I gave Scott the last word.

Comments are now closed.

[mod. edited]

In the end, [a church size of] 300 might be fine, or 200, or 67. I think it is ultimately dependent upon the vision God has given – what that local body is looking to accomplish in God as they hear from Him. And I think you would agree with me on that. Most just get out there and try and do, rather than hearing from Him.

This, I believe, is the bigger thing we need to guard against in the west – not if our numbers are ‘too big’ (or even ‘too small’), but are we hearing the heart of God in the situation. I know too many people who are trying to build something like a business because they think that is the good ol’ American way when it comes to church. Capitalism guides there thinking about church, rather than the Spirit and the Word. Thus, they think, ‘Ok, I need to first reach 100. Then we will go for 150. Then we will go for 250. Then we will start to plan for 400. Then…….’

That is not healthy. The regular question should be, ‘God, what are you saying to us, for that is what we want to walk out?’

At the same time, I know people who are so against having any larger size local body, and they just want to meet in a home with 20 people. There is nothing wrong with that. It is beautiful. But what I have seen is that these leaders are reacting against things, rather than getting back to hearing God and walking out what He is saying. We are in for big problems if we are reacting hastily towards what we don’t like, rather than sitting back and responding to the voice of God.

In all aspects of life, I really love this passage: ‘Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of his own accord, but only what he sees the Father doing. For whatever the Father does, that the Son does likewise’ (John 5:19). This is truly beautiful and God’s heart.

I am going to leave your comments about heresy for now, as I have never done a study on how they do or do not spread.

I do now that I prefer church groups that have some sort of hierarchical leadership who can clamp done on individual congregations that get out of line. Leadership in independent groups can become a power unto themselves, and I have seen many cases where that has been very unhealthy verging on cultish. But this is very much another topic, so I would not like to take it any further here.

Getting back to the topic of this post, I do remember writing a thirty page paper, some 15 years ago, about models of church planting. In it I argued that church planting teams (of at least two) were the best way to church plant, and followed the model that Jesus took when he sent out his disciples.

So here, while I have been talking about a sole Pastorate, and in the discussion talking about the optimum size of church in a sole Pastorate, I do want to acknowledge that God chooses to use all kinds of people, and teams, both salaried, and unsalaried, in all kinds of situations, and all sizes of churches, large and small, to further his purposes.

And yes, I realize that that was a run on sentence, but seeing as these comments have been running on for some time, it is probably an appropriate way to end the comments to this post.

I actually think that this is not only an easy choice for most churchgoers to make but is encouraged by the leadership.
After all they are professionals and the work of God cannot be left up to amateurs.
Thankfully the Great Rabbi did not believe that not did the first great bishop, Paul. At least the first we could really know a lot about.