Barnett Photography

A photograph is like the recipe - a memory the finished dish.  ~Carrie Latet

My wife and I have begun a small business over the last few months. Barnett Photography has been building itself slowly through a little work here and there. I'm really proud of what we've accomplished lately and I feel like it's getting a bit of a groove. Anyway, our blog launched this weekend, so we're promoting it through the various and sundry outlets available on the internets. I thought I'd spread the word to you, the blog readers. I know things have been slow here, but it's because things have been happening elsewhere. So with that...Go enjoy the fruits of our labor, and email us if you're interested in some work being done for you or your family....or your friends...or your dog....you know...whatever.

This is our blog.

This is our facebook.

This is our twitter. 

Add us. Follow us. Be our friend. Spread the word. Thank you. I am in your debt.

I'll Always Appreciate Your Attitude, But A Good Attitude Does Not A Theologian Make

Well, here we are. I just read Donald Miller's latest blog. I used to link his blog on here, but I removed the link because his theology just seems to be getting worse. He loves Jesus, I have no doubt. But he theorizes like a deist. His attitude toward truth has slipped into a place where it's hard for me to find the "worthwhile" in the midst of the "please ignore".

Miller asks the question, "Does God have a specific plan for your life?" Then he answers with, "Probably not."

Proverbs 16:9 says,

"In his heart a man plans his course, but the LORD determines his steps."

If all we had to go on was this verse alone, it's enough to surmise that Miller's idea is false.

This idea of his seems to fly in the face of the teaching's of Paul who stated clearly (quoting the old testament) that God creates with PURPOSE.

The logical end of statements that support the idea of a "purposeless God" is that God is no more than the great winder-upper of creation's entropic clock. I find this, firstly, not biblical, and secondly, offensive.

Sorry Don. Lost me on that one.

The Separation of Church by Age.

There is an article in Relevant Magazine addressing age separation in churches. The first half of the article deals with young people, the second half with old people, and the whole thing is wrapped up by pointing us, not toward The Bible as inspiration, but to a modern business model as a possible guide. I'll grant that the article was not written to answer any questions, but merely to ask questions. Hopefully, we can come up with the right answers to these provoking questions.

I'll assume at this point you went back to read the article so you know a little better where I'm at.

So there are questions raised about the appropriateness of age/situation based programs and services in the modern church. Here's my favorite quote:

" I don’t know what happens, but we get lost when we transition from middle school ministry to high school ministry, from high school ministry to college ministry, from college ministry to single adult ministry, from single adult ministry to the young married ministry, etc. For those of you who are fortunate enough not to slip through the cracks, you end up spending your church life exclusively in relationship with people who are just like you. And relationships formed over a lifetime with people who are just like you is, honestly, a form of self-worship."

I found that to be (somewhat surprisingly) an honest and hard-hitting critique. Then they spend a couple paragraphs bashing the oldies for not incorporating the "new" in effort to appeal to the younger generation. Okay...maybe I'm still with it, maybe not, but the real problem begins at the end of the article. My least favorite quote:

"Creps admits the most troubling part of the research he did for his book (Reverse Mentoring) was discovering how open people in the secular market—in technology, culture and business—have been to insight from younger generations and how slow the Church has been to follow suit. He points to examples in business literature where companies like Texas Instruments, General Electric and Proctor & Gamble advise inviting the ideas and leadership of younger people. Creps goes on to say that “Christian literature doesn’t begin to point this out [as necessary] until the 21st century.”

Since when is the church instructed to study the ways of the world and follow suit? I thought that the new trend in churches was to abandon the mega-church/seeker movement. You know, the church-as-a-business trend.

So why are we again studying business models? Where is the Bible? Isn't that our instruction? Isn't that our guide? I found it hard to believe that throughout the course of the article the Bible isn't mentioned one time. It also doesn't address the church as a place for family. Just a place for you...or maybe not you, if you don't like what you see/hear.

Now, when I talk about "see/hear", I'm not referring to doctrinal disputes, or questions of theological importance. If you're at a church espousing some heretical view, by all means, flee for your sake and your family's spiritual well-being. Find a solid church that presents the person and work of Jesus Christ without reserve and in a manner pleasing to God.

But, see? This is my issue...The church is never to be self-serving on an aesthetic level. It is to be soul-serving on a spiritual level.

I've been having a grand time commenting back and forth with the other folks who have read the article and have something to say about it. The problem is that most of these folks merely tell of some personal situation where the church failed to meet their aesthetic standard. Allow me to quote myself:

"That's a sad story, but it causes me to wonder what were those young adults placing their faith in? Why did the church "experience" for them need to be so self-serving? You said yourself that as soon as the "music", "ministry", and "programs" were gone, so were they. The issue, I think, is that music, ministry, and programs will never be able to replace the true work of the Holy Spirit through the means of the Gospel presented through the sound preaching of the Word. If a church faithfully proclaims the Gospel, presents sound doctrine by exegetically preaching the Bible, thoughtfully administers the Sacraments, and approaches the throne with reverence and awe, I'm inclined to not give a hoot about the volume level of the music or the variety of programs."

The saddest part of some replies I've gotten to my call to return to the Gospel-as-standard has been to equate "Gospel-standard" with "Gaither Style". So the discussion always descends to the level of "style". Never ascending to the level of "substance". Allow me to quote myself again in response to another comment:

"Though I've given no comment on my personal musical tastes I will say that The Gaither's do not produce music that I find particularly interesting nor helpful (some of my opinion is based on style) . I will say that in a worship service I don't believe the style matters nearly as much as the lyrical content. You wanna rock in church? Ask yourself a couple questions. Is it edifying? Is it distracting? Where is your attention? Are you thinking about your heart's response to the words you sing? Are you interested in that guitar solo? I am all in favor of modern music in church. I am also in favor of traditional music in church. But I am most in favor of intelligently singing the wonder and works of God in a manner that is reverent and truthful. If a person wants to go "Gaither style" in The Lord's worship, they should ask the very same questions. But I truly think a style discussion is a surface level discussion. The Psalmist worships in his style, the Reformer's in their style, and the Hillsong's in their style. I have found songs, hymns, and Psalms in every style that I like. But I like them, because they say something meaningful. Not because they sound a certain way.
I just think that age/situation based groups should, at the very least, join the whole community every Sunday for corporate family Worship."

Is this hard to understand? The church is not a place to make our unsaved/tattooed friends feel comfortable. They should feel uncomfortable. The church is about Jesus and until they become "about Jesus" it shouldn't make any sense to them.

But what about our tattooed friends who ARE Christians? Did one show up at your church? Then you better not stare at them like they are some circus freak. Because if you do, you are doing nothing but going back to the "style" over the "substance" of their heart. Respect that Christ, through the Holy Spirit has done a genuine work in the heart of the young/modern.

The older generation is called wise counsel and they are to be respected and learned from.

And hey, the kids are okay.

But the Gospel is what is important.

So "seek" a church that presents the Gospel faithfully every Sunday. Forget what you think this should look like or sound like or feel like. Remember the multitude of instruction we have in the Bible and let that be your guide, and don't let your style influence your substance, but let your substance influence your style.

*NEW ADDITION - If you are interested in promoting the Church service as a place for families to come together I recommend this excellent article from John and Noel Piper.