Let me begin by saying that I am a college and young singles minister. I guess it goes without saying that I am a little more progressive than some and less than others. My music is sometimes pretty loud and my clothes are a little different. My kids are growing up in coffee shops and on college campuses. My three boys think their family consists of about 120 college students and young singles. There is never a time when I walk around in boxer shorts because I never know who will be in our house. There have been times when I have stumbled to the coffee maker in the morning to notice a college student curled up on the couch asleep. Guess what, we love it. So understand that what I am going to say does not come from a bitter old preacher who is stuck in the last century…
There are a lot of churches being started and others reorganized in an attempt to bridge the perceived gap between the traditional church[1] and the culture. There seems to be an attempt to make the church “fit” into the world. This has led to a rebellion against the church of the last century.
I will be the first to say that we must always be relevant but not for the sake of just being relevant. Relevance is a must because the Gospel is always relevant in all situations, cultures, and circumstances. The Gospel is not western nor is it eastern. It is not urban nor rural. It is not contemporary nor is it traditional. On the contrary, it is distinctively relevant to humanity…all humanity!
So what flavor your church happens to be, in order to be truly relevant it must be centered on the unadulterated Gospel of the Jesus Christ. Every last person on this earth is in need of salvation. That makes the message of the cross relevant to all. If we want to change the world and take the Gospel to the nations then let us be reminded as the people of God that it is our responsibility to respond in obedience in taking the Gospel to the world.
Many are in rebellion against the traditional church and some with good reason. But, my friends remember that rebellion looks no more like Jesus than does the stagnant church. I heard one emerging church leader say in a sermon that “for so long we defined ourselves by what we didn’t want to be…” now that church is on a journey to define themselves by what they should be. I think that is the key. As the church let us look back to the principles that can be gleaned in the New Testament to see what we should be and then let us move from there. Let us plant churches that so mirror the purity of the early church in principle that the Power of the Gospel is clear and unmistakable. Let us in traditional western churches never be afraid to re-evaluate and remove anything that would hinder the Gospel. We don’t need rebellion but repentance and a repositioning under the authority of Scripture. May conformity to Christ and a heart for the Gospel allow us to give greater Glory to our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. chad
[1] By “traditional” I am speaking of the mainstream protestant churches, particularly Baptist, of this past century in terms of ecclesiology, worship styles and hermeneutical approach.
There are a lot of churches being started and others reorganized in an attempt to bridge the perceived gap between the traditional church[1] and the culture. There seems to be an attempt to make the church “fit” into the world. This has led to a rebellion against the church of the last century.
I will be the first to say that we must always be relevant but not for the sake of just being relevant. Relevance is a must because the Gospel is always relevant in all situations, cultures, and circumstances. The Gospel is not western nor is it eastern. It is not urban nor rural. It is not contemporary nor is it traditional. On the contrary, it is distinctively relevant to humanity…all humanity!
So what flavor your church happens to be, in order to be truly relevant it must be centered on the unadulterated Gospel of the Jesus Christ. Every last person on this earth is in need of salvation. That makes the message of the cross relevant to all. If we want to change the world and take the Gospel to the nations then let us be reminded as the people of God that it is our responsibility to respond in obedience in taking the Gospel to the world.
Many are in rebellion against the traditional church and some with good reason. But, my friends remember that rebellion looks no more like Jesus than does the stagnant church. I heard one emerging church leader say in a sermon that “for so long we defined ourselves by what we didn’t want to be…” now that church is on a journey to define themselves by what they should be. I think that is the key. As the church let us look back to the principles that can be gleaned in the New Testament to see what we should be and then let us move from there. Let us plant churches that so mirror the purity of the early church in principle that the Power of the Gospel is clear and unmistakable. Let us in traditional western churches never be afraid to re-evaluate and remove anything that would hinder the Gospel. We don’t need rebellion but repentance and a repositioning under the authority of Scripture. May conformity to Christ and a heart for the Gospel allow us to give greater Glory to our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. chad
[1] By “traditional” I am speaking of the mainstream protestant churches, particularly Baptist, of this past century in terms of ecclesiology, worship styles and hermeneutical approach.
2 comments:
Chad,
Thank you for posting about this. We've been talking about the church some in our apartment recently, and this post has helped put some thoughts into words for me. You did say one sentence, though, that I would like to engage you with. You wrote, "As the church let us look back to the principles that can be gleaned in the New Testament to see what we should be and then let us move from there. Let us plant churches that so mirror the purity of the early church in principle that the Power of the Gospel is clear and unmistakable."
As a hopeful future OT scholar, I can't let you say that. ;) I do think that there is much to glean from the OT about the Church as well. At least for Paul, in Ephesians 5, the marriage relationship between Adam and Eve is a picture of the mystery of Church; that is, Christ's relationship with His Church. So, for Paul, ecclesiology seems to start in Genesis 2. Maybe we might find a more organic picture of the church if we began to read the Scriptures in the same way that the NT church seemed to read them. It is in this respect that I find a kind of ironic twist in the language of the church today --- that we are a "NT church."
What does that mean? I don't think it means the same thing for us as it did for Peter and Paul and the Acts' church. The church we read about in Acts and in the epistles couldn't turn to the NT to learn about itself, it had to glean its principles from the OT! So, in what respect was the very church we read about in the New Testament a "NT church"?
We often treat the OT as a pre-Christian text, and in so far as we do that we will never be a "NT church." Again, I think a more organic picture of the church is one which sees the church in the NT gleaning its principles from the OT. In that respect, we, as a continuation of that very church, should continue to be gleaning important principles of fellowship from the Old Testament.
~ Andy
Andy my man, i don't argue with you a bit. In no way was i undermining the theological nor the practical importance of the Old Testament in the church. I wanted to stress the fact that there is a picture of what the church should be in the New Testament(in light of the OT) and it is one with a clear mission, and focused heart. Old or New the message is one of faith in God lived out in a love for God and love for others. I do want to say that the church of the New Testament, as we know it, began at Pentecost (again taking us back to the OT). In light of that I am not too squeamish about calling it the NT church although i do understand your point. Thanks for the comment. i posted your comment "as is" for all to read. love you bro, c
Post a Comment