I am pretty sure most pastor’s wives will recognise these. Knowing will help us to avoid perpetuating them as churches.
I liked this from Ray Ortlund via Francis Schaeffer: ‘A nice church filled with nice people doing nice things will make no impact in the intensity of our times. Every hybrid form of “Christianity” deserves to die, and it will die, because it simply is not of God. But here is a pathway back into the prophetic power of apostolic Christianity.’
Divisive issues rear their head from time to time in the church. At one point, many thought Brexit would be the breaking point but I think responses to COVID-19 has proven far more divisive and has much greater potential to cause havoc in the church. This, then, is a timely call to unity from an infectious diseases researcher, who goes on to answer some common questions about the COVID-19 vaccine from a Christian perspective.
‘Yes, Biden is God’s man appointed as “God’s servant for good.” (Romans 13:4). We know that not because some big name international Bible teacher has a good feeling about this or because some wacky prophet claims a word from the Lord. We know it because Joe Biden is the president, because God has ordained circumstances in order to bring him to power. We also know God’s declared purpose in appointing Joe Biden. He is there to ensure that the law is upheld and justice done (Romans 13:1-7). What we don’t know yet is if God has other plans and purposes.’
This is really interesting from Dan Green. I have been in the in-person worship camp, believing that we can’t do communion separately and corporate worship apart from the body is nonsensical. However, I think Dan is onto something regarding prayer meetings. It won’t be true for everyone, but I think there is a case to be made for retaining Zoom prayer meeting.
Peter Mead highlights ten different kinds of sermon that we would do well to get rid of.
‘If we have money and resources – like the Man City’s of the world – we love to emphasise that much of what is going on is the result of our hard work, skills and excellent programmes. Sure, the money and stuff is helpful, but it’s all essentially down to us. If we have no money, we prefer to emphasise that our outward success is really impeded by our lack of money and resources. We, likewise, assume what has happened is a result of our work but similarly tend to believe if we just had the resources we’d be doing even better still. The former group can quickly assume that if folk just pulled their socks up and did things better, they would do so much better. The latter assume that if only they had more funding, or people, or whatever they would be doing better. Both draw lines between money, resources and success that are far straighter than they should be.’