seemingly reasonable, context.

For example, one of the widespread assumptions of modern-day revivalism is that a person must make some type of overt or outward response to accept Christ. The proof text for this is usually Revelation 3:20, which in the KJV reads, "Behold, I stand at the door and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him..." Thus, it is argued that the necessary response is to walk the church aisle, come forward, pray a sinner's prayer, etc. It was in response to this idea that James Engel, while at Wheaton College, wrote:

The problem with this approach is that it does gross violence to the biblical text. Revelation 3:20 is written to Christians only, and Christ is giving an invitation for a degenerate church in Laodicea to be restored to His grace. It says nothing whatsoever to the non-Christian!

Of course, much the same can be said of 2 Chronicles 7:14. Engel continues:

Furthermore, there is nothing in Scripture that makes reference to any type of sinner's prayer. Repentance and faith are called for, and nothing else. How one takes this final step is not clearly specified, except for the necessity of public testimony as mentioned in Romans 10....

Revelation 3:20 and the resultant prayer probably crept into evangelistic strategy because of the fact that most North Americans are activistic and need to take some overt step. Therefore, a prayer of commitment is valid for many people living in that context. The author prayed such a prayer himself in 1965 as did his wife, and we have seen many others come to faith in Christ through that means. But it is not a biblically normative strategy.

The real danger enters through the unverified assumption that some type of overt act is necessary if one is to be saved. Yet, the author has found that great numbers of Christians cannot recall a point in time at which they went forward in a meeting, prayed a prayer, and so on. Does this mean they have not been saved? Some might say so, but such an evaluation is unwarranted in light of what has been said here. The important issue is not how repentance and saving faith were expressed but rather the fact that this did take place as verified by present lifestyle and actions. What right do we have to require an action that is not required by Scripture?

The problem becomes compounded by the all-too-common tendency to count those who "prayed" or went forward as being Christian converts....It is now becoming painfully obvious that our proclivity to measure overt actions in this manner is leading to some downright erroneous conclusions. People can be induced to pray such a prayer for many reasons - as an act of courtesy, as an act of desperation to get rid of us, as a desire to curry our favor and gain some advantage through this means, and so on. Yet, evangelistic organizations cite such statistics with seeming abandon, and some have even declared the Great Commission to be "fulfilled" in some geographic areas on such a basis. Frankly, the author has now reached the point where such claims are completely discounted until there is evidence at a much later time that these supposed converts are united with the church and living under the lordship of Christ. We would do well to follow the example of Billy Graham and other reputable evangelists who carefully label those who undertake these types of overt action as "inquirers" and nothing more (James Engel, Con-temporary Christian Communications, 213-214).

We may conclude that there are several elements which are essential in any discussion today on spiritual growth. One is the soundness of conversion. Another is biblical, theological, and spiritual discernment. A third is the regular practice of the basic spiritual disciplines, including prayer, Bible reading, and Bible study. A fourth is the fact we need to remember Christianity is not about us, it is about our partnering with God to reach the lost.

In terms of discernment, we need to remember today that one of the marks of a true prophet in the Old Testament was his unpopularity. Why? Because they insisted on telling people what they didn't want to hear. What people want to hear is that they can have whatever they want. Why does this continue to be the case? Because most people, regardless of whether they are believers or not, are self-centered, not God-centered. This is why the traditional teaching on holiness is so essential today, but, regrettably, it is seldom heard in either Pentecostal or charismatic churches, the theology of both being almost overwhelmingly self-centered.
 
I have pointed out in teaching and preaching on holiness that it is amazing what we have heard about the Holy Spirit in the Christian world in the last fifty years. There probably has been more discussion of the Spirit in the last half-century than in any comparable period in the history of the church. If you turn on your television or look at what is on the Christian bestseller list, you can easily find the charismatic message that goes all over the world, and in that message we are told that the Spirit can do all sorts of wonderful and remarkable things. But, few people outside of older Americans in the American Holiness movement realize that one can number on one hand the charismatic theologians who believe a Christian can have a clean heart. There are perhaps a few more Pentecostal theologians who hold to this traditional teaching, but not many. It is said believers can get the power, but these groups do not preach that the blood of Christ can cleanse the depths of a person's being.

Also, in the Old Testament, and still today, false prophets and teachers tend to satisfy the appetite of the masses, of churched and unchurched, of believers and unbelievers. Jesus brought good news, but at the same time His teaching was "hard" (John 6:60), and John says "many of His disciples drew back and no longer went about with Him" (John 6:66). Apparently, Jesus made no effort, as we often do today, to soften the message, to make it more acceptable, which, in essence, is to preach a different gospel (see, for example, Gary Gilley, This Little Church Stayed Home: A Faithful Church in Deceptive Times, Evangelical Press, 2006).

In our era, as Francis Chan and Danae Yankoski hint at in Crazy Love: Overwhelmed by a Relentless God (David C. Cook, 2008), when Christian embrace the status quo of a society that searches for economic (wealth), political (power), and emotional security (experience and feelings), the result is actually spiritual complacency and a false, preconceived notion of God. Sadly, evangelical Christians today who are excited about their faith, live as though God exists for them, to do their bidding, to bless them, and to take care of their loved ones. In a word, they are self-centered rather than God-centered. Worse, they don't realize it. Chan and Yankoski  are quite correct when they say that the American church is a difficult place to live out New Testament Christianity, and taking the words of Christ literally and seriously is rare.