categories: guest
24 comments (+ Add)
Guest: Scott Rodgers
The Chameleon Church
I’m willing to try. That’s my answer. So, what’s the question? Can a local church be designed for both believers and unbelievers?
Can a church be passionate about worship, spiritual growth, and mission minded while being sensitive to those sitting next to them that may not yet believe what they believe?
Have some churches gone too far with this approach? Have some not gone far enough?
Visit 
At the risk of sounding judgmental I would like to throw in my .02 worth Scott. I am 56 so that puts me in a different “league” than probably most of your readers. I have seen a ton of stuff as the church has morphed in so many ways. I “prided” myself in holding true to the Word and as I did I alienated many. I criticized those who were making a difference in their approach and applauded those who “stood fast.” I now realize that there are/can be extremes on both ends of the spectrum. There are those Separatists who want to “hold fast to the ancient truths” and have no cultural influence. There are also those who want to embrace culture, etc and have no biblical influence. As Kary Oberbrunner says in his new book, we need to be Tranformists. We accept culture’s uniqueness, stand fast to the truth of God’s Word and transform, i.e. make a difference in our culture. It is that fine line (as he calls it) that we have to find. I believe people are seeking and hungry for something to hang on to these days. We have it in Jesus and His Word but what good will it do if we don’t “meet them where they are?” Not compromising but befriending. So the answer to your questions are Yes and Yes but there is a better way. Like I said…my .02 worth.
You bet we can have a church for both groups. Exciting worship draws unbelievers, as they want to experience what they see in our hearts and faces. Shouldn’t Christ-followers be loving to everyone. It would be automatic that a Spirit-filled Church would love and welcome what-ever walks in. Look at Jesus, that’s how HE lived. We make it so hard and it is so easy. We have baptised over 250 this year, most of those adults. New converts and our body has grown by a 1000 and the core has grown in every measurable area of spiritual growth. Keep soraing
chris
Uhhhhhh yes! ;-)
My Answer…Just LOVE people, they need someone to reach out and JUST love them.
I hope I don’t come off as judgmental either… I hope just to offer a perspective that may have not been considered…
I am not sure the “Church” can be designed Scott…because it is built by Jesus….
It isn’t a building, or a function, or the place where people get together on Sunday… its a group of believers called out of darkness into marvelous light…to worship the only true and living God…
I think the church building can be a place where non-believers go to find God dwelling in the people… (His “Church”)…
Being mission minded is great, it’s the commission, but the “Church” needs to be single-minded… and invite those who aren’t to “come”… to meet with God…
When that is the mission.. the rest is just frosting on the cake…
I think the building can be inviting… and inclusive… but the “church” is for believers only… we need to express both the inclusivity of Jesus, and the exclusivity of Jesus as ambassadors…teaching all that He commanded, going out preaching the gospel to every living creature, and making disciples of all the nations…
If first things stay first… then I think it could…
And yes… some churches have become consumer driven first, and spirit driven second…
Some have also become cold and superficial…
But “Tis Gar Plen’… the question we need to ask ourselves is in the presence of God, what kind of church are we, and are first things first…?
Its wise to look at other’s mistakes, but only if we are willing to learn, and grow for the glory of God…
Hope this came off right… :)
Wow. I sure hope so….if not, we’re in the wrong business!
I wonder when people go onto the vein of “we can’t design church” from which perspective they come from? Is this an experienced ministry perspective? Are we talking about the Church Universal or a local church? It seems like when we think along the lines of such theory as “the church can’t be designed” that we’re speaking purely theoretically.
Let’s take Lifechurch as an example. Do you not think they’ve designed their church to be a certain way? Do they not have God given goals that they mean to achieve, an atmosphere in worship that they think and does attract a certain kind of person and not others (for instance I bet you their major demographic is not 60+ and I bet they’re fine with that) and can a church not be designed to reach out to a certain generation or even people of a certain faith? Ask Bill Hybels if he had a certain kind of person in mind when he designed the Willow Creek format all those years ago.
I think far too often we want to think of how the church should be rather than how it is. We need to always be looking at how is God moving…not how do we think it makes most sense for God to move. Far too often our good ideas are not actually God ideas. We should be looking to be characters in the story God is writing and not editors of the story itself.
I have witnessed something very recently in my personal life. You asked:”Have some churches gone too far with this approach? Have some not gone far enough?”
There is a church I fell in love with because of their heart for the lost. They prided themselves on reaching the unchurched. I loved that about them. It didn’t matter what color your skin was, what you were wearing, or even what you had done in your life. They would embrace you and show you what God’s love looked like. Many lost people found Christ through the work of this church.
On the other hand, they were neglecting those who had already been adopted into God’s family. I know several people who were “caught” sinning, and were kicked out of the church. There was no offer to help them, no counseling recommended, no pastoral care. They were simply told to leave and find a new place to worship. In my opinion, they didn’t know how to minister to these people because they had put every bit of their focus into evangelism and reaching the lost.
I think there has to be a middle ground. You have to be able to take care of the lost and the believers. I think there may be damage done when you go to one extreme or the other. It makes for a very unhealthy church family.
Yes, I believe you can but it is a balance. But not as difficult as one may think. I believe you reach your culture but not in a flashy or inauthentic way (I could go deeper into this but I’ll save it for another post) And you preach the truth of the Gospel. If you ignore the culture, you will have trouble relating to the people you want to reach. But if you ignore the truth of the Gospel, people are not tranformed and you completely missed what God called us to do. Reach your culture (authentically)) and preach Jesus and I think you’ll have the perfect balance.
Tim…
I guess what I meant was that we can have the right design, target market, and demographic, and still be a Christless church…
On the other hand some of the most powerful churches don’t have any of that…
The difference is the presence of God in the people I think…
I guess the last couple of weeks of blogs on this site have shifted my perspective a bit… that’s the perspective that the vein comes from, at least where I’m concerned… and I guess the reality of ministry experience…
I get what your saying though…
Oh, and it was Hybels that also influenced this way of thinking when he addressed it here…
I am trying hard to listen to the leaders that are here, and trying to see what God is doing… I am hearing from their experience very similar things as they grow… hopefully I can glean early…
Great dialogue everyone. At times we tend to just do church without thinking about things like this enough. I appreciate the different perspectives. I can’t wait to see who else pipes in and shares.
We hear: “The church doesn’t exist for us. We are the church, we are here for the world”.
I disagree with this. The church is for believers. We need to meet together as a body, hear God’s word, and be encouraged (Hebrews 10:24,25)
However, this in no way takes away our obligation to the lost.
Churches should be equipping their people to confront culture and clearly explain their need for Christ’s forgiveness. I fear, somewhat, that we are avoiding this responsibility by only equipping church members to invite the lost to fill the pews.
What we want them to desperately to hear “in here” should be first shared “out there”.
Mike says, “The church is for believers.” I disagree with this. The believers ARE the church. The church is an organism, not an organization. Mike quotes Hebrews 10:24,25. This is an applicable scripture to what Christians are supposed to do. But it doesn’t say it has to be done in a large assembly on Sunday morning. It can be better done in a small group in someone’s home on Tuesday night. Acts 2 says that the early church met in the temple (large group) and house to house (small group). The first large group meeting of the church (Peter’s sermon on the day of Pentecost) was aimed at non-believers and 3000 responded to the message.
We need to rethink 21st century American Christianity.
I don’t see how you can do one without the other. We all need that connection (those that call ourselves saved and those that are not saved yet). If you don’t minister to those within how do they become equipped to minister to those outside of the four walls?
Each week we target both, BUT in our minds we are targeting 49% followers and 51% non-followers. Anytime we have to make a call on whether or not to do something in the gathering, we fall to the 51%. We are not always perfect with it, but that is our goal.
Great question and that is the tension that we live with. How do we best present the authentic message of the Gospel to what appears to be a multivaried framework of perspectives? Let me reframe this discussion along a different line…
It seems we are asking is how we “do” church should either be directed towards those that proclaim faith or those that may not be convinced. I would say rather than an “either or” approach, that we consider a “both and.” What this means is that we should not look at it along dichotomous terms (for the “believer” OR “for the unbeliever/seeker/etc”). I have too often seen churches that tend to lean towards one at the expense of the other. Yet, it seems that when we proclaim the message of Jesus, that is enough to confound both the believer as well as the unbeliever.
In our church, our “tagline” if you will is “church for all who believe, doubt, and seek.” We don’t have a section for believers, one for doubters, and one for seekers, but assume that we all have these perspectives and that the message of the cross is perplexing and beautiful at the same time to speak to you wherever you may find yourself.
Good Discussion! If you “do” church in a way that grows the church, it will by “default” grow the church!
If you “do” evangelism well, you will by default be “doing” discipleship well. You can’t have one without the other.
In other words, the best way to disciple someone is to get them reaching others.
If we “are” the church, then we were created to Go there fore..reach, teach and baptize…” Therefore the church is for……
If you “do” church in a way that grows the church,(spirituallydiscipleship) it will by “default” grow the church!(numerically/evangelism). Think about this for a few months! I still haven’t gotten over this one…
Scott, I’m hung up on the word design.
Would you be willing to tell me what this means to you?
In my mind it rings much the same way as manipulation.
I’m certain you don’t mean it that way and I’m fairly certain this is the language of LC that you are using. So I don’t take it as ill intent on your, or anyone else’s behalf. But it would help me to know what you mean by that.
I see this coming down to two main issues: respect and education.
(a) Respect: as in respect the people that are coming to your gatherings. Greet them. Talk with them. Ask them questions. Give them useful and helpful information. Pray for them. I don’t think anyone would refuse someone’s genuine care for their well-being, regardless of a gulf in religious belief.
(b) Education: for the people leading a gathering, don’t assume everyone knows the lingo. I tend to hang in heavily charismatic circles, but one thing that drives me nuts is when people assume everyone there understands what’s going on and what’s being talked about. Just because I might know what an “impartation of the manifestation of the glory of the angelic hosts surrounding the throne room of the seven-fold Spirit of God” etc. is doesn’t mean Joe Sixpack has a single clue. (Yes, that was an exaggeration…sort of… ;) )
So either be careful how you use your Christianese or take the time to explain what you are saying so that people who aren’t “in the loop” don’t feel completely out of it!
Thanks for the great post. It’s a challenge, to be sure!
I say yes to the question. I don’t believe we have to be either/or but rather both/and. Here at our church in Las Vegas we are sensitive to unbelievers and make sure we explain what we do. We allow our Passion for Jesus to shine in our worship, preaching and presentation. I don’t see Jesus as either/or but rather both/and. There are times when Jesus is walking on water, healing the sick and then speaking with an unbeliever at a well. God knows how to touch the heart of a person and we need to allow His Presence to touch them.
Expanding God’s Kingdom,
Benny Perez
Honestly, I don’t know. My church reaches the lost in amazing ways but has not really found a place for it’s own students. We are definitely cool but now have a generation of people that have been around for a decade or kids who have been brought up in the church. So, my answer is…we could and we must, but we have not. Not really. My question…do your own kids go to camp with your church and go to youth at your church? Is it playing a role in changing their life? Why or why not?
I heard somethng the other day that made me think of this thread…
A Christian man was invited to come to a bar by a freind..
The man said “sure, I’ll come… but first they will have to stop serving alcohol, and maybe serve cool aid, cause I will want to bring my family… then maybe they could turn on the lights… bars tend to be really dark… they would have to turn the volume down on the music, so that we could talk a little without yelling… maybe they could also put some family friendly stuff on t.v., and have some of the young ladies cover up a little, I don’t want my little girls too influenced by that example…”
The friend laughed and said, “then it wouldn’t be a bar…?”