New Hope Bible Church Website: An Ongoing Conversation

Interestingly after this morning’s comments about the research project by Ellison Research, I read Melanie’s respond to Pastor Jon’s initial post in which she wrote the following (in part):

Maybe an idea would be to have a number of committed people from church who would maintain blogs. these blogs could all be accessed through a link on the main page. That way an unbeliever could get a better idea of what kind of people he’s going to encounter at church if he decides to visit. That would also give these bloggers an opportunity to be a witness, yet show that they are just normal people, possibly with similar life experiences and interests.

Yes! It’s great to hear this concept being discussed!

Phil added this comment:

When I moved to a new area recently, it was very important for me (a believer) to access the information that Mr. Johnson said was not important to unbelievers. Most people have some small link to these things on their opening page. The rest of the opening page could be something that appeals to a wider audience or channels people to one of these other areas.

Part of the reason I was so decisive in what I wrote in the white paper was because I wanted to convey a certain amount of shock factor, primarily because the idea that an unbeliever wouldn’t care about our service times, etc. is so foreign to our minds as believers that we sometimes can’t begin to grasp it. But it’s true.

Obviously, not many churches would be willing to eliminate this information completely from their websites (nor should they probably). What I was trying to point out in the original white paper (and I may not have done a good job of this) is that we give that information too much prominence on our websites. Yes, include the information. Just don’t make it the core content on your website.

Joel has a number of important things to say, among which is this:

The business of the church and what a church does is not something that market research can understand. The business of a church and what a church does is not something that an unbeliever can understand. They view the goals and purposes of a church, at best, obliquely. For this reason, what they say is not a consideration. Their thoughts should not impact your presence on the web ....

Is there a timeless method of evangelism - or should it change? My answer is that the scripture gives all the method - and it is foolishness to the marketers of 1st Century Corinth and of 21st Century Columbus. It is proclamation of the Gospel. We announce it, we don’t jazz it up with music, or bring it home with sentimental inviatations, but we rely on the method God gave, knowing that the only persuasion is a Divine and Supernatural light imparted directly to the soul.

Joel might be surprised to learn that I agree wholeheartedly. I do not think that the message or the method of evangelism should be different than what we see revealed in the New Testament. I would say, however, that seeing the New Testament as advocating the simple proclamation of the Gospel as the biblical method of evangelism misses a bit of the context.

In the New Testament, the context that we often fail to see is the depth of community which existed between believers. The proclamation of the Gospel in the New Testament has as its context, as its platform, the depth of authentic community experienced by the first century believers. That level of community is often assumed in the New Testament, it seems to me, rather than explicity declared.

A few passages of Scripture to back up my point (I’m paraphrasing these from memory, so I may not have the words exactly right):

1. John 17:21-23 - Jesus says that if His disciples are one, if they are perfected in unity, then the world will know that the Father loves them and that the Father sent Jesus (and I believe this includes an understanding of the reason why the Father sent Jesus). I believe the converse is true - to the extent that Jesus’ disciples today are not one, are not perfected in unity, then to that same extent, the world will fail to understand the Father’s love and Jesus’ mission. And so if someone prays the sinner’s prayer, but has no exposure to authentic Christian community (and I would even say “experience of,” to the extent that an unbeliever can experience Christian community), then I have real doubts about their salvation because I don’t believe they understand the Father’s love or Jesus’ mission. Without that understanding, what good is it to repeat formulaic words?

2. Acts 2:42-47 - it’s amazing to me how many of the characteristics (almost all) of the first century church which are named here are descriptions of the depth of the community which was being lived out by first century believers. And then after all of those rich aspects are described, Luke says that the first century church was enjoying favor with all the people and the Lord was adding to their number every day.

3. Luke 10:1-7 - Jesus sent out the seventy two by two, resulting in some sense of instant community. The seventy were to seek out “a man of peace” (one open to the Word of the Kingdom) in every city they visited and then stay in that person’s house. The community originally present between the two disciples would expand to include the family they stayed with (and when they left that city, a believing community would remain). That community became the context and a platform for the proclamation of the good news.

4. 1 Thessalonians 1-2 (especially 1:4-5) - “knowing, brethren beloved by God, His choice of you; for our gospel did not come to you in word only, but also in power and in the Holy Spirit and with full conviction; just as you know what kind of men we proved to be among you for your sake.” (I quote this one from the New American Standard because I went to an online Bible to confirm the verse reference). The power of the Gospel to change lives finds it foundation in the way the apostolic band lived their lives among the Thessalonians. The depth of community which was demonstrated by the apostolic band (among themselves and among the larger community of Thessalonians) gave a certain amount of confirmation to the message that was preached. Paul frequently (I won’t say “always” without studying it) traveled with others. There was a built-in aspect of community to his method of evangelism.

I do not believe in evangelizing unbelievers over the web, except in cases where there is no local expression of the church readily accessible (in creative access nations, for example). In fact, I even discourage churches (although none have listened to me yet!) to not include a plan of salvation on their website. My entire objective in advocating the approach of sharing the stories of members of congregations on a website is to go to where unbelievers are in today’s world (on the web) and intrigue them enough (through the stories) to want to be exposed to and experience authentic Christian community. It is in the context of that community that the Gospel is proclaimed (either through preaching or through one-on-one sharing of the truth).

Pastor Jon added these words:

I think Johnson’s point is, don’t blow the opportunity by creating a “saints only” presence. Be creative, and build a portal that may be a catalyst to a relationship with an unbeliever. The portal is not the gospel, it is not a method of sharing the gospel, and it is simply a building block to a relationship in which gospel seeds may be planted. I may be giving Johnson too much credit here, but that is my interpretation. It is also why I don’t have problem with some amount of energy being expended toward that end.

Jon, you understand exactly what I’m getting at. The portal is the means by which relationships can be formed between believers and unbelievers. It is in the context of those relationships that the Gospel is preached and confirmed (through our godly lifestyle).

In Pastor Jon’s most recent post on the subject, he adds this in his wrapup of the discussion that took place over the few weeks before (I’m only quoting a bit here, but I would encourage you to go and read all of Pastor Jon’s article as he has some very important things to say about the way effective evangelism happens):

Whether or not we should design a site, or a site portal, aimed specifically at the unchurched is another animal.  I think it is an intriguing idea and worth pursuing, but I don’t believe it should be one of the main focuses of our ministry.  Here is why--we emphasize natural, relational evangelism in our spheres of influence external to the church environment.

Obviously, every church has their own leading from the Lord on these issues. I would only point out that my philosophy of how a church website should be developed has as its purpose to facilitate “natural, relational evangelism in our spheres of influence external to the church environment” as quickly as possible. My goal is to use the stories of real people to introduce unbelievers to believers around common life interests so that natural, relational evangelism can take place in wider spheres of influence than we have known to date. I want more unbelievers to learn about our people and want to meet them personally in face-to-face relationships. Those relationships (and the exposure to authentic Christian community which follows through the unbeliever perhaps being introduced to the believer’s circle of friends) become the foundation and context of the proclamation of the Gospel.