As usual, your comments hit the mark. I’m glad you’ve chosen to come here and share some insights. I always appreciate the dialog I have with you.

I pray that all reading here attend a “camp” church and not a “village” one!

Your comments are appreciated. Don’t worry that you have “killed the thread.” Actually, this post has received more comments than usual.

One most important point I neglected to address when answering Adam Clagg’s query is that the missing factor in our churches and pastors is that of taking special care to listen.

I am not accusing any of you here of that.

Listening, however, is at the very center of the problem.

Remember the Bible account (2 Kings 5) of the servants of Naaman giving him a constructive suggestion (2 Kings 5:13)?

Why didn’t Naaman immediately issue the order, “Off with your head!”?

Because he did not have what I call “Administrator’s Disease” (compare Romans 12:8, “he that ruleth, with diligence”) with its corresponding caution (Romans 12:14, “Bless them which persecute you: bless and curse not”).

Naaman was “open to suggestion.” His servants both respected him enough that they went ahead and made the suggestion, and believed in him enough that they did not fear retaliation.

It helps to have been an English teacher from 1962 until 2001, because when I read the Bible I am very aware of the literary structure present there. That is why I know that Romans 12:8 legitimately connects with Romans 12:14.

Pardon me if many of you are administrators!

But someone needs to tell you, and so that is why the Bible emphasizes the need to listen.

When we listen, we build trust in the person who is sharing with us what they wish to say. If they believe they can come to you and share, and that you will make the appropriate and justified Biblical response, you have won their loyalty.

If you have won that kind of loyalty, you won’t be losing folks out the back door.

(How do I know? My school administrators always noticed that students who were assigned to my classes in inner city Detroit almost never dropped out of school. They wondered why. I just told you.)

If you have won that kind of loyalty, and fulfill the rest of the Bible’s mandate for teaching Scripture (1 Timothy 4:16; 2 Timothy 2:2), you hardly need to be concerned about schism.

People will come, even flock to your church, because you demonstrated you care when you clearly and evidently demonstrate that you continue to listen. Provided, that is, that you also feed people spiritually, and teach them how to feed themselves.

The Bible does not sanction our creating or fostering a dependency relationship with our hearers. We should make every effort to so teach others that we literally teach ourselves out of a job.

Many years ago a remarkable black pastor was browsing books in John’s Bible and Bookstore, just like I was. I asked Pastor Goodin, “What are you doing to teach your flock how to study the Bible for themselves?” Pastor Goodin said, “Jerry, I would never do that. If I did, I’d soon be out of a job!” I told the dear pastor, “The opposite of what you fear is the truth!”

The church that asked me to find another church that believed like I do did send one of their missionaries to talk with me some years later. I knew the parents of the missionary (they attended a different church, Methodist, in a small town nearby), and through them, the missionary (served in Spain) obtained my book, The New Treasury of Scripture Knowledge, and told me he greatly appreciated my work.

I was certainly most willing to share with him exactly what happened. He was most gracious and interested.

He told my wife and I that many he had talked to shared a similar reaction to the lack of acceptance, all having felt they had been “frozen out of the fellowship.”

The local church evangelist from that church and I shared excellent fellowship, and he introduced me to many at their local church camp.

I noticed, though, that the pastor’s wife kept a close eye on us (really me, I am sure) to listen in on all I had to say (before I had been asked to find another church).

I am absolutely sure I said nothing indiscrete or objectionable.

I guess they were afraid that since I was an author, I would try to change the doctrines of their church. That is what one board member’s wife told my wife at the grocery store.

I had no such intention, and never had.

When I accepted Christ as my Saviour I was attending a Methodist Youth Fellowship at the local Methodist church. I had been raised at Highland Park Baptist Church in Detroit. I surely did not try to upset my Methodist friends by arguing the issue of baptism! Or Calvinism!

When a Presbyterian pastor urged me to attend his church, since it was close to where I first taught school, I did. I didn’t discuss issues that Methodists might urge against Presbyterians, or that Baptists might urge against Presbyterians. I kept strictly to what the Bible teaches and avoided controversy.

That pastor put me right to work. My high school Sunday school class grew from 8 to 40 regular attenders, and the youth group from a handful to 300 on our regular contact list.

But none of those churches were “village churches.” I would certainly be welcomed again to any of them, but they are all too far away to attend.

Even my former students who are now pastors (especially Pastor Emery Moss of Strictly Biblical Ministries in Detroit, who often has me on his radio program, and mentions me oftener than that) would welcome me with open arms and put me right to work! His church, though, is over 80 miles away.

But out here in the boondocks, where I live on 15 wooded rural acres where I have blessed peace and quiet, there do not seem to be any local “camp churches” looking for a Sunday school teacher.

But the real loss is to the church that declined my membership application. Anywhere I have served the Lord in a teaching capacity the attendance at the church and Sunday school increased, sometimes skyrocketed. So I grieve a little over the many who could have been reached for deeper Bible knowledge and spiritual commitment that were not.

Such choices make a huge difference for eternity.

I placed notes on how to remedy this problem in The New Treasury of Scripture Knowledge at Hebrews 3:13; Hebrews 6:9; and Jonah 4:11. See also the cross references in Nelson’s Cross Reference Guide to the Bible at Romans 15:7.

Jerome- You said we should “check into why people are leaving.” How is this done?

Is there a way to get honest answers where the one who walked out the back door feels comfortable and where we don’t get defensive?

Most guests and members/regular attendees that we lose will not tell us the truth, but they do tell other people…

Local churches sociologically fall into two basic types: “village churches” and “camp churches.”

“Village churches” are so structured that a person must literally be born into the local church nine months early, before entrance into this world, or they will not be welcomed. People are not there primarily because of a desire for spiritual fellowship and spiritual growth. Newcomers are “frozen out of the fellowship,” not welcomed, isolated, and otherwise rejected, and never admitted into the leadership.

It is a good thing, I suppose, that I am not God! For if I were, I would find a way very fast to close every church that fits the “village church” sociological structure.

Why? Such churches are an absolute disgrace to the Gospel, and dishonoring to our Lord Jesus Christ.

In a day when the population of the country is quite mobile, and often people are uprooted from their home communities because of employment requirements or economic conditions, churches ought to expect there will be newcomers to the church and the congregation who do not originate from the local church community, and should work hard to work these newcomers into the fellowship.

The pastor who invited me to seek another church that “believes like I do” made a rather remarkable, surely for me unforgettable, statement when he first visited my home.

He said, “Jerry, you talk too much about the Bible and too much about the Lord.”

That should have been my clue right then and there. But my prior experience of entering new churches had taught me to expect that over time people will get to know me and receive me into the fellowship. That did not happen at all in this pastor’s church.

When I “ghost wrote” Dr. Carl George’s book, Prepare Your Church for the Future, I learned about the village and the camp church categories. Carl said during a telephone call, “Jerry, you wrote my book. How could you not instantly recognize a village church for what it is? You shouldn’t have further darkened the door.” Carl was right.

Surely the pastor and board members at that church were totally unaware of Malachi 3:16.

The trouble is that there are no churches within nearly 30 miles of where I live that would be suitable to attend. For a time I attended a Wesleyan church where I was also asked to teach Sunday school, an adult class. The pastor was wonderful, the class was superb, but because of the distance I could not continue, particularly when conditions at school where I taught high school English became more demanding when I was placed under a different department head.

Interestingly, when I shared my “village church” experience with my class members, they said their own church once fit the “village church” pattern, but thankfully when they moved to a new building purchased from a Nazarene church congregation, there were enough newcomers such that the church was transformed into a “camp church.”

A “camp church” is a church where people are there because they have had the spiritual experience of the new birth and faith in Christ. They are eager to grow spiritually, love the Bible, want to talk about the Lord and His Word, and eagerly welcome newcomers and know how to bring them into the fellowship.

I suspect, therefore, that every church could learn much if they would take careful note who they lose out the back door. If they would check into why people are leaving, they could learn much that would help them turn the local church around and make it what it should be, an inviting and caring center that promotes spiritual growth. They need to focus upon what is involved in heeding what is written in Hebrews 3:13.

I found, working with young people, that one must not wait until Sunday to follow up on how they are doing spiritually. I kept in contact with my high school Sunday school class all through the week informally. It got to the place, a good place, where the parents would let me know if it had been too long since I last visited them.

I appreciate your comments and welcome you to this discussion.

Your experience illustrates the point that personality and theological issues are generally involved in people not associating with a local church. Although I had the perspective of the individual in mind at the time, I do not suggest these issues could only be the fault of the individual. I have Christian friends who sincerely desire to be in a local church but have very limited options due to the region of the country in which they live.

Your desire to be associated with a local church implies you do not hold the view that the local church is irrelevant.

I agree there are many problems in the churches, but the solution is not to abandon the local church concept, but rather return to a biblical model.

The question was asked at Post 4 above by Danny,

“I understand a person may leave a particular church. But why stay out? There is something wrong somewhere–in the theology or in the personality (or both). We all probably know people who assert they can be a Christian without going to church. It has been my experience these people don’t stay faithful. Typically, there is a personality conflict or some other factor that compels the person to refrain from submitting to the fellowship of a local church.”

I live in a very predominantly Roman Catholic area. One local church here is Charismatic-Pentecostal, on the wild side, so it would not serve as a place for me or my family to worship.

Another church rejected my membership application, and the pastor suggested I find a church that believes like I do. That after attending there five years, being requested to attend the membership class, and having substituted as a Sunday school teacher for the pastor whenever he was otherwise occupied.

I could go on, with much more.

I am very sure the trouble is not with me. The trouble is with our very sick local churches almost everywhere.

Norm Geisler and Ron Rhodes came out with a book last year titled Convictions Without Compromise. I just got it, and enjoyed reading it. Main point in that book: In essentials, unity; in nonessentials liberty; and in all things charity. I think they got that right, though I don’t know the chapter and verse reference on that one.

Some folks major on the minors and are unwilling to admit to their fellowship anyone who may have studied the Bible, church history, apologetics, hermeneutics, and theology more thoroughly and deeply than they have.

And here I am just a retired English teacher and reading specialist. But I guarantee you one thing, I really do know how to read, and read more by accident than most folks do on purpose, and have been doing so for a very long time.

I did produce two standard reference works on Bible study titled The New Treasury of Scripture Knowledge and Nelson’s Cross Reference Guide to the Bible.

You will find the answer and solution to the problem given in the cross references I have furnished for Romans 15:7 and Hebrews 6:9.

Be sure to look them up and consider them carefully!

Someone asked me to sort of sum up the root of what I see as non-negotiable with Barna, so I’ll break the ending of my first post and do so…and this is where I would like to know if I am wrong as you research this (time permitting of course).

Barna’s take on the Biblical notion of the Church: The Bible does not mandate the local Church concept. As far as scripture goes there is no such thing, it is a construct we have created. The real question (and best I could tell only important question for Barna) is you being the Church. This is what I got out of Revolution and a partial transcript/overview of a talk session Barna was a part of with 2(?) other pastors… (that is not the only thing I got out of Revolution, there were a number of very good things).

My observation: No self respecting Evangelical or FWB would deny the importance of being the Church – but, that has to be understood partly in relation to the local Church or for others the Parish Church concept, which really emphasizes the local Church in its own unique way. Otherwise, being the Church is devoid of its Biblical connotations – it becomes a meaningless phrase that can be molded to our own personal expectation, desires, etc… This is where I found your scriptural and historically based comments on the local Church dead on – I plan on stealing a couple of those sentences and giving you zero credit, another talent that is not so unique to me!

The Individual’s Christian Experience in Relation to the Local Church: If it is beneficial for you to take advantage of the local Church and if it meets your spiritual growth needs, then it is a great thing. If it does not, don’t sweat it – you can access other mediums to grow spiritually and you can be the Church with other people who have similar spiritual interests.

My observation: This is how we can make sense of Barna’s doublespeak concerning the importance/un-importance of the local Church – it is not a Biblical concept, it is a personal choice or need based construct – Barna can take it or leave it, promote it or deemphasize it depending on the audience or paragraph or book, because the local Church is not rooted in Scripture. Although, if I recall correctly after the first round of generally strong critique he did “clarify” on eklessia. I find this approach to the local Church amazingly at ease with larger trends and attitudes in American Spirituality in general – I tend to agree with Barna’s critics, who state that Barna essentially analyzed correctly the state of affairs, and then deployed a definition of the Church that lets him define Christianity and discipleship in a way that embraces what his research on attitudes and actions discovered. I will resist the urge to go into preacher mode and comment at length on itching ears, etc… plus, then I’d have to face up to the fact my ears itch a little bit on some issues as well

While I would not agree with Ben Witherington up at Asbury on some things about the Church (probably a host of things – for one I am certainly more Free Church oriented) his comments on Viola’s and Barna’s Pagan Christianity sums up what I see going on in Barna’s recent works as whole – the highlighted portion sums up my concern – my million dollar question – is Barna playing lose and fast with scripture and historical evidence – if yes, how should we respond individually and corporately? The main concern for me is what Barna is teaching and how I as an individual and we as a corporate group should respond, since he is being promoted as helpful for discipleship – a concept that I believe must be linked to a Biblically based concept of the local Church?

Everybody makes mistakes, says dumb things (a regularly occurrence in my life-I bet I’ll read this post tomorrow and find some comment that will embarrass me!), contradicts themselves, contradicts Scripture – but, from my vantage point Barna is (was?) not making isolated gaffes. It is a much bigger issue. If you get time to look into this, I want to comprehend the grid that informs Barna’s public teachings. I think I already do, but if someone else can show me where I am wrong and how we can make sense of Barna differently this is certainly an issue I would actually rather be wrong on!

These comments from Witherington are from some time back – when I had to research and answer some questions about Barna within a para-church setting. I think a discussion ensued between Witherington and Viola over Witherington’s critique, but to my knowledge the basic premise of Witherington on this stayed the same – if you find otherwise, again I am wide open to any recent developments and again I don’t embrace everything Witherington says – but I think that unlike Barna, he is trying to be intellectually honest. For more detailed popular critiques on Barna you can read what articles in print media as diverse as Christianity Today and Reformation 21 had to say about Barna’s more recent claims. This of course should be an immediate red flag – when Witherington, Christianity Today, and Reformation 21 all have articles criticizing Barna’s claims you have a good indicator something is awry. Within Evangelicalism that is a fairly diverse group.

Witherington on Barna/Viola:

“First a word of disclaimer. I know Frank Viola, indeed for some years he has asked me loads of good and telling questions via email. I did not really know what his take was on various matters, but I gladly answered his questions. It is interesting to me that this book appears to take no notice of various of these answers which I have given, nor are any of my works found in the bibliography at the end of the book. Perhaps I have missed something in the minutiae of the truly minute footnotes at the bottom of each page, but now I am wondering why exactly I have answered all those questions over the years. It’s a pity.
Frank Viola is a sharp person, but neither he nor George Barna really interact in this book with the scholarly literature that would call into question their strident claims and theses. They are arguing a particular case, and so they largely cite sources that support their case, for example Robert Banks’ work on Pauline house churches comes in for heavy usage. Their claim to present us with bare historical fact and to stand always on the Biblical high ground needs to be seen for what it is from the outset— good and powerful rhetoric meant to warm the cockles of the hearts of all who affirm Sola Scriptura, but when one actually examines some of the major claims closely, they will not stand close and critical scrutiny.” – This can still be found on Witherington’s blog and so can the other articles. (This pretty well sums up my opinion of Barna’s work, you can understand that if I believe this about Barna’s total project – even when he is helpful in isolated ways, I am not going to be very excited about his promotion).

Thanks Danny – you are definitely the man. Your exposition of Scripture and interaction on this is a huge credit to Randall House (although I know this is your personal blog, and it does not necessarily represent the views of your work organization).
CC