Currently having a great conversation via twitter that started with this initial question:

How would you answer? Before you do, here are some snippets of additional dialog that you may consider as well:

So, should one tithe to the church? Is a tithe 10%? Should giving be considered a tithe? Can one–in a biblical sense–give to those in need outside of the church and consider that their tithe…thereby not giving to the church as well? Your thoughts are appreciated.

I saw a video that my friend Jon Reid posted on his blog here. It is a parody of the contemporary, attractional church. However, when you watch it, if you didn’t know better, you’d have no idea it’s a parody. Take a look for yourself:

Sound familiar? It should! Seriously, this is the message I hear far too frequently in the contemporary, attractional church. In fact, this may be what you hear when you get together to worship on Sunday’s. Is there anything wrong with it? Well, yes…and no.

I don’t want to bash the attractional, megachurch, but in reality it does come across kinda cookie cutter to me. While in seminary we always went out on Sundays and visited 3 different church services to discuss as a group. I’ve seen a lot of various megachurch services and somehow they all seemed the same. Is that a negative? Well, if it works, then not really. However, in trying to reach people outside of the church, I find it can be a negative. It seems like culture is changing. What is relevant isn’t contemporary Christian songs that everyone already knows. Programming songs by length and keeping a sermon to a finite amount of time may not attract newer generations.

The oddest thing about all of this to me is that in the church we still use the terms contemporary and relevant (that’s where the name “Contemporvant” came about in the video) when in fact, this model of church was established back in the late 80′s and early 90′s. Is something 10-15 years really considered contemporary and relevant? For me, it just isn’t.

Personally, I don’t like the idea of mocking church as was displayed in this video from North Point Ministries. We do enough in the church already to build resentment and fueling that with a parody video just doesn’t seem sensible for me. If this were shown to a strictly Christian audience of regular church attenders there could be humor in it, but again, do we really need another thing to point to what the church isn’t doing right?

As all followers of this blog will know, I am not a cookie cutter model person when it comes to ministry or the church. If it works for you, great…doesn’t mean it should work for me. I care more about deeper relationships, encouragement, and acts of service in growing our relationships together in Christ over programs, great worship musicians and commanding speakers trying to be relevant. For me, engaging in conversations–which can be done in the context of preaching–is the way to reach people that are exploring their faith or seeking to grow. Letting them know they matter rather than letting them wander in and out unnoticed is what I want to see. However, some will still be drawn to that contemporary, relevant 90′s model of church as was represented in the North Point video. That’s why I don’t want to speak against that model. It does work and is great at drawing in crowds of people to hear God’s Word. I just think it comes down to connecting with people on a deeper, more-intimate level and have chosen to expend my energies in a different direction. With that said, I still cringe a bit when I watch this video as I sense the humor in it, but don’t look forward to the thoughts it may instill in those currently outside of the church, that will view it.

What are your thoughts? I’d certainly appreciate learning your impressions and feedback once you’ve watched the video.

Closing out the weeklong series on 3 questions about the church is Brett Crimmel. Brett is the lead pastor of Forefront Church in Lakewood, Colorado and has some great insights to share on being the church and helping those in need. His perspective on the church and its future is an exciting one:

1) How would you define the (local) church?

The local church is a community of people gathered together with a unifying purpose: to Love God (great commandment), to Love Others (golden rule – both inside and outside the church), and to Change the World (great commission). The church has a task to accomplish – namely to help people find their way back to God.

2) Is the church relevant? Why?

Absolutely! The church has more work to do now than ever in the history of the world. People are spiritually hungry and the teachings of Jesus are what they’re looking for. Now, more than ever, we’ve got the answers to the chaos that everyday life and the meaning of life.

Now, there are plenty of churches that have lost sight of the great commission. They are certainly not relevant. They’ve become a hotel for all the perfect people instead of a hospital for all of us jacked up sinners saved by the grace Jesus alone can bring.

3) Do you see the church looking different in the future? Please explain.

Yes. I think we’re moving past the culture of OR and moving into a culture of AND. While mainline denominations are struggling to define why they exist, the walls of separation are being torn down for the greater mission at hand. I’m seeing less division and more inclusion. Voices that are divisive are being marginalized by the social media and the back channel and those willing to work together on the mission are working together in ways never seen before.

But at the same time, the gospel is becoming clearer and clearer. And we’re preaching it with more boldness than ever before. And people are getting saved.Seems like the churches that are “getting it done” are moving from modality (a mode of operation … we’re one big happy family) to sodality (a task to complete … let’s do whatever we have to do to accomplish the task at hand)*. Maybe it’s just the people I’m listening to or maybe it’s reality, but it seems that even the establishment is adjusting to the new world order of multiple voices speaking. Someone has to filter & prioritize the noise. Churches that are about accomplishing a vision seem to be thriving in the new world order.John Ortberg said recently, “You can’t define spiritual maturity in a way that the pharisees win in the end.” Unfortunately, the pharisees have been winning for far too long. And I think the future church redefines that reality. Thank God.

Stay in touch with Brett Crimmel by folowing him on twitter: @brettcrimmel or the happenings at Forefront Church on their website: forefrontchurch.tv

David Park‘s twitter bio says it best: I dream about Asian-American culture and the church. David has a great insight into the next generation of church and how Asian-Americans can collectively influence the church culture in America. He hosts the Next Gener.Asian Church blog and is the most eloquent authority on Asian-American ministry. David has a love for–and is a student of–the greater church-at-large and lends a great perspective as he answers the three questions below:

1) How would you define the (local) church?

A disclaimer: I’m not particularly fond of my own definition of the local church, but I do think it is realistic and names how the church is viewed by non-Christians and is a good starting point for us to imagine change in the posture and future of the local church. I would define the local church is the organizational container or entity for Christian fellowship. I know we’re trying to stay away from defining the church as a building, but clearly, when we’re talking about a local church, we’re talking about an entity that (hopefully) exists with a particular objective of engaging people in the restorative, salvific, transformative, communal and missional aspects of the Christian faith. I say “hopefully” because not every local church fulfills all of these aspects well, and furthermore, they fail to take into account the strengths of other local churches. In other words, many local churches are limited in its true objective/mission because it is often preoccupied with its own perpetuation and survival.

In an increasingly pluralistic and competitive landscape then, the local church often resorts to diverse expressions and tactics akin to the business world in terms of approaching market segments and developing various products and services. While this might make sense for the survival of organizational entities, it recapitulates the problems we witness in society with perpetuating systemic injustices, tribalism, and consumerism. It is a rare church that can display to the world what reconciliation looks like, or radical generosity, or transformation at the collective level. We take ‘ekkesia’ seriously when we call people out of darkness, but we have difficulty converting this into the ‘apostolic’ dimension of the church in sending people out.

2) Is the church relevant? Why?

Relevance is difficult to achieve at a macro-scale when we tend to create industries and silos to protect ourselves. The world simply is not impressed when we mimic their culture-transforming developments, whether in the arts or in business. The local church has the capacity and potential to be relevant, but many close themselves off from others citing differences in doctrine, in zip code, in politics, in worship style, and a variety of matters that implicitly tell the world that we are not as full of grace as the gospel we proclaim. Choosing our tribe was a luxury in Christendom, but in a web 2.0, globalized, shifting America, we no longer have the space of distancing ourselves from “others”. The Mormon, the Muslim, the Jew, the Hindu, the New Ager, the atheist, and the apathetic are all watching and we simply are playing a game (missiologically speaking) without any sense of gravity to our faith and our witness before the world at our doorstep.

3) Do you see the church looking different in the future? Please explain.

Old habits die hard, but the circumstances and the consequences are dire, so I do hope that churches look different in the future with a greater emphasis on collaboration and reconciliation. The church needs to not gloss over problems of individuals or of the collective, but to invest deeply an embodied doctrine of incarnation. We must recover what it means to be a spectacle, to live a critique against the idols of political power and economic forces, and display healing, hospitality, and care to a greater extent across a wider spectrum of people than before. If the church doesn’t look different in the future, we effectively forfeit our role in shaping and informing the development of Christian witness in the global south and east and their churches.

Learn more of David’s thoughts at his blog: Next Gener.Asian Church or follow him on twitter: @dpark75.

Many of you may know Tyler Braun from his blog Man of Depravity. He’s the wild card in this blog series as he is not the lead pastor of a local church, but he brings the voice of a younger generation and is a seminary student and youth pastor in Portland, Oregon. Here is how this dynamic young man responded to the following three questions:

1) How would you define the (local) church?

A smaller and more specific expression of the church at large (church universal), designed to reach the world through discipleship and evangelism.

2) Is the church relevant? Why?

By “church” here I will move forward with the assumption that church means the combination of all local churches (though I do not think that is necessarily what the word church means, only that is helps frame the question in a way that I can answer). I say yes and no. I say yes because relevant is such an ambigous term that is often used when we think of “cutting edge,” even when cutting edge might not be what is truly relevant. Relevant means something different to each person in their own individuality. The many expressions of Christianity in churches around the world tell me that absolutely the church is relevant. I say no because my own experience says that culture is changing so fast that it is nearly impossible to stay relevant in the forefront of that change. And It isn’t only the church that struggles with this.

3) Do you see the church looking different in the future? Please explain.

Based on my definition of what the church is I would say emphatically no. Granted, I used a pretty broad and basic definition, but even if I was more specific I don’t know that much would change. Even within my lifetime there will be the changes of moving to a more internet-based approach or anything other specific change you see happening even now and churches will change as they deem change is necessary to reach the people around them. But the basic tenets of what a church is and does will stay the same. We will still gather consistently in large and small groups to pray, worship, and hear God’s Word brought in a way that makes sense to us. In that way, I think the church will stay the same.

Tyler Braun lends his insights regularly at his blog: manofdepravity.com and you can follow him on twitter as well at: @tylerbraun.

You may be familiar with Charles Lee as a public speaker and creator of The Idea Camp, but Charles’ home base is as the lead pastor of New Hope South Bay in Torrance, California. Here is how Pastor Lee responded to the following three questions about the church:

1) How would you define the (local) church?

The local church is a local expression of God’s people gathered for a common mission.

2) Is the church relevant? Why?

I think “relevant” describes a reactive culture. It lacks the proactive nature of culture-making that the church should be embodying. Is the church relevant? Sure. Many churches are reacting to the cultural changes and adapting their ministries accordingly. Nevertheless, I believe we need more churches that proactively create the kind of Kingdom culture that God desires.

3) Do you see the church looking different in the future? Please explain.

I think the church will most definitely look different in the future. I think more churches will choose multiple and viable networks over one central organization (e.g., traditional denominations). This is not to say that people will leave centralized organizations like denomination. Rather, churches will find themselves needing to connect with people outside of their tribe or family. I think more churches will start leveraging the strengths of the various streams within Christianity, especially with the growing access to networks online.

Also, I think the future church will re-integrate compassion and justice into their Gospel storytelling. It will become more central of what it means to express God’s love for the world. As the result, more in the world will come to know a God who practical cares for their deepest needs.

Learn more of Pastor Lee’s perspectives on his blog: charlestlee.com or by following him on twitter: @charlestlee. Find out more about New Hope South Bay at: newhopesb.newsong.net.

Today’s perspective comes from Pastor Joshua Roberts of Encounter Assembly in Burbank, California:

1) How would you define the (local) church

I would define the local church as a geographic gathering of Christ followers/Christian/etc. that come together on a regular basis to worship God the Father together, encourage each other, pray for others, and partake in ordinances/sacraments of the Church (i.e. the Lord’s Supper and Baptism).

2) Is the church relevant? Why?

I guess that depends on which manifestation of the Church you’re speaking about. Some local congregations are, and others are not. I believe the more important question is “Is the message and mission of the Church relevant?” To that question I answer a resounding yes! It’s up to each local congregation to use its gifts and the empowerment of the Holy Spirit to relevantly live out and communicate the good news (gospel).

3) Do you see the church looking different in the future? Please explain.

Short answer: Yes.

Long answer: Yes, the Church should constantly be examining itself (through the study of the scriptures and the guidance of the Holy Spirit). We should examine all areas of our theology and practice and leave room for the Spirit’s correction. If we do this, we should always be maturing, thus looking different.

I also sense the Church is shifting away from the Western Culture focused ministry paradigm to a more Easter and Global focused model. We see evidence of this with some Roman Catholics and even Evangelicals migrating to the Eastern Orthodox church (article). I think we are many years away from the complete shift, but it is something we should continue to watch.

***Please note that I intentionally used both “church” and “Church” in my response. The use of “church” is to denote the local gathering of believers. The use of “Church” is for the church universal.***

Be sure to follow Pastor Robert’s blog at: joshinthe818.com or he can frequently be found on twitter at: @joshinthe818. Find more information on Encounter Assembly at: encounterassembly.com

I asked several pastors to share their perspectives on three questions regarding the church. Each respondent is in a different geographical area and/or operating under different styles of ministry. Therefore, each perspective is unique and worth learning from. As you read their responses, try and imagine how you would reply to these same three questions. Feel free to share your thoughts in the comments section below.

Today we kick off the series with Pastor Jason Salamun of Project Church in Rapid City, South Dakota:

1) How would you define the (local) church?In a nutshell, the local church is a community of sinners saved by grace through faith in Jesus Christ who join God in his mission in the world.

Symbolically of course, the Church is referred to as the Body of Christ, Bride of Christ,and Family of God. Scripture gives us purposes, distinctions, and directions on how we are to function and organize but to answer your question, I’ll stick with my simple answer.

2) Is the church relevant? Why?

Five to ten years ago I would have said, “no.” The music is outdated, the dress code is too stuffy, the church buildings are on the cutting edge of 1890, etc. I’d refer to myself as a “Christ Follower” instead of a “Christian” because I didn’t want to be connected to THOSE people.

I was immature.

Many of us were.

Many of us still are.

A church is relevant because the gospel is (I’m assuming a genuine church is a gospel-centered church). The message is unchanging and relevant but communicating the message will depend on your culture. Speak the language but don’t change the message.

I’m all for contextualizing the gospel to our culture but it’s so much more than cool lights, killer environments, and pop worship. Frankly, a traditional church service full of liturgy can be just as (or more) “relevant” as a rock show worship experience. As I look out at the church planting landscape, I’m seeing a bunch of cookie-cutter “relevant” churches who somehow believe their graphic t-shirts and a coffee bars are the good news. Sad, so sad.

Throwing a pair of hipster jeans on the gospel doesn’t make it relevant.

The gospel is about a King and a Kingdom.

Every community is different but I do know this: love is relevant in any language. Jesus doesn’t need make-up to be attrative to our culture, he is to be lifted up and he said he would draw people to himself (John 12:32).

I’m not against creating environments, talking plainly, having modern music etc., (our church does that), but I think “relevance” as we know it is superficial at best. It’s so much more than style and preferences. I think our generation needs to understand the gospel better and learn how to diagnose idolatry in their culture and people’s hearts and treat it with the gospel. Show people how they fit into God’s epic story. That’s relevant to any people in any time, and any place.

P.S. Nothing is sadder than a middle-aged pastor wearing his teenage kids clothes and trying to talk Snoop in a sermon. That’s not relevant, that’s goofy.

3) Do you see the church looking different in the future? Please explain.

I believe in the church because I believe in Jesus.

This defeatist attitude we have about the church in the west is pathetic. We already know how this will all end! We are the Body of Christ! He said, “I will build my church and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” The question is, do we believe it?
In the future, just as in the past, churches will gather in various expressions and models and forms, but we all have the same mission: Make disciples who love God and people. From house churches to mega-churches, from traditional churches to contemporary churches and everything in between, we need them all. The point isn’t to build the Church, the Lord will do that. The point is to point people to him.

I don’t know about tomorrow but I know about today. The future is a product of the present. We were born for such a time as this and the need for the gospel has never been greater. The time is now!

Imagine if churches followed Jesus and lived out passages like Luke 4:18-19,

“The Spirit of the Lord is upon me,
because he has anointed me
to proclaim good news to the poor.
He has sent me to proclaim liberty to the captives
and recovering of sight to the blind,
to set at liberty those who are oppressed,
to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor.”

That’s a future I want to help create!!!

Follow more of Pastor Jason Salamun’s story at his blog: jasonsalamun.com or find out more about Project Church at their website: projectchurch.net. Jason is also on twitter as: @jasonsalamun.

Continuing a bit with a theme I started on yesterday’s blog post here, I wanted to clarify something. For those of you that don’t know my story, I wanted to give a bit of background and to confirm my thoughts on race and the American church. Being an Asian with the last name Ingland, you can imagine that it can easily lend to some confusion :)

I was born in Japan, but put up for adoption. My adopted parents are bi-racial, being that my dad was white and grew up in a small coal mining town in Pennsylvania and my mom was a native Japanese woman. My parents met in Japan while my dad was stationed there in the US Air Force. So, while I have my adopted father’s last name, I am 100% Japanese. However, the context of my culture is really American. While my mom is Japanese, due to prejudice and racism she did everything she could to assimilate us into our exclusively white neighborhood. I was one of 3 Asians in my graduating class in high school. So, for me, most of what I know is rooted in white, American culture. In the conversation of Asian-American church, I am kind of the oddball. However, there are aspects of me that are inherently Asian…things that I don’t consciously think about or purposefully do or think, yet they are ingrained in who I am. This is the conflict I have spent the past 9 months trying to figure out–who am I and who am I supposed to minister to?

When I look at the predominantly white, American church I don’t necessarily see it as evil or racist. I don’t even really consider it segregated. What I do see though is that there is a perspective present there that only someone not white would understand. When a white pastor proclaims to a white congregation that they want to purposefully try and reach out to people of color, I know their heart is in the right place. However, in reality, this is a very difficult challenge because of the current establishment. Just as most white people would feel uncomfortable driving into a black neighborhood and worshiping as the only white person in a black church, people of color can feel the same discomfort in a white church. I know that you’re reading that last sentence and believing that it is not true of you, but I think if you were being completely honest you would agree, even if not publicly. Know that not only is there a discomfort for non-whites in a white church, but there is also a disconnect. American culture, as mainstream as it is, really lacks diversity and the incorporation of other cultural perspectives. You can bring in an African-American pastor to share a message on Sunday about Kwanzaa, but that really doesn’t help us break down the discomfort and the disconnect that exists in our churches today.

Having said all of this, let me reiterate again: I do not believe that churches that are predominantly one race are racist. I just believe that the method is causing them not to realize a congregation that truly represents the diversity of their community.

If you are part of a white church, in a white community, in a small farm town in the midwest somewhere, does that make you racist? Not at all. Part of the conversation of diversity and multi-culturalism has to exclude some people just because their ministry has no choice except to be predominantly white. Same is true if you are part of a black church in a predominantly African-American neighborhood.

Does racism exist in the church today? Yes, it absolutely does. However, so does idolatry, addiction, hypocracy, the making of celebrities..etc. The church today is not perfect! We don’t always practice what we preach. If we better-understood the message of Christ and grace, we’d be a happier church without judgment and criticism.

While I acknowledge racism exists in the church, I also believe that racial segregation is a by-product of how we “do” church today. It is rooted in how we have “done” church in the past. It’s become more about us and less about Christ. That being said, I still know that the heart of many churches is in the right place.

Know that if a church is trying to establish a ministry to Russian people that have migrated to the US and still know more about Russian culture and the language than they do about America and English, it does not make them racist. Also know that if white people in a swank suburb are being ministered to in the context of being white collar professionals with no programs or ministries to connect with people other than themselves, does not make them racist. People of different cultures, in different communities, will just naturally want to congregate together.

Know this as well: There are people being called into ministry to start doing a new work that goes beyond color or socio-economic classes. As the future of our American culture changes, we as the church must change with it. For some, the status quo isn’t about racism and segregation, but there is a feeling that change must take place. Let’s not try to bridge the gap of black and white, but instead let us bridge the gap to be people reaching people, regardless of color or social status.

Being in ministry and going through the process of planting a church, I have connected with people that can help me through: sharing wisdom, supporting me in meeting my goals, prayer, guidance, etc. If I shared my contact list with you, it would be obvious who I was.

I mentioned repentance in yesterday’s blog post here. It’s an ongoing process with me and the company I keep is something I feel I need to address. I look to Jesus as an example. In contrast to what others think of Jesus, he was not some lovey-dovey, goodie two-shoes person walking through the streets of Galilee 2,000 years ago. Instead, he was actually considered to be a very dangerous man! So dangerous that he posed a threat to the Jewish establishment. People were appalled at the company he kept. Even his inner circle of twelve consisted of a tax collector named Matthew. He was seen talking and dining with prostitutes & drunkards so often that people witnessing his lifestyle thought he was a sinning glutton and alcoholic (Luke 7:33-34).

Based on the company I keep, people around me in ministry bear witness to the fact that I am blessed with leaders that have invested time in my life to help me pursue the vision God has given me to see a new ministry take shape here in Sacramento, CA. However, what do the people of Sacramento see? Do they see a ministry leader that associates mainly with Christians and others in ministry, or do they see someone that has compassion and love for his fellow human regardless of his/her faith? Do my neighbors see a revolutionary of grace or the safety of a well-positioned minister to Christians?

I’ve spent a lot of time chasing the church and making it my idol. I’ve been wrapped up in believing that I am only as good as my church–that without formal ministry, I am nothing or will be labeled a failure. I’ve sacrificed time in my business (my only source of income as I don’t take a salary from the church), time with my family, and time from those in need of Christ’s love in my community. In reality, ministry is really about people and fulfilling The Greatest Commandment (Matthew 22:36-40)–we are called to love others above ourselves, not gain respect from our work in ministry.

Know that most of the people in my life are not of a Protestant Christian faith. Living most of my life as an atheist, you can imagine that I didn’t keep many Christian friends, nor witnessed any family members come to faith in Christ through my words. I do associate with people that spend time in bars or have been known to devote their lives to making lots of money. However, I feel that my focus has been on building new relationships that will help me move forward in ministry ahead of relationships that will foster the love of Christ in unknowing, anonymous ways. Too often I’ve brought attention to myself in the name of Christ’s Church rather than in the name of Christ period. I am repenting for this and moving forward in a more-balanced way regardless of what happens with my role in formal ministry. I’m looking at making a difference in the world anonymously so that people see Christ, not me and right now I can only do it one person at a time. I cannot let my natural instincts as an introvert lead my thought process.

How would people in the world view you based on the company you keep? It’s an important question that I hope you spend a moment pondering today.