The Highway Forums General Discussion Open Forum Calvinism & the Seeker Sensitive Movement

Tom,

I have some real issues with the seeker models. Some of these I have already alluded to, but…

1. They are not Scriptural. Besides the concept of “seeker-sensitive” being unscriptural (Rom 3:11), it is just a way of getting the world into the church—the world’s perspective that is. One PCA Church here in the name of being “seeker-sensitive” played a Bee-Gee’s song as the opening “hymn.” This is not worship it is blasphemy. The pastor lost many church members, but gained some new worldly disciples! What rock band did Jesus have playing while discussing the Beatitudes, etc.? God did not call pastors to entertain goats, but feed the sheep…

2. The “seeker-sensitive” model(s) are in direct opposition to true worship in the church. God is not worshiped in spirit and truth by being seeker-sensitive model. The church is called to be evangelistic, but not called to compromise the message, true worship, or true discipleship (come out from among them…) in the process. The church itself today is very weak because every week they see how many they can get to walk the aisle vs. teaching their own how to walk. Part and parcel of true walking is true worship on the Lord's day! There is more than one way to become a den of thieves.

3. I agree with you that the “seeker-sensitive” model(s) are not cloaking the Gospel—as they are not presenting a real Gospel; as a watered down church service is not the real Gospel, et. al. There is a time and a proper place to discuss certain issues, etc….To discuss issues here we use local bookstores and discuss new books—the latest being the Di-Vinci Code… This is an evangelistic effort (1) to discuss current issues with the unsaved (2) to give them a biblical perspective (3) to develop friendships, etc. This leads to a honest presentation (a) of who you are (b) who you represent (c) why you believe the way you do, etc. There are MANY different avenues to use to be evangelistic—one does not have to use the worship time of the church ……

4. Where are the different places in Scripture that evangelism is seen? (1) the Jewish synagogues-Acts 17:17a; (2) the Marketplace—Acts 17:17b; (3) family and friends—Acts 18:7, Acts 20:20-21; (4) Public Forums—Acts 17:19, Acts 19:9 (Mars Hill, School of Tyrannus). My point here is that the majority of Scripture emphasizes evangelism more-so outside the church then inside. (please note: this does not mean that the pastor is without an evangelistic message, but it also is not his only message—which a seeker-sensitive model demands, as that is its sole intent and thus unbiblical).

As always, please take what I have written here in a spirit of goodness, as it is not meant as a personal attack.

Joe

Just so you know, you are preaching to the choir on this one. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/bravo.gif" alt="" />

I am just taking the devil's advocate position in order to understand all the issues better. Also, this is a matter that is close to my heart because I know people who have to one degree or another been sucked into this movement. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/frown.gif" alt="" />

I think what you mentioned about evangelism, might be helpful.

Thanks
Tom

I just thought that I would share some of my thoughts. First of all, this has been a very very excellent thread. This is a topic that I think about a lot. So much so that I have started to visit another church for a different perspective. I attend a PCUSA church right now. http://www.gbpres.org/ And the church that I have been examining I have found to be a little more reformed. http://ipc.faithweb.comKeep in mind that I have attended my current church for 10 years and I haven't been to any other churches. So when I decided to explore, I found that I have enjoyed it because it really has been a good learning experience for me. The first time that I went to Immanuel I was pleasently supprised. It was a lot smaller then my church. My church has over a thousand members. As a deacon I have 28 families in my flock. But I found myself really enjoying the smaller atmosphere. The Pastor was the first person I talked with and He was very open. My pastor is really nice, but he is also very careful in what he says and doesn't engage in long discussions. So much so that I don't really enjoy talking to him. But that's a minor point. The best thing I liked about Immanuel is that it was very limited in it's activities. They have two worship times on Sunday, a Christian Education time on Wednesday and a Prayer Meeting on Saturday. That's it. I have attended them all and I really enjoyed them. They also sing the psalms which I really enjoyed. But it's all done as one body. They don't even have Sunday School. My point here is that, This is an environment that has remained focused on worshiping our Lord and sharing the Gospel instead of focussing on peoples needs and trying to attract more people and keep the attendence up. The other thing that I really enjoyed about the Immanuel church was the singing. The singing was done together and the choir and piano didn't drown out everyone's voice. The choir was very small and I the music was very uplifting. My choir has about 25 people and the organ and the music director teaches at a University and I'm sorry but I feel as though try's to put everyone's attention on her and her choir. It's so loud also so that you really can't hear yourself sing. Plus I'm not too found of the way we do our hymnals. They're all very slow and I find myself yawning during them.

So to wrap this up, I certainly agree that the doors of the church should be open to everyone. But when they come in, they will hear the Gospel preached to them and feel convicted. So if they decided to come back it will be because the Holy Spirit will have worked in them and have called them back to worship and praise our Lord and not to hear a feel good sermon, or to drop they're kids off at Sunday School or to be entertained by the "drama club" or the big screen powerpoint projections and the contemporary Christian music or to go to a Sunday School class that focuses on modern problims with more secular solutions so as not to offend or scare anyone away.

A common argument is that God will use it. But my argument is that where do we mature in Christ? Are we going to be so Liberal so we can seemingly get more converts but not ever do anything to help mature the body in fear of offending them?

The very interesting thing that is happening right now, is that my Christian brother Robert ( who descipled me ) is doing a Predestination Sunday School class. This class is pretty indepth and holds to the reformed theology. You can tell that this isn't the type of Christianity that most of the attendents are used too. But the interesting thing is that the class keeps growing. You can almost see the gears turing in their heads during the lesson. It's so awesome. I have been very encouraged because of this class. So it has been a way for me to really believe that we should be concentrating on the Pure Gospel and in maturing in our pilgrimage and not neccesarily concerned about offending anyone. For we should not be ashamed of sharing the good news.

Y.B.I.C,

Dave. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/coffee2.gif" alt="" />

Dave,

I enjoyed your comments and also to learn of what is going on in your own personal life and church. And I was particularly interested in this comment you made:

As I responded to Tom in one of my replies to him, the fundamental issue is in this matter of "converts". The modern church is quick to acknowledge any type of profession and/or experience as a "conversion". But most lack any true marks of regeneration. It is my deepest concern that the modern church with its myriad worldly methodologies are producing fleshly conversions and nothing more. And the unfortunate individuals who are told that they are now "Christians" are yet dead in sin and under the judgment of God. They have been deceived and are being deceived into a false sense of security when in fact they need to be given a new nature by God's sovereign work, repent of their sins and truly cast themselves before the Lord Christ in faith.

Thus, although maturing in Christ is something which is incumbent upon us all to strive for, one must first be made alive and reconciled to God in Christ before one can mature in Christ. The "seeker-friendly" methods are offering at best crumbs of the Gospel and not the full-course meal which is the power of God unto salvation. And the result actually puts people in a more precarious condition than they were beforehand. What I see is the "blind leading the blind" and unless the Lord is pleased to intervene and dispense His mercy and grace upon them, they shall both fall into the precipice.

In His Grace,

As someone who just recently left a "seeker-sensitive church", I have to say Pilgrim is really hitting the nail on the head here. Some weeks the pastor would say, "who wants to be saved," in the service and then ask those people to raise their hands. Or, even worse, he would just ask who hasn't been saved yet. Next, he would (very) strongly encourage them to say a prayer asking Jesus into their hearts right there during the service. Then he would pronounce them saved. Often, he would say that it doesn't matter if you don't understand what you are praying for, there would be plenty of time later to learn. For many of these people, this was the first time they had ever been to church and exposed to the Bible at all. Sometimes he would ask everyone in the congregation to say a group prayer by repeating after him. This prayer would be a prayer asking Christ into their hearts. Fortunately, he didn't tell every non-Christian they were saved by repeating this prayer, unless of course they were sincere. Actually, I had huge issues with the group prayer thing (no matter what the subject). Anyway, many of the people who "got saved" didn't return to church (some did). I'm sure that many of those people were/are very confused about what Christianity is and whether or not they are really saved. Some may be certain they are saved, but are not. Others may have been soured on Christianity because they think Christianity is only saying a short prayer and isn't much different than other religions. In addition, true believers at the church whose foundation isn't strong will be led into all kind of errors about evangelizing and what really makes a person a true Christian. And, ultimately, as has been pointed out by others in this thread, this kind of behavior is not Biblical.

I mentioned "group prayer" above. I dislike the idea of being "led" in a prayer that I do not know ahead of time. In fact, after the first time it happened, I refused to recite the prayers anymore. It made me feel pretty self-conscious though being the only one not saying it. I've been at churches where prayers have been printed in the bulletin and the read by the congregation. I'm not talking about that. As long as I know the exact wording ahead of time, then if I agree with it, I can pray with a clear conscience. But when I don't know what's coming next, I have serious issues about reciting a prayer in a group (even if I trust the person leading). What do you all think about that?

John

I have to admit, I don't think I've ever been in a group prayer where everyone recites the person leading the prayer. The group prayers I've been in involve one person praying and then of course you will hear others at times during the prayer saying things like "yes" or "that's right" quietly in affirmation.

I agree with your assessment. If I am understanding this right, something inside of you felt uncomfortable about what was going on. That happens to me too. In fact, this last trip that I went on to Promise Keepers, I had an uncomfortable feeling during the whole event. I believe this is a way that the Lord guides us.

This is one of the reasons that I've got issues with a Charasmatic worship. Don't get me wrong, I believe very very strongly in the power of the Spirit. There are times in worship and other times when I can feel His convicting pressence. But I've been comparing this type of Christianity ( charasmatic ) with the dark ages. Where the common people didn't know how to read. "keep them dumb and stupid and you won't have as many problims." We will just have a worship service that concentrates on emotions and we'll center on spiritual gifts and love and devotion. But we won't advocate bible reading and serious discipling.

As I stated in my first post, I have been looking at another church. It is a small PCA and it advocates against this "seeker-sensative" movement. It keeps it's focus on worship in a modest but meaningful way. I just read one of their bulletons and I have to say it was awesome. Most of it was a commentary from their pastor and he was very concise and articulate. You can tell he is very spiritual and learned man who holds fast to a reformed view. It was very uplifting to read it and to know that here is a church who is very concerned about the wellfare of the future church.

Y.B.I.C,

Dave. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/coffee2.gif" alt="" />

I just wanted to add that the experience I had at my "seeker-sensitive church" is probably not typical of many of the churches that follow this model. I'm sure there are seeker-sensitive churches whose services and teaching are much more Biblical (even though I think the model itself is not).

John

Hi Tom--

I just had to respond to your request because I am currently in a seeker-sensitive church (If you recall my prior posts that I am kind of "stuck" in this church because my husband is an elder there - basically right now I would say our theology is different and I am more or less "reformed" and he is not). So I will just speak from experience. I also used to attend Willow Creek church about 10-15 years ago for a while (only 45 minutes from where I lived). I didn't become a member but was just going with some friends at the time. So I'm pretty well "immersed" in this. I definately can't say God isn't ever working at all in these churches, however, you are correct in the real gospel message rarely being preached. I have grown in my faith more through the parachurch organizations - Youth For Christ and InterVarsity - God has used these in my life more than my local church. This is where I've heard more real truth (and obviously mostly from the main source - Scripture). In my current church right now my pastor rarely (or never)uses the words "Sin", "Holy Spirit", "Repentance", "Born Again" up front. I actually receive and learn more from Irwin Lutzer on WMBI than from my church. At least Lutzer preaches more real gospel. I really question if he's (my pastor) born again himself because he doesn't even talk about these things. Now he does say some good things here and there. And so does Willow Creek. Bill Hybels is an excellent communicator and actually has some great messages (but probably not about TULIP -- I can't specifically remember). After attending that church my impression was that it's too much into the world. Yes they don't have any debt on their buildings (and it's in Barrington which is got very rich people living there) but it's just this "materialistic" feel there. And I don't think they support missionaries around the world either. Their "missions" vision is to start other "willow creek" churches in other countries - which they currently have. I have a problem with this kind of "missions" vision. As far as I know people in that church are not being trained or encouraged to go on the mission field (long-term). What a difference between that and the vision of InterVarsity. So there's another thing "missing" in the seeker-sensitive churches it seems-- emphasis on the missionaries and getting the word out to the ones who haven't heard it. (of course now I see the connection -- that if the theology is not in total depravity then there naturally will not be an emphasis to get the word out to the people who don't have the gospel). It is not a big important thing in my current church either (emphasis on world missions). Now I do know that Rick Warren's church emphasizes short-term missions so that's a start. Speaking of Rick Warren, I'm currently immersed in the whole Purpose Driven Life thing too. Our church just finished the PDL campaign. I went through it and further analyzed the book and the verses used from "The Message" translation from Eugene Peterson. I can't figure out the popular use of The Message. Yes there is more biblical illiteracy (and this must explain The Message's popularity) in the seeker-sensitive churches.) It is a struggle for me to not go in that direction myself. I have to go outside of my church to get the support I need (ie. I am currently going to be attending a women's bible study at another church in the fall and I was in a different study this year with a neighbor (who went to a South Baptist Church) this past year). I said before in a prior thread several weeks ago that one (who is reformed) will feel "empty" at a "seeker sensitive church" and it's because most are just not serious about the truth. Things are watered down - from the sermons to SUnday School in various degrees. (even my husband doesn't like the SS curriculum). Some churches are probably worse than others depending who's in charge. I think I recognize all of what's missing simply because I've read the Scriptures and I know what's truth. I can just kind of "sense" when things aren't really from God -- this is my discernment and the Holy Spirit talking. I thank God I have this because I myself would be "sucked" away possibly. I think this is where my husband is. I also thank the Lord for the body of Christ and that I don't have to just rely on my local church. God works elsewhere and that's where I go and my kids too (I have my oldest son in Awana at another church). Oh by the way my pastor is leaving in August to start another church. He is going to start a church ministering to "postmoderns". We'll see who comes along next as our pastor. Sorry if I've rambled on, and I'm not sure if that really give you any help Tom but I do agree with you that the important message is missing in most of these churches. I agree with John McArthur and what he has to say about the seeker-sensitive churches - he is right on. Have you read his books speaking against these churches?? Please continue to pray for my situation and that I am more bold in trying to get some in my church to see what I see. That is the tough part for me right there because it brings up conflict. Also (on a general note) there is more of a soft issue of sin in people's lives. A higher standard is not taught. In my church it's like the leaders and elders will say yes to holy living -- but then it's not really taught the way it should be (except for one elder). The idea that if one just prays the sinners prayer and is baptized means they are saved no matter what. The whole issue of being "born Again" - regeneration -- never discussed in the circles I'm in at my church. (And the only conclusion I can come to is if someone doesn't see this then are they born again???? - that sounds kind of judgmental, but it's what I really think) I would say that is another big difference there. The definition of regeneration - being born again is different in the seeker sensitive churches (on the whole). The importance of holy living is not really emphasized -- it's like it's just a secondary thing and something to be hoped for. This thinking says -- Oh well if you drop the ball and sin remember you've sincerely prayed that sinners prayer and that means you are born again and going to heaven and so it doesn't matter because this is what Jesus died for. This mentality is there with some people I personally know in my church. They just don't see it.

John

Not all seeker-friendly Churches do the same thing; in fact Bill Hybel's himself said that what works for Willow Creek will not necessarily work for other Churches. He believes that all Churches need to find out about the cultures around them and design their services accordingly.

Regardless of what extent of the Willow creek model a Church is using, the fact remains that the whole seeker-friendly philosophy is flawed, because it focuses on man instead of God. This is in direct violation of the doctrine of Total Depravity.

Tom