In Your Dreams
June 13, 2007
What have you always dreamed the church would be like? Compare the church you dream of now to the church you use to dream of back then? Are they different? If so, how?
continuing the ongoing conversation…
What have you always dreamed the church would be like? Compare the church you dream of now to the church you use to dream of back then? Are they different? If so, how?
Some things have changed. Years ago I knew nothing about church planting. I remember when Roger, while still at Coral Park, started talking about it. The thought of sending people from your church out to start another church, at the time, for me was new and I was not sure about it. As long as church is about you and getting as many people as you can to go to your “church”, you will not like the idea. Now, I see it as something healthy and something every church should be doing.
Another thought that has started to change my thinking was instead of “growing your church, to church your area”. That changes everything. It’s not about my “church”, it’s about the community, the church as a whole and the world around us.
My Dream church back then was pretty simple. Great Band- plays only modern worship, A teacher that was Rob-Bellish, Cool Logo, young adult attendants, great location and fun activities. While not all of these are bad my view on church now is totally different.
In My dreams.. church would be less focused on the above (even the cool logo) and more on LOVE. As cliche as that may sound i think majority of the churches in America seem to overlook what LOVE really means- what it meant to JESUS. We see Love as ..those that are easy to love, more comfortable to love, more familiar to love. I believe God didn’t make all these beautiful races and personalities and great minds for us- (the Bible belt pastors or even a girl in her room writing a blog) to believe that there are only few listed as the lovables. So that is my hope for all churches to act in Love.
What exactly is a dream church? Something we’d like to see in one? Sure, I’d like cool music and great motivating speeches but there’s something fishy when such a Christ-founded institution (if that’s a proper name for it) stays in the hands of men to handle as they please.
I just think that there are things that regulate Christ’s church that are not to be tampered with. I think the essence of His church, the incarnation of Christ on earth, ought to be at the forefront of the church movement. It is part of the definition of church. Honestly, I think that when believers are conscious they are representing Christ on earth and they meet together, church happens. When people get together in the name of Christ, church happens.
I suppose we need to define church. And if we define it, we do it in terms of the biblical model. Doing that, we lose the focus on ourselves and see what He intended it to be.
I would like to see the church humbly loving, exhorting, fellowshipping, sharing and giving, rejoicing and mourning, worshiping, praying, witnessing, avoiding disunity and all sins.
Granted, when I was younger I had church defined in other ways.
I think the purpose of this post was to show how we have changed in our thinking. What we use to dream about a “dream” church has changed as we have grown and matured some what. Before we use to dream inwardly, it was all about creating a place that was “relevant” with cool music, lights, a good speaker, and coffee, just to draw people in. Now most of us our thinking outwardly, going back to what the church was all about in the first place. Not a meeting place, a fortress to find peace from the outside world, as I have heard some people say. But to live out transformed lives, to love and care for the world, and above all, to proclaim Christ as savior. Now the hard part, doing it. But we can’t make excuses, it is doable, it has been done. The early church did it, now it’s our turn.
While reading Transformation today, I came across a very good definition of “church”.
“The church is the body of Christ moving in the world in the name of Christ – representing Him, calling people to Him, living and sharing His truth, and through Him healing the world’s wounds.
Couple of years back i would of signed up for doing church the conventional way. kind of what a lot of us have been saying contemporary, vibrant worship, relevant preaching, buying property for a new building, pastoring a mega church, being watched in multisite venues… etc. Is this wrong? Not at all, in fact (if i’m honest with myself) i still dream some of these things. But then i asked myself why the change of dreams? It is because there is something seductive to this way of thinking that can and has lead me to life of complacency. and that is why Jesus never spoke in parables about church programs or a building plan. Instead of a church that has a coffee house atmosphere for people to come, I dream of a church that goes to coffee houses where people are. Instead of attractive services to invite my community, I dream of a church mobilizing itself to reach their community.
So I have learned to dream different.
I’ve used the word “Church” so much during the course of my life that i think even for me it’s lost its original meaning. Having said that, I don’t think our generation is necessarily to blame for this misconception of the role of church. Sure, we are just as responsible, but the last generation taught us about church just like they taught us about politics or moral values. Come to think of it…even the early Jewish Christians (disciples of Jesus) had a skewed view of the true function of church. I think this is why God chose Paul to finally get it right. Through Paul, God showed the rest of us that church can also be spelled M-I-S-S-I-O-N. From the beginning of time God has been on mission. When Jesus came to earth He was on mission reconciling the world to himself. Now, we are supposed to be on mission reconciling the world back to God. The Word says that Jesus has given us the ministry of reconciliation not the ministry of religion. The Pharisees and religious leaders in Jesus’ day had the ministry of religion down pact and we know what Jesus thought of them don’t we? Think about this question and maybe you’ll come up with the true intention for “Church”. As a Christian, what are you willing to die for? As for me, I would die for the truth of the gospel of Jesus Christ and its power to transform broken, sinful people like me. I wouldn’t die for style of service, evangelistic model, style of music, a churchy building, or even a pastoral title. Jesus said, “make disciples.” That’s the mission…see you on the battle field!
There is a sense in which the church ought to be missional. I am sure there is no doubt about that. But in the same way I think there ought to be a place for the community of believers. As missional as the early church was, they spend a lot of time together. Paul had the mentality that the church of Christ should not cease meeting together.
I don’t think we can simply neglect instruction, theology, and exhortation. (And I know no one intends to say that)
I think that there is a balance between the missional role and the building up of the church. Besides, you still have to show people why you think the church should be missional.
[...] 20, 2008 A while ago, Van posted a question on this blog. The point of the post was to show how as we mature as Christians our views of the Church change, [...]