Do you remember the playground game Red Rover? You know, where school kids stand in two lines facing each other and take turns yelling out, "Red Rover, Red Rover, send Suzy right over!" Then little Suzy would have to leave her line and run as fast and hard as she could to break through the other line of kids holding hands. If successful, she would take one member from the other team back with her to her line. If unsuccessful, Suzy had to remain in the opposing team's line and then another child would be called to come over.

The game has seemed to lose some steam in the last few years. Maybe it's due to the development of "cooler" games. Perhaps it's due to the number of kids with neck injuries from nearly being strangled trying to break through. Whatever the case, it seems for the most part that Red Rover has gone to the playground cemetery along with King of the Hill. We'll have to hope for a resurrection.

It has occurred to me that we often to adopt a kind of Red Rover Strategy in church planting and pastoring. Like Paul in Acts 16, we hear the call, "Come over and help us!" and we react with a violent attempt to just break through the line. We have a dream in our heart to plant or pastor a church and we become so consumed with this vision that we barrel right into a new town looking for the weakest link in the chain before ever getting an honest and clear picture of the people that live there. We start plowing into a community with strategy, plans, and really great books written by "cool" church planters and pastors without ever considering the group of people into which we're being sent. And before we know it, we find ourselves strangled, trying to break into a community that is not ready or able to receive the church we have planned.

So, let me say this; before planting or pastoring a church, it's vital that we have a vision of the people to whom God has sent us. This was the crucial step that happened in Acts 16.

Paul and his companions are setting out to minister to people and they're running up against barriers along the way. The Bible says, "Paul and his companions traveled throughout the region of Phrygia and Galatia having been kept by the Holy Spirit from preaching the word in the province of Asia. When they came to Mysia, they tried to enter Bithynia, but the Spirit of Jesus would not allow them to. So they passed by Mysia, went down to Troas. During the night Paul had a vision of a man of Macedonia standing and begging him, come over to Macedonia and help us!" The "Come over and help us" ends with a little dative case pronoun: "us." And, it matters.

Here was Paul, sure of where he wanted to go, never stopping for directions, but being stopped at every turn. Until he received God's vision for ministry. And in the vision, he met a person, the man from Macedonia. We can learn a clear lesson from this story. Do not go plant or pastor a church if all you have is a vision for a particular kind of church, or because you think a particular city is "cool." You can only plant or pastor a church when you have a vision for the people. Part of being missional is to recognize that we are to go into a culture, engage the people of that culture, and plant a Biblically faithful church for those people, all the while acknowledging that culture matters in the way we do ministry. In many ways, the how of church ministry is determined by the who, when, and where of culture.

So, when we "come over," it's important to remember that we are going into our own community, not someone else's. It's so easy to hear an incredible speaker at a conference and say, "I'm going to be just like that pastor!" That is not the right goal, nor is it what God is calling you to be. Too often, we get so excited by someone else's church that we get a vision for their church before we get a vision for our people.

My challenge is, don't plant or pastor a church in your head. Plant or pastor a church in your community. When you are there, that's when the Gospel transforms real people who are living real lives. When we are in love with someone else's community, we fall prey to community lust and demographic envy. We begin thinking, "If I could just be in this part of California, or this part of Seattle, or this part of Manhattan... then, my church would be incredible." Know and live in your culture, not someone else's. Don't just bring a model, bring the Gospel. Create a church. Don't create a plan.

Most importantly, we must bring Christ, not just a church, particularly a way of doing church. Sometimes, I think we get too excited about the fact that we're leading a church. That's great, as long as we remember that we're planting the Gospel that creates a church, not a church that's known for being the best church or the most trendy or the most relevant. We're planting the Gospel and so we bring Christ and not just the church. Being missional has to be tied into the mission of Jesus, which is to seek and save the lost.

Unlike the in the game Red Rover, we win when we get to stay with our new "team" and begin leading it in a new direction. Planters and pastors must first take the time to listen to the Spirit, responding appropriately His call to the particular people He assigns to us. Then, we can best respond to the call to "Come over" and win them for the kingdom of God.

"Kids these days."

The Barna Group has released a new study that explores the how different generations of American adults view and use the Bible. And guess what - it turns out perspectives are different!

Barna groups those surveyed into four generations, broken down as follows: the Mosaic generation refers to adults who are currently ages 18 to 25; Busters are those ages 26 to 44; Boomers are 45 to 63; and Elders are 64-plus.

Not everything is wildly different between these generations. In fact "a majority of each of the four generations believes that the Bible is a sacred or holy book." Shocking. Ok, not really. But another commonality is that "millions within each of the generations report reading the pages of Scripture in the last week." That is more interesting to me.

Similar proportions of the generations embrace the most conservative and most liberal views. For instance, the "highest" view of the Bible - that it is "the actual word of God and should be taken literally, word for word" - is embraced by one-quarter of Mosaics (27%), Busters (27%), and Boomers (23%), and one-third of Elders (34%). The extreme view on the other end - that the Bible is not inspired by God - is embraced by proportions that are also statistically close to one another, including Mosaics (25%), Busters (19%), Boomers (22%), and Elders (22%).

Of course there are significant differences between the generations and their perspectives on Scripture. The Barna Group summarizes that the younger generations show the following changes in thought as it relates to the Bible:

Less Sacred - While most Americans of all ages identify the Bible as sacred, the drop-off among the youngest adults is striking: 9 out of 10 Boomers and Elders described the Bible as sacred, which compares to 8 out of 10 Busters (81%) and just 2 out of 3 Mosaics (67%).

Less Accurate - Young adults are significantly less likely than older adults to strongly agree that the Bible is totally accurate in all of the principles it teaches. Just 30% of Mosaics and 39% of Busters firmly embraced this view, compared with 46% of Boomers and 58% of Elders.

More Universalism - Among Mosaics, a majority (56%) believes the Bible teaches the same spiritual truths as other sacred texts, which compares with 4 out of 10 Busters and Boomers, and one-third of Elders.

Skepticism of Origins - Another generational difference is that young adults are more likely to express skepticism about the original manuscripts of the Bible than is true of older adults.

Less Engagement - While many young adults are active users of the Bible, the pattern shows a clear generational drop-off - the younger the person, the less likely then are to read the Bible. In particular, Busters and Mosaics are less likely than average to have spent time alone in the last week praying and reading the Bible for at least 15 minutes. Interestingly, none of the four generations were particularly likely to say they aspired to read the Bible more as a means of improving their spiritual lives.

Bible Appetite - Despite the generational decline in many Bible metrics, one departure from the typical pattern is the fact that younger adults, especially Mosaics (19%), express a slightly above-average interest in gaining additional Bible knowledge. This compares with 12% of Boomers and 9% of Elders.

Go and read the report at Barna.com, and then head back here to talk about it. What does this shift in perception mean for the church? On the one hand we want to affirm that "the Spirit of God bearing witness by and with the Scriptures in the heart of man, is alone able fully to persuade it that they are the very Word of God," but what will our part be in showing the younger generations, particularly the unchurched, the nature, value and use of Scripture? What is your church doing to help younger generations develop a healthy, biblical view of Scripture?

While 31 million people were watching Michael Jackson's memorial service at the Staples Center in Los Angeles on July 7th, I joined a few hundred people at Life Point Church in Smyrna, TN for the funeral of 17-year-old Gabe Brewer, the son of Chris Brewer, my friend of many years. Chris and his friend Tim Miles helped me write my first book. Chris and I have traveled to Romania to teach church planting. And, I know how much Chris and Judy loved Gabe.

Many have shared their thoughts on the passing of a pop culture icon, and the spectacle that was his very public memorial service. I don't want to rehash what others have said so well about our culture's habit of deifying and worshiping men whose talents and gifts should point us to the giver of all good things, but I was so struck by these two different services I am compelled to talk about it.

Michael Jackson was one of the most famous men of his lifetime, selling over 300 million records, earning hundreds of millions of dollars, and was inducted in the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame-- twice. And if you're over 30 and under 70 you owned the Thriller album. Don't lie, you know you did. Everyone had it.

Gabe Brewer was entering his senior year at Lancaster Christian Academy. He loved the Lord and his family. He was a leader among his peers, a good student, and played football and soccer. Chris told some wonderful stories in our time together and at the funeral. Gabe's faith and passion were clear.

Only one of these men was famous before men, but both were precious to God and stood before Jesus when they died. And, I saw both services the same day.

Against the advice of many, Chris preached his own son's funeral. I am glad he did.

He called men and women to faith in Christ... and then asked them to come forward to counselors waiting at the front. The song they sang was "Give Me Jesus," which was the song that they sang together a few days before as Gabe left this earth and came into the loving arms of Jesus.

Listen to the words. You can see Chris at the front inviting people to Christ, Gabe's picture is on the screen, and the people responding are at the front. I originally made this short and grainy video to send to Chris later on, but he encouraged me to post it here so that others might be blessed by Gabe's life and his faith.

Gabe Brewer Funeral Clip from Ed Stetzer on Vimeo.

Millions tuned in to watch Jackson's memorial service where the King of Pop was remembered, and his work was lifted up. Everyone looked back, and it seemed there was nothing to look forward to. The golden casket seemed, at least to me, a sad reminder that not even a Pharaoh could take wealth into eternity.

A few hundred gathered at Gabe Brewer's funeral where the young man was remembered. But while we all looked back at the life Gabe lived, Chris also called us to look back to the One who gave his life that we might find ours; to Him who was raised from the dead victorious over death. And he called everyone there to look forward-- to the rest of our lives and called everyone there to repent of their sins and trust in Jesus Christ.

Gabe didn't have a golden casket, but he is walking on streets of gold.

This was quite the contrast.

Thanks, Gabe, for your life. Thanks Chris for your witness. And, I pray for Chris and Judy in their pain and loss.

I remember the day I watched my teenage sister die of cancer. There are few things as painful. And, contrary to all the platitudes of well-meaning Christians, there are often few answers this side of eternity. But, I know this: Gabe, and his parents, are in the love and care of a loving Father.

I believe that those who have a real concern for communicating the gospel to the people God has sent them to will find great value in research that explores and exposes cultural and religious trends. So, of course, I want to share a few things with you that are worth noting.

The ARDA Archives have been updated
I've blogged about The Association of Religion Data Archives before (some great stuff there). Well, the website has recently been updated with several new improvements and features.

ARDA's GIS Maps now have an improved interface that is much easier to use. It provides one-button access to a report for the displayed error and changing areas is as easy as enter a zip code and clicking a button. Try it out at here.

Our U.S. Congregational Membership feature now includes advanced reports. View membership reports for any selection of counties, metro areas or states that you want! Our advanced state reports provide quick links for maps of census divisions. Try it out here.

ARDA's National Profiles have been updated. The Adherents page for each country and region has been updated to include agnostics. The Socio-Economic page includes education measures such as the adult literacy rate and gross enrollment rate.

Check out the Census 2000 Foreign-Born Population Map Series by Selected Countries of Birth

These state level maps show percent distributions and some detailed socio-economic characteristics from Census 2000 for the foreign-born population in the United States and Puerto Rico for selected countries of birth, such as Mexico, China, the Philippines, India and El Salvador. Comparative maps for the native and total foreign-born populations are also provided. The socioeconomic characteristics include poverty rate, public assistance income, labor force participation rate, language ability and year of entry for noncitizens. Internet address. (Check it out)

Getting Current: Recent Demographic Trends in Metropolitan America
The Brookings Institution has released some helpful stats in their March 2009 report on recent demographic trends across the United States. It's a 28 page report that breaks down trends concerning migration, immigration, aging, educational attainment, and poverty in the United States. The report reveals:

Migration across states and metro areas has slowed considerably in the past two years due to the housing crisis and looming recession.

Racial and ethnic minorities are driving the nation's population growth and increasing diversity among its younger residents.

The next decade promises massive growth of the senior population, especially in suburbs unaccustomed to housing older people.

Even before the onset of the current recession, poverty rose during the 2000s, and spread rapidly to suburban locations.

There's a lot more. Download the report here (PDF)

According to Gallup and the Coexist Foundation Americans are more likely than Europeans to be classified as "integrated," meaning that respondents seek to know more about and learn from other religions. The integrated believe that most faiths make a valuable cultural contribution, respect differing perspectives and feel that they are respected themselves.

According to the study 33% of Americans are integrated, with only 20% of British, and 13% of German participants fall into the this category. It also reveals that 35% of British and 38% German respondents are considered "isolated." Those considered isolated tend to not be associated with a particular faith group and are not interested in learning about other religions. Only 15% of Americans are "isolated." In between these groups are the "Tolerant" who have a live-and-let-live attitude toward people of other faiths, and believe in mutual respect. This group makes up the biggest percentage for all groups surveyed.

There is much more to the study that is worth discussing (so go and check it out here), but do the numbers surprise you? What does this mean for the church? What challenges and/or opportunities does this reality create for us in America?

Lifeway Research recently conducted a phone survey of over 1,000 randomly selected Protestant pastors concerning global warming. The question was not just whether or not global warming is happening, but if it is happening and is the result of anthropogenic greenhouse gases.

Participants were asked to indicate their level of agreement with the statement, "I believe global warming is real and man-made," and it turns out that Protestant pastors are split right down the middle. 47% agree (either strongly or somewhat), and 47% disagree (either strongly or somewhat). But the study is also interesting in that it shows that these views tend to settle in particular denominations, locations and ideologies.

Here's some of the breakdown...

75 percent of pastors in mainline denominations agree global warming is real and man-made, but only 32 percent of pastors in evangelical denominations agree. Pastors in rural areas are less convinced than large-city pastors. Forty-three percent of rural pastors and 55 percent of large-city pastors agree. Pastors in the Eastern and Western United States are more persuaded, 60 percent and 53 percent respectively, than pastors in the South (45 percent) and Midwest (40 percent).

When the pastors' personal beliefs are factored in, the differences grow even more pronounced. Among pastors who consider their political ideology liberal or very liberal, 93 percent agree that global warming is real and man-made, and 79 percent of self-perceived moderates agree. Among those who identify themselves as conservative or very conservative politically, however, agreement is only 37 percent and 16 percent respectively.

Go and read the entire article here, and the PowerPoint presentation of the data is available here.

And what about my readers? How would you answer the question, "I believe global warming is real and man-made."

Since I did not want to post "on top" of this "Convergent Church" interview, I posted a clarification below from Rick Warren's people below. Click here to read that and only comment on that issue in the Rick Warren post.

Mark Liederbach and Alvin L. Reid wrote the book, The Convergent Church: Missional Worshipers in an Emerging Culture. I had a chance to talk to them a bit about the book and why you all might want to read it.

What prompted the writing of the book?

Alvin: Mark and I had talked for some time about writing a book together that would bring together ethics (Mark's field) and evangelism (Alvin's) in a way that is rarely seen. As we witnessed the rise of the Emerging/Emergent movement and as we observed the waning influence of the evangelical church, we began to talk about writing a book that was even more, a book that looked at faith and culture in our time in a manner that would not only discuss relevant issues, but also offer suggestions for change.

Mark: While this book interacts with the emergent church, I think for both of us it is much bigger than that one issue. We are concerned that as culture on the whole embraces the ideas of post-modernity (or what David Wells call "hyper-modernity") the Church must be careful to do three things:

1) Know where we are and how we got here,

2) Re-invigorate our commitment to foundational faith and doctrinal certainty,

3) Layout sound strategies to live in culture as missional worshippers

This book is our attempt to serve the Church by writing on these very things.

What do you mean by convergence?

Mark: It is so important for us evangelicals to not be afraid to listen to our critics. We do so many things well... but not everything. Like it or not, there are areas that conventional Christians have failed methodologically and where we are also failing to listen and learn. Thus, when we say "convergence" we are hoping to give an honest listen to folks in the emerging church movement who seem to be very aware of some very important ways the "conventional" church has failed to recognize we are living in a new era of thought and cultural norms. At the same time, while listening we also want to be careful not to simply capitulate to new ideas without first testing them by the standard of God's word and historical orthodoxy. Thus, convergence means an attempt to take the best critiques of the emergent movement while rigorously seeking to stay true to the doctrinal purity that the conventional evangelical church fought so hard to maintain.

Alvin: Simply put we mean bringing together the best of two things that may not be exactly alike for the greater good. Mark and I had such a convergence in writing the book. I grew up in the south and have pretty much always been a Southern Baptist. Mark grew up a self-proclaimed "theological mutt," and only recently has become committed to the SBC. I am not a Calvinist and Mark is; I teach evangelism, Mark ethics; and in all these things we have attained a personal convergence that we think can happen in the evangelical world and in our tradition.

What do you mean by "conventional" and "emerging?"

Alvin: I will let Mark answer this one.

Mark: While it would be wrong to categorize the Emerging Church Movement (ECM) as one large, monolithic entity, in our book we lay out what we believe to be six aspects or traits that serve as core values of the ECM. These include a commitment to being missional in methodology, wholistic in ministry emphasis (practice not just doctrine), culturally and contextually relevant. Crucially, this group will describe themselves as post-evangelical in the sense of "outgrowing" evangelical ideas of the past. This does not not necessarily abandoning them, but being willing to move beyond.

In light of these core elements we also identify (following Ed Stetzer's lead) four different "streams" or divisions appearing within the emerging church movement: relevants are those who are doctrinally conservative but methodologically innovative; reconstructionists who are seeking ecclesiological change; revisionists who are willing to surrender key elements of historic orthodoxy in order to achieve relevance; and a group we call roamers because while they are disenchanted with the conventional way of doing things, they are uncertain of where to go forward and often merely drop out of local churches and attempt to go it alone.

Is this even possible? Can we attain a convergence today?

Alvin: We believe it not only possible but essential. You can see this in the SBC today. There is a growing tension between holding on to our conventions, our heritage, and at the same time a growing number who argue that if we do not see a genuine, deep, biblical, great commission resurgence our convention will slide more and more into decline. While we did not write the book with that in mind, we think it can add much to discussions in our own tradition.

Mark: I can only wholeheartedly agree with Alvin. Too often we evangelicals find ourselves years behind the cultural shifts and thus we miss out on great opportunities to be in the midst of the messiness of life where only the name of Jesus can bring healing and hope. Emergents seem to have the vision of where culture is going, conventionals have the hope of truth and biblical fidelity. Lets figure out how to take the best of both so that we can be about the mission of God for the glory of God in the most effective manner possible!

How does this relate to converging evangelism with social ministry?

Mark: There seems to be a rather unhealthy fear among evangelical leaders that as soon as someone wants to engage social justice issues they will also surrender historical orthodoxy to do so. No question there is historical precedence for such a fear in light of the "social gospel movement" of the early 20th century. But the greater and richer history of the people of God is that throughout the previous 2000 years it has consistently been the people of God wh were not afraid to stand up for social justice issues that have also been some of the most effective witnesses to the Gospel of Jesus Christ. One need only think of Annie Armstrong or William Wilberforce to understand this. In our chapter on this issue, however, we expressly emphasize that it is via a intentional direct VERBAL proclamation of the gospel message that social justice ministries reach their most effective level. It is a both/and strategy and methodology.

How does this translate into effective church ministry?

Alvin: our attitude is one can add without subtracting. We do not argue for abolishing current methods of evangelism, but reshaping our perspective and changing the culture of our churches to be less institutional and more missional. We offer eight points of convergent evangelism:

Mark: Likewise, discipleship and mentoring moves out of the classroom and into the lives of men and women who we must seek to train up into mature and ministering worshippers of God. This is not to say Sunday school and curriculum based training is a thing of the past - far from it. When combined with life on life accountability, interfacing with lost people in real life settings and commitment to authentic community we see significant change in the quality of life, discipleship and ministry of the people of God.

Mark and/or Alvin will be on the blog today to answer your questions, so jump in the comments and let's talk. Also, I wrote the book's foreword and will post that later this week.

The blog has been on "content overload" as of late, so perhaps a lighter topic might be helpful. If you follow on Twitter, you know I like to take the kids to movies. But, I am also particular about what I take my daughters (ages 4, 6, and 10) to see. Since I am now officially on vacation, I am quite certain we will be checking out some movies.

Obviously, one of the dominant forms of art and entertainment in our culture is film. We've got it all these days when you go to the mulit-plex: "Popcorn flicks," independent film, "Rom' Com's," drama, "bio-pics," summer blockbusters, the never ending stream of re-makes (or re-imagining for those trying to feel better about it), and of course we have the man who is a genre unto himself - Michael Bay. In the last few years we've also seen a growing number of "Christian films" of varying degrees of quality getting theatrical releases.

With movies playing such a large roll in American culture Christians always have something to say about the film industry and the new releases that hit the big screen every weekend. It seems like much of it is complaining. Some of that is valid, but sometimes I think we should take ourselves to task.

If you have children, it is your job to check out the film before you to to the movie.

Maybe you took your kids to see Michael Bay's Transformers without knowing the content. Well, you knew it wouldn't be an Oscar nominated film - it's a Michael Bay movie, after all.

But giant robots fighting it out on the big screen? Robots that can change into suped up Cameros? Robots that had cartoon series and toys you were into as a kid? You expected something exciting and fun. You didn't expect it would have some of the more coarse parts.

You can take issue with those choices by the filmmaker, but you took your kids to see it without knowing what you were walking into - and you should have. You could have.

We recently were going to take the kids to see "Marley and Me." Seemed like a happy film about a cute couple with a fun loving dog. Well... you might want to check out the review before you go (we did and decided it was not for our kids).

Let me just encourage everyone to be responsible participants in the culture, thoughtful movie-goers, and involved parents. If you take your kids to see a movie without doing your homework on the content of the film, and then find the film objectionable, don't yell at the industry or film makers before you sit yourself down for a serious talking to. You dropped the ball. It's easier than ever to find out what's in a move before you drop $60 on tickets and snacks for the family.

No, you can't rely on the ratings system (it's broken), nor the trailer (they're trying to sell you tickets!), but you can get the low-down on the themes of the movie, language used, sexual content, violence, and of course reviews on the quality and value of the film as well all before you cross the velvet rope. Here are a few helpful resources for the thoughtful movie goer.

Plugged In Online
Kids in Mind
Screen it
Rotten Tomatoes (not a Christian site, but compiles reviews and gives an overall "fresh" or "rotten" rating-- and you don't want to go to bad movies just because they are "clean" movies, right?)

Are there other resources you use in checking out a film before you go to see it? Share in the comments below.

A couple of updates:

If you want to dialogue about the story on Anderson Cooper's CNN blog, click here.

LifeWay News has posted the story with downloadable graphs here.

In this morning's USAToday, you will find Cathy Lynn Grossman's article pointing out the growing numbers of people in need looking to the church for help as we continue through this economic crisis. She includes research that Lifeway Research recently completed. Cathy brings out a few important details and provides some helpful examples.

As you know, I often try to highlight religious research data. There has been much data on mainline denominational leadership as of late. Last week, it was the Mainline Protestant Clergy Survey. Now, it is the Pew Forum.

The Pew Forum is sharing some research that shows most mainline Protestants say society should accept homosexuality. Perhaps this is not "new news," but the strength of opinion is surprising, at least to me.

Donna and I are in North Georgia today.

We are here for a few reasons. First, we are taking a little time off today. Then, I have some meetings at the North American Mission Board tomorrow. Finally, we are staying over for a conference on Monday called ChurchPlanters.Com. (It's a great conference so check out the web page if you are in the area-- more about that on Saturday.)

My meetings at NAMB revolve around some recent research.
Obviously, I believe in research. It doesn't hold out the hope for fallen humanity, but I believe that research is valuable to the church as we seek to communicate the gospel, plant churches with strategic precision, and lead congregations that are effective in their God called tasks.

In case you missed it in Outreach Magazine, here's my article from the most recent issue and it's on that oh-so-popular subject of "culture." If you are not a subscriber, well, why not? Grin.

Here is the article. Feel free to comment below.

Kary Oberbrunner, self-described "Recovering Pharisee," is the Pastor of Discipleship and Leadership Development at Grace Church in Powell, Ohio. He is also the founder of Redeem the Day Ministries and author Called and The Journey Toward Relevance. His most recent book, The Fine Line: Re-envisioning the Gap between Christ and Culture, aims at helping the church figure out what it means to live in the world, while not being "of it." While many in the church are talking past one another on the issue of cultural relevance Kary's book should prove to be a helpful addition to the conversation-- if people will listen.

I had the chance to read The Fine Line when I wrote an endorsement for it. It is a good read and worth your time. We asked Kary a few questions as part of his blog tour. Kary will be around to interact so please take a look and share your questions.

I did an interview this morning with a national secular magazine about the efficacy of "door-to-door outreach" and will link to the story as soon as it's available. Much of what I shared came from some research we did at the Center for Missional Research on whether or not door-to-door is an effective tool.

Here is what we published last year:

Every Saturday morning at First Church, dedicated church members meet to do something both their parents and grandparents did before them--door-to-door visitation. They visit people in the neighborhood who might be new church prospects with the hope they'll begin personal relationships with Christ either that morning or the next Sunday at church. Recently there has been a growing debate among those assembling for outreach as to how to approach their task. Some on the team want to share the gospel with every person they come in contact with--or they believe they're putting the person's eternal destiny at risk. Others suggest that the team should simply invite people to hear their biblically faithful, gospel-preaching pastor tell them about Jesus during his Sunday message.

Who's right?

We (the North American Mission Board's Center for Missional Research) decided to find out. By partnering with a polling firm1 to ask 1,200 random Americans we discovered that the answer just might be--"both."

When you knock on a stranger's door, more people are open to a church invitation than a gospel presentation--but a significant minority are open to both. According to the survey, Americans are far more open to people coming to their door with that simple invitation than trying to tell them how to get into heaven (53 to 35%). The only exception to this trend is among African Americans, nearly half of whom are okay with someone coming to their door with an evangelistic message--15 percent more than any other ethnic group surveyed.

These stats tell an important story--many people are open to an invitation to your church and some are open to hearing about heaven. Even 40 percent of the most unchurched are open to an invitation to your church, which is something that the whole church can do-- something that's much less scary for the typical believer and takes less training. It is helpful to know that many people are open to a church event invitation where, perhaps, they can hear the gospel in an understandable way. Imagine how many more houses your church group could visit if every person could be convinced to make one visit and one simple invitation.

Many people, including me, were surprised that the negative reaction was not more pronounced. But, the numbers are here and, surprisingly, more people are open than we think--particularly if they are approached in a respectful manner.

This survey also contradicts the long-held belief that young people would outright reject church groups coming to their door. In fact, despite being known as one of the most difficult to reach demographics in the country, people between the ages of 25 to 34 were virtually just as likely as their next elders (ages 35 to 54) and considerably more likely than the 70+ crowd to appreciate someone coming to the door and inviting them to church.

As you'll see in the chart below, it's only those on the low and high ends of the age spectrum that will generally shun a door-to-door invitation to church more often than not.

Ideological and socio-economic factors also play a part in how open people are to door- to-door church invitations. More than two-thirds of those who call themselves conservative would likely listen to your church invitation, should you come to the door. But churches in "blue states" should take note--only a little more than half of self-described liberals would do so.

In fact, as you put together different components of the research, you begin to see a clear picture of the type of community where door-to-door church invitations could be most successful. If you were picking such a place, you'd probably settle on a poor to working class community that's ideologically conservative with a high number of Protestants. All three of these demographic groups recorded higher than average openness to church invitations through the door-to-door method--all were above 60 percent. Conversely, it's not as well received in a liberal, well-to-do or middle class, non-Protestant community.

Yet any good news about door-to-door church invitations can only be limited as we look at the study. The fact remains the unchurched are far less interested in being invited to church by someone they don't know knocking on their door. Only 39 percent of those surveyed who attend church rarely, on holidays, or never would be okay with someone coming to their door and inviting them to church, according to the survey. The numbers are consistently worse when asked about "counseling" for "heaven," or what we would call personal witnessing. In other words, the very people we say we want to get into our churches the most are the people least likely to be impacted by one of our favorite outreach strategies.

Now more than ever, we need to look toward new methods to get the unchurched into our churches. Some people will be reached through door-to-door methods. Others will not. While more than half of Americans would listen cordially as a stranger at their door invited them to church, more than 60 percent of the unchurched might tune us out before the invitation left our mouths. Now, the cross is always a stumbling block, but we also want to be sure that our methods are less so.

The message of the gospel is too important to be spread through just one strategy--and if God leads you and your church to a certain strategy, you should use it. Door-to-door methods can be and are used to reach people. At my own church plant, we went door-to- door passing out flyers and free popcorn to invite people to our preview service. This method can still be an important part of our evangelism strategies, but our study shows that not everyone is open to such an approach. Let us ask God to show us additional ways to reach the unchurched--through relationships, service, ministry, and invitations to visit. Remember, God wants to see the unchurched connected to a family of faith even more than we do.

I have attached a PowerPoint presentation covering the same data. You can download it below.

"But how?"

That's a good question. Living missionally is a biblical and exciting theory, but it doesn't matter if we can't answer the practical question concerning how to actually do it. There are a lot of answers to that question, and we examine some of them in Session 5 of Sent. In that session, we take a look at Paul's example of cultural engagement when he walked into Athens, the pre-eminent city of learning and philosophy in his day. Rather than avoiding the Athenian culture, Paul actually found a way to use it as a bridge to walk his hearers to the gospel.

We can put ourselves in a position to talk about the gospel through an understanding of culture. Paul didn't ask the people to come to him; he went where they were. He listened. He examined. He learned. Then he spoke. We can do the same thing.

It's called cultural engagement. But not in the surface-level, doing-what's-hip-so-people-will-like-us variety that we sometimes see played out. It's being relevant in the look-at-what's-happening-at-the-core-of-who-people-are-variety. It's loving people as they are but then showing them a better way.

In Athens the culture of the day was one of debate. That may not necessarily be the best mode of conversation in your circles. But maybe a helpful approach is to look deeper at the themes of films as a way of entering into talks about what seems to be driving or motivating humanity today--and then having conversations about a new way of life. Maybe it's time to read books of substance so that you might have conversations of substance. Maybe you need to go to the places where real people live real (and sometimes messy) lives and have honest conversations. Regardless of the method, it's about meeting people where they are and then giving them the choice to go further.

Wander through your own Athens. Look at the cultural idols. Let this burden your mind and spark your imagination. Let godly passion drive you to say "Give me Athens or I die." Then confidently share the gospel with those who may see its uncluttered message, trust its validity, and receive its Savior--Jesus Christ. You don't have to make the gospel, God, or the Bible relevant. They're already relevant. But we need to find relevant means to communicate that eternal truth.

You can find more information about Sent here.

While we survey on a lot of serious topics here at LifeWay Research, we thought we would mix it up a little with a question touching on a topic that comes up during Halloween (or, as we call it around my office, Reformation Day). The topic: "haunted houses."

The belief that such places exist seems to be widespread (just watch the cable shows to catch the ghosts therein). Many churches have seen this as an opportunity, planning their own "house," calling it (subtly) "Hell house."

It is very interesting to me that people are still quite superstitious and regularly report a high level of belief in things such as haunted houses. (Of course, secular people would consider me superstitious for being an evangelical.)

On to the research...

As part of another project, we surveyed 1580 Americans with the following question: "I would be willing to spend the night in a house that was widely reported to be haunted." We were interested in the fear level that people have towards the "haunted," much like there are tribes throughout the two-thirds world who fear a hex or a curse.

Overall, 44 percent agreed they would be willing to spend the night. However, a remarkable high 47 percent disagreed. In other words, almost half of the random Americans we surveyed would be unwilling.

A few interesting results standout:

54% of males either somewhat or strongly agreed they would be willing to spend the night while only 34% of females agreed.

Interestingly, the age group most agreeable to spending the night in a "haunted house" -- those age 65 or older with 51% indicating they would do so. The age group least likely to do so was the 25-34 year olds with only 38 percent agreeing with the statement.

African Americans (72 percent) and Hispanics (53 percent) were disagreeable to the idea with 38% of Caucasians indicating they would not be interested in spending the night.

Region of the country seemed significant in that those in the south were significantly less likely than those in other region to "agree":

-South - 39 %
-Midwest - 46 %
-Northeast - 47 %
-West - 49 %

Marital status, education level, and income did not seem to influence a person's response to the question. But age, gender, culture and region all appear important when answering this question. Feel free to share your theories in the comments.

It is remarkable to me that so many are afraid. Perhaps we are more like the hex-fearing tribe in the two-thirds world than we like to admit. Anthropologists tell us that superstition is a universal trait and (like religion) it is found in almost every culture.

OK, since it's Halloween here is a polling question for my blog readers (with a small twist on the question): If you knew a house in your neighborhood was widely reported to be haunted, would you be willing to spend the night there? Post your votes (yes/no) and your comments on why or why not in the comments section. And, how would you deal with its reputation as a believer in your community? Is there a way to help people who believe in the supernatural (but respond in fear) to instead know the one who conquers fear, death, hell, and the grave? How do we (or can we) move from superstition to meaningful conversation?

[If you are interested in more (serious) research on church and culture, check out LifeWay Research's subscription email newsletter at www.lifewayresearch.com/insights. It is a twice monthly email with first release research with practical ministry application tips. Today's email introduces data and analysis on what Americans said when asked if they agreed with the following statement: I believe it is possible to communicate with someone after they are dead.]

Disclaimer: LifeWay Research, Ed Stetzer, the trustees of LifeWay, Thom Rainer, Johnny Hunt, and other people walking by the building today in no way endorse, promote, or believe in Halloween, haunted houses, and other things associated with this holiday that churches call everything but the H-word. Also, no animals were harmed in the writing of this blog post. And, it was made with recycled electrons.

What do you think of when you hear the word "world?" What's your response, or reaction? A cursory reading of the New Testament can make it seem like John can't even make up his mind on the subject of "the world." In John 3:16 he wrote: "For God so loved the world..." But then in 1 John 2 he wrote: "Do not love the world or the things that belong to the world. If anyone loves the world, love for the Father is not in Him."

In Session 4 of Sent, we discuss the difference between the people of the world and the fallen system of ideas that work in rebellion to God. In that sense, we are to both love and hate (Prov. 8:13) the world. Part of what that means is living in the world but not being of the world. But many Christians have responded in fear to being of the world, so much so that they've completely isolated themselves from anything in the world. That's not how we are supposed to live and it denies the missional nature of the church. We point it out like this in Sent:

The Bible specifically tells us to live with 'worldly' people. That's exactly what Jesus always got in trouble for--hanging out with drunkards, sinners, prostitutes (you know, the 'bad' ones). Paul emphasized the same point to the church at Corinth. The church had become confused based on some things the apostle had taught earlier. In response, the church began to disassociate with the world around them. But Paul wanted them to understand the solution to their problems--and they had lots of them--was not withdrawal from the world:

I wrote to you in a letter not to associate with sexually immoral people--by no means referring to this world's immoral people, or to the greedy and swindlers, or to idolaters; otherwise you would have to leave the world. But not I am writing you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother who is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or a reviler, a drunkard or a swindler. Do not even eat with such a person (1 Corinthians 5:9-11).

Two things become clear from Paul's words. First, he has absolutely no intention to separate Christians from non-Christians. The concept was laughable to him because it would negate the whole reason Christians live in the world. The second thing is that there is an incredibly high standard for someone who claims the name of Christ. If such a person forgets where his or her loyalty lies and adopts the manners and customs of another country, then Paul says not to give them the privilege of 'dual citizenship.' They have to choose.

The church today is still missing the mark on both of these implications, though. To begin with, our lives as Christ-followers often look no different from the system of the world. Too often, the divorce rate is the same in the church and outside. There's the same addiction to pornography. There's the same greed and materialism. There's the same focus on ourselves and our comfort.

On the other hand, we may not participate in the world's systems, but instead insulate ourselves in a self-made Christian bubble, a life constructed so that we we live out our days without ever even bumping into someone who doesn't believe or live as we do.

As the sent church of God we must love the people in the world with the love of Christ expressed in words and deeds, while hating the broken and sinful systems of the world that war against the Kingdom of God. It turns out John wasn't confused at all, but the church often times is.

Find out more about Sent here.

The Scripps Howard News Service published a story with the title, "Is sex outside of marriage a sin?" (The title may change in local papers.) Terry Mattingly interviewed me for the story a few days ago (after the Pew research was posted).

You can read the full story here.

Some excerpts:

It's becoming more and more dangerous for preachers to use the words "sex" and "sin" in the same sentence...

"We have to recognize that our historic positions on sexual issues are becoming incredibly distasteful to more people in this culture and especially to our media and popular culture," said Ed Stetzer, director of the Southern Baptist Convention's LifeWay Research team.

"The whole 'Hate the sin, love the sinner' thing -- people are not getting that anymore. People do not believe that we mean that."

Right now, the gay-marriage issue is making headlines. But for millions of traditional believers in Christianity, Judaism, Islam and many other faiths, this issue is linked to a question rooted in religious doctrine, not modern politics. In a spring LifeWay survey, researchers asked: "Do you believe homosexual behavior is a sin?"

The results showed a culture torn in half, with 48 percent of American adults saying that homosexual acts are sinful and 45 percent disagreeing.

Considering the margin for error, this is a virtual tie...

These numbers are evidence of great change in the religious and moral views of many Americans, yet they also point toward familiar tensions between traditionalists and progressives. The Pew Forum survey, for example, again demonstrated a reality seen in recent elections. Americans who frequently attend worship services and say that religion is very important in their lives continue to take more conservative stands on hot moral issues in public life.

What about people outside the pews? That is where another set of statistics will prove especially distressing to clergy who sincerely want to defend what Stetzer called the ancient "one man, one woman, one lifetime" doctrine of marriage.

In the LifeWay survey, 32 percent of American adults said that their decision to visit or join a congregation would be "negatively affected" if it taught that homosexual behavior is a sin. That number rose to 49 percent among the "unchurched," those who rarely or never attend worship.

The issue of homosexuality does not, of course, stand alone, said Stetzer. It's getting harder for religious leaders to maintain consistent teachings about other acts and conditions that traditional forms of religion have, for centuries, considered a sin. This affects preaching on premarital sex, divorce, cohabitation and adultery.

"Ultimately, the modern church has failed to proclaim and explain a biblical ethic of sexuality," he said. "We also need to admit that the church has failed to live out the ethic that it's claiming to be advocating. If we are going to say that we stand for the sanctity of marriage, then we -- in our churches and in our homes -- are going to have to live out the sanctity of marriage."

LifeWay Research (LWR) recently released research on the issue of homosexuality. I will share it in two parts. This is the first and we released it in early June. The second part was released in Indianapolis on Tuesday-- that will be part of a forthcoming post.

Lifeway recently conducted a survey that focused on Americans' view of homosexuality. The results present our churches with a serious cultural challenge. "A telephone survey of 1,201 American adults, conducted in April 2008, revealed that 48 percent of all Americans believe homosexual behavior is sinful, while 45 percent believe it is not sinful, almost a statistical tie when considering the margin of error." The country seems to divided on the issue, but the result is an impact on who may be unwilling to give you and your church a hearing.

"Thirty-two percent of Americans - almost one in three - said their decision to visit or join a church would be negatively affected if that congregation taught homosexual behavior is sinful." This means that about a third of the people we are seeking to share the gospel may be unwilling to give our message a chance based on our theological convictions. The challenge will be to demonstrate both compassion and truth; to love unconditionally while pointing to the life transformation that God offers to all who believe. This requires a robust theology, and a compassionate heart.

Check out the article from Lifeway and be prepared to engage this issue in your city with love for the lost that compels you to speak and practice the truth for their good and God's glory.

The cultural trajectory is toward greater acceptance of homosexuality. Recent books like unChristian, They Like Jesus but not the Church, and my own forthcoming Lost and Found: The Younger Unchurched and Churches that Reach Them have all pointed to this challenge among younger generations. Simply put, the younger you are, the more accepting you are of homosexuality.

It is an important issue and Christians will need to walk a difficult line-- to speak the truth, but also to do so in love.

A recent study by Lifeway Research demonstrates the differing perspectives on current events and hot button issues between Joe Public and Southern Baptist pastors. From global warming, to physician-assisted suicide, to embryonic stem-cell research church leaders are seeing things differently than average American.

Be sure to check out a summary of the study and the presentation. The research also shows who our pastors are likely to vote for in the upcoming presidential election. Can you guess?