Feb. 13, 2006 - The Reasons Are Varied

Posted by SteveWalden

My friend works as a youth pastor at a "Family Worship Center," which used to be a Church of God (Cleveland). I asked him why they didn't include "Church of God" in the name and he grimaced. Apparently, they're trying to get people past the name and let them experience the church without branding themselves. I guess a good comparison would be a group of Denny's restaurants changing it's name to Tony's Family Restaurants. No menu changes and maybe the uniforms change, but it's still the same restaurant. Re-branding a restaurant is an old trick that works sometimes. Some people don't go to Denny's because ot the stigma associated with it. I suspect the same is true with churches. I don't think they're intentionally betraying anything. They're looking to get people in the door, which is worthwhile, but only if the Word is being preached and people are finding Jesus.

• Permanent Link

Feb. 13, 2006 - It's tough leading a church these days

Posted by Somerschool

I spent two years looking for "the perfect church," and was very discouraged. It wasn't that I really expected to find anything near "perfect," but I did hope I could find something that wouldn't kill my children's love for Sunday, church, and God forever. Good news: I found everything I had hoped for and more. Bad news: I drive 70 minutes to work every day! (But I live 2000 feet from the church building.)

• Permanent Link

Feb. 13, 2006 - True-ish...

Posted by Confessor

Yes, the whole "escaping pre-conceived notions" thing makes sense, except for one thing. The preconceived notions are based on what the denomination really believes! For instance, there are churches that I'm sure are God-seeking churches, but I don't agree with several of their denominations' beliefs. Therefore, I don't go to those churches. The two possibilities are they they do believe what their denomination believes, in which case I know I don't want to make that my church. OR, they don't believe what their denomination believes, in which case I'm not sure I want to be a part of a church in conflict with their denomination. Yes, I'm sure that, among the unchurched, "Baptist" may mean preachy and moralistic (ANTI-FLAME NOTE: I don't believe those things, but I know people who do), but why not work with those specific things and not deny the denomination. As for me, when I go into a new church, I don't sit through the service and then think, "Hmmmm...that wasn't that bad. I was upset that it was a Lutheran church and they didn't tell me about it, but perhaps I'll just rethink my beliefs on infant baptism..." (ANOTHER ANTI-FLAME NOTE: This wasn't the case with us, but it is a good, clean, easy illustration.)

• Permanent Link

Feb. 13, 2006 - Untitled Comment

Posted by sagerats

I have two experiences, that to me, shed light on this epidemic of lack of affiliation. We attended a church for awhile where the associate pastor was much more interesting to listen to than the actual pastor. The pastor was a very godly man, and so it seemed was the A.P. His preaching was very biblical and I learned a lot from him. Then one day he set out to start his own church. He didn't want to be affiliated with any recognized organized church. He said it would cause people not to come. The truth eventually came out. He was a polygamist, and because of his sin he could not be affiliated with any church. He had lied to the elders and pastor in order to receive the position that he had, found out he was good at preaching, and felt that many in the church would follow him. Several did, until the truth came out. Not all unaffiliated churches have pastors who have no business being a pastor, but usually if the church started out that way there is a reason they did not become affiliated, be it sin, or they feel they were just called to start a church and didn't want to go about it in the usual way. Which to me, should cause one to question, "Do they have a different interpretation of the word than any other known affiliation, or did they just not get good grades or have the money to go to school?" The second reason for choosing a name with no affiliation comes from this experience: A congregation was looking for a new pastor. They found one and were excited about having him as their shepherd. As time went on however some thing became apparant to the wise in the congregation. This pastor was deceptive. Through his deception he was taking the congregation further away from what the church body believed. The wise eventually found out that this pastor too had lied on his application about being a member of that denomination. He didn't even believe anything that particular denomination believed in! By that time the majority of the congregation was caught in his trap and didn't want to believe that they were. Satan had taken firm hold of them all. This church divorced itself from it's affiliation and now has a new name, to fit their new beliefs. The wise tried to make a difference and were basically shown the door. These were two very different denominations, in two different states. This isn't why every unaffiliated church is set up as such, but I would question any such church about it's history. Nor is this to say that a pastor of such a church is ungodly. Many may be godly, and have a very good reason for not being associated. You won't know unless you ask. Abiding in the Vine!

• Permanent Link

Feb. 13, 2006 - Yikes!

Posted by Confessor

Wow! Those are some scary stories. That's sort of the flip side of what I was talking about. We've been (unknowingly, at first) going to churches that actually are still affiliated with the denomination, but they don't let you know that they were whatever they were. On the unaffiliated ones (which is where we usually end up), we do have to do some digging to see what they really believe and how they came about.

• Permanent Link

Feb. 14, 2006 - I can totally relate

Posted by spunkyhomeschool

For reasons I'd rather not go into we are looking for a new church. Not by choice but by necessity. I have found a similar struggle. We are currently visiting a church that isn't seeker friendly but trying to find out what they believe isn't easy. If you find a church let us know. I don't mind driving a bit. And my husband's business is somewhat portable.

• Permanent Link

Feb. 19, 2006 - Untitled Comment

Posted by OreoSouza

Wish I could help, but I really have no clue. An idea occurs to me, tho. If a woman puts on enough make-up and wears the right cut and colors, she can pass herself off to be anyone she wants to be...and maybe get a husband in the bargain. It's only *after* the marriage that the guy knows what he's gotten himself into. My guess is that the new names for these churches are just their way of putting on the make-up and finding themselves a husband. We all know that bigger numbers and great programs are the only way to the Father. BTW, we found a great church. The Evangelical churches are keeping their name, old-fashioned tho it may be. I don't know about all of the Evan. churches being an AOG gal from way back. But this one we found is great! The congregation consisted of people over 60...I think the Sunday School had two children before we came in. Let me tell you what a relief it was for my conservative husband to be able to mix with these old guys, and my children all of a sudden had pockets full of new grandmas and grandpas, and I'm enjoying being spoiled as a "young" (hahahahehehoho!!) mom. Look for a place with lots and lots of old people and a guy who stands up front actually *reading* from the Word while he's teaching.

• Permanent Link

Feb. 19, 2006 - Untitled Comment

Posted by blogginaddict

Yes. I can. That is, if I correctly understand your problem. Many people choose to hide something (whatever that something is) because they are afraid of public opinion. Churches do it for that same reason. Tolerance is all well and good, when it is in the realm of what is right by God. That is the problem - we people in America are too tolerant of what is wrong and too uncomfortable about doing what is right.

• Permanent Link

Feb. 24, 2006 - Untitled Comment

Posted by Anonymous

Churches are interested in reaching the lost and often denominational labels prevent some from visiting because of some negative sterotypes about that particular denomination. I wouldn't read too much into it. They are simply attempting to remove barriers that may keep some "seekers" away. I'm sure if you visit with any of the ministers they are more than happy to share with you their beliefs. Most people don't even know the doctrinal differences between Baptists or Methodists anyway, so I'm not sure that the name on the sign will make that big of a difference in the long run.

• Permanent Link

Mar. 21, 2006 - Why Are Churches Hiding Who They Are?

Posted by Anonymous

My wife sent me this link and I've read your post here. Let me tell you, friend, that this is nothing new for Baptists. Many of them have been trying for years to shake the stigma they feel is attached to the word Baptist. Dr. David Jeremiah, who has a radio program called "Turning Point" changed the name of his church in Calif. back in the 90's to "Shadow Mountain Community Church". One would not know that he or his church are affiliated with the SBC, without careful listening over a period of time, and some research. As for the United Methodists, perhaps that church doesn't want to be confused with the liberal leaning national denomination while trying to work for reformation from within. I'm not saying that this is a good trend, or that I agree with it. I'm just giving what would seem to be possible, or perhaps even probable reasons their behavior. One part of the problem with this trend form the other end of the spectrum is that many churches have bought into bad doctrine, like the prosperity gospel, or the seeker sensitive/emergent church, oneness pentacostal movements. Their focus is on unity at any cost, in many cases and they want no part in solid biblical doctrine that might bring division. Teaching for itching ears has become prevalent today, almost to a point of dominating the church as a whole. We need true reformation, far more today than we need revival in the American church today. Our Christianity is a miles wide but only inches deep. May you be blessed in yuor search, and may God lead you to where HE would have you!!!!

• Permanent Link

Mar. 21, 2006 - Why Are Churches Hiding Who They Are?

Posted by Anonymous

My wife sent me this link and I've read your post here. Let me tell you, friend, that this is nothing new for Baptists. Many of them have been trying for years to shake the stigma they feel is attached to the word Baptist. Dr. David Jeremiah, who has a radio program called "Turning Point" changed the name of his church in Calif. back in the 90's to "Shadow Mountain Community Church". One would not know that he or his church are affiliated with the SBC, without careful listening over a period of time, and some research. As for the United Methodists, perhaps that church doesn't want to be confused with the liberal leaning national denomination while trying to work for reformation from within. I'm not saying that this is a good trend, or that I agree with it. I'm just giving what would seem to be possible, or perhaps even probable reasons their behavior. One part of the problem with this trend form the other end of the spectrum is that many churches have bought into bad doctrine, like the prosperity gospel, or the seeker sensitive/emergent church, oneness pentacostal movements. Their focus is on unity at any cost, in many cases and they want no part in solid biblical doctrine that might bring division. Teaching for itching ears has become prevalent today, almost to a point of dominating the church as a whole. We need true reformation, far more today than we need revival in the American church today. Our Christianity is a miles wide but only inches deep. May you be blessed in yuor search, and may God lead you to where HE would have you!!!!

• Permanent Link