7thFebruary
Should we rename the Assemblies of God?
Categories: Church, ecclesiology, Christianity | 2008 | by Ken Horn | 2 commentsI have heard that AG churches should not have religious sounding names. Is this true,and if so, why are we doing this? Should we rename the Assemblies Of God?
Editor’s note: This is an editorial response since there is no straight biblical answer on the topic.
One of the goals of the church is to reach the unsaved and the unchurched. To this end, many pastors and congregations have opted for names that they feel are more inviting to the general populace. In the ’60s and ’70s, there was a movement away from the then typical names: “First Assembly of God,” etc. Many churches became “Christian Center” or something similar. AG churches used to use the word “Temple” a lot. That gave way to “Community Church,” etc. Today, even many of the biggest seeker-sensitive churches use the word “Church” in their name, along with a descriptive word of the location. A few churches have gone to names that do not incorporate anything religious.
I don’t have a beef with anybody’s name. What I do have a problem with is when a church is trying to “trick” people with their name or lack of full disclosure. I don’t believe the name “Assemblies of God” needs to be in the title of a local AG church. But I have seen AG churches that try to keep people from knowing they are AG or Pentecostal. They have the philosophy that people are more likely to attend a church that is not tied to a large fellowship or denomination. I believe this is inherently dishonest.
And, no, we shouldn’t rename the AG. “Assemblies of God” is just fine, and all our churches, while they don’t need to include it in their name, should make it clear they are Assemblies of God. If they don’t … then why are they (AG)?
Ken Horn
In my travels I visit many AG churches, and the church of today is nowhere near the pentecostal churches in the beginning of this new movement.
As a matter of fact for many A/G churches there is not much difference between the A/G and Methodist, Babtist, and many of the non-denominational community churches that now dot the landscape. It’s all the same.
It is difficult after all these years to see the “changes” away from truth in the name of “our message hasn’t changed, just our method”. Don’t be fooled, there is only one method of impacting our world for Jesus, that is one soul at a time. I speak with a variety of denominations and their leadership, and I tell them, “If you are not a soul winner, what business do you really have in an elder or deacon position in the church?” That goes for all of us. It seems so much like a social club. We’re happy and smiles, but we cannot figure out why the A/G is not growing in the U.S. Oh well I like this blog thing, it really won’t make much difference what is said here as many have a seared mind and don’t even realize it.
I do not like it when AG churches do not incorporate the AG title or logo in their church name. We have a small home missions church and when we got our new pastor the name was changed. We were not there at the time ( we had left to go to church with our son at another church for a few months). While we were gone the name was changed and I do not like the name nor the fact that AG is not in it at all. But, I love our church and the people and pastor and that is all that really matters I guess. But, if I were a stranger looking for a church, I would WANT to see AG in it so I know for sure. I am 60 years old and 3rd generation AG and very proud of it and that is why I like to see AG. I personally feel it is inviting to see AG, ex. whatever town 1st Assembly of God.