The video below (produced/edited by Bill Kinnon) is an interesting conversation 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?

I like this definition of the gospel from John Dickson:

“The gospel is the announcement that God has revealed his kingdom and opened it up to sinners through the birth, teaching, miracles, death and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ, who will one day return to overthrow evil and consummate the kingdom for eternity.”

Later in a section titled “Underestimating the Mission” Dickson makes a helpful distinction between proclaiming the gospel and promoting the gospel.

I want to make a distinction throughout this book between the specific activity of proclaiming the gospel and the broader category of promoting the gospel. The former is properly called “evangelism,” a word that derives from the New Testament term evangelizomai, which only ever means “announcing (grand) news.” The wider category of promoting the gospel includes any and every activity that draws others to Christ (including, of course, evangelism). People sometimes use the words “mission,” “out-reach” or “witness” for this larger work, but I prefer the expression “promoting the gospel” (I’m sure I pinched this from someone else but I can’t remember from whom) because it reminds us that at the heart of our mission to the world is the news about Christ, the gospel. In my view, when “mission” becomes disconnected from the gospel, as it sadly does in some church circles, it no longer deserves to be called Christian mission.

– John Dickson in The Best Kept Secret of Christian Mission: Promoting the Gospel with More Than Our Lips

Several weeks ago I received a pre-release copy of a new book called Jesus Manifesto: Restoring the Supremacy and Sovereignty of Jesus Christ by Leonard Sweet and Frank Viola. I am only three chapters into the book, but I wanted to share a couple of excerpts that really spoke to me:

“God is not so much about fixing things that have gone wrong in our lives as finding us in our brokenness and giving us Christ. When Christ is not central and supreme in our lives, everything about life shifts out of orbit and moves out of kilter. So for Christians, our first task is to know Jesus. And out of that knowing, we will come to live Him, adore Him, proclaim Him and manifest Him.”

“So what is your chief occupation in life and ministry? Here’s a hint: Whatever you are occupied with comes out of your mouth. It’s what you talk about most of the time.

For many Christians, their occupation has nothing to do with spiritual things at all. For others who are more inclined to divine matters, their occupation is evangelism. For some, it’s church multiplication that matters most. For others, it’s memorizing the Bible and learning theology. Many Christians, are most occupied with social action, while others are most occupied with leadership and its various principles. Still others are mainly occupied with missions, or praise and worship; the casting out of demons, or healing; miracles, holiness, or the end times; spiritual authority and submission, justice, or politics, etc. The list is endless.

But all of these are “its” — just things. In fact, the Christian family has swung so far from its Lord that most of our preaching and teaching today is an “it” rather than a “Him.”

The result: We focus on “things” — even good and religious things. And the Lord Jesus Christ is pushed off into a corner. (He usually gets inserted somewhere in the message as a side dish, but He’s rarely the main course.)

Yet, the reality is that Christ trumps everything. All Scripture testifies of Him. The Father exalts Him. The Spirit magnifies Him. The angels worship Him. The early church knew Him as her passion, her message, and the unction of her life. Christ was her specialty. He was her Bridegroom and head. She specialized in nothing else.

All told, there’s nothing worth pursuing outside of Christ.

To our minds, there is one reason why a Christian would not be absolutely occupied and consumed with Christ. That person’s eyes have not been opened to see His greatness. The sad truth is that the Jesus who is preached so often today is so shallow, so small, and so uncaptivating that countless believers are enthralled with countless other things.”

You can learn more about the book by going to JesusManifesto.com.

Over the past couple of years I have been attempting to read through every book from the Gospel and Our Culture Series written or edited by such authors as Darrell Guder, Craig Van Gelder, George Hunsberger, Lois Barrett and others. My two favorites have been the ever popular “Missional Church” and the lesser known “Confident Witness – Changing World.”

In additon to the book in this series I have also tried to find writings by each author that were pre - GOCN. One such book is “Be My Witnesses” by Darrell Guder. In chapter ten, titled “Correcting The Church’s Course” Guder offers an excellent contrast between what the church is and what it should be using the images of the Temple and the Tabernacle. He writes:

With regard to the church’s interpretation of its role in history, I suggest that the church has developed, from early on, a “temple” interpretation of itself, whereas the biblical image of the church is more the “tabernacle” of the Old Covenant. The difference between these two images is profound.

The temple is an unmovable building, a center for religious activity, even a headquarters for a religious elite or massive building housing an organization whose commitment is to its continuation as it is. Temples often are walled compounds, separated from the world without, architecturally symbolizing a chasm between the so-called sacred and the secular. Temples can be places in which religion functions as an arcane discipline, reserved for the initiates. They are built to last forever, to resist change, to maintain their form and activity in as pure a fashion as possible.

Tabernacles, on the other hand, are a unique expression of a people’s faith. The “tent-church” of the Old Covenant was not permanent but moved with the people whenever they followed God’s leading into new territory. The furnishings of the tabernacle, and the acts of worship and community that took place there, constantly focused the people upon their God, his actions on their behalf, his presence in their midst, and his will and direction for their future.

Israel symbolized and celebrated her faith in this tent-church. It carried both the history and the future hope of Israel’s faith within it, and stood as a constant reminder of her identity as God’s chosen people. At the same time, it was designed and equipped to be mobile, responsive to change, and to provide what the people needed spiritually as they continued their pilgrimage from bondage to the promised land. . . .

My contention is that the tabernacle is closer to the New Testament image of the church than is the temple. We have mentioned earlier that Peter refers to the Christian community as the diaspora, the aliens or pilgrims, when describing their situation in the world in his first epistle. The early church clearly had that sense about itself. Its first self-denomination was “the followers of the Way,” which conveys the sense of movement and pilgrimage that we find in Peter and in the tabernacle.

But very early in its history, the church began to adapt itself to the temple mentality. We see this in its architecture, once Christians began to build buildings or adapt other religious buildings to their use. Gradually, the accoutrements of temple worship crept into the church (we really cannot sort out how and when), so that within a few centuries we have altars, priestly orders, and many of the features of the temple-oriented religions that thrived in the Mediterranean world.

As the Christian church became more and more woven into the fabric of society and government in the Western world, its temple self-interpretation expanded and hardened. The church became the central institution in the typical town or village, symbolized still today by the church steeple that dominates the skylines of Europe and America.

The distinction between secular and sacred developed into a system according to which all of social life, even the practices of calendar keeping, was regulated. Rather than being understood as a pilgrim people, following God through history, the church was seen as a great unchangeable and permanent presence in the world, guaranteeing those central and sacred realities that the haphazard course of human history could not affect. In that position, the church exercised great power. But we must regard that power as a threat in many ways to the church’s obedience to its primary calling.

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.

The Historical Books

The books of Joshua, Judges and 1 Samuel continue the vocabulary of sending in passages that reflect on the Exodus event (Josh. 24:2-6; Judg. 6:8; 1 Sam. 12:8). Furthermore, in 1 Samuel God sent Jerub-Baal, Barak, Jephthah, and Samuel to deliver his people (12:11). He sent Samuel to anoint Saul as king (15:1). He sent Saul on a military conquest (15:18, 20). He sent Samuel to Jesse to anoint his son David as king (16:1). And in 2 Samuel God sends the prophets Nathan and Gad to the king, “The Lord sent Nathan to David” (12:1) and “So Gad went to David and said to him . . . think it over and decide how should I answer the one who sent me” (24:13).

In 2 Kings 2 the prophet Elijah, when conversing with Elisha, referred three times to the Lord sending him to a variety of places, “Elijah said to Elisha, ‘Stay here; the Lord has sent me to Bethel’” (2:2), “Then Elijah said to him, ‘Stay here, Elisha; the Lord has sent me to Jericho’” (2:4), and “The Elijah said to him, ‘Stay here; the Lord has sent me to the Jordan’” (2:6). In 1 Chronicles God sent a plague on Israel and threatened to send an angel to destroy the city:

So the Lord sent a plague on Israel, and seventy thousand men of Israel fell dead. And God sent an angel to destroy Jerusalem. But as the angel was doing so, the Lord saw it and was grieved because of the calamity and said to the angel who was destroying the people, ‘Enough! Withdraw your hand (21:14-15 emphasis added).

Second Chronicles tells of how the Lord sent an angel who “annihilated all the fighting men and the leaders and officers in the camp of the Assyrian king” (32:21). The book “closes with the sad note of God’s compassion and long-suffering in repeatedly sending messengers to his ever disobedient people.” [1] In 2 Chronicles 36:15 the Chronicler writes: “The Lord, the God of their fathers, sent word to them through his messengers again and again, because he had pity on his people and on his dwelling place.”

The Poetic Books

In the book of Job God is described as one who sends “water upon the countryside” (5:10) and “lighting bolts on their way” (38:35). In chapter fourteen, Job counters Zophar by stating that God overpowers man, changes his countenance, and sends him away (14:20).

The Psalmist uses sending language multiple times when remembering the events leading up to the captivity of the Israelites, as well as the exodus out of Egypt. For example in chapter 105 alone God is seen as the sender three times, “He sent a man before them – Joseph, sold as a slave” (17), “He sent Moses his servant, and Aaron, whom he had chosen” (26), and “He sent darkness and made the land dark” (28).

However, the Book of Psalms also reflects often upon the physical and spiritual blessings sent by God. In chapter twenty he sends assistance: “May he send you help from the sanctuary and grant you support from Zion” (43:2). In chapter forty-three he sends guidance: “Send forth your light and your truth, let them guide me” (43:3). In chapter fifty-seven he sends safety and faithfulness, “He sends from heaven and saves me, rebuking those who hotly pursue me; God sends his love and his faithfulness” (57:3). In chapter seventy-eight he sends the provision of food, “He sent them all the food they could eat” (78:25). Finally, in the Book of Psalms God sends out his commandments to cause nature to bless mankind:

He sends his command to the earth, his word runs swiftly. He spread the snow like wool, and scatters the frost like ashes. He hurls down his hail like pebbles. Who can stand his icy blasts? He sends his word and melts them; he stirs up his breezes and the waters flow (147:15-18).

1. Francis M. DuBose, God Who Sends (Nashville, TN: Broadman Press, 1983), 44.

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.

I have been especially blessed lately, or “lucky” (you will have to watch the video to understand) by the work of Eugene Peterson. I wish his books would have been required reading in my seminary studies.

Our monthly network group is currently reading through Peterson’s “The Contemplative Pastor.” If you are a pastor and you haven’t read this book then do yourself and your people a favor, and do so. The short ten page chapter entitled “The Subversive Pastor” is well worth the price of the book. 

After first illustrating how Jesus was a master at subversion, partly through the use of parables to subversively slip past the defenses of his hearers, Peterson writes:

Prayer and parable are the stock-in-trade tools of the subversive pastor. The quiet (or noisy) closet life of prayer enters into partnership with the Spirit that strives still with every human heart, a wrestling match in holiness. And parables are the consciousness-altering words that slip past falsifying platitude and invade the human spirit with Christ-truth.

This is our primary work in the real world. But we need continual convincing. The people for whom we are praying and among whom we are telling parables are seduced into supposing that their money and ambition are making the world turn on its axis. There are so many of them and so few of us, making it difficult to maintain our convictions. It is easy to be seduced along with them.

Words are the real work of the world — prayer words with God, parable words with men and women. The behind-the-scenes work of creativity by word and sacrament, by parable and prayer, subverts the seduced world. 

The pastor’s real work is what Ivan Illich calls “shadow work” — the work nobody gets paid for and few notice but that makes a world of salvation: meaning and value and purpose, a world of love and hope and faith — in short, the kingdom of God.

For a very enjoyable sample of Peterson’s insight and wit check out the following video from ‘07 as he discusses a wide variety of topics, including the need for pastors to read fiction, the importance of new Bible translations, and a hilarious story about his interaction with Bono. For a bit more on the Bono connection you might also enjoy this post.

Lastly, during the month of June, Christian Audio.com is offering a free download of Peterson’s “Christ Plays in Ten Thousand Places.” Simply go here and follow the instructions. No strings attached. Also be sure to sign up for the monthly newsletter to be notified of future free downloads.

(ht)

I just finished reading “The Doctrine of the Holy Spirit”  by Hendrikus Berkhof. Here is a powerful quote taken from a section titled “The Theological Neglect of the Mission.”

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 . 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 of today.

– Hendrikus Berkhof in The Doctrine of the Holy Spirit

Here is a link to a short video (17 minutes) on the Allelon website that I believe is worth the time. The video is an interview conducted by Alan Roxburgh with 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” 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 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. I am reminded of Bosch’s quote that “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 think well when we observe and 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?”

With this issue of discernment in mind, I want to ask a couple of questions.

As the church, what do we need to do differently to discern where and how God wants us to participate in our communities?

In what ways might your church do things differently in your context?

The church does not do mission, it is mission. By its very calling and nature, it exists as God’s ’sent’ people (missio = sending). Its worship, its proclamation, its life as a distinctive community, and its concrete demonstration of God’s love in acts of prophetic and sacrificial service are all witness to the good news whose sign and foretaste it is to be.

Such is the consensus of missio Dei  theology — but it is hard to translate into the deeply rooted and long since defined classical patterns of western theology. It is equally difficult to translate into the structures of churches which are still shaped by the mindset of Christendom and which have not come to terms with the paradigm shift that surrounds them.

No area of theological work or churchly practice is untouched by the theological agenda of the Missio Dei. This is demonstrated by the ways in which the study of missiology has evolved in this century. From a rather narrow focus upon the expansion of western Christianity and it implications, the discipline today intrudes into every area of theological discourse.

It is still possible to find seminary courses on “the theology of mission.” But the global paradigm shift requires now that we do “missionary theology.” This is the missional challenge that confronts the biblical scholar, the church historian, the systematic theologian, and the practical theologian.

– Darrell Guder

I have found Darrell Guder to be one of the most important voices in the missional conversation. In an excellent essay titled “The Challenges of Evangelization in America: Theological Ambiguities”  Guder emphasizes the fact that mission is the  definitive task of the church.

Furthermore, Guder believes that any attempt to reclaim the missional calling of the church will require serious reflection on a spectrum of theological ambiguities that Christendom has left behind.

For a list of some of these ambiguities check out Kruse Kroncile’s post on the same article. Michael also has a link to download the article.

In one portion of Guder’s article he introduces what has come to be known as “the Newbigin Triad.” Lesslie Newbigin proposed a series of questions that spoke to the need of reclaiming the missionary nature of the western church. These questions were organized around the key emphases of Gospel, Church, and Culture.

Newbigin stated that it was essential that we constantly ask these fundamental questions:

Gospel:

What is the Gospel and how does the Gospel form and confront the church? What has happened to the Gospel in the course of western Christendom? How do we reclaim the fundamentally event character of the Gospel over against more abstract, propositional renderings of it? How do we engage the fundamental translatability of the Gospel?

Church:

What is the church and what is its purpose? How do we reclaim the church’s essential vocation as witness to the gospel, as light, leaven and salt, as Christ’s letter to the world. How does the church after Christendom learn what it means to “lead its life worthy of the calling with which it has been called?”

Culture:

What is the interaction between the church and the cultures in which it is planted? How does the gospel through the church both confront and affirm cultures as ways in which witness becomes concrete. Here again, we are asking about the fundamental translatability of the gospel, recognizing that the Gospel “destigmatizes” every culture by affirming it as a potential bearer of gospel. How does the witness to the gospel become appropriately embodied in diverse cultures, while continuing to confess the one message of the one Triune God?

If you are interested in a few of the books and journal articles by both Newbigin and Guder that I have found helpful check out my missional reading list.

In [John] 20:21, the point seems to be that the mission of Jesus’ followers is to be guided by the same kinds of parameters that determined the sender-sent relationship between Jesus and the Father. Also, Jesus is shown to invest the disciples with authority and legitimacy.

The more general reference to ’sending’ ties the disciples’ mission to the characteristics of Jesus’ relationship to his own sender, the Father. At this stage, Jesus, the paradigmatic ’sent one’ (9:7), turns sender.

Now Jesus’ followers are to embody the qualities characteristic of their Lord during his earthly mission. As Jesus did his Father’s will, they have to do Jesus’  will. As Jesus did his Father’s works, they have to do Jesus’  works. As Jesus spoke the words of his Father, they have to speak Jesus’  words. Their relationship to their sender, Jesus, is to reflect Jesus’ relationship with his sender.

These correspondences are explicated well by the following observations on the force of kathos (‘just as’) in 20:21:

The special Johannine contribution to the theology of this mission is that the Father’s sending of the Son serves both as the model (the comparative aspect of kathos) and the ground (the explanatory aspect of kathos) 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 (R. E. Brown, The Gospel according to John)

- Salvation to the Ends of the Earth: A bibilcal theology of mission by Andreas Kostenberger & Peter T. O’Brien