I grew up identifying with skateboard culture. Remember, I’m old, so this was in the 1980′s. It wasn’t like it is today when you can turn on network television and see the Mountain Dew tour of professional skateboarding as part of mainstream America and everyone knows who Tony Hawk is. It wasn’t mainstream. And that’s one of the things that attracted me.

I’ll be honest and I’ll be the first to tell you that I was never very good at skating. But I loved it nonetheless and I’ve been wondering recently why that was. Why did I love to do something I didn’t excel at? One of my favorite skaters growing up was Lance Mountain because he was good, but he just didn’t seem as competitive as some of the other guys. He seemed to truly love skating for skating’s sake. I watched the Bones Brigade videos (especially Animal Chin) incessantly and they became woven into my psyche (for good and bad!).

Last night I finally had the chance to watch Stacy Peralta‘s documentary: Bones Brigade: An Autobiography. Even if you’re not interested in skateboarding, it’s a great story of finding meaning and belonging in a world that doesn’t seem to want you. That was one of the themes throughout each of the skaters’ recollections: they just didn’t feel like they fit in until they found skateboarding. They weren’t sure about life’s meaning until they found skateboarding. I deeply resonated with that sentiment growing up. I could play sports but I just had no interest in organized sports. In fact, I really didn’t like them. I could do well in school when I tried but it just wasn’t important to me. It wasn’t until I found skateboarding that I really felt like I had found an outlet that not only provided personal growth and expression but community.

Now, many (many) years later, as a Christian, I have a deeper understanding of what I was looking for and I have found more than I ever could have hoped for in Jesus. But I’m left wondering, especially as a pastor; does the way we practice “modern-day North American ‘Christianity’” fulfill those deepest desires that we all try to fill in various ways? We all want to be accepted for who we are and the freedom to express our individuality in community that accepts us. Skateboarding has offered that for countless young people.

But I struggle with the way that so much of our practice of Christianity tends to isolate us from those “who aren’t like us.” We withdraw from culture and build our “Christian” baseball fields, football fields, bowling alleys and tennis courts, believing that we can offer a “safe” alternative to people. Yet, in practice, we’ve asked people to “become like us,” to cross a cultural boundary before they can be part of our community. We use belief to exclude people from community. Yet, Jesus flipped this on its head; he used community to draw people to belief. Christians are the worst about asking people to fit into preconceived notions and become monochrome when we should be the most beautiful of tapestries, made up of all kinds of people who preserve their differences in love instead of water them down in conformity. How is it that skateboarders can practice community and acceptance better than those who have been accepted forever by God?

Bones Brigade: An Autobiography reminded me of a time in life when I truly felt free to be myself and felt completely accepted at the same time by others who were truly being themselves. Now, many years later, I’ve come to realize just how rare that is. May our “version” of Christianity be a better treasure than a skateboard.

Watch a trailer for  Bones Brigade: An Autobiography:

I’ve been thinking a lot lately about how local churches can best create contexts in which God’s truth is more likely, not just to be clear, but become “real” for people (for more on this concept, see my feeble post here, listen to Tim Keller’s fantastic lecture series Preaching to the Heart, or read Jared Wilson’s wonderful book Gospel Wakefulness). We cannot, nor should we try to force people to change. And yet, I do believe that Christianity is most powerful outside of the institution. By this, I don’t mean that local churches should have no structure. I simply mean that, to a large degree in the West, Christianity has become institutionalized.

We have largely helped people in the segmentation of their lives. We have encouraged them to abandon their “non-Christian” friends to enter into the “Christian” world. We have replaced their movies. We have replaced their music. We have replaced their friends. This, of course, has been done in order to protect Christians from “being pulled down.” Because, as we all know, it is much easier to pull someone off a ladder than it is to pull someone up onto the top of a ladder.

The result, of course, has been that many Christians have isolated themselves from those who don’t (yet) believe. We encourage our unbelieving neighbors to join us in the sports league at the local mega-church and we ask those who don’t (yet) believe to cross cultural barriers that we ourselves are not willing to cross. All the while, we forget how much we love to sing “Jesus, What A Friend Of Sinners,” without really wanting to live like Jesus lived.

I should have mentioned at the beginning that, alongside my thinking about making the Gospel “not just clear but real,” I have been thinking about the idea of discipleship in light of Matthew 28:18-20, which has become known as “The Great Commission:”

And Jesus came and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age.

The more I think about these verses and its implications, the more I have come to personally distinguish between “disciples” and “discipleship.” In his fascinating book The Divine Conspiracy, Dallas Willard describes a “disciple” as:

A disciple or apprentice, then, is simply someone who has decided to be with another person, under appropriate conditions, in order to become capable of doing what that person does or to become what that person is.

I think (but please help me understand if I’m wrong), that we can safely distinguish between the process we have come to know as “discipleship” and someone who is actually a “disciples.” Let me explain. Based on Willard’s explanation, coupled with the “Great Commission,” I understand a “disciple” to be someone who has actively decided to follow in Jesus’ ways and strive to become more like Him.

“Discipleship,” however, I understand, to be the process teaching people to “observe” or “practice” all that Jesus commanded, so that we can baptize them “in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy spirit” in the promise and strength that, not only has “all authority in heaven and on earth” ben given to Jesus, but that He is with us, “always, to the end of the age.”

But, let me further explain. As I understand it, “discipleship” applies to both those who have made the decision to become “disciples,” but those who haven’t. And, to add to the mix, “discipleship” is not just about modifying people’s behavior. Because, let’s be honest: we can tweak people’s emotions and we can scare people into certain decisions, but, in our own strength, and in our own ways, we can never really change people’s hearts. That’s up to God and God alone.

So, what are some of the things that Jesus has commanded people to obey? Think about Matthew 16:24-28:

 Then Jesus told his disciples, “If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me. For whoever would save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for my sake will find it. For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world and forfeits his soul? Or what shall a man give in return for his soul?

Here, Jesus basically says that we should love God so much that the rest of life is simply rubbish to us (a sentiment the Apostle Paul expressed years later). We love God so much that we’re living to give up the rest of life in order to follow Him. Or, when asked what the greatest commandment is/was, what was Jesus’ response, was, if I may summarize, “Love God and Love Others” (Matthew 22:36-40). Or, what about the time when Jesus said that it was by our love for one another (not our political affiliations or the “family friendly” radio we listen to or the movies we watch or don’t watch, or the neighborhood we live in, or the car we drive, or the church we “go to” or drinks we do or don’t drink) that the world would know that we are His (John 13:35)?

Here’s the thing: “discipling” those who profess to follow Jesus and those that don’t often boils down to the same thing: getting people to realize that they can’t possibly meet God’s standards on their own. They need Jesus. They need His perfect, Spirit-dependent, Law-abiding, God-loving, perfectly dependent, God-glorifying, joyfully obedient because it flows from Worship of the Almighty who created Heaven and Earth life. What Jesus did, we need but could never do. What Jesus is, we should be but don’t want to be. We have loved other things. We have pursued other loves. We have bowed down to the altar of _____________ when all that said “god” represents is only found in the One true, Creator God who somehow exists in Three Persons in One Being and demands our worship because it is good, right and perfect.

So, as I meet and talk and live life with my Christian friends, we are continually finding the myriad of ways in which we fail to meet God’s standards. And we are so thankful that Jesus has d0ne what we do not and could not and, frankly, do not want to do: glorify God in utter dependence with every breath. We learn to show one another how utterly dependent on Jesu we truly are and how utterly beautiful His life of perfect obedience not only was, but is for my everyday.

And, as I talk and live with my friends who do not yet belong to Jesus, my home becomes an example of my worship/joy-fueled pursuit of the Perfect Model, Sacrifice and Intercessor. They will begin to witness the way I lay down my own life for my wife’s best interests and, in response, she joyfully yields herself to my lead. They will witness how we sacrifice our time, our money, our resources for the sake of others. And we will continually seek opportunities to tell them that it is only because we have come to know the depths of how much God has first loved us by giving His only Son (1 John 4:8-12) so that we may have everlasting life (John 3:16).

In other words, as I see it, the point of “discipleship” is to get those who already believe and those who don’t to get to the point where they throw there hands up and say “I have no hope other than Jesus.” The point of “discipleship” is always to get people to the Gospel, to get them as close to hugging that bloody, splintery Cross as possible.

For some, this will result in belief and new life and following Jesus through earthly death unto eternal life. For others, this will result in eternal judgment from God. At some point, everyone, everywhere, at every time, must decide what to do with Jesus. He is the the one inescapable historical figure who everyone must deal with. After all, He claimed to be God and that makes Him either a “liar, a lunatic” or a truth-teller, to paraphrase C.S. Lewis.

So as I understand it, though a “disciple” is someone who has been spiritually raised from the dead (Ephesians 2) and has committed themselves to Jesus and the glory of God in all things, “discipleship” is the point of getting people to the point of realizing that they have no hope before God other than Jesus. So, “discipleship” applies both to “disciples” and not-yet discipels, since the Gospel is the hope for both.

I hope you’re tracking with me and I’m not sure I’m communicating my point here well, but what I’m trying to say is that I understand “discipleship” as something that applies to both “Believers” and “Non-Believers” (to use more traditional Evangelical terms) because the point of discipleship is never just behavior modification but heart modification which comes only through contact with God which comes only through the Spirit leading us through contact/confrontation with Jesus and His Work at the Cross.

As we bring everyone into contact with what is expected of them by God (Matthew 5:48, etc.), which is nothing less than perfection, we all begin to realize that the only way we can meet such expectations is by a perfect substitute inserting themselves between us and God, which is exactly what Jesus has done. So, the idea of “discipleship” means bringing a professed “disciple” through, not only the initial changes that come at salvation (I used to smoke/drink/think about that and now I don’t) but the heat issues behind the sins  (I now realize that I smoked/drank/thought about that because I was looking for _____) and it also means bringing someone who does not yet follow Jesus to a point of crisis, whether it means they realize they can’t possibly do it on their own or they don’t want to curtail their “freedom” to follow Jesus.

So the point of “discipleship,” as I’m beginning to understand it, is to always make someone a better disciple of Jesus, no matter where they’re at on the continuum; to always bring them closer to fuller belief (while realizing that there will be some who simply never cross over the full threshold of belief, which, ultimately, is God’s business, not ours) and full discipleship. It is always meant to bring us to the point of brokenness (the intersection of “law/gospel”), where we realize that we can’t possibly meet God’s standards without Jesus.

What are your thoughts? Am I right in distinguishing form “disciples” and “discipleship”? Is the point always to bring us (as Sovereign Grace Ministries has taught me to sing}, “Deeper Into The Glories of Calvary”? Am I right in understanding the process of discipleship to begin even with those who don’t (yet) believe in helping them to confront Jesus’ expectations and guiding them to the realization that they will never meet such standards on their own? Am I right in understanding that the ongoing process for those who have already professed allegiance to Jesus is the same?

By the way, iff you wonder why the image for this post is based on Franz Kafka‘s brilliant short story “The Metamorphosis,” please read it if you haven’t and then e-mail me if you still have questions. Or, if you have read it and don’t like my associations, also please e-mail me. Otherwise, please

• Read my previous post about helping the Gospel become, not just “clear” but “real.”
• Listen to Tim Keller’s “Preaching to the Heart” lecture series.
• Read Jared Wilson’s helpful book Gospel Wakefulness.

As the GOP Presidential race swings into full gear, Mitt Romney once agin finds himself, not only as a front-runner but at the center of controversy surrounding his beliefs. At root is the question of whether or not Mormonism can be equated with historic, orthodox Christianity.

This is an issue I’ve watched with interest over the years. Before Seminary, I worked for a Christian eating-disorder treatment center. Working in the HR department, one of my roles was to perform basic telephone interviews for professional-level positions. Because the center was distinctly Christian, part of the interview was a ten-question section to determine whether or not the applicant met basic standards of orthodox Christianity (yes, this is allowed under the Civil Rights Act 0f 1964). Because this was a job interview, I was not allowed to ask someone’s religious affiliation but there were always two groups who offered up this information: Roman Catholics and Mormons.

It was an interesting thing because, during the three years that I worked there, I saw a dramatic shift. Towards the beginning, Mormons would not pass this section of the interview process. Yet, by the end of my tenure there, Mormons passed this section. This was accompanied by a concerted effort within the LDS church to present themselves as more mainstream “Christian.”

Growing up, when I encountered LDS missionaries, they were very clear that our belief systems were different and that they were not Christians, though they believe in Jesus. Yet, over the years, there has been a decided shift within the LDS ranks. Now, when I encounter their missionaries, they are quite adamant that we are both Christians, just with different emphases. In fact, many of them seem offended when I assert that we can’t both be Christian because we mean utterly different things even though we use the same language. In fact, in response to mainstream concern that LDS beliefs are not “Christian” Mitt Romney said: “Poisonous language does not advance our cause.” Really? Asserting differences is “poisonous?” Isn’t this the foundation of the LDS faith, that everything had been corrupted? But I’m getting ahead of myself.

I live in a heavily LDS area. In fact, they are building a new temple nearby. If anything, their temples should reinforce the understanding that the LDS faith is not “Christian” in any sense that anyone has accepted the term for 2,000 years. The notion that there is still a temple which is not open to all undermines the very work of Jesus. When Jesus died on the Cross, the temple curtain was torn from top to bottom (Matthew 27:51). Why then, have the LDS resurrected the separation? 1 Peter 2 insists that we are now the “living temple.” Why then should I go to a building? What’s more, Jesus is our Priest (Hebrews 2:17, etc.). The very notion of the temple is a return to the shadows while Jesus is the substance (Colossians 2:16-19).

There are, of course, other differences. In 1844, Joseph Smith gave what has become known as the “King Follett Discourse” which has become doctrine. In this discourse, he insists that “God was once a man as we are now” while Christianity insists that God is eternal, never created (Deuteronomy 33:27, etc.). Fundamentally, Christians and Mormons do not worship the same God. This is made all the more clear in that Christians are Trinitarian, asserting that Jesus Himself is God.

Though there are certainly other differences, including on-going revelation; authority and others, it should be obvious, even at a cursory glance that Mormon doctrine differs significantly from orthodox Christianity. We don’t worship the same God. We view the work of Jesus quite differently. In fact, we don’t even talk about the same Jesus.

So why is Romney so concerned? What’s the big deal? Why insist that Mormons are “Christians” when they are clearly not? This is not a value statement, simply doctrinal reality. How can Romney call pointing out differences “poisonous”? Isn’t it more poisonous to whitewash those differences as though they are unimportant? Romney is not a Christian in any sense anyone in the past 2,000 years has used the term, so why not be comfortable with that?

By now I’m sure that many of you have read or seen interview clips/segments of Bono discussing, among other things, his faith and relationship to “the church.” I recently came across the full content and wanted to pass it along. It’s very interesting and, though long, definitely worth the time if you’ve got it. This content is the basis for the book Bono: In Conversation With Michka Assayas: