M & M
We are now closer to the year 2050 than we are to the year 2000. If that doesn’t ruin your day, nothing will. But it has got me thinking about how different things are today than they were 25 years ago. And then I have to wonder—how different will things be in 2050?
I don’t think we’ll have flying cars or anything Back to the Future predicted. For all our advances, we’re still basically the same creatures—just with smartphones, larger TVs, and the ability to doomscroll in high definition.
In the grand scheme of the church, we’re also not that different from the early days. We still gather, sing songs, and talk about the Bible. Sure, the way we do each of those things would probably look a little ridiculous to a first-century Christian—but does that make it wrong?
There’s a framework some people use to evaluate church practices: it involves distinguishing between the message and the method. The idea is to ask whether these things should stay the same over time or adapt to the culture around them. That gives us four basic camps:
Those who believe the message and the method should stay the same
Those who believe the message should stay the same, but the method can change
Those who believe the message should change, but the method should stay the same
Those who believe both the message and the method should change
I realize this veers a bit more academic than your average blog post, but I bet as you read that list, two things happened. First, you nodded along with one option and thought, “Yeah, that sounds right.” And then you cringed at another and thought, “That’s borderline blasphemy.”
Like nearly everything in the Christian world, there are very smart, devout believers who hold firm convictions in each of these categories. Can I let you in on a little secret? Nobody’s entirely right—and yet, somehow, everyone’s kind of right. Call it church math. The same logic that makes the Trinity 1 + 1 + 1 = 1.
I say that with confidence because the view you think is heretical probably isn’t being taken to the extreme you assume. The person who wants to change the method might just mean using all the stops instead of just the reed stop on the organ. The person who says the message needs to adapt might mean emphasizing God’s love and justice for a time to speak to a culture burned out by shame and fear, not tossing the resurrection out the window.
As we inch toward 2050, the question isn’t whether we’ll still sing or preach or gather. The question is whether we’ll do it in ways that still bring people to Jesus.
We don’t have to pick a side between message and method, we just have to keep asking the right question:
What helps us love God and love people better?
That’s the kind of church ‘m glad to be a part of, one that can grow without losing its roots, one that can reach without letting go of the truth, and one that knows God isn’t afraid of change. After all, He’s the one who makes all things new.