Comments on: Church size: Is 150 the “magic” number?

By: Shepherd’s Notes » What is the Perfect Size for a Church?

Shepherd’s Notes » What is the Perfect Size for a Church? — Tue, 18 Dec 2012 12:50:36 +0000

[...] to David Murray it’s 150 One of the joys of a smaller congregation is the comfort and relaxation of just knowing [...]

By: Is There An Ideal Church Size? | Tim Brister

Is There An Ideal Church Size? | Tim Brister — Fri, 14 Dec 2012 14:15:39 +0000

[...] week, David Murray wrote a blogpost entitled, “Church Size: Is 150 the ‘Magic’ Number?” In this rather short article, David makes some rather large assumptions–assumptions [...]

By: Latest Links | blog of dan

Latest Links | blog of dan — Fri, 14 Dec 2012 11:02:20 +0000

[...] Church size: Is 150 the “magic” number? [...]

By: Darren Chapman

Darren Chapman — Fri, 14 Dec 2012 02:45:32 +0000

Couldn’t agree more Clive. I’ve been in churches of 20, 50, 100, 400 and 1000 and what you can DO with a larger church, the missional impact is astounding. Mobilising hundreds of people in one venture makes whole communities stand up and take notice.
I do agree that smaller churches have a better ratio of involvement and winning people for Christ however.
Reality is the Church needs mega-churches, large, medium and small churches to meet needs. But for us to reach whole cities for Christ we’re going to need a LOT more growing churches and mega-churches!

By: Mark Loughridge

Mark Loughridge — Wed, 12 Dec 2012 13:34:33 +0000

Malcolm Gladwell says something similar about 150 being the number of connections we can sustain – I think it is in Tipping Point

By: Steve

Steve — Tue, 11 Dec 2012 02:07:50 +0000

I’m concerned, in the view point of the writer, that “relationship” seems to be the purpose of local churches. Isn’t The Gospel the purpose of the local church?

By: Matt P

Matt P — Mon, 10 Dec 2012 01:46:26 +0000

Thanks for this post…. it was a joy to read. I have recently been thinking through this issue and taking it to the scriptures and, as often happens, many of my culturally developed presuppositions have been challenged. I wish these conversations took place in seminaries…

By: Clive Pritchard

Clive Pritchard — Sat, 08 Dec 2012 23:30:04 +0000

I have to disagree with the article and many of the comments. I have had the privilage of traveling and visiting many churches over the last 30 years in many countries and I have clearly seen how much outreach and mission can be acheived by good size churches (400+). Knowing people on a one to one basis is good but not central to all church life and growth.
I have also belonged to a church of 20, and one of 50, and one of 200 and also one of 400. Give me the 400 church any time. For fellowship, outreach into the community and for international mission.

By: AndyNBarringer

AndyNBarringer — Fri, 07 Dec 2012 19:54:20 +0000

ey,

I’ll spoil the party and disagree.

Causally knowing everyone’s name in a social setting may provide a level of comfort to some but it by no means indicates deep friendships.

If we take Jesus’ example we can see he had a close inner circle of three or four with close friendship with 12 or so. Then a much wider audience of casual “friendships”.

This mirrors the findings of recent studies like http://www.slideshare.net/padday/the-real-life-social-network-v2

It found that “Average American has four strong ties” and “10 people they speak to at least weekly”. (slides 100-104) and the Average FaceBook user has 130 friends(Dunbar!) but only interacts with 4-6 on a regular basis. (slide 105).

From Jesus’ example and the social studies that have been done we can better organize our churches in ever expanding circles. Each person should have a core group of 3-4 that they meet with of the same gender frequently. This is the deep friendships that we all so desperately need but I’d guess most of us don’t have.

Then a small group of 10-15 gender diverse people that meet weekly. (now commonly known as “small groups” or “care groups”?)

Through various life circumstances I’ve had to move many times during my life and had the opportunity to be a member of various size churches. In my ancedotal experience the size of church had almost nothing to do with whether or not people had deep friendships. Those always take hardwork and a culture that accepts but doesn’t condone failure. I’d guess the vast majority of men do not have any deep gospel centered friendships. As has been said, “The mass of men lead lives of quiet desperation.”[1] I think if there is an organizational deficiency in most of our churches it’s in developing the deep friendships regardless of the number of regular attenders.

[1] David Henry Thoreau (?)

By: Nathan Eshelman

Nathan Eshelman — Fri, 07 Dec 2012 18:39:40 +0000

This is my session’s vision for church planting. 125-150 and 50 of them will be planted in another location of Los Angeles. Pastoring more than 100 people is difficult if you are the only teaching elder.