Two Questions I would like to ask the regulars.

1. Aside from the opportunity to vent, what do you see as the purpose of this website, and is it accomplishing that purpose?

2. Can a person desire to do something in a church setting in a way that is different from the traditional way and not be considered a "change agent"?

These are intended to be serious questions. I'll give you my thoughts.

1. There seems to be the occasional worthwile discussion, but I doubt many minds have been changed in either direction. It still makes for interesting reading though.

2. The term "change agent" has been so overused and misused that it barely holds any meaning anymore.

I'm sure the moderators will respond, but I'd also like to provide an answer.

QUESTION ONE: "Aside from the opportunity to vent, what do you see as the purpose of this website, and is it accomplishing that purpose?"

ANSWER: This web site exists to provide factual information about a movement that is sweeping across the planet and infiltrating thousands of churches with a philosophy of “change” that is not authorized by the Scriptures. This movement is known by a host of names, which include, but are not limited to, the Change Movement, Purpose-Driven Movement, Community Church Movement, Market-Driven Church Movement, Seeker-Friendly Church Movement, User-Friendly Church Movement, etc.

As a brief review, the movement sees the “traditional” New Testament Church with strict adherence to all commands in the New Testament as outmoded, outdated, boring, arcane, uninteresting, culturally irrelevant, and not applicable to 21st-century society. Thus the movement attempts to redefine and restructure the New Testament Church as well as biblical doctrine to meet the “felt needs” of society. Believing that many people today are intimidated or turned off by “traditional church,” the movement uses a pragmatic, whatever-it-takes approach to appeal to church-goers. Unfortunately, this includes introducing a host of worldly, entertainment-oriented gimmicks into worship services along with a de-emphasis on strong biblical doctrine to make “doing church” more tolerable, acceptable, and appealing. Numerous, well-written articles on this site from Christian authors and links to similar articles elsewhere delve deeply into the movement and why churches should not subscribe to it if they wish to remain true to New Testament principles and biblical Truth. Many of these authors, including myself, have had most unpleasant experiences in churches undergoing “change,” and we have first-hand knowledge of the discord and strife inevitable when the Change Movement infiltrates once-traditional churches.

Regarding your reference to “an opportunity to vent,” in my experience, those who support the Change Movement and who oppose this web site are the principal ones that respond with the most hateful messages, who vehemently rant and vent.

Are we accomplishing our purpose? We cannot force anyone to make a decision. All we can do is to present the facts as they present themselves. But I believe that this web site has presented and will continue to present mountains of biblical evidence against the Change Movement, such that any discerning Christian who really wants to follow the Bible instead of the edicts of men will reject the Change Movement. To that end, yes, we are accomplishing our purpose.

QUESTION TWO: "Can a person desire to do something in a church setting in a way that is different from the traditional way and not be considered a 'change agent'?"

ANSWER: First, a “change agent” is far more than someone who just wants to change things around a bit. A change agent is someone who is dissatisfied with God's New Testament guidelines and deliberately supports, promotes, or introduces into the Church any practices, philosophies, preferences, or doctrines that are not specifically outlined and authorized by the Scriptures. Thus, change agents follow an agenda that is man-centered, not God-centered.

What specifically do you want to do differently from the “traditional” way? People who are unwilling to follow the Bible's simple command to worship “in spirit and in truth” (that is, specifically according to strict biblical guidelines) are more likely to “do things differently” or bring alien, unbiblical practices into worship services to suit their own desires. Changing time of Sunday worship, number of songs sung, order of worship, use of heating and air conditioning units in the building, etc., are harmless “changes.” However, attempting to make the Church more acceptable to the world (instead of separate from it) through worldly gimmicks (drama, skits, dance routines, orchestras, soloists, choirs, praise teams, rock bands, ensemble groups, other instrumentalists, etc.) and emphasizing love, acceptance, and interpersonal relationships over biblical doctrine (change agents often consider the latter as entirely “disputable”) are elements which the Change Movement specifically pushes. “Changed” worship services emphasize the “self” and strive to make people achieve a heightened “worship experience” for themselves, “feel good” about themselves, and have their immediate, felt needs met through entertainment and “positive-only” messages that de-emphasize sin and a judging God. Traditional worship services are not only simple, emphasizing pure, unadulterated worship of God without emphasis on self and without the “extras,” they preach the whole Word of God, the God of mercy to the penitent and the God of judgment to the hardened heart.

It seems to me that only those who are change agents themselves would feel that the term “change agent” is much overused and abused. It accurately describes those whose actions steer the Church away from the New Testament.

Since you were “serious” in posing your two questions, know that this web site takes a serious stand in warning all people about the Change Movement. We believe that this movement is a serious breach of biblical principles and must be opposed rigorously, as Matt. 7:15 and Romans 16:17 commands. This web site will not likely change the minds of those who have already been taken in by the Change Movement, as their responses indicate. But this site serves to educate and prepare those who wish to preserve the New Testament Church by casting the Change Movement from their midst.

I am trying to get a feel for the changes to look for in the church that would indicate that big changes are afoot.

It has already been stated in David Rhoad's article about the 'Secret Agenda', that some of the changes include new and more ministers, small groups, power point use...Now I realize by themselves these things are not negative or ominous, but if they are regularly used by a certain movement and precede church takeovers I think we should be alert to them.

In our church there has been a tremendous push and that is the correct term -toward evangelism, not only local, but for the most part foreign. Now they want to send the youngsters to a third world country, which a few of the parents are not very happy with;but no one will say anything about it; they just publicly say its too expensive, but privately wonder at the wisdom of sending their adolesents to a primitive foreign country for ANY reason.I suspect most parents will jump on the bandwagon.

They are also using the power point projector presentation for songs, and sermon points.We have already gone down the path of the canned fill in the blank pages to follow the sermons. During VBS the words _____ _____(name of congregation) FAMILY OF GOD were projected on the screen.This wouldn't have rung any bells except that I know several formerly Church of Christ congregations are now calling themselves this on their signs. I wonder if they were trying to get us used to the term.

We also had a great number of skits, and plays put on by the adults during VBS, most of which were turned into comedies, and so the message of some was lost anyway amid the laughter.

I guess none of these things are negative, unless they are part of plans like those that have been implemented elsewhere without the congregation knowing about the real and future changes that they might lead up to. It seems to fit the pattern, but I can't be sure.I do feel alot of pressure to get busy busy busy in the church, and I hardly ever see my children on the weekends anymore as they are always involved in the church youth activities. It has gotten a bit overboard, especially now that school has started.

We haven't had the surveys yet. Nor the third service.

I don't know how long they have been incorporated- hard for a woman to ask things in the CoC, especially since I don't have a husband....but in the last year they have stressed benevolence and missions much more than before.I know the 501c3 corporation structure requires that the organization prove it is doing outreach and community service.

As far as I can tell by reading this board, most change agendas are kept secret and most change agents won't admit to what they are doing anyway.Maybe they are just using some of the techniques and aren't going to go all the way with it.I would hate to have my kids locked in here if it seems we need to leave.
Are there any more things we need to look for?
Thanks.

The problem with detecting churches that subscribe to the Change Movement is that indoctrination to their agenda is implemented subtly and slowly to arouse less suspicion from an undiscerning congregation. But you can arm yourself against the Change Movement by first reading the movement's very own "how-to" book or "bible," "The Purpose-Driven Church" by Rick Warren. Don't waste good money buying it, just check it out of your public library. Most churches in the Change Movement have implemented most of Warren's principles and philosophies, but perhaps not all of them. After all, a church doesn't have to obey all of Warren's points to be a "changed" church. One thing many churches do that Warren warned NOT to do is to bring his form of "change" into traditional churches and totally disrupt them. Warren intended that only new churches be built around his methods, not that once-traditional churches should be destroyed in the process. But change agents, by virtue of the fact that they choose to infiltrate traditional churches anyway, prove that they are more set on railroading their man-contrived agenda than worshiping God "in spirit and in truth."

For telltale signs to look for in churches that are changing, see “The Church Growth Movement & Purpose Driven Church versus the Bible” at http://www.christianunplugged.com/cgm_chart.htm. This article presents a rather exhaustive chart that compares the unbiblical characteristics of the Church Growth Movement against the Bible’s positions.

Then read the most informative five-part article “Spirit-Led or Purpose-Driven?” from Kjos Ministries at http://crossroad.to/.

This information should equip you to be wary and on guard for any outside influences that threaten to disrupt a New Testament church.

I came across this website looking for a church that left the Boston Movement years ago. I was actually checking to see how it had fared. I apologize for not having the Biblical skills many seem to profess here, but I'll give a little background.

My father has preached in the main-line Churches Of Christ for nearly 60 years. This was completely in the deep South other than for some "Gospel Meetings" in Western and Ohio valley areas. He was a boy preacher who spent time literally sleeping on the front porch of Gus Nichols, who taught him to preach. He attended Freed-Hardeman College and got his BS at Alabama Christian College. As a child and then young man, I was a part of the 15-20 churches he has served as preacher or Elder. I attended Freed-Hardeman College and married a graduate of David Lipscomb College. I was born in 1955 to give you a timeline of my experiences.

In my "walk with God" I have experienced the gamet of vibrant churches with several hundred members and struggling ones with less than 100 strong. At the time I became fully aware of "liberalism" or "false teaching" growing in the Church, I myself, was struggling with the "deadness" and "apathy" that seemed to prevail throughout the churches.

The status quo in the South then, and likely even today is a church that has 100 members, maybe 2 Elders, a minister who has retreated into spending lots of office time writing to periodicals or forums about "Defending the Faith" to massage the ever demoralizing feelings of worldliness in his church and the creeping worldiness of his own clergy style existence. The church usually has one Elder with questionable spiritual maturity. The members give lip service to evangelism and daily fighting Satan, but are usually just interested in Biblical history and being "smart" about the scriptures. They high and bye after the sermon and maybe 10% can be counted on to participate in any "outreach" program other than some initial window dressing. Sound familiar to you?

In 1988 I moved to Gainesville Florida and due to my wife's urging and with great trepidation began attending the Crossroads Church Of Christ. My declaration to my wife was to leave at the first sign of "my" idea of false teaching. The church there was reeling and morphing from trying to untangle itself from its past. Though I was new and somewhat petulant, I spoke up against any practice of worship or teaching I didnt approve. I was not criticized for this much to my initial suprise. I attended open meetings where past abuses and false teaching was discussed and church leaders were blasted. This was at a time when the Boston Movement(Crossroads mutated step child) was trying its darndest to pull members into it. I watched Boston lure nearly 200 of the 600 left away. Poetic Justice right? The bottoming out continued.

When I finally settled in with the 300 that were left, I was amazed to learn that 80% had been converted from the world and had no C of C background what soever. The church eventually changed its name from Crossroads to the Campus Church Of Christ. It has never fully recovered from the Lucas era, but enjoys a vibrant fellowship and the pulpit minister is as solid as it gets.
I know many people were hurt and damaged by the Crossroads ministry. I would never condone the control,arrogance, and abuses that happened there. There also was a practice of exporting the Crossroads "methods" to other churches, and that was wrong.

But you could tell that something remarkable other than abuses and false teaching had occurred there. They emphasized daily Christian living and evangelism. This might have been accomplished at the barrel of a gun, but there are hundreds of people in the main-line Churches today who were converted directly from the world. Years later now, the International Church Of Christ has imploded, like you knew it eventually would. For all its damage, there are wonderful encouraging things happening with them. Many of their churches are throwing off the shackles of false teaching and discovering the joy of freedom in Christ. Though you may not stomach all of their practices, I feel like God is going to bless this happening. Please pray or send encouragement to the Campus Church and the ICOC churches who are embracing change. Forgive them, and think about the thousands they reached out to while the main-line churches sat on their dignity.

Why and how did these churches emerge and grow? There are good reasons and bad reasons, but the main thread was that they were something that stood apart from the world and emphasized Evangelism from the start. Yeah, I can type all night long about the abusive and controlling way it was accomplished, but at least someone saw this as important.

From Crossroads to Boston, almost all the top leaders sited the stagnant eroding state of the Church Of Christ as the genesis of their birth.......With all the things bantered here, Do we deserve all the troubles we are facing in the Church?

Richard:
Do you mean that the "the end justifies the means".

Joe McKnight