Posted on 11/30/2016 2:41:47 PM PST by SeekAndFind
A Canadian study has found that Mainline Protestant churches that have both modern worship services and teach a literal interpretation of the Bible grow faster.
(Photo: Reuters/John Gress)A parishioner cries as he signs a song of worship in the 7,000-seat Willow Creek Community church during a Sunday service in South Barrington, Illinois, November 20, 2005. Institutions like Willow Creek and Houston's Lakewood Church, each drawing 20,000 or more on a weekend, offer not just a vast, shared attraction but a path that tries to link individuals on a faith-sustaining one-to-one level beyond the crowd, observers and worshipers say.
The Canadian researchers who authored the study, "Theology Matters: Comparing the Traits of Growing and Declining Mainline Protestant Church Attendees and Clergy," surveyed 2,225 churchgoers in Ontario, Canada, and interviewed 29 clergy and 195 congregants. The study will be published in next month's issue of the Review of Religious Research.
"This study was important because it quantified empirically something that evangelical renewalists have been saying for decades — theology matters," said the Rev. Tom Lambrecht, vice president and general manager of Good News Magazine, a United Methodist publication, in an interview with The Christian Post.
Lambrecht, who served for 29 years as a United Methodist minister in Wisconsin, told CP that people who are interested in the things of God "want spiritual substance, not just a feel-good message or the opportunity to engage in community service." The Church, he said, has to to be distinct from and offer more than local civic associations and charities.
A solidly Orthodox Gospel that motivates churches to adapt their worship life and ministries to engage the next generation more effectively will be one where the message remains the same, but the means of delivery look different.
The study also showed that services at growing "churches featured contemporary worship with drums and guitars, while declining churches favoured traditional styles of worship with organ and choir."
"The use of contemporary Christian worship music is an example of that adaptation," Lambrecht said. "It has been around for over 40 years, yet some churches still resist making that adaptation." He added, however, that he's seen examples of churches that have more traditional styles of worship that are also yielding growth.
Pastor John Daffern who leads a Southern Baptist congregation in Columbus, Mississippi, calls himself "an apologist for the modern church."
(Photo: Chris Ellis Photograhpy)Josh Daffern, pastor of MTV Church in Columbus, Mississippi.
"I pastor a church that fits that mold," said Daffern, who leads MTV Church, in a recent interview with CP after he read some of the study's findings.
"We are theologically conservative, according to that study, and yet we are unashamedly modern and we are in a sustained period of growth in our church, and that is in direct contrast to many of the Mainline churches and even some evangelical churches.
"And I think the wisdom of that study is the two parts. There does need to be a modern sense of an expression of the faith while at the same time a conservative, Orthodox view of Christianity," he added.
Daffern said he believes that what church growth comes down to is how man-made controls are applied and both liberals and conservatives do that in their own way.
"For those who would say that we want to liberalize the tenets of Christianity and pick and choose which parts we are comfortable with and which parts we aren't, that's man exerting control over the theology," Daffern said.
"In the same way, a conservative theology yet a traditional approach is still trying to exert man-made control over religion, but it's not over the theology but over the cultural expression," which amounts to an approach which he describes as leaders saying, "Hey, we're going to stick to the Bible but we're going to pretend that it is the 1950s or the 1960s."
Those man-made controls rob the supernatural aspect out of Christian faith, he asserted.
Lead researcher of the study, David Haskell, said in an interview with The Guardian earlier this month that Christians who rely on a fairly literal interpretation of the Bible, "are profoundly convinced of [the] life-saving, life-altering benefits that only their faith can provide, [and] they are motivated by emotions of compassion and concern to recruit family, friends and acquaintances into their faith and into their church."
The study also found that only half of the clergy interviewed who are presiding over declining churches agreed that it was "very important to encourage non-Christians to become Christians," whereas every member of the clergy in a growing church felt that way.
A whopping 93 percent of clergy and 83 percent of worshipers from growing churches believed in the literal bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ, compared to 67 percent of worshipers and 56 percent of clergy from declining churches. One hundred percent of clergy and 90 percent of worshipers from growing churches believe God does miracles in response to prayer, whereas only 44 percent of clergy and 80 percent of worshipers from declining churches say so.
"One of the reasons that people are drawn to modern churches is because people don't want to be part of a monument." Daffern asserted. "They want to be part of a movement. One of the greatest beauties of Christianity is that it is living and active."
"In my world, as a Southern Baptist pastor, I tend to deal with churches that have a conservative view of the Bible yet a very traditional mindset, often times it is monument to a bygone era of what they imagine to be the golden age' of Christianity in America."
Such churches are perfectly poised to come back were the 1950s ever to return, he mused.
However, the problem with some more modern churches, he added, is that people sometimes make the modern expression itself an idol of sorts.
"But the key is to be modern enough while not being a mere imitation of everything else around in culture."
Well thank you for this little example of projecting like a cineplex.
Repent is changing your direction. Remorse (Is less important)/contrite (Of sinful deeds), however creates harmony towards others so that they may genuinely forgive as commanded. Giving the bike back would be a good start.
Where it’s possible that “can” be a good start. However you still borrowed it without permission and how do you erase that? You can’t give the borrowing back too. History is indelible.
This is where we realize we too are debtors to the grace of God. We can refuse it, but we can’t force it to occur either. When it occurs it is because God willed it, and we would be foolish to refuse it when God does.
Ultimately, repent is the only thing actually required by the Lord. We’d never be able to personally undo all the stealing of grace we stole away from other people, something that actually matters more than a bike, though in our materialistic system we get it upside down. But the Lord by furnishing new grace can make it possible to reverse this course in the world.
There was a legal case a few years ago where the USSC upheld the reclamation of funds that had been donated to the Salvation Army after being defrauded. I asked a knowledgeable friend about this, whether this meant the defrauded funds would be returned to those who were defrauded. Oddly enough the answer was no. They’ll go to another charity....
BTW, the instance of Zaccheus is interesting. He pledged, out of the wonder of salvation that he had accepted from the Lord, to better than make whom he had cheated financially whole.
That can literally be done sometimes. Presumably Zaccheus had also prospered in more honest ways — which the Lord had previously willed would occur — and this prosperity was now being shared with those who had been cheated.
An even more important thing is to share a multiplied share of grace with those willing to receive it and whom you had stolen grace from in the past. (One does not, however, bestow pearls upon pigs.) This is to live out a picture of the Lord.
Remember what parables are, things that are “thrown alongside” the truth.
A worldly reaction might be seen of a fallen person before a spiritual reaction.
Actually you mean you have no argument except to post the words whose meaning are the very thing that are in dispute, which the rest of the NT, Acts onward, are interpretive of. And which do not support the neoliteralistic Catholic interpretation of Jn. 6 and the gospel accounts of the LS. Nor does the rest of John or elsewhere in Scripture, in which spiritual life is never obtained by literally physical eating anything.
Among the problems the Catholic has conflating the rest of Scripture with Jn. 6, if "Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you," (John 6:53) is be understood literally as Caths invoked it, then since it is as much an absolute imperative as other "verily verily" statements, then it plainly means that no one who has not received as well as those who deny the "real presence" do have spiritual life in them.
Yet the NT church nowhere teaches that it is by receiving the Lord's supper that one obtains spiritual life in them, but which is believing the word of the gospel message of salvation, (Acts 10:43-47; 15:7-9; Eph. 1:13) and which conflates with the metaphorical interpretation expressed in the concluding statement, that "the flesh profits nothing. The words that I have spoken to you, are spirit and life." (v. 63)
Eating itself in Scripture does indeed profit nothing, for "meat commendeth us not to God: for neither, if we eat, are we the better; neither, if we eat not, are we the worse," (1 Corinthians 8:8) but as the gospel of John in particular teaches with its many metaphors, it is by believing that Jesus is the Christ, the "lamb" of God which takes away the sins of the world (Jn. 1:29) that one obtains spiritual life, receiving "living water" (Jn. 4) and becoming "born" from above, (Jn. 3) and a "temple" of the Holy Spirit, (cf. Jn. 2) and becomes a water "fountain." (Jn. 7)
And even modern Rome affirms Scripture-centric Prots as being born again.
In addition, the Lord said that font color="#5e11a6">"As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me." (John 6:57)
And how did Christ "live by the Father but how He said we should, "
" But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God. (Matthew 4:4) "
And thus Jesus saith, "My meat is to do the will of him that sent me, and to finish his work." (John 4:34)
All of which alone conflates with believing the word of God which results in obtaining spiritual life, and then living by the God/Christ. To Him be glory now and forever. Amen.
As John said without mentioning the Lord's supper but by believing Jesus Christ was manifest in the flesh (which is contrary to the Catholic "looks/tastes/tests as a bread but it "really" is Jesus Christ):
These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God. (1 John 5:13)
Well, we have a lively theological discourse going on here.
I’d warn, however, please try not to let it get personal (unless someone is really, truly, being a jerk in which case a short, sharp rebuke is fitting).
Snap judgments do have a way of becoming unfastened. Something that is “common” in the Roman Catholic church is not necessarily “universal” among all worshipers there. In fact the individual action of Christ, so prized in Protestant circles, is also responsible for individually fixing a lot of the problems in many Roman Catholic churchgoers.
Crazy Evangelical that I am, I won’t stand up for official Roman Catholic theology as a whole, but I WILL stand up for Jesus and how He works past the gnarliest theological problems on a surprisingly frequent basis. Jesus makes all believers into “disciples” — learners, students. Teaches them how to do the spiritual math, which none can do till He shows them. And keeps it up for a lifetime.
Work, work, work your way to the broad gate ... sad that you are so thoroughly herded by this false religion, which is not Christianity as it insults the Grace of God in Christ insisting its adherents must strive to obtain what GOD alone gives by HIS Grace not their merits. You might learn something really deep if you study 1 Cor 5:3-5. Then again ...
Unless the Shepherd snatched some off that path and, hand on their backs, kept putting them back on the narrow one... nobody would live eternally.
God saves looking forward. “Whosoever will.” Lack of every bit of guidance effort needed to effect this, is not something that God can ever be accused of. The ones to be lost won’t accept the result, under any circumstance; they’ve made up their eternal mind.
... I mean also, the sooner one quits fighting God the better of course. But “I fought God” is only the middle of the story for some.
Why should be obvious. 1. this 40 day fast was not even one the Lord examples was an annual practice, for instead of being done each year of His ministry, it was a special even at the beginning of His ministry, He being "driven" by the Spirit into the desrrt. .
2. Unlike the Lord's supper or baptism, the Lord never said that was a practice He enjoined, but only said in regards to this "when ye fast" and that such as sometimes necessary in cases of demonic possession.
3. If Catholics really want to follow Jesus like they present themselves as doing with their 40 days of Lent, then they need to go into solitude and eat and drink absolutely nothing.
Instead, the idea that giving up meat and peanut butter or something for 40 days is a much of a fast, let alone as following the 40 day absolute fast of Christ, is absurd.
Christians are to fast, and just water is a full fast, but this is to be led by God.
That would be making non-Catholics less-sinners and Catholics greater sinners. Is that your idea? Lol.
My, my SOMEone has an inflated idea about himself, perhaps.
If you knew ANYTHING about the Church you would know
*that their Judaic tradition led the way for their Apostolic Tradition.
**You would KNOW why Mary is so important.
Well, never mind,you do have your own bias, PERHAPS.
PERHAPS the LOW ROAD, the easier path, is all that that non-Catholics can do. PERHAPS they simply can't make the higher grade, can't cut the less difficult stuff.
Suppose a lot of this “more difficult stuff” is in fact self effort that comes to vanity?
“I bear them witness that they have a zeal for God, but not according to knowledge.”
100% Wrong.
I thought your Protestants knew you Bible. I guess I was wrong.
Try again.
That could apply to Hindus, Buddhists or Muslims too.
100% Wrong.
I thought your Protestants knew you Bible. I guess I was wrong.
Try again.
Rejecting Christ can be forgiven??
And Mary... what can I say about Mary. Excellent example of motherhood. She needed all the grace she could get so that her holy Offspring wouldn’t get her all proud like the stereotypical Jewish mother. She mostly succeeded; not entirely. That is why she needed a Deliverer too.
What in the Roman church is often attributed to the tender love of Mary... is the tender love of Jesus. Some folks have a lot of problems with “tender love of Jesus.” They might not say it, but might think down deep... this Jesus is gay or something! No normal man could be like that! And the point is that Jesus was not a normal man. He was a Hero of Heroes who did not care how little people thought of Him when He stooped very, very low.
“1. When Protestants don’t go to Sunday service EVERY week they aren’t breaking the COMMANDMENT on keeping holy the Lord’s Day?”
Where is this commandment you speak of? There is only a commandment to keep the SABBATH holy, and it says nothing about going to “Sunday service”.
“2. And, when Protestants divorce and remarry they are keeping the COMMANDMENTS?”
Well not all Protestants divorce and remarry, first of all, but let me remind you that Jesus himself said that divorce is allowed in certain cases.
Any way, what does this have to do with God placing different standards on Protestants or Catholics? If divorce is not allowed in a certain situation, then it isn’t allowed for any Christian. It doesn’t matter what your church, my church, or any church says about the matter, since the instruction came from God.
100% right. FIFY
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.