Sometimes I am confused by such a high emphasis on the “movement language.” I look at a passage like 1 Timothy 3:14-16 says, 14 These things I write to you, though I hope to come to you shortly; 15 but if I am delayed, I write so that you may know how you ought to conduct yourself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth. 16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness:
God[c] was manifested in the flesh,
Justified in the Spirit,
Seen by angels,
Preached among the Gentiles,
Believed on in the world,
Received up in glory.”
The movement has always been the Church and the reason why we don’t emphasize that is because the church lacks power. The lack of the body doing something still doesn’t replace the language. It gets tricky to say that a movement is coming when the movement has always been. I agree with wanting revival but I don’t know if saying everything is a movement does anything for people. Power in our words should be enough to keep people at your church so pursue understanding in the word and just do that instead of trying to rephrase something that doesn’t need redefinition.
It is also never good to lower the view we have of the church. The church is awesome and of course we have all been mistreated by people at church(join the club of people making mistakes).
THE RUCKUS JOURNAL 