Here is an interesting video dialog (produced/edited by Bill Kinnon) between Alan Roxbugh and Pat Keifert. They discuss a wide range of issues, including definitions/descriptions of missional church, common views of the contemporary church, and leadership in missional congregations.

In the discussion on leadership I appreciate Keifert’s emphasis on leadership being more about time than about a position. He speaks about the leader cultivating segments of time to assist the congregation in discerning what God is doing in their local context. It is about taking the time to create environments for people to dwell in the Word. It is about having the time to be patient — to hear from God and to hear from each other.

Another topic that I found interesting dealt with Keifert’s journey towards the missional church conversation. He shares how it involved both “failure” and “discovery.” The failure involved disenchantment with his own ministry experience in a traditional church. The discovery included the reading of Newbigin’s “Foolishness to the Greeks.”

I think Keifert’s journey parallels the experience of many. There is a deep sense of  uneasiness, frustration, or even failure in a current ministry setting. Church leaders recognize something isn’t right about how they do ministry. They sense that something has changed, but they are unsure about the essence of the change, or what changes might be necessary. At some point, however, they “discover” that others have experienced the same anxiety. They “discover” authors that begin to give language to these changes. Perhaps, like Keifert its Newbigin, or Bosch; or more recently, maybe it is Guder, Van Gelder, Hirsch, or Frost. But regardless of the author, they rediscover the missionary nature of God and His church, and the reality that the church is sent into the mission field that is now North America.

This has certainly been my journey. I wonder about your experience. Has failure + discovery propelled you into the missional conversation?

Here are the links to two very good presentations from Alan Hirsch on the topic of cultural distance in a post-Christendom context. The first video is a 19 minute talk given at the Q conference. The second clip is an expansion on the same topic in a 47 minute session at Velocity.

Over the past year I have had an increasing number of conversations with pastors and church leaders about the church’s inability to “reach” their local communities. Many local churches have come to the realization that they have lost the ability to “attract” people to church programs and events. They sense that something has changed, but they are unsure about the essence of the change and what ministry adjustments might be necessary. In most cases, the leaders have no “grid” or “framework” to rethink the form and function of the church. Therefore, they lean towards a solution that ultimately involves more of the same church growth principles and programming.

I believe, as many of you that follow this blog, that a significant portion of the “solution” begins with recapturing the missionary nature of God and His church. The “framework” that is necessary is found in the best of the missional church conversation that is taking place today.

I have been studying and participating in this conversation for the past decade. Last year I completed a doctoral project that was targeted on assisting churches in the development of a missional ecclesiology. The core of the training project included three major elements.

The first piece of the training attempted to answer the question, “What is Missional Church?” During this portion of the training we examined the biblical, theological, and missiological underpinnings of the missional conversation. We also conducted a brief survey of the history of missional church, along with exploring what others were saying on the topic.

The second portion of the training focused on understanding the cultural shifts that have taken place in North America, and how those shifts have contributed to the marginalization of the church. This second element speaks to the question of “Why is the Missional Church conversation important?”

The third element of the training dealt with missional practice, or the question, “How can an existing church cultivate a more missional posture?” In this final section of the training we focused on issues surrounding community engagement and transformation, as well as how to make incremental changes in a missional direction with resources such as prayer, time, staff, facilities, and finances.

I share this brief training outline as an introduction to what I would be willing to share with other local congregations. I would like to make available a customized seminar that would focus on the series of topics mentioned above. The training could be customized to any size group that was most helpful. It could range from a two hour presentation targeted to a selected group of church leaders to a full day seminar presented to the whole congregation. You would decide the best fit for your situation and local context.

I want to make perfectly clear, that I am not trying to “make a buck” off of the missional church conversation. In fact, because I am supported by a national mission organization, the North American Mission Board, I would lead such a seminar with no required fee. I simply desire to assist churches and church leaders to better understand the missional conversation, and the significant implications it has for a local congregation.

If you have questions or would like to discuss what this might look like for your church, simply email me at brad.brisco@gmail.com

Here is an extended quote from a great book by Linda Bergquist and Allan Karr. I hope to post a review for the book in the next week.

Today’s church has posed itself a serious challenge: to live according to its missional nature rather than simply organize around mission activities. This challenge is something of an antidote to the church’s previous practice of piecing together a theology out of the two “Great Commission” verses found in Matthew 28:18-20 and Acts 1:8 rather than from the entire biblical story.

When we miss the big picture — that God is forming a people for Himself and reconciling the world to Himself — it affects our ecclesiology and reduces mission to a program or department of a church. A century ago, the German theologian Martin Kahler said that mission was “the mother of theology” in that the theologizing of the early church was necessitated by its missionary encounters with the world. Over many years, other prophetic voices have tried to call us to a more authentic theology, but we have not always listened. In 1969, missiologist Heinrich Kastin wrote: “Mission was, in the early stages, more than a mere function; it was a fundamental expression of the life of the church. The beginnings of a missionary theology are therefore also the beginnings of Christian theology as such.”

As you design, refine, or re-align, these questions about the role of mission will be some of your most important decisions. Do you believe that missions are something that the church does, or that mission is something that the church intrinsically is? Your answer to this question either limits or releases people. It helps define whether the church seeks the lost, or whether we expect the lost to seek the church. Which will it be?

– Church Turned Inside Out: A Guide For Designers, Refiners, And Re-Aligners by Linda Bergquist and Allan Karr

Following is a short video (produced and edited by Bill Kinnon) that recently “resurfaced” on the internet. It is an interview between Alan Roxburgh and Craig Van Gelder.

Van Gelder is professor of congregational mission at Luther Seminary in Saint Paul, Minnesota. He is author of “The Essence of the Church,” “The Ministry of the Missional Church,” “The Missional Church in Context,” “The Missional Church and Denominations,” and editor of “Confident Witness — Changing World” and “The Church Between Gospel and Culture.” (All of which are excellent, but the last two are my favorites)

There are a couple of issues raised in this video I think are important to consider. First, I appreciate Van Gelder’s emphasis on the theological foundation of missional church. Like many others in the missional church conversation, Van Gelder sees the necessity to shift the starting point for any discussion on missional church to the topic of mission.

Instead of beginning with questions surrounding the mission activities of the church, we must start first with questions concerning the missio Dei, or what is God’s mission in our context. Or to use David Bosch’s famous quote, “It is not the church which undertakes mission; it is the missio Dei which constitutes the church.”

Second, this emphasis on participating with what God is doing raises the crucial issue of discernment. When we start with God’s mission it is imperative that we discern how He is working. We must ask, “What is God doing in my neighborhood, workplace, or school?” And the follow-up question, “In light of our gifts and resources, how does God want us to participate with Him?”

Craig Van Gelder & Alan Roxburgh – What is Missional Church? from Allelon on Vimeo.

As presented in the previous posts in this series, the explicit language of sending found throughout the Old and New Testament is substantial. Moreover, the usage of sending language “establishes such a clear picture of mission in the Bible that its unique missional character is seen unmistakably even in events and ideas where the language as such is not explicit.” [1]

There are multiple passages in Scripture that speak to the missionary nature of God and the missional essence of the church that employ terms different from sending language. For example, the widespread use of the word “go” in both the Old and New Testament “is the imperative mood of the missional idea. It expresses through mandate form what the sending expresses in description and idea through the indicative mood.” [2]

In Genesis, God told Abram to “go to the land I will show you” (12:1). There God’s plan was to bless Abram so he in turn could be a blessing. In many of the Prophetic Books the word “go” is central to commissioning of the prophets. In Ezekiel, the prophet is told to “go and speak to the house of Israel” (3:1), Amos is commanded to “go and prophesy” to God’s people (7:15), and Jonah is told twice to “go to the great city of Nineveh and proclaim to it the message I give you” (1:2; 3:1).

In passages mentioned earlier the idea of going and the idea of sending are linked. In chapter six of the Book of Isaiah not only does the prophet respond to God’s question, “Who shall I send? And who will go for us?” in the affirmative; but after he does respond, God tells Isaiah to “Go and tell this people” (6:9). Moreover, in the sending of the seventy-two in Luke’s gospel they are told to go as Jesus was sending them out, “Go! I am sending you out like lambs among wolves” (10:3).

Finally, while the language of sending is clearly explicit in the commissioning of the disciples in John’s gospel, the language of “go” (or “going”) is evident in the Great Commission in Matthew 28:16-20 (cf. Mark 16:15-18). However, it is still clear that Jesus,

the one who was sent on mission and who has accomplished his mission, now becomes the sender. . . . The eleven disciples are the sent ones. Jesus had called them with a view to mission (4:19). He had taught them about kingdom living (5:3-7:27), kingdom mission (10:5-42), the mysteries of the kingdom (13:3-52), relationships within the kingdom (18:1-35), and the future consummation of the kingdom (24:3-25:46) – all in order to prepare them more effectively for their mission. [3]

The shear volume of the sending theme evident throughout Scripture ought to prompt the church to examine more closely the theological implications of such language. It undoubtedly illustrates the sending, missionary nature of the Triune God. The mission is ultimately the mission of God the Father, who has sent the Son, who has sent the Spirit, who has sent the disciples – this must give the Church’s mission both its power and its authority. In the excellent little book,A Sense of Mission, Albert Curry Winn concisely summarizes the importance of having this sending theme form the church’s understanding of its nature and activity when he writes: “If the sense of having been sent defines who Jesus is, from henceforth it must define what the church is.” [4]

---

1. Francis M. DuBose, God Who Sends (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1983), 55.

2. Ibid.

3. John D. Harvey, “Mission in Jesus’ Teaching,” in Mission in the New Testament: An Evangelical Approach, ed. William J. Larkin Jr. and Joel William (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 1998),, 129.

4. Albert Curry Winn, A Sense of Mission: Guidance From the Gospel of John (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1981), 43.

Most of you that follow this blog are familiar with The Forgotten Ways by Alan Hirsch. It is certainly one of the most significant books in the present missional conversation. If you are not familiar with the book you can read a series of post I did here. I would also highly recommend the more recent The Forgotten Ways Handbook, which I wrote about briefly here.

To move the conversation beyond the written word, and to hear directly from Hirsch himself, check out the training videos created by Lance Ford at Shapevine. The training involves eight sessions, or “podules,” that include an introduction, a session on chaos theory, and a session on each of the six mDNA elements described in The Forgotten Ways. The eight session training is priced at $39.95, however Shapevine is currently running a special which includes the same online training in a DVD format. In other words, you can get instant access to the online training while having the DVDs shipped in the next couple of weeks.

For those of you in the Kansas City area, keep a watch out for the development of some local learning cohort groups as we work through this excellent training together.

The Epistles and Revelation

In the Pauline Epistles, there are several clear uses of sending vocabulary, “each conveying a different theological perspective within the larger salvific sphere.” [1] In Romans, Paul speaks of God “sending his own son in the likeness of sinful man to be a sin offering” (8:3). In Romans, Paul also asks how the people can hear unless the one who preaches is sent (10:15). When dealing with division in the church at Corinth over loyalty to certain leaders, Paul states, “For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel” (1 Cor. 1:17). Speaking to the heart of the Gospel, Paul makes reference to both God sending the Son and the Spirit in Galatians 4:4-6:

But when the time had fully come, God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under the law, to redeem those under law, that we might receive the full rights of sons. Because you are sons, God sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, the Spirit who calls out, “Abba, Father.”

In Second Thessalonians, Paul refers to God sending a “powerful delusion” to those who have rejected the gospel (2:11). Finally, in multiple places throughout the Pauline epistles we find Paul adopting and defending the title of apostle [2] or “sent one” (Rom. 1:1; 1 Cor. 1:1; 2 Cor. 1:1; Gal. 1:1; Eph. 1:1; Col. 1:1; 1 Tim. 1:1; 2 Tim. 1:1; Titus 1:1).

In the General Epistles, the author of Hebrews refers to Jesus as the “apostle” [3] or “sent one” (3:1). First Peter speaks of the “Holy Spirit sent from heaven” (1:12) and in keeping with Johannine tradition, 1 John speaks of the Son being sent by the Father (4:9-10, 14).

The Book of Revelation “uses the language of sending to convey a variety of theological ideas.” [4] In chapter one, the revelation is made known to John through the sending of an angel (1:1), later in the same chapter John is told to send messages to the seven churches (1:11), and in chapter five the seven spirits of God are “sent out into all the earth” (5:6). Finally, in chapter twenty-two we read that both God and Jesus send angels, one to prepare the people for what was to come, “The Lord, the God of the spirits of the prophets, sent his angles to show his servants the things that must soon take place” (22:6) and one to give John the message for the churches, “I Jesus, have sent my angel to give you this testimony for the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, and the bright Morning Star” (22:16).

---

1. Francis M. DuBose, God Who Sends (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1983), 51.

2. Apostle (apostolos) is defined by it s use in the New Testament and its relationship to the three words apostello, pempo, and the Twelve. Apostello (‘to send’) is used frequently in the Gospels, Acts, and the Epistles when referring to an authoritative commission. The word apostle is indebted to the Hebrew term shaliach. A shaliach, as used by the Jews, was someone sent by one party to another to handle negotiations concerning matters secular or matters religious. Harold E. Dollar, “Apostle, Apostles” in Evangelical Dictionary of World Missions, ed. A. Scott Moreau, Harold Netland and Charles Van Engen (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2000), 73-74.

3. In this case, Jesus is designated as “apostle,” a title that otherwise is never used of him in the New Testament. The title apostolos is invariably used for one sent on a commission by another, and is given specifically to the representative of Jesus sent out by him (see Matt 10:2; Mark 3:14; Luke 6:13; Acts 1:2; 14:14; Rom. 1:1; 1Cor. 4:9; 12:28). Luke Timothy Johnson, Hebrews: A Commentary (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2006), 106.

4. DuBose, 52.

The Book of Acts

In the book of Acts it is common to recognize that Luke’s presentation of mission is less about the “Acts of the Apostles” than about the “Acts of the Holy Spirit,” less about the mission of the church than about the mission of God. [1] “For Luke’s narrative portrays each person of the Godhead as a “sending one,” both in commissioning and promoting mission. Each person of the Trinity is also a “sent one,” a direct agent of mission, as well as a participant working through human agents,” [2] both individually and collectively.

The individual aspect is clearly illustrated through the ministry of the Apostle Paul. The Lord appeared to Ananias and sent him to Paul in order that Paul would regain his sight (9:17). Twice Luke describes Paul’s ministry to the Gentiles with sending language, “Then the Lord said to me, ‘Go; I will send you far away to the Gentitles’” (22:21) and “I will rescue you from your own people and the Gentiles. I am sending you to them to open their eyes and turn them from darkness to light” (26:17-18). In chapter twenty-eight Paul also speaks of salvation being sent, “Therefore I want you to know that God’s salvation has been sent to the Gentiles and they will listen” (28:28).

The collective nature of sending in the book of Acts can best be seen in the church at Antioch. In chapter thirteen Luke records that after prayer and fasting the leaders of the church placed hands on Paul and Barnabas and “sent them off” (13:3). The next verse describes the beginning of the journey by stating that “the two of them, sent on their way by the Holy Spirit, went down to Seleucia and sailed from there to Cyprus” (13:4).

Finally, in the Book of Acts the language of sending can be found in two sermons recorded by Luke. In chapter three, Peter’s messages uses sending language as he affirms God’s salvation in the sending of the Messiah: “that he may send the Christ, who has been appointed for you. . . . When God raised up his servant, he sent him first to you to bless you by turning each of you from your wicked ways” (3:20, 26). Then in chapter seven Stephen’s speech to the Sanhedrin reflects back to the Exodus story of God sending Moses back to Egypt to confront Pharaoh (7:34-35).

---

1. William J. Larkin, Jr. “Mission in Acts,” in Mission in the New Testament: An Evangelical Approach, ed. William J. Larkin, Jr. and Joel William (Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis, 1998), 174.

2. Ibid., 175.

When considering the theological and biblical underpinnings of the missional church conversation I find the two most helpful topics to address include the concept of missio Dei, or mission of God, and the language of “sending” found throughout Scripture.

The chief element to grasp about the missio Dei is that the mission is God’s. We are not called to bring our mission into a local context, instead we are called to partner with God in His mission. In the words of South African missiologist David Bosch; “It is not the church which undertakes mission; it is the missio Dei which constitutes the church.” We often wrongly assume that the primary activity of God is in the church, rather than recognizing that God’s primary activity is in the world, and the church is God’s instrument sent into the world to participate in His redemptive mission.

This leads to the second important topic, which is the theme of “sending” in Scripture. The reason it is important to recognize such language in Scripture is not only because it speaks to the missionary nature of the Triune God, but it also connects – particularly in the New Testament – God’s mission to our’s. This is never more true than in the Gospel of John.

The Gospel of John

The primary focus of the Fourth Gospel is the mission of Jesus: “he is the one who comes into the world, accomplishes his work and returns to the Father; he is the one who descended from heaven and ascends again; he is the Sent One, who, in complete dependence and perfect obedience to his sender, fulfills the purpose for which the Father sent him.” [1] “The entire Gospel is about sending and being sent.” [2] Therefore it is not surprising that John’s gospel is laden with the vocabulary of sending – the term and its derivatives appear almost sixty times.

While there is a variety of vocabulary used to describe the sending concept in the Fourth Gospel, [3] the concept is most often “expressed by different variations of the verbs pempo or apostello.” [4] The verb pempo, which is commonly translated as “to send,” occurs 33 times in John as compared to the Synoptic Gospels where the word is found four times in Matthew, once in Mark, and 10 times in Luke. [5] The verb apostello has the basic meaning of “to send forth,” and can be used of persons or things. [6] “When the object of the verb is a person, apostello often has the connotation of a commissioning, which transfers the authority of the sender to the person being sent.” [7] On account of the frequency of these two verbs it would appear that both words are of equal importance to the Johannine concept of sending and are virtually synonymous in John, however the question of synonymity has created significant debate in the past few decades. [8] Nevertheless, regardless of the position one takes on the nuances of the sending vocabulary in the Gospel of John it is difficult to overemphasize “how deeply the sending concept relates to Jesus’ identity. Almost every page of the Fourth Gospel breathes with a passage in which Jesus expressed who he is in terms of his sense of being sent.” [9]

When considering the sending motif in John’s Gospel there are at least three major areas of exploration: (1) Jesus’ mission and the origin of that mission, the Father who sends; (2) the fulfillment of the mission in the sending of the Holy Spirit to the disciples; and (3) the continuation of Jesus’ mission through the sending of the disciples into the world.

“It is part of the fundamental structure of any sending, even the sending of a mere human being, that the one sent does not follow his own will, but that of the sender, and that he does not speak and act in his own name, but represents another.” [10] This structure is clearly evident in Jesus’ relationship with the Father as depicted in the Gospel of John. Jesus, the sent one, is to know the sender intimately (7:29; cf. 15:21; 17:25) and to live in a close relationship with the one who sends (8:16, 18, 29; 16:32). Jesus came not to do his own will but the will of the Father who sent him (4:34; 5:30; 6:38-40), to speak not his own words but the words of the one who sent him (7:16-18; 8:26-29; 12:49; 14:24), and not to do his own work but the work of the Father who sent him (5:36; 9:4). The sending relationship between the Father and the Son speaks to the very heart of the gospel: “For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him” (3:17).

In addition to the theme of the Father sending the Son, the Gospel of John speaks twice concerning the sending of the Holy Spirit. [11] In John 14:26 the Spirit is sent by the Father: “But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you.” And in John 15:26 the Spirit is sent by the Son from the Father: “When the Counselor comes, whom I will send to you from the Father.”

Of special importance in John is the linking of the mission of Jesus with that of his followers as the “sent ones.”  “The disciples’ mission is essentially the same as the mission of the Son and the Spirit – to bring glory to God and to bring to the world forgiveness of sins and spiritual life.” [12] In Raymond Brown’s commentary on the Gospel of John he explains the continuity of mission in the following way:

The special Johannine contribution to the theology of mission is the Father’s sending of the Son which serves both as the model . . . and the ground . . . for the Son’s sending of the disciples. Their mission is to continue the Son’s mission; and this requires that the Son must be present to them during this mission, just as the Father had to be present to the Son during His mission. [13]

After his conversation with the Samaritan woman, Jesus sends his disciples to reap the harvest (4:38). In the high priestly prayer Jesus prayers to the Father for the protection of disciples as Jesus sends them into the world (17:18).  And shortly before Jesus ascends to the Father he commissions the disciples to evangelize the world. “As the Father has sent me, I am sending you” (20:21). Here John in one pericope repeats once again three main aspects of mission he has been developing throughout the gospel: (1) Father has sent Jesus into the world, (2) Jesus sends his disciples into the world, (3) the Holy Spirit is sent to enable disciples in their mission. By themselves the disciples are inadequate to fulfill the mission, yet by receiving the Spirit they receive authority and so also become God’s “agents, or sent ones,” the apostles. Referring to this verse, John Stott remarked that the church’s mission finds precise articulation in the Fourth Gospel:

The crucial form in which the Great Commission has been handed down to us (though it is the most neglected because it is the most costly) is the Johannine. Jesus had anticipated it in his prayer in the upper room which he said to the Father: “As thou didst send me into the world, so I have sent them into the world” (John 17:18). Now, probably in the same upper room but after his death and resurrection, he turned his prayer-statement into a commission and said: “As the Father has sent me, even so I send you” (John 20:21). In both of these sentences Jesus did more than draw a vague parallel between his mission and ours. Deliberately and precisely he made his mission the model of ours, saying “as the Father sent me, so I send you.” Therefore our understanding of the church’s mission must be deduced from our understanding of the Son’s. [14]

Finally, in an excellent commentary on the Gospel of John by Craig Keener he offers a similar summation of the importance of the commissioning passage in the Fourth Gospel for the life of the church:

Whereas the sending of the Son is the heart of the Fourth Gospel’s plot, its conclusion is open-ended, spilling into the story of the disciples. Thus the church’s mission is, for John’s theology, to carry on Jesus’ mission (14:12; 17:18). Because Jesus was sending “just as” (kaqws) the Father sent him (20:21), the disciples would carry on Jesus’ mission, including not only signs pointing to Jesus (14:12) but also witness (15:27) through which the Spirit would continue Jesus’ presence and work (16:7-11). [15]

---

1. Andreas J. Kostenberger and Peter T. O’Brien, Salvation to the Ends of the Earth: A Biblical Theology of Mission (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 2001), 203.

2. Johannes Nissen, “Mission in the Fourth Gospel: Historical and Hermeneutical Perspectives” in New Readings in John: Literary and Theological Perspectives, Essays from the Scandinavian Conference on the Fourth Gospel Arhus 1997 (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1999), 215.

3. In addition to the most common use of the verbs pempo and apostello, analogous to these are erxouai, ecerxomai and katabaino; prepositions that are used with the sending concept are apo, ek and para; other terms that relate to the concept are agiazo, didwmi and entellomai; verbs that describe the return of the emissionary to the Father are upago, poreuomai, anabaino, and metabaino. Johan Ferreira, Johannie Ecclesiology (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1998), 167.

4. In John’s gospel the term pempo is used approximately twenty-three times for the sending of the Son, all in articular participial forms: eight times in the nominative (5:37; 6:44; 7:28; 8:16, 18, 26, 29; 12:49); seven times in the genitive (4:34; 5:30; 6:38, 39; 7:16; 9:4; 14:24); seven times in the accusative (5:23; 7:33; 12:44, 45; 13:20; 15:21; 16:5); once in the dative (5:24). Apostello occurs seventeen times in reference to the sending of the Son, in indicative forms only. Martin Erdmann, “Mission in John’s Gospel and Letters” in Mission in the New Testament: An Evangelical Approach, ed. William J. Larkin, Jr. and Joel William (Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis, 1998), 210.

5. Ferreira, 168.

6. Ibid., 167.

7. Ibid.

8. For an excellent overview of the debate see Andreas J. Kostenberger, “The Two Johannine Verbs For Sending: A Study of John’s Use of Words with Reference to General Linguistic Theory” in Studies on John and Gender: A Decade of Scholarship (New York: P. Lang, 2001), 129-147.

9. Francis M. DuBose, God Who Sends (Nashville, TN: Broadman Press, 1983), 49.

10. Michael Waldstein, “The Mission of Jesus and the Disciples in John” Communio 17, (Fall 1990): 319.

11. For an excellent study on the priority of the Holy Spirit in mission see Hendrikus Berkhof, The Doctrine of the Holy Spirit (Richmond, John Knox, 1964). Berkhof argues that there has been a serious theological neglect of the doctrine of the Holy Spirit in the work of mission. He writes: “In Roman Catholic theology, the Spirit is mainly the soul and sustainer of the church. In Protestant theology he is mainly the awakener of individual spiritual life in justification and sanctification. So the Spirit is either institutionalized or individualized. And both of these opposite approaches are conceived in a common pattern of an introverted and static pneumatology. The Spirit in this way is the builder of the church and the edifier of the faithful, but not the great mover and driving power on the way from the One to the many, from Christ to the world. In one of the very rare theological works on the relation between the Spirit and mission, the American missionary Harry R. Boer writes: ‘Much has been written about the work of the Holy Spirit in the salvation of men, but very little about his crucial significance for the missionary witness of the Church.’ This situation is probably to the detriment of the mission, but surely to the detriment of theology, which suffers a great impoverishment indeed in that it is oriented to situations far more than to movements. In neglecting rather than reflecting the great movement of the Spirit, it distorts the whole content of faith and is an accomplice to the individualistic and institutionalistic introversion and egotism still found in the churches today” (Berkhof, 33).

12. Geoffrey R. Harris, Mission in the Gospels (London: Epworth, 2004), 177.

13. Raymond E. Brown, The Gospel According to John, vol. 2 (New York: Doubleday, 1970), 1036.

14. John R.W. Stott, Christian Mission in the Modern World (Downers Grove, IL: InterVaristy, 1975), 23.

15. Craig S. Keener, The Gospel of John: A Commentary vol. 2 (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2003), 1204.

The Missional Language of “Sending” – Introduction
The Missional Language of “Sending” – The Pentateuch
The Missional Language of “Sending” – The Historical & Poetic Books
The Missional Language of “Sending” – The Prophetic Books

The Gospels

Some people might argue that “as a collection of documents telling the story of Jesus, the Gospels do not contain a systematic theology of mission.” [1] However, “the New Testament is a missionary book in address, content, spirit and design. . . . [It is] theology in motion more than theology in reason and concept.” [2] Furthermore, while the sending motif is clearly significant in the Old Testament concept of mission; the theological concept of sending plays an even greater and more central role in the understanding of missions in the New Testament.

“As the Old Testament closes with the promise of the special messenger whom God will send as a forerunner of the Messiah” [3] (Mal. 3:1), the New Testament begins with the announcement that the messenger has come in the person of John the Baptist, “a man who was sent from God” (John 1:6; cf. Matt. 11:10-15; Mark 1:2-8; Luke 7:18-28). Each of the Gospels then proceeds to illustrate the importance of sending in understanding the mission of Jesus. The vocabulary of sending is most prominent in the Gospel of John, while occupying a lesser, yet still significant, place within each of the Synoptic Gospels.

The Synoptic Gospels

In the Synoptic Gospels Jesus is pictured as one who has a profound sense of being sent:

Every mission involves a sender and a sent one. In a saying recorded in all three synoptic gospels, Jesus alluded to a relationship in connection with his own mission: “He who receives you receives me, and he who receives me receives the one who sent (ton aposteilanta) me” (Matt. 10:40; Mark 9:37; Luke 9:48). With this statement, Jesus established three facts in regard to his mission: first, there was a sender; second, Jesus himself was the sent one; third, there was a close identification between the sender and the one who was sent. [4]

Jesus’ self understanding of being the “one sent” can also be seen in other passages in the synoptics. In Matthew Jesus speaks to the Canaanite woman telling her that he “was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel” (15:24), in Mark Jesus tells his disciples that anyone who welcomes a little child does not only welcome Jesus himself, but “the one who sent me” (9:37) and in Luke Jesus shares that he must preach the good news of the kingdom “because that is why I was sent” (4:43).

In the Gospel of Luke there are three key sending passages. First, is the record in Luke 4:16-30 of Jesus returning to the synagogue in Nazareth and equating himself with the passage read from Isaiah 61:1-2. “Of all the Old Testament passages he could have chosen, he selected this one as the platform for his life and work. It became the manifesto of his ministry.” [5] As noted earlier in the discussion on the sending language of Isaiah 61:1-3, each of the redemptive deeds listed in the passage proceed from the verb “sent.” Having Jesus identify himself with this particular Old Testament passage adds to the relationship between his mission and that of being sent.

In Luke, Jesus is not only the sent one, but he is also one who sends. The second significant sending passage in Luke is that of Jesus sending out the Twelve in Luke 9:1-6:

When Jesus had called the Twelve together, he gave them power and authority to drive out all demons and to cure diseases, and he sent them out to preach the kingdom of God and to heal the sick. He told them: “Take nothing for the journey – no staff, no bag, no bread, no money, no extra tunic. Whatever house you enter, stay there until you leave that town. If people do not welcome you, shake the dust off your feet when you leave their town, as a testimony against them.” So they set out and went from village to village, preaching the gospel and healing people everywhere.

“If the foundational mission, according to Luke, is Jesus being sent by God, then the sending of the twelve is an integral part of Jesus’ own mission. From a larger group of disciples Jesus chose and commissioned twelve ‘apostles’ (apostoloi, Luke 6:12-15). He now shares his power and authority with them, and sends (apostello) them on their mission (9:1-2).” [6]

Reminiscent of Jesus identifying his ministry with Isaiah 61:1-2, he now sends out the Twelve to “preach the kingdom of God and to heal the sick” (9:2). Parallel passages of the sending out of the twelve can also be found in the Gospel of Matthew, “These twelve Jesus sent out with the following instructions” (10:5) and Mark, “Calling the Twelve to him, he sent them out two by two and gave them authority over evil spirits” (6:7).

The third significant sending passage in Luke is the sending of the seventy-two [7] in Luke 10:1-24. Jesus again sees himself not only as the sent one, but also as the sending one. Jesus sends out the seventy-two as advance teams to prepare the towns and villages he was about to enter. Jesus not only sends out the seventy-two, but he also calls upon the people to ask the “Lord of the harvest” to send workers to assist them in their labor (10:2).

---

1. A. Scott Moreau, Gary R. Corwin and Gary B. McGee, Introducing World Missions: A Biblical, Historical, and Practical Survey (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2004), 40.

2. George W. Peters, A Biblical Theology of Missions (Chicago: Moody, 1972), 131.

3. Francis M. DuBose, God Who Sends (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1983), 49.

4. John D. Harvey, “Mission in Jesus’ Teaching,” in Mission in the New Testament: An Evangelical Approach, ed. William J. Larkin, Jr. and Joel William (Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis, 1998), 31.

5. DuBose, 50.

6. Andreas J. Kostenberger and Peter T. O’Brien, Salvation to the Ends of the Earth: A Biblical Theology of Mission (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 2001), 120.

7. Some manuscripts say seventy. It is difficult to come to any final decision regarding the number of disciples sent out by Jesus – seventy or seventy-two. See Kostenberger, 120.

The Prophetic Books utilize the language of sending more than any other portion of the Old Testament. There is a clear “association between God’s sending and the office of prophet.” [1] “The prophets were first and foremost men whom God had sent.” [2] Perhaps the most dramatic example of sending in the prophetic books is found in Isaiah 6. In this passage the reader catches a glimpse of God’s sending nature in a kind of Trinitarian fullness, “Then I heard the voice of the Lord saying, ‘Whom shall I send? And who will go for us?’” To which Isaiah responds, “Here am I, Send me” (6:8, emphasis added).

Later in the book of Isaiah, he recognizes that God’s Spirit has anointed him to “preach good news to the poor” and that he is sent to “bind up the brokenhearted” (61:1). In the larger passage of Isaiah 61:1-3 it is interesting to note that there is no less than six redemptive deeds that proceed from, or are dependant on the verb shalack = “He has sent me.” [3]

He has sent me,

to bind up the brokenhearted,

to proclaim freedom for the captives and release from darkness for the prisoners,

to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor and the day of vengeance of our God,

to comfort all who mourn, and provide for those who grieve in Zion –

to bestow on them a crown of beauty instead of ashes, the oil of gladness instead of mourning,

and a garment of praise instead of a spirit of despair.

In God’s call to Jeremiah he is sent to speak what God commands in 1:7: “You must go to everyone I send you to and say whatever I command you.” The people obeyed the message of the prophet Haggai because he was sent from the Lord (1:12). Zechariah stated on several occasions that it was the Lord that sent him to the nations (2:8-9, 4:9, 6:15).

In the vast majority of cases the prophets were sent to pronounce God’s judgment upon the nations. Isaiah spoke of the Lord sending judgment on Israel (9:8), of sending his wrath on the godless nation of Assyria (10:6), and sending a “wasting disease upon sturdy warriors” (10:16). Jeremiah spoke of God sending “venomous snakes” (8:17), sending both fishermen and hunters to catch and track down the disobedient (16:16), of sending his people out of Judah and to the land of the Babylonians (24:5), and of sending judgment in a assortment of ways, “I will send the sword, famine and plague against them until they are destroyed from the land I gave to them and their fathers” (24:10). Other passages in Jeremiah that speak of God sending various types of judgment include: 25:16-17, 27; 26:12, 15; 29:17,20; 43:10; 48:12; 51:2. [4]

The Book of Ezekiel continues the sending of various types of judgments, including sending “famine and wild beasts” (5:17), plagues (14:19), the sword (14:21), and fire, “I will send fire on Magog and on those who live in safety on the coastlands, and they will know that I am the Lord” (39:6). While the other prophets speak less often of the sending of judgment from God, the theme is still very apparent. Hosea speaks of God sending fire upon the well fortified cities (8:14). Amos also speaks of God sending fire upon various cities (1:4, 7, 10, 12; 2:2, 5) as well as sending judgment in the form of plagues (4:10) and famine (8:11).

While the message of the prophets is heavy on judgment, they were also sent to proclaim God’s care and blessings. Isaiah speaks of the Lord sending a “savior and defender” (19:20), of being sent himself to Babylon (43:14), and of the purpose of God’s word being fulfilled regardless of where it is sent, “So it is my word that goes out from my mouth: It will not return to me empty, but will accomplish what I desire and achieve the purpose for which I sent it” (55:11, emphasis added).

Daniel speaks of God sending an angel to rescue Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego (3:28) and of God sending an angel to protect Daniel by shutting the mouths of lions (6:22). Joel speaks of God sending “grain, new wine and oil, enough to satisfy you fully” (2:19). Micah reflects on the Exodus event and how God sent leadership to the people, “I brought you up out of Egypt and redeemed you from the land of slavery. I sent Moses to lead you, also Aaron and Miriam” (6:4). Zechariah speaks of a group of angels as “the ones the Lord has sent to go throughout the earth” (1:10). Finally, in the last book of the Old Testament God promises to send his special messenger, “See, I will send my messenger, who will prepare the way before me” (Mal. 3:1).

In addition to recognizing that God sent prophets to pronounce judgments and blessings it is also significant to note that Scripture makes clear that false prophets were not sent by God.  In the Book of Jeremiah God denies sending false prophets on four different occasions (14:14; 23:21; 27:15; 29:9) and in chapter twenty-eight Jeremiah himself recognizes that Hananiah has not been sent by God, “Then the prophet Jeremiah said to Hananiah the prophet, ‘Listen, Hananiah! The Lord has not sent you, yet you have persuaded this nation to trust in lies” (28:15).

Furthermore, in Ezekiel the people are told that unless a prophet is sent from the Lord his words will not be fulfilled, “Their visions are false and their divinations a lie. They say, ‘The Lord declares,’ when the Lord has not sent them” (Ezek. 13:6).

---

1. Ferris L. McDaniel, “Mission in the Old Testament,” in Mission in the New Testament: An Evangelical Approach, ed. William J. Larkin, Jr. and Joel William (Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis, 1998), 19.

2. Francis M. DuBose, God Who Sends (Nashville, TN: Broadman Press, 1983), 46.

3. Koole, Jan L. Isaiah III, vol. 3, Historical Commentary on the Old Testament, ed. Cornelis Houtman, Gert T.M. Prinsloo, Wilfred G.E. Watson and Al Wolters (Belgium: Peeters, 2001), 270. See also John N. Oswalt. “The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 40-66,” in The New International Commentary on the Old Testament, ed. R. K. Harrison and Robert L. Hubbard, Jr. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998), 565.

4. DuBose, 47.

When considering the theological and biblical underpinnings of the missional church conversation I find the two most helpful topics to address include the concept of missio Dei, or mission of God, and the language of “sending” found throughout Scripture.

The chief element to grasp about the missio Dei is that the mission is God’s. We are not called to bring our mission into a local context, instead we are called to partner with God in His mission. In the words of South African missiologist David Bosch; “It is not the church which undertakes mission; it is the missio Dei which constitutes the church.” We often wrongly assume that the primary activity of God is in the church, rather than recognizing that God’s primary activity is in the world, and the church is God’s instrument sent into the world to participate in His redemptive mission.

This leads to the second important topic, which is the theme of “sending” in Scripture. The reason it is important to recognize such language in Scripture is not only because it speaks to the missionary nature of the Triune God, but it also connects – particularly in the New Testament – God’s mission to our’s.

Over the next couple of weeks I am going to present a series of posts that survey the “sending” theme throughout Scripture. The survey is based largely upon the work of Francis DuBose in his 1983 publication, God Who Sends. However, I do hope to augment DuBose’s work, particularly in the Gospels, and especially in the Gospel of John. In the following introduction I lay out the breath of the study that I hope will be an encouragement to those who are wrestling with the need to cultivate a missional theology.

Introduction

The Evangelical Dictionary of Biblical Theology defines “mission” as “the divine activity of sending intermediaries whether supernatural or human to speak or do God’s will so that God’s purposes for judgment or redemption are furthered.” [1] However, when examining the idea of mission in the Bible is there a “divine activity of sending” as suggested in this definition? Furthermore, is it reasonable to ask if there is consistent biblical language that speaks directly to the topic of mission? Is the concept of mission something that has been imposed upon Scripture as a result of our own back ground and history, or does the Bible speak consistently regarding the missionary nature of God and his mission?

Throughout the following series of posts I will respond to these questions by examining the language of “sending” found in Scripture. A “survey of the term sending in its various forms in Scripture suggest that it is more than a simple descriptive word,” [2] it instead reveals the missionary nature of the Triune God, as well as the very essence of the Church. The redemptive activity of God, his relationship to the world, and his dealing with mankind is described in Scripture by the word “sending.” In fact, the word “sending” is the “sum and substance of God’s creativity and activity.” [3] The entirety of redemptive history exhibits itself as a history of God sending others to participate in the missio Dei. [4] Theologian Darrell Guder summarizes the breath of the sending theme throughout Scripture this way:

Mission is the result of God’s initiative, rooted in God’s purposes to restore and heal creation. “Mission” means “sending,” and it is the central biblical theme describing the purpose of God’s action in human history. God’s mission began with the call of Israel to receive God’s blessings in order to be a blessing to the nations. God’s mission unfolded in the history of God’s people across the centuries recorded in Scripture, and it reached its revelatory climax in the incarnation of God’s work of salvation in Jesus ministering, crucified, and resurrected. God’s mission continued then in the sending of the Spirit to call forth and empower the church as the witness to God’s good news in Jesus Christ. [5]

To illustrate the totality of the sending theme, I will consider the language of sending by surveying seven major sections of Scripture, including the Pentateuch, the Historical Books, the Poetical Books, the Prophetic Books, the Gospels (with specific emphasis on the Gospel of John), the Book of Acts, and the Epistles and Revelation. This survey of Scripture will be followed by a brief examination of biblical language that is less explicit, yet still speaks to the sending nature of God’s activity.

---

1. William J. Larkin Jr., “Mission,” in Evangelical Dictionary of Biblical Theology, ed. Walter A. Elwell (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1996), 534.

2. Francis M. DuBose, God Who Sends (Nashville, TN: Broadman Press, 1983), 24.

3. Georg F. Vicedom, The Mission of God (Saint Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1965), 9.

4. Latin for “the sending of God,” in the sense of “being sent,” a phrase used in Protestant missiological discussion especially since the 1950s, often in the English form “the mission of God.” Originally it was used (from Augustine on) in Western discussion of the Trinity for the “sentness of God (the Son)” by the Father (John 3:17; 5:30; 11:42; 17:18). Georg F. Vicedom popularized the concept for missiology at the CWME meeting in Mexico City in 1963, and publishing the book: The Mission of God. John A. McIntosh, “Missio Dei” in Evangelical Dictionary of World Missions, ed. A. Scott Moreau, Harold Netland and Charles Van Engen (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2000), 631-633.

5. Darrell L. Guder and Lois Barrett, eds., Missional Church: A Vision for the Sending of the Church in North America (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998), 4.

History of Missional Church – Part I
History of Missional Church – Part II
History of Missional Church – Part III

Other Notable Authors and Contributors

There are a number of other authors who have contributed significantly to the missional church conversation in the past decade. Two of the more notable voices have been that of Alan Hirsch and Michael Frost. Their first collaborative effort was The Shaping of Things to Come [1] published in 2003. In that book, the authors built upon the twelve indicators first offered by the GOCN by adding three additional overarching principles that provides perhaps the best direction for what it means for a church to be missional. The additional principles include the following:

1. The missional church is incarnational, not attractional, in its ecclesiology. By incarnational we mean it does not create sanctified spaces into which unbelievers must come to encounter the gospel. Rather, the missional church disassembles itself and seeps into the cracks and crevices of a society in order to be Christ to those who don’t yet know him.

2. The missional church is messianic, not dualistic, in its spirituality. That is, it adopts the worldview of Jesus the Messiah, rather than that of the Greco-Roman empire. Instead of seeing the world as divided between the sacred (religious) and profane (nonreligious), like Christ it sees the world and God’s place in it as more holistic and integrated.

3. The missional church adopts an apostolic, rather than a hierarchical, mode of leadership. By apostolic we mean a mode of leadership that recognizes the fivefold model detailed by Paul in Ephesians 6. It abandons the triangular hierarchies of the traditional church and embraces a biblical, flat-leadership community that unleashes the gifts of evangelism, apostleship, and prophecy, as well as the currently popular pastoral and teaching gifts. [2]

Hirsch and Frost believe the missional “genius” of a church can only be unleashed when there are foundational changes made to the church’s very DNA, and that means addressing fundamental issues like ecclesiology, spirituality, and leadership. It means there must be a complete shift away from a Christendom way of thinking, which, as mentioned above, has been attractional, dualistic, and hierarchical. [3]

Several other books that have added much to the missional church conversation in the past decade are included in the following abridged annotated bibliography:

Craig Van Gelder, The Essence of the Church: A Community Created by the Spirit (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2000).

In The Essence of the Church, Van Gelder shares his concerns for many churches taking a functional approach to ecclesiology. He then moves to articulate a missional ecclesiology, which he places in the context of God’s purposes within creation and his eschatological intention. According to Van Gelder, the church is the redemptive reign of God implemented in a fallen world. Furthermore, it is the Spirit which carries out the redemptive purposes of God through the church as the Spirit empowers it for ministry. After describing the church from a redemptive, Trinitarian theological perspective, Van Gelder reserves the second half of the book to give practical advice about what the church is, what the church does, and how the church should organize to best live out its missionary nature.

Milfred Minatrea. Shaped by God’s Heart: The Passion and Practices of Missional Churches (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2004).

In Shaped by God’s Heart, Minatrea offers a good introduction to the missional church conversation. The book is organized in three sections. Part one is titled, “The Church in a New and Changing World.” In this portion of the book Minatrea discusses the difference between being “mission-minded” and “missional.” In part two, “The Nine Essential Practices of Missional Churches,” he presents the core of the book as he shares nine practices that he has observed in studying missional churches. Part three is titled “Structures and Strategies for Becoming Missional.” In this last section Minatrea shares strategies for church leaders who desire to move their churches towards becoming more missional. Additionally, each chapter includes helpful reflection and application questions to be used in group studies.

Michael Frost and Alan Hirsch, The Forgotten Ways: Reactivating the Missional Church (Grand Rapids: Brazos, 2006).

In The Forgotten Ways, Frost and Hirsch describe the current form of church in two simple ways. A missional church is one that goes to where people are to engage them on their own cultural turf while an attractional model expects people to leave where they are and come join the church culture. They contend that the attractional, institutional church that in large part is the creation of the church growth movement, has created a spectator Christianity that is largely irrelevant at reaching 85 percent of the culture. However the book is much more than a simple attack on the attractional church or the church growth movement. Building upon theological reflection and missiological principles, the authors develops a sound missional theology for the church. The Forgotten Ways will certainly remain one of the most significant contributions to effective missional engagement.

Alan J. Roxburgh and Fred Romanuk, The Missional Leader: Equipping Your Church to Reach a Changing World (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2006).

In The Missional Leader, Roxburgh and Romanuk draw upon many years of experience as consultants to church leaders across the United States and Canada. They offer a realistic approach to leaders who are struggling with what it means to be a missional church in a local context. The authors caution against adopting business models and church growth techniques. Instead they continually emphasize the importance of recognizing that the church is a spiritual entity that is lead and empowered by the Spirit. The goal of spiritual leadership therefore is to discern where and how the Spirit of God is working in the context of the local church.

Ed Stetzer and David Putman, Breaking the Missional Code (Nashville: B&H, 2006).

Breaking the Misisonal Code is one of the most practical introductions to the missional conversation. The book is built upon the premise that the church is a community created by God to be sent as a missionary into a local context. To do so effectively means that the church must break the “missional code” of their context. Each church must function as a missionary people exegeting their culture in order to better present the Gospel.  Throughout the book Stetzer and Putman provide numerous examples of churches that exhibit missional qualities. They also offer multiple definitions to bring clarity to missional terminology. For any church leader who desires to better understand the basics of missional practice Breaking the Missional Code would be a great place to begin.

Patrick Keifert, We Are Here Now: A New Missional Era (Eagle, ID: Allelon Publishing, 2006).

In We Are Here Now, Keifert offers a framework for deep change in churches and leadership teams that are striving towards missional engagement. Similar to other books on the missional church, Keifert agrees that as a result of vast cultural changes the church is in desperate need of recapturing its missionary nature. However what sets We Are Here Now apart is that Keifert lays out a long-range plan of spiritual discernment and transformation for a local congregation. Keifert maintains that when it comes to serious missional commitment, there are no quick fixes and real change is shaped by Scripture, the Holy Spirit, and attention to each other.

Craig Van Gelder, The Ministry of the Missional Church: A Community Led by the Spirit (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2007).

Van Gelder writes that the premise of The Ministry of the Missional Church is to encourage churches to recognize the ministry of the Spirit in the midst of constant congregational change. He believes that God’s intent is often to use change either directly or indirectly to move a congregation in new directions of meaningful ministry under the leading of the Spirit. Furthermore, Van Gelder desires for congregations to understand that the Spirit-led ministry of the church flows out of the Spirit-created nature of the church. In other words, being precedes doing. Or to put it another way, the nature of the church establishes the foundation for understanding the purpose of the church and its ministry and determines their direction and scope. Van Gelder does an excellent job of showing that when a church begins with its nature, or essence as a Spirit-created community, growth and development are the natural outcome.

Craig Van Gelder, ed., The Missional Church in Context: Helping Congregations Develop Contextual Ministry (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2007).

The Missional Church in Context is a collection of eight outstanding papers presented at a consultation held at Luther Seminary in December of 2005. The premise of the consultation, and exemplified by the book title, is that every context should be seen as a missional context, and every congregation as a missional congregation that is responsible to participate in God’s mission in that context. The book does not promote a method or model of ministry but encourages various congregational expressions to enter a discernment process, with the Spirit, to identify the theological foundations and insights in order to develop the capacity for ministry engagement. Again as indicative of the title, context does matter. Collectively the contributors state that the church needs to develop a “formation triad” that includes congregational formation (the shaping of a concrete Christian community), spiritual formation (corporate and personal attention to initiatives of God) and missional formation (local church’s identity and agency in its encounter with the immediate context). This text represents another important voice speaking on the significance of context in the formation of the local church.

Hugh Halter and Matt Smay. The Tangible Kingdom: Creating Incarnational Community (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2008).

The Tangible Kingdom is a guide to the planting of missional communities written by two missional practitioners and church planters. One of the strengths of the book is the use of stories to illustrate the power of incarnational community. They show what it looks like to leave the safe “bubble” of much of modern evangelicalism and ventured out into the lives of those around us. Further it provides helpful direction on combating consumerism, living out our mission in the context of an entire community, and what it means to practice biblical hospitality.

Alan Hirsch, The Forgotten Ways Handbook: A Practical Guide for Developing Missional Churches (Grand Rapids: Brazos, 2009).

The Forgotten Ways Handbook is a follow up to the 2006 publication by the same name. However, the handbook moves beyond the theological foundation built in the original The Forgotten Ways to a place of practice that very little resources provide. This extremely practical handbook includes many helpful tools including summary sections encapsulating the ideas contained in each chapter of the original book, suggested habits and practices to help readers embed missional principles, and adult learning-based techniques and examples from other churches that enable readers to process and assimilate the ideas in a group context.

Reggie McNeal, Missional Renaissance: Changing the Scorecard for the Church (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2009).

The most significant contribution that Missional Renaissance makes to the missional church conversation is McNeal’s attempt to establish a new way of measuring success in the church in the United States. For years the measure of faithfulness and vitality in the church has been in terms of growth in attendance, finances and facilities. However to assist the church in making a shift in a missional direction, McNeal argues that the church must begin to measure success by using a new scorecard. He asks, What would happen if we measured vitality in terms of growth in the area of people, service, prayer and outreach?

---

1. Michael Frost and Alan Hirsch, The Shaping of Things to Come: Innovation and Mission for the 21^st Century Church (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2003).

2. Ibid.,12.

3. Ibid.

History of Missional Church – Part I
History of Missional Church – Part II

The Gospel and Our Culture Network

As Newbigin’s writings gained a larger circulation and the British programme received greater recognition, a version of the Gospel and Our Culture conversation began to emerge in the United States. A network began to take shape in the mid-1980s and by the early 1990s, under the leadership of George Hunsberger, the Gospel and Our Culture Network (GOCN)[1] was publishing a quarterly newsletter and also convening a yearly consultation. “By the mid-1990s, the movement in the United States had begun to find its own voice beyond the influence of Newbigin, and the Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company began to publish a series of books under the moniker The Gospel and Our Culture Series.”[2] To date the following volumes have been published in this series:

George Hunsberger and Craig Van Gelder, eds., The Church Between Gospel and Culture: The Emerging Mission in North America (1996).

Darrel L. Guder, ed., Missional Church: A Vision for the Sending of the Church in North America (1998).

George Hunsberger, Bearing the Witness of the Spirit: Lesslie Newbigin’s Theology of Cultural Plurality (1998).

Craig Van Gelder, ed., Confident Witness — Changing World: Rediscovering the Gospel in North America (1999).

Darrel L. Guder, The Continuing Conversion of the Church (2000).

James V. Brownson, ed. StormFront: The Good News of God (2003).

Lois Y. Barrett, ed., Treasure in Clay Jars: Patterns in Missional Faithfulness (2004).

While the Gospel and Our Culture Network does not offer a precise definition for “missional church,” they do provide what they refer to as “indicators of a missional church.” The indicators are an effort to identify what might be some of the key aspects that contribute to the church’s unique ability to better understand and therefore connect with the diverse cultures within the North American context.

1.  The missional church proclaims the gospel.

What it looks like: The story of God’s salvation is faithfully repeated in a multitude of different ways.

2.  The missional church is a community where all members are involved in learning to become disciples of Jesus.

What it looks like: The disciple identity is held by all; growth in discipleship is expected of all.

3.  The Bible is normative in the church’s life.

What it looks like: The church is reading the Bible together to learn what it can learn nowhere else – God’s good and gracious intent for all creation, the salvation mystery, and the identity and purpose of life together.

4.  The church understands itself as different from the world because of its participation in the life, death, and resurrection of its Lord.

What it looks like: In its corporate life and public witness, the church is consciously seeking to conform to its Lord instead of the multitude of cultures in which it finds itself.

5.  The church seeks to discern God’s specific missional vocation for the entire community and for all of its members.

What it looks like: The church has made its “mission” it priority, and in overt and communal ways is seeking to be and do “what God is calling us to know, be, and do.”

6.  A missional community is indicated by how Christians behave toward one another.

What it looks like: Acts of self-sacrifice on behalf of one another both in the church and in the locale characterize the generosity of the community.

7.  It is a community that practices reconciliation.

What it looks like: The church community is moving beyond homogeneity toward a more heterogeneous community in its racial, ethnic, age, gender, and socioeconomic makeup.

8.  Peoples within the community hold themselves accountable to one another in love.

What it looks like: Substantial time is spent with one another for the purpose of watching over one another in love.

9.  The church practices hospitality.

What it looks like: Welcoming the stranger into the midst of the community plays a central role.

10.  Worship is the central act by which the community celebrates with joy and thanksgiving both God’s presence and God’s promised future.

What it looks like: There is a significant and meaningful engagement in communal worship of God, reflecting appropriately and addressing the culture of those who worship together.

11.  The community has a vital public witness.

What it looks like: The church makes an observable impact that contributes to the transformation of life, society, and human relationships.

12.  There is a recognition that the church itself is an incomplete expression of the reign of God.

What it looks like: There is a widely help perception that this church is going somewhere – and that “somewhere” is a more faithfully lived life in the reign of God.[3]

One final note from the writings of the Gospel and Culture Network: Darrell Guder emphasizes the importance of having congregations formed by hearing the Bible “missionally.” He points out that when missional renewal is happening, different kinds of questions are brought to the Bible. He writes:

Congregations are open to being challenged, to looking hard at their deeply ingrained attitudes and expectations. The missional approach asks, How does God’s Word call, shape, transform, and send me . . . and us? Coupled with this openness is the awareness, that biblical formation must mean change, and often conversion. Christian communities may discover that their discipling will require repentance and that their way of being church will have to change.[4]

---

1. “The GOCN is a collaborative effort that focuses on three things: (1) a cultural and social analysis of our North American setting; (2) theological reflection on the question, what is the gospel that address us in our setting? And (3) the renewal of the church and its missional identity in our setting.” George Hunsberger, The Church Between Gospel and Culture (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996), 290. For more information on The Gospel and Our Culture Network see www.gocn.org

2. Van Gelder, The Missional Church and Denominations, 4.

3. Walter C. Hobbs, “Method,” in Treasure in Clay Jars: Patterns in Missional Faithfulness, ed. Lois Y. Barrett (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2004), 160.

4. Darrell L. Guder, “Biblical Formation and Discipleship,” in Treasure in Clay Jars: Patterns in Missional Faithfulness, ed. Lois Y. Barrett (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2004), 70.

Stetzer & Fitch – a missional conversation – Part III from Bill Kinnon on Vimeo.