The article written below is from Earl Chambers,a 75 year old preacher who has been preaching it straight for over 50 years. Please read carefully what he says: "Schools have dumbed down their scholastic standards, hospitals have dumbed down their health care standards, factores have dumbed down their product standards, and society has dumbed down its moral standards. The homosexuals are doing their best to dumb down marriage as God ordained it. The president has dumbed down the meaning of truth, honesty, marital fidelity, law, justice, sexuality, the White House, patriotism, and the high office. The Washington District of Corruption has obviously dumbed down most what the president has, or they would have thrown him out of both the Office and the White House. The people of this great land have also dumbed down the meansing of these areas, for them to put a man, so lacking in character into the hightest office of their country. The importance of the blood of Christ, and preaching against sin has been dumbed down in seeker-sensitive churches because this is offensive to some. So for those sensitive souls, basic truths of the gospel are compromised. The Holy Spirit inspired scriptures are dumbed down by some, giving them a psychological twist which shades the message God intended to convey, dulling the two-edged sword. Many are misapplying the word "pastor" by applying it to the preacher, evangelist, and minister. Many of the denominations call their minister "pastor" and they want to be like their religious neighbors. The contemporary music, all the way from "rock" to "bach", with the worship leader and worship teams have dumbed down Colossians 3:16 with their ding-a-ling ditties, consisting of single phrases repeated from 3-7 times. The "teaching and admonishing one another with Psalms, and hymns and spiritual songs" on just about every subject in the bible, as found in the old traditional hymn books have not been dumbed down, but eliminated. Sermons are dumbed down with clips of Hollywood movies that illustrate or relate to the topic of the day. This, we are told, helps the people to relax and laugh, thus reducing stress and anxiety. Holy Spirit conviction through the preaching of the Word of God is what it takes to produce genuine conversions. Baptism for the remission of sin and the receiving of the Holy Spirit has been dumbed down to include anyone and everyone that has been dunked under water for whatever reason. Anyone that has gotten wet is received into felloship. The weekly observance of the Lord's Supper as taught in the Scriptures has also been dumbed down. Some are no more observing it upon the first day of the week, but rather at the mid-week service, or Saturday night, or any day for special occasions. Some, like the denominations, are hiding their identity by using some name that does not reveal who they truly are. When CHRIST is eliminated, that is being dumbed down to the lowest degree. Application forms for membership, baby dedications, and many other such things are not coming from the Bible."

Romans 4:3---"For what does the scripture say?" 1 Peter 4:11---if anyone speaks let him speak as the oracles of God Isaiah 8:20---to the laws and to the testimony, if any speak not according to the Word, it is because they have no light in them.

-- Anonymous, July 26, 2000

Answers

Bob....

I agree with MOST of what you wrote.

-- Anonymous, July 26, 2000

What you win them with.....is what you win them to.

-- Anonymous, July 28, 2000

John....

I didn't realize there were so many elders attending the NACC.

-- Anonymous, July 29, 2000

Ahhhh.....that says it all....the "left" coast.

-- Anonymous, July 31, 2000

Bob,

I agree. The problem though goes even further than this. Not only are people being accepted because they have gotten wet for whatever reason, they are being accepted without getting wet at all.

A sad state all around.

-- Anonymous, July 26, 2000

Question:

Do you think it is because (a) even though the preachers, elders, and all kinds of leaders know better, they are willing to compromise? (b) church leaders themselves are too "dumb" and too poorly educated in the word of God to know the difference? or (c) society in general has "dumbed down" so much that nobody (except the few "prophetic" souls in this forum?) knows the difference?

Question #2: Do you have any recommendations as to what those who see the problem can/should do about it?

By the way, many people are still attracted to good solid Bible teaching when the find it, if there is someone who can make the truth "accessible", i.e. understandable, to them. There are churches that have solid Biblical expository teaching and a strong teaching programme that are growing as much as or sometimes better than the ones that "dumb down."

-- Anonymous, July 26, 2000

Benjamin,

My vote would be...

(c) society in general has "dumbed down" so much that nobody (except the few "prophetic" souls in this forum?) knows the difference?

I am wondering just how many of us are prophets, or have that gift?

-- Anonymous, July 26, 2000

Actually, I dont believe it has much to do with society in general. The blame must be placed directly on the church. In some cases it is true that the preachers, leaders, and elders know better. The problem here is they will not confront with truth because truth is much too controversial. It is easier to go the middle road, to compromise than to have to stand and fight.

Also, there are leaders who do not know the truth. This does not in any way excuse them. In many of these cases tolerance and so-called love (non-biblical definition) prevail. Just look Benjamin at how many denominations are accepting of all the others with no regard to the fact that their teachings are in direct opposition to the other. So doctrine whether good or bad goes out the window so that we can accept EVERYONE NO MATTER WHAT THEY BELIEVE.

As to what we should dofirst, STUDY. The number one reason people are so tolerant, misguided, etcis because they do not study the Bible. Of course that is not to say people will never misunderstand even when studyingto see that, we only have to read various posts in this forum. I am sure at one point or another, each one in this forum has thought someone else is misunderstanding or misusing scripture.

Second, Study some more. Seek Godly counsel. Pray for wisdom. I know it is very difficult, but try to put aside man-made traditions.

Finally, teach. You are correct when you say many people are still attracted to good solid Bible teaching when the find it, if there is someone who can make the truth "accessible", i.e. understandable, to them. There are churches that have solid Biblical expository teaching and a strong teaching programme that are growing as much as or sometimes better than the ones that "dumb down. I believe that this is true my local congregation is one of these. But...look around again Benjamin...we are outnumbered by a long shot.

-- Anonymous, July 26, 2000

Sister Muse,

You said, "Finally, teach. You are correct when you say many people are still attracted to good solid Bible teaching when the find it, if there is someone who can make the truth "accessible", i.e. understandable, to them. There are churches that have solid Biblical expository teaching and a strong teaching programme that are growing as much as or sometimes better than the ones that "dumb down. I believe that this is true my local congregation is one of these. But...look around again Benjamin...we are outnumbered by a long shot."

Your last sentence is probably true, but the point of what I was saying is that it doesn't have to be that way. If it is true that many people are attracted to strong Biblical teaching, then there is no need for church leaders to be afraid of implementing it.

In previous threads I have once or twice mentioned a book I am reading right now (very slowly). It is by Os Guinness, a protegi of the late Francis Schaeffer. It is called "The Gravedigger Files." The idea is something like that of "The Screwtape Letters" by C.S. Lewis. "The Gravedigger Files" purports to be a series of memoranda to one of Satan's minions from his immediate supervisor, outlining Satan's strategy for subverting the church in the latter part of the 20th Century.

The chapter I am reading right now is about liberalism in the church. He says that liberals in the church are so concerned about "relevance", that they usually end up following the world rather than leading it, as the church should do. A couple of sentences are worth quoting. From page 214, "When the most radical liberal revisions are complete, the result is little different from what the outsider believed anyway." And from page 211, "Just let the modern world look askance at the extreme liberal and, like a chronically nervous strip-poker player, he removes another layer of clothes without even looking at his cards."

What he says about extreme conservatism is no more complementary -- just slightly different. The solution is not either extreme, but rather getting back to the Bible, studying it, and following it, no matter which "side" others may want to "stick" us.

In answer to your question (real or rhetorical, I'm not sure) in the earlier message, regarding how many of us have a prophetic gift -- I put the word "prophetic" in quotation marks when I used it, to indicate that I was using the word metaphorically rather than literally. If you have followed what I have written in some of the threads on spiritual gifts, you will have seen that I do not believe the gift of prophecy is given today. But some people definitely have the capability to speak "prophetically" (in a metaphorical sense) about current needs and problems, and should be doing so. How many in this forum are capable of that, I don't know. I've seen some really sharp thinking here, and some very fuzzy, muddled thinking. But those who can give the kind of teaching and warning that this generation needs, should definitely be out doing it.

-- Anonymous, July 26, 2000

Brother Lentz:

I agree 100% with what Brother Earl Chambers has said and I appreciate your quoting his words for us in this forum. I also agree with Sister Muse. We must return to a diligent and prayerful study of the word of God so that we can know what the will of the Lord is in all things. The path of truth is straight and narrow and for that reason I agree with Brother Ben that we must be diligent to follow the teaching of Gods word without going to extremes in any direction.

My father was an alcoholic and on one occasion he said to me, Straight is the gate and narrow is the way that leads unto life and no drunk staggering to the left and right in and out of that path will ever find it! Though he took some liberties in his quotation of the master what he said is true not only of the drunk but also of the religious zealots of either the liberal or conservative sects who are drunk form drinking their on concoctions of preconceived notions that are contrary to truth. Thus they sway in their dizzy imaginations. These are often given to staggering from one extreme to the other and never satisfied with the straight path laid out and paved for us by our Lord and Master Jesus the Christ. This path of righteousness is narrow but not invisible! It pierces through the mountaineous extremes of men It is the only road that is lighted while all others, because they lead off from the true path and have the benefit of light from it, often tempt us to wander into darkness before we realize that the light is fading into the darkness. None of the diverging paths are completely without light. They often use the light from the true path in order to appear to be just like the straight and narrow way and they do not begin to twist and turn until the light begins to dim as one travels on these divergent roads into the dark. We should watch carefully for the dimming of the light. For when it begins to weaken we should be warned that we are no longer walking in the light but rather wandering away from it!

WE must understand that Christians are neither liberal nor conservative but are striving in all things to be FAITHFUL to Christ who is the way, the truth and the life. (John 14:6). But Brother Chambers has detected the result of intellectual laziness resulting in a severe lack of mental industry, which prevents one from diligently studying the word of God and understanding it. I especially appreciate his observation concerning the shallowness of most sermons that we are exposed to in our day. I remember days of gospel meetings that lasted two weeks or longer with sermons that often took more than three hours filled with numerous expositions of portions of the word of God with few if any cute little illustrations intended to entertain rather than instruct. Sermons are often thought to be successful upon the basis of their thrill value these are often rated upon the basis of how exciting and emotionally charged and moving they are to the audience. They are often thought to be true if they thrill us or move us rather than if they are in harmony with the teaching of the word of God.

The choice of sermon topics is often guided by the popular themes in the News and world around us rather than NECESSARY themes delivered to us in the word of God. Expository preaching is very much out of vogue today because such requires entirely too much effort. There is little or no room in this type of sermon for crowd pleasing and thrilling illustrations of human invention. It is one of the very best methods of teaching the word of God and using the many wonderful illustrations that God himself has given of His divine truth. His illustrations are far superior to those that our modern preachers devise to entertain. God does not seek to entertain but to teach us. We do need to take a close look at this desire for entertainment present in the church today. It is severely out of control. It is not pleasing to God. And it is leading many away from the truth. Before you argue with these statements take a real close look at the matter. Why do some have ELVIS IMPERSONATORS in their worship? Talk about dumbing down few things could be more indicative of the need to entertain rather than teach the word of God. Think of the many sermons where it was obvious that the preacher intended to entertain us. Watch over the next few weeks and see how much is actually taught and how many preachers are obviously completely unprepared to preach the sermon that was obviously selected only a few hours before it was delivered. Just watch for a while and I believe you will see that we must return to a diligent study of the word of God and reprimand those who are obviously not putting effort into preparing to teach it. We must reject those who love to entertain us and tell them that it is not appreciated. But most of all we must study the word of God ourselves. For with this culture of entertaining preachers and ELVIS IMPERSONATORS we shall not learn it from the pulpit.

I thank you Brother Lentz for your pointing to these severe problems of DUMBING DOWN among us.

If one wants to see the difference between this age of shallow preaching and writing and the days of the restoration leaders who were struggling to return to genuine Christianity found in the pages of the New Testament I have some suggestions. I suggest reading some of the great expository sermons of the restoration movement. But more important than this I recommend reading some of the great sermons of the Bible.

Your Brother in Christ,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, July 27, 2000

Lee;

While the "Elvis Impersonator" no longer attends our church, I feel compelled to defend his ministry. First, he was never a part of our worship service. His talent (and God commands to use our talents!) was in singing and in such a style that it mimicked Elvis Presley. Using that talent got many people, often unchurched, to come to his concerts, where he would sing gospel songs and give a testimony afterwards. Many have come to faith in Christ after being initially interest in "just another concert." Many who would otherwise never come to a church or listen to a preacher preach a sermon at them. Sure, his method is not your method; and it is certainly unique. But it is not unbiblical. "Do not stop him," Jesus said, "for whoever is not against you is for you."

-- Anonymous, July 27, 2000

John,

While we don't have 'Elvis Impersonators' at our church, I think of what Paul said: "I become all things to all men that I might win some".

A really strait-laced, buttoned-down formal-type guy is for a really strait-laced, buttoned-down congregation; whereas a more casual, laid-back person appeals to that kind of congregation, usually a younger one.

Music is another thing which separates the choirs (a capella) from the praise bands. As long as the Gospel is being preached, and, as you say, if they are not against us, they are FOR us, I say, "Praise God!"

People brought up to walk a certain line are usually attracted to a more formal, legalistic style. I am not against their type of service, (if they are preaching the Gospel ~ there are some very formal churches which are not Gospel-adhering or Bible-believing) but I just prefer a warmer, more affectionate, greet-one-another-with-a- Holy-kiss type of fellowship, BUT ONLY IF IT, TOO, PRESENTS THE UNVARNISHED GOSPEL.

I was brought up in a non-alcoholic, affectionate, demonstrative, talkative household. My mother was the only parent of my acquaintances who had a college education. (Including my father ~ who quit school after graduating as valedictorian of his 8th grade class because he didn't have decent clothes to wear ~ sad).

We had lively conversations about cultural and world affairs (unfortunately they weren't Christians) and I can remember their listening to classical music and the operas from New York every Saturday.

I think our up-bringings have more to say about how we approach the way we worship than we'd like to admit.

I have a niece who became a Christian in college (the daughter of my devout agnostic sister ~ ;-) ) who will only attend an Episcopal Church, and only if it is acoustically perfect, because she sings and plays without amplification. But I know she is a Christian, and I hope God is as faithful in instructing her as He is me. She knows her Bible inside and out and lives by it.

The way we get the Gospel out is less important than whether we do or not. IMHO

-- Anonymous, July 28, 2000

Bob

Some of this I do agree with but much of it is spoken in general and I think it is to broad a statement. Some of the statements I disagree with when they are all inclusive,(dumbed down).

1. Schools. Working in a University setting I see at least 2 types of people.Those that work towards a goal of more knowledge and those that goof off.There are a large portion of kids today that want to learn and are willing to work hard to accomplish their goals.There are many teachers that want to teach them and are eager to do so.I know many members of the CC that are teachers and administrators in our public schools.I believe there are very qualified teachers. We need parents that become involved in their children's lives rather than continuing to act like children themselves. We also need much less government intervention.

Hospitals.I consider this to be a ridiculous statement.I am very hesitant about using personal illustrations but here goes.My son-in-law and daughter are physicians. They are able to do things today that Dr's and hospitals just dreamed of a few years ago.Medicine of today has made tremendous advancement beyond that of 20 years ago. The excellent public school education our daughter received was the foundation for her higher education. For 10 1/2 years I took a pill that was invented just a few years prior. I believe it saved my life and offered me a chance at a normal life span.Would you want to trust your life to medical practice of 25 years ago.

Product standards. I drove a 4 cylinder Ford truck 200,000 miles with very little problems.

The blood of Christ has always offended some and will always continue to do so.My guess is that at this time there are more good bible believing, truth preaching, well educated in the scriptures preachers than ever before. I do not doubt there are also more false teachers. When it is said, as I so often hear, "people don't want to hear the truth preached anymore" it is very disturbing to me. I think most people want to hear the truth and most preachers want to preach the truth.Those that do not want to hear the truth and those that do not preach the truth are not a part of the true church.

Scriptures dumbed down.In my opinion SOME of our,(CC) bible colleges are becoming a very weak link in the chain.I still can not understand how classes such as drama and a few others have found a place or need in our bible colleges. I do not go so far as to say that this is wrong but I fail to see the value of doing so. BUT, from other schools I see young men graduating that seem sound, eager and excited about the opportunity to preach and teach. Most bible colleges seem to be doing a good job but I do wonder about the goals and objectives of some.One thing that I have wondered about for a long time now is, Do we have to many Christian church preachers preaching in the Christian churchs. Could not those that see winning the lost as a priority be more effective preaching and teaching others.I do not pretend to have the answer but hope this is considered by many in the years ahead.

Rather than seeing this as a time of gloom and doom I see this as the most excellent time in all of history to be a christian, a preacher, with more opportunity to proclaim Christ, with more people searching than ever before. I have seen through the years what seems to be a mind set of many good men.In their preaching and teaching they reflect anger and bitterness.It seems so much in conflict with a heart that is breaking for the lost.It seems to be often accompanied by a pessimistic attitude. I need to hate the sin, love the sinner, be firm and faithful in and to the word. What would Paul say about our opportunity today when compared to his day? I thank God that I am here at this particular time in history. GO, TEACH, BAPTIZE, TEACH

In rereading this it seems somewhat critical.It is not intended to be so but rather simply a statement of my disagreement with what seems to be a, "down the tubes" sort of attitude.

-- Anonymous, July 28, 2000

Brother John:

You have said:

Lee;

While the "Elvis Impersonator" no longer attends our church, I feel compelled to defend his ministry. First, he was never a part of our worship service. His talent (and God commands to use our talents!) was in singing and in such a style that it mimicked Elvis Presley. Using that talent got many people, often unchurched, to come to his concerts, where he would sing gospel songs and give a testimony afterwards. Many have come to faith in Christ after being initially interest in "just another concert." Many who would otherwise never come to a church or listen to a preacher preach a sermon at them. Sure, his method is not your method; and it is certainly unique. But it is not unbiblical. "Do not stop him," Jesus said, "for whoever is not against you is for you."

Let me begin by saying that I have nothing personal against one who has chosen the entertainment business as a vocation. I therefore have nothing against your Elvis Impersonator as an entertainer or as a person. We have, however been commanded to go ye therefore and preach the gospel to every creature. (Mark 16:15). We have been given this as our ministry. I am very talented and well trained with all forms of weapons, explosives and military operations. But that does not mean that I should be entertaining people in the church with halo jumps out of airplanes and weapons demonstrations and explosive displays as a ministry to reach those who would otherwise have no interest in Christ. I once read an article in the paper of a Lutheran Church that had a stripper dancing in their assembly and the argument given to justify this practice was a three-pronged one. 1.) Dancing nude was her talent, 2.) We are commanded to use our talents for Christ, 3.) Many, who would otherwise have no interest in the church, were being brought in by her performances. This argument failed to recognize the fact that her performances were sinful because her behavior, though talented, was against Gods commands regarding fornication and adultery. But it is interesting how they were able to be convinced to overlook this fact on the grounds that it was allowing her to use her talents and at the same time bringing large crowds to their services. Now, your Elvis impersonators actions are not inherently sinful and are therefore not in the same category as the Lutheran Stripper, but this desire to use to bring in the unchurched by any means possible is the same. This converting people by entertainment rather than by plain gospel preaching is probably the reason many churches and preachers feel the need to keep everyone entertained for it is not Christ they have been converted to but the fun and entertainment found at the church. The church is not a divine Hollywood where we entertain people until hopefully we can convert them. It is the Pillar and ground of the truth (2Tim. 3:15). Entertainment has absolutely no place in Gods plan of preaching the gospel to a dying world. The apostles and first century Christians use no such entertainment efforts to bring people to Christ. Certainly, there is no place for entertainment in the worship. I assume here that since you made the point that your Elvis Impersonator was never a part of your worship service that you would have objected if he had been a part of the worship. It does appear that you see that entertainment such as this has no place in our worship. Then how could it have a place in our WORK of preaching the gospel of Christ?

You claim that many were brought to faith in Christ in this way. How many were brought to faith in Christ? How many were actually converted to Christ by being obedient to the gospel by being immersed into Christ? How many have remained faithful to Christ and how many will leave when the entertainment the church provides goes away? Are you sure that this is the one thing that brought them to Christ and that they could never have been brought to Christ otherwise? Are you sure they were converted to Christ or were they converted to a church that provided free concerts for their entertainment pleasure and enjoyment?

Preaching the gospel is the most powerful means of converting people to Christ. Entertaining people is a sure-fire way of pleasing people but it does nothing to lead them to Christ. NOTHING!

You say:

Many who would otherwise never come to a church or listen to a preacher preach a sermon at them. Sure, his method is not your method; and it is certainly unique.

You sound as if you think that the only place they could hear the gospel preached is at the Church and from a professionally trained preacher. We are not commanded to lure the lost to COME to the church so that we can sneak up on them with the gospel. We are commanded to GO into all the world (Mark 16:15;Matthew 28:19,20) and preach the gospel. We are to take the gospel to them not lure them like the Pied Piper to the church. This very attitude is the direct opposite of what our Lord commanded us to do.

Therefore, Brother John, there is no just defense of this Elvis Impersonators so-called ministry. You say it is not unbiblical. Yes it is both unbiblical and anti-biblical. There is nothing in the scriptures that teaches or justifies entertainment as a lure for those not interested in the gospel to gain their attention to it. And it is contrary to the command of Christ who did not tell us to lure the world with entertainment but rather to go and preach the gospel to every creature He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; He that believeth not shall be condemned. (Mark 16:16).

Your Brother in Christ,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, July 28, 2000

Lee, you wrote:

There is nothing in the scriptures that teaches or justifies entertainment as a lure for those not interested in the gospel to gain their attention to it.

Neither is there anything that prohibits it.

it is contrary to the command of Christ who [told us] to go and preach the gospel to every creature

It is hardly contrary for indeed that is what he is doing. Far more than most people who sit in church and do nothing but take up space.

-- Anonymous, July 28, 2000

John,

Could I get a definition of unchurched? I believe this type of language to be part of the dumbing down process.

-- Anonymous, July 28, 2000

In scanning through, again, some of what has been written in this thread, I was suddenly reminded of an old saying. "In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king." If things are as bad as some are saying, what an opportunity this affords for people of even moderate ability to stand forth and be counted! It would not take much to better some of what is being done and said at present. On the other hand, there is always the risk that the blind will decide they don't want to be led and will ignore, denigrate, or even try to "blind" the one who dares to speak out.

-- Anonymous, July 28, 2000

D. Lee ... sorry for using politically correct lingo. By "unchurched" I mean people who are not Christians and do not attend any church.

I find your attitudes interesting. This man's ministry (as well as that of our dancers) have been met with enthusiasm by most Christian churches we have been in contact with, and generated a lot of interest from pastors at the last NACC, from what my pastor told me. I am reminded of Paul's words, "I become all things to all men, that I might win some." Here is a man who becomes "Elvis" to those who love, eat, drink and sleep Elvis (and there are lots of those types out there!), that he might win some. He sings gospel songs to them and gives them a gospel message. How is this wrong?

-- Anonymous, July 29, 2000

I think we should re-phrase that verse which you mentioned of Paul's: 'Let's do everything in our power which will keep everyone out except those who cross their t's and dot their i's EXACTLY the way we do'.

We like us when we're exclusivist elitists. [This is that 'Sarcasm Zone' you alluded to above.]

-- Anonymous, July 29, 2000

Danny if that was sarcasm, and I expect it was, it went way over my head.

-- Anonymous, July 30, 2000

John,

I am still not sure I am understanding your definition of "unchurched" correctly. The term implies those who do not go to any church at all. Am I correct in that assesment?

I believe your second paragraph was intended for E. Lee and not myself. I do have to say though that I can not see Paul dressing up in the costume of a contemporary singer of his day to draw people to Christ.

-- Anonymous, July 30, 2000

John,

I don't KNOW this is what Danny meant, but this is my guess.

Traditionally in our movement we have taken the position that PASTOR = ELDER, though I suspect that when you talked about the reactions of many "pastors" at the NACC you actually meant "ministers" or "preachers" -- hence (I think) the sarcastic comment, "I didn't know so many elders attended the NACC."

I'd be prepared to argue about this in a thread dealing with church leadership, but I think calling attention to it here just sidetracks the main issue.

I can remember, years ago, at least one person, perhaps several, who used to give karate demonstrations to attract people to meetings where the gospel could be presented. (That attracted criticism for a different reason -- from people who considered that karate was always and necessarily linked to pagan Eastern religions.) I don't thank that and Elvis impersonators are much different. Both (and a hundred other things) are gimmicks. If the message itself is then presented in an effective way, they may be useful "tools" for spreading the gospel. If not, they remain just that -- gimmicks.

-- Anonymous, July 30, 2000

Benjamin: Then I would say this man fell into the 2nd catagory (not just a gimmick - he sincerely was using his talent as a tool to get people to a place where they would listen to his message).

As far as the Pastor/Elder thing goes ... this whole debate is a new one on me. In every CC church I've been in in the past 25 years, there has been a Pastor/Minister/Preacher/Whatever, who may or may not have been an Elder. I dunno ... maybe churches out here on the west coast are different. Maybe its a cultural thing. Wouldn't surprise me.

-- Anonymous, July 31, 2000

Brother John:

You have asked for an explanation as to how it is wrong to become Elvis that one might win some who love, eat, and drink Elvis as follows:

I am reminded of Paul's words, "I become all things to all men, that I might win some." Here is a man who becomes "Elvis" to those who love, eat, drink and sleep Elvis (and there are lots of those types out there!), that he might win some. He sings gospel songs to them and gives them a gospel message. How is this wrong?

Think of this. Many, during the lifetime of Elvis, idolized him. They Worshipped Him. They were guilty of idol worship as surely as was anyone who idolized a Buddha or Diana or any other false God. It is true that Elvis did not necessarily like the idea of being an idol but nevertheless he has been treated as such. Now can anyone imagine Paul arranging a worship service for the favorite local idol so that he could by some means, ANY MEANS, attract those that were interested in that Idol and then sneak up on them and preach a gospel sermon to them? It is not right to promote idolatry in order to preach the gospel. Brother John has told us that these people love, eat, drink, Elvis. He has demonstrated with these words that they idolize him yet he cannot see that this Elvis Impersonator is imitating their Idol in order to reach them with the gospel. This is far more serious than a mere gimmick. He is imitating their IDOL so that they can engage in their continued worship of him in the hopes that he can preach the gospel to them! This so-called ministry would have been appalling in the first Century.

But this issue of entertaining others as a gimmick to get them to hear the gospel is not justified by the verse given by Paul which has been quoted in order to support the practice. The scripture quoted was I have become all things to all men that I by some means might win some. Paul did not mean by this that we are justified in becoming idolaters in order to convert those who worship idols. He did not mean that we are justified in becoming prostitutes ourselves in order to be able to understand and convert the prostitute. He did not mean that we could provide homosexual entertainment for homosexuals in order that we might preach the gospel to homosexuals and save them. He did not mean that we could join a band of thieves and become thieves ourselves in order that we might by some means convert them to Christ. He did not mean that we could become LAIRS that we might be able to convert those who tell lies. He did not mean that we are to become murderers that we might be able to convert those who have committed murders. He did not mean that we should become antichrist in order to convert those who are against Christ the Lord. He did not intend that any should become Atheist in order to convert those who do not believe in God. He did not mean that we should become dishonest in order to convert those who are dishonest. He did not mean that we are to become Buddhist in order to convert Buddhist. He would never have become a false teacher in order to correct the false teacher. Therefore this verse is being abused severely to teach us that we can become Elvis, who is an idol that many worship today, in order that we might win some who worship him. If this is acceptable then we could just as easily learn to practice Buddhism. Then we could build a Buddhist temple and invite Buddhist to join us in the temple. And by becoming a Buddhist to those that are Buddhist we might by some means win some! Therefore at some point in the temple, at just the right time, we would simply sneak up on them with the gospel of Christ. As long as we do this we are justified in practicing Buddhism in order to attract those interested in Buddhism so that we might win some of them to Christ! No faithful Christian could contemplate such a thing but it is no different than what you have recommended and sought to justify with your misuse of Pauls words in your efforts to justify your friend the Elvis Impersonator.

This ministry of the Elvis Impersonator is just a gimmick that takes advantage of the fact that many love Elvis so much that they idolize and worship him. In order to take advantage of their idolatry this Brother must arrange for them to worship at the feet of one that imitates their Idol. He probably sees nothing wrong with this because he does not perceive that those who idolize Elvis are in fact worshipping him. I do not doubt one moment that he is sincere. But sincerity does not make such entertainment and idolatry acceptable to God.

Brother John, you even admit that he was not allowed to imitate Elvis in your Worship. You did not answer the questions that I asked you concerning this matter. Why your congregation did not allow him to practice his so-called ministry during your worship service you have not explained but it to us. Could it be that your congregation recognized it at best as nothing more than vain entertainment having nothing to do with GOd or did they recognize it as a gimmick and did not want to associate the worship of God with such gimmickery? Or, did they in the worst case see the idolatry involved in such behavior and did not want to encourage the worship the "King of Rock 'N Roll" in the same place where we worship the KING OF KINGS? THis "King of Rock 'N ROll" has no place along side the KING OF KINGS and LORD OF LORDS! I agree with the decision of your congregation to keep this Elvis Impersonator from bring his entertainment into the worship of the church. For no "entertainment" has a place there especially such a carnal entertainment as one that idolizwes Elvis. And, for the same reasons it has no place in the worship of the church it also has no placein the work of the Church. We must turn from these gimmicks to the simple preaching of the gospel of Christ which is the power of God unto salvation to the Jew first and also to the Greek. (Romans 1:16). This desire for gimmicks to support the gospel is an indication of a lack of faith in the power of the simple preaching of the gospel to save them that hear believe and obey it. God has determined by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe". (1 Cor. 1:18). He has not chosen the wisdom of entertainment and compromise of the gospel to entice them that might have sufficient pleasure to be convinced to come to the church for more of the same entertainment and pleasure that originally interested them in the first place. God has not sent us to fill the pews in any church building but to preach the gospel and save those who are lost without hope and without God in this world! Only by preaching the gospel can this be done and that is Gods choice. (1Cor. 1:18). Remember that the foolishness of God is wiser that the wisdom of man. (1 Cor. 1:18-24). If we think that Gods way is foolish and will not work as well as the ways that our own wisdom dictates we are in very much trouble indeed! God has not left the salvation of the lost of this world to the frail wisdom of man. He has told us to preach the gospel and he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved. (Mark 16:15,16). TO follow any other procedure than this is to have a lack of faith in God. The arm of flesh shall fail you, ye dare not trust your own.

Your Brother in Christ,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, August 01, 2000

Lee -

I agree with you here. The scripture "all things to all men" is usually taken out of the context its in when actually applied.

The way I learned what this really meant was when I lived in Germany. After a year of living as an English speaking American in Europe, I started dressing like the local Germans, and learned the language. When I did this, the novelty of having an American wore off, and they began listening to what I had to say. "All things to all people" means to me to live with the locals, dress like they do, speak their language, and eat like they do (this is particularly important, since Americans are pretty picky eaters).

Now, what I also learned was that while being part of their culture, I was not to partake of their sins, such as alcohol abuse and the lax European sexual standards. But in all other ways I was basically "one of them." Later reading revealed that I was on track, because this is what Hudson Taylor and other missionaries did to be effective.

-- Anonymous, August 01, 2000

Lee, I didn't say he wasn't allowed to, I just said he never did. It just really didn't fit in with Sunday morning.

Also, he had a cape, a la Elvis, which had printed in very bold letters (with lots of rhinestones, of course): Jesus is the real King.

-- Anonymous, August 02, 2000

I hope everyone here knows the difference between the "LOST" and the "unchurched"! Because if we don't, we are in a world of hurt.

There are many, many people who attend church, but have not obeyed the gospel of our Lord.

Using the term "unchurched" causes us to loose sight of who the lost really are.

-- Anonymous, August 02, 2000

Dr. Jon:

I appreciate your comments especially since I spent so much time in my last post explaining what this verse from Paul DID NOT mean that I had failed to fill in the gap by explaining exactly what he did in fact mean by the words,  I have become all things to all men that I by some means might win some. Your example is very appropriate and correctly demonstrates just what Paul did mean by those words. I sincerely appreciate your making this point so clear for us.

I do pray that we will be careful not to take verses out of their context and abuse them in our eager efforts to justify the things that we particularly like at the expense of the truth.

For Christ,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, August 02, 2000

Brother John:

You have said:

Lee, I didn't say he wasn't allowed to, I just said he never did. It just really didn't fit in with Sunday morning. Also, he had a cape, a la Elvis, which had printed in very bold letters (with lots of rhinestones, of course): Jesus is the real King.

What you actually did, Brother John, was argue in defense of this Elvis Impersonator by pointing out that he never was a part of your worship service with these words:

While the "Elvis Impersonator" no longer attends our church, I feel compelled to defend his ministry. First, he was never a part of our worship service.

Your very first argument in defense of your Elvis Impersonator was that he was NEVER a part of your worship service. Now just how does this argument have any relevance to the defense of this so- called ministry if he could have been and would have been a part of your worship if you were able in some way to fit him into it? You were trying to avoid the idea of this mans performance being a part of the worship because you knew this would be hard to defend. But now you seem to be saying that his performance would be perfectly acceptable in the worship but he just did not fit in. Therefore one of these arguments nullifies the other. Which one is it, Brother John, that you want to make?

Second you say that his performance just did not fit into your worship. I do not know what you mean. Do you mean that such a performance has no place in the worship of God or do you mean that it was not convenient to use him at that time? If you mean that it has no place in the worship I agree and on the same grounds contend that it has no place in the noble task of preaching the gospel of Christ! If you mean that his performance would be perfectly acceptable in the worship I strongly disagree for such pandering to the idolatrous practice of praising man instead of God has no place in Christian worship. Entertainment of any type has no place in an assembly of Christians who are gathered to worship God. Our worship is designed to adore God and praise Him. Elvis has no place alongside of God in the worship. Our hearts should ever be centered upon Christ our Lord and we are to commune with Him. Anything that distracts from or seeks equal standing with this is a perversion of that Holy purpose. Then you seek to justify this mans ministry on the grounds that he has a cape, which is incidentally behind his back, that has the words Jesus is the real king written in bold letters on it. This is what you said:

Also, he had a cape, a la Elvis, which had printed in very bold letters (with lots of rhinestones, of course): Jesus is the real King.

Then why doesnt he imitate the real King instead of the idol that so many have denominated the King of Rock and Roll and have idolized him to the point of making him the King of their lives. Why imitate their IDOL in order to lead them to the real KING. Tell them the gospel without the performance. The gospel is the story of the real KING and if they hear that gospel it will change them if they are really interested in their souls. For it is the power of God unto salvation and it is not so feeble that it needs the assistance of the King of Rock and Roll to accomplish its purpose! I do sincerely doubt if one who cannot see that he is imitating an idol in order to teach men of Christ is really preaching the gospel.

Christianity does not need any assistance from such things. For God is able to do "exceedingly abundantly above all that we ask or think" and He is therefore able with the simple preaching of the gospel, unadulterated with such idolatry, to reach these souls and save them from their sins. (1 Cor. 1:18-24).

The rhinestones are nothing more than the decorations on an idol that this brother is holding up in from of them and, almost as an after thought, he tells them of Christ. Christ, our Lord does not take second place nor does he take an equal billing with anyone, least of all the King of Rock and Roll! Such idolatry is counter to Christ and cannot be used by Christians to convert anyone to Christ. Does this man take time to tell these people that they are sinning against God to idolize Elvis? Does he tell them that they must give up their idol before they can become Christians? I do doubt it. I do not know but I sincerely doubt it.

This is a gimmick and worse it is a gimmick that is based upon IDOLATRY. I urge all faithful Christians to avoid such things.

Your Brother in Christ,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, August 02, 2000

Sister Muse:

As always you speak forthrightly for the truth when you say:

I hope everyone here knows the difference between the "LOST" and the "unchurched"! Because if we don't, we are in a world of hurt. There are many, many people who attend church, but have not obeyed the gospel of our Lord.

Using the term "unchurched" causes us to loose sight of who the lost really are.

Now, not all of what I will say in response to your words will apply to Brother John, for I do not think that he intended any harm with the use of the "non-word" "unchurched". But I must say that I agree with your assesment of what the constant use it can indicate. it most certianly can indicate that we think that everyone who is "churched" is not lost and that those who are not in the church reqularly are the lost.

We should know whom the lost are so that we know who to preach the gospel to. There are many who attend the churches who have never obeyed the gospel. And unfortunately there are congregations that have long since stopped preaching the gospel that saves and have been turned unto fables and worse some are even pleased with idolatry so long as it is entertaining and some one does an advertisement for Jesus sometime during the show!

Some are so afraid of being judgmental that they are unable to determine who are in fact LOST and therefore can never decide just to whom they should preach the gospel. It does require us to make a judgment now doesnt it?

If we were to go to some who have attended the church all of their lives yet have never obeyed the gospel and simply asked them why they have not become Christians yet we would surely be shouted down by some with the rebuke that we are being judgmental! Have no fear of doing such things. I have done it several times and the usual result is that they immediately obey the gospel and they are often shocked that it never occurred to them that they were among the lost!

I appreciate you, Sister, for all of the reasons that I have often enumerated in my other post to you. May our Lord abundantly bless you and your family.

Your Brother in Christ,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, August 02, 2000

from reading this post--the-question comes to my mind-if using- gimmicks is the in thing[right-bait?]-HOW do you tell if a real- conversion [born-again] has happened? all this[do jesus a favor] & accept him-stuff-confuses me!! WHERE is the cost of the cross & the reason for it-in all this??? just asking!!

-- Anonymous, August 28, 2000