What’s Wrong With The Churches Today?

            Heard about the Stayaway Saint Syndrome? ¹

            Research company, Barna Group, estimates that 156 million Americans are churchless - those who have never attended a worship service barring a wedding or a funeral.² These numbers need not be considered as unique or native to the USA, but representative of all the countries.

            Why are there stayaway saints or churchless Christians? The condition of today’s churches does not appeal to the stayaway Christians.

            If you think that everything is well with our churches today, then you may be partially correct. Not everything is right in the churches today, much is wrong.

            Christian apologist, Frank Turek, thus highlighted the church’s failure by examining the aspects of the timing of church services, Scripture reading, message, and worship (singing). He then concluded that if the church fails to disciple its flock, then its members would have a very poor commitment to Christ and their lives would hardly show any change. Here is an excerpt from his article, “The Seeker Church: Is Anyone Making Disciples?”

            “Time:  This won’t take long– 45 minutes to an hour, max.  You can set your watch by these services.  And if the pastor or priest goes just a wee bit longer, the congregation gets restless.

            The Bible:  Leave your Bible home– the folks on the stage or altar handle the Bible reading which is normally a mere sprinkling of verses yanked from their context.  Moreover, there is no attempt to teach you how to study the scriptures yourself.

            Worship:  Just watch– there is a performance up front.  You’re more of an observer than an active participant in worship.

            Message:  It’s groundhog day– you hear the same, short message repackaged every Sunday.  The sermon (or Homily) is to preaching what cotton candy is to nutrition.  Sweet but of little value.

            Outcome:  Low commitment and little life change. 

            …We’ve got to stop defending our church practices if they are not doing what Jesus told us to do.  If you’re not making disciples, you’re not doing church the way Jesus commanded it.  As Jesus warned, we can’t let our traditions nullify the Word of God.

            …We’re loosing 75% of our young people because– instead of making disciples who are in awe of God and devoted to His purposes– a majority of churches from most  denominations are producing shallow narcisists obsessed with themselves and their own happiness.” ³ (Emphasis Mine).

            “Satan is not fighting churches, he is joining them. He does more harm by sowing tares than by pulling up wheat,” these were the very words of the renowned evangelist, Vance Havner, who added another dimension – the satanic – to emphasize the spiritual poverty of our churches.

            Satan is hyperactive in our churches. An article in the “Charisma News” reveals the sorry state of our churches that preaches the gospel of Satan in lieu of the gospel of Christ.⁴ This article highlights the false teachings a.k.a satanic doctrines that many churches preach today. A church that preaches one or more of these concepts is yielding to the control of Satan and not the Lord Jesus Christ. Here is an excerpt from that article:

            “Overemphasis of Prosperity: Carnal prosperity preachers encourage God’s people to seek after riches—or to seek after God for the purpose of riches—often even judging your spirituality by the kind of car you drive. What does that have to do with the gospel of Jesus?

            Hyper-Grace Teachings: They rightly teach that Jesus died for all our sins—past, present and future—but wrongly conclude that as believers we no longer have to deal with sin (meaning we never have to confess sin or repent of sin, and the Holy Spirit no longer convicts us of sin).

            Antinomianism: In practice, it means that “anything goes,” since Jesus has set us free. The problem is, Jesus didn’t set us free to sin; He set us free from sin.

            Deification of Man: Many false teachings today start with man rather than with God. In contrast, when Paul laid out the gospel message in Romans, he started with God and then went to man: God is holy and we are not; He is righteous and we are not; we are under His judgment and in need of mercy, and that mercy comes through the cross.

            Challenging the Authority of the Word: Best-selling authors tell us the biblical text isn’t reliable, that the biblical manuscripts we have in our possession are hopelessly contradictory, and that we can know little or nothing about the real, historical Jesus. Other authors tell us that the Bible is no more than a collection of religious traditions and that God Himself is nothing more than a religious myth.

            Rejecting Hell: Nowhere is this questioning of God’s Word seen any more clearly than when it comes to the subject of hell and future punishment. And because we preach an imbalanced gospel—emphasizing God’s love and ignoring His wrath, emphasizing His mercy and ignoring His justice—we no longer have room for hell and future punishment in our theology.

            Universal Reconciliation: Universal reconciliation promotes a get-out-of-jail-free mentality—that in the end, everyone will make it into heaven because of Jesus’ death on the cross. (In contrast, universalism teaches that all paths lead to God.) There may be future suffering, but it will be purging rather than punishment, and ultimately everyone will be saved.”⁵

            We could go on and on about how pastors deem their ministry as a money-making occupation than as a service rendered to the Lord and HIS people. We could also speak much about the lay leaders of the church who merely use their leadership position as an opportunistic projection of their personal glory in the mould of the Pharisees during Christ’s time, instead of glorifying God.

            Let us also not think that the larger (mega) churches where hundreds and thousands of people congregate to worship are godlier than the smaller congregations. In fact, there are more chances for the mega churches (with its greater access to the seductive material resources) to yield to the Satan than the smaller churches.

            So what do we do?

            We need to be the agents of change in the local church says theologian R.C Sproul, “…We’re the church that God ordained from the foundation of the world. We’re His people; we’re His household, so let the church be the church.

            We’re living in a time of crisis…but if we want to be concerned for our nation and culture, our priority must be the renewal of the church. We are the light of the world.

            …Change in culture doesn’t always come from the top down. It often comes from the bottom up. The change we need to work for, chiefly, is renewal within the church…We must remember who we are, who the foundation is, who the cornerstone is, who the head of our building is, who the Lord of the church is.

            Do we love the church? I doubt if there have been many times in our history when there has been as much anger, hostility, disappointment, and disillusionment with the institutional church as there is today. It’s hard not to be critical of the church because in many ways the church has failed us. But if the church has failed, that means we have failed. We are called to serve the church in the power of God the Holy Spirit.

            We, the church, have been made for this task by the indwelling presence and power of God’s Spirit. Yet, we are called not so much to rise up but to bow down. And if we bow down to our Lord, as Paul says in Ephesians 3:14, the church will be the church, and our light will pierce the darkness.”⁶

            How do we make this change in our churches?

            First, it is impossible to know the error if we do not know the truth. In other words, we ought to read and study the Bible. This is our personal responsibility.

            Second, change is a slow process. Change should be effected by God and not us. God is the source of all blessings. We are mere channels. Hence, we need to prayerfully align ourselves with God in order to know what to do and when to do. Since change is always slow, patience ought to be our key attribute and prayer is a means to that attribute.

            Third, change would only be effective if administered with humility, love and grace. Therefore, we ought to be humble, loving and gracious with everyone in this process.

            Finally, administering love and grace in a spirit of humility does not imply a condition of being politically correct. Truth needs to be spoken out loud and clear. Those who stand for truth cannot be politically correct. Feathers would be ruffled, tough stance ought to be taken, but more importantly, every aspect of change ought to be guided by the Spirit of God, who is the wisdom of God.

            Staying away from church is not an option. Let us by the power of the Holy Spirit make a positive change in our church. Amen.

Endnotes:

Websites referenced here were last accessed on 14/July/2016

¹ http://www.brutallyhonest.org/brutally_honest/2005/02/whats_wrong_wit.html

² https://www.barna.org/barna-update/culture/698-10-facts-about-america-s-churchless#.V4YShvl95hE

³ http://crossexamined.org/the-seeker-church-protestant-roman-catholicism/

⁴ http://www.charismanews.com/opinion/from-the-frontlines/39026-the-7-great-lies-in-the-church-today  

⁵ Ibid.

⁶ http://www.ligonier.org/learn/articles/what-church/  

Reasons You Won’t Believe Why People Attend Church!

I’d Be Hatching, Matching & Dispatching

            Hatching (birth), matching (marriage) and dispatching (death) could be three primary reasons for people to attend church. Membership in a local church fetches baptism, marriage, and a place in the local graveyard.

            Definite worldly needs indeed! But if these are the motivational factors to worship in a church, then we are missing the mark. If the church you are worshiping in does not liberate you from these worldly needs, then your church and your spirituality are equally pitiable.

            The church is the body of Christ and not solely a channel for our material needs.  

I’ll Be Blessed           

            Would attending a worship service render a greater blessing?

            In the past, I diligently attended a church. My body was parked inside the church but my mind was wandering outside consumed with the responsibilities of my work. I was materially blessed, since I fared pretty well at work.

            I did not worship the Lord in the church. But was I blessed because I was diligent in my church attendance? No! The Bible does not say so.

            God blessed me, not because I attended church regularly, but because HE is gracious. Grace of God does not punish at every opportunity, instead it patiently blesses us constantly.

            You may still argue that God blessed me because I diligently attended the church. If so, what about my non-christian boss who was greatly successful (read blessed) but had never attended church?

            There is only one God, so all blessings flow from HIS being. HE blesses both the Christians and non-christians. If God blesses non-christians who do not attend the church, then would it not entail that our mere church attendance amounts to nothing?

            We will not be blessed merely for attending the church worship service.

I’ll Go To Hell

            That I’ll go to hell if I don’t attend church is a fascinating premise, or shall we say, a fearful premise. Many Christian leaders instill fear in the hearts of Christians, so to retain the believer in his church, whereas in reality he is to retain the believer in Christ.  

            Is there a verse in the Bible that posits hell for a believing Christian for his failure to attend the local church? If so, show me that verse please!

            Heaven is guaranteed to those who believe and love the Lord Jesus Christ. Church exists as a means to Christian discipleship and growth, not as a means to hell.

I’m In Trouble

            When in trouble go to church. This seems to be the mantra of quite a few. 

            God is not a doctor whose only objective is to heal us of all our sickness. God is not a magician who magically delivers us from all our perils. We degrade God when we go to church only when we are in trouble.

            God, being gracious, would deliver us from our troubles. It’s then our real intent would be exposed.

            Do we continue attending church after we are delivered from our troubles or do we cease to attend church? If we discontinue church after being delivered from our troubles, then there is no greater hypocrite than you and me.  

It’s A Weekly Ritual

            Church going is a weekly ritual to a few Christians. This is a sad phenomenon. When church attendance is a weekly ritual, then it’s highly possible that these Christians’ love for the Lord Jesus could be lukewarm or absolutely nonexistent.

It’s A Sin If I don’t Attend Church

            Some Christian leaders teach that failure to attend a church is a sin. This need not necessarily be true. The more important question we need to ask is the reason behind not attending.

            Poverty, distance, personal problems etc. could play a genuine role in dissuading some Christians from attending church. Some Christians could have had a bitter experience with the local church so they may not attend church. However, their love and devotion for the Lord could be as good as those who attend church regularly.

            Willful negligence to attend church but indulging in lethargic or sinful pleasures is a sin against the Lord or could lead us to sin against the Lord.

I Should Perform

            We may be gifted in playing music, singing, preaching, teaching and administration. But to attend the church with a sole motive to perform is a dubious reasoning. Spiritual gifts are graciously given by the Triune God.

            There is a critical distinction between performance and offering.

            Performance makes us greater and the Lord lesser. When our mind is set on performing, we would become self-centered. Our focus may be to garner attention upon ourselves.

            God gives good gifts; not to bring glory upon ourselves. But God gives good gifts so that we bring glory to God.

            Primarily, our gifts are to be an offering to God. Our focus ought to be on God, and not on our gift. In other words our question should always be, “Is my offering pleasing and acceptable to God?” When our gifts are an offering to God, the Lord becomes greater and we become lesser.

            In quite a few instances, parents push their children to sing in the choir / worship team or act in a play. If parents fail to instill the concept of our skills being an offering to God, then the child would perform and would be unmindful of worshipping God through the spiritual gifts.

            We don’t go to church to perform, but to offer our gifts as an act of worship.  

I Should Lead

            Some Christians are addicted to leadership and power. From the moment they enter the church, they worm their way to leadership. Leadership as a motive to attend church is deplorable.

            We don’t intend to become anything. We become what God intends us to be. We submit ourselves to God and HE enables us to become who HE wants us to be.  

I Want A Big Church

            Some think that mega churches are better than the smaller churches. There is a reasonable premise behind this need. If a church serves its people well, people flock to it; hence mega churches could be better.

            However, there could be quite a few genuine reasons as to why small churches do not grow in numbers. Their lack of growth need not necessarily imply a deficiency in their ministry.

            Small churches could be as effective as a mega church.

I’d Attend Church Only On Occasions

            Have you wondered why churches overflow during occasions such as New Year, Good Friday, Easter and Christmas? It’s because some Christians attend church only during these occasions.

            This sad phenomenon exposes the presence of nominal Christians. Those who attend church only during occasions display their lack of love for the Lord Jesus.

Conclusion

            Having said these, attending church is a good step into growing as a Christian. It’s better to worship in a church than not.  

            Although our motive to attend church may be nauseatingly revolting, we may be giving ourselves an opportunity to grow in the Lord when we are in the church. While we are at the church, a song or a sermon or a Scripture reading could lead us to love the Lord. It’s the church’s bounden responsibility to disciple its members. 

            We attend church to worship God in the community of fellow Christians. Church should enable our discipleship in our Lord.

            The purpose of the church is “…to equip his people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God and become mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ.” (Ephesians 4: 12-13, NIV). May our churches be diligent in this responsibility.

            Just as the Lord went after that one lost sheep, may our churches care for that one member who may be in need so to motivate, encourage and draw him closer to the Lord. 

The Dirty Church

The church is to be a beautiful community that worships the only living God, nurtures the seeker with the truth, fellowships in the loving community of saints, and encourages the brokenhearted with Christ’s love. In other words, the church looks ‘upward’ in worship, ‘inward’ to edify, and ‘outward’ to serve those in need.

However, the church, from Christ’s time on earth, has been losing these components slowly yet steadily (cf. Mark 11: 15-17). A church can profess her allegiance to the Lord Jesus, yet be corrupt in her core values and expressions. In other words, the church, from the surface, could seem adherent to the biblical teachings, but avoid being truthful, loving and gracious, and thus corrupt.

When resolving a situation, the church could opt to enforce law or grace. Here is a rather dense situation to highlight the church’s corruption. A church rejects the marriage proposal of a couple because one partner has had multiple divorces. Not only is the church ungracious, but she could be successful in driving away the couple from her precincts. While rejecting the proposal, the church may have even cited a few scripture passages (e.g. Malachi 2: 16). But is this the only viable or the most biblical option for the church? If you say yes, please allow me to contradict you.

I submit that the church should have married this couple, of course, with bible-centered pre-marital counseling. If this couple were married, it is possible that this marriage would survive and the past sins of divorce, repented. By rejecting the marriage proposal, the church eliminated a magnificent opportunity for the person to repent and establish a family. More importantly, the church may have even driven these two away from Christianity. (You could argue that the multiple divorcée, as in the past, would reject/divorce this partner as well. This, however, is an ‘argument from ignorance’ i.e., one cannot predict if that marriage would result in divorce.)

Now then, why should the church not be radically gracious in solemnizing such a marriage? The church may have either rejected this proposal to avoid unnecessary criticism (for the leadership to have their job intact) or because she is profusely legalistic (so to abandon grace into oblivion). In both these instances, the church abandons the minority. This is in total contradiction to the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ. (If the church leadership claims ignorance on this matter, then they are inadequate for leadership.)

It is good to err on the side of grace, than on the side of law. But only strong and courageous leaders (Joshua 1: 9) would dare to err on the side of grace. The selfishly fearful, corrupt and theologically impotent leaders would cite the law to evade being gracious. They defy the Lord’s act of running after that one lost sheep, leaving the ninety-nine. Losing one sheep is insignificant to these leaders. They satisfy the majority, even at the cost of one sheep and the gospel! The Lord is the epitome of grace (John 1: 14-17); when the church adheres to the law and abandons grace, the church becomes corrupt.

The first entity to take responsibility for the church’s corruption is her leadership. Christ showed the way for mankind to follow. Similarly the church leadership ought to be role models for the flock to follow the Lord. If the leadership is legalistic, the essence of the church would be legalistic.

However, it could be healthier to have a legalistic leader than a weak leader. If the leadership is weak, then the church would travel the way of the powerful group in the church, and the powerful, if biblically correct, will remove the weak leader (so to resolve the problem). If the weak leadership remains, the church is bound to be sold to the devil in one form or another. If leaders are ruled by fear, they will inevitably succumb to the temptations of the evil one.

The elaborate description of Jesus cleansing the temple in Mark 11: 15-17 presents an instance of a ‘dirty church.’ The Lord’s house was transformed into a house of business instead of a house of prayer. The Lord cleansed the temple by driving out the offenders (15). Wait! Did HE really drive them out? I don’t think so! Verse 17 fascinates me, for the Lord taught ‘them’ the true intent of the church. ‘Them’ refers to those who abused the temple precincts and the spectators. Hence the Lord not only cleansed HIS house off its filth, but taught the abusers the truth. Isn’t this what today’s church leaders ought to do and isn’t this where they fail?

We take pride in proclaiming the church as a congregation of sinners, and truly so. Sin is inevitable in the congregation of sinners. When sin is encountered, the sinful act should be eliminated by the power of God, and the sinful actor cleansed by the Word of God. 

Today’s church seems more intent on driving out the sinners; not the sinners who sin against God, but those who disagree with the leadership. The formula of today’s church seems to be if-you-don’t-agree-to-my-agenda-you-will-be-fired. Thus, instead of church multiplication, church division seems to be the order of the day. Where is the fault? It’s obviously in the insecure arms of the weak leadership.

I am part of a ‘facebook prayer group’ of a certain church. One day, I realized I wasn’t a part of that prayer group. Upon digging for clarity, I discovered that the church leadership had me removed from that group, because my blogs seemed to implicate that church. Thus far, I have not received a response as to what unholy or unbiblical content from my blog merited such an ungracious decision. If I am a sinner, where is the teaching to correct me? If there is no teaching, does it imply I am correct? If I am correct, why should I be removed? Or am I a terrible sinner beyond correction? This is not a personal rant, but an illustration of what I see as a failure of the church.

The church seeks easy, or evil, solutions today. Quite a few AGM’s (Annual General Meeting) of the contemporary church present a sad yet hilarious scene. The powerful oppress the powerless and the seemingly-more-spiritual oppress their brothers and sisters. If you speak the truth, you are mandated to shut up. Is this the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ? Laugh-out-Loud! It is the case of weak and unbiblical leadership. Weak leadership manifests in several ways. You are fired if you disagree; you are disciplined if you speak the truth. Both situations were a reality in the life of Martin Luther and many others who stood firm for truth. Welcome to the dirty church.

George Barna and Frank Viola expressed this sentiment as they dedicated their book, “To our forgotten brothers and sisters throughout the ages who courageously stepped outside the safe bounds of institutional Christianity at the risk of life and limb. You faithfully carried the torch, endured persecution, forfeited reputation, lost family, suffered torture, and spilled your blood to preserve the primitive testimony that Jesus Christ is Head of His church. And that every believer is a priest .a minister ... and a functioning member of God's house. This book is dedicated to you.” ¹ Weakness hides behind law, discards grace and Christ out of the church. The church then is sold to the devil.

I think it was Malcolm Muggeridge who ridiculed the church to say, “they have taken that which belongs to the soul and institutionalized it.” Do you belong to a dirty church that destroys a soul, or do you belong to a grace-abounding, Christ-filled, Spirit-anointed church?

You can for all you want shout at the top of your voice that you are anointed. But if you discard grace from your life, you are discarding Christ. If you are abandoning Christ from your life, are you a true disciple of the Lord Jesus? You need to answer these questions as much as I need to. Amen.

References:

¹ George Barna and Frank Viola, Pagan Christianity, 2007. 

The Church Building

On 30^th March 2013, BBC reported, “…the doors of St John's Episcopal Church are open to hundreds of Muslim worshippers, arriving for daily prayers. The familiar sounds of Christian hymns have been replaced with Islamic prayer in the chapel this Friday lunchtime and the church priest with the imam from the neighbouring mosque.” ¹ What’s your response to this? Some would welcome such a move, others may not have a view, and some traditional christians may express shock, disbelief, anger, and disappointment.

I once believed that ‘church’ referred to the building in which christian worship services are held. Little did I know then that the church is the community of the believers of the Lord Jesus Christ.

To understand this, let’s explore the Old Testament temple, which I believe is the precursor to the modern day church worship (I will not touch upon the “tent of meeting.”). Outside of sociopolitical compulsions, David considered the temple construction as a dwelling place for God, the Ark of the Covenant and the Tent of Meeting and its sacred furnishings (2 Samuel 7: 2, 5, 13; 1 Kings 8: 3-4), but Solomon built it. The holiness was ascribed to the temple when the Ark of the Covenant, Tent of Meeting and its sacred furnishings (institutional representations) were in the Most Holy Place, and when the glory of the Lord filled the temple (1 Kings 8: 10-12; 2 Chronicles 5, 7: 1-3). There was a tangible manifestation of God in the temple. Hence, the temple, without its institutional representations and the tangible manifestation of God, would not have acquired the intense holiness.

As days passed, the temple was used as state treasury, “emptied to pay tribute or filled and decorated with booty according to the power of the land.” ² Let us also bear in mind that the Ark of the Covenant was “presumably lost during the destruction of Jerusalem by the Babylonians in 587 BC. There was no ark in the second temple (Josephus, BJ 5. 219).” ³ Finally this temple was destroyed by the invading Babylonians.

A vision of a new temple was given to Ezekiel, but was not built according to the vision (Ezekiel 40-43). The second temple was built, but its foundations were apparently inferior to the first temple (Ezra 3: 12; Haggai 2: 3). Antiochus IV Epiphanes set up a pagan altar or statue, which the triumphant Maccabees cleansed (1 Maccabees 4: 36-59). The institutional representations in the Holy Place were limited to the seven-branched candelabrum, the table of showbread, and the incense altar. This temple lacked the glory of the Lord that was present in the first temple. The main structure of Herod’s temple (third temple) was completed in 9 BC.⁴ This temple was destroyed in AD 70 by Romans. The candelabrum, the table of showbread, and other objects were carried to Rome. This temple too lacked the glory of the Lord. Thus the second and the third temples without the tangible manifestations of God lacked the intense holiness that was present in the first temple (cf. after centuries of covenant disloyalty, the Lord withdrew HIS presence - Ezekiel 8: 6, 10:18).

The Lord Jesus had two opposing views of the temple, on one hand he respected it and on the other hand he relegated the temple to a subordinate position. HE called the temple the “house of God” and considered it holy (Matthew 12:4, 23: 17, 21; John 2:16-17). On the other hand, Christ taught that HE was greater than the temple (Matthew 12: 6), and deemed the temple as an umbrella for Israel’s spiritual emptiness (Mark 11: 12-26).⁵ Christ also proclaimed the temple’s destruction (Mark 13: 1-2), thus indicating the unworthiness of the obstinate Judaism of the divine presence of God incarnate – the Lord Jesus Christ. Thus the new temple was established in the congregation of believers of Christ (Matthew 18: 20; John 14: 23).

The Greek word “ekklesia” represents the New Testament church. Etymologically “ekklesia” means “to call out.” This supports the biblical doctrine of the church as a people called out, and separated from the world by God. “Specific Christian Assembly” is the New Testament meaning of the word “ekklesia.” The New Testament uses “ekklesia” in the sense of the ‘local church’ and ‘universal church.’ It is certainly not used for a Church building, or a particular denomination.

Christ, standing in the temple precincts called out people to HIMSELF (John 7: 37-38). HE emphatically stated HIMSELF as the temple (John 2: 21). Further, the body of the believers is also stated as the temple of the living God (1 Corinthians 6: 19; cf. Romans 12: 1-2). Therefore, the temple made of flesh and blood replaced the temple made of stones. We do not go into the temple to worship God, but we carry the temple to worship God in the community of the saints. This is the church.

So how do I respond to the sharing of the church building with the muslims? Do I vote for people or the building?

Since 2003, I did not consider the church as a building. I lived this belief and experienced the public wrath of the traditional christians. I was awarded a 6-month suspension from public worship, for providing oversight to an evangelistic hard rock concert that was held in the “church building.” The traditional christians considered this radical evangelistic event (where the gospel was proclaimed) as sacrilege, and even went to the extent of cleansing the church precincts of evil spirits.⁶ They disregarded people for the sake of the building!

Having been raised in the mainstream church that considers the building holy, it was initially difficult for me to comprehend such a radical deed of sharing the worship place with another faith community. But the building has lesser spiritual significance than people, so why not?

When 2 or 3 gather at my home to worship God, my home is a church building. I do have muslim friends, and would welcome any of them to stay at my home. But I would not prevent them from worshipping at my home, if such a need arises. If my muslim friend can worship at my home, then what prevents me from allowing muslims to worship from the church building?

Many christian worship services are being held in larger halls of hotels. In a hotel, there is a good possibility for a simultaneous occurrence of a christian worship, muslim worship, and even a sinful deed of a man satisfying his lust with a sex worker. Would the latter two destroy the sanctity of a christian worship? I don’t think so.

Many muslim countries have allowed the existence of churches. If such is their benevolence, why should a church close its doors to muslims? Shouldn’t the christian community also be benevolent?

These are however my secondary reasonings.

My primary reasoning is as follows:

(1) The universe is God’s dwelling place (cf. Isaiah 66:1; Acts 7: 49).

(2) The existential reality showcases God’s freedom to people to worship any entity of their choice irrespective of HIS pleasure, and that from within HIS dwelling place.

(3) If God says ‘yes’ to conflicting worship from within HIS dwelling place, why should man say ‘no,’ especially when the sacredness of worship has been taken out of building and brought into the realm of human body?

If the choice is between the building and people, my vote any day would be for the people. Do you agree or disagree? Please state your views, in case of disagreement.

May God bless us all. Amen.  

References:

¹ http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-21953899

² New Bible Dictionary, 2^nd Ed, p1169.

³ New Bible Dictionary, 2^nd Ed, p82.

⁴ But the work continued until AD 64.

⁵ New Bible Dictionary, 2^nd Ed, p1171.

⁶ This christian outreach event was deemed evil, because the hard rock (performed by christians) and its elements were considered evil.

Useful reads:

1. http://www.biblestudytools.com/dictionaries/bakers-evangelical-dictionary/temple.html

2. Pagan Christianity, Frank Viola & George Barna. 

Rejected by Church but Accepted by God

Loving our neighbor is more important than offerings and sacrifices (Mark 12:33), and love is the fulfillment of the law (Romans 13:10). So love needs to be practiced in the Christian church. Sadly, rejection is also practiced in churches. Here are some instances.

A church I was aware of disqualified many of her members from public reading of the Scripture (from the pulpit) because of their alleged inadequacies in pronunciation, punctuation, voice modulation etc. Ironically, the ‘experts’ were imperfect in reading as well!

When members fellowship after the worship service, we find people standing isolated without anyone to talk to. This reality is due to the existence of likeminded groups. Time is limited but topics are unlimited, so likeminded groups are busy managing their topics on time. The isolated person stands alone and rejected.

Pastors ought to lead by example, but they too reject their own members – ignorantly or intentionally. If a pastor is busy engaging a member of his choice, he denies the request of another desiring to talk to him. I was denied handshakes, since the pastor was preoccupied with his own agenda.

I was once depressed at work, so I desired prayer from an after-service intercessor. Citing the hot and humid evening, the intercessor scampered to the comforts of the home instead of spending quality time interceding for my needs. The prayer ended hastily and added much disillusionment to my sorrow.

Some churches encourage competitions which demonstrate individuals’ Bible knowledge (e.g. recitations, quizzes etc.). The upside is the motivation that members receive to read the Bible; the downside is rejection. The winners are awarded with gifts, whereas losers feel the brunt of pain from failure.

Gossips, insults, cleverly veiled insinuations, public condemnations on account of sins committed, dump the person in contention into much pain. The pain is acute when the person has repented of his sin, yet suffers rejection by the church. Then there are those who are falsely accused as sinners. Some in the church no longer believe in “innocent until proven guilty,” but rather in “guilty until proven innocent.” They treat this member as a proven sinner and reject him wholeheartedly.

These are just some forms of rejections in a church. But here are some personal and biblical insights about rejection in the church.

In the case of Scripture reading, any member who can read adequately well and is confident of reading in public must be offered an opportunity to read. If a church disqualifies people from reading Scriptures on the basis of excellence, the same policy should determine all other aspects of worship - worship leader, intercessor, preacher etc. This would be an interesting complexity to resolve!

Corporate worship is community worship. As far as possible, distinction between ‘good’ and ‘not-so-good’ should be avoided. Perfection in our life is impossible, but for the perfect sacrifice of the Lord Jesus on the cross. ‘Graciousness’ is a viable alternate to excellence. Sloppy participation in worship services is to be discouraged along with elimination based on excellence.

Rejection (isolation) of members after the worship service defeats the purpose of worship. We decide to love our neighbor during the worship service. But immediately after, we reject our unknown neighbor by loving those who love us and whom we love. It is our intentional responsibility to accept and integrate everyone into the body of Christ.

With respect to competitions, exposure of one’s lack of biblical knowledge is not enriching especially when these activities do not reveal a doctrinal understanding of the Bible. Verse recitations are beneficial, but the church should find a way to encourage and motivate the losers. The church should bear in mind that the majority are losers (if 10 participate, there are 3 winners and 7 losers).

Rejection on account of sins committed is the most deplorable of all rejections. This verse summarizes Christ’s response to a sinner, “Let the one among you who has never sinned throw the first stone at her” (John 8:7, J.B Phillips).

The church is a congregation of sinners; hence grace should be practiced profusely. The temptation is to be super-righteous and condemn the sinner while conveniently ignoring the fact that all are sinners. When those with Christ behaved super-righteously, HE instilled truth by affirming every one as sinners with a need to repent (cf. Luke 13: 1-5). Even if a person is convicted of sin, the church should exhibit grace, love, mercy, and patience in engaging this child of God.

If a convicted sinner is to be treated with love and grace, should not the one merely suspected of a sin treated with the same love and grace?

Church may reject, but God accepts all men if they believe in HIM. Christ came to “preach the Gospel to the poor... to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives and recovery of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed, to preach the acceptable year of the Lord’ (Luke 4:18, J.B Phillips).

Christ left the ninety-nine sheep to rescue the one sheep that had wandered off (cf. Matthew 18: 12-14).¹ If the Lord considered that one sheep too precious to lose, the church should also be gracious to all. Rejection opposes the gospel of the Lord Jesus.

Many deem it wise to sacrifice the one to save ninety-nine. In a controversial situation, an innocent is often the scapegoat. The world may justify this atrocity, but certainly not the church of Christ. The church should love and defend the lost and brokenhearted.

When asked who the greatest is in the Kingdom of Heaven, Jesus affirmed that the least is the greatest (cf. Matthew 18: 1-4). The one who is humble is the greatest in the Kingdom of God. Unless the church has a humble heart she cannot identify the rejected, even if he stands in front of her sight.

Think with me please. Christ hung out with the prostitute, leper, centurion, and the woman who had five husbands. Would these children of God be lovingly embraced by the local church today? Who is more recognized in the church – Mr. Insignificant Bloke or Mr. Prominent Righteous? The answer to the latter question will answer the former.

We desire healing through ‘signs and wonders,’ but ignore opportunities to heal the rejected, especially when he stares right into our face. May we not be those who seek signs from heaven by ignoring signs of our time (cf. Luke 11: 29-32). The Lord - greater than Jonah and Solomon – lived on earth, died for our sins, rose again from the dead to save and intercede for all, which includes the lost and brokenhearted. May we offer Christ’s love, comfort, and compassion to all those who need it desperately.

If the church rejects you, please know that God loves you. Amen.

Additional Note:

¹ The lost sheep in this parable refers to a believer; the lost sheep in the gospel of Luke refers to an unbeliever (Luke 15:4-7).