Are you a rebel or a revolutionary?

13 Mar 2009

Absalom ran into David’s men, but was out in front of them riding his mule, when the mule ran under the branches of a huge oak tree. 2 Samuel 18:9

David ran quickly toward the battle line to meet the Philistine. 1 Samuel 17:48

I see two camps of church leaders, church planters, and Christ-followers. If you just look at them, listen to them, you can’t really tell the difference. They blog the same, dress the same, attend the same conferences.

But listen a little longer over time, and watch where they are headed. You’ll begin to see the camps: the Rebels, and the Revolutionaries.

And there is a BIG difference:

The Rebel runs away from something
The Revolutionary runs towards something

The Rebel is a wanderer
The Revolutionary is an adventurer

The Rebel invites people to come along to enjoy their company
The Revolutionary invites people to come along to experience the dream

The Rebel is cynical about the past
The Revolutionary is optimistic about the future

The Rebel casts the blame
The Revolutionary takes the responsibility

The Rebel attacks old traditions
The Revolutionary builds new traditions

The Rebel is passionate about demolishing yesterday’s church
The Revolutionary is passionate about constructing tomorrow’s church

The Rebel entertains people with their venom
The Revolutionary engages people with their vision

The Rebel wants freedom from authority
The Revolutionary wants submission to Christ

The Rebel will one day be made to surrender
The Revolutionary has already surrendered to the Master

You can these two lived out in the same family – David and his son Absalom.

David started life as a sheepherding songwriter. He stumbled into a historic battle between Israel and Philistia. His adolescent passion was stirred by the tauntings of the champion Goliath, and that match launched his career as a Revolutionary king.

Sadly, his son Absalom didn’t catch this spirit. Yes, he was handsome, talented, popular like his dad. But he used his power to lead for self-serving motives. He led a rebellion against his dad. The Rebel ran away, down a road that led to his death.

Questions:

Who would you rather follow Christ with - a Rebel or Revolutionary?

Who would you rather have as a church leader – a Rebel or Revolutionary?

What kind of church would you like to lead – one filled with Rebels or Revolutionaries?

Who will reach your community and change the world – a Rebel or Revolutionary?

Who would you rather be - a Rebel or Revolutionary?

Tags: leadership

17 Responses to Are you a rebel or a revolutionary?

Tim Blaisdell

March 14th, 2009 at 2:25 am

Today’s Revolutionaries are just Rebels the to established authority. It’s not until the Rebels become the established authority that they are seen by others as Revolutionaries.

So:

The Established Authority sees the Revolutionary as just someone running away from them, and do not accept the legitimacy of what they’re running to.

The Established Authority discredit’s the Revolutionary’s adventuring, calling it foolish wandering.

The Revolutionary casts blame appropriately on the Established Authority, and takes respositbility for overthrowing him.

The Established Authority scoffs at the Revolutionary’s dream.

The Established Authority denies the Revolutionary’s power to bring about the future he dreams of. Since the Established Authority represents the past, the Established Authority discredits the Revolutionary, calling him a cynical Rebel.

The Established Authority is charged by those who brought him to power to maintain the traditions handed down by the elders. He attempts to discredit the Revolutionary by saying that his efforts to build something new are really just efforts to tear down what was.

The Established Authority sees the Revolutionary’s vision as a poison, warning people of what he sees as rebellious venom.

The Established Authority sees any passion expressed by the Revolutionary as negative and harmful, denouncing his liberty as fleshly and evil.

The Established Authority claims that the Revolutionary is a Rebel who will one day be made to surrender, but the Revolutionary doesn’t give a damn what the Established Authority thinks.

To the King of England, the American Revolutionaries were mere Rebels. The Revolution merely a rebellion.

So the question is not merely “are you a Rebel or a Revolutionary?”, but:

1. To whom are you merely a Rebel?
2. Who or what is the Established Authority you are rebelling against?
3. What is the cause that will transform your rebellion into a revolution?
4. Might those you see as cynical, running Rebels actually be the Revolutionaries of tomorrow, while you fade away as yesterday’s defunct authority?

THE REVOLUTION WILL NOT BE TELEVISED !

Tim Blaisdell

March 14th, 2009 at 3:33 pm

p.s. Don’t forget, David spent years hiding in the desert running *FROM* King Saul. One must first rebel, in order to become the revolutionary.

willmington

March 16th, 2009 at 10:50 am

very true good word. Maybe an additional comment is that Rebels can be converted to Revolutionaries! The difference i see with David is that he had been CALLED, ANOINTED by God to be the king. A dream, a vision had been given to him, one that he could run towards. Yes, the Establishment saw him as a “rebel”, but in his heart he knew where he was going.

Rebels start running away from authority, status quo, whatever. But if they never get a vision of where they are headed, they just keep being a Rebel Without A Cause

Tim Blaisdell

March 16th, 2009 at 5:30 pm

A lot more could be said about Absalom than that he was a rebel, not “called” or “annointed” by God, whereas David was, and had God on his side.

Absalom was reacting, at least initially, to terrible crimes committed against his sister by his brother Amnon, and ignored by the father of all three: King David.

David had a habit of turning a blind eye to his own children’s faults, and in this case the crime was so awful that Absalom had to act.

Also, false rumor was involved: Absalom had only avenged Tamar by killing Amnon (and by the way, Absalom’s actions were the kind of thing God had defended and even rewarded several times in the past), but the report that came back to David was that Absalom had killed ALL his brothers.

The truth is: Absalom was both right and wrong, and so was David. The truth is a complex thing.

Matt, if I may say so, as a lay-person familiar with the ways of church leadership, this is a case where an important Bible story, with many important and some very politically-incorrect things to say about leadership and life in general, is being glossed over and dumbed-down to illustrate a point that has no basis in reality!

The fact is, a person who seeks to instigate revolution against the existing establishment will ALWAYS be marginalized and rejected by the authority at first. And sometimes “at first” can mean several GENERATIONS of passionate people fighting — both inside and outside the existing system — for something they believe in, but will never see accomplished.

The abolition of slavery, once an acceptible and common practice in virtually every nation on earth, but now just as widely forbidden and socially unacceptable, is a good example. By Abraham Lincoln’s time, there were already pockets of “rebels”, in America fighting against the practice — and there had been for a long time. Those people were marginalized, mocked, and made to appear foolish by the establishment. Their actions were characterized as overly violent, but today if anyone in America were to try to put slavery back into practice, he would be met with the very same violent reprisal (this time coming from the established authority) that those rebels used. Eventually their cause was shown to be right, even though some who fought for it never saw that day.

Sorry for venting all over your blog (but thanks for the opportunity!). You brought up the subject of revolution, which in my opinion the church is in dire need of. Maybe I’m wrong — indeed, I hope so — but as I see it the needed change will NEVER come from the established authority (of which you are now a part), because the established authority has as one of it’s primary goals the transmission from generation to generation of the status quo. Change must ALWAYS come from “rebels” who are marginalized and rejected by the authority, sometimes for a long time.

Also (and this may be the real reason why change can’t come through the establishment), the established authority’s financial security is intimately entangled with it’s unwillingness to stray from the so-called “orthodox” position.

Virtually every pastor I’ve talked at length with (about my particular “heretical beliefs”) has eventually had to say to me some form of the following: “What you are saying may or may not be right, but I cannot even investigate this further, because to do so would get me in trouble with my congregation, and my denomination, and my livelihood would be in jeopardy.”

willmington

March 16th, 2009 at 7:27 pm

I disagree with you - of course!

We are probably arm wrestling over semantics.

Yes, i was giving a broadbrushed example of 2 terms. But i disagree with you. Absalom WAS a rebel, scripture does show him as unlawfully making a grab for his father’s throne, taking over the city, his father’s family, etc. It was, by simple terms, a rebellion against the rightful king.

My point has been that many rebels, rebels IN THEIR HEARTS, fight against the system or run away for selfish gain, because of arrogance. That IS different from someone who has a brighter vision for the future, like freeing the slaves, who fights against the regime. There CAN be a difference between someone fighting for selfish gain and those for selfless causes.

i agree with you about the need for revolution in the church. Even there it must be based on a brighter vision for the future, a future based on Scripture. Yes, religious leaders argue over the meaning of scripture at times. But an orthodox reading of scripture can give us the vision worth fighting for.

Its sad to hear the statements from your pastors. I completely disagree with some fo your theological views, but i would welcome the investigation into scripture with you, and enjoy our fellowship.

You stinkin revolutionary,

Tim Blaisdell

March 17th, 2009 at 2:32 am

I agree with you — about the possibility of someone rebelling for selfish reasons, or arrogance, etc.

Hey, I’d love to talk more with you more. My views aren’t set in stone. They’re more like the waves of the sea, driven and tossed by the… hey, wait, that’s not a good thing, is it?

George Cannon

March 17th, 2009 at 8:24 am

Matt
I believe that you have hit on something here (in your initial blog post). The contrast between rebel and revolutionary has relevance to the rural context.

When a young pastor comes to this context, he has a choice to make as he makes an assessment about what needs to take place in an established church with its engrained structure and traditions.

The easiest route for a pastor is to become a rebel. To react to what needs to change and let the chips fall where they may. The results are churches that are resistant to change. This is due to the fact that vision, teaching and patience were not utilized to move a church forward.

What is needed is a revolutionary as you described it. A revolutionary who will cast a vision for a better future. One who will lead the church to the destiny that Christ has for them. One who will lead them to radically change their context for Jesus.

Once again, you have provided some great thoughts.

May God raise up a great number of revolutionaries for the gospel, not rebels against tradition.

Larry Phillips

March 17th, 2009 at 10:33 pm

Matt-I’m a revolutionary at age 50!

Though I’m not a good fit in today’s church culture. Schooled and influenced greatly by the 70’s fundamentialist gaints, I simply don’t have the upper body needed to dress down the the casual tight shirt platform apperance. Even though I talk southern, I’m against cursing on the platform to make a point.

I sometimes stutter-even when texting, and I pastor an established church, when all the buzz is about the new church—so at times I feel caught between generations!! And yet this gives me what I believe is a unique perspective–the view of two generations!

Having noted this, if there is one issue that gets my “dander up” to use a country term, its to see the disrespect the next generation of pastor give to the previous generation.

I’m not talking about making idols of them-simply respecting the spiritual battles they’ve fought and won. Battles this generation will have to fight also.

The flesh is flesh, sin is sin and satan is satan in every generation. There is nothing wrong with the perspective of some rebels that a full blown spiritual battle can’t correct!

willmington

March 18th, 2009 at 10:50 am

Larry-

Agreed. Revolution has nothing to do with hair, jeans, staging, websites, music styles, etc. Revolution is about the continuing carrying out of the Great Commission in different cultures, and different time periods.

Also agreed that younger leaders don’t always show respect for the giants who have come before. Two thoughts:

- they don’t respect older leaders because they want to be bleeding-edge, what’s hot now? That’s the pull of culture
- they don’t respect older leaders because those older leaders preach against any new ideas. I have experienced this first hand working in a church plant. Old guard dogs who condemn anything new

We need balance.

larryphillips

March 18th, 2009 at 12:12 pm

Matt-Thanks!
My hearts is saddened at some of the things I’ve heard said to younger pastor who used a different method in ministering. The unwillingness to distinguish between biblical principles and ideas has been the means of a lot of unnecessary hurt and division.
I just wish some of these guys would take a deep breath and understood one day someone will refer to what they’ve done not as cutting edge, but “old school.” That’s assuming their in it for the long-haul.

After 21 years at the same church, longevity in ministry requires the ability to change programs, methods or policies which I once implemented and used effectively. Staying “stuck on stupid” doesn’t advance the gospel!

Just as we work to keep our physical bodies flexible as we grow older, pastors and staff have to work hard to keep flexibility in methods and ideals.

The pull of the comfort zone is equally as powerful as the pull of the culture.

larryphillips

March 18th, 2009 at 12:36 pm

Matt-one additional question!

From your perspective what’s being done now to equip these new church plant pastors for longevity in ministry?

Thanks

Tim Blaisdell

March 18th, 2009 at 1:42 pm

taking some liberties with Matt’s opening statement in that last comment:

“Revolution is not about anything new or different happening. Revolution is about continuing to do exactly what we’ve been doing for the last 2000 years, just as we’ve been doing it. Oh, and make sure none of the old guard get’s their feathers ruffled.”

Now there’s a revolution with teeth!

Larry Phillips

March 18th, 2009 at 2:00 pm

Agree-and common sense respect needed on the part of both the old guard and the new! The disrespect is my point! Tearing down the victories of a previous generation to be “cutting edge” is spiritually dangerous. Do we really think we’ve “perfected” things so, that the next generation will avoid many of the same spiritual battles. If not, then let’s be willing to learn from the old guard, those fundamential enduring principles that lead to victory. We may repackage the principle-but we need to think twice before we abandoned it!

Leadership coaching for church planters « T-Blog

March 22nd, 2009 at 10:30 pm

[...] March 22, 2009 by troytemple My good friend Matt Willmington is a great coach. During March Maddness while you’re watching your bracket blow up, take a break to check out his blog post “Are Your a Rebel or Revolutionary?” [...]

Are you a rebel or a revolutionary?

17 Responses to Are you a rebel or a revolutionary?

study, practice, teach

Categories

Archives