Truth Magazine

By Connie W. Adams

On the instruction of an angel of God, Cornelius, the Roman centurion, sent men to Joppa to locate Simon Peter and bring him to the house of Cornelius. Peter himself had received a vision in which he was told not to call common or unclean what God had cleansed. The next day, Peter and six Jewish brethren accompanied these messengers to Caesarea to the house of the centurion. Upon arrival, they found a collection of kinsmen and friends of Cornelius. Peter said, “Therefore came I unto you without gainsaying, as soon as I was sent for: I ask therefore for what intent ye have sent for me?” (Acts 10:29).

That was a fair question then and it is a fair one now when brethren send for a preacher either to come and live along them or for a gospel meeting. Sometimes the expectations of the preacher and those of the people who sent for him are not the same. Therein lies the cause of misunderstandings, friction, and sometimes division.

Why He Did NOT Send For Peter

Peter did not come to be idolized and venerated and to establish a cult built around his personality. In fact, when Cornelius fell down before Peter when he arrived, Peter quickly told him to “stand up; I myself also am a man” (v. 26). There is no indication that Peter delayed for a few moments to savor this adulation. If a preacher comes to a place expecting to be put on some sort of pedestal to be adored but never questioned, then there are going to be some rough times. There is something wrong with the general view that the preacher alone is responsible for the success or failure of the work. He may well be a contributing factor in either case, but the work must be built around him. Peter was a messenger of the gospel. The message was not his. He was obligated to deliver it without change.

He did not send for Peter to entertain and amuse himself, his kindred or his friends with bursts of eloquence, one-liners, and pitiful stories to make them cry. The motive in sending for him was much nobler than that. Sadly, that is what untaught or worldly minded church members want and expect. They will come in droves to hear such delivered by gifted speakers but they will stay away when such adornments are missing.

He did not send for Peter to take over his God-given responsibilities. That is what some think the work of a preacher to be. They want an official socializer who will be visible at all the right times and places to enhance the image of the church before the world. You know, someone who can convince the community that he is a “good ole boy.” They want someone to do all their personal work for them. Sometimes brethren will advertise for a preacher and will say “it doesn’t matter if he is able in the pulpit as long as he is a good personal worker.” Is this an advertisement for mediocrity in the pulpit? Paul told Timothy to commit what he had learned to “faithful men who shall be able to teach others also” (2 Tim. 2:2). Does this mean that a man is expected to do his part personally in teaching the lost, or does it mean that they are going to fulfill their work by proxy through this hired hand? Cornelius did not depend on Peter, after his arrival to round up his relatives and friends. He did that himself.

He did not send for Peter to organize sports and entertainment for the young people. Peter was not expected to organize some sort of mountain or wilderness survival expedition or lead an adventure to see who could be the first to cross the Mediterranean in a rowboat. He was not to arrange for surfing contests down at the sea. No, his motives were higher than that.

Why DID He Send For Peter?

The angel had said to Cornelius that “he shall tell thee words, whereby thou and all thy house shall be saved” (Acts 11:14). That very statement told Cornelius that he and his house were lost. The means out of that peril involved the speaking of words. Notice that the angel did not tell him what to do. That was not in the divine plan. God purposed to use human agency in delivering the necessary words. “Preach the word” (2 Tim 4:2). This same Peter said once, “Lord, to whom shall we go? Thou hast the words of eternal life” (John 6:68). Such words are of the utmost importance and urgency. They must be heard at all cost.

“Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of God” (Rom. 10:17).

Cornelius said, “Immediately therefore I sent to thee; and thou hast well done that thou art come. Now therefore are we all here present before God, to hear all things that are commanded thee of God” (Acts 10:33).

Observe that he sent “immediately.” It could not wait. “Thou hast done well that thou art come.” Cornelius did his part in sending for Peter. Peter did his part by coming even though his entrance into that house violated every principle of separateness that Peter as a Jew had always observed. Both men showed great faith in God. The Lord’s plan was to bring a faithful messenger of the word together with a man and his house which needed to hear the message. That is how it worked with the Ethiopian treasurer in Acts 8, with the conversion of Saul of Tarsus, with the conversion of Lydia and her house, and other cases in the book of Acts. A faithful preacher was brought together with honest hearts ready to receive the word.

Cornelius and his house were ready to “hear all things commanded thee of God.” How refreshing. If all preachers would go with the determination to deliver a “thus saith the Lord” and be prepared to produce the very place in Scripture where the Lord said it and then had an audience with the mind-set of Cornelius and those he gathered to hear Peter, think what great things could be done for the Lord. Maybe I am missing something, but it appears to me that many congregational troubles and stress in the lives of preachers, grow out of a failure of either the preacher to faithfully deliver the message or the audience who arrives with a desire for something other than that message.

Do you have a preacher living and working among you? Why did you send for him? Preacher, why did you go?

By Mike Willis

Across the country church growth seminars are conducted among denominational and liberal folks designed to teach others how to cause churches to grow. None of us is content with dead and dying churches; we want to see souls saved, those who are fallen away restored, and churches growing so that buildings must be enlarged. We are encouraged to see exhortations to greater faithfulness in proclaiming the gospel to the lost, reaching out to unsaved men and women with the gospel of the grace of God. However, this is not what is occurring in church growth seminars.

Things One Must Do To Make the Church Grow

The program for church growth can be analyzed. It’s the same for almost all of the denominations and it almost always involves the following things:

1. Generic preaching. Preaching that draws the crowds must be positive, feel-good preaching. This preaching eschews doctrinal sermons that discuss such topics as inherited depravity, impossibility of apostasy, election, grace and works, and other such weighty topics. Rather, the content of such sermons must be things that meet the needs of the audience — how to overcome depression, how to raise teenaged children, how to survive mid-life crisis, and such like topics.

The sermons must also not emphasize sin, except in vague, general terms. Everyone is against sin, so preaching must condemn generic sin, but never become specific to address such things as divorce and remarriage, immodest dress, dancing, social drinking, gambling, or other relevant issues that might leave anyone in the audience feeling condemned when they depart the worship services. If he feels condemned, he may not return for services next week.

Furthermore, the pulpit must not be used to condemn another’s religion. Sermons that expose the false doctrines taught by the Mormons, Catholics, Baptists, Methodists, and other denominations are avoided, because they may “offend” some visitor who would never return to the services. After all, this is the aim of the sermon — to present a message that attracts visitors and makes them want to come back again. Those things in the gospel that may alienate visitors or keep them from returning are systematically passed by and not preached.

As a matter of practice, many of the mega-churches simply refer to themselves as “community churches,” because all denominations are welcome there, without regard to their previous denominational affiliation, beliefs, and practices. This is done even though most community churches maintain ties to their denominational organizations.

2. A “felt needs” ministry. The mega-churches are com- mitted to the ministry of the whole man. Mega churches survey the town to see what spiritual needs they perceive and then aim the direction of their ministry toward meeting those needs. Such churches have programs of work that feature such things as: divorce recovery workshops, grief recovery, overcoming depression, how to become debt-free, aerobic exercises, church sponsored athletics, day-care, pre-school through sixth grade elementary schools, and such like things. Some churches have large restaurants so that a family can stop at the church building to pick up the children from day-care and school, stay for basketball practice and aerobics, attend a workshop on finances, and have a late supper, all on the church premises. That’s the Wal-mart way!

3. Contemporary worship. Church growth seminars ad- dress the distaste that the baby-boomers have for traditional worship. Consequently contemporary worship services are developed to attract the baby-boomers. To keep from driving away traditional families, whose contributions and support are necessary to keep the doors open, many mega-churches have two separate worship services. The traditional worship services feature songs like “Amazing Grace,” “Just As I Am,” “Be With Me Lord,” and other timeless hymns sung to the traditional melodies, preaching, prayer, observance of the Lord’s supper, and giving. The contemporary worship services are a bit different. The Sunday morning presentation may present the message in drama, rather than in sermon. A special singing presentation is frequently used, featuring singing that is more contemporary (the range of music may be from Bluegrass gospel, to Southern gospel, to Contemporary gospel, to Rock gospel, depending upon which is most attractive to the community). The presentation is professional and the audience listens, rather than participating, showing its appreciation by clapping and hand raising. The assembly has a decidedly Pentecostal flavor with a Baptist doctrinal emphasis (salvation by faith only, once saved-always saved). The preacher may present his message in a sports shirt, casual slacks, and sneakers. The audience may be seated in a circle of chairs or in a circle sitting on the floor. Both are designed to present the casual approach toward worship. The members who attend may show up wearing jeans and a T-shirt or shorts. The audience may be drinking coffee and eating donuts while the lesson is presented.

The role of women in the public services is more pronounced than in the traditional services. Women are used as public readers of Scripture, to make the announcements, to serve the Lord’s supper, to usher, and to serve in other public roles (including preaching). They are added to the “board of deacons” and appointed as elders and bishops.

Those who raise protest against the changes they witness in worship are hide-bound traditionalists whose old-fogey ways stifle the church’s ability to adjust to the changing times in order to reach out to the modern community.

The Pragmatic Defense

The defense of this change is simple: it works. And, who can deny its success? The mega-churches have thousands in attendance and are constantly growing.

The Temptation To Mimic The Denominations

Witnessing the “success” of the mega-churches, there is a great temptation for Christians to mimic church growth practices. Consider some of the things that we can specifically identify happening among us:

1. Change in content of the preaching. The content of gospel preaching is changing in many churches. Its thrust is distinctly positive (that is, these churches eliminate from their preaching those things that may cause a visitor to be offended and not return). Distinctive gospel sermons that have a heavy theological content are eliminated; the one- church theme is removed; the identifying marks of the New Testament church are not preached; exposing the doctrinal apostasies of the denominations is condemned; preaching that specifically condemns immodest dress is eliminated (one can preach against immodest dress so long as he does not define what it is); etc.

Trying to avoid the prejudice the world holds toward the churches of Christ, some have removed “church of Christ” from their meeting house. Signs on the meeting house that say “Christians Meet Here” leave the same impression on the general public as “Community Church” does. This says to the general public, “This is an inter-denominational group, where I can be a member without regard to my denominational ties.”

2. “Felt needs ministry.” Our most conservative liberal brethren (the new “antis”)are fighting a battle for their lives to stave off the social gospel of the felt needs ministry. They are so compromised by their acceptance of fellow- ship halls and the church support of human institutions (colleges, hospitals, orphan homes, old folks homes, etc.) that they have little hope of success. Among ourselves, already we are seeing meetings designed to preach about time management, depression, being debt free, and other such topics that indicate significant movements in the thrust of gospel preaching.

How Can We Compete?

As we witness the growth of the mega-churches, we are tempted to ask, “How can we compete with them?” Our little band of disciples that meets in a plain-jane building in a middle-class neighborhood has little chance of competing with the mega-church with its extravagant building on prime real estate. Why would anyone want to be a member of the church, when he can go over to the mega-church and hear a professional singing group, listen to a dynamic speaker, attend the supper served after services, watch the drama skit, and never be condemned for immodest dress, lack of attendance, or practically anything else in his life?

We tend to forget that this problem has been with the saints since the first century. That little band of disciples in Jerusalem (after the dispersion of Acts 8) had little to offer in comparison with the services at the Jewish temple. They met in the home of one of the disciples. Just across town on Mount Zion, was a beautiful Temple. Its priests were dressed in priestly vestments. The singing was conducted by the sons of Asaph and sons of Korah, professional choirs. The pageantry and ceremony of their public worship were majestic. Their feasts were festive, not solemn and doleful. How could 20-25 disciples meeting in the house of one of the members compete with the Jewish Temple?

The situation was even worse in pagan cities such as Corinth. The pagan worship was also associated with an impressive temple complex. Their worship included banquets and feasts that tended to drunkenness and excess. What’s more, some of the fertility cults had priestesses that committed fornication with the votaries. How could a little band of disciples compete with the pagan temples for the hearts of those young men and women faced with the choice of Christianity or paganism?

Lest anyone think our situation is so unique that we must make some changes to attract the people in order for the church to grow, we need to be reminded of what circumstances our brethren before us faced. Despite the odds that were against those brethren, look at what happened: the Jewish Temple was destroyed in A.D. 70 never to be rebuilt and those fertility cults of the first century have passed from the contemporary scene and are barely known, except by a few archaeologists and historians. But the church of Jesus Christ is alive and well! Let us never be tempted by the appeal of modern church growth seminars to change the church of Jesus Christ into another religion built according to the wisdom of men.

If it should be our lot to preach in a time and place similar to Noah, let us be content to stand alone as a preacher of righteousness, not compromising the gospel to appeal to a generation of hell-bound men!

By Larry Ray Hafley

Filling a pothole does not fix the road. It is merely a temporary “surface cure.” Make-up does not do away with unwanted lines and wrinkles (sorry, ladies!), it simply hides them from view. A hair-piece will hide my bald spot. It will not restore my hair.

As an example of an attempted “surface cure,” note the following: “A conference of police chiefs and black leaders recommended . . . that President Clinton establish a presidential commission to study the uneasy relationship between blacks and police officers in America.” The president of the National Urban Coalition, said many young black men have very hostile attitudes toward authority and police in particular. ‘I work with young people every day. . . . The alienation and the resistance among the young is devastating. It’s dangerous for them and for the police. We would like to help the (police) chiefs get their departments more in tune with what the young people need, while we work to make sure the young people are not so anti-social and so hostile.’”

Conferences are not the cure. Changing the “tune” of police departments is not the solution. Changing the hearts of “hostile” and “anti-social” people is the only cure. This work cannot be done by a conference, a commission, a coalition, or a police panel. Primarily, it is the work of the home and family.

War in the streets has been preceded by a dismantling of the domestic realm. Sexual promiscuity and the celebration of the termination of marriage have produced a generation of “hostile” and “anti-social” young people. The end is not yet. It will become worse. Why? In part, because we are treating the surface. We are filling pot-holes and applying make-up when only a complete overhaul of the heart will do (Prov. 4:23).

As long as society honors “hostile,” “anti-social” misfits (John Lennon, Dennis Rodman, and Curt Cobain come to mind) as heroes while it seeks to destroy virtue as a virtue, there will be conflict, deadly conflict. When condoms can be passed out in schools where it is forbidden to teach morality from the Bible, there will be blood in the hallways and in the streets. Where abortion and homosexuality are extolled with “charitable broadmindedness,” while a list of the ten commandments cannot be posted in classrooms, there will be drive-by shootings and murder “just to see how it feels to blow someone away.” When students may be led in studies of immoral and porno- graphic material, but are denied the opportunity to present a biography of Jesus from the gospels as a book report, you need not be surprised when rapes and homosexual liaisons occur on campus during school hours.

By rejecting the Bible’s moral standards, by making light of the sacred union of marriage, we have produced a crop of “hostile,” “anti-social” people. So, while the police chiefs and community leaders are having their conference, they had better post guards outside. If they do not, they may return to a car that has either been stripped or stolen. And if one is caught burglarizing a police car, let him not be accused or charged. After all, the kid could not help it. A racist society made him what he is. He is not to blame. To incarcerate him would make him a victim and deprive him of justice. So, let him go — and plan another conference!