32 comments (+ Add)
Dangerous Churches
I was talking to a guy on a plane about God. When I asked him if he went to church, he explained politely that he wasn’t interested. I asked him why he wasn’t and he said matter of factly, “Because I’ve already been and nothing happened.”
Maybe he went to a “safe” church. In a safe church:
- The message makes you feel better.
- You’re never confronted about your sin.
- No one rocks the boat.
- You don’t have to change.
- You may never truly encounter our Holy and Life-giving God.
When I read about the New Testament Church, it was filled with people with a dangerous faith. While we certainly should make our environments welcoming, our message should remain dangerous.
- We’re called to leave everything to follow Christ.
- We’re invited to believe God for the impossible.
- We’re told to love our enemies and pray for those who persecute us.
- We’re told that to find our life we have to lose it first.
There is nothing safe about that message. May our churches become a safe place to encounter a dangerous message.
What are some of the ways you offer a welcoming environment while presenting a dangerous message?
Visit 
Complacency in the church is the devils greatest tool – I have been in a few churches that brag about how well everything is going. The thing is there definition of “well” is a steady attendance and offering, no conflict, no challenges offered, no one stepping up and the people are not complaining.
I too was complacent until God put it on my heart that lost people really matter, that to value the fringe more than the core is key to being a church like the first church.
A great reminder for my Monday.
[...] Dangerous | Mar 30th 2009 http://swerve.lifechurch.tv/2009/03/30/dangerous-churches/ [...]
Love is the key to all aspects of what you’re talking about - love them through the door with genuine desire for them to encounter the Living God and love them with the message like a father loves his son through those formative years (I have a 3-yr old son)…unconditional acceptance of the person coupled with a vigilant hunt for the pitfalls of sinful nature.
Thanks for the good word this morning!
Rarely does it not take some form of pain to get where you really should be going. Shortcuts lessen the workout to ease the pain but the results diminish. The same is in our spiritual lives. The painful truth with sincere love is the incredible example Christ set for us. Go Craig!
Bold post and TRUE. I believe, just me, when things get safe, things start to decline. It’s like Passion in sports, when an athlete stops reaching higher, pushing themselves, taking risks, they level off..and like Pastor Troy says, standing still is “pre-backwards”…
GOD is alive, that message is powerful and life changing and HIS power should be evident in any church and life change should also be evident in any church.
FRC/Hallandale
I’m glad you’re talking about this. We are seeing growth in our church and we are attempting to balance welcome with confrontation. Pray for us.
It happens to us all, way more than we want to admit or look at for too long. Recently it has hit home, because someone put the notion in my head, we need leaders who lead leaders. My constant thoughts have been, lead them where, and what does leading really look like? Is leading just stating a vision and talking about it every chance you get. In other words, just keep talking about it, having meetings, gatherings, etc. where you just keep telling each other what we should be telling others who lead, to tell their listeners? Jesus sure enough did speak about leading and what it takes, but way more than talk about it, He did it and demanded His followers do what He has done. He went somewhere and did something and said, you want to know what to do, do this. Every time I see Him do that, I am immediately uncomfortable and totally challenged to my core. Jesus really did love folks to the endth degree, how do I know, He didn’t just say it, He showed it. It’s sobering, but He told us it costs to be a fully devoted follower, you choose what you want to be. Don’t just talk about it, do it. Churches that challenge are dangerous, but they learned it from the Master. You may choose not to go there, but there’s no doubt something happened in you.
Great post really made me think, maybe a little too much. I have a question for you. Do you believe that there are different “levels” of churches? In other words do you believe that there is or should be a church for beginners and church for seasoned veterans? Have a “stepping stone” church and then graduate to the next level. Your opinion on this would be very valuable.
Thanks
Marty
I believe God designed the church to draw people in by sacrificial compassion and supernatural miracles. I don’t want to lure people in with the offer of a comfortable social network, entertaining music, fun events, or a promise of happiness and prosperity.
As I develop the messages for our kids though, it’s really hard to create an experience that a kid will want to come back and bring their friends to that also delivers the power of the pure gospel. At some point, I have to learn to trust that a clear and personal gospel message IS what will make them come back.
Marte asked an interesting question. Here is is:
“Do you believe that there are different “levels” of churches? In other words do you believe that there is or should be a church for beginners and church for seasoned veterans? Have a “stepping stone” church and then graduate to the next level.”
What are your thoughts?
Marty’s question strikes at the heart of what “church” means. I think it was Brian McLaren who wrote that the church should more closely resemble a MASH unit than a country club. That is, it should be a place that does emergency surgery on those wounded by life. But where do they go to convalesce? More importantly, where do they go to learn to become surgeons themselves?
I’ve heard Ed Young (the younger) say that a healthy church is about 1/3 seasoned believers, 1/3 baby Christians, and 1/3 people who are just checking it out. The job of the pastor is to remember all three groups when preaching. Whenever I’ve heard him preach, I’ve always been amazed at how he’s able to direct his message to all three groups at the same time.
It seems to me that this is an accurate strategy for the church as a whole. That is, there should be different “levels” within the same church. There should be places where unbelievers — even hostile ones — are welcome. But it should be obvious to all that there are places within the church (training centers or life groups come to mind) where people can heal and grow in knowledge and wisdom and walking by the Spirit.
If you are a pastor who is better at triage, you should probably find a pastor (or a layperson if you can’t hire a pastor) who excels at discipleship to team with you. And our country is full of people who seem to excel at discipleshep and need to find a pastor who excels at triage. (I say “seem to” because Matt Hankinson once said, “If you have a great discipleship program that doesn’t include a serious evangelism element, you’re kidding yourselves. You don’t have discipleship without evangelism.”)
I’m sure this answer is incomplete. I’m curious as to what others believe.
intriquing concept …and one I have considered for years, watching vital churches flourish with very different missions and points of emphasis.
We are ONE BODY, so is it too much to think that while our church may be anointed to draw people to the Lord and to an initial decision that the prospering church down the street that majors in discipleship may be the next best place for these new believers?
Are we unselfish enough and is our corporate ego resilient enough to admit that while we may be very good at one thing, another church is far better in something else?
Should the global Church begin to form strategic partnerships that leverage all of our strengths and move people from questioners to seekers to believers to followers to servants to reproducers, through a system of allied local churches? Is anyone aware of this being done effectively in the US or abroad?
It seems that if churches were able to focus on one aspect more, hire and cultivate staff and lay leaders for that bent, and create environments customized to produce very specific results, that each “unit church” may become a more effective contributor to the whole Church and its ultimate goal of producing fully dedicated followers of Christ.
Also, would it be dangerous to consider a de-institutionalization of the Church in order that both human and practical resources are better leveraged for compassion ministries than for corporate systems.
It seems that at times very large churches spend an inordinant amount of time on internal issues and efforts whereas smaller churches are often more able to focus their resources on actually meeting needs in the community.
What if we strategically became smaller so that our work could become bigger? Would that be dangerous enough for all you spiritual risk-takers out there?
Just another thoguht for everyone’s Monday…
Will said:
“It seems that at times very large churches spend an inordinant amount of time on internal issues and efforts whereas smaller churches are often more able to focus their resources on actually meeting needs in the community.”
I find the opposite to be true.
It seems to me that you could have a church with new believers and mature believers and a large group moving from the former to the latter. You could also have a group attending that are “pre-believers”. If you try to have one church for “pre-” and new believers, one for mature believers, and a third for those in-between you have a major problem. If all the mature believers are in their own church, who is going to disciple those in the former two churches–a staff that is as big as the “non-staff”? Churches need to find a way to involve and nurture those in every situation.
The Church has utilized the internet for much of it’s mission. I have yet to hear of a full-blown, systematic online disciple program, however. I hope my wait will be short.
I think one of the reasons the messages in our churches become safe is for fear of upsetting the “church folk.” Pastors start to think, “What will Brother So-And-So think about this? What if they get upset? What if they leave?” When pastors begin to craft their sermons to keep people happy, the message clearly has become safe.
I constantly remind myself that God called me to this work and to this church — not man — so I am working for the approval of an audience of One. I like how Craig addresses focus in his book “it” - “Focus tends to let it breathe. Lack of focus generally suffocates it.” Focusing on what God calls us to do keep our messages dangerous!
In answer to Marty’s question: No. Discipleship is a process. You start with basic things and mature into the “deeper” things. I think the trend earlier this centruy among churches was to take the entire message to a very basic level in an effort to appeal to those turned off by church. I’ve begun to realize that you don’e have to sacrifice the entire message. We don’t give the Holy Spirit enough credit when we think certain people will be turned off or confused by certain teachings. Yes we have to be mindful of our audience. But we can teach on prayer or salvation or other things in a way that speaks to those who have yet to proclaim faith in Christ as well as those who are much more mature in their faith.
Dangerous assumptions! Why didn’t you ASK the guy WHY he stopped going to church??? This is the biggest problem I see from this discussion. It is a one-way monologue. If we really want to know how to connect to our world, then we must ENGAGE with those outside of our bubble. ASK, don’t ASSUME!
Jesus wasn’t afraid to preach “deep” and have people misunderstand Him. (John 6)
[...] by Craig Groeschel [...]
First off… great message today…
When I am looking for a church, wherever I might be there are two questions I ask:
Is the church “inviting”…?
Is the church faithful and challenging members to grow deeper with Christ ?
All else doesn’t mean much to me…
The music, the environment, or anything else is secondary to the life of Jesus to me… though some of those things compliment that and facilitate that…
He was inviting and had a dangerous message… and if I am not seeing both of those… like you said… He probably isn’t in the area… and there will be people who probably won’t meet Him as a result… so I think to myself… “Can I invest here to bring that to this church, or should I find one already there and get involved?”, which brings me to the next point…
Secondly, concerning “levels” of churches…
I think there can be levels of churches… depending on where people are or how they are growing… but the call, and the calling is always only on one level…all or nothing…and all of Jesus churches are in unison…everything else is playing church… and the wise person won’t waste their time playing games with God…
That was Jesus message always.. all or nothing… and I think that there was never any room for anything less…
Either trust him with all or nothing… the steps to get there can vary, but the call is, was and always will be the same… just like the One who is calling…
He is the same yesterday, today, and forever…
All too often I think everyone wants to put the “Church” in one happy feel good package. For the “Church” to be effective it has to be the “Church”. For that to take place we the people have to be willing to put aside what we want and reach out to those in need and give them what God wants. In are politically correct world the “Church” falls prey to trying to make everyone happy in an attempt to not step on any toes. It is not our job to tip toe around avoiding the real issuses but to spread God’s message. Those in the pews that are already saved should be more focused on bringing more people to be followers of Christ than what program, sermon or song makes then feel good. Hope this is not too deep, but what a great topic for dicussion.
I just preached on this last Sunday (Message series called TNT). I believe the reason so many have stopped going to church is because nothing ever happened. We made it BORING. Jesus was not boring when he was on earth. I believe that when we as the church stop making church so “safe” and boring that is when the world will take notice. I agree with you Craig. The church should be dangerous and exciting. That is why we are hitting the streets for 7 Days of Servolution this week! It’s going to be incredible.
[...] This is a good reminder for Student Ministries. We too are building a church.! The students we lead today will be leading the church tomorrow. (WRITTEN BY: Craig Groeschel) [...]
One of the things that we did to make a welcoming environment with a dangerous message was to just think. For example, we were doing a series about what it means to be abandoned to Jesus, not being lukewarm, etc. The title of the series was “Turn Up the Heat”. Our original stage design was to have flames and use fire. Then we thought through it and realized that if someone entered into our church to see flames all over the place that we were talking about _______. Yeah you guessed it hell. We believe that Scripture is clear about hell. We talk about that reality. BUT…we did not want people to walk in with a preconceived idea for the message and create a barrier. Plus, we were calling the series “Turn Up the Heat” which would really make us Baptists look morbid. “Yeah we are talking about hell and we want to turn up the heat!” So instead we went with hot sauce bottles! Nice way to create a welcoming environment with a very dangerous and in your face message.
I too was talking on the same subject with some church friends. Some responses were, the church should only present the “New Testament God i.e. Love”. Some said that’s why many were leaving mainline churches, because they were not “uplifting”.
I sometimes wonder if our church growth strategies are aimed primarily at tares only and not redeeming the lost.
I still like Edwards’ imagry of a spider hanging over the flames of hell or Spurgeon’s , when after an eternity in the flames of hell, the unsaved will still realize that they have but an eternity ahead but to suffer.. now that’s a dangerous message!
The gospel has NEVER changed, it’s the same today as it was at Pentecost…repent, believe, follow..
Then God saw fit to provide 27 additional writings to HIS body, for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.
Preaching and teaching those, things ARE the mission of the Church……….at home, around the corner, to the uttermost parts of the world!
No long comment here… the key for that fellow is Jeremiah 29:13, his complacency is a reflection of where he is spiritually more than the church he tried. He could have come to the NT church described and left for the same reasons, and someone earnestly searching for God can still find him in the safe church.
[...] in his post Dangerous Churches, he writes: When I read about the New Testament Church, it was filled with people with a dangerous [...]
[...] Dangerous Churches - we need more of them! [...]
[...] Craig Groeschel on Dangerous churches [...]
I have not heard of dangerous churches. This is a good site thought I would drop by. I am going to church on Sunday and In one of these comments I feel i have lost everything and feel im in the same boat as jesus but its true.
God bless
[...] But in the meantime . . . would you go to a dangerous church? [...]
My family & I attend a dangerous church.The truth of God’s word needs to be spoken. Parents have stopped disciplining their children and look at what has happend. I for one do not want to stop being disciplined and spoken the truth too. With it comes growth and blessings. Both for myself and the church. People who attend a safe church will eventually stop going to church because they see no growth and no change. If we don’t preach and teach all the word then are we in fact changing the word to suit us.Keep up the good work. The truth needs to be told.