Book: "Pagan Christianity" By Frank Viola and George Barna

Quote from the book, "WARNING: IF YOU ARE UNWILLING TO HAVE YOUR CHRISTIANITY SERIOUSLY EXAMINED, DO NOT READ BEYOND THIS PAGE

So I have heeded the warning and just started reading this book. If I didn't have to go to work or sleep I would have finished it by now. There is a great desire in many of our brothers and sisters in Christ to draw closer to God daily. If the body they attend is not complimentary to this inward longing of the Spirit then it will result in a mixture of frustration and grief to the Saint. While they mature on their own in their love for the Lord, their love for others, sanctification, prayer, praise, evangelism, worship etc... one of the fundamental supports and designs architected by Christ to aid them in their growth can end up being the very instrument that stunts it. There are so many traditions that the church has brought into the congregation that do not belong. This book will deal with many of them. It will examine with historical footnote the subjects it queries. Nothing is sacred in this Berean like audit except Christ. The authors will say that the church in its contemporary, institutional form has neither a biblical nor historical right to function as it does. Subjects catagoried below (not exhaustive) are but some of the items offered for closer inspection to the reader.

The Pastor
Sermons
Clergy Saleries
Christian Education
Baptism and Lords Supper
Order of Worship
Church Building
Choirs
Modern Funeral Services
Seminaries
Church Dress
Sinners Prayer
etc......

The authors will be pointing out that most of what is done in religious circles has no precedent in scripture. They do not criticise everything the church has taken in where scripture is silent, but they would seek to qualify that which is supposed to glorify Christ through the effort. They goal to be true to Christ's plan so that the Bride can be all that she is called to be. There seems to be a good heart and Spirit in this book given the subjects they broach and there is a Spirit of love in their writing. If you have read this book I would be very interested to hear how it has changed the way you worship?

Many of the subjects this book addresses have been struggles of mine over the last few years. I was reborn four years ago having attended church for 34 years prior. All of those years I had absolute confidence in my salvation and I was pretty much the model Christian. It is amazing how our merciful God can bring to life and open the eyes of those who have been dead and blind for so long, even within the church. Needless to say the sudden coming to life amidst the church body I had attended caused great difficulty. I now understand why and pray for that church hoping that God will do a mighty work within them.

I have not read the book but saw it a few years ago and paged through it.I had learned of these things over 25 years ago as a child and our church put much of that in play.So my warning is doing things one way or another means nothing to Jesus without love.I say this because this church put how they did church over people and Christ.Jesus wants to set us free from the "system" but if it does not cause us to love Him and others all the more what good is knowing more history.

Good book.

I saw it in the thrift store for a buck a while back...I passed.

Lots of information. Some of it was a little picky, but I think it is a book that all of us should read. To learn why we do/have done the things we have in "church."

It has made me look at "church" in a whole new light and really seek God in prayer about how He would have us worship and not just follow traditions. It has made us take notice and accountability for our actions and not just be followers of the system or man. I guess this subject weighs heavily more on my heart that others........ All I can do is wait for God's instructions.

sermonindex wrote:

Sadly I cannot recommend this book at all. It is anti-authority which God has established in his church.

Brother, with all due respect there seems to be a big misunderstanding and mischaracterization on the part of many Christians toward many in the house church movement and their view of leadership/authority.

Have you read the book(Pagan Christianity) by chance and the part on The Pastor? I personally heard the audio version of the book.

We do not not throw out the need for leadership, just a certain type of leadership which we strongly believe is unbiblical. Here are some examples of the misunderstanding I have noticed:

Question asked to Frank Viola: "Do you believe that the church should have no leadership? Doesn't the Bible teach leadership?"

Frank Viola's answer: "I don't ever recall saying anywhere that the church doesn't nor shouldn't have leaders. I don't believe that at all. As my friend Hal Miller has said, "Leadership is. It could be good or bad. But it always is." It's the type of leadership that's the issue. Official, top-down, hierarchical leadership is what we discuss in the book. When we trace the origin of the modern pastor, for instance, we're contrasting that office with the NT concept of shepherd/elders. . . a very different thing in our view."

"The next book(Reimagining Church) will explore the idea of leadership in the church in much more detail. And it will discuss the issues of "covering," "accountability," "authority", and "submission." It takes a very different view on these issues than what's commonly taught in Protestant circles."

Another question: "I am intrigued with your writings and am ordering your revised book (Pagan Christianity). I am wondering, however, how you are able to ignore the diverse, varied, and cross-supporting (interchangeable) descriptions of Elders (Presbuteros/Episcopos/Poimen) as active, accepted leaders of the first century church, as presented in the New Testament."

Frank Viola's Answer: "Hmmm . . . I'm wondering where you heard this or why you believe it? I argue for this very thing in the book. What gave you the idea that I reject plural elders? I certainly believe in them; not as an office, but as an organic function. Elders, leadership, "covering," authority, etc. will be discussed in the upcoming volume."

Another question: "Frank. Here’s a recent blog post. He first quotes from your book saying, "They will bring their own songs, they will write their own songs, they will minister out of what Christ has shown them--with no human leader present!" Then he gives his opinion, "Um... no they won't. They won't do much of anything without a leader. They won't even clear the 16 inches of snow (don't you miss northern Indiana Tony?) off the church steps and handicap ramp. They leave it for the "leader" to do it alone. They won't bring food for the food pantry. "Leader's" job. They won't even show up to worship let alone write their own songs. Barna and Viola overestimate the commitment that nominal Christians have to anything. Sheep won't do much else but die without a shepherd.” What’s your response?"

Viola's answer: "I’d say that this sort of thinking and assumption is one of the reasons why we’ve written the book. It runs deeper than we can imagine. It's job-security for modern clergy that's built on fear and helplessness. My experience over the last twenty years, as well as the experience of my co-workers who plant churches, is that God’s people can certainly function under the headship of Christ if they are equipped to. The statement about singing, therefore, is not arm-chair philosophy or wishful thinking. It’s been my experience over the last two decades. In my book, THE UNTOLD STORY OF THE NEW TESTAMENT CHURCH, I trace how Paul of Tarsus raised up churches and equipped God’s people to function in his absence and without a local pastor. Some say this can’t be done today; yet experience defies such an assertion.
On a related note: To my mind, the quotes in the book by top notch scholars and theologians are worth the price of the book. I love the one by Karl Barth where he says that "the term ‘laity’ is one of the worst in the vocabulary of religion and ought to be banished from the Christian conversation," as well as the one by James D.G. Dunn where he says that the clergy/laity dichotomy is the worst of all heresies."

Another question: "How do you address the Scriptures in 1 Timothy and Hebrews about submitting to leaders?"

Viola's Answer: "These questions are addressed in the book. They will also be explored in great detail in the next volume, "Reimagining Church," especially the concept of "covering" and "submission to authority." I believe very strongly in leadership in the church. I've never denied this. But I believe, along with people like Robert Banks, that it should be expressed drastically differently than what's commonly accepted today."

Why is it that when someone brings up this book or anything about questioning the way "church" is done it is normally about people that say it does not promote true biblical leadership? This book contains so much more information about every aspect of traditions other than the leadership side of it. In my opinion the book is not promoting leaderless worship. Part of it is teaching that the pastor is a gift just like the other gifts mentioned in Ephesians 4 and why does that gift get paid or on salary when the others are not? Why is the pators name always on the sign out front?
Why is the GIFT of pastor the only one recognized in "Christian" traditions.

Lots of men think they are called to be a pastor when in reality they don't function in that gift, but maybe a teacher or a prophet or evangelist or apostle. To me this is why so many men get burned out, stressed to the limit because they are being required to carry the whole "church" when in reality they should only be apart of the body contributing their gift as God directs.

IMO Until we get back to building the body as God directed the body will not truly function in the power of Christ. We will be lopsided, one arm, one leg or no fingers and wondering why the power is missing.

Eph. 4:14-16
verse 16 is the clincher.

14 So then, we may no longer be children, tossed [like ships] to and fro between chance gusts of teaching and wavering with every changing wind of doctrine, [the prey of] the cunning and cleverness of [c]unscrupulous men, [gamblers engaged] in every shifting form of trickery in inventing errors to mislead.

15 Rather, let our lives lovingly [d]express truth [in all things, speaking truly, dealing truly, living truly]. Enfolded in love, let us grow up in every way and in all things into Him Who is the Head, [even] Christ (the Messiah, the Anointed One).

16For because of Him the whole body (the church, in all its various parts), closely joined and firmly knit together by the joints and ligaments with which it is supplied, when each part [with power adapted to its need] is working properly [in all its functions], grows to full maturity, building itself up in love.

noone, good post.

brother Greg Gordon, I appreciate your clarification.

In your 95 thesis, your 5th one states:
"In most “churches” the priesthood of all believers isn’t acknowledged and the role of pastor is abused. (1Pt 2:9; 1Cor 12:12; Eph 4:11-13)"

I am seriously wondering what exactly you mean in that statement. Can you elaborate a little? It seems from that statement that you do see abuses in the pastoral roles of today's churches. But I am confused as to what kind of abuses you see and what you would like to see corrected.

The book Pagan Christianity and many others like it argue for "acknowledging" and bringing back the priesthood of all believers as you mention. So my question would be, how would you like to see it "acknowledged"? I ask in all sincerity.

Excellent article you posted Greg. thank you, very concisely written.

When I first came across the Organic Church/House Church literature by Gene Edwards, Frank Viola and others, I jumped in head first. I joined in three separate house church planting endeavors. All three failed. In retrospect, I have to admit that we were mainly motivated by bitterness toward the professional clergy. This is understandable. Organized religion is basically a commercial racket and the industrial clergy is an inherently farcical vocation. Of all the ridiculous things to do for a living, Professional Religious Person is the most ridiculous.

So the Organic Church seems like a rational solution to the Commercial Christianity problem. But in real life, it has not worked out the way it was supposed to.

The Plymouth Brethren movement didn’t work out the way it was supposed to, either. It began in the 19th Century when four Irishmen observed that there was no biblical basis for a professional clergy and that clergymen were largely responsible for all the disunity, error and worldliness in the church, so they organized a fellowship "run strictly along New Testament lines," with no ordained ministers. They were confident that this Church Model would end sectarian strife and provide a basis of unity for all believers. By the 20th Century, the Brethren had schismed into 48 warring factions. A whole cascade of divisions and subdivisions resulted from increasingly inane Baptism controversies: "household" or "believer's baptism;” indoors or outdoors; in running water or still; one dip or three; forward or backward. One faction, the River Brethren, added to river baptism the ordinance of foot-washing. But then a controversy arose: should one Brother wash and another dry, or should both functions be performed by the same Brother? They divided into the One-Mode and Two-Mode River Brethren.

Let's face it: there is no magical "church model" solution.

I only recommend the book for the historical study it provides explaining why we practice some of things we have historically practiced as a church. But I do not commend to anybody the ministry of Frank Viola at all. While highly sympathetic to the house church movement, and a major proponent of many of the things this movement represents, I have found that Christ is hardly the center of this movement, in spite of the prolific language of many who attempt to say otherwise.

Of course, there are exceptions to this rule. I have known brethren who were part of "house churches" that were some of the greatest saints I have ever known. But I have found saints who were of equal stature in more traditional churches. Indeed, presently I am part of a "mega church." And while it does have some of its typical institutional top-down issues, I have found rich fellowship and spiritual depth amongst many.

Indeed, last night about a dozen saints from my church gathered in my apartment to celebrate the New Year. I'm going to a hockey game with some of them tonight. Now, these things might not sound very spiritual. But, it has been altogether very organic, and even though we are meeting for purposes other than reading the Bible or praying, Christ still is the center of the things we are doing.

Yes, we do the other things as well. But, I say all this to say I am experiencing "life together" in a massive church, and in the process of doing life together, we are ministering to one another and praying with one another. It's absolutely fantastic. I've been a part of much smaller fellowships over the years, and have never had the depth of fellowship I am experiencing now.

Emergent Church Theology

Frank Viola and others, such as Rob Bell, Steve Chalke I would flee from there theology as fast as you can! They are on things such as the Nomad Podcast which is an open Emergent Church Podcast!

Jude 1:3 KJV
Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort [you] that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.

2 Thessalonians 3:2 KJV
And that we may be delivered from unreasonable and wicked men: for all men have not faith.

Grewing up in a House Church

I grew up in a House Church and there are many benefits! I struggle with these different church models and structures to me it sounds like more computer structures whether they should be hierarchical, to me they should work more of the servant structure placed by jesus in the bible! I know church has got to have a structure.

1 Corinthians 16:19 KJV
The churches of Asia salute you. Aquila and Priscilla salute you much in the Lord, with the church that is in their house.

Colossians 4:15 KJV
Salute the brethren which are in Laodicea, and Nymphas, and the church which is in his house

Philemon 1:2 KJV
And to our beloved Apphia, and Archippus our fellowsoldier, and to the church in thy house:

Intersting points made by Kingjimmy and Wayneman, which both make some good points.

I read both Pagan Christianity and Reimagining church, when they were lent to me a while back.

Now I lean heavily to the 'house church / priesthood of believers' type church. I don't agree with the head pastor, professional corporate style leadership model many churches follow and believe all members of the church are able to minister one to another according to the gifting God gives them. The only biblical authority in the church is a plural eldership, with each elder submitting equally to the others. Their role is overseeing (bishoping) and shepherding (pastoring) God's flock.
HOWEVER - I cannot recommend the books by Frank Viola, because although he makes many points I would agree with, he seems to me to over emphasise the points he makes and writes of in far too simplistic a way many things. He clearly has an agenda to promote 'his idea' of church.

I thought it a bit contradictory (also amusing) that he stands against 'organised church', but is going around speaking at conferences about 'the house church movement' and how to set up a house church!Just another movement.
We have been down that road in the UK. Back in the 70's there were a number of 'house church' streams that started and very quickly became very organised with a clear leadership structure of Apostle, head pastor, elders, deacons, etc. Some also became involved in the heavy shepherding movement that was around at that time. They became just another 'non denomination - denomination'. Sad thing is now most are into error of one type or another.

One thing I remeber Viola picks on is 'preaching' and says this is not biblical and says it comes from the Greek Philosophers, yet he fails to understand that scripture speaks about preaching and also the purpose of preaching.

I think that our only focus should be Jesus Christ and our submission to Him, not structure or methods. Zac Poonen seems to me to have a very good view of Church leadership and operation. i.e. No paid clergy.

There was a very good article posted a little while back by Pilgrim (who I don't see around here now) called 'Simply Stated' by Oliver Peng. My understnding is that this is written by a House Church person, but is very balanced and explains that just trying to go back to a NT church church model will not produce the life of Christ. You can check it out at www.thecloseddoor.com

Wayneman, I recently visited a Brethren church in my area. I think it is good that they believe in a plurality of elders and endeavor to keep that role in a humble status, acknowledging the equality of all brethren in Christ.

KingJimmy, good post. I would have to say I agree and have had a similar experience myself at times.

deltadom, I have had the same concern about Frank Viola's friendships with Emergents. That's why I don't usually recommend his books. There is plenty of material on organic/simple/house church life out there written by more sound authors. Like Jimmy pointed out, Viola's book is good for the historical info(He also makes many points that agree with most organic/simple/house churchers concerning authentic church life). The trouble that Viola gets into sometimes stems from his pointed statements without enough clarification or elaboration. Many misquote or misinterpret his writings.

Heydave, good post also. Concerning Viola's views on preaching, it seems to me that you may have misunderstood him somewhat. He is not against sermons, just long ones in church meetings, because they take up almost all the time of the meetings and leave no room for others to participate as prescribed in 1Cor.14. Like many others, he points out that "school of Tyrannus" type preaching/teaching meetings are biblical, as clearly seen in Paul at Ephesus in Acts 19.

All of the post have been good on this subject, each one has good points.

What is hard for me is where is the balance. I am not an emergent. I am very old school believing in true repentance, holiness, prayer, bible study, true spirit filled living, dying to self and so on......

I don't want to be a part of anything emergent, but I don't want to be a part of traditions just to be apart of something.

Why can't there be balance on this subject without throwing out the whole subject. What I am finding is that no one really wants to open up this "can of worms" this says to me that they are content with the system. That we just need to pray harder and longer and eventually God will move and a great revival will occur. Maybe God is waiting for us to really look at the "house" and finally build it the way He wants and then His Glory will fill it. But until we are really ready to give up our traditions and the way "we" have built the "house" I believe the house will either be empty of His Glory or only partial harvest will occur just like in Haggai.