I really think it’s the grumpy old buzzard avatar, though, more than other preconceived notions. Not that I don’t suffer from those.

God bless,

Cindy

He even used Paul, who did literally have the blood of believers on his hands. He’s using former pastors of ICs who have either “left the ministry” or attempted (whether successfully or not) to transition their IC congregations to house church networks. And yes, He does even use IC pastors and members who have no intention of going NT with their practices.

We can’t put God in a box, saying He will do this, but not that (unless it contradicts His nature). God is pretty good at resisting being boxed up, as many have found who have tried it. It’s almost as if He laughs and says, “Oh, I can’t do that, huh? Okay, whatever . . . ”

Other than that, right on, bro!

God bless,

Cindy

While I am not those old birds defender – I have disagreed with them a few times – and I think there is some bitterness with them about all things church – and they throw a lot of stone, but I think if you read all of there stuff, you’ll find they are uncomfortably dead on most of the time. The church – in general – is simply pointless and mired in mediocrity and worldiness and has been for some time. No one should be surprised at this for we are humans and fallible and all that. And as the buzzards said, there will be no change unless God forces us to change.

Deacon: It’s all part of trying to build the best “church mousetrap”, so they boast that they’re the ones doing the “will of God”. The reward is more money, more financial independence for the preachers, the gold ring of consumerism. It’s truly the same goal whether business or church.

Usher: But isn’t measurement equivalent to David taking a census or the ability to measure one’s worth? Isn’t that about taking His glory for one’s own? Isn’t it why the megachurches exist?

Deacon: If the church wasn’t a business, then measurement wouldn’t be essential. But it is! Consumerism is the major lifeline of the church. Pastors who have great giftings in teaching and speaking and even truly God-given ministries cannot extract themselves from it. They cannot resist the fame, the fortune nor the notoriety our society offers them when the commercial “fruit” (large congregations, exponential growth, big money being spent on big projects) starts to become apparent.

Usher: So how does one prevent it?

Deacon: Lose the titles, refuse the money and build along first century guidelines. But these guidelines are not apparent to those who have been steeped in consumerism. It’s kind of like David not getting to build the temple due to so much blood on his hands. He had to defer to God and leave that to Solomon. Those who have been building the consumerist institutional church model with its stadiums and book deals and political influences (Ricky boy), cannot and will not be allowed to build with first century practices. (Even Ricky gets into it as he cannot resist selling his “God-inspired” sermons to those who are less gifted.) But there is a generation up and coming that will be able to build on first century guidelines with greater effectiveness. They have not been indoctrinated, they are smarter and less apt to follow such a hollow way of thinking, and they see through the consumerisms that rule todays IC.

Usher: Where will they come from?

Deacon: Most likely from the mission field afar where they have been influenced by the pioneers who have been building overseas for years (having divorced or never accepted the consumerist model years ago). Many are missionaries leading large numbers to be disciplers, not preaching in stadiums to hear themselves and sign book deals.

Usher: But what about all the debat going on in this hemisphere such as on this blog? Won’t these people play a part in all this?

Deacon: Not likely. They are mostly academics and they have a very slight chance of escaping consumerism because they are yet dependent on it as well. They are about theory and debate. The difference in them is that they have never experienced building on first century principles. They write books and travel and speak. Most simply enjoy debate and their perceived award is not monetary but that of being “right” or bragging rights when their arguments find traction (determined by the measurement of their sales or how many show up at their speaking engagements).

Usher: Is there any hope that this movement will prevail over the consumerist model?

Deacon: For sure. But it will take chaos, destruction and great tragedy before it takes shape. Until the economy is deflated from its credit-riddled facade via collapse, war or some other form of great disruption, man will go on as he has in his IC ways. Humans don’t change easy. It takes radical transformation and radicals to hold fast to a new model that goes against the current.

Jeff, you mentioned winning converts vs. making disciples and the choice of convert language was mine, Dan uses growth language in his article – but it’s still growth in numbers.

I wonder, should a lack of any growth numerically over time cause concern?

I know this is not the only question we should be asking, and we need to focus on the fruit of the spirit and blessing others, but if I’ve got the best fruit stand in town and we’re giving the stuff away, I’d hope to have a few more customers as the word gets out – taste and see that the Lord is good!

Mark, interesting comment. I’m guessing the way people respond to Dan’s article will be very different depending on whether they are located within a larger more traditional church or a smaller more house-like church. Personally, I am very entrenched in the mega-church world and have been for over 20 years.

As I mentioned in other posts, the biggest failure I see in the mega-church is the lack of producing fully devoted followers of Christ who are engaged on mission with God for the sake of others. While I am often critical of the form, I have not abandoned it yet. I’d like to believe it’s possible to transform a mega-church into a missional community, but we will have to wait and see on that one!