Passing Out in the Park Instead of Going to Church
Deep Thought: What is it about a beautiful sunny afternoon, with the birds singing and the wind rustling through the leaves, that makes you want to get drunk? And after you’re real drunk, maybe go down to the public park and stagger around and ask people for money, and then lay down to sleep.
Not me, of course. I have never done that. I am asking you why you do that as I have seen some of you doing that. At least I think it was you. Anyway, since you are done with that, now you can pick up where you left off reading on Thursday about some convictions about worship that we keep in mind when we design our worship services.
8. The needs of Christ followers and unchurched often overlap. They are very different in some areas but in many areas they are quite similar. We try to design our services to focus on needs of both unchurched and of followers of Christ. For instance, both groups of people need to know what God is like; both need to understand the purpose of life; both need to know why and how to forgive others; both need help in strengthening their marriage and families; both need to know how to deal with suffering, pain and grief; both need to know why materialism is so destructive. People do not stop having needs once they begin to follow Christ.
9. We try to specialize our service according to our strategy and purposes. Many churches like Willow Creek hold a seeker type service some time during the week and then add a believers type service at another time of the week. This has not been an option to us for a number of reasons.
One was because of our desire to keep things simple and to flow with our purposes of connecting with God, each other, and the world. When we started Shoreline, we were committed to keep things simple. Since then we have had to fight to keep our structure simple and avoid complexity creep. The tendency for most churches as they grow is to continue to add more and more programs until not only is the process so complicated, but the effectiveness of the ministry is watered down because of spreading itself too thin. When we started , we asked ourselves, “What are we asking people to do?” And surprisingly we answered ourselves, “Attend a worship service, belong to a Life Group, and serve with their gifts.” To add another service to ask people to attend would be in violation of our commitment to simplicity and focus. Therefore, we decided that our worship services would be designed for anybody to connect with God and that our Life Groups would be the next step where people could grow relationally and spiritually.
There are many reasons why this is a win-win situation; It takes the responsiblity of spiritual growth and discipleship off the staff and places it on other believers. That is beneficial as it allows more people to be involved in minsitry and serve with their gifts; it allows the staff to become administers and facilitators; and the people who are hungry for more will be satisfied because growth comes to those who pursue it. Which, by the way, all of those reasons have biblical precedent.
The question then becomes, “Why should Sunday morning be given to reaching those who are far from God?” In surveys where unchurched are asked when would they most likely attend church, almost every single one said, “If I ever did, it would be Sunday morning.” And if you asked people in the church, when were they most likely to bring friends, again, it would be Sunday morning. Even in today’s culture, people still think of Sunday morning as “the time you go to church.” So that is why we decided to use Sunday morning for targeting the unchurched and using Life Groups for the next step for the follower. Now there are some exceptions to both of those, but they are the exceptions and not the rule. Those exceptions will be the topic for a future post.
Services that target the unchurched are nothing new. Only the idea of using Sunday morning for that reason is a recent variation. Earlier in the previous century, Sunday evenings were generally recognized as the “evangelistic service.” I still see some churches advertise Sunday evenings as “evangelistic services,” but I doubt many unchurched people show up. Shoot, church people aren’t even going to church on Sunday night! That is a trend that started 15-20 years ago.
As a matter of fact, I think they were the ones I saw passed out at the park last Sunday afternoon.
December 15th, 2008 at 6:39 pm
Great insight. Those who try to please all end up unable to satisfy any.
December 16th, 2008 at 7:56 am
Was the drunk guy chewing on a bic lighter? Or maybe it was dave Matthews trying to get a “feel” for his next big hit. Just wondering.
I am noticing recently the effectiveness of how Shoreline does church by way of trying out churches here in Al. It’s amazing how distracted even a long time follower can get during a sermon that should have really been broken up over three weeks or maybe concentrate on the overwhelming theme of the message and trim put all the fat and stop yelling at me!! Oh, did all that just come out? Sorry, pastor Eric has spoiled me.
Anyway, thanks for being daring and trying new things. Till next time…
Matty-
August 19th, 2009 at 8:26 pm
“As a matter of fact, I think they were the ones I saw passed out at the park last Sunday afternoon.”
Do you really think that the Groom is pleased to hear you mock the bride that way?
Guard your tongue. A stricter judgment awaits those who teach. James 3:1
P.S. I know these comments are moderated, and therefore will most likely not appear underneath your posts. I wish your readers would be more discerning, but I know that you, at least, will read these comments before deleting, or, possibly, approving them for your blog.
August 19th, 2009 at 9:25 pm
When I went to approve this next comment, I accidently hit the wrong button and and I can’t get it to put it up, so I copied this next comment, also from Justin, from the e-mail notification and put it up but it is under my name.
From Justin:
“We try to design our services to focus on needs of both unchurched and of followers of Christ.”
Charles Spurgeon referred to this practice as “goat herding” (cf. Matt. 25:31-33)
One clarification before I make a point: “unchurched and followers of Christ” is a euphemism for “unbelievers and Chrsitians” just to be clear.
Sheep need to be fed. Spend your services trying to feed goats and you will starve the sheep. Why design services for unbelievers? Can they worship God? No. Do they care about walking in obedience to the King of Kings? Obviously no. (cf. Rom. 3:10-18) They do care about satisfying themselves, though. So as long as you don’t offend them and play music they like to hear, etc., they’ll keep coming. They’ll have fun, have full bellies at picnics, etc., but still die and suffer under the wrath of God for eternity. Why not feed the sheep and let them take the bread of life into the world to feed the goats with? Why not worship the true and living God of the Bible, instead of Bono’s god? Why not preach Christ and the cross intead of self-help seminars like Oprah (#8. above)?
And, why try to keep up with Willow Creek? Bill Hybels admitted failure in this unbiblical strategy: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Zrj1HfxVMQ&feature=channel
Please, keep the two greatest commandments together and in order:
1) Love the Lord your God with all of your heart, soul and mind.
2) Love your neighbor as yourself.
August 19th, 2009 at 9:50 pm
Don’t sheep and goats eat the same thing in real life. And why does it have to be mutually exclusive that if you feed goats, the sheep starve? You must be referring to when Jesus taught, the people who got the most out of it, were not the religious people but the people that you refer to as unbelievers. As a matter of fact, Jesus said that was why He was there. Not for the righteous but the unrighteous. How do you know who is a goat and who is a lost sheep?
Here is the deal. You make an assumption about me, whom you don’t know, that I would never post your comment. And I make an assumption about you and that is that it doesn’t matter what I say, we will never agree, which a shame because I believe that Jesus is the Christ the Son of the living God which should be enough. After all, Jesus said He would build His church on that statement. But that is not good enough for you. Here is the kicker, when I think about who our church has offended, I laugh a little bit. Because we’ve offended people like you who are offended because our church meets in a bar and plays loud music. And we’ve had homosexual partners leave the church because of our stance on people living in sin, hetro or homo, not being able to members of the church. We’ve had life-long churchgoers stop coming to church after a drama based on a Rhianna song, while guests have walked away because of a sermon preached from Luke on real commitment to Christ. I don’t care if I am popular; I am called to be pastor this church.
If it comes down to offending you or an unbeliever, I would rather offend you. That is who Jesus offended, the religious ones.
August 20th, 2009 at 7:55 am
First, I appreciate your posting my comments for the purpose of discussion. Not because they are my comments, but because they are discussing essential matters for Christians and unbelievers alike. You’ve proven my initial assertion wrong, for which I’m thankful.
On to the discussion…
In the biblical context, no, sheep and goats don’t eat the same thing just as in real life unbelievers want nothing of the spiritual food Christians crave.
We know who is a goat and who is a sheep by the way a person responds to the Gospel. Cf. John 6, esp. v.66-69
Well, we’ve both assumed. No, I’m not offended that your church meets in a bar, nor that you play loud music. Nor am I someone who believes the sound or volume of the music is sinful. The matter is the content. The Pharisees had all the pomp, and no truth. The Centurion was a Gentile, but with enormous faith in Christ. It’s not about the dress it’s about the truth within.
You would rather offend me? I find that statement interesting. You make a distinction between “unbelievers” and “religious ones”. Saying that Jesus offended the latter, not the former. That is simply not true. Jesus offended (from the NT record) almost everyone, especially unbelievers - many of whom were the religious ones! He also offended the Gentiles - the Samaritans told Him to leave after He allowed demons to enter pigs. And, He even indirectly called a Gentile woman, her children and countrymen dogs (Mark 7:26-29, Matt 15:22-28) - but she responded in faith to such harsh teaching.
Before we go any further, please don’t read any undue emotion into my writing. It has long been an irritation of mine that while we now have such wonderful technology for communication, we don’t have a simple “sarcastrophe” or other emotional markers for our language. I can tell you honestly that, while I disagree with what you have written (post), that doesn’t mean I would scream, or wish you or any of your hearers ill-will. I am simply trying to discuss these points with you as one brother would another.
There are many points which you haven’t responded to. I understand that, because I know that writing and responding takes time. But, would you mind responding to this:
“As a matter of fact, I think they were the ones I saw passed out at the park last Sunday afternoon.”
It seems as though, in your willingness to offend me and in your efforts to reach unbelievers without offense your are mocking the bride of Christ to appease the unbelievers. Please clarify if that is not your intended meaning.
August 20th, 2009 at 10:11 pm
Pastor Eric,
I do realize that this is my second consecutive comment, but I wanted to delve into your response a little further. Also, as mentioned before, I don’t expect a quick response, because I do realize that you have many duties outside of conversing with a stranger over your blog.
1) You said: “why does it have to be mutually exclusive that if you feed goats, the sheep starve?”
The sheep are not of this world (John 17:16), the goats are. A goat will eat anything. A sheep is lead to pasture. If you offer secular music as worship you will have poor results for both the sheep and the goats. The sheep can’t be edified by the world, nor can they praise their God with music that praises man or a false God. The goats will love the offering, but it will only lead them further into the world or their false God. The sheep are sanctified by truth (John 17:17), the goats are not sanctified but only taste of the truth at best, but are not fed by it (Heb. 6:4-6).
2) You’ve identified me as one of “the religious ones”. In your closing sentence equating my distaste for your ministry as being equal to being offended by Christ. There is an error in such an assertion. Christ has offended me, and as a result regenerated me, saved me, sanctified me and often broken me over my sin. For that I am thankful. However, you are not Christ. Your ministry can be offensive and not Christian. Your ministry could be offensive to Christ. If the Christ of the bible is what you preached and taught I would not be offended, perhaps broken, weeping or rejoicing, but not offended. My offense is with your calling carnality “church” or “Christian”, and thinking of the souls being fed culture and not Christ. You call me one of “the religious ones”, but do you realize that you have created and submitted to a religion of your own? It is a religion of carnality and pop culture. You are as religious as I am, but with different sacraments and obedient to a different will. You have defended your catering to them, so I assume you are seeking the favor of the goats, or hoping to woo them into being “churched”. We are given the opposite example in Scripture (cf. John 6, Gal. 1:10). We are called to preach the Gospel. It is up to the work of the Holy Spirit to bring believers forth.
3) You said “how do you know who is a goat or a lost sheep”.
The difference between a goat and a sheep:
A) “Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves. You will know them by their fruits. Grapes are not gathered from thorn bushes nor figs from thistles, are they? So every good tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot produce bad fruit, nor can a bad tree produce good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. So then, you will know them by their fruits. (Matt. 7:15-20)
B) “By this the children of God and the children of the devil are obvious: anyone who does not practice righteousness is not of God, nor the one who does not love his brother.” (1 John 3:10)
C) “They profess to know God, but by their deeds they deny Him, being detestable and disobedient and worthless for any good deed.” (Titus 1:16)
More could be listed, but I think the above will suffice for now. I must ask, as well, being a pastor, how is it that you ask that question as if you have trouble distinguishing between sheep and goats? It is true, when the Lord comes we might be surprised to see some who we thought were sheep being cast into the lake of fire (Matt. 7:21-23), but there is no verse that would lend itself to us thinking that a goat may actually be a sheep. So, again I ask, can you be a pastor if you have difficulty seeing some differences between sheep and goats? If you, indeed, cannot see any differences between sheep and goats this would be another reason why you can’t feed sheep and goats at the same time. If you can’t see the difference between the two, how will you know if the sheep are even getting any of the “food” you are handing out?
4) You said: “I believe that Jesus is the Christ the Son of the living God which should be enough”
James 2:19 “You believe that God is one You do well; the demons also believe, and shudder.” See John 14:21, Matt. 7:21-23, James 2, Titus 1:16, etc. And, no I’m not saying that works earn salvation. I am saying that salvation will produce evidence in love, fruit and righteousness. Saying “I believe in Jesus” doesn’t give you a pass to do church your way. It gives you the responsibility to submit to him and do church in a way that pleases the Father, Son and the Holy Spirit. (Ps. 2:11, Heb. 12:28-29)
5) Jesus did say that He would build the Church on the confession that He is the Son of the living God. And, yes, that is good enough for me. It seems that it is you who thinks it is not enough. I preach the Word of God which points to Jesus, the Son of the living God, without draping it in carnality. You add Rhianna, secular music, blasphemous mockery of the church, etc. thinking that these things can somehow help the Word of God - as if it needed help!
6) I’m happy to hear that you take a biblical stance on people living in sin (homo or heterosexual). I’m not happy to hear that “life-long churchgoers” were scared off by your carnal showcase. Are they prude, or, are you trying to make the sheep swallow something only goats would eat? If guests walked away because you were preaching true commitment to Christ, excellent! That is being Christ-like. Again, reference John 6:66-69. To quote Spurgeon again, we are called to make disciples, not returning customers.
7) You said “I don’t care if I am popular.”
I say this without any sarcasm, but with grief: I don’t believe you. If you really meant that would you be catering to unbelievers? Would you be putting on a show with secular music and secular references? If you really want to prove that you don’t care about being popular then preach the Gospel. The full story. Virgin birth, sinless life, a death that atoned for man’s sin, a resurrection and an ascension to the right hand of the Father. Then tell your crowd that unless they repent and trust in Jesus Christ alone they will be damned to hell as punishment for their sins. Then read John 14:6 and Acts 4:12 aloud. I guarantee if you do that two things will happen: 1) you will be unpopular and 2) you’ll finally be able to tell who some of the sheep are.
Honestly, I’m not nearly as upset with what I’ve seen, read and heard coming from your “church” as I am sad.
“Pay close attention to yourself and to your teaching; persevere in these things, for as you do this you will ensure salvation both for yourself and for those who hear you.” (1 Tim. 4:16)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iWMrKcFKqzk
August 21st, 2009 at 8:02 am
First of all, I will respond to some of this and not because I don’t want to address all the points but it as more as you say, I don’t have time to argue with you about this. As I said before, we will never see eye to eye on this, so what is the point.
But you did ask me to respond to “As a matter of fact, I think they were the ones I saw passed out at the park last Sunday afternoon.”
It seems as though, in your willingness to offend me and in your efforts to reach unbelievers without offense your are mocking the bride of Christ to appease the unbelievers. Please clarify if that is not your intended meaning.”
I am not willing to offend you, not at all. That is something you have taken upon yourself. But if my efforts to reach the unchurched, which you seem to be an expert on, offend you like the did they religious people of Jesus’ day, then so be it. Because if it was good enough for Him, then it is good enough for me. And you are right, I am not Christ and I never said that, but I have tried in the best way I know how by following what I saw Christ do and go after the ones He said he was there for, the lost, the sick and the unrighteous. But it seems my methods are what offends you.
Methods like in your earlier comment, “Why not preach Christ and the cross intead of self-help seminars like Oprah (#8. above)?”
In reading the gospels, I saw Jesus address those very same needs listed in #8. I saw him address worry, money, materialism, relationships, forgiveness, etc. He did that in the crowd and gave simple invitations to the many to follow Him. Then I see later in the smaller groups he talked about sacrifice, denying oneself, picking up the cross, etc. and that is how, in the best possible way, and granted that may not be good enough for you and it may fall short, we have tried to do.
But to finally answer you request to explain that one point, it is not my intended meaning. I am part of the bride of Christ too. I have dedicated my life in presenting a spotless, without blemish bride, so I am not mocking the bride. I love the church. The church and Jesus Christ are the answer to the ills of this world.
That statement “As a matter of fact, I think they were the ones I saw passed out at the park last Sunday afternoon.” was about nobody. It was fiction. It was only to tie in to the introduction “deep thought”.
But I will tell you this, as part of the bride, the church, I can look introspectively at the church, just like you are doing now, and ask questions like “why do we do “unbeliever” services on Sunday evenings when unbelievers aren’t likely to go?” And as I said in the statement, these days even church people aren’t going? And if we don’t address those things, the church will still continue to be ineffective. That may be OK with you but not with me. I want to take as many people as possible with me. And yes that is an assumption that I am making based on the “sounding” of your comments. In your writing, the way you talk sounds like an almost, “that it is the way it is, if they don’t receive it, that is their problem”. That may not be true but that is the way it feels when I read your comments. That you could care less about the lost. Again, that is the way it feels when I read it. But my heart breaks for people who spend an eternity without God.
I must end this as I have to go to work. I might sometime respond to some of the other comments. So I wouldn’t post anymore comments until I have time to respond to the rest of these. Man, they are coming fast. It just clicked again that you have posted another one while I am typing this comment out. Do you have a job. Why don’t you head on back to Slice of a Little Leaven and you can pat each other on the back.
Just to clarify, I asked you to clarify the sheep and goat thing because I wanted to hear you define a little more what you meant, not because I didn’t know. I was a little confused because I understood the difference as being what they did and didn’t do, not what they ate. Sorry.