Some people need to lighten up about the Great Commission
Yeah, it’s true. Some people need to lighten up. Did you read what Dave Black said about the Great Commission? (Sunday, April 18, 2010 at 7:57 a.m.)
The Great Commission is the church’s marching orders. Period. It sums up the mission of every individual follower of Jesus and every believing family and every church and every Christian organization. It even sums up our marriages. The first task of every Christian is to extend the kingdom of Christ among every people group in the world. Everything else must be subordinate to that purpose.
That’s so all-encompassing.
[sarcasm]Is compromise really that bad? I mean, everything in moderation, right? I went to church today, isn’t that enough? I even gave to foreign missions. Sheesh… it’s like he expects me to be a missionary.[/sarcasm]
It’s so much easier being a cultural Christians than it is to really follow Jesus Christ.
Great Commission for us?
Last Sunday, when we discussed the Great Commission passage from Matthew 28:18-20, I asked whether this command (“make disciples”) was only intended for the eleven apostles or if it was also intended for us and all other disciples of Jesus Christ? There were two good reasons to see this command as intended for all disciples (including us).
First, Jesus told the elven to make disciples by “teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you.” “All that I have commanded you” would include this command to “make disciples.” Thus, the eleven were supposed to teach their disciples to make disciples.
Second, Jesus promised that he would be with them “all the days” (or always). This promise is related to the command “make disciples.” Thus, it would seem that Jesus would intend for “making disciples” to be carried out until the end of time.
What do you think? Was the Great Commission just for the 11 apostles, for all disciples (including us), or for a subset of disciples? Why?
Sending and Re-Sending
Last Saturday, I published my translation of Philippians 2:25-30. In this paragraph, Paul tells the Philippians why he chose to send this letter via Epaphroditus. Epaphroditus had originally come to Paul both bearing a financial gift from the church in Philippi (see Philippians 4:18) and for the purpose of helping Paul (see Philippians 2:30).
In this short passage, there is a very interesting use of various terms that mean “sent”.
For example, Paul begins by saying that he is sending Epaphroditus and also calling him the Philippians’ own apostle (“one who is sent”) (see Philippians 2:25). Next, Paul once again says that he is “sendin” Epaphroditus (see Philippians 2:28).
Thus, Paul describes Epaphroditus as a double-apostle. First, he was sent by the Philippians, and now he is being sent by Paul. (Remember, both the term “apostle” comes from one of the Greek verbs for “send”. Similarly, the word “mission” or “missionary” comes from the Latin verb for “send”.)
But, I think there is something else that we can learn from this passage. This related to the perspective of the church (and Paul) on the purpose of apostles.
At the end of this passage, we see Paul’s understanding of why the Philippians sent Epaphroditus in the first place: “so that he might take the place of your own service for me” (see Philippians 2:30). So, the Philippians themselves could not all leave their homes and places of business in order to help Paul, so they “sent” someone (an “apostle”) in order to serve Paul in ways that they could not. Similarly, Paul is now sending Epaphroditus back to the Philippians because he cannot go himself. So, Epaphroditus can now serve the Philippians in Paul’s absence.
Thus, one reason that a church would send someone (“an apostle”) to another location is because of their desire to serve the people in that location. But, they are not all able to travel to that location to perform that service. So, they send someone as their representative (“apostle”).
So, seeing how Paul views Epaphroditus as “sent” by the church in Philippi and now doubly-sent by him can help us understand the relationship between the church, their apostle, and the person/people in the area where the apostle goes.
Holding a clipboard directing the servants
Recently, I saw an TV show that demonstrated the difference in leadership – that is, between the leaders of this world and the leaders in God’s kingdom. (see Matthew 20:25-28, Mark 10:42-45, Luke 22:25-27)
In this show, a lady was coming to a work site to help someone out. As she approached the site, there was a man with a clipboard directing other people as they hurried about doing their work. The lady walked up to the man with the clipboard, asking what she should do.
In this world’s way of looking at things, the man with the clipboard directing the others is the leader.
But, in God’s way of looking at things, the ones who were working the hardest serving others were the leaders.
In the world’s way of looking at things, the woman correctly picked the leader. She asked the leader what to do, and he directed her actions.
In God’s way of looking at things, the woman should have looked for the hardest workers and start following their example, serving as they serve.
In other words, for the church, the leader is not the one holding the clipboard directing the activities of others. Instead, the leaders are the ones working the hardest to serve other people.
Who are we following?
Working together to serve others
I haven’t written about our friends in “the Neighborhood” lately. We met Mrs. WÂ in the neighborhood almost two years ago. At first, we had a hard time talking to her. It wasn’t that she was mean or anything, but she just wasn’t very talkative. Eventually, though, after visiting with her week after week for over a year, she started talking to us. She tells us about her life growing up around Wake Forest and about her family.
But, in all the times that we’ve visited her, she would never let us do anything for her. Even when we raked leaves for other neighbors, she said that she wanted to rake her own leaves. And, that was cool, because she likes to be outdoors and that’s about the only exercise she gets.
Just before Christmas, she mentioned that she was having a hard time cleaning her apartment. Her family had been helping her, but they didn’t clean like she wanted. She never asked us to clean her apartment, but one afternoon Margaret (my wife), Miranda (my daughter), and another lady cleaned her apartment. (see my post “Wednesday Afternoon Worship Service“)
Last Saturday, when we were talking to Mrs. W, Margaret didn’t even ask if she wanted her apartment cleaned again. She simply told Mrs. W that she wanted to clean her apartment again. The next day, Margaret asked if anyone would like to help her clean Mrs. W’s apartment.
So, this morning, Margaret, Miranda, three other ladies, and one of their daughters cleaned Mrs. W’s apartment again.
I appreciate their example of working together to serve others!
Partners in the Good News
In Philippians 1:5, Paul thanks God for those in Philippi who were partners with him in the task of proclaiming the good news of Jesus Christ! The word “partner” and the idea of “fellowship” (same word in this case) are very important to Paul and the other authors of the New Testament.
I’m planning to go to Ethiopia this summer as part of a group led by Dave and BeckyLynn Black. One of the things that I’ve been struggling with over the last few weeks in how to go to Ethiopia as a partner, not as a specialist. How can I go in a way that engenders mutual learning, fellowship, and discipleship?
While I’m continuing to work out these issues, I was excited to read Dave Black’s latest essay called “Missions as Partnership.” Here is one paragraph:
Becky and I view our relationship with the Ethiopian churches as a partnership. Indeed, partnership is a very important word to us. Daniel Rickett, in his book Building Strategic Relationships: A Practical Guide to Partnering with Non-Western Missions (p. 1), defines partnership as “a complementary relationship driven by a common purpose and sustained by a willingness to learn and grow together in obedience to God.” Such is our desire everywhere we go in Ethiopia. Our goal is to establish partnerships between autonomous bodies in the U.S. and Ethiopia. This is one reason we prefer to work at the local church level rather than at the denominational level. A parallel commitment of ours is to develop a sense of interdependence among the churches we work with both in the States and in the Horn of Africa. We might call our work a joint venture between full partners.
This is very much in line with my study of mutuality. I am very excited about partnering together with brothers and sisters in Ethiopia. Not only do I hope and expect to help the churches of Alaba, Ethiopia, I also expect the churches of Alaba, Ethiopia to help me and the churches in my area. It’s a partnership.
Righteous deeds: dirty rags or sacrifice of praise?
When Paul was writing to the Philippians, he said that he counts everything as “rubbish” or “dirty rags” (for the full contexts see Philippians 3:1-11):
But whatever gain I had, I counted as loss for the sake of Christ. Indeed, I count everything as loss because of the surpassing worth of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord. For his sake I have suffered the loss of all things and count them as rubbish, in order that I may gain Christ … (Philippians 3:7-8 ESV)
The author of Hebrews presents another view of our righteous acts:
Through him then let us continually offer up a sacrifice of praise to God, that is, the fruit of lips that acknowledge his name. Do not neglect to do good and to share what you have, for such sacrifices are pleasing to God. (Hebrews 13:15-16 ESV)
So, are our righteous deeds dirty rags or sacrifices of praise that are pleasing to God?
Among you and for your sakes
This is from Dave Black’s blog this morning (Saturday, February 13, 2010 at 6:45 am):
In Greek 4 we’re going through 1 Thessalonians. The last line on this page of my Greek New Testament is 1 Thess. 1:5, where Paul says “You know what kind of people we were among you for your sakes.”
These two brief prepositional phrases pack a wallop: “Among you,” “for your sakes.” What a vast area of thought that opens up! This was Paul’s missionary method and motivation. He did everything “among the people,” not from the outside (or from above). He did everything on their behalf, not for his own benefit. I must learn from Paul. I must live among the people when I am in Ethiopia — not above them or beyond them. And I must make sure that they know I am there to serve them, not myself.
Yes, yes. “Among you” and “for your sakes”… but not just for the people in Ethiopia, or other people “over there.”
What about the people you work with everyday? What about your neighbors? What about the people that you meet with every week? Do they know what kind of person (i.e., a child of God) you are because they way you act when you are “among them” is “for their sakes” – i.e., to serve them and for their benefit?
Lunch Partner
My wife and I had lunch with another couple. After lunch, one of our lunch partners said something like this:
It doesn’t matter how much we study the trinity, we will never understand it. And, continuing to study the trinity isn’t going to help the young girl on the corner to stop selling herself to get drug money.
Gathering or Going?
If we read the narrative of Scripture as a whole (Old Testament and New Testament), we’ll see examples of God’s people gathering together and examples of God’s people going out.
I’ve been wondering lately, where should our focus be? Obviously, both gathering and going are important to the individual follower Jesus Christ and to the church. I agree with the Anabaptists that every disciple is both an ordained missionary and an ordained minister (servant).
But, should one (gathering or going) have a higher priority in our lives? Should this focus be different individually than corporately (as a group)? How would we (individually and corporately) demonstrate this priority?