They Like Jesus but Not the Church: Insights from Emerging Generations | Dan Kimball

They Like Jesus but Not the Church: Insights from Emerging Generations | Dan Kimball | Excellent for pastors concerned with the emerging generations

books:

They Like Jesus bu...

	They Like Jesus but Not the Church: Insights from Emerging Generations Dan Kimball Zondervan, 2007 - 272 pages average customer review:based on 44 reviews view larger image
	for more information click here

highly recommended

Becoming Missionaries

Anyone who is serious about sharing their faith with others in this generation and culture needs to read Dan Kimball's They Like Jesus But Not the Church. Not so that we can package a church that they will like, but so we will, like good missionaries, understand the culture and the spiritual climate in which we minister.

The book convicted me on the very second page when I realized that I had become so busy "doing ministry" that I had lost almost all contact with those outside the church. My prayer now is "get me back into the game."

Dan's tone is full of grace and understanding, but his words are straightforward and prophetic. Based on several years of interviews with folks outside the church, They Like Jesus But Not the Church highlights the reasons that emerging generations respect Jesus but are totally turned off by his bride. Many of the reasons are misperceptions; many are not. Some of the reasons that really jumped out to me included the following:

"The church is an organized religion with a political agenda."
"The church is judgmental and negative. It is known for what it is against more than for what it is for."
"The church is homophobic."

Dan is whole-heartedly committed to the truth of Scripture , and he shows us how we can uphold the authority of Scripture while stripping off some of the extraneous trappings we have picked up along the way. I love Dan's humility and transparency. He is fair and gracious to both sides of the conversation, and he offers hope to those in the church and those outside the church.

This is one of the best books I have read, and I believe all pastors need to read it. We need to understand the culture in which we minister. We need to understand the people we are trying to reach. We need to get outside the walls of our church office and get to know the people in our communities. And we need to think Biblically and critically about how we do church.

for more information click here

Excellent for pastors concerned with the emerging generations

Take notes, communicate it with your congregations, and start reaching out with Dan Kimball's ideas in mind.

Some good ideas, though a bit judgmental of some Christians

The title of my review probably got some of you to read what I'm going to say here, but hear me out. First of all, yes, I read the whole book, and I appreciate many of the things Kimball had to say. He made me think, and I believe the Evangelical Christian church can learn from the emerging church movement. I especially appreciate the zeal that the astute Kimball has to reach the lost. He has a great ministry in the coffee houses of his area as he builds relationships while sharing the Christian faith. As time passes, things change, and we Christians need to be willing to not remain status quo, to "be all things to all people" and culturally not drive people away from the gospel based on an unbiblical stubbornness. This is exactly what scholar D.A. Carson says in his book on the emerging church, titled "Becoming Conversant with the Emerging Church." (I highly recommend it.)

"They Like Jesus" is helpful in showing Christians that we need to be aware of the culture around us and make sure we're not offending just for the sake of arrogance. We must understand that there are many people who will never set foot into a church building; unless we go out to them, how else can they ever understand and know the gospel? Kimball does a good job here and has given the pastor/reader some things to consider. I appreciate his fresh perspective.

Where he does become judgmental, however, is painting straw man figures of those who don't do evangelism the way he apparently deems proper. (Note: We must remember that, in good Postmodern thinking, "perception" is everything, as Kimball's entire book is built on the perception of the emerging generation whom he meets in the coffee houses. Thus, what I am about to relate is my perception, whether I am accurate or not to the real intent/meaning of the author. Fair enough.) The reader is thus left with a caricature that, while maybe true in some or--for the sake of argument--even many cases, is nothing more than a mere generalization. The idea conveyed is, unless you do it Kimball's way, it isn't the right way. And this is where I think this book falls short.

For instance, on page 99, he writes: "This unflattering perception of the church and Christians comes from seeing Christians protesting on the streets with large signs telling people they are going to hell." Later, on page 167, he writes, "There seem to be plenty of Christians who will hand out a tract or hold a street sign saying 'Jesus is the only way,' but not many who build friendships and trust with people about what that means." Then, on page 238, he writes that those who are approached on the street "will only get an impersonal tract that focuses on hell or see a street evangelist who many times ends up making things worse."

From these images, Kimball makes it appear that any type of signage used in witnessing is "protesting." Street evangelism is apparently discouraged, regardless of what method is chosen. Just because these methods may not be to Kimball's liking does not mean they are "protesting." (I think of "Hell no, we won't go" and other silly protest slogans when this word is used.) Yet, in the right place and time, I have seen many instances when street evangelism and signs work, whether with "Million-Dollar Bills" or messages on placards that are produced in creative love. In fact, Kimball--whether he intends to or not--gives the appearance that the only correct method to do evangelism is through the building of "relationships." Of course, building relationships ("friendship evangelism," we called it in the 1970s) is obviously going to bear the most fruit. Nothing can beat time invested into people's lives. But it's only one type of evangelism. Can't/shouldn't we take the Great Commission to the streets and approach strangers as well? Isn't there a way to build relationships in the context of a three-hour airline flight or stopping someone sitting in the park and bringing up spiritual issues? Of course, I am a firm believer that any sharing must be done in gentleness and respect, but what I took from Kimball is that these methods apparently don't work with today's generation. Is this the message he intended to convey? I'm not sure, but that's the meaning I took in my reading.

Another bothersome thing for me is found on page 102. Kimball tells the story of how he was offended at a new believer's Bible that he wanted to give away because it included commentary notes he considered judgmental. He tells the story of trying to tear out pages from this Bible that he felt was offensive until he realized he was going to have to tear out too many pages. What did he consider offensive? Well, the initial page he wanted to tear out had a note saying that Christians shouldn't have sex before marriage, in reference to 1 Cor. 6-7. But the new convert he wanted to give the Bible to was living with his girlfriend. So, in order not to offend him, Kimball finally decided to not tear out pages and instead get another Bible to give away. He didn't want the new believer to become offended at the note. I was puzzled by his consternation. Just what exactly does 1 Cor 6-7 intend to say to the audience? Was the note in the Bible incorrect?

He explained that a new convert might think the commentary notes should be considered scripture, But would someone really be so naive to think that? If so, wouldn't it have been easy enough to have quickly explained to the new convert that the Bible had notes in it but not to consider these "scripture"? I'm not sure I understood the full reason for his apprehension to these notes, and it made me wonder what things he might hide from those to whom he was speaking at the coffeehouse. Would he hide some truth of Christianity merely to convert them? Of course, I'm not saying the Christian needed to immediately open up to 1 Cor. 6 right after the moment of conversion and say, "Now, be a good Christian and don't live with your girlfriend any longer!" That would obviously be silly and not very wise.

But isn't the idea of sex before marriage going to become an issue somewhere along the line? And I really doubt that the new believer would have gone home that night and immediately opened up to 1 Cor. 6. What were the odds? So, I just think that the very idea of ripping out pages from a study Bible was troublesome to me. And, while I understood that he is against sin, his chapter on homosexuality made me wonder what he would say to someone who approached him in the coffeehouse and asked about this issue. Would he tell them this is wrong (something he says he does believe)? Or would he steer around the issue so as not to offend? I'm not sure hiding the truth is something commissioned in scripture either. We must be wise as serpents and innocent as doves. Hiding the truth might be considered wise but not innocent. Honestly, I'm not sure how he might handle himself in this situation.

Finally, Kimball seems to hold a negative stereotype of Calvinists. For instance, on page 240, he writes, "If the arrow of someone's gospel presentation doesn't hit the target, then the person is dismissed as nonelect." This wasn't the only place where he bashed on Calvinism, whether overtly or not, but I think he has made another unfair stereotype, this time with those who stress the sovereignty of God and whom he made to appear as generally arrogant people. Just as Kimball wants to protect the image of Christianity, I think he needs to be careful to carelessly dissing his brothers in Christ merely because he disagrees with him. We can disagree in love and save the potshots.

In conclusion, I really wish my Christian brother would have stuck with presenting his methodology without being so judgmental. Jesus himself had something to say when the disciples were up-in-arms about others who were casting out demons. If they're not against us, they're for us, he said. Before I leave this review, I want to reiterate that there are good things to take away from this book, and I think discerning pastors ought to consider reading it, whether or not they agree with the emerging church. Yes, I do have reservations, but I need to get down to the coffeehouse...it's time for a tea.

for more information click here