Filed under: Church, Mission Leadership | Tags: Awakening Chapels, Campus Transformation Network, cell church, Chaordic Age, Church Multiplication Associates, Dee Hock, disciple, George Patterson, house church, Jesus, kingdom of God, Leaders, Neil Cole, Organic Church, Roland Allen, spontaneous multiplication movements, Thom Wolf
I read Neil Cole’s book “Organic Church: Growing Faith Where Life Happens” last summer. Cole is founder and Executive Director of Church Multiplication Associates, which began in 1990 fostering and serving organic church movements and the network he founded called Awakening Chapels. I found myself in association with Neil in 2006 when he and I were both asked to consult the leaders of the Campus Transformation Network. Neil is also author of Cultivating a Life For God, co-author of Raising Leaders for the Harvest, and Search & Rescue: Becoming a Disciple Who Makes a Difference.
This book is an appeal to Christians to go where life happens to connect with the disaffected people who would not otherwise come to church. Cole presents more than a consistent organic theme as he outlines his story and the story of a movement of simple, reproducible churches, he argues that the very nature of the church is organic and must therefore contain within the smallest grouping the complete DNA for reproduction.
The core of this book is the study of the “DNA of healthy church life and reproduction” (99-140) Cole wisely shows that the practice of Modernity, seeking a universal principle or pattern, such as Thom Wolf’s “New Testament Discipleship Pattern (NTDP),” is not necessarily wrong. Cole shows how the “pattern” must be “easily passed on by both example and teaching.” Wolf called this “napkin theology…if you can’t pass it on by writing it down on a napkin at a restaurant, then it isn’t worth writing down at all.” (110-111) Cole has benefited from Roland Allen’s “Missionary Methods: St. Paul’s or Ours?” and George Patterson’s thinking about “spontaneous multiplication movements” and “obedience-oriented education” in his journey seeking the simple reproducible church model. (113)
Cole examines the organic nature of the Church in Jesus’ agri-parables and the organic nature of the Kingdom of God through agro-biology and astronomy. Seeking the basic pattern of church multiplication, Cole explains how the organic church goes beyond the popular “cell churches or house churches.” Cole shows how the scriptures consistently affirm the small group of two or three, “the ideal size for effective fellowship and ministry” where reproduction is easiest and community, accountability, confidentiality, flexibility, communication, direction and leadership are strongest. (100-102)
The DNA of Christ’s Body (D-Divine Truth or Faith, N-Nurturing Relationships or Love, and A-Apostolic Mission or Hope), like a seed, which is the “contagion” of the Kingdom of God, “must be whole, intact, and in every cell…complete in its simplicity.” (117-120) Cole warns that many churches have succumbed to Modernity’s tendency to specialize, concentrating on one part of the DNA and eliminating or segmenting out the other parts, such as “excellent preaching on Sundays, which is where we have divine truth.” Those same leaders will argue that they have small groups for nurturing relationships and a mission committee for apostolic mission, however Cole argues, “To separate each part is to destroy the whole thing.” (120)
Cole defends the “beautiful…design and order” of the organic structure of church, which is of “utmost importance.” (124-125) While some church leaders may argue that an organic structure will lead to disorder and chaos, Dee Hock, founder of VISA, author of the book The Birth of the Chaordic Age, writes:
“Purpose and principle, clearly understood and articulated, and commonly shared, are the genetic code of any healthy organization. To the degree that you hold purpose and principles in common among you, you can dispense with command and control.”
Some may think that Cole is arguing for chaos, but he clearly states that, “structures are needed, but they must be simple, reproducible, and internal rather than external.” (124) For internal structure, a structure based on principle and purpose, to work, we must put more faith in the DNA than in organization.
In summary, Cole simply reminds us that, like a seed, “multiplication starts with death” and “there is no resurrection without a death.” (103)
Cole, Neil.
2005. Organic Church: Growing Faith Where Life Happens. 1st ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Filed under: Church, Mission Leadership | Tags: Church, Jesus, Christian, relationship, Prayer, emerging leaders, Fuller Theological Seminary, Global Leadership, leader, leadership emergence, training, paradigm, obedience, Great Commission, disciple, life, love
Have you asked this question? What kind of leaders does the church need today?
There is no simple answer, unless you say that it needs more and better leaders. But it takes more than wishing for better leaders. What is needed is better training. Churches and those training church leaders need to clarify their purpose.
Recently, I completed significant training with Fuller Theological Seminary. I now have a Masters in Global Leadership. Yippee!
But seriously, what was emphasized in my training was the basic questions. I was taught to name the “why”, to clarify the purpose for training.
Certainly the purpose for training Christian leaders must be founded on the Great Commission. When training emerging leaders the emphasis needs to be on “obeying,” not just “knowing.” More importantly, our training must be centered on obedience as an overflow of our relationship with God. We obey God because we love Him; we look to Him and follow His lead, His way, and His extraordinary love for everyone.
So let me ask you this: Have you received teaching that has led you to greater obedience or has that teaching just filled up your head?
Every Christian leader is charged with the task of making disciples. We’re directed and empowered by the Holy Spirit to lead people, modeling a life of learning and loving. We’re called to equip them who follow the One who loves them unconditionally. As we personally follow God’s extravagant ways in response to His amazing love, we will equip emerging leaders to do the same.
Those disciples, those learners, will also obey all that Jesus commanded because they will see us doing it as a response to God’s love. Whether you are involved in formal training of emerging leaders or whether you do it informally, every Jesus follower, every lover of God, will be involved in teaching the next generation to obey the Great Commission.
What do you think is the best way to train people to obey?
I think we’ll miss the real importance of this question if we jump right to the questions of technique. We should not be so concerned about how to lecture, what materials to use, or how to create a syllabus. Our primary purpose should be life on life, or live-learn experiences, teaching with the goal of obedience.
The paradigm from which we operate our training is what will determine our results. Have you considered the results of the past century or so of seminary training for church leaders?
From my studies of leadership emergence, the history of the church, and my personal observations in 30 countries and almost 25 years of faith missions, it is obvious that in many cases the paradigm of training has been ineffective.
To be effective in training emerging leaders to obey, we must begin with full on love for God and a passion to know him. We must be whole-hearted followers fully engaged in the Great Commission. As we respond to God’s love through our own obedience, he will give us the understanding of the most appropriate way to teach every individual emerging leader he brings to us.
Too many have been concerned about knowing Jesus as a means to an end. That kind of teaching will never produce life in our churches. Jesus spoke these words in prayer for you and me, “Now this is eternal life: that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.” (John 17:3)
Filed under: Activist, Madison, Wisconsin, Mission Leadership | Tags: Christ, community, environmentalism, Freedom, Global Human Need, Globalization, HIV/AIDS, individualism, Jesus, Madison, neighbor, Pharisees, poverty, technology, University of Wisconsin, water, Western culture
How do people react to individualism, environmentalism, and poverty in Madison? These forces may be at the same time subtle and powerful. Globalization is having a paradoxical effect, connecting people and resources through technology and isolating people in reaction to the enormity of global needs. “As the [global] demand for water continues to increase, there is greater pressure placed on an already shrinking water supply,” says Joel Pedersen, a UW-Madison environmental chemist. “More people are considering the reuse of water.” While most expect individual freedoms to continue, others are sounding the alarm to warn us that individualism in Western culture is a major contributor to global problems. In Madison, research on water resources, HIV/AIDS, and global poverty is churning in the laboratories of the University of Wisconsin. How should today’s Jesus follower respond? Followers of Christ believe in community, but most have so aligned with the culture of individualism that they take little notice of urgent global human needs. Jesus said, “Love your neighbor as yourself.” Perhaps, like the Pharisees of Jesus’ day, evangelical believers in the 21st century should ask “Who is my neighbor?”
Filed under: Church, Mission Leadership | Tags: Alan Hirsch, ceremony, Emerging Church, fear, Frank Viola, Jesus, Jesus Manifesto, Len Sweet, Religion, superstition, Tradition, word of God
Len Sweet has been a prophet to the Church for some time. His voice has been out there in the “wilderness” like John the Baptist. And he’s affirmed other voices too, like Frank Viola and Alan Hirsch.
The word that comes to mind as I read this Jesus Manifesto is the eternal truth that Jesus spoke:
“So, for the sake of your tradition, you make void the word of God.” Mt 15:6
It’s a warning to the emerging church, and all new movements of the church. How did the bronze serpent, originally set up to bring healing, turn into an idol? How have we turned our best practices in religion, even house church, into traditions that make the word of God void?
My wife pointed out to me from a book she finished last night that the root meaning of the word religion is to “bind”.
I looked it up and found it has various roots. In addition to ceremony, it is connected with mystery, or superstition, or fear of demons, or to be troubled, clamoring in fear.
Jesus is not religious. As Sweet and Viola have described, it’s not what Jesus “would” do, it’s what he “is” doing in and through us.
Filed under: Bible | Tags: elders, Eternity, heaven, humanity, incarnation, Jesus, justice, King of Kings, Leadership, peace, Revelation, spheres of society, Worship
The revelation of a “new heaven and new earth” offers a destination, where Jesus will “dwell” with “his people” and all things are “new” (Rev. 21:1, 3, 5). Like John who was commanded to “come up here” (Rev. 4:1), Paul also claimed higher ground with his “revelations” (2 Cor. 12:1, 7) of God’s eternal plan. Paul emphasized the vision of one new humanity (cf. Eph. 2:15). Revelation exhorts the church to “wake up and strengthen what remains” (Rev. 3:2-3) in order that they may fulfill their calling to “reshape a humanity previously warped by sin.”
Jesus’ eternal nature, embodied in human flesh, implies a very human understanding of eternity, with limitations of embodiment. Just as John by implication, dramatically portrays the eternal nature of Jesus’ incarnation, he likewise implies the nature of the structures and spheres of life are eternal. The “harp” and “trumpets” imply the arts (Rev. 5:8, 8:2, 6, 13); “leaves for healing” imply health care and counseling (Rev. 22:2); the “scroll” (Rev. 5:1-9) and “golden bowls” (Rev. 5:8) imply the media; and “every tribe” implies that family will exist for eternity (Rev. 7:4-9, 13:7, 14:6). Education (cf. 1 Cor. 2:14) is implied where learning is present (cf. Rev. 3:9). And as the elders present their “crowns” (Rev. 4:10) in worship to Jesus, the King of Kings who became a servant of all, the model of governmental leadership is made plain for all eternity. Perhaps to communicate this point was not John’s intention. Little matter, the implication is evident. Revelation is a message of God’s rule, bringing peace and justice to all creation, every nation, and every structure of human existence, for all eternity in the new heaven and new earth.
Filed under: Bible | Tags: antichrist, character of God, churches, civil law, conquest, conversion, corrupt society, criminal, culture, Ephesus, ethic, exclusivism, faith, Gnostic, Greco-Roman culture, idolatry, incarnation, Jesus, Leadership, margins, missionary, Nero, Nicolaitans, ostracism, pagan, Pergamum, Pharisees, political rallies, principalities and powers, punishment, Revelation, Roman Empire, Sadducees, seduced, self-giving love, servant, sporting events, syncretistic, Temple, theatrical presentations, Torah, trade guilds, victims, witness
JESUS’ LEADERSHIP
Jesus’ leadership is demonstrated in the incarnation through his integration of faith and commitment. Jesus warns “beware the yeast of the Pharisees and Sadducees” (Matt. 16:6, 11-12) whose influence, through Israel’s Temple and Torah, had become like pagan allegiance to principalities and powers (cf. Gal. 4:8-11; Rom. 5:20, 7:7-25). John’s audience, living within the Roman Empire, had witnessed idolatry taken to a new level, the deifying of the pagan state. Nero was the “symbol of political power that abuses its God-given authority.” Nero’s approach to leadership was the antithesis of Jesus, which is why he is characterized as the antichrist. Sadly, missionary endeavors at times have practiced variations of the conquest ethic of the Roman Empire, coercing conversion in the Name of Jesus!
What can we learn from Jesus’ leadership example and warnings to the churches in Revelation? While Paul encouraged churches to live in accord with civil law, John warns against becoming too comfortable. John’s churches appear therefore to be negotiating the margins of a corrupt society, seeking to avoid becoming “victims of social ostracism.” Christians today may also be ridiculed for their exclusivism and seduced into compromising their loyalty to Jesus. John’s churches may have been threatened with punishment for failure to participate in pagan idolatry, including sacrifice to Roman gods. The Nicolaitans, a religious sect with “Gnostic” tendencies in Ephesus and Pergamum, were denounced and “hated” for participating in syncretistic practices (cf. Rev. 2:6; 3:14-16; 3:20-24). How then should Christians follow Jesus’ lead in today’s society? Are Christians therefore to withdraw from trade guilds, dinner parties, legal transactions, political rallies, sporting events, and theatrical presentations? Was it openness to the surrounding Greco-Roman culture that Jesus rejected, or was it something else?
Participation, or lack of it, has profound impact on the character of a church’s witness. Perhaps Christians should witness to the servant-leadership of Jesus by demonstrating how it is possible to move with confidence through everyday life? Truth is “revealed supremely” in Jesus who was “obedient to the point of death” without considering his “equality with God something to be exploited” (Phil. 2:8, 6). John’s Revelation of Jesus has made plain the character of God who is willing to become a servant and die as a criminal in self-giving love.
See more at http://johnthenry.wordpress.com
Filed under: Bible | Tags: apocalypse, churches, eschatological, Glory, history, humankind, incarnation, Jesus, Leadership, majesty, Messiah, mystery, New Testament, promise, prophecy, repent, Resurrection, Revelation, society, wrath
The Book of Revelation is a unique New Testament apocalypse, often mistaken as a “mystery” to be decoded. Revelation has been dramatically portrayed in recent years as a predictive timeline of the end of the world. Apocalyptic literature has predicted the coming of the Messiah for centuries, before and after the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. The central message of Revelation, however, is not predictive. Rather than seek a timeline of eschatological events, Revelation confirms that the “great turning point” in history has already occurred. Revelation is a testimony of Jesus’ resurrection and sovereignty, which is “the spirit of prophecy” (Rev. 19:10). Prophecy is not primarily intended to predict future events. It is for the “upbuilding and encouragement and consolation” of the church (1 Cor. 14:3-4). John’s prophecy is exposing false teachings and denouncing idolatry, which result in the abuse of authority in every sphere of human society. This message to “seven churches” at the end of the first century is written as a warning to evoke a particular response, to “repent.”
The book of Revelation is an encouragement to the churches to “return” (Rev. 2:5), to “obey” (Rev. 3:3), to “beware” (Rev. 2:10), to “wake up” (Rev. 3:2-3), to “hold fast” (Rev. 3:11), to “listen” and to “open the door” (Rev. 3:20) in response to Jesus. While unveiling the glory and majesty of the risen “King of the nations” (Rev. 15:3) to his readers, John reveals Jesus’ hope for “the rest of humankind” (Rev. 9:20), that through the times of “wrath” (Rev. 16:1), all would have opportunity to repent. Revelation is demystified when we read it essentially as a prophecy, encouraging churches to be faithful to the testimony of Jesus, his incarnation, his leadership, and his promise for all humanity.
See more at http://johnthenry.wordpress.com
The Book of Revelation is a unique New Testament apocalypse, often mistaken as a “mystery” to be decoded. Revelation has been dramatically portrayed in recent years as a predictive timeline of the end of the world. Apocalyptic literature has predicted the coming of the Messiah for centuries, before and after the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. The central message of Revelation, however, is not predictive. Rather than to present a timeline of eschatological events, Revelation confirms that the “great turning point” in history has already occurred. Revelation is a testimony of Jesus’ resurrection and sovereignty, which is “the spirit of prophecy” (Rev. 19:10). Prophecy is not primarily intended to predict future events. It is for the “upbuilding and encouragement and consolation” of the church (1 Cor. 14:3-4). John’s prophecy is exposing false teachings and denouncing idolatry, which result in the abuse of authority in every sphere of human society. This message to “seven churches” at the end of the first century is written as a warning to evoke a particular response, to “repent.”
The book of Revelation is an encouragement to the churches to “return” (Rev. 2:5), to “obey” (Rev. 3:3), to “beware” (Rev. 2:10), to “wake up” (Rev. 3:2-3), to “hold fast” (Rev. 3:11), to “listen” and to “open the door” (Rev. 3:20) in response to Jesus. While unveiling the glory and majesty of the risen “King of the nations” (Rev. 15:3) to his readers, John reveals Jesus’ hope for “the rest of humankind” (Rev. 9:20), that through the times of “wrath” (Rev. 16:1), all would have opportunity to repent. Revelation is demystified when we read it essentially as a prophecy, encouraging churches to be faithful to the testimony of Jesus, his incarnation, his leadership, and his promise for all humanity.
Filed under: Bible | Tags: Christ, congregations, deceivers, Docetism, ethical living, fellowship, Gnosticism, gospel, house churches, human nature, incarnation, itinerant, Jesus, John, materialist, miraculous, prosperity, Resurrection, Sacred, Secular, spirituality
The Johannine letters refer to the danger of itinerant teachers who had “gone out” (not “sent”) from a larger fellowship (1 John) to smaller house churches (2 John). These “deceivers,” probably claiming to be “without sin,” may have denied Christ while demonstrating the allure and power of the world. They might compare to those who preach a prosperity gospel and claim a higher form of spirituality.
Today’s congregations are caught in a similar conflict between two extremes: One is the “secular” materialist view, which denies the miraculous and, for some, even the resurrection; and the other is the “sacred” super-spiritual view, which tends to minimize the incarnation. (i.e. “Docetism” and an evangelical form of “Gnosticism”)
John’s letters testify that Jesus came in the flesh, saying “we are eye witnesses!” Jesus is human, but not merely a human being. Docetists believe Jesus only “seems” to have come in the flesh, and only “seems” to have suffered physically. This is a devastatingly dangerous error John warns against.
On the other hand, Jesus is not only spiritual; he is personal, a living soul who walked among his people and was raised from the dead. He is eternally incarnate, forever in human flesh.
Why is false teaching about the incarnation so dangerous? Because failure to understand Jesus’ incarnation will result in a failure to be human. Failure to know Jesus’, his eternal human nature, will result in a failure of personal responsibility. Worse, failure to know Jesus will result in a disregard for life, all of life. Incarnation is inextricably linked to ethical living.
Filed under: Bible, Church, Mission Leadership | Tags: Abraham, captivity, Davidic kingdom, exile, extractive economic system, Hasmonean kingdom, Herod the Great, Israelites, Jesus, Judaism, Leadership, Persian, Roman rule, Second Temple, society, Temple, Vocation
So much changed after the first Temple was destroyed and the Israelites were sent into exile. The entire society and leadership changed during the years of captivity and the rebuilding of the Temple under Persian authority. No longer was it a Davidic kingdom. Rather, it had become a Hasmonean kingdom and the Second Temple was expanded and remodeled by Herod the Great. The Second Temple, during Jesus life and ministry, was only a shadow of the original.
Second-temple Judaism was more concerned with purity of kinship bloodline, reinforcing a Patron-Client political and extractive economic system, than it was in fulfilling her vocation and the covenant of Abraham, to be a blessing to all the families of the earth. Second-temple Judaism continued in captivity, a Client-kingdom under Roman rule.
Jesus’ message to Herod and to all of Israel, who was still completing the Temple at the time, was that they were “building their house on the sand.” They had failed to seek God’s rule, which Jesus came to announce. They failed to recognize their deliverer because their social and political system had become self-reinforcing, exclusionary, and corrupt. Those who sought political deliverance for Israel failed to see the extraordinary fulfillment of Israel’s destiny taking place through Jesus.
Filed under: Bible, Church, Mission Leadership | Tags: aliens, Church, community, culture, dialog, exiled, Gonzalez, gospel, history, interpretation, Jesus, marginalized, Mestizos, New Testament, One New Humanity, Paul, Pentecost, principalities and powers
Understanding González’ paradigms of culture helps us understand Paul, who reconciled his identity as a Mestizos. González’ paradigms help us understand why Paul stood so strongly against those who preached a “different gospel” (Gal. 1:6 NIV) which throughout history has fragmented, marginalized, exiled, and made aliens. These paradigms help us interpret how God is at work among people in the margins or between cultures. The paradigm of solidarity helps us see in the Scriptures and throughout history the need for give-and-take dialog between cultures and the need for proper engagement within culture. As González relates, “The most exciting things have happened, not at the traditional centers of the life of the church, but at the edges.” The disarming of principalities and powers occurs as we participate with God in the example of Pentecost through which God’s Spirit inaugurates the character of openness to outsiders. Interpretation of the New Testament, without attention to the influences of culture, may lead to alienation and distort the message, however the Bible will always affirm the purpose of God, directing the readers’ understanding to the call of the new community of Jesus’ followers to open their hearts to every culture to become One New Humanity.
Filed under: Bible, Church, Mission Leadership | Tags: Council of Jerusalem, cultures, elementary principles, Gentiles, gospel, idols, interpret, Jesus, Judaism, Mestizos, missionary, nations, Paul, powers, principalities
Paul’s greatest contribution is his defense of the gospel for the Gentiles, most notably leading up to the Council of Jerusalem. Paul’s ethnic and educational background, his nationality, and his religious identity was useful, however he knew they also obstructed his vision and witness of Jesus. (Phil. 3:8) Paul found the center of Judaism in Jesus, who helped him interpret the Scriptures and discern points of dissent with his own and with every other culture. From his Mestizos vantage point he also understood the powerful forces at work dividing cultures and people. He was forthright at pointing out idol worship among the nations, which had also found its way into Judaism. (Acts 17:23, Rom. 1:25, Gal. 3:25) Rather than serve God’s purpose to unite all humanity (Gal. 3:26-28), humankind had erected dividing walls through the influence of invisible forces. Paul’s missionary task and the task he calls the church to undertake is to unmask the principalities and powers, exposing the cultural idols, false teachers, and elementary principles to proclaim in their place the gospel for every people. (Gal. 4:8-9) The Church is challenged to deal with these powerful forces holding people and cultures captive, blinded from seeing the gospel. (Eph. 3:10)
Filed under: Bible, Church, Mission Leadership | Tags: aliens, Bible, Church, coercion, doctrine, Ephesians, Ethnic, exile, foreigners, frontiers, generation, Gentiles, gospel, Hispanic, interpretation, Israel, Jesus, Jose Vasconcelos, Judaism, Justification by faith, Justo Gonzalez, kingdom, Latinos, Messiah, military, missionary, Modern, Moses, Paul, pride, Protestant, religious, Roman Empire, Samaritan woman, Second-Temple Judaism, Spanish, triumphalist, unity in the faith, Western civilization, worldview
The notion of the “Cosmic Race,” popularized among Latinos by Mexican author Jose Vasconcelos, is a philosophical basis for pride in the mixture of races. González writes, there is “no single perspective or a single clue to ‘reading with Hispanic eyes.’” Therefore a people of varied backgrounds sharing a single identity is dubious. However, this is Paul’s vision and the message he preaches to the Gentiles. In his letter to the Ephesians, Paul (or one of his disciples) writes that Jesus’ “purpose was to create in himself one new person.” He (or she) continues with the message of solidarity, “Consequently, you are no longer foreigners and aliens, but fellow-citizens with God’s people and members of God’s household.” (Eph. 2:15, 19 NIV) This “unity in the faith,” misunderstood by Paul’s contemporaries, has also been misinterpreted in every generation since.
Before meeting Jesus, Saul/Paul’s aim was to eliminate the threat that the new sect of Jesus followers represented to Judaism. Ethnic and religious purity, which was tied to the ultimate conquest of Israel’s Messiah over all nations, defined his worldview. Sadly Spanish missionary endeavors in the late fifteenth and sixteenth centuries interpreted the Scriptures envisioning a kind of religious purity through coerced conversion in Latin America, which appears to be an amalgamation of the purity ethic of Second Temple Judaism and the conquest ethic of the Roman Empire. Modern Protestant missionary endeavors continued a triumphalist interpretation, albeit separated from military coercion, by expanding into the “frontiers,” which implies redrawing the “borders” of Western civilization. Western individualism, informed by the Protestant Reformation’s doctrine of justification by faith, which possesses an important “supporting role” in Paul’s gospel, became the central understanding the expanding Protestant missionary enterprise. Today, when Westerners read the stories of Moses at the burning bush (Exo. 3:1-10) and the Samaritan woman at the well (John 4:5-35), they read how the individual finds God, rather than a calling, “to go back to their people to do the work of God with and among them.” Westerners interpret the purpose of the Church (and of the Bible) to be a functionary agent to meet individual needs, rather than an expression of the gospel itself and a “foretaste of the kingdom.” This misinterpretation of the gospel message has resulted in a new form of “exile,” “a dislocation from the center,” as people are either left out, pushed out, or choose to remain outside the center.
Filed under: Bible, Church, Mission Leadership | Tags: community, Jesus, Christian, Christ, Purpose, Messiah, Paul, Road to Damascus, Jewish, monotheism, Israel, eschatalogical, doctrine, blasphemous, humanity, dualism, destiny, exodus, election, future
Something about that encounter on the Road to Damascus was so “utterly trustworthy” that Paul was convinced that the God of his fathers had appeared to him in the person of Jesus. God had called Israel to fulfill a purpose, which is the future for all people. This has always been the purpose of Israel’s election. Jesus is the ultimate exodus for Israel and the whole world. Israel’s destiny is summed up in the Messiah. Paul is not teaching Christian dualism and he is not launching a new movement. He is not forming a separate people. However, he is preaching a new message, one of the fulfillment of Israel’s promises, one new humanity.
Throughout his life, Paul was committed to Jewish monotheism. What changed was the depth of his understanding of that “fighting doctrine,” which declares “blasphemous” all other gods, all other philosophies, and all other political loyalties. The contrasting changes and consistencies in Paul’s identity within his faith community, his understanding of the Law, and his eschatological vision were clearly the result of his personal encounter with Jesus on the Road to Damascus. Paul realized a vital relationship with the One “true content” of Jewish monotheism, Jesus Christ. Paul became “known” by the God of Israel. (Gal. 4:8-11)
Filed under: Bible, Church, Mission Leadership | Tags: Damascus, Hebrew, Jesus, Judaism, Messiah, monotheism, prophetic, Saul, Scriptures, Second Temple, Spirit of Life, Torah
Saul interpreted the Hebrew Scriptures and carefully observed the Torah with increasing zeal. He saw himself as an instrument to bring the fulfillment of Israel’s story. Following the Torah according to Second Temple Judaism meant that God’s people must “mark boundaries of separation” through food laws, circumcision, and the Sabbath. Second Temple Judaism had defined holiness as a relative purity, a relative status before God. Saul’s zeal for the Law, however, should not be interpreted as his attempt to gain personal salvation. Instead, he sought to follow the covenant and increase Israel’s power for deliverance from her captivity through the holiness of God’s people. Therefore Saul determined to put a stop to the emerging community of Jews, members of the Way, who had “thrown open the doors to a new expanded membership,” not based on purity rituals of Second Temple Judaism.
Outside the city of Damascus the sudden appearance of the brightness of God’s holiness had blinded Saul. After falling to the ground, he heard a voice calling his name saying, “Saul, why do you persecute me?” (Acts 9:3,4) Who could this be other than the One God he sought to honor? “I am Jesus,” came the voice. (Acts 9:5) Saul’s profound and personal encounter with Jesus did not disengage him from Judaism, rather it realigned his wayward zeal with a more complete revelation of the God of Israel. Rather than leaving Jewish monotheism, Saul found the center of Israel’s ancient faith. Having met Jesus, Saul continued to engage in a prophetic critique of Judaism, speaking “to the heart of their tradition.” Israel’s failure is her “relentless pursuit of national, ethnic, and territorial identity.” The “Son of Man” is revealed to Saul as the One who conquered sin and death through the Spirit of Life as Israel’s representative. Therefore, Saul not only found Jesus to be the fulfillment of Israel’s promised deliverance; he understood the purpose of God for all humanity through Israel’s Messiah.
Next post will be about Paul’s Eschatological Vision.
Filed under: Mission Leadership | Tags: Abraham, community, eschatological, faith, Isaac, Jacob, Jesus, Jewish, Judaism, monotheism, Paul, Road to Damascus, Saul
Saul of Tarsus’ dramatic meeting with the risen Lord Jesus radically completed his appreciation for Jewish monotheism. The change of his name to Paul and the dramatic changes in his ministry orientation have sometimes been interpreted as an abandonment of his zeal for the faith of his fathers, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. However Paul’s scathing criticism of the first century practices of Judaism and his message of inclusion to pagan Greeks and Romans into communities of faith alongside Jews is not his final verdict on Judaism, it is rather his interpretation of the sequel to Israel’s story. After more than a century of Biblical scholarship, which has both “used and abused” Paul, some have begun to reevaluate Paul’s relationship to Judaism. With these new studies, we can now better compare and contrast changes in Paul’s story, his identity before and after his encounter with Jesus. In the next several posts, I will look at the changes and consistencies in Paul’s identity within his faith community, his understanding of the Law, and his eschatological vision, which I believe are all best understood through the singular lens of his personal encounter with Jesus on the Road to Damascus.
Filed under: Bible, Church, Mission Leadership | Tags: Book of Acts, Christ, Christ's return, Christians, Church, eschatological confusion, Jesus, Judaism, Left Behind, Macedonia, Messiah, Organic, Paul, Rapture, Second Coming, Thessalonians
Based on his missionary journeys in the Book of Acts, it’s very likely that among Paul’s letters in our Bibles, his letters to the Thessalonians were probably the first. Paul’s main concern for the Thessalonian believers relates to Christ’s second coming. Nothing has changed. For as long as I can remember, Christians have had similar questions about Christ’s second coming. What can we learn from Paul’s letters regarding the second coming? More than I can relate in this short post.
Because Paul’s first letter shows a curiosity among early Christians about Jesus’ return, we should not be surprised when today’s Christians are also curious.
The Thessalonians were despairing over the long delay of Christ’s return. The fame of their church had spread beyond Macedonia, even though there was apparently little formal church organization. It was truly an organic movement of believers radically committed, no matter what the risk, to a new king, Jesus.
Paul writes to assuage the early Christians’ worries about Christ’s delayed return, especially their questions about those who have already died. This is when the letter gets interesting.
Paul writes about what Christian tradition has called the “rapture.”
Paul writes with pastoral compassion. He is particularly intimate in his first letter, as he not only teaches and corrects, he also admonishes with advice regarding behavior. This is not a private letter. He admonishes the one who receives it to read it aloud for the whole community.
In his second letter, Paul addresses the Thessalonians’ anxiety that Christ may have already returned. They thought they had missed it. This was a festering eschatological confusion, which continues today. In this second letter, Paul is comforting those suffering under persecution and uncharacteristically speaks of the coming wrath and judgment.
Again Paul is primarily addressing apocalyptic issues, which are consistent with his background in apocalyptic Judaism. So what does he say about the rapture?
The return of the Messiah will be sudden and the events preceding his coming will be observable. It will be sudden, like a thief, but it will not be a secret. No, you won’t wake up from your nap on a plane and find your neighbor’s underwear “left behind.”
This notion of being “left behind” is the popular view, but it does not stand up to an honest and thorough study of the scriptures. Jesus is coming. But everyone will know when it happens.
More on this in a later post.
Filed under: Mission Leadership | Tags: culture, evangelism, Holy Spirit, isolation, Jesus, Lord, New Humanity, pantomime, powers, Promises, relationships, sin, society, YWAM
In 1986, when our YWAM troupe did a pantomime drama in a public high school, I was asked to give the closing, which was typically an altar call. But I did not want to set off a political “bomb” in the public school. I simply held up the “black gloves” that represented sin and said, “you know what these are and you know now how they isolate you and cause broken relationships.” I said, “I want to invite you now to break down the barriers in response to the Star of this presentation (and you know who that is). Reach out to your fellow students and teachers and tell them you really care about them today. Be free from the powers that hold you in isolation.” That was it. That was the altar call. Be free and truly human.
I’ve struggled with the issue of a private consumer-type evangelism for years. I am not content to be part of a community that presents a private “ask Jesus in your heart” commitment to Jesus. Proclaiming Jesus is King is an afront to all principalities and powers and rulers, both human and otherwise.
I am becoming more vocal confronting powers with the “royal proclamation” and fact that “Jesus is Lord”. It has never felt anything like treason, however, it may very soon.
The message that Jesus is Lord is not private, but there are amazing private rewards. We can experience intimate fellowship with the Father, through the Holy Spirit. We are no longer waiting for the End of Days; they have come through the Person of Jesus Christ. He is the fulfillment of all the Promises to Israel. When he returns, we will all be like him. We have the Spirit now as a deposit, that we will be fully like him, a New Humanity. We will be everything we were always intended and designed by God to be, fully Human.
To say “Jesus is Lord” represents a commitment to live in such a way that the reality of the confession must be realized in all of society, in our community as well as in the surrounding culture. This profession is an afront to the personal lifestyles and religions of the surrounding people as well as to the political powers that purported to “lord it over them.”
Filed under: Activist, Church, Mission Leadership | Tags: gospel, Jesus, kingdom, kingdom of God, law, Matthew, Pharisees, prophets, Sabbath, Scriptures, Tradition
Do you ever wonder what Jesus really meant when he spoke of the “law and the prophets”? He was referring to the Scriptures, those that we now identify as the Old Testament and some other apocryphal texts. The law and the prophets refers to the testimony of God’s word to his people and the traditions of those people. These two, testimony and tradition, converge and clash at the time of Jesus.
Jesus represents that clash; he had a high regard for the law and he also challenged the teachers of the law. He said he came to “fulfill” the law, but there are looming questions that arise from his behavior. He obviously broke the Sabbath to provoke the Pharisees and to make a point about how we are to interpret the law.
Jesus announces that the kingdom has come. What did he mean by that? The kingdom is the “place” where God’s rule is evident. God rules all things, but his rule is limited by something. Otherwise, Jesus would not even need to announce “the kingdom has come near you.” What limits God’s rule? Traditions.
Jesus said, “thus making void the word of God through your tradition that you have handed on. And you do many things like this.” (Matt. 7:13) When he makes the announcement that the kingdom is near, we need to see that it is Jesus who is the fulfillment of the law. The rule of God has finally come, not in written code, but in the person of Jesus. Jesus declares that the law is accomplished in him.
By saying “the law is accomplished”, was he implying that the law is actually temporary?
Now that Jesus has come, the law is fulfilled, and the law is accomplished. Do you sense the tension in Matthew’s Gospel regarding obedience to the law? Matthew’s congregation apparently needs some understanding, and so do we. We need help navigating between the amazing liberty we have received in Christ and the dangerous license that has too often resulted.
Jesus did not abolish the law. In fact, he calls for an adherence to the law, which is “greater than the Pharisees.” How do we live free from the law and at the same time under the “rule of God” as citizens of the kingdom of God?
Jesus rules his kingdom. Jesus critique of the Law is not so much about obedience to a strict set of Pharisaic laws, but rather the heart motive behind that obedience. Jesus critiqued the traditions of the Pharisees, which made the Law of “no effect.” Jesus sought to reveal the underlying kingdom values reflected in the law, while also unmasking the dangerous effects of tradition. Jesus calls us to a deeper obedience, a new way of life in the kingdom of God.
Filed under: Mission Leadership, Prayer | Tags: Abraham, calling, Court of Gentiles, covenant, Fuller Seminary, God's voice, gospel, Jesus, John the Baptist, Kelly Brown Douglas, Kurt Aland, Mark Powell, Mission, N. T. Wright, Parable of the Sower, parables, pericope, Potok, Synopsis, Temple, Word, YWAM
A Paper written in partial fulfillment of NE500 New Testament Gospels
Fuller Theological Seminary
March 11, 2009
John Henry
Let Anyone With Ears To Hear Listen
The challenge for Youth With A Mission (YWAM), a twenty-first century international missionary community, is to examine what Jesus said and did in Palestine two thousand years ago, compare that to our contemporary picture of Jesus, and then to assess how the Jesus of history informs how we understand him here and now. Chaim Potok’s novel, The Promise, presents the comparable struggle of a Jewish Talmudic student who faces critical questions regarding the ancient texts relating to faith in the Orthodox and Hasidic communities Kelly Brown Douglas’s The Black Christ similarly describes the struggle of understanding a contemporary Jesus within the African-American community. In his book, The Challenge of Jesus, Bishop N.T. Wright offers a portrait of our struggle to know the Jesus of history, his life in first-century Palestine, in order that we may more faithfully follow the resurrected Christ of faith today.
Could the YWAM community misunderstand the biblical testimony and historical context of the Jesus of history? It is very possible. This study is an attempt to reconstruct the original historical setting of a selection of key passages that relate to YWAM’s understanding of Jesus’ practice and teaching of hearing his Father’s voice. Recognizing our personal knowledge of Jesus is not the same as a scientific certitude; we must avoid the extremes of the liberal quest for the historical Jesus and the conservative reaction against it. YWAM, an international mission committed to know God and to make Him known, follows the Christ of faith to the best of our understanding in our present day reality in every nation.
YWAM leaders periodically gather from across the globe to listen to God’s voice for direction by studying the Scriptures, with the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, and through our communal sharing. The doctrine of hearing God’s voice is our understanding of the practice of listening to God, which takes place in virtually every YWAM community. Why do we have the expectation that Jesus will speak? Have the Scriptures informed us or have we created some other Jesus through the influence of our cultural context? I will argue here that Jesus speaks to anyone who will listen and obey. I will show that Jesus modeled the way, taught the importance, and interceded on behalf of all nations to know God through the practice of hearing his voice.
Jesus Modeled the Way for Us to Hear God’s Voice
YWAM is part of a long history of communities seeking to translate the Jesus of history into a contemporary and often changing cultural context. YWAM leaders encourage fearless and courteous conversation among Christian traditions by inviting those from many denominations to teach and participate in its various programs. This continuing conversation, including discussions of the lives and backgrounds of the Gospels’ authors and the literary relationships of the Gospels and other source materials, is appropriate for those seeking to hear God’s voice today. In this section, I will show that the Jesus of history has modeled the way for YWAM’s understanding and practice of hearing God’s voice.
The Gospel writers’ selection, arrangement, and adaptation of their source materials portray Jesus in his own discourse between ancient Hebrew traditions and his contemporary culture. The Gospel writers appear to follow Jesus’ example. Rather than remove themselves from the story as teachers, the Gospel writers have entered the story by interpreting Jesus to their cultural context. All appear to agree that Jesus’ followers were to hear and obey God’s voice, which commands all to make him known among every people. Jesus is portrayed in each Gospel as the fulfillment of all that God said he would do. N.T. Wright argues that Jesus’ announcement of a new kingdom was also a judgment against Israel coupled to his own representative fulfillment of Israel’s purpose to be a light to the Gentiles.
The story of Jesus’ baptism shows how Jesus modeled the way to hear the voice of God. The Gospel writers all agree regarding the historical importance and particulars of the event. In the synoptic Gospels we find the near word-for-word account of the Holy Spirit descending on Jesus and “a voice from heaven, saying ‘This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased.’” John’s Gospel adds the Baptist’s narrative, “he who sent me to baptize with water said to me, ‘He on whom you see the Spirit descend and remain, this is he who baptizes with the Holy Spirit’” (Jn. 1:33). Matthew’s adaptation, likely on behalf of his primarily Jewish audience, includes the narrative of Jesus modeling the necessity “to fulfill all righteousness” (Jn. 1:15).
Three things should be noted regarding the Gospel writers’ accounts of this historic event. First, all the Gospel accounts agree that this event took place, including a sign of Holy Spirit’s appearance. Second, God’s voice is reportedly heard as an announcement from heaven, as well as privately to John the Baptist. And third, Matthew highlights Jesus’ demonstrated commitment to personally submit to all that is necessary to fulfill the requirements of the ancient Hebrew prophetic tradition. These ancient texts together affirm that God communicates in human history and that Jesus modeled the way for us to hear God’s voice. YWAM’s practice of listening to God’s voice corresponds with the Jesus of history who modeled a commitment to fulfill the purposes of God in his contemporary setting.
Jesus Taught the Importance of Hearing and Obeying God’s Word
Though often misunderstood, parables represent Jesus’ chief teaching method. The Gospels depict Jesus’ penchant for perplexing and mystifying his hearers with simple, ordinary, yet startling messages. Jesus’ parables were stories of fields, vineyards, yeast, houses, and a “high incidence of agrarian motifs.” Jesus parabolic teachings are more than an effective technique to teach the kingdom. In this section, I will show how Jesus taught the importance of hearing God’s voice through the parables, calling the hearers to obedience with resulting changed lives, which are the fruit of the kingdom of God.
Throughout the Mediterranean in the first century C.E., broadcasting seed, some of which would fall on a beaten path, or rocky ground, or among weeds, was common practice. Probably eighty to ninety percent of Jesus’ audience engaged in agricultural work. The people of Jesus’ day knew a good harvest would at best yield ten to fifteen times what was planted. Jesus taught his contemporaries the prominent Parable of the Sower, also found in all three synoptic Gospels , with the surprising conclusion that seed sown upon “good soil” would bring forth a phenomenal harvest of “thirty, sixty, and a hundredfold.” Certainly Jesus had the attention of his hearers! Jesus concludes this parable with the adage, “He who has ears, let him hear,” which presumes most anyone could and should.
The Gospel writers also select and arrange Jesus’ interpretation of the parable, including a triple-tradition explanation for speaking in parables. It appears the author of Mark’s Gospel had the help of an eyewitness who was one of Jesus’ twelve. All synoptic Gospel writers intentionally invite the reader into a more intimate understanding. Jesus tells the twelve with him, “To you has been given the secrets of the kingdom of God, but for those outside everything is in parables” (Mark 4:11). N.T. Wright explains that, despite their rootedness in the prophetic language of return from exile, Jesus’ message to his contemporaries is that God is “sowing his people again in their own land ” The explanation Jesus offers is like a riddle. Quoting Isaiah, Jesus explains his use of parables, “so that they may indeed…hear but not understand.” (Mark 4:12) Jesus is in fact judging Israel while “simultaneously calling into being a new people, a renewed Israel.” While this background is not obvious to the twenty-first century YWAMer, the Gospel writers all suggest that this parable is to teach the importance of listening with a good heart and obeying by becoming a fruitful participant in God’s continuing story.
Jesus Interceded on Behalf of All to Hear His Father’s Voice
YWAM’s commitment to listen to God’s voice is not merely for the purpose of private guidance and individual fruitfulness. YWAM’s mission is not limited to one nation or group; we are an international family of ministries called to listen to God’s voice together for the purpose of knowing God’s plans and purposes to preach the Gospel to every person and disciple all nations in our generation and in our varied and particular cultural settings. In this section, I will show that YWAM’s practice of listening to God’s voice is congruent with Jesus historical example of interceding on behalf of all nations to communicate with God.
Appealing for every person, from every background, nationality, and economic status, Jesus said, “He who has ears, let him hear.” The political, economic, and religious systems of second-temple Judaism presented an insurmountable obstacle for the ordinary person of Jesus day to approach God freely. Jesus likely knew that religious protest movements of his day sought “to become ‘political’ by contesting elite control of religious institutions.” It is into this larger story that all four Gospel writers portray Jesus driving out all those selling animal sacrifices and moneychangers. Jesus was not merely driving out a few opportunists trying to profit off religious pilgrims, his subversive message and action was to single-handedly confront the Temple’s political establishment and redistributive economic system, which had become an obstacle to God’s plan for Israel to be a light to all nations.
Appealing with the ancient text of his own Jewish tradition, Jesus asks, “Is it not written, ‘My house shall be…a house of prayer’? Interestingly, Mark’s Gospel, likely the source for Matthew and Luke, also includes “for all the nations.” The exclusion of this appeal for all nations in Matthew and Luke’s Gospels is a concern, however further examination will show that the act of turning over tables was clearly an appeal for all nations to come to his Father’s house. In John’s Gospel, Jesus told those who sold pigeons, which were offered to restore the “postpartum woman to normal life while acknowledging God’s sole authority to establish pure blood relations,” that they should not “make my Father’s house a house of trade.” This dramatic act overturning tables is coupled with his appeal for his Father’s family, which he indicates should not be a matter of “trade” or limited to an exclusive bloodline. Jesus appeal that day was within view of the inscription in the Court of the Gentiles, which restricted those outside the bloodline of Abraham. Jesus instituted a new Temple (himself), through whom purity and forgiveness is now available to all people everywhere. Jesus has made the way for all nations to pray to and communicate with his Father, fulfilling the covenant given to Abraham. (Gen. 12:1-3)
Conclusion
The calling and the mission of YWAM is to enter this continuing story fulfilling all that is required to reflect the life of Jesus in our multi-cultural and multi-national contexts. Just as Jesus taught the abundant fruitfulness resulting from hearing and obeying God’s voice, Jesus followers may expect the same abundance. And just as Jesus confronted political, economic, and religious systems that hindered people from coming into relationship, including the intimacy of hearing God’s voice, Jesus followers must also appeal for every person and every nation to enjoy the blessedness of intimate relationship with his Father.
The Gospels, especially John, have much more instruction about the importance of hearing God’s voice. This study has been limited to only a few events paralleled in the Gospels. In those events, the historical Jesus demonstrated the attitude and obedience required to hear God, as well as God’s inclination to speak. He modeled the way at his baptism, he taught the importance of hearing God through the bearing of fruit from a heart of faithfulness, and he overturned symbolically every hindrance to hearing God’s voice. Jesus instituted a new Temple worship, constituted in himself and wherever two or more gather in his name, through which all nations are welcomed to worship the Father in spirit and in truth. Youth With A Mission practices hearing God’s voice through the Christ of our faith in a multi-national and multi-denominational community. This Christ of faith can be properly understood to be the Jesus of history. Through YWAM communities around the world, Jesus’ words echo today: “Let anyone with ears to hear listen!”
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Aland, Kurt. 1982. Synopsis of the Four Gospels: Completely Revised on the Basis of the Greek Text of the Nestle-Aland 26th edition and Greek New Testament 3rd edition: The Text is the Second Edition of the Revised Standard Version. English ed. [New York]: United Bible Societies.
Douglas, Kelly Brown. 1994. The Black Christ, The Bishop Henry McNeal Turner Studies in North American Black Religion;. Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis.
Hanson, K. C., and Douglas E. Oakman. 1998. Palestine in the Time of Jesus: Social Structures and Social Conflicts. Minneapolis: Fortress Press.
Potok, Chaim. 1969. The Promise. 1st ed. New York,: Knopf.
Powell, Mark Allan. 1998. Fortress Introduction to the Gospels. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press.
Wright, N. T. 1999. The Challenge of Jesus: Rediscovering Who Jesus Was and Is. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press.
Filed under: Church | Tags: Christ, Church, conservatives, eternal, evangelical, Gnostic, healing, incarnation, Israelis, Jesus, liberals, nations, Palestinians, Resurrection
From my experience, evangelical churches are largely Gnostic, which removes Jesus from much of any daily practical consequence.
Today’s church leaders need to consider the incarnation of Christ. Jesus incarnation is eternal, therefore the practical concerns related to Jesus’ resurrected body (and eventually our own) are eternal. Because he has eyes, ears, and a nose, arms to embrace, and taste-buds to enjoy foods, every facet of our physical existence has an eternal stamp of Jesus incarnation on it. Education, Government, Media, Arts, Sciences, every Social and Cultural concern today will have a fuller appreciation in the resurrection. If trees are for healing nations, as it states in John’s Revelation, perhaps there will still need for some further healing between peoples, such as Palestinians and Israelis.
The question this all raises for liberals and conservatives is this: How then should we live? Should we not engage every facet of our existence on this green earth with respect to the resurrected Christ?
Filed under: Church | Tags: Abraham, economic, forgiveness, Gentiles, Hanson & Oakman, Jesus, pilgrims, political, purity, reconciliation, religious institutions, Temple, Worship
Jesus likely knew that religious protest movements of his day sought “to become ‘political’ by contesting elite control of religious institutions.” (See Palestine in the Time of Jesus: Social Structures and Social Conflicts, by Hanson & Oakman, p. 125) When Jesus drove out all those selling animal sacrifices and the money changers, he was not merely driving out a few opportunists trying to profit off religious pilgrims. He was single-handedly confronting the Temple’s political establishment and redistributive economic system. Amid all that blood sacrifice, Jesus overturned the Temple’s aim of purity in worship, replacing it with the aim of reconciliation with his Father.
Jesus overturned more than tables. He overturned the concern for purity in the Temple, which “attracted and cleansed impurities from the social body.” (p. 135) Jesus presented a new vision and a new Temple (himself), which took God’s purity and forgiveness out of the Temple to touch the people who needed reconciliation with his Father.
When Jesus singled out those who sold doves, saying they have made his “Father’s house” a “marketplace,” he was showing how much he desires to welcome the families of nations. Doves were offered in Temple worship to restore the “postpartum woman to normal life while acknowledging God’s sole authority to establish pure blood relations.” (p. 135) Jesus was appealing for his father’s family, while standing in close proximity to the Temple inscription in the Court of the Gentiles, which restricted those outside the blood line of Abraham.
Filed under: Church | Tags: breakthrough, Church, community, cross, die to self, Fruit, Jesus, Leadership, Mission, missionary, model, no reputation, Pastor
I just read an article on leadership development in the church. The point of the article was that Jesus spent time with the few, as we read in Bob Coleman’s “Master Plan of Evangelism.” The important point I took away from the article is that developing leaders is done by modeling people to follow Christ’s example. The central act of Jesus is the cross; he modeled unrelenting surrender.
The “seed” Jesus refers to in John 12 is not only our willingness to die to our most favored activities; we must die to self, our egos. We must be willing to be of no reputation as we serve our pastor, Jesus.
The one thing to which leaders today need to die to is the image of the senior pastor. I am not a senior pastor. I am a missionary. Of course, Jesus is not only a pastor; he is also a missionary. Jesus said, “As the Father has sent me, I send you.” We, the Church, are not only the sheep of his pasture; we are a sent people with a mission. God’s Church does not have a mission; God’s mission has a church.
The willingness to die to our reputations of churches led by a single senior pastor leader, a Jesus figure in the community, may be the most important breakthrough in the church, as a seed breaks under the earth, which is necessary to produce many new seeds for growth and release of leaders. This is the “way of Jesus,” modeling the way to bear much fruit.
Filed under: Church | Tags: Authenticity, Bolger, community, Emerging Church, Gibbs, Innovation, Jesus, Modern, Private, Public, Sacred, Secular, theology, western
Secular space was created when Western theology “reduced God to power and removed the sense that a good and beautiful God participates with humans. Unbelievers successfully created ‘safe zones’ so that God would not interfere with them” (See Emerging Churches, by Bolger & Gibbs, p. 192)
Modern Christians became comfortable in the ‘sacred spaces’ of the Church and their private lives. The witness of the Church was therefore weakened and reduced to a private decision, in a place set apart from the public domain. Emerging churches are countering this weakness by “removing the distinction of church and non church activities.” (Bolger & Gibbs, 107) They are synthesizing evangelism and service, avoiding differentiation between Christians and non-Christians. Emerging Churches are changing the focus from the external boundary of belief to the Person of Jesus at the center. They are more concerned about relating to Jesus in any setting, including night clubs and golf courses, than they are defining who is in and who is out.
Church communities today face a significant challenge, creating “bridges to span the sacred/secular divide.” (Bolger & Gibbs, 67) The way to do that may be for members of your church community to become the good news to their neighbors, encouraging and modeling gospel living to take place in secular spaces. The emphasis among Emerging Churches is to create “innovation” to “ensure authenticity.” (Bolger & Gibbs, 210)
Next week’s Emerging Church Pattern: Leading as the Body
Filed under: Church, Mission Leadership | Tags: Abraham, Adam, change, Church, community, Eden, Glory, Jesus, Journey, Liminality, Mission, Missional, Moses, Steven Hawthorne, Temple, Tent of Meeting, Tradition, Transition, Weight of Glory, Wine Skin
Looking for alternatives to church forms will always challenge the status quo. Alternatives collide with traditional ways of doing things. However, alternatives will also encourage vision of the Church as a people and a community on mission with God.
Jesus used terms like “wine skin” and “cloth” to explain this tension between the new and the old. The nomenclature we employ, the terms we use to name things, is one of the greatest gifts of God. Like Adam who named all the creatures in Eden, God created us with the amazing privilege of naming things. What kind of God is this who would create all things and give away the privilege of naming them? We name our children and celebrate the wonder of God’s good gifts as we do so.We create with God and ascribe names to those creations, songs, books, events, buildings, even communities and cities. The power to name things is the power to assign character and our values to them.
This privilege of naming things is not an exclusive task for just a few experts or elites. God never intended to separate people by class or caste, giving more power and privilege to the few. Some might argue that it creates confusion to have so many names for things. Allowing a few to assign names to things may avoid confusion, but there will be a cost. It will limit creativity. The privilege of participating in a community, naming things creatively, is a gift of God to every member of Christ’s body.
When we share the responsibility of naming things, shared creativity ensues. This is the process of creating culture, I believe. It’s happening all around us, and it can’t easily be contained or controlled to avoid confusion.
Confusion may occur temporarily; it is part of the process of change. The Church has always been emerging and always will. When it stops changing, it becomes an old wine skin. The few may enjoy the old wine for a season, but there is no place for the new wine for the new generation. As we step out into an unknown future, as Abram did, we may experience some temporary confusion about where we are going. However, by setting out on this journey of change, we are the people of faith God called us to be.
God intends that his community of followers accept that there will always be change, transition, liminality, and a stepping into a future together. Certainly, the Children of Israel did not know all that was before them when they were delivered from Egypt. They entered into a transition in the wilderness. Nomenclature from the past carried meaning of the past and habits and sins of the past. The children of Israel needed to find terms for what God was wanting to do next. The Tent of Meeting was a new idea. Later came the Temple. But God would never dwell in a house made by human hands. Neither will he dwell, that is to stay permanently, in our contemporary idea of church. He has chosen to dwell in the hearts of his followers who are on a journey, on mission with him. This liminality is an exciting process; we are always following, always taking up our cross, always going in Jesus Name. You see, the Church, the community of Christ followers, is not a static central edifice in history. As a missionary, I’ve thought long and hard about this. Too many churches have relegated their understanding of the Great Commission to a department of the church, a line item in their budget. This formation, this attitude, has emasculated the Church. You see, the Church does not have a mission, God’s mission has a Church. We, the whole community of Christ followers, are called into his mission. This alternative view, this missional formation of church, will take us to new places, doing new things, in new ways, and assigning names to those things along the journey.
Those who have made the choice have within them Christ’s love compelling them to embrace and explore the new things God is wanting to do. When our hearts are full, we surrender our rights to the security of tradition. With faith and hope and love, we declare how majestic is the Name of Jesus in all the earth. This is the extraordinary “weight of glory” in naming things. Steven Hawthorne describes glory as “a relational beauty that every person’s heart yearns to behold and even to enter. The essential worth, beauty and value of people, created things and, of course, the Creator Himself.”
God told Moses, “Let my people go, that they may worship me.” As we set out through the wilderness of major transition, we’ll name things with the shared purpose of ascribing greatness to God. He’ll receive glory as we follow him in faith, so long as we don’t hold too tightly to the security of the ways we once knew.
Filed under: Activist | Tags: Angels, Christmas, Jesus, Prince of Peace, World
This is the season when we think about the baby born in a cave, an animal stall in a little town in the ancient world of a tiny nation, a nation God chose to shine His light into the dark corners of the world. Even under the beauty and calm of a starlit night, shepherds kept watch to protect their flocks. They knew the peace they experienced was fleeting and wolves would prey on their hopes to provide for their families. The Prince of Peace came to make peace in a violent and dangerous world.
We sing of this Prince of Peace, remembering his birth each year. Away in a manger, happy carolers sing door to door reminding their neighbors of the little Lord Jesus. No crying he makes? What do you think? Did he cry? Did he experience the same pains, disappointments, fears in a struggle for peace that we experience? Yes, the scriptures tell us, in every way.
Jesus experienced what it is like to be helpless, and completely dependent on the love of imperfect people to feed him, wipe his tears, and clean his swaddling cloths. He came to this tiny terrestrial ball in the vast emptiness of space as a human child, with eyes, ears, nose, hands, feet, and toes. His small frame grew as his heart pumped blood to his brain and other vital organs. His lungs filled with the stench of a world far away from ours; no hot showers, no temperature-controlled homes, no treated water, no sewers, and no refrigerated food storage and convenience stores.
Though shepherds came when a curious angelic throng announced that the King of all Kings was born in David’s ancestral city, the baby would not have survived if his parents had not made the daily sacrifice to care for him. Though Sage star-gazers brought gifts for the Lord of Life, he would have certainly died at the hands of Herod if Joseph had not followed the private instructions of another heavenly Messenger.
Have you ever wondered what Gabriel looked like? Certainly the angel was not one of those effeminate baby cherubs with a bow and arrow. And why don’t we have masculine angels to decorate our Christmas trees? I digress.
Though he is fully God, and though he had at his disposal all of heaven’s resources, the Son of God chose to be fully human and fully vulnerable to every temptation, every disappointment, and every peril of life. He chose the name, Son of Man.
As a boy, Jesus chose one day to hang out with the wise guys at the temple asking questions. What did those religious men think of this precocious boy? Did Jesus have all the answers or was he in the process of discovery? I believe he was sorting out his relationship with his earthly parents, Mary and Joseph, and he was discovering intimate relationship with his Father in heaven. His discoveries were all part of the process of growing spiritually and physically. He found favor with His Father and with humankind. Like you and me, he had to learn to obey and how to resist temptation.
Jesus lived in a time when the curse on all of creation was enforced by the fully armed rulers of darkness. All his young male cousins were murdered by the tyrant ruler of Israel. His parents were charged to protect him, but not without cost, not without the experience of scorn, derision, and dismissal of relatives and neighbors who judged his questionable legitimacy. They could not protect him from every scraped knee, every splinter of wood, and every bloody nose. Yes, he surely shed his blood before the ordeal of cat of nine tails, the whip that tore his flesh when the Roman soldiers placed a mock crown on his head, thorns that cut his scalp to the skull.
Cruelty remains on this planet and wrongful deaths have multiplied a hundred-fold, but when our Prince of Peace triumphed over those evil powers, they were disarmed by the sacrifice of blood Jesus shed on the cross. He made peace through intense suffering. Peace has a price.
Jesus is Emmanuel, God with us. He is God who became man. The Son of God made an eternal choice. He put on skin and he has that same skin and bone today. The incarnation is eternal. The Prince of Peace is forever making peace.
Have you ever considered what it is like in heaven, the place Jesus is preparing for those who make the eternal choice to receive his free gift of love, hope, and forgiveness? We were taught to pray, “your kingdom come, your will be done, on earth as it is in heaven.” But what is it like in heaven? That’s the place where Jesus lives today. He still has two ears, two eyes, and a nose. He’s preparing a feast for us and we will look on that food and taste it around a table of friends from every nation, tribe, and tongue. There will be people of many generations our arms will embrace. There will be dwellings and our feet will take us through the doors. There will be much yet to learn and we will love the journey exploring the depths of God’s wisdom and love. We will live there forever.
Let’s return to earth. Here I sit in a small town in the Midwestern United States in December 2008. My neck is in pain and my not-that-old body is sore. I must keep watch, like those shepherds, over my family and my own life. If the Prince of Peace was subject to dangers, rejection, and harm, I must not be surprised when the same perils face me and those I love.
There is a place of protection, however. It is called the secret place where God hides us under a protective shield, the shadow of his wing. So as I seek peace, choosing to dwell in the secret place, I must understand that in this world, there are troubles. If I fail to make peace, standing firm in Jesus authority as victor over the powers of darkness, I cannot presume that I will have peace in this world. Making peace is a proactive stance against forces allied against God’s dream for this world. I must stand and resist, as a peace-maker, just as Jesus stood against the powers of darkness and defeated them.
Jesus grew in wisdom and stature and in favor with God and man. He faced resistance and his Spirit teaches us to fight the good fight of faith. If I eat right, I will grow in health. If I set the resistance on the exercise machine, I will grow in strength. But if I fail to stand in resistance to a world that is antagonistic toward us, I will be destroyed. If I fail to fix the leak in the roof, the house will slowly fall apart. It will be destroyed. The cold and the heat of my surrounding environment are harmful to me, therefore I must make peace with my environment. I must create an environment for my family, my community, my world. I must not presume that peace can be found by seeking a cosmic harmony, assuming that if we do nothing, the surrounding world will embrace us and protect us. Jesus modeled a different way.
The Prince of Peace came to make peace.
Filed under: Church | Tags: Bolger, Church, Cole, community, evangelical, family, Father, Gibbs, Jesus, Mission, Organic Church, Samaritan, seeker-sensitive
The first of the nine patterns of emerging churches as outlined in the book, Emerging Churches, by Ryan Bolger and Eddie Gibbs, is “Identifying with Jesus.”
Many evangelicals have witnessed the “seeker-sensitive” approach to church. While this approach may have been justified at one time, many today recognize that it was inadequate. A seeker sensitive approach inadvertently teaches “people to be passive spectators, objects, receivers.” (Bolger & Gibbs 2005: 172)
When he spoke to the Samaritan woman, Jesus said the “Seeker” is the Father, implying that “we are His heart’s desire.” (Organic Churches, Cole 2005: 39) Jesus is our model for living and worship. He lived the Father’s mission. His supreme purpose was not measured in the number of his followers. He did not write a book. He did not create an organization or build a building. Jesus’ supreme purpose is to bring glory to his Father. In doing so, he lived in intimacy with his Father, seeking to do that which gives his Father pleasure.
Rather than leading seeker-sensitive churches, emerging churches are seeking to identify with Jesus. This new “seeker-generating” approach is not about a place, but a Person. Rather than ask people to, “Come to us,” emerging church groups emphasize a call to be like Jesus, moving around the neighborhood, engaging the community, and extending his family to the ends of the earth.
Filed under: Church | Tags: Church, community, humility, Jesus, kingdom of God, service, witness
The emergence of the church is “part of a long history of God-inspired apostolic endeavor.” (Steve Taylor, Out of Bounds Church 2005, p. 39) Before discussing formations of the Church, which I plan to do in subsequent posts, it is imperative that our understanding of “church” be distinguished from the “kingdom of God,” which is the boundary-free domain that Jesus commissioned his witnesses to proclaim. As citizens of heaven, Christ followers must remember that our formation of church communities will fall short of the ideal. However, the most effective witnessing church formations take a posture of humility and service within smaller groupings. Amid a world consumed by façade, how do we create authentic communities to best demonstrate the Church’s anticipation of the kingdom of God? (Tim Keel, Intuitive Leadership 2007, p. 117)
