Pagan
I just finished a review copy of Pagan Christianity? by Frank Viola and George Barna. This is a revised and updated version of the same book that Viola published in 2002. Basically, the book is an attack on the institutional church and Viola and Barna’s attempt to portray the house church movement as the only biblical method for the church body to gather. In fact, the "final thought" that the book shares is a three-step process for people to leave their current church.

Viola and Barna use the book to try to prove that just about everything that the institutional church does is pagan and unbiblical. That includes the building, the worship leader, the sermon, the role of the pastor, paying church staff and getting Bible training outside of the local church. Their overarching conclusion is that if a method wasn’t used in the
first-century church and was invented by someone who isn’t a
Christ-follower, it doesn’t belong in the ministry of today’s local
church. This, of course, removes the possibility that our God is big enough to
redeem advances over the last twenty centuries for his purposes.

Here are some of their quotes:

  • "If the church is following the life of God who indwells it, it will never produce those nonscriptural practices this book addresses."
  • "Almost everything that is done in our contemporary churches has no basis in the Bible."
  • "The stunning reality is that today’s sermon has no root in Scripture. Rather, it was borrowed from pagan culture, nursed and adopted into the Christian faith."
  • "There is not a single verse in the entire New Testament that supports the existence of the modern-day pastor!"
  • "Nothing so hinders the fulfillment of God’s eternal purpose as does the present-day pastoral role."
  • "Therefore, to our minds, these passages show that every Christian has the right to participate in ‘leading worship’ under Christ’s headship."
  • "Giving a salary to pastors elevates them above the rest of God’s people. It creates a clerical caste that turns the living body of Christ into a business."
  • "The one who plants a first-century-styled church leaves that church without a pastor, elders, a music leader, a Bible facilitator, or a Bible teacher… 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!"

One of the most accurate statements that the authors made was this: "Every Christian who has ever lived interprets the Bible through the lens of his or her own experience and thoughts. We are no exception." This book is the perfect example of that. I think the authors do a good job, as examples, of reminding us that we are a priesthood of all believers, that we shouldn’t hold our methods as sacred, that our methods may be creating barriers to spiritual growth and biblical community, and that we would do well to try to model the early church. Where I think they stand on dangerous ground is to take the position that their method is the only biblical approach to ministry.

In fact, to discredit the institutional church, they also had to attack the "nonscriptural practices" of people like John Calvin, Martin Luther, D.L. Moody, Charles Wesley and Billy Graham. Bill Hybels, as an example, has for years also taught and written about following the model of the first-century church. Needless to say, his interpretation of what that looks like as demonstrated through the ministry of Willow Creek is very different than the house-church-only conclusion of Viola and Barna.

It’s unfortunate that Viola and Barna chose to take this tact with their book. I think the church could have benefited from this historical account of the various church methodologies they reviewed. There’s a learning in that history that should remind us not to hold our methods sacred but to focus our worship on Jesus himself. The irony, of course, is that Viola and Barna chose to use their book to raise the house church movement as the one sacred method for gathering the believers.

By the way I’ve stated before, I’m not necessarily opposed to the house church movement. I’m sure for some people it’s the expression of faith that best helps them experience biblical community and spiritual growth. Though it’s not for me, it’s just another reminder that it takes all kinds of churches to reach all kinds of people.