Allen Kleine Deters

I would agree with that Neil,

Our elders could use some real help with initiating tough conversations as well as how to be a good listener. We have all male elders at this time and I could see the benefit of topics dealing with being sensitive and not so much giving advice.

I see the value in it. I'd participate. I'm fortunate to have a professional graphics designer who does amazing work on our powerpoint slides for our sermon series'.

I think we should be shouting that God loves people.  I'm afraid that the focus of egalitarianism is side-tracking any discussion regarding the quality and content of the curriculum that others -- as have been vocal here -- have appreciated, both male and female.  To dismiss a curriculum strictly on the title being perhaps "outdated" would be a grave misfortune and perhaps suggesting one's own passionate agenda is more important than the value in the progam and the main point; discipling others into a closer walk with Christ and thus reaching others for the kingdom.

While I agree words are important and how we use language, the nature of this thread is in regard to the content of the curriculum and not "words" per se.  I believe the discussion on the use of language in our denomination belongs somewhere else on the Network but not this particular thread.  It is becoming clear that that discussion is not going to be resolved here.  And as the current guide I do not want the thread to stray from its intent.

Hey Forbes,

Not sure if that's your name, but hi.

In regard to your question about discipleship small groups and starting from scratch, I've posted a new forum topic that will stay at top called Small Group Resources.  You will find, what I believe to be some of the best resources; books and websites available.  Other's may post some too.

As far as starting from scratch, I'd be happy to consult with you over the phone and email.  There are many factors that determine a person's or church's avenue for beginning a small group(s).

You can contact me through my profile. There are a number of avenues there. :-)

Blessings on your endeavors.

I get that and I think your point was clearly made early on.  And I have no problem with dissenting dialogue, but that issue won't get resolved here but has been highlighted. Points were made and stated and it looked as if it may continue becoming circular or ad hominem in nature.

"2. Don't fix what ain't broke --> usually, established churches already have men's groups, women's groups, bible studies, prayer groups, etc. Instead of replacing those for people, recognize that they work and grandfather them into the small group structure. Start calling all your bible studies small groups; call your worship teams small groups; then encourage them to act like small groups and work unconnected people into new groups.

What's your take on this?"

I don't think this is valid at all. Just the amount of groups you've listed show that the church is just too busy for small groups to be effective.

We've begun a visioning process here and already we are looking at how to simplify to make disciples. I am convinced that many church systems inherently keep people from actually becoming disciples even though they have lots of what they call disipleship ministries.

I think we talked about this during our coaching times, that churches need to have a structure for growing disciples that actually works. Business kills it. If the small group doesn't take you to deeper personal application and hold you accountable to these new commitments then chuck 'em. Keep it simple so people can actually be involved without feeling guilty.

You know what I mean?

Chad,

I really believe it starts with the vision and purpose of the groups set forth by the leadership. If they are just another program of many, then I think it will be difficult to form any real depth because people are thinking programatic and since no other program gets deep, why should small groups.

I found that in an established church the statement has to be made that this is going to be something really different than they are used to; it's about accountability and growing spiritually not just in more knowledge. I tell them that it is not going to be a Bible study, but where real transformation happens; be ready to be uncomfortable, but if you desire to grow as a disciple then stick with it.

The vision of what they are supposed to be must be absolutely clear. I've even told people in a previous church that they may not turn it into a Bible study where no one gets real. I'm a hard ass sometimes.

Then you have to spend a lot of time with your leaders training them what it means to lead such a group. There is some great stuff out there especially on smallgrouptrader.com (FREE) and smallgroups.com (worth the $99). Then coaching them while their dealing with this new phenomenon they've never encountered before is essential. Otherwise they will not have the vision, will become discouraged and momentum will slow.

Developmentally it is hard for groups to become immediately transparent. It's always a process that must be nurtured and sometimes people need to be challenged along the way. Leaders need to learn to ask the right questions that don't leave people safe. And they lead the way in being vulnerable.

I have found that accountability groups can work if the people are committed to it. I started one with some guys that is still going strong. But it is only 4 for good reason. If it's a moral compass kind of group then small is better.

Our sermon-based small groups are the best I've seen as far as taking the application to heart. As I'm writing the sermon, I know what questions I want the groups to talk about. I know where the folks are at and what stuff they struggle with so I'm able to formulate the questions to be very personal. Often each group member sets a goal for the week in relation to the questions and they follow up the next week. Some leaders even started calling their people during the week to see how things were going.

The groups also commit to doing mission together in the community with their families. That has really deepened the group as they serve and debrief.

See, I didn't have much trouble with Origins.  I hear what you're saying regarding science and contradiction and all that.  But this conversation is exactly the reason for this topic  -- there are two sides to this discussion, both with some reasonable grounding and room for discussion and dialogue.  Let's not forget the nature of Genesis that certainly is similar in style and nature up against other Near Eastern religious contexts with a significantly different twist.  You raise the question, "But did he?"  but the converse is valid as well.  To think literally about the account is certainly up for discussion.  Consider, along with your discussion, where all the cities and other people came from that God talked about regarding Cain.  Where in the world did they all come from?

And if a day is like a thousand years (Peter is not meaning exactly 1000 years but rather God is not trapped within time and space), therein lies room for discussion in regard to the whole creation debate.

My thing is I'm not a scientist but a theologian and I agree with you that we cannot speak with certainty.  I look at it this way, however God decided to do it is up to him, but I believe he did and it's amazing, mysterious and pretty complexly awe inspiring and humbling.

White Horse Inn?  Never heard of it.  I don't usually go out of my way to listen to podcasts.

While I'm not a scientist, I think we have to be careful as well not to downplay science too drastically since it is the gift of science by God that has helped develop cures and help in identification of so many important discoveries.  While it is not scripture nor should it be taken as such, it has validity in our discussion just as much as philosophy, mathematics, literary style and history.  God's got a hand in all of it.

I'll be interested to see what happens at synod.