I know who Mark Driscoll is, and have read a few excerpts from his writing, but had never heard him speak. I listened to the message you referenced twice, and thought it was very good.

Interesting is it not? – The people who had the most problems with Jesus when He walked this earth were the religious people. They were the ones who wanted Him crucified. Has anything changed?

mome,

Thank you for the kind words. May those whose lives we touch each day catch a glimpse of Jesus as we convey His love, through us, to them.

Those non-Christians who appreciate the things you do and the words you say in the name of Jesus: I hope they *do* lump you together with the churchgoing Christians, at least a little. I say this because it would be nice if their appreciation of Christians in general, members of churches or not, would be deepened (or sparked) by encountering a Christian who is committed to putting Christ’s teachings into practice. I do think that non-Christians tend to judge Christians in general based on the ones they see, either in person or in popular caricature. Many of the strange ideas people have about Christians and churches are caricatures (exaggerations of genuine foibles or flaws), which will only be erased by the encounter with Christ in his people. I know the organized Church now and in history bears and has borne these foibles and flaws within it because of its human element, but that was certainly true of the Church described in the New Testament as well. Christ be with you.

http://www.sebts.edu/images/video/audio/0574561978.mp3

Thank you for your comments. I was aware of the Spanish & French words, but think pretty much in terms of the American church.

I basically know three groups of people: those who are part of a “church”, followers of Jesus who are not part of a local “church” and the biggest group – those who are not followers of Jesus. Of those who are part of a “church”. I know one or two at most who partially understand my thoughts on this. Of those I know who follow Jesus, but are not part of a local group that calls themselves “church” , they all understand my perspective, although they themselves may or may not use the term to refer to themselves or to the NT organism.

Interestingly, however, the group that best understands this are those who are not followers of Jesus and not part of any church, however you use the term. I do not go around telling people about my relationship with Jesus until they ask. Actually, they ask why I do the acts of service I do, why I am honest (such as the bank teller who honestly wanted to know why I returned when I figured out she had given me an extra $140 – she said the mistake could have cost her job if I hadn’t returned), kind and treat people the way I do. When I reply that I am trying to follow Jesus and His teachings, I always get positive responses.

Frequently these people ask me what church I “go to”. When I explain that I have friends like me, and that we serve our community, and do sometimes meet together in the neighborhood in the street, the park, a cafe, at the rec center or wherever, the most common response is “cool”. They get it! And sometimes they make remarks along the lines of “That’s what a church should be.” (actual remark from a non-follower of Jesus).

Most of these non-Christians do not lump me into the same crowd with the “church” folk. They do not see this as a fine distinction, but as the difference between religion and putting Jesus’ teachings into practice.

Much of yesterday, and all the rest of today my time is occupied with helping a non-Christian friend put together a major event in his life and his spouse’s life. I have a background in that business, although this is the Lord’s business now (I don’t charge.) Tomorrow I plan to spend time with a friend with cancer who is very sick. Sunday we plan to spend the morning picking up trash in the neighborhood.

Perhaps the most interesting remark came from a non-Christain who is somewhat a student of religions. He asked “Are you sure you’re not a Buddhist? The way you treat people is more like Buddhists do than like Christians do.” That didn’t tell me a lot about Buddhists, but did tell me a lot about his impression of Christians.

Jesus is the one that builds the true church, not toy giveaways or kickin worship bands. He’s the seeker that we need to be sensitive to.

Too much of American evangelicalism is laboring in vain.

You got me on the Acts 2 reference. I realized it a while after I sent my comment, and feel a bit abashed. Thanks for your clarification. I don’t really buy ideas that there is little or no continuity of church over time or notions that the church went sour after the apostles, but I hope Christ blesses your witness to him. Peace.

My perimeters regarding non-Christian religions- non Apostles’/Nicene affirming- is that description and information are welcome.

An apologetic that the LDS doesn’t

-deny the Trinity
-deny that Jesus is the second person of the Trinity as defined by the Creeds
-deny that the Bible alone is sufficient for revelation
-doesn’t claim all Christendom is apostate
-subscribe to the belief that God was once human
-claim that the Father and Mary had a physical relation

is welcome as a matter of explanation.

At the same time, I won’t allow any attacks on you. But I do want you to be clear, as a friend, that I do not accept the LDS as a church. Same vocabulary. Different dictionary.

peace

ms

Of course, the Greek speaking church fathers (and modern Greeks) never stopped calling it “ekklesia” but they pretty much meant the visible body of believers on earth who were one body and shared in one Lord, one faith and one baptism. They were a unified assembly. Spanish “eglisia” and French “église” reflect that the same word was handed down (not that this proves anything — it’s just interesting). And Luther and Tyndale had very particular reasons for eschewing the word “church.”

For my part, though, when I read Acts and the epistles and Revelation, I get a pretty good feeling that the ekklesia that is being referred to is an bona fide organization, and assembly of people who knew they were together and shared in each other’s lives, and when I read the epistles to the Corinthians in particular, I get the feeling that the organization could be a bit whacked out in certain times and places, but it was still called “the Church at Corinth.”

You say, “I choose not to identify myself as part of the “church”, especially to those who are not followers of Jesus, because they immediately lump me together with all sorts of strange things. ”

From my limited perspective, I find that people who don’t follow Jesus think that about Christians no matter what they call themselves or identify themselves with. The cross is a stumbling block to the world, foolishness. It doesn’t matter whether you say you’re part of the church or not, if you say Jesus is your Lord or you follow him, you’ll be lumped into the same crowd by most non-Christians, who don’t have much use for the fine distinctions we make amongst ourselves.

Forgive me, I’m not trying to argue. I’m just nitpicking a bit. I always find it funny when Christians work hard to distance themselves from the word “church.” It’s like all the churches around town that call themselves anything but churches, but everyone knows that they are churches.