Had dinner again tonight with my mate Owen. We try to catch up every Wednesday. We spent a lot of time tonight talking about what makes a true follower of Jesus.

This came in on the ‘reframe’ list just a few minutes back. What do you think?

After thinking and chatting with mates, here’s my question; you reckon if we basically facilitate mediocrity (makes Him puke) in the church, and don’t emphatically bring attention to what Jesus says in Mat25 (feed the poor, clothe the naked, visit those in jail”) that we are basically facilitating a road to hell? I know it’s pretty scary, but you think it’s true? I know most pastors probably love God, are great guys, and would be devastated to get to judgment day to have Jesus say, sorry, but you didn’t complete the actual assignment (even though the singing was nice).

Hmm” It’s a tough call” but then, I don’t reckon Jesus would be invited back to too many churches for a second preach…

Owen

Hmmm… what’s your point O?…

I was talking to a friend the other day when I said ‘I reckon a good metaphor for what I was doing in the established church is that of spinning plates – getting things going and then continually going back to keep the plates spinning.’

The metaphor that came to mind for the emerging missional scene was that of playing chicken – having the nerve to hold your line when you are tempted to bale.

A friend asked ‘so what is that object coming from the other way?’

What would you say?

Here’s a serious and fairly critical question I am pondering about how leadership looks in a pioneering context.

Is the primary role of the pioneering leader to:

a) Act as a catalyst and empower others to engage in missional activity that is in line with their calling and gifting. This will mean that ‘less happens’ unless people get it happening, but it also means that what does happen will flow from the hearts of the people who initiate it.

b) To seek out and start up initiatives that others can be ‘envisioned for’ and get on board with. This allows a go-getter to ‘go get em’, but its failing is that the go-getter could finish up spinning all the plates himself if no one else gets excited about any of the projects. Or he could go the route of guilting people into ‘serving God’ to keep them going

I realise we do both, but if you had to pick a primary

free cujo movie download role what would it be and why?

While there is no question that scripture was written in and for a specific cultural context, this is also a great card to play if some aspect of the Bible doesn’t suit us.

Don’t like wearing hats to church? Its ok girls cause it was cultural

Want to have a same sex marriage? Go for it. Paul was writing for his own culture. And t doesn’t apply to us now.

You know the drill”

I came across an interesting ‘cultural card’ in Bangkok last week however that I would value your reflections on. In most of the western world the way to deal with conflict between two people is in accordance with the Matthew 18 principle. Go your bro/sister, take a friend etc.

According to my friend Jeff, who we stayed with, In some parts of Asia the way to raise an issue is to tell a friend who tells a friend who then tells the person who you have issues with. And you deal with the issue thru these intermediaries.

When asked how they see this in light of Matthew 18, their response?…

Matt 18 is cultural and specific for those people at that time. Now I can’t see that at all, but I am product of my culture and I see things thru that lens!

Of course the question it raises at some point is what is authoritative and what is temporal and culturally bound? And if we have no good way of determining this (that isn’t culturally bound in itself) then is there anything in scripture we can really be bound by?

I’d be interested to hear from some Asian readers how they see this issue in particular, but also to hear some broader comments on the question that is at the core of it all.

How do we know what is and isn’t ‘cultural’?

Phil Parshall is well known for his C1-C6 contextualisation spectrum and its application to an Islamic context. However what would it mean for us to think in those terms for Oz?

Here’s

download super the divx

a summary of what its all about. Make sure you have a read of the different stages otherwise the rest of this post will not make sense!

My personal preference is to push the contextualisation boundaries further rather than lesser. I think we have almost always erred in the reverse direction, and tended towards extractional mission, so I am interested to see how far we can go to genuinely share the gospel and help people follow Jesus. While C6 is far from ideal, there is a definite option in C5 for Muslims to retain their cultural identity, worship in a messianic mosque and be a follower of Isa (Jesus).

One writer has put it like this:

C5 practitioners insist that-even as Paul argued tirelessly with Judaizers that Gentiles don’t have to convert to Judaism to follow Jesus-Muslims don’t have to convert to “Christianity” to follow Jesus. C5 believers surely are genuine disciples of Jesus (Acts 15:8,11), but they do not desire to align themselves with what they perceive as that godless Western institution called “Christianity,” where (from a Muslim perspective) homosexuals enter the clergy, immodest women worship in scantily clad summer dresses, and people put their Holy Scriptures on the floor right next to their dirty shoes.

I wonder what this might mean for us?…

Do people need to become Christians to follow Jesus?…

In The Message 1 Cor 9: 22-23 Paul speaks about his own understanding of contextualisation and says this :

I didn’t take on their way of life. I kept my bearings in Christ–but I entered their world and tried to experience things from their point of view. I’ve become just about every sort of servant there is in my attempts to lead those I meet into a God-saved life. I did all this because of the Message. I didn’t just want to talk about it; I wanted to be in on it!

I’m not sure I like the expression ‘I didn’t take on their way of life’ although I know what he’s trying to say. I do like the phrase ‘kept my bearings in Christ’. The NIV says it a little better I reckon…

I have become all things to all men so that by all possible means I might save some. I do all this for the sake of the gospel, that I may share in its blessings.

When it comes to contextualising the gospel the reality is that sometimes we will get it wrong. If you choose to live on the edge occasionally you will fall off. I’m happy to take the risk because I feel like I do have my ‘bearings in Christ’ pretty well established. I don’t fear being any more syncretistic than I already am. (Yes – I am sycretistic and you are probably are too when you look at what you mix with Jesus to bring you ‘salvation’. Its just easier to see other culture’s sycretisms! )

Syncretism and compromise is a risk inherent in incarnational missional engagement. The other option of course is to come with our own form of ‘Christianity’ and impose that on people.

I find myself wondering, why is it ok for overseas missionaries to push the contextualisation boundaries, but not for us? Yesterday I suggested to our local Baptist newspaper don t answer the phone divx that they might want to do a story on some friends of ours (John and Angie – missionaries to muslims in Africa) alongside ourselves, because these guys are the people we find we have most in common with. It might help others here in WA better grasp the thrust of what we are trying to do.

The vast majority of Australian churches still operate at a C1-C3 level, and I am wondering what a C4/5 expression of faith would look like – a more indigenous way of living the gospel in Oz.

What implications might this have for mission in the burbs?

I wonder if we might need to accept some radical (yet biblical) ecclesiology where the need to gather weekly in one place is replaced with a strong relational connection that allows us to ‘be church’ with each other but doesn’t make us ‘do church’? What I mean by that specifically is that as people come to faith they would be connected into the church community but they may only be connected to one or two other families. They may be followers of Jesus who never go to a church gathering as we experience it, but they may ‘gather’ when they meet with other Christians be it only for dinner or coffee.

Will that be understood?

Is that a C4/5 approach to Oz?

Of course it raises some difficult questions, like ‘how would you take an offering in that kind of setting?… ‘

Scott

download christie s revenge dvdrip

is looking to run a very creative and challenging forum looking at Future Church.

The deal is that 16 people prepare 500 word papers on 8 key questions – for each question there is a person who will come from one angle and a person who will from a very different angle (not necessarily opposing viewpoints).

The group who rock in on the morning will decide which 3 topics recieve highest priority for the day and these get discussed. The rest are left – although the papers get distributed.

So far the topics on the day look like being :

What is Church?

Finance and Stewardship of Resources

Success and how it’s measured

Appropriate forums to effect change

Leadership and its many expressions

Incarnational / attractional mission

Does ‘ future church ‘ include Youth/Kids ministry?

Discipleship – The Jesus Way

There are quite a few there I have some interest in so I’m going to make it a priority to be there on the day. I’ll be writing on one of the topics, but not sure exactly what just yet. As I was chatting with Scott today and he read me the list of topics and people he hoped to have speaking to them I told him he was starting to sound like a fight promoter. These are contentious issues in a lot of places. Scott actually said he was seeing it as an opportunity to promote unity as we listen to each other and understand each other.

There aren’t many people who could pull this kind of gig off but Scott is one of them. I like the idea and the courage to bring so many differing opinions together to listen and debate.

If you’re interested then let Scott know. The details are:

Tue 16th August

10am – 3.30pm Located at South Perth Church of Christ

Cost $5 ( to cover light lunch )

This is a question I often get asked.

As we explore new forms of church what will happen to our kids?

What if there is no Sunday School or youth group? This morning I met with Scott who serves as my ministry coach and amongst many valuable things we discussed was this question of how we raise our kids to love Jesus and to be real followers of his.

While we (Scott and I) have obviously made it thru the current system, the reality is that many many do not go beyond Sunday School or youth group. I can’t remember the exact figures but I think an NZ study showed the attrition rate to be as high as 80%.

Is this a failure of the church?

I don’t think its so much a failure of the church as perhaps failure of the family and a fact that the Jesus way is a narrow way. No matter how ‘well’ we do with our kids some will choose not to love and follow Jesus.

One of my favourite cartoons from Youthworker journal is a picture of a young person being carted off to jail by the police while parents stand there lamenting ‘where did our youth pastor go wrong?!’ In our conversation this morning we discussed the possibility that the absence of Jesus from the everyday rhtyms of family life and conversation is probably much more of a contributor to adolescent drop off than the church’s poor discipling or the absence of a youth group.

This does put responsibility for discipling squarely in the hands of the parents – where it belongs. It is not a youth pastor’s role to disciple my kids or your kids. That’s our alien movie job. Youth pastors can assist, but they are very much secondary to a healthy family where Jesus is present, visible and honoured.

I wonder if for some parents to talk about Jesus is on a par with talking about sex? Its kind of awkward and they don’t know where to start. This is possibly also generational.

We have made it a practice to talk about Jesus with our kids as openly and as regularly as we can. Its one of our favourite topics. As a person who loves to talk about Jesus anyway I am always excited when Ellie wants to talk about him. I am hopeful that as we make this an integral part of life that really good discipling will occur. If discipling is about ‘doing life together’ then there is no better setting than with our kids who watch us every day and who see what really happens in our lives.

Maybe a key to the next generation of young people and children becoming disciples is in equipping parents to think about discipleship differently and to call them to a much more engaged family spirituality.

(And if you’re wondering if the ‘timestamp’ on this post is correct… it is… I fell asleep on the couch at 7.30 for two hours and now I am wide awake…)

Might go and change the oil in the car…

I am an unashamed fan of Paul!

I am amazed at his church planting activities and inspired by his courage and passion. He is one my great heroes and I read Acts regularly. This week I was asking again ‘how did he do it?’

You see when we first came to Brighton I came saying we will probably be here 3-5 years and then we’ll go do the same thing somewhere else and then do it again etc. That was the original plan. Recently someone asked me how long I think we will be here now and I said 5-10 years is much more in the line of sight – and that’s if we ever leave…

And then I started thinking…

If we stay too long surely we run the risk of setting up a ‘control’ system that Roland Allen would say is the death of a church’s multiplying ability?… What ought we do?…

What was the longest Paul stayed anywhere? I think it was Ephesus where he spent two years. He was a hit and run kinda bloke. Steve has described him as a ‘catalytic’ church planter.

I don’t see many of them around these days. I’m not sure that I am one of them either.

As I read Acts this week I have been reflecting on some factors that might affect the different pace at which we do things:

Gifting – Paul was a rare beast. No question about it. Strong leadership gift, incredible intellect, high teaching ability. He was suited to itinerant stuff. I can’t think of anyone like him in my own city.

Historical Setting – I wonder what impact it had being so close to the whole Christ event? I wonder if there was a buzz in the air and if it was hot news and therefore a bit easier to speak to, or at least the topic was up for grabs?

Cultural Setting – Paul speaks of himself as the apostle to the gentiles yet almost everywhere he goes he first of all heads off to the synagogue. He goes there and makes public presentations of his teaching to those who are up for listening. I reckon this is an advantage – being able to have a public forum to fire up debate. In Athens where he didn’t have a synagogue he used the Areopagus. Paul definitely used his communciation skills to evoke some debate about the gospel. Paul didn’t seem all that committed to slow relational engagement. He was more of a spruik it out there and then deal with the conversation that it produces kind of bloke. I identify with this kind of apologetic evangelism, but I wonder do we have these forums anywhere? In middle class family land I don’t think they exist. Most people are too busy to get into something like this, or just plain disinterested.

Paul did seem to see converts everywhere he went. He was very clear about calling people to follow Christ and to accept the reality of his death and resurrection for them.

He had some fairly significant biffo in a few places because of his open and forthright approach, even to the point of getting beaten and run out of town.

Are we too soft in our approach to evangelism?

Are we too concerned to be ‘effective missionaries’ and not concerned enough to actually speak the truth of the gospel to those we live amongst?

One thing is for sure. I don’t think we could ever say we have established a church in a place if there are no new Christians. Until there are a good pile of them I’d say we will be staying put no matter what.

“Every moment and every situation challenges us to action and to obedience. We have literally no time to sit down and ask ourselves whether so-and-so is our neighbour or not. We must get into action and obey — we must behave like a neighbour to him. But perhaps this shocks you. Perhaps you still think you ought to think out beforehand and know what you ought to do. To that, there is only one answer. You can only know and think about it by actually doing it. It is no use asking questions; for it is only through obedience that you come to learn the truth.”
Oscar Romero

How about that?

‘You can only know and think about it by actually doing it…’

‘It is only thru obedience that you come to learn the truth…’

Is Romero suggesting that we learn as we ‘do’ rather than learning before we ‘do’? I wonder how that would transform our educative process if we took that approach?

I actually believe there is significant truth for us to hear in that quote. It may not always be true, but it is probably true way more often that it would currently appear to be in our churches.

This bloke has some great things to say on thinking and living like a missionary here in the first world.

Phillip has written some great stuff on New Age / alternative spiritualities and was a great help to us when we put a stall in our own local healing festival.

His latest post is a great image of contextualised Chinese Christ images. Phil says:

"New Zealanders and Australians might like to reflect on "how to de-Europeanise Jesus in our south-western Pacific contexts". In what ways does a Europeanised version of Jesus need to be renovated for today’s Europe? How does globalisation impact on our images and depictions of Jesus?"

Here he is calling Zacchaeus.