They felt we had nothing to give them
A friend of mine sent me the following quote from an article called “Anachronism and Adventurism: Recent Mission Trends“:
Most of the volunteers I have observed in the Dominican Republic and elsewhere have arrived on the field with the desire to work with, not for, the nationals. However, many volunteers lack even minimal cross- cultural sensitivity or knowledge of their own denomination’s understanding of mission. Such people are apt to repeat the mistakes of the past. On one occasion a group of American evangelical volunteers traveled to Barahona to spend two weeks “working with the youth.” After they returned to the U.S. I asked the president of our youth group what he thought of the volunteers’ work. He replied: “They said that they had come to us with a mission, but they took no time to understand our mission. They should have come to share with us. It’s as though they felt we had nothing to give them. They spent a lot of time on the beach handing out tracts and lying in the sun. Evidently this made them feel good.”
This is a good admonishment and warning to anyone attempting to work with people from other cultures. However, I think this warning also applies to those who are seeking to minister to people within their own cultural context.
Do you think it applies? How?
We were your apostles – Ethiopia Report 1
This is the first official report that I’ve published on my blog about our recent trip to Ethiopia. For the last few days, Danny (from “learning…“) and I have been putting together pictures and videos in preparation for a presentation report to our church yesterday.
It was important to me to make a report to our church before I reported to everyone else via the web. Why? Well, because, through the work of the Holy Spirit, the church sent us as their representatives to the church and people in Alaba, Ethiopia.
Our church has been involved with the church in Alaba for several years. A few years ago, someone gave us a large amount of money. As we were praying and trying to decide what to do with this money, several suggestions were offered: buy or build a building, buy some land, pay a pastor, etc. At the time, we were all still struggling with our understanding of the church and the role and function of the church and church leaders.
About a week after we received the money, Dave and BeckyLynn Black visited with us and told us about their work in Ethiopia. After further prayer and discussion, we decided to give the money to the church in Alaba so that they could buy a truck. The truck would be used to carry people and supplies as needed. It would also be used as an ambulance to carry sick or wounded people to Addis for medical attention. (By the way, we used the truck while we were in Ethiopia.)
The next year, the Black’s returned to our church and invited us to go to Ethiopia with them. Several of us wanted to go. I especially wanted to go. But, the timing was not right, and we felt that God was not directing us on this trip. However, we continued to support their work and pray for them and the people of Ethiopia, especially the church in Alaba.
Last fall, the Black’s again returned to our church. Again, they invited us to go with them. Twelve people indicated that they were interested, but the Black’s could only take a few. So, after much prayer and consideration, Danny and I were chosen (by God and by the church, I think) to go to Ethiopia.
You see, in reality, we went both as God’s representatives and as representatives of Messiah Baptist Church, a people who already love and prayed for the church in Alaba, Ethiopia. We were apostles (messengers) to the church in Alaba from our church (Messiah Baptist Church).
During our first few days in Ethiopia, Danny and I discussed this passage from Philippians:
I have thought it necessary to send to you Epaphroditus my brother and fellow worker and fellow soldier, and your messenger and minister to my need, for he has been longing for you all and has been distressed because you heard that he was ill. Indeed he was ill, near to death. But God had mercy on him, and not only on him but on me also, lest I should have sorrow upon sorrow. I am the more eager to send him, therefore, that you may rejoice at seeing him again, and that I may be less anxious. So receive him in the Lord with all joy, and honor such men, for he nearly died for the work of Christ, risking his life to complete what was lacking in your service to me. (Philippians 2:25-30 ESV)
No, neither Danny nor I came close to dying. But, like Epaphroditus, we were sent as messengers (apostles) by our church. I’m sure that many, many more members of our church would love to have gone to Ethiopia to love on and care for and teach and learn from their brothers and sisters in Alaba. But, they could not all go. So, they all sent Danny and me “to complete what was lacking” in their own service and love for the people of Alaba.
We were their apostles… their messengers to the church in Alaba, Ethiopia. And throughout our trip we continually reminded ourselves and the people that we met that we represented many, many people who loved the people of Alaba.
Here are a couple of videos of the main church in Alaba and the Zobechame church in Alaba sending their greetings back to our church in America.
Alaba Church #1 sending their greetings back to the church in America from Alan Knox on Vimeo.
Zobechame Church in Alaba sending their greetings back to the church in America from Alan Knox on Vimeo.
Removing Stones
You won’t find many story-tellers better than “Strider” at “Tales from Middle Earth.” His latest story is called “Picking Up Stones.”
In this true story (with names changed), Strider tells of gospel proclamation through showing the “Jesus” film as well as personal interaction, and gospel demonstration through digging wells.
I love the way he weaves the theme of “picking up stones” through the story. There are the stones they must be removed in order to dig the well deep enough, but there are also spiritual stones that would keep people from believing the good news of Jesus Christ.
Could it be that removing the physical stones is helping to remove the spiritual stones? Read his story, and see what you think.
Duplicating what God Created
Over the last few days, I’ve had conversations with different people around the idea of “duplicating what God created.” We didn’t call it that, and never used those words, but that was the point of our discussions.
What do I mean?
Well, as humans, we tend to be methodical. When we see something that “works,” we tend to want to re-created it… duplicating the systems and processes that seemed to produce the result. Often, we get good results. This works well in the scientific fields. But, in sociological fields – i.e., where people are involved – usually the “duplicates” fall short of the original.
Why? Well, simply put, because people are involved, and people are different from place to place and time to time.
This works into our church life as well. Perhaps a group of believers get together, and they make a huge impact on their community. People study this group of believers, and produce a system with the same activities and programs and ministries and leadership structure, etc. But, they don’t get the same results.
Why not? Because the people involved are different. The context is different. The gifts and opportunities are different.
Perhaps this is why we do not see a clear picture of what the church “looked like” in Scripture. If God gave us a clear picture of what the church looked like in Jerusalem, then many would try to duplicate it. If we had a clear understanding of how the church met in Thessalonika, then others would try to create the same kind of meeting. This kind of duplication will not work, because the people involved (i.e. the church) is different.
So, instead of giving a clear picture of what our church meetings should “look like” or how leadership should be structured, or what ministries we should pursue, we’re given different types of information. Whatever we do should be in love. However we meet, we should edify one another. Wherever we go and whatever we do and whoever leads us, we do so as family.
If we take these kinds of “normative” principles with us, it will not matter (as much) what the church meeting ultimately looks like, or how the leaders operate, or what kinds of ministries we pursue. And, we will recognize that while our meetings, leadership, and ministries may look different than another group’s, our goals and purposes are the same.
We will only be concerned when we find love missing, or mutual edification lacking, or family identification nullified. Then we will seek to rectify the problems… not because of wrong activities.
While we will rejoice about how God works among a group of believers, we will not jump at the “next big thing” that comes along, trying to force another group of believers into a mold created by different people.
Instead, we will be comfortably uncomfortable allowing God to create what he wants to create, with the people that he brings together, using the gifts and talents and opportunities that he gives them. And, we will recognize that it’s okay (and even expected) that we don’t look like another group of believers or that God is working differently in and through us.
And, we will happily refuse to try to duplicate what God may be creating somewhere else or at a different time or among a different group of people. Instead, we will focus on loving, edifying, caring, making disciples, and evangelizing the world as God has given us gifts, talents, opportunities, ministries, and resources.
Like a Charging Rhino
Dave Black’s latest essay “Rhino Evangelism” is an admonishment away from “impersonal approaches to the Gospel” and towards “loving” those we wish to hear the good news of Jesus Christ.
Is Dave against spontaneous or confrontational evangelism? Of course not, as long as the one proclaiming the gospel truly loves and cares for the other person/people. While the gospel will be a stumbling block and divisive, that doesn’t mean that the way we interact with people needs to be a stumbling block or divisive.
As Dave says:
The greatest danger of confrontational evangelism is that along with toughening our hides we harden our hearts. I urge all of us who share Jesus’ love with others to let our Christ-like actions speak as loud as our words. You lose nothing by protecting the dignity of non-believers. In fact, you may even gain a friend — and ultimately a brother or sister in Christ.
So, when you approach someone with the gospel, approach with the love of Christ, not like a charging rhino.
Missional Stew
Two years ago, as part of a synchroblog with 50 other bloggers, I wrote a post called “Missional Stew.” The purpose of the synchroblog was to flesh out a definition of the term “missional.” For my post, I simply threw in a few ingredients that I think are necessary for a true missional stew. What do you think?
—————————————————
Rick at “The Blind Beggar” suggested a synchroblog to discuss the definition of the term “missional” (see his post “Call for Missional Synchroblog“). To be honest, I don’t know how much I’ll be able to add to this discussion. I’ve only recently begun to consider the meaning and implications of being missional. However, I’m looking forward to reading the other posts, and I encourage my readers to read and consider what other people are saying about the term “missional”.
When I was growing up, the “regional” airport in a large city near us decided that it wanted to steal some of the air traffic away from ATL (Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport). Over several years, there were studies and consultants and budgets and votes. Eventually, the airport made a huge decision – they decided to change their name from “regional airport” to “international airport” – as if changing the name would change who they were.
I think many followers of Jesus Christ may be attempting to add “missional” to whatever they already doing. But, adding the label “missional” to their meetings and programs does not make them missional. So, what does “missional” mean?
Several bloggers will be posting and defending their definitions of the term “missional”. To be completely honest, I don’t know exactly what it means. Instead of offering my own definition of “missional”, I thought I would throw a few ingredients into the stew (so to speak). In other words, whatever “missional” means or how “missional” is applied to someone’s life, I think it should include these things (not a comprehensive list):
Gospel: “Missional” is dependent upon the Gospel – the good news of Jesus Christ. I’m not talking about a “gospel presentation”. I’m talking about living a life that is reconciled to God through the finished work of Jesus Christ and the continuing work of his Spirit. It means recognizing that just as God has reconciled us to himself, he desires to reconcile “all things” to himself.
Relationship: “Missional” is relational. I don’t see any other way around it. God includes his children in his mission toward other people. It is a relational mission – both relationship with God and relationship with one another and relationship to the world.
Intentionality: “Missional” requires intentionality. I do not see how someone can be accidentally missional. This does not mean that missional activities are always pre-planned – they can be spontaneous. But, spontaneous acts of mission can still be intentional.
Cost: “Missional” is costly. This does not mean that you are being missional by only giving money. However, it does mean that living a missional life will cost you money, time, and energy, among other things. It may even cost your reputation (especially among religious types).
Love: When I originally wrote this post a couple of weeks ago, I did not include “love” as an ingredient in my missional stew. Why? Because I thought “love” was obvious. However, after further thought, I think “love” needs to be a part of any definition of “missional” – both the love of God and the love of others – both the love of other believers and the love of those who are not followers of Jesus.
Like I said earlier, I’m looking forward to reading more posts that actually define the term “missional”. I hope that many of them include some of these ideas.
Broken
On Sundays, we’ve started studying through Genesis together. Yesterday, I taught and led a discussion on Genesis chapters 3 and 4. While the first two chapters of Genesis focused on creation (and specifically the creation of mankind and the special relationship between mankind and God and between man and woman), by the time we get to chapters 3 and 4, we find out why our world is broken.
The brokenness that begins in chapter 3 affects everything in our life. In fact, apart from Adam and Eve and Jesus, no one else in Scripture (or history) knows what it means to live without sin. But, in the cases of Adam and Eve, they were affected by sin. And, even Jesus had to live within a world that was broken by sin.
In fact, the brokenness of this world not only affects our life, but affects the way that we see everything else (much like looking through a shattered window). Even when we read chapters 1 and 2 of Genesis (and the last few chapters of Revelation), our understanding is limited by our own brokenness and our perspective which is clouded by sin.
Of course, in spite of the brokenness of this world, we have been re-created by Christ and we have been reconciled to God and to one another. This is the great plan and mission of God that also begins to be unfolded in Genesis 3. Now that we have been reconciled to God by Christ, we have also been given the service of reconciliation.
We cannot reconcile other people to God, nor can we reconcile other people to one another. But, God has chosen to work through us to present his message of reconciliation.
Yes, the world is broken, but God has reconciled and is reconciling the world to himself through Christ. As his ambassadors, we should always consider how we are representing God and presenting his reconciliation to the world.
Servant of the Gospel
A couple of times, Paul calls himself a “servant” of the gospel:
Of this gospel I was made a minister according to the gift of God’s grace, which was given me by the working of his power. (Ephesians 3:7 ESV)
He has now reconciled in his body of flesh by his death, in order to present you holy and blameless and above reproach before him, if indeed you continue in the faith, stable and steadfast, not shifting from the hope of the gospel that you heard, which has been proclaimed in all creation under heaven, and of which I, Paul, became a minister. (Colossians 1:22-23)
Now, in these passages, the ESV translates the word for “servant” as “minister.” But, the words mean the same thing.
Paul saw himself as a servant of the good news of Jesus Christ.
What does it mean for Paul to be a servant of the gospel? Is this service specific to Paul? Is it specific to a certain sub-group of Christ’s followers (i.e. apostles, evangelists)? Or, are all believers to be servants of the gospel?
Am I willing to go “back to square one”?
Sometimes I like to read Dave Black’s blog posts. Sometimes I don’t. I haven’t decided how I feel about one of his latest entries (Today, Wednesday, April 21, 2010 at 4:30 p.m.):
I realize that many of my readers are committed to following Jesus and His model for the church, yet we seem to get bogged down in the practical application of biblical truth. What would happen if we went back to square one? What if we recalibrated our thinking so that The Cause of Causes (the Gospel) became the main passion of our lives? If and when we put Jesus first – being His hands and feet in the world, offering even our enemies a warm embrace in His name, being willing to engage in Dangerous Discipleship – don’t you think that everything else in terms of church reformation would fall into place? The real problem in our churches is not that we are mired down in traditions. The real tragedy is that we have gotten our eyes off of the world for whom Jesus died. For instance, if we really believed that there are over one billion lost souls in this world who have never even heard about Jesus, then we would automatically begin rethinking how we spent the Lord’s money. Do we really need those Sunday School curriculum booklets? The answer is “Yes” if we put our church first. The answer may well be “No” if we consider the needs of the world. Calibrating our church budgets in light of the mandate to evangelize the whole world takes the focus off of ourselves and our comfort and spotlights the crying and dying needs of others. Moreover, a missional focus takes our eyes off of “our” kind – our churches, our denominations, our missionary programs – and unleashes holy havoc across the world as we intentionally adopt a cooperative model of serving King Jesus and building His kingdom of love.
Yeah I know, none of this is news to you. But that’s part of the problem. We so easily forget first things and make second things first things. So let’s rethink our church structures and priorities, not because someone tells us to, not because “the denomination says so,” but because Jesus calls us to radical, scandalous love for the nations! Praise God for the work He is doing in the hearts of His people in North America who are beginning to reach outside of themselves in order to make disciples of the nations. Think about it. When the church acted like this in the days of Acts, the entire culture was changed. The Holy Spirit is a pyro at heart and wants to set us ablaze with the Gospel wherever we go in this world. May God raise up a new generation of passionate and compassionate Jesus followers in our generation. And wherever we go and whatever we do, may we preach The Cause of Causes and its Savior more than we preach anything or anyone else.
I mean, he’s absolutely right. I’m not struggling with this because I disagree with it (mentally), but because I’m not living it.
Teaching them… what?
So… consider these two phrases:
- … teaching them what I commanded you…
- … teaching them to do what I commanded you…
Which one reflects a portion of the Great Commission?
What is the difference between the two phrases?
What does this say about teaching?