Such a radical transformation changing of the American church, and no one has any comment? I don't get it.
Very interesting article at the following link concerning the state of the traditional church in America. I've posted a few quotes to give you it's flavor so you can determine if you want to read the entire article or not. My thought: I know numerous believers who have left the traditional church, myself included. Most of us, I beleive, are looking for a more pure form for the expression of our faith.
http://www.barna.org/FlexPage.aspx?P...naUpdateID=201
"Barna estimates that the local church is presently the primary form of faith experience and expression for about two-thirds of the nation's adults. He projects that by 2025 the local church will lose roughly half of its current "market share" and that alternative forms of faith experience and expression will pick up the slack."
"That growth is fueling alternative forms of organized spirituality, as well as individualized faith experience and expression. Examples of these new approaches include involvement in a house church, participation in marketplace ministries, use of the Internet to satisfy various faith-related needs or interests, and the development of unique and intense connections with other people who are deeply committed to their pursuit of God."
"Having been personally frustrated by the local church, I initiated several research projects to better understand what other frustrated followers of Christ were doing to maintain their spiritual edge. What emerged was a realization that there is a large and rapidly-growing population of Christ-followers who are truly want to be like the church we read about in the book of Acts. We began tracking their spiritual activity and found that it is much more robust and significant than we ever imagined - and, frankly, more defensible than what emerges from the average Christian church. But, because the Revolution is neither organized nor designed to create an institutional presence, it typically goes undetected."
Such a radical transformation changing of the American church, and no one has any comment? I don't get it.
Revelation gives you the different stages of church status, from Ephesus which had left "its first love" to Laodecea, which was lukewarm (neither hot nor cold). Its hard to find a church that is on fire for God, because we as human beings are weak and have not followed His Great Commission to the letter. Its not enough just to win the lost to Jesus. The church must also be busy about teaching the new Christian to be an effective tool of the Holy Spirit. What I have found in my Christian walk of over 30 years is that if I feel "distant" from God, then it's my fault. God doesn't move away from us, we move away from Him. The same is true for the church. What I have also found is that a lot of churches play to the world, that is, things that are worldly are now accepted by the church, whereas 50 years ago they were not. A lot of churches have surrendered to liberal or moderate pressure to allow women and homosexuals as pastors or deacons. God, through Paul, outlined both the man's and the woman's role in the church. My church will not even allow a man that has been divorced to serve as a deacon. Conservative thinking? You better believe it!
I would estimate that over 50% of churches in America are more liberal than moderate, with the remaining percentage to be moderate and conservative churches. The conservative churches are probably a minority now.
I would also say that in our area the percentage of conservative churches far outweigh the moderate or liberal churches. There are many in my immediate area that I would feel comfortable worshipping in, because they are Bible-believing, Bible-teaching churches, with good leadership - leadership that recognizes that their growth comes from God.
"Yes, there are two paths you can go by
But in the long run
There's still time to change the road you're on."
Do you think the typical, traditional southwest VA church more closely resembles the Biblical model or the Constantinian model? In my understanding and thought, the 2 are diametrically opposed models.
There are really NO churches typical of the early Biblical church. Why? The church of that day was filled mostly with converted Jews, (remember, Peter had to have a special vision from God to convince him to take the Gospel to the gentiles)whose background was all about Biblical principles and laws that had filled their lives since infancy. You won't find people now selling all that they own to help other members of the church either.
The church today has no resemblance to the Constantinian church in my estimation, as it was more closely tied to the state than to true religion. Although Constantine may have elevated Christianity to legal status in Rome, he also tried to force it down some throats. I think it was more about ritualistic traditions than anything else.
In essence though, I suppose you would have to associate our local churches to the early church, in that Jesus Christ and the leadership of the Holy Spirit was/is the focus, or at least that's what we're supposed to be about.
"Yes, there are two paths you can go by
But in the long run
There's still time to change the road you're on."
I agree that there are no churches that are typical of the early church - but there should be. Why should the original mission of the church change? It shouldn't, but most (and maybe all) of the churches today masquerade behind some veil of religiosity - put your best face on when tou come in here, as I once was told by a pstor. My bottom line is this: ALL people, including Christians and church-goers - have problems, Yet they are content to pretend that all is well, they have no problems. At the sme time, the "heathen" are exercising better discernment that the church-goers - they realize that most (nay, all) of the church goers have problems, won't admit it, pretend all things are well, and perceive the churchians as hypocrites. And I must agree with them.
The perception of many is that Christians go to church to show they are "religious". A true Christian goes because that was the Lord's edict, that we should congregate together. Church, as such, is supposed to be many things: worship, reverence, obedience; receiving healing, encouragement, and direction. Our downfall is that we have let church become more about man and less about God. Are there perfect churches out there? No! But there are some who are really trying to get it right.
"Yes, there are two paths you can go by
But in the long run
There's still time to change the road you're on."
Have we determined how we "assemble ourselves together" by looking through the glasses of the conventional church, or have we missed something: Possibly, our assembling can be done without the confines of tradition? A living room? That's how the first century church met. But down through history, especially beginning with Constantine and continuing with catholicism, church as we know it today has adpoted and adapted to so many pagan customs and rituals (clergy, choirs, elevated altars, ecclesiastical garments, etc).
In II Timothy, chapter 2 verse 4, The Bible tells us to Preach the Word, to be instant in season and out of season. This is meant for all believers. The Apostle Paul, in his many letters and visits, did just that. The church building has become a traditional symbol of the church, but church is in the heart of the believer.
According to the words of Christ, all you need to acquire salvation is to confess and acknowledge God and his Son as saviour...Not dress up nice and put on a show on Sunday mornings...
...And if you ain't down with that, I got 2 words for ya....
Bookmarks