Right after having a difficult discussion with his 12 disciples in Luke 9, Jesus sent 70 others in pairs ahead of him to every town and place he was about to go.
He said to them, “The harvest is plentiful, but the laborers are few; therefore, ask the Lord of the harvest to “kick out” workers into his harvest. Go on your way. See, I am sending you out like lambs into the midst of wolves. Do not carry a fanny pack with money, backpack, or flip flops; and do not stop to greet people on the way. Whatever house you enter, first say, ‘Shalom to this house!’ If there is a person of Shalom, your peace will rest on that person; but if not, it will return to you. Remain in the same house, eating and drinking whatever they provide, for the laborer deserves to be paid.
"Do not move about from house to house. Whenever you enter a town and its people welcome you, eat what they serve you; heal the sick who are there, and say to them, ‘The kingdom of God has come near to you.’ But whenever you enter a town and they do not welcome you, go out into its streets and say, ‘Even the dust of your town that clings to our feet, we wipe off in protest”. Yet know this: the kingdom of God has come near.’"
In Luke 9:51 Jesus “turned his face toward Jerusalem.” As he followed the trade routes through Samaria it became clear to these villagers that he was not caught up in culture. Their rejection of Jesus created a stir with his disciples, yet Jesus reminded them that he had come to save all people, not just the Jewish nation. His challenge to three Samaritans who considered following him on this journey was a reminder that his ministry required focus, commitment, and a willingness to suffer. This hostile territory required stubborn and focused leaders.
Jesus sent his disciples into this hostile community. Samaritans had their own temple (Mt. Gerizzim), their own translation of the Torah, a culture that clung to witchcraft and idolatry, and typically distrusted and disliked Judeans. It is not until Acts 8 that we read of this community embracing the Good News of Jesus. However, Jesus saw the need to prepare them for the future by sending disciples to preach and teach in their villages.
Jesus described this community as a field that had fruit ready to harvest. Harvesting is hard work, must be done quickly, creates and requires “all hands-on deck.” Unfortunately, Jesus reminded them that there were “few hands-on deck.” The Greek clause in Luke 10:2 reads, “on the one hand there is a full harvest, but, on the other hand, there are only a few workers.”
This is the dilemma we face in ministry today.
None of this really matters to the Mission of God. Jesus sent his disciples into hostile territory with a simple request, ”Pray for the master of the harvest to ‘throw people out into the field’.”
The word we usually translate “send” is a Greek word that means to “kick out,” “cast out,” or “throw out.” Throughout the Bible God’s people have had to scatter to follow the original call to “be fruitful, multiply, and fill the earth” (Gen 1:28). Whether it was languages around the tower of Babel, allotted land, exile, or fleeing Jerusalem of the murder of Stephen; God’s people have needed a “shove” to embrace missional life. For Jesus, the call to follow was a call to an active missional lifestyle.
He also asked the disciples to have both a public and intimate ministry. They were to stay in the home of a person of Shalom. While the Greek word in this text is “peace” the Jewish culture understood it as Shalom.
Shalom is more than peace—it includes justice, integrity, honor, and safety. Disciples were to find a man (and family) of integrity, justice, peace, love, and safety. In Samaria this would be important as it would be a base of operation for the disciples. They would eat what they were served (difficult for Jewish males in Samaria), serve the family and their extended connections, confront the evil in their area of influence, and bless the homeowner in the eyes of his community. In those homes with corruption, injustice, and lack of safety due to a person who was not “Shalom,” the disciples would publicly distance themselves from their influence and lifestyle by rejecting the behavior of the owner. This would clear Jesus of any accusations from the community. Additionally, the disciples' public display of justice would create space for other people of Shalom to invite them into their homes.
Finally, Jesus twice mentioned that the Kingdom of God was close. This is not a temporal event, but spatial. When Jesus’ disciples preach and live out their faith in hostile communities, they illustrate the presence of God’s Kingdom. When Jesus’ disciples get to work and harvest the crop, people see the presence of God. When Jesus’ disciples choose to do mission, rather than talk about it, they bring the presence of Jesus into any community.
Kairos Church Planting Support has experienced a tremendous surge of young couples and individuals seeking to join the harvest. During Covid, the Holy Spirit has responded to our prayers to “shove” workers our way. Our Discovery and Strategy Labs continue to be full; ministries have decided to “reboot” and found growth; our church plants are taking on interns and apprentices, and new works are preparing to begin. During these events we continue to receive requests from more and more interested disciples who feel the call to join the mission of Jesus. As with the disciples, an “all hands-on deck” ministry in the US is still met with a “few hands-on deck” pool of future leaders. However, we continue to pray, and the Lord is faithful.
Continue to pray for us as we train leaders to plant new churches in new places for new people. Please continue to offer praise to the Lord of the Harvest, who is always faithful in any time, season, and among hostile villages.
Here is our latest snail mail newsletter with lots of what's been happening the past couple of months. God's Spirit is moving and we are excited to be witnesses and participants in his work.
Download this newsletter for easier reading.
In Daniel 2:24-45, the Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar had a dream about a statue crushed by a “rock.” This king ruled an empire which overpowered the Assyrian kingdom while stretching to the gate of the mighty Egyptians. In his quest for power he laid siege to countries in between Babylon and Egypt taking some captive, including the city of Jerusalem and its surrounding villages. The Hebrew narratives and prophets indicated that this was done by the will of Yahweh as a punishment for Judah’s breaking faith with their God (2 Chron. 36:15-21). However, God continued to show the Jewish nation that their Lord was still in charge, even as captives in a foreign land.
Nebuchadnezzar was troubled by his night vision. He asked his wise leaders to interpret and when they claimed to be unable, he “put a hit out on all of them.” One of the Judean captives, Daniel, volunteered to interpret the dream for his king. After Yahweh revealed the answer, he shared with the king that his dream involved a statue with five parts. A rock was “cut” (possibly from a quarry—and possible another statue/idol) which crushed the statue causing the particles to be scattered by the wind.
Numerous interpretations of Daniel’s description have been given by Biblical scholars, clergy, and religious authors. Interpretations may focus upon the identity of the future kings or Empires as well as the temporal establishment of Babylonian, Persian, Median, Greek, Asian, Roman, and other empires. Some interpretations seek to determine the establishment of the “final” kingdom, known as the Kingdom of God, church, and/or final reign of Christ.
While many pages have been dedicated to discussing these interpretations and their application to academics and ministry, I find that a deeper issue—the permanence of the reign of God, is at the heart of Nebuchadnezzar’s dream and its interpretation. It may be that the divine message to this king is more regal than chronological. Was the lesson to this Babylonian king concerned with “who would succeed him, and that God would reign hundreds of years later”? Or was the lesson that “no matter who ruled the world, God ruled all?”
First, the book of Daniel occupies two different locations in our Canons of scripture. The Hebrew version, known as MT, and Greek version, known as the Septuagint or LXX, places Daniel in different locations. LXX translators put Daniel immediately following the Major Prophet Ezekiel, and at the beginning of the twelve “Minor Prophets.” In this canon Daniel occupies a place within the prophets, which may suggest many of the “prophetic” and “apocalyptic” interpretations of the book. This is the same location as our modern translations.
Second, in the MT Daniel was placed within the Hagiographa (known as the Writings or Praise), rather than the Nabim (Prophets). In this location Daniel occupied a place in the praise and wisdom corpus of the Hebrew Bible. Daniel, along with Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, and others represents the stories of courage, faithfulness, and the Fear of the Lord in the courts of the Gentile kings of the world. Daniel shares themes similar to Proverbs through the Fear of the Lord, youth (Na’ar), wisdom, and instruction for kings passages. This also suggests that Daniel’s ability to interpret dreams and serve in the Babylonian court had less of a Messianic emphasis than wisdom.
It is this location, the Hagiographa, which offers us a unique view of Nebuchadnezzar’s dream, involves life under the reign of God rather than a future prediction and fulfillment through prophecy.
Interpreting the Vision
Nebuchadnezzar’s vision was interpreted by Daniel because he feared Yahweh, which was considered the beginning of wisdom (Prov. 1:7). The king’s advisors and leaders could not tell him the dream, nor could they interpret it. Daniel, who had proven to be obedient to Yahweh and this Babylonian ruler, through prayer, claimed to receive a divine message from God which included both dream and interpretation. The setting of this dream suggests that this world regent not only needed a lesson in humility, but one that reminded him Yahweh, rather than Marduk, ruled Babylon as well as the rest of the world.
First, the dream included various empires representing parts of the statue such as a head of gold, arms and chest of silver, bronze pants/waist, legs, and feet of iron and clay (Dan. 2:34). Nebuchadnezzar was identified as the head of gold (2:38), while the other parts represented future kings or kingdoms (the Hebrew word mlk can mean either). Often, these components comprise the bulk of scholarly commentary concerning their attempts to “prove” or “validate” history alongside Daniel’s interpretation of the dream. Pages have been written discussing various rulers in the Babylonian, Median, Persian, Greek, Judean, and/or Roman Empires. Other more modern writers have suggested that Daniel’s interpretation has a modern fulfillment connecting the book to Revelation and the Beast/Antichrist. However, these discussions became unimportant for the existing king of Babylon or those reading the text centuries later.
Second, the dream suggested that an “unshakeable” kingdom not only crushed the other rulers but is also eternal (Dan. 2:44-45). Interpreters agree that this is the kingdom of God, however, many disagree as to the “timing” of this “establishment.” “In the days of those kings” has been discussed as occurring at the end of the four or five reigning kings. The establishment of this “future empire” becomes dependent upon the interpretation of the kings. This basis for interpretation has contributed to numerous prophetic predictions concerning the “establishment of God’s reign,” or “Jesus’ kingdom/church.” Was the dream meant to apply only to Nebuchadnezzar, during the reign of Cyrus, persecution of Antiochus, Roman persecution, or even the kingdom “yet to come?”
I offer that the dream has a continual application to those in Daniel’s day and all readers in the future. The phrase “in those days of the kings” suggests that the kingdom of God exists during the reign of any king. This interpretation is not dependent on who rules or when the kingdom of God arrives, but the present reality of Yahweh’s kingdom. For Nebuchadnezzar, the dream suggested that God will always be in charge. For the Judean people the reminder was that no matter who was on the throne, past, present, or future, Yahweh reigns. This application offered hope to those under the Babylonian exilic crisis as well as those serving under the Persian, Greek, Syrian, or even Roman empires. One can even extend this theology of a present kingdom during the dark and chaotic days of history for those facing religious persecution or those feeling that God is silent. Daniel’s actions indicated that even though Yahweh had turned a deaf ear to their cries as the Babylonians sacked Jerusalem (Jer. 11:11, 14), faithfulness and devotion would rouse God to remember the covenant (Dan. 1:9, 17-20).
Applying the Vision
Yahweh’s kingdom is not waiting for a future home—it was/is a current reality. The kingdom lives through the faithfulness of God’s followers. This becomes clearer throughout the story of Daniel. Nebuchadnezzar, influenced by the dream, created a statue (like the one in Daniel 2) but saw, through the courage of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego’s obedience that Yahweh was key to this kingdom. He erupted in praise because of their courage and God’s faithfulness. In Daniel 4 Nebuchadnezzar learned that he was to be submissive to God. In Daniel 5 Belshazzar saw firsthand the power of God because of his sinful behavior. God transferred power to the Persians who also continued to reign throughout the book. Daniel’s continued obedience in Daniel 6 brought praise to Yahweh and young Daniel was honored by the angel—who gave him insight into a future where Yahweh ruled—even though the Jews would suffer. Rather than the last half of Daniel focusing on “future prophecy” the text further illustrated that Yahweh ruled through the hearts and lives of faithful followers, even during persecution.
This belief has continued throughout Jewish, as well as Christian history. God’s reign exists among faithful followers, whether they are on a throne or on their knees. This belief provides hope for those who question the divine presence during times of chaos, evil, or despair. It provides a response to the Psalmists question, while in Babylon: “How can we sing the songs of Yahweh while in a foreign land?” (Psalm 137:4). The belief that the reign of God exists here and now, rather than something in future, reminds the reader that the “fear of Yahweh is the beginning of wisdom,” (Prov. 1:7). As the angel Michael shared with Daniel, at the end of the book, “None of the wicked will understand, but those who are wise will understand,” (Dan. 12:10). The wise now have the opportunity to inspire hope and faith in those suffering during chaotic, painful, and depressing days.
In dark times God’s kingdom is always present, regardless of who wears the crown.
A Testimony of God's Lovingkindness
"You know when we are lost, and even while we are running away, God can still speak to us."
Whatever you've done, whatever choices you've made, God is always ready to welcome you. Bruce Bates, Director of Coaching at Kairos, shares his testimony of learning this the hard way. And he wants you to know God is there for you, too.
Updated: Bruce spoke on Vulnerability in his sermon at The Feast Church on June 6, 2021. Below is a video of that sermon, which includes the pre-recorded testimony above. May you be blessed by the freedom that comes as you share life and Christ with others.
Martin Luther King Jr., in his Letter from a Birmingham Jail, famously made this biting critique of the church: "So often the contemporary church is a weak, ineffectual voice with an uncertain sound.” Unfortunately, this is oftentimes true in our own time as well. Many of us are left with the suffocating feeling that the church seems to stand for little that Jesus stood for and that our world is suffering because of it. What should be salt and light has become dim and tasteless.
This year’s theme for the Kairos Blog is “Renewal.” Renewal is certainly something we long for and need. Renewal comes from the Lord lifting up leaders among his people to call for a new course. These people are His prophets. In the abstract, the work of the prophet is a good and necessary thing in the life of the people of God. The prophets call us back to the standard of God. In fact, far from being cynical complainers, prophets call the people of God into a brighter future--a future characterized by love, peace, and justice--the future “beloved community” as King labeled it.
The Problem With Prophets
In practical terms, prophets create problems. The problem with prophets is that they critique the church and call us to change. (Apparently humans have always had a hard time with change!) The brighter future they envision can only materialize through self-reflection, repentance, and sacrifice. The process of change will always include coming to terms with undesirable truths about ourselves and our communities.
John the Baptist came onto the biblical scene within a long line of Hebrew prophets. In fact, he came preaching essentially the same message of repentance that Isaiah, Amos, and Hosea did. Jesus Himself does the same, adding that the Kingdom of God was at hand. Both John and Jesus continued the two-fold focus of the Hebrew prophets of calling the people of God back to faithfulness to Him alone and to establishing justice for the people made in His image.
I believe the problem with the American church is not the lack of prophetic voices; our problem is that we marginalize our prophetic voices, refusing to listen to them. In that way, we’re not very different from the 1st century religious elites that Jesus interacted with during his ministry.
And Jesus said, “Woe to you lawyers also! For you load people with burdens hard to bear, and you yourselves do not touch the burdens with one of your fingers. Woe to you! For you build the tombs of the prophets whom your fathers killed. So you are witnesses and you consent to the deeds of your fathers, for they killed them, and you build their tombs.
In Matthew’s version Jesus adds, “You say, 'If we had lived in the days of our fathers, we would not have taken part with them in shedding the blood of the prophets.’”
The people of Jesus’ times liked to think of themselves are righteous superiors to their predecessors. They “honored” the prophets by building their tombs, all while not recognizing the very prophets in their midst. Of course, they would add Jesus and many of the apostles to this long list of martyred mouthpieces of God.
Do we see the same today? We need to look no further than Martin Luther King Jr. He is widely held as a modern-day prophet with days devoted to him, streets memorializing him, and other cultural landmarks of respect. However, many of the same people who quote King continue to fight against the things he stood for (i.e., racial justice, economic equity, and the end of militarism). Many reject the prophets in our midst who continue to advocate for the things he taught. We find similar responses to sexual abuse survivors and advocates who want to make churches safer places.
That’s the major problem with prophets. They’re much more lovable once they’re dead. A dead prophet is a prophet who can no longer challenge us, one we can make into whatever image we desire. The dead prophet is one that we can with confidence say, “had we have been there, we would have been different!”
The nature of the prophetic word will always make it difficult to hear. Many times, it will originate outside of the religious establishment. There is a necessary distance a person must have to be able to see and critique the established ways. Because of this, many of our prophets will be from the margins of our American society: racial minorities, women, Christians from the global south, the poor, and the young. Similarly, many of the prophets who start within the establishment can find themselves marginalized because of their demands for change. The prophet Jeremiah is a biblical example.
In another episode with the Pharisees, Jesus says, “I know that you are Abraham’s descendants. Yet you are looking for a way to kill me, because you have no room for my word” (John 8:37).
A fundamental question for those of us who seek renewal is: Is there room in us and our churches for these prophetic words? Are we willing to take necessary steps to restore what we’ve lost and obtain the promised brighter future? The comforting truth is that as long as Jesus is head of the church, there will always be hope. In the Kairos Network, we believe deeply in the church. It’s the only hope for the world. Clear eyed and humble acknowledgement of hard truths only leads us to greater productive action.
2 Ways To Renewal
There are two big ways we can pursue renewal that come out of the two-fold message of the prophets: to faithfully serve God and to work toward establishing justice. The first is that we can recommit to inviting people into the Kingdom of God. True and lasting peace is ultimately found in the new creation of Jesus. This will undoubtably take new churches for new people in new places. The second is that we can restore our Christian commitment to justice. Justice is certainly not a secular concept unrelated to “preaching the gospel.” Jesus, the prophets, and apostles organically combined the two. By committing ourselves to justice, we can make major headway in restoring our witness in the world by showing our concern for the common good. Our goal is for both of these things to work in beautiful concert as individuals and communities come to increasingly reflect the Kingdom of God in every way.
Prophetic voices can be hard to hear, but when listened to are better than thousands of well-wishers. Their hard truths and future visions can bring us closer to what we desire above all, Jesus and His Kingdom. If we can open up room for the prophets in our midst, we will experience renewal.
“If Christ has not been raised, your faith is empty; you are still in your sins. Those also who have fallen asleep in Christ are lost. If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are of all people most to be pitied.” (1 Cor. 15:17-19)
Paul’s discussion of the resurrection with the Christian community at Corinth in 1 Corinthians 15 is a common text at Easter. Even though I have written a book on this letter, I still have difficulty with this chapter. However, Paul challenges us to see the resurrection of Jesus as a renewal and transformation of life.
First, Paul suggested that our faith, Christian life, and reason for being is based on the conviction that Jesus rose from the dead. While believing in the resurrection is incredible, it is who we are. Over the years I have met and become friends with many “secular religion scholars” (their words, not mine) who teach and speak about religion but do not believe much of Christian claims about Jesus. I live and have preached in a city with one of the highest Religiously Unaffiliated rates in the United States. If you visit this link you may also find your city on the list.
In the US we are experiencing a growth in a faith that does not see the need to be attached to a practicing faith community. In addition to this, Christianity continues to hold a unique position among world religions in that we proclaim Jesus’ resurrection. However, does this conviction still hold true? Is it common to hold to a Christian/religious belief without embracing the incredible claim that Jesus rose from the dead for our lives? Paul suggested that the Christian life, existence, and worldview hinged on the acceptance of this claim.
“Just as we have borne the image of the earthly man [Adam], so shall we bear the image of the heavenly man [Jesus]. I declare to you, brothers and sisters, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable.” (1 Cor. 15:49-50)
Paul wrote in this section that there were two “bodies” or “lives.” One was fleshly, the other spiritual. This theme ran through the entire letter to these Corinthian Christians who struggled to live differently than their world. Jesus (and Paul) had introduced a new system, empire, and way of life--the way of Agape (love), mercy, support, and faithfulness. The Roman Empire introduced a system of power and violence that Paul indicated was “passing away,” “fading,” and “being abolished.” The Empire of Jesus was going to endure with faithfulness, hope, and love. The resurrection of Jesus was also a resurrection of his people. We would no longer live according to our corrupt system but with loyalty, honor, love, and integrity—which were fruits of faithfulness.
These two themes of the chapter suggest that Christians have a great opportunity not only at Easter, but in our daily walk with Jesus. The resurrection of Jesus is incredible—however it is believable when people see the resurrection among Jesus’ followers. The Empire of Jesus brings renewal and transformation. We accept people but also guide them to growth and living in the new life. We witness the resurrection verbally and behaviorally.
People will not believe in the risen Jesus until they see it in us. In our renewal of faith and discipleship we can transform and offer that transformation to others.
Transformation is not judgment. Judgment says, “You are hopeless—here is your sentence.” Transformation says, “Come as you are but don’t stay that way.”
Transformation is not neglect. Neglect says, “We accept you and will do little to help you get better—because we don’t want to butt into your business.” Transformation says, “Flesh and blood cannot enter Jesus’ Empire—how can we help you get there?”
Transformation is not manipulation or exploitation. Exploitation says, “Let’s get you to do this so that we can look better.” Transformation says, “How can we help you get to where Jesus’ wants you to be?”
Transformation is not observation. Observation says, “Let’s adore Jesus from afar.” Transformation says, “Let’s do what Jesus did so that we can become like him.”
Happy Easter, Renewal, and Transformation Sunday,
Welcome back. We’ve come to my third and final musing on church. Drawing conclusions are hard, but I’ll do my best.
Remember that picture in the previous blog? If you didn't see it, you can find it here. That was my grandparents’ farmhouse. My grandmother was born in that house. So was my dad. There is more than a hundred years of family history there. My parents and I used to drive hundreds of miles to visit Grandma and Grandpa Carr at that house most every summer and winter through my youth. My nose would be against the car window for the last 30 miles in anticipation of spotting the farm lights on the horizon.
By the time I was around, my grandfather wasn’t actively farming. Remnants of old barns and chicken coops remained but I had to just use my imagination. All the same, this was my happy place. I donned my overalls first thing in the morning and followed my grandpa out the door to see what kind of fun we might get into and to play farmer for the day. Dinner (that’s “lunch” for you city-folk) was a feast, and our evenings were serene, watching a little T.V. or working a puzzle. Grandpa snored in the recliner. Grandma sat in her chair next to him playing a game of solitaire.
When I was in college, my grandparents decided to sell the place. They felt the need to live closer to medical assistance so they moved ten miles into town. My grandmother, after leaving behind the only home she’d ever known, died the next year. Grandpa followed her a few years later. Last I heard, the farm belongs to a distant cousin . . . one I’ve never met. I guess you could say it is still in the family. But I knew after it was sold that I’d probably never see the inside of that house again. I still think about it quite often.
If the situation had been different and the house and farm had come to me, what would I have done with it? I have been considering my answer since sharing Tickle’s metaphor with you.
Thinking through this is a meaningful exercise in discussing the future of the church. Any talk of preserving, restoring, modifying, or reconstructing this “homestead” of ours should hit very close to home. When we discuss updating or scrapping the place that has shaped us, we must do so carefully. Our generation knows what might be lost in the process if we act too hastily. And yet, we also recognize the burden of possessing something that means a lot to some at the same time as it feels out of touch for others.
Author Shawn Lovejoy had an extensive collection of Hot Wheels. As a parent, Lovejoy gave them to his son hoping that he would love the toy cars, maybe even passing on the cherished set to future grandchildren. But there was a problem. His son didn’t love the cars the way he had. They mostly lived in a closet collecting dust. One day, without Lovejoy’s knowledge, the cars were included in a pile of giveaway items.
While the author uses this story to make a different point, I cannot help but see its relevance for this conversation. Sure, I loved my grandparent’s farm. I have a lot of memories there. But if all of sudden I was given the chance to give my wife and kids a first-time tour would they feel any nostalgia or connection? And even if they did, would any of us choose to live there? I doubt it. Sad but true.
Where then do we go?
You might recall that we began this discussion looking at some troubling statistics. The church is in decline. Something should be done. We can read disheartening numbers as a rejection of Christian ideals and values. Or, we can take the hint that old forms simply don’t evoke the same meaning to current generations. This is why, given the opportunity, I would choose the Tickle’s fourth option of “new construction.”
If that seems harsh, realize this is my calling. I’m a church planter. I’m supposed to think differently. Hopefully there are leaders of established churches or energized disciples who are ready to take bold steps with me to buck the trends and stop the bleeding. Consequential obstacles may require dramatic solutions.
Just because I believe that a new construction is in order for my context, I do not deem to speak for all of us. As I said last time, we should have the freedom to discover our uniqueness while we hold space for the different conclusions of others. Let us agree that context and environment matter. Church is not—and should not—be McDonalds. What may be effective in Little Rock may never work in Little Havana. Even within the same city, we might benefit from a variety of church expressions that connect with different people groups differently.
This has not really been our strong suit in the past. We love conformity and sameness because it is simple and orderly. Ironically, the drive for alignment and agreement has actually increased our disagreements.
If you’re interested in what I’m talking about, read Will Mancini’s Church Unique. Discover what is special about your context and get specific about ways to make an impact on your community. Imagine if more churches specialized in certain ministries. As we settle into our uniqueness, we hopefully find the opportunity to let go of needing to be everything for everyone. (That’s a relief!) What if we were okay with getting really good at one thing while we supported our friends across town who were strong where we were weak?
I see untapped power inherent in a variety of expressions. We should recall that Jesus had unique expectations for Peter and John (John 21:18-22). Remember that the early Church benefited from Paul and Barnabas going their separate ways (Acts 15:36-41). We even know that no two of Paul’s churches looked or acted exactly alike.
This brings me back to a point from my first blog. We need to release people for ministry even if they don’t fit our mold. Too many well-intentioned, creative, and energized disciples have been shot down or discouraged because what they came dreaming about didn’t match a leader’s expectations.
I have no problem with identifying and staying focused on a particular vision; we should not apologize for our visions. But let’s also not discourage people who feel inspired by our energy and focus from discovering their own unique calling. Let us give them our blessing (and some funding would be nice) to start the halfway house or the after school program or the new worship service aimed at the missed demographic. Then, let’s stay in relationship with them even if they get too busy to attend and support our thing. Can we commit to resisting the temptation of Kingdom competition?
We--you and I--have this unique opportunity to discover and shape the hereafter of Christian expressions. I believe the future is bright. This mission is worth our effort, our creativity, and our shared resources. It might even surprise you to hear me say that I don’t think we really need more “church planters.” I believe we need more disciples who take the calling and the opportunities uniquely afforded them to share the gospel wherever they live and work and play.
What do you say? Will you join me?
In my post The Shifting Church, Part 1, I discussed where we and the church are now. Specifically, I opined on the state of churches and asked some questions to get us thinking critically. Based on shared statistics, I conclude that churches are not connecting like they should.
A good, long look in the mirror seems in order. If we are unwilling to do that, then any new strategy might be like reaching for a bandaid when stitches are really what we need. (Um…why are my metaphors so violent? Sorry. Here’s to hoping the future of the church is peaceful.)
Ok, bear with me as I share a longer post this time. I believe we will find it thought-provoking and integral to our discussion on the subject.
Where We Are Coming From
Phyllis Tickle, in The Great Emergence, explains that, through its history, the church has experienced a major shift every five hundred years. A thousand years ago was the beginning of the Great Schism, the split that led to the Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic churches. Then on October 31, 1517, Martin Luther inadvertently started the Great Reformation. Even though other dramatic developments have taken place within the last five hundred years— including the Restoration Movement that led to Churches of Christ—authors such as Tickle agree that the five hundred year mark is significant.
What “great” shift, then, is upon us today?
According to Tickle, those who could, at one time, be firmly found in one of four categories, or quadrants, of Christians--Conservative, Renewalist, Liturgical, and Social-justice—are moving away from their traditional polarities and convening near the center as they search for authentic faith and practice. Even secular religion historian Stephen Prothero says, “Christians identify less and less each year with labels of this sort" (God is Not One, p. 82).
Have you ever dropped a quarter onto one of those colorful donation boxes in the center of the mall and watched as the coin slowly looped around the plastic vortex toward the hole at the bottom? Many Christians, like coins, seem to be circling through the four quadrants, borrowing from one another’s traditions and perspectives, and becoming what Tickle labels “The Great Emergence.”
My Journey Through the Quadrants
Come to think of it, this is a pretty accurate description of my journey. Growing up in churches of Christ, I remember being drawn toward a desire for the experiential in ways that our tradition had mostly neglected. This was more than just teenage excitement in response to youth group
highlights. I overheard talk about the presence and movement of the Holy Spirit. I watched as some found cause to introduce demonstrative forms of worship as their personal expression. We may have not know it, but we were leaning into and borrowing from Renewalists, such as
the Assemblies of God.
Later when I was in college, I was introduced to the deep mysteries and traditions of liturgical churches. I was not alone in my curiosity; there was a sudden collective interest in the church calendar, uses of lectionary readings, and contemplative postures from ancient mystics. A few years later, a friend and I were reading and discussing The Irresistible Revolution by Shane Claiborne. We began to judge faith by its concern for the least of these and were suddenly attuned to social justice.
This journey produced in me an appreciation for the many forms of Christianity. At the same time, it required that I let go of the unnecessary trepidation of becoming like “those” Christians —whomever “they” were. Over time, I grew in my faith as I found a wide variety of expressions
that helped me discover an authentic and diverse set of practices for my personal development.
I’m not the same as I was back then. And I’m glad for it.
All of this discussion might send shivers up spines as some fear losing a particular distinction or heritage. Some might even suspect, based on my coin metaphor, that such a movement leads Christianity (or at least our wandering sons and daughters) to fall through the center and out of sight completely.
My bad. There is no drain; there is no hole in the vortex that threatens our existence. Sorry for the confusion.
Tickle proposes that this flow will draw some out of their quadrant and into one of four “currents" around the center, as you can see in the graphic above.
Approaches to Repairing and Restoring
Tickle uses the following metaphor to further desribe distinctions within Christiantity.
Imagine that you’ve recently inherited an old farm house that has been in your family for generations. You have a strong connection to this homestead, even if the years of wear and tear show its missing luster. Now it belongs to your generation. It is up to you to decide what to do with the house. And let’s assume that you have already resolved it would be a shame to just sell the property to a stranger who doesn’t know the meaning held within.
How would you approach this home?
Some may be fine to dust off the cobwebs and shake out the rugs. They won’t find any need to get new furniture or change much of anything. Their grandparents’ old couch and bed will suffice after a little cleaning and repair. For them, it will bring great joy to know that they are living just the way that their family always has. It will be sweet to hear the floorboards creak like they would have under Grandpa’s footsteps. They will rest easy in Grandma’s chair out on the porch. Sure, they’ll have to learn how to use the old wood burning stove to heat the house, but they will feel a great honor in doing so every time.
Others will say that the furniture is beyond repair . . . and so are some parts of the house. They believe there is something about this century old home that could shine again with a little effort. They will set out to restore it, refurbishing the floors (fixing the creaks), repairing missing baseboards and hardware. They will even update the wiring and the HVAC to bring in some modern comforts. However, the goal is not to notice major changes. They want to work hard to make the old feel like new again.
Then there are those who will say moving a wall or two, adding a much needed second bathroom, or modernizing the kitchen will not change the connection one has with the original place. In fact, they might even argue the changes are the only thing making the house livable in this modern age. They suppose, “Grandma and Grandpa would have done the same if they
were still alive.” This family concludes that it would be silly not to swap out drafty windows and install modern appliances. In no way does even the most drastic updates jeopardize any connection they hold with the past.
Finally, there will be others that maintain great fondness with the homestead even when the original house is gone completely. They may argue that the view from the house or the land it sat on is the real heritage worth building upon. Now, in the process of tearing down the old house and building a modern place to live, these thoughtful folks may designate mementos from the old to feature in the new. They may save a section of the flooring where Grandma used to stand in the kitchen to hang prominently on the wall. Maybe they’ll keep that old bench that used to live by the back door where Grandpa would sit and take off his muddy work boots every evening. For them, the memories will live on and the connection to the past will remain long after the physical features are replaced.
Or option five.
I really don’t think there is a wrong answer here. I might argue that we need all of these systems to address the homestead, or the church, of the future. Any of these approaches, done with authenticity and intentionality, can be an option worth the effort. And yet, can we also appreciate and honor the journey of others who arrive at different decisions from us?
Our opportunity here is to foster a positive landscape, fertile for producing unique takes and fresh approaches while avoiding drawing boundary lines of distinction and alienating the brave.
Remember: even if we’re in a different current, we’re all swimming in the same water.
Maybe you are not familiar with the term “futuring.” No worries, neither is my spell check. Researcher Stephen Millett writes, “Futuring is a systematic process of thinking about the future in order to frame reasonable expectations, to identify emerging opportunities and threats to the company or organization, and to anticipate actions that will promote desired outcomes.”
Futuring is an aspect of strategic planning that identifies market conditions and trends to help businesses consider what customers may be attracted to in the future. Some might confuse this with creating a vision. In fact, visioning is the opposite of futuring. Futuring is like a pair of binoculars we use to assess what is on the horizon. Visioning is donning a pair of bifocals to see what is within you in order to develop an intentional response to the perceived future. Both are necessary for a well-rounded, strategic approach to business…and Christianity for that matter.
These disciplines have become essential in my work as a church planter. I try very hard to consider the needs of the community as well as continually observe what is happening all around Christendom. I am committed to not to start a church without first addressing what kind of church—and even if a ‘church’—is needed.
I hope that by pulling back the curtain on the work of church planting, I might inspire existing churches and leaders that are also on the cusp of addressing current cultural shifts and hoping to connect with a lost audience in their area. I plan to share my thoughts in three parts, since we have quite a lot to consider.
Where We Are
First, let’s start with where we are now. It should come as no surprise to you that the Church is dying. According to the Barna Group, there are now half as many “Practicing Christians” as there were ten years ago.
Yes, you read that right.
Fifty percent of those surveyed in 2009 “identified as Christian, agreed strongly that faith is very important in their lives and attended church within the past month.” By 2019, this number was twenty-five percent. Wow. That sentence deserves a long pause to fully take it in. (Let me point out that these statistics DO NOT reflect fallout from the coronavirus crisis. That number very well may be even lower now.)
It doesn’t take an analyst to conclude that what we have been doing in churches seems to be connecting less and less with our audience. Something drastic may be in order.
There is hope. People do seem interested in tangible, fresh approaches that connect with their innate desires. Authors Michael Frost and Alan Hirsch (The Shaping of Things to Come) have found that “the advent of postmodernism has raised within the West many expectations for an experiential, activist form of religious, mystical experience.” I’ve seen this to be true. People are hungry and looking for authentic, meaningful connection to one another and the divine. They long for something to inspire them, something to move them beyond their current scenarios and perspectives. They are looking for this, but often they haven’t found it in the Church. Why is that?
Here are a few pointed questions:
I want to be the kind of leader who is willing to work through these complicated questions, to keep an eye on the horizon and try to develop tangible solutions to answer that call. I hope others are doing the same in their own ways and in their own areas. This work requires that leaders are brave. And it always helps to know that we are among good company.
Renewal. What a good word for 2021. We are ready for renewal after we emerge from the pandemic, of course. But considering renewal leads us to its deeper theological meaning.
In English, we make a distinction between renew and new. New means brand new, or something that has never existed before. We use renew to describe something that already exists that is being improved.
In commercials, they say something is "New and Improved!" It can't be both--It must be one or the other!
However, the Hebrew Bible does not make a distinction between renew and new. The Hebrew word ChDSh (chadash) can be translated “new,” “repair,” “renew,” or “rebuild.” It also is the same root for “month” or “new moon.” The ancients saw each month as a cycle of the moon which brought a new or renewed day.
God was not afraid to take what was broken, used, old, or bad and renew or repair it. It was then considered ChDSh.
In Genesis 1-2, Yahweh created the earth as new. After the flood God has continued to renew his relationship/covenant with people. In the prophets, God promised to return Judah and Israel from captivity to repair and rebuild Jerusalem and the temple. This was described as a “renewed heavens and earth,” “renewed or repaired covenant/relationship,” “renewed Spirit,” “renewed life and resurrection,” and “repaired city of Zion,” (Is. 65:17-25; Jer. 31:31-34; Ezek.37:1-14; Zech. 12). As Isaiah 40 shifts from judgment to restoration, Yahweh describes the process of renewing the people in exile as childbirth, healing from sin, forming a new city, and restoring nature (Isaiah 40-42).
Renewal and repair have always been the work of God, especially for those seeking forgiveness, healing, and transformation.
Unfortunately, the Greek word for new (kainos) failed to capture the diverse meanings of ChDSh. We have typically understood many passages in the New Testament gospels and letters to refer to “new” as “brand new” or “newly created.” In the book of Hebrews the writer tells the audience to listen and trust Jesus, who is the author of a “renewed covenant” (Heb. 3:7-11). Rather than interpreting this with New Testament context, we can understand the letter to state that the old covenant was broken when the people disobeyed God; yet Jesus offered a chance for forgiveness and renewed the relationship/covenant…by giving his own blood. In the Gospel of Luke, Jesus served a meal as a sign of this “renewed relationship through his blood” (Luke 22:20-22). Same relationship, same God, same humans…but repaired by the sacrifice of Jesus. The Apostle Paul encouraged Christians to be “renewed” by repenting of their sin and transforming their lives into the image of Jesus (Rom. 12:1-2; Eph. 4:17-5:20; Col. 3:9-10).
Through the resurrection of Jesus, we are “repaired,” “renewed,” and “rebuilt,” to live to the glory of God.
Same person, same relationship, same God…but rebuilt to live a different life.
Those of us who have planted churches understand this concept. We do not plant brand new churches, we learn from the best and rebuild ministries to serve those who live in our contexts. We preach and teach from old texts that repair lives both young and old. We reestablish relationships with people who remember the Jesus of their past, but who have lost touch with their first love and Savior. We guide people to see Jesus and reignite their passion through the Holy Spirit. Church planting restores relationships and lives in the image of the one who created all things new and repairs them when they are broken.
What will 2021 hold for our Kairos network? We hope that this year will bring change and healing. All kinds of people are asking all kinds of questions.
I encourage you to join us in considering renewal.
Easter 2021 will be April 4. What a perfect time to share how the resurrection of Jesus rebuilds lives. Your people, your community, and you personally need to experience repair.
I challenge you to dig through the Biblical text, look for themes of renewal, repair, and rebuilding. Share them with us, your churches, your family, and your community.
“Behold I renew all things…” Rev 21:5