Question about "mega" churches

Although I do not enjoy a mega-church as much as I normally do a smaller church (100-500), I have found that someone can get just as lost in a small church as in a large one. The large churches I have attended have always had smaller groups, such as Sunday school classes or cell groups, to aid in making people feel like they are a part of the whole.

I believe it is mostly a matter of opinion as to what size church a person feels comfortable in. The important thing is that they preach the Word of God and plainly proclaim the Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ.

 

"Mega church" does not mean mega spirituality!

Nor does micro chirch mean mega spiritually.

It seems that no one has a good answer for my question: If a church's attendance gets larger and large over the years, what's it supposed to do? Close its doors and turn people away, and tell people to go somewhere else?

The fact that many megachurches have multiple sunday morning services but only one sunday evening service simply means that people don't like to go Sunday evening. I hate going on Sunday evening. I've always liked starting my week by going to church first. At my church, I used to go Sunday evening to avoid the crowd. But now we have three am services, so I son't go on Sunday evenings anymore. I don't see the relevance.

 

I personally see nothing wrong with mega churches. The way I have seen most of them thrive is thru soul winning, a good Sunday School outreach program, and making people feel welcomed. A lot of small Sunday School classes is a great way to keep people from never knowing anyone in a 'mega' church.

[ September 30, 2002, 05:02 PM: Message edited by: Kuntry Boy ]

 

Yeah, more money for things like animatronics. Sorry if I sound too cynical of mega-churches, but here are a couple examples of mega-churches out of control (sorry if you read this in a previous post of mine, but here it is again). There is a church in Houston who hired Wacky World, an "edutainment" company to design a $595,000 Soul Train City and Hangar area complete with Disney-style life-size animatronic figures for children and teens. Another church in Springdale, Ark. also hired Wacky World to design "Toon Town," a children’s sanctuary featuring a children’s baptistry built inside a fire truck so that when a child is baptized, a bell rings and he or she is sprayed with confetti.

I know those are two extreme examples, but, how on earth any church can justify spending over a half million dollars on animatronics, etc. is beyond me.

On the other hand...

man, that is so true!

Soli Deo Gloria,
Chris

 

Personally, I think a "mega" church is the result of a Pastor with a "mega" ego. I have a problem with churches where people are driving 2 hours on Sun. morn just so they can hear some dynamic speaker. What are they going to church for anyway? They should branch out into smaller sattelite churches.

 

Someone said they don't like the small church because of the "family power" and usually a one family control of the whole thing.

Well, here goes nothing. Move your letter to the Mega-church and then try to move in toward the inner core. I guarantee--the mega church is just as much controlled by a core group of families as the smaller church. Its just that the mega church is so "mega" that folks fail to see the struggle. The faces of the President's carved on Mount Rushmore all look fine from a distance--but get yourself a rope and some climbing shoes and start climbing up with your nose about six inches from the rocks--and you will find all sorts of flaws--undetectable from a distance.

Your friend,
Blackbird

 

I think a "mega" church is the result of a Pastor with a "mega" ego.

If this is a generalization, I'd have to disagree. What makes a church large is its membership. Again my question. If small churches get full, what are they supposed to do, turn people away? No. Either add more services or increase the sanctuary to accommodate the additional people.

If the church gets to the size that it's labeled a "mega" church by its critics, just keep on being a church and let the Holy Spirit worry about the critics.

[ September 30, 2002, 07:04 PM: Message edited by: Johnv ]

 

I live near a "mega" church (i think they're presbyterian... not sure) that has a membership of about 8,000 people. My understanding is that most of those people live within 1/2 hour of the church. The founding pastor was there some 30 years, and the senior pastor there now has been there for some 20 years. Of course, it's also in the middle of a metropolitan area that supports that kind of membership. I think that's the difference between living in Los Angeles Califirnia, and and living in Springdale Arkansas. What's a "mega" church in Springdale may not be one here.

We don't hear the label applied to churches like Thomas Road in Virginia or the Washington National Cathedral in our nation's capital, or even St Patrick's Cathedral in New York. So it seems the label might be ann attempt to put a negative connotation on whatever organizations gets stick with it.

 

I don't think all these generalizations about 'mega-churchs' are true. I have gone/go to two so called mega-churches. To me, they never seemed "large". Sure they had a lot of members but its easy to get involved/connected and in touch through Sunday School and other activities. The way they set up the church and "chain of command" make it hard for new people to "slip through the cracks" and become just seat warmers. From parking lot greeters to phone calls after the service and throughout the week, it makes the church seem warm, friendly and not so large. The reason both these churches are large is because of weekly outreach. Every Wednesday, the members go out and share their faith. Then the new christians then go to that church. At the church I go to now, it is "mega" and is sending out church planters all over the world. God has blessed these two churches and many other mega churches that are biblically sound.

 

Since I know all the parties you have mentioned here personally (including the owner and CEO of Wacky World -- he was led to Christ by my brother [children's pastor at FBC Springdale] and just spent a weekend at our church), I will simply say that you should not speak when you are very uninformed of the motives and intent of these churches and individuals. Since the implementation of these modern facilities, scores of individuals (including whole families) have come to Christ. Flannelgraph of yesteryears served the same purpose. These methods are simply tools in the Master's hand to communicate the gospel in a relevant fashion.

Far from being "out of control", these churches are reaching lots of families with the resources God has given them. This is how they "justify" spending lots of money. If one soul is worth more than all the money in the world, I think a church is justified in spending what God has given them to reach people where they are.

So before you jump the gun and speak about issues of which you have no clue, understand that God uses a lot of methods to get out His message.

Thank God for these churches who are willing to meet kids & families where they are with the Gospel.

 

Since I know all the parties you have mentioned here personally (including the owner and CEO of Wacky World -- he was led to Christ by my brother [children's pastor at FBC Springdale] and just spent a weekend at our church), I will simply say that you should not speak when you are very uninformed of the motives and intent of these churches and individuals. Since the implementation of these modern facilities, scores of individuals (including whole families) have come to Christ. Flannelgraph of yesteryears served the same purpose. These methods are simply tools in the Master's hand to communicate the gospel in a relevant fashion.

Far from being "out of control", these churches are reaching lots of families with the resources God has given them. This is how they "justify" spending lots of money. If one soul is worth more than all the money in the world, I think a church is justified in spending what God has given them to reach people where they are.

So before you jump the gun and speak about issues of which you have no clue, understand that God uses a lot of methods to get out His message.

Thank God for these churches who are willing to meet kids & families where they are with the Gospel.</font>[/QUOTE]Haven't you forgotten the Baptist national pastime: ridiculing and condemning those who work harder and see greater Great Commission results than us.

Most of us tend to admire Spurgeon. But I would bet that a bunch of us would speak harshly of his methods were we leading smaller churches in his day.

 

You got it. I have often said that those who want to quote Spurgeon the most are often the same ones who would refuse to have him in their pulpit if he were alive today.

I was told early in my ministry that if you are getting kicked from the rear it is usually b/c you are out in front. Not a bad cliche to remember.

 

Time to buckle your seat belts, here we go!

I am afraid it is exactly because you know all of the parties involved that you lack the ability to view the situation with objectivity. I feel I can speak when I see fellow believers doing things that I think are misguided. We try to back up everything we do by saying things like, "If just one got saved, it is all worth it." Well, how many of those kids being baptized in that fire truck are now going to have a false sense of assurance that they are saved? I mean, what kid would not want to be baptized in a fire truck like that? God doesn't need a fire truck, or animatronics to save people. If we would spend more time preaching the Gospel (which IS the power of God unto salvation) and less time dreaming up and designing and building these ridiculous amusements, maybe God would bless the effort and draw more people to Himself. Why in the world are we in the church being influenced more by the world than we are being an influence on the world?

You better believe I would have him my church! Would you have Spurgeon, a 5-point Calvinist, in your church? I am not sure he would step foot in either of the two churches I wrote about. Here is a quotation of Spurgeon from an article I think we all could benefit from ("Feeding Sheep or Amusing Goats?"):

It literally sickens me to see a church spend that kind of money when, for example, there are orphans all over this world in desperate need of parents. How can a church sit back and spend $595,000 on amusements when they could use that same money to help keep 24 orphans from living a life out on the streets of Vietnam, or China. That could be 24 little girls who do not have to grow up in a life of prostitution. WHERE ARE OUR PRIORITIES?!? We have so much money in this country, yet we choose to spend over half a million dollars on strobe lights and video games and the like. I know we in this country do a lot for missions around the world, but we could do so much more if our priorities were better.

God doesn't need our help to make the Gospel relevant, I think He has done a fine job of that on His own. We act like God needs us to come up with all these neat gimmicks to draw people into the church before He can save them. God doesn't use confetti to save people, He uses His Word. There sure are a lot of people being saved in China right now, and how do you think it is happening? Not with $595,000 animatronics, but by the Gospel being preached and heard and read and the Holy Spirit working in the lives of unbelievers to bring them to repentance.

Are there really greater Great Commission results? How many of these mega-churches have "10,000" members but barely half that actually attending church? Where is the other half of the membership? If these "methods" are so great, why isn't there 100% attendance? Because of shoddy evangelism "techniques" which result in half the people coming in the front door, and right back out the back door.

I think he would be speaking harshly against mega-churches attempting to entertain people into the kingdom. I'll let him say it. Again from the same article:

Soli Deo Gloria,
Chris

 

Personally, I think none of us know the motives of any church and how they spend their money, except those directly involved.
The appeal to help children in other parts of the world certainly touches my heart (though Africa is where I donate money), but unless a church is committed to that ministry, it will fail miserably. If a church spends millions to win souls in their own town/state and are committed, it will flourish. Who are we to question it? And vice-versa.
I think we could all focus on our own churches and what its commitment is. Is it effective?

 

Or maybe b/c I know the parties involved I am a better judge of their motives and character than you are.

Get the beam out musicman. You are speaking out of complete judgmental ignorance therefore your beam protrudes so far we cannot hear your words.

I would call it misguided to criticize methods with which you may personally disagree, but since you are not the sole authority on what is appropriate and what is not, guess what????

That's right, you have no grounds.

Again you show your ignorance of the situation. I will not even attempt to explain to you the process involved before a child is baptized in the fire truck. But rest assured, no child enters the water w/o adequate knowledge of what he or she is doing. As a matter of fact, few kids are even baptized in Toon Town. Most choose the sanctuary. What is that falling from the sky? That would be your uninformed speculations.

Neither does he need you, so why don't you just stop telling others about Jesus. Your logic makes no sense. Of course God doesn't need these things, but neither does he forbid them. If we follow your logic, we must throw out sermon illustrations, padded pews, PA systems, pictures in SS lessons, SS cirriculum, organs, etc. All of these are methodological tools.

Since you have absolutely no idea how much time is invested in sharing the gospel as opposed to "dreaming up amusements", we will discount your words for what they are -- rubbish.

I almost laugh out loud when I hear "maybe God would bless the effort and draw more people to Himself". As I mentioned before, scores of people have come to Christ thru these tools. Just imagine what could happen if they went to bare walls and sitting on the floor!!! Your hole is getting deeper.

I would say that men, women, boys, and girls coming to Christ on a weekly basis is influencing the world.

I can hear you now: "Jesus get out of that boat, put down that mustard seed, stop using agricultural language .........."

No God doesn't need our help, but that is never an excuse to be irrelevant!

Exactly. God uses different means and methods but the same message.

On a final note, you are using some type of method to reach people -- whether it be a gospel tract or a flannelgraph story or a puppet. There are very few churches that are not employing some method. The problem is most of them stem from 1902 instead of 2002.

Most of those I have ever heard criticizing others who are presenting the gospel in a clear and relevent way are those who are doing very little themselves. I hope you don't fit the stereotype, but based upon your response ....

 

Thanks for the reply. Of course I can't mention every need in the world. The needs of orphans was just one example of how I think money could be better spent.

And, btw, aren't we all a part of the one body of Christ? We don't need to isolate ourselves in our own little congregations and not worry about the rest of the body. Each congregation is just a small part of the larger body of Christ.

Also, I don't think I have yet questioned the motives of these churches. I think their motives are commendable, just a bit misguided.

Soli Deo Gloria,
Chris

 

Or maybe b/c I know the parties involved I am a better judge of their motives and character than you are. </font>[/QUOTE]As I told Optional, I don't feel I have judged their motives, just critiqued what I see money being spent on.

Get the beam out musicman. You are speaking out of complete judgmental ignorance therefore your beam protrudes so far we cannot hear your words.

I would call it misguided to criticize methods with which you may personally disagree, but since you are not the sole authority on what is appropriate and what is not, guess what????

That's right, you have no grounds. </font>[/QUOTE]Dude, chill! Who says I don't have a right to criticize? Seems like someone may be a bit touchy about the subject, huh? I'm just calling it like I see it.

Again you show your ignorance of the situation. I will not even attempt to explain to you the process involved before a child is baptized in the fire truck. But rest assured, no child enters the water w/o adequate knowledge of what he or she is doing. As a matter of fact, few kids are even baptized in Toon Town. Most choose the sanctuary. What is that falling from the sky? That would be your uninformed speculations. </font>[/QUOTE]Ok, my comment there might have been a little too judgmental. Sorry about that! Forgive me?

Neither does he need you, so why don't you just stop telling others about Jesus. Your logic makes no sense. Of course God doesn't need these things, but neither does he forbid them. If we follow your logic, we must throw out sermon illustrations, padded pews, PA systems, pictures in SS lessons, SS cirriculum, organs, etc. All of these are methodological tools.

Since you have absolutely no idea how much time is invested in sharing the gospel as opposed to "dreaming up amusements", we will discount your words for what they are -- rubbish.

I almost laugh out loud when I hear "maybe God would bless the effort and draw more people to Himself". As I mentioned before, scores of people have come to Christ thru these tools. Just imagine what could happen if they went to bare walls and sitting on the floor!!! Your hole is getting deeper. </font>[/QUOTE]Whoever mentioned bare walls and sitting on the floor? Not me. There is a HUGE leap from bare walls and no pews all the way to "Toon Town".

You know, during Charles Finney's ministry, there were "scores of people" coming to Christ then too, but what happened to a lot of those people? They eventually fell away because there "seemed to be life", but there was no real fruit. Just an observation, take it for what it is worth (which may be nothing, who knows!)

I can hear you now: "Jesus get out of that boat, put down that mustard seed, stop using agricultural language .........."

No God doesn't need our help, but that is never an excuse to be irrelevant! </font>[/QUOTE]As soon as someone in one of those churches walks on water...
Sorry bud, "apples and oranges."

 

And as I mentioned before, is there an investment too high for the salvation of souls? It does go back to judging motives.

When you are attacking family and friends, things can get touchy especially when the accusations being made are based upon ignorance of the situation.

Just call them like I see them.

Done

It is all about methods. Be consistent my friend. Or do you alone have the authority to say which methods are legitimate and which are not?

And the amazing thing is that God used Finney's methods as well!!! I know you are not suggesting that those who follow the 5-pointers plans are producing only converts with real fruit. I would say the stats are about the same.

Jesus spoke in a way that was relevant, ways with which people in his culture could identify. Oranges and apples? I think not.

Spurgeon has been wrong before. I would have to understand his context here. I don't think Spurgeon was arguing against using modern methods to present the gospel. After all, the goal of these churches is not entertainment. The goal is Great Commission oriented.

Let me ask a reverse question: should people be bored in church? Should there be nothing done that might "entertain" people? Should we eliminate anything someone might enjoy? Should our presentation be irrelevant?

I would say Spurgeon himself was swimming upstream in his culture.

Methods are merely ways to communicate the clear message (which should not be compromised).