How to Start a Mega-Church in 7 Steps

  1. First think about yourself. To succeed you need to build a major corporation with a dedicated and loyal customer base. To do this you need to be professional, and powerful. They are your two watchwords. Being informal is akin to being random. Being weak is unattractive. Build a persona for yourself around these two words. It is fine to deliberately shift the focus from yourself (God is powerful, I am weak), as long as you don’t believe it yourself. It is up to you to do this thing. If you dress like a bum, then go and hire a personal shopper. You shouldn’t end up looking like a Mormon, but you want to exude power. Learn to shake hands firmly and look men in the eye as you talk to them (this is more threatening to women, but they matter less for your success, as we’ll see). Oh, and be male and able-bodied.
  2. Get up to date demographic information for your city. Find the up-and-coming area. Ideally it should be growing quickly, mainly through settlement by young adults. These people are attracted to areas with lower housing costs (because they don’t have large amounts of housing equity), yet have good disposable incomes. They bring in their middle class values into an area. And aspirational middle classes are your prime market. The same areas are historically not as middle class (or are not residential at all), meaning you have less competition. If you’re really serious about this, look for the same data for the whole country, or whole world. The biggest mega-church planters have been willing to move anywhere to maximize their success.
  3. Plan to run a commissioning service for three months down the track. Your first month goal is to recruit a small group of people to support you. You will find them particularly at smaller local churches just outside the area you are targeting. Go to churches, attend services. Seek out key people, ex-members of the leadership team (they often are disenchanted with their churches progress). Make it clear that you are planting a new church in an under-served area, and need prayer support. Ask them to pray. Take details. Contact them. Ask them if they’d be willing to join with a group of others in a short time of communal prayer for you as you “reach the next stage” of your outreach. You will, of course, expect these people to jump ship as soon as possible, but initially make it clear that you are just looking for prayer and moral support. Get 10 or 12 of these  people together regularly to pray for you, if some drop out, find more. During those times spend the majority of your effort on enthusing them. Motivating them to believe in this great work. Talk lots about what this new church will look like and feel like and how it will reflect the desires and the plan of God. You need to capitalize on the fact that 99.9% of churches are staid, repetitive and have no desire to act on their ‘vision statement’.
  4. Hire a great graphic design company (or better yet a talented religious designer willing to work on the cheap). Get a great flyer, website, and logo going. This will be your major calling card for the next 3 months. You will use it in your ‘outreach’ (see below). Don’t ever settle for crappy communications, professionalism is your lifeblood. Most of your target market will be used to corporate style professionalism. Cooky and home-grown might be cute, but won’t take you far. If you can write, then write a small book on how it is time to really move forward, fulfil the promises of your creed, and win the world to God. Focus entirely on the what, not the how. Self-publish it through Lulu, or a similar service. Have a bunch of copies to give to folks who might become your supporters.
  5. Recognize that most of your churchgoers will be currently attending other churches (you’ll typically have less than 1/5 new converts). Your ideal recruit will be an existing churchgoer and male (because men still typically have more money, and have more say over their family finances, and if a man goes to a church it is much more likely that his whole family attends). Keep that in mind, and take your message door to door. Eventually this will be self sustaining. But initially you have to talk to people. This isn’t evangelism. You don’t need to worry about converting people. Ask if they are church people. If they are, make a joke about not targeting them (to put them at their ease), give them a flyer and enthuse to them about what new great work you are going to do with your church. How amazing it will be. And how much it is divinely endorsed. Ask them about their religious and work experience (keeping an ear out for potential supporters), and ask them to pray about your ministry moving forwards. If you find folks who aren’t already into church, it is fine to just introduce yourself and move on. The goal is to get your potential market excited about the church, and hearing about it. Your goal is to make them want to “come and see”.
  6. Make sure your first year of church is super-professional. Accept no amateurish compromises, even if you have to spend like crazy, or cut something out. Find some great musicians. If you can’t find them willing to do it for nothing, hire them. Music has to be top notch from day one. It is a main driver for visitors to feel ‘wowed’ and to feel that your church is better than theirs. Invest in a good PA and lighting. Find a venue that you can quickly outgrow, preferably in the first month. Plan an initial sermon series about what a great work God is doing in the area. Follow the basic rules of TV series: hint at what is to come but don’t tell them. Make sure they know that the “Really Big Thing that will change this corner of the World” will be revealed later. At this point your church hasn’t failed to live up to anything, so you can make your sermons unremittingly ambitious for what the Church could be. People love success, and love to be involved when success is easy. Give them this ground-floor opportunity. An opportunity to change their religious lives. Remember most of these folks are in other churches, so you need to tell them what you will be doing differently. How you will support them (they will feel under-supported in their local church), how you will empower them (they will feel week), how your church will show the real power of God (they will feel underwhelmed by their religious experience). Power language attracts men. Never explicitly try to recruit them, but make the grass way greener on your side.
  7. From the very first service you need to be thinking about revenue. Initially it isn’t a hard sell. If you’ve done your job right, you’ll have a bunch of people excited about what you’ll do. They realise it needs resources. Appeal for support after your big sermons about changing the world. Appeal to folks to become subscribers, partners in your ministry. Have the relevant documentation to hand, and ask your helpers to get the signatures there and then. Don’t talk about tithing or sacrificial giving, talk about how God is going to change the world, and they will be the people to make it happen. People don’t respond well to being begged for money, but they will put money into buying something, something like a major work of God. They will buy the idea that this church will put into practice what they’ve been told to believe, but have failed to see materialize in the past.

I’ve spent the last month or so researching how mega-churches (defined as churches with more than 2000 attendees) get started. Those that are started from scratch follow a remarkably similar model. This list is drawn from that reality. Almost no new mega-churches fail to head this. It is pretty basic marketing, really.

Edit – June 11, 2010: A small bibliography of stuff I’ve read on this:

Eiesland, Nancy L. 1997. “Contending with a giant: the impact of a megachurch on exurban religious institutions.” In Contemporary American Religion: An Ethnographic Reader., ed. Nancy L. Eiesland and Penny Edgell Becker, 191–220. Walnut Creek: Altamira.

Einstein, Mara. 2007. Brands of Faith: Marketing Religion in a Commercial Age. 1st ed. Routledge, September 18.

Hoover, Stewart M. 2006. Religion in the Media Age. Routledge.

Lynch, Gordon. 2007. Between Sacred and Profane: Researching Religion and Popular Culture. I B Tauris & Co Ltd.

Thumma, Scott. 1996. The Kingdom, the Power, and the Glory: The Megachurch in Modern American Society. Emory University, Ann Arbor, Michigan. (PhD dissertation).

Thumma, Scott and Dave Travis. 2007. Beyond Megachurch Myths: What We Can Learn from America’s Largest Churches. Jossey Bass.

Thumma, Scott. (ed.) 2010. Database of Megachurches in the US.  Online at http://hirr.hartsem.edu/megachurch/database.html.

Zook, Thomas. 1993. An Examination of Leadership Practices in Large, Protestant Congregations. Emory University, Ann Arbor, Michigan. (PhD dissertation).

The Zotero RDF is here.

These are all more or less credulous, but are quite reasonable in comparison with the huge literature on Church Growth which, by putting the emphasis on the actions of a God, miss the point of why big churches really happen. Also it is worth saying that these resources relate to the (mainly protestant, mainly US) Christian phenomenon of mega-churches. Please let me know of any resources for other religious groups.

About these ads

39 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

39 responses to “How to Start a Mega-Church in 7 Steps

  1. The mega-churches in my area (I am familiar with two or three) started out as “bible study groups/cells”. Usually a religious businessman or industrialist would feel “empty” with his (always a he) otherwise successful career, and so start reading the good book. Later he starts having informal meetings with other like-minded businessmen (not necessarily from the same company). When the study group grows too big, the founder starts a church, and runs it like he runs a corporation.

  2. I have such mixed feelings about this post… on the one hand, it seems so coldly calculating and businesslike. We have a strong feeling that religion should not be like that (or if we are more skeptical, we are sure that religion is always like that (when it is not too incompetent to manage it!)

    On the other hand, if religious people are serious about religion in the sense of service to the world and not just to themselves, they ought to be doing everything it takes to include more people.

    Of course, I only want people who have an inclusive religious ethos to succeed. Anything homophobic, doctrinal, repressive, misogynistic, superstitious, abusive, etc. should not be permitted to read the post above.

    Unitarian, Quakers, Liberal Jews and any other group that is working for true justice and is truly accepting of all – study this carefully!!

  3. Ian

    @Qoholet, yes, absolutely. That definitely chimes with my research. Of course in writing a 7 step plan I had to compress some of the diversity, but that model is pretty common.

    The people who start these churches tend to either be successful in their own right, or come from upper-middle-class family backgrounds. A common denominator is money. Starting a mega-church needs reasonable amounts of up-front money.

    As for the study group, that was my allusion in point 3. Often churches grow out of a group that the leader gathers around them. For church planters who move into an area, they are usually gathered from that area (rather than coming with the leader). For church planters already in an area (which is the majority, but tends to be smaller mega-churches), they tend to be disaffected colleagues from previous churches. These may provide the initial financing and almost always form the ‘board of directors’ of the new church. I’ve collapsed the timescales somewhat, because I wanted to write this as a ‘how to’. But you’re right, the pattern is pretty common.

    @Andy. My motivation for reading on this topic was partly about how churches that were forces for good might take advantage of the mega-church model. There is a lot to learn there. It would make an interesting book I think – looking at the mega-church from a business and psychological perspective. There are books such as :

    Thumma, Scott, and Dave Travis. 2007. Beyond Megachurch Myths: What We Can Learn from America’s Largest Churches. Jossey Bass.

    Which are interesting, but look at it from a confessional (and to my mind very biased) viewpoint, which obscures the sociological and business side behind a veil of pious language.

    There are two things that I think are tricky from a liberal point of view. Firstly the early-stage rhetoric for mega-churches is often quite radical, and they attract folks who feel that their current churches are not walking the talk. This, I think, may presuppose a heavy dogmatic foundation. Secondly is the embarrassing (for them) fact that the vast majority of members of mega-churches are sucked from regular churches in the surrounding area. Because liberal traditions are starting from a lower base, this could also make it more difficult to get started.

    Of course I’m just guessing, because I’m not aware of a UU mega-church (may be my ignorance, I’m not totally au fait with UU, beyond the church I attend from time to time).

    Can I ask you a question? (I’d understand if you don’t want to answer in a public forum like this). What proportion of your growth has been drawing disenchanted members from a church background (i.e. who have regularly attended church as an adult at some point in the last 10 years – the measure normally used for this), and what proportion has been folks new to church?

  4. What proportion of your growth has been drawing disenchanted members from a church background (i.e. who have regularly attended church as an adult at some point in the last 10 years – the measure normally used for this), and what proportion has been folks new to church?

    Over the past few years, virtually no new members have been active members of somewhere else who have moved over. Using your measure with the 10 year history, I’d estimate (roughly) that only 10-20% are are “disenchanted members from a church background.”

    It’s important to recognize my context – this is London, youthful and diverse capital of a country where only 5-10% attend religious services regularly.

    Most of our growth has been in young adults and most of them grew up essentially unchurched, even if they did occasionally get dragged to the local CofE or Catholic church for rites of passage or Christmas…

    In the US, there are a few Unitarian Universalist congregations with membership over 1,000. The average is much lower (about 200?)

    So, if drawing membership from other congregations is not essential – and I’m quite sure it’s not for the uber-liberals like us – then that early stage rhetoric may not be needed.

    I really appreciate your post. It is very helpful to hear this from a more practical/less confessional perspective and it gives me a great deal to think about. Is it your sense that mega-churches can only arise from starts that intend to create mega-churches? I recognize that it can be hard to change from one way of thinking to another – in fact, this is why congregational size often hits very stubborn size plateaus…

  5. Ian

    Thanks, that is very interesting. Congratulations on achieving that growth in that way.

    It is interesting to think how a completely different tradition might achieve the same results. It may be that the US megachurch phenomena has those properties because it is merely playing to its own psychological strengths. And that liberal traditions could do the same by playing to their strengths. I hope so. Wouldn’t it be so cool to have a Holy Trinity Brompton size Unitarian congregation in North London?

    And talking of HTB, the answer to your last question is no. I was quite careful to phrase the article about how to start a mega-church. A sizeable proportion of mega-churches (maybe even a majority) did grow out of existing congregations. They do tend to do so with a charismatic and visionary leader still, and a deliberate reinvention. But they are contiguous to some extent.

    I’ve seen growth plateaux in business too. And there (as I suspect it is in churches) it is as much about the comfort zone and ambition of the CEO. Rick Warren, for example, every time he speaks you can hear his unbridled ambition – he talks about thousands more reached, percentages of churches involved, etc. He counts his empire in church congregations not individuals now. My intuition is that, often in churches, the leader believes in what they are preaching, and that can be distracting from the rough and tumble of building a large empire.

    I don’t pretend to have any answers. But I think it is useful to bounce ideas around.

  6. Ian

    Incidentally, I’m in London every few days or so with work (though I live in south Wales). Do you have any time in your schedule for me to buy you a coffee?

    According to my commenting policy, I don’t use email addresses you’ve put in here without permission, but if you’re agreeable, I’ll ping you directly.

  7. Wouldn’t it be so cool to have a Holy Trinity Brompton size Unitarian congregation in North London?

    Ian – oh my yes! YES! Imagine a few thousand of us out there lighting candles for same-sex marriage equality…

    And yes, I’d be delighted to meet up in London. Email away or phone me – all my contact info is on my congregation’s web site.

  8. Sabio

    Best wishes on your first mega-venture ! You’ve got the cattle figured out.

  9. Pingback: a megachurch model « Half a bridge

  10. Rebecca

    Rev Andy Pakula and Ian, you both represent what is wrong with Christianity nowadays. You don’t care about the bible or exegeting the truth out of it, instead you follow the philosophies of men. People like you are not lead by God but by Satan himself. You will make piece with the Antichrist one day and take the mark of the beast because you don’t know God. You have created and idol that supports your liberal ideas, so basically you are making a god out of yourselves.

  11. Ian

    How very nice of you to be anonymous ‘Rebecca’. I’ve passed this comment for publication because the irony of it will be amusing to most of the folks here. Pots and kettles and all that.

  12. How sad. No mention of God.

    Its clear that Jesus had all the qualities you described (NOT) he drew crowds wich in modern terms would be 100s of thousands – Just to listen.

    Love is the key as the bible tells us, Love of God and Love for the lost & eachother. This post has little to do with ether.

  13. Ian

    Not sad at all.

    I’d say it is *very* unlikely that Jesus would have founded an american evangelical mega-church. If you want to found an american evangelical mega-church, then I think it is pretty essential that you don’t act the way Jesus did. For example: being poor, wandering from town to town, where-ever you could get put up, condemning the rich, insulting prominent religious leaders, spending time with exactly the kind of people those religious leaders condemn from the pulpit (prostitutes we still have, and people of other religions [though our Samaritans and gentiles might be Muslims and Wiccans now], perhaps we should add gay folks and communists). All traits that would not lead you to be successful in the whitened teeth, television ministry and sharp suit world of the american mega-church.

    Despite its claims, american evangelicalism has nothing to do with who Jesus was or what he stood for.

  14. patrick

    The greatest and perhaps most difficult window the traditional church cannot see out of is the one that clearly reveals a mass exodus. God is love but the love that we’ve been conned into believing is powerless at effecting real change. Mostly doomed by ego, the traditional church is also as disconnected and unconcerned with an appeal to the masses as apposed to the passive progressives. Youth are not only a foreign object but closed minded, traditional, small minded ministries do more to alienate youth than to include youth. Mega is not just a size of church, it is also the size of the vision, an inclusion vision. Mega is simply a byproduct of a vision to include, empower and equip the masses.

  15. Ian

    I agree, I’d quibble about whether appeal to progressives is the problem, but I think the rest is spot on. It is the size of vision and the will to see it through which marks out some of these ministries.

  16. AtheistsJustAreCowardlyAntitheists

    Wow. What a fun, yet horrifying read. Are you planning on perhaps expanding it into a series of oh, say, ea. month you post a new point?

    A riddle:
    Q: What is the difference between a cult & a religion?
    A: In a cult there is a person at the top who know it’s a scam; in a religion that person is dead. XD

    “The more I study religions the more I am convinced that man never worshipped anything but himself.” — Anon

  17. Ian

    No, I wasn’t planning on expanding it. It is horrifying. But I think interesting because (as pointed out above by a couple of drive by Christians) it has nothing to do with how Christians see their own religion working.

    I like the riddle and the quote. I don’t think the riddle works (I think cults can be founded by people who believe their own crap), but yeah, fun. The quote is spot on.

  18. Shame. I think you’re quite succinct, yet entertaining, on these aspects. I’m sure it’d be trivial for you to expand on them.

    Re: religion & cults.
    I can see your point. Still, until these theist twits start showing proof/evidence for their BS delusions, all they’re doing is arguing the /size/ of their cults.

    Praise Discordia!

  19. Ian

    “until these theist twits start showing proof/evidence for their BS delusions”

    Not all religions are theistic. Not all Christians, even, are theists. Delusions are myriad in religion, and only occasionally theistic. I think part of being a clear advocate of reason is to deal with religion as it actually is, and as its adherents understand it, rather than projecting on it a simpler caricature. That isn’t giving unreason a free ride, or pretending the emperor has clothes, it is just not adding more delusion about the delusions.

    “all they’re doing is arguing the /size/ of their cults.”

    Yup. Academic religious studies stopped using terms like ‘cult’ (and to a lesser extent ‘sect’) decades ago for that reason. Often the only thing that makes a sect is that a bigger group of religionists don’t like it. And a cult is just a pejorative way of talking about a small and relatively new religious movement. So yeah, no argument from me, the only thing that separates a small cult from a world-religion is power of numbers, and often, political power.

  20. Vizion

    If the Devil had written this article it would not look any different at all.
    Everything you say is all fleshly, worldly, devilish “wisdom”. You make me sick.

  21. Ian

    And what makes you think that setting up a mega-church isn’t “fleshly, worldly, devilish ‘wisdom'”? Don’t shoot the messenger if you don’t like the way the church really works!

  22. Vizion

    I didn’t say it wasn’t. I just pointed out for others who may be interested to know the origin of the ideas. By the way: Satan has a church too (Rev 2:13), so saying “the way the church really works” means absolutely nothing. It depends on what church you’re referring to. The one that Christ purchased with His blood is still lead by Him and uses no gimics to build a crowd.

  23. Ian

    ” so saying “the way the church really works” means absolutely nothing”

    Not really. I’m not making any claim about all churches here. But if you look at the actual story of the way many of these kinds of churches are founded, it matches this pattern.

    When their pastors talk about it, they dress it up in lots of spiritual language of course, and drop bits of scripture into the story (e.g. you might talk about targeting men as “a vision for energising men”). But underneath that, this is what happens, very often.

    So that is important, if as you say, that method is devilish. It means that you need to not listen to what a pastor preaches, or have a cursory glance at their life. But you need to really understand the mechanics of how the church is governed, and how it runs.

    For example, how about asking what proportion of the people in the church came to the church from other congregations? That tells you whether the church is really trying to reach out, or whether its growth was on the back of other groups.

    If you really think these methods are devilish, then surely it means you need to make very sure that you aren’t associating with people or churches, or denominations that use them.

  24. Vizion

    I agree with your description of how a mega-church functions.
    My point of view has to do with why and the purpose of it.

    Here’s some questions to consider:
    1. Why would someone desire to build a mega church?
    2. Does God have anything to do with this approach?
    3. Is God pleased with this strategy?
    4. What makes this a “church”? A Buddhist, Hindu, Muslim, motivated speaker, etc can follow the same approach and achieve the same thing. Is “that” a church?
    5. Should a Christian that desires to follow God as outlined and commanded in the Bible follow these instructions?
    6. Do any (or all) of these points violate Biblical principles and commandments?

    I think the article can mislead people to believe that this is what they should follow to achieve success in God’s eyes.

    As long as the distinction is made clear that the article only claims how to build a mega church and is not concerned about what God thinks of it, or the fact that each point is in direct violation of scripture, then we’re good.
    If someone’s goal is to “energize the people” then I’m fine with the description, although I would argue that other methods like juicing, energy drinks, drugs, coke, starches and energizer bunny can provide good sources of energizing if that’s what someone is into.

  25. Ian

    These are all good questions. Thank you for asking them.

    I think that very often what someone does, and what they think / say about what they are doing can be different.

    So you can do something not very honorable, but yet present it to others (and think of it yourself) as being scriptural, or God-honoring. And that is part of the problem. When stripped of the Christian language, you get something like my post. When stripped of the Christian language, could this apply to any religion – or even to building a company or a golf club? Yes, I think it can, in fact I think this approach is just entrepreneurship applied to religion. It treats church as something that people buy, and if you want to win market share, you have to be the whizzyist church on the block. Unfortunately I think that *is* how church works, for many people. Though I don’t think that is how it *should* work.

    My big concern is that too many people fall for the story and don’t see this. If someone quotes enough scripture, and says “Lord, Lord” enough, many people follow them, regardless of how they run the church. Clever justification can make even the most cynical manipulation seem scriptural.

    As to whether this post promotes this approach. I hoped the cynicism and unpleasantness of it would be obvious. The aim of the post was to draw attention to the gap between what is claimed, and what is actually done. As I said at the end, much of what is written in the ‘church growth movement’ is this kind of thing, just dressed with a few ‘Jesus’s and ‘God’s here and there and decorated with a few scriptures.

    So, since we’re in danger of agreeing. At least in some of this. Do I still make you sick? ;)

  26. Vizion

    Well, since you’re changing your position to “I don’t think it should be like this”, then yes, we might be in danger of agreeing :-)

    My point is, one only needs to read the Bible to know what God thinks of the state of the church today (Rev 3:16,17).

    But just because that is the state of the church (especially in America) it doesn’t justify it or deserve any attention in replicating it.

    Yes, there is a gap in what is proclaimed and what is done, and the more you get into the Bible the more you understand it.

    After all, God has commanded us (Eph 5:6):

    Let no man deceive you with vain words: for because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience.

    and than again: (2Thess 2:3a)

    Let no man deceive you by any means:

    So the reason “they” are getting away with these tactics is because the church has stopped listening to the Bible and:

    For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; (2Tim 4:3)

  27. Ian

    Fair enough. I’m not changing position. I have no great love for industrial American mega-churches, nor any desire to see more of them. I also agree that most popular religion is unhealthy.

    But I’m also sure we wouldn’t agree on most things outside of that!

    Thanks for your comments. I’m happy to have them here as a Christian viewpoint on why this isn’t healthy.

  28. Vizion

    Sure, thanks for allowing me to comment.

    My last thought is that there is an alternative and a Christian is given no option to quit just because many (most) are conforming to a non-biblical approach. The church is still God’s vehicle of proclaiming the truth and reaching the world.

    One has to use some simple judgment in telling them apart, and … did I mention that the Bible is really good at setting those things straight :-)

  29. Rolando

    Ian, just changing channels. This post brought my attention. Unfortunately I’ll have to agree on this, which essentially points to what is wrong with “corporate christianity, USA”. Just don’t lose focus to the fact that institutional religion does not reflect Jesus teachings at all. There is some paralellism with the religious structures of Judea, circa 30 A.C.

  30. Ian

    No, indeed. I try not to judge Christianity on the basis of corporate Christian morality or teachings. A lot of my family and friends are Christians, who have a very different model of what it means to be a faithful follower of Christ. So I don’t confuse this with how Christianity should be.

    But I also wonder whether this approach is necessarily bad, intrinsically. A charismatic and energetic leader with a clear vision and a way to communicate can change the world. For the worse, yes, but also for the better. So as someone who wants to see the world change, I’m conflicted about whether the structure is inherently wrong, or whether it just becomes wrong in the hands of those who’s theology I object to!

  31. Rolando

    Good question. I also wonder whether this approach is “acceptable” or not, from the evangelical message standpoint. Sadly, more often than not experience shows that those using this approach end up propagating a theology not aligned with the Sermon of the Mount, but rather with a strange mix of “positive thinking” and materialism.

  32. Ian

    Yup, I think the danger is that, if you submit yourself to the power of marketing, it is tempting to submit to the will of the market. And most people don’t want “dying to oneself”, they want positive thinking and a religious figleaf over their consumerism. So it isn’t surprising that you end up with folks like Joel Osteen.

    See, we agree on stuff Rolando!

  33. Rolando

    Joel Osteen…the best example of this new breed of “Norman Vincent Peale meets Donald Trump”. “Dying to oneself”???? No, they don’t know what that means. Christianity needs to get back to its roots of compassion and social justice if it is to survive as an institution, remain relevant and cease to be the atheist making machine it is today.

  34. Prophet j.c

    It is a wonderful experience.

  35. Pastor Jona Rotich

    Thank you i am planing to plant mega chuch.i need more advise

  36. Pingback: Mark 11:11-25 Faith without Fruit | All for Christ – a pastor's blog

  37. Tim Scott

    One of the saddest things I’ve ever read regarding the church. How did the church become a corporation?

  38. Ian

    The church has long tried to replicate secular power.
    When the early Christians decided what to call their groups, they chose “ekklesia”, a secular term meaning the ‘assembly’ or perhaps ‘council’ of a town.

    For more than a thousand years, when power was defined by kings and emperors, the church had its own divinely appointed chief.

    I guess it is only human to look around and the great secular institutions of the day, and try to get a piece of that action. In the baby boomer generation, that institution was the multinational corporation, with the pastor as its Forbes-style CEO.

    But I agree with what I infer is your subtext. That the church apes the structures of secular power and by doing so spreads its power and influence, does not mean it is fulfilling its core purpose.

  39. You could turn this into a bestselling book, you know.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s