Conference on Innovation, Day Two

5 October 2009 | Ryan Bell

| 26

This is part 2 in a series of reports from the National Conference on Innovation in Columbus, Ohio. Click here to read part 1 by Rachel Davies.
-----

I am in Columbus, Ohio, this week for the 5th Annual National Conference on Innovation. I have only missed one of these conferences and each has been inspirational while opening different streams of learning and innovation to participants. Every year I have listened to speakers who I've never heard before. This year has been no exception.

But before I get into who spoke today and what I enjoyed and was challenged by, I should also say that the main reason I come to the Innovation Conference year by year is to see and spend time with the other participants. In many cases this is the only chance I have to connect with other pastors, professors and church administrators in the North American Division. Each year this event, more than any other, brings together the brightest minds and most creative practitioners in the Adventists Church. This fellowship and conversation is the best thing about the Innovation Conference, in my opinion.

Today was a long day filled with rich presentations by three distinctly different presenters.

In the morning we heard two presentations by popular author and speaker, Margaret Feinberg. Her first presentation - "Church & Culture, Style & Substance" - challenged listeners to think about how fast culture is changing and how ill prepared the church is to minister in a changing world.

Two illustrations of this point stood out to me. First, she asked who in the group owned old vinyl records. Besides a few eager hands, very few owned records. Eight-track tapes? One person. Cassette tapes? Again, very few. CDs? Now most everyone raised their hands. But then, Margaret pointed out how fast CDs are becoming obselete. How many have iPods? Again, quite a few. She then talked about a few individuals and groups, including Madonna and Radiohead, who have taken matters into their own hands. She said, "Record labels can't adapt fast enough, so musicians have decided to distribute their music in creative ways that often bypass the major record labels." Interesting.

She also pointed out the trend toward personalization. Everything from M&Ms to Wheaties cereal to sneakers can now be personalized. She used this observation to say that people now want to be involved in their consumer choices and aren't content to just buy what is on offer. They want to customize their purchases.

Later in the morning she gave her second presentation, entitled, "Backstage Pass: A Toolbox of Ideas." In this talk she showcased a dozen or so churches who were doing very creative things to reach a younger generation. The stories were engaging and coupled with her earlier presentation, you could see how these churches were attempting to grapple with the rapidly changing culture around them. In the end, however, I was left feeling like the emphasis was on style over substance and as a result there wasn't must emphasis given to how these church were being called by gospel to confront and and challenge the brokenness and systemic evil in our culture.

After lunch there was a significant shift of gears as we welcomed David Neff, vice president of Christianity Today International, editor-in-chief of Christianity Today magazine and former Seventh-day Adventist pastor. David spoke about "The Ancient-Future Church." In many ways his presentation was everything Margaret's wasn't. Margaret's presentation was fluid and conversational. David read a paper. Margaret's spoke of the new things churches were doing to adapt to a changing culture. David emphasized the importance of church history and narrative theology. Margaret talked about branding and marketing as an important part of a church's communication with the culture. David said that ecclesiology has become captive the individualism created in part by management theory and marketing methods.

I personally resonated much more with David's presentation, though I deeply appreciated much of what Margaret was saying as well. David's lecture ran much deeper, tapping into the ancient practices of the church as a well of wisdom for the church of the future. In my opinion, David got to the root issues while Margaret tended to describe surface level traits. As I talked to the people in the room, however, my sense was that both presentations were helpful in different ways. I was reminded that the church has always been and will always be very diverse, both in theology and methodology of ministry.

Finally, this evening, we heard from the very engaging Suzy Welch, author of the new book 10-10-10. She spoke very candidly about her own faith, life as a business commentator and journalist, remarking frequently about how liberating it felt to be able to speak about her faith in a friendly environment. She told us about how she developed her 10-10-10 concept, applying it first to her own life, then gradually sharing it with close friend and family and finally sharing it with the whole world. Put simply, 10-10-10 is a decision making tool that asks a person to think about how a potential decision will be perceived in 10 minutes, 10 months and 10 years.

As an added bonus, Dave Weigley, president of the Columbia Union Conference, made a spur of the moment decision to buy Suzy's new book for every person in the room. As a result we each went home with a signed copy of 10-10-10. You can learn more about Suzy Welch, her new book and the 10-10-10 principle here.

The diversity of speakers - from a young, popular evangelical author and speaker, to the somewhat older, more academic editor, to the high-powered business commentator, made for an inspiring, if exhausting day. Tomorrow we will hear from my friend and roommate during this conference, Samir Selmanovic. Samir is the founder of Faith House Manhattan and author of the recently release book, It's Really All About God: Reflections of a Muslim, Athiest, Jewish Christian.

glennspring - Tue, 10/06/2009 - 07:14

Sounds a like a great community to be involved with. You pastors have all the fun.

glennspring - Tue, 10/06/2009 - 08:59

The first two presenters you described help to illustrate what I think is a healthy and necessary tension in the church, that of simultaneously reaching back to the past while being open to change. But both ends of the spectrum are really about how organizations and communities learn. We are always learning about our past as well as the present and future. And that is probably something that divides traditional ways of doing church with more emergent ideas. The latter seems to me is genuinely interested in learning and challenging itself, the former not so much. There's a risk with the "learning" outlook in that what it is grounded on will sometimes seem elusive. What will help keep the innovators and emergents grounded, however, is a steady connection to the Christian church's roots and the Bible's narrative theology, which traditional Adventism has tended to downplay or be largely ignorant of.

Hansen - Tue, 10/06/2009 - 08:24

The ICOC owned a nightclub in Hollywood for the exclusive use of their members and guests. It was within walking distance of the SDA church. They also held gospel meetings in old movie theatres which were attended by hundreds of members and interested people.

If the ICOC had taken over the Hollywood SDA church, it would have been filled every weekend with hundreds of vibrant young people, eager to deepen their relationship with Christ. Nearly all would have been new members or those interested in becoming members. There was no old guard to spoil the experience of the new believers. Frankly, a significant % of the attendees would have been the very kind of young people who are leaving Adventism or not interested in it--WASPS.

While pastoring the Hollywood SDA church is convenient for those whose primary interest is attending Fuller, I wonder how many people who pass through there really have a burden for the lost souls that live in and visit Hollywood.

Ryan Bell - Tue, 10/06/2009 - 08:51

Hansen, you have a knack for being offensive, I'll give you that. My main question is what is the ICOC?

Zane - Tue, 10/06/2009 - 09:00

I believe Hansen is referring to the "International Churches of Christ."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Churches_of_Christ

They are a controversial group that focuses on "evangelism" through "discipleship."

The reasoning of the movement goes something like this: Christian=disciple=making more disciples.

Therefore, if you don't make disciples ("evangelize"), you are not a disciple, hence not a Christian.

Needless to say, the groups, for a short time experienced lots of growth, mainly by convincing Christians from other traditions that they are not really Christians.

They have come under fire for their aggressive discipleship methods that remind many people of the mind-control practices of cults and sects.

In short, Ryan, its a good thing you don't belong to the ICOC.

Hansen, I'm going to second Ryan in describing your comments as offensive. I don't see how they are related to the report given in this post, and why you feel the need to attack the ministry of Hollywood SDA Church, and then attempt to malign Ryan personally.

Totally uncalled for.

Rachel Davies - Tue, 10/06/2009 - 13:56

Thanks Ryan!

Hansen - Wed, 10/07/2009 - 01:54

Wikipedia article on the ICOC? LOL. Try atending for a couple of years and experiencing the power of Bible based preaching transforming the lives of new believers. If someone really wanted a description of the ICOC, I would refer them to the magnificent spiritual creatures that moved about in the early chapters of Ezekiel.

Unfortunate thing how people get off on the wrong foot in "religion". I met some novices at Fuller who were death on the ICOC. Of course, none had attended. They relied on things like Wikipedia articles to form their views.

Of course, since I had attended, and had many friends among their members, they were somewhat embarrassed to be criticizing a Christian movement about which they had no first hand knowledge, once that inconvenient fact was pointed out.

I said something that offended an SDA pastor? That's a good thing, right? I mean, most of the SDA pastors I know hate the justification theology of the Reformation, which is what I expect to ultimately save me. You know, the imputed righteousness which justifies me through Christ's shed blood, apart from the works of any and all laws. That blood and righteousness merits the life changing spirit of God in my life and secures my place in heaven.

So people who are offended by things like that, should I be sorry?

I once spoke in an SDA church (if you can believe that). Admittedly, some people in the congregation wanted to shout me down from the pulpit, once I warmed to my message. It was a fairly simple message. I referred to the passages in Daniel (SDA home turf) which describe the king of the North pitching his tent in the beautiful land. At the time I understood the passage to refer to the conquest of Adventism by Rome. I ticked off numerous evidences which I felt sustained my position. While perhaps not the intent of the writer, it made a nice homiletical device.

Although the pastor smiled and had me home for dinner, I was surprised at what a deft backstabber he was. He went about hoping to destroy my reputation, which didn't amount to much, anyway. I looked him up and asked him why he was so angry and had taken such steps against me. "What did I do wrong?" I asked. "You told the truth," he said.

Offended? Ryan, lucky for him, is not acountable to me. He likes to attend meetings, which apparently is something many SDA pastors like to do. There are more constructive ways for salaried clergymen, the ones interested in soulwinning, to spend their time.

Zane - Wed, 10/07/2009 - 04:37

Hi Hansen,

Let's cut the rhetoric and generalizations, okay?

For the record, my comments about ICOC comes from personal experience, when I encountered them in Atlanta as a college student and also with later conversations with a campus ministry colleague (from the United Church of Christ, i.e. the denomination ICOC broke away from).

I attended their worship services through the invitation of a friend, and also had a series of Bible studies with their leaders, one of them a former Seventh-day Adventists.

You mention your love for the doctrine of justification; this is precisely what is at the heart of my contention with the ICOC. They muddy the water between justification, discipleship, evangelism; it's all one thing. My "salvation" ultimately hinges on my ability to follow Jesus (in the way the ICOC defines this, by making more converts.)

There were extensive conversations between ICOC leaders when Kip McCean broke off and the leaders of the United Church of Christ, and this was the issue--where to place "discipleship" in the theological scheme of things. Does it belong under the category of soteriology (salvation)? Kip thought it did; the leaders thought this was legalism.

So, the leaders of ICOC, as well-intentioned as they were/are, made two fundamental theological mistakes. They:

1. misunderstood justification as being the same thing as discipleship.

2. misunderstood discipleship being the same thing as evangelization.

By they way, instead of attacking the Wikipedia entry, please point out what parts of the entry you disagree with/have problems with; I found it highly informative and to be congruent with what I know of the movement and my interactions with its members. While Wikipedia is not the best place to get all information, it's a good starting point for discussions, especially when people do not know what you are talking about.

Hansen - Wed, 10/07/2009 - 05:59

While I was not comfortable joining them, I saw a lot of lives being changed through the message and discipling program in the church. The impression that they made on me over a period of a couple of years was a positive one.

The leaders of the ICOC understood that young people today need some radical discipline. Many of the people who joined the church realized that as well.

I saw quality young people educated in the best universities joining the ICOC. They welcomed the structure the church provided. They started Christian homes based on principles of Christian chastity.

While some people may want to examine the theological or ecclesiological issues, the bottom line was that Kip wanted a church comprised of "sold out" disciples.

He was not going to get that in a dying church full of Laodicean type people.

I was totally blessed by my association with the ICOC. For a young person interested in building a Christian home, the structure of the church offered a great opportunity to do that.

There are personality disordered people associated with every church. Someone here said that the term "humiliation" or "degradation" best characterized her experience as an Adventist. Would you agree?

I've had great experiences with different churches. I worked in an RC monastery over the course of a year. It was an excellent experience, enriching in numerous ways. I had a great time with the ICOC. In my youth, I was blessed by my association with a Mormom family. I've had some very positive experiences with Adventists.

If Kip was allowed to take over the Hollywood SDA church, I can almost guarantee that the church would be filled every week with hundreds of vibrant young people.

Someone who likes to attend meetings ought to take a few meetings with Kip or some of his co-leaders to understand how to evangelize young people today in the USA.

Joselito Coo - Wed, 10/07/2009 - 07:43

Ryan writes: "Each year this event, more than any other, brings together the brightest minds and most creative practitioners in the Adventists Church."

Just wondering if that is not an overstatement. Besides Ryan, who else came from the Southern and Southeastern California Conferences and are attending the Innovation meetings in OH? As far as I can tell, the most number of pastors with earned post-graduate degrees, such as those with PhD's or DMin's together with those who are well on their way to acquiring their terminal degrees, seem to reside near where I live.

Ryan Bell - Wed, 10/07/2009 - 12:39

I thought this was more or less a newsy kind of report. Who knew it would be such a controversial post. My comment about "best and brightest" was intended as a rhetorical flourish and my general impression of being impressed with the caliber of people in attendance, not a slur on the intelligence of the hundreds of smart, highly educated pastors who did not attend. My humble apologies for giving the wrong impression.

Hansen - Thu, 10/08/2009 - 02:27

Since I know little about Ryan or the present state of the Hollywood church, perhaps a little history would be of interest.

I had friends and acquaintances in the Hollywood area for many years. A couple of my friends owned an art and antique gallery on Melrose Avenue, the 8400 block. I lived with them in a small town outside of Hollywood. Coincidentally, the pastor of the Hollywood SDA church lived not far from where we lived.

I was relatively new in the church in those days. I expected that the Hollywood SDA church would be one of the best things going. After all, it was the remnant church, situated in one of the most well known cities in the world.

There was a vibrant street life. People flocked from all over the world to Hollywood. I spent hours on the streets of Hollywood, talking to people about Christ and giving them SDA literature.

I went to the pastor's house one Friday evening for a Sabbath vespers. I was excited to know that an SDA pastor lived so close. It would be very convenient for him to meet my friends and share Christ with them.

Unfortunately, the pastor's idea of "fun" was a game like musical chairs. I was appalled, to say the least.

My friends were trying to have a painting of Christ baptising the Ethiopian eunnuch authenticated as a recovered Rembrandt. They had already made a trip to Europe for that purpose. Another of their pieces, a sculpture by Hiram Powers, was on loan to the L.A County Art Museum. I could go on. The gallery wasn't called Museum Treasures without reason.

How could I take my friends to the SDA church, when the pastor himself indulged in such activities? Musical chairs? I was nowhere close to my friends in terms of worldly wisdom or sophistication, yet I found the idea of church fellowship unappealing.

Of course my own witness as a Christian failed to change the life course of my friends. In many respects, it didn't need changing.

Hansen - Thu, 10/08/2009 - 02:29

Eunuch

Scott Arany - Thu, 10/08/2009 - 19:55

Who knows if this will actually aid in constructive conversation or not, but I do feel compelled to stand up here for my home congregation, which is the Hollywood Adventist Church, and for Ryan Bell, who is my good friend.

For what it's worth, we *are* filled with many vibrant young adult Christians. In the past few years we've doubled in attendance and committed membership, and the largest area of growth has been amongst young adults. Many of them are Adventist. Many of them are not Adventist.

The congregation is deeply concerned with living the incarnational truth of Christ's salvation in Hollywood. We're intimately involved with the city's rhythms, laments, and victories.

This is one of the most vital, creative, innovative, and committed congregations that I've been honored to serve. I'm an elder on the church board, and the pastoral intern for worship and the arts, so I admit that I'm somewhat--justifiably--biased.

Hansen, please ask us how we're doing before you begin criticising. Everything that you've said would happen if the ICOC took over our church… well, it's happening anyways. Your negative presumptions about Ryan's ministry as an Adventist pastor, and our congregation's life and identity, do damage to the positive things you have to say about your own growth and positive experience within the ICOC. I do appreciate hearing about your experience with the church; we can only benefit from learning more about our stories and Christ's work, past and present. Thanks for sharing your story, I hope you take some time to learn ours.

Hansen - Thu, 10/08/2009 - 21:26

Scott, I have seen young pastors, and not so young, in various churches whose primary interest did not appear to be self sacrificing service but rather the advancement of their own careers.

I see the posts of Ryan here. He impresses me as a pastor who attends a lot of meetings away from his home church. It is difficult for me to understand how anyone can be involved with people in a soulwinning relationship yet often be absent. I'm involved in Bible readings. Once the continuity is broken, it's difficult getting things back on track.

When a person constantly is telling about the meetings he attends, meetings that are primarily attended by brilliant, innovative, creative leaders, it sounds self serving. Obviously other people are interested. I'm not.

Suppose Adventist Kinship hosted a beauty contest and then selected the most handsome and muscular men to take up the offerings at their Kampmeeting. I informed you of this and then said I was among those who took up the offering, what am I doing? Self serving, feeding my own narcissism, and so forth,right?

That's what I get from Ryan's posts.

I had a friend who was in the end stages of AIDS. He and his partner had been professional dancers who toured with rock groups. His mother was a blond haired, blue eyed Mexican.

At that time, the ICOC was holding Sunday services in the Wiltern Theater. Talk about awesome. They had put together a gospel band from among their own members. The music they played was incredible. It was followed by a Biblically based(?) message. Fellowship followed. I was telling them about the church one day, just talking. Suddenly he said, "I want to go to that church." Of course, his Mother would go with him. I was just telling them what I had experienced. They wanted to experience it too.

David Hamstra - Fri, 10/09/2009 - 07:38

Hansen:

A word of advice: I have never seen criticism of a pastor's ministry based on anything other than first hand experience affect the critic's reputation positively.

But I'm only 29 so take it or leave it.

David Hamstra
apokalupto

David Hamstra
Memory, Meaning & Faith

Deb Thompson - Fri, 10/09/2009 - 08:02

Adventists have great need for ministers who can approach and embrace human diversity and still stay centered on their task. Each churched area is unique and it would seem to me to be a good thing for a pastor to reach for tools to improve outreach/inreach in his or her particular area of influence. The negative comments here puzzle me. If you've never been in the Hollywood area you might not realize how many different mindsets there are. It would seem to me that Pastor Bell is simply being wise in gathering information for touching as many lives as possible. Just because someone is called to ministry, it doesn't mean they shouldn't enhance their career skills. Just my three cents' worth from a little north of Hollywood.

Joselito Coo - Fri, 10/09/2009 - 08:08

I've been worshipping almost every week with the Thai Church that meets in a chapel in the Hollywood Church since November of last year. I have heard only what people who used to come to the main sanctuary have volunteered to tell me without my prompting them.

One question for Scott: Has anyone kept any record of the Sabbath morning attendance each week in the Hollywood SDA, at least from the time you joined its fellowship?

Hollywood SDA Church, IMO, would make a good case study.

Scott Arany - Fri, 10/09/2009 - 09:38

@Joselito, Yes, one of our elders has been counting attendance every Sabbath. I also try to keep track of how many bulletins were used or left over, which gives another estimate of that Sabbath's attendance. Each year we work out a chart of our numeric growth.

And I agree with you, I think we'd make a fascinating study. For better or for worse this church is unlike any other I've ever attended.

Sounds like you're getting to hear all sorts of fascinating things from different people. It's good to be a listener.

Joselito Coo - Fri, 10/09/2009 - 10:59

Scott,

Since joining them last year, I've counted about 16 to 20 who regularly fellowship each week with the Thai group. On special occasions, we may sometimes reach a total attendance of about 30, including guests who come from the Thai SDA church in Redlands.
http://www.hollywoodsda.org/city/thai-ministry/

Following up on the chief complaint, no matter how seemingly insignificant, is essential to the practice of my vocation. While forming my initial impression, needless to say, I try my best to distinguish the subjective from the objective data I have collected. That said, I personally would not easily dismiss Hansen's observation no matter the distance that separates him from the fellowship of Hollywood Church at present.

Hansen - Fri, 10/09/2009 - 14:09

David, this may be difficult for you to grasp. There are people whose primary or even peripheral concern is not establishing, preserving, or enhancing, their "reputation."

Rich Hannon - Fri, 10/09/2009 - 14:45

But Hansen, why comment unless you hope to contribute to the collective readership gaining some additional insight, being persuaded, etc? And to do that you need credibility. David's comment to you was that when you make judgments about a pastor's ministry from such a distance that you are unacquainted with the 'facts on the ground', then it harms your credibility. This has nothing to do with someone wanting to be 'establishing, preserving, or enhancing, their "reputation."' - per se. It is about being taken seriously by your readers.

Zach - Fri, 10/09/2009 - 16:57

Knowledge puffs up but love builds up. - a guy named Paul

Hansen - Sat, 10/10/2009 - 22:40

One significant way in which Luther differed from EGW was in his approach to Scripture. Luther was an expositor, an exegete. In his discussion of Genesis 15:6, he dwells upon the word impute, emphasizing its importance to the doctrine of justification by faith:

"As for the verb חָשַׁב, I do not object very much whether you take it to mean either “to impute” or as "“to think”; for the result remains the same. When the Divine Majesty thinks about me that I am righteous, that my sins have been forgiven, that I am free from eternal death, and when I gratefully grasp this thought of God about me in faith, then I am truly righteous, not through my works but through faith, with which I grasp the divine thought.

"For God’s thought is infallible truth. Therefore when I grasp it with a firm thought—not with an uncertain and wavering opinion—I am righteous."

Luther, M. (1999, c1961). Vol. 3: Luther's works, vol. 3 : Lectures on Genesis: Chapters 15-20 (J. J. Pelikan, H. C. Oswald & H. T. Lehmann, Ed.). Luther's Works (Ge 15:7). Saint Louis: Concordia Publishing House.

There is nothing close to this in Patriarch and Prophets. Why? Luther correctly observes that the passage in Genesis 15:6 is one of the most important in all Scripture. He wants to remeove himself, lest he obscure the significance of the passage. He points to Paul's interpretation of the passage in Romans 4.

Strange, that EGW, who railed against legalism, appears to have done much to promote it among Adventists. She passed up great opportunities to explicate the gospel in its OT setting. Luther, on the other hand, was on the texts like a lion on his prey, setting forth the justifying merits of Christs righteousness and the roll of faith in securing them.

I hope that another bio will seriously consider her roll in interpreting Scripture.

Hansen - Sat, 10/10/2009 - 22:47

Oops, wrong thread.

Hansen7 - Wed, 10/14/2009 - 22:56

Deleted