Goal Centered

Goal Centered Evangelism

Previous Home Next Table of Contents

11. Goal-Centered Evangelism

The reader must begin with the basic question of why the church must evangelize the world. What is the purpose of this activity? Is it just to be courageous and noble as the Christian shares a few words of inspiration hoping to make the world a better place to live? The Scriptural answer to this reveals, first, that the church is to share the gospel of Jesus Christ because it has been commanded to do so. This is the basis of the Great Commission and the words of Jesus as recorded in the first chapter of Acts. A second biblical reason for evangelism has to do with the fact that Jesus is the only way man can be saved. There is never a hint in God’s revelation that man may be saved if he does not hear the good news. There is not even a suggestion that a person may be saved through other religious traditions. On the contrary, the Bible affirms that Jesus is the only way and name whereby a person may be saved. The third reason for evangelism is because unless the church goes the lost will be destined to an eternal separation from God in everlasting condemnation. Moreover, this is the basic purpose of the biblical ideas of a calling and election, Christians separated to be witnesses to the truth of Jesus Christ. Thus, when an individual goes out from the church, he goes as an ambassador of Jesus Christ, which is more important than being a “salesman” for the local assembly. Indeed, the local assembly is the place to worship God and find encouragement for the task it has been called out of this world to do while serving the living God.

However, it does not appear that, as a rule, the above truths and reasons for evangelism are directing the outreach of the church. In fact, one may rightly ask whether the ambassador really proclaims the nearness of the Kingdom of God and the need for repentance. Instead of this being the case, the primary reason for the “visit” appears to make sharing the gospel more of an appendage to something else. For the most part, most outreach is nothing more than thinly disguised salesmanship for the local assembly. What is really being “sold” is the church and its ministries. At best in the visit, the house hears the gospel of Jesus Christ which is somehow connected to the programs that are offered by the ambassadors. In the worse scenario, the house receives and invitation “to come and visit our church” or “to be a part of our exciting and growing services.” At other times, the outreach seeks to “restore” individuals who once may have been a member or visited the church: individuals who equally have no desire to serve God now or ever. Instead of preaching the need of repentance and the need to be reconciled to God, however, these individuals are sold the package and even told they are needed in the church. Are these biblical techniques in sharing the gospel? Has the outreach perhaps become more determined by some other goal and vision?

It is a simple matter of logic to realize that this type of evangelism grows out of a faulty or subjective approach to Scripture. If the church really feels that Jesus is not going to return and that man has to make the future what it will be, then the above approaches are the only logical methods of evangelism. However, one does not even have to disbelieve that Jesus is not going to return to fall into this type of evangelistic approach. I know many of the readers will ardently defend the second coming of Jesus and yet operate on these types of methods. The reason, the subjective rationale has leavened the church to a greater degree than is realized. This has happened because the leadership has become so preoccupied with temporal results and church growth. Fancy brochures and catchy phrases are used to try to stimulate the prospects’ curiosity, rather than proclaiming the Word of God. In fact, the goals seem to border on the desire for the perpetuation of the local assembly, or to extend the length of the minister’s term, or to gain new members as if a social club was being sustained. Evangelism is rarely done out of a deep sense of urgency for the lost, or the realization at any moment, even today, Christ could come back for His church. The outreach neglects the fact that many of our families and friends, whom we keep hoping will be saved while we attempt to draw them by “loving them,” are going to end in hell or possibly go through a great period of tribulation if the church does not speak up. How has this occurred? Ministers have subjectively approached Scripture in their interpretations to make it say what they want so as to support their visions or goals for the assembly. In so doing, they have left off the real reason for evangelism and neglected the true future facing this world. Instead, the church gives itself to the pursuit of profane and carnal worldly goals.

This truth becomes apparent about ministry when a person has a close person die. When I lost my wife, I became overwhelmed at the number of things we had planned for the future. Visions and dreams that I would have in a moment said God wants us to do. Visions and dreams for which I could find much Scriptural support for doing. However, when my wife died suddenly, I began to realize just how much of my life I was giving to my own dreams and visions of the future. So much so that I was neglecting the things that really mattered and not facing the reality of what really was going to occur in this world. I learned very quickly what Paul warned the church about when he spoke of “wood, hay and stubble.” For the most part, however, this is what the church is giving itself and laboring for, its own vision of the future and its own goals. When this occurs, the reasoning for ministering is done for all the wrong reasons.

Furthermore, the methods and goals of ministry have become corrupted by this faulty view of the future. Instead of God doing the gathering, the church seeks to find ways to draw people under its own power. The “hope of glory” seems to fad in the background as more important ideals are realized, like 89 in 89. This is why ministry begins to be measured in terms of the number of lunches handed out, the number of visitors (goats) that can be drawn in on any given Sunday, the number of children which attend the puppet or ventriloquist show, the number of adults who attend the singles fellowship, the number of people who come for the “Halloween party,” or the number of people who are contacted by the membership. Is this the measure of the church’s effectiveness? Was success in Scripture equated with the number of heathen that attended their “love feasts”? On the contrary, the apostles pointed out in many places how harmful the effects of the world were in leavening the saints, their holiness and their doctrinal understandings, if they did not preserve their purity and discipline in the local assembly. However, if one asks the present minister why the above practices are so common in the local assemblies, the answer will simply be it works to bring them in. But what is this accomplishing? Does this not suggest that the church really has no confidence in the proclamation of the Word of God? Has its message become so secondary that other things have to be used in order to draw people to Jesus Christ? Has the Holy Spirit become so weak in the process of conviction through the proclamation of God’s Word that He needs the assistance of worldly attractions? It seems to me that this is what the above evangelistic methods suggest.

Moreover, the above types of thinking in a congregation reveal a vision of the future which is created and sustained by well-meaning individuals. They are trying to bring about positive results. However, where is a church found today which has accepted that their lack of growth is due to the harsh environment and the hostility which is directed toward the Christian faith. I am no speaking of those situations where the individuals due to laziness or indifference or by complacent acceptance of their situation do no evangelize. I am speaking of those places where the saints are commendable for their perseverance, such as was exemplified in the church at Smyrna. These are churches which will refuse to compromise the truth and faith and thus have little growth. They will not resort to methods to try to bring in the goats, but will simply live, often in danger to their lives, the faith they have been made part of. Equally, there are other possibilities which the church must face. It could very well be that God is not drawing and convicting those about the local assembly for reasons that are presently unknown to His servants. If this is the case, does the church then resort to methods and programs to try to get results in spite of God’s refusal to draw the lost Himself? It could be that God is trying to get the attention of the church, to make them look at themselves closely, to reveal some sin within the camp, to humble them, or even just draw them closer to Himself. Man must not be so presumptuous to think that the church never has its own wilderness experiences or sins of Achan. Neither should the church or individuals think that God will not withhold blessings for a time to “humble thee, to prove thee, to know what was in thine heart, whether thou wouldest keep his commandments, or no” (Deuteronomy 8:2 KJV). Instead of being humbled, instead of seeking God in prayer and perseverance, instead of continuing to witness faithfully in spite of the lack of results, the congregation gets worried about the “lack of results.” The members then start looking for someone else or something else which will “get results” or increase the membership of the assembly. This is not an attempt to give excuses for the laziness and indifference of preachers and members. However, the church needs to remember that it is God who gives the increase. If God does not do it, then whatever may be considered conversion is not that. When the Holy Spirit is moving with power and conviction, the results will occur. This is not a phenomenon the church can within itself bring about unassisted. The church can only be

faithful and obedient.

Of course the ones who have really been mislead by these faulty visions are the lost and those outside the church. In fact, they have become experts on the outreach methods of church evangelism. In many places they even know when to expect a visit since there is an up-coming “revival” scheduled. These individuals, who have not truly responded to the gospel, have learned how to manipulate church “visits” so that nothing is accomplished. These are they who have no intention of bowing before God and who skillfully maneuver the ambassador into defending his assembly. This is done simply by allowing the conversation to drift to all the “abuses” or sinful tendencies of previous ministers and members. Then the conversation becomes guided by assurance that things have changed or that their feelings are respected and appreciated. At other times, the ambassador will even compromise truth and morality in order to be able to “minister” to these disgruntled individuals. In the meantime, the real subject of the visit, whether they have been saved, is not addressed. The prospect in reality is no closer to heaven than before they were visited. Yet those who shared and ministered unto them may even think they have accomplished much.

This is not the only way the lost will maneuver the visit. If they do show an interest in the things of God, the ambassador is quickly maneuvered into “selling” the ministries and opportunities that await the person if they will come to church. I do not know how many visits of this type that I have been on in which the present spiritual conditions of the family are only briefly, if at all, addressed. The subject and the goal of the visit get sidetracked by the possibility of a new member. For sure, the ambassador would not want to say anything that might offend or turn the prospect off from their interest in the church. As a result, little of eternal value is shared. The time is lost, time better spent in prayer. Indeed, the church may shrug this off as simply a time of sowing seeds and a worthwhile visit, but the question still remains as to if we have been truly obedient to Jesus’ command. A side result of this type of maneuvering in visitation is that thousands of good prospects have gone shopping for the church that fits their ideas and wants. Afterall, all of this interest in church is in reality nothing more than disguised attempts to find out if they will be accepted with all of their sin problems, beliefs and desires. There is little desire to die to self, to submit to God’s Word and become a servant to God and others. Unfortunately, the church then tries to meet the expectations of these individuals. This is an interesting contrast to the biblical idea of confronting the world with God’s Word, not man’s programs and visions.

This state of affairs has not occurred overnight but has come about as earnest and well-meaning individuals have sought ways in which to “minister to others.” More specifically, the eleadership has asked the question how the church can meet the needs and the expectations of the prospects. This is called identifying the potential areas of ministry. It is at this point that the subjective approach to Scripture has found an inroad into the methods of evangelism. In fact, it is the new vision of the existential view that has shaped the way churches are evaluating their outreach and goals for the future. As we have seen, the way one views the future will affect the way a person or group acts now. Evangelism may thus be seen as having been shaped from two directions primarily. On one hand, the church has a desire to “minister” and reach the world in meaningful ways. On the other, the existential modal has provided a basic understanding of man’s need and thus the direction which ministry should take in meeting this need. When these two directions converge, a basic view of what the church’s task is to be is determined. The only problem with this approach is that the existential view of man’s need and the future are not based in revelation, as seen in Section II. In spire of this fact, the seminaries and colleges of leadership continue to teach and write that the church is to deal with man’s quest for understanding what it means to be man. Thus, whatever the church does, whether preaching, teaching, or evangelism, its primary task will be in meeting this need. The future is viewed from the possibilities of man being able to reach his potential and actualize if the church is faithful in its task.

When this is applied to the “lost” or those living inauthentic lives, that ambassador’s task is one in which a “commitment” is sought from the prospect. By this choice or commitment, the prospect can be assured that they are participating in the “New Being,” although for the most part it will be spoken of as “being saved.” From the unknowing prospect’s point of view, he has made a “commitment” to God. From a practical point of view, and those of existential persuasion, the commitment is to live authentically and responsibly in all relations. Of course this commitment also involves joining the local assembly where the “convert” is expected to support the ministries and programs. In doing so, the new “convert” is shown how his life is made meaningful by all the works of righteousness that now are performed, as well as, the meaningful values which have been espoused. The basic thought here is that in choosing to live responsibly, or committing himself to God, the person will also be choosing for all mankind. At the same time, the choice can be viewed as a choice for self in that the person has now, or potentially, will soon after he is indoctrinated, acknowledge the power and possibility for becoming what “God wants man to be.” This type of though is not much different from that spoken by Sarte who says”

When we say that man chooses himself, we do mean that everyone of

us must choose himself; but by that we also mean that in choosing for

himself he chooses for all men. For in effect, of all the actions a man

may take in order to create himself as he wills to be, there is not one

which is not creative, at the same time, of an image of man such as he

believes he ought to be. (p. 29)

Thus when this commitment is made by the prospect, the choice he has made will be beneficial for mankind at large. This is because all the self-seeking and alienating choices that are usually made, have been denounced and the new life embraced, one which follows the life of Jesus. With reference to the future of the convert, it will be up to the preachers and teachers to guide or shepherd these converts in the direction which will cause them to continue to choose those directions which will help society to actualize in an atmosphere of love and justice. It will also be the responsibility of the leadership to act as change agents in moving these individuals toward the desired goals and dreams of the assembly and denomination. By the use of the life of Jesus and the words of His followers, moral preaching and example will be frequently used to give authority to the goals desired.

The main problem with trying to get prospects to make a commitment, however, is primarily the fact that God draws man unto Himself. Man is not the initiator of a commitment or even told to get commitments. Christians are simply to be the ambassadors of the gospel. If man gets or asks for a commitment, one must ask what is man making a commitment toward? In the existential viewpoint, it is clear that the commitment is to the future which is envisioned and described as the ultimate environment. Of more probability, the convert is making a commitment to the local assembly or to a program or opportunity offered. This is not biblical conversion! I suspect, however, that assemblies are filled with these types of individuals who have made a commitment to “Jesus,” but who have in reality simply chosen a lifestyle or way of thinking, or the vision or program of the local assembly. It is the same type of commitment a person makes when he says he is going to support some charitable organization or purpose.

Let the reader be assured, true conversion comes through a broken and contrite spirit in which a person casts his life into the hands of a gracious and merciful God because of the sacrifice of Jesus on the cross. This is not an act of commitment, it is an act of trust and hope. Further, it is an act by which Jesus becomes Savior and Lord. In this, the individual submits to the authority of Jesus as head and Master. The results are always different. If a person merely commits himself to some task, they can equally uncommit themselves, as millions have done in Christendom, often when the preacher changes or some trial of life arises. If the are called and bought by Jesus, the cannot get away from this fact even if the chastening hand of God has to require their physical life. When a person commits himself to the possibility of the future, he has committed himself to a future that many or may not be certain or assured. When a person trusts Jesus, he gains a future that is certain and assured. The difference between commitment and repentance is enormous. Yet the church still operates as if its chief task is to derive commitment from its members and prospects. Thus the outreach and ministry are adjusted accordingly to what will bring about the best response and commitment.

The existential view has also affected the way the needs of the prospect are met. Knowing that the biggest problem for man in his fear of non-being, death and lack of a meaningful life, the ambassador will show how the church will try to meet this need. That this is the basic problem of man as viewed by the existentialists is expressed by James Coleman.

It is this awareness of our inevitable death and its implications for our

living that lead to existential anxiety - to deep concern over whether we

are living a meaningful and fulfilling life. (p. 71-72)

With this type of assumption in hand, the ambassador sets out to meet this need by sharing the significance of Jesus who has shown man the way to the abundant life, and moreover, has made it possible for all to participate in a new way of life in this world. The “abundant life” becomes possible if they will just see that their lack of meaning in life is due to their lack of commitment to live after Jesus. Thus, if the prospect would like to live the “abundant life,” or the authentic life in existential terms, he merely has to choose to repent and commit himself to the life offered in the local assembly. The problem with this approach is that it neglect’s man’s true need, his sin problem and alienation from God because of sin. Many may commit themselves to the Christian way and never deal with the basic sin problem. All they become are carnal flesh in outward robes of righteousness who support the program and denomination.

Of even more concern is how ministry and goals begin to reflect the idea that the church is to be an “abundant life center.” In fact, the whole future becomes blinded by this carnal goal. The existential belief that the future of man is man’s choosing it seems to be the ruling principle. The more people the leadership can get to commit to the ministry (e. g., growth by numbers), the more opportunity for the church to become the “abundant life center.” It is the idea, the same as in the business world, that with enough money and enough people the church can do all that is envisioned. Sounds like the philosophy of Babel doesn’t it? This idea of an “abundant life center” for the future, however, is also of existential origins. Jean-Sarte expresses his ideas of the future being man’s in this way:

Only if one took this to mean that the future is laid up in Heaven, that

God knows what it is, it would be false, for then it would no longer

even be a future. If, however, it means that whatever man may now

appear to be, there is a future to be fashioned, a virgin future that

awaits him - then it is a true saying. (p. 34)

What Sarte suggests is that the future is not to be viewed as coming from without, as “descending from heaven,” but rather the future is what man makes of it. It has already been shown in Section II how to believe that the future comes from without is a cop-out and an inauthentic way of thinking. This is because in this idea the individual refuses to accept his responsibility in the actualization of society. If there was ever a definition for it, this would be the essence of “sin” for the existentialist. As a result of this type of philosophical leavening in leadership, the goals and methods of evangelism are no longer primarily concerned with a future reality of Jesus’ return but in how best to make the church an “abundant life center.”: Even while some will not necessarily deny the second coming of Jesus, many in leadership have fallen into a ministry which is characterized by this type of vision for the church. In fact, most of the training seems to be directed at how to build this type of church, mobilize the membership to achieve these carnal goals and visions, and to be successful as a minister.

What becomes of interest at this point is the description of the goals and visions that are expressed. Admittedly, these visions have come about out of a desire to minister to others and an existential understanding of man’s need. Thus, the commitment is to help people to overcome the threat of non-being or meaningless, often at the expense of biblical truth and prophecy. In fact, many of the visions that are suggested are wholly different from those spoken of in Scripture. A couple of descriptions of these types of visions will demonstrate:

The goal of human history is not a far-off mystical day in which sheep

are dramatically separated from goats and various powers and

principalities are brought to judgment. The end of days begins now.

In resurrection with the Christ, man gives up his old, dead past and

begins a new way of life that differs from his old pattern of strife and

contention....In truth the Christian self moves in another realm of

being, in the present fulfillment that is the end of all man’s

Messianic seeking. (Borowitz, p. 155)

Freedom and responsibility in our present come to us out of the

freedom of God’s future of us and for all being....As the power of

the future, God is the promise of a unified and unifying future for

all being. In ways that surely transcend the specificity of Jewish

Christian images of the coming Kingdom, God has disclosed the

divine intention to redeem, restore and fulfill all being. (Fowler, p. 210)

As these statements indicate, the future which is envisioned and being promoted is not one which is drawn from the prophecy of Scripture. It seems to be one in which man in his freedom and choice has the potential to being about. In this scheme, God is only the power of the future, the force or the idea that makes this future possible. God is not seen as the author of it nor as bringing it into being by the return of Jesus. This future is said to be what God desires for man and the reason that He sent Jesus to show man how he might be partakers of this vision of the future. The interesting aspect of this vision is that it goes beyond the glorious hope as presented in Scripture. No doubt Satan is not even being subtle at this point in drawing man from the greatest blessing God has prepared for man. Instead of a future reserved in heaven, the future is one which is brought about by man’s freedom. In this view, the Book of Revelation is just an eschatological writing best understood symbolically. Once it is symbolically viewed, it is only a small step to show that the struggle in Revelation is between the forces of man’s becoming and those oppressive systems which hold man back from this future. It demonstrates the power of “inauthentic living” and the power of the “New Being” to overcome inauthenticity and usher in the new age. Society comes from without only in the sense that the ground and source of being is the reason that it is possible.

Another interesting aspect of this new vision is the character that faith begins to portray. In many ways it is a faith which believes in the potential of man and his ability to accomplish anything. It is a psychology of positive thinking. It is a faith which causes man to live and act in authentic ways to usher in the “Kingdom of God’ by participating in the New Being. The faith is directed toward the realization of a world which is guided by the primary virtues of love and justice. It has exposed the politics of oppression and the economics of affluence as the true “Satan” binding upon man. Thus, this ultimate environment is not limited to the symbolic visions of John on the isle of Patmos. It rather includes all religious expressions of the future. From a present perspective, this future is only intellectually realized and may be referred to as a “transcendent center of value and power.” Faith is the vehicle by which this transcendent center will become actualized in the world. The church becomes the primary means by which this faith is proclaimed to the world. This vision, however, is not limited to the traditional descriptives as found in the Scriptures.

James Fowler describes this ultimate environment in this manner:

...a comprehensive frame of meaning that both holds and grows out

of the most transcendent center of value and power to which our

faith gives allegiance. The point is, faith affects the shaping of our

initiatives and responses, our relationships and aspirations in

everyday life, by enabling us to see them against the backdrop of

a more comprehensive image of what constitutes true power, true

value and the meaning of life. (p. 28)

The point of this statement is that faith will determine the future of man. Man's future is determined by what he places his faith and trust toward and realizes that it can be possible. It is thus assumed that the ultimate environment is that point toward which man has been aspiring toward as a whole, not as reflected in the religious, national or group ideals. When this point or goal is defined, then man has a good picture of what he is striving toward. In other words, if man’s faith can envision a world which is characterized by the ruling virtues of love and justice, then it is possible to attain.

No doubt, this type of belief and confidence in the future of man is the reason individuals can exhort others, and in particular those in leadership positions, to “dream dreams.” The point being, whatever man envisions the future to be like, whatever he wants to see happen, believe in it, believe God wants it also, work toward it, give ones’ life to it and mobilize the membership to be involved in it. For with God, who is the reason all becomes possible, all things are open for man’s future. He is the reason that the future is free to be whatever is possible for man to envision. Thus, man ought to dream dreams and know that if it is for the good of mankind, God will support it. Equally, with this type of teaching, whatever may in reality happen in the future as prophesied becomes secondary to what man believes God is telling him to do now. The result of this type of ministry is a lot of wood, hay and stubble being built upon the foundation of Jesus’ sacrificial death on the cross. Even more interesting is how many will give their lives to these earthly and carnal “dreams.”

I am reminded of the words of the prophet Jeremiah,

I have heard what the prophets said, that prophesy lies in my names,

saying, I have dreamed, I have dreamed. How long shall this be in the

heart of the prophets that prophesy lies? Yea, they are prophets of the

deceit of their own heart; which think to cause my people to forget

my name by their dreams which they tell every man to his neighbor,

as their fathers have forgotten my name for Baal. The prophet that

hath a dream let him tell a dream; and he that hath my word, let him

speak my word faithfully. What is the chaff to the wheat? saith the

Lord. (Jeremiah 23: 25-28 KJV)

Are not these dreams of the same nature of those spoken of in Jeremiah’s day? Are the preachers and teachers today speaking God’s Word faithfully or are they just spouting out their own dreams and visions? There is no doubt of the effect that these false prophets had on God’s people in Jeremiah’s day. The tendency of the flesh is to accept those things which are most appealing to man’s carnal desires. Indeed, what church can resist the idea that they are going to be the very vessel of God to make all the difference in their locality”? Why is it that one church, among many others, is the one assembly that has been chosen above all others to realize its “dreamed” vision of the future? What church can resist the talk that God has appointed it to be the “abundant life center” of an area, thus giving approval to spend millions on building centers and ministries that do little more than attract the flesh and pamper to its desires. The fact that God has a greater place reserved in heaven does not seem to be an accepted fact. The vision and dreams are all earthly in nature. No one cries for Jesus’ return. In the end, God’s truth concerning the future is forgotten and only the goals and visions of the leadership are seen. Equally, once these goals and dreams have been given godly sanction and approval, if a person points out any error with these dreams, he is viewed as being at odds with God Himself. Has this not been exemplified best in the television ministries which have come under criticism in the last few years? This problem, however, is just as frequent at the local church level as it is in major television enterprises. Let the reader look at the results of “dreaming dreams.”

The first result of this dreaming is that a vision of one person or a certain group begins to dominate the scene. In fact, the church becomes increasingly encumbered with numerous individuals with dreams, whether they agree with Scripture or not, to which others are asked to give their time, money and commitment. The next result is that evangelism becomes centered on this vision rather than the gospel hope. In fact, the gospel becomes merely the means of achieving these carnal dreams. The larger the assembly, the more dreams and visions the church is likely to promote. This being the case, there is no reason to wonder why so much conflict and confusion are occurring in the church. This type of activity was denounced by Paul when he wrote to the Corinthian congregation saying, “How is it the, brethren, when ye come together, every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying” (I Corinthians 14:26 KJV). While the present confusion may not be as severe as it was in Cornith, the same spirit of confusion is at work.

In most cases, however, it is the pastor who has dreamed dreams and brought a vision to the assembly. Usually the church endorses this dream at the “call” where this dream is given some elaboration. If the dream is what the church wants, they will call the individual. If it is not, the preacher sends his resume’ and “dreams” elsewhere. When the “dream” is accepted by the church, the pastor, who is supposed to be an ambassador of God’s Word and for the equipping of the saints for the work of ministry, comes to the assembly with his agenda of what he expects to happen if the assembly cooperates. The task becomes one of equipping the congregation toward the dream. While this may not be bad in itself, since all preachers must have some idea of where they are going, all to often the dream becomes the guide and measure of how all the ministry and work of the church are done. Thus, along with this dream comes a package of programs and techniques, which have been learned in seminary or in associational retreats and seminars, to “sale” and motivate the congregation to the dream. Many times, and solely due to the motivational ability of the techniques, these dreams are realized. At other times, the dream does not seem to be even possible. When this happens, the preacher becomes increasingly frustrated and bitter toward God and his congregation that the dream is not being achieved. Instead of looking to see if this is truly a God-given dream, the pastor will then begin to seek other types of motivational techniques and programs guaranteed to bring results. If nothing still does not happen, the preacher becomes sure that God has told him it is time to move on to better things and places.

As was mentioned, the sad thing about this type of scenario is that all too often these man-made gimmicks and principles of growth work to achieve the dream. In fact, programs and promotions have become the regular and expected character of modern church methods. Since they do get results, desperate preachers in similar situations scramble to try out some new idea or promotion they have heard about. Sometimes the new techniques and suggestions will be successful. At the end of all this activity, the preacher and congregation who have dreamed dreams look around and say “God has blessed us so much.” The only problem with their judgment is that any good salesman or corporate executive in any industry could have gotten the same results or maybe even better results if they used the same techniques. Let this be seen for what it is. This is not the power of God, this is the power of human beings committed to using man-devised techniques to achieve man-made goals which they have embraced. In fact, there really is no reason for the assembly not to pat themselves on the back since they truly have been the reason that the program “sold.”

The problem with this type of ministry activity is obvious. A person must merely ask the question in the midst of all of this goal setting and programmed response and enthusiasm, is it not God who gives the increase? If God does, why do all of these man-made techniques become necessary? Did not Jesus say He would draw all men unto Himself? If he is proclaiming the true picture of man’s future, does the preacher have to justify his vision and motivate the congregation through all types of techniques? If the members saw clearly what God expected of them through his Word, do you think they would need speakers brought in to the church to try to motivate their support? The truth is that only man-made dreams need this type of promptings. God’s true ministry will exist through the power of the Holy Spirit energizing the saints (I Thess. 2:13). The results of man’s dreaming are clear. Confusion, bitterness and strife erupt among God’s people. The church becomes filled with goats who have not responded to the life-changing gospel of Jesus Christ but to the program and incentives offered in the dream. Others will joining the church only to receive the benefit of a certain ministry, as if the church was serving a buffet dinner in which people can pick what blessing of God they want for themselves.

If one asks the leadership why the programs continue, the answer is it works. Dreams and goals are achieved. Names are made for oneself. I have heard it admitted many times that if it were not for a certain program or promotion there would not be as many people involved or members. Is this to be considered the power of God manifested in the life of believers? I wonder what kind of success this really is. If people are not responding to the gospel then what has the church gained except another goat who will no doubt destroy the purity and holiness of the Body of Christ. Furthermore, church leader, if it can be truly admitted that the only reason that people are coming is due to some promotion or gimmick or program, then you faith does not reside in the gospel of Jesus Christ you claim to profess, but in your own abilities and genius to attract the crowd or motivate others into following your dream. While you may get results, is it any wonder why six months later many “converts” are nowhere to be found or have lost all interest in the assembly? The truth is that they have either grown bored with the dream or dreamed up one of their own which you will not support. Equally, even those who stay will become bored with the dream. In order to keep herding the flock you have to come up with a more “exciting” dream, or some new program, or idea from denominational thinkers, so that the people will continue to support. In other cases, in a “democratic congregation,” a committee will develop some new idea to attract the people and thus set the assembly apart from other church’s in the area.

This just demonstrates, however, how the church which is supposed to be a supernatural and spiritual organism is being sustained by worldly techniques which are meant for worldly organizations. It may be said that the church is now big business, but this is only because it has become corrupted by the above type of carnal goal-setting. The truth is that the church is to be sustained by supernatural empowerment, such was evident in the first century. If the assembly was concerned about raising support, they merely had to look at Ananias and Sapphira for motivation. What has been forgotten is the fact that the church is successful in ways which often defy logic. The would should stand in amazement with how the church can continue to sustain itself. This, however, is not the case with most present religious activity. It is clear how it is sustaining itself by techniques, programs and charismatic individuals. That these means seem to get good results makes them as right as the techniques of Baal worship which Israel engaged in to achieve results. They both are an abomination to God. The game is not to get people to respond to the fact of Jesus Christ, but to get people to respond to the dream which has been dreamed up in a committee meeting or a retreat.

There is no doubt that one of the reasons that “dreams” have become so popular is that it does meet the existential need of man, as proponents would suggest; e.g., the fear of meaningless. The church has responded graciously in providing every type of imaginal dream and vision to which an individual drifting along in life can commit himself to and be a part. This is in spite of the truth that many of these different ministries are actually opposing one another, nay fighting with each other, as they try to draw from the same support base and prospects. Of even more interest is the fact that they all are said to be “God-given” dreams. Usually this is stated by saying that “God has shown me this is what He wants done and what He will make happen if we are faithful.” My thought is, if all of these dreams are truly from God, then He must be irrational. This is not the case, however. The irrationality exists on the part of individuals who has set aside truth and doctrine, who have set themselves free from Scriptural restraints, and have used Scripture to promote their own agenda of church work and goals. The end of this is their own glory. They are offered the chief seats and invited to the highest paid street-corners. They sell the most books. Others, who are not as talented, look on in lust and craving for their power and glory. Nothing becomes too sacred to retain in order to reach these carnal dreams and goals.

I can only wonder how different the churches would be if they were consumed with the vision of God’s redeeming time of grace against the awful day of judgment which is about to occur. How I would rather see the church praying for this cause instead of praying only when carnal goals and dreams are not being achieved. (It amazes me how denominational agencies are always seeking prayer when their goals are not realized. It is as if the leadership wants God to cater to their carnal goals in case they be fired when they do not produce results.) How different the church would be in the sight of the world if it was resting in the supernatural manifestation of God’s glory in the vessels of weakness. Indeed, let the church forget all of its carnal pursuits and pray for an empowering upon God’s people before it is too late for millions. I can only suggest that the dreams have already brought enough destruction upon the evangelistic efforts of God’s servants. If this is a person’s goal, please step aside and let the gospel be proclaimed unhindered by all these carnal pursuits. Let God be the goal setter. Let God give the increase.

There is no doubt that the idea of dreaming dreams is a by product of the existential point of view which has leavened modern Christendom. Sure there is an honest desire to minister and help others, but is this the way Jesus intended for His Body to carry on? The fact that the church has left the scriptural vision of the future has had a profound effect on its methods. The truth is that man does not know for sure when Jesus will return. I could be today or 10 years from now. This should not matter, however. The church should labor as if today was the last day. Instead, the goals and programs have become the most important aspect of church life. In an attempt to minister to people, the question is always what do they want from the church and can it be delivered. Once this answer is found, the church or evangelism committee sets off a series of goals and visions which are tailor-made to moving the prospects into church life. Evangelism becomes defined by what the goats want church to be, not what Jesus commanded the church to do.

No doubt, Scripture is clear on how to go about evangelism. Jesus simply said “go.” Go into all the earth and share the great gospel of Jesus Christ in the power of the Holy Spirit. Pentecost was the beginning of the fulfillment of this command. The Spirit of God empowered the disciples and they were obedient to the command. If there are two characteristics which should be seen in evangelism it should be a manifestation of the Spirit of God in the ambassador and a “going forth” by the ambassador. Anything less is not true evangelism and cannot have the same results. Moreover, the message of this evangelism was simply the message of Jesus Christ, the Good News. This is why Paul said he was not ashamed of the gospel of Jesus Christ because it was the power of God unto all who would believe. Please take note of this, the power is not in the charisma of the preacher, it is not in the wisdom and knowledge of the teacher, it is not in the appeal of the assembly’s programs and ministries, the power is in the message of Jesus Christ, the foolishness of the cross. Is this too much for man to grasp?

This being the case, one must wonder why the promises of God are so casually thrown around like pearls before the swine. In order to gain support for a certain dream or vision, there is a tendency on the part of leadership to remind the people of all the great things God has promised. There are all theirs if they will just commit themselves to the dream, which has been equated with faithfulness to God. This is interesting because in reality all the promises that are laid out before the lost are not made to the children of God directly, but are made to Jesus Christ who distributes them to the saints. It is only by man’s participation in the salvation bought for him by Jesus that he inherits a part in the blessings. This is the point that Paul was making concerning the promises made to Abraham. As Paul wrote to the Galatians, “Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ” (Galatians 3:16 KJV). This indicates that all the promises were made to Jesus Christ. Through Jesus, we and Abraham are able to participate in the privileges of being God’s children. Of even further interest with regard to the blessings is the statement made in the Book of Hebrews, “These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded by them, and embraced them, and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth” (11:13 KJV). No doubt, there were not great earthly ministries and dreams which obscured the vision of Abraham and others. Yet today, so close to the fulfillment and completion of what Abraham and other saints looked toward, the church is preoccupied with its own dreams and goals, so much so, that it has nearly forgotten the One who has bought it, nay, even denied He bought the church by His blood and is coming back.

This truth is important because it has a tremendous affect on the outreach of the church and its ministries. With regard to the lost, the church needs to be honest and realize that it has nothing of value to offer the world except Jesus Christ and the truth of His coming Kingdom. A person can boast of the generosity of the assembly, its love and devotion, its ministries, its advantages, but in reality the only thing worth speaking of is Jesus Christ. Consequently, the church must preach Him and Him alone if anything worthwhile is going to be said to the world. This is why being side-tracked in visits with prospects is usually useless to the expansion of God’s rule in the hearts and lives of those the church ministers unto. Equally, Jesus is not only the beginning word, He is the final word. When this is realized there will not be a temptation to brag or promote certain programs and dreams as if by them the Christian is made complete. Paul clearly revealed that in Christ the believer is made complete (Col. 2:10) since the fullness of God resides in Him. The Book of Hebrews makes it clear that Jesus is the author and finisher of the believer’s faith. He is the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end.

This is the critical point. Jesus is man’s only hope for the future. He is the Bridegroom which the servant is waiting to see and serve (Luke 12:31 f.). He is the initiator of the end to which man waits earnestly for and pleas “even so come Lord Jesus” and “Maranatha.” This is not some mystical “New Being” or actualized society that the church and the saints of old were seeking. It is rather the consummation of this wicked age of rebellion. If this was some hope which was only to be “realized” when man understands who Jesus signified, why would Paul and other biblical writers exhort the saints to be patient for the coming of Jesus and to stand fast in their hope? It seems to me that it would be only logical to exhort them to get on with their life, to become the actualized people they can be, to give themselves to the dreams of their lives and live abundantly since Jesus has shown them the way to freedom. But this is not the case. On the contrary, Paul writes, “But if we hope for that we see not, then do we with patience wait for it” (Romans 8:25 KJV). Equally, the church today should not be so consumed in its own vision and ideas of ministry, but rather in the eternal destiny which is facing all men. When this is realized, the programs will be developed with one goal in mind. Not a goal of numbers, of types of ministries, of building abundant life centers, etc., but a goal of simply being ambassadors of the gospel of Jesus Christ to the whole world.

Previous Home Next Table of Contents