Even though church is a place where the God of consuming holiness comes to meet and speak to his people, believers stand before holy God every week with confidence and joy, being clothed with the righteousness of Jesus Christ (Hebrews 4:16). In the same way, even though church is a place where disciples fostered a countercultural relationship, believers can nurture a deep and authentic relationship of love for one another as they imitate Christ who had loved them to the point of laying down His life for them (John 13:34). Most importantly, while Satan continuously seeks to destroy a church and her saints, the Scripture testifies that Jesus will continue to protect and empower the Church so her enemy will never triumph over it (Matthew 16:17-19).

Church – a Safe, Welcoming, and Casual Place?
A big stage with smoke machines and flashing spotlights, emotional music and songs, a man wearing jeans and a shirt with tattoos standing on a podium, a sign that reads “Welcome! You are loved here!” These are the pictures that come into our minds when we think about typical broad evangelical churches in the United States of America.
In recent centuries, many modern American churches have gone through a significant shift in their cultures. For example, in the 20th century, American evangelicalism was impacted by the “Seeker-Sensitive movement,” where churches actively contextualized their cultures, practices, worship, and message to attract irreligious people.[1] In the 21st century then, American evangelicalism is impacted by various social and political movements such as “Black Lives Matter” or “Sexual Revolution”, causing many churches to embrace and promote such cultural agendas to embrace socially marginalized people.
And while these cultural and social movements, such as the seeker-sensitive, social-justice, and sexual-revolution cultures, have influenced many evangelical churches in various ways, one undeniable influence they have played is convincing churches to reshape their identity – an identity that communicates they are safe, friendly, and casual places to the world and to people.        
But this raises an important question. Is church really a safe, friendly, and casual place as many modern churches try to communicate to the people? Is church really a place where worshippers and visitors can casually and comfortably enter and enjoy their time? My answer is no. Contrary to many churches that try to communicate to its worshippers and visitors, I would argue that a church is first and foremost a dangerous place to be for anyone.
 1. A Place with A Dangerous God
The church is a dangerous place because it is, first and foremost, a place where a dangerous God comes to meet His people. Contrary to the widely spread view about God in modern American Christianity as loving, accepting, and affirming, the Bible often depicts God as an unapproachable being. For example, there are many accounts in the Bible where saints encountered God in their lives and were utterly swallowed up by fear and dread.
To mention a few incidents from the Old Testament, when Gideon encountered God at Ophrah, he cried out, “Alas, O Lord GOD! For now I have seen the angel of the LORD face to face (Judges. 6:22).” When Isaiah encountered God and saw Him with his own eyes in his vision, he also cried out, “Woe is me! For I am lost… For my eyes have seen the King, the Lord of hosts! (Isaiah. 6:5)” When Elijah encountered God at the Mount Horeb, he quickly covered his face with a cloak (1 King 19:13) because he understood the danger of being in God’s presence as God had once spoken to Moses, “You cannot see my face, for man shall not see me and live (Exodus. 33:20).”
To be more precise, it is God’s holy attribute that renders Him to be a dangerous being because His holiness cannot tolerate any hint of unholiness or sin in His presence (Habakkuk 1:13a). In fact, the New Testament also recognizes the danger of God’s holy presence as it commands Christians to stand in awe and reverence when they come into the presence of God as it declares, “Our God is a consuming fire (Hebrews 12:29).”
It is this Holy God who comes to meet and speak to His people every Sunday when worshippers gather together in His sanctuary. The God who does not, “Leave the guilty unpunished, visiting the iniquity of fathers on the children and on the grandchildren to the third and fourth generations (Exodus 34:7)”; the God who does not tolerate man’s clever inventions or ways of strange fire (Leviticus 10:1), every man and woman who comes to church every Sunday and stands before the audience of this dangerous God.
Read More
Related Posts:

Written by T. M. Suffield |
Saturday, September 30, 2023
You need some sense of where you’re going long term—that could be supporting missionaries, it could be sending people to pastor elsewhere, it could be planting churches or sites, it could be growing until you’re of a size to do a particular thing (though I’m wary of this last one, because growth soon becomes its own goal; growth is only good when in service of other goals). These are all valid, other things will be too, and they are a unique vision in the sense that not every church will do the same things with their limited resources.

It’s common these days to expect a church to have a specific vision, often expressed in a pithy statement about what they will or won’t be seeking to do in their location. Sometimes it’s accompanied by a mission statement—which sometimes is the same thing, but at least in business speak isn’t—though these are more common in churches that drew on a slightly older stream of business insights.
Is this a good idea? I’ve gone on record as thinking that lots of churches in the spaces I move in have missed what the church is for, and think this can be symptom of the same thing.
However, we should distinguish carefully because there is, I think, a good and a bad way to do this.
Good Vision
My late friend Zoltán Dörnyei was a Professor of Psycholinguistics who later in his life completed a PhD in Theology. One of his interests was the place of vision in the Christian life, due to his work on the importance of ‘mental imagery’ in acquiring a second language.
The scriptures tell us that without vision the people perish (Proverbs 29). In order to go anywhere and do anything, you need vision. In other words, to do something you have to first visualise it. Zoltan would teach that you needed to both appreciate the benefits of the thing you are considering and consider the costs of failure.
In church life, if the body is going to do anything—and we mean here acts as diverse as witness to their friends, move to a new venue, give their money, volunteer their time, support a project helping the poor, make friends who aren’t like them, and many more—then the elders of the church will need to articulate a ‘vision’ of why this is worthwhile as well as the potential costs of failing.
This isn’t business speak, it’s clarity and ‘leadership’. It’s also not anything super-fancy, for all you can be better or worse in how you go about it. By vision we mean simply painting a picture with words so that people understand why they might choose to take some concrete actions.
We can’t function without this, for all it can easily stray into manipulation—which is true of much of what we call leadership—where you make the vision sound compelling so that people are more likely to take those actions. That’s a tempting thing for a pastor to do, but honesty is integral for Christian leaders in these matters.
Read More
Related Posts:

Written by Terry L. Johnson |
Friday, August 12, 2022
So it is with our sexual nature. God made us for heterosexual, monogamous marriage. That is the physiological and biological reality. That alone is the context in which sexual expression may safely take place. The lifelong union of one man to one woman alone is suited to our design. The sexual act is a procreative act. It has other dimensions, but that is its fundamental meaning, its basic biological meaning. When we make other meanings primary, or when we move sexual expression outside of marriage, we pervert it. When we “exchange the natural for the unnatural,” to use the Apostle Paul’s language, we do harm to ourselves, as when we pretend to have gills or wings (Rom 1:26,27).

How can a secular society make moral distinctions? How can it separate right from wrong? This is more of a problem than most people realize, especially in the realm of sexual ethics. A generation of “everything is normal” sex education, mixed with “everything is desirable” Hollywood sit-com and cinema seductions has morally disarmed our civilization. Politicians frame the issue as, “the freedom to love whom you choose,” which it is not. Of course we can love whomever we choose. We may love our parents, our children, and our neighbor’s children. However, we may not have erotic relations with them. The language of freedom and equality, as in “marriage equality” has added to the confusion. Can we say that any form of sexual expression, any form at all is wrong? Or must we say, as it seems we must, that various lifestyle choices are merely a matter of personal preference lying outside the categories of moral judgment? After all, who can be against freedom and equality?
Human nature
The traditional Christian view is that humanity has a God-given nature. There are those things that are consistent with human nature (e.g. breathing air with lungs; walking with feet) and others that are inconsistent (e.g. breathing underwater; winged flight). Humanity has a given design, purpose, and nature. We ignore that nature at our peril, as when we try to breathe under water or flap our arms as we leap from tall buildings.
So it is with our sexual nature. God made us for heterosexual, monogamous marriage. That is the physiological and biological reality. That alone is the context in which sexual expression may safely take place. The lifelong union of one man to one woman alone is suited to our design. The sexual act is a procreative act. It has other dimensions, but that is its fundamental meaning, its basic biological meaning. When we make other meanings primary, or when we move sexual expression outside of marriage, we pervert it. When we “exchange the natural for the unnatural,” to use the Apostle Paul’s language, we do harm to ourselves, as when we pretend to have gills or wings (Rom 1:26,27).
Christian-influenced civilizations understood this for over a millennia. The west was never in doubt – until recent times. “Everything is normal” sex education, has given us “anything goes” sexual ethics, with dire results.
Are homosexual acts natural or normal? Of course not. They are physiologically unnatural. They are “contrary to nature” (Rom 1:26). As such, they are “shameless acts” driven by “dishonorable passions,” and a “debased mind” (Rom 1:28). Again, western civilization understood this for the better part of 1500 years, and its legal systems were designed to discourage this form of human degradation.
The campaign to normalize homosexuality has been successful. With the acceptance of the “gay” way, a wall came crashing down that may never again be rebuilt. What wall? The wall separating the moral from the immoral. We warned years ago that if and when homosexuality was normalized our ability to make sexual moral distinctions would vanish. Many scoffed at the suggestion.
Read More
Related Posts: