I read a recent post on Randys blog, and it linked to another blog that was really funny. A story about being stuck in a location that was rife with bigotry, and Randy's remark was "So this guy says "We need to plant a church here!""
What I am about to say is no reflection on either of them. I am sure that someone whom Randy esteems so much by definition must be someone worth esteeming.
However, I couldn't get that thought out of my mind. As I was driving through North Ohio, among unbelievable stretches of corn fields, I kept running that thought over and over in my head.
Why am I so bothered by the idea? I understand the sentiment, and in fact agree with it. However, it is the WAY the sentiment is manifested that just sticks in me. What has starting a non profit corporation got to do with the Kingdom expanding in manifestation in a local area? What has creating structures and systems and "planting" them in an area have to do with following Christ?
I have to believe it is simply programming and conditioning. It is how people think the church is, so they want to do more of it. Im sure God sees the intent, and loves it. But I think it is time to break away from thinking and practice that doesnt have any significant model in scripture, and has proved by most estimates (Barna for example) to be far less relevant than we think.
Planting a church in a place is like planting a barn in the middle of a cornfield.
The reality is the church is all around us. It needs to be encouraged, strengthened, edified etc... but what I believe it DOESNT need is more event driven, centralized, hierarchies to "gather". Im betting (and did a little asking around) that the person references int he blog post, is probably the most giving, generous, and sincere man. So I would bet he will be successful. That why this isnt a commentary on him or the post. It is my thinking through the concept.
Putting a building, or a gathering, or a movement, or anything, in a community is like taking a cornfield, and rearranging it to put a big fat barn in where the corn was growing. And then its effect is to create dependency on the barn and the infrastructure. The barn becomes the point of the farm, regardless of what it says. It is inevitable.
But the point of a farm is the corn. IT is the corn growing and developing and giving itself to the harvest. Whatever that means.
Im not sure Im being clear enough, and it might come across wrong. But I will say this again:
Planting a church in a city is like planting a barn int he middle of a cornfield.
Woman who refuses to get vaccinated denied transplant
-
To see the religious exemption 6 part series visit this website and it is
located in the menu at the top of the page: http://torahlifeministries.org/
3 years ago
9 comments:
Your post does not make a lot of sense to me. I do not understand where this contempt for the church (little "C")comes from. I hear this time and time again, that the church is not supposed to be this structured entity that it has become. And I disagree, scripturally.
Why on earth would God have included books like first and second Timothy that have blatant spelled out instructions and structure for the church in them, in the Bible? Or for that matter, the church of Corinth was so jacked up that Paul had to write them to warn them about not having STRUCTURE in place. Without structure and LEADERSHIP, the people started getting drunk on the wine, and one guy starts sleeping with his dads wife. The gifts are being abused left and right.
I think the main problem is the failure for people to fall under authority today. We want no authority but God, but we fail to yield to the authority he has put into place.
Maybe we really are a wicked generation.
We plant churches in places that are dependent on the church because we are made to be in community. This community is what God wants us to be apart of because it is the Body. The Body is useless without the parts doing their part.
For example, we can sit in our little exclusive communities, and do great things. But can 5 people raise the millions of dollars it takes to help Katrina victims? Or can they raise the millions it takes to open food shelters? or feed the hungry? Maybe, but it is rare. Five people sitting around having an unstructured church service are five useless people. Without structure, NOTHING gets done.
We battled anarchy in the 19th century and early 20th century (read G.K. Chesterton) because it was self defeating.
God gave us structure and rules to build his church with proper leadership and authority. To ignore this is to rebel against Scripture, and thus rebel against God.
The church is completely useful and helps MILLIONS of people come to know Jesus and walk in His ways passionately. I would recommend checking out the teachings of learned men like Mark Driscoll, J.I. Packer, John Stott, G.K. Chesterton, and R.C. Sproll (to name a few) instead of flash in the pan wanna be pastors who are leading God's people astray by condemning His body.
They will have to answer for this on judgment day, and I do not think God is going to like the answers.
I am not condemning house churches, or small groups, or the underground persecuted church. And I am in no way saying the church is perfect (the established church, both big and small), but we are not supposed to be. we are supposed to be part of the work that Christ Jesus has in us until the day of His return.
This is getting really long, so I will let it end here.
-don-
Oh yeah,
And what the heck was Paul doing with his life? I think it was planting churches. He was planting them in cities so people would hear the Gospel of Christ, repent, and be baptized.
So was Paul just planting barns to make people dependent?
What was God thinking having Paul do this? I mean, what was Paul doing that had anything to do with following Christ for that matter?
The church is all around us both gathered and scattered. We are supposed to come together and preach, pray, fellowship, and celebrate the Lord's supper.
You have to be gathered for that, and you have to have structure.
And I do not know about you, but I will not come under the authority of some guy who has whacked out interpretations of the Bible that he just wants to teach to me because some spirit might have said something to him.
wow Don - not knowing you I would say that that you weren't hearing what Sean was saying. But I do know him so let me attempt to bring some clarity.
He never said that "STRUCTURE" or "LEADERSHIP" is completely bankrupt. (by the way what's up with your caps?? I mean in email land that's considred yelling) Statistically -(read George Barna Revololution or any Brian McLaren and the pluthera of emergent church resources) people are leaving the old strucute of doing things to go for a new structure. Not dumping it all together as you seem to interpret. That's a statistic - not my opinion. So I belive Sean's point was why continue to use structures that don't seem to be factually working? The whole idea of one church model fits all is a farce. So rather than the old ways of delivering the gospel - explore creative opportunities. There is more than **one** way to deliver the gospel than the (buliding/Pastor (aka CEO)model. Let's explore ideas and structures that create disciples not pastor dependant, event driven structures which is the current state - this isn't an attack - it really is a fact. Even "Mark Driscoll, J.I. Packer, John Stott, G.K. Chesterton, and R.C. Sproll" wouldn't want that either.
NEVER (yes - I'm yelling) did he say screw structure only house churches will save the day - that's your grid - own it. You said "Five people sitting around having an unstructured church service are five USELESS people" (caps used for emphasis not yelling) So what's your point? There's a cloaked accusation here mixed with a "Straw Man" argument and frankly is a little confusing. Two points here 1) Any gathering secular or spiritual without any structure is useless regardless of # of people. 2) 5 people were never meant to compete w/ the major denominations to help Katrina victms nor is Sean suggesting that they be ablolished - again YOUR grid. (caps emphasis). I believe he's saying that the way a community can be reached through gospel is up for serious re-evaluation and that doing it that same way doesn't garuntee outcomes. Plenty of research done on that point.
Sean my have some kinda of reaction - but please don't try to sell yourself as someone who isn't. Size of communities will reach diffrent situations. It's just that now that smaller communites are setting the stage for opportunites the mega-churches don't and cant. I accept the tension. Can you?
oh yeah,
lastly I don't think Paul had an idea how modernity would shape our current church world view. If he knew the hundreds of millions (literelly) that were being invested in salaries, church buildings, church PR campaigns, celebrity pastors (i.e. I go to Rick Warrens church), air conditioning, and the bubble gum christian pop culture funded by these millions INSTEAD OF feeding the poor, instituting social structures geared towards the widow, the orphan and the addicted?? I mean you think the letter to the Corinthians was a rebuke...
Lastly you said "...I will not come under the authority of some guy who has whacked out interpretations of the Bible that he just wants to teach to me because some spirit might have said something to him"
Funny...the Catholic church had the same fear when Martin Luther said that common people should have access to the Bible and that the Holy Spirit REALLY IS the teacher and that Jesus is in control of HIS church. *gasp* look where that got us...
And yet somehow I bet you heard me just say that structure and leadership are absent from that reality right? :-) ***sarcasm intended***
First off,
The caps are used for emphasis to point out words that are typically mixed in conversations, especially typed.
Now, back to your response.
I do not read Brian McLaren due to his unchristian beliefs and his non-Christ centered theology and epistemology. And I know Barna is a well respected surveyor, but we have to look at all variables of his research. Did he take nation-wide polls? What communities did he poll? Where these people who call themselves frequent church-goers because they go on Christmas and Easter? What is the doctrine and beliefs of those who were surveyed? Is their mega church or small church progressive? What is the old structure? What is a new structure? Were all the people surveyed clear on the structures?
Research is good, but also full of holes. It would take larger surveying practices over many years to actually get an accurate sample (Statistics 101). A more accurate method of surveying would be to poll each church individually to see the needs of the people in that church. Or survey each community (neighborhood) surrounding the church to see what they are looking for.
I do agree there is more than one way to spread the Gospel. This was never in my argument. I like evangelism in regards to servant, friendship, and street preaching. And I am sure there are many other ways as well.
“Let's explore ideas and structures that create disciples not pastor dependant, event driven structures which is the current state”
I find this statement to be…kind of incoherent. To dissect it, one would assume that being pastor dependant is a bad thing. I will say, to the end that it creates a lazy American Christian, I agree. However, I disagree that being dependant on a pastor to help lead and guide, as well as add accountability to the church, is tremendously good. It is people without good pastoral leadership that make bad decisions. Man is made to be in community, and that includes with pastors and church leadership. Or should we just be like the Corinthians?
I think if you had read Sproll, Packer, Stott, and Driscoll, you would know there hearts are for pastors and the church (in the old form) that creates disciples and communities. Driscoll preaches at Mars Hill in Seattle and has one of the best leadership structures I have ever seen. His church is growing fast and planting other churches at record pace. He is pumping out godly pastors at light speed. Well trained men who contend for the faith.
Your accusation that I am making a “straw man” argument is understood, but not correct. When I read Sean’s post, I see his wish to tear down the church the way it is because it has become ineffective. If this is not his point, than his article (or post as it is) makes absolutely no sense what-so-ever. How can one claim a dependency on the church is a bad thing, and degrade it through an analogy, hope the institution survives?
(side note, I am not sure what this “your grid” thing means, but I am assuming it would be like saying “your interpretation”).
But let us take a look at Orthodoxy. We want to re-evaluate the spread of the Gospel, why? I think a better idea is to start spreading it period. The problem is with too many people worried about ineffective methodology that is remaining untested. There is actually research that will say street preaching has a higher conversion rate than coffee house conversation preaching. Other research tells us that seeker insensitivity is producing more Christians than seeker sensitivity. Is this true in all “markets”?
Orthodoxy (a return to the ways of the earliest Christians) would show that preaching in churches was not meant for the believer, but the unbeliever. But how do you get the unbeliever in your church? Hold an event. According to you, event driven churches are bad.
You are talking about the same Paul who said a pastor is worthy of double salary, and that he has the right to demand money from a church would not like the paying of pastors. That is ridiculous. Paying pastors is a biblical concept. Should we instead allow our pastors to starve? Should we not allow them to take care of their families? Should pastors have “day jobs” pulling them away from the duties of the church? Or should we swallow our pride and pay the man? It is worth it to me to pay a pastor to learn and teach. And what about the buildings? How can we house churches that can do more things without money? Or have signs and PR in order to help the community know there is a church in their area that can help them spiritually and physically?
And what about you Jason? Does ALL your money go to feeding the poor? Do you have a computer? TV? Books? Video Games? Car? House? Dishes? Camera? Do you buy only the cheap generics, or the name brands? Do you make a birthday list of items you would like? Do you have heat in the winter and AC in the summer? Ever turn on a fan to move the air? Maybe you should stop. This is money that can feed the poor and take care of the widows. Why should you have any modern comforts? Why should you make your house suitable when there are kids who have no roof over their heads? Maybe I should put my wife and kids out on the street in order to make sure all my money goes toward these things.
And while I am not going to debate sola scriptoria, I will admit I have often thought that while the common man should have access to the scriptures, he should also have access to good teachers. While the Holy Spirit is in control, and so is Jesus, we have also seen people use both these members of the godhead to their own personal gain. I believe it was Bob Jones who used his “spirituality” to get young women to parade naked before him. Or Paul Cain who used his position of authority to engage in drug use and homosexuality.
But I am sure the Holy Spirit was all they needed. Because the Holy Spirit would NEVER use a man to teach. Right? He would not give a man the ability to discern the error of another, would he?
Is this the same Holy Spirit who told a girl she was to marry me? But I didn’t and now I have two wonderful kids and a beautiful wife. Or the one who told David Koresh(sp?) to have multiple brides and start a cult where all the followers would be killed?
CONGRATULATIONS!! YOU WIN DON!!!
Paul NEVER said a pastor is worthy of double, let alone single pay. PReachers of the Gospel, not pastors. Paul was an "ambassador in chains", not a pastor. At best he was considered an itinerant.
Quoting people as if the basic examples in scripture arent enough,a nd going to authors to provie poitn rather than basic biblical examples is ludicrous.
I appreciate everyones right to have an opinion, but I simply stated mine on my blog. MY BLOG. LOL
Here is the bottom line. I love the body, I love the church. I love the bride. I have serious reservations about WHAT it is, and HOE it conducts itself. But warts and all, it is my family, and I am committed to fighting WITH/ALONGSIDE it to accomplish the directives of the King and HIS Kingdom.
I love your blog, and I really like what you said, Sean.
I liked reading it too. And my church has air conditioning. Also, I really like corn, the fresher the better.
Post a Comment