Imagine (by Jim Wallis)
In The Great Awakening, I wrote,
Imagine something called Justice Revivals, in the powerful tradition of revivals past but focusing on the great moral issues of our time.
Imagine linking the tradition of Billy Graham with the tradition of Martin Luther King Jr.
Imagine a new generation of young people catching fire and offering their gifts, talents, and lives in a new spiritual movement for social justice.
Imagine disillusioned believers coming back to faith after many years of alienation, while other seekers discover the power of faith for the first time.
Imagine politics being unable to co-opt such a spiritual revival but being held accountable to its moral imperatives.
Imagine social movements rising out of spiritual revival and actually changing the wind of both our culture and our politics.
Last week in Columbus, Ohio, that vision came to life. The first night, as I stood on the stage looking out over a church filled with 3,500 people inspired by Matt Redman's opening worship music, I felt a sense of amazing grace. Over the next three evenings, more than 10,000 people attended. There would have been more if they could have gotten into the Vineyard Church -- this largest church in Columbus seats 3,500 people, but it turned out to be too small for the crowd. Pastor Rich Nathan of Vineyard and Bishop Timothy Clarke of the First Church of God, the co-chairs of the revival, led the services. My three sermons focused on the call to conversion, the call to community, and the call to justice.
Hundreds of people came forward to commit their lives to Christ for the first time, and thousands came down the aisle to commit themselves to the social justice that is core to the kingdom of God, to the "least of these" whom Jesus calls us to care for. The Columbus Dispatch headlined a story, "The Justice Revival: Faithful aim to aid poor, as Jesus did", and wrote:
The revival … is a call to walk the walk and dig into issues about which Jesus preached, such as helping the poor.
Our call to the churches was to make the city of Columbus their "parish" – that the churches of the city together take responsibility for what happens in their city. The whole spectrum of the churches, from the most conservative to the most liberal, supported the revival. On Thursday evening, 50 pastors from those churches joined on the stage for an altar call to make Columbus the parish of the churches in the city.
Friday evening, an inspiring challenge by Dr. Gene Harris, superintendent of Columbus Public Schools, for mentors who would develop relationships with the city's children led to hundreds of responses. On Saturday following the revival, the Dispatch wrote that the "Revival's faithful take good will onto streets":
About 2,000 people -- many of them teenagers, college students, and young adults -- took to the streets of Columbus yesterday for community-service projects that put their Christian faith into action.
Governor Ted Strickland of Ohio came to our "City Leaders Lunch," as did Mayor Michael Coleman of Columbus, city council members, many nonprofit organizations, and many more pastors. They spoke together about communication and collaboration, and the partnerships among them that could change the city.
Billboards announcing the Justice Revival were all over town and simply said, "Love God? End Poverty." By the end of the week, the stories of how people wanted to follow Jesus into relationship with the poor of Columbus were changing the image of Christianity in the city. And that change will continue, as one local pastor said in the press:
Bethany Christian Church's co-pastor, Elaine Fennell, reminded the volunteers that their mission didn't end yesterday. "We cannot sleep, not until poverty is no more and no child is hungry and they all have shelter and clothing," Fennell said. "You are the beginning of a revived movement. We are going back up the mountain, and we cannot rest."
It was an extraordinary week, even more than I had hoped. As we discern how to move forward, many other cities now want Justice Revivals in their communities. Just imagine!
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Comments
Imagine
Imagine there's no Heaven
It's easy if you try
No hell below us
Above us only sky
Imagine all the people
Living for today
Imagine there's no countries
It isn't hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion too
Imagine all the people
Living life in peace
You may say that I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one
I hope someday you'll join us
And the world will be as one
Imagine no possessions
I wonder if you can
No need for greed or hunger
A brotherhood of man
Imagine all the people
Sharing all the world
You may say that I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one
I hope someday you'll join us
And the world will live as one
John Lennon 1971
Posted by: justintime | April 24, 2008 2:53 PM
John Lennon's overrated - too caught up in wishful thinking. ;-)
Enough wishful thinking, time for action!
I don't believe the devil
I don't believe his book
the truth is not the same without the lies he made up
I don't believe in excess
success is to give
I don't believe in riches but you should see where I live
I, I, believe in love.
- U2, God Part II.
Posted by: johnlennonisoverrated | April 24, 2008 3:17 PM
ITS FUNNY THAT PEOPLE WHO SAY ITS TIME FOR ACTION FIND THE TIME TO COMMENT ON THIS BLOG.
Posted by: CODY | April 24, 2008 4:03 PM
I wish you'd take this revival from city to city across our nation! It is time to put our faith in action. Oakland, CA could use such a gathering. Gang violence is rampant here. This is a crucial movement, especially in an election year!
Great job!
Posted by: Christoph Nauer | April 24, 2008 4:04 PM
Jim,
Your words, as usual, are inspiring and profoundly simple. The advent of justice revivals is an encouraging sign that a faith and justice revolution is taking shape, but I cannot help to think this justice revival is painfully inadequate to what you have so powerfully described in "The Great Awakening."
This is a strong beginning but let us not stop at issues of poverty. Empowering my generation for action in the world around reconciliation and education about justice, claiming and living out of our past (but not being controlled by it) and global stewardship can also be issues addressed in justice revivals.
We are a people hungry for a new world in which God's justice rains down upon all. I am committed to this goal and hope to take part in revivals as well--just give me the chance.
Peace!
Posted by: Fletcher Wells | April 24, 2008 4:21 PM
Imagine if you would a Justice revival that includes people with disabilities and their families that are included not only in their local communities, but are included with local faith groups. What can you imagine when sheltered workshops stop paying piecemeal, but a salary and health benefits that the people working there no longer receive SSI benefits? What do you think of L'Arche International or the Global Nazarene Lamb's Hope PROPOSAL at http//:www.globalnazarenelambshope.blogspot.com?
Posted by: Gary Lee Parker | April 24, 2008 4:21 PM
As I read your article, I had tears in my eyes and goosebumps on my arms -- I have recently been reading a variety of books and articles and this was one of my "imaginations" -- when we all pick up and use whatever our God-given talents are to help eliminate poverty, to help the "least of these" live a life worth living.
Keep up the good work and may your "revival" continue in other cities throughout our nation until everyone who wants to participate has an opportunity to "walk the walk" of Jesus.
God bless you all!! ljw :O)
Posted by: Linda Woolsey | April 24, 2008 5:54 PM
Seeing the word "politics" in the same phrase with "God" frightens me. I am old. When I was growing up I was taught that God and politics did not mix. Politics is the realm of the Beast (see Daniel and Revelation), and God is the realm of the Prince of Peace. The two will not mix. God's children should be devoted to spreading the Gospel and bringing lost souls to Jesus
Christ. Those who are involved in politics serve Satan. God has already taken care of them. Yet a little while and the wicked shall not be. If you diligently search for Adolph Hitler, can you find him? In a short while it will be the same for George W. Bush, Richard Cheney and all the others in power who oppress the poor.
Posted by: Pearl Crayton | April 24, 2008 9:00 PM
wasn't 10,000 people. first night only had about 3500-4000 people. and attendance went down over the nights.
Posted by: Nicholas Van Dohovel | April 24, 2008 10:23 PM
Imagine that we actually preach the Gospel, and let the Gospel be the primary, central thing. Then, imagine that we actually believe Jesus when He said that the poor would always be with us (Matt 26:11) and because of what Jesus said, we give up our egotistocial obsession that we know better than Jesus.
Now, imagine we really believed that the Gospel calls the church to care for the poor, destitude, disenfranchised, homeless, broken, hurting, needy, desparate people. Every single one of them. Then inagine we believe that God is not interested in status, income, race or gender (Gal 3:28), rather He is pleased to use us in the expansion of His Kingdom, becuase at the end of the day, what ethnicity we are, how much or little money we have, does not matter. God will not be looking to see if we are the right race, nor will He be looking to see if we are poor enough, He will be looking for His Son, in us.
Jim Wallis is preaching a different gospel, a gospel that only allow people in that "live right so God will like them more". He asks us to trade salvation by grace alone through faith alone, for salvation by helping the right type of needy people, the groups that are politically correct. Jim Wallis sees different groups of people, the Gospel only sees that all people are in need of redemption.
Reformation and revival will not come by way of those attempting to hyphenate justice. Nor will it come from large podiums in front of large crowds declaring that reformation and revival are here because of some political movement. True reformation and biblical revival, historically, come when the people of God first confess their sins, return to the pure doctrine of the Gospel, and pray for, hunger for, and beg for the Spirit of God to come and restore what we have allowed to be eaten away.
Posted by: Paul C. Quillman | April 24, 2008 11:22 PM
Imagine that we spin the gospel to conveniently affirm our North American-centric, capitalist-inspired perception of reality. Then imagine that we spiritualize the words of Jesus about the poor into some kind of quasi-pseudo-metaphorical nonsense so that we get our affluenced engorged arses off the hook.
Then imagine that we say something really insightful like "first night ONLY had about 3500-4000 people" in a church that seats 3,500.
This then would qualify as the wisdom espoused by certain of Sojo's detractors.
Posted by: canucklehead | April 25, 2008 1:45 AM
All right, start the flame throwers!
Dr. Butler, THANK YOU! I cannot say that you will agree with my post, but here is what i wrote in response to my mother....
While I admire the fervency of their commitment, I am saddened by their lack of historical grounding (keep reading please). They appeal to Christ and his ministry to the poor (or pick your mission), but lack the ability to understand (as I see it) their historical error. They are rightly seeking to do the ministry of Christ, and invoking the Spirit of God in what they are striving to achieve, but they are doing it outside of the historical (for lack of a better word) sandbox of faith. They are trying to do something commendable and valuable, but without the historical grounding of faith that is provided by an historical/biblical/spiritual/traditional framework (none really more important - SOLA SCRIPTORA is a model which is sadly lacking in any BIBLICAL foundation in my view). Without a tie to the church as it has existed for millennia, they are trying to accomplish a task that is based on a reformation that was in-itself a based on a collegial understanding of community governance (which ROME rejected and supplanted with their own system culminating in Papal infalabilty - a totally foreign concept to the CHURCH prior to the split). This was a rejection of the faith that had existed for over 10 centuries. I would say, "more power to them," but they are working outside of the framework of the UNITY which Christ desired. That is NOT TO SAY that what they are doing is inherently wrong or detrimental to the work of the Holy Spirit or Christ, but to say that I don't believe that it is centered in one of the founding principles that Christ espoused: UNITY.
Obviously I don't understand how they can take "justice" out of context. Justice exists because GOD exists. God, through Christ, ordained a structure for his church through Christ and in Christ. That structure has been lost in the west (in my mind), and has been replaced by any number of competing systems. As such, it's message is fractured and viewed through a foggy glass. Clarity comes from a single lens through which we as the body of Christ view the world. Justice is one of the defining characteristics of our Lord, and as such should light our understanding. But without a framework rooted in history/common practice/tradition and shared experience, it is a moving line in the sand.
While I respect her IMMENSELY, I do not agree with her historical/traditional foundation. It is rooted in (my experience as well) in a tradition that is bereft of any (perhaps overstating here) historical/traditional framework that defines usable boundaries which were instituted by our Lord and Savior and delineated in the UNIVERSAL COUNCILS OF THE CHURCH. Dr. Butler REQUIRED that I acknowledge the grey areas in faith and life. I like to think that I have done this (though very imperfectly). The problem that I have is that in examining that "grey area" I have come to realize that my faith was inherently shallow and subject to the historical whims of "christianity." In my study, I have (I believe) come to a more historical/traditional faith that is not beholden to the errors made in the ill-advised separation of the roman church from the greek, but grounded in the shared faith of experience and councils which set the limits of my exploration. Is this a perfect system, "No." Is it a system that I find reliable in my endeavor to live a Christ centered life? More so than my childhood? Yes. It provides me with a "sandbox," an expanse of theologically stimulating ground over which I can course my "heart mind and soul" and explore possibilities, but still within the bounds of historical/traditional faith. I find that comforting. That there have been, are and will be believers who refine that line over which orthodoxy becomes heresy. In the "west" today, that line has not only been blurred, but erased for all intents and purposes. The "leading of the spirit" directs our search for "truth" (all be it on an individual level subject to my interpretation versus yours!). While that sentence may be a sledgehammer on an orchid, it captures the nature of our churches, I think, very well.
If I don't like the pastor/congregation/message/ministry of a church, I am free to look elsewhere. I HAVE A MAJOR PROBLEM WITH THIS ATTITUDE! It is like looking at the adds for the supermarket, and selecting where I will shop! I find a few good deals that I can sign off on, and take the hit for the other "products on offer." The result is that I go to a self gratifying location and pay more for stuff that I either don't "need" or wouldn't have purchased anyway. How is that in line with God's desire to save the whole world? I just don't "get it." We are called to UNITY IN CHRIST, NOT SATISFACTION IN MESSAGE!
Is the Orthodox tradition perfect? Of course not! But it at least has an historical root that is traceable (or at least arguably so) to the roots of Christianity and faith in Jesus as our Lord and Savior (which the Roman tradition - of which protestants are a derivative of - also shares but has "walked away from"). It pains me to say that I think that THE VAST MAJORITY OF Christians are unknowingly using assumptions in their faith that were/would be totally foreign to our ancient brothers and sisters in Christ.
But, as you know, I am personally persuaded that all will be reconciled in Christ. That is, in the end, christ will be "all-in-all." I admit that this is a hope and belief that is VERY much "up for discussion," but it fits very snugly with my belief that God is Sovereign over all of creation and will be triumphant. A very different position from the one that I held when I went off to college and believed that there was an elect few who would reap the benefit of GODs grace/salvation.
Posted by: Joshua Sidwell | April 25, 2008 2:25 AM
Dear Pearl,
We do live in a world system or powers that hate Jesus. Many of us have wanted to keep the wonderful news of Jesus pure so others can come to know our wonderful Saviour.
In trying to do so we understood it was wrong to place our hope in politics instead of Jesus.
But some of us went overboard. I realized that the government built the roads and sewers that service my Gospel-loving church. I called 911 when my wife's heart stopped beating and her body slumped in her wheelchair.
I think I came to see that government (just like people) can be an instrument of Satan or God; and that I actually use much of what government provides (like roads, sewers, and the 911 system).
I too do not want to confuse God with politics. If those who truly love God can help take care of politics, then maybe politics can more often be the way Jesus would want, and we would be less inclined to think politics will save us.
Posted by: letjusticerolldown | April 25, 2008 2:27 AM
Paul,
If Jim Wallis held his hand out to you and said, "Brother, let's walk side by side and keep our eyes on Jesus, the Author and Perfector of our faith;" would you walk with him?
Would you walk with me?
Posted by: letjusticerolldown | April 25, 2008 2:40 AM
The Joy in my heart is inexpressible for Hope Who Springs Eternal, Who Makes ALL Things New. I am in awe that this beacon Revival is happening here in my own State, the city where my husband was born...where his parents lived and died. Sometimes the Joy speaks not and only dances....
Posted by: Madeleine Breen | April 25, 2008 5:35 AM
Canucklehead, I finally almost agree with you. But, the poor are used by the other guys just as conveniently as they are rich trying to ease their conscience. In a true revival though, you see the numbers go up after the first night. I am a "detractor of Sojo" in that I doubt their true "agenda" still.
Posted by: One step in the "right" direction | April 25, 2008 7:41 AM
I was intrigued by Jim's article and felt compelled to comment on this blog for the first time. I am not about to get into all the theological commentary, but I DO see young people hearing and heeding a call to serve in numbers and efforts far beyond my generation. My daughter is in college, and is a member of a service organization. Yes, it is a "secular" organization, but when they showed up 60 strong for a workday in inner city Houston, almost every kid was singing along with the Christian songs being performed by a church band at lunch. I am on staff of an organization committed to ending poverty in inner city Houston, and it IS a Christian organization. We have multi-denominational volunteer groups, as well as secular groups, coming out every week to do physical labor, tutor, mentor, even pamper the older ladies with hair and manicure treatments. I guess I'm just finding it difficult to understand why people have a problem with folks being awakened to the plight of the poor in their own backyards and getting out and doing something about it, regardless of theology. Our organization professes that WE can do nothing, and all the miracles we are witnessing are directly from Christ. What can be bad about taking that witness to all the groups volunteering to serve, as well as to the servants? And we don't "choose" certain groups of people to serve. We involve the kids from the inner city, their families, the homeless, and a very special group of "formerly homeless" men who live and work at our center,and in a couple of transitional living homes.
I prefer to rejoice in the heightened awareness and desire and commitment to serve, and in the lives we are seeing changed by Christ, rather than overanalyze the motives of the servants. I've said my piece - back to occasional "lurking"!
Posted by: Melissa | April 25, 2008 8:54 AM
Many people are deceived by a "message" of hope and change, that resembles the Gospel, but once the veneer is sanded a bit, these groups look very much like non-Christian sociialists, or secular anti-Christian so-called civil rights groups. It starts with a movement "for the people" less fortunate, and its ends up with those in that leadership, becoming those in power. This is what seems to be the root of those claiming to help the poor, but they jettison these same people once they get to the top. People that truly help the poor do not glorify it in best selling books. Jim and Sojo are no different, as people that want to hold to their political ideation in absolute control when they get power. "Test all things . . . and hold firmly to the truth" is very solid teaching. A Christian and conservative one at that.
Posted by: One step in the "right" direction | April 25, 2008 9:05 AM
Jim and Sojo are no different, as people that want to hold to their political ideation in absolute control when they get power.
Do I detect some projection here? Because that's what the right has always done, and even with secular backers.
"Test all things . . . and hold firmly to the truth" is very solid teaching. A Christian and conservative one at that.
I would never have become a follower of Jesus if being an ideological conservative were required to do so. That sounds like "adding to the Gospel."
Posted by: Rick Nowlin | April 25, 2008 1:52 PM
I find it incredably stupid that people find fault in helping anyone. There have been so many close minded, narrow vision comments, that I don't know where to start. So I won't. But, God calls us to take care of each other; Feed the poor, clothe the naked, heal the sick.
Posted by: Daniel | April 25, 2008 3:32 PM
I seem to remember Paul rejoicing that Christ was preached regardless of the preacher's motivation (What then? notwithstanding, every way, whether in pretence, or in truth, Christ is preached; and I therein do rejoice, yea, and will rejoice. Phil 1: 18).
Nehemiah had his detractors as well.
"True reformation and biblical revival, historically, come when the people of God first confess their sins, return to the pure doctrine of the Gospel, and pray for, hunger for, and beg for the Spirit of God to come and restore what we have allowed to be eaten away."
Posted by: Paul C. Quillman | April 24, 2008 11:22 PM
Which is exactly what is happening in these revivals!
Pastor Jeff
Posted by: Pastor Jeff Staples | April 25, 2008 3:37 PM
are we teaching the poor three simple rules? stay in school, don't get pregnate or get anyone pregnate,get a job any job and keep that job until you get a better one. roger
Posted by: roger | April 25, 2008 3:41 PM
are we teaching the poor three simple rules? stay in school, don't get pregnate or get anyone pregnate, get a job any job and keep that job until you get a better one. roger
That's not the problem, in part because the "rich" themselves already break those rules but because they have something to fall back upon the consequences aren't as damning.
What's needed first is hope, then opportunity -- if those come the discipline often follows. And they also need a "cheering section."
Posted by: Rick Nowlin | April 25, 2008 3:54 PM
Roger: Yes
PJ
Posted by: Pastor Jeff Staples | April 25, 2008 3:54 PM
If you do a study of all the times Jesus speaks with beggars in the Gospels, He never once rebukes them for being poor or not working. He doesn't shame them for their circumstances.
I firmly believe people should work and work hard, but if you ever find yourself begging on the street, there's no real shame in it.
So, if you're fed up with those getting a free ride, it may be worth examining what's really upsetting you about it.
Posted by: frankie | April 25, 2008 5:01 PM
Rick Nowlin wrote:
What's needed first is hope, then opportunity -- if those come the discipline often follows. And they also need a "cheering section."
Actually, I think the specific order among discipline, hope, and opportunity is going to vary from person to person. I suspect that we are forgetting an ingredient, Knowledge, of both the formal and informal kind, that allows a person to recognize Opportunity, seperate Hope from wishful thinking, and focus Discipline in ways that are likely to bear fruit.
I would never have become a follower of Jesus if being an ideological conservative were required to do so. That sounds like "adding to the Gospel."
And I would have had to abandon Jesus if following him had required me to become an ideological liberal. Fortunately for both of us, neither is mandatory.
Wolverine
Posted by: Wolverine | April 26, 2008 12:52 AM
I suspect that we are forgetting an ingredient, Knowledge, of both the formal and informal kind, that allows a person to recognize Opportunity, seperate Hope from wishful thinking, and focus Discipline in ways that are likely to bear fruit.
To do that, however, takes contacts -- which, frankly, many of the "poor" don't have because they don't have access to folks who can point them in the right direction.
I would have had to abandon Jesus if following him had required me to become an ideological liberal.
You miss my point. "Liberalism" as we understand it today has never been part of evangelical discourse to any great extent; "conservatism," on the other hand, has been dominant for the past 30 years. Put another way, far more Christians agree with you more than me.
Posted by: Rick Nowlin | April 26, 2008 8:56 AM
"And they also need a cheering section"
Like Jeremiah Wright. He'll get them pointed in the right direction.
Posted by: debarrio | April 26, 2008 9:33 AM
letjusticerolldown: If Jim Wallis held his hand out to you and said, "Brother, let's walk side by side and keep our eyes on Jesus, the Author and Perfector of our faith;" would you walk with him?
Would you walk with me?
Paul: I would certainly be glad to walk with anyone who believed the Gospel. However, I will not compromise the Gospel, and would hold you, Jim Wallis, or anyone else to the standard of the Gospel as layed out in Scripture. I would expect the same of anyone walking with me.
Paul: "True reformation and biblical revival, historically, come when the people of God first confess their sins, return to the pure doctrine of the Gospel, and pray for, hunger for, and beg for the Spirit of God to come and restore what we have allowed to be eaten away."
Pastor Jeff: Which is exactly what is happening in these revivals!
Paul: No, Jim Wallis is preaching a political revival. Do you want politics to change? Start with preaching the Gospel? Do you want the hungry fed, the naked clothed, the homeless sheltered? Preach the Gospel, first. Everything else is a by-product of preaching the Gospel. Jim Wallis is calling for people to engage in his social justice agenda, and the Gospel is a convienent tool in his agenda, not the central controlling issue.
Posted by: Paul C. Quillman | April 26, 2008 10:01 AM
What happens after Revivals?
It's too sad to post this concern. But, this is very true. I have been to several Revivals for several years; and, with various denominations or non-Ds. They all go home afterwards, do not follow -up with Discipleship, lack encouragement like "hey meet me and we will supper with the Lord in the Park, my home, your home, even by the bus stop. Huh?
Posted by: Maritess Taylor | April 26, 2008 11:25 AM
Like Jeremiah Wright. He'll get them pointed in the right direction.
Actually -- to your chagrin -- he will and probably has already done so.
I would certainly be glad to walk with anyone who believed the Gospel. However, I will not compromise the Gospel, and would hold you, Jim Wallis, or anyone else to the standard of the Gospel as layed out in Scripture. I would expect the same of anyone walking with me.
The Gospel, ultimately, is about reconciliation, with God and with others. Is that what you preach? Wallis does for sure and has always done so.
Posted by: Rick Nowlin | April 26, 2008 12:37 PM
Rick: The Gospel, ultimately, is about reconciliation, with God and with others. Is that what you preach? Wallis does for sure and has always done so.
Paul: Yes the Gospel is about reconcilliation with God, but Wallis preaches a Gospel of works, not of Grace alone, through Faith alone. He preaches that we must do good works to gain salvation, not that we do good works because we have a great salvation.
Posted by: Paul C. Quillman | April 26, 2008 12:51 PM
Paul Quillman wrote:
". . . Wallis preaches a Gospel of works, not of Grace alone, through Faith alone. He preaches that we must do good works to gain salvation . . ."
I see much to disagree with in Wallis' point of view, but this is one thing I don't see there. I don't see much of a position about salvation, by grace or works. His message seems to me to be a characterization of Christianity as a social philosophy.
Posted by: Gordon | April 26, 2008 1:40 PM
The Justice Revival was a unique combination of evangelical/charismatics with the so called "social gospel" people. I see how the evangelicals were affected--they are now doing projects among the poor (which Vineyard Columbus was doing anyway) which hopefully will impact their city and state. I'd like to ask how the social gospelites were affected by the partnership with charismatics? I'd like to hear how they are now more open to the giftings of the Spirit--miracles, faith, healing, words of knowledge--as a result of this "Justice Revival".
I also question how charismatics/evangelicals/social gospelites can team up to fight poverty but stand staunchly against what they call the "prosperity gospel." How can you be anti-poverty and anti-abundance? God blesses us to bless others, but these groups regularly condemn "those that preach prosperity." Seems like "unity" is easy to say, but hard to practice.
Posted by: carol | April 26, 2008 2:31 PM
"a social philosophy" that amazingly lines up perfectly with Marxism. What are the odds?
"Imagine" no more deluded old Hippies. Maybe Euthanasia isn't such a bad idea. Heck, if Wallis can cling to his precious partial birth abortion, I should at least be able to ponder a solution to the "old hippy" problem.
Posted by: debarrio | April 26, 2008 2:35 PM
Paul: I am going to walk with you as you would walk with others. Please support your accusations with actual quotes or citations. Otherwise repent from lies and stop joining with the Accuser of the Brethren and the Father of Lies.
Pastor Jeff Staples
Posted by: Pastor Jeff Staples | April 26, 2008 2:41 PM
Yes the Gospel is about reconciliation with God, but Wallis preaches a Gospel of works, not of Grace alone, through Faith alone. He preaches that we must do good works to gain salvation, not that we do good works because we have a great salvation.
Frankly, Wallis does no such thing -- in fact, after the "God's Politics" book came out he wrote another one that didn't get as much press, "A Call to Conversion." I recently read an article in ChristianityToday.com about him, and he actually defended the very same doctrine you espouse (and even sacrificed some of the Sojourners community in the process when some of the people working for it objected to it).
What Wallis has consistently said, in complete congruence with the Scripture, is that if your faith doesn't result in deeds it's useless (James calls it "dead").
I don't see much of a position about salvation, by grace or works. His message seems to me to be a characterization of Christianity as a social philosophy.
Remember, he's generally addressing other Christians, who we assume are already saved and being discipled; thus, there's no reason to go over that ground again. Not everyone is called to be an evangelist, you know, and criticizing him for not following others' idea of Christian mission just doesn't wash. And even if he were more overtly evangelistic he would still get beaten up for not being "politically correct" (that happens to Ron Sider all the time).
Posted by: Rick Nowlin | April 26, 2008 3:44 PM
Pastor Jeff: I am going to walk with you as you would walk with others. Please support your accusations with actual quotes or citations.
Paul: I will cite 2 examples.
Jim Wallis: Hundreds of people came forward to commit their lives to Christ for the first time, and thousands came down the aisle to commit themselves to the social justice that is core to the kingdom of God, to the "least of these" whom Jesus calls us to care for.
Paul: This smacks of the decisionistic, emotion driven, try harder, live right and God will love you more, quazi, neo-fundementalist upbringing I had. It is good that hundreds are coming to Christ, but that is not enough. Will these hundreds be discipled? Who will disiple them? Will they be taught Christ and Him crusified, and that good works are a by-product of faith, or will they be taught that they have to do good works for God to like them more and bless them?
The thousands committing themselves to social justice is a bigger issue. If anything, they should be commiting to futher prayer, study of the Scriptures, and from that, seeking to be instruments in expanding Gods Kingdom, His will done on earth as it is in Heaven.
Who are the least of these that Wallis alludes to? Are they only the homeless, or the poor? What about the CEO who looses everything? Does he qualify? What about Donald Trump? Wallis only seems to be concerned about the poor, but what about those who are not poor? Do they deserve the Gospel any less? Why does Wallis see different groups of people, when the Gospel sees that all are broken and in need of redemption?
The second example is from the justice revival. Below is a link to the YouTube video. My focus is on time stamp 2:09 to 2:12.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wM3Fp-h9UCY&feature=related
Here is the money quote:
Jim Wallis: "If our gospel is not good news to poor people, it is simply not the Gospel of Jesus Christ."
Paul: Why would Wallis single out one group? He seems to only see people in terms of special interest groups, as opposed to the Gospel seeing everyone as broken and in desparate need of a Savior.
As I said, this is the other side of the coin that I grew up in, and bought into for a time. But that is $3 worth of Gospel, at best. The truth of the Gospel is that everyone from the begger on the street to Donals Trump, and everyone in between is in desparate need of a Savior, and we all have the same right to hear the Gospel as the next person. Poverty, wealth, ethnicity, need, want, plenty, brokenness, wholeness, all of these are dignified, not because of a political cause, but by the Gospel. God is the Lord of all of these, yet I do not hear that from Jim Wallis.
I could get into the wrongness of government wealth redistribution, abusive tax policies, destructive "green ideology", but do not have the time today.
Lest you think I hate the poor, that is not true. I am very close to that economic classification myself, and only recently moved out of that tecnical designation. I am very much aware of the needs of the poor, and a political solution is not it. It starts with the Gospel, and ends with the Gospel, it is the Gospel.
Posted by: Paul C. Quillman | April 26, 2008 4:22 PM
Rick N: Rev. Wright has already pointed poor folks in the right direction? Let me guess. He invinted them all to a picnic at his 2 million dollor mansion. Unfortunatly, Rev. Wright has choosen to have his mansion,(paid for by all the poor folks that he points in the right direction)located in a gated community with a bunch of White folks. Oh well. They can all stand outside the gates and dream.
Posted by: debarrio | April 26, 2008 4:26 PM
Debarrio: Watch Bill Moyers' journal (if you dare) and then tell me what you think of the man rather than the characterizations you are being fed.
Pastor Jeff
Posted by: Pastor Jeff Staples | April 26, 2008 4:36 PM
My appologies for the multiple posts. I am having problems posting to this site, but none of my other blogs.
Here is the second example. Below is a link to You Tube video from the justice revival in Columbus:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wM3Fp-h9UCY&feature=related
Focus in on time fram 2:09 to 2:12
Jim says, "If our gospel is not good news for the poor people, it is not the Gospel of Jesus Christ."
Paul: Why should we limit who the Gospel goes to? Do the rich deserve the Gospel any more or less than the poor? The rich and middle class families in crisis need the Gospel as much as the poor famlies do, don't they?
Having only recently moved out of the poor, into the lower middle class in terms of income, I am very familiar with poverty. What I needed was not a government handout, nor did I need some extra hyphenated form of "justice". I needed the government to get out of my way, and I needed to hear and believe, and see and recieve the Gospel in every form it comes.
Posted by: Paul Quillmann | April 26, 2008 8:25 PM
Paul: Did Jesus preach the full gospel according to Paul. Please cite references.
You are very troubled by thousands devoting their lives to doing something about their faith rather than making shallow, emotion based decisions for Christ? Sounds like you are trying to have it both ways.
I asked that you supply references for your serious allegations and you respond with speculation about what he may or may not have been preaching. The penalty in the OT for false accusations was that the punishment for the false accuser was to be that which would befall the accused if the accusation was proven true. ("The measure you measure with shall be measured unto you") If you would like to handle the matter biblically I suggest you write to Rev. Wallis directly. I believe he will respond. You may also be able to obtain first hand information from some on this blog who attended the revival.
PJ
Posted by: Pastor Jeff Staples | April 26, 2008 9:06 PM
Paul: In my first paragraph I of course meant the full gospel according to Paul C. Quillman. In my journey's background there would be some who would include the infilling of the Holy Spirit accompanied with the evidence of speaking in tongues as preaching the full gospel. I don't think that happened at the revival meeting and I don't have a problem with that.
Jesus also preached to and about the rich (sell all you have and give to the poor and something about camels and needle's eyes). Was he too biased for you also? BTW-you left out the element of baptism from your list.
PJ
Posted by: Pastor Jeff Staples | April 26, 2008 9:18 PM
It appears that Wallis is preaching a political gospel, the other side of the same coin that neo-fundies preach.
Well, the Gospel does have political implications, though it isn't political per se.
Why is Wallis so obsessed with a particular socio-ethnic-economic group? Does he not see that everyine is in desperate need of the Gospel, not just the poor?
Because, and the Scripture makes this very clear, the powers-that-be, even in the church, often shunt the poor aside and even abuse them for the sake of power. There actually are more verses about dealing with the poor than any subject in the entire Bible with the exception of faith, which tells you where God's priorities really are.
Posted by: Rick Nowlin | April 26, 2008 9:53 PM
Pastor Jeff,
I'll take you up on your offer and try to catch the Moyers/Wright interview. I'm sure I will gain more insight into the man. At the same time, do you think it's OK for him to live in a Mansion inside a gated "White" community. A mansion paid for by poorer innercity blacks?
Oh, and Paul C. I think you hit the enter key a couple too many times. Take it down a notch.
Posted by: debarrio | April 26, 2008 11:12 PM
Dear members,
If you find your posts are being held up (it's our Spam filter), please email staff at our community mailbox and I'll check the Junk file and release them. Continuing to submit comments only makes Spambot "think" it has captured real spam.
Plus I have to release every comment, individually, to the live board (in essence telling Spambot they are not spam), and then go back and delete the duplicates.
Have pity! ;-)
----> community@staff.beliefnet.com
Thanks!
Beliefnet_Tiger
Community Monitor
Beliefnet.com
Posted by: Beliefnet_Tiger | April 27, 2008 12:41 AM
Jesus said to take care of the widows and orphans, to call no man father, but our father in heaven, and that we are all the sons of God.
So why the big todoo about a male hierchy and it's representative in the world God loved so much?
I like Jim's idea of revival. A few weeks ago the thought was strong in my spirit too. I think we're going to see a choice between status quo and hope. I for one will vote a fruit of the spirit over dirty or ignorant politics.
Thanks Jim for reminding me to live the kingdom before I die.
Posted by: B Jordan | April 27, 2008 1:19 PM
Oh yeah,
If you want to take care of the widows and orphans, be a good father and husband. A godly man is the hope of both.
Peace, B
Posted by: B Jordan | April 27, 2008 1:21 PM
Debarrio: I agree if things are as you present them. Does he own the mansion personally? What is the source of your info?
PJ
Posted by: Pastor Jeff Staples | April 27, 2008 5:20 PM
PJ: Here's a link to one article from the Sun Times you can look at regarding Rev Wrights new crib. (or google Rev. Wrights Mansion)
http://www.suntimes.com/business/867629,CST-NWS-wright29.article
Also, I'm from Chicago and have a friend who lives by Tinly Park and is a Mortgage Broker. He's the one who told me it was a gated community.
BTW: I did watch the Bill Moyers interview earlier today. I'll get back to you shortly regarding that.
Posted by: debarrio | April 27, 2008 8:23 PM
OK, one final comment regarding the Wright thing and SOJO's in general. (Not coincidentally, I happened to read Romans 12-18 today. "If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone.." My acerbic and scathing comments haven't been real peaceful, so I should probably take a break.
PJ: Regarding the interview with Moyers, I shouldn't have been surprised that Moyers is also a member of the UCC, which is widely accepted as a liberal denomination. As far as an interview, Moyers wasn't only tossing Wright the softballs, he was hitting them for him too. Wright could barely eek out an answer without Moyers rushing to his defense for him. It was sort of funning to watch actually. PJ: Were obviously miles a part theologically and politically, and I'm certainly not going to annoy you over to my way of thinking. Liberation Theology however, whether Black, White or purple, is, in my view, a false Theology.
Also, my main problem with Wallis is that he tries to give the uninitiated and naive the impression that he is just some middle of the road kind of guy looking for Truth in the Bible. This, I believe, is deception. Wallis is and always has been a Democratic Operative and champion of a radical and liberal Socialist Agenda. But hey, that's just me. This blog, IMO is a Political Blog, not a Christian blog. So one final comment on politics for you, Wallis and Rev. Wright to consider. Slavery existed for something like 10,000 years until the establishment of the Republican Party and the sacrifice of a couple hundred thousand Americans brought and end to it. (Practically speaking.)
In 1964, the Republican Party passed the Equal Rights Amendment with about 85% of Republican Representatives voting in favor as apposed to only about 65% of Democrats. For the last 30 plus years, the Republican Party has been the voice for the protection of the TRULY repressed. The unborn! The Democrats. Well they dropped the bomb on Japan twice and got us stuck in Vietnam at the expense of 50,000 American lives. Those are my comments as a "Republican Operative."
Enough said, for now, and for awhile.
Posted by: debarrio | April 27, 2008 9:13 PM
Also, my main problem with Wallis is that he tries to give the uninitiated and naive the impression that he is just some middle of the road kind of guy looking for Truth in the Bible. This, I believe, is deception. Wallis is and always has been a Democratic Operative and champion of a radical and liberal Socialist Agenda. But hey, that's just me.
With all due respect, that is just you and that's part of the problem. For openers, Wallis, for from being a Democratic operative and champion of a radical and liberal socialist agenda according to your inaccurate and hateful accusations, rather is and has always been non-partisan and indeed also an apologist for the historic Christian faith, buttressed by a story now liked to the ChristianityToday.com website (you might want to read it). I'm hearing from you outright prejudice against, as the Rev. Jeremiah Wright just talked about and broadcast on CNN, people who are "different." And that does nobody, least of all the Body of Christ, any good.
In 1964, the Republican Party passed the Equal Rights Amendment with about 85% of Republican Representatives voting in favor as apposed to only about 65% of Democrats. For the last 30 plus years, the Republican Party has been the voice for the protection of the TRULY repressed. The unborn! The Democrats. Well they dropped the bomb on Japan twice and got us stuck in Vietnam at the expense of 50,000 American lives. Those are my comments as a "Republican Operative."
You conveniently forget that all this was "B.B." -- "Before Barry" (Goldwater, that is). In fact, the Southern segregationists who were Democrats eventually became Republicans, beginning in 1965 or thereabouts when Strom Thurmond switched in protest to the Civil Rights Act. Ronald Reagan, who was hostile as any political figure to social justice in my lifetime, even wanted to overturn the Voting Rights Act "because it discriminated against the South." There are reasons why most African-Americans vote Democratic, and it's not because they love liberals!
Posted by: Rick Nowlin | April 27, 2008 10:26 PM
Why should we limit who the Gospel goes to? Do the rich deserve the Gospel any more or less than the poor? The rich and middle class families in crisis need the Gospel as much as the poor famlies do, don't they?
The Gospels are full of references to the fact that Jesus' ministry was directed especially to the poor. I don't have time to look up all of them, but here are a few off the top of my head:
Mary's prophecy (the Magnificat) (Luke 1:46-55; pay special attention to vs. 51-53)
Jesus' announcement of his ministry by reading from the prophet Isaiah's declaration of jubilee (Is 61:1-3) in the synagogue (Luke 4:18)
Jesus' response to John the Baptist's query from prison regarding whether Jesus was the expected one (Matthew 11:4-6)
The fact that the disciples themselves were not recruited from among the well-to-to and well-connected but from fishermen and social outcasts. Remember too that among Jesse's sons, the one God chose to be king was the lowly shepherd boy (shepherds were rather despised in those days). And don't forget that Jesus himself wasn't exactly born in a palace or of wealthy parentage.
You might also want to read about the ministry of John Wesley. He recognized the fact that the Gospel was uniquely directed to the poor and preached to the poor especially.
Yes, the Gospel is for all--rich and poor alike. But bear in mind what Jesus said regarding how difficult it is for the rich to inherit the Kingdom (Mark 10:17-27); it's interesting to note that just before Jesus' dialogue with the man of "many possessions" is the story of the little children being brought before Jesus, and his comment about how we must enter the Kingdom as a little child (Mark 10: 13-16).
Peace,
Posted by: Don | April 28, 2008 8:15 AM
Jim Wallis denies the full rights of those whose sexual orientation or gender identity puts them in the minority. The lack of human and civil rights our homophobic society denies them has added this group to the class of 'the least among us', not because of their lack of worth but because of prejudice and inequality. When will my LGBT friends be considered worthy of inclusion in Jim's categories of concern? We're waiting in the hope that he'll see the light soon.
Posted by: Carol Edman | April 28, 2008 9:23 AM
When will my LGBT friends be considered worthy of inclusion in Jim's categories of concern?
Sorry, but that's not likely; based on the article I mentioned above he doesn't believe that homosexual practice is congruent with Scripture or Christian practice. He has conceded the concept of "civil unions," per "God's Politics," but would stop short of marriage for gays.
Posted by: Rick Nowlin | April 28, 2008 10:06 AM
Rick N. Calling my accusations about Wallis "inaccurate and hateful" is an inaccurate and hateful accusation. Oh Boy, I vehemently disagree with Wallis and Jeremiah Wright so that makes me a prejudiced hatemonger. Guess what. You vehemently disagree with me. Does that make you hateful bigot? You tell me.
BTW: Wallis is non-partisan? Wake up dude.
Posted by: debbario | April 28, 2008 11:06 AM
Calling my accusations about Wallis "inaccurate and hateful" is an inaccurate and hateful accusation.
Au contraire -- it's telling the truth. Having seen bigotry in the past from both sides, I recognize it when I see it and have no problem calling it by its name in the process. You should know that it has absolutely no place in a Christian's life.
I vehemently disagree with Wallis and Jeremiah Wright so that makes me a prejudiced hatemonger.
There's a way to disagree without name-calling, which you have done consistently (and which you just did to me). Be advised also that you in the process may be violating the terms of this blog and could be banned from posting.
Posted by: Rick Nowlin | April 28, 2008 11:16 AM
I'm a youth pastor in Tennessee, and I have been here since last summer. Most of what I try to teach my kids in expanding the Kingdom of God is by actually meeting the needs of those around them. Loving someone enough to give them food to fill their stomach is going to speak many more volumes into someone's life than trying to regurgitate all the right verses. If it's going to be about Jesus, even he met the needs of the masses before preaching to them. The most efficient way to spread the Gospel of Jesus is by using minimal words and boatloads of action.
I have read criticism about Wallis being a politician and only having a political agenda, and not truly being a Christian and advocate of the church. My question is why do those have to be mutually exclusive? Why can one not be a Christian, and be an advocate for all those in need who have no voice. If anyone should take a stand, and make a difference politically, it should be a Christian. The church should be the one's meeting the need, but we have left it to Brad Pitt (not that he is not a Christian because I have no idea about his faith) and other celebrities to do the job of the church.
I am completely stoked about the justice revival. I too would love to see that span the country if for nothing else but to educate the millions of ignorant and uninformed individual who rarely open their eyes to see the injustices all around them. Keep up the incredible work, SOJO!
Posted by: Chris Lee | April 28, 2008 12:00 PM
My question is why do those have to be mutually exclusive? Why can one not be a Christian, and be an advocate for all those in need who have no voice. If anyone should take a stand, and make a difference politically, it should be a Christian.
Chris, let's hope that someday you'll be more than just a youth pastor. As the LORD Himself said, "You are not far from the Kingdom of God."
Posted by: Rick Nowlin | April 28, 2008 12:11 PM
Dear Jim,
(I'm not sure if my message was already sent because I just released a "Pop Up Block." Here is its essence.)
Your new book, THE GREAT AWAKENING, is like an extension of my book, THE GREAT REVERSAL, which was published in its third edition last year with a new subtitle, Reconciling Evangelism and Social Concern, and some other new features.
Review copies are sent only upon specific request addresssed to Scarlettah Schaefer, Wipf & Stock Publishers, 199 West 8th Ave., Suite 3, Eugene, OR 97401, or her Email address, .
I'm glad your work is finally getting prominent attention.
Your fellow servant, David
Posted by: David O. Moberg | April 30, 2008 12:10 PM
And there is good reason for that.
Yes. They're taught deficient doctrine; that the only issues in being a serious Christian are personal piety, adherence to a religious tradition and corporate cultural morality, none of which approach the Good News of the Kingdom of God.
Posted by: Rick Nowlin | April 30, 2008 3:51 PM
What a kairos moment this is for American Christians. This shows every sign of being a for-real awakening, a sobering up and a renewal for many of us too long enthralled to the idols of consumerist culture. The words that come to mind are the apostle Paul's: "nothing less than life from death." Or, as John wrote: "the sign that we have passed over from death into life is that we love the brothers." Love beginning to be lived out in community- cause for celebration!
Posted by: Erich Brough | May 1, 2008 4:19 PM
Dear brethrens of the body of Christ JIM WILLS
Greetings in the mighty and wonderful name of our lord and savior Jesus Christ. My name is Isaac Mandere a pastor of christ churches in Kenya . Is my first time to visit your website which is so interesting and so uplifting? Indeed my heart has been filled with joy and gladness for the marvelous things I have experienced on your web page. With great joy I would like to request you to affiliate with us, so that you may teach us and make us able to understand better the word of God. We started to work as a fellowship since 1993; right now we are with seven church fellowships and two orphanage school. Also we have started building champions home.We thank God for making us able to reach you through the website for His work to be accomplished. We shall be happy to hear from you as His spirit will enable you to do.God bless you and anoint you with His power of the Holy spirit, as we remain yours and servant in His vineyard.
Yours faitfully
Isaac Mandere
Posted by: Isaac Mandere | July 4, 2008 2:57 AM
Post a Comment
Are you aware of our Rules of Conduct?