Currently, I am reading Douglas Wilson’s book 5 Cities that Ruled the World: How Jerusalem, Athens, Rome, London and New York Shaped Global History. Eventually, I will have to do my formal review, but I did not see how I could possibly get everything I need to say about this book into one 200-word post.
Each of these posts will deal with the sections on each of these five cities and will address the topics of context, history and accuracy. Let me preface by saying that this book feels poorly researched. I do not mean that Wilson did not check his biblical references. I do mean that it appears to me that he did not consult much in the way of archaeological or historical information outside of the standard Bible college library (which, sadly, often does not contain any research more recent than the 1960’s).
The premise of the book is great – here are the five most influential cities of the Western world. The problem is that at least in the chapter on Jerusalem, the author continually makes sweeping assumptions, offers wild theories with no proof (or footnotes) and tends to adopt whatever interpretation of the Scriptures fits his theories.
Here is just one example:
In 63 BC, these two descendants of the Hasmonean line asked Rome – in what must have seemed like a good idea at the time to arbitrate the dispute. When the Hasmoneans refused the results of the arbitration, the Roman general Pompey took advantage of the situation and easily took over…Pompey tried to rule through Hasmoneans at first, but that didn’t work too well. In 37 BC, Herod the Great came the throne.
First of all, would it have killed him to mention the ‘two descendants’ by name? Their names were Aristobulus and Hyrcanus by the way.
Second, the Hasmoneans did not refuse the arbitration. Pompey refused to give them an answer, and Aristobulus saw that as a sign that he was going to side with Hyrcanus. He entrenched himself in a fortress, but then chickened out and came running to the Roman summons, willingly handing over Jerusalem. The Jews at Jerusalem, however, refused to allow Pompey in, so he took the city by siege.
Third, Pompey placed Judea under the proconsul of Syria, who divided it into five regions. The Hasmoneans did not have a throne to rule from.
Fourth, Pompey died in 48 BC. He had nothing to do with Herod coming to the throne. Herod bought the throne, was deposed by the Scythians (in favor of Arisobulus’ son Antigonus), and then received the title “King of the Jews” by senatorial proclamation. His advocate in the Senate was none other than Marc Antony.
Needless to say, the chapter is full of these simplifications which play well in the narrative I know Wilson is building but bear only a passing resemblance to the historical record. As another example, his decision to simply consider Darius, Ahaseurus and Artaxerxes as one person would meet with considerable criticism among people who specialize in Persian history. I have studied this time period and the Bible for well over a decade now and consider myself fairly well read in the subject and I have never read such a thing.
And don’t get me started on his narrative about the House of David and the subsequent divided kingdom!
As you can probably tell, I am not particularly pleased with this book thus far. It is the kind of history book I loathe – one with a definite agenda and poor research. The combination of these two things drives me nuts because if writers would just do their diligence, they would see the absurdity of their simplifications.
This morning, we met with the family of Grace Baptist Church in Merrimack. Above is a photo of their auditorium from the platform. Of course, the church is not the space they meet in, but I am posting it because compared to our current space, it looks positively HUGE.
It was a great morning of new experiences and new friends. Ariel warmed right up to her teacher, Mrs. P. Nichole and I played with the worship band (YAH DRUMS!) and I think everyone involved was very pleased with the synergy among us.
Here was Ariel’s favorite part!
Since our current worship space has ABSOLUTELY NO exterior play area, this is a huge plus!
The expectations for the potential merger between Heritage Baptist Church and Grace Baptist Church are high on both sides.
In my experience, people often hope for the best but expect the worst. It is a self-defense mechanism built into the human brain. We want things to work out, but we often do not believe they will. Here are a couple of examples from pop culture:
HIGH HOPE, LOW EXPECTATION AND HIGH FULFILLMENT
My expectations for Batman Begins were pretty low. I hoped that the movie would be good, but my experience with the Spider-man franchise as well as the other well-known superhero movie franchises had disallusioned me. I expected the film to be sub-par, even though it was directed by Chris Nolan and had an all-star cast. When the movie turned out to be awesome, I was very pleased. I saw it three times in the theater.
HIGH HOPE, HIGH EXPECTATIONS, BUT LOW FULFILLMENT
In another situation, my expectations for Hulk (the Ang Lee directed failure from 2003) were very high. I wanted it to be fantastic. In reality, it was pretty terrible. In fact, it was probably the worst big budget superhero movie ever made. Because my expectations were so high, I felt frustrated and even a little annoyed by the film.
HIGH HOPE, HIGH EXPECTATION AND HIGH FULFILLMENT
Here’s another situation: The Lord of the Rings trilogy, particularly Fellowship of the Ring. My expectations were very high for this franchise. I wanted the films to be incredible, and they were.
LOW HOPE, LOW EXPECTATION, BUT HIGH FULFILLMENT
Then, every once in awhile there is a film that you really don’t think will be any good and have no expectations of and it turns out to be excellent. I’ve had this happen to me a lot. Most recently, it was the TV show “Super Hero Squad” but probably the best example of this for me was 17 Again. This film had multiple strikes against it, not the least of which was that it starred Zach Ephron – of High School Musicial trilogy fame. But when I watched the film, it was funny and well-made.
My point is that we have to strike a balance whenever we come to something like the proposed merger. If we get our expectations too high, we can only fail. We need to set realistic expectations. If you are talking about Peter Jackson, the crew and cast of Lord of the Rings, then your expectations should be epic. If you are talking Zach Ephron then your expectations should be minimal.
We want to strike the balance. We do expect God to do something awesome and we hope that this is what will happen. But we cannot expect this merger to fix all of our problems or answer all of our questions. Those expectations are too high and no matter how successful the merged congregation is, you are bound to disappointed.
Here are some realistic expectations:
- God will unite us in the transition as long as his glory is our central theme (and our glory, position or territory is not)
- Leaders and volunteers from both congregations will work together and develop plans that will strengthen ministry all around.
- There will be some confusion and frustration during the transition.
- The transition will be months of hard work and hard conversations.
- All of us will have to change and compromise somewhat.
Some realistic expectations for us. I am sure you can think of more.
Filed under: Heritage & Grace Merger
This is the Fairchild A-10 “Warthog.” Designed in 1972, it remains in service with the United States Air Force. It has one job, and one job only – to utterly destroy anything threatening United States forces on the battlefield.
The Warthog is a battlefield ordinance delivery system. It can loiter over the battlefield for hours over the battlefield. The ailerons (the part that makes a plane roll) are situated at the tips of the wings, allowing the Hog to make tight rolls and turns, giving it unbelievable close combat maneuverability.
At the nose of the Warthog is a massive 30 mm GAU-8/A Avenger Gatling gun. It can unleash depleted-uranium rounds at 3,900 rounds per minute (that’s 65 rounds per second!). It has enough hard point mounts on the wings to carry enough ordinance to destroy pretty much anything it encounters on a modern battlefield.
The pilot sits inside a 900 lb titanium bathtub which is resistant to rounds in excess of 25mm and has shown to be resistant to some rounds in excess of 57mm. The cockpit glass is constructed of diffusion-bonded stretched-acrylic which is bulletproof and can resist 20mm cannon fire.
It mounts two GE TF34-GE-100 Turbofan engines. Each engine produces over 9,000 lbf static thrust. This does not mean much to most of us, so let me translate that. It means the Warthog can operate at standard tolerances with one engine completely blown off.
If you haven’t noticed already, I am a geek when it comes to the Warthog. I LOVE THIS BIRD!
So, what does the Warthog have to do with the Church and merging two congregations? It lies in this fact.
The Warthog is tough, but what makes it REALLY TOUGH is that every system in it is designed with a redundant system right behind it. Some systems even have triple redundancy. You can fly the Hog with one wing, one stabilizer, one engine and half the fuselage blown away. It is one tough bird.
During the first Battle of Baghdad in 2003, then-Captain Kim Campbell was flying ground support missions when her A-10 received extensive damage from ground flack. Damage was significant enough to shut down the hydraulic system that controls her rudder.
Any other aircraft would have been downed and Captain Campbell would have found herself a guest of the Iraqi military. But not the Hog.
Capt. Campbell switched to manual reversion mode, turned the aircraft around and calmly flew the hour back to base.
People have asked whether it is a bad thing that after Grace and Heritage merge, we will have multiple people capable of handling the same tasks. The answer is a resounding and definitive NO!
Redundancy is absolutely essential to survival as a church. When you only have one group of people who can accomplish a task, if something happens to those people, you are in a ‘dead stick’ situation. You’re going in and there is nothing you can do about it.
It is awesome that Grace has musicians, and teachers, and preachers. It is awesome that Heritage has the same. Bringing the congregations together requires that we design our style of ministry around redundancy. We welcome it and we learn to operate with it in place.
Even the diversity of the redundancy is awesome. When Capt. Campbell switched to manual reversion mode, she switched to an entirely different way of handling the aircraft. Neither system was right or wrong, better or worse – they were just different. And the manual reversion system was intentionally discrete from the hydraulic system so it WOULD be different and still accomplish the same goal.
We are not a business.
This is a hard thing for some people to understand when it comes to the church. Unlike most non-profit organizations, we do not operate on business principles.
As hard as published and often highly respected people try to convince you otherwise, businesses exist to pay the salaries of the employees and the bills of the corporation. If you make MORE money, then someone gets paid more or bills get bigger, assets swell. This is the function of business – the core of what it is.
A non-profit may not make a ‘profit’ but it often pays the CEO and board quite handsomely. (Don’t get me started on some of the bogus non-profits out there!)
This is not the church. The church is not a business.
When it comes to thinking about programming and structure, we have to approach it from a specifically and intentionally NON-BUSINESS perspective.
People are not our consumers; they are our fellow human beings. Salvation is not a commodity; it is a necessary gift, a divine blessing. Ministry is not our strategy to ‘get’ more people and preaching is not about ‘appealing’ to people.
And, in our current context, the potential merger of the congregations of Heritage and Grace is not so we can ‘get’ more people or ‘have’ more programs. It is not to guarantee the staff’s salaries or to ensure that we have the most up-to-date equipment and facilities. We are not bringing businesses together because it makes good business sense.
We are not taking two bodies and trying to make them one – that just produces a monster. We are bringing together parts of the same body that have been separated. (Don’t ask me to make an analogy in human experience. I can’t think of one!)
We must approach relationships with this understanding. We must expunge the ideas of ‘us’ and ‘them’ from our vocabulary and our minds. From DAY 1, we are THE CHURCH, OUR CHURCH, WE THE CHURCH. We must work to remove the barriers that say “GBC” and “HBC.” While these names carry a great legacy, they are just labels we human beings have placed on components of Christ’s body.
We are one body already. This is the outgrowth of understanding Christ’s prayer of John 17 as our uniting influence. If we begin thinking this way and make this clear distinction from the business world, we will not expect a business merger but the unification of the Holy Spirit.
How do you go about unifying two congregations into one?
The intensely individualistic local church idea has to be rethought and possibly even rejected in order for it to happen. This product of modernism has bred distrust and disunity in the Church, and it is the biggest obstacle that has to be overcome.
Consider Jesus’ words:
I do not ask for these only, but also for those who will believe in me through their word, that they may all be one, just as you, Father, are in me, and I in you, that they also may be in us, so that the world may believe that you have sent me. [John 17:20-22]
This passage is quoted often, but it needs to be considered here. Jesus makes a blanket statement – those with him (the apostles) would produce later generations of believers (that’s US!) by their word (the New Testament). And he wants us to be not only one with one another but also with those who came before and with Jesus and the Father themselves.
All of this goes back to Jesus’ opening words in this prayer:
Father…glorify your Son that the Son may glorify you, since you have given him authority over all flesh, to give eternal life to all whom you have given him…I have manifested your name to the people whom you gave me out of the world…” [John 17:1-2, 6]
Here are some concepts that need to sit in the forefront of our heads as we work toward uniting Grace Baptist Church and Heritage Baptist Church:
- The church was called out by the Father, given to Jesus – it is appointed by the Father AS CHRIST’S and God does not create disunited things
- The church is called out by Jesus’ manifestation of the Father – it is divinely united
- The church is united in the Apostles’ WORD – the New Testament – not through a congregational identity.
- The church has one message, the Gospel of Jesus Christ – we must continually refine our conversations by this standard.
We simply do not have the privilege of disunity. These are words for the Church, not just within individual congregations. We seek opportunity to be united, not to divide. As two congregations brought together through God’s providence, we have an amazing opportunity to be living testaments of Jesus’ prayer.
Why do people give up on the church so easily? During the lead up to this merger process, I had a number of supportive friends in the ministry who were praying for God to do something awesome between Heritage and Grace. (Mad props to Larry, Rob, Darin, Doug and my dad!) But there were some other friends with whom I did not even broach the subject because I know their opinion of ‘established’ churches.
Here are some faulty assumptions about ‘established’ churches that do nothing but destroy the body of Christ.
Assumption #1 – Established churches have had their day.
The prevailing sentiment seems to be that old churches are like broken down buildings. We scavenge them for members and bits and pieces, but overall they are used up.
I have nothing against church planting. It is a necessary exercise in the kingdom, and we should always be encouraging it. But should we be planting churches at the price of destroying ones we planted a generation or two ago?
Assumption #2 – People in established churches don’t like change.
The reality is that no one really likes too much change. All of us have a change threshold. What I think people in established churches do not like is the way in which change is pursued. Often, new pastors come into a situation or context and want to change things to get a bigger audience or to ‘turn the church around.’
This is often done at the expense of treasured traditions and memories. Pastors are impatient to prove themselves for some reason. I know I was early in our ministry at Heritage. Although I gave lip service to the idea that the Holy Spirit had been present prior to my arrival, I still conformed everything to what I wanted. It took a couple of years to learn how stupid that really was…and trust me, it was really, really stupid.
Assumption #3 – A new church can do things an established church can’t
Granted, not all established churches have the best reputation in their community. I’ve been a part of churches that people still hadn’t forgiven for mistakes made before I was born. But does that mean an established church cannot be as effective as a new church?
I guess it depends on how someone defines effectiveness. I define effectiveness as the involvement of a community of grace and truth (the church) in ministering these things to the larger community. What this looks like for an established church might be different than it looks like for a new one, but that does not make it any less effective.
Meeting the Challenge of a Reborn Congregation
Make no mistake about it, the reborn congregation formed from Heritage and Grace will have its challenges. There will be conflicts and frustrations; but there is so much potential to influence so many people.
What better way to show the 300,000+ people of this south central New Hampshire region that Jesus is alive and well than to be reborn and reinvigorated by the uniting power of the Holy Spirit?
Personally, I think this is going to have an impact that most church planters only dream about having. I’m so excited about seeing these two ‘established’ churches become one ‘established’ church!
Filed under: Church, Heritage & Grace Merger | Tags: Church, church growth, church merger, erik divietro, hooksett, merrimack
Yesterday, both Heritage Baptist Church and Grace Baptist Church announced plans to merge the congregations into one. To say this is an awesome movement of God would be an understatement, and we are all eagerly anticipating what God is going to do through the new congregation. (Of course, this is far from a done deal and we have a challenging road before us.)
Because we will be journeying together toward this merger, we will be posting some thoughts about the merger. Any time two congregations take a faith risk like this, there are a lot of concerns and we want to try to make sure we address these concerns.
We will begin by addressing the BIG questions that we addressed during the meeting at Heritage Baptist Church yesterday:
Is this a takeover?
No. Heritage is not taking over Grace, and Grace is not taking over Heritage. We are privileged to be participants in the birth of a new congregation out of two. This is something new in our experience, and we will be working through all the details.
Is this about money?
It is hard to say that anything in our modern world does not involve money, but this decision is not motivated by money. Heritage’s leadership has actually requested that Grace place their cash reserve in escrow during the transition period (1st and 2nd quarters of 2010) to alleviate fears that the ‘other church’ will spend their money.
Yes, there is a financial aspect to this consolidation. The combined congregation will save the $30,000 per year that Heritage invests in our rented space because Grace Baptist owns their property outright. This substantial savings, combined with Grace’s savings and the expected growth of the congregation will free nearly $50,000 per year to invest in ministry and building funds.
Who will lead the new congregation?
This is an excellent question that needs to be asked. The three elders of Grace Baptist Church will join with Greg Jones and myself to form a joint elder board of five. I will serve as the senior pastor and the vocational pastor. This means I will be responsible for preaching and vision casting, working with these four men of God to lead the new congregation through the transition and into the future.
As the senior pastor, I will be ‘first among equals.’ This means that I will have somewhat limited executive power because of the recognized calling of God on my life; but my position will not be (and should not want to be) the seat of power. All the elders share equal authority with different gifts. Leadership decisions will be made by all of us as elders and not by any one of us individually.
Will we give up our identity?
Both churches will need to yield a certain amount in most areas. This is part of merging. It is necessary. As much as we treasure our own way of doing things, what is not Scripture is up for discussion. Just as a blended family must take the best of both and sometimes compromise to choose an option that works best for both groups, so too the blended church must learn through one another’s values and practices.
Will they accept our ‘quirks’?
Every body has quirks. They are part of who we are. The most important thing to acceptance is learning to explain and not be offended when we do something that is not part of the other’s makeup. In time, we learn to value what others value and we grow together.
How much further will I have to drive?
Since the combined congregation will meet at Grace’s facility, there will be an additional drive for some of us. On average, drives will extend about 6 miles. At an average speed of 45MPH, that’s an additional 8-10 minutes of driving. For those living to the east, the increase will be greater. To conserve gasoline and promote fellowship, consider car pooling from time to time.
Filed under: Church
All of you have been waiting patiently! This morning, Heritage made the BIG REVEAL! Here is what we’ve been working on.
Heritage Baptist Church and Grace Baptist Church of Merrimack are going to be working toward a merger of the congregations!
Grace and Heritage have a shared vision, values and beliefs. And God has orchestrated some amazing stuff to get us to this point, and to say Heritage is excited about it would be an understatement!
This will be an amazing combination, and we are looking forward to moving forward in the process with our brothers and sisters at Grace Baptist Church.
Download the Merger Brochure for more information.
Filed under: Book Reviews, History, Reading | Tags: Book Reviews, Guinness, Stephen Mansfield
I am not a huge fan of Guinness. As I get older, I have warmed to it but it is not my favorite beer. (In case you’re wondering, that distinction goes to Sam Adams’ White Ale.) Perhaps it is because I’m not Irish. But I have always held Guinness in the highest regard because of its storied past. I knew it was old, but I had no idea how old until I had the opportunity to read and review The Search for God and Guinness: A Biography of the Beer that Changed the World by Stephen Mansfield.
Interestingly enough, this book is not really a biography of the beer but rather the brewers. It tells the story of the Guinness family, from Arthur Guinness who founded the brewery in 1759 to Arthur Francis Benjamin who resigned from the chairmanship in 1986. It follows the family and their namesake brewery over 250 years of challenges and successes.
The fascinating part of the story is the spiritual and social journey of the Guinness family who, despite being created peers and being unbelievably wealthy, remained focus on the needs of their workers. Mansfield makes the point that “righteous wealth” can do more for the betterment of society than government mandates can.
One of the best history books I’ve read in recent months, God and Guinness really looked at the journey of hope that is the Guinness’ family history. It shows how Guinness itself became a symbol of Irish pride and Guinness the company became symbols of generous charity, patient hope, and just plain good business. Their vision was never limited to a profit and because of that, the world was better for having them.
Mansfield’s style is upfront and direct. He presents the facts while offering some marginal thoughts along the way. Overall, it was an excellent presentation of business, moderation and vision.
For your reading pleasure, I offer sixteen unbelievable but true things I learned about Guinness:
- The Guinness Book of World Records came about because of an argument between Sir Hugh Guinness and a friend during a hunting trip in 1951.
- Sir Alec Guinness is probably NOT related to the Guinness family. He was born illegitimate but his father was probably Andrew Geddes. The Guinness part of his name is probably a typo.
- Guinness is ‘officially’ a dark ruby, and not black as most people assume.
- The trademark thick foam head is the result of the presence of nitrogen. This is why one should drink Guinness from a glass and not the can or bottle.
- Arthur Guinness, the founder of the brewery, leased the original premises at St. James Gate in Dublin for a term of 9,000 years! The brewery may need to locate in the year 10,759…
- Before British forces hit Europe in 1939 (to be later be beaten back by the Germans) every soldier received a pint of Guinness. The Red Cross actually sent volunteers to the brewery to help get the vast number of pints out on time!
- Henry Grattan Guinness, a descendant of Arthur Guinness, was a contemporary evangelist who was on par with D. L. Moody and Charles Spurgeon. His son married J. Hudson Taylor’s daughter.
- Guinness did ABSOLUTELY no advertising for the first 167 years of the companies existence. It nonetheless monopolized the Irish market and became a world-wide brand.
- Guinness (and all other beers) reduced their alcohol content during the 1890’s to comply with a British Law.
- Guinness’ advertising in the mid-1900’s was so effective that their posters were made "real life" for the first commercial television broadcast in Great Britain.
- In the late 1800’s, Guinness went everywhere the British or Irish did. A traveler in the 1890’s actually found Guinness for sale in the Himalayas (at the outrageous price of 8 shillings a pint!)
- A privately held company until 1886, when Guinness made a public offering of stock, people snapped up the stock certificates in minutes. This was before modern stock exchanges and their automation.
- Today, nearly ten million glasses of Guinness are consumed daily, nearly 2 billion pints a year!
- Rupert Guinness, who received 5 million pounds as a wedding gift from his father Edward Guinness, moved into a slum with his wife and used the money to improve the community.
- Arthur Guinness, the company’s founder, also founded Ireland’s first Sunday School.
- In 2003, a researcher for the University of Wisconsin concluded that a pint of Guinness a day actually bolsters heart health and is infinitely better for you than the caffeine in coffee or the high fructose corn syrup in soda.
And now you know…
