Critical Review of “Total Church by Steve Timmis and Tim Chester”

Introduction

This critical review of Total Church by Steve Timmis and Tim Chester is written from the perspective of someone who personally experienced the practical and theological outworking of the ideas proposed in the book. Having attended Grace Church Boroughbridge, a church previously pastored by Tim Chester. I was exposed to a church culture shaped heavily by the authors’ ecclesiology. The first major red flag was bad hermeneutics of “what does that verse mean to you”. Another red flag was, we knew that they had broken away from “Crowded House Sheffield”, but no one would explain what happened and why. It was a subject that just simply was not to be talked about. There was also a need that all members of that church would be pushed/pressured into meeting together for dinner after service at each other’s houses, this also happened on a house group night, there was high pressure to attend the 5pm meal before the 8pm house group. We didn’t go to this because of our working hours despite many attempts from the leadership team to attempt to make it happen or work out something that would work, the importance of this was a head scratcher. So, sometime after leaving this church I decided to investigate what happened at “Crowded House Sheffield”, and wow it blew my mind. Another Mars Hill (Mark Driscol) incident and no surprise as both Mark Driscol and Steve Timmis were leaders in Act 29, an organisation that I now believe to be very dangerous and any, all connections with, should be severed. After this discovery, I then came across a book written by Steve Timmis and Tim Chester “Total Church” which is about a new way to do church. I now know that anyone who writes a new way to do church has to be an instant red flag. I decided to get a 2^nd hand copy of the book as I don’t want to make any financial contributions to these writers. I wanted to have an understanding of the red flags and head scratching that I had experienced at “Grace Church Boroughbridge”.

This review seeks to examine Total Church from a biblical perspective using the Legacy Standard Bible (LSB) as the scriptural standard. Particular attention will be paid to how the authors define the gospel, how they handle Scripture, and whether their church model aligns with the biblical one.

Main Concerns

1. Hermeneutics

2. Alternative Gospel

3. Redefinition of Evangelism

4. Functionally Redefining the Gospel

5. Confusion in Gospel Definition

6. Use of False Teachers

7. Scriptural Misuse (Genesis 1 / John 1)

8. Scriptural Misuse (Genesis 3)

9. Strawman Argumentation

10. Inclusion of Community in Gospel

1. Hermeneutics: A Faulty Foundation

In the opening pages of Total Church, a troubling statement sets the tone for the authors' interpretive approach. Quoting Lesslie Newbigin, they assert:

“The local congregation is the hermeneutic of the gospel.”— Total Church, p. 12

This foundational claim is not only theologically confused but dangerous. Hermeneutics, by definition, refers to the principles and methods used to interpret Scripture. To say that a church, rather than the Scriptures themselves, is the lens through which we understand the gospel is an inversion of biblical authority. It turns the local church into the interpreter of truth, rather than the Word of God being the judge of the church.

Biblical Response: Scripture Is the Interpreter of Truth

Scripture presents itself as sufficient, authoritative, and clear for understanding God’s will and the gospel:

• 2 Timothy 3:16–17 (LSB):“All Scripture is God-breathed and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be equipped, having been thoroughly equipped for every good work.”

  
  

• Acts 17:11 (LSB):“Now these were more noble-minded than those in Thessalonica, for they received the word with great eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see whether these things were so.”

  
  

• Psalm 19:7–8 (LSB):“The law of Yahweh is perfect, restoring the soul;The testimony of Yahweh is sure, making wise the simple.The precepts of Yahweh are right, rejoicing the heart;The commandment of Yahweh is pure, enlightening the eyes.”

  
  

Nowhere in Scripture are we told to look to the local congregation to understand the gospel. Rather, we are called to measure even apostles by whether they align with the Word (Galatians 1:8–9), to rightly divide the Word of truth (2 Timothy 2:15), and to test all things (1 Thessalonians 5:21). The biblical model places Scripture as the final rule and authority—not the church.

Subjective Hermeneutics in Practice

In the church setting the reviewer experienced (Grace Church Boroughbridge), a key red flag was the method of interpretation that asked, “What does this verse mean to you?” This individualistic, subjective approach strips Scripture of its intended meaning and opens the door for relativism.

This interpretive model is widely critiqued in faithful expository traditions. The Master's Seminary’s resource on handling Scripture (linked earlier) emphasizes:

• Authorial Intent — The meaning of Scripture is determined by the author, not the reader.

• Grammatical-Historical Method — Interpretation must be rooted in grammar, context, and historical background.

• Sufficiency of Scripture — God’s Word is sufficient for life and doctrine, and does not need to be filtered through cultural lenses or communities.

  
  

By contrast, Total Church tends to relativize interpretation through the communal experience, privileging “story” and “experience” over exegesis. This is especially dangerous when those communal interpretations conflict with the clear teaching of Scripture.

2. A Different Gospel: The Danger of Gospel Plus

Throughout Total Church, the authors elevate community to such a degree that it becomes functionally inseparable from the gospel itself. One of the clearest examples of this is found early in the introduction:

“Is the ‘gospel plus’ (requiring something – in this case Christian community in addition to the gospel, which thereby robs the gospel of its saving power)? The answer depends how you tell the gospel story. It depends whether you see the gospel simply as the story of God saving individuals, or as the story of God creating a new humanity.”— Total Church, p. 16

This quote is deeply problematic for several reasons:

A. The Bible Prohibits Any Other Gospel

The apostle Paul could not be clearer in Galatians 1:6–9 (LSB):

“I marvel that you are so quickly deserting Him who called you by the grace of Christ for a different gospel, which is really not another, except that there are some who are disturbing you and want to distort the gospel of Christ.But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should proclaim to you a gospel contrary to what we proclaimed to you, let him be accursed!As we have said before, so I say again now, if any man is proclaiming to you a gospel contrary to what you received, let him be accursed!”

There is no flexibility in the gospel message. The gospel is not subject to reinterpretation based on one’s communal lens or sociological context. To say “the answer depends how you tell the gospel story” is to open the door to syncretism, where culture determines doctrine.

B. The Gospel is a Message of Substitution, Not Community Creation

While it is true that the gospel results in a new people (the church), that is not the gospel itself. The core gospel message, as consistently preached in the New Testament, is:

• The holiness of God

• The sinfulness of man

• The necessity of repentance

• The substitutionary atonement of Jesus Christ

• The bodily resurrection

• Salvation by grace through faith in Christ alone

Consider Paul’s clear articulation:

1 Corinthians 15:1–4 (LSB):“Now I make known to you, brothers, the gospel which I proclaimed as good news to you, which also you received, in which also you stand, by which also you are saved, if you hold fast the word which I proclaimed to you as good news, unless you believed for nothing.For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures.”

This is the biblical gospel—nothing about inclusion into a community or communal storytelling. Those may be fruits of the gospel, but they are not the gospel itself.

C. Confusion of Cause and Effect

The authors of Total Church commit a theological category error by conflating the effects of the gospel with the gospel itself. The New Testament epistles consistently teach that faith in Christ leads to union with His body (the Church), but never that community is the gospel.

Ephesians 2:8–10 (LSB):“For by grace you have been saved through faith, and this not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not of works, so that no one may boast. For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand so that we would walk in them.”

Community and good works are the result of salvation—not prerequisites, not definitions, and certainly not elements of the saving message.

3. Redefinition of Evangelism as Inclusion into Community

In Total Church, one of the book’s central themes is that evangelism is best accomplished not by proclamation alone, but by including people into the life of the Christian community. This is stated explicitly:

“Evangelism is not something to be undertaken alone but in the context of the Christian community. People need to be included into the community of believers as part of their evangelistic journey.”— Total Church, p. 64

This statement is emblematic of the book’s functional redefinition of evangelism. While the New Testament does certainly value the witness of the church body (John 13:35; Acts 2:42–47), the authors subtly shift the focus of evangelism away from the proclamation of the gospel and toward belonging in community.

A. Biblical Evangelism: Preaching Christ Crucified

Paul makes it clear that evangelism is centred on declaring the message of Christ’s death and resurrection:

1 Corinthians 2:1–2 (LSB):“And when I came to you, brothers, I did not come with superiority of word or of wisdom, proclaiming to you the witness of God. For I determined to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ, and Him crucified.”

Romans 10:14–17 (LSB):“How then will they call on Him in whom they have not believed? How will they believe in Him whom they have not heard? And how will they hear without a preacher?…So faith comes from hearing, and hearing by the word of Christ.”

The emphasis is always on the verbal proclamation of Christ as the exclusive means by which sinners are saved. It is hearing the gospel—not experiencing community—that brings faith and regeneration.

B. The Problem with “Belonging Before Believing”

The logic behind the Total Church model is built on an idea popularized in the emerging church movement: “belonging before believing.” This model invites nonbelievers into the full life of the church community—fellowship, service, even leadership roles—before they have professed faith in Christ. While this may feel loving, it creates several theological and pastoral problems:

1. It Confuses Regenerate and Unregenerate People —The local church is a gathering of believers (Acts 2:44, 1 Corinthians 1:2). Bringing unbelievers into that identity without repentance and faith misrepresents what the church is.

2. It Distorts the Means of Salvation —Salvation does not occur by osmosis through community warmth. It comes through conviction of sin and faith in Christ (John 3:18, Romans 3:23–26).

3. It Dulls the Urgency of the Gospel —If unbelievers are made to feel they already belong, the urgency of repentance is lost. Community becomes a substitute for Christ, not a result of trusting Him.

   
   

C. Jesus’ Model: Calling Sinners to Repent

Jesus dined with tax collectors and sinners, but His message was never simply inclusion. His invitation was always clear: “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.” (Matthew 4:17).

Luke 5:31–32 (LSB):“And Jesus answered and said to them, ‘It is not those who are healthy who need a physician, but those who are sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.’”

John 6:65–66 (LSB):“And He was saying, ‘For this reason I have said to you, that no one can come to Me unless it has been granted him from the Father.’As a result of this many of His disciples went away and were not walking with Him anymore.”

Jesus did not confuse people into community membership before calling them to Himself. He proclaimed truth—even when it led many to walk away.

4. Functionally Redefining the Gospel

One of the most subtle yet serious issues in Total Church is that the gospel is recast not as a message of salvation, but as a narrative of community formation. Though the authors affirm the need for the gospel, their continual framing makes it functionally indistinct from “living in community.”

On page 16, they write:

“The gospel is the story of God creating a new humanity.”

While this statement contains a grain of truth (the gospel does result in a new humanity in Christ), it is not the definition of the gospel. The biblical gospel is not about God forming community—it’s about Christ saving sinners from God’s wrath and reconciling them to Himself.

A. What Is the Biblical Gospel?

Romans 1:16–17 (LSB):“For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek.For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith; as it is written, ‘But the righteous will live by faith.’”

The gospel is the power of God unto salvation—not a social plan for community integration or reform. It is a message about righteousness, justification, and eternal life through faith in Jesus Christ.

2 Corinthians 5:21 (LSB):“He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.”

The gospel is about the substitutionary work of Jesus on the cross, not a corporate lifestyle.

Colossians 1:21–22 (LSB):“And although you were formerly alienated and enemies in mind and in evil deeds, but now He reconciled you in the body of His flesh through death, in order to present you before Him holy and blameless and beyond reproach.”

Reconciliation to God—not to community—is the central focus of the gospel.

B. The Danger of Replacing Gospel Content with Gospel “Culture”

While Timmis and Chester speak often of being “gospel-centred,” their functional usage of the term becomes murky. Their emphasis lies more on how the gospel shapes culture, than on the truths that must be believed for one to be saved. This is made explicit in their practical examples and emphasis on community rhythms rather than gospel proclamation.

This subtly shifts the reader’s attention from:

• What Christ has done to:

• How we now live as a community

In doing so, they conflate the result of the gospel with the gospel itself.

Galatians 2:16 (LSB):“But knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the Law but through faith in Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Christ Jesus so that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the Law; since by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified.”

The authors' redefinition begins to function like a new law—you are not saved unless you also live missionally in community.

C. Redefinition Has Consequences

When the gospel is reframed around human actions (even good ones like community), several dangers arise:

1. It Undermines Assurance — Believers may wonder if they are truly saved if they are not deeply embedded in a community model.

2. It Promotes Legalism or Guilt — Community rhythms become unspoken standards of holiness or spiritual authenticity.

3. It Distracts from the Cross — The focus shifts from what Christ accomplished to what we are accomplishing as a group.

This redefinition can result in sincere people missing the true gospel entirely because they confuse gospel fruit with gospel root.

5. Confusion in Gospel Definition

One of the most basic—and serious—flaws in Total Church is the authors' repeated failure to clearly and biblically define the gospel. While the word “gospel” is used extensively throughout the book, the actual content of the gospel message—as laid out in Scripture—is never plainly stated.

Instead, the gospel is described with vague phrases like:

“The gospel is the good news that Jesus is Lord.”— Total Church, p. 37

While this is technically true, it is incomplete and potentially misleading. Declaring that “Jesus is Lord” is a consequence and confession of the gospel (Romans 10:9), but it is not the full gospel message. Without context about sin, judgment, substitutionary atonement, and resurrection, it becomes a hollow slogan that could be embraced by liberals, moralists, or even cults who redefine “Jesus” and “Lord” on their own terms.

A. Scripture Clearly Defines the Gospel

Paul gives the most succinct summary of the gospel in:

1 Corinthians 15:1–4 (LSB):“Now I make known to you, brothers, the gospel which I proclaimed as good news to you, which also you received, in which also you stand, by which also you are saved……that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures.”

This is the gospel: Christ died for our sins, was buried, and rose again. This message centres on substitutionary atonement and resurrection—neither of which is clearly articulated in Total Church.

Romans 3:23–25 (LSB):“For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,being justified as a gift by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus,whom God displayed publicly as a propitiation in His blood through faith…”

The gospel includes God's justice, our guilt, Christ’s satisfaction of divine wrath (propitiation), and our justification through faith. These elements are not minor—they are essential.

B. Gospel Confusion Leads to False Assurance

In a gospel-deprived church culture (like that formed under Total Church thinking), people may sincerely believe they are saved because:

• They are in community,

• They affirm the lordship of Jesus,

• They participate in missional rhythms.

  
  

But none of those things guarantee salvation. A person is only saved when they repent of sin and trust in the finished work of Christ on the cross for their justification.

John 3:18 (LSB):“He who believes in Him is not judged; he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.”

This requires belief in who Jesus is and what He has done—specifically His death and resurrection.

C. Confusion Reflects in the Fruit

The absence of gospel clarity in Total Church is not merely theoretical—it has real effects:

• Evangelism becomes more about inviting people to meals than proclaiming Christ.

• Discipleship becomes community conformity rather than teaching believers to obey all that Christ has commanded (Matt. 28:20).

• Church unity becomes fragile, as it is built on relational culture rather than shared conviction of truth.

In short, when the gospel is not clearly defined, everything else becomes unstable.

6. Use of False Teachers and Dangerous Influences (continued)

2 John 1:9–10 (LSB):“Anyone who goes too far and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God; the one who abides in the teaching, he has both the Father and the Son.If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house and do not give him a greeting.”

The Apostle John warns against tolerating or platforming those who deviate from the core teachings of Christ. While some may argue that John Stott’s teachings on annihilationism are unrelated to ecclesiology, the biblical standard is not compartmentalized—those who teach doctrinal error, especially on heaven and hell, are not to be treated as reliable guides.

B. Affirming the Emerging Church

Perhaps more troubling is Total Church’s apparent admiration for the emerging church movement. The authors write:

“Conservative evangelicals place a proper emphasis on the gospel, while the emerging church emphasizes the importance of community. We need both.”— Total Church, p. 15

This creates a false equivalence between gospel clarity and community emphasis, as if the two are equal and equally valid. The emerging church, however, has a history of deconstructing biblical authority, questioning the exclusivity of Christ, and distorting the gospel message beyond recognition.

For example, emergent leaders such as Rob Bell (Love Wins), Brian McLaren, and Tony Jones have:

• Denied the existence of hell (universalism or conditionalism),

• Rejected substitutionary atonement,

• Undermined the authority of Scripture,

• Embraced postmodern relativism.

  
  

To suggest that conservatives should integrate the community insights of the emerging church is akin to suggesting that biblical churches should learn from apostates how to do hospitality. It’s not just unwise—it’s reckless.

Romans 16:17–18 (LSB):“Now I urge you, brothers, to keep your eye on those who cause dissensions and stumblings contrary to the teaching which you learned, and turn away from them.For such men are slaves, not of our Lord Christ but of their own stomach, and by their smooth and flattering speech they deceive the hearts of the unsuspecting.”

Rather than being critiqued and rejected, false teachers are presented in Total Church as helpful contributors. This lack of discernment is one of the clearest pieces of evidence that the authors have lost their theological moorings.

C. Lack of Biblical Separation

The Bible repeatedly warns against partnership with error, whether by platform, praise, or practice:

2 Corinthians 6:14–17 (LSB):“Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership have righteousness and lawlessness…Or what agreement has the sanctuary of God with idols?...Therefore, ‘Come out from their midst and be separate,’ says the Lord.”

By embracing voices that have strayed from sound doctrine and by blending evangelicalism with elements of the emerging church, Total Church not only weakens its message but puts its readers in spiritual danger.

7. Scriptural Misuse: Genesis 1 and John 1

In Total Church, the authors attempt to build a theology of “God ruling through His Word” by connecting Genesis 1 and John 1. While this connection is biblically valid in itself, their specific interpretation and application of these texts introduces error.

“Through His word [Genesis 1:1–3], He brought order out of chaos and light out of darkness (John 1:1–3). Where God’s word is not heard, chaos and darkness close in again.”— Total Church, p. 37

This is a classic case of inserting theological meaning into the text that is not actually present. It overlays a philosophical theme—“God’s Word drives out chaos”—onto the Genesis and John texts in a way that goes beyond what Scripture says.

A. What Does Genesis 1:1–3 Actually Say?

Genesis 1:1–3 (LSB):“In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.And the earth was without form and void, and darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the surface of the waters.Then God said, ‘Let there be light’; and there was light.”

Genesis 1 describes the creation of the universe out of nothing (ex nihilo). The earth being “formless and void” does not imply chaos in a moral or philosophical sense. It means the earth was unshaped and empty—it hadn’t yet been formed or filled. There is no indication in the text of some primordial chaos being pushed back by God’s Word as a moral agent. Rather, it simply affirms God’s sovereign creative action.

B. What Does John 1:1–3 Actually Say?

John 1:1–3 (LSB):“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.He was in the beginning with God.All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being.”

John 1 affirms the pre-existence and deity of Christ, the Logos (Word), and His role as the agent of creation. There is no mention of chaos or a cosmic battle. The emphasis is theological and Christological: Jesus is the eternal Creator.

Yet Timmis and Chester conflate the two passages to support the idea that “when God’s Word is not heard, chaos and darkness close in again.” This is pure eisegesis—reading their community-driven worldview into the biblical text.

C. Inserting Ideas That Aren’t in the Text

The statement “Where God’s word is not heard, chaos and darkness close in again” is not found in Scripture. While it is true that sin brings spiritual darkness and that God’s Word brings light (Psalm 119:105), it is a different thing altogether to take Genesis 1 and John 1 and extrapolate a general sociological pattern about chaos and community.

Proverbs 30:6 (LSB):“Do not add to His words lest He reprove you, and you be proved a liar.”

2 Peter 3:16 (LSB):“[Paul’s letters]…in which are some things hard to understand, which the untaught and unstable distort, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction.”

The authors take a true concept (God’s Word is powerful and good) and misapply it to a context that Scripture does not support. This is a hallmark of poor hermeneutics and should cause immediate concern for any discerning reader.

8. Scriptural Misuse: Genesis 3

In their discussion on sin and the fall, Timmis and Chester write:

“It was the lie of the serpent to portray God’s rule as harsh and tyrannical.”— Total Church, p. 39

This interpretation is problematic. While it is true that Satan lies and deceives, there is no textual evidence in Genesis 3 that the serpent portrays God as “harsh and tyrannical.” Rather, the serpent calls God’s truth into question and tempts Eve with the desire to be like God—not a reaction against tyranny.

A. What Genesis 3 Actually Says

Genesis 3:1–7 (LSB):“Now the serpent was more crafty than any beast of the field which Yahweh God had made.And he said to the woman, ‘Indeed, has God said, “You shall not eat from any tree of the garden”?’And the woman said to the serpent, ‘From the fruit of the trees of the garden we may eat;but from the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God said, “You shall not eat from it, and you shall not touch it, lest you die.”’And the serpent said to the woman, ‘You surely will not die!For God knows that in the day you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.’Then the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was desirable to make one wise, and she took from its fruit and ate; and she gave also to her husband with her, and he ate.Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves loin coverings.”

Nowhere in this passage does the serpent say or imply that God is harsh or tyrannical. The deception of the serpent is theological—not sociological or emotional. He accuses God of lying and withholds the truth, suggesting that God is limiting Adam and Eve’s potential.

B. The Danger of Reading Modern Concepts into Ancient Texts

Timmis and Chester’s mischaracterization of Satan’s lie reflects a modern sensitivity to authority—a lens shaped more by postmodern discomfort with hierarchy than biblical theology. This approach imposes onto the text a 21st-century fear of authoritarianism that simply isn’t there in the original Hebrew narrative.

This type of reading distorts the theological gravity of the Fall:

• The sin was not rebellion against tyranny.

• It was disobedience against God’s holy command and the desire to be equal with God.

  
  

This is confirmed in Paul’s commentary on the Fall:

Romans 5:19 (LSB):“For as through the one man’s disobedience the many were appointed sinners, even so through the obedience of the One the many will be appointed righteous.”

It was disobedience, not a protest against divine oppression, that plunged humanity into ruin.

C. Satan's True Tactic: Undermining God’s Word

Rather than casting God as a tyrant, Satan’s actual method was to undermine the authority and truthfulness of God’s Word—a tactic echoed by Timmis and Chester’s own hermeneutics, unfortunately.

John 8:44 (LSB):“You are of your father the devil, and you want to do the desires of your father.He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth because there is no truth in him.Whenever he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies.”

To misrepresent Satan’s strategy in Genesis 3 is not merely a harmless error—it undermines the seriousness of sin and weakens the biblical definition of rebellion.

9. Strawman Argumentation and False Dichotomies

A recurring issue in Total Church is the use of logical fallacies, particularly strawman arguments and false dichotomies, to justify the book’s central thesis: that community is as essential to the gospel as the message of salvation itself.

For example, early in the book the authors ask:

“Is the ‘gospel plus’ (requiring something—in this case Christian community in addition to the gospel, which thereby robs the gospel of its saving power)? The answer depends how you tell the gospel story.”— Total Church, p. 16

This is a textbook strawman. It frames critics of the book’s thesis as suggesting that the gospel excludes community entirely, or that those who value community are inherently preaching a “gospel plus” message. The authors then dismantle this imagined opponent by asserting that their own model is more balanced.

A. A False Choice Between “Gospel-Centric” and “Community-Centric”

The authors continually frame conservative evangelicals as being overly focused on gospel truth and the emerging church as being rightly focused on community. They then position themselves as offering a middle way.

But this is a false dichotomy. The idea that one must choose between a gospel of personal salvation and a gospel of community formation is not found in Scripture.

Acts 2:42–47 (LSB) shows both:“They were continually devoting themselves to the apostles’ teaching and to the fellowship… And the Lord was adding to their number daily those who were being saved.”

The apostles’ teaching—the Word—comes first. Fellowship flows from salvation, not alongside it as a co-equal means.

B. The Real Gospel Already Produces Community

It is unnecessary to pit gospel proclamation against communal experience because biblical community is a fruit of the true gospel. The book of Ephesians illustrates this beautifully:

Ephesians 2:13–16 (LSB):“But now in Christ Jesus you who formerly were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ.…that He might create the two into one new man, making peace,and might reconcile them both in one body to God through the cross…”

Here, reconciliation to one another (community) happens through the cross. Community is the result of Christ’s finished work, not a co-ingredient in the gospel recipe.

C. Gospel-Centeredness Doesn’t Neglect Community

The strawman that gospel-centred churches ignore community is also misleading. The healthiest gospel-preaching churches naturally cultivate deep relationships, sacrificial service, and mutual edification (Romans 12; Galatians 6). The claim that conservative evangelicalism fails to value community is more anecdotal than theological—and does not justify redefining the gospel.

1 Thessalonians 2:8 (LSB):“Having so fond an affection for you, we were pleased to impart to you not only the gospel of God but also our own lives, because you had become beloved to us.”

Paul did both: preach the gospel and share his life—but never confused the two.

10. Inclusion of Community in Gospel Definition

Perhaps the most serious theological error in Total Church is the way Timmis and Chester functionally redefine the gospel to include community as part of its very content. While the authors do not outright deny the traditional gospel, they subtly merge it with their emphasis on communal life in such a way that the two become inseparable.

Consider this summary statement:

“The gospel is the good news of God’s kingdom. It is about God’s rule being extended through His Word, creating a new people who live under that rule.”— Total Church, p. 38

This is a conflation of categories. While it is true that God’s redemptive plan culminates in a people living under His rule (Revelation 21:3), this is the result of the gospel—not the gospel itself.

A. What Scripture Says the Gospel Is

The gospel, as preached in the New Testament, is a message—not a sociological phenomenon.

Romans 10:17 (LSB):“So faith comes from hearing, and hearing by the word of Christ.”

1 Corinthians 15:1–4 (LSB):“Now I make known to you, brothers, the gospel…that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures,and that He was buried,and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures.”

This message is personal, historical, theological, and eternal. It demands repentance and faith, not social engagement or belonging.

B. Gospel and Community: Cause and Effect, Not Co-Essentials

When the gospel is rightly understood and believed, it naturally results in community. The New Testament is filled with “one another” commands for believers, but none of those are presented as gospel requirements.

Galatians 3:26–28 (LSB):“For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus…There is neither Jew nor Greek…for you are all one in Christ Jesus.”

Unity and community flow from faith in Christ—not as a means of grace, but as its fruit.

To insist that true gospel life must be community-centric is to risk undermining:

• The sufficiency of Christ alone for salvation,

• The efficacy of the Word alone to save,

• The work of the Spirit alone to apply redemption.

C. The Danger of Gospel Blending

Blending community into the gospel results in:

• Missional confusion — evangelism becomes inviting people to meals or groups, not to Christ.

• Doctrinal compromise — the offense of the cross is muted in favour of belonging and inclusion.

• Ecclesiological dysfunction — the church becomes a shared lifestyle rather than the gathering of the redeemed.

  
  

Galatians 1:6–7 (LSB):“I marvel that you are so quickly deserting Him who called you by the grace of Christ for a different gospel…which is really not another, except that there are some who are disturbing you and want to distort the gospel of Christ.”

The moment we begin altering the content of the gospel—even by adding beautiful things like community—we are preaching a different gospel, which Paul says brings damnation (v. 9).

Conclusion to This Concern

The authors’ emphasis on community is not wrong in itself, and community can be good and work for many people. But when community becomes integral to the definition of the gospel, the book crosses a dangerous line. Scripture guards the gospel message with holy jealousy—nothing can be added, not even something as cherished as fellowship.

Galatians 1:6–7 (LSB):

“I marvel that you are so quickly deserting Him who called you by the grace of Christ for a different gospel, which is really not another, only there are some who are disturbing you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should proclaim to you a gospel contrary to the gospel we have proclaimed to you, let him be accursed! As we have said before, so I say again now, if any man is proclaiming to you a gospel contrary to what you received, let him be accursed!”

The book and any Church that follows the book and or its authors must therefore me Marked and Avoided.