The church is not sent on a mission by God, rather God is on a mission and the church is called to join him. The mission is not the church’s; it is the Missio Dei, or “mission of God” that we are called to be part of. Andrew Jones of TallSkinnyKiwi blog fame points out: “Missio Dei stems from the Triune God: the Father sends the Son, the Father and the Son send the Spirit, the Father and the Son and the Spirit send the church into the world.”
Missional activist Alan Hirsch points out what being missional is not: First, the missional church is not synonymous with the emergent church, which is primarily a renewal movement to contextualize Christianity for a postmodern generation. Missional is also not the same as evangelistic or seeker sensitive, terms that generally apply to a more attractional church. Missional is not a new term from church growth it has a much bigger agenda than that. Finally, missional is not just social justice. We should engage the needs of the world, which is a part of the mission, but certainly not the whole of it.
Hirsch goes on to say, “A missional theology is not content with mission being a church-based work. Rather, it applies to the whole of life of every believer. Every disciple is to be an agent of the kingdom of God, and every disciple is to carry the mission of God into every sphere of life. We are all missionaries sent into a non-Christian culture.”
Monday, September 14, 2009
Friday, September 11, 2009
What do you mean by Church 3.0?
We need to upgrade the operating system for the church. A good upgrade does a few things. It makes the operation simpler and more intuitive. It also is more powerful in accomplishing all its important tasks. Finally, a good upgrade opens up the software to whole new markets that would never have tried to use the product in the past.
There have been two major upgrades in Church formation since Acts that have changed the entire system. The first occurred dramatically during the rule of the Emperor Constantine. The church shifted from an underground, grassroots, organic movement to a more institutionalized organization. I believe that the second is occurring now.
Church 1.0
The first century church was church 1.0 in its various minor differences. The Jerusalem church would have been the original church 1.0. Antioch would be church 1.1. The Galatian churches started in the first journey of Paul and Barnabas would represent church 1.2. Corinth would represent a change to 1.3 as Paul added some patches to the way he approached church. The Ephesian church would be church 1.4. And so the changes went on through two centuries of church life kept simple and organic by the oppression and persecution of ten different Roman emperors. Heresies emerged and were purged. There was the establishment of regional bishops and the institutionalization of some of the forms of Christianity during this period, but over all the church remained a grassroots, marginalized movement under the heat of intense persecution.
Everything changed in 313 AD when Constantine declared that the empire would not only tolerate Christianity but restore to the church all lost property. He was the first “Christian” emperor and Christianity went instantly from the margins to the mainstream and everything changed. Christianity became the state religion and the church did not change much from that point on. This was the shift to Church 2.0 and all its eventual variants.
Church 2.0
Over the centuries, after Constantine, the Western church has evolved in many ways, but none have been a significant systemic change. There was the establishment of both the Roman Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church and for hundreds of years there were very little changes. The Reformation split the Western church into the Roman Church and the volatile protestant church—or church 2.1. But as an institution, in spite of the differences, the institutional system remained mostly unchanged. The Anabaptists were set lose by the reformation (and persecuted by it) but it was just a change from church 2.1 to 2.2. Whether the church adapts to reach coal miners in the 18th century England or postmodern pilgrims in the 21st century, most of the changes have been patches and plug-ins to the Church 2.0 system. Whether you are talking about high church or low, Pentecostal or Reformed the church has remained in the 2.0 range of upgrades. From Baptist to Brethren, from Mennonite to Methodist, the changes in the system are relatively untouched over the centuries. Music or no music? Pipe organ or electric guitar? Tall ceilings with stained-glass widows or meeting in a box building without windows, the actual system of church has gone relatively unchanged.
You have the priests or pastors, the Sunday service with singing and a sermon, the weekly offering, the pulpit with pews and the church building. These have been constants since the forth century. Even if you move the whole show into a house instead of a church building, if the system hasn’t changed you have only shrunk the church, not transformed it. Changing the style of music does not upgrade the system. Turning down the lights and turning up the volume is a simple patch to the same old system. Choirs and hymns or praise bands and fog machines, kneeling or standing the system is changed very little. Sermonizing with topical messages or expositional ones is not changing the system just making minor adjustments. Sunday Schools or small groups as secondary learning environments are not a systemic change at all, just a variation on the same old operational system.
While most of the advances to Church 2.0 over the centuries have been plug-ins and patches to the same old system, there have been anomalies along the way. Usually, these anomalies are the result of rampant persecution that drives the church back to the old default system. One could say that these are examples of going back to the Church 1.0 system, because their 2.0 system crashed in the face of extreme heat. The radical Anabaptist churches are like that. The Chinese house church phenomenon is also a departure from the expression of the Church 2.0 system. But these experiments are really not the norm and have not, to date, influenced the church as a whole in any permanent fashion, except perhaps to say that they are part of the learning that has led to this new operating system—Church 3.0
Church 3.0
I believe that the second major shift is occurring now in our lifetime. Many people want to go back to the beginning again. As much as I am enamored of what I learned about the church of the first century we simply cannot go back; we can only go forward. Granted, if we did go back it would be a vast improvement on where we have been more recently. But I have to ask, could we do even better than Church 1.0? Some may find that even such a question is heretical. It is only a question, but it bears consideration.
Can it be that we can actually improve upon the first century church? A careful study of Acts reveals that even in the first decades of the church there was profound improvement as people learned from experience, so why not more so today, building upon the foundation of two thousand years of mistakes? I believe it is possible. I think we can see the awesome impact and rapid spread that the first century saw, but we also can benefit from two thousand years of learning as well and utilize the technological advances we have available today.
Imagine if the apostle Paul could buy an airline ticket and be across the world in twelve hours instead of twelve years. Imagine what he would do with the internet and the ability to see events unfold globally and instantaneously. Our ability to understand culture and translate languages today is built upon two thousand years of mistakes and the successes they produce. Perhaps more than any other benefit we have is that we can look in hindsight at how easily the church was overcome by institutionalization—where the church is no longer people in relationship to one another, but an organized system—and move forward armed with that knowledge. The early church flew blindly into a trap of a religious hierarchical system that kept her in the dark ages for hundreds of years. History can train us for the future if we listen to it. No, church 3.0 is not a shift downward in church life or quality. It is an upgrade in every sense of the word, perhaps even above the early church. Why would we suspect that God would be content with us going backwards? Why wouldn’t he want us to grow and develop in better ways?
The best upgrades do a few things. First they allow for greater power in what you want to accomplish, and church 3.0 is a huge boost in raw spiritual power. Every part of the body of Christ can function at a much higher level. A second thing you may look for in an upgrade is to move to a simpler and more intuitive ways of using the system. This upgrade to the church 3.0 is certainly that in so many ways. It is built upon simplicity and potency bound together in a way that increases speed and power in the influence that the church can and should have. Thirdly, upgrades take advantage of the latest discoveries in technology and help you interact better with all the other electronics you may use. Church 3.0 is far and away better at being fluid and mixing with multiple expressions of church structure and overcoming the world’s obstacles. Fourthly, an upgrade should have greater capacity to accommodate much more information, functionality and storage. Finally, some cool new features in an upgrade should significantly improve the system’s performance and make it much more fun to use. Church 3.0 is so enjoyable it is quite common for those who have made the switch to comment that they could never go back to the old system.
Do not be deceived into thinking that this is just another patch to the same old system; it is a radical change from the core of what church is. Church 3.0 has rebuilt the function of the church in every sense from the smallest to the largest capacity.
There have been two major upgrades in Church formation since Acts that have changed the entire system. The first occurred dramatically during the rule of the Emperor Constantine. The church shifted from an underground, grassroots, organic movement to a more institutionalized organization. I believe that the second is occurring now.
Church 1.0
The first century church was church 1.0 in its various minor differences. The Jerusalem church would have been the original church 1.0. Antioch would be church 1.1. The Galatian churches started in the first journey of Paul and Barnabas would represent church 1.2. Corinth would represent a change to 1.3 as Paul added some patches to the way he approached church. The Ephesian church would be church 1.4. And so the changes went on through two centuries of church life kept simple and organic by the oppression and persecution of ten different Roman emperors. Heresies emerged and were purged. There was the establishment of regional bishops and the institutionalization of some of the forms of Christianity during this period, but over all the church remained a grassroots, marginalized movement under the heat of intense persecution.
Everything changed in 313 AD when Constantine declared that the empire would not only tolerate Christianity but restore to the church all lost property. He was the first “Christian” emperor and Christianity went instantly from the margins to the mainstream and everything changed. Christianity became the state religion and the church did not change much from that point on. This was the shift to Church 2.0 and all its eventual variants.
Church 2.0
Over the centuries, after Constantine, the Western church has evolved in many ways, but none have been a significant systemic change. There was the establishment of both the Roman Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church and for hundreds of years there were very little changes. The Reformation split the Western church into the Roman Church and the volatile protestant church—or church 2.1. But as an institution, in spite of the differences, the institutional system remained mostly unchanged. The Anabaptists were set lose by the reformation (and persecuted by it) but it was just a change from church 2.1 to 2.2. Whether the church adapts to reach coal miners in the 18th century England or postmodern pilgrims in the 21st century, most of the changes have been patches and plug-ins to the Church 2.0 system. Whether you are talking about high church or low, Pentecostal or Reformed the church has remained in the 2.0 range of upgrades. From Baptist to Brethren, from Mennonite to Methodist, the changes in the system are relatively untouched over the centuries. Music or no music? Pipe organ or electric guitar? Tall ceilings with stained-glass widows or meeting in a box building without windows, the actual system of church has gone relatively unchanged.
You have the priests or pastors, the Sunday service with singing and a sermon, the weekly offering, the pulpit with pews and the church building. These have been constants since the forth century. Even if you move the whole show into a house instead of a church building, if the system hasn’t changed you have only shrunk the church, not transformed it. Changing the style of music does not upgrade the system. Turning down the lights and turning up the volume is a simple patch to the same old system. Choirs and hymns or praise bands and fog machines, kneeling or standing the system is changed very little. Sermonizing with topical messages or expositional ones is not changing the system just making minor adjustments. Sunday Schools or small groups as secondary learning environments are not a systemic change at all, just a variation on the same old operational system.
While most of the advances to Church 2.0 over the centuries have been plug-ins and patches to the same old system, there have been anomalies along the way. Usually, these anomalies are the result of rampant persecution that drives the church back to the old default system. One could say that these are examples of going back to the Church 1.0 system, because their 2.0 system crashed in the face of extreme heat. The radical Anabaptist churches are like that. The Chinese house church phenomenon is also a departure from the expression of the Church 2.0 system. But these experiments are really not the norm and have not, to date, influenced the church as a whole in any permanent fashion, except perhaps to say that they are part of the learning that has led to this new operating system—Church 3.0
Church 3.0
I believe that the second major shift is occurring now in our lifetime. Many people want to go back to the beginning again. As much as I am enamored of what I learned about the church of the first century we simply cannot go back; we can only go forward. Granted, if we did go back it would be a vast improvement on where we have been more recently. But I have to ask, could we do even better than Church 1.0? Some may find that even such a question is heretical. It is only a question, but it bears consideration.
Can it be that we can actually improve upon the first century church? A careful study of Acts reveals that even in the first decades of the church there was profound improvement as people learned from experience, so why not more so today, building upon the foundation of two thousand years of mistakes? I believe it is possible. I think we can see the awesome impact and rapid spread that the first century saw, but we also can benefit from two thousand years of learning as well and utilize the technological advances we have available today.
Imagine if the apostle Paul could buy an airline ticket and be across the world in twelve hours instead of twelve years. Imagine what he would do with the internet and the ability to see events unfold globally and instantaneously. Our ability to understand culture and translate languages today is built upon two thousand years of mistakes and the successes they produce. Perhaps more than any other benefit we have is that we can look in hindsight at how easily the church was overcome by institutionalization—where the church is no longer people in relationship to one another, but an organized system—and move forward armed with that knowledge. The early church flew blindly into a trap of a religious hierarchical system that kept her in the dark ages for hundreds of years. History can train us for the future if we listen to it. No, church 3.0 is not a shift downward in church life or quality. It is an upgrade in every sense of the word, perhaps even above the early church. Why would we suspect that God would be content with us going backwards? Why wouldn’t he want us to grow and develop in better ways?
The best upgrades do a few things. First they allow for greater power in what you want to accomplish, and church 3.0 is a huge boost in raw spiritual power. Every part of the body of Christ can function at a much higher level. A second thing you may look for in an upgrade is to move to a simpler and more intuitive ways of using the system. This upgrade to the church 3.0 is certainly that in so many ways. It is built upon simplicity and potency bound together in a way that increases speed and power in the influence that the church can and should have. Thirdly, upgrades take advantage of the latest discoveries in technology and help you interact better with all the other electronics you may use. Church 3.0 is far and away better at being fluid and mixing with multiple expressions of church structure and overcoming the world’s obstacles. Fourthly, an upgrade should have greater capacity to accommodate much more information, functionality and storage. Finally, some cool new features in an upgrade should significantly improve the system’s performance and make it much more fun to use. Church 3.0 is so enjoyable it is quite common for those who have made the switch to comment that they could never go back to the old system.
Do not be deceived into thinking that this is just another patch to the same old system; it is a radical change from the core of what church is. Church 3.0 has rebuilt the function of the church in every sense from the smallest to the largest capacity.
Thursday, September 10, 2009
Church 3.0
To be born is a good thing. To know why you were born is a better thing. To fulfill the reason you were born is perhaps the greatest thing.
My life is devoted to creatively releasing the reproduction of healthy disciples, leaders, churches and movements to the ends of the earth until Christ returns or I die. I am pretty set in this purpose and it is hard to get me away from it. There is little else that I see relevant to my calling. This is what gets me up in the morning and keeps me up at night. All of my writings to date have been to this end. For instance…
Cultivating a Life for God and Search & Rescue were written to help reproduce healthy disciples. Organic Leadership, Raising Leaders for the Harvest (with Bob Logan) and TruthQuest were written to develop healthy leaders. Organic Church and Beyond Church Planting (with Bob Logan) were written to release healthy church reproduction.
Church 3.0 is the first book I have written that is actually focused on the big picture of releasing healthy church movements. While it does address healthy churches (you can’t have a church movement without them), it presents a bigger picture than that. The upgrades I am recommending in this book are all dedicated to help us see a true, global church multiplication movement.
This book addresses all the questions I am most often asked about organic church, and uses those questions as a launching pad to discuss the important changes that can bring about a legitimate upgrade to the expression of the church in today's world.
In this book I look at the mission of the church, models of organic churches, how networks are formed, what are some God-designed size groupings for the most effective function of God's people. I also address raising children in organic church, reducing heresy, handling money and the ordinances.
I will post some thoughts from the book on this blog, but the book is very comprehensive and cannot be put entirely on a blog. It comes out this winter with Jossey-Bass under the Leadership Network label. In my next post I will explain the title Church 3.0.
My life is devoted to creatively releasing the reproduction of healthy disciples, leaders, churches and movements to the ends of the earth until Christ returns or I die. I am pretty set in this purpose and it is hard to get me away from it. There is little else that I see relevant to my calling. This is what gets me up in the morning and keeps me up at night. All of my writings to date have been to this end. For instance…
Cultivating a Life for God and Search & Rescue were written to help reproduce healthy disciples. Organic Leadership, Raising Leaders for the Harvest (with Bob Logan) and TruthQuest were written to develop healthy leaders. Organic Church and Beyond Church Planting (with Bob Logan) were written to release healthy church reproduction.
Church 3.0 is the first book I have written that is actually focused on the big picture of releasing healthy church movements. While it does address healthy churches (you can’t have a church movement without them), it presents a bigger picture than that. The upgrades I am recommending in this book are all dedicated to help us see a true, global church multiplication movement.
This book addresses all the questions I am most often asked about organic church, and uses those questions as a launching pad to discuss the important changes that can bring about a legitimate upgrade to the expression of the church in today's world.
In this book I look at the mission of the church, models of organic churches, how networks are formed, what are some God-designed size groupings for the most effective function of God's people. I also address raising children in organic church, reducing heresy, handling money and the ordinances.
I will post some thoughts from the book on this blog, but the book is very comprehensive and cannot be put entirely on a blog. It comes out this winter with Jossey-Bass under the Leadership Network label. In my next post I will explain the title Church 3.0.
Wednesday, September 9, 2009
Where's Waldo?
Hey friends,
Sorry about my long absence from the blog world. I have been writing a book and I find that I am not a good multi-tasker. I had four months to write this book, called Church 3.0--it is the most research demanding project to date--so my blog suffered. Now that the book is written and turned in I can give more attention to the blog, at least until the next book is due (Jan 1, 2010)! The good news is that my new book provides a whole lot of blog fodder! So I plan on putting up more posts based upon my new book.
I am excited about this book because it takes current thought on movemental Christianity and advances thinking. I have tried to expand theory with real life examples from our (Church Multiplication Associates) own experience over the past ten years.
There are many things that you really can't learn until you actually set out to practice movemental kingdom principles. In fact, you don't even know what questions to ask, let alone solutions until you get out there in the mess of it all. Some very good books describe movements as historians and observers from outside, but there needs to be more that can only be discovered by doing the work. I have been getting my hands dirty in the soil of trying to be part of a church multplication movement in the West for almost 20 years now and this book is packed with the real life practical lessons learned at ground zero of mistakes, successes and accidental breakthroughs that have come from pursuing God for a movement for over a decade.
Thanks for your patience. I hope you will come back and check out some new stuff.
Pressing on,
Neil
Sorry about my long absence from the blog world. I have been writing a book and I find that I am not a good multi-tasker. I had four months to write this book, called Church 3.0--it is the most research demanding project to date--so my blog suffered. Now that the book is written and turned in I can give more attention to the blog, at least until the next book is due (Jan 1, 2010)! The good news is that my new book provides a whole lot of blog fodder! So I plan on putting up more posts based upon my new book.
I am excited about this book because it takes current thought on movemental Christianity and advances thinking. I have tried to expand theory with real life examples from our (Church Multiplication Associates) own experience over the past ten years.
There are many things that you really can't learn until you actually set out to practice movemental kingdom principles. In fact, you don't even know what questions to ask, let alone solutions until you get out there in the mess of it all. Some very good books describe movements as historians and observers from outside, but there needs to be more that can only be discovered by doing the work. I have been getting my hands dirty in the soil of trying to be part of a church multplication movement in the West for almost 20 years now and this book is packed with the real life practical lessons learned at ground zero of mistakes, successes and accidental breakthroughs that have come from pursuing God for a movement for over a decade.
Thanks for your patience. I hope you will come back and check out some new stuff.
Pressing on,
Neil
Nines Conference Today
Don’t miss the Nines Conference today. Leadership Network asked some of the church’s greatest communicators: “If you had nine minutes to talk one-on-one with thousands of church leaders, what is the one thing that you would tell them? The result is a series of passionate and personal messages that will help you and your church navigate into the future.
So far, there are over 9,000 people registered. If you haven’t registered (it’s free), I think you still can HERE
Someone leaked the preliminary speakers and their time slots last night. According to this schedule I’ll be on 2:00 p.m. (CST).
Here’s the schedule (all times CST):
9AM — Troy Gramling, Mark Beeson, Anne Jackson, Dave Ferguson, Scott Hodge
10AM — Perry Noble, Stacy Spencer
11AM — Dino Rizzo, Nancy Beach, Steven Furtick, Reggie McNeal
12PM — Craig Groeschel, Leonard Sweet, Greg Surratt, Jon Tyson
1PM — Margaret Feinberg, Larry Osborne, Matt Carter, Pete Wilson
2PM — Neil Cole, Reggie Joiner, JD Greear
3PM — Mark Batterson, Dan Kimball, Mark DeYmaz
4PM — Jud Wilhite, Brian McLaren, Bob Roberts, Rick McKinley, John Ortberg
5PM — Alan Hirsch, John Bishop, Toby Slough, Ed Stetzer
6PM — Mark Driscoll, Darrin Patrick, Brad Powell
7PM — Darrin Whitehead, Brian Bloye
8PM — Eric Bryant, Nancy Ortberg, Rick Warren
Thursday, April 16, 2009
The Divine Commodity Blog Tour with Skye Jethani
Skye Jethani is touring the blog world today. I was invited to ask Skye a question about his new book, The Divine Commodity. I found the book refreshing. It was well written and addresses a key issue we must all face. Here is the question I asked and Skye's response below.
Skye, what is the most extreme example of consumer-oriented Christianity you have seen or heard about?
How do I pick? I’ve read reports of churches raffling away prizes like homes and SUVs to visitors. The idea is that if you visit the church during a certain period, you can enter a drawing to win a new Hummer. That’s pretty shameless, but at least it’s obvious. I’m actually not as worried about these kinds of extreme examples. What worries me are the more subtle, and therefore more insidious, ways consumerism creeps into our communities of faith. As the Godfather once advised, “Keep your friends close and your enemies even closer.” Well, in many ways I feel like the church is often blind to its greatest enemy, consumerism, because we’ve gotten so cozy with it that we can’t even see it anymore.
For example, at my own church we had a policy that we could not use the word “need” when seeking to recruit ministry volunteers. So, rather than saying “The homeless population in our county has grown significantly and more workers are needed at the shelter to care for these people with whom Christ identified.” We might say “Come experience the joy of serving the poor by volunteering at the homeless shelter.” The appeal was usually to a person’s self-interest rather than obedience to Christ or the need of others. Over time this very subtle linguistic device ends up strengthening consumerism’s message that self-satisfaction and desire is the center of life and the primal determining value when making decisions.
Most people would never see consumerism lurking behind the way an announcement is presented at a church gathering, and I don’t think most church leaders are using these appeals to self-interest intentionally. But once you know what to look for you may begin to see consumerism’s ugly face everywhere. That’s what The Divine Commodity is intended to help us do—uncover our blind spots and help us deconstruct the malformation consumerism has inflicted upon us and the church.
Skye's observation is very much the same as my own thoughts found in Organic Leadership (pp. 60-61). I also see that the more subtle expressions of consumerism are the more dangerous influences because they are accepted as normative and even spiritually correct.
This is an important book Skye has written. Consumerism is an infection in the body of Christ that is crippling us. We simply must stop competing with one another for parishioners. Our true enemy is not flesh and blood, nor the bricks and mortar of the church around the corner.
I am grateful Skye wrote the book so well, because it's message is important and we need to listen to it. This is not a book you can simply skim read and get the idea. You have to actually read this one, but you will not be disappointed if you do.
With my art background I was especially was drawn to the use of Vincent Van Gogh in Jethani's writing. You may be asking, "What does a one-eared, depressed, post-impressionist painter have to do with consumer-driven Christianity?" If that alone intrigues you go get the book and read it.
Tuesday, March 17, 2009
Who Should the Church Pay: Start with Nothing But God!
There are actually a lot of strategic reasons to come first as a weak missionary.
1. The indigenous people are empowered from the start. The new churches do not start dependent upon the missionary. In fact, it can be the opposite. The new churches begin with empowerment.
2. Multiplication of missionaries is much faster. The next generation of churches does not have to wait to get the strength needed to perform at a higher standard. If building hospitals and schools is our first wave of missions there will never be a second wave.
3. The missionary starts with complete faith in God. Missions are an exercise in humility and faith in God’s power, not an exercise in your own abilities. That also passes on much quicker to the next generation.
4. God gets all the glory. The missionary is seen as a normal human who needs assistance, but who also has a powerful God who grants him or her what they need. God’s provision is not just part of the story…it is the story!
5. The missionary is not better then the indigenous people. When we have nicer homes, cars, schooling for our kids and more discretionary money then those who we are trying to reach then there are a lot of negative side-effects. This dis-empowers the indigenous church. It also raises the missionary to a level above those they are trying to reach. Jesus carries this thought further when he tells the missionary to stay in their house and eat and drink what they eat and drink. The missionary is to live at the same standard as the people he or she is trying to reach.
6. It keeps the missionary’s motivations truer. The missionary’s motives are not in question. This is definitely not a career move. When someone goes out without pay and does the job just for Jesus it is pure. There is a sense of confidence that one can have in someone who has proven their heart on the fields in this way.
7. It keeps the indigenous Christian’s motives truer. The new Christian’s motives are also kept more pure because it doesn’t offer some false hope of a raise in their standard of living by becoming a Christian. Coming in strength may give the new Christians a poor incentive to be saved and serve as a missionary. There may be an unspoken promise that “you too could step up to a better standard of living if you become a Christian worker!”
This happens all over the world. There is a monetary incentive to become a Christian, and especially a Christian leader in many parts of the world. Your standard of living raises instantly as Western money supports your life. An American family giving up a daily latte can feed a family for a month in many parts of the world. That is cheap labor for the church, but what it does is mess with the new Christian’s motivations. It actually separates the indigenous Christian worker from the very people they are best suited to reach because suddenly they are in an entirely different social class.
The more I have studied the passages of Luke 10 and Matthew 10 I have an increased appreciation for Jesus’ missiological strategies. He does know what He is doing.
Many will say that the culture in the time of Christ was much more hospitable, so this sort of missionary method was able to be used. Today is a very different culture. True, but I do not think Jesus’ words are to be classified as irrelevant because the culture has changed. I believe that His words here are transcendent above culture. The point is not that the people are more hospitable, the point is that the sent one must depend upon God for his or her daily provision. Personally, that is a lesson needed in every culture and generation! At the same time, when doing cross-cultural missionary work, there are some cultures just as hospitable as the one Jesus was part of.
Jesus shows us the value in training missionaries in this manner in a later passage of Luke’s Gospel. Near the end Jesus pulled the disciples together and asked them, “When I sent you without purse, bag or sandals, did you lack anything?"
“Nothing,” they answered.
Then He said to them, “But now if you have a purse, take it.” This is what my wife always quotes back to me in the Mall when I do finally start to hold her purse.
Why does He first instruct them to not take a purse, and now He is telling them to take along financial resources? Does He want them to go without or to go with financial resources? After all the reasons given for going without finances we now have to explain this statement.
As I said earlier, it is not whether people are supported or not, but when they are supported; that is the issue. Going first in weakness and dependency is important. After you have shown that you will do it without support, support can be given more confidently. There is a testing process. It is, however, much more then a testing process, it is a growth curve. It is as much a chance for the missionary to test God as it is for God to test the missionary. The disciples came out believing in God’s provision with stories they would tell the rest of their lives. That is a foundation to build upon.
Dallas Willard was once sharing at a workshop on ministry in a postmodern world on this very passage. He asked the question, “Why would Jesus tell them not to take a purse at first and now tell them to take a purse?” His answer was, “You don’t know how to handle a purse, until you know how to go without one.”
We learn something when we trust God’s provision and He comes through. What we learn sets a course for the rest of our lives. When we have gone on faith and God shows us His miraculous care and provision it changes the way we see everything. We view God differently. We view ministry differently. We view money differently. When the tough times hit, and they will, that old lesson will fuel the same faith once again. You will be reminded always that I am not in this for the money.
This is a far better foundation for a life of service then simply deciding on a career move. Even when leaders are supported “full-time”, it’s still not a job but a life calling.
1. The indigenous people are empowered from the start. The new churches do not start dependent upon the missionary. In fact, it can be the opposite. The new churches begin with empowerment.
2. Multiplication of missionaries is much faster. The next generation of churches does not have to wait to get the strength needed to perform at a higher standard. If building hospitals and schools is our first wave of missions there will never be a second wave.
3. The missionary starts with complete faith in God. Missions are an exercise in humility and faith in God’s power, not an exercise in your own abilities. That also passes on much quicker to the next generation.
4. God gets all the glory. The missionary is seen as a normal human who needs assistance, but who also has a powerful God who grants him or her what they need. God’s provision is not just part of the story…it is the story!
5. The missionary is not better then the indigenous people. When we have nicer homes, cars, schooling for our kids and more discretionary money then those who we are trying to reach then there are a lot of negative side-effects. This dis-empowers the indigenous church. It also raises the missionary to a level above those they are trying to reach. Jesus carries this thought further when he tells the missionary to stay in their house and eat and drink what they eat and drink. The missionary is to live at the same standard as the people he or she is trying to reach.
6. It keeps the missionary’s motivations truer. The missionary’s motives are not in question. This is definitely not a career move. When someone goes out without pay and does the job just for Jesus it is pure. There is a sense of confidence that one can have in someone who has proven their heart on the fields in this way.
7. It keeps the indigenous Christian’s motives truer. The new Christian’s motives are also kept more pure because it doesn’t offer some false hope of a raise in their standard of living by becoming a Christian. Coming in strength may give the new Christians a poor incentive to be saved and serve as a missionary. There may be an unspoken promise that “you too could step up to a better standard of living if you become a Christian worker!”
This happens all over the world. There is a monetary incentive to become a Christian, and especially a Christian leader in many parts of the world. Your standard of living raises instantly as Western money supports your life. An American family giving up a daily latte can feed a family for a month in many parts of the world. That is cheap labor for the church, but what it does is mess with the new Christian’s motivations. It actually separates the indigenous Christian worker from the very people they are best suited to reach because suddenly they are in an entirely different social class.
The more I have studied the passages of Luke 10 and Matthew 10 I have an increased appreciation for Jesus’ missiological strategies. He does know what He is doing.
Many will say that the culture in the time of Christ was much more hospitable, so this sort of missionary method was able to be used. Today is a very different culture. True, but I do not think Jesus’ words are to be classified as irrelevant because the culture has changed. I believe that His words here are transcendent above culture. The point is not that the people are more hospitable, the point is that the sent one must depend upon God for his or her daily provision. Personally, that is a lesson needed in every culture and generation! At the same time, when doing cross-cultural missionary work, there are some cultures just as hospitable as the one Jesus was part of.
Jesus shows us the value in training missionaries in this manner in a later passage of Luke’s Gospel. Near the end Jesus pulled the disciples together and asked them, “When I sent you without purse, bag or sandals, did you lack anything?"
“Nothing,” they answered.
Then He said to them, “But now if you have a purse, take it.” This is what my wife always quotes back to me in the Mall when I do finally start to hold her purse.
Why does He first instruct them to not take a purse, and now He is telling them to take along financial resources? Does He want them to go without or to go with financial resources? After all the reasons given for going without finances we now have to explain this statement.
As I said earlier, it is not whether people are supported or not, but when they are supported; that is the issue. Going first in weakness and dependency is important. After you have shown that you will do it without support, support can be given more confidently. There is a testing process. It is, however, much more then a testing process, it is a growth curve. It is as much a chance for the missionary to test God as it is for God to test the missionary. The disciples came out believing in God’s provision with stories they would tell the rest of their lives. That is a foundation to build upon.
Dallas Willard was once sharing at a workshop on ministry in a postmodern world on this very passage. He asked the question, “Why would Jesus tell them not to take a purse at first and now tell them to take a purse?” His answer was, “You don’t know how to handle a purse, until you know how to go without one.”
We learn something when we trust God’s provision and He comes through. What we learn sets a course for the rest of our lives. When we have gone on faith and God shows us His miraculous care and provision it changes the way we see everything. We view God differently. We view ministry differently. We view money differently. When the tough times hit, and they will, that old lesson will fuel the same faith once again. You will be reminded always that I am not in this for the money.
This is a far better foundation for a life of service then simply deciding on a career move. Even when leaders are supported “full-time”, it’s still not a job but a life calling.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)