|
Post by karen sawyer on Feb 1, 2006 15:16:19 GMT -5
Welcome to the Revolution Chat message board. Please feel free to browse the topics posted, suggest new ones or reply to this article.
There are multiple pages of comments. Please be sure to visit each page to see what has been said. You can find the scroll bar for sub pages at the bottom left of this page.
Thank you, The Staff of Revolution Chat
|
|
|
Post by jim on Feb 2, 2006 9:46:15 GMT -5
one of the common complaints about Barna's new book is that he is telling people to leave the church. Too bad this is not true. This is not what Barna is saying. This is how what he is saying is being misintepreted and/or twisted, for the sole purpose of dismissing his comments as heretical. He never says "leave the church." Barna is calling us to "BE the church" which is quite different. And his position is that the "local church" or "organized church" or whatever you want to call it, is not doing an effective job of actually and realistically BEING the church - and therefore, people are leaving, and others won't even step through the doors. It has nothing to do with style wants and wishes - it has to do with BEING the church Christ calls us to be. In my opinion, Barna makes a great case for us to, at the very least, EXAMINE these trends and see what God might be challenging us to do with them... let's not dismiss this yet.
|
|
|
Post by JAMIE on Feb 2, 2006 9:48:40 GMT -5
While there are dangers of people taking control of church in any model or form of gathering, it would seem that we have an opportunity to open ourselves to however God wants to move his church. That's both freeing and challenging. If Barna (among many others) is right, it would seem that we need to start praying for an increase in faith. It's also nice to know that my own struggles with belonging in a church are part of a larger trend.
|
|
|
Post by Grace on Feb 2, 2006 9:50:20 GMT -5
Barna says " The family faith experience is a third holistic model, in which the family becomes a primary spiritual unit and pursues faith matters together, with the parents and their children (and, often, members of the extended family) becoming a close-knit faith community" I was thrilled to see barna mention this. it reminds me of the idea of Oikos (household) in the book of acts - this family unit could easily be the base of a house church but barna identifies it as distinct from it . . which is fine by me.
|
|
|
Post by Tim on Feb 2, 2006 9:52:31 GMT -5
It is becoming increasingly evident that this wrestlessness among so many Christians is not a function of consumer dissatisfaction (which seems to be more the case with some, but definitely not all believers who flock to megachurches), but is truly in concert with the present movement of God's spirit. As to whether or not this latest paradigm shift is revolutionary, I say that the Gospel itself is revolutionary and each generation has an opportunity to be a part of yet another dimension God's radical redemption project. Also, I believe that Luther taught us that there is a fine line between Reform (or "Evolution") and Revolution. And one trend is often informed by the other. I look forward to reading the book.
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Feb 2, 2006 9:54:04 GMT -5
i heard Pastor Sam Williams (ex-Barin Marin Church, San Rafael) say 10 years ago that there was a spiritual movement from God going on . . . but the church was not a part of it.
|
|
|
Post by jim on Feb 4, 2006 17:47:44 GMT -5
It's time for the church to face facts instead of disparaging the ever growing cloud of witnesses that is looking toward a dimly visible horizon. It's time for the church (the community, the body, the people of God) to die to its institutional self. And if we won't (which is more likely, I'm afraid) then it's time for those of us afflicted with a holy dissatisfaction to come out.
|
|
|
Post by Bob on Feb 4, 2006 18:10:22 GMT -5
We've gone through the periods, the Early Church, the Period of the Church Fathers, the Dark Ages, the Reformation, and the Denominational era. In the Reformation, some thought it was best to hold on to as much of the old form as possible, changing only what was expressly forbidden in the Scripture. Some thought it best to abandon all but what the Scripture expressly requires. Some stayed with the Roman church. Others formed denominations, a church divided by doctrinal statements. Now we are shifting again. I don't think the denominations will fold up and quit. But the church is still on the move, moving out past those forms and structures. The Church is living still, within the Roman church, within the denominations, and in the new forms of the church that are emerging. Let every believer find his/her place in this exciting new era.
|
|
|
Post by Mike on Feb 11, 2006 1:11:49 GMT -5
I found the book to be more "descriptive" than "prescriptive." I do think he was applauding the motivations of the "Revolutionaries" and giving the institutional structures a kick in the head to wake up and see what is going on around them. The appendix was titled "How a local church can respond appropriately to the revolution." I didn't read Barna to advocate an abandonment of being community but calling for a radical redefinition of community.
The great creed of the Reformation was "The Church reformed, always reforming, according to the Word of God." Where is Scripture do you see the construction of separate buildings to be primarily used for once a week service? Find one place in scripture that relates worship to the idea of a guy up front talking to a bunch of people sitting in rows? The Greek "laikos" is the word translated "laity," meaning "of the common vulgar people." It is a synonym for "idiotes" from which we get the word "idiot." Laikos (laity) is not in the Bible. "Laos" is the word in the Bible meaning "the people." "Kleros" is the word in the Bible from which we get "clergy." It means "inheritance" or "lot." In the Bible, kleros always appliles to the laos, the whole people of God. The clergy/laity distinction was later addition. Yes, God calls some to be pastors but they of the people not above the people.
The Reformation got half way to the goal. It removed the priest as the mediator between us and God but it left the ecclesiastical structures between the believing community and God. It is time to complete the Reformation and remove the ecclesiastical structures between God and the called community. There must always be community and therefore structure. But structure exists to serve community and the reverse is now true. Most who challenge this order find themselves on the outside looking in. Thus, a revolution.
|
|
|
Post by tony on Feb 11, 2006 1:14:16 GMT -5
I have not read the book but have listened in on some of the debates about the book. I must say, to start, that I am somewhat of a revolutionists myself. Somewhat.
First, let me say that I believe church serves a two fold purpose. That is to help a person grow spiritually and for that person to help others grow spiritually through fellowship. So the whole revolutionists mindset sort of works against itself according to my thoughts on the purpose of church. If everyone with a revolutionist mindset left the church because they felt like they weren't growing spiritually then who would be there for the other Christian (non revolutionist) that went there. Christians should be there for each other, and one way is by showing up for church.
Now, for most of my life I have been in great churches where I was fed the Word of God and profitted greatly from it. For the past three years, however, since I moved, I have struggled to find a place like that. I have really benefited from Sunday mornings with just me and God. There are a lot of churches that just arent' my style. I am not saying they are bad churches, they just don't suit me. I think it all boils down to your heart, and so does God.
|
|
|
Post by Z on Feb 11, 2006 1:48:51 GMT -5
I plan to read this book straight away, but I wanted to mention that I am one of these people that Barna is talking about, and there are a number of others that I know online who are leaving congregational churches (predominantly, the "Americhurch" conservative evangelical variety). It will be interesting to hear what Barna has to say about something that until recently has been intensely personal for me. I can only offer some anectdotal evidence of the phenomenon that Barna is describing. Peace, and thanks for writing on this.
One thing I do want to mention, and I say this with all due respect to you, is that it does seem that people are conflating Church and church. This is evident in the assertion of some that leaving a congregational church is synonymous with rejecting other members of the Body. That assumes that congregational churches are the physical expression of the spiritual Body, and that's debateable--but it may be beyond the scope of a comment thread to do that topic justice.
I can only again offer up myself as an anectdote: what I am leaving behind is the notion that my discipleship must include attending approximately 45-120 minutes a week of professional sermons plus corporate worship and donating time and money to support the staff and space needed for these activities. After attending 12 years of evangelical sermons 1-3 times a week and investing countless hours and dollars to serve that mode of "doing church," I think I'd rather recover the time and money for service that I think (and yes, I do hear the "I think" in what I'm saying) is more rubber-meets-the-road discipleship. Spending less time and resources serving the needs of my local congregation and more time serving the needs of people "out there."
Besides, when it comes to accountability for my walk, isn't it all about me? Will you or some other pastor be standing next to me at the judgment? Will my local church congregation be involved in any way shape or form when what I have done is determined to be gold or wood/hay/stubble? This is high on my mind now.
|
|
|
Post by Jms on Feb 11, 2006 2:05:38 GMT -5
Barna wrote "It seems that God doesn’t really care how we honor and serve Him as long as he is number one in our lives and our practices are consistent with his parameters." This statement is puzzling and seems to show an inconsistency in Barna's reasoning. On one hand he is saying God is not concerned with our practices, but in the same breath says our practices have to be consistent with what He wants from us? ? This inconsistency aside, I think what Barna is seeing and praising are Christians who exalt themselves above the body of Christ and refuse to submit to God's authoritative design for his church. Can Christians meet in a house church? You bet because the New Testament shows us that early Christians met in homes. Can a Christian exist apart from the community of faith? No, and usually when Christians try they end up returning to the ways of the world so that one cannot distinguish them from an unbeliever. The church is supposed to be an outpost of God's kingdom in this world, and rather than run from it Christians should run to it for support, instruction, guidance, and help.
|
|
|
Post by david on Feb 11, 2006 2:16:14 GMT -5
I don’t know any Revolutionary now with the Stature of Martin Luther, but in practice, aren’t revolutionaries following in the tradition of Martin Luther? Didn’t Martin Luther see a Church where Christ seemed missing? Didn’t Martin Luther make valiant attempts to transform the Church of his time? Didn’t Martin Luther eventually leave the Church of his time in order to reform the universal Church? Are revolutionaries any different? Will we someday view one of those branded as revolutionary by Barna as a second Martin Luther? Will the revolutionaries reform into a second reformation?
Then again, is it possible that the Body of Christ quit being complete when the Orthodox and Roman Catholic Church split in the Great Schism?
|
|
FBbondServant
New Member
Proverbs 27:17 As iron sharpeneth iron; so a man sharpeneth the countenance of his friend.
Posts: 17
|
Post by FBbondServant on Feb 11, 2006 20:53:10 GMT -5
WOW "Z" you hit it great. I find the article at revolutionchat.proboards92.com/index.cgi?board=revolutionareview to be quite complimentary and OK by me. The two exceptions noted were well spoken and accurately conveyed. IN FACT The writer did not even have a BIG issue and seemed to allow complete TRUTH to prevail even in his exceptions. I hope more Rebels and Revolutionaries ralley to this cause and form groups thru at least internet if not in real flesh assemblies. My friend has started a website at www.truthforfree.com. There we find much effort and resources to some of the issues we are all discussing here. The really weird thing God is doing though is thatHe is having a different look to HIS body and bride. If an outsider tries to assemble these believers then he is resisted by BOTH sides of this equation. I take comfort in the fact that my thoughts are NOT God's thoughts and that if I am bewildered then likely I am in a good, fertile, and healthy place where the Holy Spirit of our Father Himself can teach me.
|
|
|
Post by lorrell on Feb 20, 2006 23:58:25 GMT -5
Finally, a barnaism I fit into. Yes, I am less involved in my local church and in so doing am probably doing more ministry. It feels as though many churches, including ours, are merely "playing church". Yes, yes, and yes. I can relate to this and am somewhat relieved, really, to hear someone else make a comment about it...
|
|
|
Post by mark on Feb 21, 2006 0:35:23 GMT -5
I wonder if twenty years or so the revolutionaries will suddenly realize that they are missing something. Or maybe it will be the subsequent generation and not these people that Barna talks about. Maybe this something that they find they are missing is an intense, loyal connection to a specific body of believers... just a thought.
However, it seems to me that Barna's revolutionaries are "reacting" to the church just as the emerging church is reacting. Also, I know Barna concentrates on analyzing and interpreting statistically data but the examples of revolutionaries that he has given seem to me to be the exception rather than the norm. In the midwest at least, most people don't leave the church and intentionally involve themselves in a wide range of spiritual endeavors but simply allow "life" to crowd out "church activities." But then, I am somewhat biased in what I tend to observe (as we all are).
|
|
|
Post by lnn on Feb 21, 2006 22:20:54 GMT -5
I got frustrated with this book as I saw Barna trying to have it both ways — he claims he is just predicting what will happen based upon his observations, but the he encourages these things to continue almost to fulfill his own prophecy.
The “revolutionary” is what I call a “Christian” although Barna’s version seems to be much more self-absorbed. The golfing buddies example at the beginning of the book showed a revolutionary who was into his own spiritual life, but didn’t seem to be doing much for anyone else except his golfing buddy. Not much accountability, not to mention discipline.
|
|
|
Post by aaron on Feb 24, 2006 1:44:34 GMT -5
As someone who can relate to this, I'd like to share my developing opinion. First, attacking the "church" is not the answer. In this case, the "church" is not the problem, nor is it the answer. As a Christian, we are called to be a part of the Church, and to have fellowship with other believers. One of the most effective ways of accomplishing this is through our local churches. However, to expect to be constantly fed and completely satisfied from the leadership/programs of our local churches is perhaps immature. There will most likely come a time in the life of any long-term or deeply devoted and knowledgable Christ-follwer where they will find themselves learning almost nothing new at their church. They will perhaps even find that they have deep-seated spiritual needs that are not being met. They may find themselves in the leadership positions themselves, but that is not going to make any difference. At some point, in my view, a mature Christian needs to begin to take responsibility for his own relationship to Christ. This is an exciting time of self-discovery and spiritual growth. Everyone's journey (how I am beginning to hate that word, lol) will be unique. Other Christians will be unlikely to be able to help you in this. It is between you and God, as it was always meant to be.
|
|
|
Post by camille on Feb 24, 2006 2:01:43 GMT -5
I am feeling the same frustration about the lack of focus on the inward journey of the Christian faith in the churches here in America. Of course, I can only speak for my church but now at least I know that I am not the only pilgrim who feels the same. I don't see it as an attack on the church but as something that we should be aware of. That small tugging at our hearts and minds cannot be ignored. I'm glad it's been brought to our attention. Hopefully, at some point in our christian lives, we are going to experience that inward journey. It's a sign of maturation. There's no cause to be afraid or paranoid. We should not be afraid to reexamine what we believe as if afraid of finding some skeletons. Maybe those old beliefs or "formulas" need a little dusting. What makes this journey so exhilarating is that there is no formula. We work it out as we go along. The God we know is the Unknown and the Unknowable. That is the paradox of this faith.
|
|
|
Post by stan on Feb 25, 2006 23:41:41 GMT -5
I think the problem isnt that there arent enough "revolutionaries".
The problem across the church is nominalism. And neither the "next big thing that we will market" or the Ancient-Future church can cure that.
|
|
|
Post by jan on Mar 8, 2006 21:44:30 GMT -5
We in the church want more out of life, more sales, more money in our accounts, more people in the churches, more giving in our budgets. We focus on the more. But Christ focuses on the individual. Though Jesus preached the overwhelming example that we have the most of is the outpouring of himself into a few who in turn did the same. So, can we do more than Christ by focusing on crowds?
|
|
|
Post by jasin on Mar 9, 2006 21:42:08 GMT -5
I've been ready for this revolution from the start of my Christian walk. Traditional Evangelicalism has never worked for me.....and the liberals....puleez.....though I love the liberal heart. Hook the liberal heart up with the Evangelical reliance on Scripture, and let's PARTY!!!
Let's cut the crap! The Church is not a corporation and pastors aren't CEO's. Deacon's boards aren't corporate boards of directors. NUKE the programs til they glow!! The Church is family. LOVE ONE ANOTHER....this is a command and not open to discussion.....Another thing S-A-C-R-I-F-I-C-E....it's a terrible dirty word, and every believer is called to a life of it. whoever doesn't like it can go skip a rope.
If your foundation is good then scrape off everything above the foundation and build anew. For so many churches/denominations the foundation was removed, and the house is built on shifting sand....HERE COMES THE WIND.
It's time for a Revolution.
|
|
|
Post by hntr on Mar 9, 2006 22:50:55 GMT -5
I think it’s important to note that Barna is both “describing” and “prescribing” in this book. He’s certainly describing problems in local churches and the phenomenon of “Revolutionaries” leaving them as a result. But he’s also advocating this as a biblical alternative to local church fellowship. Responding to this require nuance, I think.
Briefly, my thoughts: 1. I have always had a high opinion of Barna as an observor of trends within evangelicalism. So, I tend to trust his data and projections. I’ve personally encountered many people who fit the “Revolutionary” description he paints.
2. I think Barna and “Revolutionaries” have legitimate critiques of many local churches. Certainly his research supports the conclusion that many churches are not places of spiritual vitality. Revolutionaries don’t want to be part of such churches, and I can’t blame them.
3. I think Barna tends to be a better “describer” than “prescriber.” While he observes legitimate problems, some of his solutions and biblical analysis falls flat…and might even contribute to the problems he laments (his early book “Marketing the Church” could certainly contribute the shallowness he so hates). Is it more a reflection of an individualistic bias that he can see no “allusions to or descriptions of a specific type of religious organization or spiritual form” in the Bible? He says, “The Bible does not rigidly define the corporate practices, rituals, or structures that must be embraced in order to have a proper church” (p.37). What about Paul’s detailed qualifications for elders and deacons? What about Jesus’ instructions on correcting a brother, “tell it to the church” (Mt. 18)? What about Paul’s instructions to the Corinthians on how to act when they gather? I see the whole background of the NT epistles assuming that visible, identifiable organizations called “churches” existed. Barna’s biblical analysis doesn’t address this or even acknowledge it.
But this is also where nuance is needed, because defending a biblical ideal called “local church” is not the same thing as defending the status quo “church as it’s done today.” Again, many of Barna’s critiques are valid, but does this give us permission to abandon the local church form altogether? By way of comparison, think of marriage: certainly there is much wrong with the way Americans in general do marriage today, but marriage is a biblical institution and so Christians don’t abandon it but strive for the ideal.
4. There needs to be much repentance in American Christianity, and it needs to start with pastors who have created the environment that provoked this reaction (I say this as a young pastor myself). If people are abandoning the biblical ideal for a consumer-driven approach to spirituality (as I’m afraid Barna is), then the only way to lead them to repentance is to repent ourselves and strive for better local churches that come closer to the NT standard.
|
|
|
Post by teah on Mar 9, 2006 22:55:17 GMT -5
I hesitate to comment but feel compelled to. I relocated here nearly three years ago and went unchurched. I have recently begun to attend a church that seems lifeless. I joined. Few attenders, 86 years this church has stood, the pastor has been driving from two hours away for 17 years, he commits to one day a week, rituals, traditions abound. Pastor anniversary, church anniversary, yet he refused to have a christmas program. Interesting. Only the lifeless can sing when we all get to heaven and sound tired and unbelievable.
A few young people have joined with me from the local college. The church is almost invisible physically. Painted white it doesn’t stand out next to the car dealer ship, few have heard about it, those who know of it don’t always speak kindly of the ministry, many have left for whatever reason. Perhaps it is this church that Barna talks about. They don’t bother anyone andno one bothers them. People live what ever life they desire. A brother who leads the worships service cusses like a sailor through the week and sings songs of Zion on sunday. I don’t mean to “judge” but I wasn’t raised that you can live whatever life you desire. I am not legalistic, I had that growing up, I mean they might as well put a big no behind the pulpit. But I do know that the Bible commands us to live life worthy of Christ.
These are the local churches that people say, "Is this all there is?" The rituals and traditions, no changes. Isn’t this what Christ came to deliver us from? Perhaps Barna isn't speaking to everyone, just us who feel like walking away.
I am here because I am a prodigal and I feel compelled to prepare a home for those prodigals that are returning. I feel compelled to help people understand that while spiritual information is available in many sources only one source provides salvation. I’m talking about a saviour and not a building. while there are many things made with brick and mortar some temples need to be made with a relationship with him. The unchurched are unchurched for a reason.
|
|
|
Post by GTRGTR on Jan 14, 2009 21:48:05 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by FERFRE on Jan 14, 2009 21:52:17 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by GRGTR on Jan 14, 2009 21:52:52 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by GRTGRT on Jan 14, 2009 21:55:09 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by GTRGTR on Jan 14, 2009 21:57:54 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by YTH on Jan 14, 2009 22:00:31 GMT -5
|
|