Monday, September 28, 2026

 

15 things pastors wish they were taught

15 “How To’s” Pastors Wish Someone Had Taught Them

By Chuck Lawless on Sep 28, 2026 01:00 am

I’ve taught seminary students now for 30+ years, and I’ve worked with hundreds of graduates in doctoral programs or local church events. I always want to know what leadership issues pastors wish someone had taught them. Here are fifteen I hear often, in no particular order:

  1. How to oversee a budget – Because financial issues often create tension in a church, the battleground is not the best place to learn about budget preparation, proper budget percentages, spending policies, etc.
  2. How to lead a meeting – One reason people don’t like meetings is that they’ve never seen one led well. A poorly conducted meeting is a waste of everyone’s time.
  3. How to interview potential staff – More than one of us have conducted interviews that were incomplete at best, borderline illegal at worst. That happens when no one trains you in recruiting and interviewing.
  4. How to prioritize family while also ministering to the congregation. Trying to find this balance isn’t easy—and most leaders have had to learn it on the fly. They want role models and prayer partners to help them. 
  5. How to manage staff and church conflict – For some church leaders, the only remedy they know for addressing deep conflict is to leave the church. Usually, the conflict remains.
  6. How to develop and cast a vision – Knowing the importance of a vision is not the same as knowing how to develop and cast one. Too many visions go nowhere simply because the leader is a poor, untrained vision-caster.  
  7. How to evaluate “success” – If numbers are the only way to evaluate success, many church leaders are failures. On the other hand, to ignore numbers is to invite an unhealthy inward focus. Most leaders need help in finding the best way to evaluate “success.”
  8. How to manage personal finances – It’s hard to count the number of pastors I know who simply didn’t know tax laws for clergy, missed the benefit of a housing allowance, or planned poorly for retirement.
  9. How to fire a staff member – Terminating a church staff member is difficult unless he or she has committed some flagrant offense. Many church leaders tolerate mediocrity among staff because no one ever taught them about lovingly helping unproductive staff members move on. 
  10. How to preach the funeral of someone who likely was unsaved – Many pastors received training in leading a funeral, but the unwritten assumption was that the deceased person was a believer. 
  11. How to counsel without getting overwhelmed – Meeting all the needs of a congregation can quickly become overwhelming, especially if no one has ever taught pastors how to counsel briefly while leaning on other counselors for longer-term help.  
  12. How to enlist and motivate workers – The church is essentially a volunteer organization. The problem is that many church leaders have never learned how to enlist and motivate beyond pulpit announcements. 
  13. How to build sabbath rest into a busy schedule – Some pastors have learned this balance, but many have not—and they have no role model to teach them. 
  14. How to delegate well – The issue here is not only to delegate at all, but to know how to delegate to the right person at the right time. 
  15. How to know when it’s time to leave. I can’t tell you how many times pastors have asked me this question—usually when they’re already considering that possibility. It’s better to think about this issue before the issue is a hot one. 

I would add
16. What if a counseling situation results in discovery of a reportable crime? 
The first time this occurred someone reported being a lookout on a break and entry that resulted in a murder.  The person was having hallucinations at the time of crisis  counseling in his home.  I later learnt he may have been the murderer. He disappeared from all family and friends immediately after relating the events to me.  I was informed he probably suicided as he has been missing for 40 years.    

17.  What if the family counseling situation reveals major police corruption?  After the wife dropped off 27 marijuanna plants into my backyard I discovered police were not wanting to deal with it because they belonged to a police Sargent.  The problem escalated.  On two occasions the drugged parties came to shoot me. 

18. What if notorious drug dealers issue you with a death threat.   This happened to my family twice.  

19. What if a counseling session reveals a clergy pedophilia? Who do you report to and when ?

20. What if a church board member reveals something to you that he later regrets concerning his own patterns of adultery.  He also made claims that may indicate he murdered his son’s drug dealer with a gun he illegally purchased . He then orchestrates a leadership revolt.  Is it right to leave ? Is it appropriate to reveal content of a counseling session to the other leaders ? 

21.  What if a neighbouring church permits a former pastor who was recently jailed for being a predatory pedophile to conduct a funeral service at his former church but denominational leaders say it is just a small thing or that you are unforgiving for challenging that behaviour ? 



# posted by Groseys messages @ 9:57 PM

Sunday, September 27, 2026

 

Belonging and believing

Grace Davie, who coined the term “believing without belonging,” writes, “Europe  believes, but it does not belong.” She is describing those who subscribe to some belief,  however vague that belief may be—for example, “general statements of belief, the  notion of a religious disposition, and denominational self-ascription” which “remain  relatively high, whilst those that pertain to regular religious practice or to the creedal  statements of Christian doctrine have dropped very markedly indeed.” Many Europeans  believe, but their beliefs are vicariously experienced at a distance from mediating  institutions like churches.”

The trend in Europe is not toward atheism. In fact only twelve percent of Europeans 
“don’t believe in any kind of God, spirit or life force.” The number increases to 22 
percent if you include those who “don’t know what to believe.”Europeans do 
believe, even if most wouldn’t necessarily believe in a transcendent, personal God. Yet,  many people are no longer looking to the Church as an institution for spiritual 
nourishment or guidance. According to the European Values Atlas, a high percentage 
(over 50% in most countries) of Europeans believe that they “can connect to the divine  without churches or religious services.” I am sure that Australian anti-authoritarianism and anti-institutionalism would reflect a higher percentage.

Cassanova acknowledges  “Since the 1960s an increasing  majority of the European population has ceased participating in traditional religious practice on a regular basis, while still maintaining relatively high levels of private  individual religious beliefs.”
Grace Davie has characterized this general European  situation as “believing without belonging.”  At the same time, however, large numbers of Europeans, even in the most secular countries, still identify themselves as 'Christian,’ pointing to an implicit, diffused, and submerged Christian cultural identity. 
Danièle Hervieu-Léger has offered the reverse characterization of the European 
situation as “belonging without believing.”
Although churches may be low in attendance and active membership, the general populous still know which team they are batting for, even if they are down at the pub at the time. They still have relatively conservative Christian beliefs, in spite of the more radical views often espoused from liberal pulpits. “Christian cultural identities are intertwined in complex and rarely verbalized modes.” What Thomas Luckmann called ‘invisible religion’ in the 1960s remains the dominant form of individual religion. The modern individual is condemned to pick and choose from a wide arrangement of meaning systems. 
Perhaps both are correct. Perhaps there is a sense in which Australians believe but don’t belong: Between 2008 and 2010 I conducted more than 500 funerals in the Newcastle region of NSW. I conducted those funerals, not as a religious minister, but as a civil celebrant, conducting most funerals for ‘James Murray’s Funerals’ in Broadmeadow. 
Of the 500 funerals I conducted, less than 1 % required atheistic funerals (with no 
mention of God). 99% of these “no-religion” funerals involved the deliberate selection  of Bible readings, hymns and prayers. Other non-religious materials were offered as an alternative selection. Over 90% of the time, both Psalm 23 and the Lord’s Prayer were requested, after considering and discussing the possibility of the non-religious option materials. I would often be requested by members of the family, or by the same funeral organisers, to conduct funerals for other members of their family, as these folk referred to me as their ‘padre,’ or chaplain. The effect of liberalism within the mainline churches with corresponding concerns that have developed into a Royal Commission, indicated that these people believed, but would not belong to the mainline churches. At the same time, they knew that they belonged to one religious denomination or another. 
One family asked me “Who stole our church?” They were unaware that the Church of  England had changed its name to the Anglican Church of Australia. However, they were more concerned that the Anglican Church of Australia no longer espoused the beliefs and values that they had grown up with in that denomination. They belonged, but no longer believed what the mainline liberal churches were espousing. Instead, they believed a somewhat more conservative version which was no longer tolerated in their religious denomination. They felt unwelcome by their former denomination. They believed, but did not belong. Often their children had been refused admission to their religious denomination through the refusal of the clergy to conduct infant baptisms for non-attenders.

The National Church Life Surveyfound that there was a pattern of decline in mainline 
denominations.
Key findings of the changes between 1996 and 2001 include: 
· Strong growth in Pentecostal and some Evangelical denominations (eg Baptist)
· Anglican and Protestant denominations grew by 1% as a sector 
· Catholic mass attendance declined by an estimated 13% 
· Overall, weekly church attendance in Australia declined by 7%.

There is a phenomenon in Europe and across many parts of the Western world that is sometimes underestimated — while religious structures and beliefs are struggling for survival, spiritual interest is alive and well. Secularism in Europe has not stamped out spirituality. Europe is not a continent that is full of secular atheists, nor secular rationalists. Of course they are there. But the spectrum of belief is not simply between those believers who hold to a traditional view of God and those secularists who deny God’s existence and have subscribed to a philosophy of scientific naturalism. To the contrary, we find in between these two poles a rich, complex population with a vast array of spiritual beliefs, fascinations, and interests.

 Stefan Paas comments: “By far the largest part of our populations may be called pagans...I do not use this term in a moral or derogatory sense, but simply to describe people who believe in a (usually vague and distant) higher power, who cherish rituals in the most important moments of their lives, and for the rest simply accept what works for them.”

Grace Davie (2012) has appropriately recognised that perhaps the word “post-secular” may be inaccurate as; “the world is deemed post-secular because we have chosen to take notice of religion rather than to ignore it. The religious situation itself has not changed that much. 'Post-secular,' secondly, is rarely a neutral term. The increasing visibility of religion is welcome or less welcome depending on who you are, what you do, and where you are situated in society. Religion, thirdly, “returns” in many different ways, but its return to the public sphere has been vigorously opposed by the New Atheists, whose opposition brings a more drastic recognition of the religious beliefs of a vast section of the society, particularly among academics.”

While Christianity may not have the influence it once had, in terms of outward practice, there is still a strong “collective memory” (a concept employed by Danièle Hervieu-Léger) of religion in Modern Europe.
 Religion is literally in the landscape, popping up in church steeples and seen in monasteries throughout the European countryside. The Christian tradition can be envisaged as a cord — however frayed—that connects people to the past, present, and future, and which still provides a sense of cultural and national, if not personal identity. It seems that people are “ceasing to be ‘actively religious’ much more quickly than they are becoming wholly secular.”
Voas calls this ‘fuzzy fidelity.’ “Despite dramatic shifts in the prevalence of conventional Christian belief, practice, and self-identification, residual involvement is
considerable. Many people remain interested in church weddings and funerals, Christmas services, and local festivals. They believe in ‘something out there’, pay at least lip service to Christian values, and may be willing to identify with a denomination. 
They are neither regular churchgoers (now only a small minority of the population in 
most European countries) nor self-consciously non-religious. Because they retain some loyalty to tradition, though in a rather uncommitted way, we can call the phenomenon ‘fuzzy fidelity.’”

Goldsworthy comments that “spirituality is some vague religious or mystical feeling. Often it seems to mean nothing more than a sense of the aesthetic, a feeling of belonging within nature, or an intensified feeling of self-worth. It is a rejection of the hard-nosed scientism of the twentieth century that cannot admit to the inexplicable.”
Australia has most certainly developed a taste for spirituality, whether it is clothed in the newer garments of the old Christendom, or in the different garments of New Age religious spirituality.
“Spirituality is now well and truly part of the Australian landscape, as well. 
When Sydney celebrated the new millennium with the most spectacular 
fireworks display in the city’s history, it selected as its motto for the millennium 
the word ‘Eternity’, which was spectacularly lit up across the city’s most famous structure, the Harbour Bridge. This word, in its readily identifiable cursive 
writing style, was made famous by the enigmatic reformed drunk, Arthur Stace. 
While the word carried undeniable Christian resonances, for most people its 
appeal lay in the fact that it symbolized their awareness that there was something 
transcendent about the changing of the millennium.”

Believing and belonging in the church community are a function of a sect-type 
volunteerist epistemology. It can stand in contrast to a generally accepted epistemology, as a counter- epistemology contrasting that of the general community, and finding its support from the sect-community. The sect-community would view themselves as counter-cultural.
“Not believing” and “belonging” may represent an adherence to an institutional church, without necessarily holding to the beliefs of that church.It is possible to “believe” and “not belong”. A person may believe Christian beliefs, but choose not to belong to any particular local religious institution. Perhaps the institutional church is believed to be the only church alternative, perhaps it is a product of strong denominationalism, ignorance of sect-type churches that demand individual commitment and public commitment, and the anti-institutional Australian attitude that may dominate the individual’s perspective. Perhaps the individual who “believes” but does not belong has reacted to subjugative attitudes within the church-type, or sect-type,and loss of confidence in the leadership of the institutional or sect-type church.
Subjugative relationships can be willingly or unwillingly entered into. Primarily there is a demand to subjugate the individual’s values and epistemology to the dominating epistemology. If the relational or promised rewards are motivating enough, the individual may consent to the subjugative epistemology. If the rewards either do not exist or fail, then a reactive situation may occur; the individual reacting strongly against the subjugative epistemology. 
It is possible to “belong” and “not believe”, where perhaps the generalised epistemology developed from the positivist philosophical position has dominated the individual’s epistemology, and yet the social and relational benefits of belonging to a church or sect type organisation contribute to the individuals’ self-identity and sense of personhood.
It might be concluded by some that a diversity of religious belief may be appropriate or even desirable, so long as there is a high wall; a way of separating religious or spiritual belief from the public square, and most notably, from education. For some, this viewpoint would substantiate a notion of hard secularism in the public square; one that drives out all religious opinion as divisive and unhelpful. However, spirituality is such a deeply embedded, culturally necessary thing that to make such a strong separation in the educational realm dehumanizes the child or adult.

Cassanova, J.(2006). Rethinking secularization: A global comparative perspective. Hedgehog Review  Spring/Summer 2006 vol. 8. p.14.
Davie, G. (1994). Religion in Britain since 1945: Believing without belonging. Oxford: Blackwell. 
Davie, G. (2000). Religion in modern Europe: A memory mutates. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hervieu-Léger, D. (2004). Religion und sozialer Zusammenhalt in uropa. Transit: Europäische Revue 26 (Summer 2004). pp. 101–119.
Davie, G. (2001). The persistence of institutional religion in modern Europe. in Woodhead, L. Heelas,  P. and Martin, D. (eds.) in Peter Berger and the study of religion. London and New York: Routledge. pp.  101-11. Martin, D. (2011). The future of Christianity: Violence and democracy, secularization, and  religion. Farnham: Ashgate.
Pass, S. (2012) The crisis of mission in Europe –Is there a way out? Scandinavian Evangelical e- Journal 3 (2012). pp.16-51 retrieved from: 
On the ‘spiritual but not religious’ phenomenon, see Zinnbauer, B. and Pargament, K.(1994). Religion and spirituality: Unfuzzying the fuzzy. in Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 36:4(1997). pp.549‐564. 
On the concept of ‘believing without belonging’ see Davie, G. (1994). Religion in Britain since 1945:  Believing without belonging. Making Contemporary Britain. Cambridge, MA: Ashgate.
Paas, S. (2012). The crisis of mission in Europe: Is there a way out? Scandinavian Evangelical e-Journal 3. p.19. Williams, R. (2012) Faith in the public square. London: Bloomsbury, A & C  Black.Williams makes a distinction between programmatic secularism and procedural secularism in order  to find a place for religion in a crowded and argumentative public square managed by respect for law.
The New Atheists is a term coined by journalists for Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris, and Daniel Dennett, in their vigorous literary attacks against Christianity. 
Dawkins, R. (2006). The God delusion. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Harris. S. (2004). The end of faith: Religion, terror and the future of reason. New York: W.W. Norton and Co. 
Hitchens, C. (2007). God is not great: How religion poisons everything. New York: Twelve Hachette 
Book Group.
Dennett, D. (1996). Darwin’s dangerous idea: Evolution and the meanings of life. London: Penguin  Science.
Davie, G. (2012). Thinking sociologically about religion: A step change in the debate? ARDA Guiding  Paper The Association of Religion Data Archives Retrieved from: 
 Tacey, D. (2000). Re-enchantment: The new Australian spirituality. Sydney, Australia: HarperCollins  Publishers. p. 17.
Goldsworthy, G. (2006). A biblical theological perspective on prayer. In the Southern Baptist Journal  of Theology 10:4. p.14. Retrieved from: 
Raiter, M. (2003). Stirrings of the soul: Evangelicals and the new spirituality. Kingsford, Australia:  Matthias Media. p.74.




# posted by Groseys messages @ 9:38 PM
 

Belonging and believing




Grace Davie, who coined the term “believing without belonging,” writes, “Europe 
believes, but it does not belong.” She is describing those who subscribe to some belief,  however vague that belief may be—for example, “general statements of belief, the  notion of a religious disposition, and denominational self-ascription” which “remain  relatively high, whilst those that pertain to regular religious practice or to the creedal  statements of Christian doctrine have dropped very markedly indeed.” Many Europeans  believe, but their beliefs are vicariously experienced at a distance from mediating  institutions like churches.”

The trend in Europe is not toward atheism. In fact only twelve percent of Europeans 
“don’t believe in any kind of God, spirit or life force.” The number increases to 22 
percent if you include those who “don’t know what to believe.”Europeans do 
believe, even if most wouldn’t necessarily believe in a transcendent, personal God. Yet,  many people are no longer looking to the Church as an institution for spiritual 
nourishment or guidance. According to the European Values Atlas, a high percentage 
(over 50% in most countries) of Europeans believe that they “can connect to the divine  without churches or religious services.”169 I am sure that Australian anti-
authoritarianism and anti-institutionalism would reflect a higher percentage.

Cassanova acknowledges  “Since the 1960s an increasing  majority of the European population has ceased participating in traditional religious practice on a regular basis, while still maintaining relatively high levels of private  individual religious beliefs.”
Grace Davie has characterized this general European  situation as “believing without belonging.”  At the same time, however, large numbers of Europeans, even in the most secular countries, still identify themselves as 'Christian,’ pointing to an implicit, diffused, and submerged Christian cultural identity. 
Danièle Hervieu-Léger has offered the reverse characterization of the European 
situation as “belonging without believing.”
Although churches may be low in attendance and active membership, the general populous still know which team they are batting for, even if they are down at the pub at the time. They still have relatively conservative Christian beliefs, in spite of the more radical views often espoused from liberal pulpits. “Christian cultural identities are intertwined in complex and rarely verbalized modes.” What Thomas Luckmann called ‘invisible religion’ in the 1960s remains the dominant form of individual religion. The modern individual is condemned to pick and choose from a wide arrangement of meaning systems. 
Perhaps both are correct. Perhaps there is a sense in which Australians believe but don’t belong: Between 2008 and 2010 I conducted more than 500 funerals in the Newcastle region of NSW. I conducted those funerals, not as a religious minister, but as a civil celebrant, conducting most funerals for ‘James Murray’s Funerals’ in Broadmeadow. 
Of the 500 funerals I conducted, less than 1 % required atheistic funerals (with no 
mention of God). 99% of these “no-religion” funerals involved the deliberate selection 
of Bible readings, hymns and prayers. Other non-religious materials were offered as an alternative selection. Over 90% of the time, both Psalm 23 and the Lord’s Prayer were requested, after considering and discussing the possibility of the non-religious option materials. I would often be requested by members of the family, or by the same funeral organisers, to conduct funerals for other members of their family, as these folk referred to me as their ‘padre,’ or chaplain. The effect of liberalism within the mainline churches with corresponding concerns that have developed into a Royal Commission, indicated that these people believed, but would not belong to the mainline churches. At the same time, they knew that they belonged to one religious denomination or another. 
One family asked me “Who stole our church?” They were unaware that the Church of 
England had changed its name to the Anglican Church of Australia. However, they were more concerned that the Anglican Church of Australia no longer espoused the beliefs and values that they had grown up with in that denomination. They belonged, but no longer believed what the mainline liberal churches were espousing. Instead, they believed a somewhat more conservative version which was no longer tolerated in their religious denomination. They felt unwelcome by their former denomination. They believed, but did not belong. Often their children had been refused admission to their religious denomination through the refusal of the clergy to conduct infant baptisms for non-attenders.

The National Church Life Surveyfound that there was a pattern of decline in mainline 
denominations.
Key findings of the changes between 1996 and 2001 include: 
· Strong growth in Pentecostal and some Evangelical denominations (eg Baptist)
· Anglican and Protestant denominations grew by 1% as a sector 
· Catholic mass attendance declined by an estimated 13% 
· Overall, weekly church attendance in Australia declined by 7%.

There is a phenomenon in Europe and across many parts of the Western world that is sometimes underestimated — while religious structures and beliefs are struggling 
for survival, spiritual interest is alive and well. Secularism in Europe has not stamped 
out spirituality. Europe is not a continent that is full of secular atheists, nor secular 
rationalists. Of course they are there. But the spectrum of belief is not simply between those believers who hold to a traditional view of God and those secularists who deny God’s existence and have subscribed to a philosophy of scientific naturalism. To the contrary, we find in between these two poles a rich, complex population with a vast array of spiritual beliefs, fascinations, and interests.

 Stefan Paas comments: “By far the largest part of our populations may be called pagans...I do not use this term in a moral or derogatory sense, but simply to describe people who believe in a (usually vague and distant) higher power, who cherish rituals in the most important moments of their lives, and for the rest simply accept what works for them.”

Grace Davie (2012) has appropriately recognised that perhaps the word “post-secular” may be inaccurate as; “the world is deemed post-secular because we have chosen to take notice of religion rather than to ignore it. The religious situation itself has not changed that much. 'Post-secular,' secondly, is rarely a neutral term. The increasing visibility of religion is welcome or less welcome depending on who you are, what you do, and where you are situated in society. Religion, thirdly, “returns” in many different ways, but its return to the public sphere has been vigorously opposed by the New Atheists, whose opposition brings a more drastic recognition of the religious beliefs of a vast section of the society, particularly among academics.”


While Christianity may not have the influence it once had, in terms of outward practice, there is still a strong “collective memory” (a concept employed by Danièle Hervieu-Léger) of religion in Modern Europe.
 Religion is literally in the landscape, popping up in church steeples and seen in monasteries throughout the European countryside. The Christian tradition can be envisaged as a cord — however frayed—that connects people to the past, present, and future, and which still provides a sense of cultural and national, if not personal identity. It seems that people are “ceasing to be ‘actively religious’ much more quickly than they are becoming wholly secular.”
Voas calls this ‘fuzzy fidelity.’ “Despite dramatic shifts in the prevalence of conventional Christian belief, practice, and self-identification, residual involvement is
considerable. Many people remain interested in church weddings and funerals, 
Christmas services, and local festivals. They believe in ‘something out there’, pay at 
least lip service to Christian values, and may be willing to identify with a denomination. 
They are neither regular churchgoers (now only a small minority of the population in 
most European countries) nor self-consciously non-religious. Because they retain some loyalty to tradition, though in a rather uncommitted way, we can call the phenomenon ‘fuzzy fidelity.’”

Goldsworthy comments that “spirituality is some vague religious or mystical feeling. Often it seems to mean nothing more than a sense of the aesthetic, a feeling of belonging within nature, or an intensified feeling of self-worth. It is a rejection of the hard-nosed scientism of the twentieth century that cannot admit to the inexplicable.”
Australia has most certainly developed a taste for spirituality, whether it is clothed in 
the newer garments of the old Christendom, or in the different garments of New Age 
religious spirituality.
“Spirituality is now well and truly part of the Australian landscape, as well. 
When Sydney celebrated the new millennium with the most spectacular 
fireworks display in the city’s history, it selected as its motto for the millennium 
the word ‘Eternity’, which was spectacularly lit up across the city’s most famous 
structure, the Harbour Bridge. This word, in its readily identifiable cursive 
writing style, was made famous by the enigmatic reformed drunk, Arthur Stace. 
While the word carried undeniable Christian resonances, for most people its 
appeal lay in the fact that it symbolized their awareness that there was something 
transcendent about the changing of the millennium.”

Believing and belonging in the church community are a function of a sect-type 
volunteerist epistemology. It can stand in contrast to a generally accepted epistemology, as a counter- epistemology contrasting that of the general community, and finding its support from the sect-community. The sect-community would view themselves as counter-cultural.
“Not believing” and “belonging” may represent an adherence to an institutional church, without necessarily holding to the beliefs of that church.It is possible to “believe” and “not belong”. A person may believe Christian beliefs, but 
choose not to belong to any particular local religious institution. Perhaps the 
institutional church is believed to be the only church alternative, perhaps it is a product of strong denominationalism, ignorance of sect-type churches that demand individual commitment and public commitment, and the anti-institutional Australian attitude that may dominate the individual’s perspective. Perhaps the individual who “believes” but does not belong has reacted to subjugative attitudes within the church-type, or sect-type,and loss of confidence in the leadership of the institutional or sect-type church.
Subjugative relationships can be willingly or unwillingly entered into. Primarily there is a demand to subjugate the individual’s values and epistemology to the dominating 
epistemology. If the relational or promised rewards are motivating enough, the 
individual may consent to the subjugative epistemology. If the rewards either do not 
exist or fail, then a reactive situation may occur; the individual reacting strongly against the subjugative epistemology. 
It is possible to “belong” and “not believe”, where perhaps the generalised epistemology developed from the positivist philosophical position has dominated the individual’s epistemology, and yet the social and relational benefits of belonging to a church or sect type organisation contribute to the individuals’ self-identity and sense of personhood.
It might be concluded by some that a diversity of religious belief may be appropriate or even desirable, so long as there is a high wall; a way of separating religious or spiritual belief from the public square, and most notably, from education. For some, this viewpoint would substantiate a notion of hard secularism in the public square; one that drives out all religious opinion as divisive and unhelpful. However, spirituality is such a deeply embedded, culturally necessary thing that to make such a strong separation in the educational realm dehumanizes the child or adult.

Cassanova, J.(2006). Rethinking secularization: A global comparative perspective. Hedgehog Review  Spring/Summer 2006 vol. 8. p.14.
Davie, G. (1994). Religion in Britain since 1945: Believing without belonging. Oxford: Blackwell. 
Davie, G. (2000). Religion in modern Europe: A memory mutates. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hervieu-Léger, D. (2004). Religion und sozialer Zusammenhalt in uropa. Transit: Europäische Revue 26 (Summer 2004). pp. 101–119.
Davie, G. (2001). The persistence of institutional religion in modern Europe. in Woodhead, L. Heelas,  P. and Martin, D. (eds.) in Peter Berger and the study of religion. London and New York: Routledge. pp.  101-11. Martin, D. (2011). The future of Christianity: Violence and democracy, secularization, and  religion. Farnham: Ashgate.
Pass, S. (2012) The crisis of mission in Europe –Is there a way out? Scandinavian Evangelical e- Journal 3 (2012). pp.16-51 retrieved from: 
http://www.livedreligion.org/fileadmin/_migrated/content_uploads/S_Paas_Is_there_a_way_out.pdf
On the ‘spiritual but not religious’ phenomenon, see Zinnbauer, B. and Pargament, K.(1994). Religion and spirituality: Unfuzzying the fuzzy. in Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 36:4(1997). pp.549‐564. 
On the concept of ‘believing without belonging’ see Davie, G. (1994). Religion in Britain since 1945:  Believing without belonging. Making Contemporary Britain. Cambridge, MA: Ashgate.
Paas, S. (2012). The crisis of mission in Europe: Is there a way out? Scandinavian Evangelical e-Journal 3. p.19. Williams, R. (2012) Faith in the public square. London: Bloomsbury, A & C  Black.Williams makes a distinction between programmatic secularism and procedural secularism in order  to find a place for religion in a crowded and argumentative public square managed by respect for law.
The New Atheists is a term coined by journalists for Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris, and Daniel Dennett, in their vigorous literary attacks against Christianity. 
Dawkins, R. (2006). The God delusion. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Harris. S. (2004). The end of faith: Religion, terror and the future of reason. New York: W.W. Norton and Co. 
Hitchens, C. (2007). God is not great: How religion poisons everything. New York: Twelve Hachette 
Book Group.
Dennett, D. (1996). Darwin’s dangerous idea: Evolution and the meanings of life. London: Penguin  Science.
Davie, G. (2012). Thinking sociologically about religion: A step change in the debate? ARDA Guiding  Paper The Association of Religion Data Archives Retrieved from: 
http://www.thearda.com/rrh/papers/guidingpapers/arda_guidingpapers_davie.pdf
 Tacey, D. (2000). Re-enchantment: The new Australian spirituality. Sydney, Australia: HarperCollins  Publishers. p. 17.
Goldsworthy, G. (2006). A biblical theological perspective on prayer. In the Southern Baptist Journal  of Theology 10:4. p.14. Retrieved from: 
http://www.sbts.edu/resources/files/2010/02/sbjt_104_goldsworth
Raiter, M. (2003). Stirrings of the soul: Evangelicals and the new spirituality. Kingsford, Australia:  Matthias Media. p.74.




# posted by Groseys messages @ 8:35 PM
 

Intertestamental period

Uploaded Image


# posted by Groseys messages @ 1:28 PM
 

Maccabees

The author of the First Book of Maccabees regarded the Maccabean revolt as a rising of pious Jews against the Seleucid king who had tried to eradicate their religion and against the Jews who supported him. The author of the Second Book of Maccabees presented the conflict as a struggle between "Judaism" and "Hellenism", words that he was the first to use.[29] Modern scholarship tends to the second view.

Most modern scholars argue that the king was intervening in a civil warbetween traditionalist Jews in the countryside and Hellenised Jews in Jerusalem.[30][31][32] According to Joseph P. Schultz, modern scholarship, "considers the Maccabean revolt less as an uprising against foreign oppression than as a civil war between the orthodox and reformist parties in the Jewish camp."[33] In the conflict over the office of High Priest, traditionalists with Hebrew/Aramaic names like Onias contested against Hellenisers with Greek names like Jason or Menelaus.

What began as a civil war took on the character of an invasion when the Hellenistic kingdom of Syria sided with the Hellenising Jews against the traditionalists.[37] As the conflict escalated, Antiochus prohibited the practices of the traditionalists, thereby, in a departure from usual Seleucid practice, banning the religion of an entire people.[36] Other scholars argue that while the rising began as a religious rebellion, it was gradually transformed into a war of national liberation.

Pompey entered the Holy of Holies(this was only the second time that someone had dared to penetrate into this sacred spot). Judaea had to pay tribute to Rome and was placed under the supervision of the Roman governor of Syria. Aristobulus was taken to Rome a prisoner, and Hyrcanus was restored to his position as High Priest but not to the Kingship. Political authority rested with the Romans whose interests were represented by Antipater. This factually ended the Hasmonean rule of the area and Jewish independence.




# posted by Groseys messages @ 1:08 PM
 

John 3. John the Baptist

After this Jesus and his disciples went into the Judean countryside, and he remained there with them and was baptizing.23 John also was baptizing at Aenon near Salim, because water was plentiful there, and people were coming and being baptized24 (for John had not yet been put in prison).

25              Now a discussion arose between some of John's disciples and a Jew over purification.26 And they came to John and said to him, "Rabbi, he who was with you across the Jordan, to whom you bore witness---look, he is baptizing, and all are going to him."27 John answered, "A person cannot receive even one thing unless it is given him from heaven.28 You yourselves bear me witness, that I said, 'I am not the Christ, but I have been sent before him.'29 The one who has the brideis the bridegroom. The friend of the bridegroom, who stands and hears him, rejoices greatly at the bridegroom's voice. Therefore this joy of mine is now complete.30 He must increase, but I must decrease."

31              He who comes from above is above all. He who is of the earth belongs to the earth and speaks in an earthly way. He who comes from heaven is above all.32 He bears witness to what he has seen and heard, yet no one receives his testimony.33 Whoever receives his testimony sets his seal to this, that God is true.34 For he whom God has sent utters the words of God, for he gives the Spirit without measure.35 The Father loves the Son and has given all things into his hand.36 Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life; whoever does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God remains on him.


John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance 


Acts 19:1-6 ESV - And it happened that while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul passed through the inland country and came to Ephesus. There he found some disciples. 2 And he said to them, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?” And they said, “No, we have not even heard that there is a Holy Spirit.” 3 And he said, “Into what then were you baptized?” They said, “Into John's baptism.” 4 And Paul said, “John baptized with the baptism of repentance, telling the people to believe in the one who was to come after him, that is, Jesus.” 5 On hearing this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. 


In its context there were four sects of Judaism:

The Herodians. 

Herod built the temple.  He was an Idumean (not Jewish, of Edomite descent … Edomite goes back to Esau and Jacob).


Unlike strictly religious sects, they supported Hellenistic (Greek) culture and Roman political integration in Judea.


The Herodian dynasty began with Herod the Great who assumed the throne of Judea, with Roman support, bringing down the century-old Hasmonean Kingdom. His kingdom lasted until his death in 4 BC, when it was divided among his sons and sister as a tetrarchy, which lasted for about 10 years. Most of those tetrarchies, including Judea proper, were incorporated into Judaea Provincefrom 6 BC, though limited Herodian de facto kingship continued until Agrippa I's death in 44 AD and nominal title of kingship continued until c. 92 or 100 AD, when the last Herodian monarch, king Agrippa II, died and Rome assumed full power over his de jure domain.

The Hasmoneans had fought Alexander the Great.  They weee priests 


During the time of the Hasmonean ruler John Hyrcanus (134–104 BC), Judea conquered Edom (Idumea) and forced the Edomites to convert to Judaism. The Edomites were gradually integrated into the Judean nation, and some of them reached high-ranking positions.


Despite his announcement as king of the whole of Judea, Herod did not fully conquer it until 37 BC. He subsequently ruled the Herodian kingdom as a vassal king for 34 years, crushing the opposition while also initiating huge building projects, including the harbor at Caesarea Maritima, the plaza surrounded by retaining walls at the Temple Mount, the Masada and the Herodium, among other fortresses and public works. 


Herod  Antipas, a  son of Herod and Malthace, was made a tetrarch of Galilee and Perea; he ruled there until he was exiled by emperor Caligula in 39 AD, according to Josephus. Herod Antipas is the person referenced in the New Testament, playing a role in the death of John the Baptist  and the trial of Jesus. 


So the Hasmoneans Josephus and 1 Maccabees identify the family as belonging to the priestly order of Joiarib.


So Herod replaces the priestly line (and he is not Jewish and not priestly) and rebuilds the Temple.  


Around the temple are several mikvah’s , immersion baptistries.


In the original temple there was the laver of washing for daily cleansing of the priests by immersion washings. This is now replaced BY the mikvahs and everyone pays to be immersed there at the temple before bringing their offerings.  


John the baptists was the son of Elizabeth and Zechariah 


Luke 1:5-7 ESV - In the days of Herod, king of Judea, there was a priest named Zechariah, of the division of Abijah. And he had a wife from the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elizabeth. 6 And they were both righteous before God, walking blamelessly in all the commandments and statutes of the Lord. 7 But they had no child, because Elizabeth was barren, and both were advanced in years.


John’s baptism outside of the Idumean Heroduans was probably perceived as more deeply fundamentalist than the Sadducees who who were in bed with the Heroduams and the Pharisees.  





I.               There Is No Greater Place Than God’s Will

The highest place is not the biggest place. The highest place is not the smallest place. The highest place is not the easiest place or the hardest place. The highest place is simply doing what God tells you to do. “A man [has] nothing, except it be given him [of God].” (John 3:27)

I’ve seen young preachers, David, try to present themselves and oversell themselves to a congregation. And, in a sense, he paints himself into a corner. If he tries to act like God, people will blame him when he doesn’t perform like God. We have what we have. Whoever we are and whatever we are is a gift of God. “A man [has] nothing, except it be given him [of God].” (John 3:27) Therefore, we need to understand what we can expect of ourselves. Others need to know what to expect and what not to expect. And there’s absolutely no room for jealousy or envy in the ministry or in any other area of life. “No man has anything except what’s given him of God.” (John 3:27)

 

II.             There Is No Greater Purpose Than Presenting Christ

 

John is still answering; he says, “Ye yourselves bear me witness, that I said, Iam not the Christ, but that I am sent before him. He that hath the bride is thebridegroom”—he’s talking about Jesus and the Church. The Church is the Bride, and Christ is the Bridegroom—“but the friend of the bridegroom, which standeth and heareth him, rejoiceth greatly because of the bridegroom’s voice: this my joy therefore is fulfilled.” (John 3:28–29)

John had an awareness of his call, and his call was that he was to present the Lord

Jesus Christ. John saw himself as a friend of the Bridegroom. Now, what does that mean? Well, a friend of the bridegroom is kind of like the best man of our day, except he did more in that day. He prepared for the wedding feast, the friend of the bridegroom did. The friend of the bridegroom would send out invitations. The friend of the bridegroom would prepare the bridal chamber. He would take the bride and escort her to the wedding. He would deliver her to the bridal chamber. He would be the protector.

And when he brought her to the bridal chamber and heard the bridegroom’s voice, he would greatly rejoice that he had presented the bride to the bridegroom. John said, “That’s what I’m here to do. I am a friend of the Groom.”

In the ministry, you’d better find your joy in presenting people to Jesus Christ, not in budgets, not in buildings, not in organizations, not in numbers, not in honors, because if you do, sooner or later you’re going to be disappointed or discouraged.

One of the things that I love about John the Baptist is this: he was a Jesus man. For he said, “He must increase, [and] I must decrease.” (John 3:30) As a matter of fact, they were talking about John the Baptist over there in the Gospel of John, in the tenth chapter. And they said of John the Baptist that “John did no miracle.” (John 10:41) You know, John never performed a miracle. Yet Jesus said of John, “There was not a greater born of woman than John the Baptist.” (Matthew 11:11;; Luke 7:28) That’s a pretty good compliment when you consider who said it—“not a greater born of woman than John the Baptist.” (Matthew 11:11; Luke 7:28) But in John chapter 10, it says that John never did a miracle. (John 10:41) John never opened blind eyes and unstopped deaf ears. He never straightened withered limbs. He never multiplied loaves. He didn’t raise the dead. John never did a miracle. But that verse goes on to say, “But all things…John [spoke] of [Jesus] were true. And many believed on [Jesus]” (John 10:41– 42) because of John’s words. I’d rather have that said at my graveside than to say, one day, “I raised the dead,” “I healed the lame,” or “I fed the multitudes.”

And if you ever get discouraged, just go out and win somebody to Jesus. If you ever get down, just get the focus again and say that “He must increase.” And keep your focus upon Jesus. If you get your focus upon people, if you get your focus upon buildings, if you get your focus upon programs, sooner or later you’re going to be dragging bottom. There is no higher place than the will of God. There is no greater purpose than presenting the Lord Jesus

 

III. There Is No Greater Peace Than Seeing Christ Magnified

“[I] rejoiceth greatly because of the bridegroom’s voice: this my joy therefore is fulfilled. He must increase, but I must decrease.” (John 3:29–30) Jealousy and discomfort and discouragement come when we get our fulfillment fromachievements and possessions rather than Jesus. And not everybody’s going toappreciate you. Not everybody appreciates me.

There was a violinist who did a great concert. And the people stood and cheered, but the violinist stood aside with his head down. One of the stage managers said, “Go out and take a bow. You did wonderful. The people are so pleased.” He said, “Not all of them. You see that man sitting down there with his head down? He’s my teacher. If he’s not pleased, I’m not pleased.”


# posted by Groseys messages @ 12:32 PM

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?


Free Hit Counter