Dancing on the Grave of the Church

I just read this interview on the book by Barna. It's really interesting, especially the heated discussion afterwards
http://thin-edge.org/2008/02/27/the-thin-edge-hosts-joint-interview-with-barna-viola/
the authors are also answering questions from readers at http://www.paganchristainity.org Barna's book seems to be provoking a lot of thought.

I was troubled by Bob's thorough denunciation of the premise and conclusions without actually mounting an attack upon the substance of Viola’s and Barna’s major points. For example, is his only defense of “sermons” the passages which we have labeled as “sermons?” Is he suggesting that we overlay our modern traditions and terms on the scriptures?

One of the main points in the book is that certain things may be biblical but they are not “Christian.” Citing Ezra’s “sermon” doesn’t exactly refute their point. If, rather, he could point to a pattern in New Testament church life in which sermons (as we understand them today) were a matter of practice, then, he would make a valid attack upon their claims.

I do disagree with Barna if he says that the (institutional) church is dying. Religious folk love their religion even if they complain about it. They are not going to give it up any time soon.

Bob, be secure. You'll be in business for quite a while. You're good.

The attitude in this article, namely a mocking defensiveness and a complete lack of self-examination or willingness to submit ANY of his own assumptions to scrutiny, is exactly what is driving so many people away from the organized church in the first place. Very disappointing.

Apparently in reserching the "Early Church" Mr. Barna has not researched 1st and 2nd century Judaism. Most of what the church has today comes not from the Pagan Culture but From the Temple and Synagouge (Which has vestments and appointed leaders, Pulpits and Candles, and so on). It is not suprising that there were not church buildings until the third century (a point to be disputed in itself), However when one considers that many early christians also went to the synagouge and temple what need did they have for their own church buildings until they were kicked out of the Jewish system. Finally, the early church did not have recognized clery What?!?!?! Does Paul not talk about elders and bishops and deacons. These may or may not have been paid (Even though Paul does say the laborer deseves his wage and the Pastor is due double honor) but there was still recoognoized leadership.

Judging from the emotion in the articles about this topic I can see the anger and resentment from mainstream Christianity. Nevertheless the Trumpet is sounding the alarm...the Church is in need of change! It is sad that those involved in this change refer to it as a "revolution" with all of it's negative connotations. Resistance to change involves many factors including tradition, political power and an unwillingness of believers to think for themselves based on Scripture and the leading of the Holy Spirit,and the unwillingness of the Church to release its "control" of what the Church is. A modern reformation would be a better word. Anger emanating from the "revolutionaries" comes from the fact that they seem unable to get through to the Church as it stands today and the danger is that they will go too far. What we all need is a return to submission to the real Head of the Church..the Lord Jesus Christ and nothing or no one else. The greatest among us is the Servant of all.....