Returning To Biblical Missions
What does it mean to "return to biblical missions"?
Several years ago myself and a good friend and colleague of mine, Elbert Smith, were discussing how we could make our training for missionaries, national partners, and volunteers more strategic and more practical. One of the outcomes of this discussion came the idea that everything we presented would come from one or both of two sources; The Word of God and The Works of God. This caused us to ask two questions.
1) Do we see this concept or practice in Scripture?
2) How do we see God moving in the world today to bring lost souls into His Kingdom?
Joshua 1:8 states: "This book of the law shall not depart from your mouth, but you shall meditate on it day and night, so that you may be careful to do according to all that is in it; for then you will make your way prosperous, and then you will have success."
When you look at all of the plans and strategies being implemented around the world today, a close examination of these strategies reveal that those which are inline with biblical teachings are producing the greatest eternal fruit. The good news is that we do not have to keep coming up with something new, but instead, just keep remembering what Scripture both teaches and promises.
Then in Psalm 111:2, we read, "Great are the works of the Lord; They are studied by all who delight in them."
Especially in IMB circles the buzz words for several years now has been Church Planting Movements. It is undeniable that a significant amount of observation and evidence exists to support the claim that this is a work of God, a mighty movement of the Holy Spirit. With the emergence of CPMs we see characteristics and practices that has helped return our focus on the early days of Pentecost and the rapid spread of the gospel in the years that followed.
However, at the risk of sounding heretical, we must be careful not to fall into the trap of believing that CPMs are the last word on missions and mission strategy. Even a cursory review of modern missions history will show that we are currently riding the latest wave of mission thought and practice and even if we can't see it yet, another new wave is forming just over the horizon. But until this new wave begins to build, we need to be sure that we do not miss the opportunities that lay before us today.
So, I will ask the question again, what does it mean to return to biblical missions? Here are just a few of my responses.
1. My first and primary source for mission strategy is found in Scripture. The Bible is replete with examples and commands that allows us to go from lostness to saved, saved to church, and from church to multiplying churches.
2. We call it best practices, but I believe the Bible calls it the work of the Holy Spirit. We need to be spiritually sensitive observers, showing both discernment and wisdom as we seek to determine where and how God is working to redeem lost men, women, boys and girls to Himself.
3. Lostness should impact everything we do so that everything we do impacts lostness.
4. I do not know who originated this phrase, but I heard it first from Bruce Carlton. "Church is not where we meet, but church is who we are."
5. Jesus said that a tree is judged by it's fruit. Are we bearing eternal fruit or are we taking up space that could be used by someone else who would bear fruit?
6. If we consider the apostle Paul a missionary model for us to follow, then it's important to remember that almost everywhere he went he left behind, new believers, new churches, and developing leaders. More on this in a future blog.
Returning to biblical missions is rediscovering the value and impact of 1st century principles and practices in a 21st century world.


5 Comments:
Great to know that you are applying blogging as part of your comm. strategy.
I will look forward to your future posts, especially your perspective on #6 above. Here is a peeve I have about SB churches and I believe it is also a part of missions everywhere--both propogated by volunteers and by missionaries. I believe we place disproportionate emphasis on evangelism vs. discipleship. Look at our stateside churches. It is embarassing that nearly 10 million SB don't show on Sunday morning...but we were able to get them to walk the aisle and make a decision to follow Christ. Did they really? Are they really regenerate? I'm not so sure.
This flimsy commitment by the churches to hold them accountable and to mature them is the reason Western Evangelicalism is SOOOOO superficial. Unfortunately, too many people--in my opinion--see missions as winning converts with little thought to what comes next. (Of course why would we have the vision to do something overseas that we don't even have the vision for here. We are products of our environment.)
This is my beef with CPM strategy. I simply don't believe church planting can outdistance an indiginous ledership base capable of maintaining doctrinal integrity and not be subject to syncretism. I wonder what percentage of missionaries give proportinate emphasis to discipleship to ensure that the church being built is on solid foundation. Yes, I know Paul spent much of the NT correcting problem churches, but he also left them with DEEP instruction for being the church.
I look forward to you expanding on #6 and addressing the balance of evangelism and discipleship.
(Know that my comments are not communicated with hostility, just frustration from what I've seen in SB churches since returning to the States.)
The second half of the Great Commission (i.e. "teaching them to observe all that I commanded you") is as important as the first half ("going," "make disciples," "baptizing them"). Any church or organization that does not keep the second half is not keeping the Great Commission, no matter how many baptisms they record.
I am also inclined to believe that Jesus' promise of "Lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age" is predicated upon His followers keeping the preceding commandments. His presence is with us as we are actively going, making disciples, baptizing them, and teaching them to obey His commands. Should we claim His presence if we are not actively following His command?
Glad to see this blog. I trust that many will take the opportunity to interact with each other as a result. You raise some key issues which deserve honest appraisal.
The whole issue of best practices is one that think needs to be addressed. Best practices can easily slip into pragmatism to the neglect of the role of the Holy Spirit. Over the past two years as I have worked on my dissertation, I have come to believe that many evangelicals are trinitarian in their theology, but not trinitarian in their missiology. We tend to favor pragmatism over the Holy Spirit. Within Southern Baptist circles, perhaps it is because of the charismatic issues that keep arising. Whatever the reason, a return to Biblical missions demands that we be trinitarian in our missiology and missiological practices. Roland Allen, in my opinion, has laid out perhaps one of the best missiological perspectives on the role of the Holy Spirit in missions in his two books - Missionary Methods and Spontaneous Expansion of the Church.
The discipleship issue within CPMs is another major issue. I am consistently asked the question, "How do you keep syncretism and heresy out of CPM?" My answer normally is, "The same way we have kept it out of the traditional churches." What do I mean? First, you cannot keep out all syncretism and heresy. Second, you have to restructure discipleship toward being obedience-based and not exclusively knowledge-based (typical Western model). In my experience, obedience leads to a thirst for more Biblical knowledge, but more Biblical knowledge does not necessarily translate into obedience.
I look forward to being a part of this ongoing dialogue. BTW - what I normally say is "Church is not a place where we go, but church is who we are." A return to Biblical missions requires a Biblical understanding of church, and when we get that it sets us free from being locked into any one specific model of church.
Ken,
A thought in response to the blog about returning to biblical missions. In Frank Viola’s book, Rethinking the Wineskin, there is an interesting comment made that we may, as Southern Baptists, be overlooking. Frank says this; “The present burden of the spirit is fastened upon a people who will shed their man made, encrusted traditions concerning church leadership, church practice, and church organization. His burden is to have a people who will hand the church back to the mastery of the Lord Jesus Christ! Put another way, the spirit is not only speaking about the wine. He is also speaking about the wineskin.”
In our zeal to add to the Kingdom could we be missing the fact that some of the new converts are being contaminated by placing them into wineskins that are not worthy of receiving new wine. And is the wineskin an ever-changing vessel that we will not recognize without Holy Spirit sensitivity as we move from community to community?
Okay so maybe this is the best case scenario and we will be only starting biblical New Testament churches and maybe the entire correct DNA will be inserted. But what do we do with the old wineskins? Can they not experience any type of biblical renewal and be useful once again? Herein is where I see a dilemma for the catalytic church planter. We have to stay focused on the best, and nothing less than the best. We have to be biblical in word and action and yet particle in training and planting. Can the two mix successfully? Not by earthly power, I am sure of this! Yet in returning to biblical missions I believe there needs to be a renewed focus on the work of the Holy Spirit. This, I see, needs to happen in three distinct areas.
1. The prayer life and ongoing sanctification of the planter.
2. An honest look at church planting practices, past and current.
3. Thick skin when our detractors say we are dismantling the traditional church.
Well the other thing I would say is I have been wrong a lot of times in my short life as a Strategy Coordinator and yet almost every day the Holy Spirit allows me to see something fresh from our work area. Thank you for some biblical insight and also some practical advice.
Rich F
Bruce,
What a powerful statement about being trinitarian in theology but not in our missiology! That one came as a word to my heart and really touches on something we are dealing with as CP M's. We are trying to do this impossible job in our own strength and it is not happening. We know very little about the role of the Spirit in CPM and tend to go about Kingdom business "the best we know how."
I have attempted to blog on this vert subject at my own site here. It is mostly questions, but questions I for one would like answers to in regards to something all of us are dealing with on the field.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home