I am a Christian, an Indian, and a former rock musician. I grew up in South India and lived in a subculture of my urban Indian melting pot. When the Lord saved me in my senior year of college, I soon found myself surrounded by people who were completely different from me—people from different ethnicities and cultures, who spoke different languages, ate different foods, and even had completely different musical tastes (they didn’t even know who Deep Purple were!). Did I feel uncomfortable? Yes. But what amazed me then, and continues to amaze me now, was not the radical differences and «otherness» that divided us. No, what amazed me was the unity and brotherhood that these people shared among themselves, despite all their differences—a unity and brotherhood that I had joined through my conversion to Jesus Christ, who breaks down all barriers and gathers all peoples together as members of his family.
In both North America and in missionary work around the world, the «homogeneous church» principle is arguably the most effective way to multiply disciples and plant «strategic» new churches. Churches grow faster, church growth experts say, when the gospel is spread along existing social lines and networks, and when people do not have to overcome ethnic, cultural, or class barriers to become Christians. People group together in churches that are defined by ethnolinguistic differences, tribal or caste differences, social and economic status, educational level, occupation, and even shared interests—for example, churches for cowboys or NASCAR fans (this is not hyperbole, Google it!). The «homogeneous church» principle argues that such homogeneous churches grow faster because they are more welcoming to those who may feel uncomfortable crossing cultural, ethnic, or other boundaries. This «strategic» uniformity permeates many church planting organizations and fills the pages of strategic guides for missions and church planters. But does the Bible support uniformity? Does Scripture offer a different vision for the local church?
My goal is to challenge the «homogeneous church» principle in church growth by showing that this pragmatic structure is contrary to the apostolic vision of the church in the New Testament. In the process, I argue that planting multi-ethnic churches, where possible, is not only more faithful to Scripture, but also allows such churches to more fully reflect the glorious Gospel of Jesus Christ. In other words, churches should strive to be as diverse as the communities in which they are found.
(A Short) Biblical Theology on God's Multinational Plan of Redemption
To establish the context for the multinational vision of New Testament Christianity, I will briefly consider how this theme manifests itself throughout the canon.
Linguistic diversity in Scripture begins at Babel, when God responds to humanity’s proud disobedience by confusing their languages (Gen. 11:1–9). On the next page, we see God’s multinational plan of redemption in His covenant promise to Abraham that all nations would be blessed through Abraham’s seed (Gen. 12:1–3; 22:15–18). This promise becomes clearer throughout the biblical text as David is promised a universal kingship through which God’s law and glory would be established throughout the earth (2 Sam. 7:19; Ps. 72:17–18). The prophets further elaborate on this vision, envisioning a glorious eschatological restoration in which a restored and reconstructed Israel will consist not only of ethnic Jews but also of peoples from all lands who worship and know Yahweh, the true and living God (Isa. 2:2–4; 56:6–8; Zech. 8:20–23).
The New Testament testifies that God’s promise of universal redemption has been fulfilled in Christ, and the boundaries of God’s people are no longer defined by Jewish identity, but by repentance and faith in Jesus Christ. Israel is restored, rebuilt, and resurrected in and through the risen Messiah, who established the new covenant with his blood. Faith in Christ grants full access to membership in the new covenant people of God. This development of salvation history unfolds in the book of Acts, where the evangelist Luke shows how the gospel reaches ever wider circles, including those who were previously excluded. God’s people gather in local churches that proclaim and reflect the glorious gospel of Christ. The New Testament concludes with John’s awe-inspiring vision of an unspeakable multitude of saved people from every tribe, tongue, and people worshiping Christ in unison (Rev. 7:9–10).
The heterogeneity of the apostolic churches
Biblical theology of universal redemption helps us understand the apostolic model of churches. In the New Testament, the kaleidoscopic glory of Christ’s redemptive work is reflected in the formation of local churches that span ethnic, cultural, socioeconomic, and even linguistic boundaries. This striking heterogeneity of the apostolic model stems from a widespread and enduring conviction of unity in Christ, who has reconciled believers to God and to one another (Gal. 3:28; Col. 3:11). The «otherness» of different people outweighs the «unity» that these people share in Jesus Christ.
As the early church grew, the apostles faced several challenges that arose from the diversity of the newly formed churches, but they never divided the church into homogeneous communities. Evidence from the book of Acts shows that the church that was formed on the day of Pentecost was made up of Jewish Christians from a variety of cultural and linguistic backgrounds (Acts 2:5–11). Acts 6:1–6 describes a conflict between the Jews of the diaspora (Hellenists) and the Jews of Palestine (Hebrew Jews). However, the apostles did not divide the community; they resolved the problem by appointing men from a minority to serve. Acts also confirms the heterogeneous nature of the early church, recounting the diversity of leadership in the Antioch church (cf. Acts 13:1), which included a former Pharisee (Paul), a former Gentile (Lucian), a former Levite (Barnabas), a member of Herod’s court (Menahem), and a man of dark skin (Simeon, who was called Niger).
In Romans, Paul addresses a church that was undoubtedly made up of people of various nationalities, both Jews and Greeks (Rom. 7:1; 11:13). Paul exhorts them to live in love through the gospel and to sacrifice their own preferences for the sake of others (Rom. 13:8–10; 14:1–23). Here we see that the gospel has implications not only for personal salvation but also for corporate sanctification—believers must learn to live in community with those who are different from them, following the example of Christ and considering others above themselves.
In 1 Corinthians, writing to a church made up of people from diverse backgrounds, Paul affirms their unity in Christ and urges them to prefer one another and to be sensitive to the consciences of the weaker brethren (1 Cor. 10:23–33; 12:12–13). In both cases, the question of separate churches of homogeneous communities is completely foreign to Paul’s thinking. «Strategic» considerations for more effective outreach or for people to feel more comfortable never outweigh the common life in Jesus Christ. Instead, the conviction that believers are a new humanity in Christ encourages Christian unity in the church, as believers love one another as Christ loved them. Indeed, Paul proclaims that the manifold wisdom and glory of God are revealed through the unity of the diverse people in the church (Eph. 3:1–10).
The early church radically disrupted social and economic divisions. Paul decisively undermines the existing order of slavery, calling on slaves and masters to fellowship as brothers in Christ in the one church (1 Cor. 7:17–24; Phil. 8–16). Faith in Christ eliminates social status as a boundary for fellowship. Similarly, James emphasizes the need to avoid prejudice and special treatment of the rich, since he believes that both the rich and the poor should unite in unity, rather than form homogeneous communities along socio-economic lines (Jas. 2:1–9). The New Testament also shows that churches were «multigenerational,» bringing together both younger and older people who lived in fellowship, unity, and sacrificial service (1 Tim. 4:12; 5:1–16; Titus 2:1–8; 1 John 2:12–14).
The apostolic model of multinational, heterogeneous churches is not limited to the New Testament witness, but is also supported by the history of the early church. As David Smith notes,
«"It was the heterogeneous, multinational nature of the church that made an impression on the divided Roman world and contributed to the growth of the Christian movement.".
While homogeneity in churches only maintains the status quo of society, biblical evidence demonstrates that the Gospel broke down ethnic, social, economic, and cultural barriers, uniting people in a way that has no parallel in history.
New Testament polemic against ethnocentrism
Another reason why homogeneity is contrary to the New Testament is that it promotes and reinforces an ethnocentric way of thinking. Throughout the New Testament we see an attack on ethnocentrism and, consequently, a mandate for believers of different ethnic groups to accept one another with love and live together in harmony in the local churches. Paul is adamant that Jews and Gentiles are reconciled to God through the blood of Jesus Christ, so that in Christ
«There is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision, barbarian, Scythian, slave nor free, but Christ is all and in all» (Col. 3:11).
Christ broke down «in his flesh the middle wall of hostility» and reconciled Jews and Gentiles to God «and in one body to reconcile both to God through the cross, having put to death the hostility» (Eph. 2:14–16). Believers are part of God’s new creation: once all of them were sinners in Adam, they are now new people in Christ.
This problem is most clearly seen in Galatians 2, when Paul rebukes Peter for separating himself from the Gentiles (Gal. 2:11–16). Peter, along with other Jewish Christians in Galatia, acted out of fear of the Jews who might take offense at sharing a table with Gentiles. But Paul insists that this kind of exclusion is an offense to the gospel itself (Gal. 2:15–21). Here, accepting Gentiles—those from a different ethnic group—as equal members of God’s family through sharing a table takes precedence over a pragmatic desire to avoid offending others.
In Romans, Paul also attacks the root of ethnocentrism. Paul asserts universal human sinfulness and the power of the gospel for salvation in God’s act of justification of both Jews and Gentiles in Christ (Rom. 1–3). All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified by grace through faith in Christ (Rom. 3:21–26). All become children of Abraham through faith in God who justifies the ungodly (Rom. 4). All are condemned in Adam, and all are justified in Christ (Rom. 5:12–21). Paul warns both Jews and Gentiles not to be conceited but to acknowledge the grace of God for both peoples (Rom. 2:17–29; Rom. 11:17–24). Evidence from Romans suggests that Paul was almost certainly writing to a heterogeneous church, urging them to cast aside ethnic pride and live together in Christian unity.
The polemic against ethnocentrism is not limited to Paul; it permeates the Gospels as well. Jesus insults the ethnocentric pride of the Pharisees by associating himself with pagans, tax collectors, and sinners. The Gospels teach that citizenship in the kingdom of God is gained through faith in Christ, not ethnicity. The call to repentance includes a call to repentance from ethnic and racial pride. As John Piper argues, «Faith in Jesus trumps ethnicity.» Piper cites several examples of this theme in the Gospels: the commendation of the centurion’s faith (Matt. 8:5–13), the story of the Good Samaritan (Luke 10:33), the healing of the ten lepers, of whom only the foreigner returned to give thanks (Luke 17:16), the healing of the Syrophoenician woman’s daughter (Mark 7:26), and the cleansing of the temple (Mark 11:17). Clearly, Jesus was not afraid to offend the ethnocentric pride of the Pharisees.
Now, to be clear, proponents of the «homogeneous church» principle claim that they do not want to promote ethnocentric pride among Christians, but instead believe that homogeneous churches are more culturally sensitive and comfortable for non-believers who may feel uncomfortable crossing cultural barriers. In other words, proponents of homogeneity believe that it is more strategic to remove cultural barriers to the Gospel by creating mono-ethnic and mono-cultural churches. However, it is naive and overly optimistic to assume that sinful people who have an innate tendency toward ethnocentric prejudice will somehow grow out of this without being called to live in community with those who are different from them. The New Testament evidence indicates that Jesus and the apostles never compromise with the ethnocentrism of unbelievers, but instead include a call to repentance from ethnocentrism and an invitation to embrace «others» as an integral part of the gospel message. While the principle of the «homogeneous church» emphasizes the desire to win people over without offending their ethnocentric sensibilities, Jesus’ approach is radically different—Christ lays the axe to the root of ethnic pride.
Were the New Testament churches «mono-ethnic»?
Donald McGavran, the father of the church growth movement who formulated the «homogeneous church principle,» argued that
«"New Testament churches were strikingly monoethnic.".
McGavran believed that under the influence of the Holy Spirit, the apostles operated within homogeneous churches, initially reaching primarily Jews to grow the church:
«"As long as Jews could become Christians within the confines of Judaism, the Church could and did grow incredibly among Jews... These, having become Christians in the synagogue, could do so without racial and class barriers.".
So we must consider whether this is a correct reading of the New Testament. I argue that McGavran’s view of the New Testament testimony is distorted because it fails to take into account how Luke shows the progressive development of salvation history in the book of Acts. The apostles did not operate on the basis of some «homogeneous church principle»—this is clearly evident from the cultural and linguistic diversity among the Jews at Pentecost and the heterogeneous nature of the churches that were founded after the Gentiles were included in the church. Luke depicts the development of the church’s mission within the historical context of salvation in the book of Acts. Luke emphasizes that the gospel, proclaimed by the apostles and supported by the Holy Spirit, overcomes insurmountable barriers as the people of God are united around the risen Christ. Thus, Donald McGavran and the church growth movement have employed a false understanding of Scripture, promoting uniformity by imposing a preconceived pragmatic framework on the text.
Conclusion
The apostolic model of the church in the New Testament teaches that churches, wherever possible, should not be created or divided along ethnic, cultural, class, age, or other group lines. In some situations, language differences may justify the need for separate churches. However, even in such cases, if there is a common language for communication, language differences need not necessarily be a cause for division.
The glory of Christ is most clearly seen when outsiders observe the love and unity that believers from different cultures show for one another. The pragmatic desire for rapid growth and multiplication of churches should not compromise the unity that Christ purchased with His blood. Rene Padilla puts it very aptly:
«"It may be true that 'people want to become Christians without crossing racial, linguistic, or class barriers,' but that is irrelevant. Membership in the body of Christ is not a matter of preference, but of belonging to a new community under the authority of Christ. Whether a person likes it or not, the same act that reconciles him to God also brings him into a community where identity is based on Jesus Christ, not on race, culture, social status, or gender, and therefore reconciles him to other people.".
Am I against the rapid growth and multiplication of churches? Not at all! I also deeply desire that many nations be reached for Christ. But I ask that gospel workers remember that there is no command in the New Testament to divide churches along ethnic lines. As we have seen, the testimony of Scripture points in quite the opposite direction—people of different tribes, tongues, and nations being united into one people of God to worship God together in fellowship and harmony as a kingdom of priests to our God. May the church in America continue to work for racial reconciliation, learning to recognize that in Christ there is no «Negro» or «Ku Klux Klan.» Likewise, may we recognize that in Christ there is no «Brahmin,» «Dalit,» «Tutsi,» or «Hutu.» May our unity be reflected in the demographic makeup of our churches as a manifestation of the manifold wisdom of God, who reconciled us to Himself through the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ (Eph. 3:10). May He receive the glory and honor He deserves!
