Social Media MisunderstandingsNavigating the digital landscape can be challenging. At some point, we’ve all said something that wasn’t received the way it was intended. The digital world seems to magnify these unintentional missteps. Social media, while beneficial, undoubtedly leaves a void as it pertains to authentic relational connections. I’m convinced that it’s nearly impossible to really “get to know” someone on a digital platform. I think most of us would agree that until we can sit down, look a person in the eye, and hear his or her heart, it’s really difficult to say we actually “know” them. Many times someone has said, “I see you’re friends with ‘so and so’ on Facebook, how do you know them?” Then I have to explain that ‘so and so’ and I are only connected on social media, and that I don’t actually know them personally.

Undoubtedly, communication that lacks relational equity will more often be misunderstood than relationships that exist in the “real world.” Developing relational equity happens when we invest in people over a period of time. It is very difficult to cultivate a deep sense of respect in a relationship that lacks intimacy on some level. On social media, I’ve often been misunderstood. I’m certain that many of you know what that’s like. Therefore, this is an attempt to strengthen relationships by offering more insight.

Recently, I shared that I have screenshots saved on my hard-drive and am working on a case study pertaining to the antagonistic spirit that often prevails in various online forums. Over the past couple of years, I’ve had an unusual amount of screenshots sent to me privately. Often the sender solicits my opinion regarding the “topic” captured in the image. This has been a way for me to continue to dialogue privately with people without being heavily involved in the larger group discussions.

At times, I too have captured conversations, but not with the intent of using them against anyone. I have a long history of taking copious notes during meetings and important discussions. As a denominational leader, it is important to be accurate and represent peoples’ words fairly. When something eyebrow raising appears online that is directed toward myself or another elder, I have often captured it just to make sure I do not later misrepresent what was said.

Moreover, some material forwarded to me has been horrible beyond words and I have been advised to retain a record in the event a legal investigation was deemed necessary (every leader should understand the gravity of these situations). Programs like Evernote have become commonplace for keeping track of digital interactions.

As to online disagreements and controversial matters appearing in Nazarene forums, I have never used this information to harm someone, nor have I placed it in the wrong hands. In fact, I’m not that serious about it; I just think it is interesting and I have learned a great deal from those with whom I disagree. With that said, I have checked references for people soliciting ministry engagement on the Kentucky District, especially if I identify suspicious online behavior.

Beyond this, I have filed information to establish a case study library of sorts. Being informed on the issues of our day and keeping my finger on the pulse of the denomination has helped me personally as a leader. Understanding surging theological shifts is something I feel every leader should be aware of. In that respect, names aren’t important; I would conceal a person’s identity if that material were referenced in conversation or writing.

My focus is on the renewal of the Kentucky District where we are having success planting new churches and revitalizing existing ones. I am primarily responsible for the pastors that I serve and their development as leaders. Creating case studies has helped me better lead the Kentucky District by identifying movements within the denomination that are bearing fruit. I have no interest in policing forums and building files against leaders from other Nazarene districts; it just isn’t something I think about, nor is it my responsibility.

I am convinced that we cannot be fruitful for the Kingdom of God and play a game of online “gotcha,” besides I don’t know who has time for that game. Sowing seeds of discord and mistrust will not help us win a single person to Jesus. As such, I am resolved to believe the best and give people the benefit of the doubt. I would ask the same of you. Unless someone becomes overly antagonistic I’m willing to walk together for the sake of advancing the cause of Christ.

I appreciate your taking the time to follow my feed and read my blog. I am a very transparent person, my life is an open book, I know of no other way to live. Thank you for letting me be me, and helping me identify areas of improvement. I really do believe we are better together.

 

 

Static - Dan Bohi

Growing up, on Saturday mornings my brother and I would pour ourselves a gigantic bowl of cereal and lay in the floor in front of the television watching cartoons. We had the rabbit ears antenna on our television set; if they weren’t aimed in the right direction static interfered with the signal. However, we were usually enjoying our cereal too much to actually get up, walk over to the TV, and adjust the antenna. Thus, we grew accustomed to watching cartoons with static.

Static distorts our ability to see clearly. It’s the same in our relationships with people.

There’s a name in Nazarene circles that elicits a lot of relational static. People hear the name and typically either respond with endearment and support or with opposition and skepticism. I’ve heard the conversations, followed the online discussions, and been privy to the criticism that undermines this man’s ministry and defames his reputation. Until recently, I have largely remained silent because for many years I too was a skeptic.

Let’s back up a few years… In February 2011, he was one of the plenary speakers for the Church of the Nazarene’s M11 Conference in Louisville, KY. Up to that point, he had been preaching around the country, but the M11 Conference was the first time many of us heard him. The word on the street was that God was using this man in a mighty way. Therefore, the leaders of the denomination asked him to speak at M11.

I was in attendance at the now infamous Tuesday morning service. In fact, I was a presenter at a workshop at the conference. I remember him preaching a bit long that day. His sermon was too “Pentecostal” for some of us well-versed Nazarenes. He talked about a baptism of fire, a fresh anointing, miracles and healing, signs and wonders, and spiritual breakthrough. He even had the nerve to say that his sermon would probably interfere with the afternoon workshop schedule. That really got under my skin… Who did this guy think he was?

I remember standing at the back of the auditorium as people went forward to pray after the service had already exceeded the hour and a half mark. I watched high-level leaders, including District and General Superintendents, fall to their knees crying out to God. In fact, the front of the auditorium was filled with people praying for the Holy Spirit to fall fresh on the church.

As for me, I just stood there… and I wasn’t alone.

There I was, in a room full of church leaders praying for revival, yet I was offended because the service was infringing on the workshop schedule that afternoon. I thought to myself, this guy isn’t even a licensed evangelist; he’s just a layman. Who gave him the right to speak with such authority?

There I stood, sorting through my feelings about this “strange occurrence” at a Nazarene conference. Then my attention turned to the back of the room. While the front was filled with people on their knees weeping and crying out to God, the back of the room was filled with skeptics. These folks were sitting in the bleachers with folded arms and disgruntled looks on their faces.

Then something else caught my attention.

One of my closest friends was about thirty feet away from me on his knees with his hands in the air and tears streaming down his face. We had traveled to M11 together. There we were in the same room; I was conflicted and he was worshipping Jesus. The image of my friend worshipping so freely brought tears to my eyes; however, my pride quickly stepped in and dried them up for me. Although I was standing in the aisle, in my spirit, I was sitting with the disgruntled folks sneering from the bleachers.

When the service finally ended, my friend and I walked out of the auditorium together. He was overflowing with joy, saying, “That was so good! This is exactly what we’ve been praying for. Praise the Lord.” While he was rejoicing, I was trying to hide the fact that I was annoyed.

I left M11 confused about the direction of the Church of the Nazarene. I felt like I wanted revival as much as anyone. I’d been reading a lot about the beginning of our movement and praying for the spirit of our forerunners to be unleashed in this generation. In fact, I’d been praying for another Great Awakening for over a decade; I longed for that kind of spiritual revitalization. Nonetheless, I thought I knew what it would look like when it arrived, and I’d determined that what we experienced at M11 wasn’t it.

Fast-forward… In 2013 while sitting in my office I received an interesting phone call. On the other end of the line was none other than the guy who’d caused so much controversy at the M11 Conference. I remember feeling anxious about talking to him. This was the guy that messed up the workshops and irritated a lot of people back in 2011. This was the guy that many were calling a “false prophet.”

As we talked, God began to reveal some things to me that I wasn’t even aware of. In those moments my heart began to soften toward this man. I didn’t realize it, but I was harboring resentment toward him and his ministry. I was still upset over the events that transpired three years prior. While we were on the phone tears began streaming down my face.

This guy shared stories about how the Holy Spirit was moving in churches all over the country. He shared the vision God laid on his heart to wake up the church. As I listened I found myself agreeing with him. I began to realize that I had judged him based on a religious spirit of offense. After that conversation, we spoke on the phone several more times over the course of a year. Each time we talked God revealed more about how I had allowed feelings of resentment to distort my perception of someone that I was beginning to consider a friend.

After the third or fourth conversation, I fully recognized that I’d sinned against my brother. Although he didn’t know about the negative feelings I’d been concealing, it was weighing heavy on my heart. My ability to see this man for who he really was had been impaired by spiritual “static.”

I judged Dan Bohi without knowing Dan Bohi.

Over the years I’ve taken the time to get to know Dan. Today, I consider him a dear brother. In January 2016, I was at a retreat with about forty other leaders. One evening God provided an opportunity for me to publically confess how I had allowed gossip and offense to influence my perception of Dan. I repented openly in front of the entire room.

Although I had never spoken poorly of Dan, and although he didn’t realize I’d dealt with feelings of offense in the past, God showed me that I needed to take another step and openly admit my resentment. I had allowed religious static to impair my vision, and up until that point, I had been unwilling to adjust the antenna. That day, the Lord provided an opportunity for me to move the rabbit ears and clear up the signal.

Since then God has revealed that I hadn’t gone far enough in validating my friend, Dan Bohi. This is a man who has been terribly misrepresented by a lot of people in the Church of the Nazarene. So let me say this, if you don’t know Dan Bohi, you should take the time to get to know him. If you’re not willing to get to know him, you should refrain from ever saying another word about the man.

I’ve heard people slander his name who don’t have a clue what they’re talking about. I’ve read the threads in the online discussion forums where people literally spend hours, and even days, picking his ministry apart when they’ve never even had a conversation with him. I’ve also seen the people who say, “I’m staying out of it.” These are the ones who genuinely want revival but are too afraid of what people might think to actually connect with those on the frontlines.

Listen carefully; if you really want revival, “staying out of it” isn’t an option.

I’ve heard all the excuses: “He’s not a licensed evangelist,” “He has no accountability,” “He’s too charismatic,” “He’s a neo-Pentecostal,” “He makes his living doing revivals, but isn’t ordained.” I could go on and on with the ridiculous commentary that’s based on nothing but conjecture and gossip.

Dan Bohi is more Nazarene than most Nazarenes I know. The man’s father, Rev. Jim Bohi, is an ordained minister in the church. His wife, Debbie Owens Bohi, is the daughter of a former General Superintendent. Dan was a longtime member of College Church in Olathe, Kansas: a church that’s produced more General Superintendents than any other church in recent history. His son, Chad Bohi, is the lead pastor of Cornerstone Church of the Nazarene in Santa Maria, CA, where Dan is now a member. Beyond that, Dan recently received his local minister’s license and started the process of ordination.

Dan has been a committed layman his entire life. He served on the church board, sung in the choir, taught Sunday School, went on mission trips, and a whole lot more. He reads the entire Bible through every two months. He goes wherever the Lord sends him and tells people about Jesus. He has a board that oversees every aspect of his ministry. In fact, Dan has more accountability in his life than most leaders I know. I wish every church I’d ever pastored had ten lay leaders like Dan Bohi.

Did I mention that Dan’s ministry is fully funded? He has a team of ordained Nazarene ministers that travel with him fulltime, including Craig Wesley Rench, Hal Perkins, Dave Flack, and Jay Jellison. God has provided a way for his team to travel together with a vision to “wake up the church” a no cost to the church. In fact, if you would like to host an Awakening/Revival, Dan’s team will come to your church or district without charging a dime. All they ask for is a love offering. What God is doing through this ministry is absolutely amazing.

You may ask, “How do you know these things, Brian?” I know because I, along with several other leaders in the Church of the Nazarene, currently serve on the board that oversees Dan Bohi Ministries.

For those of you that have interacted in the gossip circles about Dan, maybe God is speaking to you about the need to repent. That doesn’t mean you have to book a meeting with Dan. However, maybe you need to simply call him and have a conversation. Maybe you need to adjust the rabbit ears and clear up the relational static.

We need revival. It isn’t going to happen sitting on the bleachers with our arms crossed. It isn’t going to happen standing in the aisle between the bleachers and the altar like I did at M11. The only way it’s going to happen is if we fall on our faces, admit when we’re wrong, and cry out, “Come Holy Spirit.”

Dan Bohi.jpg

DanBohiMinistries.com

 

 

 

Screen Shot 2017-06-18 at 10.14.17 PM

General Assembly is the quadrennial gathering of the global family that is the Church of the Nazarene. Every four years delegates from all over the world come together to celebrate what God has done, discern how the Holy Spirit is leading, and make decisions about how to faithfully advance the mission of Making Christlike Disciples in the Nations in the years ahead.

The Church of the Nazarene has always been theologically and biblically conservative, yet progressive in practice. In other words, we believe the Bible is true and we take the message of holiness seriously. Nonetheless, we’re willing to stop at nothing to reach people with the life-transforming message of the Gospel.

From the beginning, the distinctive doctrine of the Nazarene movement has been “entire sanctification,” which teaches that after one becomes a Christian there’s a deeper work to be experienced. When a person is filled with the Holy Spirit (entirely sanctified) his or her devotion to Jesus becomes the essence of life. Entire sanctification is the doctrine of “love made perfect,” lived out as the Holy Spirit empowers us to be His witnesses to the ends of the earth (Acts 1:8).

At General Assembly, we make decisions about resolutions that have been submitted by districts and committees from around the world. These resolutions affect the theology, polity, social positions, and overall governance of the church and are incorporated into the Manual (book of discipline) if passed by the global delegation. I am thankful for the growing delegation from the Africa, South America, and Mesoamerica Regions, as I believe they will keep us on track theologically.

After reading the resolutions for the 2017 General Assembly, I decided to elaborate on a few that are categorized in the “Christian Action” grouping. This category informs our identity more than any other as it pertains to who we are theologically and where we stand biblically.

While administrative matters need to change as we discover better ways to faithfully steward the organizational structures of the church, theological distinctiveness should only be strengthened, never diluted. In a world of pluralism, relativism, moral decline, and social injustice, if our theological distinctiveness is not reinforced the church’s influence in the world will diminish.

———————————————-

CA-700: Affirmation and Declaration of Human Freedoms – The United Kingdom British Isles South District submitted this resolution. It calls for us to “confess our complicity” as it pertains to the enslavement of human beings. That statement alone makes this resolution a bad idea. With that kind of wording, this could become a legal issue in some world areas. It reads as an admission to a crime against humanity. This resolution is not necessary because our involvement in “setting captives free” is a given by nature of the holiness message (Isaiah 61:1, Luke 4:18).

CA-701: Human Sexuality – Resolution 701 was created and submitted by the Board of General Superintendents. It is the best choice of the three submissions on “Human Sexuality.” There is unquestionably a minority looking for loopholes as it pertains to same-sex marriage. While we need to be gracious in our response, we must also remain committed to biblical orthodoxy concerning sexuality. The Board of General Superintendents engages this topic with a deep sense of compassion, yet they also remain clearly grounded in Holy Scripture and Wesleyan-Arminian theology. This resolution lovingly speaks to the various nuances related to the doctrine of human sexuality.

CA-701a/701b: Human Sexuality – The Netherlands, New England, and Kansas City Districts submitted these two resolutions. They remove any language pertaining to homosexual behavior. Without such language being supplemented elsewhere, these resolutions weaken the biblical doctrine of sexual purity and potentially opens the door to homosexual behavior becoming acceptable. It’s impossible to remain biblically responsible, yet remove language pertaining to homosexuality from our doctrinal statements.

CA-708: The Christian Life – The Mid-Atlantic and Northwestern Ohio Districts, and the General Assembly Resolutions and Reference Committees collectively submitted this resolution. The new wording offers a much-needed global perspective. Without it, this entire section of the Manual is established on paradigms employed primarily in western culture, especially the U.S., and is not reflective of the fact that we are an international church. This resolution is a great addition to our Manual.

CA-709: The Use of Social MediaWhile I appreciate the efforts of the Mid-Atlantic District and the Reference Committee, to say that all social media activities should be affirming and uplifting to all people is biblically inaccurate (Jer. 1:10). There would be large portions of the Bible that couldn’t be quoted on social media if our activities must continually be uplifting to all people. This would also deny anyone the ability to speak prophetically about the difficult issues facing the church. Beyond that, who decides what qualifies as “respectful” when it comes to social media interaction? Various personalities speak, write, and communicate differently. Interpreting online interaction becomes an impossible task if we attempt to judge one person’s written expressions based on what another person considers respectful and/or offensive. Being gracious and forgiving to one another on social media should be a given.

CA-710: The Use of Intoxicants – The Nebraska and Mid-Atlantic Districts, and the Reference Committee submitted this resolution. While we could certainly work on the wording of this Manual paragraph, this particular submission weakens our position on the use of alcohol to the point that we might as well remove it altogether. I struggle with the missional implications as it pertains to something as addictive as alcohol consumption. We certainly realize the devastating effects it’s had on the poor and marginalized. We should consider rewording these paragraphs our Manual. However, I’m not comfortable with this resolution as it’s presented.

CA-714: Sanctity of Human Life – The Mid-Atlantic District submitted this resolution. I struggled more with this submission than any other. The suggested change weakens our current stance and actually devalues human life beyond what we presently affirm. It’s a slippery slope that we should avoid at all costs. When we arrive at the place in our theology where we view the sanctity of human life as a “political” issue we fail the most innocent human beings among us: those still in the womb. If anything, we should make a stronger statement on the sanctity of human life, especially as it relates to abortion.

CA-717: Covenant of Christian Character – The Netherlands District submitted this resolution. The Covenants of Christian Character and Conduct are designed to give additional direction to members of the Church of the Nazarene concerning what is beneficial to the Christian life. They are not exhaustive, but they are helpful. They serve to strengthen believers in the pursuit of holiness. Eliminating these details deprive us of our distinctiveness. When we lose the things that make us unique we ultimately ignore the distinctive call of God on our movement, and in turn become generic and ineffective.

CA-718: The Christian Life – The New England District submitted this resolution. Rewording this Manual paragraph to include the Great Commandment and the Sermon on the Mount would be extremely helpful. However, removing the reference to the Ten Commandments when Jesus said, “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law…” (Matt. 5:17), only weakens the statement. I agree that focusing exclusively on the Ten Commandments centers primarily on rules and lends itself to legalism. The teachings of Christ should be highlighted in this paragraph. Rewording this resolution slightly would strengthen our theological position.

CA-721: Christian Marriage – The Southwest Indiana District submitted this resolution. This amendment strengthens our theological and legal position on marriage. As society continues to change at a rapid pace there will be more and more groups attempting to redefine marriage in light of cultural shifts based primarily on human reasoning. One recommendation: if we are going to change the word “biblical” to “Christian” in the last sentence, we should also change it in the second-to-last sentence.

CA-724: Gender Identity – The Board of General Superintendents submitted this resolution. In a day and age where gender identity is surrounded by controversy, we desperately need a statement that provides direction on an issue that is predominantly driven by culture and politics. This resolution is rooted in biblical doctrine and Christian tradition and affirms that gender identity reflects God’s divine plan for humanity.

——————————————–

This is by no means an exhaustive list of the resolutions submitted to the General Assembly. This article only speaks to resolutions that some feel could have a significant impact on the future identity of the Church of the Nazarene. These particular resolutions are what I describe as “identity declarations.” When we amend the Manual paragraphs concerning what we believe and how we practice what we believe we are reinterpreting how to apply biblical doctrine, which cannot be done lightly.

The sentiments expressed in this article are based on conversations with various leaders in the Church of the Nazarene, analysis of the negative impact that secularized culture is having on the church, application of Scripture in the Wesleyan-Holiness tradition, and personal convictions as it pertains to how the church can best move forward in the power and authority of the Holy Spirit.

Please feel free to contact me at kynazds@gmail.com with any questions or comments. If you have more insight as to how we can better discuss these issues in the future I’d love to hear from you.

ConfidentialityTransparency is essential for effective leadership.  It is also a necessary attribute of holiness. As a pastor, over the years I’ve chosen to be very transparent with staff and ministry leaders, and many times probably too transparent from the pulpit (I tend to wear my heart on my sleeve). However, there have also been times where confidentiality was the best policy.

The unpleasant reality is that I’ve had to part ways with staff who didn’t share the same vision as the rest of the team. I’ve also had to dismiss pastors and ministry leaders who were working against the church’s mission. Every time this happened I received criticism for those decisions. Yet, regardless of the criticism, I didn’t give public notification pertaining to the details. It was always something the church board and myself handled confidentially. That’s what we were called to do… lead. In these cases, confidentiality was the best policy.

Regarding the recent issues with Nazarene Publishing House (NPH), a situation where personal profit seemed to lead the demise of an important ministry, I think we need a lot of transparency and critique. However, in my opinion, that’s different than issues regarding some of our university professors. Our universities, like our churches, share a vision of equipping people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up (Eph. 4:12). This vision can only be successful when there is unity.

I’ve read numerous comments relating to Dr. Thomas Oord’s dismissal from Northwest Nazarene University (NNU). Let me start by saying I love Oord’s work. I have been challenged to think more deeply about important theological issues because of him. I think he is a brilliant theologian and there is no doubt that Tom is going to land on his feet. However, I don’t feel like the masses of spectators are in a place to judge the relationship that exists between professors and the university leadership as a whole.

I also believe the Board of Trustees love NNU and want to see the university thrive. Legally, the board cannot make a press statement about all the details pertaining to directional disagreements between university leadership and faculty. Certainly, we all know that. Obviously, different ideas about direction often lead to a place where it is not beneficial for people to continue together. That doesn’t make either wrong, it just makes them different in their vision and approach to ministry.

My experience with our universities primarily relates to Dr. Dan Boone at Trevecca Nazarene University (TNU). Dan pastored for years before being called to the position of university president. I think it’s fair to say that TNU sees Dan not only as a visionary leader but also as a shepherd. He has the heart of a pastor. And theoretically, if he parted ways with a professor, even one that I loved and admired, I wouldn’t question his vision or integrity for doing so. Dan is very transparent about his vision and leadership strategies, yet when it comes to legal issues confidentiality protects everyone involved.

I understand that the university and local church context are not exactly the same thing. However, the parallels, when it comes to vision, team-work, and kingdom advancement, are extremely similar… or at least they should be.

Scenario: Let’s say I have a staff pastor who is loved by many in the church and community. We’ve worked well together for years. He begins leading in ways that I believe are contrary to the overall direction of the church. Not only are his ideas and actions opposing to mine, but they are actually working against the direction of the leadership team. I have numerous discussions with him about teamwork and joining us as it relates to the vision of the church. Still, he refuses to listen.

Now our relationship is tense. It’s hard to even be in the same room. I still have a deep love for this person, but a time has come where we have to part ways. I inform him that we have to part ways. I give him a fair severance package. I tell the congregation. Some are angry at the situation, I get criticized. They demand answers. I refuse to explain “why” my friend and I can’t continue to work together because I believe that would make things worse. I want to allow him to leave and go serve in a place where his philosophy of ministry would be a good fit. So I take the criticism and refuse to say anything bad about my brother in Christ (by the way, I’ve had scenarios that are very close to this and I’m still great friends with some of those people).

Dr. Thomas Oord is a theological visionary. No doubt he is a courageous thinker. I believe we need trailblazers that push the limits of the institution. However, I also believe we need unity, and when that becomes absent sometimes people have to go their separate ways. Similar issues have been dealt with by church leaders throughout scripture.

Transparency is the only policy for the misuse of power and financial incompetence, especially when there seems to be personal gain and monetary conflicts of interest (e.g. million dollar lease agreements and “gifts”). However, confidentiality is best when leaders disagree on direction and there are legal issues that call for discretion so that no one’s reputation is slandered in the process. Transparency and confidentiality, we need both.

NPH and NNU is an apples and oranges comparison. It’s unfair to compare the two. With NPH, we should demand complete transparency. With NNU, I believe the board of trustees bears the responsibility to make decisions based on what they believe to be best for the future. And I don’t feel like I have the right to know why all those decisions are made.

Let’s stop speaking from emotion and painting the entire church with broad strokes. For the sake of balance and grace, we need to think beyond the noise created by social media. Sometimes we get so busy pointing fingers that we fail to proceed with grace ourselves. As Dr. Thomas Oord would appropriately say, let us choose to… live a life of love.