» Meet Phil

6 Responses to “Meet Phil” »»

1. mm
   Comment by mm | 07/16/05 at 2:39 pm

   I read the blog. But what struck me about it is what’s the difference between that and a business? So many areas. So many ‘successful’ people. No need for Jesus!

2. Steve
   Comment by Steve | 07/17/05 at 8:16 am

   Ouch! Don’t think I could come to such a blanket assessment of someone else’s life and ministry. I think there’s a lot more to Phil and his ministry than you assume. Yes, “success” for throws up its challenges. Hope to deal with some of them in future posts.

3. Brett
   Comment by Brett | 07/21/05 at 2:16 pm

   Wondering what link you see between Phil’s approach and pomo?
   To me the approach seems typical of the ‘life centre’ type churches, albeit more successful and hip than most. It also looks v modern with the all the organisation, hitech and thoroughly attractional approach.
   Granted, Phil is probably unusual among his peers for having a blog, but what I’ve seen of it reveals far less about himself than most blogs by christians.
   Perhaps he’s asking some questions others aren’t prepared to. But so far he seems to have come up with similar answers?

4. Steve
   Comment by Steve | 07/21/05 at 4:31 pm

   I wouldn’t say that I know Phil well. Have yet to visit his church. I threw him out as an example of how the grandchildren of classic Pentecostalism continue to adapt to a changing world.

   I agree with Allan Anderson who said, ““Pentecostalism has shown itself both flexible and resilient enough to be at home with both modernity and its elusive successor, post-modernity.” http://www.steveaddison.net/2005/07/18/pentecostalism-must-face-the-challenge-of-it%e2%80%99s-own-success.html

   Not quite sure how good organization, hi tech and big events are necessarily the wrong approach for everyone in the post modern world. The Forge Summit was all those things. I know healthy, incarnational, missional churches that appear to the outsider as “attractional” and are written off. The problem is they are doing a great job of making and growing disciples amongst postmoderns. They are also planting churches that are doing the same.

   It’s going to take all sorts of churches to reach all sorts of people. Big and small; Emergent and Pentecostal; Contemporary and Traditional; House church and Megachurch; First World and Majority World; Modern and PostModern and PostPostModern!

   Out of this wonderful mix God is gathering his people. That’s why I like Phil.

5. Brett
   Comment by Brett | 07/22/05 at 9:10 am

   From what I’ve seen of him, I don’t mind Phil either, and I wasn’t saying he was doing anything ‘wrong.’ Just wondering what was particularly pomo about his approach, compared with other v large churches?

   It also seems to me that when it comes to these supersize churches, their denominational label or history fades well into the background, at least for the experience of the new comer. Churches like Phil’s seem to reflect (usually US) influences like Willowcreek more than pentecostalism. When I’ve gone to a more typical pentecostal church of 50-100 people the difference is enormous.

6. Steve
   Comment by Steve | 07/22/05 at 10:10 am

   Good insight. They are not classic Pentecostal churches. But they aren’t just a Willowcreek clones either. Maybe “Contemporary Pentecostal” is a good description. The challenge is to keep revisting their heritage while they innovate. Pentecostals have a good track record of doing that. But as I tried to outline in recent posts, the trend over time is for dynamic movements to tame their spirituality to lower the tension with the surrounding culture. Eventually that creates the space for new movements to emerge.

   What the emerging church can learn from the rise of Pentecostalism is that only a passionate, high demand, white hot faith can launch a movement that sustains. This was true for the early Church, Monasticism, the Reformation, the radical Reformation, the Wesleyan revivals etc. As Christian Schwarz once told me, “Spirituality is not enought. It’s got to be Passionate Spirituality.”

   That means taking the authority of the Word and the power of the Holy Spirit seriously. Restructuring and innovative methods are not enough by themselves.

Leave a Reply »»

Name

Email

Website

• Comment Preview