TILL HE COMES Blog

It’s popular in Christian circles today to talk about creating community. It is argued that one of the greatest things lacking in most of our churches is a sense of community, that we all belong, and are headed somewhere together — and actually enjoying each other’s company as we do it!

Whole books are written about how to develop this community within your church. Church planters talk about founding communities of faith, hope, and love. Many churches will even put the word “community” in their name.

However, the more I read the Scriptures, the more I get this strange feeling that Jesus never really intended to create a community. Instead, my reading of the Gospels leads me to believe that Jesus never intended to found a new community and ask people to join it, but rather to find already-existing communities, and join with them. So he went to synagogues (the teaching centers), weddings, dinner parties, watering holes, and join in the community that had already naturally developed.

There were, of course, always problems in such communities, and Jesus frequently tried to heal the brokenness and pain that was present in the community. But this is a more natural way of developing community than by putting together a bunch of strangers and saying, “Now get along!”

So are you trying to “plant a church” or “reach out” to your community? How about rather than starting something of your own and asking them to join you, why don’t you find out what God is already doing in your community, and then see how you join them. Don’t try to found the community; just find the one that is already there.

17 Comments »

This post concludes my “What if…” series. I am sure I will have more questions in the future as I try to seek answers to those already asked, but that’s what this process of reimagining church is all about.

I know that most of these questions will come back to haunt me in the future….

What if Prayer were different?

What if when we prayed for something, we concluded every prayer by asking, “How can we ourselves be an answer to our prayer?”

What if we didn’t feel the need to bow our heads, close our eyes, and fold our hands when we pray?

What if prayer was more like a conversation with God than a strange, wordy, repetitive incantation?

What if we stopped saying “Father” after every phrase? (I thank you, Father, for this beautiful day, Father, and for the opportunity to be here, Father….). He knows we’re talking to Him. He doesn’t need the constant reminder.

What if we didn’t backtrack on our prayers of faith with the statement “…if it’s your will”? (I know Jesus prayed this way once, but that’s a subject for a different study.) 

What if we stopped using prayer as an excuse for gossip?

What if strategies for getting money were different?

What if we didn’t pass tithe plates?

What if, when someone wanted to give a large sum of money to the church, we had them sign a document saying that they understood this did not entitle them to any sort of recognition in the church, or any power or say over where/how the money was used?

What if we didn’t take “special offerings” multiple times until we got the amount we were “praying” for?

What if we didn’t pressure people into giving “10%” (which is a misunderstanding and misapplication of the Old Testament principle of tithing)?

What if fellowship were different?

What if believers actually cared for each other?

What if we wanted to spend time together? How would we encourage this to happen?

What if we were more interested in loving and serving each other than in being served?  But HOW?

1 Comment »

Following the theme of my last post, I want to take several posts and simply raise questions. You don’t reinvent the wheel by setting out to reinvent the wheel. The first step is to simply raise questions about the current model, and dream about what could be. In the next few posts, I will share some of the questions I have been asking myself.

Since in years past, I saw “preaching” as the central function of the church, I will begin by questioning it. Please understand that my questions are NOT statements of what should be, but simply “What if?” questions…what would happen if…?

What if Preaching and Teaching were Different?

What if we didn’t preach…at all? This is near heresy for some of us (it was for me a few years ago), but really, what would happen? I imagine at first, all those people who are used to showing up on Sunday to hear a 45 minute sermon would sit around staring at each other, asking, “What are we supposed to do now?” Exactly. If we didn’t spend 30-45 minutes on a Sunday with the sermon, what would we do instead? On a related note, what if we stopped telling people how important it is for them to read the Bible daily? It wasn’t until about 500 years ago that people even had the option, and even then, it wasn’t until about 100 years ago that there was widespread literacy. I’m not suggesting we jettison preaching and Bible reading from our churches. The opposite in fact. But I wonder what would happen in our churches if we fasted from gorging ourselves on Scripture for a while?

What if, when we did preach, instead of trying to be funny and cute in three easy-to-remember points, we simply taught the Word of God? What if we didn’t mask what we were doing by changing a book series into a topical series (calling Preaching through Psalms, “How to Praise God.”), or trying to be more “relevant” by speaking to people’s needs, or mask that we preaching a text by giving lots of illustrations, stories, and images? What if we just said, “Today we going to study Ephesians 1:1-10.” What if, in doing so, we taught as long as it took to adequately explain the text, whether 10 minutes or two hours? Would this be a wise use of time? Would this be an effective way to teach Scripture? Who would it be for? All people or just some? Who gets to decide what “adequately explain the text” means?

What if we didn’t apologize for biblical terminology, but used it and explained it? Are simpler translations of Scripture actually better? Or do they tend to dumb us down?

What if the preaching/teaching was more dialogue/interactive than monologue? Would this depend on group size?

What if we used movies and art and music to teach from, and bridges with culture to direct us to Scripture? What if instead of condemning movies and art and music, we looked for ways to redeem them?

What if the teaching and preaching was not done only by those with seminary degrees and formal education? Who else would do it?

What if we stopped trying to make sure a person was “orthodox” (by our standards) before we let them teach? If the argument is that we need to protect our churches from false teaching, just look at our churches. Can we honestly say that preaching and teaching only by the “seminar-trained and ordained” has kept false teaching at bay? Would allowing “untrained lay persons” the opportunity to teach really introduce heresy (by our definition) or would it open up more streams for dialogue? Would doing this be too dangerous in some settings? Would it make a difference if the teaching setting was set up as a dialogue instead of a monologue?

What if, after every time we opened the Bible to read and study it, we wouldn’t move on until we had asked “What is this passage telling us to do, and how can we as a church do it?” What if we didn’t move on to the next passage until, as a community, we obeyed the first passage? Week 1: Teach. Week 2: Obey. What if obedience and service were built in to the teaching aspect of the church?

What if, as we taught, we added humility to everything we said? Everything. What if, rather than say, “This is the way it is” we said, “This is my current understanding”? Do people really learn better from teachers who are certain of their beliefs, or do all the conflicting certainties from various teachers just confuse them further?

What if we refused to draw lines of orthodoxy about which people were in and which people were out?

What if in our teaching, we refused to judge a group of people unless/until we actually were friends with some people from that group? Would this keep us from judging them? Is that wise?

————————

Feel free to offer suggestions to the questions above, or to ask a few questions of your own below.

4 Comments »

When it comes to church, I can’t tell you how often I’ve heard people tell me, “Don’t reinvent the wheel.”

I imagine back in cave-man history when they had square wheels, a certain caveman— we’ll call him Firestone—noticed that square wheels didn’t roll too well, and so started asking some “What if” questions. His first was probably, “Square wheels are easy to make, but those corners sure cause problems. What if we rounded them off?”

Probably the other cavemen came around and, through a series of grunts and club beatings, told Firestone, “Don’t reinvent the wheel.” He especially got grief from the wheel cutters, because they had been making wheels like this since their great, great grandfathers developed opposable thumbs. “Besides,” the stone cutters said, “if we have to round off the corners, it will take us a lot more time to make wheels. Right now, we can cut two square wheels a day. If we have to round off the corners, we can only make one wheel a day.”

For a while, Firestone was a little discouraged. But then one day, he came across a wheel cutter named Michelin who shared similar ideas. They sat for long hours into the night, talking about round wheels, and that even if it took longer to cut round wheels, it would save everybody a lot of time, because now the wheels could actually be used. “Why doesn’t everybody see this?” they wondered.

So one day, they stopped talking about it, and actually made a round wheel. At first, people made fun of them. Firestone and Michelin were scoffed at and ridiculed. “A round wheel,” they were told, “doesn’t look right on a square cart.” But then people noticed that the carts were actually moving and transporting things, and so the criticism shifted. ”All that rolling,” they were told, “will cause the wheel to crack. Square wheels are better because they don’t roll, and so don’t crack.”

But Firestone and Michelin just kept making round wheels. After a while, they even had a few disagreements with each other on how to make the best wheel, and so agreed to go their separate ways. At first, the naysayers cheered, and said things like, “I won’t say ‘I told you so’” even though “I told you so” was exactly what they were saying. However, wheel production actually increased. Instead of one group making round wheels, there were now two. And the competition caused both cutters to continually refine and redesign their wheels.

Today, both Firestone and Michelin continue to “reinvent” the wheel, adding treading that sloughs off rain, traction that handles curves better, and studs for driving on ice and snow. A day may come when they will reinvent the wheel again, so that all of us can do life faster, smoother, and more efficiently. Maybe, eventually, they will get rid of wheels altogether, and we will ride on air.

I want to reinvent church. Why? A lot of it has become square and isn’t going anywhere. People come week after week, and work, and serve, and sweat, and teach, and give, and pray, and the church doesn’t go anywhere. There’s lots of lights and big, white-toothed smiles, warm handshakes, and media glitz, but the people aren’t going anywhere.

Don’t reinvent the wheel? Sorry. It needs to be reinvented.

3 Comments »

A few posts ago, I complained that the typical “church planter profile” is based only on the big and successful churches which have “Type A” personalities at the helm. I questioned the idea that “mega-church” status should be the goal for all churches, and therefore, that only “Type A” people should plant churches.

Someone once told me that “It takes all kinds of churches to reach all kinds of people, and all kinds of churches require all kinds of planters.” I agree. So what is it about the Type-A person that attracts crowds and convinces so many people that their way is the right way?

One answer may be that such leaders are louder.

A recent Time article revealed that these loud leadership types are wrong more often than the quiet types, but people will often follow and agree with them, for the simple reason that they speak up first and loudest. Here are a few quotes:

Repeatedly, the ones who emerged as leaders and were rated the highest in competence were not the ones who offered the greatest number of correct answers. Nor were they the ones whose SAT scores suggested they’d even be able to. What they did do was offer the most answers — period.

“Dominant individuals behaved in ways that made them appear competent,” the researchers write, “above and beyond their actual competence.” Troublingly, group members seemed only too willing to follow these underqualified bosses. An overwhelming 94% of the time, the teams used the first answer anyone shouted out — often giving only perfunctory consideration to others that were offered.

3 Comments »

I took a “church Planter’s Assessment” test a while back and failed. But I didn’t like the way some of the questions were worded, and so I decided the problem was with the test, not with me. So I took a different assessment, and failed that one too. But again, my complaint was that the questions seemed to be…weighted in a particular direction.

For example, on both “tests” many of the questions seemed to be geared toward leading lots of people, raising lots of funds, and getting lots of conversions. It seemed to me that the creators of the test were only testing for one certain kind of church – the rapidly growing megachurch.

So I did some research into how the tests were developed. It turns out they interviewed and sent personality inventories to some of the pastors of the fastest growing megachurches in the country. Then, based on the results, tests were created to help find people who had similar traits and characteristics as these megachurch pastors.

Does anyone else see a problem with this?

How about the fact that fewer and fewer people are finding spiritual fulfillment in the “megachurch experience”?

How about the fact that the megachurch model is, for the most part, does an incredibly poor job of helping people come to faith in Jesus (most megachurch numerical growth is transfer growth from smaller churches).  

How about the fact that the megachurch model generally does a rather poor job of helping people develop close, interpersonal relationships, and leading them down the path of discipleship?

How about the fact that the megachurch model is primarily a western, 20th century, logical-extreme c0nsequence of the “church growth movement” experiment, which was itself based on business models and Christendom-style thinking?

How about the fact that the vast majority of mega-church pastors have Type-A personalities, who–while good at leading large organizations, and generating a lot of excitement and publicity–are not so good at many of the “shepherding” aspects of pastoral ministry such as interpersonal relationships, tenderness, compassion, humility and patience?

I could go on (and on). I am not trying to bash megachurches or their pastors. I think that both are accomplishing some good things for the kingdom of God, and both have helped a lot of people. The only thing I am tired of is this idea that the megachurch mentality, structure, and systems are the only right way to “do church” (whatever that means). I am tired of being told that unless I can raise $100,000 to blow through in a year on radio ads, billboards, and door hangers, I can’t plant a church.

Somebody needs to write a book called “How to Plant a Church on less than $100 a Month.” I know it can be done, because I am beginning to do it. Are you ever going to hear about this church? Probably not - I’m planning on not even naming it. (When and why did we start naming churches, anyway?) Will I ever get a book deal out of it? If I did, who would read it? Will President Obama invite me to the White House for a luncheon? Not a chance. Will I get asked to speak at a church growth conference? The idea is laughable.

But I think Jesus is pleased with the direction I am headed, and that’s all that matters–even if I did fail two “church Planter’s Assessments.”

10 Comments »

Below is a story I read on Alan Knox’s blog. I think it is a good example of one possible way to “gospelize.”

In November I heard Dino Rizzo speak in a workshop at the National Outreach Convention in San Diego. Dino talked about ways to serve the community. He said that if he were new in a city he would buy some garbage bags and volunteer at a community event to help do cleanup. If there was no community event, he said he would just go up and down the streets in his neighborhood and pick up trash.

I told this story to our little group that is trying to learn how to serve an inner city neighborhood in our city. We decided that we should try it the following Sunday morning, the second Sunday in December, and then do it every other Sunday morning. Our first Sunday out was a cold, windy day, but we met, prayed and then picked up trash in the neighborhood for about eighty to ninety minutes.

We skipped the fourth Sunday in December, since everyone in the group was out of town or occupied with visiting relatives. However, we resumed our trash pickup last Sunday, the second Sunday of January.

We met, prayed and started picking up trash. About two minutes after I started a car pulled up near me.

(Him) “What are you doing?”

(Me) “We’re picking up trash to make the neighborhood look nice”.

(Him) “Who are you people?”

(Me, while pointing to the yellow shirts we all wore that has our group’s name printed on it) “We’re a little group of Christians just trying to help out the neighborhood.”

(Him) “What church are you with?”

(Me) “We’re just a small group that meets here in the neighborhood.”

(Him) “I mean, where’s your church? The building?”

(Me) “We meet in cafes or the park. We don’t use a church building. We try to be out around people.”

(Him) “But are you part of some church, like the Catholic church, or something like that?”

(Me) “No. We’re just followers of Jesus, and every other Sunday morning this is how we do church. We go out in the neighborhood and pick up trash.”

Suddenly I was his good friend.

(Him) “My name is xxxxxxxx. I’m on the planning commission here, and I’ve never seen anything like this. I’m church way back, but I don’t go any more. (He gave me some reasons. He doesn’t think much of “religious people”.) Now this is real religion.”

He told me about the dislike the churches in the neighborhood and the people in the neighborhood have for each other, a story that I have heard several times from the neighborhood. (Most of the churches in the area are attended by people who drive into the neighborhood. The churches and their neighbors regularly complain to the city, the police and whomever will listen about each other.)

As we continued picking up trash, people watched. When cars drove by, I looked up. Several people smiled and waved. Some people came out of their houses and thanked us, after watching us from their windows. When we reached the end of our time, and turned around to go back to our cars, picking up a few bits of trash that we had missed on the first pass, more people came out of their houses and thanked us.

Several weeks earlier I walked these same streets trying to see what I could see, and prayed for the neighborhood. No one stopped to talk to me. No one smiled and waved as they drove by. No one came out of their house to talk to me. A couple of gang members asked me for money. That was it.

Oh yes, we do not hand out tracts or invite people to church. We’re just getting to know them and they’re getting to know us. They’re trying to figure out who we are. When they’ve got that figured out, perhaps, just perhaps, they’ll invite us into the spaces of their lives. That is where we will be allowed to hear each others stories. But for now, they’re just smiling, waving, coming out of their spaces to say hello or thank you or to ask who we are and what we’re doing.

After writing this, I thought about a group that is trying to start a new church. Twice they have walked through our neighborhood, hanging invitations to the new church on people’s doors. I watched them. No one smiled and waved at them as they drove by, no one stopped to talk to them, and no one came out of their house to talk to them. After the group had passed, I did see people open their doors to get the flyers, look at them a second or two and toss them in the trash. Hmmm!

I’m going to close out this series on gospelism tomorrow with a post that might ruffle a few feathers. We’ll see you tomorrow!

1 Comment »

I have been a long time reader of Chris Elrod’s blog, and he recently announced his departure from the blogosphere. To say goodbye, I am posting one of his final posts below that all church planters (and all who are followers of Jesus), should read. I strongly encourage you to also go and browse his archives (which are still active).

You will be missed Chris!

You Gotta Love that Sh*t
by Chris Elrod

Curse words are just words…but oh what a tapestry of division they can weave.  Recently I was meeting in a restaurant with some other church leaders.  Sitting near us were two truck drivers that were cussing up a storm in their conversation.  In between f-words and a-words one of the guys said REAL LOUD…”you gotta love that sh*t”.   That was the final straw for one of the pastors at our table and he asked the waitress if we could move to a different location…because he was offended by the language of the men.  That’s when it hit me…some people are offended by cussing…but it’s music to my ears.  When I hear cussing…I hear people far from God.  When I hear people far from God…I hear an opportunity to make an impact for the Kingdom of God.

I seriously don’t understand “leaders” that plant churches that appeal to themselves.  I don’t understand “leaders” that plant churches to reach other church people.  I really don’t understand “leaders” that plant churches with no real heart to reach people far from God.

Don’t get me wrong…reaching people far from God is messy.  They cuss…they have serious issues…they smell…they drink…they live lifestyles that are at times really repulsive.  Reaching people far God also means going to places that church folks have been taught not to go.  People FAR from God do not hang out in Starbucks or Junior League meetings…they hang out in bars, porn shops, downtown streets, bowling allies, courtrooms, emergency rooms and R-rated movies.  It’s not easy…it’s not pleasant…it’s not always rewarding.  However, reaching people far from God with the Gospel of Jesus Christ is what the Father called us to do.

I know that quite a few potential church planters read my blog so let me say this to you.  If you don’t want to do ministry that is messy…don’t plant a church.  If you just want to “feed the saints”…don’t plant a church.  If you just want to stop having to take orders from your current pastor…don’t plant a church.  If you just got fired, let go or laid off from a ministry position…don’t plant a church.  If you are still trying to impress seminary professors with your preaching skills…don’t plant a church.  In fact, if you think planting a church is cool…don’t plant a church.  If you think those things, It’s probably going to be best for you to get a job in your state denominational office…where it’s safe, there’s a steady paycheck and you only have to interact with other Christians.

On the other hand if you love the smell of vomit and beer….if you love to hear about people’s addictions…if you love hearing the f-bomb dropped by every member of a family (including kids)…if you love people wearing halter tops and Budweiser t-shirts in the Sunday service…if you love people putting three dollars cash in the offering plate and crossing their arms during worship…if you love getting 3 a.m. marriage counseling calls…then by all means…plant a church.  I’m not talking about you liking that stuff…I’m talking about…you gotta love that sh*t!!!

Church planting done right is messy…and attracts messy people.  If you don’t have a passion for the mess…if you don’t hear someone cussing and think, “That person is a potential guest for my church”…if you don’t wake up every day with an unquenchable thirst to see people far from God come to know Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior…church planting is going to be a miserable experience for you!!!

4 Comments »

Though the reason I came to New York is for a government job, I am convinced that one reason I am up here is for “church planting.” I won’t do this at work, of course! First and foremost, I will be a good employee.

However, after work, one of the things I want to do is plant a church. So in a sense, I’m church planting on the government’s dime! This kind of church planting does not require any fundraising. In a sense, since I am a government employee, all of you who pay federal taxes are technically supporting my church planting efforts. So thank you! I appreciate your generosity!

Anyway, I have already realized that it would be nearly impossible to plant a typical church in area of New York. In fact, as I meet more and more people, I am convinced even more that the only kind of church that will make any progress at all up here, is the type of church that most Christians would not consider “church.” It wouldn’t even be similar to what has come to be called “house church.” I doubt we would ever have a “church service” or have any paid “staff.” There will probably not ever be a “church building” or any sort of “church programs.” Definitely no bulletins, songbooks, Sunday school classes, overhead projectors, worship teams, or websites. We would not give ourselves a “church name.” I am convinced that the less “churchy” we are, the better we will do as the church in this area.

We would be so unchurchy, that most of the people in the church would probably not even know we are “church.”

Is that possible?

Right now, the church consists of five people (not that I’m counting numbers! ha ha): myself, my wife, and our three girls. This next year or two, we are going to focus on loving and serving each other, and loving and serving one or two of the families in our immediate neighborhood (within 100 yards of us). There will be no strings attached. We just want to love and serve.

Some people will say, “That’s not church planting! That’s just following Jesus’ instructions for believers!” Yep. I believe that if we follow Jesus, we will naturally be the church. And wherever the church is, the church gets planted. That is my entire “church planting strategy.” Simple. Organic. Reproducible.

Will this strategy result in a mega-church? Nope. But that’s not my goal. My goal is to change lives, and that gets done one person at a time.

3 Comments »

As many of you know, I am interested in church planting. I am currently attending a relatively new church plant in Arlington, TX, and hope to be involved in more church planting efforts in the future. Some of my favorite conferences and favorite books are related to church planting.

Many of you who read my blog are also interested in church planting, and so I want to introduce you to a friend of mine, Nathan Laughlin (and his wife Amy), who is heading to Vancouver, BC next year to plant a network of churches called “Open Circle.” What they are doing is so simple anybody can do it, so innovative it is exciting to think about the possibilities, and so missional it could change the face of church planting.  

Go check out out his site at opencirclevillage.org, listen to his podcast, read the blog. Who knows? Maybe you can start an Open Circle in your own neighborhood!

6 Comments »