The Road Not Taken

[TadQueasy]

That's not how I understood the article at all. I think that the author is looking at the focus of the church (on increasing numbers vs faithfulness to the Word), not at the results of that focus (as God grows these "faithful churches" and not man). I would have described the difference as being between preaching Scripture and developing a marketing strategy. One relies on pragmatic methods while the other tries to be obedient (regardless of "church growth.")

There are comments that make me lean towards the conclusion that the author is speaking of motivation and not size of a church:

“These churches are typically (but not always) small, and, as far as the world is concerned, they usually lack in influence.”

"Our joy doesn’t rise and fall from the ebb and flow of earthly success. Our lives are enriched and full of identity and meaning when we reject pragmatism and simply seek to know, obey, and proclaim His Word."

"Like most of you reading, I have found little success at times when I’m working for it the hardest; and I’ve stumbled into great success when I’ve done absolutely nothing."

I attend a very pragmatic church and have often thought of leaving. Church (for me and my family) is in the small group setting and not the weekly show. So my understanding of the article may be colored by my own experience.

:thumbsup: You got it.

 

[Scarlett O.]

TQ, if the author had left out the words "large" and "small" and focused on what he was actually actually talking about - pragmatism vs. dogma - then people here might not have understood him to mean what he did.

Honesty, I took him to mean that larger church were all about prestige and smaller churches were the only ones that followed the truth path.

It means it’s likely I’ll never serve in auspicious positions, large churches, or ever be asked to preach in big venues. It likely means ministry in a small place at the end of a career cul-de-sac.

If you are not a pastor it might mean driving a little further to the smaller church that properly exposits the Bible. Or perhaps it means taking your family and children to the church without the climbing wall and trampoline room. Maybe it means going to the church that still uses hymnbooks.

I just felt that he missed the mark in implying that the small church was the righteous church.

Sorry.

 

[TadQueasy]

I think we assume too much based on the words small and large.

Perhaps the author could have used better words, but I think the overall intent of the article is a homerun and I would hope people would seek the actual meaning of the article instead of jumping to conclusions.

 

[Revmitchell]

I think we assume too much based on the words small and large.

Perhaps the author could have used better words, but I think the overall intent of the article is a homerun and I would hope people would seek the actual meaning of the article instead of jumping to conclusions.

Did you ever stop to consider that it is you who misunderstood the article?

 

[InTheLight]

I think we assume too much based on the words small and large.

Perhaps the author could have used better words, but I think the overall intent of the article is a homerun and I would hope people would seek the actual meaning of the article instead of jumping to conclusions.

Yes, the author could have written with more clarity. I'm not jumping to conclusions, I'm reading what the author wrote.

How does one seek the actual meaning of the article except by reading the words? Mind reading?

 

[InTheLight]

How does God's Kingdom grow except through the local church?

This statement about the small churches that seek the truth of the Word from the article is loaded with innuendo: "The pastors and people in that church agree that they cannot by their best efforts grow the Kingdom; but, by God’s Grace, they can vigorously pursue the truths (the dogma) in Scripture and pray that the Lord would allow them some joy in His harvest."

The unspoken implication is that pastors and congregations of what the author calls "pragmatic churches" think they are going to grow the church by their own efforts (rather than give God the glory.) It is more nobler to eschew modern evangelistic methods, instead seeking the "dogma of Scriptures." Apparently while they are translating the Greek and drilling down into the epistles they can only hope that God would bless them with some converts. Really? Is that how we bring people to Christ? He even admits that this type of studious church has little influence for the Kingdom of God.

How is that obeying the Great Commission?

 

[JonC]

How does one seek the actual meaning of the article except by reading the words? Mind reading?

I skimmed the article first, so when I read it a second time I just took it that the subject was pragmatism and not church size.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Revmitchell]

I skimmed the article first, so when I read it a second time I just took it that the subject was pragmatism and not church size.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The subject is pragmatism. I do not think anyone disputes that. The problem with the article is that it condemns big churches and implies that it is only through pragmatism that they have reached that size and it also implies that it is only small churches that are likely to be less pragmatic and therefore more concerned with (dogma=scripture) and therefore more aligned with God.

 

[JonC]

The subject is pragmatism. I do not think anyone disputes that. The problem with the article is that it condemns big churches and implies that it is only through pragmatism that they have reached that size and it also implies that it is only small churches that are likely to be less pragmatic and therefore more concerned with (dogma=scripture) and therefore more aligned with God.

Yes, I realize that. I believe that the author clouded the issue when he introduced the actual size of churches rather than sticking with pragmatism. I have and do attend a church that focuses on pragmatic ways of getting people in the doors (the focus is on church growth in numbers rather than being a faithful church). So I understand where the author is going in his argument (based on pragmatism), I agree that his context may not be as clear as it should, but ultimately I agree with what I take out of the article. Pragmatic churches...bad....faithful churches....gooooood. The issue is that all churches probably have to be a little bit pragmatic. I've always argued that churches conduct business but they have to be careful not to become businesses that do church.

 

[Don]

I think we assume too much based on the words small and large.

Perhaps the author could have used better words, but I think the overall intent of the article is a homerun and I would hope people would seek the actual meaning of the article instead of jumping to conclusions.

One person thinks an article says something a certain way - that could be jumping to conclusions. Six (or more) people think an article says something a certain way? That's indistinctness of writing.

Unless you're trying to say that everyone besides you and Jon are jumping to conclusions. :tongue3:

 

[JonC]

everyone besides you and Jon are jumping to conclusions. :tongue3:

:thumbsup: I'm good with that :laugh:

 

[Revmitchell]

Regardless of the poor wording and implications in the op the truth is that we have, as a church, traded the power of the HG for pragmatism. I am convinced that this is what is going on in church planting in the SBC as well.

Waiting on and relying on the HG is more work as it is a spiritual battle. We tend to take the paths of least resistance and when we work through God Satan builds up resistance and pragmatism Satan leaves alone. Our spiritual muscles have grown weak in the church in America and we do not like to use them.

However, the size of a church is not an indicator either way for the power of God or the strength of pragmatism.

 

[JonC]

Regardless of the poor wording and implications in the op the truth is that we have, as a church, traded the power of the HG for pragmatism. I am convinced that this is what is going on in church planting in the SBC as well.



Waiting on and relying on the HG is more work as it is a spiritual battle. We tend to take the paths of least resistance and when we work through God Satan builds up resistance and pragmatism Satan leaves alone. Our spiritual muscles have grown weak in the church in America and we do not like to use them.



However, the size of a church is not an indicator either way for the power of God or the strength of pragmatism.

Well states. As unfortunate as it may be, I completely agree. This is one thing that concerned me with "Send North America," or the push in general. We (SBC) are not seeking to spread the gospel to unreached areas as much as we are seeking to claim a larger percentage of SBC among existing churches.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[TadQueasy]

Regardless of the poor wording and implications in the op the truth is that we have, as a church, traded the power of the HG for pragmatism. I am convinced that this is what is going on in church planting in the SBC as well.

Waiting on and relying on the HG is more work as it is a spiritual battle. We tend to take the paths of least resistance and when we work through God Satan builds up resistance and pragmatism Satan leaves alone. Our spiritual muscles have grown weak in the church in America and we do not like to use them.

However, the size of a church is not an indicator either way for the power of God or the strength of pragmatism.

:thumbs: I agree completely with this, and I am convinced the author of the article agrees as well. This is a big problem in the church today.

 

[TadQueasy]

We (SBC) are not seeking to spread the gospel to unreached areas as much as we are seeking to claim a larger percentage of SBC among existing churches.

That is a great point as well. However I will say I think we are on a better path in the NAMB than we were a few years ago. But I am still not sure about things. Lots of reform needed IMO. I am much happier with my experiences with the IMB and what is taking place there.

 

[Revmitchell]

That is a great point as well. However I will say I think we are on a better path in the NAMB than we were a few years ago. But I am still not sure about things. Lots of reform needed IMO. I am much happier with my experiences with the IMB and what is taking place there.

It's a nightmare. Talk about pragmatism.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk