Every time I enter a building where a church meets, I am reminded of something one of my seminary professors said: “First we make our buildings; then our buildings make us.” It seems that far too often, a church is formed and influenced more by its buildings than by Scripture or even Jesus Christ. We defend our buildings and what we do in them more than we defend the fatherless, the widows, the poor, the hungry, and the destitute.

A church that might begin in simplicity, with fellowship and service being the focus of their community, radically changes once it constructs a building. It now becomes focused on filling the pews, upgrading the sound system, paving the parking lot, and paying the mortgage. Whereas before the church used to go the community and get involved in their events, now the church invites the community to the church building to attend the church events.

Continue Reading…

Many believe there is no harm in church buildings. In fact, most believe that there is more harm in not having a building because of how they provide convenience for gathering, a social identity for the people, and a position of prominence in the community. While it could easily be argued that these are not truly beneficial, but detrimental, there are two other main problems with church buildings and how they hinder the church’s mission.

First, buildings bind the church with financial burdens. The biggest two expenses in most church budges are pastoral salaries and mortgage payments. Imagine how much money could be freed up for local and global missions if one (or both) of these budget items disappeared? A gathering of believers must ask themselves if a mortgage payment every month—whether it is $500 or $5,000—could accomplish more if put toward helping the poor and sick in the community.

Continue Reading…

In the days of Jesus, the Jewish people believed in a form of incarnation. They did not believe that God could become a man, but that heaven and earth connected at the Temple in Jerusalem. God, for the Jewish person, dwelled in some sense in the temple. The temple was seen as the central incarnational symbol of Jewish life.

The Incarnation of the Temple

This is one of the primary reasons that the teachings and actions of Jesus were so controversial. In many different ways and at many different times, Jesus indicated that He was the new temple; that in Him people could receive forgiveness from sins, access to God, and restoration from exile. When people believe that God is in the temple, imagine what a shock it would have been for Jesus to announce that the Temple would be destroyed (John 2:19-21).

But as shocking as it was to predict the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem, John indicates that Jesus was actually talking about His own body! We tend to think that this would soften the blow of such words for Jewish people at the time, but the opposite is actually true.

Continue Reading…