Disciple's
Feature Articles
Volume 12 Issue 2
Newsletter Menu
Home
Go ye into all the world,
and preach the gospel to every creature
Mark 16:15
Is Growing Your Church a Case of Compounding Errors?
(Ignore the Truth and the Lie Will Grow)
Ye are the light of the world. A city that is set on an hill
cannot be hid.
Matthew
5:14
Return to the
Menu
Among the morass of deceitful “fruit” the “church” of today is succumbing to, the most insidious goes by the mischievous handle of “church growth.” Perhaps we should say, “has succumbed to,” because we rarely if ever hear the Truth within the confines of what we euphemistically call the “church.” This is the reason why, in The Disciple Newsletter, the word “church” is invariably in quotations. It is rare, if not nigh on to impossible to find a “church,” to find a “pastor” who preaches the Gospel Truth. In one of those rare small groups in which members are still able to ask the “pastor” questions about his sermon (rare because the group is small and even more rare because questions are tolerated) someone asked about what cause sickness. Is sickness caused by sin” as so many “fake healers” profess? After much discussion back and forth, one person advanced the idea that they thought the Bible said something about infirmities allowed God’s be made manifest in him. There is the story in the Book of John about Jesus healing a blind man that says almost exactly that; it is in John 9:1-3. On another occasion, a devout Christian, multiple amputee guest speaker was asked why he thought he was made to suffer instead of being healed. His response was simple but profound, “Why not? Am I better than the Lord? Should I expect to be, to have a better life than He?” Words and thoughts rare seen in the “church” of today.
Instead, what we hear in “churches” these days is sermons “founded (at best) on “pabulumic scriptures” that have been carefully chosen not to offend anyone who might be listening, not to frighten the timid, not to condemn anything, nor to appear in any way to be judgmental or demanding. They are further “enhanced” by being filtered in language and syntax to eliminate anything harsh or unreasonably sounding. What we hear is a God, who just loves the pieces out of everyone; who is just simply dying to grant everyone everything their tender little hearts desire or that their sweet little minds could possibly dream up. And, if the very idea of “a god,” let alone “THE ONE AND ONLY GOD” is too offensive we, through “conversation,” may come to the “consensus” that we don’t need to mention such improbabilities again. Instead, we’ll focus on the “positive,” “possibilities,” “let’s all be winners, yeah champions, in this life,” “eat, drink and be merry for tomorrow we could just possibly die,” (on second thought, we’ll just not bring up tomorrow) “Christianity.”
Doesn’t it seem truthful to say that if increasing in numbers of church members is bought at the expense of the Gospel, it is compounding errors? In reality, there are only a couple of reasons for embracing “church growth;” none of them are justifiable. Here is just a sample of some of the reasons for expansion: Clearly a large church membership gives the preacher greater prestige; so does large edifices spread over many acres. One retired preacher dearly coveted having what we would now call satellite churches all over the country. You see he wanted to have the title of “bishop,” that technically he would “earn” if he had many “branch” churches. Then too, large churches have a large staff of people and the big budgets that go along. On the negative side is the loss of fellowship so central to the first century church. The incessant need to keep the throngs coming back necessitates constantly increasing the entertainment component of “services” at the expense of the Word. “Sermons” must become increasingly vague so as not to offend one segment or another of the Sunday horde. As they are vague, they increasingly focus on resolving worldly personal and social ills with psychosocial solutions rather than “growing disciples” founded in the Word.
Whether “church growth” is a good or bad depends entirely on what is intended by the phrase. Nine times out of ten, it means increasing the size of what is now called “the campus” and the number of people in attendance at the “campus’s” behemoth, stadium-sized buildings euphemistically referred to as “worship centers” in which everything but “worship” occurs. This type of “church growth” is clearly compounding a bad thing. It is more and more of a bad thing. On the other hand, for that 1/10 of one percent of the time when “church growth” means congregational (vs. the organizational) goals are “to shape our lives in the image of Jesus,” (Rom. 8:29) is the best of things. That is, or should be, the goal of a Christian life. Paul told the saints in Galatia he would struggle “until Christ is formed in you” (Gal. 4:19). He told the Ephesians that our goal is to “attain the whole measure of the fullness of Christ” (Eph. 4:13) He also wrote to the congregation at Ephesus that our new self is “to be like God in true righteousness and holiness” (Eph.4:24). Obviously, we cannot match His righteousness, His holiness, but we can constantly, continuously, without ceasing strive to be all that we can to be “transformed by the renewing of our mind” (Rom. 12:2). See also 1 Cor. 10:31; Eph. 1:11-12 and 1 Peter 2:9. It is Christians who should stand out, not their churches. Churches should grow in the spirituality of their members, not in the size of their membership or their properties. This is church growth worth crowing about!
Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. Matthew 7:15
Rings
Links
Directories
Banners
1
Banners
2
Get
Out The
Vote!
For all
that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and
the pride of life,
is not of the Father, but is of the world.
John 2:16
Return to the
Menu
Most polls show that well over 80% of Americans are Christian with Protestant denominations making up more than 50% of the population. Knowing this, many preachers are calling for their congregations to go to the polls during election time and vote for those candidates who espouse Christian beliefs and principles. The argument is that, if we voted as a block, we could sway elections at every level of government and, thus, change the direction the Country is taking. Doubtless, even with the many schisms and denominational differences that characterize Christianity, we could. With a concerted effort, we could probably muster a sufficient block of voters to do just that. However, the real question may not be “could we,” but rather “should we.”
Are the politicians our “Christian Voting Bloc” would remove from office of other faiths? Are the atheists, agnostics, mystics or of some other persuasion? Is none of them Christian? It is interesting that among the sundry qualifications and details of their political and personal lives, we rarely learn of their religious orientations. Why is that? (A rhetorical question.) It is interesting to note that what information is available suggests the overwhelming numbers of Federal office holders is Christian. In the 109th U.S. Congress (2005-2006) for example, 28.8% was Roman Catholic. Half that were Baptists comprising 14.1% of the members and 11.4% professed to be Methodists. Another 3.9% claimed to be “Protestant" and .9% called themselves "Christian." Unless we have overwhelming evidence to the contrary, it is more than likely the religious composition of the present Congress is much like the 109th. Historically, the pattern of Christian domination holds for the Office of President including Barack Obama who claims affiliation with the United Church of Christ. This pattern of the overwhelming numbers Christians holding political office is virtually the same for Governors of these United States. The religious composition of the 2006 Supreme Court was 5 Roman Catholics, 2 Protestants and 2 Jews. What is wrong with this picture? Once in office, do politicians disconnect from their Christian heritage or is there a more insidious explanation? Granted the old saw about politicians having just two goals (1 get elected; 2 get reelected) does the problem lie with politicians or somewhere else?
We must also consider the behavior of “average” Christians, those not in office. Here we find in everyday life, our behavior is indistinguishable from that of non-Christians. We frequent the same bars, houses of prostitution, gambling establishments as non-Christian patrons. We watch the same movies and TV programs as they do. Christians break as many of the same kinds of laws; and engage in the same immoral practices as the rest of the non-Christian population. The same can be said for those seeking abortions, narcotic and alcohol addictions, As a matter of fact, the major difference between Christians and non-Christians (politicos included) is that Christians attend church more-or-less frequently. This may be a pessimistic but, it is an accurate assessment of what we must jokingly call our Christian “faith.” There seems to be a “disconnection” between our “faith” and our everyday lives. To say nothing about the effect this “schizophrenic faith” has upon proselytizing or the raging theological debate on “works vs. faith.” We need to recognize that without the participation by Christians these activities we rail against would cease to exist.
“Get out the vote” campaigns are little more than added distractions; little more than ways of avoiding our real Christian responsibilities. There is no evidence that the direction this Country is going in can be blamed on politicians any more than on the rest of us. How can they be the sole cause when the overwhelming numbers of politicians already in and running for office at any given time are Christian? Rather, it is an internal problem with Christianity itself. Is it our charge to change the world, to make it a better situation for the “huddled masses,” a wonderful “Edenic” place to live? Whether done through the political arena or by some other means, are we charged with the task of solving world problems? Is that our call? Is that our “global mission?” Is “taking on “Global Giants” as promoting reconciliation, equipping servant leaders, assisting the poor, caring for the sick or educating the next generation really things Christians (in or out of office) should be concerned with or are they deceitful distractions? Are we really to focus on preventing abortions, curing addictions? Solving such problems as these as well as all other social ails would be hollow victories if they were to become substitutes for the salvation story. It would be a hollow victory to reform the whole world, free it from all that ails humanity at the expense of the loss of a single soul. Is it not as Jesus said in Mark 8:36, For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? The Great Commandment tells us to love God and others. Is there any other way to fulfill that commission than by sharing the Gospel through our words and deeds? Nothing we can do will reform this world, only the King of kings and Lord of lords will.
Behold ,
he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which
pierced him:
and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen.
Revelation
1:7
