Skip to main content

Three Faces of the Church

Three Faces of the Church
...which one are we known for in America today?

Taking some license with Stephen Covey's best selling tome, "Seven Habits of Higly Effective People", here are three very different, but apt discriptions of church models that exist today. These lists are not exhaustive... and they were written with a broad brush strokes, intentionally, to include a wide variety of church "experiences" in each category. In fact, I would like to know what would your lists comprise of? Read Ephesians 4:11-16 to get a glimpse into the church that glorifies God.


Seven highly effective habits of the Contemporary Church that almost always guarantee church growth with very little spiritual impact:

1. Go political, not biblical
2. Go pragmatic, not theological
3. Go psychological, not discipleship
4. Go anthropocentric, not Christocentric
5. Go postmodern, not transcendent
6. Go “share your story”, not “all for His glory”
7. Go sickness, not sin; go disease not, disobedience


Seven highly effective habits of the Traditional Church that almost always guarantee church stagnation with very little spiritual impact:

1. Go traditional, not spiritual
2. Go legalistic, not grace
3. Go corporate, not community
4. Go “count converts”, not “make disciples”
5. Go pastoral/elder ruler, not shepherd/servant leader
6. Go more information, not Christlikeness
7. Go programs, not prayer


Seven highly effective habits of the Biblical Church that almost always guarantee God’s blessing and spiritual impact:

1. Go supremacy of God and His glory in worship
2. Go sola fide, sola scriptura, sola gratia, solus Christus, Soli Deo Gloria
3. Go The Great Commission and the Two Great Commandments
4. Go take care of the poor, the widow and the orphan
5. Go discipline of sin
6. Go pray without ceasing
7. Go equip the saints for the work of the ministry

posted by Campi

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Are Arminian Baptists Legitimate Biblical Churches?

With all the discussion going on about whether Presbyterians are biblical churches because of infant baptism, I would like to ask if we believe that Arminian Baptist churches are legitimate churches? If a Baptist Church, regardless of their affiliation if any, believes in a universal, insufficient atonement by Christ, issuch Baptist Church really a biblical church? And if so, how can we say that it is when it involves the very heart of the gospel in the atonement. Further, how can we say that those Presbyterian churches that believe in a particular, sufficient atonement yet infant baptism are not biblical, yet those that believe in a universal, insufficient atonement yet believers baptism by immersion are biblical churches. Inquiring mind wants to know ;- ). Thanks..... P.S. Still Baptist and thank the Lord for it!

Issues I Have Been Associated With Recently

The King James Only Controversy : I have been in 3 churches since the Lord was pleased to save me, the last 2 of them as a pastor. The first church was when I was not a pastor, but did teach Sunday School, and preached occasionally. It was a church that used the KJV of the bible, but neither I or the pastor was hardcore KJV Only. The second church was the first church I pastored. For the sake of some long time members in that small church, I used the King James version for sermons, but after I was there a year or two, I began using the NKJV for Scripture Readings. My third church, which is the one I'm pastoring now in Idaho, does not use the KJV. We offically use the NASB for our sermons, and the ESV many times when quoting other scriptures. I know some of my long time Christian friends from Maryland are KJV Only. I am not. I think it is an issue that we can agree to disagree on, but it seems there may be some that cannot. In the not so distant future, I'll post on the Blog why...

Christian Discussions and Chem-Trails

What a title, huh? I just didn't want to post these separately :-). This morning as we were sending off our daughter, son-in-law, and grandchildren, there was a Chem-Trail right over us in the sky. Have you heard of Chem-Trails? They are chemicals being put in the sky to supposedly help with so called global warming  :-). Sadly, too many people still think this is a conspiracy theory. For those that do, I recommend you just put that in a search engine and see what comes up and just start reading. They come from the exhaust of commercial airliners, but they are not the same as "contrails." Contrails dissipate and follow the plane. Chem-trails stick around. They have certain chemicals in them (Aluminum and Barium are two of them if I recall correctly) and they just add to the list of toxins that our bodies absorb and endanger our health. If more people would pay attention and communicate with our elected officials at all levels perhaps, we could put a stop to this Lord will...