The Comfortable Substitute

(This article is part of our latest GroupZine: Beyond the Trend. In it you'll find more challenging and thought-provoking articles like this one.)

When I first started Cornerstone Church, I asked myself the question: What things do I need in order to start a church? The answer was obvious: find a building, a person to lead the singing, a sound system, a childcare area, and put together a good sermon. There were other things that I wanted, but these were the essentials. You can’t have church without them. Every evangelical knows you need a building, a sermon, singing, and a program for the kids. Other elements are negotiable, but these are the absolutes.
 
Here’s the million-dollar question: Is that what I would conclude from searching the Scriptures?  
 
Of course not.
 
I simply followed what other churches in America had done. I didn’t even think twice about it. But as I look back, I’m amazed that I didn’t consult the Scriptures as my primary resource. Had I done so, “church” probably would have looked different.
 
If I had consulted the Bible first, I probably would have created a gathering that emphasized loving one another. Instead, I spent years running a service that left little room for love. It quickly became the most popular service in town. It was “successful.” The problem is, we defined success as a lot of people coming, enjoying the service, and receiving some sort of benefit. Our motives seemed pure, and good things were happening, so we didn’t question much.
 

REDEFINING SUCCESS
How would we define success if the Bible were the only standard by which we judged our church? If you had no theological training or previous church experience—if you did nothing but read through the Bible fifty times—what would you consider to be essential for a gathering of believers? How would you measure the success of a church?
 
This process of starting with the Scriptures alone is what we call exegesis. One of the first lessons I learned in seminary was the difference between exegesis and eisegesis. Exegesis is starting with a passage of Scripture and pulling the meaning directly from the text. Exegesis aims for objectivity. You try to study without preconceived notions of what the passage teaches. You are surrendering yourself to whatever the text says.
 
Eisegesis is the opposite of that. We were warned against it, and rightly so. Eisegesis is when you attempt to import a subjective meaning into the text. In other words, you start with an idea, then look for verses to support your idea. This is a dangerous approach because your personal desires can determine your interpretation. In your heart, you desire divorce, immorality, wealth, etc., so you search the Bible for verses that will defend your point of view. In eisegesis, you are surrendering the Scriptures to your desires. In exegesis, you are surrendering your desires to the Scriptures.  
 
While we were taught to study and preach exegetically, I don’t remember being taught to live exegetically. Many teach exegetically, yet live eisegetically. We call this hypocrisy. When it comes to life, do we really search the Scriptures first? Is the Bible really the basis for how we live? Or do we pursue a certain way of life and then use the Bible to justify our actions?
 
With regard to church, I can justify many different styles of gatherings. The point, however, is not to defend our current models. Rather than pointing to biblical elements in the way we do things, we should build our model from the Scriptures alone.  
 
We have trouble building our churches exegetically, however, because we are surrounded by so many influences, and each of these beg us to think subjectively. My thinking is constantly affected by my Asian culture, my American culture, my Southern Californian culture, my evangelical church culture, and a host of other factors. Then I have my own flesh that begs me to believe what I desire to be true. There is so much in this world that would keep us from simply listening to the voice of God.
 
When I began to realize this, I prayed that God would allow me to ignore the prodding of my culture, my lifestyle, and my flesh as I searched the Scriptures for an exegetical model of church. I have listed some of my conclusions below.
 
Understand that I’m not saying we need to “do” certain things in order to become a part of the church. We become a member of His church the moment His Holy Spirit enters us. He is the proof of our salvation. When the Spirit enters us, He gives us a desire for the things He desires. He gives us a passion to build His kingdom through obedience to these commands.
 
There are many things that could be listed, but I’ll limit it to these characteristics because they seem to be the most emphasized. I mention these not because I found a verse about each of these, but because these are the things that I see over and over in the Scriptures. These practices were obvious in the life of the early church and they appear to have been given priority. If we were to follow an exegetical model of the church, then we would:
 
1. Love one another (which motivates all the “one anothers” in Scripture) - This would have more to do with actions than with feelings. We would care for each other in such a way that we would be moved to intense prayer and giving in order to meet the needs of the people around us. An intense, love-based fellowship would exist because of our common, deep-rooted devotion to Jesus and His teachings. This love and commitment to each other would continually spread to larger and larger circles.  
 
2. Proclaim His message - Our lives would be devoted to proclaiming the amazing news of the gospel to the world. We would announce that salvation has come through faith in Christ. We would teach people to “obey everything that Christ commanded”—not just assenting intellectually to a few core doctrines, but dying to self and becoming immersed in Jesus, His teaching, and His mission. We would be gathering with other believers to remind them of this gospel and to encourage them to stay focused on the mission. In proclaiming Christ’s message, we would be joining Jesus on His mission to rescue the physically and spiritually impoverished by leading them to an all-satisfying God.
 
3. Practice Communion and Baptism - This was important to Jesus and the early believers. We need to devote ourselves to gathering with like-minded followers to remember Him. We would make sure that His death and resurrection were always at the center of our gatherings, always our motivation and priority. As we baptized new believers, we would be reminded that they are committing themselves to a new life that begins with the death of the old one.
 
4. Pray - We would gather with other believers in order to pray. We would come into His presence, asking Him to further His kingdom. We would ask Him to lead us according to His will. We would pray fervently for one another.


KILLING OUR SACRED COWS
After searching the Scriptures, I am convinced that if I gathered a group of Christ-followers to practice these things then I could rightfully call it church. There are other things the church could do, but these are things we must do. Here’s another way to look at it: If I’m not living these things out with other believers, do I have the right to say I’m part of God’s church?  Biblically, I would have to say no.
 
Do these things take place at our “services”? If not, then shouldn’t we make it a priority to create gatherings that center on these elements? Shouldn’t this take priority over maintaining services? I believe what we do in our services is good, but it’s not all necessary, it’s not all commanded. So shouldn’t we first spend our energy on what is commanded? What should we hold sacred: our “services” or the commands?
 
Although good things can happen during a service, certain things cannot take place when two hundred or two thousand people sit in chairs, face forward, and listen to people on a stage for an hour. You cannot truly love your neighbor in that type of setting, nor can you practice the “one anothers” in that manner.
 
As I said before, it’s time for us to stop defending the models we are comfortable with and start pursuing church in a way that allows us to do and be everything that God desires His church to do and be. It’s time for us to make a change.


HOW DO WE CHANGE? 
Some will object by saying this is good information for someone starting a new church, but what about those of us who are part of an already established church? As someone who is in exactly that position, I’m not sure of the answer, but I’m devoting the next years of my life to figuring it out. For starters, I’m going to be consistently explaining to people that church is not something they attend, and they can’t call themselves the church simply because they attend a weekly service.   
 

SPEECH
One of the major changes we need to make in the evangelical world is our speech. We have people claiming to be followers of Christ even though they don’t actually follow Him. In the same way, we have people claiming to be the church even though they don’t practice the “one anothers” of Scripture. If people are going to begin to understand what God designed the church to be, then we need to start speaking rightly about it. It’s not “just semantics.” What we say affects how we think and how we act. If “church” is not a building, then why do we call it that? If we really believe that “church” refers to a people that God has redeemed, then why are we using the word for so many other things?  
 

PRIORITIZE BIBLICAL GATHERINGS
We have to start gathering believers who are focused on the mission. This should resonate with those filled with the Holy Spirit (Heb 10:24-25). There ought to be a desire to gather together to practice the “one anothers” of Scripture for the sake of the mission. Whether we continue our Sunday services or not is almost irrelevant. What is relevant is that we gather in a biblical way and for biblical purposes.
 
Practically, I’m toying with the idea of starting a network of gatherings that meet in homes in order to practice the commands of Scripture. They could watch sermons via DVD or have a leader give the lesson. They may even sing together. But the gatherings wouldn’t stop there. They would discuss how to live out the sermon in their neighborhood. They would also pray for each other. They would take communion and remind each other of the mission. They would meet the needs of the members of their group and their unsaved neighbors. Rather than coming to church, they would be the church—not in a sacred building, but in their neighborhoods. Occasionally, we could all gather in an auditorium or stadium to celebrate and worship collectively.
 

THE PROS
There are many benefits to this type of church network:

1. We can be obedient to the “one another” commands through the interaction that takes place in these gatherings. Whereas before people were spectators, they become active participants—not in a service, but in the joys and needs of the people around them.

2. There’s no limit to growth. The old system limits evangelism based on the size of a building. Every growing church runs out of space with the “build a bigger building” model. But when every home is a potential gathering spot, growth can continue until we actually accomplish our mission.

3. Gifted and bored leaders now have a mission, a place to be challenged and to exercise their giftedness in teaching and leading. With a service, only a few charismatic leaders can use their gifts. But if church is more than a service, then every person can use their God-given talents to edify the body of Christ.

4. There is greater accountability as people learn and interact in a smaller setting led by a lay leader in their community. People are no longer anonymous; now they are vital members of a community.

5. A huge amount of money is freed up for meeting real needs for the sake of the gospel. I can’t even think about how much money we have spent on buildings and comfortable chairs and air conditioning and everything that comes with running an entertaining service. When we focus on the biblical essentials of ministry, then God’s money is more directly and efficiently used to meet the actual needs of our actual neighbors.

6. It keeps people from idolizing their homes, furniture, carpet, etc. By allowing others to gather in their homes, it reminds them that their houses truly belong to God. It also helps us to bring Christ into every area of our lives rather than seeing a church building as the place where ministry and growth take place.

 
THE CONS
I also want to be honest about some of the dangers I see with a neighborhood church network:

1. It could easily become ingrown. As we become comfortable with our own little group, we can stop caring about and therefore reaching out to the people around us. While this is also a problem in the current church model, the neighborhood church network model seems to pose an even greater danger of this.

2. Individual groups could stray from truth. More leaders means more potential for things to go in the wrong direction.

3. By deepening involvement we increase the potential for inappropriate relationships. Again, this problem has always been present, but as we encourage deeper interaction, sin has a greater opportunity to pervert what is intended to be good.

4. It can be seen as rebellious or an attack on other established “churches.” Historically, it’s been the angry “I’m tired of church” people who begin gatherings in homes. They are the people who have the attitude that everyone else is doing it wrong.
 
These problems will need to be addressed. I believe that many of them can be solved through a midweek-training time. By gathering the leaders together regularly, elders can constantly encourage them to run from these issues. We would make use of gifted leaders in the church to train and equip the other leaders, not only during the midweek-training time but also discipleship throughout the week. This would ensure greater unity in doctrine and practice across the network of churches.
 

WHERE IS ALL THIS GOING?
Where is all this headed? What do I think the American church should look like? I really can’t answer those questions. All I can say is that I am responsible to God for how I shepherd the church that He has entrusted to me. I certainly don’t want to say that this is “the” model for everyone. It’s just the direction I keep sensing the Lord wants me to head. By sharing it, my hope is that it will encourage others to not only search the Scriptures but to boldly implement your findings.  
 
As I prayed and thought through the way I “did church,” I believe that in many ways I hindered the mission of the church and created confusion about what the church actually is.  
 
I cannot in good conscience call the old model “church.” Jesus created the church when He redeemed us from sin and death by dying on the cross. He is adding new members to the church daily through the powerful work of the Holy Spirit. As the church, we are called into the mission of Jesus. This mission is what our lives and gatherings must center on. The model does not matter unless it pulls us away from our mission.

I believe Satan has distracted us through programs, entertainment, and comfortable substitutes for what the church really is. It’s time for us to wake up, cut the fat, and be who we are: a people redeemed by Jesus, empowered by the Holy Spirit, on a mission to show the world the glory of God, and waiting for the day when all things are subjected to Him (1Cor 15:24-28).

37 Comments »

1. Francis is the deal and I always enjoy his discussions as he rewinds time and redefines who/where his team is heading. It is a ballsy move but I give full thumbs up for someone who is listening more than they are talking to their audience.

   I heard this saying somewhere, “Love never fails”. Cheers Francis and catalyst team, great post

   Comment by ihatechurch - Nov 18, 2009 @ 09:59 AM

2. Unreal. Francis always hammers it home. He preaches truth. How can you deny that? I love his boldness and his humility.

   Comment by John Alexander - Nov 18, 2009 @ 12:07 PM

3. At JCC we started using worship videos and dispensed with the hired guns until the Lord raises up a leader from within. I reached the frustration point (crisis of faith) in this third church plant with worship leaders and what we had to have. The last three weeks have been liberating as the worship songs were on the big screen and we all worshpped without a live band, choir, leader etc.

   The Apostles never talk about a worship leader just, apostolous tous de profhitas tous de euaggelistas tous de poimenas kai didaskalous…sun episkopois kai diakonois.

   Francis hit the nail on the head.

   Comment by Terry Little - Nov 18, 2009 @ 12:36 PM

4. It has been a privilege to process through convictions like these with Francis and the elders of Cornerstone. I have been working through the same convictions for many years now and continue to be encouraged by what the Spirit seems to be doing in the church as more and more are having this dialog.

   Thank you Francis for speaking the truth in love with humility and respect. I continue to pray for Cornerstone and the leaders as they navigate into the future.

   Comment by Jeff Vanderstelt - Nov 18, 2009 @ 01:15 PM

5. Thought provoking… which leads to the questions:
       How do we lead existing churches to be more exegetical in their living?
       How do we go about changing current culture (within the church) without      
             going to war between the generations?
       We need to make sure that in seeking to align with our lastest understanding of
             church, that we do not abandon those practices already in worship that
             are Biblical as well.

   I applaud the insight that obviously comes from the Spirit and the willingness to share honestly from his heart. F Chan has such a sweet spirit about him; I am confident that what he communicates is from a position of Christ-like humility.

   Grace & Peace Cur3t

   Comment by Curt Combs - Nov 18, 2009 @ 01:18 PM

6. Mr. Chan…are you going to try this…maybe start over….or keep going as you are…just asking

   Comment by JUDY - Nov 18, 2009 @ 01:35 PM

7. Francis, thank you for sharing your heart!  This is SO WHERE I AM!!  My husband and I have been in pastoral ministry for 34 years and the Lord has brought us to the point where my driving passion is to teach the body to BE the church; to practice the “one anothers”; to fulfill His purpose for our individual lives one day at a time; and demonstrate to this world what a Christ follower looks like!  Thank you again for this timely word.  It is such a confirmation to what I feel the Lord has been drawing my heart towards.

   Comment by Susan Nolley - Nov 18, 2009 @ 01:57 PM

8. AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAmen!

   Comment by Eric Lerew - Nov 18, 2009 @ 04:49 PM

9. The beauty of what Franics Chan is talking about is biblical small groups.  There is nothing wrong with big groups (in Acts 2 the 3000 met in the temple) but the real power of the gospel takes place when people meet in their homes.  The thing I wonder about is should we encourage people to truly follow the biblical model where people met EVERYDAY.  I know that’s radical to our culture but think of how powerful it was to have people that really loved Jesus and each other so much that they shared life daily! May that be us one day.

   Comment by Jason Lineberger - Nov 18, 2009 @ 05:38 PM

10. It seems everyone would worship together when Jesus would teach (unless in the Temple and I have heard too many accounts of how that looked to really believe any of them). Children would sit with parents, no breaking out to classes.  Would this even come close to working today.

    Comment by Judy - Nov 18, 2009 @ 05:45 PM

11. Glad to see Francis joining the growing choir of those questioning / leaving the Constantinian model, and moving towards a more NT-inspired / organic ecclesia.

    I would question, however, the priority of symbolic action (communion, baptism) over the primacy of love, prayer, plain relationship, and being available for our neighbors (love embodied). Not that NT symbolism isn’t important, but I wouldn’t put it on the list of “absolute priority” in small group settings. OTOH, missing from that list might be the necessity of the small group to remain fluid, open, and spontaneous to the Spirit.

    A lot of people have been talking about this for a long time, with increasing numbers now practicing. Some other recommended authors: Simson, Viola, Gehring, Cole, Payne, Hirsch, et al.  Great to see the conversation continuing at Catalyst.

    Comment by John L - Nov 18, 2009 @ 06:27 PM

12. Acts 2:42ff makes the Chuch of today look top heavy and cumbersome.

    Thank you for this thought provoking article.  My wife and I have been meeting in our home for a few years now in a very loose asoociation, mostly having fellowship with neighbours and friends.  Numbers fluctuate but I have discovered that numbers don’t necessarily correlate to success.  Anyway, it’s God’s business what the definition of “success” is.

    We have been challenged to meet at times other than Sunday morning so that the weekend can be freed up for intentional hospitality: family, neighbours and friends that are yet to meet Christ. 

    The only downside so far is trying to explain to my old Christian freinds that what I am doing is OK for me.  I’m not angry with the Church, God or His people, I’ve just been challenged to reach my neighbours.

    Comment by Phil Diefenbach - Nov 18, 2009 @ 06:51 PM

13. Francis has articulated what I believe to be the biggest challenge of church planters everywhere. How to gather biblical communities of called out ones and maintain the essentials from scripture.

    I have often gathered in my home with insiders and outsiders and thought it felt more like what I read in the scriptures than what I experience each weekend. At the end of the day, I am committed to gatherings like the temple courts and house to house.

    Thanks for giving it to us straight.

    Chad Alvaraddo

    Comment by Chad Alvarado - Nov 18, 2009 @ 09:44 PM

14. I have a chance to heard Francis on a couple occassions including at Catalyst this year.  I strongly believe Francis is a catalyst of God for this season to tell it the way it is, with boldness, humility and a crazy faith.  Francis, you challenging me to continue challenge my nation (Haiti) to leave traduction and culture but to use the word of God as the standard for the church. thanks for hollowing God to do His work both to you and through you.

    Comment by Julio Volcy - Nov 18, 2009 @ 09:57 PM

15. This would be a helpful guide as we start small groups in our church as part of our recent campaign called e4m - equipping for minstry.

    In fact, we even plan to utilize these small groups following the exegesis examples you mentioned and tap them as active participants in our weekly Worship Services.

    Priase GOD for the wisdom HE has bestowed upon you Francis ...

    More of God’s Love, more of God’s Power .. more of GOD’s anointing to the body of Christ.

    Equipping for Ministry

    Emmanuel Maddela

    Comment by Emmanuel Maddela - Nov 19, 2009 @ 04:02 AM

16. It was interesting reading your article and how true it is, that church is not the building that you attend but comprises the biblical principles you mention of loving one another, proclaiming God’s message, sharing in the Holy Communion and praying together. I attend a church in Nairobi, Kenya, known as Mavuno church that follows some of the principles that you have mentioned, and boy are you correct in your article!! I was one of those people that went to church and because the congregation was so large about 2,000 I did not feel any connection to scripture or anyone until I joined this church that has an amazing concept known as “Life Groups”.  Life Groups comprise of about not more than 10 people (each group has leaders who are constantly being trained by the church). The Life Groups meet at least once in a week (in someone’s home) and sometimes even more times, in this groups we discuss the sermon preached on Sunday, we share what we are going through and it also works as an accountability group. We also share in the communion every month (the Church does not have Holy Communion during Sunday services as they believe the Church is in these Life Groups, although Baptism happens in the normal church service). And boy!! am I learning a lot about what church is, through this small “Life groups” I am learning that Church is about loving one another, it’s about proclaiming God’s message, its about sharing in the Holy Communion and praying together. My life and my faith has grown so much because of being put within this small church (my life group) that is within the larger church (Mavuno). (Mavuno is accountable to a larger church known as the Nairobi Chapel which is accountable to other churches within Kenya.) To avoid the small groups from straying from the truth each group has a coach/mentor, who is responsible for a number of life groups; this coach is answerable to a zonal coach/mentor who is responsible to the Life Group pastor who is responsible to someone else and so on and so forth. Through this, every member of the congregation is a leader in one way or the other.  And because of this, the Life Groups (small churches) feel motivated to go out and have an impact for the Kingdom of God. This concept has truly changed my faith in Jesus Christ and made me stronger in the word of God. I have come to appreciate that the real power of the gospel takes place when people meet in their homes.Please visit http://www.mavunochurch.org/j/  to learn more about this church.

    Comment by D.M - Nov 19, 2009 @ 05:34 AM

17. Francis hits it. What is our biblical direction from Gods Word.We place our sights on mans vision and what we think is needed. We must remember, the Holy Spirit gets there before we do.

    Comment by Kalani Watanabe Sr - Nov 19, 2009 @ 09:22 AM

18. I want you to know before I say anything else that I believe Francis Chan is absolutely correct. I believe that he is one of the major mover and shakers of our time. And with that being said, I just want to add to a couple of areas of what he said.

    I as a Pastor of Worship also see very strongly in Scripture the element of corporate singing praises to the Lord. We are commanded to sing new songs. We see references all over Scripture that asks us to sing. In fact, I take a very strong stand that it is not an option as a Christian. So for those taht stand there and fold their arms during corporate worship and don’t sing, I believe is a direct violation of Scripture. So I would just simply add one more element to the model. Now don’t get me wrong…I am not talking about performance of songs of big choirs or even a hot band and praise team singers. I think all of that is fun and enjoyable to use to accomplish this element. But what I want to point out is that we need this element in what we do.

    The second area is another con. Now before I say this, I know this statement is self-serving because I pay my bills and live because I get a salary from leading the worship in our body of believers. One of the cons is personally finding a different source of income in order to be involved in this definition of “the church.” That is just down right nerve racking for me. So I guess when it comes down to it, am I willing to make a “career” change to be a part of “the” church?

    Last, I am 10,000% in agreement it is NOT “semantics” that we are dealing with here.

    Comment by Phil Beck - Nov 19, 2009 @ 09:37 AM

19. Hey Phil,

    Great response and thoughts. I have one thought I’ve thouhgt allot about and experiemnted with. The reason people don’t sing is that they don’t know the songs. In the “now” music is not writtent to sing along but to listen. Try this experiement. Do and accapello hymn, say All Hail the Power of Jesus Name, or use contemp version and see what happens. There wil be a crescendo of voices that will blow you away.

    We contemporists have missed th boat on leading a congregation to sing. Try Hillsong’s in Christ alone video on utube and watch what happens. 

    About the salary thing, if you’re a pastor then the Bible says you ought to live off that ministry. I get the no professional clergy thing andwould like to be there but not there yet. It’s not a cut and dry thing. I guess when the dollar colapses and we’re owned by China we’ll see who’s in it for the money.

    Comment by Terry Little - Nov 19, 2009 @ 10:41 AM

20. My wife had a dream about this home-based church setting last year. I think the Lord can use this in a huge way!

    Comment by jim - Nov 19, 2009 @ 11:15 AM

21. Thanks for Francis article. I was asking to God about our fellowship in Las Vegas long time ago. I was leading a fellowship who is “the angry “I’m tired of church” people. But God convicted us to change the thinking. Praise the Lord, that people in our fellowship understand that their previous experience with the church have to be buried and start with fresh revelation from scripture. Now on, everybody is committed with their church, served faithfully and gather together to practice their life exegetically.

    Comment by Maruli Sihite - Nov 19, 2009 @ 01:01 PM

22. Does anyone know when this article was originally written by Mr. Chan?

    Comment by H.Z. - Nov 19, 2009 @ 04:36 PM

23. Awesome!  We moved from suburban Atlanta to rural Southern Virginia.  In doing so, we said goodbye to our “church”.  Since being here, we have faced a dilema about finding a “church” home because of all the reasons that you mention in the article.  Honestly, we were struggling with it before we ever left our mega church in Atlanta.

    Since then, we have stumbled onto a body of believers who are practicing 1st Century Christianity.  We actually meet in a barn!

    It is humbling, hot, cold, wet, and downright uncomfortable.  However, we aren’t there for the comfort.  We are there to meet Jesus, love Jesus, love others, and spread the Gospel in thought, action, and deed. 

    We are not chained to pews and programs.  It is utterly freeing to worship God like it says to in the Bible. 

    Rock On!  The movement is on!

    Comment by robin jones - Nov 19, 2009 @ 08:42 PM

24. i respect francis to the utmost. i can see the biblical merit to what he is saying, however, this is a different culture and the time we live in is different. not that we throw out the bible (obviously) but this isn’t 60 AD so i think the church ‘should’ look different then it did back then. we should still carry on with godly conduct and practice what the scipture says about how to live our lives. but, can’t we do that in a larger church setting as well? if we were all small churches meeting in homes there are a few things that would suffer. 1) being able to corporately combat things globally (i.e. if there was a problem in uganda that needed $10,000 my little group would probably have a difficult time taking up a love offering to take care of the problem. 2) combating things domestically (i.e. our church gives food, free, to over 1,500 weekly in our community) we would have a very difficult time accomplishing this if it were just a small group. those are just a couple of things. i think that according to ephesians 4 that the 5 fold ministry gifts that were given to the church are suppose to do 1 thing… equip the saints to do the work of the ministry. we are suppose to have community in our churches (big and small alike) and we’re suppose to take care of our members… but we’re also suppose to equip them to minister. i think that can happen no matter what size facility we meet in or whether we do or don’t have AC or whether we are elder led or pastor led. it doesn’t matter. it’s all about fulfilling the great commission and making disciples. did i mention that i love francis chan? lol! seriously, i do.

    Comment by jim dunn - Nov 19, 2009 @ 09:57 PM

25. Thousands of people are getting saved every year through the “old church model.”  People - both in the body and unsaved - are getting served turkeys and food this Thanksgiving by “old” churches all across America.  The church is beautiful and…..old.

    I say, let the Holy Spirit stir leaders who may hear, to do things that are different and ........new.  Our Supernatural God is always doing something new and something that rocks the boat.

    Let the old and new glorify God.  God not only gets all the glory, but He will use anything yeilded to Him. 

    It’s all good.  We need both!

    Comment by Ozy Alvarado - Nov 19, 2009 @ 11:29 PM

26. @Ozy, I kinda agree, but I don’t think it’s about old vs new - it’s about biblical vs unbiblical. Francis is unapologetically saying that the way most of us are doing church is not super biblical & not accomplishing biblical goals for church - loving one another, loving our neighbor, discipling people to become mature Christians who are able to disciple others also. I don’t think what we’ve done for so long now is really working or accomplishing what God would like us to - I think Francis’ model will lead to more loving, obedient disciples of Christ, in my humble opinion.

    @Jim Dunn - I agree that one small group cannot raise $10,000 or give food to 1,500 people. However, I think 100 groups of 10 people each together could give much more than $10,000 & feed more than 1,500 people weekly. The reality is most churches give 10% or less to these kinds of things. But churches meeting in homes can give prob 80%-90% of their tithes to this work. Therefore, I must respectfully disagree. Meeting in homes benefits b/c it’s a “free” venue & the staff are unpaid - therefore, more actual ministry gets done and more resources are used to love outsiders.

    Comment by Jesse Phillips - Nov 20, 2009 @ 11:50 AM

27. We must be SO careful to not steer this question once again towards MODELS. For years, we’ve argued and discussed the best MODELS.

    I’ve seen megachurches save thousands.
    I’ve seen house churches impact their neighborhoods.
    I’ve seen Emerging, vintage, traditional, contemporary churches save lives.
    I’ve seen megachurches make zero difference.
    I’ve seen house churches that do little else than make the 10 people feel good about themselves.
    I’ve seen Emerging, vintage, tradition, contemporary churches do little if anything at all to usher in the Kingdom of God.

    The point is: It’s NOT the model. It’s the heart. It’s the Spirit of God moving actively. It’s the people involved in the movement vehemently praying: “Lord, do what you need to do in me so you can work mightily through me.”

    I’m so tired of attempting to determine what “model” is most effective. What’s most effective is what Francis listed: Love one another, pray, baptize and commune with one another, and proclaim the Gospel.

    Even as Francis is attempting to get people to focus on the heart and not the model, it’s funny how the proceeding comments then turned to arguing over which model would best serve those purposes!

    Comment by John Alexander - Nov 20, 2009 @ 05:34 PM

28. John A, everything is a model. Even self-organizing systems follow a model, albeit a very complex one. What’s needed here are ecclesial models that remain organic, pliable, generative, deeply dependent upon God and open to Spirit - models that require and encourage all-body participation - models that promote spiritual freedom over religious dependency. And, as you say, Love is the utmost model.

    Jesse, totally agree with your answer to Jim.

    Comment by john - Nov 20, 2009 @ 07:18 PM

29. @ Jesse/#27: thanks for the feedback.  I have to disagree that the church today isn’t seeing the things you would like: “loving one another, loving our neighbor, discipling people to become mature Christians who are able to disciple others.”

    It is happening.  Is it happening everywhere?  Of course not.  Now, The Holy Spirit is too wonderful and powerful to not let these things happen.  I also believe there are many Christians out there to live out missional and incarnational lives. 

    I do agree we can do new things…but the compelling energy to do that should not be because it is not happening now - it should be because we want to do more and do it better for the Glory of God. 

    Another thing that keeps coming to my head and it has already been touched on by some other entries here - is that we are a Gentile Church in America with a unique evolving culture.  Church will look different than the NT model.  This does not mean that Christ and his message are to be presented differently.  But it is, what it is.

    Comment by Ozy Alvaraso - Nov 20, 2009 @ 07:44 PM

30. I am so thankful for how Francis Chan is courageously declaring the reality of our situation as seen in the light of God’s word. Many of us realize these things, but the Lord has blessed him with a huge platform and he is using it in a tremendous way. You go Francis! You are not alone.

    Comment by Frank Erb - Nov 22, 2009 @ 03:49 PM

31. Francis provided a challenging, biblical article on the nature and marks of the “church” . It is a pattern that can be followed by “traditional” fellowships because it has to do with personal faith, opennes of life and concern for others .
    Alan Davies, Kenilworth, England

    Comment by Alan Davies - Nov 24, 2009 @ 06:58 AM

32. I am encouraged by this article having been led out of organized religion in 2001. Let me encourage everyone that you do not need to wait on Francis Chan or anyone else to “be the church” and not just go to building. American Church, by and large has become a weekly entertainment stop with a sprinkling of a feel good message. Where is the call to repentence? Where is the fire and brimstone preaching we once heard? Are we heaping up unto ourselves teachers that tickle the ears as Paul wrote to Timothy would happen? Pray to the Lord and ask what He would have you do! Read the Scripture! If we are His then we are all priests in His service! There is no pastor/laity in the eyes of God. There is only service as priest and kings in Christ! God Bless!

    Comment by Al - Dec 03, 2009 @ 02:51 PM

33. I understand No. 32 (Al) what you are saying and by in large I agree with you.. Just be careful taking one part of Scripture over another to prove a point. Scripture does call out Pastors, Evangelists, Teachers, Apostles, and and Prophets in Ephesians 4:11.

    I was driving down the road the other day in Dallas and saw a billboard that a church in Dallas was trying to prove a point. I agreed with the point, but unfortunately the Scripture they blasted on their billboards was absolutely out of context and didn’t come close to proving their point. It just fuels people when we pick and choose to justify our belief…just a thought.

    Comment by Phil - Dec 03, 2009 @ 03:01 PM

34. God Bless you Phil. Something for you to think about, if you aren’t already there, is that Pastors, Evangelists, Teachers, Apostles, and and Prophets are duties bestowed by God through the Holy Spirit, not titles bestowed by seminary, a board, etc. or to display on doors. Titles bestowed by seminary, etc. is the doctrine of man. I understand this seems offensive to some because they feel comfortable when someone has a title bestowed upon them with a document to back it up. The apostles were such because God ordained it, not men. They operated outside of the system at the time (the Pharisees and the Saducees). Even if you disagree with this, my only passion is to encourage everyone to seek out the Lord and His will.
    In Christ!

    Comment by Al - Dec 03, 2009 @ 08:30 PM

35. Thank you Francis for being willing and faithful to go through this explorative journey in the years to come. I am confident that it will impact the Kingdom of God and the city of L.A. Press on….

    Comment by almost an M - Dec 11, 2009 @ 10:28 AM

36. This is definitely something that has been on my mind even before reading the article. I really respect Jim and Ozy for their questions because most american christians probly agree even if they cant defend it theologically. However, I cant shake the nagging thought that we , not only in worship methods,consistentlly defend our actions for practical or “common sense"reasons. I also agree that God can use any model,but isnt that a strong encouragement to try it His way, i.e. the scriptural way? The christian who follows Christ and the scriptures really cannot fail no matter what, even if they dont get the results they were looking for. However if we do it our way and it doesnt produce   fruit, what are we left with ?                                                                                One more question ,please dont hurt me! Is there a biblical/model for what we call a pastor i.e. an on sight spiritual leader that provides most of the food for the “laity”  ?

    Comment by jason - Jan 08, 2010 @ 06:53 AM

37. As a former minister for over two decades I have discovered what it means to step out of full financial support and become part of a more missional group. The “traditional church” has become what I call “building-centric-event-driven” rather than relational-incarnational. Francis is spot on!

    Coming from a tradition which observes the eucharist weekly I’ve often been so surprised at those who argue against weekly communion because “it quits becoming meaningful”. No one has ever made that argument about praying, singing, Bible study/preaching (although I think some of my parishoners might have gone along with that one) or offering! Why is it only with eucharist—the one communal element that is specifically Christ/gospel focused? It IS proclamation of the gospel. After all over the years I am certain my mom made some pretty dreadful meals and we had some pretty dull meal times, but no body argued we ought to skip a meal because it wasn’t as meaningful! Sometimes even what seems to be a meaningless observance is filled with meaning over a course of weeks, months, and years.

    Certainly you cannot exegetically demand weekly observance, but on the basis of Acts it seems every time the followers of Christ gathered, they were eating the supper! (Although one might argue from 1 Corinthians 11-14 and history that there is justification for at least a weekly observance).And why wouldn’t they? If the story of Christ is the center of your life, wouldn’t you want to constantly remember it and nourish yourselves with it every time you came together?

    Just some thoughts.

    Comment by D. B. W. - Jan 08, 2010 @ 05:34 PM

Sorry, but commenting is no longer available for this post.