Last
week, we closed our discussion of church mission vs. buildings with some
questions. Let’s explore.
1. Are
church buildings good things, or bad things?
Good things. Anything that facilitates
ministry is a good thing. Being able to bring the unchurched to your building
to hear solid Bible teaching is a prudent use of God’s resources.
a) Should you contribute to the “building
fund?”
Sure. If a new building is the vision for
your church, get onboard.
2. Is it
better to be a church with no mission, or a mission with no church?
A church with no mission is dead, or at least
they missed the whole point of the Great Commission. Matthew 28:16-20 So if you had to choose, it
would be far better to be on a mission for God than to establish a church that had
no purpose. Hopefully, we can have both – a church with a purpose. God’s
mission for you could include establishing a local church where one did not
previously exist.
3. Does the
church where you worship have:
a) a building?
b) a mission?
c) both?
By now we all know that it’s ideal to have
both.
When
Jesus started his ministry on earth, he had a job to do, a mission. He did not
have a church. He called the 12 Apostles and the many other disciples,
followers and believers who then became “the church.” The Acts 2 church didn’t
have a building. But even though they met in homes, they were clearly on a
mission from God.
Norton
Lawellin
Join Jesus in the City
Fellowship (JICF) Sunday, April 28. Lead Pastor Michael Pilla continues our
journey in Luke 9:18-27. We meet in the North end of the Oliver Ministry
Building, 27th Street & Bloomington Avenue, Minneapolis. See you there!
NL
No comments:
Post a Comment