My View

I promised earlier to get back to George Barna’s book Revolution. It’s an analyst’s view on why, as Barna puts it, millions of Americans are finding faith outside the church. Barna makes a distinction between “the church” (with a small c) and “the Church” (with a capital C). The “church” is the local congregational church. The “Church” is the global church of Jesus Christ. And there is one important point to be remembered; Barna discusses the church in the US, not anywhere else. In essence, Barna believes the glorious days of the local congregational church are numbered, and offers several reasons.

1. The local church has failed to produce disciples

Barna lists a number of points where he believes the local church has failed. The traditional methods of “doing church” have not produced discipleship. They have produced church members, people who have a faith in God and their salvation, but do not show any sign of transformed lives. A few examples:

• “The biweekly attendance at worship services is, by believers’ own admission, generally the only time they worship God.”

• “The typical churched believer will die without leading a single person to a lifesaving knowledge of and relationship with Jesus Christ.”

• “Although the typical believer contends that the Bible is accurate in what it teaches, he or she spends less time reading the Bible in a year than watching television, listening to music, reading other books and publications, or conversing about personal hobbies and leisure interests.”

• “Churched Christians give away an average of about 3 percent of their income in a typical year – and feel pleased at their ’sacrificial’ generosity.”

• “The most significant influence on the choices of churched believers is neither teaching from the pulpit nor advice gleaned from fellow congregants; it is messages absorbed from the media, the law, and family members.”

• “In an average month, fewer than one out of every ten churched families worships together outside of a church service; just as few pray together, other than at mealtimes; and the same minimal numbers study the Bible together at home or work together to address the needs of disadvantaged people in their community.”

Is he right on this one? I think Barna has a point (mild understatement) in recognising the lack of discipleship in the local church. The local church hasn’t produced disciples, people who are transformed by their faith, but believers. And this is a serious problem. We need to do something about it!

2. The local church is not in the Bible, we made it up

This is not a quote from Barna, it’s a very extreme intentional dramatization from my part. Barna argues that the local, congregational church as we have come to know it, doesn’t exist in the Bible. Barna writes:

However, you should realize that the Bible neither describes nor promotes the local church as we know it today. Many centuries ago religious leaders created the prevalent form of “church” that is so widespread in our society to help people be better followers of Christ. But the local church many have come to cherish – the services, offices, programs, buildings, ceremonies – is neither biblical nor unbiblical. It is abiblical – that is, such an organization is not addressed in the Bible.
In fact, if you scour the Bible passages included at the beginning of Chapter 3 [in the Barna book], you will find no allusions to or descriptions of a specific type of religious organization or spiritual form. The Bible does not rigidly define the corporate practices, rituals, or structures that must be embraced in order to have a proper church. It does, however, offer direction regarding the importance and integration of fundamental spiritual disciplines into one’s life. Sometimes we forget that the current forms of religious practice and community were developed hundreds of years ago, long after the Bible was written, in an attempt to help believers live more fulfilling Christian lives. We should keep in mind that what we call “church” is just one interpretation of how to develop and live a faith-centered life. We made it up. It may be healthy or helpful, but is not sacrosanct.

What about this one? I believe this is the point that Barna has been most critized for. And I believe it is very important. Barna is right in that the cultural form of the local congregational church isn’t in the Bible. We made that up. Or someone did, a long time ago. And he’s also right in his admonition that the Bible isn’t about doing church, it’s about being church. I think most of Barna’s critics have misunderstood him here – fellowship is important, and vital, according to Barna. He’s isn’t about to abolish the local church. But he is frustrated with its rigid form, and by Christians being obsessed with “belonging to a church” as something salvational. This is simply just another form of “no salvation outside the church” as taught by the Catholic church for centuries. The church doesn’t save anyone, Jesus Christ does. Belonging to a church doesn’t (according to Barna’s studies) transform your life (with e.g. same divorce rate for churched people and non-churched people in the US). Following Christ does.

So what does it mean to follow Christ? And what does Barna mean by the term Revolutionary? I’ll get back to that in a separate post.