I’m confused. Just when I think I start to figure things out, God says, “Calm down Michael.”
As many of you know, I often like to take a break from my church and explore what is going on in other places. Today was one of those days. Due to my confusion, I don’t have a pulpit with me right now. Therefore, I am comfortable revealing names and places. I went to Life Church today. This is not so unusual as I have been there before. The main campus is just a couple of miles down the street.
Life Church is one of those things that makes someone of my tradition scratch their heads. I have scratched a big portion of my hair out today. Life Church is somewhat of a phenomenon. It has become quite legendary due to the way church is done. They are more technologically savvy than Paramount pictures. Let me just briefly describe the service today to help you out.
This summer the theme has been “Life Church at The Movies” (or something like that). When you walk in there are huge posters that are done in the theme of Toy Story. These are the kind of posters that we would have to create a separate line item at the Credo House to cover. They were visually stunning. But that is not even half of it. In the lobby, everything is decorated according to a movie theater/Toy Story theme. “Decorated” is a bad word as it was much more than just decoration. It was a movie theater entrance. And a nice one at that. On the other side of the lobby, there were artifacts from the Toy Story set. You would not believe it. They had a twelve foot etch-a-sketch. I think it actually worked! Andy’s room was set up perfectly in a separate roped off area. They even had an eight foot tall game machine like the one that the aliens were taken from in Toy Story 1 (you know . . . those guys who say “you have saved our lives, we are eternally grateful”). I could go into more detail, but you get the idea.
Wait…I have some pictures.
Etch-A-Sketch to Left
Alien Game to Right
The idea during this movie series is to show twenty or thirty minutes of an inspirational movie and then draw lessons from it. Today the movie was “The Blind Side.” Last week it was “Walk the Line.” The messages were great. The typical motivational seminar type stuff with some Christian justification behind it. Not too much scripture. Certainly not any expositional preaching.
Now I need to back up a bit…
I am from a tradition that is in a love/hate relationship with this kind of stuff, with hate tipping the scales more often than not. Its called by many names: “seeker-sensitive,” “seeker-friendly,” or the more pejorative “seeker driven.” I went to seminary when all this seeker stuff was hotly debated. Rick Warren’s Purpose Driven Church was the book to read and your spirituality was based on how much you hated it. The biggest and, for many, most definitive criticism of the “seeker” mentality is that while there is evangelism that happens, discipleship can hardly be found. Like a friend of mine often says, “Tastes great, less filling.” Michael Spencer used to call this movement the “Evangelical circus.”
Now, I have to come clean and admit something here. There is a sense in which those like me actually want these type of churches to fail. That is hard for me to admit. In fact, I am thinking about taking that line out. But it is true. “See . . . I told you so” are words that are often on the tip of my tongue ready to be interjected at the slightest hint that the “seeker” churches have compromised or failed. What a terribly sinful entanglement that I have. I admit it. There is no justification for that.
Okay, back to the story…
I sat down by some big biker dude. He was awesome. Long hair, bandanna, and long ungroomed beard. For a moment, I thought he might be a prop for the set. Then I looked across the church and saw that he was not so uncommon. None of these people looked like “churchy” people at all. The majority were under forty and dressed in the same thing they were going to wear for the rest of the day (or the same thing they wore last night). Did I mention flip-flops? Lots of flip-flops (including mine). Concerning my biker neighbor, I did not know anything about him. I did not know what sins he struggled with, how his marriage was, or what he did the night before. However, I could tell that he was glad to be there and he seemed to really love Jesus. I was glad he was there too. In this place, for better or worse, the curtain between the church and the culture was wrent in twain. The atmosphere was one of grace and excitement.
Was the lesson impactful? For me, it was a 3 on a scale of 10. Sure, I felt a bit of conviction “to go,” as the message said, “and find someone in need and be an influence upon them.” But it is one of those things. In order for it to really have any chance of lasting beyond a fly in the ointment of my conscience for the day, the conviction level must be above a 6. Otherwise it is just one-day-guilt. I normally respond better to those messages that are grounded in Scripture and illustrated by a movie rather than grounded in a movie and illustrated by Scripture. (There, got my one cheap shot flowing with snarkiness out. I feel a tincy bit better.)
However, there was something different going on there. Something that was intoxicating. Something that my spirit had been deprived of but I failed to realize it until now. A spiritual anti-depressant if you will. It was the power of the Gospel. But not this alone. It was the power of the Gospel as it was proclaimed to so many people who had never heard it. From what I understand, there were hundreds, even thousands, of unchurched people there. Seems right. It is a “seeker” church. That is what all the production is for: to get unbelievers to come hear the message of Christ by whatever means (within reason) necessary. We were informed that over four-hundred people accepted Christ last week during the “Walk the Line” message. Now, I take those numbers with a grain of salt. However, I would not be surprised if there are not a lot of people who are being ushered into the kingdom at this church. Whatever people might think of Craig Groeschel (the lead pastor) and his philosophy of ministry, he gives one of the clearest presentations of the true and uncompromised Gospel that I have ever heard. It is this that is so exhilarating. To witness the evangel (the Gospel) being proclaimed to so many in need is a vitalization, for me, of what we are about. You must understand, being from this part of town and growing up living on the other side of the Christian train tracks, these people represented hundreds of my friends and acquaintances that I grew up with who I could never get to come to my church or show up for a Bible study, but were sitting there willingly listening to what Christ has done for them and how to be forgiven.
It has been a long time since I have wanted to stand up and cheer, but today I jumped off the wagon of evangelical stagnation and was reminded about why we are here. It is this vitalized celebration of my heart that has confused me. I want with all of my stubborn being to say how wrong Life Church, the new Mecca of seeker churches, has got it. But I can’t.
What I have been coming to realize over the years is that there is simply no one way to do church. I think that this is a strength of Evangelicalism. We can stretch in many directions. Evangelicalism has its arms open wide to a varied set of liturgies, from high church formality to Toy Story lobbies. Neither do I don’t think that there is one transcendently right way to do church. I am not arguing for seeker churches, but I am not arguing against them either. They have their place, and I think it is about time to recognize how God is using them in spite of all our “yeah, buts.” There are some churches that are good at the discipleship, but lack in outreach. There are some churches that are good at community, but lack in strong teaching. There are some churches that are good at connecting with the past, but have no connection to the present. And there are some that are good at converting the lost, but don’t know what to do with them after.
I have yet to find the perfect church. I am coming to think that our territorialism is the biggest problem. We want to throw rocks at the church across the street for not having the strengths of our church, while not recognizing our weaknesses. We have a distorted self-defense that clinches its fist when people are not doing things the way we think they ought to. While I think churches should be as balanced as they can, maybe the individual churches should unclinch their fists and begin to hold hands with those who don’t share their strengths but do cater to their weaknesses. I am not so sure that we should see ourselves as “belonging” to any one church.
When Paul would write to the churches, he never addressed any particular group or gathering within the larger whole. He did not write one letter to the “First Baptist Church at Corinth” and one to the “Evangelical Community Church at Corinth.” While I am sure there were many individual house gatherings by that time, all having strengths and weaknesses, he wrote to “the church at Corinth.” No territorialism. No rocks. No preference. Everyone saw themselves as parts of the whole. It is the whole that needed the message. This is how he wrote to all the churches. I figure that were he to write to my church, it would be addressed to “the church of Oklahoma City.” The problem is that we are so busy throwing rocks, criticizing each others’ weaknesses, and territorially worried about our own church’s budget, that we would probably not recognize the other churches and share the letter.
Do churches have gaping holes of weakness? Certainly. Is discipleship a hole in Life Church. I think it is. Does Life Church need to change their style. No. What they are doing is incredible. Where else would my biker friend feel welcome? They, like all local churches, need to recognize that they are only one part of something bigger. Having gapping holes of weakness does not mean that we have to have gapping holes of neglect. If Christ-centered churches saw themselves as a part of a larger community of churches, then we could all work together to provide the balance that is needed. Then people like me could do more celebrating than criticizing.
Today, God helped me to celebrate the “Evangelical circus.”
162 replies to "My Experience Today at LifeChurch.tv"
Michael, another home run.
Why are we so eager in our judgment of the church down the street? Romans 14:4, though out of the immediate context, still seems applicable.
“Who are you to judge someone else’s servant? To his own master he stands or falls. And he will stand, for the Lord is able to make him stand.”
I remember my first visit to Willow Creek, many years ago. I went in expecting to dislike it, to find it shallow and compromised. I came out with an attitude much like you describe above.
Great points, Michael. I think a lot of it comes down to mature Christians going to “meaty” churches looking down on the churches that cater more towards evangelism to the “milk” crowd. We are not open to an “all things to all men” approach and think that what worked for us is the only thing that works. I think there is also different giftings going on as well. We recognize the need or benefit for the hellfire and damnation of the evangelist coming in every once in a while and know that his style can complement our normal pastor’s style used the rest of the year, but don’t want to see that the seeker-pastor, the pastor on the curb outside the soup kitchen, and the pastor at the traditional 1st Baptist can all be pointing in different ways to the same message. Instead, in a defense of there is only one way to heaven, we often believe that there is only one way to point that out.
Daniel
Wow, Michael, you are starting to scare me. Since when did the body of Christ become about how a certain church does it’s business and stop being about how the the church, as Christ defines it, become paramount? I understand how you say it’s about the larger church, and appreciate that, but yet you seem to agree we should apply more unorthodox ways to reach the lost. I applaud churches who reach out to the lost of any genre, because that’s where I have always been in my own ministry. I just don’t agree that it’s embracing a certain religious methodology that defines, or should define, the body of Christ.
Could you expound more upon the differences more? Thanks, and please know, if you already don’t, if we don’t always agree, I do sincerely appreciate your honesty with us.
God bless.
This is good. Now I have to carry on the conversation.
Man, you are confused! 🙂 There is no way a biker dude is more drawn in by a Toy Story (come on!!) atmosphere than he would be by a pot luck dinner or a sermon preached from..eeeewww!!… a pulpit! no way! Sorry Michael, but I give this a 4 barf out of 5. If he has the nads to get a tattoo he can stand some straight preaching, without glitz from the pulpit. Don’t complicate it or better yet don’t be demure with the gospel. It rings of deception and insincerity. Although it must have been a good show if it got you!
@Cadis: Maybe it isn’t so much the biker being drawn in by Toy Story as it is him being *rejected* at other places because of his choice of hair style or transportation….
Daniel, possibly but doubtful. Long hair and black clothing does not have the affect it once used to.
I know an ex-Amish, now non-denominational pastor, who is a biker and runs with the biker’s because he likes motorcycles. He himself looks “evangelical/dweeb” the biker’s don’t care and niether does he. That is honest.
“6.Daniel Eaton on 11 Jul 2010 at 7:44 pm #
Maybe it isn’t so much the biker being drawn in by Toy Story as it is him being *rejected* at other places because of his choice of hair style or transportation….”
I couldnt agree more. I recently asked our sunday school class the question if they were walking along and they saw someone drowning in dung would they be willing to stop reach out and help them?
We study scripture but has it become part of our being were its ooozing out of us? Are we willing to reach those under 30’s that are listening to rap music with there pants hanging down to the ground with what appears to be no respect for themselves nor others.
???
@Cadis, I know it is possible for there to be Amish biker pastors. But you have to admit that is more of the exception than the rule. I know a missionary that was fired from his mission organization when it was learned that on the mission field in Norway that he grew a beard and rode around on a motorcycle. In my own past, I was told in one church that I could not join the choir unless I shaved my facial hair and started wearing suits. So the rejection in some circles is very much alive and real….and it is *those* extremes that the church becomes known for, not the loving and accepting exceptions to that.
[…] But I think the biggest revelation of it all is this: “What I have been coming to realize over the years is that there is simply no one way to do church.” (read entire post and comments…) […]
Daniel, No I don’t think it is the exception. The exception nowadays are those who might seperate due to clothing, hair, appearance, music etc,
What I’m trying to say or convey is don’t contrive an atmosphere. Don’t bend over backwards, don’t be hypocritical.. just care, live and let it shine.
I’m curious. Do you think that the format (movie/pop culture themed services/sermons) helped get the message across at all (besides getting people in the door)?
I guess what I’m thinking is that I might (emphasis might) attend a church like that for the positive things that you mentioned, but I just find it hard to envision myself deriving anything but annoyance from the other elements.
When I try to get inside the mind of an outsider, it’s even worse. Perhaps this is because most of the non-Christians I know are of the more cynical variety, but most of them would look at a service like that and find it at best baffling, and at worse disingenuous (like bait-and-switch marketing).
So what I want to know is, what keeps people coming back? What do “seekers” get from Toy Story week + gospel that they don’t get from just gospel? Or from even from Toy Story week plus welcoming community that they don’t just get from welcoming community? What does this strategy add, if anything, to the usual marks of a good church?
I’m really asking. I really want to try to wrap my mind around it.
Two questions:
1) What is the Biblical function of the church (the gathered body of Christ)?
2) What is the Biblical function of the saved one regarding the lost?
I would say the answer to the first is to worship the Lord and to disciple His sheep. If an unbeliever happens to come to a service, that should be what he witnesses: saved ones worshiping their savior! Could he be saved through that? I would venture that the chances are far greater than through stories and movies…
I would say the answer to the second is to evangelize the lost.
The individual Christian should do the evangelizing; the church should do the discipling.
If I am correct in those answers, then the entire foundation for the “seeker-sensitive” church is false, and churches like this are doing little but creating false conversions.
Mike, I would not say that they get anything more out of the cultural themes that draw them in. In fact, if the meat of biblical truth and theology is the end game, then they would get less.
However, the question is their goal. Their goal is to get people their that would not otherwise come to church. They cultural themes, decorations, music, look, feel, and Toy Story provide a bridge from the world they know to the world of the church.
Charley,
While I am not necessarily disagreeing with you in principle, I don’t know if you understood the crux of my conclusions. You seem to assume that individual local church bodies are just that—individual. Therefore, they must provide perfectly all that is needed in isolation to the others without relying on other means of support to help them in their weaknesses.
Small churches have to rely upon larger communities all the time. For example:
-some churches don’t have any counseling services and need to outsource to larger bodies who, in turn, outsource to professional care when needed.
-many churches in the past have relied on crusades to come into town to host evangelistic events knowing that they would not be able to draw the same attention.
-churches rely on ministries such as ours for theological training of lay people.
-churches rely on seminaries for training of pastors.
-some churches exist to win the lost and then encourage their people to get involved in some “meatier” fellowships where they can grow deeper in biblical studies.
My point is that we need to stop thinking of the individual bodies made up of individual buildings as the church that we must find all our nourishment in.
I go to a church that is great on teaching the Bible, but lacks some with regard to building fellowship and community, not to mention this kind of outreach.
The question you are really asking is “What should always be done on Sunday morning service?” While I understand where this comes from, it carries so many assumptions that it is hard to answer. I don’t think there is one thing that has to be done on Sunday morning.
Local churches should have a balance of discipleship, fellowship, outreach, inreach, and worship. But the local bodies can do these at a lot of places and a lot of times.
My goal would be to have the leaders of each of these churches encourage their congregations to make sure that this is being done, no matter where. I don’t think they need to ALWAYS intent themselves on being the “be-all” in all areas. Most churches just cannot do it all and do it well. Let’s start seeing ourselves as part of a bigger whole and we will see the richness many churches have to offer us without the pressure of being a member of any one church.
BTW: were I to start a church myself, it would not be a seeker church. Not because I am against it, but because I would not be as effective as I am in expositional preaching and teaching.
My point is that we need to stop thinking of the individual bodies made up of individual buildings as the church that we must find all our nourishment in.
I couldn’t agree with you more. There is no one church that has it all. We need one another to truly be the body of Christ–the church universal.
This is good to hear. My only real trouble with seeker-sensitive churches is when they downplay the gospel for fear of being too offensive. When the gospel is clear and present, I’m cheering for them.
I think it’s disgusting to see people where flip flops in church.
Sorry, gonna get people riled up at me but it’s disgusting.
“Something that was intoxicating. Something that my spirit had been deprived of but I failed to realize it until now. A spiritual anti-depressant if you will. It was the power of the Gospel. But not this alone. It was the power of the Gospel as it was proclaimed to so many people who had never heard it….. I would not be surprised if there are not a lot of people who are being ushered into the kingdom at this church. Whatever people might think of Craig Groeschel (the lead pastor) and his philosophy of ministry, he gives one of the clearest presentations of the true and uncompromised Gospel that I have ever heard. It is this that is so exhilarating. To witness the evangel (the Gospel) being proclaimed to so many in need is a vitalization, for me, of what we are about.”
Amen, Michael! You have touched on something so vital…and yet in many places so LOST in the current direction of many evangelical churches. With such a great focus on social justice and redeeming culture the simple, powerful proclamation of the gospel has been over-shadowed. ALL churches need to participate in this more! Yes, it is intoxicating…and many will come to know Jesus if we proclaim His name boldly and lovingly….and reach them with the true gospel however we can. This IS the mission of the church!
P.S. I wouldn’t call our church ‘seeker friendly’ in this way. I MISS it.
One important note here (that should probably be its own blog!):
When Craig presented the Gospel, he said something like this: “You don’t go to heaven because you are a good person. Hell is going to be filled with ‘good’ people the way we define ‘good.'”
Certainly, there was much more to it than that. But I say this because it is so common for people to compromise the message. Hell is not well received, so let’s not talk about it in such definitive terms. Craig did not compromise on Hell nor the exclusivity of Christ. It was clear as can be. For this I added pom poms to my cheer!
People often equate “seeker sensitive” with emerging type churches. I believe this needs to be distinguished (and I know there are exceptions).
In order to reach the lost, Evangelical seeker churches build bridges by adapting to the culture’s modality (not sinful modality) but don’t adapt the Gospel.
In order to reach the lost emerging type churches build bridges by adapting the Gospel to the culture’s tolerance level and, often, as a result, compromise the Gospel.
I will take the former rather than the latter ANY day.
CMP,
I know you are generally more careful when talking about the emerging church (or whatever they are calling themselves these day) but just a reminder to not paint too broad of brush strokes. The “emergent” types are certainly compromising the Gospel to be relevant to culture. Yet there are other “emerging” churches that are very clear on the Gospel and orthodox in their teachings, they just gear things to attract young adults (i.e. candles, rock music, relaxed dress code, none-traditional location, non-traditional time, etc.).
“In order to reach the lost emerging type churches build bridges by adapting the Gospel to the culture’s tolerance level and, often, as a result, compromise the Gospel.”
So true. I feel like our church has sort-of done this.
The thing is we don’t need to apologize for the truth. “For I am not ashamed of the gospel for it is the power of God unto salvation”! Hell and the wrath of God to come IS part of the gospel message. If we leave that out and always try to woo people with ‘nice-nice’ why would they need Jesus. Jesus becomes an option for life that they can easily dismiss as something they don’t really need.
Michael, that is why I said “I know there are exceptions.” Maybe I should have been more careful. However, the lines have been drawn pretty clearly in the last couple of years. Most of the former orthodox emergers want nothing to do with that nomenclature any more. I know that there is still the ethos that is out there, but it has yet to find an identity.
Dan Kimball was associated with ’emerging’ until a year or so ago. He said that in it’s beginnings ’emerging’ was all about evangelism, but over time that seised to be the case. Thus, he divorced himself from the term. Now he is taking pains to address the deficit of evangelism in the Evangelical church at large…with special focus on churches who have put a huge emphasis on social justice/ deed ministry. He acknowledges the tendency for such churches to neglect the verbal proclamation of the gospel. We’ve chatted a bit on FB about this, because it has definitely been a concern of mine with my own church.
This post made me think of this parody video, which makes me chuckle a bit.
That one is good, this one is better: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yb9DF16Fx8k&feature=related
“with special focus on churches who have put a huge emphasis on social justice/ deed ministry. He acknowledges the tendency for such churches to neglect the verbal proclamation of the gospel.”
I’ve had issues in my church with this as well. Keeping balance and following all we are called to be as the Church is never easy and no church that I’ve ever been to or even visited does it perfectly (if they did I’d be there…).
On the issue of the emerging church I’m probably behind the times since I stopped going to a church which called itself “emerging” a few years back (nothing against the church – just found a group of friends and ministries I connected with more at another church). Dan Kimball was one of the people I was thinking of though. The things that the guy believes and what he teachers are as historically orthodox as you can get pretty much.
Scott L,
ROFL on that parody. The funny part is I could swear this was a megachurch church parodying themselves. I don’t know what other churches would the the resources to put together a stage setup like that – the lighting on the stage in the video (much less the LED screens) costs $5,000+ a piece. I go to a pretty large church and they rent equipment like that for Christmas and Easter – it’s not cheap. Any idea who made the video?
I don’t agree that we shouldn’t judge. On the contrary, we must judge everyone, starting with ourselves! Those who don’t judge don’t care. But after you judge, don’t focus on their problems and mock them or call them names. I believe we must love them after we judge them. Otherwise, if we love everyone and don’t judge them, how can we show the way? How can we be salt to everyone (be it a non-believer or a “circus” church) and “cater to their weaknesses” if we don’t know very well what their weaknesses are?
So, I say, let us judge and then love!
From their website:
“By leading people to become fully devoted followers of Christ. That’s the driving purpose behind everything we do.”
That Christ-centered goal can be understated. I am in the midst of changing back to the more distant mega/seeker-church due to it being more Christ-centered, compared to the closer mega-church that is usually more into getting people “fired-up”, telling them what’s in it for them, and bordering on moralistic therapeutic deism teaching.
A high church cathedral, a small church on the corner, or a massive mega/seeker-church may all be effectively impacting people in their given context, or they may be appealing and growing, yet truly lifeless. It all depends on the message (or Person) they are focusing on.
Michael,
I don’t know you and have never read your work until this morning. I am sitting on the balcony of my Hotel in S. Beach Florida and ran across this blogpost this morning. First of all I want to say you are a gifted writer and spot on. Thank you for your boldness, candor and eloquently spelling out what is real.
BTW- I’m the guy that’s in the pictures that you have featured in this blog. I’m the pastor of the location NW Oklahoma City location that you attended, however I was on vacation this past weekend.
When I get back to OKC, I’d love to grab lunch and learn more about what God is doing through you, the Credo House and your ministry. My email is [email protected], if you shoot me your contact info. I’d love to grab lunch or coffee.
Thx. for keeping it real and your new Biker friend that you sat by in church is my homeboy! 🙂
When I think of the purpose of our local assemblies, I think of these passages
“We proclaim Him, admonishing every man and teaching every man with all wisdom, so that we may present every man complete in Christ” (Colossians 1:28)
“It was he who gave some as apostles, some as prophets, some as evangelists, and some as pastors and teachers, to equip the saints for the work of ministry, that is, to build up the body of Christ, until we all attain to the unity of the faith and the knowledge of the Son of God – a mature person, attaining to the measure of Christ’s full stature.” (Ephesians 4:11-13)
Our local assemblies have to be a place that produces growing up in Christ to accomplish his work.
I’d also have to agree with Rick on this statement
Churches have to be growth centers instead of pep rallies.
If I were sick, I wouldn’t want a doctor with a good movie theme. If I was in financial trouble and I walked into an advisor’s office and it was set up like “Toy Story” I’m not sure how serious I would take the “experience”. If they were offering their services for free with no strings attached I might go for the entertainment and maybe I would be tricked into getting a good diagnosis or good financial advice but that is not the entire point.
I could reach a certain crowd of people and market a certain other crowd who are often uncomfortable with the church atmosphere by making an exclusive club, offer golfing and pools, champagne and caviar, valet parking, black tie dinners and dangle the suggestion of meeting the right clientele for your business, charge a huge membership fee to cover the cost but bare wages for myself. Or, even, offer it for free funded by donations. It is not far removed from what is going on at Life Church. The money is coming from somewhere. It is not champagne and caviar but someone is paying the tab.
Why not stand on the side walk outside the church and offer free candy to any kids passing by to grow your Sunday school class? Isn’t this the same principal?
VBS themes are ridiculous anymore and we wonder why there is no reverence for God or his word, we are teaching them young. It’s all about attention spans, keeping it attractive and entertaining.
Did anyone listen to the message on the web site “Unstoppable power”? The irony is uncanny. The unstoppable power of the church and the gospel of Jesus Christ ..If we can just get them away from their sports and TV’s to listen to us..If only the unstoppable power were more attractively packaged like Hollywood stuff, man we could change the world with the right sets and props. ???
Why are we calling this place a church when it isn’t a church at all, but rather an evangelistic outreach center. I agree with Charley, “The individual Christian should do the evangelizing; the church should do the discipling.” Are the same people showing up week after week to get saved again or is there real discipleship and equipping going on? Is there eldershipleadership to carry out church discipline and who are the attendees accountable to? What is the worship like? Is there any? Any Communion received? I think they are probably good at what they do, but it is not church.
[…] C. Michael Patton: What I have been coming to realize over the years is that there is simply no one way to do […]
Sam #34-
“I think they are probably good at what they do, but it is not church.”
All those things may be taking place, although not in the style you may be accustomed to.
Until you know what that answers are to your questions, you may want to hold off on making that statement.
CMP, this is something I have been thinking on and my perspective of church is reforming.
I think the evangelistic drive at Life Church is good, and agree than many churches that are “solid” in other areas are lacking in this one, but I have been leaning more and more to the stance that Sunday morning service is not to be an outreach ministry, but a gathering together of believers to worship the LORD. I grew up in “fundy” churches, and although they would condemn life church for their methods, they actually have the same reason for gathering – the betterment of men. I am wondering if our gathering together is to be one of corporate worship, discipleship, etc. and not aimed at bringing the lost to the “service”. The paramount picture evangelism is a good idea, and I like it, but I wonder if that should be our aim at a Sunday morning worship service.
Thoughts?
That was obviously a hard post to write, Michael. Lots of humility. I just wanted to say that your central thesis was spot on: EVERY church has a point or points of weakness, and it takes a very prideful pastor or congregation to not learn from each other or at least to work together to build up the church as a whole. Kudos.
Michael T –
I believe it was Northpoint church in Georgia (Andy Stanley’s church) parodying either themselves or others.
Who is church for? The saved or the lost? In Acts, after the Holy Spirit came, they went OUT – they didn’t decorate the building and invite the lost in…
I think the church is full of folks that think the church is there exclusively for them….yet they don’t go out and evangelize themselves but rather see that as the job of the church. The problem with defining who the church is for is that we have multiple definitions and expectations for it.
I couldn’t agree more that folks don’t proclaim the gosple enough. But does that change the purpose of the “church” and why it was instituted? Doesn’t God define the purpose of the gathering of the body of Christ?
I just caught CMP’s comment on the presentation of the Gospel at the church. I was wondering about that. That is encouraging to hear. I’ll have to consider if that changes my outlook in general…not sure.
I agree with those that have commented here that the pattern in the New Testament seems to be that church is for believers to gather, worship, and grow together. Then to go out from there to reach the lost.
I think the Scriptures that Lisa quoted bear this out. I also think this is born out in the instructions on how we are to “do church” in I Corinthians 14. There the only seeker sensitive instructions that are given are in regard to the regulation of prophecy and tongues in case unbelievers should come in–if everyone speaks in tongues they will think us crazy but prophecy done properly will convince them that God is there.
Beyond that, nowhere in the Bible do I see instructions being given to make church be something to attract unbelievers to come to our services.
Still, I rejoice anytime I hear the complete gospel preached to the lost under [almost] any circumstance.
Phil 1:18 “What then? Only that in every way, whether in pretense or in truth, Christ is proclaimed; and in this I rejoice. Yes, and I will rejoice,”
Still, I rejoice anytime I hear the complete gospel preached to the lost under [almost] any circumstance.
Phil 1:18 “What then? Only that in every way, whether in pretense or in truth, Christ is proclaimed; and in this I rejoice. Yes, and I will rejoice,”
Jesus preached the gospel in the synagogues. Every church has a large number of tares…those who aren’t believers, and many who appear to be believers but aren’t. We’ve all heard the alarming stats by now about kids who are raised in Christian homes but depart from the faith once they go off on their own. I think that in most cases this is because they never were true converts (even though they might have prayed to ‘ask Jesus into their heart’ when they were preschoolers or ‘gone forward’ somewhere). Many parents have a false assurance of their child’s salvation and tell the child all their life that they are forgiven (when in fact maybe they are not). I’ve heard one Christian leader say that it is wise for parents to wait to think that their child is a true convert until they are teens perhaps, and their faith is tested.
The fact is we ALL need to hear the very clear and powerful message of the gospel frequently. For believers it encourages our faith and teaches us how to speak to others (I dare say most of the young generations at our church now couldn’t share the gospel with someone in order to bring them to a point of conversion at this time in our church’s history). I’ve been bringing an unchurched teen to church with us every week for three months now. I recently asked her if she understood how a person becomes a Christian. Without skipping a beat she said, “By becoming involved in the community.” sad, but not surprising. That’s certainly the big emphasis at our (formerly evangelistic) church these days.
I’m not saying that the entire message every week should be the preaching of the gospel, but I do think that the gospel should be clearly presented (as if their are nonbelievers present BECAUSE THERE ARE) very often. A pastor can feed the flock of long-time believers and include the gospel as well. Skilled pastors do this all the time!
Some people sit in church year after year without even realizing that they aren’t saved.
I think contrasting the “go reach the lost” in the great commission with Luke 14:23’s “bid them come in” can be a false dichotomy. We can surely do both. Building up of the saints doesn’t have to be referring only to quality. It can also refer to quantity. Large 11am Sunday morning services are great for worship, but not for discipleship anyway. The crowd is too large and too diverse. Discipleship happens in small groups. So I have no problem at all with “the big service” being used for worship, evangelism, and basic teaching and the deeper meatier stuff happening at other times. To do otherwise almost comes across as if 11-12 on Sunday is “my time” because that is the only time I am going to set aside for this during the week and my growth is more important than your salvation.
In a WWJD perspective, did Christ banish the multitudes when they showed up, or did he cater a message for them and do in-depth discipleship in smaller groups at a different time?
Susan,
I hope I didn’t come across as saying that I don’t believe the Gospel should be presented in church. That is not what I had in mind at all.
I just don’t see that church services are mainly meant to cater to the unsaved and to do whatever it takes to bring them through the doors. It doesn’t seem to me that fits the NT pattern at all.