Who are the Evangelical Untouchables?

Michael Patton is the director of Reclaiming the Mind Ministries, blogs at Parchment and Pen and is one of the teachers on The Theology Program.
Tony Kummer is on staff at a Southern Baptist Church in the midwest and blogs at SBC Voices.
Ryan Couch is a Calvary Chapel pastor in Oregon, and blogs at Small Town Preacher.
Kirk Cowell pastors a Church of Christ in North Carolina. He blogs at A Soul In Training.
Lindsey Williams is planting a PCA Church in North Carolina, and blogs at From Acorns to Oaks.
Matt Edwards is a small groups pastor in a Non-denominational/Bible church in Washington, and blogs at Awaiting Redemption.
Darrell Young pastors a Christian and Missionary Alliance Church near Calgary, Alberta, Canada.

This episode’s question: “Many evangelicals are abandoning the practice of formal church membership. What is your feeling about the practice of formally joining the local church? How do you relate your church’s practice to the mission of the church?”

Michael Patton (Independent/Bible Church): What is your feeling about the practice of formally joining the local church?

I remember in one candid moment not too long ago a church member asked me why he should join our church and I answered as honestly as I could at the time. I am going to share the answer I gave, but I want to fill this in with a little reminder of my background. Being a part of a non-denominational church and, for the most part, growing up in these circles, has made church membership somewhat of a formality, transferring a person from going to such and such church to really going to such and such church. It, unfortunately, has no traditional inherent meaning. For the most part, the most it does is qualify someone to teach, or to be an elder, or to be a deacon (yes, we have deacons).

I answered the gentleman by saying, “To be honest, it is really for legal purposes.” You will find this more often than you think among church leaders, especially those who have been burned in one way or another. You see, in order for a church to exercise church discipline and not get sued, you have to protect yourself. Sometimes that is what church membership is about. You sign that you will abide by the rules. If there is no speaking in tongues during service among our membership and you formally agreed to such, now we can more confidently usher you out. If you teach a Sunday School class and commit adultery, we are protected when you are removed from your position.

Of course, this is not all there is to church membership, but every church administration knows that legal council will tell you to have membership to protect yourself. Usually, in big “free churches” this is the straw that breaks the back of the undecided. Not too theological, but very practical.

Theologically speaking, we are members of the body of Christ, no matter what formality we have in our name. I think this is very important to keep in focus. Church membership is fine so long as it does not serve to alienate you from Pastor John down the road. The local church is simply a local extension of the universal body of Christ. Membership should always focus on this first so that the new members have perspective. No local church has ownership of any individual members. In this respect, ironically, I am normally more comfortable with local church membership in the “free church” (non-denominational) than I am when there is a particular tradition or denomination involved.

How do you relate your church’s practice to the mission of the church?

I feel as if my church does membership well. But, I have yet to become a member of this particular church we have been involved in for the last year and a half, so my comments here would not be too well informed (it is actually loosely affiliated with a denomination). However, I believe that my tradition normally keeps the universal body of Christ in perspective well. This is somewhat easy where there is no denominational pride involved.

Kirk Cowell (Church of Christ): In the church I attended as a little boy, church membership was essentially equivalent to certificate from the leadership testifying that you had fulfilled the requirements to be saved. I think there was a subtext to our practice that assumed that our congregation was the only outpost of the kingdom in our city (or one of a very few) and if you wanted to “go to heaven” you needed to be in good standing with us. That’s a pretty poor theology, and one that I’m happy to be rid of.

If your ecclesiological view is that there are many legitimate expressions of the kingdom–high church, low church, house church–and that God is calling people through all of those expressions (and that’s my view), then we need to rethink what church membership is–for that matter, we need to rethink what a “local church” is. I hesitate to stick the label “church” on our organization, as the church is much bigger than us. The “XYZ Church of Christ” is really a voluntary community of like-minded believers with some significant theological and stylistic similarities. We aren’t “the church”–just a tiny part of it. All of which is to say that if we drop the idea that church membership is an endorsement of your redeemed status, or a sign that you are in good standing with the One True Church, then we have the freedom to make it something much more useful and interesting.

I would like to de-couple membership from assent to theological propositions and instead make the salient issue one’s willingness to commit to the spiritual practices of the community. That’s essentially a complete reversal from what we do right now. At the moment, if you are properly baptized and believe that Jesus is the son of God, we’ll put you on the roll and you can be a back-bench, essentially non-participating “member” of our “church” for decades. I’m not necessarily critical of a person’s choice to do that–there are plenty of ways to work for the kingdom outside of our congregational structure, and if you want to show up for Sunday worship and never be seen other than that, I’m not interested in judging that choice. I just think we shouldn’t have such a low bar for members. What if, instead, membership meant that you were committing to follow the spiritual authority of our elders, to faithfully participate in Sunday worship, to pray regularly and to join a fellowship or accountability group? I’d love to say to people “There are lots of communities you can join. Many are good options. But if you want to join us, you need to realize that we hold ourselves accountable to certain expectations in order to maintain a robust spiritual life. If that’s a commitment you aren’t ready to make, you are truly welcome to join us for worship as often as you like. But membership here isn’t a casual thing. It’s a deep commitment to living together as the family of God for the sake of the world.” Church membership done in that way is one step away from viewing church as organization or event, and a step toward viewing church as people following the way of Christ together.

Tony Kummer (Southern Baptist): I’ve never been in a church that practiced real church membership. The 200-person church that baptized me actually had 1,200 members. Each SBC church hop since then has been the same story. All of them claimed to receive members, but none had a committee on math.

What was worse, I never found real community and belonging to these churches stunted my spiritual growth. The church I now serve is similar. We’ve made some strides over the last few years, but real spiritual fellowship is still very distant. Our church understands baptism and membership as implied by the Great Commission. But in practice, we don’t have it worked out.

I believe the New Testament church did have a clear sense of who was “in” and “out” of their church. People were removed from fellowship and welcomed back. How this translates to our modern context is a problem. The ancient church held private services in secret or small venues. Our churches hold public services in massive buildings that encourage anonymous participation. There is a wide gap between our formal church membership and the New Testament concept of the body of Christ.

Lindsey Williams (Presbyterian Church in America): It does seem that the notion of “church membership” is becoming less and less popular in evangelical circles. The typical response I have heard is that the term “church membership” is nowhere to be found in the bible. To that, I would respond, you are exactly right. The term is nowhere to be found. However, the term “trinity” is also nowhere to be found in the bible, but does that make it any less biblical of a concept. To that I would hope our answer would be “no”. The question is not a matter of whether or not the term exists, but whether or not the concept exists, because theology is done on the concept level. While on the surface we don’t see “church membership” as we practice it today in the pages of the bible, we do in fact see a number of new testament practices which make a commitment to the visible body of Christ an essential part of the Christian life. The NT equivalent of “membership” was baptism as it was a practice signifying one’s membership in the body of Christ. In a normative sense, this was very much connected to the leadership of the church and provided a very clear distinction between those inside the church and outside the church. What the bible does not address is the reality of our current culture in which we are much more transient and thus switch churches frequently. We do see primitive forms of membership transfer when the apostle Paul encourages one church to embrace a visitor from another church as they travel to their locale (see Philemon; 1 Corinthians 16, etc.). There are a number of passages in the NT which imply the reality of being formally connected to a local body of believers. Hebrews 13:17 indicates Christians have clear understanding of the leaders they are to submit to. Matthew 18 implies a system of visible accountability for dealing with sinfulness (as does 1 Corinthians 5:12-13). It is very clear that baptism signifies one’s inclusion into a church (1 Corinthians 12:13), and in this same passage we actually do see the word “member” used. Virtually every major protestant denomination has encouraged “membership” over the years and I believe it is because they have come to believe the idea of church membership is based upon very biblical concepts and it is actually necessary in our transient culture to ensure that we as leaders can fulfill the command of Acts 20:28 to keep watch over the flock of which we as pastors are overseers. Practically, church membership helps me to know who the sheep are that I am called to pastor. We live in a culture of non-committal, and I have a very hard time thinking that the new push to not have formal church membership is based upon anything biblical when church history tells us otherwise and the culture of the day seems so only encourage the lack of a clear understanding of commitment in relationships. I don’t put church history on equal footing as the bible, but it is very helpful in figuring out if my interpretations of the bible are correct. I do think there is a big danger in American evangelicalism to basically “make out” with the church, without being willing to commit to her. In my opinion, this is just as dangerous as trying to co-habitate with someone without actually getting married. When someone asks me, “Why should I join a church?” my response is that they are asking the wrong question. The right question is “Why shouldn’t I join a church?”. Why shouldn’t I commit to a community that Jesus has made so clear that he has loved enough to die for (Ephesians 5:25)? Why shouldn’t I commit to loving the very people that Jesus loved. Why shouldn’t I commit to people who worship Jesus, when I have already agreed to commit to being a citizen of the United States? Furthermore, most of the NT epistles are written not to general Christians, but to specific visible churches. Those instances where letters are written to general Christians, there are passages (like Hebrews 13:17) which imply a commitment to the visible church. While the NT does not say, “Go join a church”, it is implied all over its pages. So I say, lets not “make out with the church”, but allow her to make a “honest” Christian out of us.

All of this being said, I think it is very important to make your church an atmosphere where people can explore Christianity without being forced to become a member. I am very willing to let people just come and not commit for a period of time, allowing patience for God to work in their lives and for the gospel to take root. However, I do want to make it clear (primarily through my actions) that my commitment level to “members” is different than my commitment level to non-members. I’m deeply committed to evangelism, and firmly believe in the church fulfilling the great commandment and the great commission. But I will treat the failing marriage of a member in our church much different than the failing marriage of someone who just “attends” my church. A member has invited me to be their pastor, while the “attender” has not given me such a privilege. I will then help the struggling couple who are non-members only insofar as they invite me to help them and as I feel able to do so in light of other priorities. I have found this to be a very helpful distinction in my previous role as an associate pastor in an established church. I want people to know that much like a marriage, there are certain benefits you receive from being connected formally with the church that you don’t by merely “dating” the church. But my ultimate goal is for everyone to grow in their commitment to the body of Christ as a reflection of his commitment to us. I will gently encourage people as they come to faith in Jesus Christ, to seek to fulfill the biblical principles of accountability by going through our best expression of establishing those relationships and modeling biblical community, aka membership. I have gradually learned to love the church, not because she is perfect, but because the One who loves her, being Jesus is perfect and loves her in spite of herself.

Darrell Young (Christian and Missionary Alliance): The first response we’ll hear from many on this subject is that church membership is not biblical. I’m not so sure. In 1 Timothy 5 Paul goes into a rather detailed set of instructions regarding the care of widows and who should or should not be “enrolled” into the church’s support. This may not relate to modern church membership but it at least makes reference to developing a list of people falling under the care of elders. Further, in discussing church discipline, Paul gives instruction in 1 Corinthians 5 to take the immoral man and put him out. You cannot really put someone out if they have not in some meaningful way been “put in.”

Aside from the modern legal issues around the running of an organization, there are some practical considerations. Without a system of membership, how do the elders know who is under their care? How many Sundays a month does one have to attend before pastoral responsibility is taken? Do you go with those who give money? Those who volunteer? Membership can give clarity to the leadership. This has actually been something we have emphasized to our people. Taking out membership is encouraging and helpful to the elders. It is a positive way of expressing submission in community. While an individual submits to the leaders, the leaders feel the collective accountability to the members.

We don’t think of membership as akin to a marriage commitment. It is simply this; while I’m here, I’ll be a part of this fellowship. To express this I’ll take the class, meet with the elders, shake their hand in front of the congregation in the simplest of ceremonies, and get my name on the list. Then I’ll get busy with my “time, talents, and treasure.” When I move I’ll take this up with my next church.

Now, here is the key for the way we are thinking about membership in our church and how it relates to our mission of making disciples. What is the number one criticism of Christians? Is it not that we are hypocrites? We can’t live by our own precepts. This takes us back to church discipline, which is directly related to evangelism. Evangelicals have dropped discipline partly out of fear of losing people. I suspect that the opposite has happened; we have lost people because we have dropped discipline. Membership facilitates the practice of church discipline. It does not guarantee it, but it can lend itself to a process where it is more likely. A congregation of holy people living and speaking their faith is the most vital component for carrying out our mission.

Matt Edwards (Independent/Bible Church): A couple of years ago Brooke and I moved from an apartment in Gig Harbor a house 20 minutes away in Port Orchard. The experience was exciting. For the first time in our lives we were homeowners. We had our own plot of land (and a picket fence to boot!). We had permanent neighbors. We finally felt “rooted.”

But moving from Gig Harbor to Port Orchard was also a bit scary. Our housing expenses tripled. My commute quadrupled. We were displaced from one community and transplanted into another. It was a bit traumatic. But the worst part of the whole experience was . . .

I had to quit the gym in our old neighborhood.

Is there a harder thing in the world to do than quit a gym? The queue that forms at the membership cancellation desk truly is “the line of shame.” And as you wait in the line of shame behind the 300-pound guy and the lady with four screaming kids, you notice that everyone walking by gives you that look. You can tell that they would wag their finger in your face if it was culturally acceptable. You’ve failed. You’ve given up. You’ve quit. And the form that you fill out to cancel your membership always has at least one question on it like:

Why are you quitting the gym?

I no longer care about my appearance. My next errand is to buy a Mumu.
I think health and wellness are highly overrated. What’s so bad about a heart attack at 50, anyway?
I have abandoned all hope of ever returning to my pre-baby weight. I mean seriously, who am I kidding?
I don’t have the energy. Work out? Ha! At my age, it’s a good day if I even leave the house.

But now that I say that, perhaps there is one thing more difficult than quitting a gym—quitting a church. I don’t know what it is about formal membership, but once your get on the role at most churches, Saint Peter himself has to write the church secretary a note to get you off. I kid you not; five years ago I went to a large church in Dallas where Billy Graham was on the role (or at least that was the rumor). I used to tell people that someone needed to call Billy. I hadn’t seen him in church in quite a while and I was starting to worry that he was backsliding.

Have you ever received “the call” from a church that you used to be a member of, but hadn’t attended for some time? “Hi, this is Brother Bob from First Church of Springfield. We haven’t seen you in a while and we were just wondering how you were doing. We miss you around here.” And you’re thinking, “Well, ever since I moved away from Springfield 18 months ago, I’ve been going to church here in my new town. But thanks for checking up on me. It’s good to know that if I suddenly died in my apartment that someone from my church would come check on me within two years.”

How were you a “member” of that church in any way but on paper?

Believers Fellowship does not have formal membership, but that doesn’t mean we don’t have membership. We say, “Those who have believed in Christ and have chosen to fellowship with us are considered to be a part of our church family. Therefore any Christian is a ‘member’ of Believers Fellowship by virtue of his or her continued participation and ministry in the church.” In other words, if you’re here, you believe, and you’re involved, you’re a member.

How do you relate your church’s practice to the mission of the church?
It’s been said that while previous generations believed and then looked for a place to belong, this generation needs to belong before they can believe. I agree. Most people today need to be accepted by the community of faith before they will make a confession of faith. Thus there will always be unbelievers in our faith communities. (Unless, of course, we abandon the mission and just talk amongst ourselves.)

But are these unbelieving members of the community members of the church? I would have to say “no,” even if they participate in the life and ministry of the church. There has to be a difference between those who are truly a part of our church and those who just ape our Christian devotion. How do you distinguish between the two groups? I don’t know. What do you call the crowd of people that hang out with us, “worship” with us, take communion with us, but don’t believe? I don’t know. But I’m glad they’re here. That means we’re doing our job. (Perhaps Matthew 13:24–30 applies.)

But then again, getting people to sign their names on a form to become “members” doesn’t solve that problem, anyway.

Ryan Couch (Calvary Chapel): The only church I’ve ever been a part of that practiced formal membership was the Conservative Baptist Church, where I came to Christ as a teenager.

Calvary Chapel as a whole does not embrace the practice of church membership. I think there may be a few Calvary Chapels that have instituted the practice but by in large it’s not part of our tradition or ecclesiology.

For our church locally I think we have always seen church membership as something that happens on a spiritual level, we are baptized into one body (1 Cor. 12:12ff) and any effort to duplicate that falls short of the intended goal. Obviously church membership does not equate salvation, so the motivation generally falls under the category of discipleship. For which I have absolutely no qualms whatsoever. If the leadership of a local church believes that they can best fulfill the Great Commission by practicing formal membership then they would be sinful not to do it. Transversely if a church institutes or perpetuates membership so that they can obligate people to attend, serve, and give more faithfully I think they are traveling down a slippery slope.

I want people to identify with Jesus first and foremost. We are in fact Christians, which means that our identity should never be with “Calvary Chapel” or any other denomination. That being said the absence of formal membership does not insulate a church from this isolationist paradigm. My movement has been very guilty of turning its nose up at other Christian groups and that is a shame. Therefore in light of this desire to simply identify with Jesus and no man or group we have chosen not to adopt the practice of formal membership, and it hasn’t been a hindrance any in of the above areas of concern.

However in light of the Bible’s ambiguity regarding the subject I believe that each individual church needs to hear from God as to what practice will help them best achieve the mission of the local church.

Our mission at Calvary Chapel in Prineville, OR has been to make disciples of Jesus; to inform people that the kingdom of God has come near (Luke 10:11) and to allow the Holy Spirit to revolutionize lives with the power of the gospel. In keeping with that mission we want to bring broken people to His kingdom, which is far bigger than what we’re doing here. We are dedicated to pointing sinners to Jesus and allowing Him to covenant with them individually from which will flow a spontaneous response of faithfulness in the local church.

NOTE: There are several IM posts on Rebaptism in an SBC context. Use the search function and they are on the first page.

The Evangelical Untouchables are seven diverse evangelicals who will give us a window into what’s happening in evangelicalism today.

Who are the Evangelical Untouchables?

Michael Patton is the director of Reclaiming the Mind Ministries, blogs at Parchment and Pen and is one of the teachers on The Theology Program.
Tony Kummer is on staff at a Southern Baptist Church in the midwest and blogs at SBC Voices.
Ryan Couch is a Calvary Chapel pastor in Oregon, and blogs at Small Town Preacher.
Kirk Cowell pastors a Church of Christ in North Carolina. He blogs at A Soul In Training.
Lindsey Williams is planting a PCA Church in North Carolina, and blogs at From Acorns to Oaks.
Matt Edwards is a small groups pastor in a Non-denominational/Bible church in Washington, and blogs at Awaiting Redemption.
Darrell Young pastors a Christian and Missionary Alliance Church near Calgary, Alberta, Canada.

This episode’s question: “Evangelicals love to convert and baptize other people’s church members.

Recently, I received word that one of the elders of a church where I served as supply pastor for many years had been baptized and proclaimed himself a new Christian. This was a man I discipled, prayed with, ministered with and was constantly encouraged by in my own ministry. While I’m not God, all my understanding of the evidence of true faith says he was a Christian. Now he’s been told by his new church that all those years- including years serving as an elder- were spent as an unconverted person.

Sometimes this happens with a stress on questioning assurance. Sometimes it comes because of the claims of the church involved.

How do you process, in your own understanding of conversion, grace and baptism, the “conversion” of your own church members into “new converts” at other churches? Would you tell a person who considered themselves a Christian that they weren’t, and needed to be rebaptized?”

Michael Patton (Independent/Bible Church): How do you process, in your own understanding of conversion, grace and baptism, the “conversion” of your own church members into “new converts” at other churches? Would you tell a person who considered themselves a Christian that they weren’t, and needed to be rebaptized?

Let me start by saying that I do believe that there are a lot of unconverted people in the pews of Evangelical churches everywhere. I never assume that just because someone is a member of this or that church that they have ever truly and personally trusted in Christ. I think one of our biggest problems in pop-Evangelicalism today, ironically, is the discharge of the Gospel. I am not one to continually call people’s assurance into question, but we must realize that there is a faith that does not save, and there are a lot of people in possession of such faith. Making our calling sure is very important.

Having said that, baptism would not be the issue. Baptism is a sign of your conversion, not the conversion itself. Therefore, rarely, would baptism come up unless we were to discover that this person was never truly a believer to begin with. If, upon discovery that this person had never trusted in Christ, the issue would be their trust in Christ. After this, I would discuss baptism. At this point I would think it a good idea for that person to be rebaptized, but we would not push this too much. I think I speak in line with my tradition, but my tradition on these issues is very broad.

Kirk Cowell (Church of Christ): Churches of Christ have historically held a very high view of baptism. A proper conversion in our fellowship involves an adult (loosely defined) who is baptized by immersion as an act of faith and repentance, following a public confession that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God. It is generally believed that a person is saved at the moment that he or she rises out of the baptismal waters. We don’t say sinner’s prayers or ask Jesus to come into our hearts. As a consequence, there is a very clear line of demarcation between sinner and saint. Although I’ve known people to leave Churches of Christ and later come to believe that they hadn’t fully received the Holy Spirit, or that they hadn’t properly understood grace, or that they had been indoctrinated into an overly restrictive and sectarian mindset, I don’t personally know of anyone who didn’t think that their conversion experience hadn’t been efficacious for salvation. One thing we’re good at is jumping through all the hoops!

And yet: The fundamental quality of a Christian is that he or she has submitted themselves to the Lordship of Jesus. I would never tell a people who have done so that they aren’t Christians. They might be misinformed–even badly so–but if the grace of Jesus doesn’t cover a person’s failure to properly grasp the normative process of conversion, then I certainly can’t trust it to cover lust, rebellion, greed and hatred–and we’re all in trouble. It’s been a long time since I could really sympathize with the mindset of folks who think that the same Jesus who said “Forgive them, for they know not what they do” in regard to the people carrying out his execution would willingly (if regretfully) send pedobaptists off to hell, unable to forgive their doctrinal error. I’ve often asked my colleagues in ministry why it is that Abraham’s faith alone was credited to him as righteousness if we have to have faith + x (for divergent values of x, depending on your denomination) to be counted righteous? How is it good news if the work of Jesus resulted in it being harder for me to be saved than for Abraham? Wouldn’t I have been better off before the cross? But, of course, Paul’s point is that our God has, through Jesus, extended to all people the opportunity to be reckoned righteous in exactly the same way that Abraham was.

The words “it was credited to him” were written not for him alone, but also for us, to whom God will credit righteousness—for us who believe in him who raised Jesus our Lord from the dead. He was delivered over to death for our sins and was raised to life for our justification.

If it were just me making the call (and it isn’t), folks whose conversion process differ from the template we teach would be welcomed as full, participating members of our congregation, but we would simulatenously continue to teach that our tradition is believer’s immersion and it is our belief that such practice is in harmony with the best reading of the scripture. That might be a tricky balance to maintain, but I don’t know how else to live out the fruit of the Spirit in this regard: love for all who confess Jesus, joy in our mutual service, peace in spite of our differences, patience while Jesus leads all of us more fully into his truth, kindness to people who read the Bible differently than I do, goodness (not doctrinal conformity) as our calling, and yet faithfulness to my Lord and to the scriptures as I understand them. In a lot of ways it would be easier to say clearly “you’re in” or “you’re out,” but I see more wisdom in saying “I love you in the Lord; let’s walk together and keep talking about this one.”

Tony Kummer (Southern Baptist): There’s a joke down in Louisville that the largest Baptist church in the city is actually Southeast Christian Church. Maybe that’s just seminary humor, but something about it rings true. Our little town is similar. All the churches take turns loosing membership to whichever church has momentum (newest buildings, dynamic preacher, cool music).

I don’t call that conversion, just church-shopping. The current hot church is a Christian church that blends Campbellite doctrine with attractional church growth techniques. It’s a bit eclectic, but they still like to baptize former Southern Baptists. We believe this is an invalid use of the ordinance. Baptism should be a one-time symbolic act of public confession to faith in Christ. It’s a testimony to conversion, and it does not contribute to justification.

We discourage re-baptizing, mainly because it confuses the symbolism of the resurrection, which is a one-time deal. We make exception for people not literally “dunked” since we insist (with pompous Greek exegesis) that Baptism = dunked. I would counsel people to find assurance in personally knowing Jesus, not in the ordinance of Baptism.

Lindsey Williams (Presbyterian Church in America):First of all, I would say that as a pastor I can never guarantee someone’s conversion. I know plenty of people who have shown all the evidences of faith, and yet years later seem to have turned away from that faith which they professed (1 John 2:19). As pastors we are called to investigate and see if people give a credible profession of faith and show the fruits of such a faith before we admit them as communing members in a church. We are then called to treat those people as “believers” and encourage them in their faith and in the assurance of that faith. But it is entirely possible that an elder in my own church could end up not being a believer down the road. 1 Corinthians 3:6-9 helps to keep me from being too consumed with whether or not previous people in my church were believers or not should they be “new converts” in a church that preaches the true gospel. Regardless, the credit goes to God and it doesn’t diminish God using me whether as a planter or as one who waters (either way, I can be confident God used me!). Obviously, the key issue is whether or not this new church is actually preaching the gospel and not some heresy. There are Christian traditions that confuse assurance of salvation with salvation itself, so it is possible that there is merely a poor teaching as it relates to these respective terms, and that is the cause for their “new conversion”

I would most certainly tell someone they aren’t a Christian if they don’t assent to the truths of the gospel. However, it gets trickier when it comes to addressing their Christian experience. There must be some evidence of “good works” in their life, but it is difficult to get a clear picture depending on how long you have known this person (and allowing for the reality of temporary backsliding). I would actually never rebaptize someone if they had already been baptized by an ordained minister in the name of the Trinity with water. In my denomination there is some debate as to the question of someone baptized in a Catholic church. The basic denominational position (which I tend to agree with) is that as long as the baptism meets the criteria above, then it is a legitimate baptism (Ephesians 4:5). The basic reformed position is that baptism is not ultimately about what we have to say to God, but what God has to say about us. It is God’s sacrament to us, not our sacrament given to God. We baptize those who profess faith, but we also baptize the children of those who profess faith precisely because God has declared that he has a special interest in the children of those in the covenant community (1 Cor. 7:14; Genesis 17; Acts 2:38,39; Colossians 2:11-12). This may be a whole other discussion topic on the question of infant baptism, but we’ll just assume I’m right on this and move on. A person’s actual conversion is not necessary for baptism, only the profession of faith on in the case of an infant (the profession of their parent’s faith). This is a good thing, because the whole point is that we can never be totally sure of someone’s conversion. Only God can. Furthermore, infant baptism has the exact same meaning as an adult baptism. Baptism does signify the signs of conversion like the remission of sins, and the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, the only difference is that with a child we look to that from a different perspective in time. We hope that he will one day embrace all that baptism signifies. With an adult, he simply is baptized as one who has already embraced its significance. The difference between the two is only a matter of chronology (not unlike Abraham’s faith in the coming Christ as compared to our faith in the Christ who has already come). I’m writing this now at 2am, so pardon me if I have not sufficiently addressed this topic from my theological position.

Darrell Young (Christian and Missionary Alliance): I will leave it to some of the other Untouchables to articulate the theological nuances of this. I’ll just relate how some of this has worked out for me. The Internet Monk’s frustration over his friend is understandable. I had seen a man and his family through conversion, baptism, growth, membership, the whole deal, only to have him leave over an awkward conflict. He began reporting real spiritual progress in his next church. Then, during that same season, other fringe people left us for that same church and promptly became drawn right into it. While I didn’t like any of this, and doubted myself, it did give me a greater sensitivity when the opposite happened.

As for the person who thinks they are saved, I certainly would not base my opinion on which church they were from. I would simply get to know them, and should be able to get a good sense of their understanding and acceptance of the Gospel. From a church leadership standpoint this becomes important to discern if they want to get baptized and become a member. We hope to take only the truly converted through this. Our denomination requires “believer’s baptism” for membership. This can be frustrating for those baptized as infants, but its who we are and what we believe. We don’t twist arms for people to get rebaptized, but will do it if they want. At the same time, we don’t think this says anything about when they became converted. We would not take someone in from another denomination and insist they were not saved, must now convert and be rebaptized. In our tradition you can attend and even be involved in certain ways, and even for years, without becoming a member. We would simply start to walk along together and let the Lord work it all out.

Matt Edwards (Independent/Bible Church): he number one question we get about our church is “You guys aren’t some kind of cult, are you?” There is no offering plate passed, no baptismal, no membership, and no senior pastor. It’s weird for a lot of people, but it’s who we are. We are “Low Church Gone Wild.” So, there is no doubt in my mind that former attendees are asked to get doubled dipped when they join other churches. It’s sad, but I’m not losing any sleep over it. I grew up in the Baptist church. We double dipped people with extreme prejudice. If you wanted to be a part of our church, your baptism needed to be “on the right side of your salvation.” My dad is a Baptist and my mom is a Roman Catholic. If my mom was ever to join my dad’s church, she’d have to get double dipped (and that’s not going to happen).

I taught Sunday school to young married couples at an SBC church years ago. This great young couple joined our class—the wife was from an SBC background and the husband was from a Methodist background. The husband had a kind of religious awakening when he got married and had kids. When they joined our church, he was asked to get re-baptized. He initially responded, “I was baptized as a baby. Why do I need to get baptized again?”

Fair question.

He eventually consented to the baptism, not because he felt he needed it, but because the church required it. Our class all joined him at the baptismal, and as he was drying off I heard his wife ask him, “Did it take this time?” He laughed and said, “I hope so.” The whole experience turned me off to the practice of re-baptism. My friend obviously didn’t feel the need to be re-baptized, but he did it because it was best for his family. It wasn’t an act of faith; it was ecclesiastic hoop-jumping.

How do I respond to other churches converting and/or re-baptizing former attendees of my church? I don’t let it get to me. It says more about that church than it does the legitimacy of that person’s faith or baptism. I have zero expectations of most churches. Churches are controlling and sometimes abusive. But, I would also admit that perhaps the person did find something in this church that they didn’t find in my church. Different strokes for different folks. Maybe God is doing something new in their life. Does my understanding of conversion lead me to convert people of other denominations? Yes and no. There are people who have been sitting in the pews of my church for 30 years who need to be converted. Obviously we are not reaching them. If the Presbyterian church down the street can convert them, praise God. If we can reach their members better than them, praise God. Like I said, different strokes for different folks. But do we feel the need to convert and re-baptize members of other denominations? Not if that church affirms the Nicene Creed. In my mind, if someone believes in the Trinity and the death and resurrection of Jesus, and if they have “faith,” then they don’t need to be converted. I allow for re-baptism if someone thinks that their first baptism was not an act of faith, but I would not try to persuade someone to get double dipped.

Ryan Couch (Calvary Chapel): Like most church planters, I’ve never set out to “steal” people from other churches. But like all church plants we’ve had many people come to us from other churches over the last 7 years. That being said I have never told any Christian that they need to be re-baptized into our church or our brand of Christianity. However if someone who believed themselves to be a Christian because they were raised in the church or went forward during an altar call yet later realized that they were never truly converted; I would not hesitate to ratify that revelation by praying with them for salvation, baptizing (or re-baptizing) them in obedience to Scripture, and discipling them so that they can truly bear fruits worthy of repentance.

In my opinion it is the height of arrogance to assume that people are not truly converted unless they make that decision in your church. It reeks of sectarianism and it is exactly what is wrong with the Church. There is only one baptism into one Church (1 Cor. 12:13). Granted there are many wacko “churches” and religious groups that sadly attach Jesus’ name to their idiocy. When “converts” arrive to our church from those cults and pseudo-churches we do not hesitate to let them know that they were fed a false gospel and are in need of true conversion, baptism into Jesus’ Church, and discipleship to strip away all the heresy and root them in the essentials of Christianity.

This arrogant sectarianism stems from a general misconception regarding salvation in evangelical circles. Responding to an altar call, raising your hand (while everyone’s eyes are closed and head is bowed) apparently to join some secret club does not equal conversion. Conversion happens when election and faith working in tandem revolutionize a life which is then substantiated by works that were already prepared by God and now made possible to walk in (Ephesians 2:8-10). True conversion is not a onetime response, it is a life of faith (Romans 1:17) that perpetually abides in Christ and rests in the finished work of the cross. A church with poor soteriology that wrongly believes that a person must get re-saved every time they sin will make these unbiblical demands of their people so that they can inflate their numbers to impress headquarters.

Who are the Evangelical Untouchables?

Michael Patton is the director of Reclaiming the Mind Ministries and is one of the teachers on The Theology Program.
Tony Kummer is on staff at a Southern Baptist Church in the midwest and blogs at SBC Voices.
Ryan Couch is a Calvary Chapel pastor in Oregon, and blogs at Small Town Preacher.
Kirk Cowell pastors a Church of Christ in North Carolina.
Lindsey Williams is planting a PCA Church in North Carolina, and blogs at From Acorns to Oaks.
Matt Edwards is a small groups pastor in a Non-denominational/Bible church in Washington, and blogs at Awaiting Redemption.
Darrell Young pastors a Christian and Missionary Alliance Church near Calgary, Alberta, Canada.

Our first question: “If you had only two paragraphs to express the Gospel to an audience of secular twenty-somethings who don’t go to church, what would you say? Then tell us how you are promoting it in your church.

(Beware “TRs:” Ryan is clearly a disciple of Mark Driscoll!)

Michael Patton (Independent/Bible Church): The Gospel is “good news.” It is good news only to the degree that the bad news can be understood first. The world is a mess-up place. It is not just our generation that is notices this, but every generation has had to deal with their share of problems. Today is not really any worse than it was 100 years ago or 1000 years ago. The good news is that God is fixing what is broken in every generation. This is called redemption. Redemption means to “buy back” or restore to a previous condition. God is in the process of putting his messed up creation back in order. The Gospel is the good news that that which was broken is being fixed.

But the brokenness had its genesis in us, mankind. God is different. He is perfect and demands perfection because of his character. In other words, as the Bible puts it, God is righteous. Our brokenness is due to choices that we have made. All of us have messed things up. This is called “sin.” We have sinned through our selfishness, pride, hatred, and perversion of his creation. It is not the way it was supposed to be. God allows us to reject him and suffer the consequences, but he also offers us hope. This hope is the Good news. It is the hope that God has not abandoned us. It is the hope for redemption. God loves us in spite of our perversion of good. God loves us in spite of our rejection of him. He did not wait for us to live up to his standard, which can never happen, but he sent his Son, Jesus Christ, 2000 years ago to live a life that we could not. God the Son became man and never failed, never perverted, and showed us who God is. Because Christ lived a sinless life, he could take the place of man, creating a new race . . . a redeemed race. Christ was rejected and killed on a cross by man. But God allowed this so that Christ could take the punishment that man—that you and I—deserved. In doing this, he died instead of you. He took your penalty of death and separation from God on a execution cross. But since he was God the Son and since he never sinned, he did not stay dead. After three days he came back to life and proclaimed victory over all the death, perversion, sin, and penalties that man had afforded creation. But this Good News does not apply to everyone. It is only for those who believe and trust in what Christ did for them. If you believe in him, you will have life. If you trust in him, not in yourself or your works, but in him alone, you will live forever, witnessing and being a part of a redeemed creation. One day Christ will come back to call into account all people. You can either stand on your own, giving account for your own sin or you can accept the free gift of salvation and stand with Christ. The bad news is that without Christ, you stand alone and hopeless. The Good News—the Gospel—is that you can stand with Christ full of hope.

Promotion presumes and audience of some sort. Gaining an audience presumes that you have an audience. Just because people are standing or seated in front of you listening with their ears does not mean that you have an audience. Today, gaining an audience is more difficult than it has ever been. I truly believe this. People are full of suspicion and doubt. They either think you are a naïve person who still holds to your old time traditions or you are trying to manipulate. Rarely do people grant audiences to people they don’t know. I don’t. In order to give the Gospel, we must have an audience. In order to have an audience, we must have their trust. In order to have trust, they must know you. It starts with real personal engagement. This does not mean that we have to be perfect, but that we are transparent and honest. But this is not the only preparatory ingredient. You must also convince people these days that you are not naïve. In order to convince them of this, you must not be naive! Your faith must be real, not something handed down to you or outsourced to you pastor. This means you must have personally wrestled with the questions, concerns, and doubts that others are going to express. Our church is about preparing people—preparing believers—to engage the world themselves. Their lives are the greatest witness to the truths they will profess. We prepare them by being transparent ourselves. Letting our people know that it is ok to have problems. It is ok to have doubts. It is ok to be yourself. It’s ok to be weak. We also want to make sure that people are well prepared to share the Gospel. We prepare them through discipleship training, helping them to understand the essence of the Christian faith through biblical studies and historical studies. This is how we aspire to promote the Gospel, by preparing the people to do so in their lives everyday.

Kirk Cowell (Church of Christ): “One thing we can say with certainty is that the power structures of the world repeatedly engage in abusive practices that harm and dehumanize. Governments will displace native peoples, indulge in slavery, and commit war crimes. Accounting firms will cook the books; banks will risk our money for a chance to enrich themselves; churches will loudly decry certain sins while covering up their own. And then the people who caused the most harm will be offered bonuses. Not all power structures will do this, and not all the time, but it’s definitely the general trend.

“The good news of Jesus is that the one with the most power–ultimate power–chose to become a servant. And he taught a way of living the rejects personal power and privilege while subverting the power structures of the world. It’s no secret to anyone that the institutional structure called ‘church’ has often missed the mark on this, trying to impose its will through petitions, politicians, and the personality of the pastor. But I want you to know that those kinds of power grabs reveal the nature of our humanity, not our Lord. When you’ve seen churches act like that and wanted to pull your hair out, I don’t think it was because God is a lie. I think it’s because we, as God’s creation, sometimes have a gut-level response to harmful distortions of the God who is True. Jesus called his disciples to deny themselves and take up the cross. To be baptized is to die on the cross with Jesus, and rise into a new kind of life centered on love of God and of others. The good news–in part–is that the Spirit of Christ can empower us to live a life modeled on his own. Following his example, we don’t run into the world trying to conquer it, and we don’t run away from the world into a protective isolation. We engage the world to join God’s work of helping the hurting and fixing what is broken–including all those broken power structures.”

I think the best thing we can do to promote the gospel is to live the crucified life with joy and purpose. For my ministry this year, I have a few simple goals: we enjoy each other’s company, we serve our neighbors, and we tell each other our stories. Any attempt to evangelize that has the slightest hint of coercion is going to fall flat–and it should. Anything based on being the coolest church with the hippest preacher is going to convert people to something other than the cross of the servant God (and we couldn’t pull it off, anyway!) I don’t think we are called to anything other than pooling our Spirit-given gifts to continue the work that Jesus began and promised to finish.

Tony Kummer (Southern Baptist): You did not make yourself. Instead, the all-powerful, all-wise, and all-good God of the Bible made you to show his glory. Even so, you have not lived for Him, and I would guess you have ignored Him much of your life. Deep down inside you know there is something very wrong with that – and with you. If you are like me, you cannot even live up to your own definition of right & wrong. Even worse, you have rejected what you do know about God. You are not alone in doing that, all people have done the same and together we have made a mess out of this world. Think about all the injustice and suffering caused by human choices – even by our choices. God is right to be angry with us. He is right to bring final justice to this world.

God still loved us, even when we rejected Him. He did not give up on humanity, but did something radical to make us right again. He sent a man we call Jesus Christ, but He was much more than an ordinary man. Jesus lived a life in complete submission to the will of God. He lived up to the standards God had set. He spent every moment loving God and loving other people. Eventually, a conspiracy of religious leaders put Him to death. However, God was working behind this evil act to rescue us. Both Jesus and the Old Testament had predicted it. His death was a freedom payment for God’s enemies. On the cross, God punished Jesus in place of sinners. Jesus received in his body the anger of God against evil. Because of his holy life and death in our place, we can have a right relationship with God. Then Jesus rose back to life and proved himself to be the Son of God. His resurrection was a real historical event witnessed by hundreds of 1st century people. This same Jesus now rules from Heaven and is working through his followers to build a new people of God. His people are the first hints of a new world to come. They follow the teaching of Jesus by loving God and serving all people out of love. Knowing all this, it leaves each of us with a choice. We can continue to rebel against God and act as if we are independent of Him. Or we can believe in the message about Jesus and be reconciled to God. This belief in Jesus will lead us to give up anything that does not belong to his kingdom. It will also lead us to spend our lives learning from his teachings.

In our church, we are working to clarify the message of the Gospel and spread it through our community. The content of the good news is more than “say this prayer” or “walk this isle” or “God loves you.” It is a message about Jesus and his real work in history to purchase our salvation. Telling the Gospel begins with knowing it well. This means thinking about the Gospel story (biblical theology) and the Gospel doctrine (systematic theology). We also want to live out the consequences of the good news. We are aware of our daily need for God’s grace and the power of the Gospel message to change our hearts.

Lindsey Williams (Presbyterian Church in America): n order to truly know a person we need to know their story. In fact, our family background (like it or not) plays a very big role in helping to shape our personal stories. If I have one hour to spend with a person, I would spend the majority of my time getting to know their story which has led them to the present day. This is no less true when it comes to the gospel. The gospel is not set forth primarily through a set of principles, but it is a story that has been played out even before we personally came into this world. We as humans have a story. Our ability to embrace the essence and beauty of the gospel is directly tied to our ability to grasp the story that led to our need for the gospel. And this requires us spending the majority of our time in the first 3 chapters of Genesis. I would go back to the beginning of the human story and the fact that we are created in the image of God, and as a result are created to find our ultimate rest and fulfillment in relationship with Him (which our human ancestors originally experienced). However, in disobeying God’s command to not eat of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, Adam and Eve made a conscious choice to begin seeking fulfillment outside of their relationship with God. This choice not only affected Adam and Eve, but it was a generational sin that was passed down to all humanity (not unlike both the good and bad characteristics we often get from our parents), such that all mankind has a natural proclivity to seek fulfillment and ultimate happiness outside of a relationship with God. Furthermore, this choice resulted not only in our alienation from God (which led to both a spiritual and physical death), but it resulted in our alienation from creation (Genesis 3:17-19), with fellow man (Genesis 3:16), and even from ourselves (Genesis 3:7). From that day forward all humanity is born with a longing to connect with their Maker and recover the beginning of the human story, but we are continually “looking for love in all the wrong places”. We look for fulfillment in sex, materialism, work, autonomy, and even religion, but none of them will fulfill us because we can’t change the fact that we were made for relationship with God. All of the pain, depravity, and alienation we experience is at its core a result of our alienation from God from both Adam’s original failure to trust in God and all of our subsequent failures to seek fulfillment in Him. Even our attempts to be “religious” and “christian” people apart from God only serve to further that very alienation.

But we are told that while we were still looking for fulfillment outside of God (whether through religion or irreligion), Jesus came to pay the penalty of our alienation from God (being death) through his own death on the cross. His death was a means of removing the alienation between us and God (clearing the slate of our mistakes), and restoring us to the rightful place of being the crown of his creation and his royal sons and daughters. The gospel first comes through recognizing that our actions to look for fulfillment outside of God is the source of our alienation from God. Secondly, it comes through trusting that when Jesus died on the cross he did so to fix that very alienation. The gospel is simply an effort to bring the human story full circle and repair those past events in our human story. While the gospel takes root through our restored relationship with God, the reaches of the gospel go well beyond. In fact the gospel goes as deep and as wide as the world’s problems extend. Wherever the curse of the fall is found in this world, Jesus seeks to bring the power of the cross to those areas. The gospel story is the story of God repairing and recovering all that was lost in the garden, and ultimately it is a story of restoration of our relationship with the one person in whom we find our most enduring happiness and fulfillment.

I have found that one of the best ways to promote the gospel in my church is by simply being willing to embrace both my need for the gospel and experience of the gospel, and to do so openly and authentically. As their pastor, I have to be willing to share my personal story with the congregation, including those areas of shame and how I am seeing Jesus move in the midst of those areas. The gospel is contrary to pretense, and so the gospel must come first and foremost from the pulpit. A pastor can only take people as far as he himself has gone. The story of the gospel has 3 key chapters: creation, fall, redemption. In all our relationships, we seek to honor those ways in which we reflect the image of God (creation), mourn those areas where we fall short of his image (fall), and look to the one who can renew us in his image (redemption). Simply put, we seek to share and stories and we invite people into them. And we even invite people to help us to see & promote the gospel in each of our stories. The gospel actually requires a community of faith, because Jesus never intended for us to see the gospel apart from community with others.

Darrell Young (Christians and Missionary Alliance): With this kind of group I would not be able to resist the temptation to ask them what THEY think of Jesus. Then I would like to hear what they think about our modern society and the heart of humanity. Is there evil? Then I would personalize it and talk about my own heart, and how I have thought of far worse than I have actually done. For example, I have had murderous thoughts, but I’ve never actually done it. Still, Jesus says this makes me a murderer. This is important because most people think that deep down they are pretty good. I want to direct them to their biggest need in life. The story of Jesus and the paralytic who was lowered through the roof could serve well. He obviously needed physical healing. But Jesus shocked everyone there by saying, “My son, your sins are forgiven.”

Our biggest need is to be forgiven our rebellion. So I would then take them to the cross and resurrection as an initiating, loving, sacrificial, forgiving action on the part of Jesus. He had the power and the love to create a wonderful exchange. He died so we could live. God treated His own son like a rebel so He could treat rebels like His own sons and daughters. I would emphasize the goodness of this and tell them that anyone who wants in on it must simply walk away from rebellion and see Jesus as the hope and focus of their earthly and eternal destiny.

Our gospel ‘promotion’ is best pictured from an analogy lifted from Mark Dever. We have to have two things: the preached word and some people. The Word goes out like a fountain, and the people are like a bowl to capture the Word and display it for the glory of God. We preach the gospel every week from whatever text we are in. This comes from the conviction that the Bible has a “Gospel Shape”. By this we mean that every text in both testaments ultimately speaks of Jesus. Then we need a people, an intergenerational family of brothers, sisters, parents, uncles, nieces, grandparents, kids, and friends to form the ‘bowl.’ This makes everyone necessary and all the activities and programs are really just ways to gather as a family and be what we’re supposed be: a disciplemaking community.

Matt Edwards (Independent/Bible Church): The Gospel in Two (Long) Paragraphs

I saw this video on YouTube the other day about a guy who calls himself the Guerilla Gardener. He finds neglected areas in his city and sneaks out at night to plant flowers, herbs, and shrubs to beautify the landscape. His work is technically criminal mischief, but no one can deny the positive impact that his covert operations have on the surrounding neighborhoods. As I watched the video, I thought, “This is what God is doing in our world.” He is transforming the darkness one area at a time. The Apostle Paul wrote, “[God] delivered us from the power of darkness and transferred us to the kingdom of the Son he loves, in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins.” (Colossians 1:13–14 NET) God is in the rescuing business. He infiltrates our world, grabs people out of the darkness, and teaches them a better way to live.

The Scriptures teach that there is something wrong with our world. I don’t think many of us would dispute that. All around us we hear stories of injustice, hate, selfishness, and greed. That’s the darkness, and the Scriptures call this darkness sin. Paul described sin as the cosmic force that is at work in each and every one of us. We see sin’s symptoms on the six o’clock news, and we see it in our own inability to live like we feel we should. But the Scriptures have good news—the world is not as God intended it, and it’s not the way He’s leaving it. God is redeeming the world from sin. The redemption mission started 2000 years ago when He sent His Son, Jesus Christ. Jesus died on a Roman cross for our sin, and three days later He rose from the dead. When Jesus rose, God’s rescue mission went into full tilt. God separated for himself a community, called the church, and He sent the Holy Spirit to empower this community to live the way we were created to live. God calls each and every one of us to become a part of this rescue effort. He calls us to leave the darkness and follow Jesus. Will you follow?

Believers Fellowship and The Gospel

Leo Tolstoy wrote, “Everyone wants to change the world, but nobody wants to change himself.” Changing the world means changing people, and we believe that the primary means by which the Holy Spirit changes people is the proclaimed Word of God. Paul wrote, “For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is God’s power for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek.” (Rom 1:16 NET) Because there is power in the proclaimed Word, biblical teaching is a key element to our ministry. But since we can’t proclaim a message that we haven’t embraced ourselves, we also emphasize living the Gospel. Our church partners with other organizations to promote compassion, community development, and social justice. Our most recent project partnered us with Tacoma Youth for Christ. We helped them with a remodel project that will transform an old tavern into a youth and family center for the residents of Tillicum, one of the poorest neighborhoods in the Tacoma area.

Ryan Couch (Calvary Chapel): The Gospel in two paragraphs to secular twentysomethings:

I would say something like this…

Life is a real bitch. Have you noticed? But you what to know something? God never intended it to be that way. He created you to have a perfect life with no dysfunctional families, heartache, sickness, money problems, or death but our rebellion against God’s perfect plan screwed it all up. Now we are faced with the repurcussions of our rebellious hearts…separation. Separation from all that God intended us to enjoy in this world…separation from true community with others…separation from true love…separation from authentic peace…separation from lasting fulfillment. Because of our love for self and hatred of God we have now isolated ourselves from the only source of meaning and purpose in this life. So where do we go from here?

This same God with whom we’ve consistently turned our back on and spit in His face; stepped out of heaven, condescended to mankind and ultimately gave His life on a criminal’s cross and was then raised from the dead three days later. Jesus…the Son of God…your Creator…became like you and took the punishment your sin and rebellion deserved. In so doing God’s holy wrath has been assuaged and relationship with Him has been made available to anyone who will call on Him, by recognizing their sinful condition, realizing that He offers the only solution to that condition, and then confessing Him as your Lord.

We are working to promote the gospel in three ways…
1. Preaching the gospel in every message from the pulpit – Every Christian message should be rooted in Christ and ultimately in the gospel.
2. Equipping our people to be preachers of the gospel in our community – Every Christian should see themselves as on a mission and representing Christ in their context.
3. Providing venues for our church to preach the gospel – We hold both small and large outreach events where we provide resources for our people to tangibly show the love of Christ to their friends and neighbors. A few examples would be:
a. Sportman’s Banquets
b. Summer Festivals
c. Soup Kitchen (www.oasissoupkitchen.com) We serve about 50 meals per day, 6 days a week.
d. Clothing Give aways
e. Work projects
f. Street Evangelism – it doesn’t always have to be consdescending and obnoxious.
g. Crook County Connect: An event we are hosting where we are gathering practical resources (medical, dental, food, clothing, counseling, etc) for the needy of our community.