Author: admin

An excerpt from Will The Real Heretics Please Stand Up by David W. Bercot. Sometimes you just need a hard Reset!

At no other time in the history of Christianity did love so characterize the entire church as it did in the first three centuries. And Roman society took note. Tertullian reported that the Romans would exclaim, “See how they love one another!” Justin Martyr sketched Christian love this way: “We who used to value the acquisition of wealth and possessions more than anything else now bring what we have into a common fund and share it with anyone who needs it. We used to hate and destroy one another and refused to associate with people of another race or country. Now, because of Christ, we live together with such people and pray for our enemies.”

Clement, describing the person who has come to know God, wrote, “He impoverishes himself out of love, so that he is certain he may never overlook a brother in need, especially if he knows he can bear poverty better than his brother. He likewise considers the pain of another as his own pain. And if he suffers any hardship because of having given out of his own poverty, he does not complain.”

When a devastating plague swept across the ancient world in the third century, Christians were the only ones who cared for the sick, which they did at the risk of contracting the plague themselves. Meanwhile, pagans were throwing infected members of their own families into the streets even before they died, in order to protect themselves from the disease.

Another example illustrates both the brotherly love of Christians and their uncompromising commitment to Jesus as Lord. A pagan actor became a Christian, but he realized he had to change his employment because most plays encouraged immorality and were steeped in pagan idolatry. Furthermore, the theater sometimes purposefully turned boys into homosexuals so they could better play the roles of women on stage. Since this newly-converted actor had no other job skills, he considered establishing an acting school to teach drama to non-Christian students. However, he first submitted his idea to the leaders of his church for their counsel.

The leaders told him that if acting was an immoral profession then it would be wrong to train others in it. Nevertheless, since this was a rather novel question, they wrote to Cyprian in nearby Carthage for his thoughts. Cyprian agreed that a profession unfit for a Christian to practice was also unfit for him to teach, even if this was his sole means of support.

How many of us would be so concerned about righteousness that we would submit our employment decisions to our body of elders or board of deacons? How many church leaders today would be so concerned about offending God that they would take such an uncompromising position?

But that isn’t the end of the story. Cyprian also told this neighboring church that they should be willing to support the actor if he had no other means of earning a living-just as they supported orphans, widows, and other needy persons. Going further, he wrote, “If your church is financially unable to support him, he may move over to us and here receive whatever he needs for food and clothing.” Cyprian and his church didn’t even know this actor, yet they were willing to support him because he was a fellow believer. As one Christian told the Romans, “We love one another with a mutual love because we do not know how to hate.” If Christians today made such a statement to the world, would the world believe it?

The love of the early Christians wasn’t limited simply to their fellow believers. Christians also lovingly helped non-believers: the poor, the orphans, the elderly, the sick, the shipwrecked even their persecutors. Jesus had said, “Love your enemies…and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you” (Matt. 5:44). The early Christians accepted this statement as a command from their Lord, rather than as an ideal that couldn’t be actually practiced in real life.

Lactantius wrote, “If we all derive our origin from one man, whom God created, we are plainly all of one family. Therefore it must be considered an abomination to hate another human, no matter how guilty he may be. For this reason, God has decreed that we should hate no one, but that we should eliminate hatred. So we can comfort our enemies by reminding them of our mutual relationship. For if we have all been given life from the same God, what else are we but brothers?…Because we are all brothers, God teaches us to never do evil to one another, but only good-giving aid to those who are oppressed and experiencing hardship, and giving food to the hungry.”

It’s no wonder that Christianity spread rapidly throughout the ancient world, even though there were few organized missionary or evangelism programs. The love they practiced drew the attention of the world, just as Jesus said it would.

This is the second excerpt from Selwyn R. Stevens’ book and it highlights where many of our current church practices originated from. If you’re interested in getting more details you can pick up the classic book Pagan Christianity authored by Frank Viola and George Barna. You can check out Selwyn’s website here. He has some great free material available here.

Church buildings: were first constructed by the Roman emperor, Constantine (285-337), around 327AD. They were patterned after Roman basilicas, modeled after Greek temples.

The Pastor’s Chair: was originally the Cathedra, the seat of the judge in the Roman basilica.

Tax-exempt status for Churches & Clergy: This was granted by the Roman emperor Constantine, in 323AD, to make them equal to the tax-free privilege for Pagan priests.

Stained Glass Windows: Introduced by Gregory of Tours, perfected by Sugar (1081-1151), abbot of St Denis.

Gothic Cathedrals: were first erected in 12th Century, according to the pagan philosophy of Plato.

The Church Steeple: Based on ancient Babylonian and Egyptian architecture and philosophy, this medieval invention was popularized by Sir Christopher Wren, noted occultist.

The Pulpit: The earliest known use in a Christian church was 250AD. It was derived from the Greek “ambo” used by Greeks to deliver monologues.

Sunday Morning Order of Worship: Evolved from Gregory’s Mass in 6th Century.

Communion Table: Introduced by Ulrich Zwingli in 16th Century.

Taking Communion Quarterly: Introduced by Ulrich Zwingli in 16th Century.

Two lit Candles on Communion Table: Used in the ceremonial court of Roman emperors in the 4th Century.

The Pew: Developed in England from the 13th Century onward.

Congregation Standing & Singing when Clergy enter: Borrowed from ceremonial court of Roman emperors in 4th Century.

The Altar-Call: Instituted by 17th Century Methodists, popularlized later by Charles Finney.

The Sermon: Borrowed by Greek sophists, masters of oratory and rhetoric. John Chrysostom and Augustine popularized the Greek-Roman homily.

The Single Leader (Bishop or Pastor): Ignatius of Antioch in early 2nd century. Did not prevail as model until 3rd century.

The “Covering” Doctrine: Former pagan orator, Cyprian of Carthage. Revived under Juan Carlos Ortiz of Argentina, and the “Fort Lauderdale Five” from USA, who created the “Shepherding Movement” during the 1970’s, since repented of.

Hierarchical Leadership: Imposed by Roman emperor, Constantine in 4th Century. This was the leadership model from the Babylonians, Persians, Greeks and Romans.

Clergy and Laity: The term “laity” first appeared in writings of Clement of Rome approx. 100AD. Clergy first appeared in Tertullian’s writings (160-225) in 2nd Century, with Christian leaders all called clergy by 3rd Century. (The term “nicolaitan” means to enslave the laity.)

Celibacy of Clergy: Required by Pope Siricius (334-399). This was carried over from the enforced celibacy required by the Priests of Mithras, a major pagan religion in Rome prior to then.

Ordination: From the Roman custom of appointing men to civil office. Augustine, Gregory of Nazianzus and Crysostom developed the idea of the minister being “the holy man of God.”

The Title “Pastor”: Developed by Lutherans as an alternative title to the Priest of the Roman church.

Clergy Attire: Began in 330AD when Christian clergy began to copy the dress of Roman officials.

The Clerical or Backwards Collar: Invented by Dr. Donald McLeod of Glasgow in 1865.

The Church Choir: Copied from Roman imperial ceremonies, and Greek dramas and temples.

Funeral Processions and Orations: Borrowed from Greco-Roman paganism of 3rd Century.

The Worship Team: Developed by Chuck Smith of Calvary Chapel in 1965, patterned after secular rock concerts.

The “Sinners’ Prayer”: Originated with D.L.Moody (1837-1899), popularized in 1950’s through Billy Graham’s “Peace with God” tract, and later with Campus Crusade for Christ’s “4 Spiritual Laws.”

Use of the Term, “Personal Savior”: Originated in mid-1800’s by Frontier-Revivalists, later popularized by Charles Fuller (1887-1968).

Infant Baptism: Rooted in superstitious beliefs in Greco-Roman culture. Brought into Christian practice in 2nd century, replaced adult baptism by 5th century.

Sprinkling replacing Immersion: began in late Middle ages.

Baptism Separated from Conversion: Began in early 2nd century, based on legalistic view that baptism was the only medium for the forgiveness of sins.

The Lord’s Supper Condensed from full Agape Meal to only Cup and Bread: Late 2nd century, resulting from pagan ritual influences and anti-Semitism, and enforced by Roman Emperor Constantine (4th Century) and later emperors who saw themselves as leaders of the church. (This is a fraction of the Jewish Passover which reveals the Messiah.)

Tithing: Became a widespread Christian practice in 8th Century. Copied from 10% rent charge by Roman empire, and later justified using the Old Testament.

Clergy Salaries: Instituted by Roman Emperor Constantine in 4th Century.

The Collection Plate: The Alms dish appeared in 14th Century, Passing the collection plate began in 1662.

The Catholic Seminary: Early result of the Council of Trent (1545-1563), a reaction to the Protestant Reformation. The curriculum was based on the teachings of Thomas Aquinas, which blended Aristotle’s philosophy, Neoplatonic philosophy and Christian doctrine. Aquinas created the new doctrine of transubstantiation.

The Protestant Seminary: Began in 1808 in Andover, Massachusetts, with a curriculum also based by teachings of Thomas Aquinas.

The Bible College: Influenced by revivalist D.L.Moody, started in NewYork (1882) and Chicago (1886).

The Sunday School: Created by Robert Raikes from Britain in 1780. It was designed to teach poor children basics of education and had nothing to do with religious instruction.

The Youth Pastor: Developed in urban churches during the 1930’s onward to meet the needs of a new socialogical class called “teenagers.”

Chapter Numbers in the New Testament: Created by Stephen Langton, a professor at University of Paris, in 1227.

Verses added to New Testament Chapters: by printer, Robert Stephanus in 1551.

The book Help! The Sheep are Escaping by Selwyn R. Stevens is only 96 pages but it’s packed full of goodness. This would be a great book for anyone sitting on the fence about attending or even starting a relational gathering. The chapter discussing the definitions of “ekklesia” and “church” are very easy to understand. The excerpt below is from a section called New Testament Church: Meeting Together Manifesto.

1. We are the Church, People not Steeples.
   The church is not buildings. There is a growing, deep recognition that “We are the church. The English word “church” is from the Greek word “ekklesia” and means “the assembly,” “those gathered together.” It is not something one goes to or joins or has or does. We are the church! Many of God’s people are returning to this simple way of being the church, learning to just walk with God and enjoy Him!
2. Jesus is the Head of the Church; He is building it.
   The church has but one Head, Jesus. No person should interfere with His sovereign leadership of every believer and every gathering of believers. He is in charge, not us. He promised that wherever two or three are gathered together in His name, that He would be in our midst. We also need to yield to Him for results and not think it is by our cleverness, labor, wisdom, or creativity that the church will be built. Psalm 44 is wonderful meditation of our need of Him, His mercy, and His favor.
3. The Church gathers anywhere, typically in homes.
   The “church gathered” can happen any where and at any time – any where and any time two or three are gathered together in His Name (Matthew 18:20). The most common Biblical place of gathering is the homes of believers (Acts 2:1-2, 2:46, 5:42, 8:3, 10:24-27, 12:12, 16:40, 20:20, 28:30-31; Romans 16:3-5, 16:23; 1 Corinthians 16:19; Colossians 4:15; and Philemon 2). At times, the “whole church” comes together in one place 1 Cor 14:26. Today, most churches have dispensed with meeting regularly in homes, preferring anonymity over intimacy and responsibility.
4. The Church gathers for loving ministry one to another, not to be an audience.
   Churches make the mistake often of organizing around a few gifts (pastors, teachers) and even institutionalize them and make them above all other giftings and servants till they literally exclude every other function as less than legitimate “church.” When the church gathers, it is not to be an audience for lectures and entertainment, but rather it is to be a multi-gifted, all-as-ministers, functioning Body, where all (men and women) are free to fully participate under the Holy Spirit’s leading and anointing in ministering to one another (1 Peter 4:8-11; Ephesians 4:16; 1 Corinthians 12-14).

5. The Church has leading servants, not priests.
   All in the church are servants, it is the highest calling. Some are
   recognized for their faithfulness in serving and become leading
   servants. Scripture calls these Elders and Deacons. They are servants of servants. This leadership, submitted to Jesus, and to one another, is:
   a. Shared among several, rather than consolidated in one person (Acts 14:23, 15:6, 20:17; Titus 1:5, etc.).
   b. Raised up from within by the Holy Spirit, rather than brought in from the outside (Acts 14:23, 20:17; Titus 1:5, etc.).
   c. Serving, releasing, and coaching the members in their giftings and ministries to be a functioning Body; rather than to control, manipulate, and do all of the ministering themselves.
   d. Alongside the members- serving together, not above other members or between them and God.
6. The Church exists in locality, undivided by doctrinal or
   other differences.
   The church exists by locality, i.e., “the church which is at Cenchrea” (Romans 16:1). In your locality there is only one church – we need to begin to think, talk, and walk this important truth. We are members with all believers in our locality, and owe them our love and service. The church in the US has been splintered into almost 200 denominations and divisions by the focus on heads (knowledge and theology), not hearts.
7. The Church scatters to be light among the lost.
   Churches really get confused when they organize around the lost. Some even make that their whole focus (seeker-sensitive, or gospel message based, etc.). God calls us first and foremost to be, not to do. Church is not something we go to a few hours a week, it is something we are 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. As His servants at all times, we need to act in such a way as to bring Him honor. The highest recognition in the world is to have someone ask us a reason of the hope they see in us.

You can check out Selwyn’s website here. He has some great free material available here.

Subscribe below, thank you.

The excerpt below is from the book The Yoke of Christ by Elton Trueblood published in 1958.

(Jesus) did not leave a book; He did not leave an army; He did not leave an organization, in the ordinary sense.  What He left, instead, was a little redemptive fellowship made up of extremely common people whose total impact was miraculous…It is hard for us to visualize what early Christianity was like.  Certainly, it was very different from the Christianity known to us today.  There were no fine buildings…There was no hierarchy; there were no theological seminaries; there were no Christian colleges; there were no Sunday Schools; there were no choirs.  Only small groups of believers-small fellowships.

In the beginning there wasn’t even a New Testament.  The New Testament itself was not so much a cause of these fellowships as a result of them.  Thus the first books of the New Testament were the letters written to the little fellowships partly because of their difficulties, dangers and temptations.  All that they had was the fellowship; nothing else; no standing; no prestige; no honor…The early Christians were not a people of standing, but they had a secret power among them, and the secret power resulted from the way in which they were members one of another…

Can you think of what it must have been like?  One little fellowship was meeting in a home in Philippi…mostly Christians gathered in homes…What occurred in the ancient civilization was the organic development of the fellowship but never a merely individual Christianity.  That would not have been able to survive.  The fellowship was the only thing that could win.  The early Christians came together to strengthen one another and to encourage one another in their humble gatherings such as are described in 1 Corinthians 14, and then they went out into their ministry in the Greco-Roman world…All of these parts (of the Empire) were touched because the fellowship itself had such intensity, such vitality, and such power…

If all the salt is washed out of (the fellowship), if all that is left is just the worldly emphasis of respectability and fine buildings, an ecclesiastical structure and conventional religion with the redemptive power gone, it isn’t partly good; it isn’t any good.  Christ is saying that mild religion, far from being of partial value, is of utterly no value…It is easy to go on with a system.  But Christ says it isn’t worth a thing.

Subscribe below, thank you.

The full title of this book by Alan Kreider is “The Patient Ferment of the Early Church”. This work, at a little over 300 pages, is extensively researched. Alan provides insight from documented sources on how a small group of Christ followers were able to impact the world. This book is not for the faint of heart but provides great perspective. Check out the excerpt below for a take on Evangelism.

Unlike many churches today, the third-century churches described by the Apostolic Tradition did not try to grow by making people feel welcome and included. Civic paganism did that. In contrast, the churches were hard to enter. They didn’t grow because of their cultural accessibility; they grew because they required commitment to an unpopular God who didn’t require people to perform cultic acts correctly but instead equipped them to live in a way that was richly unconventional.

The churches chose this approach for good reasons. The first was theological: they believed that the God whom they worshiped revealed himself in Jesus of Nazareth, an embodied human who at ultimate cost demonstrated the way to live, and that Jesus’s way was saving and life giving for individual humans and their communities. It was vital for the Christians to live in his way, unusual though it was, because they thought that it was true. The second reason was evangelistic: the churches’ primary witness was a product not of what Christians said but of how they lived. It was rooted in the assumption that the lives of Christians and their communities provided embodied evidence of the truth of their words. How could the Christians undercut this approach to mission? By admitting new people too quickly whose behavior compromised the Christians’ distinctive attractiveness.

What happened was this. Non-Christians and Christians worked together and lived near each other. They became friends. Non-Christians were at times attracted by the Christians and interested in exploring Christianity further. The Christians could not take them to Sunday worship services-these were off limits to people until they had been catechized and baptized. But the Christians could invite their friends to go with them early on a weekday to meet the church’s “teachers.” Would the teachers admit them to a process of study and habituation-lasting for some time-that would eventually lead to their admission to the community? Would they admit them as catechumens en route to baptism?

The non-Christian applicants went with their friends/sponsors to meet the church’s teachers. In this meeting, called the First Scrutiny, the teachers-at times clergy, at times laity-gave primary attention to the sponsors and asked them to “bear witness” about the candidates. The sponsors had to answer questions, not about what the candidates believed or (as in conventional associations) about whether they could pay hefty initiation fees (the churches required none), but about how the candidates lived. Why this concentration on how they were living? There were two reasons.

The first reason was the candidates’ teachability. The teachers wanted to know that the candidates were living in such a way that they were able “to hear the Word.” Can they appropriate what the teachers are teaching? According to the Apostolic Tradition, the church gave major attention to these questions. And for good reason. The teachers, like the early Christians generally, believed that the surest indication of what people thought was the way they lived, and they were convinced that the candidates’ behavior was the most reliable predictor of whether they would be able to learn the Christians’ habitus. The teachers, with the candidate standing by, pressed the sponsor about the candidate’s behavior in light of the church’s deep rejection of idolatry, adultery, and killing. Would the way the candidate has been living enable him or her to “hear the Word” (to master the church’s teaching with their bodies as well as their brains)? For example, actors who gave pagan theatrical performances-could they hear the Word in a community that vigorously repudiated polytheism? Gladiators who killed in the arena-could they hear the Word in a community that forbade the taking of life? Prostitutes-could they hear the Word in a community that emphasized chastity and continence? The Apostolic Tradition specifies that, in each case, these people needed to leave their professions if they were to be accepted as potential Christians; their professional commitments made it impossible for them to comprehend the Christians’ teaching.

In the case of certain other professions, however, it was somewhat different. The Apostolic Tradition asserts that their practitioners would be capable of hearing the Word on one condition-if they took socially costly steps necessary to modify their behavior. Painters, for example, could be accepted as catechumens if they refrained from depicting pagan themes.” As for soldiers, the Apostolic Tradition assesses them, like the members of other professions, by their capacity to hear the Word: did their external professional commitments the tasks and milieux and religious commitments of their jobs-enable them to receive the Christian good news in churches that emphasized patience and in which reconciliation with the alienated brother was a precondition for prayer? The Apostolic Tradition’s assumption is clear. Inner and outer are inextricable; if you live in a certain way in everyday life, you cannot hear, comprehend, or live the gospel that the Christian community is seeking to embody as well as teach. The church will not baptize people in hopes that they will change thereafter.

The church’s witness was the second reason that the teachers carefully examined the candidates in the First Scrutiny. As a catechumen, would the candidate’s behavior represent the church well or let the church down? Christians are to “be competitors… among the nations [gentes]” by their exemplary behavior; if they behave conventionally, the pagans will conclude that there is nothing in Christianity worth investigating. So if a potential candidate is married to a husband (who may be pagan), let her be admitted as a catechumen, provided she is willing to be taught “to be content with her husband.” Her admission is conditional on receiving teaching; as we have seen, the church was open to having women members, chaste and sexually disciplined, who were married to pagan men. However, the church categorically refused to admit to the catechumenate other candidates whose occupations contradicted the church’s teaching. For example, in the case of men who were makers of idols or gladiators whose profession involved killing, the teacher’s verdict was crisp: “Let them cease or be cast out.”

But for the sake of the church’s witness, other candidates whose jobs were at least in part acceptable could be admitted on the condition that they gave up their unacceptable behavior. For example, in some places soldiers had been attracted to the Christian communities that rejected all forms of killing, including killing in warfare. So the teachers responded to a soldier by saying, “Let him not kill a man. If he is ordered, let him not go to the task nor let him swear.” If the soldier was unwilling to submit to this limitation of his professional behavior, the verdict was “Let him be cast out.” Four times in chapters 15 and 16 of the Apostolic Tradition, the teachers accept applicants on the condition that they receive teaching; three times they accept applicants on the condition that they give up unacceptable behavior; and ten times the teachers respond by categorically refusing applicants. In one case, the teachers are astonishingly flexible: when a man teaching young children (whose lessons involve pagan stories) has no other trade, the teachers determine that “he should be forgiven.” Church leaders of a later age might have said, “Let’s admit them as they do their current jobs and eventually, when they have ‘heard the word,’ they will think their way into a new life.” The church of the Apostolic Tradition says in effect, “No, our approach is the opposite. We believe that people live their way into a new kind of thinking. If we admit them as they engage in idolatry, immorality, and killing, they will be unable to ‘hear the word,’ and they will change the church, fatally compromising its distinctiveness, which is the basis of our witness.”

Don’t miss a post, subscribe below.

Written in 2006, this small 80 page book by Buff Scott, Jr. is easy to read and highly recommended. If you’ve visited my Resources page, you can see all the books I’ve read over the last couple of years. This book has a passion that most of the others lack. There are only a few copies left in print. They can be purchased by going to Jon Zen’s website. In the search menu type “Buff” and his book will come up. It’s only $4.00. You can also download a free PDF version of this book by going here.

When Moses’ descent from the Mountain of God was delayed, the children of Israel built an idol in the form of a golden calf and bowed down to it, thus corrupting themselves (Exodus 32:1-8). If the implication of the above caption carries any validity, the Christian community can be charged with idolatry, for she has built for herself “golden calves” in the likes of church edifices while Jesus’ descent from heaven is being delayed.

I affirm that church structures and edifices are monuments that testify of our idolatry. The issue is not whether it is right or wrong to meet somewhere. The issue is whether or not we have built church structures and edifices and set them apart-sanctified them as holy articles or entities. I’m convinced we have. The evidence surrounds us. If I might be so bold, the organized church is as guilty of idolatry as were the children of Israel who erected Asherah poles as symbols of worship.

“Do not make idols or set up an image or a sacred stone for yourselves, and do not place a carved [consecrated] stone in your land to bow down before it” (Lev. 26:1).

Protestants and Catholics have done just that. Catholics have not only set up “consecrated stones” in the form of “holy” church structures, but they have made idols and images and bow down to them. We are speaking of earthen material destitute of emotions- idols and images that cannot hear, speak, or understand. Protestants, on the other hand, have set up their elaborate edifices and crosses and view them as sanctuaries and hallowed designs. There may be a few exceptions, but the rule seems to be universal.

There’s an old maxim, “Our heart is where our money is.” If we will but consider the hundreds of millions of dollars that are squandered on church structures, designs, religious inventions, edifices, statues, and compare that amount to the few dollars we spend on seeking and saving the lost and feeding the genuinely poor, we don’t need a prophet to locate our hearts. If this isn’t idolatry, I’ve lost my ability to reason. In the institutional church, money has become the “name of the game.”

And speaking of “games,” be on the lookout for those churchy “pledge cards.” Usually, they’re just another way of bleeding us blind so that the “holy edifice” idol can be even more embellished and revered. Instead, I suggest we bypass the collection plate and “pledge cards” and send our dollars to evangelize unbelievers and help feed the world’s poor.

But no! We’re too busy with our home-based “materialistic evangelism” to bother with the lost or to fret over empty stomachs.

When we mull over the fact that an evangelist and his family in Asia, Africa, India and several other world locations, where responsive hearts are abundant, can be supported for as little as $50 a month, but we don’t because we have an edifice to construct and a deadbeat pulpiteer to keep vocationally afloat, it is heartbreaking and depressing.

There are scores of missionaries who have been “called home” from evangelistic fields who could no longer be supported because of a materialistic program back home. This is not only despairing, it is an evil and a misplacement of priorities.

Ours is a history of a noble movement that apostatized centuries ago when Jesus’ command to “get out and go” was replaced by the clergy to “come in and stay.” Our idols-churches-have isolated us from the world’s needs, immobilized us, nailed our pants and panties to cushioned pews, and provoked us to import professionals to do our ministries. We no longer have to speculate why the world looks upon us in disgust and laughs at our efforts to “save” them.

To clean out one of the cobwebs some of you may have accumulated, let it be said that I have never argued that believers should not come together. For if we’re going to encourage and stimulate each other’s faith, and we ought, we must have a designated place to meet-whether in the living room of our home, under the shade of an old apple tree, or in some idol (church structure).

My whole point has been that our priorities are misplaced. We spend millions of dollars on our idols-venerated structures and edifices and very little on evangelism and feeding the world’s hungry. As I see it, we are as guilty of idolatry as were the children of Israel and the pagans of their day. I entertain no doubt but that my analysis is correct.

We esteem our church structures as the “works of our mighty hands” as though God Himself built them. We refuse to be ousted from our comfort zones. The cushions are too comfortable, and we delight in being hand-fed by hirelings who induce sleep by their stagnated “sermons.” We are stalemated with no hope of recovery unless we revamp the whole system and start over.

Buff Scott, Jr. produces a weekly newsletter on all faith related topics. You can be added to his email list by contacting him at renewal@mindspring.com.