Is the church, in its structure and approach, static or organic? [Static – unchanging vs organic – living, growing and adapting] Is the Acts 2 model of the church the end or the beginning? It appears to me that the church described in Acts 2 would be the beginning and the Holy Spirit continues to form the church to meet the ever changing world. The structure and approach of the church may adapt and evolve in order for us to effectively present the unchanging Gospel to a changing world.
Significant voices in today’s culture are questioning the traditionally accepted methods of “doing” and “being” the church. For example, George Barna’s controversial book, Revolution, expresses: “There is a new breed of Christ-follower in America today. These are people who are more interested in being the Church than in going to church. They are more eager to produce fruit for the kingdom of God than to become comfortable in the Christian subculture. They are focused on the seven spiritual passions that facilitate their growth as genuine people of God and citizens of the kingdom. These people are Revolutionaries.”
Are people like these truly revolutionaries or just wrong? Are they being guided by the Holy Spirit or by their own intellect and hang-ups? I join with the revolutionary voices questioning the traditionally accepted method of doing church. Free the people to be the church – to fulfill their roles as ministers (servants of others), missionaries (sharers of the good news and love of Jesus) and priests (helping peopl make peace w/ themselves, others and God) – to be the Kingdom of God right where they live, work, study & play. May the church universal break the chains that hold hostage its power to bring glory and honor to God. May each of us proclaim the gospel and culture of Jesus where we are and as we go. Later, Dale