Tags
acts 29, annual, Brister, Church, embarrasment, Joshua, meeting, metro, Mitchell, motion, plantboxx, SBC, Shank, youngstown, youngstownmetrochurch
Updated: In case you may have been wondering who hatched this idea to promote the Acts 29 network at SBC 2010, look no further. Apparently, A29 supporters Josh Shank, Charlie Mitchell and Timmy Brister came up with the idea on a 3 hour drive to Orlando. Their first idea, “punking the SBC” may have to wait until next year. According to Brister:
During the three hour drive to Orlando for the 2010 SBC Annual Meeting, Josh Shank, Charlie Mitchell, and I began to think what contribution we can make to the business meeting. Should we try to punk the SBC? Nah, too controversial. How about making a motion expressing appreciation and affirmation for the investment of the Acts 29 Network for their work in planting gospel-centered churches in the SBC? Yeah, that’ll work.
So beat-boxing phenom Josh labored to help drain the hatorade so many of our elder generation of SBCers have been drinking with this little rap. It isn’t much, but it is history making.
Brister’s post assures us this will not be the last of the stunts. You can read the rest here.
Some things need no explanation….but a few comments might be in order for this video.
This is Joshua Shank, designer of Plantboxx.com and ‘pastor’ of Youngstown Metro Church (very hip, lots of food) presenting ‘a motion’ at the recent SBC Annual Meeting to Johnny Hunt. Shank, as you will see, is more set on promoting and exalting the Acts 29 network than presenting any serious, worthwhile motion. Not being satisfied with proper use of the English language and maintaining some degree of decorum – oh no – Joshua decided to ‘rap’ his motion to the then head of the SBC, Johnny Hunt, to the shame of everyone who has even a modicum of an education.
It was a complete embarrassment not only to Shank himself, but to the Acts 29 network and the SBC.
This young hipster may be recognized as a pastor by some, but of what? He exalts himself, Acts 29 and ends up speaking in a dumbed-down version of the English language. I’m almost embarrassed for him.
When did speaking like an ignorant, uneducated brute become acceptable? More importantly, how does this reflect on the church at large? What kind of witness is this?
Thanks Joshua, for not only making yourself look compromisingly silly and self-absorbed, but for degrading the very existence of the SBC meeting. I pray you influence very few young people, but I’m almost certain you will.
The only thing possibly more disturbing than Shanks motion is Johnny Hunts enjoyment of it. What a shame.
Well, the old expression; “consider the source” comes to mind. Acts 29 “NUT”work promotes contextualization of scripture, spiritual formation (mystic prayer practices, including the guru’s who this orginates with; Bro. Lawrence, R. Foster, Willard, Merton, etc..), global agenda, missional quackery, etc.. and founded by none other than Driscoll.
Honestly, when will men cling to God’s Word and stop relying on the “methods of men”? (and ones who speak perversions and interfaith agendas! 2 Cor. 6:14)
ENOUGH!
Come on, really? “Thanks Joshua, for making yourself . . . ”
Since you’re obviously okay with being brutally sarcastic to a brother you don’t know, maybe you’ll let this brother try his hand at it? Okay, here goes:
Thanks, 5 pt salt, your objections to what Shank said are right on the money! Gosh, “to plant and multiply Gospel-centered great-commisioned churches,” what was he THINKING!? Even worse, he then goes on to suggest that we should apply “text to context”, as if applying scripture to our lives and our view of the culture around us is actually what God would want us to do!
The guy is just trying to express himself and his motion in a way different from the norm. If the content of the message is not objectionable, who are you to take issue with the way he presented it? Or do you also take issue with King David dancing with all his might before the Lord?
Bottom line: if your issue is with the message, you should raise that issue. Unlike you, Johnny Hunt and Joshua Shank understand that, in a message, it’s Christ and content that counts. “What a shame,” that you don’t see that, to use your words.
Interested to see if you delete this post or actually step up and respond . . .
See comment policy
quote:
‘team work will make the dream work’
yep, no Holy Spirit needed. No guidance from the Lord through the Word.
You sow to the flesh, and from the flesh you reap corruption.
If they will ever set aside their ‘dream’ of a social gospel advancing by way
of following the dominion mandate,
then they can go back to preaching the cross and repentance and trusting Christ’s
atonement alone for salvation.
@Laura: Good! A criticism of content, at least. Though I agree that quote is useless in the rap, you’re probably taking it a bit far to claim that he means that there’s no guidance needed from the Lord through the Word, and no Holy Spirit needed. If he does mean that, in fact, then of course I agree with you. Do you have any evidence that this is the case?
I’m not a part of Acts 29, but what’s the opposition about? Doctrine seems fairly mainstream (though some of the language is admittedly unknown to me):
J
Being mainstream does not necessarily mean sound doctrine. You might be interested in reading of Acts 29′s practice and promotion of contemplative mysticism for instance (among other things).
Here’s a good, reliable source of info.
Of course, of course – sorry, I should have been more precise. By mainstream, I meant mainstream within the standard reformed doctrine that you like, as said in an article you linked to:
“Acts 29 is most certainly not heretical in its basic theological beliefs.”
Any of those articles in particular that you recommend? There’s quite a few. The latest seems like a good review of the issues.
J
A friend sent this to me yesterday. My reply yo dear sister in Christ: “Sadly, I am not surprised. Disgusted – yes. With thanks to Ken Silva for the germ of this idea, might, in this case SBC stand for Slowly Becoming Contemptible?”
This is the sad state of the entertainment-driven “church” today. And this young man is suppose to be a shepherd? Give me a break! Unfortunately, this is exactly what the bleeting sheep want because they’re too busy to read the word of God themselves and are willing to accept what any hireling will feed them.
I’m of the opinion that goats want to be entertained and sheep want sheep food. Some baby sheep will take stuff from goat herders and hirelings for a season or two, but there will come a time when they demand sheep food. They will leave and find a shepherd and the goat farms will continue to add to their number.
I agree with Manfred. Time will tell who is whom. Sheep will eventually mature to see the fault of unscriptural ‘churches’ and leave for good food. Goats will keep banging their heads and saying, “Woe, dude, we are rockin’ out today. Pass the peace pipe and party on…”
Reggie,
Have you been to his church? Have you listened to the messages he preaches? Have you seen the community at his church, and the extent to which it is Christ-centered (or not?)
I haven’t, but like the author of the original post, you seem to be making a very strong judgement based on having very little information about him or his church.
If you’ve already done the research on the details, then please forgive me – but if you’re judging just based on this video? Then get your head straight, brother.
J
J,
there is enough evidence to see that there is a major problem
within the visible church at large.
the problem is actually the same in all of the denominations now.
It would take me an hour or more probably to give a well written answer.
but here goes my attempt to be brief in my explanation.
This is from my very own ‘story’, that God allowed to happen in my former church.
One Sunday, my congregation was made aware of a problem and a needed change in the ‘health’ of our church.
From this point onward much transpired to cause me to go outside my church to figure out why I no longer recognized the gospel that was preached or why we were dropping the Bible for books that were to be used for Sunday School and other classes.
The theme overall now at church was ‘health’ and that we need to ‘join God in what He is doing’.
(together, of course!)
My first hint that the problem was with more than my congregation was while attending the new ministry called small groups.
This was a new ministry that came complete with prepackaged curriculum, like books and DVDs and a lesson plan with questions and exercises called ‘ice breakers’. ( We used ice breakers I guess because Christians today can’t just have normal relationships and conversations like the rest of mankind.)
So, because I could go on and on. (and I don’t want the spam patrol to delete me, I will post this and continue my saga in the next edition of my posts)
ok?
Hey there J,
pt 2 of ? LOL,
I don’t want to make this about my particular experience. Because my experience was duplicated by the thousands
and thousands of other spiritually molested congregants, over the last 5 years or more. This is what we learned, and this is my ‘evidence’.
I want to point to some interesting web sites that helped me in understanding what happened to my beloved church and why and HOW, myself, my family and the congregation were spiritually molested. And so you don’t think I forgot the whole point of posting a reply to the OP and your reply: I originally said: ‘quote: ‘team work will make the dream work’ yep, no Holy Spirit needed. No guidance from the Lord through the Word. You sow to the flesh, and from the flesh you reap corruption. If they will ever set aside their ‘dream’ of a social gospel advancing by way of following the dominion mandate, then they can go back to preaching the cross and repentance and trusting Christ’s atonement alone for salvation.’ unquote
you said: quote: ‘… you’re probably taking it a bit far to claim that he means that there’s no guidance needed from the Lord through the Word, and no Holy Spirit needed. If he does mean that, in fact, then of course I agree with you. Do you have any evidence that this is the case? I’m not a part of Acts 29, but what’s the opposition about? Doctrine seems fairly mainstream (though some of the language is admittedly unknown to me):
It would be correct to say that I don’t know that Joshua’s statement didn’t mean that he thinks no guidance was needed from the Holy Spirit. However, the deception is in the choice of wording when giving public comments, or teaching a class. Words mean something. And leaving OUT words mean something too.
Over the course of my experience at my beloved church, (and remember, that thousands of others have gone through also), we were subjected to the use of small group brainwashing (and that’s not all!)
for that ‘evidence’ you need to do the work of the reading at the sites I will post later, that explain more fully what I am talking about. Over all though, the small groups were the most blatant with their use of -words- or the neglect of -words, for one example, and not a small one, I will continue in the next post.
ok?
I very much appreciate your input here. However, I’d like to keep comments within a reasonable length, to encourage others to join in the conversation, ok?
Thanks
Hi, part 3 of ?
Before I launch into the example, I will tell you that this is something I take very seriously.
Why, because in the end the atonement of Jesus Christ, my Savior is being set aside.
Why is that happening in a body that calls itself a church? I’ll tell you why.
Because there is a ground swell of pastors/leaders who no longer see the need to look upon humanity as lost and in need of redemption.
Much teaching in many seminaries is about building a kingdom of God, on this earth, before the return of Christ.
Preaching the ‘old’ way is looked down upon now.
Notice the comments throughout web sites of SBC churches. and others.
they aren’t the only ones talking about a very different kingdom of God than
what I was taught about for many, many years till about 6 years ago.
Anyway, if the kingdom is now changed, the wording about how to enter this ‘other’ kingdom
has been changed from the ‘old’ biblical way to a different way.
so, back to the evidence of a blatant dropping of a word, a word that makes a big difference in which kingdom is being preached today. a word that is now offensive.
The setting is my small group on a Wed. night at church.
we are a ‘closed’ group. only ten of us. It’s got a curriculum to follow.
We had to sign a small group covenant to be in the group. weird.
We have our little ‘ice breakers’ at the beginning.
many of these are geared toward being very, very personally intrusive.
(you can really do some research on that one and the harmful effects it has)
so then
we have our little 10 min DVD with speakers I never heard of before. (Brian McLaren, Rob Bell I don’t remember who else)
(who btw, are saying some very unusual things I never heard before),
The DVD is followed by using a book that follows with the DVD.
It’s got comments for us to read and at the end discussion questions
for us to, discuss.
So, this one session, we are using a book called:
‘Beginning in Christ together’
(another clue btw, since no one anymore begins personally with Christ, it’s all a group conversion, city conversion, country conversion mentality-but very unbiblical-they are taking away our personal relationship with God-another aspect for research on evidence of ‘team’ and it’s negative implications)
ok. let me end here and return with part 4 LOL
Nothing illustrates the Biblical doctrine of sanctification more then pastors striving to be exactly like the world in their style and presentation (sarcasm intended). Why do so many feel their “freedom in Christ” is actually free license to imitate the world and boast in themselves (see “teamwork” comment). Whatever happened to true sanctification and the pursuit of humility and holiness?
Okay… if you don’t like Acts29, Driscoll, etc. That’s fine; there’s a lot that some people legitimately don’t like. If you think that Joshua Shank’s rap was immature and out of place. Okay. You can probably make a good argument, especially in matters of decorum.
But… to question his pastoring and rip into the guy…how is that in the spirit of 1 Tim 5:1-2?
And… is what he did really that much different at heart than the humor page on this site? I don’t know the man or his motives, or you or your motives, but to me it seemed like he was just trying to make a point and have a little fun in the process. Is that really that terrible?
Is the microphone on the floor of the SBC annual meeting the “place to have fun”? Think, reason.
I don’t know… I can think of plenty of times I’ve wanted to bust out in song during a business meeting, especially when we were going into the 30th minute of talking about whether or not the church should have doughnuts before Sunday School (sadly, that is a true story).
I wasn’t there, so all I have to go on are video clips.
But from people I know who were there: some thought along your lines, and others said it provided good relief from the tension. I don’t know…
One thing I do know, or at least that I’m sure of in my opinion is that yes there is a time for seriousness and a time for joking, but I don’t think Jesus ever intended for us to be so serious in meetings of business that we can’t enjoy ourselves every now and then.
My thought and reason…
As someone who has actually worked with Josh Shank, I must point out that your negative assessment of him and his pursuit of Christ is totally unfounded and incorrect.
Josh’s church is thriving and he’s reaching a huge number of young people, not because he’s succumbed to a dumbed-down version of the Gospel, but because he and the rest of Youngstown Metro Church have their eyes set firmly on Christ. Is he the stereotype of a Southern Baptist pastor? Goodness, no. And his unconventional character is precisely what makes him an effective minister in Youngstown, Ohio.
Please do a little research before tearing down someone who’s on your side.
Youngstown Metro Church
Who said he ‘dumbed-downed’ the Gospel? No one. Defensive people are prideful.
His church web site (thanks for the link!) shows it to be just another worldly bunch, typified by their “About” page, which says: “Youngstown Metro Church is a community of people who gather to experience real friendships and a real encounter with God. It is a place where a generation often abandoned by family, friends, and the church will feel at home. It’s a place to connect with the one thing that will truly satisfy the human soul. It’s a place for you. We invite you to come, seek, and find the God who is relevant to every generation. Come seeking. Come expecting.”
That ain’t Gospel focused, ain’t Christ focused. Pure worldly with the skin of “Christianity” on it.
Yep!…and Amen. Say it again brother!!!!
And – good grief! – I just looked at PlanetBoxx.com. Shank is nothing but a worldly marketing dude, polluting as many churches as he can.
What about PlantBoxx makes you say that, Manfred?
Rae,
Everything from the look to the phrases screams out “I am of the world! Hip and cool is the message for the church!” No reference to the gospel, no reverence for the Lord. Nothing that would attract a Christian nor repel a reprobate.
Yes, I noticed it too, Manfred. They are marketing people. Marketing alone is not bad but when you try to market God…well, you totally misunderstand who God is.
The problem with many churches is not a lock of marketing, a lack of coolness in the view of youth, nor a lack of looking enough like the world… the problem with many churches is that the Spirit of God is no longer there!!!
Read the Bible young, hip people. God never lacked anything nor will He ever lack anything. We lack God when we fail to honor Him as God.
Josh and his posse are embarrassed, whether they realise it or not.
(Hmm, I guess you can’t nest comments any further than two here.)
Anyway, Manfred — I guess I don’t quite understand your rationale there. I don’t think that PlantBoxx is specifically meant to “repel a reprobate”. Pastor Shank is a skilled designer and is using those skills to serve to church planters. The design style certainly isn’t everyone’s cup of tea, but to call it “worldly” is a pretty big stretch, it seems to me.
I am so happy to see that there are so many like-minded baptist who agree that hip is bad for the Gospel! We need to preserve the SBC meetings from degrading things like rapping that is only found to be humorous by people with facial hair and hip glasses. Worldly Heretics!!!