Church Planting Thirty Years Later
In 1982 my wife and I planted our first church in Philadelphia – Faith Independent Baptist Church. The long church name seemed awkward back then but I wanted to be sure people knew up front where I stood. Fresh from eight years of ministry training at fundamentalist schools, I was a committed independent, fundamental Baptist. As extra insurance to validate my IFB credentials, I often added “militant and separatist” as well. The church’s doctrinal statement enshrined a dispensational hermeneutic essential for correct interpretation, the pre-tribulational rapture as the next event on the prophetic calendar, and the King James Version as the official translation. As a church we were known more for what we were against than for who we were.
Fast forward to 2011 where in the same city I am now working with a team of elders to plant another church in a spiritual wasteland where we parachuted in with a few families but without a significant core group. After thirty years of church planting I claim no special expertise, offer no guarantees of success, and sense an even greater dependency upon the Lord to build His church. Similar struggles, resistance to the gospel remain.
This one-year-old church is elder led, non-denominational, non-dispensational, and uses the English Standard Version. Much has changed. Most remains the same. I would venture to add that what is essential has not changed. In areas where change has occurred, thirty years of ministry, of study, of relationships, and of experiences have conspired to bring me to the place I am today. For many years IFB was all I knew or cared to know. Now I find myself rarely at home in this fragmented movement of competing networks. I find myself increasingly on the outside looking in. This is my journey, but I’m glad I was not alone.
After planting a church in Philadelphia from 1982-1987 my family and I went to France and then Romania in church planting and pastoral training ministry. Those years spent overseas provided opportunities for fellowship with believers from different horizons and spared me the need to engage in many of the needless conflicts being fought in the States. There was less need to conform to others’ expectations of what it meant to be safely within the fundamentalist orbit.
During that time overseas I pursued further studies with Reformed Theological Seminary’s extension in Budapest and in time completed a degree in theological studies. For the first time I was challenged from a different theological perspective by men with whom I had strong disagreements. Yet I was persuaded of their evangelical commitment, their love for God, and their commitment to God’s authoritative Word. I began to see that we could differ interpretatively and still enjoy fellowship in the gospel. I was moving away from former positions for which I could still argue but could no longer support biblically with integrity.
In late 1998 we returned to the States where I began a short residency in Deerfield, IL at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School and where in 2004 I completed a DMin in Missiology. Once again I was struck by the combination of scholarship and godliness among the professors. There were differences in some areas but the centrality of the gospel transcended those differences.
From 1999-2008, I was missions pastor and director of church planting at a well-known suburban church. I travelled frequently and taught overseas in Russia, Ukraine, Lebanon, Peru, China, and several other countries. There were opportunities to teach in the area of missions and church planting at several schools and seminaries and invitations to preach at various conferences. My visits to China were especially revealing as we looked for house church leaders with whom we could partner for training purposes. I found myself looking for “significant compatibility” and agreement with the historic Christian faith rather than agreement with my convictions. My time in Lebanon among Arab believers caused me to look at Scripture afresh and contributed to modifications in my views on eschatology.
Some might find it surprising that personal experiences have influenced my theology to such a degree. In reality our experiences or lack of them have a great part to play in how we read Scripture. We read it with the eyes of those around us, those who trained us or those we look to for guidance. Our experiences should not determine our theology yet how we read and understand Scripture cannot be separated from our outside influences and experiences. Some may consider it a badge of honor to hold the same beliefs and convictions they held thirty years ago. While I can say that for the fundamentals of the faith, I must confess that second and third-tier commitments and interpretations are held loosely and are no longer a cause for separation or hindrance in partnership in the Lord’s work. Perhaps it’s partly due to the fact that I recognize it is His work not mine and that I labor in His vineyard not one of my creation.
On one hand, I have no argument with fellow believers who affirm their identity as independent, fundamental Baptists. I have no difficulty in seeing them as legitimate representatives of the diverse body of Christ. I have no reason to demean them or to expect them to cease being what they are. I have no desire to avoid fellowship and friendship with IFB men of integrity who are sound theologically and choose to remain within an IFB framework. On the other hand I find after all these years in ministry, with experiences and exposure to global Christianity, that IFB fails to describe how I see myself in my relation to the Lord, in relation to other believers, and in relation to the mission of the church.
The last few years have been especially decisive in the direction I have taken. When I returned from Romania in 1998 I knew that both I and the spiritual landscape that I knew had changed. Then in 2008, while temporarily living in France and helping to plant a new non-Baptist church, I wrote an opinion article on Fundamentalism. It was my way of signaling at that time that although I was on a journey out of Fundamentalism as I had known it, I wanted to remain friends with Fundamentalists. I began to write, to challenge conventions and traditions. I have not always been irenic and have not avoided controversy.
When I described myself as a “soft cessationsist,” questioned elements of dispensationalism, took issue with unbiblical separation, did not clearly espouse literal six-day, twenty-hour creation days, expressed my dismay at the paucity of resources committed to church planting, or challenged traditional thinking in the church’s engagement with culture, I found more criticism than interaction with the ideas. The criticism wasn’t about the gospel. It was mostly about culture, tradition and even personalities who thought I was out of line and should keep a lower profile.
Whether or not I should’ve written some of those articles for publication is another story although I have few regrets. I know there are some who are so much surer in many areas where I have questions. I know others who do not want to rock the boat and, to mix metaphors, prefer to fly under the radar. I suppose that would’ve been a safer route for me but that bridge has already been crossed. I must confess that I have found somewhat amusing the wide range of men who have disagreed with me, attacked me, or separated from me. There has been something for many to dislike although certainly not the same things.
I have no one to blame but myself although these experiences reinforced in my mind how important agreement is to Fundamentalists in areas where I believe we have scriptural latitude to disagree charitably. The agreement demanded by many IFB gatekeeper leaders, churches, and institutions in order to play in their yard far exceeds biblical teaching. The loyalty required by many in order to be safe requires submitting to traditional rather than biblical standards. It is not a virtue to have an inquiring mind in much of Fundamentalism. I had to decide whether I would shut up or speak out knowing that speaking out might marginalize me.
There are a few glimmers of hope as some IFB brethren have begun to break out of their isolation. I think particularly of Northland University which has invited professors from outside IFB circles and of Calvary Baptist Seminary with Mark Dever at their ATC Conference. Of course these moves have triggered substantial criticism from within IFBdom which comes as no surprise. Many IFB factions, which contribute little to theological reflection, brook nothing which deviates from their long-held conventions. I encourage those who choose to stay within the movement to continue their pursuit of God-honoring unity with those outside the IFB pale.
As for me, the time has come to seek to identify with men and movements which demonstrate greater generosity with dissent and challenge than I have found in my IFB experience, to identify with those interested in productive gospel-centered, church-planting partnerships, and God willing, to seek teaching opportunities to train men for next generation church planting. I have no illusions that moving on will bring greater resources or guarantee success in church planting. I’m not looking for greener grass. At this point any grass will do. I still welcome friendship and even partnership with my IFB brothers who have not drawn unreasonable lines in the sand. But I’m too old to jump through all the hoops, too ornery to kowtow and prefer relative obscurity and a few warm relationships to playing ingratiating politics and pleasing men.
Much has changed over the years but God has not. He is faithful and He remains the Lord of the harvest in these challenging and needy times, the ultimate Judge who knows the hearts, and the Accomplisher of His divine purposes. Before Him only I lift my hands, bend my knees, and bow my head.
Steve Davis Bio
Dr. Stephen M. Davis is on the leadership team at Grace Church, a new church plant in Philadelphia. He holds a BA from Bob Jones University, an MA in Theological Studies from Reformed Theological Seminary (Orlando, FL), an MDiv from Calvary Baptist Theological Seminary (Lansdale, PA), and a DMin in Missiology from Trinity Evangelical Divinity School (Deerfield, IL). Steve has been a church planter in Philadelphia, France, and Romania.
- 174 views
[Jeff Straub] Aaron:Of course I am. And I respond only because at least my friend Jeff is still reading :-) But being wrong is partly my point. How much can we be wrong or differ with others without being considered NE or worse? Many are more comfortable with “righterism” and “saferism” and find security in being immovably right on everything even in areas where there has never been Christian consensus. I want to find my security in Christ and not in getting everything right and not living in that self-assured state where I treat every disagreement as disobedience or slippery slope departure. I’ll get it all right some day. Until then I’m trying……..
This thread is one reason why I seldom check SI. New Evangelical? How easy the term is tossed out and how poorly it is understood. Moreover, I marvel that some have so much time on their hands to write these long posts that go nowhere? How does this advance the work of Christ? Now the term pseudo-fundamentalist. These ad hominem arguments advance no conversation or promote genuine work of God.
The whole thing is lamentable. So Steve Davis is wrong … let him be wrong before God who is his judge. Whatever Steve is, he is no NEW EVANGELICAL. He may be wrong and I think he is on some things. So may you (Aaron) but you are no PSEUDO Fundamentalist. These attacks are … . well I am tired of the silliness. We could all use a bit of humility in our walk with God!
Jeff Straub
[Bob T.]You win. You’re harsher than me and maybe even more sarcastic. Congratulations.
Also, you made a post about what you considered harsh language and included examples. If that was not a joke and you considered those really as harsh language examples, then I would recommend you stay in bed all day and never go anywhere as the whole of society is too harsh for you.
[Bob T.]So it looks like you’re not actually asking for forgiveness, and continue the sarcasm. I can’t take this comment any other way.
Please forgive me for not having paid much attention to your posts. However, I probably may continue to do so.
[Bob T.]So now many young fundamentalists are confused evangelicals. It’s this kind of CONSTANT minor name-calling and needling that discredits your ideas, whatever good ones you might have. If the point of you posting on SI is to actually convince anyone, then please continue to post here, but with well-laid out ideas that make sense. If you want to continue the ad hominem needling, then I suggest you write to yourself.
I think one problem here on SI is that there are some who may be YF by background but are in reality now CEs (confused evangelicals) still trying to plug into Fundyism without having sufficient convictions. The result is they have more hang ups than the President’s suit closet.
Joel understands this and labels fundamentalists A, B, and C. But this attitude of being right in fundamentalism will ultimately destroy the label, even as some have already stated that they want nothing to do anymore with the label.
I am a fundamentalist. Having served in the EFCA, many fundamentalists would call me a new evangelical. But that would be out of ignorance - a lack of knowledge about who and what the EFCA is.
Blessings!
Of course, to say something like that puts me outside of established Fundyism as a movement, so… I guess the point is moot. :)
"Our task today is to tell people — who no longer know what sin is...no longer see themselves as sinners, and no longer have room for these categories — that Christ died for sins of which they do not think they’re guilty." - David Wells
Im kind of a nobody in fundamentalism and a female (of lesser doctrinal importance ;) ), so I am not really risking a lot here. But I will say that my life experiences have been similar somewhat to Steve’s. I have my own list of things I could speak up about that I no longer consider of the importance to which I was taught when I was deep in the fundy world. Like music, the idea of “confronting” someone with their sin, fellowship with other groups of Christians (I have interacted quite bit a and worked with pentacostal and charasmatic Christians), and women wearing bikinis.
I’ll stop on that last one to make a point. I’ve become a little blaze about christian women wearing bikinis here in Ukraine. I was really shocked by it at first. It was so incomprehensible to me how, maybe 15 yrs ago, my Christian friend had to apologize to the church for cutting bangs in her hair (a major no-no at that point), yet the entire youth group goes to the beach and no one, absolutely no one in the church considers it odd or inappropriate that every girl in the youth group wears a bikini. (Lest we think ourselves too holy than they, I will say that they are absolutely shocked by our idea of dating. It is sinful (here). Also, most Christians here have, for the most part, begun to accept the idea of using sports in evangelism—that also used to be considered sinful.) … . and now marrying a Ukrainian guy … well, some things change… . So I’m not encouraging anyone to wear a bikini, but i’m just saying, it’s not the marker it was to me yrs ago.
Now, I really don’t face the marginalization in fundy circles that Steve does, though i’ve felt it a little. But I understand young fundys’ reactions and why it’s easy for them to either be mostly critical of fundy-ism or to leave altogether or sort of claim a no-man’s land in fundy-ness (not use the label).
It’s very easy to feel betrayed by fundamentalism. Steve wrote:
[Steve Davis] I have no one to blame but myself although these experiences reinforced in my mind how important agreement is to Fundamentalists in areas where I believe we have scriptural latitude to disagree charitably. The agreement demanded by many IFB gatekeeper leaders, churches, and institutions in order to play in their yard far exceeds biblical teaching. The loyalty required by many in order to be safe requires submitting to traditional rather than biblical standards. It is not a virtue to have an inquiring mind in much of Fundamentalism. I had to decide whether I would shut up or speak out knowing that speaking out might marginalize me.It’s very easy to feel betrayed by fundamentalism. What makes it more confusing is the fact that, as I relax about *external* things that fundamentalism focused on or in many ways conveyed as being so very important, the more I have grown in my love of the true fundamentals, the more I have seen my own sin b/c it can’t be covered up by being a good girl who obeys certain rules, and the more I have grown in my love for and understanding of the gospel and of God’s love shown to us in Jesus Christ. It brings tears to my eyes.
I hope Bob T doens’t answer this post AT ALL, but I do want to insert where I somehow agree with him. Or do I? I don’t know. But i do know that ideas have consequences. So what ideas/truths am I clinging to and where do I need to draw lines? Those are sometimes difficult questions. Maybe they are not as difficult as we think… . But that is what I would find helpful talking about. I have a few more things on my mind, but that’s all for now.
[Anne Sokol] What makes it more confusing is the fact that, as I relax about *external* things that fundamentalism focused on or in many ways conveyed as being so very important, the more I have grown in my love of the true fundamentals, the more I have seen my own sin b/c it can’t be covered up by being a good girl who obeys certain rules, and the more I have grown in my love for and understanding of the gospel and of God’s love shown to us in Jesus Christ. It brings tears to my eyes.In the Fundamentalism that I knew that was exactly the problem - doing all the “right things” allowed us to ignore our own hearts. Right externally allowed us to ignore the internal deceitfulness. During my senior year of high school on the mission field, I got my hair cut only 3 times. All 3 were when I visited in the home of a missionary couple who “confronted” me about my sin, and how my sin would cause my folks to have to leave the field. I had a very tender heart and was easily manipulated into crying tears of repentance (I was always one of the first to go forward at camp each year to rededicate my life), but the heart problem wasn’t solved. I looked like the good missionary son but those who knew me knew better.
I am glad to have left that brand of fundamentalism behind!
CanJAmerican - my blog
CanJAmerican - my twitter
whitejumaycan - my youtube
[JohnBrian]I’ve also ‘left’ that brand of Fundy-ism, but find myself even more conservative than ever. I can’t help it- I have wicked flesh that needs killin’. A lot.[Anne Sokol] What makes it more confusing is the fact that, as I relax about *external* things that fundamentalism focused on or in many ways conveyed as being so very important, the more I have grown in my love of the true fundamentals, the more I have seen my own sin b/c it can’t be covered up by being a good girl who obeys certain rules, and the more I have grown in my love for and understanding of the gospel and of God’s love shown to us in Jesus Christ. It brings tears to my eyes.In the Fundamentalism that I knew that was exactly the problem - doing all the “right things” allowed us to ignore our own hearts. Right externally allowed us to ignore the internal deceitfulness. During my senior year of high school on the mission field, I got my hair cut only 3 times. All 3 were when I visited in the home of a missionary couple who “confronted” me about my sin, and how my sin would cause my folks to have to leave the field. I had a very tender heart and was easily manipulated into crying tears of repentance (I was always one of the first to go forward at camp each year to rededicate my life), but the heart problem wasn’t solved. I looked like the good missionary son but those who knew me knew better.
I am glad to have left that brand of fundamentalism behind!
It seems the ‘dirty little secret’, or maybe it’s the elephant in the living room of some ‘camps’ of IFBism is that the façade is not nearly as impermeable or unassailable as they think. People see through the bluster and intimidation tactics to the “Do as I say and not as I do” message, and eventually they leave, even when it means they are going to be branded as compromisers and apostates and rebels.
But now that we feel like we are one the ‘other side’, and the ‘right’ side to boot, we are still talking about ‘them’ and ‘they’, and IMO this is the same self-congratulatory pit we found ourselves in before. We need to be careful to spend more time looking in the mirror than we do looking out the window.
I say all of that because I wonder about the relationships of “Fundamentalists” who can’t admit that they screwed up, that they might be wrong, or that they must be followed at all cost…I wonder if they really understand where they came from before Christ, or if they ever really understood it. So much of what characterizes the bad behavior of Fundamentalists is so self-centered, just like Edmund’s, and they just don’t get it but yet claim to understand the gospel, preach it, and live it. It’s almost like the more important or more powerful they get, the less the gospel and actual ministry matters.
"Our task today is to tell people — who no longer know what sin is...no longer see themselves as sinners, and no longer have room for these categories — that Christ died for sins of which they do not think they’re guilty." - David Wells
“What makes it more confusing is the fact that, as I relax about *external* things that fundamentalism focused on or in many ways conveyed as being so very important, the more I have grown in my love of the true fundamentals, the more I have seen my own sin b/c it can’t be covered up by being a good girl who obeys certain rules, and the more I have grown in my love for and understanding of the gospel and of God’s love shown to us in Jesus Christ. It brings tears to my eyes.”
Laurel
[Shaynus][Bob T.]You win. You’re harsher than me and maybe even more sarcastic. Congratulations.
Also, you made a post about what you considered harsh language and included examples. If that was not a joke and you considered those really as harsh language examples, then I would recommend you stay in bed all day and never go anywhere as the whole of society is too harsh for you.[Bob T.]So it looks like you’re not actually asking for forgiveness, and continue the sarcasm. I can’t take this comment any other way.
Please forgive me for not having paid much attention to your posts. However, I probably may continue to do so.
[Bob T.]I’ll try to be deliberately general, because I do not find myself personally offended here, and hopefully not an offender, either. In reviewing back through the posts, I find condescending comments, harsh statements, and a “real-close-to-the-line” way of phrasing some replies, from both “sides” of the thread (which has been discussed to some degree or another).
I think one problem here on SI is that there are some who may be YF by background but are in reality now CEs (confused evangelicals) still trying to plug into Fundyism without having sufficient convictions. The result is they have more hang ups than the President’s suit closet.
I admit, this format allows me to do nothing but read; I don’t get to hear someone, see his/her face, read any non-verbal cues, I get that. So I must be careful to not mis-read, or specifically to try very hard to give a brother or sister the benefit of the doubt. And my “take” on a comment might also be indicative to me and where I stand on certain points and topics, so I try to understand what I already bring to the table with my understanding (hermeneutics of blogging, I suppose).
Perhaps when we are impassioned about God and His truth, conversations “need” to be a bit tense/adamant in the areas of disagreement, while trying very hard not to sin in the process. It is refreshing to “hear” people defend what they believe, even perhaps being properly angry, and I can only trust that most here have thought through and studied through the issues, and even considered the impact of their conclusions, most likely moreso than myself at this point of my walk.
Biblically though, I trust that those offended will seek out the offenders, gently rebuke as per Luke 17:3-4 , and that the offenders will repent and seek forgiveness, where that is applicable, and if that is applicable (that is, if people have truly felt offended personally). Several here have told others to apologize, and maybe that is our duty to help police each other, but neither do I want to talk someone into being offended when they weren’t to begin with. And when we tell someone to ask for forgiveness, the preface is also that the gentle rebuke has occurred. Maybe others even see the harsher rebuke of Titus 1:10-14 in play, dealing with false teachers, and even that with the end goal of “…that they may be sound in the faith.” The goal is to be the same, unity in truth, according to our Savior.
All this to say, harsh and bitter comments can be potential sources of casting a shadow over one position, just as condescension can be over another.
Shaymus, I thank you for the consideration of the young among the readers, who are trying hard to learn and absorb. I need to do more of that myself.
First, I would like to describe a “conservative” Christian in Ukraine. This person is a pacifist (this means not only in war, but even in protecting your person and family), wears only black and white to church (no loud colors), uses no birth control, does not waste time engaging in sports or other physical activity, if a woman no make up, no jewelry (no wedding ring), long hair constantly worn up, head covering during church if not all the time, if a man, doesn’t wear a tie (the “arrow to hell”), no computer, no internet, no TV, … and many other things. (Bikinis are OK, however, go figure.)
We think many of these things are bizzare, and I will say, in Ukrainian culture at large, they are also bizzare.
Now, we know that the purpose of conservative standards is so that we are not “worldly.” Worldly is a slippery concept. And, after reading Martin Luther, I can better understand and articulate that performing certain external acts and standards cannot touch my inner man, cannot make my faith stronger or make my inner man freer. Only faith in the Son of God does that. Paul himself, if you look over the entirety of his NT books, was so all over, so everything to everyone in controversial ways at that time … Interesting that we do not discuss these things… .
One thing that really shook me up when I started thinking outside the fundy box was this: no one had ever asked me examine, for example, if I had a worldly view of money—I really struggled with this when I wanted a house. This is a normal desire, right? … Well, maybe not for me, and am I OK with that? No one had consistenly asked me to look at the sin in my heart—impatience, jealousy, etc.—it was mostly covered by externals. No one had ever said: I’m becoming more conservative and spending $20k to adopt an orphan. Or I’m becoming more conservative b/c God convicted me that I need to work in s*xual trafficking or help illegal immigrants.
I mean, I know that fundamentalists can sometimes engage in these things. But I think what I’m trying to say is that I discovered rather large spheres of God’s concerns and character and morality that were not systematically taught to me in fundamentalism the way other, debatable points were emphasized and taught.
I’m not saying evangelicalism does this right—I honestly don’t know. But the wider body of Christ has taught me these things. Like my Vineyard acquaintance who leads a s*xual trafficking ministry; my Mennonite friends who adopted special needs children through much poverty and hardship …
Are we systematically teaching our children to be concerned about major areas that God shows us over and over that He is concerned about? Are we teaching them to adapt to other cultures without judgment? I think, compared to the way we teach about personal standards, we are … ignoring (?) these areas.
I’m not sure I said it well, but I think I can go on with life now ;) Although now other things are rumbling around … I may be back.
Also, I wanted to say briefly, that if we, as fundamentalists, are going to have a doctrine of separation, we need to have a longer, more well-thought-out doctrine of unity. Maybe we need to have an enormous doctrine of unity. Maybe that could be a doctoral dissertation for someone ;) Or, as my mom says, just write the book :D
For me, being ‘conservative’ is about focusing on the fruits of the Spirit as outward evidence of spiritual growth, and not so much the anti-movies/pants/Facebook etc… standards. That’s why we get into problems with focusing on externals, but it also is true that what is going on on the inside will become evident on the outside in appearance and behavior. The two cannot be completely divorced. However, the focus on externals often results in ignoring character and spiritual issues because the traditional externals can be so easily faked.
So- a struggle with the proper view of money would dictate how one uses money and desires possessions, right? I know some young women who clip coupons and shop thrift stores and appear to be quite frugal on the surface- but they go out to eat regularly, could go 3 months without wearing the same dress/skirt twice, they talk about how they have no space for all their clothes and shoes, and in the next breath they complain about how they don’t have much money, they are on gov’t assistance for healthcare and food stamps… and yet none of these things are treated as being worldly or sinful or even problematic. But this is a serious character issue, and could be (usually is) a sign of larger problems in the home.
If some of these underlying issues were dealt with properly, most of the other stuff that seems to concern so many would IMO work itself out eventually. Just teaching our kids what self-control means would solve SO many problems. But you can’t teach what you can’t model, and American Christianity certainly lacks chops in the moderation department.
gdwightlarson"You can be my brother without being my twin."
[gdwightlarson] MANY of us have experienced much the same things Steve has described. As much as I’ve benefited from the positives of fundamentalism I have also watched so many people burned (including myself). Still have tried to objectively analyze the issues—the good, the bad, and the alternatives. I have concluded that there are some real alternatives, most of which Steve has addressed and recommended. Steve doesn’t want to throw out everything, does he? So may the Holy Spirit guide him. May the Holy Spirit guide each of us. May we avoid defensiveness and/or harshness as the Spirit brings any of our faults, failures, and sins to light. May we be slow to make friends and slower to lose them.Thanks for the encouraging word. I don’t know if anyone is still reading this so it might be between you and me alone and that’s ok. You’re right - I am not throwing out anything that I know to be biblical. But for some people every change is compromise and needs to be hammered. I still count as friends some who call themselves Fundamentalists but who are balanced and not righter-than-thou on every issue. I want to enjoy fellowship with them and partnership in the gospel when possible.
God bless you my brother,
Steve
[Steve Davis] I still count as friends some who call themselves Fundamentalists but who are balanced and not righter-than-thou on every issue.But I am righter-than-thou!!!
Just saying!
Maranatha!
Don Johnson
Jer 33.3
Discussion