Empowering the Church Body: Beyond the SuperPastor
What if church were different? What if we emphasized the ministry of people instead of a “SuperPastor”? When we say, “I follow Paul,” or, “I follow Apollos,” we are being merely human. What then is Apollos? What is Paul? We are all God’s fellow workers (1 Cor. 3:4-9).
What if we emphasized the ministry of the church body instead of one “professional”? The early church leaders valued the ministry of the church’s people, the ministry of the “non-pastors.” We see this, for example, in all the people Paul greeted in his letters. He knew them and appreciated them. And part of this was valuing the ministry of women. Romans 16 mentions 29 people and 10 of them are women.[1]
Church as event communicates that the special people on the stage are equipped to do the work of the ministry. The people who sit in the audience are simply passive and not gifted to do ministry. That is exactly backward. God has given leaders to equip the saints for the work of the ministry (Eph. 4:12), God has already given the people of the church various gifts (Rom. 12:6-7; 1 Pet. 4:10-11).
Even though Paul was the church planter par excellence, he practiced partnership and co-leadership, which Jesus Himself established (cf. Mark 6:7). Jesus turned the world upside down in part through the hands of 12 ordinary men who had clearly been with Him (Acts 4:13).
Paul followed this same pattern. He was almost always with a colaborer[2] and always desired to be with them. When Paul was separated from his colaborers he said, “Come as soon as possible” (Acts 17:15 cf. 2 Tim. 4:10-12; Titus 3:12-13) and he waited for them (Acts 17:16). Paul mentions his fellow shepherds—Timothy, Titus, Silas, and Barnabas—all over the place.[3] From his first church-sponsored “mission trip” (11:30 cf. Gal. 2:1) to his last (notice “we” in Acts 28) he sought to be with fellow laborers. We also see Paul “appointed elders [pl.] for them in each church” (Acts 14:23; cf. 11:30; 15:2; 20:17-18; 21:18; Titus 1:5), which also establishes the importance of co-leadership.[4]
Pastors are important. Pastors ensure attention is concentrated in the right place—on Christ. No pastor should ever be the focus. Jesus should ever be everyone’s focus. Jesus is central. Everyone else plays a supporting role. But everyone must play their role. The church is a body and Jesus is the head. Every part of the body must be engaged and functioning properly for the body to flourish (1 Cor. 12:27; Eph. 4:16).
The church is the body, and each member is to do their part for the body to function as it is supposed to (1 Cor. 12:4-31). Each member is equipped with gifts from the Spirit (Rom. 12:3-8) and is to employ them for the common good (1 Cor. 12:7). Sadly, but not surprisingly, a Gallup survey found that only 10% of church members in America are active in any kind of personal ministry.[5]
The church is supposed to be the furthest thing from fans sitting in the stands. The church is more like the football team on the field. The church gathers once a week in a huddle to remember and carry out the play. The church works together to hold tight to the gospel and move it forward. Sideline Christianity is not biblical Christianity. Every single Christian—not a special breed of Christian—is to be on the field, whatever that particular field is, loving Jesus and loving others. We all have a part to play, and when we aren’t doing our part gospel movement is hindered.
May pastors stop building fans and equip the saints. And may the saints stop sitting in the stands and get on the field. The war is raging. The time is now.
Notes
[1] The New Testament, in contrast to the literature of the time, knows the inestimable worth of women. Here is the list of the females mentioned: Phoebe (Rom. 16:1-2), Priscilla (Rom. 16:3-5), Mary (Rom. 16:6) Junia (Rom. 16:7), Tryphena, Tryphosa, and Persis (Rom. 16:12), Rufus’ mother (Rom. 16:13), Julia and Nereus’ sister (Rom. 16:15). Women were valuable colaborers in the early church. Here are some other women Paul mentions in his letters: Claudia (2 Tim. 4:21), Priscilla (Acts 18:25; 1 Cor. 16:19; 2 Tim. 4:19), Chloe (1 Cor. 1:11), Nympha (Col. 4:15), and Apphia (Philemon 1:2).
[2] See Acts 11:30; 12:25; 13:2, 13, 42-43, 46; 14:1 [“they”]; 15:2, 25-27; after a disagreement Silas goes with Paul v. 40; 16:3, 25; when he went to Corinth he connected with Aquila and Priscilla 18:1-3; when he went to Antioch he took them with him v. 18; in ch. 19 he found other believers; 20:4-5.
[3] For Timothy see Acts 16:1, 3; 17:14, 15; 18:5; 19:22; 20:4; Rom. 16:21; 1 Cor. 4:17; 16:10; 2 Cor. 1:1, 19; Phil. 1:1; 2:19, 22; Col. 1:1; 1 Thess. 1:1; 3:2, 6; 2 Thess. 1:1; 1 Tim. 1:2, 18; 6:20; 2 Tim. 1:2; Philemon 1; Heb. 13:23. For Titus see 2 Cor. 2:13; 7:6, 13-14; 8:6, 16, 23; 12:18; Gal. 2:1, 3; 2 Tim. 4:10; Titus 1:4. For Silas see Acts 15:22, 27, 32, 40; 16:19, 25, 29; 17:1, 4, 5, 10, 14-15; 18:5; 2 Cor. 1:19; 1 Thess. 1:1; 2 Thess. 1:1; 1 Pet. 5:12. For Barnabas see Acts 9:27; 11:25; 12:25; 13:2; 15:2, 36-41; 1 Cor. 9:6; Gal. 2:1, 13.
[4] Even in Paul’s address to churches, he often includes his colaborers. For instance, 1 Thessalonians 1:1 says, “Paul, Silvanus, and Timothy, To the church…” (cf. 1 Cor. 1:1; 2 Cor. 1:1; Phil. 1:1; Col. 1:1; 2 Thess. 1:1; Philemon 1). Also, from the time of his conversion Paul realized the importance of discipleship since he was taught by Gamaliel (Acts 22:3), Ananias (Acts 9:17), Peter (Gal. 1:17), and heard from Peter about Jesus’ own emphasis on discipleship.
[5] Rick Warren, The Purpose Driven Church, 365-66.
Redefining Church: From Building to Body
What if church were different? What if we had a church body instead of a building? Paul says we—the people of the church—are “God’s building” (1 Cor. 3:9). Yet, we have communicated for a long time that “church” occurs on Sunday morning. This has resulted in various negative side effects.[1]
Church attendance has become the standard of faithfulness, if people occasionally give to the church or serve in the church they are a “super Christian.” When the building is communicated to be the church, the building receives the attention, time, and money, instead of the church body. The budgetary considerations of the church building can weigh more heavily on leadership than the personnel, relational, and spiritual needs of the church body.
An example of how this has played out: Instead of Deacons caring for the tangible needs of the church—and the church having a “house to house” (Acts 5:42; 20:20) aspect, where people are known in their daily lives and needs—they have become custodians of the church building and grounds. Deacons equipped and needed to care for the church body, are working on the building. Thus, widows and single mothers are often left to struggle.
The church in America communicates that you can come to the church and receive religious goods and services at a set time. Religious goods and services are mediated through a church building and professional clergy. God is accessed on Sunday. To receive what the church offers one must go to a church building and receive a message from an approved person on the stage.[2]
Churches often, unknowingly, communicate that church is a business, brand, and building; they advertise and sell their religious goods and services.
Look at any church website and what is advertised are worship services for us to enjoy, sermons for us to listen to, youth provision for our children, and perhaps a small group that can provide for other needs. We post pictures of our smart buildings, of our edgy youth work, and of well-designed sermon series; we invest time and money in brilliant branding and a hip visual identity. This all serves to reinforce the idea that our churches exist primarily as events for consumer Christians to attend.[3]
What if we stopped seeing the church as a building and saw it as a body? Jesus and being the church are life, not an event.
The church gathers to encourage one another and remember the good news of Jesus. The church is not the building, the church is not the service, and it’s not an hour and a half on a Sunday. The church gathers, yes. But the church is a body of people, people in relationship. People are the church Sunday through Saturday. The church gathers to remember and scatters to bless. “Church building” is a misnomer.
It’s interesting that many of the biggest revivals utilized different spaces than what has now been deemed church buildings. The Methodist circuit riders grew the Church by riding the circuit and going from house to house. The early church did not have buildings deemed “church,” instead, they knew they as the people were the church 24/7, Saturday through Sunday, not some “professional” pastor, not some slick church with programs that can almost compete with the secular market. But it’s not just an early church thing that can’t work now. Consider the house churches in China. Of course, I am not saying it’s bad for churches to gather in buildings and even buildings that are owned strictly for the purpose of the gathering of the church. But the building is not the body. And the building does not grow the body. The building, however, can be a great distraction from the body.
Chuck Colson shares a story about a pastor in Washington DC. He led the church for years when suddenly, one night, he saw the church clearly for the very first time. “He was flying into Washington one day at dusk. At that time the approach path to Washington’s Reagan National Airport happened to pass directly over Fourth Presbyterian Church.” He “pressed his face against the window to catch a glimpse of the building from the air. But everything on the ground was shrouded in the shadows falling over the city as the sun set.”
He couldn’t see the church. He followed the Potomac River, then from a distance the White House and then the Capitol dome. But, as he stared out the window, he began to think about all the people of the church who worked in those offices and government buildings. Disciples he had equipped to live their faith. Then it hit him. “Of course! There it is!” he exclaimed. The church was there all the time. “The church wasn’t marked by a sanctuary or a steeple. The church was spread throughout Washington, in the homes and neighborhoods and offices below him, thousands of points of light illuminating the darkness.”
“That is the way the church should look in the world today. The people of God—one body with many different parts spread throughout every arena of life, twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week.”[4] The church is not a building. The church is a body of people shining wherever they work, live, and play. Church, let’s be the body. And let’s not hide in a building. Let’s mix it up in the world, and be the salt Jesus has called us to be.
Notes
[1] “If the local church is understood as a building and not the people of God, then many ecclesiastical problems develop over time” (J. D. Payne, Apostolic Imagination: Recovering a Biblical Vision for the Church’s Mission Today).
[2] The modern American church, in this way, looks a lot like catholicism. People don’t go to church to receive communion, as has historically been the case for Catholics. They go to a church building to “experience God” through a “worship experience” meditated by “professionals” on the stage and the lights dimmed low. There is a special priestly class that does the ministry. The priesthood of all believers is functionally lost because church revolves around the building and church service.
[3] Krish Kandiah, “Church Is a Family, Not an Event.”
[4] Colson and Vaughn, Being the Body, 307-8. “In His earthly ministry, Jesus was limited to one human body; now the Body of Christ is made up of millions and millions of human bodies stamped with His image” (Ibid., 306).
Authentic Church: Moving Beyond Performance
What if church were different? What if we were authentic instead of artificial?
We’ve communicated for decades that church is essentially a performance that you sit down and watch. Is it any wonder so many have decided church is irrelevant? If that’s what church is, it is to a great degree irrelevant. When surveyed, the unchurched gave “There is no value in attending” (74%) as their top reason for abandoning the church.[1] We can get better entertainment at home or half a million concert venues, amusement parks, or sporting arenas. The church can never offer all that the world can, but the church offers something the world can never offer. Have we sold our birthright for a meager porridge?
People long to be real. There’s even a social media platform called “Be Real.” Christians must be real, for real. Distrust in corporations and institutions is very high[2] and most churches have all the markings of a corporation.
What if we did away with the stage and a staged experience? What if instead of curating a culture that looks perfect and happy, we were able to be honest even when we’re struggling? We need a hospital instead of a beauty pageant. We need people to be able to be their sick selves and get better rather than just plastering on a fake face.
Scripture calls us to “bear one another’s burdens” (Gal. 6:2) and “confess our sins to one another” (James 5:16). If we are to carry out these commands of Scripture, we must have a culture that supports and allows their practice, not that contradicts their practice.
Also, the very structure of the “church service” is often artificial. Going to a “service” where we sit in a chair or pew is disconnected from most other parts of our lives. It is more similar to going to a movie or a theatrical performance and is not integrated with the rest of our lives. Many churches have community groups to provide a real-life Christian experience. Churches see the need for real-life Christian relationships, and a Sunday service doesn’t and can’t provide that. It is, however, much more convenient to just “get fed” at church and not bother with being the church, so often people opt out of authentic community.
Christians are to shine as lights in the world but that doesn’t mean they have to be “shiny happy people.” The word hypocrite comes to us from Greek and means to “pretend” or “play a part” as in a theatrical performance. Christians, however, have no need for a mask. As Christians, we know we are all simultaneously saints, sinners, and sufferers. That’s the reality. But many “church services” don’t take those simultaneous statuses into account. The biblical worldview communicates that there is a time for sorrow and a time for rejoicing (Ecc. 3:4; 2 Cor. 6:10). There is a time to lament and a time to dance and praise. But we often lack that breadth of expression. Yet, how can we bear one another’s burdens (Gal. 6:2) if we shy away from the fact that we have burdens?
Jesus often hungout with the lower-class rabble and rebel rouses. Modern American Christianity often communicates that cookie-cutter, middle class is the ideal. Can we expect people in the church to be real, honest, and seek help with their challenges when the church service presents a squeaky clean picture of what it means to follow Jesus? Again, if “the medium is the message,” the message is Christians live super happy, put-together lives. Is it any wonder those who are suffering or struggling don’t want to share, or “go” to a church where perfection is televised from the stage?
Notes
[1] See James Emery White’s book, Meet Generation Z, 84 where he references research done by the Barna Group for his previous book Rethinking the Church. It should be noted that this data is old as that book came out in 1997.
[2] Office of the Surgeon General, Our Epidemic of Loneliness and Isolation: The U.S. Surgeon General’s Advisory on the Healing Effects of Social Connection and Community, 13.
Why Simplicity is Key to Church Growth
What if church were different? What if we were simple instead of complex?
One of the problems with what has become the “traditional church model” in America is its complexity. It’s difficult to quickly replicate because there’s so much involved—typically a building, band, “professional” clergy, and all sorts of programming. This is not the model in many contexts overseas, nor has it been the lone model throughout church history. The early church required simplicity. “They devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and to fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer” (Acts 2:42). That’s simple but transformative and powerful, it’s also very replaceable. The early church, as simple as it was, grew. “The Lord added to their number day by day those who we being saved” (Acts 2:47). The early church is not the lone example of this happening. It happens across history and across the globe.
There are some 485,000 churches in the United States and the vast majority remain under eighty per congregation.[1] What if we leaned into the strength of small simple churches? What if we found the easiest size to manage, grow, and host, and keep replicating around that size? Wouldn’t that model save money, necessarily engage the church in constant discipleship, and wouldn’t the church function as a body, using their gifts and practicing the one another passages?[2]
Jeff Christopherson has said, “The spiritual movement required to transform secular nations with the gospel is unlikely to emerge from complex structures that are usually associated with church. Something simpler, leaner, and far easier to reproduce is required to experience a gospel-saturating movement.”[3]
What if we lowered the bar for what is required for church—no building or paid professional clergy necessary—and raised the bar in our expectation for disciples of Jesus? That might just be means to a movement and be closer to what we see in the New Testament and in various contexts overseas.
To replicate and reach America and the nations, simplicity is essential. Simplicity allows for speed and better stewardship of our resources. Simplicity also allows the Church to get more of the priesthood of believers involved in ministry. Simplicity requires us to rely on the Spirit and all He has given us. Simplicity also holds Jesus before people without any distractions.
We started a simple micro church because we need Jesus and each other but we do not need all the other stuff. In fact, we believe some of the “extra stuff” can be a distraction and diversion from Jesus’ call to sacrificial discipleship. Church is not about coffee and convenience, it’s about worshiping Jesus and being shaped into His image. We also believe in replicating micro churches, we always want to be about the mission Jesus has given us; we don’t want to be a mere “holy huddle.” The “huddle” happens so we can better love the world that needs Jesus’ love.
Micro church is an intentionally simple approach to church that’s often small and informal in style. There are, however, certain requirements a micro church must meet to be a biblically faithful church (e.g., qualified leadership and teaching, preaching the good news of Jesus, regular singing and reading of God’s word, celebrations of baptism and communion, discipleship and purity, and sharing the good news of Jesus and loving the world).
We are working to build multiplying micros instead of a mega church. But as we know from microbiology, microbes can grow, and grow fast. If conditions are right (like ample nutrients and correct temperature), a single cell will quickly split into two identical cells. This rapid replication is due to their simple genetic structure with only one chromosome. Simple DNA allows for quick multiplication. This is true in the church too, simplicity facilitates discipleship and replication.
Notes
[1] Hirsch, The Forgotten Ways, 215.
[2] There are many “one another” passages: honor one another (Rom. 12:20), accept one another (Rom. 15:7), bear with one another (Eph. 4:2; Col. 3:13), forgive one another (Eph. 4:32; Col. 3:13), pray for and confess sins to one another (James 5:16), cheer and challenge one another (Heb. 3:13; 10:24-25), admonish and confront one another (Rom. 15:14; Col. 3:16; Gal. 6:1-6), warn one another (1 Thess. 5:14), teach one another (Col. 3:16), be real and honest with one another (Gal. 5:15; Rom. 12:9), bear one another’s burdens (Gal. 6:2), share possessions with one another (Acts 4:32), and submit to one another (Eph. 5:21).
What if we were Colaborers instead of Competitors?
What if church were diffrent? What if we were colaborers instead of competitors?
The reality is that Christians are not competitors; they are brothers and sisters in Christ. Jesus’ Kingdom is not divided. Although Jesus’ Kingdom is made up of people from Sierra and Senegal, Armenia and America, China and Chad, Portugal and Pakistan, Mexico and Malaysia (and many, many more), in Christ, we are all one.
We may not always feel like we’re together or unified; we may not always want to be together, but the reality is that we are. We are united and one in Christ Jesus (Eph. 4:4-7). Believers in Africa and America, Iraq and Iran, Canada and Cambodia, all have the one Spirit in them. Although we look, act, and think differently, we all have this in common: We are temples of the living God. More significant than our culture and country is that God lives in believers.
All Christians have one Spirit and one Lord (Ephesians 4:5). This verse reminds me of marching in the army. As we marched together in a company of 200 soldiers, there was no distinction. No matter who you were or where you were from, there was no distinction. When our commander said, “Left,” we put our left foot down. When he said, “Right,” we put our right foot down.
We were very different, but we all had the same commander, so there was no distinction. It is the same for Christians, we all have “one Lord.” And we all march the same, to Jesus’ command.
Yet, “By nature, a consumer mentality creates a competitive market environment where each producer of goods and services tries to outdo the others. So churches end up competing for ‘customers,’ and the mutual cooperation of the Body is destroyed. That means we lose our unity—which is, in fact, our greatest, driving evangelistic witness that Jesus is who He claimed to be.”[1]
As comrades, we should not be competitors. Is Jesus’ Kingdom divided against itself? As Jesus said, “Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation, and every city or house divided against itself will not stand” (Matt. 12:25). We must work against being competitors and consumers, we are, rather, Christ-followers, together marching to the beat of our Master’s drum.
Jesus prayed that we would be one as He and the Father are one (Jn. 17:21), and He said that people will know that we are His disciples by our love for one another (Jn. 13:35). So, what message does it send when we value “our” building and brand over Jesus’ Kingdom? What message does it send when we single-handedly contradict Jesus’ prayer?
What if we were sold out for the Kingdom instead of the brand? Of course, we never outright say we put the church brand over the Kingdom, but it is nevertheless communicated in our particular structure and forms. Let’s be team Jesus, not team name-brand church.
The New Testament letters repeatedly model Kingdom collaboration. We see this in Paul’s appeals for support. Paul had many colaborers in the gospel. The Philippians, for example, partnered with Paul in gospel ministry (Phil. 4:15-17). The Kingdom is about Jesus the King, and all His people made up of every tribe, language, nation, and tongue. The Kingdom thus demands collaboration, not competition. There is no name brand, only the name of Jesus for whom every knee will bow.
Notes
What if we were Intergenerational instead of Isolating?
What if church were different? What if we were intergenerational instead of isolating? What if older Christians could build up younger ones, and what if younger ones could bless older ones? One of the major problems in American Christianity is we are not passing on our faith to our kids. In fact, a recent study has estimated that over 40 million young people who were raised in Christian homes could walk away from a life with Jesus by 2050. One of the answers to this problem is for Christians of different generations to be together.
Many churches isolate the generations from one another. Kids are siloed from seniors and young adults are isolated from older adults. This is problematic for several reasons. For one, Scripture presumes that Christian formation occurs within intergenerational, familial, and community settings[1] (e.g., Deut. 6:4-9; 11:19; 32:46-47; Ps. 78:6; Prov. 22:6; Eph. 6:4).
Second, intentionally mixing the generations in a church uniquely nurtures faith formation for all ages.[2] It “creates opportunities for adults, youth, and children to build relationships across the age spectrum, to share each other’s spiritual journeys, and to learn from and encourage those ahead of us on the journey as well as those coming along behind.”[3] Mixing in this way stimulates “healthy spiritual growth and development across the generations.”[4]
At the Gathering, where I pastor, we have childcare for kids ages 1 to 6 during the teaching time but we love to have kids involved! We believe families, singles, retirees, under-employed, and over-employed all journeying together to pursue Jesus is the ideal. Seeing each other authentically loving Jesus through the thick and thin of life blesses the whole church. We learn from each other and grow to understand and love each other more. We do have childcare for young kids as a service to parents, but we care about kids learning and seeing the whole church body love Jesus.
Yesterday at the church gathering, we sang the old powerful song by Keith Green, “There Is A Redeemer.” I was standing by the young kids and it was beautiful. A young black boy swung his little fox stuffed animal around while belting out “Thank you, oh my Father for giving us Your Son…” There was a little brunette boy coloring and singing and a little blonde girl with fake fish on her fingers, not singing, but wearing the biggest grin.
Let’s not fumble the handoff. Let’s live genuine lives of love as we wholeheartedly follow Jesus. Let’s worship Jesus and ensure they see us worship Jesus. And let’s have fun with them as we do so. This, I believe, is especially important when there are so many single-parent families. The biological mom or dad may not be around, but the church has moms and dads aplenty. The church may not be able to literally replace a parent but it can provide faithful familiar mentors. The church is a family, let’s be the intergenerational family God has called us to be.
The need for intentional, costly discipleship for children and youth from an early age has never been greater. New cultural pressures continue to widen the gap between daily American life and biblically reinforced orthodoxy and orthopraxy. Long gone are the days when Christians represented 80-90 percent of mainstream culture… Across many different research projects, studies have found that the most important driver of retention is actually pretty simple: actively engaging youth into a full life with Jesus in their family and church. It turns out that being in a family and church that talks with Jesus— where they actively evangelize, serve together, know other adults that take their faith seriously, and live the Gospel and not sin management— will more often than not produce young people who want to continue on in a life with God.[5]
Notes
[1] Holly Catterton Allen, Christine Lawton, and Cory L. Seibel, Intergenerational Christian Formation: Bringing the Whole Church Together in Ministry, Community, and Worship, 65.
[2] Allen, Lawton, and Seibel, Intergenerational Christian Formation: Bringing the Whole Church Together in Ministry, Community, and Worship, 143.
[3] Ibid., 22.
[4] Ibid., 95.
[5] “The Great Opportunity,” 59.
Transforming Church Growth: From Addition to Multiplication
What if church were different? What if we grew exponentially instead of by addition?
Upwards of 80% of church growth is actually transfer growth.[1] We rearrange the furniture on the Titanic quite a bit, so to speak, but we’re not moving a whole lot of new people into the lifeboats. We’re adding some but we’re not multiplying very much.
The early church exploded, it didn’t merely add. Larry Hurtado gives this estimate on the exponential growth of Christianity: “One thousand Christians in 40 AD, about seven to ten thousand by 100 AD, about two hundred thousand or a bit more by 200 AD, and by 300 AD perhaps five to six million.”[2] There was a time when Methodists were growing at an outlandish pace. In 1776 Methodists made up just 2.5 % of religious adherents but by 1850 they were up to 34.2 %. Explosive growth has happened at various times throughout church history. How can it happen again in America?
First, we need to think super simple and super small.
You may be familiar with the story of the inventor of the chess game. As a reward for his invention he was offered one free wish as his reward by the king of India. As a most ‘modest’ reward, he wished just for a kernel of rice on the first square of the chess board to be squared (multiplied by itself) for every section of the chess board—64 sections in all. That will mean two kernels on the second square, four on the third, sixteen on the forth, and so on. The king, who had initially smiled on it, thinking that he would get off lightly, simply could not grant the wish. He would have to produce 26 kernels of rice, which is 2,223,372,036,000,000,000 kernels, or 153 billion tons of rice.[3]
We must do all the Bible things a church has to do but not all the modern American things, it doesn’t have to do. Simple things can spread quickly, but complexity bogs down. Also, disciples disciple, consumers don’t.
Second, trust that the Spirit has endowed the church body and individuals with various gifts to build up the body. Every Jesus follower has God the Spirit within them. They have latent potential. When Jesus’ followers work with others in the body, the body grows. It builds itself up in love. All the markings of a Jesus movement are contained in one church body. Just as, “In the seed the whole tree lies coiled, and in the tree, there lies the potential for the production of countless other seeds. In the tree is the full potential of the forest.”[4]
God has gifted His people. We go in the confidence of Jesus the Lord who has “all authority in heaven and earth” (Matt. 28:18). We go with the power of the Holy Spirit, the Helper, who is with us and for us. We don’t need huge budgets and fancy buildings. We need to lean into all that God has already provided. It is more than enough. When we overly rely on buildings, budgets, and human wisdom, we often emphasize our power, and not God’s, and thus don’t see explosive growth. As D.L. Moody said, “The world has yet to see what God can do with a man fully consecrated to God.” What if we raise up an army of men and women who set their faces like flint and put their hands to the plow?
God never promised to bless our innovation or entertainment. He said sow, and then we’ll reap. It won’t always be “sexy,” in fact, it will often be scary, but that’s the work our Master has told us to be about.
The Jesus movement was not exponential, at first. By definition, nothing is exponential at first. But, if we actually focus on disciple-making, and not injecting Christians with consumerism resulting in lethargy and atrophy, a movement can happen.
We see a pattern of multiplication in the Bible, from Genesis to Revelation. God says, “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth” (Gen. 1:28). God says to Abraham, “I will surely bless you, and I will surely multiply your offspring as the stars of heaven and as the sand that is on the seashore”(Gen. 22:17). We see a call for multiplication in Acts (1:8) and we see that multiplication happening: “The church throughout all Judea and Galilee and Samaria had peace and was being built up. And walking in the fear of the Lord and in the comfort of the Holy Spirit, it multiplied” (9:31).[5] Thus, later in Revelation, we see “a great multitude that no one could number, from every nation, from all tribes and peoples and languages, standing before the throne and before the Lamb” (Rev. 7:9-10).
Paul was about the multiplication of the Church and sacrificed to see it spread. Paul multiplied himself in others to facilitate the multiplication of the Church. Paul said, “Be imitators of me, as I am of Christ” (1 Cor. 11:1 cf. Acts 20:18ff; Phil. 3:17; 1 Tim. 4:12; Titus 2:7-8; Heb. 13:7; 1 Pet. 5:2-3).[6] Thus, Paul taught men, like Timothy, who would be able to carry on and teach others (2 Tim. 2:2). Paul’s desire was not to merely preach but to make many disciples. That was Paul’s consuming toil and struggle (Acts 14:21 cf. Col. 1:28-29). He sought the strength of his disciples and not merely their salvation (Acts 14:22; 15:32-41; 16:5; 18:23).
A church is never meant to be about that one church, it is to be about the Kingdom of God, the Church. So, the church is to pursue multiplication because it is a mere embassy of the Kingdom, it’s a local outpost. But, the church is about the Kingdom, and Kingdom expansion.
Notes
[1] Ken Sidey says, “research that shows that more than 80 percent of all the growth taking place in growing churches comes through transfer, not conversion” (“Church Growth Fine Tunes Its Formulas” https://www.christianitytoday.com/1991/06/church-growth-fine-tunes-its-formulas/ see also David Dunlap, “The Myth of Church Growth,” Current Thoughts and Trends, 8/6, (June 1998), 7).
[2] Hurtado, Destroyer of the gods, 3.
[3] Hirsch, The Forgotten Ways, 208.
[4] Hirsch, The Forgotten Ways, 206.
[5] “There must have been hundreds of churches in the small cities and towns throughout this large region, but all of them together can be called a “church” (Gk. ekklēsia, singular in the earliest and best manuscripts of this verse, though some later manuscripts have the plural). The NT can apply the singular word “church” to the church meeting in a home (Rom. 16:5; 1 Cor. 16:19), in an entire city (1 Cor. 1:2; 2 Cor. 1:1), in a large region (as here), or throughout the whole world (1 Cor. 12:28; Eph. 5:25)” (ESV Study Bible note on Acts 9:31).
[6] Robert L. Plummber, “Imitation of Paul and the Church’s Missionary Role in 1 Corinthians” in JETS 44/2 (June 2001) 219-35. This article demonstrates that individuals are called to imitate Paul in his witness for the gospel. However, Paul did not expect “bland uniformity” (235) because people are entrusted with different stewardships.
Why Consumerism Harms Church Discipleship
What if church were different? What if we disciple instead of entertain? I recently read this striking description of church: “Sunday services are essentially a bunch of people gathered to sing along with a worship cover band.”[1] But church was always meant to be much more than an entertaining sing-along.
Jesus talked about the cross yet we encourage and support consumerism. Jesus said, “If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross daily and follow me” (Lk. 9:23). What if the church growth method of coddling Christians is backfiring? Perhaps our emphasis on entertainment over discipleship is partially at fault for this startling statistic: “51% of Churchgoers Don’t Know of the Great Commission.”[2] Clearly, being a churchgoer is not the same as being an apprentice of Jesus.[3]
It seems like at least many of the biggest and brightest churches across America are the most successful vendors of “religious goods and services.”[4] As Kenneth Woodward said, “Some of the least demanding churches are now in the greatest demand.”[5] Yet, as has often been said, “What you win them with, is what you win them to.” Of course, most churches will not be able to compete with the world when it comes to amazing entertaining experiences, but “even if we could produce cool church events, we would create a generation of Christian consumers who look to the church to entertain them.”[6]
Plus, the church has what the world can never duplicate. We foolishly put the emphasis on the wrong thing if we put it on entertainment. America is drowning in entertainment. We are “amusing ourselves to death.”[7] We have the bread of life, if the world has butter, why are we offering more butter?! They need bread! They may not know it, but they’re desperately hungry for substance.
Further, when we entertain and coddle Christians, is it any wonder why Christians don’t want to take up their crosses as Jesus commands? Dietrich Bonhoeffer, in The Cost of Discipleship, said, “When Jesus bids a man, He bids him come and die.” We, instead, offer entertainment and amusement. The church often tries to compete with what the world offers all the while Jesus is calling us to put to death what is earthly in us. I’m not saying all entertainment is wrong, but entertainment as a church growth model is problematic for discipleship.
Christ tells us to take up our cross but we’re often worried about our coffee. Jesus tells us to lay our life down but “the sermon didn’t really speak to me.” This mindset is problematic and prevalent. And it’s been bred in our churches in America. Alan Hirsh has said,
Ninety percent or more of the people who attend our services are passive. In other words, they are consumptive. They are the passive recipients of the religious goods and services being delivered largely by professionals in a slick presentation and service. Just about everything we do in these somewhat standardized services and ‘box churches,’ we do in order to attract participants, and to do this we need to make the experience of church more convenient and comfortable. It is the ultimate religious version of one-stop shopping-hassle-free. But alas, all we are achieving by doing this is adding more fuel to the insatiable consumerist flame. I have come to the dreaded conclusion that we simply cannot consume our way into discipleship. Consumerism as it is experienced in the everyday and discipleship as it is intended in the scriptures are simply at odds with each other.[8]
We have so distorted the radical call of Jesus that the standard for Christian faithfulness has become somewhat frequent church attendance or checking out the church’s livestream. It is such the norm for pastors to pander to the middle classes’ desire for safety and security, comfort and convenience, that it’s hardly ever seen for what it is. It’s just the way it is, the way it’s always been. Pastors will run themselves ragged, be chewed up, and spit out, all the time catering to the church’s perceived “needs.” The pastor can feel good because he sacrificed himself—and probably his family—for the “good” of the church. But what if “good of the church,” is equal to “sufficiently coddled and entertained”?
A major threat to the viability of Christianity in America is consumerism. Revelation warns Christians of the beast and Babylon. Perhaps American Christians are unaware that one of the evils of Babylon is its consumerism. Consumerism and following Christ are contradictory, they are positive and negative magnets, they repel each other. Again, “We plainly cannot consume our way into discipleship.”[9] In part, because “The task of the church is not to make men and women happy; it is to make them holy.”[10]
Entertainers provide popcorn and reclining chairs. Coaches provide water to replenish sweat and bandages to stop bleeding. Fans sit in their seats and buy hot dogs. Players lay it all on the line on the field. When we entertain we make fans. When we coach we make players. Fans may not sweat and bleed from the stands but are often overweight and unhealthy.
When we overprotect and provide, we stunt growth. In this way, people and plants are both byproducts of their environments. Biosphere 2 was built in Arizona to test the possibility of creating an ecological system that would support plant and human life in outer space. Everything was thought of; everything was perfect—too perfect. The trees in Biosphere 2 appeared strong and healthy until they collapsed.
The trees did not experience the stress of real life outside their perfectly designed environment. There was no wind, which resulted in a weaker cellular structure and roots that did not grow as deep. Perfectly curated environments hinder actual maturity. In the same way, an emphasis on entertainment is antithetical to an apprenticeship with Jesus. Curated comfortable environments can curb our conformity to Christ.
Notes
[1] Justin Sarachik, “Everybody Loves a Good Cover,” 48 in Common Good
[2] https://www.barna.com/research/half-churchgoers-not-heard-great-commission/
[3] Being a disciple of Jesus is much more than knowledge but what we believe is very important. When we look at the beliefs of “evangelical Christians” there is much reason for concern. The 2022 Ligoniers State of Theology found that 43% of evangelical Christians agree with this statement: “Jesus was a great teacher, but he was not God” and 56% agree with this statement: “God accepts the worship of all religions, including Christianity, Judaism, and Islam” (See https://thestateoftheology.com).
[4] Alan Hirsch, The Forgotten Ways, 110.
[5] Charles Colson and Ellen Vaughn, Being the Body, 22.
[6] Tim Chester and Steve Timmis, Everyday Church: Gospel Communities on Mission, 49.
[7] See Neil Postman’s book with the same title: Amusing Ourselves to Death.
[8] Hirsch, The Forgotten Ways, 110.
[9] Hirsch, The Forgotten Ways, 45.
[10] Colson and Vaughn, Being the Body, 26.
Rethinking Church: From Invitation to Evangelism
What if church were different? What if we evangelize instead of invite?
Admittedly, this is an old study, but in 1988 George Barna found that
Despite the fact that churches and para-church organizations have spent billions of dollars on evangelism. More than 10,000 hours of evangelistic television programming have been broadcast, in excess of 5,000 new Christian books have been published, and more than 1,000 radio stations carry Christian programming. Yet despite such widespread opportunities for exposure to the Gospel, there has been no discernible growth in the size of the Christian body.[1]
Could it be because invitation has replaced evangelism, and inviting people to the Christmas program has replaced dinner in our homes? The church was always supposed to incarnate the good news of Jesus and show the lived reality of His reign through Christian love. Francis Schaeffer went as far as to say that the love of Christians must be visible, for it is “the final apologetic.”[2]
Perhaps we must take a different approach than the church growth experts have promoted for decades. Instead of watching the neighbor’s kids, who is a single mother and in need of a lot of help, we are exhausting ourselves in the nursery supporting the church service. What if we did the opposite?! What if we didn’t serve in nursery, and instead knew and helped our neighbors? The church was never meant to be for itself. It exists to love Jesus and love others like Jesus.
The Bible tells us to “go and tell.” It doesn’t instruct us to “invite people to a building.” We are to be the church, not invite people to a building we’ve falsely labeled “church.”
“Letting our light shine” was never meant to become: “gather all the lights in the same building and keep them from the dark.” Too often, Christian life circles around propping up and keeping the institution of the church afloat. It becomes a vicious cycle. The church needs people at the “church” to keep the “church” going, all the while taking the church out of the world.
People often ask me, “Why is the world such a dark place?” Could it be, in part, because the church—the light of the world—has left the world and gone into a building? Sadly, churches are notorious for taking people out of actual outreach to put them on an outreach committee.
Further, we’ve hamstrung ourselves by encouraging and facilitating invitation over evangelism. Instead of the whole body being deployed in specific contexts where different people are specifically equipped to contextually share the good news of Jesus, we’ve allowed the onus to fall on professional clergy. Inviting someone to church is now the faithful thing to do. We’ve essentially taken an army off the frontlines where they are desperately needed and given a weapon to one person to wield from the stage.
UPS delivers packages to us, typically Amazon packages. What if UPS went around town and told us we could go to the distribution center one day a week between 9 and 11 AM and pick up packages? First, that’d be bizarre. Second, it would be very unhelpful and UPS wouldn’t be in business very long. Third, it would be a lot like our “evangelism” in America. Yet, as Bill Hull has said, “There are no commands in Scripture for non-Christians to go to church, but there are plenty about Christians going to the world.”
Instead of being missionaries, we expect those who would be part of the church to become missionaries. The responsibility is on them to cross boundaries and learn a new vocabulary. Instead of crossing the thresholds into people’s homes and inviting them into ours, we’re inviting them to a sterile church building. We’re inviting them to a strange and foreign institution. Jesus and Paul sought out people where they were, they didn’t invite them to a church service.
Jesus who is the good news, brought good news. He did not merely call us up to heaven. He came down from heaven—to walk, dine, and die for us—to bring us up. And Jesus said, “As the Father has sent me, even so I am sending you” (Jn. 20:21; 17:18). He has sent us not to merely invite people to a church building, but to compel people into the Kingdom.
Notes
[1] George Barna, Marketing the Church (Navpress, Colorado Springs, CO, 1990), 22.
[2] Bryan A. Follis, Truth with love: the apologetics of Francis Schaeffer, 58.
[3] Luke 14:23 says, “Go out to the highways and hedges and compel people to come in, that my house may be filled” but the context (note v. 15) informs us that the parable is about the Kingdom, and not any one church. It’s certainly not about a church building.
The Bible Shows the Worth of Women
The Bible over and over again shows the worth of women. This is in great contrast to the culture of its time. At the time of the writing of the New Testament women did not have equality with men. For example, there was no approved public place for the self-expression of women, and women could be subject to the death penalty if caught in the stands at the Olympics.
Christianity was also different from the surrounding culture in that it demanded holiness and honor not just from the wife but also from the husband, and both partners had sexual rights. This was not the Roman way. Sexual loyalty was required of women but not men, but the Bible counter-culturally taught that both partners were to be exclusively loyal to the marriage partner.
The Bible shows and defends the value of women. It repeatedly defies the expectations of the surrounding society. Christians turned the world upside down in many ways, for one, it showed women have inestimable worth and so their names are written across the word of God.1 There are some 202 women listed in the Bible. This is significant, for example, because the Quran lists just one and the Hindu Bhagavad Gita lists none.
Women have worth not as sexual objects, not as carriers of kids, and not as cooks. Women have worth because God loves them and Jesus died for them. Christianity also teaches that women are not to be mistreated. That, however, was not the expectation in the culture from which Christianity sprang. We see the contrast between Christianity and the culture of the time when we compare the contemporaries Plutarch, the philosopher and historian, and the Apostle Paul.
Plutarch allows husbands to have sexual relations outside of their marriage. It was actually expected that married men would have sexual relations with other women, such as prostitutes, female slaves, or mistresses from lower social classes. Demosthenes even famously said, “Mistresses we keep for our pleasure, concubines for our day-to-day physical well-being, and wives in order to bear us legitimate children and to serve as trustworthy guardians over our households.”
Paul, by contrast, calls for loving marital commitment for both the husband and the wife. Plutarch does not let wives speak in public, but Paul does. Plutarch says a wife should follow the religion of her husband. Paul says both spouses should love their spouse regardless of their religion. “For Plutarch, it is the husband who takes the initiative in sexual matters. For Paul, both partners have mutual obligation and should act in agreement.”2
Plutarch said husbands should rule their wives “as the soul rules the body.” Whereas Paul says in Ephesians 5 that “husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. For no one ever hated his own flesh.” What Paul and Plutarch say about how husbands are to live with wives is very different. Paul’s instructions to the churches he wrote to were subversive. He showed love and respect for both women and wives and told others to do so.
When we read the New Testament we see “Women were among the early churches’ most active and respected members.”3 The Bible shows women in high roles of leadership, compliments them, greets them, and considers them fellow workers in the gospel. Jesus spoke to and cared for the outcast Samaritan woman at the well. Even Jesus’ disciples were surprised. “They marveled that He was talking to a woman” (John 4:27). Yet He was. Jesus loved and cared for women. Of course, He loved women. He created them. And He created women as part of His good design to image Himself through humanity.
The Bible is emphatic that women have worth. Women are precious and made in the image of God. Women do not have less worth than men. Sadly, this has not always been understood or communicated as it should be. But thankfully Jesus once and for all communicated it on the cross when He bled and died for precious women. He never treated them like meat to fulfill His pleasure but died like meat to provide salvation.
Photo by Joel Muniz
- Romans 16 mentions 29 people and 10 of them are women. Here is the list of the females mentioned: Phoebe (Rom. 16:1-2), Priscilla (Rom. 16:3-5), Mary (Rom. 16:6) Junia (Rom. 16:7), Tryphena, Tryphosa, and Persis (Rom. 16:12), Rufus’ mother (Rom. 16:13), Julia and Nereus’ sister (Rom. 16:15). That may not seem like a lot but it is very significant for the time that over one-third of the people Paul greeted were women. Women were valuable colaborers in the early church. Here are some other women Paul mentions in his letters: Claudia (2 Tim. 4:21), Priscilla (Acts 18:25; 1 Cor. 16:19; 2 Tim. 4:19), Chloe (1 Cor. 1:11), Nympha (Col. 4:15), and Apphia (Philemon 1:2). ↩︎
- Benjamin Marx, “’Wifely Submission’ and ‘Husbandly Authority” in Plutarch’s Moralia and the Corpus Paulinum: A Comparison,” 88 in Journal of Greco-Roman Christianity and Judaism. ↩︎
- Sarah Ruden, Paul Among the People: The Apostle Reinterpreted and Reimagined in His Own Time, 86. ↩︎
in X 