Intro to Deaf Ministry: Methodology Part 3

Steve Dye writes his second post about methodology in Deaf ministry. Entitled Deaf Ministry 201: Why Deaf Worship Has to be Different, Steve gives a personal testimony on how methodology has helped him as a Deaf individual to worship the Lord and talks a bit about a Scriptural principle that should inform our methodology, especially where the Regulative Principle is concerned. An excerpt:

A pastor in Maryland that I recently spoke with said something that pretty much knocked some of my brain cells out and got me collecting them back up to rethink my strategy…in 1 Corinthians 10:23 it states “Everything is permissible but not everything is beneficial” now I know that verse was talking along the lines of other things…but what this pastor was trying to indicate was that…visual aids are permitted only if we feel if it is beneficial to our worship experience.

In our preaching…it is beneficial. In our worship music…it is beneficial. In our sunday school classes…it is beneficial. In all that we do…any type of visual is beneficial…WHY? because most percentage of Deaf in today’s churches rely heavily on visuals.

As always, read the whole thing.

Darth Sinus has laid me low, so I won’t be doing any more posting til Monday, when I’ll finish talking about Deaf preaching.

Intro to Deaf Ministry: Methodology Part 2

I said last time I would talk about the methodology of Deaf preaching. Let’s take a look.

I must begin by first settling on the foundation for all preaching: the Bible. The Deaf minister must be committed to the Word of God as God’s revelation to humanity and the only authority for our behavior, beliefs, and practice (see Statement of Faith). Without this foundation, there can be no Deaf preaching. Instead, the minister is left to practice Joel Osteen-type ministry — that of a “life-coach” who never preaches the Gospel but instead teaches self-help with Bible verses thrown in to make it look good.

Further, we must be committed to the Scriptural ideal that no Deaf person will be saved unless someone preaches the Word to them (Romans 10:13-17). The Deaf must “hear” the Word through the minister, and as such the minister must know with certainty the terrible duty he is taking in bringing the message of salvation to the Deaf. Failure to preach the Gospel, he must believe, means dooming Deaf people he loves to eternal punishment.

Flowing out from this commitment is the understanding that because it is the Gospel alone that saves, the salvation of Deaf people is not up to us. It is the Word that saves us by telling us what God has done in Christ and calling us to repentance. It is God, through the power of the Holy Spirit, who takes this Gospel and convicts those who hear to repent. There is nothing the minister can do to bring a person to salvation. His responsibility is simply to faithfully proclaim God’s Word and leave the results up to the Lord.

For many of us who read that statement, you may think this is all we really need to worry about. We don’t need to worry about the method the Word is delivered; we only need proclaim it rightly. In Deaf ministry, this is a dangerous assumption.

First, the minister must evaluate his listeners. What kind of Deaf people are in my audience? Do I have ASL speakers, PSE speakers, Signed English, Oral? Are my people institutional (Deaf schools) or mainstreamed? Do I have high-function or low-function Deaf? Do I have a mixture of these?

Generally, most Deaf ministries I have encountered contain a mixture of these. My own church is a buffet table of these different kinds of Deaf. We are primarily a mainstreamed church, with many of those very much leaning towards “cultural” Deafness. As such, we must begin by understanding that the language we use must be that which communicates to them most clearly. In my church, that means a strong mixture of ASL and PSE, so much so that conceivably one or the other could be used interchangeably.

Further, the Deaf minister must preach from a Bible translation that facilitates clear communication in the language. I’ve said in the past that I can’t use the ESV with my congregation for two reasons. One, the reading level is too high for many of them; two, I cannot preach the ESV clearly. it is difficult to sign words like justification off the top of my head, but when a Bible instead spells out the term by saying made right with God, I can easily sign that without having to mentally translate the text into sign language as I go. For that reason I tend to use translations such as the NCV or the CEV, or a blend of those plus the ESV. If I’ve been working on my Greek, this process gets even easier because I can then directly translate into sign language what I am preaching from. Find a translation (preferably one with a good level of accuracy) you can comfortably sign from and use it in your preaching. Even better, shepherd your church towards using that translation, if they are willing to do so.

My senior pastor does this remarkably well. I have observed that he prepares his messages from the NASB, but preaches in the NCV. As a result, he knows the Scripture for that message well from his preparation, and that only makes using the “easier” translation in preaching result in a better flow of thought. He does not have to pause, translate the Scripture into sign language mentally, and then sign it. He can continue right on with his train of thought and keep the listeners with him. In other words, it allows the Gospel to be the only stumbling block between him and his listeners.

Next, the Deaf minister must realize that Deaf preaching is a visual medium. Sign language is not an auditory language, it is a visual one. That means the majority of Deaf people, if not all of them, are visual learners. Deaf people, generally speaking, must be shown something in order to understand it. The use of visuals to explain the Word is a necessary part of Deaf preaching.

This means the use of illustrations, both verbal and physical. That’s right, I said pictures. Often, you must explain a concept, and then give an example that can be seen. I currently have a new hire at UPS who is Deaf. I cannot just explain the job methods to the new hire and expect the new hire to understand, I must demonstrate the methods if I expect the new hire to be able to apply them. I can do this personally or show a picture or video, and the new hire will grasp the explanation at that point. The same must be done when explaining the Word to a Deaf audience. Freely use pictures in your preaching. Sometimes a picture can explain the concept you are preaching about more clearly than merely explaining in sign language. Jesus did this often, using parables to reach his own audience; as did Paul with his skillful use of athletic language to describe the Christian life (the “run the race” verses). Throughout the Word, pictures are used to describe God’s revelation in a way people could grasp.

I will stop here for the evening; I have written 1000 words. Tomorrow I will go further into Deaf preaching.

T4G Session 2 - Thabiti Anyabwile (Race & Deafness)

Some of you looked at the title and thought, “What? Race and Deafness?” Bear with me through this one and all will be revealed.

Thabiti Anyabwile delivered perhaps the most provocative, thought-provoking, challenging, and convicting message of the conference. Thabiti, pastor of First Baptist Church – Grand Cayman, began his message by joking that his name means “Sure, invite the black guy to talk about race.” I’m sure the irony was lost on no one, and many of the blogs out there that are not as friendly to Christian conservatism and Reformed beliefs have taken it upon themselves to hammer away at this point.

Thabiti was actually mentored by Mark Dever at Capitol Hill Baptist Church for several years before becoming pastor at FBC Grand Cayman and they consider each other to be great friends and brothers. It was made known during the panel session that followed that C. J. Mahaney also developed a deep and abiding friendship with Thabiti during his years at CHBC. For these reasons alone I would like to invite my readers to throw out this silly and quite frankly stupid prejudice, especially in light of the message Thabiti gave us.

Thabiti began with an assertion that at first left many of us slightly confused. We must, he said, throw out our concept of race. Race is not a “black/white” type of issue. Instead, we must have a biblical view of race if we are to address this issue correctly.

Race, he continued, is a biological term. It talks about our inherited genetics from the human family that passed these genetic traits down to us. In contrast, we have many ethnicities – many cultural divisions among humanity. We are familiar with many of these: black, white, Asian, Hispanic, Native American, etc. However, the world’s view of race is to conflate biology with ethnicity. Thus we have many “races” that follow these ethnic lines.

The biblical view of race is that there is one race, descended from Noah, who in turn is descended from Adam. The biology of every human being is derived directly from Adam through Noah. Every “race” is descended from one man, and as such it is wrong, biblically, to think that there are “many races.” This would mean that there is another person out there, not descended from Adam, who created a certain “race.” As such skin color, the world’s criteria for “race,” cannot be the correct criteria in determining “race.” Instead, it is biblically correct to think of one race but many ethnicities as humanity spread throughout the earth in obedience to God’s command to be fruitful and multiply, as well as a result of the Tower of Babel.

Thabiti then gave six reasons why our modern concept of “race” is wrong:

1. It causes abuse of people and Scripture
2. It makes racism possible
3. Cooperation and fellowship becomes impossible, because “race” causes separation.
4. It removes the authority of the Bible, since the world’s concept of “race” denies that we are one in Adam, as the Bible says.
5. It causes us to resist the Holy Spirit – instead of being united, we are divided by “race.”
6. It destroys the Gospel.

This last point is likely the most serious, though it is the result of the five that precede it. The world’s concept of “race” destroys the Gospel because it makes Jesus’ death contentious. It forces us to look at Jesus’ death as not for all people, but only for the Adamic race. Because of this, we will spend the rest of existence arguing about which “race” is truly “in Adam.” Is it the blacks? The whites? The Asians? The Native Americans?

The world’s concept of “race” further destroys the Gospel because it gives us no motivation for missions. We are already experiencing this today – we don’t do missions because other “races” are not like us. We want to do missions in a comfortable setting. We don’t want to go out of our comfort zone. That’s why we send missionaries – “You do it for me. I’m not comfortable doing it myself!”

Thabiti then called us to think and act biblically on the issue of race. We must see each other as “in Adam.” In John 17:20-21 Jesus prayed that we who believe would be one just as he and the Father are one, and by doing so the world would believe in him. Again, in 2 Corinthians 5:14-18 exhorts us to have a spiritual perspective on this issue, not a fleshly view, a worldly view. We are to regard no one according to the flesh, and in terms of race, not by the color of their skin. Christ has died for all – biblically all “in Adam.” If we allow the world’s view of race to dictate our view, rather than being led by a spiritual view, we have capitulated to the flesh.

As such, when we look at a person, we cannot look at their skin. Instead we must think, “He is created in the image of God, just like me. He is descended from Adam, he is ‘in Adam,’ just like me. He is a sinner, just like me. Therefore I can fellowship with him as a brother in Adam.” With believers, we are to take that one step further: “He is a sinner saved by grace, just like me. Therefore I can fellowship with him as a brother in Christ!”

This is why unity in Christ is far more important than “race.” Ethnicity – which is what the world is really talking about when it talks about “race” – is not permanent. Rather, our identity in Christ is permanent. Therefore, our churches must be a reflection of this reality until we get to heaven.

This was a jaw-dropping, deeply applicational message for me. I and many of the Deaf pastors there constantly looked at each other knowingly all throughout this message. We were furiously nodding our heads and “amen”-ing many of the things Thabiti imparted to us.

You see, our Deaf community is fractured along the same worldly “lines” as race. There are great divisions in Deaf culture that have caused much friction. Deaf people divide along lines of deafness (deaf/hard-of-hearing), language (ASL vs. Signed English or PSE), culture (culturally Deaf vs. mainstreamed/Oral), and psychological makeup (high function vs. low function), just to name a few. The ouster of Jane Fernandes from the presidency of Gallaudet University is a glaring example of this.

Yet we Deaf people, of every stripe, are all “in Adam.” We are all created in the image of God. We are all sinners under the wrath of a holy God in need of a Savior. As such, the Deaf community, in order to survive, must throw out its concept of “Deaf.” We cannot afford to accept the world’s concept of “Deaf.” We cannot afford to accept the division we have created through accepting the world’s concept of “race.” We must accept a biblical view of “Deaf” if our community is to thrive in the 21st century and beyond. And ultimately, Deaf believers must strive to bring these fellow sinners into Christ, just like us.

This message was the capstone of a major shift in my thinking on Deaf issues that has slowly been taking place. I had begun to move away from the rigid categories many Deaf had created for the different types of Deaf people, in order to emphasize that we are one Deaf community, not many. With this message, all the pieces came together with a resounding click and thud that can be both heard and felt. It is my prayer this click and thud reverberates through the hearing and Deaf world for ages to come.

Intro to Deaf Ministry: Methodology, Part 1

Steve Dye, my partner in Deaf ministry crime, has put up his first contribution to a blog series we’ve been discussing for some time. Entitled Deaf Ministry 101: Music and Visual Aids, Steve tackles part of the methodology of modern Deaf ministry. Many of you who are hearing might find this intriguing, so I encourage you to read it. Steve provides a glimpse into why such tools as Powerpoint are a help, rather than a hindrance, to worship. Having interacted in the past with some who were utterly unable to understand this (due to what I think is a faulty understanding of the regulative principle as well as a little theological hubris on their part), and as such rejected the use of Powerpoint in Deaf worship; Steve’s post is a breath of encouragement. An excerpt:

Now the question is…after hearing about all the options that Deaf churches can us for music and visual aids…the question that may pop up frequently is “Why do Deaf NEED this?”

The answer is really quite simple…Deaf depends on visual because they can’t HEAR. Now some of us like myself and Stephen can hear a little bit but still the visual impact of a song makes the experience much more inspiring to worship. I cannot explain in words how much more my worship has been heightened through the use of visual aids. But then the next question pops up would be, “Isn’t using technology in churches the same as worshipping technology?” No, not really. We appreciate techonology because it helps the worship alot more for Deaf.

As always, read the whole thing.

In my upcoming post on the subject of methodology, I will tackle Deaf preaching methodology.

Smells Like Teen Spirit

Phil Johnson over at Team Pyro has written a post on youth ministry that hits the nail squarely on the head. It’s too good to simply say “follow the link,” so here’s what he has to say:

At last June’s Founder’s Conference, Roy Hargrave delivered a powerful message that got me thinking about why so many churches lose their young people. (That wasn’t the theme of Dr. Hargrave’s message, but he brought up the subject in one of the points he made.)

Here’s a really brief summary of some of my thoughts on the matter:

The very strategies many churches adopt to try to keep their young people involved in the church are the main reasons they lose so many of them. The dominant philosophies of youth ministry today are spiritually lame or worse—and almost completely counterproductive.

Specifically, it’s time we faced the fact that systematically dumbing down the teaching ministry and ramping up the party atmosphere while isolating our young people from the rest of the body is not a very good strategy for increasing the rate of retention among our youth.

Think about it: Youth ministries (not all of them, of course, but the vast majority of squidgy evangelical ones) deliberately shield their young people from the hard truths and strong demands of Jesus. They tailor their worship so worldly youth can feel as comfortable in the church environment as possible. They squander the best opportunities of those formative student years by minimizing spiritual instruction while emphasizing fun and games. They let their teens live with the false notions that believing in Christ is easy, sanctification is optional, and religion is supposed to be fun and always suited to our liking. They fail to equip their high school students for the rigorous defense of the faith they will need in college. They neglect to integrate them as young adults into the adult community of the church.

And then they wonder why so many young people abandon the church about the same time they leave home.

How hard can it really be to understand why the “Youth Specialties” approach to student ministry has been such an enormous failure?

Given that I spent my first few years of ministry in youth ministry primarily (both hearing and Deaf), I can only say that Phil is absolutely correct. In 14 years of involvement with youth ministry, I have seen no examples contrary to what Phil describes above. Challenging your teens with the Gospel is implicitly forbidden. Why? Because the leadership of many youth ministries are convinced that they will lose young people if they do not distract them with “fun and games.”

One incident that I experienced reflects this sad trend. I gave a message at one of our Deaf teen events using the wedding festival of Matthew 22:1-14, focusing on verses 1-10. I changed the “characters” in the story to reflect our ministry; the “host” was the leader of the ministry, the “servants” were those leaders who directly worked with the teens, and of course the teens were the “invited guests.” Acting this story out in front of our teens, I used many of the excuses the teens themselves had given us for not going to church or attending our events in place of the wedding guests’ excuses. Then I reached the crucial point. When the “king” in the story sent servants out to bring the “uninvited” guests, the people on the street; I referred to those people as hearing teenagers!

Very predictably, when the teens realized what I had just said, they were upset! Then I delivered the punch line: “Is that how you treat Jesus? Is that how you treat church? Is that how you treat this ministry? Other things are ‘more important’ than Jesus? You have been invited to the greatest thing you could ever experience, a ministry just for you. You have been invited to receive the greatest thing you could ever have, Jesus as your savior and lord. But if you continue to ignore Jesus, he will find someone else who wants him. If you continue to ignore this ministry, you will go on to college and get nothing out of this, and those who come after you will get the benefit, not you. Don’t ignore the blessings you have here!”

Several of the teens present that night immediately got my point, and for the next few months I had many conversations with them about our ministry and spiritual things. I do not yet know what has resulted from that, but I pray that seeds were planted and watered, and that God harvested them.

In stark contrast, the leadership of the ministry was outraged that I would think to challenge the teens like that. I was bluntly told that I “can’t do that,” as I would apparently “scare the teens away.” I was told that kind of teaching “did not connect” with teenagers, and that what we did was “develop an opportunity to present the gospel through one on one relationships.” We were to “attract” the teens with our events in order to “provide openings to share the gospel in that context.” I was also told that any future messages I gave were to be reviewed by the leadership for approval.

That was the moment I realized that particular ministry was a failure, and that my time there was limited. When you cannot challenge young people with the Gospel, something is dreadfully wrong. Our (and by “our” I mean Christianity in general) entire philosophy of youth ministry is wrong. There is nothing wrong with being relational, but to be relational at the expense of the Gospel is a great and evil sin, and directly contradictory to the Great Commission.

New Deaf Ministry Blogger

It is with great joy that I welcome to the blogosphere my comrade-in-faith, Steve Dye! And I didn’t even have to “shame” the guy into blogging.

I have worked with Steve either directly or indirectly for 4 years now. We initially met through my wife shortly after we began dating back in 2003. We ministered together in Deaf Teen Quest - Louisville and later through Deaf Cafe - Louisville before both of us resigned in order to focus more on our home churches. Last year Steve left his home church to take a position as Minster to the Deaf at Southeast Christian Church.

Steve and I are alike in many ways. We both like many of the same things (Star Wars, college football, Tennessee Titans football, etc.), we’re big kids most of the time (okay, Steve is usually the big kid “most of the time” ), we’re former baseball players, we golf, we both think our wives are the hottest women alive, and we are both stubborn mules when we want to be. Soon I’ll be able to add another similarity: we’ll both be dads.

We try to regularly meet up for fellowship and encouragement, though lately I must confess we haven’t done a good job of it. Ever since Steve resigned from Deaf Cafe we both have been on our own ministry paths, which brings about different schedules and busy-ness that we have regrettably allowed to dictate our relationship. We will certainly do better with that in the future!

I’m going to try and get Steve to start a blogging dialogue with me in the near future regarding Deaf ministry and possibly help re-start the Deaf ministry series I have been wanting to do. In the meantime, take a peek at his blog here and leave some encouragement for him to be a regular blogger!

Kentucky Baptist Conference of the Deaf

Gone to KBCD. All you hearing guys can go to the other one, the “hearing” one. Let’s compare notes when we get back. If you’re wondering about the theme for this year, here’s the design made by an enterprising Deaf artist in my church:

Yes, I know, it’s supposed to say “Every Christian’s Battle,” but somehow we misplaced the original and I only got to scan the second draft. The original has the possessive.

Those of you staying home, don’t forget to spend the Lord’s day in His own house with His own people. We’ll talk about this “battle” stuff as well as the church starting on Monday, with a sermon or two sprinkled in for seasoning throughout the week.

A Plea for Oral Deafness

I am Oral Deaf.

This is the plea of my heart. I pray it pierces yours.

I am Oral Deaf.

What does that mean? It means that I am “Oral.” I can talk, and quite well at that. I can talk clearly and understandably. You would not know I am Deaf simply from my ability to speak well. As an “Oral” person, I can function almost exclusively as a hearing person. I can carry on a conversation without needing aids such as writing back and forth or interpreters. I can, because of this gift, embrace hearing culture and ways. I feel “at home” with hearing people. As an “Oral” person, I can blend in with the hearing world almost seamlessly.

I am Oral Deaf.

What does that mean? It means that I am “Deaf.” I cannot hear. Many things that are accessible to my hearing counterparts are unavailable to me. I cannot hear the radio. I cannot hear the voices on television. I cannot hear the laughter of an audience at a comedy club. I cannot hear the melodies of music. I cannot hear the waves on the beach, the songs of the birds, the rolling of the thunder.

I am Oral Deaf.

I can function almost exclusively as a “Deaf” individual. I use Sign Language to communicate with other Deaf people. I embrace the culture that gave me this language. I embrace the people that make this language their first language. I can carry on a conversation with other Deaf people without needing aids such as writing back and forth or interpreters. I can, because of this gift, embrace Deaf culture and ways. I feel “at home” with those who have struggled just as I struggle. I feel brotherhood with those who bear the burdens I bear. I experience unity with those who make a way of life around their Deafness. As a “Deaf” person, I can blend in with the Deaf world almost seamlessly.

I am Oral Deaf.

You say, “You could wear a hearing aid!” Hearing aids do not fill this gap completely. I can hear spoken voices, but I do not necessarily understand everything they are saying. I can hear songs, but I cannot distinguish the lyrics unless I have memorized them first. Mechanical sounds are impossible. I can hear the actors on the television, but I cannot understand them. I can hear the lyrics from the radio, but I cannot understand them. I can hear the voice through a telephone, but I cannot understand a word. Sometimes, I need you to write things down for me. Sometimes, I need you to repeat what you said so I can be sure I understand. Sometimes, I need an interpreter to make your words clear to me. Listening is a task of Herculean proportions. I am forced to spend the majority of my time listening. But, by necessity, it has become second nature to me.

I am Oral Deaf.

I am unique in my own setting. I have a foot in two worlds, hearing and Deaf. I am part of both worlds, but I do not belong to either world 100%. Do not ask me to live by “hearing” rules. Do not ask me to live by “Deaf” rules. Your rules are crowded and suffocating. I don’t want to hear just because you can. I don’t want to be “Deaf” just because I can’t hear. I do not belong to the hearing. I do not belong to the Deaf. I belong to God alone. I want to be the person God made me. I want to be the person that God wants. I want to be myself. That is all.

I am Oral Deaf.

I love who I am. I would not change myself. Why should I sin against God by changing myself? He thought about me long before I was born. He planned my life before I had done anything. He decided that I would be “Deaf.” He decided that I would be “Oral.” I should not reject what God has made me. Instead, I should praise Him and give Him glory for being Deaf. I should praise Him and give Him glory for being Oral.

I am Oral Deaf.

I am between two worlds. Call out to me, and I will speak with my voice to you. Touch my shoulder, and I will sign with my hands to you. Alone, in my world between worlds, I will lift up my hands and my voice and shout to the Lord.

I am Oral Deaf.

This is the plea of my heart. I pray it pierces yours.

I am Oral Deaf.

Moving Towards a Church Bible

I have suggested to our church’s Ministry Team that we needed to consider possibly selecting one Bible translation for our church to use. We would encourage our members to purchase this translation, Sunday School and discipleship classes would use it, and the pastoral staff would commit to preaching from this translation. This would reduce the amount of time we are spending explaining the differences in translations, because our members use a variety of translations.

For example, I tend to use the English Standard Version (ESV) to study and prepare, while preaching from the Contemporary English Version (CEV). When putting together Scripture for my sermon outlines (which are printed and handed out), I have tended to cross-read a mixture of the ESV and CEV, which to me has allowed me to be accurate while rendering the passage readable. Our senior pastor tends to use the New American Standard Bible. He has recently begun to move towards the New Century Version (NCV). However, many of our church members use the New International Version, New International Reader’s Version (NIRV), New Living Translation, or Today’s New International Version. There is even a King James Version Only-ist among our members.

Given that most of our members have low-level reading grades (about elementary or middle school for most), you can understand the need for us to select a readable translation to use across the board. When someone pops up their hand to say they don’t understand what a verse says, or that their Bible version says something else, that is valuable discipleship time wasted just to explain the difference.

Our senior pastor suggested that we immediately begin a discipleship series on Bible translations for the next month. We will be explaining the differences between various translations as well as how to pick a translation to use. We might examine several translations individually. Ultimately we want to come to a decision as a church on which translation to use. This will allow us to be deliberate about which Bibles we purchase for our pews and to give away.

So far, what are our candidates? We have the NIRV, the NCV, and the CEV. All are eminently readable at a low reading grade (they avoid words like “eminently” ), our Deaf have little difficulty understanding these versions, and they carry a good degree of accuracy. The problem with each, however, is that in some places they sacrifice the meaning of the Greek and Hebrew in favor of making a verse readable. It changes (whether intentionally or unintentionally) the meaning of a verse in order to make the verse understandable to a low-level reader. And if we try to spend time explaining this we run the risk of confusing our members.

Pastor Tim (our senior pastor) is partial to the NCV and before this suggestion was encouraging our members to use it. I went out and purchased my own copy of the NCV for study and comparison, and I found it to be more accurate and usable than the CEV. Which is funny to me, because the CEV is more “preachable.” I don’t yet own an NIRV, so I cannot yet make any comparisons.

It has just occurred to me as I write this that many of you are looking at me weird. A “preachable” Bible version? See, I have to preach in an entirely different language from the one read in the Bible. It is extremely difficult to preach the ESV in American Sign Language. I can do it, but I don’t think I do it very well. There are no signs for many of the concepts packed in “regular” ESV words. You can’t just sign words like predestination, justification, imputation, and so on. They have to be spelled out. That is what a version like the CEV tries to do, spell it out. For example, the average Deaf person is not going to understand the word justification, but if you simply say “made right with God,” how much easier is that to understand? Hey, I got signs for those words, so why not use that Bible? If you substitute the KJV and make your language that of postmodernism, you get a pretty good idea of what I mean.

What I will be doing over this next month is posting our lessons from the discipleship class. I taught a brief introductory yesterday in preparation for Pastor Tim to lead the main thrust of the class. Please pray for us as we develop these lessons and for our church as we prayerfully seek a good “church” Bible.

“My Deaf Church Is Dying!” Part 2

In my previous post on this topic, I began to examine the “numbers are important” fallacy in describing the health of a church. Let me recap what brought this about.

Recently I talked with one of my church members (hereafter CM for “church member”) about a group discussion in which CM took part. CM was telling me about an issue they were discussing, in which apparently “church growth factors” or some such nonsense was being discussed.

Long story short, once it was disclosed to the group that our church (Louisville Baptist Deaf Church) has a membership of about 35, with an average attendance of 25, CM was in no uncertain terms immediately told by CM’s peers (all of whom were hearing), “Your church is dying! It may already be dead!”

Needless to say, CM was upset by such an assertion. This was, quite honestly, an assertion made from ignorance. Moreover, this assertion assumed that numbers is a valid judge of the “health” of a church.

In my first post, I began deconstructing this assertion by showing that those who made the assertion failed to understand the unique ministry setting of the church. They failed to understand that Deaf churches tend to be small groups of less than 50, with the average Deaf church having at least 15-25 members. Very few Deaf churches have memberships greater than 30-50. Larger than this, you have a “Deaf megachurch.”

Today, let us continue by examining a second mistake made in this discussion.

Second, CM’s peers failed to consider the spiritual health of the church. This is the more dangerous failure of the two, even though it is difficult if not impossible to assess the spiritual health of the church without first understanding the unique setting of the church. But even having done this, you cannot determine the health of a church by the number of people in membership or attending.

In other words, numbers are not an accurate gauge of the health of a church. Numbers mean absolutely nothing. Even though the verse is usually applied to church discipline, Matthew 18:20 promises believers that “wherever two or more are together in My name, I am there in the midst of them.” A church could consist of no more than two and still be healthy. In fact, some church plants begin with little more than two people! No, health must be measured by means other than numerical.

In our church, the Word is preached forcefully, the Gospel is proclaimed shamelessly, Scripture is exegeted and applied carefully and expectantly. Our people are hungry to understand Scripture. Our people want to know and understand the Bible. To my knowledge, all of our members currently “on the roll” are believers. And that is a lot more than can be said for many hearing Southern Baptist churches.

Are we a healthy church? By no means, if by that you mean a church bucking the current (hearing) denominational trends. But comparative to those denominational trends, we are healthier than many of the hearing churches with 300+ members, including mega churches! Comparative to Deaf ministry trends, we are healthier than the vast majority of Deaf ministries.

That said, we still have a ways to go before our bill of health is “clean.” Like many of our hearing counterparts, our church does not evangelize. Many of our members seem to believe “that’s the pastor’s job.” Yet our members are enthusiastic and supportive of missions. They do not understand that missions and evangelism are synonymous; that is, they are one and the same. Our church does not make a habit of working out their salvation (Philippians 2:12). Discipleship to many of them is nothing more than Bible study, Bible study, and more Bible study. Some have been taught all their lives that “real Christianity” consists of going to church on Sundays and Wednesdays, praying when you need to, and studying your Bible. Changing their lives, Christian service, and other evidences of faith are strange to many of them. Our church does not make a habit of prayer. That is either “the pastor’s job” or it is “boring.” The only times many of them pray is when there are sicknesses or needs. Again, many of them have been taught this all their lives.

But a church of regenerate members hungry for Scripture can be transformed. In fact, I believe such a church is actively being transformed by the Holy Spirit. Can we say the same of a church of mostly regenerate members or a church half-full or less-than-half full of regenerate members with little or no desire for Scripture? In my less-than-enlightened opinion (because not only am I a fallible man, but Deaf on top of it), there is no way that is possible outside of a work of God. A true revival is necessary for such a church.

All this is to say that a church, especially a Deaf church, cannot be considered “healthy” unless, at the very minimum, all of its members are regenerate. Numbers do not equate saved church members or saved attenders. A church will not grow when its members are lost. A church will only grow when its members are saved and seeking Scripture. Beyond that, a church can only grow when that saved, Scripture-hungry church begins to be transformed by what it is learning. They will be pleased with the church because they have learned to please God and be pleased with Him.

But if you try to grow a church numerically, you will not really have saved, Scripture-hungry, transformed (and transforming) people in your church. You will have a crowd that looks like it showed up for a Saturday college football game — only happy and content so long as you are pleasing them.