Alan Adams - Return to Simple Church

WHAT ABOUT CHURCH 3.0? | August 30, 2011

What follows is part of the Introduction to Neil Cole’s fantastic book CHURCH 3.0 –

There have been two major upgrades in church formation,
since Acts, that have changed the entire system. The fi rst occurred
dramatically during the rule of the Emperor Constantine. The
church shifted from an underground, grassroots, organic movement
to a more institutionalized organization. I believe the second
is occurring now.

church 1.0

The fi rst-century church was Church 1.0, with its minor differences.
The Jerusalem church would have been the original
Church 1.0. Antioch would be Church 1.1. The Galatian
churches, started in the fi rst journey of Paul and Barnabas, wouldrepresent Church 1.2. Corinth would represent a change to 1.3,
as Paul added some patches to how he approached church. The
Ephesian church would be Church 1.4. And so the changes
went on, through two centuries of church life, kept simple and
organic by oppression and persecution from ten Roman emperors.
Heresies emerged and were purged. There was the establishment
of regional bishops and institutionalization of some of the
forms of Christianity during this period, but overall the church
remained a grassroots, marginalized movement under the heat
of intense persecution.

All that changed in 313 a.d., when Constantine declared that
the empire would not only tolerate Christianity but restore to the
church all lost property. He was the fi rst “ Christian ” emperor;
Christianity went instantly from the margins to the mainstream,
and everything changed. Christianity became the state
religion, and the church did not change much from that point
on. This was the shift to Church 2.0 and all its eventual variants.

church 2.0

Over the centuries, after Constantine, the Western church
evolved in many ways, but none has been a signifi cant systemic
change. There was establishment of both the Roman Catholic
Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church, and for hundreds
of years there were very few changes. The Reformation split
the Western church into the Roman Church and the volatile
Protestant church, or Church 2.1. In spite of the differences,
the institutional system remained mostly unchanged.

The Reformation set loose (and persecuted) the Anabaptists,
but this was just a change from Church 2.1 to 2.2. Whether
the church adapts to reach coal miners in eighteenth – century
England or postmodern pilgrims in the twenty – fi rst century, most
of the changes have been patches and plug – ins to the Church
2.0 system. Whether you are talking about high church or low,
Pentecostal or Reformed, the church has remained in the 2.0
range of upgrades. From Baptist to Brethren, from Mennonite
to Methodist, the changes in the system are relatively untouched
over the centuries. Music or no music? Pipe organ or electric guitar?
Whether seeing tall ceilings with stained – glass windows, or
meeting in a box building without windows, the actual system of
church has gone relatively unchanged.

You have the priests or pastors, the Sunday service with singing
and a sermon, the weekly offering, the pulpit with pews, and
the church building. These have been constants since the fourth
century. Even if you move the whole show into a house instead
of a church building, if the system hasn ’ t changed you have only
shrunk the church, not transformed it. Changing the style of
music does not upgrade the system. Turning down the lights and
turning up the volume is a simple patch to the same old system.
Choirs and hymns or praise bands and fog machines, kneeling,
or standing are miniscule changes to the system. Sermonizing
with topical messages or expositional ones is not changing the
system; it ’ s making minor adjustments. Sunday schools or small
groups as secondary learning environments are not a systemic
change at all, just a variation on the same old operational system.

Although most of the advances to Church 2.0 over the centuries
have been plug – ins and patches to the same old system, there
have been anomalies along the way. Usually, these anomalies
are the result of rampant persecution driving the church back to the
old default system. One could say that these are examples of
going back to the Church 1.0 system, because their 2.0 system
crashed in the face of extreme heat. The radical Anabaptist
churches are an example. The Chinese house church phenomenon
is also a departure from the expression of the Church 2.0
system. These experiments are really not the norm and have not,
to date, infl uenced the church as a whole in any permanent fashion,
except perhaps to say that they are part of the learning that
has led to this new operating system — Church 3.0.

church 3.0

I believe that the second major shift is occurring now, in our lifetime.
Many people want to go back to the beginning again. As
much as I am enamored of what I learned about the church of
the fi rst century, we simply cannot go back; we can only go forward.

Granted, if we went back it would be a vast improvement
on where we have been more recently. I have to ask, though:
Could we do even better than Church 1.0? Some may find evensuch a question as this heretical. It is only a question, but it bears
consideration.

Could we actually improve on the fi rst – century church? A
careful study of Acts reveals that even in the fi rst decades of the
church there was profound improvement as people learned from
experience. Why not seek more improvements today, building on
the foundation of two thousand years of mistakes? I believe it is
possible. I think we can see the awesome impact and rapid spread
that the fi rst century saw, but we also can benefi t from two thousand
years of learning and use today ’ s technological advances.
Imagine if the apostle Paul could buy an airline ticket and be
across the world in twelve hours instead of twelve years. Imagine
what he would do with the Internet and the ability to see events
unfold globally and instantaneously. Our ability to understand
culture and translate languages today is built on two thousand
years of mistakes along with the successes they produced. Perhaps
more than any other benefi t we have is looking in hindsight
at how easily institutionalization took over the church. It was no
longer people in relationship to one another, but an organized
system. Armed with that knowledge, we can now move forward.
The early church fl ew blindly into a trap of a religious hier archical
system that kept her in the dark ages for hundreds of years.

History can train us for the future, if we listen to it. No, Church 3.0
is not a shift downward in church life or quality. It is an upgrade
in every sense of the word, perhaps even rising above the early
church. Why would we suspect that God is content with our going
backwards? Why wouldn ’ t He want us to grow and develop in
better ways?

The best upgrades do a few things. First they allow greater
power in what you want to accomplish, and Church 3.0 is a huge
boost in raw spiritual power. Every part of the body of Christ can
function at a much higher level. A second thing you may look
for in an upgrade is to move to a simpler and more intuitive
way of using the system. This upgrade to Church 3.0 is certainly
that, in many ways. It is built on simplicity and potency bound
together to increase speed and power in the infl uence that the
church can and should have. Third, upgrades take advantage of
the latest discoveries in technology and help you interact better
with all the other electronics you may use. Church 3.0 is far and
away better at being fl uid, mixing with multiple expressions of
church structure, and overcoming the world ’ s obstacles. Fourth,
an upgrade should have greater capacity to accommodate much
more information, functionality, and storage. Finally, some cool
new features in an upgrade should signifi cantly improve the system
’ s performance and make it much more fun to use. Church
3.0 is so enjoyable that it is quite common for those who have
made the switch to comment that they could never go back to
the old system.

Do not be deceived into thinking that this is just another
patch to the same old system; it is a radical change from the core
of the church. Church 3.0 has rebuilt the function of the church
in every sense, from the smallest to the largest capacity.


Posted in Uncategorized
Tags: , , , , , ,

10 Comments »

  1. I should have stated that the excerpt from CHURCH 3.0 was copied from a link in the House2House e-mail of August 30, 2011.

    Comment by Alan Adams — August 30, 2011 @ 9:43 am

  2. This is good, useful as an analytical tool regarding where we have been. it would seem that there are irreducible minimums to anything that purports to be Church, with the templates set in the later first century and 2nd century AD. As is written above, most changes have been variations on the theme. I still have a lifelong vision that Church 3.0 will entail The Body of Christ in given areas ( municipalities, regions ) coming together in winsome public witness to the beauty of the Body of Christ. When we are asked where we ‘go to church’ , I often respond ‘ we attend The Body of Christ Kingston ( or insert your city’s name here ) and serve @ St. Andrew’s Presbyterian congregation downtown. ‘ I envision the pleasure of one another’s company as a precursor to visibly worshiping, working and witnessing together in winsome ways ( sorry for the alliteration!) in such a way that the world looking on will say ‘you folks remind me of Somebody. Whose family do you come from? What’s your background? ‘ Our family resemblance to the Family which is God the Father/Son/Spirit should be profoundly plastered on our actions and attitudes as The Body of Christ Kingston ( etc. ) ” See how they love one another” would become our well-known brand in our gathering as the ‘called-out’. Unless that becomes part of Church 3.0’s programmed DNA, the world justifiably sniffs and turns away from a growing putrescence. Just some thoughts about this……..

    Comment by Christopher Walker — August 30, 2011 @ 10:23 am

    • Chris…thank you…Amen! My questions are,

      (1) Who will – like Peter – step out of the convenience and predictability of the ship to walk in risky, extraordinary competence beside the extraordinarily competent Master?
      (2) What group of disciples of Jesus will abandon the comforts of tradition to be totally at His beck and call, even it means sinking once or twice?
      (3) Where will we find this happening in Canada? Will it be Kingston, Moose Jaw, or London?

      Comment by Alan Adams — August 30, 2011 @ 10:56 am

  3. Servant-leaders of every generaton like old man Peter and newer man Timothy — those with the fire in the belly for disequilibrium in the Church — we/they must do it in a mutually supportive way. Saw the movie “The Help” recently — just like those domestics of the civil rights era that literally and virtually held one another up, and brought others on board, in doing the risky thing — just like them, and with that fiery desire for revolution, we all must do it.

    Same response for the next question…….

    Third question: answer, yes. It will be where we live, move and have our respective beings. The older we become, the more daring we must be. ‘Down in a Blaze of Glory’ ( Bon Jovi) comes readily to mind……
    “Blaze Of Glory”

    I wake up in the morning
    And I raise my weary head
    I got an old coat for a pillow
    And the earth was last night’s bed
    I don’t know where I’m going
    Only God knows where I’ve been
    I’m a devil on the run
    A six gun lover
    A candle in the wind
    When you’re brought into this world
    They say you’re born in sin
    Well at least they gave me something
    I didn’t have to steal or have to win
    Well they tell me that I’m wanted
    Yeah I’m a wanted man
    I’m colt in your stable
    I’m what Cain was to Abel
    Mister catch me if you can
    I’m going down in a blaze of glory
    Take me now but know the truth
    I’m going down in a blaze of glory
    Lord I never drew first
    But I drew first blood
    I’m no one’s son
    Call me young gun
    You ask about my consience
    And I offer you my soul
    You ask If I’ll grow to be a wise man
    Well I ask if I’ll grow old
    You ask me if I known love
    And what it’s like to sing songs in the rain
    Well,I’ve seen love come
    And I’ve seen it shot down
    I’ve seen it die in vain
    Shot down in a blaze of glory
    Take me now but know the truth
    ‘Cause I’m going down in a blaze of glory
    Lord I never drew first
    But I drew first blood
    I’m the devil’s son
    Call me young gun
    Each night I go to bed
    I pray the Lord my soul to keep
    No I ain’t looking for forgiveness
    But before I’m six foot deep
    Lord,I got to ask a favor
    And I’ll hope you’ll understand
    ‘Cause I’ve lived life to the fullest
    Let the boy die like a man
    Staring down the bullet
    Let me make my final stand
    Shot down in a blaze of glory
    Take me now but know the truth
    I’m going out in a blaze of glory
    Lord I never drew first
    But I drew first blood
    and I’m no one’s son
    Call me young gun
    I’m a young gun

    Comment by Christopher Walker — August 30, 2011 @ 11:16 am

  4. Other than the ‘devil’ language, that’s the spirit in which we are to move forward. That’s what I think….

    Comment by Christopher Walker — August 30, 2011 @ 11:18 am

  5. Let’s name the next church plant – Free Methodist, Wesleyan or Presbyterian – “BLAZE OF GLORY”.

    Comment by Alan Adams — August 30, 2011 @ 11:26 am

  6. Reminds me of the song “we’ve come this far by faith”

    We’ve come this far by faith
    Leaning on the Lord
    Trusting in His holy word
    He’s never failed us yet!!

    One thing God does not do is repeated things I dont believe it could ever be in his plans to go back to church 1. Its always been forward in the new challenges ahead of us with Jesus at the helm guiding our way.

    But I do get anxious for change. Lord Jesus Forgive Me For My Impatiences

    Comment by Randy Raynard — August 30, 2011 @ 2:55 pm

    • Randy (Doc)…keep in mind the statement in the second to last chapter of the Old Testament: “Then those who feared the Lord spoke to one another, and the Lord listened and heard them; so a book of remembrance was written before Him for those who fear the Lord and who meditate on His name.” We’re speaking to one another; the Lord is listening. No telling what He may do with us.

      Comment by Alan Adams — August 30, 2011 @ 3:45 pm

      • Praise The Lord !!

        Comment by Doc Crash — August 30, 2011 @ 3:54 pm


Leave a comment