I just read an article about “Atheist Mega-Churches,” which
claims that humanist gatherings that look like church but disavow any belief in
God are popping up throughout the U.S., Australia and Great Britain. I did a
Google search and found seven or eight article links.
These “unbeliever assemblies” are the brainchild of a
British couple, Sanderson Jones and Pippa Evans. Their goal, apparently, is to offer the
best of church without the God part.
Here's a quote from Mr. Jones as he reflects on his experience at Christian churches: "There was so much about it that I loved, but it's a shame because at the heart of it, it's something I don't believe in. If you think about church, there's very little that's bad. It's singing awesome songs, hearing interesting talks, thinking about improving yourself and helping other people — and doing that in a community with wonderful relationships. What part of that is not to like?"
You know what? That sounds a lot like what some Christian leaders believe we should do to make church better, more “seeker sensitive.” You’ve got to get on the wavelength of unchurched people. Give them an experience they’ll really like. Present awesome music that doesn’t sound religious, help them connect with other people like themselves, and when it comes time for the sermon, make it a funny, interesting talk about self-improvement and helping other people.
Avoid theological words and ideas. They’re not ready for
serious talk about Jesus. They don’t understand that stuff and it will turn
them off. Start with their “felt needs” and deemphasize gloomy topics like sin,
blood sacrifice, and hell.
I recently heard a church planter speaking to a gathering of
pastors. He was sharing what he had learned to make his church effective. When
he spoke on Sundays, he “got real.” Example: he told his congregation, and I quote, "how he
was “p*$$ed off” about something. But a moment later he explained that he would
never use the word “propitiation” because people didn’t understand it.
So slang and border-line profanity are recommended, but
glorious truths about the atonement (there’s another big word I guess you shouldn't use) are forbidden. (Maybe you could consider, you know, actually teaching the meaning of big words?)
Forgive me for this cynical question, but I can’t help it: what makes the “atheist church” different
from many churches that call themselves Christian? Answer: not much.
In our desire to speak the language of unbelieving people,
let’s also accept the responsibility to actually teach Christianity, which
includes many ideas that are foreign to our culture. With the attempt to apply sociological
insights, savvy use of media, and good leadership principles, let’s remember
that conversion is not a decision we convince people to make, but a
supernatural work of grace that will never happen without the intervention of
God. And in our desire to attract unchurched people and see our churches grow,
let’s not be ashamed of the gospel or of our Jesus. Without the gospel, without
Christ, what’s to distinguish us from a really fun gathering of atheists?
