By Oyewole Sarumi
There is a quiet but persistent whisper that circulates through ministerial corridors, conference halls, and leadership retreats. It is rarely spoken aloud in such crude terms, yet it exerts an extraordinary gravitational pull upon the hearts of church leaders across every continent.
The whisper suggests that if a church is large, if the numbers are impressive, if the attendance figures rise year after year, then surely God must be pleased. Surely His hand of approval rests upon that work. Surely the methods employed, the doctrines taught, and the practices observed must be vindicated by the very fact of numerical increase.
This assumption, however plausible it may appear, represents one of the most dangerous theological errors confronting the contemporary church. It is an error that has seduced countless well-intentioned leaders into measuring ministry success by metrics that the New Testament never elevates to primary importance. It is an error that has allowed congregations to drift from biblical fidelity while congratulating themselves on their expanding influence.
And it is an error that must be confronted with the full weight of Scriptural authority, historical witness, and pastoral wisdom.
The premise before us is stark and uncompromising: let’s note that numbers are not the biblical test of truth. A bigger church does not mean God is in there, and has approved everything happening there. The responsibility of every Christian leader, indeed of every believer, is to patiently and humbly test what they believe against the unerring standard of Holy Scripture. This is not a peripheral matter; it strikes at the very heart of how we understand the nature of the church, the work of the ministry, and the character of faithful leadership.
THE BIBLICAL WITNESS: NUMBERS IN PERSPECTIVE
When we approach the Scriptures with open mind with wider eyes, we discover a far more nuanced treatment of numerical growth than the modern church growth movement often acknowledges. The biblical record is, in fact, quite mixed in its treatment of numbers. While numbers are frequently recorded, more is not always presented as better.
Consider the prophet Gideon. When he assembled an army to confront the Midianites, God deliberately and dramatically reduced his forces from thirty-two thousand to three hundred.
The Lord declared, “The people who are with you are too many for Me to give Midian into their hands, lest Israel become boastful, saying, ‘My own power has delivered me’” (Judges 7:2).
Here we find a profound theological principle: numerical strength can actually become an obstacle to experiencing God’s deliverance because it encourages human pride and self-reliance. God deliberately chose weakness so that His power might be displayed more clearly.
Let’s even consider Noah, described as an “heir of righteousness” (Hebrews 11:7), yet he was only able to save his immediate family through the ark. The prophet Elijah stands alone against the four hundred and fifty prophets of Baal on Mount Carmel, achieving one of the greatest victories recorded in Scripture.
The prophet Jeremiah ministered for decades with little visible fruit, yet his faithfulness remains eternally honored. The prophet Isaiah was told that his ministry would largely fall on deaf ears, yet his prophecies shaped the faith of generations.
The most sobering warning comes from the parallel accounts in 2 Samuel 24 and 1 Chronicles 21, where David ordered a census of the people and God responded with severe judgment. Please note that a census was not inherently wrong; God had directed such censuses in Numbers 1 and 26.
But on this occasion, David’s motivation was sinful. He placed his trust in “multiplied troops” rather than in the promises of God. He counted his military strength so he could “boast in human might”. His sin was either pride or walking by sight instead of by faith. These passages are particularly pertinent for church growth advocates precisely because they expose the very sins into which those who concentrate solely on quantitative growth may easily fall. The temptation to trust in numbers rather than in God, to boast in human achievement rather than in divine grace, is ever present.
Dear readers, this does not mean numerical growth is unimportant. As one scholar observes, God has called His church to make disciples of all peoples, and disciples are countable. Luke gives us statistics in the Book of Acts to show when the Spirit acts, the Church grows numerically. Yet Luke provides just enough statistics to demonstrate this pattern but not enough to allow us to seize on numerical growth as the essence of the Church or as the only measure of a church’s life and effectiveness.
The Book of Acts records growth, “the Lord was adding to their number day by day those who were being saved” (Acts 2:47), “the word of God kept on spreading” (Acts 6:7), “the churches were being strengthened in the faith and were increasing in number daily” (Acts 16:5), but these are descriptive observations, not prescriptive principles.
Strikingly, the Apostle Paul never mentions the size of a church in any of his epistles. He celebrates growth when it occurs, but he never establishes numerical increase as a primary metric of ministry success. In Christ’s seven letters to the churches in Revelation, it is the unimpressive and beleaguered churches, Smyrna and Philadelphia, that receive unqualified commendation, while the influential and powerful churches, Sardis and Laodicea, face severe rebuke.
The church at Sardis had a reputation for being alive, yet Christ declared, “You are dead” (Revelation 3:1). The church at Laodicea boasted of its wealth and influence, yet Christ described it as “wretched, pitiable, poor, blind, and naked” (Revelation 3:17). Herein lies the unmistakable testimony of Scripture: external success and divine approval are not synonymous.
The Puritan divine Gervase Babington captured this truth with characteristic clarity when he wrote: “O weigh it well and with a religious heart, and let neither popery tell you of multitude, nor Anabaptists of fewness and paucity, but ever look you for truth, be they many or few. For proof, there is too much to be recited now, that many may err, and many hold truth, therefore neither the one number, nor the other any rule to a Christian conscience”. Gervase is saying here that “the multitude is no proof of orthodoxy; the minority is no proof of error.” Hence, truth stands on its own authority, not on the number of its adherents.
THE NEW TESTAMENT LANGUAGE OF GROWTH
A careful examination of the New Testament’s vocabulary of growth reveals something frequently overlooked in contemporary discussions. The Greek word ‘auxanō’ (to grow, to increase) is employed to describe the growth of the kingdom (Matthew 13:32), of grace (2 Peter 3:18), of the fruit of righteousness (2 Corinthians 9:10), of the knowledge of God (Colossians 1:10), and of the Word of God (Acts 12:24), but it rarely applies to numerical increase. Acts 6:7 is instructive: the multiplication of the disciples (plēthynō) is depicted as the result of the growth of the word (auxanō).
The growth of the Word, its deepening influence, its transformative power, its faithful proclamation, produces numerical increase as a secondary effect, not as the primary objective.
This distinction is crucial. When the New Testament speaks about the increase of believers, it does so descriptively and does not suggest that what is depicted should be regarded as a principal aim. The New Testament simply does not portray the growth of church membership as a primary concern. This does not mean numerical growth is irrelevant, but it means it must be understood within a larger framework of spiritual vitality and faithfulness to the gospel.
The word translated “growth” in the Great Commission, the command to “make disciples of all nations” (Matthew 28:19), does not primarily emphasize numerical increase. The imperative is to make disciples, not simply to multiply attendees. Discipleship involves teaching, baptizing, and nurturing obedience to all that Christ commanded. Yes, numbers may follow, but they are not the goal; they are, at best, the fruit of faithful disciple-making.
Some contemporary research underscores how deeply the preoccupation with numerical metrics has penetrated church leadership culture. A 2025 Christianity Today analysis observes that for decades, church leaders have relied primarily on three metrics: attendance, giving, and engagement; (or what some called ABC: Attendance, Building and Cash) to gauge their impact, yet these indicators reveal little about the spiritual formation and holistic flourishing of their congregations.
The same analysis notes that a congregation might be growing numerically while experiencing spiritual stagnation. Attendance might be rising while community connection weakens; giving might be strong while leadership burnout lurks beneath apparent success. The numbers, in other words, can deceive. And it’s deceiving many today!
THE TEMPTATION OF NUMERICAL VALIDATION
The tendency to equate numerical growth with divine approval is not merely an intellectual error; it is a spiritual temptation that strikes at the deepest motivations of pastoral ministry. When a church grows, the leader experiences validation. When numbers decline, the leader experiences discouragement.
When the metrics are impressive, the leader feels affirmed. When they are disappointing, the leader feels like a failure. In this way, numbers become a cruel master, powerful both to puff up and to pull down. In fact, pastors have been relieved of their job because they didn’t post expected numbers in people and money!
This dynamic and practice creates a perilous environment for ministry. The attractional church model, which has dominated so much of contemporary church life, often operates on the assumption that growth in numbers is not just a measure of success but a justification for any methodology used to achieve it. So, numbers become not merely a metric to track growth but a badge of honor and a demand for validation. When this occurs, the leader is subtly drawn away from faithfulness to effectiveness, from biblical fidelity to methodological innovation, from the foolishness of the cross to the wisdom of the world.
The Apostle Paul addressed this temptation directly when he wrote to the Corinthians: “I planted, Apollos watered, but God was causing the growth. So then neither the one who plants nor the one who waters is anything, but God who causes the growth” (1 Corinthians 3:6-7). Paul utterly refuses to claim credit for numerical increase. He recognizes that growth is God’s work, not human achievement. The minister’s responsibility is not to produce growth but to be faithful in planting and watering. The results belong to God.
Charles Spurgeon, the great prince of preachers, addressed this same tendency with his characteristic fire: “Do not, therefore, consider that soul-winning is or can be secured by the multiplication of baptisms and the swelling of the size of your church. What mean these dispatches from the battlefield? ‘Last night fourteen souls were under conviction, fifteen were justified, and eight received full sanctification.’ I am weary of this public bragging, this counting of unhatched chickens, this exhibition of doubtful spoils. Lay aside such numberings of the people, such idle pretense of certifying in half a minute that which will need the testing of a lifetime”. Spurgeon’s words cut through the fog of numerical obsession with prophetic clarity. The testing of a lifetime, this is what genuine conversion requires. A decision card, a raised hand, a walk down the aisle, these are not the same as transformed lives. These are spectacles we behold and boast of in most our churches today.
The temptation to seek numerical validation is particularly acute in an era of declining church attendance in many parts of the world. Recent data from the Barna Group reveals that practicing Christians have declined from 46 percent to 24 percent of U.S. adults over the past twenty-five years. Weekly church attendance has dropped significantly. Nearly half of American Christians, 45 percent, have not attended church in the past six months. The Southern Baptist Convention, the nation’s largest Protestant denomination, lost more than 390,000 members in 2025 compared to the previous year. In this context of decline, the pressure to produce growth becomes even more intense, and the temptation to compromise biblical fidelity for numerical increase becomes even more seductive.
Let me state that even in this challenging environment, there are signs of spiritual renewal. Barna’s 2025 research indicates that Gen Z and Millennial Christians are attending church more frequently than before, with the typical Gen Z churchgoer now attending 1.9 weekends per month. For the first time in decades, younger adults are outpacing older generations in regular church attendance. Men are now reporting higher levels of church attendance than women, a historic reversal. These trends suggest that God is still at work, but they also remind us that attendance statistics tell only part of the story. The deeper question remains: Are these attenders being transformed into disciples? Are they growing in faith, love, and obedience?
THE TEST OF TRUTH: DISCERNMENT AND THE WORD
If numbers are not the test of truth, what is? The Scriptures answer with unmistakable clarity: the truth is tested by the Word of God and by the fruit of the Spirit in transformed lives.
The Apostle John commands believers: “Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world” (1 John 4:1). This testing requires active discernment, not passive acceptance. The Greek word translated “test” is “dokimazō,” which carries the sense of examining, proving, and approving after careful evaluation. Hence, discernment is not optional; it is essential for Christian maturity. The presence of many false prophets makes testing imperative.
The test that John provides is doctrinal: “Every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God; and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God” (1 John 4:2-3). The truth about Christ, His incarnation, His deity, His atoning work, is the foundation upon which all genuine Christian faith rests. A church that preaches another Jesus, a different gospel, cannot be approved by God regardless of its size or influence.
Jonathan Edwards, the great theologian of the First Great Awakening, faced a similar challenge in his day. The revivals of the 1730s and 1740s produced intense emotional experiences, and Edwards was pressed to distinguish between genuine spiritual affections and counterfeit ones. In his classic work Religious Affections, Edwards identified twelve “no signs”, phenomena that neither confirm nor deny the presence of the Spirit. These included strong emotions, bodily reactions, and an outbreak of religious conversation. Such things might accompany genuine revival, but they might also accompany mere emotionalism or even demonic deception.
The Apostolic Fathers, those early church leaders who followed the apostles, understood this principle well. Clement of Rome, writing to the Corinthians, spoke of the Holy Scriptures as constituting the only rule of faith. Ignatius of Antioch warned against being deceived with strange doctrines. The Shepherd of Hermas exhorted believers to “love the truth, and let nothing but truth proceed from your mouth”. These early witnesses understood that truth was not determined by popularity or numerical success but by conformity to the apostolic teaching.
The Puritan tradition carried this conviction forward with remarkable clarity. John Owen, whom J.I. Packer called “the greatest of the Puritan theologians,” understood the dual operation of the Holy Spirit: His external testimony through the Scriptures and His internal testimony in the hearts of believers. Through His external testimony, the Spirit gives evidence, through the Scriptures, of their own divine origin. Through His inward testimony, the Spirit works in the minds of men to receive and embrace the truth. Truth, for Owen, was not merely propositional but experiential, it was to be known in the heart as well as in the mind.
This is why the faithful minister must be committed above all to the faithful preaching of the Word. As the Reformers insisted, the marks of a true church include the proper preaching of the Word and the right administration of the sacraments. When the Word is faithfully proclaimed, when the gospel is clearly preached, when sound doctrine is taught and defended, then the church is fulfilling its primary calling. Numerical growth may follow, but it does not validate the preaching; rather, the preaching validates itself by its conformity to Scripture.
A.W. Tozer, the twentieth-century prophet, warned against the corruption of worship by what he called “the great god Entertainment”. He saw clearly that when worship becomes entertainment and the church becomes a performance venue, numerical growth may occur but spiritual transformation suffers. Tozer’s warning echoes across the decades to our own time, when so many churches have adopted marketing strategies, worldly music, and cultural accommodation in pursuit of numerical increase. The question we must ask is not whether the methods work but whether they are faithful. Please note that results do not justify means. The end does not sanctify the method.
QUALITY OVER QUANTITY: THE MEASURE OF CHURCH HEALTH
If numerical growth is not the primary measure of church health, what is? The New Testament provides numerous indicators of congregational vitality that have nothing to do with size.
The early church in Acts 2 exhibited multiple marks of health: devotion to the apostles’ teaching, fellowship, the breaking of bread, prayer, generosity, and community impact. These are qualitative realities, not quantitative metrics. The church was devoted to teaching, not merely attendance at teaching events but a deep, sustained engagement with apostolic doctrine.
The church enjoyed genuine fellowship, not superficial social gatherings but authentic koinonia characterized by mutual care and shared life. The church was marked by prayer, not perfunctory prayers but earnest, persistent communion with God.
The church practiced generosity, not grudging or legalistic giving but sacrificial sharing of resources. These are the marks of spiritual health, and they can exist in a congregation of fifty as truly as in a congregation of five thousand. That leanings will depend on the leadership.
Paul’s letters consistently evaluate churches not by their size or resources but by their unity, maturity, and effectiveness in equipping saints for ministry. The Ephesians are commended for their faith and love (Ephesians 1:15). The Philippians are praised for their partnership in the gospel (Philippians 1:5). The Thessalonians are held up as examples for their faith, hope, and love (1 Thessalonians 1:2-3). These are qualitative commendations, not quantitative ones. In today’s church, these are rare metrics.
The early church fathers expanded on these biblical foundations. Ignatius of Antioch emphasized unity and regular gathering. Cyprian highlighted care for the poor as a crucial sign of church health. Augustine pointed to the quality of love within the community. John Chrysostom stressed the moral conduct of members and their care for the marginalized. Through the medieval period and the Reformation, these qualitative measures remained primary.
It was not until the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries that quantitative metrics began to dominate church health assessment. The Sunday School movement introduced systematic attendance tracking, and the church growth movement of the 1960s and 1970s emphasized numerical measurements. By the 1990s, sophisticated demographic studies and seeker-sensitive metrics had become standard tools. But numbers alone cannot capture the full reality of church health. A congregation might be growing numerically while experiencing spiritual stagnation. Giving might be strong while community connection weakens. A church might be flowing in material wealth, but poor in spiritual wealth.
Modern church health assessment requires a more holistic framework, one that examines three essential questions about congregational life: How are we nurturing life within our congregation? How are we equipping people for ministry outside our church? And how are we strengthening our leadership culture and organizational operations? The nurturing of congregational life focuses on creating an environment where authentic spiritual growth and deep community can flourish. Equipping people for ministry beyond church walls transforms a gathering into a movement that God is in it. Healthy churches intentionally prepare their members to share their faith naturally and authentically.
Christian Schwarz, in his work on Natural Church Development, makes a compelling case for quality growth over quantity. He writes: “Goals in terms of worship attendance appears to me to be rather shallow. Increased worship attendance is not the ultimate ‘goal,’ with everything else being a means to that end; it is a natural by-product of improved quality”. Because increased church attendance is the natural effect of higher quality, monitoring attendance can serve as a strategic instrument for “success control,” but the point of departure is not goal setting in the area of quantity but quality.
Peter Steinke makes the point even more strongly: “Organic processes are not linear. They are not merely progressive or expansive. Some organic processes promote growth through decay, shedding, and breakdown. Some organic growth is downward, a deepening, a rooting, a maturing process. An organic view will not allow us to make health synonymous with enlargement and mass. At times health is manifested by growth in size. At other times health involves sheer maintenance”. This is a crucial insight for pastoral leadership. So, not all growth is upward. Sometimes growth is downward, into deeper roots, into greater maturity, into more authentic faith. Sometimes health is manifested not by expansion but by endurance, not by increase but by faithfulness.
The contemporary church would do well to recover this organic understanding of growth. The kingdom of God grows like a mustard seed, from small beginnings to great size, but also like leaven, working quietly and invisibly through the whole lump (Matthew 13:31-33).
The kingdom grows like seed sown in the ground, the farmer scatters the seed and then sleeps and rises night and day, and the seed sprouts and grows, though he knows not how (Mark 4:26-29). There is mystery in growth, and there is patience. The farmer does not produce the growth; he simply sows and trusts God for the harvest.
This does not mean that church leaders are passive. On the contrary, faithful ministry involves diligent sowing, careful watering, and patient waiting. But it also involves a deep trust that God alone gives the increase. The pastor’s responsibility is not to manufacture growth but to be faithful in the tasks God has given. The results belong to God.
Marshall and Payne observe that numbers can be a blunt instrument for evaluation. On their own, they don’t tell the whole story. Good numbers can be a sign of spiritual health, or they can indicate that you are running a non-demanding, people-pleasing ministry that lots of people like. This is the uncomfortable truth that many leaders prefer to avoid. Large attendance might indicate faithful ministry, or it might indicate that the gospel has been diluted, that the demands of discipleship have been softened, that the offense of the cross has been removed. Numbers alone indicate nothing.
The warning from the parable of the wheat and the weeds (Matthew 13) is sobering. Satan is able to mislead God’s people by giving them what they desire most, so long as it draws them away from finding satisfaction and significance in Christ. Satan revels in a church where attendance is the mark of faith and its leaders worship growth. We may grow a large ministry only to have most of it ripped up and burnt. The warning for every leader is to pursue genuine gospel growth, growth that is rooted in the gospel, shaped by the gospel, and directed toward the glory of God.
THE RESPONSIBILITY OF LEADERSHIP: FAITHFULNESS OVER SUCCESS
The pastoral calling is a sacred trust, and its central demand is faithfulness, not success. The steward is not judged by the size of the harvest but by the quality of the stewardship. The minister is not evaluated by the numbers in the pew but by the truth proclaimed from the pulpit. The leader is not measured by the size of the congregation but by the depth of the discipleship.
This is good news. As one writer observes, “It is good news because it means God’s approval of us is not based on our ability to produce statistics. We are not called to be successful but faithful. We may plant, we may water, but it is God who gives the growth” (1 Corinthians 3:6). The burden of producing results is lifted from our shoulders and placed where it belongs, on the sovereign God who alone gives increase. Our responsibility is to be faithful in the tasks assigned to us: to preach the Word, to care for the flock, to equip the saints, to proclaim the gospel. The results are God’s concern, not ours.
This does not mean we abandon all measurement. As one writer notes, “not all attendance increases are created equal”. We must measure, but we must measure what matters. The things that matter most, transformed lives, ministry effectiveness, spiritual growth, are the hardest to measure. Yet they are precisely the things we must prioritize. The percentage of members being mobilized for ministry and missions is a more reliable indicator of health than how many people attend services.
The Puritan understanding of experiential religion, faith that is known in the heart as well as in the head, provides a helpful framework for evaluating ministry effectiveness. John Owen spoke of the “experimental knowledge” that a believer has of his own heart, the workings and reasonings thereof. This is knowledge that comes through experience, through the application of truth to the soul, through the work of the Spirit in the inner person. A ministry that produces this kind of knowledge, genuine, heartfelt, transformative knowledge of God, is a successful ministry, regardless of its size.
The Apostle Paul’s words to the Corinthians are deeply relevant: “You show that you are a letter from Christ delivered by us” (2 Corinthians 3:3). Therein lies the difference between disciple-producing and decision-producing. The way we are typically programmed to measure the success of our ministries sets us up for hollow victory and desperate failure. When we produce decisions without disciples, we produce a fragile faith that cannot withstand the storms of life. When we count professions without nurturing transformation, we fill the church with names on a roll but not with hearts on fire.
The contemporary research bears this out. A Christianity Today analysis notes that “growing churches are growing largely by transfer growth”. That is, people are moving from one church to another rather than being converted from unbelief to faith. The conversion ratio of all churches studied is 19:1, nineteen transfers for every one genuine conversion. Growing churches are only slightly better at 17:1. This is a sobering statistic. Much of what passes for church growth is simply the reshuffling of existing believers. True growth, growth through the conversion of unbelievers, is far rarer than we often assume.
This should not discourage us; it should humble us. It should remind us that growth is God’s work, not ours. It should free us from the burden of producing numbers and free us for the joy of faithful ministry. It should redirect our attention from the size of our congregations to the depth of our discipleship.
THE CHALLENGE OF DISCERNMENT IN A NUMBERS-OBSESSED AGE
Perhaps the greatest challenge facing church leaders today is the cultivation of genuine discernment in a culture that is obsessed with numbers. We are surrounded by metrics, surrounded by statistics, surrounded by the constant pressure to demonstrate success through quantifiable results. The question we must ask ourselves is this: Are we measuring what matters, or are we measuring what is easy to measure?
The call to test the spirits (1 John 4:1) applies not only to false prophets but also to false measures of success. We must test our assumptions about what constitutes a healthy church. We must test our methods to ensure they are faithful to Scripture. We must test our motives to ensure we are seeking God’s glory rather than our own reputation. We must test our metrics to ensure they are measuring what truly matters.
This testing requires patience. As Spurgeon noted in the earlier section, genuine conversion “will need the testing of a lifetime”. We cannot pronounce a person saved on the basis of a moment’s decision. We must watch for the fruit of the Spirit over time. We must see evidence of transformation in character, in conduct, in relationships. This is slow work. It does not lend itself to quarterly reports or annual statistical summaries. But it is the work to which we are called.
This testing also requires humility. We must acknowledge our own susceptibility to the seduction of numbers. We must confess our tendency to seek validation through visible results. We must repent of our idolatry of growth. And we must return to the Scriptures as our sufficient guide for faith and practice.
The word of the Lord to the prophet Zechariah is relevant here: “Not by might nor by power, but by My Spirit, says the Lord of hosts” (Zechariah 4:6). The work of the kingdom is not accomplished by human strength or human methods but by the Spirit of God. When we rely on our own strategies, our own marketing, our own techniques, we are operating in the flesh. When we rely on the Spirit, we are operating in the power of God. The results may not always be impressive by human standards, but they will be lasting, they will be genuine, and they will bring glory to God.
THE CALL TO FAITHFULNESS
As I conclude here, let’s note that the premise with which we began is both simple and profound: Numbers are not the biblical test of truth. A bigger church does not mean God must approve everything happening there. The responsibility of every Christian leader is to patiently and humbly test what they believe against the Scriptures.
This is not a call to abandon evangelism or to despise numerical growth when it comes. On the contrary, it is a call to pursue the right kind of growth, growth that is rooted in the gospel, shaped by the Scriptures, and evidenced by transformed lives. It is a call to prioritize faithfulness over success, quality over quantity, depth over breadth. It is a call to trust God for the results while being faithful in the tasks He has given.
The words of the Puritan Richard Baxter are a fitting conclusion: “I beseech you make sure work. Remember that judgment and eternity are before you”. We are not building a temporal kingdom; we are building an eternal one. We are not preparing people for a few years of comfortable religion; we are preparing them for eternity. The stakes are infinitely high, and the call is to faithfulness, not to numerical success.
Let us, then, lay aside the idolatry of numbers. Let us repent of our obsession with statistics. Let us return to the Word of God as our sufficient guide. Let us preach the gospel with faithfulness, care for the flock with diligence, and trust God for the growth. And let us remember always that the approval we seek is not the approval of the world or even the approval of the church growth experts but the approval of Christ Himself, who will say to the faithful steward on that final day: “Well done, good and faithful servant” (Matthew 25:21).
May God grant us the grace to be faithful, the wisdom to discern what truly matters, and the courage to pursue it regardless of the numbers. To Him be the glory, both now and forevermore. Amen.
Prof. Sarumi, a Bible scholar and teacher of the Word of God, writes from Lagos