Thursday, May 01, 2014
Giving God A Bad Name
Todd Rhoades links to a video that argues is a church's programs would succeed if they charged a $20 cover charge, then they are being well done. Within that idea is a very good point, but I find its expression repellent.
The good idea is that whatever we do in Christ's name it should be well done.
The repellent part is that using the cover charge thought as a means of measuring that quality further solidifies the idea that what is done at church is a form of entertainment. It completely ignores the work of the Spirit. Church has a bit more going on than the average night club.
Then there is the idea that it is so utterly impersonal. Most of what happens in church happens based on relationship, not presentation.
And finally, think about what people will pay a cover charge for. There is a lot of nasty stuff out there that makes a whole lot of money. It's not much of a measure, really.
I'm thinking repellent wins this one - time to move on.
church quality
The good idea is that whatever we do in Christ's name it should be well done.
The repellent part is that using the cover charge thought as a means of measuring that quality further solidifies the idea that what is done at church is a form of entertainment. It completely ignores the work of the Spirit. Church has a bit more going on than the average night club.
Then there is the idea that it is so utterly impersonal. Most of what happens in church happens based on relationship, not presentation.
And finally, think about what people will pay a cover charge for. There is a lot of nasty stuff out there that makes a whole lot of money. It's not much of a measure, really.
I'm thinking repellent wins this one - time to move on.
church quality