Surely belief is the main reason. But Brett's got a slew of other reasons to attend church. Valid?
Is he missing any good reasons to go -- or not to?
Does this convince any "I believe, but I'd rather commune with nature" types?
It was interesting. Took a long while to get to his reasons, but I found myself hard pressed to disagree with him. I don't think I'll take up the challenge - been there, done that, own the t-shirt. But he made some very good points, for those who can stomach the commercials that come with the community.
Lifting directly from the article, my thoughts can be summed up as follows:
But couldn’t I get the same benefits by participating in another kind of social/cultural/civic organization? Hypothetically speaking? Certainly.
He then goes on to argue:
Realistically though, getting the benefits of church in the absence of church would be difficult to accomplish for a few reasons. (...) Church thus offers the advantage of conveniently compiling the most benefits under one roof.
My opinion is that the statement above is an opinion rather than a fact. And IMO whether or not that statement is true for you highly varies depending on your geographic location and the organizations / services in your region. Just like not all churches will be able to offer all of the benefits listed in his arguments, not all non-church organizations or services will be deficient of these same benefits. IMO finding a non-church organization that offers a combination of benefits of similar value than those of a church-like organization isn't too hard. Parent/kid groups instantly come to mind.