“Repent!” The word conjures different notions in people according to the varied experiences that they have had with it. Some describe the idea as that point when they “left the road to Hell and began on the road to heaven.” Others have imagined simply unadulterated judgment (usually from “those church folks”) without a bit of that grace, which “those church folk” also speak of concerning themselves. In Systematic Theology Repentance comes before Justification, which comes before (or at least parallels) Sanctification. More practically, much of theology teaches a continued return to repentance, daily. But the question remains, biblically speaking, what was the intent before 2,000 years of baggage (positively or negatively) affected the word?

The Greek word translated “repent” in many of the English translations of the Bible is the word metanoia. It simply means a change of mind. Thus, taking the word at face value, one could be going the “right way,” have a change of mind, and decide to go the “wrong way” (Incidentally, in many circles this action is termed “back-sliding,” which term I despise! Bygones…). The biblical context of the word speaks of a positive change of heart that is expressed in a positive change of lifestyle. I prefer a more general, but direct, sense of the word – “think.” According to its definition, metanoia is any point and time in our lives when we must actually “think” (as opposed to just going through life reacting to actions based on emotions and feelings, and ignorance). Biblically and theologically speaking, those times when we “think,” are times when we are tapping into the mind of God; conversing with God. Philosophically, the mind of God is the epistemological seat of human thought; the fount from which reason and logic flow.

The New Testament idea of “repenting” comes as a result of God’s in-breaking into the life of humanity. When Jesus first came on the scene – God’s in-breaking into humanity – the message was “repent and believe the Gospel.” Humanity generally, and Israel in particular, was helplessly locked away in its own form(s) of religion. Jesus broke in and said, “Think! It will lead to belief in the reality of the Good News!” Humanity (nor Israel) can reach God on its own accord, thus, “Change your mind and heart! Believe the Good News of God’s love, which is expressed in a changed way of life!”

God is daily breaking into our lives, still. Not because we are going the wrong way, but often because God wants us to learn anew. God wants us to “repent;” “think” differently about things or something. Repentance is a continuous cycle – daily cycle, even – where we are continually challenged to “think,” and “think” differently. When we are first challenged by the Good News, “repentance” is where we first learn (or at least relearn) how to “think” and “think” differently. Today, living life in the Good News of God’s love, we are still challenged to “think;” to “think” about new paradigms, new ways of expressing life in the love of God, and what it means.

Sometimes God’s in-breaking is a positive point of “repentance” and sometimes it’s a negative. But either way it is God breaking into our lives, to which we must “think” – observe what is happening, reflect on what is happening, discuss with others what is happening (all of which can and should take the form of prayer), and then act on what we’ve learned from what is happening. Repentance is not some magical exchange, but a thought process. It is not a blunt instrument of judgmental ignorance, but an invitation into the heart and mind of God. To “think” is the proper response to the in-breaking of God at any point and time in our lives. If you will “think,” then you can believe the Good News of God’s love for humanity (Mark 1:15).

Aggravation being a gift (and a curse), I spend a lot of time stirring the stagnant waters in which the church, for the most part, finds itself. It is true however that many in the church are aware and awake, and causing ripples. There is an ever-growing movement within the church that is reminiscent of John Wesley and the old Methodist revival days of 18^th century England (even for those who do not claim to be either Wesleyan or Methodist). There is also a paradigm shift occurring, the likes of which we haven’t experienced since the first couple centuries of the Christian era. It is interesting that the movement and the paradigm shift have something in common that the church (bound in Christendom) has long since abandoned. What the church has lost, but the movement and the paradigm shift demand is, not just a Christ-centered focus, but a life lived out of the Resurrected Christ lifestyle.

Church, centered in the Resurrected Christ, concerns a balance of two fundamental practicalities. Where the old paradigm attempted to teach the right information in order to get the right behavior, the new paradigm (and its movement) strikes a balance between invitation and challenge. I do not question the idea of teaching the right information (theology – the Logic of God). I simply question what the old paradigm thinks is “the right information” – I question their theology – when the end-goal is “right behavior” (religion). Invitation and challenge necessitate faith, which necessitates the Resurrected Christ for living life.

An invitation to humanity to live in proper relations, with God, with other humans, and with creation, is the mission of God in Jesus Christ to humanity. The challenge is to live a lifestyle out of the life of the Resurrected Christ, not out of the alienation of our personalized religions; to be the expression of Christ in creation, not expressing our own fallen nature to the world. The challenge is to equip multiple cultures to be the collective church, not to build a church with a singular culture. An imbalance in these two is catastrophic, producing something else altogether, something almost worse than having neither of the two.

No invitation and no challenge is an apathetic society. Status-quo is inevitable. No one is invited to share in the life of the society and no one is challenged for not inviting anyone. This church is balanced between their lack of excitement and their lack of interest.

No invitation and all challenge is a members-only club. No one invites anyone because everyone is challenged (continually) to find someone who fits the requirements. Judgmental criticism for not mirroring Club Dead members is acceptable in this church.

All invitation and no challenge is a consumer culture. Anyone and everyone are invited, but to challenge someone contradicts the economics of the culture. This church needs people to be needy so as to sustain the budget and the image. The only challenge is maintaining the product.

A balance of a lot of invitation and a lot of challenge is the Body of Christ. Everyone is invited into relationship and everyone is challenged to invite everyone into relationship by the life of the Resurrected Christ living in everyone. This church has no consumers – the people are empowered for life – and no clubs – the people are included in the life of the church. Enjoying God every day, everywhere, and at any time (even those times that are not officially designated as “church services”) is now church. This was the motivation in the Methodist movement, this was the combination that pushed the Good News of Jesus Christ off the map, and this is the life for living in the Resurrected Christ in the new paradigm.

The apostolic church (where it all started) can be described as a movement of disciple-making. It was making disciples of Christ that resulted in the primitive church that followed (the next couple hundred years). In Christendom (the next 1500+ years), the church can be described as the keeper of status-quo; disciple making of the church, building a church culture. Building churches, we do not make disciples of Christ. Church, by definition, is the effect of making disciples of Christ, not the cause. We do not build a church in the hopes of making disciples; we make disciples who become the church in person.

If you start with the church (which is historically impossible, but we are usually ignorant of history) you enable consumers who are dependent on professional providers of religion, but you do not make disciples of Christ. Built to consume, the church uncontrollably sucks the life out of everything that happens across its path; claiming as its own (as a rite) the life of the community. The people who populate its statistics are takers; they habitually come to “services” prepared to take from the religious provider and from one another. Even the professional providers, though depended on by the consumer, are consumers themselves; taking from the people to feed their incessant need to be needed.

In the new paradigm church (like the apostolic church), Christ is calling people to follow Him – to be a disciple of Christ – not build churches and count its own disciples. In this era we start with Christ – resurrected and imparting (or imputing) His own faithfulness to (into) humanity. We do not enable, but equip; not consumers, but disciples; breathing life into everything and everyone that enters our sphere of influence. We claim nothing but the Cross of Christ as our own; our lives are ever expanding relationships with Him; empowering others to give, to live a life of pouring out in service to others – prepared to give all that Christ has given us – the church, the expression of Christ on earth.

Like the circular logic in the question, “Which came first, the chicken or the egg?” (Incidentally, the chicken came first. Have you ever read Genesis?), we confuse which came first, Christ or the church. At first, the implication seems absurd but, as with the rhetoric of the chicken and the egg, we get lost in the information and lose touch with reality; it’s the old “not seeing the trees through the forest” adage. What Jesus did in His life’s ministry, when He walked the earth in the misty recesses of time, has nothing to do with life as church. When He was nailed to the cross He redeemed and reconciled humanity, but it is His resurrection and ascension that empowers humanity; resurrection and ascension make redemption and reconciliation possible, and not the other way around. It is the power of His resurrection life, today, that empowers humanity to “follow Him.”

The resurrected Christ (the chicken) births resurrection life in us (the egg). Our incubation is discipleship lived out in community, called “church.” Otherwise, we build a church and lay eggs hoping to get Christ, but continually get offspring of the church and not Christ. So, “if a tree falls in the woods” of course it makes a sound even “if no one is around to hear it.” It doesn’t make a sound because we hear it; we hear it because it makes a sound. And it is resounding, whether someone is around to hear it or not. Do not be fooled, Christ is making disciples for Himself. The church doesn’t make disciples of Christ; disciples of Christ are the church.

Trucking for as many years as I did, being a part of the biker community for as long as I have, growing up in the midst of the Metal scene (of which I still embrace), and coming from an “un-churched” background as I have all combine to form a certain culture of me; a particular way of thinking. For nearly a dozen years now I have been a “pastor” (whatever that means), the last eight of which being “fulltime” (as if there is any such thing as “part-time”).  This strange combination has made for some odd encounters, experiences, and relationships; not to mention much understanding, and many misunderstandings.

Many pastors find incredible comfort in the Sunday service called “church.” For them, the church culture is a safe place. Dressing up, playing the role of worship leader, fluctuation of the voice during the sermon, needing to be needed, and the ancient liturgy, etc. all combine to form a comfortable safety that they can receive nowhere else; a certain culture, a particular way of thinking.  This is rather alien to me. “Church,” quite honestly, is not that way for me. It is, to me, a place of invitation and challenge, where ever you are – Church. It is an opportunity to invite people into relationship and to challenge them to invite others into relationship – the full expression of God on earth. The church building is a platform from which the Vision is cast, no more and no less. Sunday morning is just another day of the week, another hour that I get to talk to people. I bring my un-ceremonial, un-sacramental self (usually in leather) and talk about the Cross of Christ. Church is not a place to sit and relax, to me, but a place to cast and receive Vision; non-stop, not a day off, always inviting and challenging, and not necessarily organized.

Being “at church,” I find no comfort or safety. However, I find it necessary for the matter at hand, for it is the place where the “churched” gather; a people to which I’m called to cast a Vision. With the “un-churched,” without the building, I am also called, though I feel no more comfortable or safe than with the “churched.” Although I love casting Vision, neither is the comfort and safety found in the casting of the Vision itself, regardless of to whom I am casting it. Vision casting is a calling; it is suffering – completing the sufferings of Christ.

When I meet people I previously did not know, and they find out what I do, they almost always ask me what “biker church” or what “metal church” I pastor. While it is interesting that we must always categorize people we don’t understand (where I pastor is a melting pot of a mass of humanity), the point in this is not simply culture either. Culture is a variable, but not the reason for my point of view. I may be uncomfortable in a culture that is not my own, finding no safety in a place quite odd to me; but the thing is, comfort and safety are not why I’m a pastor and they’re not what I’m looking for “at church.” I’m a pastor solely out of calling. I’m a Vision caster because I love God and His Vision casted. When asked what I would do if the UMC no longer had a place for me as a pastor I reply, not that I would start a church somewhere, but that, “I’d say, ‘thank you God’ and get in the truck!”

Comfort, for me, is found “in the wind” – riding the ultimate two-seater, my bike – or when I was truckin’, to be in the truck, in some state; just the road to guide me. [Oh, how I miss truckin’!] Safety is being “at the house” – in my own home; my castle. On the bike, in the truck, at the house, that’s comfort and safety. Where I come from, Heavy Metal is the form of worship. The musically expressed dissatisfaction of humanity with humanity causes me to discern the Vision. I do not look for comfort and safety anywhere else. That is my culture. That is how I think.