RESPOND TO - TWO COMPLETED DISCUSSION BOARDS

RESPOND TO DISCUSSION BOARD #1

250 WORDS

STUDENT#1

C Mc

Provide a substantive reply. Be sure to cover the following:

· In what ways was your classmate’s assessment and your assessment similar?

· In what ways was your classmate’s assessment and your assessment dissimilar?

· In what way did the post make you think, and what did it make you think about? Provide examples and interaction with key points from the initial thread.

   As I read through the chapters, I could not help but relive some of the same thoughts, perceptions, and emotions my Family and I experienced when we moved back to the United States after our time as international missionaries to East Asia. We were elitist in our thinking about church and really thought the American church was missing the mark when it came to "doing" church. Because of this, there are a number of aspects, ideas, and thoughts that stuck out to me in these books.

            In chapter three of Deep and Wide, Stanley writes about how the “church” is improperly translated from the original language.  It should read ekklesia, not church. He speaks to the idea that Christ’s movement was to be just that, a movement, and not a place. When we returned from being overseas, that is exactly what we sensed. Church was no longer a movement or gathering[1] of the people of Christ, but rather a place to come and feel good about ourselves. This follows into the other section of Stanley’s book that sticks out when he quoted Acts 15:19, “It is my judgment, therefore, that we should not make it difficult for the Gentiles who are turning to God.”[2] Are we setting the stage for a gathering of lost, sick, and hungry souls to come and be found, healed, and fed or is the “church” only for the well. Wilson, in chapter three, of his book says something similar as well, “The worship service must be conducted with the unbeliever in mind, but it doesn’t need to be conducted with the unbeliever in focus.”[3] I believe for too long the church has gotten away from this driving force in bringing people to God and God to people.

            The similarities in the books were fairly noticeable, especially as they both talked about worship being “supernatural”, as Wilson put it. “The gospel that saved us ought to be a reminder itself that, for all the earthiness, for all the natural means, for all the restoration of the creation that God is doing, Christianity is sourced in God himself in heaven above. It is supernatural.”[4] This is similar to how Stanley wrote regarding “providential relationships”[5] for changing the lives of non-believers.

            While there were similarities in these books, I felt they diverged on a number of topics as well. Specifically, Wilson sees the attractional church as not much more than attempting to fill seats with cheeks; and in doing so the message of the cross is lost.[6] It gets lost because the goal and aim is seats filled. Stanley on the other hand would say, yes we get people through the door, but in doing so, we plug them into the gathering of the Body of Christ in order to present Christ and life change to them.

 

[1] Andy Stanley, Deep and Wide: Creating Churches Unchurched People Love to Attend (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2012), 58-59.

[2] Ibid., 90.

[3]Jared C. Wilson, The Prodigal Church: A Gentle Manifesto Against the Status Quo (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2015), 62.

[4] Ibid., 163.

[5] Andy Stanley, Deep and Wide: Creating Churches Unchurched People Love to Attend (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2012), 133.

[6] Jared C. Wilson, The Prodigal Church: A Gentle Manifesto Against the Status Quo (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2015), 25.

RESPOND TO DISCUSSION BOARD #2

250 WORDS

STUDENT#2

D Par

Provide a substantive reply. Be sure to cover the following:

· In what ways was your classmate’s assessment and your assessment similar?

· In what ways was your classmate’s assessment and your assessment dissimilar?

· In what way did the post make you think, and what did it make you think about? Provide examples and interaction with key points from the initial thread.

The aspect of Deep & Wide that stood out to me was that the church is a movement rather than a location.[1] Stanley points out that the Greek term for “church” is best translated as gathering. Also, Stanley explains that the movement of church is for unchurched people. This means the target of the movement should be people who do not attend church. In other words, the church should not hold to traditional models or means to reach people for Jesus. Instead, it is essential to do whatever it takes to reach unchurched people. This may mean that the church uses unconventional means to draw people to Sunday services.

The observation of a church being a movement is one that should not be missed. It seems that many believers only view the church as a location. Stanley’s advice about the church being for unchurched people can be dangerous if taken out of context. I do believe that the church is for born-again believers to grow. However, I believe that the church needs to be a place for the unreached as well. I believe it is essential for the body of Christ to seek after those that are lost in whatever means necessary. Stanley pushes his readers to think of the church as a “movement” and not an institution.

The aspect of The Prodigal Church that stood out to me was Wilson’s explanation of the attractional church method not working. I was challenged to think if my church is really doing what God has called us to do. It is essential to make sure that my church is not engaging in pragmatism or consumerism.[2] It does seem that this method can focus on the needs of people rather than God’s character.

Both books are great and bring up some great points. There do seem to be some similarities at various places throughout the book. The one similarity that stands out is that both books attempt to show that any ministry model must focus on God. The priority needs to be showing people who God is. The way that a church does this is through God and his Word.

The approach that Deep & Wide takes the approach that focuses on reaching the unchurched community for Christ. The church's idea is a movement that gathers communities rather than waiting for communities to come to the church. The author believes that the church exists for unchurched people. This means that the goal is to use means that attract people even if it doesn't bring many unchurched people. The author wants pastors to know that Sunday morning should be the main focus of this method. The reason being is that attracting people to a Sunday morning service will help people seek God. The Prodigal Church’s approach is to focus on the believers that are already attending the church. Wilson believes that the primary goal of Sunday service is to raise up strong believers. These believers will be the ones that reach the unchurched population in their neighborhoods or places of work. It seems that Stanley is focused on unbelievers, and Wilson is focused on believers. The end goal for both is to reach the lost. However, the approach to do so is very different.

 

[1] Andy Stanley, Deep & Wide: Creating Churches Unchurched People Love to Attend (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2016), 65.

[2] Jared C. Wilson, The Prodigal Church: a Gentle Manifesto against the Status Quo (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2015), 49.