My Field Trip To A Willow Creek Style Mega-Church

My "Field Trip" To A Mega-Church


My son Alex and I were invited to attend a Saturday night service at a mega-church, one of the fastest growing mega-churches in our part of the nation. This is a report on our experience. I'll summarize we saw and did while we were there, and then offer up some opinions at the end, pro and con. My goal is to describe in such a way that the Quest people themselves could agree that it was a fair, accurate description of their service.

As we drove in, we were directed to a small parking area reserved for first-time guests. Everyone else parks out in front of the new main entrance on the opposite side of the building from where we were. We received a colorful booklet at a greeter's booth, which included a CD of a sermon.

We made our way to the new front entrance, and located the couple who had invited us. We noticed that they had a coffee bar near the front door, serving beverages. I was told that first-time visitors get a coupon for a free coffee. All the greeters were very friendly, and worse bright red T-shirts that said "Help Staff".

Alex and I walked into the auditorium and sat down. Alex estimated that the room probably seats around 2,000 people. There is a large stage up front with a two-story-high screen suspended at its back. Two other screens are up on the walls to the left and the right. The room was kept dark the whole time. It was not so dark that you couldn't see people or get around, but dark enough that your attention is naturally drawn to the stage.

When we sat down, there was a band on stage, and a beautiful young woman in a black sleeveless tunic was belting out a pop song. The lyrics flashed on the screen behind her. (I just learned that this was a hot song this past summer by the pop singer Rihanna, on her album Good Girl Gone Bad.) The theme of the song is that of a young person lamenting that she is losing her bearings and all sense of meaning or order in her life. The volume level was loud enough that my chest cavity vibrated with the bass line. The rhythmic percussing was accentuated by the bright, whirling graphics on the big screen, that pulsed at us in time with the bass.

The stage is lined along the top with hundreds of colored gel lights, hung from the metal scaffolding. Along the floor were eight spinning, rotating spotlights that could change the light color as they spun. I assume they were computer-controlled. They could do circular rotations at 360 degrees, and also tilt up and around in any direction Several times they shone directly into our eyes, so that we had to shut our eyes and turn our faces away. The volume was such that Alex and I could not hear each other speak unless we spoke directly into each other's ears, even though we were seated next to each other.

There were two plastic columns on stage, to the left and the right. They flashed and twinkled with various colors throughout the music, and also, to a lesser extent, through the message. There might have been a mist machine running, though I couldn't tell for certain if it was mist, or just dust reflecting in the rotating spotlights.

That band left the stage, and a different band replaced them. This was the worship band. The emotional tone settled down somewhat, though the volume level stayed more or less the same. Various verses from the Psalms were projected on the screen, as the lady song-leader greeted the crowd and then performed abou four contemporary worship songs. It seemed as if some of the crowd was singing along, but it also seemed as if many were not. Alex and I did not know three of the four songs, so we did not sing along.

Next came a DVD skit, projected up on the screen, of a heavy-set young man with a beard, dressed in a white shirt. This was supposed to be Jesus Christ, and He was answering the "help" line at a desk in an office. The skit was intended to comically illustrate what it must be like for Jesus to receive so many selfish, demanding, or just-plain-odd "prayer calls" from people.

This skit was followed by another skit, a live one on stage, in which a young woman has a conversation with God (God is unheard). She converses with God while seated on her living room couch, during her uncertain, artificial attempts at "worship" (playing Gregorian chants on her Ipod, prostrating herself, stilted language, and so on).

Next came the message, delivered by a staff pastor. The topic was "Hearing the Voice of God". This subject was picked as a result on an on-line Quest conducted, asking people what they wanted to hear messages about. The over-all series is called "Because You Asked 4 It".

The pastor spoke for approximately an hour. It's difficult to reproduce his message's main points just from memory, but the highlights of it were:

· God wants to talk to you, in a conversational way;
· you need a soft, pliable heart to hear Him;
· God talks to you in three ways, the Bible, other people, and by inner impressions;
· the Bible is the main way God talks to you;
· the Bible is the test (the "guardrails") of the other two ways;
· we can't "hear" Him because of wrong ideas in our minds about God, such as the idea that God is angry at anyone;
· we need to unharden our own hearts to hear Him.

The speaker cited about 10-12 different Bible verses throughout the message. I could not tell what version he was using. Alex thought it might have been the New Living Translation, or maybe Eugene Peterson's The Message. Object visuals were used at points. There was a large red Play-Doh heart to illustrate softness and pliability in God's hands; a box screen covered with a black stain, that illustrated man's wrong ideas about God; inside that box were thousands of clips of paper, illustrating sin and self. This was well done. It isn't easy to maintain interest for an hour, and the audio-visuals helped with that.

The speaker gave testimony of his own conversion, and an evangelistic challenge was given. He also praised the head pastor of the church as a man who hears from God better than anyone.

Then the head pastor got up on stage, and encouraged everyone to come to the building dedication this coming Friday, at which Bill Hybels of Willow Creek Community Church will preside. The pastor encouraged everyone to invite others, including people from other churches, and thanked God for Bill Hybels being his personal mentor. There was an offering taken during this time, seekers were encouraged to still come down to the front even though the service was over, and the meeting let out. It began around 5:50 PM, and ended at 7:45 pm. Our hosts told us that this was the exact same service that would be done two more times Sunday morning.

My thoughts, after a couple of days mulling it over.

I'm disappointed to discover how completely subordinate this church is to Willow Creek. The Willow Creek attitude, in my opinion, is that winning people to Christ automatically makes everything else you do all right. I object to this mentality. The whole Bible has authority over us. I feel this warping is what happens when the head man is an evangelist. Saddleback is similarly warped.

I recognize that what they did in this Saturday meeting was to consciously create a somewhat non-religious setting. By dropping the word "church" out of their name; by using a Rihanna song as the opener (because we came in at the end of it. I don't know what they did about the "s" word that Rihanna uses in the original), by using comical skits in which formality or fear toward God was ridiculed, their goal is to present God in a therapeutic, non-threatening way. No crosses, or other distinctively Christian art, could be seen anywhere. The assumption seems to be that the public feels only fear and loathing toward the iconography of Christianity.

I very much dislike feeling my chest cavity vibrate. Alex commented that all the flashing strobe lights made it hard for him to concentrate. He joked later to me that it would be dangerous to bring an epileptic to this church. Alex is nineteen. He described the presentation as "garish". I commented later that it reminded me of the flashing lights of a carnival midway.

On a deeper level, I have a big question about the ethics of using sensory stimulation to manipulate an audience. Is no one aware of how adrenaline can be used, to create a chemical substitute for the Holy Spirit? But because they were doing it to reach the lost, and that sort of show is what a lot of lost people like (obviously), did that make it okay?

Alex and I were both offended by the DVD skit in which Jesus was played as a comical, semi-hapless figure. The same goes for the live skit, in which God rebuked the woman for kneeling in His presence. God doesn't ever want us to kneel, or bow down? What about the Psalms?

Why do Christian people feel no hesitation about putting their own imagined words into God's mouth? Don't they read the Old Testament? Even the pastor told a joke in which God delivers the punch line. Where is the reverence for God? Have they never read about the Bible's prohibitions against false prophets and false teachers? Is it OK to put our own lame words into God's mouth, as long as we're doing it to reach the lost?

What about the theology of the message itself?

Many of the Bible verses cited were taken out of context, and were used to prove points they didn't prove. For example, Jesus' words from John 10, "My sheep hear my voice", doesn't mean that Christ promises to talk to us inside our heads. God's word to Israel, "I have a plan for you, a future and a hope", from Jeremiah, reflects God's bigger prophetic plan for the Jews. Jesus standing at the door and knocking was addressed to a church that was out of fellowship with Him. He was not speaking to an unsaved person there. That's a classic mis-application that I have heard used over and over through the years.

"God doesn't send anyone to Hell", the preacher said. "We send ourselves there." In a strict sense. that's absurd. Of course God sends people to Hell. After all, who created Hell? God. Who created human beings with the potential ability to sin, and as a result die and go to Hell? God. Did God create Adam's capacity to sin already foreknowing that Adam would sin? Yes. Who actually causes the godless soul to go into Hell, when he or she dies? God. So the statement, "God doesn't send anyone to Hell" is misleading. Even thoughtful non-Christians can reason that out.

Now, whose fault is it that someone goes to Hell? That is a different question. It is the sinner's fault, and not God's fault. Sinners deserve to go to Hell. Is God happy that sinners go to Hell? No. He says clearly, in Ezekiel 18, that He takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked. But don't try to get God off the hook by claiming He doesn't send anyone to Hell. Of course He does. It is right and good that He does. He is the only one who can send someone to Hell. Jesus said, "Do not fear men, who can only destroy the body, but fear God, who destroys both soul and body in hell."

The speaker said that God isn't angry at anyone. Does the Bible not teach about the wrath of God? If God isn't righteously angry at us sinners, then why do we need to be saved? Romans 1 says that the wrath of God is being made manifest from heaven against we sinners who suppress the truth in unrighteousness. Psalm 5 says that God hates all workers of iniquity. God is angry at sinners, because God is holy.

Alex's paraphrased comment to me was that the church presented God as if He's our therapist. I feel they presented Him as our "buddy". At no time did the message present God as being righteous or holy.

Do we, as lost people, have the spiritual power to unharden our own hearts? The speaker said that we do. The Bible says we do not. He cited a passage from the Old Testament, which says that we have the responsibility to unharden ourselves toward God. That's true. We are all responsible before God to repent of our pride and come back to Him.

But do we have the power to do it? The Bible says we do not. There is no connection between responsibility and ability in the Bible. We are all responsible to think and act righteously because God created Adam to think and act righteously. The fact that Adam sinned and destroyed our ability to think and act righteously did not erase our original mandate from God. But the speaker's teaching on this reflected the man-centeredness of a kidn of hyper-Arminianism.

The over-all thrust of the message was that we should all have on-going conversations with God. Some of the message was fairly standard "guidance" doctrine, but over-all it was very mystical.

I thought the head pastor'sclosing exhortation to the crowd, to get people from other churches to attend their dedication, was inappropriate. It sounded a bit like like sheep-stealing.

Conclusions? I will say this.

I respect what this church is attempting to do with this Saturday night meeting. One brother in the church I serve compared it to a Baptist tent revival, but for the 21st century. I agree. My problem with it is that they do it on Sunday morning.

The New Testament teaches that the Lord's Day meeting is for the worship of the Lord Jesus Christ by His people, and for their fellowship and edification. The Lord's Day meeting is not for the lost. It is a sin for a church to abandon that rule, just as it would have been a sin for Israel to turn the Sabbath into Reach-The-Philistines Day.

We should not ignore New Testament rules about church and Lord's Day worship. Uzzah thought it was OK to touch the holy ark, because he didn't want it to slide off the ox-cart on which they were (wrongly) carrying it. God killed him for it, without regard for Uzzah's heart. Why? Because the ends never justify the means. We don't labor under all those ceremonial laws of Israel anymore, but the rule remains forever true: We're never allowed to break God's rules, whatever they are. Just because we don't care about church government rules, or worship rules, doesn't mean that God doesn't care.

Our adult Bible class this past Sunday morning, regarding the content of the Gospel, dealt with an issue in which the Saturday night prteacher failed. That pastor gave an invitation to receive Christ at the end of his message. But he never presented the Gospel. He mentioned bits and pieces of the Gospel, sort of, throughout a message that wasn't an evangelistic message. But he never presented the Gospel. We need to be careful about that.

The Bible says the purpose of the local church is to worship God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Our God-given purpose is God-centered, not man-centered. Like four wheels on a car, the church has four ways that we do that. We corporately worship on the Lord's Day and other times, we teach and preach God's Word, we evangelize the lost, and we do good works of service in Jesus' name. The teaching and preaching of God's Word takes priority over all of it, because without the Word of God we wouldn't know how to worship, what discipleship is, how to witness, or what good works are. Worship is bigger than discipling, though it includes it. Worship is bigger than marriage and family life, though it includes it. It's bigger than missions, though it includes it. Worshiping God in Christ is why we are here.

So, to say that the purpose of the local church is to reach the lost is like inflating one tire on the car to ten times its appropriate size. More than that, to make evangelism THE purpose of the local church is man-centered. Evangelism isn't even God's own purpose for Himself. God's purpose for Himself is to glorify His own name. So that approach is distorted and imbalanced, just like churches that only do Bible study after Bible study are distorted and imbalanced in a similar way. A church that is all about marriage and child-rearing is distorted. A church that is all about world missions is distorted. The issue is Biblical balance -- maintaining a balanced ministry.

Contrary to the doctrine of the therapeutic deity, God is indeed angry at sinners, because God is a consuming fire of righteousness, and we are evil. But God is also merciful, gracious, and compassionate as well That's why He sent His son. R.C. Sproul is correct when he said that God sent Jesus to save us from Himself.

We at our church are in no danger of overwhelming people with sensory stimulation. But, even for us in our stylistic conservatism, it always bears fruit to think about how we do ministry, and that includes for whom we are doing it. Do we ever do anything with the non-Christian in mind? It seems to me, basically "no." That is our fault. This mega-church is thinking through carefully who their missionary target group is, what they want, and what they like. The missionaries our church supports do the same.

I think this mega-church meeting I attended showed a great lack of Biblical discernment in many ways. I couldn't be its pastor, and I wouldn't attend it. But they are trying to think like missionaries, and as far as that goes, in spite of my generally negative reaction, I think we should commend them in that area. We should be able to weed through all of it, keep the wheat, but discard the chaff.

Prophets & Priests, Church & Mission

We had opportunity during our recent vacation to visit with a Christian family that is deeply involved with mission outreach to a very particular ethnic/religious group in the Washington D.C. area. They sponsor and lead a special meeting in their house, and seek to involve religiously-observant members of their community in Bible study, seeking to lead them to faith in Jesus Christ.

Their methods are stripped of all local-church trappings. Indeed, they are quite cautious about the use of certain particular words, even Biblical words such as "conversion", because of their target audience's historic psychological aversions. It was very interesting to observe this family's adherence to lifestyle distinctives that would make them seem like true insiders to their target group.

It seems to me that the local EFCA church automatically becomes stagnant when this sort of local mission work is abandoned or neglected. Indeed, many of our EFCA churches dawdle in this very state of mission stagnation, due to the lack of mission work. It's one thing to enthusiastically support world missions, in the sense of financially supporting foreign missionaries, or even going out on short-term trips (all good things, and both of which should be more done than we do). But it is quite another matter to plunge into the colors and sounds of someone else's turf, not just with the Gospel, but with one's self carrying the Gospel.

A church with no local mission work is like Solomon's temple with no synagogues; or like priests with no prophets. The priests rightly concerned themselves with the apparatus of running the tabernacle correctly. Are the poles in good order? Are the walls going up properly? Are there holes in the fabric that need mending? Is the altar grate scrubbed and ready? Is this lamb really blemish-free? And so on. Everyone is expected to come inward to the temple. A fixed geographical location, with stated times of service and an administrative system to keep it running. This is as it should be.

God also thought there needed to be prophets as well. The prophets, for the most part, went forth. They took the Word out to the localities. The prophets traveled by foot, or on horseback. They went to Saul gathering his father's mules, they went to David's throne room, they went (reluctantly) to Nineveh. They stood on the marshy bank of the Jordan, in the open air, or literally in the Jordan. Later, Jesus used the prophet pattern by ordaining seventy workers whom He sent out to every town and village in Israel. He even compared them to the prophets, as far as reward for persecution may apply. These were men on mission projects. They, unlike the priests, were outward bound.

But the prophets were tethered to the temple, even when the temple was in disrepair, because the temple was of divine origin. The outward-bounding prophets called for fidelity to the law of Moses, which taught God's laws about the temple. In theory, the prophets were obliged to return thrice yearly for the mandated festivals. The prophets had their sins ceremonially covered on Yom Kippur by the work of the high priest, in the Holy of Holies.

There are believers involved in mission work who become so focused upon it that they detach themselves altogether from the local church, and this is sin. They value the flexibility of mission work, the lightness of administrative oversight, the quickness of decision-making, the lack of burdensome overhead costs. And these are good things. You can see in the book of Acts how differently Paul's mission teams worked, compared to how the settled churches in Antioch or Ephesus must have worked, with their elder and deacon teams, and their established pastors exercising authority (see 1-2 Timothy, Titus). And yet Paul and his team were commissioned by Antioch (Acts 13). They were accountable, and reported back to Antioch. They still worshiped on the Lord's Day, baptised converts, and partook of the Lord's Table --- both of which are local-church-oriented ordinances.

Herein lies the mistake of the seeker-focused church, in that it tries to turn Sunday church into a mission project. Or of rebellios groups who wreck the local church in their rebellion against local-church rules, pastoral authority, and diaconal oversight, as happened in the case of at least one EFCA church of my own acquaintance. "Mission" became a hypocritical excuse for revolt against a system of pastoral and elder leadership that Christ Himself set up.

Church and mission in the EFCA need to exist symbiotically with each other, with church holding the upper hand. A church without local mission work is in a state of stagnation and unhealthy self-absorption. But a mission team with no anchors down in a specific local church has to be considered renegade, even if they do reach people for Christ, Mission groups like this are vulnerable to the sin of the personality cult, and doctrinal deviations due to their lack of iron sharpening iron. Christ never said that He would build His mission team. He said He would build His church. Paul in Romans 10 said that those who go in mission must be sent. Sent by the local church. Baptism publicly identifies you as a disciple of Christ. The bread and the wine state that we are one bread and one body. We are a temple and a collection of prophets. We are a church and a mission. We are a denomination and a movement -- not just the former, or just the latter.