Search This Blog

Tuesday, 9 December 2014

Christmas - More For than Against!

Annual Agony
Every year, around this time, I find myself in an internal battle, which after the years have passed, has still not been resolved: what should we do about Christmas? The fact that the battle resurfaces regularly is a sign that my heart is not settled on the issue, but the older I grow, I sense the balance of my mind is tilting more for than against. 

Against
Christmas secular western style has virtually nothing to do with Christ or Christianity. It is simply an opportunity to indulge in excess, excess drink, excess food, excess pleasure, excess debauchery, you name it. Christians are called instead to be sober minded (1 Peter 5:8-9). I could easily live in a cave from December 24th-26th (with my family and brothers and sisters in Christ, of course, but away from the maddening crowd).

For
And yet, there are many many good things about this season of the year, and here are half a dozen.

First, it is an opportunity to visit friends and relatives. My wider family, for example, have an annual get together over Christmas, and it's great to touch base - in some cases the only time in that year.

Second, it's a chance to get some rest.... well kind of, anyway.

Third, it's a time for family traditions. Nothing wrong with family traditions. In our home, for example, there is a particular "Christmas" scent which we put on potpourri only in December! If we didn't roll it out we'd have a riot on our hands.

Fourth, Christians have the liberty to remember the birth of Jesus Christ in a special way. It's not proscribed, but what can be found against finding some time to remember the miracle of God made flesh, dwelling among us, identifying with our joys and sorrows ultimately to win us and save us from our sins.

Fifthly, thank God, the mid-winter celebration is not focused on some pagan myth, which would bring with it the debauchery that normally attends such pagan myths. Thank God that even today, nativity plays are still at the heart of most school Christmas celebrations. What a salting effect traditional Christmas has upon our near-pagan culture. Think of how more excessive the 'celebrations' would be without the influence of the Gospel in our land.

But sixthly, what a fantastic opportunity to share the Gospel with a lost world! Let's take this opportunity to invite people to Carol services, give them a free Gospel tract, and spend time with them, and pray that God may give them the precious gift of faith.

Friday, 5 December 2014

The glory of tradition!

I cannot believe I am writing this....
I don't know of anyone who is more against tradition than myself. I see red every time someone says "this must be done this way, because we've always done it this way." I want robust - which means biblical - arguments for doing things.

The New Testament has no traditions
The genius of the Gospel is that it can find a home in any culture in any age. And thus there are no traditions for worship in the Scriptures.

"But what about 'when you come together, everyone has a hymn, a word of instruction, a revelation, a tongue or an interpreation' (1 Cor 14:26)?", I hear someone ask.

If anyone thinks this verse is the last word on corporate worship traditions they are making two mistakes. The first is a failure to note the difference between the descriptive and the proscriptive. Paul is not saying, "this is how to worship", he is not issuing a command (proscriptive), he is simply describing what they do (descriptive). The second mistake is a failure to set this letter in its historical context. The first believers had no NT (perhaps a letter here or there), they had no complete and final revelation. For that reason, the church was instructed by divine revelations, as through tongues: that's why Paul includes in their tradition, revelations, tongues and intepretations. Once Scripture had been completed, the church had the complete and final word of Christ which is able to thoroughly equip the man or woman of God for every good work (2 Timothy 3:16-17): I don't need a prophecy to guide me today, I have God's certain Word along with his glorious Spirit. 

The requirements/principles of the New Testament
The New Testament gives us broad outlines and principles, but by the genius of the Gospel it does not give us any of the little context-specific details that mark all man-made religions, such as pray five times a day, etc.

The guidelines of Scripture are broadly and briefly that church life ought to include (there are too many verses to include here by way of justification):
  1. fellowship
  2. breaking of bread
  3. apostle's doctrine(preaching)
  4. mutual building up
  5. singing God's praises
  6. prayer
  7. disciple-making/evangelism
How these are put together, is left utterly to the culture in general, and then the leaders in specific to determine.

Enter, "tradition"
So elders then must work out how these different elements can combine in a way that honours the Lord and builds his people up. And once these traditions have been established, they ought to be open to change, but only slowly and carefully and prayerfully. Why slowly and carefully and prayerfully? Because unity is perhaps the first requirement of corporate church life: woe betide the leaders who introduce division on account of rapid change.

Tradition is a wonderful thing, it enables a specific church to fulfil its Christ-given requirements to the sheep and a lost world in a stable framework which builds unity.

100,000 traditions
All this means that there will be an innumerable number of different, but authentic church combinations of 1-7, which are all capable of building up the flock. 100,000 good traditions!

Our tradition
At Manor Park for example, we have the following tradition for the 7 elements above; we think it is a robust, biblical and a Holy Spirit directed tradition.....
  1. how do we do 'fellowship'? We have an opportunity every Sunday to drink coffee with each other after morning worship, we meet in home groups each week, we have an evening Koinonia meeting, plus other opportunities to share with one another
  2. how do we do 'breaking of bread'? Once every month on a Sunday morning, once a month at Koinonia and sometimes in a home group
  3. how do we do 'apostle's doctrine'? Preaching every Sunday!
  4. how do we do 'mutual building up'? At home groups and other opportunities to meet such as Koinonia, spontaneity opportunity is there at home groups and Koinonia
  5. how do we do 'singing God's praises? Home groups, and Sunday mornings too
  6. how do we do 'prayer'? Sunday mornings, home groups and monthly day of prayer
  7. how do we do 'disciple-making and evangelism'? Through the home groups and through numerous evangelistic opportunities that we take, whether mission to farm workers, monthly guest services, Christmas service, you name it...
We judge this by the Scriptures to be an excellent (but not perfect!) tradition, wholly suitable for the building of the saints, and faithful to the Spirit.

What if you don't like our tradition?
If someone came to us and said "I don't like your tradition", our response would be three-fold: (i) show us how it fails to fulfil the Scriptures, (ii) it's not the only way to do things, we are the first to admit, but it is our way, (iii) if you don't like it, you are unlikely to change it, unless God calls you to be an elder, so it is best to find another church: we bid thee God-speed.

For a radical antitraditionalist, that's quite some blog!

Wednesday, 3 December 2014

Modern Day Gnosticism - and how to counteract it

Old fashioned Gnosticism
In the days of the apostles, gnosticism, old-fashioned, flourished. At root it was a view that you needed some higher knowledge (from God, of course) to reach the high dizzy heights of the Gnostic Christian..

Poor ordinary Christians, like you and I, languish in the low plains of spiritual ignorance; if only we knew what they knew!

The root of Old fashioned Gnosticism
The root of old fashioned Gnosticism was, of course, devilish pride. I know something you don't, I'm up here, buddy, and you are down there; poor languishing saint! It really is as simple as that. A Gnostic is someone who is filled with pride, pride in what they know (or think they know). But of course, one has to hide pride, for we all know pride is a devilish thing. So a Gnostic is normally an expert in false humlity - and that's how they take in many Christians.

Modern Gnosticism
Of course Gnosticism hasn't gone away. It turns up in every church at some point or other. Folk either come in from the outside (the most common source) or arise within the church, who know far far more than that local church knows about:

  • how to worship in song
  • how to bring up children
  • how to organise church life
  • how to evangelise
  • how to read the signs of the times
  • what translation is best
  • etc., etc.

Of course they don't actually have a clue about these matters in reality, they just think they do.

The results of Gnostic influence
Gnostics always divide a church.  They normally first attack the leaders, and if there is a pastor, they attack him first. Of course, very cleverly, they realise that attacking the shepherd openly is not a wise strategy, so the opposition is subtle. Eventually, when they discover that the leaders won't buy into their gnostic myths they leave, normally in a trail of division and stumbling, including the stumbling of those who are naive and young, of course to the Gnostic's great spiritual judgement (Matthew 18:6).

How to avoid their influence
How can a church avoid the pernicious impact of the Gnostics?

All believers note this, one of the surest marks of a Gnostic is a critical spirit towards their local church. This arises out of their proud hearts. Should they leave the church they will carry the same spirit into the next fellowship too, until eventually they find themselves worshipping in a "church" of one, or one family. Another mark of a Gnostic is that they think (falsely) that God has revealed things to them in a special way. It may not be through visions, it may be through their own study of the Bible which they are convinced somehow advances them far beyond the dozens of hours which their poor leaders/pastors undertake each week.

If you are a young believer, be on your guard against anyone who speaks against the teaching you have received from your church leaders - you can be sure that such false teachers are pursuing a Gnostic agenda:

"I urge you, brothers, to watch out for those who cause divisions and put obstacles in your way that are contrary to the teaching you have learned. Keep away from them, for such people are not serving our Lord Christ, but their own appetites. By smooth talk and flattery they deceive the minds of naive people.." (Romans 16:17-18)

If you are an older believer, don't allow the Gnostics to judge what you do and don't allow them to  tie your life down with their foolish man-made regulations and laws:

"Therefore, do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration o a Sabbath day.. Do not let anyone who delights in false humility and the worship of angels disqualify you for the prize. Such a person goes into great detail about what he has seen, and his unspiritual mind puffs him up with idle notions...."

The high-faluten teaching, says Paul is actually, nothing more than "idle notions", that's quite a balloon popper, right?

All believers realise that, far from being closer to Jesus, a Gnostic actually has no relationship with Jesus - he is frankly self-deluded! Paul goes on...

 "... He has lost connection with the Head, from whom the whole body supported and held together by its ligaments and sinews, grows as God causes it to grow." (Colossians 2:16-19) 

All believers realise, that if the Gnostics leave you, they do so because they were never actually with you in the first place. This is of course not at all surprising because if they are no longer connected to Jesus, they can't be connected to his body, the church.

"They went out from us, but they did not really belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us; but their going showed that none of them belonged to us." (1 John 2:19)

This last truth is a great comfort. We would be saddened if dear and real brothers and sisters left us, but we are assured by no less than the Apostle John, the Apostle of love, if Gnostics leave, they show by their leaving that actually they were never with you.

A present danger
In the Internet age where it is all too easy to confuse knowledge with wisdom, outcrops of Gnosticism should not surprise us. Let's be on our guard and press on, knowing that His Kingdom cannot fail, in spite of all Satan's attacks.

Wednesday, 26 November 2014

"....but we love each other"

A "powerful" argument
One of the most common and powerful arguments used by those who advocate same-sex relationships is, "But we love one another, so how can that be wrong?" This, to them, is an unquestionable argument: how can you deny true love? Sometimes it is even given a theological twist, "God is love, so surely he must approve of any and all loving relationships."

This argument, in its most persuasive form, rules out promiscuous relationships, and asks us to focus only on same-sex couples who demonstrate monogamous commitment: what can be wrong with such a life-long committed loving relationship?, they argue.

The problem with love
The first problem with this love-argument is that in the end it must become the means which justifies all relationships where the two involved say they 'love' each other. If love is the final arbiter of the rightness or morality of a relationship, then it would be wrong to call illegal any relationship where the couple say "we love each other."

But what if the two involved are an adult and a child? You could argue that a child could not know if it loves the adult, or that the child is too young to know, but what if one day, clever arguments are found to "prove" that the child does indeed love the adult (and a child can love an adult, for example a parent)? If your only criteria is "do they love each other", you cannot rule out paedophilia. And what if the two are a brother and sister who are no longer children? We know full well that any children born to such a couple stand a higher risk of deformity, but how could you deny them the fruit of their "loving" relationship?

These simple considerations flag up the possibility that there may be a problem with "love" being the defining characteristic in determining the morality of a relationship.

It's possible for love to be wrong?
Perhaps not all loves are equal, perhaps some loves are wrong. Is that not a possibility? Is it not possible for someone who says "But I love her/him" to be actually wrong, no matter how loud their protestations? Most people reading this blog would say that an adult loving a child sexually was a wrong love, and yet it would not be difficult to find an adult who protested and said "but my love is real and genuine." Most people believe that it is wrong to fall in love with another man's wife or another wife's husband, and yet the adulterer will protest, "I truly am in love with her/him."  Most people reading this would say that love between a brother and a sister would be a wrong love.

Is it not possible for a human being to love the wrong person? If not, whence the tyranny of love?

These simple considerations show us that we all believe that some loves are wrong loves. It simply does not follow that if two people say they love one another that their love is necessarily, therefore, just by virtue of their insistence, right love.

Revelation is needed
So if love cannot be the arbiter of right relationships, since it is possible to love wrongly, what additional factor is required to determine the rightness or wrongness of love?

A good case can surely be made from nature itself. Heterosexual marriage makes a lot of sense.  A man's body is designed perfectly for a woman's body, for example. A man's body is not designed or a man's body. Severe health problems can arise from homosexual sex and from promiscuous sex. All of these facts ought to be seen as guidelines for leading us to the conclusion that an exclusive heterosexual relationship is the right one. But of course a thousand arguments will be thrown against this simple (yet sound) reasoning from nature, so where do we go next?

I do not think the world has anywhere else to go, and thus I can foresee the day when the word "marriage" will be used to cover any and every union possible, under the grand and seemingly incontrovertible banner "but they love each other". 

The Bible is clear
Christians who take all their theology (belief) and behaviour (practise) from the Bible (i.e. evangelical Christians) find very clear guidelines in Scripture. Taking their cure from the Bible is the same, they are convinced, as taking their cue from the Creator himself.  They know that in a fallen world it is quite possible for human love to fasten onto the wrong object. The now-fallen human heart can love all sorts of wrong things. "I love her" or "I love him" is no longer a guideline to propriety.
  • From Genesis 1&2 they observe that God made mankind heterosexually, and thus was designed for heterosexual love
  • From Genesis 19 (and Jude 1:7) we know that God was displeased with the homosexual sin of the men of Sodom (as he is with all sexual sin, we're not singling out homosexual sin, see Leviticus 18) 
  • From Leviticus 18:22 & 20:13 we learn that homosexual practise is an abomination in God's eyes (even though these verses form part of the civil law of the nation of Israel, they still have a teaching role)
  • From Romans 1:26-27 we learn that homosexual behaviour is shameful, unnatural and indecent.
  • From 1 Corinthians 6:9 we learn that homosexual offenders (and many other unrepentant sinners) will not inherit the kingdom of God (see also 1 Timothy 1:10).
There are simply too many statements on homosexual practise in the Bible to see it as anything other than wrong - and indeed sinful - practise.

Therefore same-sex love is wrong love.

Thursday, 23 October 2014

Seek wisdom not knowledge

"Many will go here and there to increase knowledge" 

Prophecy is fraught....
I do not know if this verse from Daniel 12:4, refers to the present knowledge explosion caused by the Internet, and I'm past trying to figure those sorts of things out. Ever since I read a tract which claimed that the bar-code system was the mark of the beast, I have lost interest in (and any confidence in) trying to interpret prophecy in a specific way....

....but one thing is for sure, "knowledge" has increased phenomenally since the rise of the Internet. I put "knowledge" in inverted commas, because not all the "knowledge" out there is truth. Take Wikipedia for example. Wikipedia produces a skewed secularized version of knowledge. If you were to ask Wikipedia about the origins of western science or modern medicine, it is very unlikely that you would learn anything about the Christian soil that was essential to develop western science and modern medicine (in the latter case, the soil of Christian compassion).

The beauty of knowledge
Knowledge is a wonderful thing, it is even a form of light. To know how a virus works and to know how to avoid it can liberate a whole people from an infectious disease. Knowledge is indeed powerful. In the spiritual realm we are encouraged to grow in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ (2 Peter 3:8), and urged to go beyond milk to meat, from elementary teachings to maturity (Hebrews 5/6).

It is worth stopping here and observing the kind of knowledge we urged to advance in, and here we are coming to nub of this blog. We are urged to grow in knowledge of Christ, which means not only knowledge about him, but knowing him better: growing in relationship with him. We are urged to grow in teaching about righteousness, which is all about distinguishing good from evil, according to Hebrews 5/6: advance in godliness knowledge/experience. And we are urged to grow not only in knowledge but in grace (2 Peter 3:8).

In the world, knowledge is about collecting facts. This guy has a PhD in XYZ and he knows alot about XYZ (normally a whole lot less than he thinks, says or boasts about). In Scripture knowledge is far more relational and ethical, it's about how much you know a Person, how much you know about godly living. 

The beast of knowledge
Knowledge, as defined by the world, the mere collection of facts, is almost completely useless in the kingdom of Christ. Indeed it can often be actually harmful. Why? Because "knowledge puffeth up" (1 Cor 8:1). Here are the two ways knowledge puffs up:

(1) Pure knowledge turns molehills into mountains
So I know tuns of stuff about one subject, and I lament the ignorance of my fellow brothers and sisters - and even leaders! Goodness gracious, why don't they realise the deal on THIS SUBJECT. Where am I going wrong? A volcanic island in the pacific ocean has become a continent in my mind. I think this is the most important subject in the world/church/etc. Why? Because I know about it!

Example: I do tons of research on Halloween and I am convinced it is a wicked festival and Christians should have absolutely nothing to do with it. But my church leaders aren't spending every sermon leading up to Halloween preaching against the evils. And then I learn, horror-of-all-horrors, that one family are sending their kids out trick or treating! So I'm through with that worldly church and I wonder if that family are converted at all (it could of course be that they are very young Christians....)

Where am I going wrong? There may be no doubt that Halloween is devilish, but I have turned a volcanic island of 1 square kilometre into a continent. How has this happened? Because I studied it for hours and hours and hours and hours and became a Mastermind on it.....

(2) Knowledge distorts the issue itself
Suppose I want to discover what translation of the Bible I should use. I spend many hours reading up on the issue and become an 'expert'.  I soon come to the conclusion that the best version is the RFV (Roy's favourite version). With the infinite pages of debate on the subject available I could prove to you (if you had the time or patience) that I was right. Of course, I would have been completely unaware that in the process of my learning, a thousand prejudices were shaping which books and gurus I consulted and which I ignored. But I am blissfully unaware of this and have now come to the conclusion that translation RFV is the best - and thus everyone should be using it. Except they don't, which makes me now suspicious of them.

The most amazing thing about the Bible is the way the texts have been preserved in such quantity and in such a manner that we need not doubt what God has said. Which translation we use is not the truth to focus on, or the debate to argue (or at least to spend much time on).  By insisting on defending the RFV I have really lost the plot: my knowledge has distorted the issue itself. 

What we need is wisdom, not knowledge
What we need is not knowledge but wisdom. Wisdom is the right use of knowledge. I have this knowledge, now how should I use it? What's the wisest way of using it? And since love is the greatest, what's the most loving way to use this knowledge?

Wisdom is the appropriate use of knowledge, wisdom is the balanced use of knowledge. Without wisdom, knowledge is useless and even dangerous.

Which brings me to my final point; knowledge should only be accumulated in connection with brothers and sisters to whom my findings and conclusions - and the effects thereof - are constantly being assessed.

"knowledge puffeth up, love builds up."











Tuesday, 23 September 2014

The Genius of the Gospel

One reason for confidence in the Bible
There are many reasons for having complete confidence in the Bible as the Word of God. One of them is this: when it comes to the details of "how to do church",  the New Testament is silent. Here are the areas of silence:
  1. when should you meet, day-wise and time-wise?
  2. what exactly should you do when you meet?
  3. what music, if any, should you use?
  4. what translations to use?
Human-made religions are filled with unkeepable detailed practical rules and regulations (pray five times a day and so on), but the New Testament is devoid of such details, and that is one reason for confidence that it comes from God.....

The Gospel is for the world
...for the task of the church is to take the Gospel into every tribal group in the world. This is only possible if the church, like the Son of God, becomes incarnational in that culture. If the missionaries stand outside that culture judging every aspect of it and trying to conform it to their own (cultural) standards, the Gospel will have little success.

The genius of the Gospel is that it focuses on majors and principles and says nothing about minors and details. Why? So that it can find a place in every culture and amongst every people.

Examples good and bad
I remember watching a black and white film from about the 1950s of a group of South American converts dressed in suits, hair brylcreemed, singing western songs in English to an approving church congregation in North America - you could read on the faces of the congregation, "these people are truly and properly converted!"  But this westerning of converts was an an embarrassing imposition of western-christian-culture and ways of 'doing church' on another culture.

If you go to many Asian churches in England, on the other hand, you will find Christians using Indian instruments singing distinctly Indian Christian songs (not translations of Wesley or Townend, words or tune-wise) and hearing sermons of a distinctly Indian nature (for example long and more rambling, rather than short and logical).

Our problem
Our problem is two fold. First we confuse tradition and Gospel. We think that what we do, as well as what we believe is of equal value and rightness. We forget that the NT nowhere stipulates that one must meet at 11.00am on a Sunday, nowhere stipulates we must sing hymns of a western variety to western instruments, nowhere says we must meet for an hour, and so on. All these little details are left to be worked out in the culture in which the Gospel finds a place.

Our real problem is far bigger: we don't get the Incarnation. In the Incarnation, the Son of God did not bring or impose the trappings of divinity upon the world, but came not only as a man, but "in the likeness of sinful flesh"  (Romans 8:3: as close as it is possible to be like us without any sin), and indeed incarnated himself into one world culture - Jewish culture. He would have been culturally indistinguishable from those around him, except for their sin. He would have dressed like a Jew, spoken like a Jew and acted like a Jew.

And we are called to reach our world in the same way.

The consequences of our confusion
The tragedy of our failure to grasp the Genius of the Gospel is that the world is so often put off by our
traditions and not by the Gospel. They are offended by ancient cultural relics in language (perhaps such as "thees" and "thous"), furniture (by pews and organs and tunes of a bygone age) and literature (KJV-like translations). They stumble over these and are put off before they have the chance to hear or see who Jesus is.

And in the end we complain that the fields are hard and stony, and we live in day of small things. While all along the problem is our refusal to become all things to all men to win them for Christ. We are more committed to our traditions than to the lost and to the Gospel.

Wednesday, 17 September 2014

Why Home Groups?

As our church's home groups restart for the autumn term, it's a good to reflect on why we meet together every week in homes. Here are the reasons, beginning with some recent history....

"Just come on Sundays and Wednesdays"
It is not so long ago that many evangelical churches in the West would encourage their members to come to a building called a "church" on Sundays and Wednesdays. This was all they needed, they were told, to grow in their new-found faith.

To be fair on that generation, since they had been brought up in a culture radically shaped by the Gospel, where persecution was zero and they already knew "how to live" because the Gospel had shaped culture, this advice was probably just about sufficient, even though not ideal - and certainly lacking, biblically. 

Today, with a radically secularised culture, "come to a church building two/three times of week" just will not grow the saints. Why do we need to meet together in smaller groups?

Because Jesus needed a small group
Right at the start of his ministry he chose 12 men "to be with him" (Mark 3:14). He the perfect man, the
God-man, did not think he could make it on his own but surrounded himself with twelve men, with whom he would not merely do worship, but with whom he did the whole of life. He wanted them to "be with him". We need people with whom we can "do life" and often a home group is where we find them.

Because we are all lacking
The Biblical view of an individual Christian is that of one body-part, an eye, a hand, a foot, and so on. By definition then, a single believer actually cannot function without other parts around us. Not merely around us, but functioning around us in living pulsating connection. I might lack wisdom on certain matters so I need someone who has wisdom to make up for my lack. Or perhaps I may lack knowledge and experience on other things, so I need someone with knowledge and experience to make up for that lack. I lack spiritual discernment perhaps, so I need someone who has that gift, who is that part, to make up for it. You simply can't get those functionings from a large gathering on a Sunday.


Because we all have something to give
The counterpoint to the previous point is that we all have some gift to contribute to others! They need us, as much as we need them. A small group is an ideal place to share the spiritual gift, the experience, wisdom, help, advice or knowledge we have been given. 

Because we need encouragement
In an increasingly postChristian culture we need encouragement. A few minutes of conversation over a coffee on a Sunday is surely not enough.

Because we need to be surrounded by examples
"Follow my example as a I follow the example of Christ" says Paul. How do we know what Christlikeness looks like unless we can see it in other more mature believers? As we meet with other believers we are challenged by their Christlikeness to become more Christlike ourselves.

Because we need mirrors
In their interaction with each other, the disciples revealed their own faults, such a pride, prayerlessness and faithlessness. If we have no mirrors around us to admonish us, how can our faults be corrected?

Because we need protection
A sheep on its own will be picked off by the enemy. A rumour about the local church, heard by an isolated sheep can be turned into a mighty lie by the evil one, stumbling that sheep. A sheep all on its own is thus not only a danger to itself, it's a danger to the whole flock.

A tragic legacy of the church aping the academy
One of the most tragic legacies of the church wanting to be like the world, is this legacy of big meetings in big buildings. The western church has aped the world and turned the church into an academy-like institution where all the emphasis is on learning, sermon-style. It took the less cerebral, more touchy-feely, more relational charismatic movement to restore the rightful place of the home group in the western church.

The blessings of home groups
Where they function well, home groups result in more Christlike Christians, for the emphasis when we meet in small groups is on character and grace and Christlikeness, not how much stuff you know. For pastors it means far fewer phone calls from the sheep because the sheep are looking after the sheep.

From a pastor's perspective
As a church pastor, I am deeply unhappy with anyone who joins the church until they commit to a small group, faithfully and regularly. Why? I know that their spiritual growth will be greatly stilted. And I know, that I, being merely an eye or a foot, cannot cause them to grow in Christ; pastors cannot replace the body. I know the time will come when they could be picked off by Satan. I know they are likely to be critical and negative because on the periphery of the church Satan will make them prime target number 1. I know they won't grow by coming only on a Sunday. I know that many wrong things they believe and many wrong attitudes in their hearts will remain unchallenged while they are not revealed in a homegroup setting. I know they will not grow into Christlikeness.

Spiritual growth is all I am concerned about -  I have zero interest in "numbers on a Sunday." I am only interested in those who like the disciples of old, are prepared to band together in a small group, for then, and only then, will they truly grow, not only in knowledge but in grace.