« We Don't Need Any More Chuches - Part 3 | Main | BUILDINGS »

Comments

Paul R

Roy, found your blog a week or two ago after the STBC article. nice blog. we are transitioning to the missional concept (very slowly). reading Driscoll's Radical Reformation and McNeal's Present future. your critique here of "missional" is good -- i've wondered this as well. I'll link to this.

sean


My thoughts exactly.
Keep up the good blogging.
-Sean
__________________
www.SeanDietrich.com
"All my music is free."

Snoopdon

While we do have a desire to see them saved, I think that when we have "no strings attached" it is a recognition that our ultimate responsibility is to love them while it is God's responsibility to save them. When we love them like Jesus and our talk about church and Jesus is not propped by ulterior (sp?) motives (which have overwhelmed and drowned out many) it will happpen in God's time that we can share more specifically after we have earned that right in a person's life. That right for some comes from a long term consistent relationship built on trust. As a result of that trust, a friendship will be the same whether or not the other person sees eye to eye with us about Jesus. A lot of times Christians come with all guns blasting before a true friendship is formed. Just because you care about a person in that way, it does not have to be labelled an "agenda." But, it could and should come up sometime naturally because of who you are. That is my thoughts for today.

The Bishop

My thoughts exactly, bro. The supernatural product of our love for people should be their well-being. And, in this case, their eternal well-being. What better way to love someone than to help them live forever?

The comments to this entry are closed.