Jesus met people where the were, and challenged them to be what they were made to be. Making church relevant to those who currently don’t darken the doors of a church isn’t a bad thing. Challenging those that come to be more than they could possibly be on their own isn’t a bad thing either. In fact, both are demanded of the Church.

I think there’s a misconception that churches shouldn’t be “seeker friendly” or shouldn’t try to “entertain.” There should be a caveat among pastors that, if you “entertain” your people, you MUST challenge them. We should always try to bring people up to the next level from where they’re at. Too many pastors are soft on their congregants because they fear losing them. They fear being labeled a homophobe by taking a Biblical stance against homosexuality. They fear being fired when holding their congregants to moral standards with regard to cohabitation and porn addiction. But the opposite always takes place, if you do it the right way. If you model the harshness of Christ with the Canaanite woman. He set the bait with a challenge, and she took it – and as a reward for her response to his challenge, she received her miracle. Only when we challenge our members, especially the men, do we find that they not only find themselves up to the challenge, but respond with zeal and abandon. Attractional isn’t a naughty word, it’s a good word. Attract men with manly stuff, then challenge them, and then they’ll find out they were Biblically mandated to not just be involved, but lead.

Roger, you’re dead on. I don’t think a church should be aimed at men 100%, but it should be an appealing place for all people, because the gospel appeals to all. Good work.