Churches Loosing Members.

[Zecryphon]

The self-serving aspect of religion has always existed. Witness the stories of Simon Magus (Acts 8:9-25) and Ananias and Saphira (Acts 5:1-11). Even today people choose a church on how it fits with their beliefs rather than how it will help them grow spiritually. I know from my own experience that when I went looking for the "right fit," I was surprisingly blessed to find a church that helped me grow spiritually and personally. It has been an awesome church experience. But I believe you have touched on something when you mention that today's version of the "Me" generation is indeed so self-centered that they don't find church very interesting -- mainly because for the first time in their lives they are being told they are NOT the most important person in the room.

Personally, in the few times I have been honored to share the message at our church, I have always emphasized that we need to be practicing our Christianity outside the church. And my senior pastor concurs, as he was a missionary for a long time before coming to the States. His whole life has been about living the gospel every single day, not just on Sundays.

I have been particularly blessed by our church recently when my wife unexpectedly passed away. The church ladies and men came through for us with meals and prayers and support all through the first month. And they have continued to help out in various ways without ever being asked. They are my friends in and out of church.

While the house church and its bigger sibling the emergent church both emphasize personal experience with God, from what I have seen there is no less emphasis on the gospel. Yes, it is possible that a person leading a Bible study one month through a traditional church will split off and start a "house church" the next, with no more qualifications than a big family room and a few like-minded friends. But there is a lot of support for the movement from theologians and even pastors, many of whom are just as fed up by denominationalism and even by "church-ism" as many of the rest of us. So a fed-up pastor spins off a small house church and keeps it small as the gospel works outward.

With many of these house churches, the emphasis is also on doing good works, on living the gospel and not just talking about it. With the smaller scale and lack of hierarchy, the house churches can act quickly and decisively to put themselves to work corporately for the greater good. No committees, no fund-raisers, no passing a request up the chain of church command. More like "Hey, next week let's meet at the soup kitchen and fix up some awesome chili" or "How about a quick drive to the Goodwill store to buy coats for those guys under the bridge on 5th Street?"

Yes, the danger is still that many a man or woman will feel like he or she has a handle on the gospel and attempt to teach it from their little learning and understanding. That is not to say that "unschooled" pastors cannot be awesome servants of God. However, when approaching Scriptures, it helps to have some foundational learning, which need not necessarily come from a seminary, but it sure doesn't hurt if it does. After all, why re-invent the wheel? There is something to be said for 2000 years of thought and tradition concerning Christ and His church. Knowing those traditions and the theology behind them can help us avoid the very heresy we fear in the emergent movement.

The self-serving aspect of religion has always existed. Witness the stories of Simon Magus (Acts 8:9-25) and Ananias and Saphira (Acts 5:1-11). Even today people choose a church on how it fits with their beliefs rather than how it will help them grow spiritually. I know from my own experience that when I went looking for the "right fit," I was surprisingly blessed to find a church that helped me grow spiritually and personally. It has been an awesome church experience. But I believe you have touched on something when you mention that today's version of the "Me" generation is indeed so self-centered that they don't find church very interesting -- mainly because for the first time in their lives they are being told they are NOT the most important person in the room.

I've read those stories in the Bible and those are great examples. One thing I've taken away from those stories though, and I may be wrong on my impression here, but I get the feeling that those people were the exception rather than the rule. Today it's reversed. People like Ananias and Saphira are actually the rule in churches. People who seeks their own needs first. Plus, people like that know God won't strike them dead like he did with those two, because, well God just doesn't do that anymore. They've got God in a nice box where He's basically powerless as far as they're concerned.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zecryphon
There's a website that actually is exploring this and where I would say most of the people who do post there are unchurched. It's: www.stupidchurchpeople.com But when you're dealing with the unchurched and how they go about interacting with others in the name of Christ, what you see is that they alone determine how that is done. It's a lot like Osteen's sermon on Being Somebody's Miracle. It all comes down to doing good deeds for others. Pretty soon, Christ will be out of the picture altogether and the unchurched will be relying upon their works for salvation. One of the biggest motivating factors driving people out of "the church" is the church subculture that exists. There's this whole mindset that if you are going to serve the Lord, you have to do it at church, otherwise you're not using your spiritual gifts as God has intended them to be used.

Personally, in the few times I have been honored to share the message at our church, I have always emphasized that we need to be practicing our Christianity outside the church. And my senior pastor concurs, as he was a missionary for a long time before coming to the States. His whole life has been about living the gospel every single day, not just on Sundays.

One of the first things I heard when I started listening to the Stupid Church People podcast was that "in order to be the church, you have to leave the church." At the time that was a radical concept to me, because it had never been implemented in any church I had been going to. I can't think of one time, until I got involved in the youth program, that anybody from that church left the church to go out into the community to serve. Another statement that hit home with me was "if the church wants to be the church, it should be closed on Sundays."

I have been particularly blessed by our church recently when my wife unexpectedly passed away.

I'm sorry for your loss.

The church ladies and men came through for us with meals and prayers and support all through the first month. And they have continued to help out in various ways without ever being asked. They are my friends in and out of church.

My statement about that is conditional. Are you still a member of that church in good standing? Are you still attending regularly? I hope in your case it's different. I know that when I left my last church, the only contact I have with any of those people on a friendly basis is if I initiate it. I served in the youth program for a year, and I never get so much as an email from the youth pastor, unless I email him first. What's up with that? They have my name, address, phone numbers and email addresses if they wanted to get in contact with me, they easily could. For me it's simple, now that I've left and have become a Lutheran, they don't want to get in touch with me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zecryphon
The house church model does frighten me, especially in today's society because there is such a focus on self. Who's really qualified to lead a house church? There's more to this than picking up a Bible and telling stories. The people who had house churches in the first century knew what was involved. Today I think it'd just be a bunch of like-minded people getting together and having fellowship with very little focus on God or on the word. It'd probably be closer to an Oprah book of the month club than anything else.

While the house church and its bigger sibling the emergent church both emphasize personal experience with God, from what I have seen there is no less emphasis on the gospel.

What I've heard about the Emergent church is not good in regards to the gospel message. It seems to be a very "me" centered gospel. It's a very self-esteem focused presentation. I think it was Rob Bell, who in a Bible study he wrote about Jesus and Peter walking on the water said that the reason Peter was able to walk on the water, wasn't because of Jesus, but because Peter believed in himself. It's a radically different gospel presentation and in some cases seems to run alongside the Word of Faith teachings. I have yet to really investigate the Emergent movement, but what I've heard said by Brian McLaren and Tony Jones seems to be very liberal Christianity.

Yes, it is possible that a person leading a Bible study one month through a traditional church will split off and start a "house church" the next, with no more qualifications than a big family room and a few like-minded friends. But there is a lot of support for the movement from theologians and even pastors, many of whom are just as fed up by denominationalism and even by "church-ism" as many of the rest of us. So a fed-up pastor spins off a small house church and keeps it small as the gospel works outward.

I have no problem with a qualified teacher starting a house church. My concern is that anyone because they have a Bible and house will start a church and I think this is one area of the body of Christ that needs to be regulated, or at least overseen in some way. The house churches have to be accountable to somebody to make sure they are teaching Christ-centered and cross-focused sermons.

With many of these house churches, the emphasis is also on doing good works, on living the gospel and not just talking about it. With the smaller scale and lack of hierarchy, the house churches can act quickly and decisively to put themselves to work corporately for the greater good. No committees, no fund-raisers, no passing a request up the chain of church command. More like "Hey, next week let's meet at the soup kitchen and fix up some awesome chili" or "How about a quick drive to the Goodwill store to buy coats for those guys under the bridge on 5th Street?"

That's good. It's probably just me, but when I think of a house church I can't help but think that they all have the potential to turn into something akin to Westboro Baptist church, where most of the 80 members are related to the pastor.

Yes, the danger is still that many a man or woman will feel like he or she has a handle on the gospel and attempt to teach it from their little learning and understanding. That is not to say that "unschooled" pastors cannot be awesome servants of God. However, when approaching Scriptures, it helps to have some foundational learning, which need not necessarily come from a seminary, but it sure doesn't hurt if it does. After all, why re-invent the wheel? There is something to be said for 2000 years of thought and tradition concerning Christ and His church. Knowing those traditions and the theology behind them can help us avoid the very heresy we fear in the emergent movement.

I personally think Oprah Winfrey is going to do more damage to Christianity than the Emergent church. But they're both spewing heretical beliefs so it'll be interesting to see which one actually is worse.

 

[Zecryphon]

Thanks for posting this!! It's very interesting reading!!!

The really good stuff though is in the archives from the beginning of the blog/podcast. I think it started about three years ago. The founder of the site Steve Chastain used to work at Saddleback church with Rick Warren so he's had first hand experience with the mega-church movement and all that entails. The really thought-provoking stuff, in my opinion, is in the early years. Now the site is really just a place for people to get together and complain about how bad any church is.

 

[Zecryphon]

I so agree with this!! I think this is one problem our church has. We hardly have any outreach at all. Everything we do takes place at church....committee meetings, Bible studies, even our so-called outreach is at the church. We really do not get out in the community at all and actually serve people.
Maybe this is why many people do get frustrated with church- we feel like we are always doing things at the church, with hardly anytime for anything else.
I agree with the second part, too. We've had quite a few people leave our church, especially in the last couple of years. Now personally, I hate to see them go, but I don't hold it against them at all. They are still my friends, and I still love them. I really don't care what church they go to. I know it really bugs our pastor though, because he takes it as them rejecting him. He always worries about what he is going to say if he runs into them on the street.

I so agree with this!! I think this is one problem our church has. We hardly have any outreach at all. Everything we do takes place at church....committee meetings, Bible studies, even our so-called outreach is at the church. We really do not get out in the community at all and actually serve people.

Yeah, I was never presented with an opportunity to go into the community and serve until I was a volunteer in the youth program. But by that time, I was already on my way out of that church. I had stopped attending services there the previous year, because of doctrinal disagreements. Some of what they were teaching was not lining up with the scriptures. So I started looking for a new more Biblically-sound church.

Maybe this is why many people do get frustrated with church- we feel like we are always doing things at the church, with hardly anytime for anything else.

Ask yourself, how many days during the week going to the church? Is it the typical 3 nights? Once on Sunday for church, the Wednesday night Bible study and maybe another night or morning for a Women's breakfast? Does it seem like your social calendar is dictated by the church? That anything you do socially revolves around the church in some way? Do you have any friends that don't go to that church? When people answer these questions it brings their whole church experience into a new light. Because people who do spend a lot of time at church think they're serving the Lord when in fact, they're just really serving that local church body and meeting it's needs.

I agree with the second part, too. We've had quite a few people leave our church, especially in the last couple of years. Now personally, I hate to see them go, but I don't hold it against them at all. They are still my friends, and I still love them. I really don't care what church they go to. I know it really bugs our pastor though, because he takes it as them rejecting him. He always worries about what he is going to say if he runs into them on the street.

I find that attitude a bit disturbing on the pastor's part, because it seems like he's focused on himself there. He shouldn't be worried about what he will say if he ever saw them on the street, but what they will most likely say to him. If he sees them on the street he should treat them like he'd treat anybody else, be warm and friendly to them. Don't ask them what church they're at and don't ask them when they're coming back to his church. He should treat them the way he'd like to be treated by anybody on the street. Pastors don't like it when people leave, because churches today are basically a numbers game. The more people you have the better you are at selling your product. It's a marketing game, really. Churches are now adopting the business plans of Fortune 500 companies to attract more people to the church. What pastors have forgotten is that the Sunday morning service is not for the unsaved. It's for the saved. But the saved are being pushed aside in favor of attracting the seekers. When the flock doesn't get fed, the flock will leave the church. But where do you go, when the majority of churches around you are most likely seeker-friendly/sensitive.

 

[Zecryphon]

How awesome is our God He sometimes works in small ways with a lot of people...and in big ways with a few people.

There are churches that have fewer than 100 people...and seem to manage to minister to people around the world...Africa...South America...China...down the street at the Soup Kitchens....to the homeless...at the local Nursing Home...the Pregnancy Crisis Centers...

Ya know...I really don't understand a whole lot of this concept...

I really don't...I don't know what people seem to expect...

We seem to place so much focus on the church...it's not about the church...any church...IMHO

My thoughts are...when the heart of the matter is driven by what man can do for the purposes men deem righteous...in their strength and power...there's gonna be problems.

When the heart of the matter is God driven, for His purpose according to His righteousness...for His glory, honor and praise....

The Holy Spirit works in awesome and wonderous ways!

...whether you're gathered in someone's home...or a small building or a large building or a borrowed building....standing on a street corner...or right there...in your own home hangin’ out with friends, family and neighbors.

How awesome is our God He sometimes works in small ways with a lot of people...and in big ways with a few people.

It is truly amazing, that's true.

There are churches that have fewer than 100 people...and seem to manage to minister to people around the world...Africa...South America...China...down the street at the Soup Kitchens....to the homeless...at the local Nursing Home...the Pregnancy Crisis Centers...

Yep, and there are big churches that do the same thing. I don't think size is really a hinderance to serving the community. I think the hinderance to serving the community comes from the attitude of the senior pastor or those in charge of the church. It comes down to what's more important? Serving your neighbor or growing your church? Sadly, today, the focus is on the latter. If you have a campus that occupies a few city blocks and your membership is in the thousands, you've arrived as a pastor. The standard for "success" is no longer how many people are soundly saved, it's how many people are filling the pews.

Ya know...I really don't understand a whole lot of this concept...

In my opinion, it's really about keeping the body of Christ as a whole, focused on the same goal. First, feeding the flock of believers so that they may seek the lost and introduce them to Christ. But which Christ is where the trouble arises. Some churches preach Christ as your friend and buddy. Some preach Christ as your life coach. Some don't preach Christ at all and just want to make you feel good.

I really don't...I don't know what people seem to expect...

I expect the church to do it's job and stop focusing on church expansion projects and church growth and get back to the business of feeding the flock of loyal sheep with the sacraments and the Word of God. Feed them and instruct them in the written word of God. The sheep are starving and dying because the sheep have been pushed to the side in favor of the goats that could become sheep if the church becomes "relevant" enough to meet the needs of the goats.

We seem to place so much focus on the church...it's not about the church...any church...IMHO

You're right it's not about any one building or any one denomination and who's doing it right, it's about the body of Christ as a whole. That's what has to be kept healthy. How do we determine what is healthy? We go to God and to His written word and read what a healthy church should look like. When I was looking for a new church I attended one, that was really an emergent church flying under the banner of a non-denom community church, where you went to individual communion stations set up around the church and helped yourself to communion. It reminded me of the church in Corinth.

My thoughts are...when the heart of the matter is driven by what man can do for the purposes men deem righteous...in their strength and power...there's gonna be problems.

Yeah, I agree. We have to be doing God's will, not man's will. People often pray "thy will be done on earth as it is in Heaven", but how many people know what God's will is?

When the heart of the matter is God driven, for His purpose according to His righteousness...for His glory, honor and praise....

Right and that's what we have to get back to.

The Holy Spirit works in awesome and wonderous ways!

...whether you're gathered in someone's home...or a small building or a large building or a borrowed building....standing on a street corner...or right there...in your own home hangin’ out with friends, family and neighbors.

Amen!

 

[Nadiine]

Amen. Some of the most edifying times I've had have been when I'm alone, just the Lord and me, and my Bible. When we lived in an apartment, I had a place set up in a walk-in closet for my devotional times (kind of necessary if one wants to be alone in a 2-bedroom apartment with a husband and two kids, LOL!). It was, quite literally, my "prayer closet".

We should actually be doing BOTH - not "swapping out" private devotions INSTEAD OF church....

It isn't meant to be replace it if this is what your post is suggesting.

Again, I don't advocate that people have to be at the church every time the doors are open for a service or else they're lost or spiritually bankrupt LOL -

As always, my focus remains on the anti-church rhetoric as if it's to be attacked and torn apart and rebelled against.
THAT is unbiblical and I consider it a rebellion issue going on in some way.
Not going is one thing becuz of some personal issues, trashing church attendance and the Christians who do go is quite another thing and I would say God is not pleased with that.

 

[Psalms34]

As always, my focus remains on the anti-church rhetoric as if it's to be attacked and torn apart and rebelled against.
THAT is unbiblical and I consider it a rebellion issue going on in some way.
Not going is one thing becuz of some personal issues, trashing church attendance and the Christians who do go is quite another thing and I would say God is not pleased with that.

Oh yeah, it's crazy but it's true that this is happening more often and even supported by noted ministries. Last month I loaded the barna website which is a well noted group that gathers statistics. the main article for last month they promoted the book that Barna's co-authored. Basically it is a full out attack against organized church congregations. Here is a bit from their promotion they posted for buying their book:

Pagan Christianity? contends that most of today’s church practices have no biblical foundation, and in some cases, hinder people from having a genuine experience with God. With extensive footnotes and documentation, the book shows that the following church practices had little to do with scriptural mandate or apostolic application:

Church buildings were initially constructed under the Roman emperor Constantine, around 327. The early Christian church met in homes.

The pulpit was a piece of stagecraft borrowed from Greek culture in which professional speakers delivered monologues in public debates. There is no evidence that Jesus, the apostles, or other leaders in the early Church used a pulpit; it seems to have been introduced into Christian circles in the mid-third century.

The order of worship originated in the Roman Catholic Mass under the leadership of Pope Gregory in the sixth century.

Preaching a sermon to an audience was ushered into the church world late in the second century. Sermons were an extension of the activity of the Greek sophists, who had mastered the art of rhetorical oratory.

There were no pastors, as an official or director of a group of believers, until sometime in the second century. That was eventually furthered by the practice of ordination, which was based upon the prevailing Roman custom of appointing men to public office.

The biblical approach to "communion" or the "Lord’s Supper," was truncated late in the second century from a full, festive communal meal without clergy officiating to the presently common habit of having a sip of wine and morsel of bread (or juice and a wafer) under the guidance of a recognized clergyman.

Pagan Christianity? also addresses a myriad of other practices, including tax-exempt status for churches, pews, stained glass windows, altar calls, the pastoral prayer, church bulletins, bishops, clergy attire, choirs, tithing, the collection plate, seminary training, infant baptism, the "sinner’s prayer," and funeral processions, among others.

crazy stuff, eh?

 

[IisJustMe]

Oh yeah, it's crazy but it's true that this is happening more often and even supported by noted ministries. Last month I loaded the barns website which is a well noted group that gathers statistics. the main article for last month they promoted the book that Barn's co-authored. Basically it is a full out attack against organized church congregations. Here is a bit from their promotion they posted for buying their book: ... crazy stuff, eh?

Uh, FW? You might want to check the web address. I think you mean "barna.org." "Barns.org" gets you ... well ... barns. Horse barns. Amish barns. Pole barns.

 

[Rajni]

I had one of those in my 1 bedroom apt. in Alaska. The closet was about 4 X 7 feet with shelves on one side. I set up some pictures and candles and stuff there and lay a throw rug on the floor. Actually in that apt I had several deep experiences with the LORD. There are also a few places in the woods where I was able to have very intimate communication with God... Here's a couple:

"The LORDS Church..."

I often stood on that ledge on the left, the one that looks like a facial profile. Very powerful place. After all the Spirit is like rivers of living water....

Me in one of my other spots...

....Which is by the creek halfway up this mountain:

[/b]

Awesome!

 

[Zecryphon]

Oh yeah, it's crazy but it's true that this is happening more often and even supported by noted ministries. Last month I loaded the barns website which is a well noted group that gathers statistics. the main article for last month they promoted the book that Barn's co-authored. Basically it is a full out attack against organized church congregations. Here is a bit from their promotion they posted for buying their book:



crazy stuff, eh?

Interesting excerpt. If this statement: "Preaching a sermon to an audience was ushered into the church world late in the second century. Sermons were an extension of the activity of the Greek sophists, who had mastered the art of rhetorical oratory" is true, what does Barna think Matthew chapter 5 is? If it's not the Sermon on the Mount, because sermons were an extension of the activity of Greek sophists, what was Jesus doing? Was He even preaching? If He was preaching, what was He preaching? I'll have to read this book now and see what he has to say. It sounds to me like Barna is just adding fuel to the fire of anti-denominationalism and promoting an anti-church agenda. But we will see. Have you read the book FW? What is Barna's solution to the Paganism in the church today? Does he offer one? Or does he just point out problem with the church and offer no solutions?

 

[Psalms34]

Uh, FW? You might want to check the web address. I think you mean "barna.org." "Barns.org" gets you ... well ... barns. Horse barns. Amish barns. Pole barns.

Haha! Well that's where it belongs, anyway; out in the barn -- behind the rotting bail of oat hay.

@ Zec, heh I suppose the sermon on the mount was "pagan" too, that's what came to mind when I first read it too, among other things. All the crazy things people come up with, we truly are sheep! Nah, I haven't read the book yet, I just found it recently. I'd rather get a used book, so my cash does not line his pockets, but that is up for debate as I'm thinking whether or not to buy it with my limited time. Give us a good review if you do

 

[Zecryphon]

Haha! Well that's where it belongs, anyway; out in the barn -- behind the rotting bail of oat hay.

@ Zec, heh I suppose the sermon on the mount was "pagan" too, that's what came to mind when I first read it too, among other things. All the crazy things people come up with, we truly are sheep! Nah, I haven't read the book yet, I just found it recently. I'd rather get a used book, so my cash does not line his pockets, but that is up for debate as I'm thinking whether or not to buy it with my limited time. Give us a good review if you do

I'm into so many books right now I don't know if I have time for another. But when it goes to audio format, I'll probably use one of my credits at Audible.com to listen to it.

 

[Caeroth]

Interesting excerpt. If this statement: "Preaching a sermon to an audience was ushered into the church world late in the second century. Sermons were an extension of the activity of the Greek sophists, who had mastered the art of rhetorical oratory" is true, what does Barna think Matthew chapter 5 is? If it's not the Sermon on the Mount, because sermons were an extension of the activity of Greek sophists, what was Jesus doing? Was He even preaching? If He was preaching, what was He preaching? I'll have to read this book now and see what he has to say. It sounds to me like Barna is just adding fuel to the fire of anti-denominationalism and promoting an anti-church agenda. But we will see. Have you read the book FW? What is Barna's solution to the Paganism in the church today? Does he offer one? Or does he just point out problem with the church and offer no solutions?

From the few bits I've read from Barna and his co-author Frank Viola, they are both very much into non-traditional churches. Viola's web site is a wealth of articles and advice for those want to run house churches. We should keep in mind that while Viola has no formal training in ministry, neither did the Apostle Paul, the one we know so well as the "Great Evangelist." Barna was a pastor for a while, but now runs house churches -- as well as his apparently successful business known as the Barna Group.

Their point in their book is to cut away the trappings that have been grafted onto what we think of as "church" -- things like the liturgy of the main denominations, and even the traditions of some of the sacraments observed even by non-denominational churches. Viola calls his movement "organic church," with an emphasis on flexing and growing as the congregation changes. Think about that for a second: Is your pastor continuing to preach to the unsaved, those who need "milk" instead of solid spiritual food? Or is your pastor taking your whole congregation forward, past the "altar call at every sermon" method? Are you getting what you need, or is that reserved for the Wednesday night Bible study? If the Bible study is giving you more, then what is the role of the church itself? Those are the questions we must ask. As I have said before, even those running a Bible study need to work from solid ground both in Scripture and in doctrine, but that is not to say one must be a pastor to run such a group.

Honestly, lately at church I have felt like a college grad student in a 9th-grade high school class, where everything is pitched to the least common denominator. Granted, our pastor has kind of been rushing through a series on the elements of the Passion, but even his better messages end with "And if there is anyone here today who has not accepted Christ..." We have 40 adults and he knows them all by name and family. I feel like yelling, "HELLO! You already know who has been saved and who's just hanging out!"

But the title of the book -- "Pagan Christianity" -- has a double meaning: While on the one hand they are trying to strip away the pagan elements from our church Christianity, they are also trying to get us back to a more primitive ("pagan"?) Christianity, one that is simpler and, as Viola says, more organic. True, I think the campfire-singalong approach to house church is a bad idea, but there is something to be learned by looking at those churches that Paul and Peter planted in Asia and Europe in the first century. The Restoration Movement was an earlier attempt to do what Barna and Viola talk about, but the present authors have in mind a lot of smaller-size churches serving the needs of maturing Christians rather than one non-denominational mega-church serving the needs of a whole stadium of Christians of varying maturity.

This all got me to thinking: If the population of a given area tends to grow a bit, and the church is doing its job of evangelizing the unsaved, then if the number of churches stays the same, then the churches all ought to grow. If the number of churches grows, then still the number of people attending all the churches ought to grow. In fact, when a whole family attends a particular church, then by the next generation, the church ought to grow as the families remain in that church. But there are obviously more variables. Marriages often prompt one spouse to leave their home community and family church. Other family changes, job changes, and such will affect the growth of a particular church, but population stats ought to correlate with church attendance stats. And that is the problem cited by the recent Pew Report: fewer people are attending church at all. There are a lot of theories about why, but the most popular one is that people are dissatisfied with what they see and experience, that the old churches are, to put it bluntly, old. Young people are no longer comfortable, young couples don't feel welcome, current social concerns are either anathema or ignored, and the traditions and liturgy are so ancient that they make no sense to a second generation raised on MTV and a first generation raised on the Internet.

Enter the house church: more personal, more adaptive, more in tune with individual members' spiritual needs. Not that the house church means to cater to whatever are the whims of a few people, but at least the message and discussion and worship can truly match the maturity of a smaller group, rather than trying to serve all alike.

Anyway, I would beware of Barna's surveys. His latest one (found on his home page) has such a small survey sample it is basically useless. Just 1003 people surveyed by phone are supposed to represent all 300 million Americans. And where did the numbers come from? The phone book. Are you listed in the phone book? Most people who operate exclusively from a cell phone are not. And I'm not. That may explain why I never get called for such things...

 

[Psalms34]

Viola has no formal training in ministry, neither did the Apostle Paul, the one we know so well as the "Great Evangelist."

You mean Paul of Tarsus who was a Pharisee and studied under Rabbi Gamaliel? heh seems to be more equipped for ministry than the apostles. Not discounting the two years of training for the apostles, though they didn't understand even half of it until after. Paul was well trained in what we call the OT, which by the light of God's understanding, is well suited for Christian ministry, since the OT fully supports the NT. From OT understanding of which he was well trained, and the Holy Spirit to teach the meanings of such, Paul wrote much of the NT. I see no comparison. Is that what Barna compared himself to by what he is doing and saying against Christians?

 

[IisJustMe]

Yeah, I think he means that one.

 

[Psalms34]

Yeah, I think he means that one.

Yeah that must be the one. I didn't know Paul was even an apostle. hehe he wasn't around when they decided to cast lots on that one, gah! He should have been though, if the apostles could have just waited it would have been apparent. Apostle Matthias, why no mention of him after that? Boggles the mind.

 

[IisJustMe]

Yeah that must be the one. I didn't know Paul was even an apostle. hehe he wasn't around when they decided to cast lots on that one, gah! He should have been though, if the apostles could have just waited it would have been apparent. Apostle Matthias, why no mention of him after that? Boggles the mind.

I think that's a case of man deciding for God, and God correcting the choice later on. Church history actually shows Mathias preached in Carthage and had many converts, and founded several churches there. But he certainly didn't have the impact the apostle Paul had. I've no problem with calling him an apostle, as most of the church has throughout the ages.

 

[Psalms34]

I think that's a case of man deciding for God, and God correcting the choice later on. Church history actually shows Mathias preached in Carthage and had many converts, and founded several churches there. But he certainly didn't have the impact the apostle Paul had. I've no problem with calling him an apostle, as most of the church has throughout the ages.

Yeah, I won’t disagree with that, I take it as an honorary title if anything. It’s cool to call him an apostle, but legally he wasn’t. Not to be “legalistic“, I mean that as officially. And yes I too take it as lots should have not been cast as they did. You know, casting lots can be connected to some pagan tradition, I’m sure. There was something about the tradition of casting lots, but it slips my mind... comes up snake eyes haha

Sure, Matthias built churches, but I mean in the NT recordings he got himself left out as writer or participant. Then again, was it even necessary to replace the 12th? I don’t get the idea that a 12th was needed nor that casting lots was acceptable means to determine a replacement. If a 12th was needed, Paul would have been a more logical choice, later on of course since he was busy saying things against Christians (like who?) and then hunting them down for you know what

 

[Caeroth]

Yeah, I won’t disagree with that, I take it as an honorary title if anything. It’s cool to call him an apostle, but legally he wasn’t. Not to be “legalistic“, I mean that as officially. And yes I too take it as lots should have not been cast as they did. You know, casting lots can be connected to some pagan tradition, I’m sure. There was something about the tradition of casting lots, but it slips my mind... comes up snake eyes haha...

Actually, the term Apostle is used to denote someone who is "sent out," an ambassador. Jesus selected the Twelve to be the ones who would go out and spread the Gospel. As noted, when Judas betrayed Jesus, another Apostle was selected by casting lots. Ironically, that's the same method the Roman guards used for divvying up Jesus' clothing.

Paul's right to be called an Apostle is recorded in Acts 9, especially verses 15-16:

15 But the Lord said to him, “Go, for he is a chosen vessel of Mine to bear My name before Gentiles, kings, and the children of Israel. 16 For I will show him how many things he must suffer for My name’s sake.”
​

Sounds like Saul (soon to be Paul) is being sent out on the Lord's behalf, doesn't it? The fact that the other Apostles accepted that Paul was sent out like they were seems like good enough proof to accept him as an "official" Apostle. Of course, that's why the church has accepted him as such from the very beginning.

For the record, Barna and Viola do not compare themselves to Paul, but I bring it up nonetheless to make the point that not all leaders of good churches -- house churches or otherwise -- need necessarily have had official schooling in doctrine and traditions. It can help, but God does not require it.

For those who still are unsure about the call to house churches, I would direct you to any resource on missions in the Middle East and in other countries where Christians are persecuted. In such places, the gospel is regularly preached in basements, houses, warehouses, shuttered businesses, and in open deserts, most often by Christian converts and not by seminary-trained pastors. Once the gospel takes hold, those who feel the fire in their bones must share it or be consumed by it. (see Jeremiah 20:9)

 

[Psalms34]

Actually, the term Apostle is used to denote someone who is "sent out," an ambassador. Jesus selected the Twelve to be the ones who would go out and spread the Gospel. As noted, when Judas betrayed Jesus, another Apostle was selected by casting lots. Ironically, that's the same method the Roman guards used for divvying up Jesus' clothing.

Paul's right to be called an Apostle is recorded in Acts 9, especially verses 15-16:

15 But the Lord said to him, “Go, for he is a chosen vessel of Mine to bear My name before Gentiles, kings, and the children of Israel. 16 For I will show him how many things he must suffer for My name’s sake.”
​

Sounds like Saul (soon to be Paul) is being sent out on the Lord's behalf, doesn't it? The fact that the other Apostles accepted that Paul was sent out like they were seems like good enough proof to accept him as an "official" Apostle. Of course, that's why the church has accepted him as such from the very beginning.

I know what apostle means, but you denoted it as “the apostle Paul”, which is not mentioned in the bible anyplace as being of the 12. If “chosen vessel” means “the apostle“, then why aren’t the 12 referred as “chosen vessel“? Anyway, the main point is he was trained for the ministry, not someone like Barna that had none. Not even saying formal schooling is required, but pointing out that Paul did as you said he didn't.

For the record, Barna and Viola do not compare themselves to Paul, but I bring it up nonetheless to make the point that not all leaders of good churches -- house churches or otherwise -- need necessarily have had official schooling in doctrine and traditions. It can help, but God does not require it.

For those who still are unsure about the call to house churches, I would direct you to any resource on missions in the Middle East and in other countries where Christians are persecuted. In such places, the gospel is regularly preached in basements, houses, warehouses, shuttered businesses, and in open deserts, most often by Christian converts and not by seminary-trained pastors. Once the gospel takes hold, those who feel the fire in their bones must share it or be consumed by it. (see Jeremiah 20:9)

I'm not against home churches, I'm against anyone that claims Chrisitan's that go to a regular owned or rented church building to meet is a pagan-christian as Barna is saying.

 

[jazzypooh]

Does anyone else notice this?

In my town (perhaps yours also) the Methodist, Lutheran, and Presbyterian congregations are loosing members. Churches are shrinking. In one extreme case there is a large church building here in town but there are only a few active members. Whats happening?

The only ones that seem to be growing are the Southern Baptists and the non-denominational ones. Wonder why?

What are your insights?

my church is growing. but its growing because the hand of God is on our ministry and we seek Him and preach the Word and His Spirit is there

there's a last day move of God that is hitting the earth. the Bridegroom is coming. people just want God. they don't want a show. they don't want phoniness. they dont want religion. leaders are falling all over the place. we need a genuine move of the Holy Ghost to gather this end-time harvest. we need to have a spirit of urgency in the Body of Christ. the Church needs to get back to the WORD! get back to fasting and prayer and seeking God. that's the only way to get a genuine move of God's Spirit...

its not about growing a church...... its about growing a Kingdom

God bless,
~jazzy~