Below is an excerpt from my column in the latest issue from Outreach Magazine on the research we did for the 100 Largest & Fastest Growing Churches. It's always a list that generates a lot of discussion-- some of it gets heated. This article (co-written with Lizette Beard from our LifeWay Research team) seeks to address some of the concerns people raise about the list.

I had the chance to interview some of the pastors of the churches on this list and will be posting them in the coming days. For now, check out the article (reproduced in part here), and feel free to dialog in the comment section here at the blog.

AS I SEE IT: ED STETZER

Is It All About Ego?
And Other Common Misconceptions

My team has a love-hate relationship with this project of researching the 100 Largest and 100 Fastest-Growing U.S. Churches. They love "discovering" growing churches and learning from the churches whose commitment to reach people lands them on the lists year after year. Their favorite part is interviewing church leaders, hearing the stories of transformed communities and individual life change. They can't get enough of that stuff.

Then there are the rough days when they can't get past the gatekeepers, whose job it is to protect pastors from research companies wanting to conduct surveys. Or when they can't find out who in the church actually knows the attendance numbers. Or they can't seem to get someone to grasp the criteria of attendance not membership, weekend not weekly. And then there is the rare but very rude staff member. Fortunately, my team is familiar with what it takes to handle a sometimes difficult personality, so they have strategies in place.

But what bothers them the most is the lack of understanding about what this project is--a couple of lists that are simply meant to tell the story of how churches throughout the country are reaching people.

As you read this issue, we ask you not to miss the stories behind the lists because the real-life examples of what God is doing in and through the local church are the best part (see Page 60). We believe pastors and leaders of churches of all sizes can learn from these churches. We have. Their examples of innovation, creativity and risk taking--all to reach people and then give God the glory--have inspired each of us personally.

As we take a look at some of these churches, we're also sharing some of the more common criticisms and comparing them to what we've heard from these churches. Unfortunately, we know telling the stories won't dissuade all the critics. But we've learned that criticism actually does our research team and Outreach a favor by driving up the buzz and keeping us on our toes.

What about conversion growth?

Aren't these megachurches just swapping sheep and drawing in church hoppers?

I can honestly say that most of the pastors we talked to in this study are strategically focused on reaching out to those disconnected from faith and church and helping them learn about God. They seek to connect them to the community of believers....

Mike Bodine, senior leader at Central Christian Church (No. 11 Largest, No. 31 Fastest-Growing), describes what God is doing through the personal relationships Central Christian attendees are building in Las Vegas.

"It's a term we call one life--that every person at Central should have at least one life they're praying for and building an intentional relationship with," he explains. "And then they should be prepared to journey with that person and invite them to come hear a life-changing message of radical grace."

Las Vegas is experiencing a renewed spiritual hunger, Bodine says. In one weekend, Central Christian baptized 1,200 people.

"These are real stories of real people pulling back from the brink of suicide. Marriages are being restored, families being put back together, and people are becoming productive in society."

What about mobilization for service?

Aren't people at these churches just sitting and soaking?

On the contrary, some of the churches we talked to have made weekends of service an annual or twice-a-year activity. We heard stories of churches cleaning up foreclosed neighborhoods, sponsoring health clinics and stocking community food pantries. As a result, communities are seeing no-strings-attached compassion--the Church being the Church. (See PutYourFaithInAction.com for more information.) And many, perhaps most, of these churches are strategically and tangibly demonstrating the love of Christ to people with needs and hurts.

Christ's Church of the Valley in Covina, Calif. ( No. 57 Fastest-Growing, see Page 69) learned that the largest homeless population in Los Angeles County is single moms and started an after-school program

"We take these single moms who are trying to work two or three jobs just to make ends meet, and we go in with our teams to local schools," Senior Pastor Jeff Vines says. "Our goal was to have an after-school program in every elementary school in San Gabriel Valley."

"So while people have made a commitment to the ministry, at the same time there is a renewed passion for service," Vines says. "They come in to use their gifts, their talents and their abilities to make a difference in the world."

What about the churches that will never make the list?

Isn't it true that many healthy, growing churches will never qualify to be listed on some Largest or Fastest-Growing list?

Of course. I have been to some incredible churches and know great pastors who will never be on these lists. Not because they aren't reaching the lost, seeing life transformation or reaching out to their communities. I know churches that plant several churches a year. Since they give away people to the new plants, they barely "break even." Others are growing at a pace that eclipses (by percentage) those on these lists, but they don't yet meet the qualification for the Fastest-Growing list of at least 1,000 attendees. Still others are seeing steady growth, but they are in a geographic location or demographic situation where it's just harder and slower--but the ministry is still good, and it is blessed. There is nothing about these lists or this report that is ever meant to diminish or take away from the great work so many of these churches are doing. If a church doesn't make the list, I have to ask, "So what?"

Head over to Outreach Magazine to read the entire article. Feel free to give your thoughts in the comment section.

I just received my copy of the Assemblies of God Enrichment Journal. It contains what must be the longest article I have ever written. ;-)

I've posted the introduction here. If that interests you, be sure to read the entire article right here and then share your comments at the blog. The Enrichment Journal is always a well done resource and I don't know any other denominational "journal" quite like it.

Introduction

I have always been struck by the first few minutes of the movie Saving Private Ryan.The Americans have landed on the beach. Captain Miller (Tom Hanks) sees an opening for the men with protection on the other side. He says, "That's the route." Immediately, he sends six men through the gap and they are brutally killed.

The sergeant, who is more experienced, warns Miller with a stern look, "That's a ... shooting gallery, Captain."

Miller/Hanks responds, "That's the route." Miller commands another group of six -- "Go." They obey and are brutally cut down.

Miller turns to the next six and says, "It's the only way ... you're next." The third group of six loses several but finally breaks through the German lines. It is hard to watch. Many people close their eyes, unable to stomach the harsh realities of combat.

That is what church planting looked like when I started in the late '80s. Planters and their teams, unprepared for the challenges, quickly ran into harvest fields that soon became killing fields. They were excited for the task, but they were not ready to face the realities.

When I came to Buffalo, New York, to plant my first church, eight of us began with great enthusiasm. Now, 20 years later, only one of our churches remains. Four pastors are out of the ministry; three are out of their marriage and faith.

My interest in developing ways to change some of these brutal realities started in a conversation in St. Louis, Missouri. My denomination wanted to stop the carnage, so they brought our church-planting leadership together and asked, "What systems can we create to change the tide?" I was determined to be a part of the solution. I later wrote my Ph.D. dissertation focusing on how church-planter support systems impact church plants.

The past 20 years have produced radical changes in how churches are planted. Success rates are increasing. A 2007 North American Mission Board study assessing multidenominational church-plant survivability rates shows how 99 percent of church plants now survive their first year, 92 percent survive their second year, 81 percent survive their third, and 68 percent survive their fourth. These are encouraging statistics, especially in light of pessimistic reports that "80 percent of church plants fail in the first year."

We are doing many things better and much of this is due to the emergence and development of church-planting systems. This article will explore church-planting systems, their components, and the impact they currently have in church planting. I will address church-planting systems in three ways: who uses them, how effective they are, and what we have learned about them.

The rest of the article is here.

The most recent issue of Outreach Magazine is out. If you are a subscriber, you have already seen it... but if not, let's get that going!

In this issue, my column asks a simple question, "Should We Really Listen to the Unchurched?"

I am always fascinated by the blog comments I receive from people who say, "We don't need to do research, just read the Bible." Now, I am one who wants people to read the Bible a lot more, but it seems that when you read that Bible you find examples of people like Paul: seeking to understand the culture as they reach it.

I do think that sometimes people listen too much to the culture and have written about that on many occasions. Sometimes people over-contextualize. But, usually the ones who object to listening to the culture and contextualization are, well, the ones who often need to do both.

So, here is my column in the most recent issue.

Should We Really Listen to the Unchurched?

Everybody listens to someone. As parents, we teach our children to listen and comply with what we tell them. As employees, we follow the guidance of those in authority over us.

However, as ministry leaders, we may wonder from whom we should take our instruction. Our theology tells us to look to God, but can we also find any insight listening to people outside the Church?

In our latest LifeWay Research book, Lost and Found: The Younger Unchurched and the Churches That Reach Them (B&H), we studied young adults' views of religion, spirituality and the Church. We used those findings to provide instruction and examples of how best to connect this generation to God and church.

As good as research can be, some question the idea of doing this type of analysis, saying we're surveying the wrong crowd. Let's agree on this: God, through His Word and the work of the Holy Spirit, is the unequivocal authority on ministry and church. But the next questions are: "Do the beliefs of the unchurched really have value? Should their ideas and perspectives inform our evangelistic strategy?" Here is my answer to both: YES.

A Hopeful Response

I believe that God is honored when we listen to the longings of the unchurched because it is mercy and mission that compel us to listen. We pay attention to the longings of the lost because we care for them (mercy) and desire to make the Gospel known to them as clearly as possible (mission). Knowing the people we hope to reach allows us to better address their concerns, articulate the truth and apply the Gospel.

Some believe this generation is disinterested in the things of God and thus, demand the Church alter its beliefs and mission. Our research indicates quite the opposite.

A Spiritual Generation

Spiritual interest is high among the younger generation. Although being spiritual does not always equate with being religious, only 18 percent said they were neither spiritual nor religious.

A majority (81 percent) of younger unchurched adults in America believe that God or a higher supreme being exists. Research also shows, that the theological beliefs of unchurched people in their 20s are closer to historic Christianity than the beliefs of older unchurched generations.

Young adults certainly are more interested in Christianity than many think. Almost 90 per- cent of the unchurched in their 20s would be willing to listen
if someone wanted to tell them about Christianity. Three out of 5 would be willing to study the Bible if a friend asked them.

Asking the Church to Be the Church

Our data showed that the younger unchurched see Christianity as relevant and viable, but more about organized religion than loving God and people. They believe the Church is full of hypocrites and is unnecessary for spiritual development.

However, much of what they are looking for can be found in God and His Church. Our churches should be embodying authentic community, a life of depth, a responsibility to serve others and the desire to connect with other generations. Our research revealed these are the very things that the younger unchurched deemed important.

The younger unchurched don't need us to re-create our message to accommodate their needs. Rather, what they are often seeking is what we need to be doing for the Church to actually be the Church.

Ed Stetzer is president of LifeWay Research (LifeWayResearch.com) and co-author (with Richie Stanley and Jason Hayes) of Lost and Found: The Younger Unchurched and the Churches That Reach Them (B&H). You'll find Ed's research blog at OutreachMagazine.com.

Richard Mouw, president of Fuller Theological Seminary, has a solid article at Christianity Today responding to - and somewhat sympathizing with - Rev. Katharine Jefferts Schori's remarks about "the Great western heresy." And what is the "great western heresy" the Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church in America wants to warn us of? Individualism. Mouw writes,

In her opening address to the Episcopal Church's recent General Convention, the Rev. Katharine Jefferts Schori... made a special point of denouncing what she labeled "the great Western heresy"--the teaching, in her words, "that we can be saved as individuals, that any of us alone can be in right relationship with God." This "individualist focus," she declared, "is a form of idolatry."

Dr. Mouw rightly agrees that there are dangerous forms of individualism that had plagued the church, and points out that Christianity Today has articles reflecting a call back to a more corporate understanding and experience of the Christian faith.

It is certainly true that God is saving a people (corporate) for himself, and with them all of creation so that in the end his redemptive work through the death and resurrection of Jesus is truly cosmic in scope. Yet this does not take anything away from the reality that God saves individuals. Mouw explains,

We evangelicals never downplay the importance of individuals--as individuals--coming to a saving faith in Jesus Christ. We never say that an individual's very personal relationship to God is not important. What we do say is that individual salvation is not enough.

Some who are talking through this very issue are simply talking past one another - some wanting to talk about bricks (individuals) while others wants to talk about the building (the community of faith). Yet others are clearly talking about another gospel altogether.

Dr. Mouw's article is a good, short read, as is R. Scott Clark's response to Schori (via Justin Taylor). Wes Kenney agrees with the Presiding Bishop here (something I am sure was difficult for him). You can also download Katharine Jefferts Schori's address here.

What do you think? What are the dangers at play here? How is the Presding Bishop right, how is she wrong? Why does it even matter to us?

Cathy Grossman and USAToday writes about christian accountability groups. You can read the whole article here.

It begins with:

Does the Capitol Hill house on C Street -- home to several congressmen although it eludes property taxes by being listed as a church -- give prayer "accountability" groups a bad name? Should elected officials seek God in secrecy while hiding sins from public scrutiny?

The fact that such a group exists in Washington, D.C., combined with recent news about participants, makes it national news.

She explains what these groups are all about:

But millions of men and women belong to small prayer and accountability groups where they read and discuss Scripture together and hold each other to truthful living in God's name. Remember Promise Keepers, the men's group that hit a popularity peak in the 90's? It stressed accountability groups heavily and even if PK no longer packs stadiums for rallies, many of those small groups continue to enriching lives.

The question that Cathy address deals with secrecy in such groups and the honesty required. I explained, "Accountability groups are only as good as the truthfulness of their participants."

Cathy linked to my blog on accountability groups and questions. That blog is here. The USAToday story is here.

Here is the blog to which the story refers:

My new article went up at Sermon Central. I have the privilege of serving on the advisory council for Sermon Central and am always appreciative when they publish our research or writings.

Check it out below and share your thoughts in the comments.

How Do You Handle the Word of God?

Recently I had the opportunity to travel to Europe to speak to pastors, missionaries, and church leaders. Europe is one of the most difficult and often discouraging ministry contexts in the world. Yet, the trip was incredible. Along the way, I met courageous men and women who were faithful to Jesus and his Great Commission within a culture that largely rejects their faith.

I visited worship services there and on four other continents. In every worship service I visited, no matter what country I was in, I had a simple expectation: the preacher would use the Bible in the sermon. God's Word is certainly (at least some) part of the vast majority of Christian sermons. If a Christian preacher doesn't use the Bible in the sermon, in fact, I'd be hard-pressed to call it Christian preaching.

But that's where the sermon similarities end. Pastors handle God's Word in many different ways depending upon their ministry context. In some ways, this variety can actually be good; after all, preachers are charged to preach the Word to a particular audience. Jesus himself taught in different ways at different times in his ministry. When he preached to the religious leaders of his day, he preached forcefully. In the Sermon on the Mount, he preached to his core group, the disciples, and he challenged them to go deeper. To the crowds, he preached differently still. So preachers who preach differently in different contexts should not surprise us.

At LifeWay Research, we recently studied the variety of ways pastors use the Bible by looking at 450 different sermons (all by different preachers). We gave our research team the audio files of these sermons and some objective questions about how the preacher handled God's Word.

Thus, let me share about the research and my views on preaching at the same time. Later, we will release a standard report; in the meantime, let me share some of the results.

First, a bit about our methodology. The sermons were randomly selected from two prominent online audio sermon sources. The dates the sermons were preached fell between August 31 and September 14, 2008. A percentage of sermons were even checked a second time to verify and confirm that the research team was accurately reviewing the material.

Our sample certainly impacted the results of our study (which is why we reveal the sample source). We know that those who upload their sermons to online sites are different than those who do not. Are they younger, more evangelical, better educated, and more computer literate? We do not know for sure. But this is not an analysis of ALL preachers, only of the sample described.

Sure enough, in these 450 sermons, the preachers handled God's Word differently. The way pastors organized their sermons varied widely. Half of pastors traveled verse-by-verse through a passage, and almost half organized their sermons around a theme. Almost one out of five pastors named and explained a Greek word in their sermon. More than half explained verses by using other verses in the Bible.

Even though different preachers handle the Word differently, I believe they're all obligated to teach it as authoritative, not merely as a scriptural footnote proving something they already wanted to say. Four things have to be true about a pastor's handling of the Bible if that pastor is to preach authoritatively.

1. The Word should be heard

Our central task as preachers is to present God's Word. Paul asked a series of questions that should haunt all of us who preach: "How can they call on him in whom they have not believed? How will they believe without hearing about him? And how can they hear without a preacher?" (Romans 10:14 HCSB) A preacher isn't a self-help guru. A preacher is not a political activist or an entertainer. Those who preach are truth-dispensers, proclaimers of the Word. If we don't do our job as preachers, people will not hear the good news and therefore can't respond to it. What we do is crucial.

At a surprisingly high level, most of the preachers we studied seemed to understand the need for the text. Four out of five of these sermons conveyed the correct meaning of the chosen text according to our research team's analysis (which was not denominationally specific). I'm encouraged by this. People will not really hear God's Word in our churches if we're not preaching it accurately.

Of course you can preach the Word accurately and still no one will really "hear" it; we must share God's Word in the way our hearers will understand it. No matter how accurately the Bible is preached, our message can get lost behind jargon and phrases that mean nothing to our congregations. This doesn't mean that we should gloss over difficult words within scripture. But we do need to explain the original language and "churchy" words we use. Words we only hear in church such as "holy," "righteousness," and "propitiation" can help hearers understand God's truth only if properly clarified.

Many of the preachers we studied did this. In fact, 41 percent explained at least one church or theological word during their sermon. Another 21 percent avoided such words altogether. This means more than half of the preachers we studied either avoided or at least explained some of the church or theological words they used. While this is notable, it still means that one out of three preachers are not speaking in the vernacular of their audience at least if the uninitiated or unchurched are in attendance.

Paul could have just asked, "How can they believe without a preacher?" But he didn't. Without people hearing really hearing what you say they will not believe the message.

2. The Word should be organized

If God is orderly, and the story of creation suggests he is, then the preaching of his Word should be, as well. Having a good sermon structure matters as listeners try to make sense of your message.

A good sermon structure simply allows your listeners to more easily grab upon truth. It's like a well-organized toolbox: If you know where everything in your toolbox is located, you can go find a tool even when your lights are out. Why? You know where everything is. A good sermon structure can do the same thing. If you've organized your sermon well, your listeners will be able to understand the Word more easily even when you're dealing with difficult subjects.

But different people and different cultures think differently and organize their thoughts differently. Not everyone looks for their tools in the same places. Your task as the preacher is to know how your listeners organize their thoughts and to organize your sermon likewise. (And you should note that our sample was in English, which limited the cultural diversity of our study group.) As we studied these 450 sermons, we saw three main categories of biblical preaching. Each category pointed to an important element in biblical sermons.

Half of these preachers focused their preaching around one block of scripture text, moving verse-by-verse through the passage. In truth, every sermon should strive to explain scripture. If the sermon fails to do so, it's hard to say the Word is central to it.

Another 46 percent of preachers focused their preaching around a main theme, question, or topic using multiple Scriptures to support it. Themes may address issues that listeners deal with throughout their life, or they might highlight a biblical principle or doctrine that should impact the listener's thinking. Again, this method effectively helps listeners apply the Word to their lives, no matter what organizational method they use.

Finally, the other 4 percent organized their message around one main biblical character using multiple Scriptures to support the theme. This demonstrates the necessity of personalizing biblical truth letting listeners see the truth lived out in someone else's life. (Wayne Cordeiro does a helpful job unpacking this approach to scripture in his book, The Divine Mentor.)

All of these examples are appropriate ways to structure a sermon depending upon your audience, and all point to essential elements in a good sermon.

3. The Word should be sufficient

Preachers today can be tempted to use all sorts of extra-biblical resources to make their sermons more interesting to the unchurched. Much of those efforts are good: For example, a movie clip may make a nice illustration. A quote from popular culture may show listeners the relevance of what you're teaching. What a commentator says about a verse may help explain the scripture better.

But, the best way to explain scripture is with scripture itself. Sometimes it isn't the most convenient place for us to go, but the Bible is simply far better equipped to explain itself than popular culture. More than half of the sermons we studied (56 percent) used cross-references to explain the Word.

I am not saying that cross-references are the only way to help us explain the Word. In many of the sermons we studied (just under half), the preacher gave contextual background information on the biblical book being studied to help listeners understand the text's meaning. About four out of ten preachers explained their text by talking about its context or what came immediately before and after the passage. Almost one in five preachers gave little to no background information to help explain the texts they preached upon.

4. The Word should be useful

God's Word should make a difference in the lives of our listeners. When God's Word is preached boldly and authoritatively, people change. Paul told Timothy, "All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for rebuking, for correcting, for training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work." (2 Timothy 3:16, HCSB)

Paul says God's Word is useful (or profitable) to equip us to do his work. In fact, he says all of God's Word is useful for this this includes Leviticus, Amos, and the lineage of Jesus. He doesn't give any exceptions.

The preachers we surveyed had a definite preference for the New Testament. Nearly three quarters (71 percent) of the main biblical texts were found in the New Testament. More than a third (37 percent) of the sermons came from the New Testament letters alone. A quarter came from the Gospels.

When preachers flipped through their New Testament looking for a passage to preach upon, they didn't flip far. Matthew was the most preached-upon and the most referenced book in the entire Bible. Genesis was the most preached-upon Old Testament book. Luke, John, Acts of the Apostles, and Romans all from the New Testament were the other most likely biblical books for preachers to use as a main text.

Every book, every page of the Bible is useful to make us more like Christ and prepare us for ministry, not just our favorite books or pages. In fact, an important part of authoritative, biblical preaching is helping listeners discover "the whole counsel of God." (Acts 20:27) This means we have to flip further into our Bibles if we're going to be completely obedient to our call.

How we handle the Word of God matters. As preachers, we have a limited time with our audience every week. The question is, how will we use that time? Will we handle the Word of God in a way that demonstrates its authority in our lives and over the lives of our listeners?

How important is this issue? God's Word is bread to a spiritually lost and hungry culture. The issue is urgent. Here is my challenge: Over the next 90 days, take action steps to make your sermons more biblically relevant. The following steps will help you get started:

1. Listen to one of your recent sermons and assess how you handled the Bible (start by listening for how your sermon addressed the four points in this article).
2. Have someone you trust (maybe from outside your church) listen to a different one of your sermons and do the same assessment.
3. Read some books on preaching, like Christ-Centered Preaching by Bryan Chappel or The Divine Mentor by Wayne Cordiero, to help your personal approach to God's Word.
4. Create a list of clear and measurable goals to strengthen the biblical content of your preaching.

My prayer is that God would do something new and deeper in all of us who have the honor of communicating his life-changing truth. May every man, woman, and child in every community truly see and hear his Word as a result. It's really the most important concern we can address as we prepare to preach.

Jump into the comments below and leave your thoughts.

When it comes to music, I tend to think, "if it ain't an 80s rock ballad, why bother?" As I tweeted this morning, some music never dies. (And, yes, my iPhone reflects my taste.)

My taste in music accounts for the low incidence of music related posts here at edstetzer.com (total thus far is zero). But a few weeks ago at Advance 09, I bumped into my friends from the music ministry at Sojourn Community Church (sojournmusic.com) who passed a copy of their new CD on to me. Then, I saw them again at the B21 panel and I thought that their new CD warranted a mention.

The July/August issue of Outreach Magazine features my article on small churches. Yep, small churches - I love 'em! Especially when they are thriving on gospel and mission.

Today, while I'm off traveling in Germany, I want to point you toward a new article written by my friend and co-author Philip Nation. He's a great friend and a pastor/preacher I trust. Our book Compelled by Love was listed by Leadership Journal as one of the three most significant books for making missional disciples.

Here's the diagram of their "missional tree."

Much of what I write here at the blog and do in my ministry is geared toward pastors, planters, and denominational leaders. It's a great life of comforting the afflicted and afflicting the comfortable. But my hope is that at the end of the day, I will have given my life for Christ and the people of His church. And, Philip talks about that at length.  So, let me encourage you to read Philip's new article "A Summer that Counts" at LifeWay.com under the Adult Ministry section.

Having served in multiple places in ministry from being pastor of a rural congregation to education minister at a suburban megachurch, he's got a pretty good grasp of what it takes to help normal Christians make ministry count. This time around, he's giving a few tips for you to pass along to your church members about how to make it a missional summer. Let me encourage you to read it and pass the link along to a few friends. I think Philip's insights can be a a benefit to all of us.

Bill Craig, Director of Lifeway Leadership and Adults, talks about Philip's article in his adult ministry newsletter:

Ahhh, Spring! When the weather starts getting nice outside I start thinking about those long, hot, sunny, Summer days just around the corner. How can I avoid the lawnmower and get to the lake, the golf course, or the seashore as often as possible? If you’re like a lot of other people, you may already be wondering about how to get the most out of your summer. Take a vacation. Spend time with family. Read some good books.

How about making this summer your Summer of Love? Well, not a Summer of Love like the hippies back in 1967, but a Season of opportunity to share God’s love with those who desperately need it. This week’s Adult Ministry article includes 8 tips from Philip Nation that will help you make your summer count by focusing on practical ways you can live with missional purpose, sharing God’s love by expressing real love to your family, friends, and neighbors who need it so much.

I was introduced to this idea of missional living through Compelled by Love. Philip Nation and Ed Stetzer wrote this book to help believers start living and thinking like missionaries—recognizing that even if they never leave their neighborhoods, they can reach people every day for Jesus Christ. At LifeWay we thought that message was important enough to create a seven-week, video-based Bible study that would help you explore what it means to live missionally, and discover how you can start living that way today.

Read Philip’s article and consider making this your Summer of Love. Days filled with the warmth of God’s love, spread to the people you meet wherever you are—at the lake, at the golf course, even at the quick stop, buying gas for your lawnmower. Then imagine the impact your church might have if it were full of missionary-minded believers Compelled by Love!

Everyone's talking about multi-site churches these days. There are books, seminars, and today we have several thousand multi-site churches in North America. Some of you read my series of posts on the subject last year. Well, last week 9 Marks released it's May/June eJournal.

It's good to see 9 Marks putting out an eJournal that doesn't just criticize mulit-site churches, but also includes a defense of them from men like J.D. Grear, Matt Chandler and Gregg Allison. The whole journal can be downloaded here, and I encourage you to check it out. I won't break down everything said in every article, but I will point out a few of the things that caught my attention.

In the 9 Marks eJournal the most consistent criticism of multi-site churches seems to focus on the issue of the church being an "assembly."

The Greek word ecclesia most often translated as "church" means assembly or gathering. The oft heard mantra "one church many locations" is a contradiction in terms. An un-gathered "church" cannot know one another, love another or bear one another's burdens in the same way a single assembly can. -Thomas White, 9 Reasons I Don't Like Multi-Site Churches

The word ekklesia denotes a literal assembly. Therefore, it should not be used to designate a body of Christians who are not characterized by literally assembling together in the same place. -Grant Gaines, Exegetical Critique of Multi-Site: Disassembling the Church?

I have heard this complaint before, and always wonder if such dissenters are actually arguing that a local church must gather the whole body together (in one place at the same time for worship) in order to function biblically as a church. If so, would the argument against multi-site churches equally apply to a church with multiple services in one location? According to Jonathan Leeman: absolutely.

Both the multi-site and multi-service church models remove "the gathering" from the necessary ingredients of what constitutes a particular church, since neither model requires all the members of a church to gather together in order for them to be a church. Instead, both models equate the local church with its leadership and its corporate structure, since it's the leadership and corporate structure that are the only things that the separate assemblies uniquely hold in common. Leadership is the church. Neither the multi-site church nor the multi-service church is a church. -Jonathan Leeman, Theological Critique of MultiSite: Leadership Is the Church

J.D. Grear addresses this perspective in his article, A Pastor Defends His Multi-Site Church,

Some argue that since a local church is by definition an assembly, a multi-site strategy fundamentally skews the nature of a local church. The essence of a New Testament local church, however, is not "assembly" but "covenant body." If the local church is essentially an assembly, then it only exists when it assembles and only when all the members are present. "Assembly" is a much-needed function, but "covenant" is the essence.

J.D.'s article is a thoughtful, reasonable and biblical defense of a multi-site church. (For full disclosure, I have preached at the church J.D. serves and greatly appreciate his church.) Gregg R Allison also offers a Theological Defense of Multi-Site using a four-fold grid (biblical, theological, historical, and missional) to evaluate this popular trend. This is also very good and worth a read.

Much of the criticisms in the other articles assume too much about churches (if we're allowed to call them that) that have gone multi-site, but some legitimate concerns are raised. For example, what about pastoral care? Jeffrey Riddle raises this issue in his article, Richard Baxter and the Multi-Site Movement.

Gregg Allison addresses this issue by pointing to Mars Hill in Seattle.

The response from responsible multi-site churches is that the pastoral team at each campus/site is responsible to provide the full range of pastoral care for its campus/site.

For example, at Mars Hill Church in Seattle,

Each campus must have its own paid staff appropriate for a church its size such as a campus administrator and children's leader, along with some unpaid elders and deacons to administer such things as premarital counseling, small groups, membership. For this to happen each campus must have its own budget that the campus pastor and other elders spend as they see fit, within certain established guidelines for all campuses...." (Vintage Church, 253).

 

Another common question and/or criticism is, "Why not just plant churches?" This is a concern I have, for I believe some churches have opted to go multi-site instead in place of planting. But this is not always the case. In fact J.D. argues that going multi-site is helping his church to develop church plants and planters.

The multi-site strategy does not preclude church planting. Rather, it fosters it! Not every church planter is equipped to be a senior teaching pastor. Campus pastors need to be men who are gifted leaders and good communicators, but not necessarily preachers. Many guys who are great leaders and pastors do not enjoy doing what I do each week, spending 20+ hours preparing messages and deciphering vision. As campus pastors they exercise leadership within their gifts in a way that they could not as church planters. Many of those not gifted to be the senior leader or primary teaching pastor would still make ideal campus pastors.

As you plant new campuses, you will notice some who begin to demonstrate the gift set to lead independent churches. This seems to be how the Jerusalem church operated. They noticed leaders emerging in the ministry who had the capacity to plant churches and they sent them out.

Finally, it has been our experience that multiple campuses provide a leadership pipeline for developing church planters. It provides a place to hone the skills necessary for teaching and leadership. The multi-site strategy is integral to our church planting strategy.

 

Thus, we have found that the multi-site strategy does not in any way eclipse church planting. In fact, it provides an opportunity to determine who has the right gift set to plant and pastor. As it stands now, new churches fail more than half the time. Wouldn't it be helpful to have an in-between stage in which leadership abilities can be tested?

 

And some ask whether or not this can be done while maintaining a congregational church polity. Greg Gilbert points out in his article, What Is this Thing, Anyway? A Multi-Site Taxonomy, there are different models of multi-site churches. Of course, some are less biblical and healthy than others, and Gilbert's piece is helpful in thinking through some difficulties for those who maintain a congregational polity.

Can a multi-site church remain congregational? In Have We Ever Seen This Before? Multi-Site Precedents, John Hammit shares the following account.

This past November I heard of a multi-site church that seemed to avoid most of the aspects of multi-site churches that have been troubling to me. This church, Highview Baptist in Louisville, Kentucky, is one church that meets in six locations. Each of the six campuses has a pastor that teaches his flock, but there is one senior pastor, a single deacon body, and a single budget. However, the whole church also assembles in one location quarterly for services that include baptisms, the Lord's Supper, and the conducting of the congregation's business (accepting new members, discipline of members, voting on matters of official business).

 

I asked the person describing this church why the six congregations do not simply avoid the inconvenience of the quarterly meeting and become independent churches. His reply was that the six pastors do not want independence and the accompanying isolation. They enjoyed being part of a larger body and sharing each others' joys and sorrows as one body.

Like most church models, multi-site churches can be healthy or unhealthy. On the one hand we need to carefully think through the biblical and practical issues related to this approach and not just jump on what, for many, is a new trend. As Matt Chandler confesses in his short piece,

...after studying the issue, we decided to go multi-site. Yet we still have some serious concerns and questions about the multi-site idea even as we participate in it. The problem that haunts us is a simple one. Where does this idea lead? Where does this end? Twenty years from now are there fifteen preachers in the United States?

On the other hand critics need to do a better job at interacting with multi-site models and not assume that all function in the same way. The multi-site phenomenon often grows out of a good problem - a rapidly growing church! I appreciate J.D.'s words,

The multi-site model is messy. As with all large churches, it is easier for important things (like people!) to fall through the cracks in multi-site churches than it is in a single-campus, smaller church. Growth from evangelism always invites chaos and disorder into the church. But it is a wonderful and welcome problem.

If you are interested in more information, I have addressed this issue before at the blog and you might want to read part 1 and part 2 of my dialogue with Geoff Surratt. 

And, one more thought just for fun. I had to chuckle at the book review of Multisite Churches: Guidance for the Movements Next Generation by Scott McConnell (a LifeWay Research book).  I love a review that begins with, "Me reviewing this book is like a PETA employee reviewing a hunting manual... I don't think churches should be multi-site... Strictly speaking, I don't think that multi-site churches even exist."  Only at 9Marks.  ;-)  (Though you gotta' appreciate the disclosure.) But, in that spirit, I will write my review of Finney's Systematic Theology tomorrow.

What are your thoughts on multi-site?

Here's my most recent article from the newest issue of Outreach Magazine. In this column, I address the issue of declining churches and what are the common factors that helps them succeed in turning around. Check it out below. Of course, if you are a subscriber, you have already read it. If you are not a subscriber, well, get on it by clicking here.

Networking for Comeback Change

Turning around a declining church is not easy. Most won't make the change. And, that should not surprise us. Sick people and sick institutions don't naturally change by themselves.

In Fast Company Magazine, two studies were compared--one in which "90% of heart patients can't change their lifestyles" and another in which 77% of patients did. The difference? The latter provided "support groups with other patients, as well as attention from dieticians, psychologists, nurses," etc. In other words, left alone, most patients choose death over change. When in a setting with relational support, the numbers are almost reversed.

And in Comeback Churches, we saw the same pattern in churches--those who changed often did so with help from others.

The Potential of Learning Community

What if more churches and church leaders decided to get real with each other and challenge each other to make a kingdom difference? What if even 20-25% of the 80-85% of churches that are plateaued and declining in North America decided that they were willing to do whatever it takes to see God turn their church around? What if a group of pastors decided that business as usual wasn't going to cut it--they were going to join together to impact the lostness in their communities?

For that to happen, pastors and churches are going to have to be willing to enlarge their thinking, network with other church leaders, and begin to establish some intentional learning relationships. Change is possible. Churches can make a comeback, but they are often going to have to look outside of their immediate church context for help. Left alone, we choose death over change, with others help we can make better choices.

Expanding Your Ministry Worldview

Often, one of the reasons that churches get caught in the trap of plateau and decline is that we are only looking at things in their own little fish bowl. We become comfortable in our own little environment, watching each other swim around in circles. As far as activity goes, things look OK. But, no new fish are entering the bowl.

To see a better future, we often need to "jump out of our fish bowl." If things are stuck or stagnant in your ministry, start looking around at what God is doing in some other churches and ministries in your community that are growing through conversion growth. They don't have to be churches from your denomination or group (really, you will survive if you build a few friendships with some other gospel-centered, like-minded churches). It would be good to look for some churches that fit fairly close to your theological beliefs and philosophy of ministry. And learn from them.

Create Leading Relationship with Other Pastors/Ministries

Then, here comes the tough part. Admit you need a little help and ask for it. In the book that I co-authored with Mike Dodson called Comeback Churches, we talk about the need for intentional, strategic leadership as a vital key for making a comeback. So, find some other pastors that are demonstrating that kind of leadership in other churches and ask them to give you some pointers.

Maybe part of the problem is that you are not a great leader, BUT that does not mean that you can't become a better one with some good coaching from a strong leader, or even some peer coaching from others on the same journey. Every pastor can improve leadership behavior and skills and we often do that by observing others farther along than we. I am not a natural born leader, but I am a better leader because I have let others speak into my life.

If you don't make the effort to step out of your fish bowl, it is not likely that anything will ever change. There is no shame in being plateaued or in decline. The shame would be in knowing that is where you are and doing nothing about it.

Build Accountability Into Your Relationships

No one really likes to hear this verse, but it's true--"No discipline seems pleasant at the time but painful, later on however, it produces a harvest of peace and righteousness for those who are trained by it" (Hebrews 12:11). If you can, build an intentional, accountable network of pastors who would like to see some things change in their lives and ministries. The only way that will happen is through being more disciplined.

One key to having a group like that make a difference is to have at least one pastor involved who has displayed strong, intentional, strategic leadership. Ask that pastor to guide the process by suggesting what issues to address and what books to read. Get real with these pastors and pray hard for each other. Maybe you need to start encouraging each other and holding each other accountable to be witnesses and share the gospel.
Where from Here?

Doing some of these things probably won't be easy or pleasant if you choose to do them . . . at first. But, what's the alternative? Swimming around and around and around in a little fish bowl? Here's the point--If you are stuck, find someone else who can help you get unstuck. Remember, your best thinking got you where you are.

So, if change is going to happen, it will probably not come from you, or at least you alone. It will come more readily when you and your church learn from others and thrive on the counsel of others. "Plans fail when there is no counsel, but with many advisers they succeed" (Proverbs 15:22, HCSB).

Feel free to comment below.

I have been serving as the guest host of the USAToday Faith & Reason blog. Cathy Lynn Grossman has written with USA Today for a decade and asked if I would fill in for her on the blog while she is in Europe on assignment.

I chose an easy topic to handle: the issue of exclusivity in terms of obtaining eternal life. You know me; I do not like controversy. No sir. Keeping it nice and light.

I started by discussing some recent research. Here is the wrap-up to my second comment that will give you a flavor of where the discussion is going:

To further the discussion, let's talk about the core issues of exclusivity of beliefs and how that affects culture, religion, and human interaction.
How do you view those who hold such exclusive beliefs? Why do you think that people increasingly seem to hold universalistic and pluralistic beliefs?
Let's make it personal, as well: Many faiths believe there is only one way to God, heaven, righteousness, etc. If you are a person of faith, does your faith teach that? If so, why does it matter?

Be nice. Engage the culture. Listen.

This clarification has been sent out to news outlets and has been posted in several locations across the Internet:

Discussion continues on the American Religious Identification Study (ARIS) study I mentioned yesterday. One important distinction might be helpful in that conversation.

The Out of Ur Blog has posted data from both that study and iMonk's article in the Christian Science Monitor in a a new post, "Goodbye, Evangelicalism."

They shared some of the ARIS data:

That means that religious people are not simply being redistributed from one religion or denomination to another, but that more and more people are abandoning all faith altogether.

And some of the comments from iMonk (aka Michael Spencer) and his article in the Christian Science Monitor (which you should read in its entirety):

Bleak news, perhaps. But not as bleak, or specific, as Michael Spencer's observations at The Christian Science Monitor. Spencer argues, "We are on the verge--within 10 years--of a major collapse of evangelical Christianity. This breakdown will follow the deterioration of the mainline Protestant world and it will fundamentally alter the religious and cultural environment in the West."

I posted this comment at the Out of Ur blog and thought it might be helpful to include that here:

Brandon,

I would add that this study is a well done project that should be disturbing to the church. Thanks for highlighting both the ARIS and the CSM article.

But, it is important to note that although iMonk provided an articulate and provocative case in his CSM essay, the ARIS study actually showed an INCREASE in the number of self-identified evangelicals, with a simultaneous decline in self-identified Christians.

So, the study shows the percentage of self-identified Christians is in decline but that is not the same thing as a great crackup of evangelicals. That may indeed be coming (and I have written on that myself), but the ARIS did not show such a trend.

Thanks for the good writing.

Ed Stetzer
www.edstetzer.com

Be sure to go by the Out of Ur blog, read the whole post, and join in the dialogue there.

Of course, feel free to comment here as well.

Sermon Central is the largest on-line community of pastors in the world. So, when they ask us to write an article, we always agree! (And, for full disclosure, they may ask me because I am on the Sermon Central Advisory Council.)

So, I was glad to submit the article to my friend Ron Forseth (purveyor of all things Sermon Central and the only person I know who spent four and a half years in Outer Mongolia). He specifically asked us to write about preaching to the younger unchurched.

You can read the whole article at this link for Sermon Central, but I have included a few excerpts below. Give it a read over at Sermon Central and then come back here to discuss.

Preaching to The Younger Unchurched Ed Stetzer and Jason Hayes

Let us begin by saying that not only is it possible to preach to the unchurched, it's quite probable you're already doing so, perhaps weekly. Just because someone has awareness of your church or has attended a service at your church does not make them churched. Consider those that show up for their annual visits on Easter and Christmas. They may have sat through the last 20 years of your holiday cantata, but that doesn't make them churched. Entertained, sure. Inspired maybe. But certainly not churched...

While the research that we share in the book discusses a broad scope of issues related to young adults and their opinions, we will focus in this space specifically on preaching and teaching. We'll leave specific stats for the book, but we hope you'll be encouraged as you read through the provided recommendations we've drawn from our research. Take note especially that so much of what the younger unchurched are looking for lines up directly with the biblical instruction we've received as teachers.

Examine Your Approach

Ralph Waldo Emerson said, "It is not length of life, but depth of life." Interestingly enough, our research shows that young adults agree. The survey data confirms that the younger unchurched maintain a high level of interest in theology, apologetics, worldview, and other religions.

Many churches have chosen to lessen their emphasis on depth in order to complement their inaccurate stereotypes of this generation. This isn't working now, and it certainly won't in the future. In fact, most young adults are turned off by shallowness and are beginning to walk away from environments (including churches) that foster it...

What they are interested in, however, is preaching that engages on several levels, that provokes deeper thoughts, that reveals complexity. This doesn't mean watering down the truth. It means teaching the truth in all its challenging fullness. Preaching that engages the younger unchurched is deliberate preaching crafted with depth of thought and delivered with conviction. Think and rethink. Evaluate and reconsider.

Encourage Struggle

Directly connected to the younger unchurched's aversion to simplistic preaching is their aversion to "tidy" preaching. The Church has somehow forgotten that life is not always about having a neat, pat answer...

This means that the moralizing of our preaching past is out like the 80s. Our preaching should encompass more than do's and don'ts. It should reach to the why and the how behind our proclamation. Great preaching requires mining truth down to its deepest core and assigning it to resonate within the hearts of our listeners. As a result, our preaching must go beyond appeals to behavior modification, beyond pithy platitudes on being happy and living well. Our preaching must wrestle with the meat and marrow of human existence, because this is what young adults are already doing. Otherwise it is like tossing a fortune cookie to a man starving in the desert.

Be Authentic and Transparent

We must remember that preaching is not just about what you say; it's very much about who you are. One of the reasons so many young adults think negatively about churches is because they see very little authentic struggle from their leadership. Indeed, a large majority of the younger unchurched believe the church is full of hypocrites.

Consider the "foolishness of preaching" from the perspective of an unchurched young adult. What they see is a pastor standing up and presenting the message in a way that implies that implies the pastor already has everything all figured out. When pastors relate to no doubt, no struggle, and no experiential element, they are just begging to be tuned out. But preaching is not just about the level of intellectual content; it's also about the teacher's relationship with that content.

Leaders who know the value of speaking to people, not over people, are leading churches that are reaching young adults. There is no substitute for authenticity. Preaching with transparency has to do with being open and honest with a purpose that is redemptive and developmental. A preacher who is being transparent opens a window for the divine and pure purpose of helping others change in positive ways, without hidden motives or pretense. That is the kind of transparency that will connect with younger adults...

Head over to Sermon Central, read the full article, (while you're there you should sign up for their newsletter where articles like this get sent to your inbox) and then come back here to discuss preaching to the younger unchurched.

Something to think about over the weekend concerning the generation gap in our churches because of technology. The Barna Group recently published some research on the role tech plays in widening the generation gap.

Technology is fast becoming the latest driving force behind what is often called the "generation gap." While Americans of every age have become quite comfortable with and dependent on technology, a new study by The Barna Group explores how technology is shaping different experiences and expectations among generations.

I was interviewed by Brian Proffit for Rev! Magazine concerning the "80/20" rule in most churches - where 20 percent of the people do 80 percent of the work. It's a good conversation to have and I wanted to share ours with all of you here on the blog.

I talked about the most common sin in many churches. I am guessing there are many, but I think one of the most common is a lack of obedience.

My observation is that we often preach against sins that are not a problem in our church (sins more prevalent in the world) while not preaching against sins that are a common problem in the church (like lack of ministry involvement in this case).

Here is the interview:

In case you missed it in Outreach Magazine, here's my article from the most recent issue and it's on that oh-so-popular subject of "culture." If you are not a subscriber, well, why not? Grin.

Here is the article. Feel free to comment below.

Some bloggers have already responded to The Tennessan article on SBC decline that I mentioned yesterday, including:

Michael Spencer (Internet Monk)

SBC Impact

Pat Hood (cited in the article)

I will add more if I see them. Feel free to link yours or suggest others below.

The Tennessean has another article about the SBC today, their second major focus this month. It has some interesting interviews and analysis.

The reporter, Bob Smietana, gathered quite an array of quotes and contacts so it is some good reading.

I found the section on "stifling innovation" to be fascinating:

The conservative resurgence also had an unintended consequence, said Roger Finke, a sociologist of religion at Penn State University. Finke said growing religious groups often share two characteristics. They have a set core of beliefs as a denomination but allow innovative practices in their local congregations.

Finke believes that the conservative resurgence stifled innovation.

"They preserved a more conservative theology," he said, "but they ended up placing controls on local congregations."

Here is what I wrote and spoke about the SBC a couple of years ago:

The first step in organizational decline is that you lose your creative people, who decide to go on to more entrepreneurial settings. We have already lost most of this number. In fact, we have actively pushed many of them out by teaching and preaching against them in many SBC contexts and venues. The next step in decline is that the most competent among us begin to leave...

We've already told a whole generation of 'Purpose-Driven' pastors that they're not really needed or wanted in today's SBC [that would be my generation]. Are we intent on communicating this same message to the next generation?...

When Jimmy Draper was planning the first national 'young leaders' meeting, he asked me for suggested speakers. I told him what we needed most was a nationally-known pastor who had credibility with young pastors and who was also still clearly connected with the denomination. His voice went up with excitement: "Exactly! Who?" With sadness I replied, 'That's my point.'

There were some insightful stats as well:

In 1978, just before the start of the resurgence, there was one baptism for every 36 members of the convention. By 2007, that ratio was one baptism to every 47 members.

"We are baptizing fewer of our own children, and fewer unchurched people," LifeWay's Rainer said.

More than 9,000 congregations, or almost a quarter of all Southern Baptist churches, reported no baptisms in 2007. And, in that year, only 8.3 percent of the churches were responsible for 49.8 percent of the convention's baptisms.

And this is particularly pointed:

In 1971, there were 1,434,892 children ages 6 to 11 in Southern Baptist Sunday schools. By 2007, the last year for which statistics are available, that number had dropped by about 455,000 to 979,429. At the same time, the U.S. population grew by 46 percent.

There are mentions of my friends Pat Hood, pastor of LifePoint Church and Rick White of The People's Church, two local contemporary SBC churches.

Feel free to weigh in with your opinion...