I was not a seminary student when I wrote this post. Did I claim to know Giglio’s heart? I don’t believe I did. Just because someone critiques something does not mean its purpose is to devour nor attack.

You say you love the church. Well, so do I which is what motivated this post. In my mind, the beginnings of this church was set up as a church at all. Passion City initially did not meet on a regular basis. When it did it must have pulled people away from their regular local church. This to me gave off a vibe that Giglio and others actually had a low view of the local church. I understand now that Passion City is meeting regularly and that is a good thing.

You write of things I haven’t investigated yet I used Giglio’s own words which were published for all to read. I would love for you to show me how I attacked a

a God exalting, Christ honoring, Bible believing stance

You come here and make charges against me without demonstrating why you believe such charges are valid. I worked through Giglio’s own words demonstrating why I took issue with his approach. If I remember correctly, I admitted in the comments that I may have overreacted on one of the issues. Ironically, you say you’re “sure there are great answers to all of your questions” which infers to me that you don’t know yourself yet you are willing to come attack (your word) me.

Thanks for stopping by.

With all due respect, who died and made you the judge of Louie Giglio’s heart? I’m sure there are great answers to all of your questions, so why would you ask them in some kind of rhetorical challenge without actually seeking out the answers yourself? Frankly, your criticisms/rock throwing sound exactly like what would come from a Seminary student….i hope that isn’t too harsh, i only know because I was one as well. How about following the advise of Jesus and leave people alone who are passionately preaching the gospel? You may have your doubts about his motives, but you also don’t know his heart, so you couldn’t possibly know what you are talking about. I love the church and am so tired of us biting and devouring each other….especially when the one you are attacking takes such a God exalting, Christ honoring, Bible believing stance….mind boggling. Please go and visit the church, ask your questions….go and worship Jesus…..And stop opining about things that you haven’t investigated….

I have listened to the messages of Passion City Church though, and after listening to some of Louie Giglio’s powerful talks on the Message of Christ, I can only wish these kinds of deep and meaningful conversations would be stirred up by those Spirit filled-yet deeply humble seeds that Louie has been busy planting in our hearts. This blog seems to be another example of such conversation.

I just want to quickly jump in and give God some thanks that I am seeing so many hearts and so many minds— stirred up towards God.

I think its beautiful. I think what Passion City church is doing is beautiful.

One just has to simply watch one of the streaming videos or listen to one of the podcasts to get a taste of Passion City Church’s message.

It appears to me at least, to be the real deal. It is not unique. It is the same Gospel. It is just presented by someone who is clearly and passionately in love with the Creator.

He simply is just sharing his overflowing cup in the most refreshingly down-to-earth and heartfelt manner I have seen and heard in a long time. I can’t seem to get enough of this guy (Louie) and the Spiritual Food that he is being fed and sharing with the rest of us.

It’s real. I want some. Now I want to know more about this God. Isn’t that the Mission? If so Passion City has already succeded in drawing my heart closer to God.

When I read my bible there are times that I believe God speaks right into my heart. If I had the same talent for speaking and communcating that Louie seems to have, I also could better share my understanding of the bible and its meaning. The fact is though, that I acknowledge that this gift of communicating or preaching is not one of my gifts, at least not yet.

But God does and has given those gifts out. His word says this is true. I recognize that Louie has this gift of preaching because I enjoy listenening to him and more imortantly, I receive real clarity on the meaning of scripture when I hear how it has been unfolded by him.

I know this seems off topic from the questions originally posed, but when you think about it it is not.

I believe it is the responsibility of the individual to grow in their walk with Christ. Just as a school teacher can not push a child through school just by feeding them information. The child must take responsibility to process the information and then prove that he has done this through evaluation and testing.

We as Spiritual children can go to school or “church” anywhere — Passion City Church, or any local church we feel like– and yes the teacher or pastor has a degree of responsibility much like a secular school teacher would have. But ultimatley what defines us is not our education or where we went to school, not even our teacher. Our teacher is not responsible for us forever. What will we do when the tests come? How will we take what we have learned and put it into practice in our own lives??

Louie is a good teacher… Now what are we going to do with this information?

I just thought of what the church looks like biblically and asked some questions.

I just thought of what the church looks like biblically and asked some questions.

I did give the Sunday evening devotion and have another coming up. If you’d like to listen to it it’s on my site: http://hereiblog.com/april-devotion-mp3/ (Feed back welcome)

I get your prayer list/updates and I appreciate you thinking of me. I don’t mind.

No box. In fact that’s the point. The world is full of people interpreting the Bible for their own ends or theories. God works in His ways, not ours. If we listen to Him, and do what He says to us then we walk in the light and our lives are fruitful – individually and corporately. And yes, it must be confirmed through his Word.

These discussions can become valueless after a certain point. Unless it’s core doctrine it’s splitting hairs to what end?

Personally I think that we should all get back to reading and living Acts. The Ravehill Challenge makes a lot of sense to me given that there’s a lot of talk but most of it’s noise, and little forward movement in the West, as opposed to the growth and fire of Christendom that we see in many other parts of the world.

Let’s pray for Louie and his team for God’s will to be done – reaching Atlanta for Christ is God’s will. If there is something of core doctrinal or moral error then revisit it.

Someone said that as ministers we are either comforting the agitated or agitating the comfortable. I will be praying for you and your ministry. We need more people willing to stand up and call to account the idolatory of a Christian generation that seems consumed by materialism, a carnal gospel and a ‘what’s in it for me’ mentality that finds the phrase ‘taking up our Cross for Jesus’ and repentance alien to our thinking.

FYI You may wish to check out http://www.billmuehlenberg.com/

G’nite,
Randy

I was a bit surprised to get the email notifications from the blog still. BTW…the new format/content/structure/look is much more visually appealing.

Also, I seem to remember you indicated some time ago that you had just been invited to address your congregation in one of the services and you were a bit nervous (I understand!). Since you seem to be putting so much work into preparation for ministry, I took the liberty (as your brother in Christ) to add you (anonymously) to what has become my daily prayer list. I hope you’re doing well in your training and making some good progress.

Upon reading Garth’s response and re-reading some of the old posts, I just thought of a new analogy that might help us make better sense of the Passion City Church methodology. As you said, You are not alone in your observations of PCC and in your interpretations of their proposed methodologies. I know….I’ve responded to several different blog posts. But my analogy is this:

1. Infancy always precedes maturity. Organizational purpose is given by God to any entity (human, business, ministry, etc.) from the beginning and that purpose is realized through stages of development: crying, feeding, dirty diapers, potty training, walking, running, learning, first dates, marriage, reproduction. This process may involve a higher percentage of mistakes to “getting it right” and will therefore require an acknowledgement of the supremacy of “grace”. And when we reach the mature stage of reproduction, we don’t reproduce perfect babies….we reproduce babies born in sin…as declared by God. Humans involved in organizational reproduction also reproduce organizations born in sin (not perfect and subject to the developmental stages to reach maturity). One aspect of the beauty of grace is that it insures that none of us are disqualified from developing toward reproductive maturity just because we are flawed. It is the same with organizations. However, the ideal is for healthy organizations to reproduce healthy organizations (church plants, ministries, businesses, etc.…and for these organizations to stay healthy. Rooted in Christ, He naturally (and supernaturally) becomes the sustenance for all operations, growth and reproduction. So….go for it in your studies! Preach like fire was upon your tongue…and love like the consuming fire that our God is……through all the necessary mistakes!

2. Thin skin covers the internal mechanisms which drive the workings of organizational functions. It’s only the skin that others get to really see….and it’s the view of the skin which primarily drives the visual interpretation of the organized entity. Understanding organizational “work” involves looking beneath the skin. Only a few people understand what’s under the skin of Passion City Church. For right now, all we can do is experience visually the external beauty of the organization (or lack of beauty depending on one’s perception) because skin prohibits view beyond the skin. I think we’ll see and understand more of this entity over time….and it is to the great joy of many of our brothers and sisters that for Passion City Church the seed is in the ground! I’ll just keep praying for them…just like I’ll keep praying for you and others!

I wish you and your family all the best!

Randy

Thanks for stopping back by. First, some irony. I had a chat with a fellow church member tonight after our Wed. Bible study and fellowship meal. He told me he reads my blog. I had no idea. He then told me, without asking, that he read my posts on Passion Church with interest. He agreed with my inquisitive observations. I share that since it came up unsolicited by me and to show that I am not alone in my ponderings here.

I just want to point out a few things for the readers here concering some of your statements. Nothing bad, just some observations.

You make a lot of assumptions about how ‘church’ should be carried out.

Simply put, we should not put God in a box. In my mind, this is what theology tends to lead to.

Everything concerning God tends to be theological. It is the essence of theology which we can’t escape. The question becomes theology on what basis?

He is not formulaic in the way he deals with us.

This is a theological statement. From where did you formulate it? In what is this position grounded?

our God is a God who reaches out to His people whether we are ready for it or not – for He can provide ALL that is required for each and every person.

Another theological statement. Concerning the church where do you get this?

Churches are setup by church management. Just as a good guide to investing in shares is to remember that you are ‘buying the management’ and their past performance is a good indicator to the future of the company, even moreso when it comes to churches. Louie’s past is solid. His focus is true. His methodologies may not make sense to you – they don’t have to.

These are several theological statments concerning church. On what basis did you develop them?

I will stop here in quoting you. See, you too are putting God in a box. It’s just a different looking box. I do my best to try and understand God via the Scriptures He’s given us. That is the basis under which I strive to work. What is your basis?

I will look into your book recommendation.

Grace always.

Simply put, we should not put God in a box. In my mind, this is what theology tends to lead to. He is not formulaic in the way he deals with us. Yes, certain glimpses of what church meant to the early Christians are provided by scripture, and yes, there are many that argue along the lines of a strong set structure and approach for modern churches. As I am intimately involved in building one I am aware of these structures, am highly analytical, and as I am a recipient of how wrong ideas, wrong foundations and wrong structure can disastrously affect members and their families I am obviously very interested in getting it right for the people that we are called to serve. I am intensely committed to ensuring discipleship is the core of all we do. BUT hear me clearly – our God is a God who reaches out to His people whether we are ready for it or not – for He can provide ALL that is required for each and every person. He is NOT limited by us. He is complete in Himself.

Churches are setup by church management. Just as a good guide to investing in shares is to remember that you are ‘buying the management’ and their past performance is a good indicator to the future of the company, even moreso when it comes to churches. Louie’s past is solid. His focus is true. His methodologies may not make sense to you – they don’t have to.

We have serious growth in our church; we have a young senior pastor that has been successful in the past, is a serious student of revival and good church management, and loves structure – but because it’s like a new church plant, yet one with a lot of prior baggage to work through, we have only started setting up serious discipleship structures. Does that mean that we should shut our doors until our structures are right?… Yet, because discipleship is really a one-on-one thing, the newly saved, and those in serious spiritual/emotional need (and that was much of the congregation to begin with) have been taken care of through the working of the HS through intimate fellowship of believers. Now we can create structures to accommodate/encourage that, but if it’s not the heart of the leader(s), then it won’t become the heart of the congregation, and structures/methodologies don’t create the culture – they only facilitate it. Having started out my Christian walk in the early days of a current Australian megachurch C3, and seeing the way in which it has grown and operated, and the ‘phases’ it went through, I have some insight into this. Interestingly C3 (or CCC as it was) is notably run along structured business lines.

Louie Giglio, on his blog http://www.286blog.com, talks about a young girl named Ashley who came to the Lord in ’07 and sadly died recently. Herein lies an example of discipleship – Christa introduced her, Ashley was impacted by Reuben Morgan’s beautiful and anointed song ‘Mighty To Save’ (a worship leader and song that is interestingly from a church that some would say has a ‘seeker focus’ and ‘prosperity doctrine foundation’) and consequently overcome by the HS. Christa walked beside her since then until a tragic car accident took her.

That’s how Passion Church will grow and be nurtured. Don’t underestimate the power of a *true conversion* and the moving of the HS in and through the lives of believers. The Body of Christ is people – it is the people that make the difference not the church.

Read the book. Visit a cutting edge mission. A lot of our theology goes out the window. Western Christendom is in serious peril, yet we are blind to it. Better methodologies and structures can be very helpful, but passion for people, loving what God loves, and hating what God hates is where it’s at.

Let’s not waste a moment more on irrelevancies.

My foundational objection to what Giglio and co. are doing is their seemingly light view of the doctrine of church and her offices. To start a church that meets less than even once a month and may also depending on who is touring, etc. seems to mock what God has put in place as the local church. Not to mention having to RSVP to attend.

Is it non-Christians who will RSVP? I highly doubt it. How does one reach the lost with this methodology? Again, what about the people who will RSVP? Are they members of other local churches? If an unbeliever did come to Christ at Passion City and the next meeting is not for two months who would this person be ministered to?

I understand one’s feelings about following one’s heart and such. One’s heart though is still subject to the will of God as revealed in Scripture. Of course, there will be differing approaches in methodology and such. I understand that. However, a church has a structure with pastor(s) who are accountable to the souls of those he shepherds. How is this biblically full-filled in a part-time church?

I may have been a bit harsh in some areas. Maybe I can address your concerns and question myself in the process. I will be traveling this weekend so I’m not sure what kind of time I will have.

Thanks for stopping by and gracefully challenging me.

Peace.

I am actually a bit taken aback by this blog post. Mark, what you have listed as ‘questionable’ seems to me real nit-picking and I question whether it has any place coming from people within the body of Christ. Some of the comments are plain unacceptable.

In Louie & Shelley Giglio we have a man & his wife, and a team of friends who have worked faithfully for the Kingdom, who worship God in their words & actions and through their general Christian conduct – their lives reflect their trust in God – and who have been faithful to their local churches, who are now stepping out to fulfill what they see is the primary focus for the Body of Christ – that being reaching the lost through the establishment of local church.

I read the article at ChristianityToday and it is the heartbeat of what we are doing at Lighthouse in the Central Coast of Australia. We have a vision for the Coast of a church for all ages that reaches out to hurting world around us with God’s love and hope eternal using all the creativity and skill and intelligence at our disposal, to disciple people into a rich and full life in Christ, one-on-one. Our focus is to serve the local community into the Kingdom. All that Louie said resonated with me to the core.

Louie said.. “I want to be able to lay down at the feet of Jesus and say I gave it a shot…”
Why would you possibly question this statement? Are you saying that a man must know the formula, format and outcome before he steps out for God – must he know the answers before he trusts God – or is it not about saying “Lord I am here, Lord I am willing”. nothing else. Rather if I hear a Christian, particularly a big name Christian saying that he was called by God to achieve in such a way as within , *just as it’s been done before like everyone else* then it would be ME asking the questions along the lines of: Is this really a God thing or a man-made plan? Where is the faith? And how come you have heard from God so clearly about the whole deal when scripture tends to show that God provides the vision, the call, but generally not much more than the next step: “go do this”, then “go do this”. Louie’s stepped out in faith in a new way right from the beginning, bringing Christ to thousands of young people in the process. Why would this step be any different?

Louie said… “It’s about a man who wants to be obedient to God. It’s about me, at 50, hearing the voice of God and saying yes, I will follow that.”

How can one question that heartbeat? I mean really? All God asks for is our obedience, our willingness to listen to Him and do what He says. Louie has been a great example of that. Why question his words or approach now when they reflect the same heart? Is it just because he is a famous name now? I’d say that these would have been similar in tone to what he was saying when he started doing Bible studies in colleges right back in the beginning.

Look, as a committed and active member of a small church that is seeking to do things along a similar line to they way he reached the young people in his area, I love this man’s heart for the things that matter to God: people. We serve a God who started the age of grace by ‘getting men drunk in the Spirit’ and then converting thousands in one go. All through Acts we see different methods of bringing people to the Truth, and different people with different approaches, and different types and ‘flavours’ of churches. How can you sit and question what God is going to do through this man and his core team before he even really knows himself?

A caveat: no matter whether the method or approach, or the words used to describe it, ‘sit with you’ or not, the proof of the solidity of a man or movement comes in what the actions reflect in terms of soundness in Truth. ‘Good’ (as in correct foundation in the Word, correct doctrine) ideas have good consequences and ‘Bad’ ideas have bad consequences. But unless it is blatantly against core doctrinal teaching, how can you judge much before it’s happened?

Louie said… “To the degree that we can let it be his and not ours—then it will be amazing. ”

Leave well alone, and judge the doctrinal stance when it’s setup, and the fruit thereof. In the meantime, if you’re going to focus on possible error in the Body of Christ, let’s look at the mega-churches that fail to reference the Bible or refer to Jesus Christ much in their message or discipleship, or those propagating the worldliness of ‘prosperity doctrine’ largely to the exclusion of all else – you won’t have to look far.

Heidi Baker headed for Mozambique with a little bit of money, no back-up plan and heart full of love, to reach people with Jesus and establish the ‘local church’. That was pretty ‘crazy’ – we should all get a little ‘crazy’ like that and as far as I can see Louie’s heart is in a similar place.

—–
On a more personal note, and a bit of an aside, but relating to good & bad ideas…

Randy said…
“My kids are born again. For that I’m grateful. But once again, it was not the church that got them there. The church was an obstacle I (we) had to overcome and I was steadfastly committed to doing so for the sake of my kids. A very good church became a very bad church and it tore our family apart…just before it fell apart. The most effective presentation of the gospel (the good news of the love of God) to my kids was my unconditional love for them – expressed both verbally and by my actions – especially in the very thick of their many wrong-doings.”

This was pretty much my experience, but the church in question was founded on an incorrect doctrinal basis and footing, which I didn’t realise until too late. My children are younger, but are either in Christ or are coming to Christ purely on a similar basis – not because of the church they attended, but the same as everyone, through the leading of the Holy Spirit and through the example of my life – living what I hold to be true.

So what am I saying?
Yes, do judge, and judge wisely in regards to how and why a church is setup or a movement is started, but be slow to criticize and careful with your words for as you mete out so in turn it will be meted out to you. But in this case we have a man, no… a team, with a history of serving God faithfully – and as far as I can see nothing’s changed. Unless there are some glaring errors or omissions, why question him or his team now? God may have used all that went before in his and his teams’ lives *just* to lay the foundation for what is to come – what does their worldly popularity matter to God? And as to those that would follow popularity… lemmings are what they are. However, the true sheep know the Good Shepherd’s voice and do what He tells them.

You said “I submit that this breakdown doesn’t start in the homes necessarily, but in neglecting the Bible and what it says about parenting”. And you asked: “So, do you agree that these unbiblical “churches” begin because “youth grow up, not having enough fun at their home church, and decide to have a “church” service that fits their own needs, disregarding the biblical function and necessity of a local covenanted community of believers”?”

Well….I can only partially agree with the assumption regarding where “breakdown” begins, because “breakdown” can happen simultaneously on more than one front…and I can only partially agree with the statement regarding the beginnings of unbiblical churches.

Here’s why…and here’s where my paradigms of church and of life in general may depart rather distinctly from the norm. However, the paradigms are fluid and I’ll change my mind….just convince me!! -:)

If I remember correctly and assuming I’ve been told the truth, the Christian church is comprised of approximately 30 or 40 THOUSAND different denominational families, groups and subgroups across various CULTURES (with varying political and social infrastructures) and across TIME. I believe this is how many are extant (existing today!). Many are relatively new and many have survived over time and have deep historical roots. Of the billions of participants in these groups, some may be born again, some may not….and therefore, some will go to heaven and some will not (per Jesus). Among these tens of thousands of groups and billions of participants over 2000 years of time, doctrinal variances have been established which define the groups for purpose of mission and for purpose of solidarity among members to get the mission accomplished. And this tends to happen through the inter-relationships of a hierarchy of groups…..reaching down to the “local covenanted” group of participants who are actually in the communities they impact.

So…when we ask questions regarding organizational (church) formation and organizational (church) purpose, I do not think there are simple answers. God (Jesus) is the same yesterday, today and forever….yet He is so infinitely complex and capable (omnipotent to be more precise) that He is able to accomplish the increase of His Kingdom across time and culture….and to begin with, He did so without a Bible (as we know it today…because it took nearly 300 years for us to get one…and remember – God is in control and could have done it differently…but didn’t)….and even today, people become Christians in cultures that have no Bible translations, and therefore not much substantial doctrine…..(and this is a noteworthy observation – many (perhaps most) of us in the modern church with many translations available to us DO NOT EVEN READ IT!!)

So….because my little mind cannot even begin to fully understand the magnitude of such workings, I need a set of lenses to help bring clarity to the vision for the church which exists far outside the parameters of even my most peripheral vision. His ways are simply too high and too wide to grasp…period.

But, here’s what has helped me make just “some” sense of it all: Enter stage left: General Systems Theory (GST) for Living Systems (plus my own additions to it stolen from the Bible, of course, which I won’t expound here). GST for Living Systems proposes definitions for various hierarchal relationships that exist in and among living systems and offers a great context from which to view the church and families and their relationships to one another and to all else that is.

Here’s what it says: There exists basically 8 tiers of living systems found in nature, the lower comprising the higher: (note: parenthesis below added by me)

Cell
Organ
Organism (individuals)
Group (families)
Organization (churches)
Community
Society (nations)
Supra-national system (international)

Here’s what the Bible says: (Ephesians 4: 9-16)

(Now this, “He ascended”—what does it mean but that He also first descended into the lower parts of the earth? 10 He who descended is also the One who ascended far above all the heavens, THAT HE MIGHT FILL ALL THINGS ) And He Himself gave some to be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers, FOR THE EQUIPPING OF THE SAINTS FOR THE WORK OF THE MINISTRY, FOR THE EDIFYING OF THE BODY OF CHRIST, till we all come to the UNITY OF THE FAITH and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ; that we should no longer be children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, in the cunning craftiness of deceitful plotting, but, speaking the truth in love, may GROW UP IN ALL THINGS INTO HIM who is the head—Christ— from whom the whole body, joined and knit together by what every joint supplies, according to the effective working by which EVERY PART DOES ITS SHARE, causes GROWTH OF THE BODY for the EDIFYING OF ITSELF IN LOVE.

My take on this is that Christ gave gifts (apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors/teachers) for the equipping of the SAINTS (individuals) for the work of the MINISTRY (churches – groups of individual saints and families of saints) for the edifying of the BODY OF CHRIST (all true churches (groups of saints) composed of all true individual saints and families of saints across all of time together unified in Christ)…..until Christ returns.

Now, to answer your question specifically I’d say that the breakdown you speak of MAY not necessarily begin at the organizational levels of home or church, but rather at the level of organism (individual). MAYBE the breakdown begins when individual SAINTS resist operating effectively within the gifts they are given and thereby thwarting the purposes for which these gifts are given to mankind by God (see above Eph. 4). When this happens, everything built upon the individual (families and churches) is negatively affected (a little leaven leavens the whole lump of bread). So, I would tend to believe that when God LOVES individuals and individuals (including saints) refuse to LOVE God in return, then the families and churches these individuals comprise become skewed in purpose and function and the “sin” of the individual is passed generationally to families and churches.

Now….I’m not saying I’m right….I’m saying this is what I observe.

Now…going back to the original Louie issue: The man may not yet have defined himself doctrinally as a church and he may not have even said if this new church (Passion City Church) will be a member of an umbrella church organization that has a defined doctrinal position, and he may say things not understood by others….BUT regardless of any of these items of secondary importance Louie’s life is a life that simply oozes the love of God….a love that he receives and a love that he returns and a love that he shares. And since love appears to be the primary fuel of GROWTH and EDIFICATION of the BODY OF CHRIST, I would say the man has built a very firm foundation to begin work upon as he moves to operate in the gift of pastor/teacher. It’s God’s gift and God’s power. Let’s let God have His own way in the life of a man who will allow himself to be loved by God and will love God in return and let’s see what contribution this relationship will make to the GROWTH OF THE BODY through the edifying power of love. Let’s you and I and everyone else seek to achieve the same results in our families and businesses (or jobs) and thereby make our churches more potent when we do come together to worship!

Perhaps this might show that we really do believe that God “hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the church, Which is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all in all. (Ephesians 1: 22-23).

Note: This is by no means a complete exposition of my beliefs, as that would require much more space and another platform. This, in a nutshell is justification for my support of Louie and every other minister who is committed to growing the body of Christ.

Later,
Randy

Very troubling indeed. Only one percent of those studied are narrow minded, hate-filled bigots as defined by our society.

I’ve had a long night and day of taking our cat to the emergency room in the middle of the night. Then, driving her around to day for treatment and to finally drop her off. I’m finally home now.

I agree with Randy on parents being primarily responsible for training their children in the Lord. Now, parents don’t seem to have done such a good job, nor have some churches not done a good job at equipping the parents. Just look at this report:

Randy, I should have a reply to your first response soon. I actually can see how you might have come across in a not so kind manner. But that was probably from “hearing” how you thought I came across. Anyways…

I’m very tired…
Mark

I think you are right but I submit that this breakdown doesn’t start in the homes necessarily, but in neglecting the Bible and what it says about parenting. This could be due to a lack of Biblical leadership in the Pulpit? Sort of a chain effect, the first link being a departure from the view that Scripture is sufficient for all things, including, and especially parenting.

So, do you agree that these unbiblical “churches” begin because “youth grow up, not having enough fun at their home church, and decide to have a “church” service that fits their own needs, disregarding the biblical function and necessity of a local covenanted community of believers”?

I am not condemning these gatherings as totally un-useful, just that they can’t be considered “churches” because they don’t fill the mandate of a Biblical church.

Just in a jovial mood, sorry. Good discussion here, Mark. Always appreciate your work.

Thanks. Response forthcoming when time allows.

As father of a son and daughter (ages 21 and 19 respectively) who have both made a profession of faith in Christ, I will give my perspective on your last question. It was not the church that led them to Christ or even made Christ that attractive to them at their young ages. I did! Therefore, I won’t say that the church has necessarily “conditioned the youth to believe that the church service is all about them and if they don’t have fun then it isn’t fulfilling”.

But, that leads me to a subtle point: If the church is not conditioning the children to believe such things that emphasize self fulfillment, self centeredness and fun for the self, and if the children do indeed believe such things…then could it be that the PARENTS are the ones doing the conditioning? Could it be that both by words and by example the parents conduct the homefront in such a manner that the kids (and the parents) just “have to be involved” in so many things in order to achieve fulfilling lives, and that the church has been reactive to this social phenomenon by offering “programs” that attract (both the parents and the children).

Hence, we have an established dynamic between the church and the home worthy of our analysis and consideration. The two encounter one another and it’s like “hey, you got chocolate in my peanut butter….no, you got peanut butter on my chocolate…..but hey this tastes great!…..unless of course the peanut butter has salmonella and the chocolate is too bitter. So, what has the potential to be great also has the potential to be both unpleasant and deadly.

As best I understand, the church’s emphasis on “programs…programs…programs” FOLLOWED the home’s emphasis on such things. Also, (I assume) that the proliferation of “church-hopping” FOLLOWED the proliferation of “home-hopping” by parents (i.e divorces and remarriages galore) To me this demonstrates the power of the home to affect the church and the vulnerability of the church to be affected by the home. Now that’s a good element to a thesis statement for someone who wants to do some meaningful research!

My kids are born again. For that I’m grateful. But once again, it was not the church that got them there. The church was an obstacle I (we) had to overcome and I was steadfastly committed to doing so for the sake of my kids. A very good church became a very bad church and it tore our family apart…just before it fell apart. The most effective presentation of the gospel (the good news of the love of God) to my kids was my unconditional love for them – expressed both verbally and by my actions – especially in the very thick of their many wrong-doings. I think the church picks up the slack in this area when the parents abdicate their responsible privilege of communicating the gospel to their children, but it is not the church’s first responsibility…it is the parents’. And if the parents need help, or don’t know how to communicate the gospel, then the church is there to help equip them…to be sure that both the parents and the children are established and grounded in God.

Therefore, I would conjecture that many of the arguments and assumptions concerning the role and place of the church are just as (if not more so) applicable to the structure of the home.

While we’ve been conditioned to seek fun as a source of fulfillment (both by our homes and by our churches)…it is really LOVE that we seek and respond best to. We respond best to our parents when they love us, hold us, talk to us, relate to us, understand us, encourage us. Churches are most effective in communities consisting of homes in which these practices are implemented….and the gospel becomes not something we have to defend or present from an overly intellectual perspective but rather the gospel becomes something (rather SOMEONE) we pant and thirst for, fervently desire above all else and unflinchingly embrace with all that we are. This is the Jesus I offered my kids….and they took it!

Randy

True about Jesus forgiving my cynicism but I shouldn’t be cynical so that grace can abound.

Rather than being cynical, I will frame my thoughts in the form of a question.

Sean,

What does it mean to “do church”?

What did you mean by “encountering God”?

How did God “respond”?

These terms that you use sound really spiritual, but they can mean so many things. Some clarification would be most helpful.

Randy,

You ask good questions for Mark, I hope that he has time to answer.

To All

My 12 year old daughter doesn’t like to go to our Wednesday night services because she says “it’s no fun”. This leads me to the following question. Have we conditioned our youth in the previous 1 or 2 generations to believe that the church service is all about them and if they don’t “have fun” then it isn’t fulfilling? My former church would bend over backwards and turn flips just to get youth in church. Programs, Programs, Programs….

Consequently, do the youth grow up, not having enough fun at their home church, and decide to have a “church” service that fits their own needs, disregarding the biblical function and necessity of a local covenanted community of believers?

Of course, having someone say church is “no fun” is indicative of other possible problems, one of which could be that person not being a Child of God.

I wish you well in your efforts in your Pastoral Theology class and your radio devotion. It’s actually a relief to me that you didn’t take my comments as being sharp. I thought they were, but if you didn’t….great! Onward we go.

You do raise a point when you say “the local church is more than that”. From the context of the sentence, I assume you mean that the local church is more than just someone’s “passion”. If so, I do agree with that. But the point raises a question. If the local church is “more than that”, then what is the “more than that” that the local church is? In other words, will you define (as fully as you can) “local church”. I’m curious to know it’s definition, purpose, function, proper organizational infrastructure and it’s optimum relationship to other churches (as well as anything else you might want to throw in!) I’m also now curious as to what a good definition might be for the “un-local church”. I supposed that in establishing the definition for both, we might arrive at an acceptable definition for “church” with no adjectives preceding it.

I also have another question. If the local pastors are accountable to God for the care and feeding of their people, and some of these people remain immature to the extent that they will leave a pastor’s congregation to be a part of a “mega-church production” just to “see their favorite Christian artist”, then does responsibility for the lack of maturity in the life of those Christians fall upon the pastor who does not feed the flock good spiritual food or upon the Christian who does not eat the good food being fed….and to what extent? Is it the pastor’s food or the believer’s appetite that stands in the way of maturity?

These questions bring to light a new perspective that looks beyond the mere occurrence of a new church plant in Atlanta (or anywhere for that matter). I think we must look FIRST at the effectiveness of pastors in maturing their congregations and the capacity of believers to mature in Christ….in other words the relationship between a ministry and its members. THEN look at the effect of another church plant on those ministries. So…perhaps other ministries (i.e Passion City Church) should remain in the peripheral vision of the scrutinous eyes examining them whereas the ministries these eyes participate in should receive the more focused vision of its participants….so that we can GET SOME REAL WORK DONE. I assume after all that’s why you are devoting quantities of time to your Pastoral Theology class and to your radio efforts….and these things are very commendable. You could choose to do something else with your time, but you don’t.

Just one more comment for now: Rather than burden Louie and the PCC team with cynical and harsh remarks, maybe we could let them be our burden in prayer.

Randy