Response to My Last Post (on a New Church Structure)

Spouse's response: sounds like you have some good ideas, but it sounds like a "crazy people" church. Many churches that have that structure have gone off the deep end theologically. So you really don't want just anybody getting up there to preach, because they could take some pretty horrible positions and use the Bible to justify them. Many churches get around this by requiring someone who preaches to be somehow ordained.

Good point, Spouse.

So, how to get around that? I do want anyone to be able to get up and preach, as long as they are Biblically grounded. I don't want them to have to have a seminary degree, though they should be knowledgeable of the Bible and basic Christian beliefs. I also don't want people to get up there and push an agenda, using the Bible to support it - the idea is preaching on the Bible itself.

You could have a requirement of the number of times they have to attend before they can preach, and have some sort of governing body approve them. This would probably involve knowing the topic ahead of time and getting to know the person. However, this puts more power in the hands of a governing body, rather than little small groups within the larger group being equal, with each small group able to do what it wants. (so that gets around the idea of "you'd need a governing body anyway to make the church's decisions".). You could do it as a small group model, where the group leader must approve of the person, though that definitely puts the power in the hands of one person, and if your group leader didn't like you, you'd be unable to preach.

So I guess a small governing body of people chosen by the church would be the best option. Although then people would choose their friends instead of the best leaders. The governing body would be small enough to be doctrinally consistent (even if they come from different denominations, as long as there are no major differences in theology) but large enough to not hold to just one theology and consider all else wrong, and large enough to incorporate a diversity of opinions to balance each other out. Grr, having to set up a government here, which is exactly what the Founding Fathers went through when they set up the United States - how to set up a government which fairly represents the people and their wishes but doesn't ramrod over a minority? In this case, it's how to set up a board which represents a diversity of opinions but not so diverse that you become inconsistent with Scripture and thus stray theologically.

Perhaps publishing by-laws, or defining theological lines? Of course, those theological lines would be broadly drawn (e.g. no official stance on whether baptism is necessary for salvation, or infant baptism, or transubstantiation, or any other non-salvation-oriented denominational issue), but would be clear on certain basic Biblical beliefs, the set that someone MUST believe in order to be considered a Christian.

If I Started a Church, It Would Be Revolutionary and Unlike Anything You've Seen, and Here's Why

Who is Church aimed at?

This post (and yes, the title question will be answered - keep reading) came about because I was reading an interesting blog post yesterday about how to be a Christian pastor. Written by a pastor with a PhD and specialty in pastoring, whose job is to teach future Christian pastors, that carries a lot of weight. He said (and I'm paraphrasing here) that a pastor's job is not to provide moral truth, and not to provide teaching, but to provide God's truth of His son Jesus Christ (in other words, the message of the cross...every sermon?).

I know as a believer, it gets tiresome to constantly hear the salvation message when I already believe. Of course it is important, and we should hear it occasionally to remind ourselves of it, but I don't believe believers need to hear it every sermon, because we're already converted. We already agree with it, so there's no need to harp on it or convince us.

So I found that I fundamentally disagree with this pastor, and realized that's because I realized I believe church's function is for a different audience (believers) than he does (non-believers). Which brings up the question:

"Why should Christians go to church?"
 This one is easy to answer - Christians all know the "right answer" is "Because we should, because the Bible commands us to." But, thinking about it, the better question is:


"Who is Church aimed at?"
Which ultimately comes down to how you picture an ideal Christian and their lifestyle, and what that looks like in the modern world. This is something I spend a lot of time thinking about.

If you've seen my last couple posts, you're probably aware that Spouse and I are considering starting a Bible Study, and at one point, I had the feeling God said "think bigger". What is bigger than a Bible Study? A church. The thought that God might want us to start a church is a very scary thought to me, as someone who grew up with a fear of people and someone who doesn't have any sort of seminary degree (and neither does Spouse). So the thought is intimidating, but if God wants to bring it about, He must think it's necessary, so who am I to argue?

First, let's consider the Christian community (and this is what I consider the christian church as a whole, consisting of everyone who has made the decision to follow Jesus, encompassing lots of denominations). I'm thinking mostly of the Christian community of the early church, described in the Book of Acts. 

• There are people who have made the decision to follow Christ, who've been around a long time and seen a lot of miracles done and people converted.
• There are new believers who are thinking, "okay I've put my trust in Christ but I don't know much about being a Christian...so now what? I want to learn more from someone."
• There are people hanging around who may have varying degrees of interest in Christ but are not yet Christians. They're just people's friends or acquaintances, who are kind of curious about Christianity.
• Then there are the people we're interacting with:  healing, preaching to, helping. The poor, whether physically or in spirit.

So I imagine the time of an ideal Christian would be spent something like this:

• in corporate or private worship (an outpouring of praise or thanks to God)
• in corporate teaching (learning/modifying our views of God)
• praying (deepening our relationship w/ God)
• Seeking God through reading the Bible (growing on our own journey)
• interacting with and uplifting our neighbors  (both non-Christians and other Christians)
  
  
  So, I see a Christian's time spent during the week as praying and reading the Bible in order to self-grow. So then, why meet for church? It's true that the Bible commands us to meet with others, saying it is good. And it feels good to talk to like-minded people, especially when you're feeling down or have some questions about things. It's especially good when you get to talk to someone encouraging, who is very nice and yet knows more (or can talk to God with you and beseech God for you) and so can give you advice.
  
  The Answer Is:
  
  During the week, I see a Christian reading the Bible and praying fervently, and volunteering with non-Christians and spending time with both Christians and non-Christians, but probably more on a one-on-one basis. Meeting also with one person in a discipling relationship, though every discipling relationship is a two-way street for learning from the other person, asking questions, and growing in faith. New Christians are probably being discipled by Longer Christians, but at some point you'll go from meeting with someone where you ask most of the questions, to meeting with someone else where you'll be able to provide a lot of guidance for their questions.
  
  On Sundays, I think Christians should meet together to worship corporately (that, at least, is the same). But, and here's where it's different, I think church should be an informal setting, a place to socialize and come together, followed by a teaching meant for all Christians there.
  
  Here is how I'd structure "church" (meant for believers, and those interested in Christ):
  Sunday Morning (just because most people already have this time set aside for "Church"):
  

  •  The primary audience is Believers
  • Start with a potluck breakfast. So yes, you'd get fed at church, and eat while you listen. People socialize with other Christians (people who share the same joy and outlook as they do), the people they haven't seen all week. This is a time for catching up, encouraging, asking questions, setting up lunch dates, etc. Short prayer before eating.
  • Corporate worship (this is the same)
  • People share testimonies of the week. Anyone who has a story of something great God's done or doing may share. This is meant to encourage and hearten the members, because we often don't even know what God is doing in the same part of the city next to us! If we don't see people regularly or it's not our group, we don't know, and it's cool to hear of miracles or conversions or great stories of God working. This setup naturally brings us closer to God and at the same time magnifies His greatness (whereas regular church, you just sit and listen, by nature not doing any of these things). Similarly, hearing your testimony could encourage people who have been discouraged that week in their own work. This works to break down walls between people (none of that just showing up to church and leaving, keeping everyone separate from each other and feeling like you don't know anyone). It serves to keep everyone at the same status (what the New Testament commands, and we don't do today!) and opens an intimacy through shared struggles and great works.
  • Short or long teaching where everyone just listens (like a sermon), but not just by one pastor. Throughout the week, anyone in the congregation (get rid of status; we're all Christians, so we all have the same status! No one preacher). So anyone in the congregation who might like to teach that week lets the group know, and after prayerfully considering all the possibilities, the group picks one (either through consensus or drawing lots). So that person stands up and gives a teaching meant for all the believers. This isn't a chance to just talk, but is only meant for someone who feels all believers need to hear something or correct a misconception.
  • Group prayer, where either everyone in the group prays at once, or people take turns praying for different issues throughout their lives, the community, and world. This is more of a focus on the community and world, as throughout the week, you're praying for people in your own life.
  Now, this structure does not give the Gospel Message to new believers. The reason most churches right now focus on giving the Gospel Message through preaching is a church service is seen as the primary way to convert someone. Most people may branch out to their friends and form a relationship, but don't know how to give the Gospel message themselves, so they invite that person to church and let the preacher do it for them. 
  This is a major problem.
  Every Christian needs to be able to give the Gospel message. It will always be scary, and we may need several versions of it, but really we're telling people why we believe. Our experiences will always be more convincing to a friend than listening to a sermon. Also, the time when a person needs to hear that message may not coincidentally fall on Sunday morning at 10 AM or whenever your church service is. They may go through an issue in their life where they need that message now. So if members were equipped, we would be able to give that message when people need to hear it, and not force them to wait for Sunday morning.
  
  The other problem is that when a church pastor is the only one to give that message, it means they must preach the salvation message every Sunday, in case there's a new person (because no one wants to miss the chance for someone to hear the Gospel message). However, 99% of the time, it's the same old crowd of believers only, and no new people. So you're boring your congregation.
  
  
  I believe to fix this, you would have a separate service or time set aside for people interested in checking out Christianity. While Sunday morning would be primarily a time for believers (although anyone would be welcome, because as believers we live an open lifestyle where people who see become curious or see God's works for themselves and want to join - it is not our amenities or music setup or our riches which attract members, which is what churches are doing today - they are selling those products, not God, and those are what are meant to attract new people. Disgusting.), you would always have a pastor available at a designated time during the week to give the Gospel message to anyone who showed up. This would catch the few people who weren't given the Gospel message through relationship with a friend, and for some reason if a particular Christian was unable to give the Gospel message to a certain friend or acquaintance, they could always attend with that person (going together, because community is what draws and anchors people), and the pastor would give it. Similarly, people in the community who simply heard and didn't meet other people first could come and hear the Gospel Message. So, it would be like a movie showing the Gospel Message every week, at this time.
  
  
  The benefits of this method are:
  1. The person acting as a pastor wouldn't feel the pressure of having to come up with a new sermon every week - which I feel is too much of a load on one person anyway! You can't force creativity every week, so you'd get better quality sermons if you rotated the load to other people.
  2. The congregation members would not be bored by the Gospel message they already know every week, but could attend the Gospel Message presentations if they chose.
  3. The pastor would get really good at presenting the Gospel Message, and sermons would be much shorter.
  4. The emphasis is more on community and individual relationships, which is what draws people anyway, and gives more responsibility to the individuals and God as it was in the New Testament, and less on power structures or fancy trappings to draw people, which are easily abused (I've seen it happen more times than I can count, especially pastors abusing their power or leaders letting it get to their head and lording that over other people, which in itself is unbiblical and causes people to hate Christianity). And the whole "pursuit of the American Dream of wealth advocated as Christianity" is definitely Not Biblical.
  5. It keeps people more involved. Everyone now has a stake in church, so it's less of something you show up to and more of something we're all working to keep going. So people are less likely to fall away, and it spreads the load to many shoulders, making lighter loads for the leadership.
  6. It builds intimacy, because you're hearing others' struggles and problems during Testimony time, but also their successes, and seeing the different ways God acts. So it helps me see more of God's power, helps me see how God can act in different situations (so if I have a hard situation that I haven't seen God in yet, or have different experiences with God, it's not treated as strange or lesser. No one right way.), and helps me appreciate the diversity God put on this earth. And hearing others' problems is a great way to get to know people and feel close to them in a short time.

  
  
  

Christians Span the Political Spectrum...not surprisingly

Like Jedi, Christians encompass a bunch of different personalities and hold political positions.

In the media Christians are typically lumped together in the same ways: as conservative socially and economically, intellectually ignorant, with some pretty "out there" theories. Christians know that this does not represent all Christians, only a subset. Many Christians I talk to laugh off the media representation as "the crazies", but I don't think the general public knows the difference. (same with street preachers, coincidentally...most Christians I know cringe when they hear someone on the street yelling to everyone going by that they're going to hell. Some Christians I know think that, in a general case while God may call individuals to do different things, that it's doing more harm than good for the faith. Some Christians are personally offended by street preachers. I myself, as a Christian, find street preachers very uncomfortable and very anti-the personality of Christ). So it's nice to see a chart like this:

(Axes are Support for Evolution and Belief Climate Change is real)




The above is a picture from this page.  It shows that Christians both support or don't support evolution depending on the denomination, and/or support or don't support the idea of climate change occurring and climate regulations to curb effects. It is my understanding that this chart was generated based on a survey, and while every individual from each of the faiths does not fit in those bubbles, those bubbles encompass the majority of the people of that faith who took the poll. Please see the original page and study for more details.

I am a Christian. I strongly believe in evolution (with a Creator, of course). I have no doubt man-made climate change is occurring, and that the Earth is headed towards a bad state without climate regulations. I don't fall on the typical liberal-conservative political spectrum.

For the record, I have no problem with Christians who are conservative politically. I have no problem with Christians who are liberal politically. I think both can be true Christians, as long as each is trying to follow Jesus Christ to the best of his/her abilities, and is trying to act to shape the world in a way consistent with that. Logic may have led different people to different political ideas or methods, and people are constantly growing to be more Christlike, (and everyone will discover they were wrong in some points, I believe). As long as we keep a dialogue open, and are willing to listen, and take good points from the other side (even if we ideologically don't agree with them), that is what is ultimately important.

Delta Groups

When my spouse and I lived in Boston, we attended a church there called The River. It was a great church, and if you're in the area, we encourage you to check it out. It was very welcoming to all kinds of individuals, and went out of its way to welcome every person individually from the moment they walked through the doors. We loved it there and were sorry to leave.

To keep consistency, one of the things they did was name each part (or meeting of different ages of people) after different bodies of water. Thus there was The River, The Harbor, etc. The young adult group decided to call themselves Delta (no "the" in front). We chose it for ourselves, and I love it on so many levels.


Delta Meanings:

• Officially, a river delta is where a river meets the ocean; in other words, a place where new people could come to get to know people from the church in a safe, friendly, relaxed environment. A place where the church and secular world could interface and dialogue.
• One of the first things I think of with the word Delta is a fraternity or sorority - in otherwords, brotherhood. Community. This is exactly what Christians are supposed to be, as a group. In the early church (see the book of Acts and Paul's letters), Christians prayed for Christians and churches in other areas, sent them money, and tried to uplift and encourage them in any areas of struggle. Sometimes they sent kind people to help out in any way needed. None of the denominational infighting we see today.
• Another thing I think of with the word Delta is the military. For some reason, at least in movies, the most elite military forces are always called Delta Force. I don't know why. But it made me feel like I was part of an elite group, the best of the best when it comes to skills or physical endurance or intelligence, chosen if you will. And Christ does choose each one of us...or rather, God is calling all of us, and the group is made of people who have accepted God's call. And I do think God calls us to be often better than we think we can be. (By the way, this is totally consistent with the Jedi...Jedi being elite warriors, probably equivalent to the military special forces today. Think about it - not just physical awesomeness but sent on missions, often to militarily impose or keep peace...)
• The last meaning of Delta is as a greek symbol. The lowercase delta looks like the lowercase letter "d", while the uppercase Delta is simply an equilateral triangle. So when I see the word Delta, a triangle also appears in my head. I only recently put together that the Trinity (God - Father, Son, and Holy Spirit) is also three parts, and often represented by a triangle. So a group that worships and serves God would be very adequately served by using a triangle as their symbol.