Miguel Labrador's Blog, page 17

You Mean To Tell Me That We’re Supposed Let The Unconverted Into Church?

Charles Spurgeon in his book: The Soul-Winner : or How to Lead Sinners to the Saviour, said

“To introduce unconverted persons to the church, is to weaken and degrade it; and therefore an apparent gain may be a real loss.”

 

Andy Stanley, in his book: Deep & Wide: Creating Churches Unchurched People Love to Attend, said

“It’s a shame that so many churches are married to a designed-by-Christians-for-Christians-only culture.”

 

So, which is it?  Are we supposed to let the unconverted into church or not?

 Or, is there a different question we should be asking?

 
CommentsI've got to wholeheartedly disagree here Wes. These are the ... by David WoodsI'd say, in a perfect world, the pews would be full of the ... by David WoodsWhat did Charles Spurgeon mean by church? by PeterThe church must have very clear boundaries for those who are ... by Wes JamesIf you view church as primarily revolving around weekly ... by Mark GuinnPlus 3 more...Related StoriesRevival or Outburst?Does Church Structure Imply Authoritative Leadership?Vertical Missional Myopia

Some Things You Might Have Overlooked In The Great Commission.

In order to Make Disciples, you must:

Listen to Jesus before you receive and act on the Commission to Make Disciples.

Matthew 28:16 ~ “Then the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain where Jesus had told them to go.”

Accept that you may be a Disciple (Student/Learner/Follower) anywhere on the scale from Adoration to Doubt.

Matthew 28:17 ~ “When they saw him, they worshiped him; but some doubted.”

Understand that it is because Jesus received all authority that He was empowered to commission the eleven and all subsequent generations of believers (including you) to Make Disciples. In fact, it was His first command after receiving that authority and His last before ascending.

Matthew 28:18 ~ Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.

That listening, accepting, and understanding opens the door to the “therefore.”  That “Therefore Faith” starts with:

Going – An imperative (something you must do actively) It carries both the sense of “go” and “while you’re going.”  It is never one over the other or apart from the other.  It’s only becomes passive in the sense of “while you’re at it,” after you have already become active in it.  It’s putting the commission into motion.  Motion is a prerequisite to Mission.  The Mission is Making Disciples.  You can’t make anything without moving.  ”For in him we live and move and have our being.” Acts 17:28

Matthew 28:19a ~ “Therefore go”

Make Disciples!  Jesus told the eleven and you by way of a transgenerational command to Make Disciples.  It is an inescapable logical loop command whereby any true disciple of Jesus will make other disciples of Jesus because it is one of the commands which must be obeyed/observed.

 Matthew 28:19b “and make disciples”

Of all ethnic groups.  The word “nations,” can mean ethnic groups, nations, races of people, heathens, Gentiles, or anyone outside of God’s people. (Unsaved)  Be careful about assuming that once every nation-state has heard the Gospel, that the end will come.  See Colossians 1:23

Matthew 28:19c “of all nations”

Baptizing them.  It is possible that water baptism is not what is being spoken of here, but highly unlikely.  You may leave a comment below regarding this if you wish.  Regardless, immersion into the the Name of the Father, the Name of the Son, and the Name of the Holy Spirit is crucial.  Baptism in water or otherwise signifies coming into the “possession” of another (Arndt & Gingrich, Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, p. 575). Hence, at the point of baptism, one enters a special relationship with the divine Godhead. That is an immersed relationship, and is always trinitarian.

Matthew 28:19d ~ “Baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit”

Teach them to observe/obey everything I have commanded you.  Teaching here is not solely the passing on of information or knowledge.  It is the constant demonstration, encouragement, and equipping of others by which you reproduce the Jesus in you in them.  All that Jesus commanded can be easily deduced from scripture and will be brought to remembrance and effect by the Spirit.  If you’re interested in seeing “all that Jesus commanded,” click here.  

Matthew 28:20a ~ “and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you.”

Hold on to the promise.  Not only did Jesus have the authority to commission you to Make Disciples, He promised that He would be with you always as you faithfully execute the commission.  You do not and can not make disciples on your own.  But, what a blessing it is to know that while you’re making disciples, Jesus is right there with you.  Always. 

Matthew 28:20b ~ “And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.”

 
CommentsIt was the first command, be fruitful, and multiply. Not only ... by Kirk StephensBaptise is also a cleansing ritual, to purify – and I believe ... by SamAlways worth revisiting the great commission. Here's another: ... by Marty Schoenleber, JrRelated StoriesTo Not Engage a church Culture is to not be The Church Culture.I Want to be a Disciple Maker, Not a Trainer.Vertical Missional Myopia

Is Mission an Attribute of God?

 

Robert E. Speer said in his Duff Lectures of 1910,

“The Last command of Christ (the Great Commission) is not the deep and final ground of the Church’s missionary duty. That duty is authoritatively stated in the words of the great commission, and it is of infinite consequence to have had it so stated by our Lord Himself. But if these particular words had never been spoken by Him, or if, having been spoken, they had not been preserved, the missionary duty of the Church would not be in the least affected. The supreme arguments for missions are not found in any specific words. It is in the very being and character of God that the deepest ground of the missionary enterprise is to be found. We cannot think of God except in terms which necessitate the missionary idea.“

In the Lausanne Covenant of July, 1974, There was a recommitment to world evangelism in Switzerland by an international gathering of evangelicals “moved to penitence by our failures and challenged by the unfinished task of evangelization.” John Stott’s talk in Loma Linda was a succinct statement of that credo which he divided into five parts:

The Old Testament God was a Missionary God

The Christ of the Gospels is a Missionary Christ

The Holy Spirit of Acts is a Missionary Spirit

The Church of the Epistles is a Missionary Church

The Vision of Revelation shows a Missionary Climax

In their book, Missional Essentials, Brad Brisco and Lance Ford say, “Mission is the central biblical theme describing God’s activity throughout history to restore and heal creation.  While often over-looked, Scripture is full of sending language that speaks to the missionary nature of God.”

Yesterday, I posted on Facebook that while laying out this idea, one objected and said that “mission is not an attribute of God, but a result of His attributes.”  I found that to be an interesting counter proposition.  You can read the comments on that post here.  In missional circles, there just might be a propensity to overstate mission concepts.

Is the idea of God being a missionary God, mission as part of His nature, or mission being one of His attributes, taking missional concepts too far?

 

 

Related StoriesVertical Missional MyopiaA Missionary’s Mission Trip To The United States – Part IThe Half-Life of an Evangelism Gadget or Method

I Want to be a Disciple Maker, Not a Trainer.

When it comes to disciple making, I really don’t like the word “training.”  There appears to be some good uses of the word in the new testament, but with deeper examination the common notion of training is surprisingly evasive.

 
Here are the problems with the word “training:”



It immediately creates an ecclesial body gap between trainers and trainees.
It makes the trainee subordinate to the trainer.
It instills the message that you can’t do what I do until you’ve been trained.
It makes discipleship about completing a program rather than entering into a life long process.
It leads to skewed notions like “train the trainer” in discipleship. 
It makes discipleship more about passing on methodology and information rather than being equipped for every good work. 
It creates an assumed knowledge base that new believers can find intimidating.
It propagates the incessant consumeristic need for training and trainers.
It turns discipleship into a profession. 
It tends towards making discipleship systematic rather than organic.
It makes discipleship clinical and doesn’t prepare others for the mess of everyday life.
It turns walking the path of life with others into completing a curriculum.


I want to be clear.  I have no issues with instruction, teaching, discipline, equipping, encouraging, and the like.  I think they are all necessary components of effective disciple making.  But, if disciples are to be naturally reproductive, then they must be freed from any notion of having to complete training.  Some of the most highly trained men in the New Testament era observed “the confidence of Peter and John and understood that they were uneducated and untrained men, they were amazed, and began to recognize them as having been with Jesus.”  Acts 4:13




Related StoriesRevival or Outburst?Discipleship – Teaching Then Doing, or Teaching While Doing?Does Church Structure Imply Authoritative Leadership?

Does Church Structure Imply Authoritative Leadership?

A branch doesn’t say to the root, “I’m over you, therefore you must heed my wishes or submit to my authority.  Neither does the leaf say to the branch that “I absorb the light and provide you with the sustenance you need to live, therefore I will dictate the manner of your growth.”  The tree has structure, but no leaders.  Yet, each part performs its function for the good of the whole.

Shouldn’t the church be the same?

Why or why not? 

 
CommentsLisa, Your post inspired it, but ultimately it's a analogous ... by MiguelIs this is in response to my post? If so, it kind of twists it ... by Lisa RobinsonThe ground is and always has been level at the foot of the ... by Jeffery MarshallRelated StoriesRevival or Outburst?Because Elders Need More Time In Word & PrayerYou’ve Been Duped! Ekklesia Does Not Mean “Called Out Ones.”

To Not Engage a church Culture is to not be The Church Culture.

They’re a write off!  I’m not surprised when one Christian group writes off another for some obscure sensibility, but I’m still saddened by it.  To write someone or something off means:

To drop someone or something from consideration…

To give up on turning someone or something into something…

To give up on someone or something as a dead loss, waste of time, hopeless case, etc.

In church circles, I’d say these write off’s are vicious and prevalent.  I’ve been guilty of it too.  Whether it be entire denominations or the smallest of house church gatherings, humans who lay hold of spirituality have a tendency to write others off.  I suspect it’s because we are always trying to write ourselves back in.  People cry out against racial profiling but snuggle up to spiritual profiling. 

I’ve met folks who will sleep with the homeless, work in a soup kitchen, be a dying person’s caregiver, hug a diseased person, and yet never enter “THAT” church for fear of contamination, accusation, or discreditation.  Every church building in every geographical location has a distinct and nuanced culture.  Let’s be clear here.  None of those buildings are actually churches.  They are buildings in which The Church gathers.  

Not everyone is cut out to engage diverse cultures, but everyone in The Church is to Make Disciples of ALL ETHNIC GROUPS.  So, the question isn’t whether or not you’re cut out for cross-cultural ministry, it’s simply whether or not you’re ready to be obedient when God calls you to and equips you for one of those cultures.  I know a lot of folks who have a strong desire to work with the unreached, but I would propose that the largest group of unreached Peoples are sequestered behind church walls.  To not engage them is to deny the very culture of the Church itself. 

So, regardless of where and how you gather, are you ready to obey if the Lord should call you for a season into a Catholic, Episcopalian, Presbyterian, Non-Denominational, or even a Westboro Baptist Church?  Are you ready to esteem another church higher than your own? (Philippians 2:3)  Are you ready to pray for those churches who have despitefully used you? (Luke 6:28)  Are you ready to bless those within other churches who have cursed you? (Matthew 5:44)  Are you ready to speak a blessing into the lives of a church which has persecuted you? (Romans 12:14)  

Should anyone intentionally enter a foreign segment of the church with the purpose of bringing change to it?

When, if ever, can a child of God “write off” another person or group of people?

What are the biblical criteria for “shaking the dust off your feet,” when dealing with a large or small group? 

 
CommentsAs far as the title of this “deviation” is concerned, I ... by David WoodsI'd say keeping a sense of unity between yourself and each and ... by David WoodsHmm…seems to me that sometimes one must just walk away. I am ... by Carlosby some measure, everything outside, behind, or beyond the call ... by MarshallWell, don't know about entering a church with the hope of ... by CarolRelated StoriesBread Machine DiscipleshipVertical Missional MyopiaThe Half-Life of an Evangelism Gadget or Method

A Missionary’s Mission Trip To The United States – Part I

I‘ve just returned from a 38 day mission trip tot he United States.  I will be writing a series of posts regarding that trip and the myriad of experiences.  I was going to say “ecclesiastical experiences,” but in retrospect I do want to blur the lines between the “spiritual” and the “secular.”  Yes, you read that correctly.  I do want to blur those lines.

In one of my favorite movies, “The Hunt for Red October,” the captain encourages his crew to take confidence in their latest technological achievement of a submarine which runs silent and undetectable to the enemy.  The captain says:

“It reminds me of the heady days of Sputnik and Yuri Gagarin when the world trembled at the sound of our rockets. Now they will tremble again – at the sound of our silence.”

While I am from the United States and grew up there, there are certain cultural gaps that I experience from spending long amounts of time in a foreign mission field.  On this particular trip, I became keenly aware of noise.  Within cultures of faith or those who claim to have none, there is a common trend.  That trend is noise.  I’m talking about audible noise principally, but not strictly.

Thoughtful pauses are all but extinct where moments of awkward silence must be filled.  Everywhere there is noise.  From the moment I landed in the states until the moment I returned there was noise.  Everyone has plugs in their ears pumping sound inward.  Practically every house, every restaurant, hotel, car, and even stores were filled with sounds.  ”In the abundance of words, there is foolishness.” (Proverbs 10:19)

I encountered so many on this trip.  Some I would consider spiritually advanced and others who are self-proclaimed as spiritually empty.  But in either case, after sweeping aside small talk, there’s a search for more.  There’s a yearning to interpret the signals of their own consciences.  People in general are waiting to hear something good.  They, in my experience, are waiting to hear the good news of the gospel.

Instead, because in many cases, they don’t know what they are waiting to hear, fill that void with noise.  A constant state of distraction is the best defense against transformational attention.  Additionally, and generally speaking, I think most people don’t want to listen to their own consciences, or to that ever-loving, gentle, and beckoning voice of God.  People who like to hear themselves talk are often shouting over the voice of their own consciences and convictions. 

All of this noise not only neutralizes that message during our waking hours, but in effect, voids the silence of our sleep as well.  ”For in many dreams and in many words there is emptiness. Rather, fear God.” ( Ecclesiastes 5:7)  The abundance of noise during the day bleeds into our respites.  ”"You will be ever hearing but never understanding; you will be ever seeing but never perceiving.”  (Acts 28:26)  When you begin to tremble at the sound of your own silence and attempt to alleviate that fear with noise, you’re self-medicating.  It’s not a solution, it’s simply an anemic substitution. 

 

 A few questions:

What other kinds of noise impede relationship with God and people?

What would you suggest are some good noise canceling devices?

If Jesus sheep hear His voice, then why are so many of them not? 

 
Commentswe remind not to be anxious for silence. by MarshallRelated StoriesVertical Missional MyopiaDisenfranchised Disciple MakersPut These 7 Mission Words In Order

Fracturing The Logos of the Gospel

I have a deep fascination with the Greek word “Logos.”  In fact, I’ve been dwelling on it and its usage in the New Testament and the Septuagint (Greek Old Testament)* for quite some time.  One of the more interesting usages of the word is in Acts chapter 15 where” logos” is used in a unique way. 

 But first, a little history:  In John 1:1 it says, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.”  There is little question that “the Word” (λόγος Logos) here in this passage is referring to Jesus.  In the same chapter, verse 14, John writes “The Word  (λόγος Logos) became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth..”  But, is that all it’s referring to? 

It has become fashionable to limit the (λόγος Logos) to Christ alone.  For example, in Hebrews 4:12 “For the word (λόγος Logos)  of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and of spirit, of joints and of marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart.”  Many misapply this verse by saying it is talking about “The Word of God,” “The Scriptures,” or “The Bible” ONLY.  It is not.  It is presenting the logos as a unified idea.  Christ AND His Words.

The principle motivation for fracturing the  (λόγος Logos) from the person Jesus, I believe, is to attack the bible or the written Word of God and detract from its authority.  Some, who’ve had the noble intention of elevating Christ as “All,” have, in some cases inadvertently fractured the Logos.  While logos has a wide variety of uses in the New Testament, there are two principle ideas in most of them:  

1. A “word” (logos) is that by which we communicate our will; by which we convey our thoughts; or by which we issue commands the medium of communication with others.

2. The Son of God may be called “the Word,” because he is the medium by which God promulgates His will and issues His commandments.  We see this in the case of Hebrews 1:1-3:

 “In the past God spoke to our forefathers through the prophets at many times and in various ways, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom he made the universe. The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word.

The logos is both the medium and message.  The logos is message by medium.  The medium without message or message without medium is a fractured logos.  This also applies to the written logos, the scriptures.  I am not declaring an absolute, but building a robust foundation for a thesis that I will develop in a series of posts related to this one.

Back to Acts 15.  Peter, speaking to some others regarding a developing problem in the church says, “Brethren, you know that in the early days God made a choice among you, that by my mouth the Gentiles would hear the word of the gospel and believe.”  One phrase leaped out at me here:

“The Word of the Gospel.”

or

“The Logos of the Gospel” 

 For those who wish to separate the message and the medium this phrase will simply not make sense.  Additionally, there are those who claim that “the gospel” only refers to Jesus the person.  If we strictly applied these concepts to Acts 15:7 then we’re left with “The Jesus of the Jesus.”  There are many other examples where the logos get’s fractured.

In the book “Scripture As Logos: “Rabbi Ishmael and the Origins of Midrash” The authors states:

“The logos is simultaneously the instructor and the content of its instruction.”  

Here is where I would normally ask you, the reader, a few questions.  Instead, I’d be glad to entertain some of yours.  If you have a question, please ask in the comment section.  Lord willing, I will be using your questions and other materials to write a piece called “The Fractured Logos.”

*  Some Old Testament usages of logos:

And Jehovah said unto Moses, Is Jehovah’s hand waxed short? now shalt thou see whether my word (logos) shall come to pass unto thee or not.  (Numbers 11:23)

And Moses made an end of speaking all these words to all Israel; And he said unto them, Set your heart unto all the words (logous) which I testify unto you this day, which ye shall command your children to observe to do, even all the words of this law. For it is no vain thing (logos) for you; because it is your life, and through this thing ye shall prolong your days in the land, whither ye go over the Jordan to possess it. (Deuteronomy 32:45-47)

  

 

 

 
CommentsI think a lot of this is derived from mere misunderstanding. I, ... by David WoodsThanks for a very timely and important blog, Miguel. The ... by Jim WrightThe commandments may be logos, but are not limited to logos. In ... by MiguelTim, Let me shoot from the hip in responding to your ... by MiguelPeter, you said, “Brother, I don’t know of anyone who ... by Tom SchultzPlus 5 more...Related StoriesFracturing The Logos of the GospelAre the Scriptures in the Bible Propositional, Objective, and Self-Evident Truth?The Appeal: ‘Eastern vs. Western Thought,’ Is a Bunch of Skubalon

Are the Scriptures in the Bible Propositional, Objective, and Self-Evident Truth?

A short, but difficult question:

Are the Scriptures in the Bible Propositional, Objective, and Self-Evident Truth? 

 
CommentsBut of course they are self evident truths. Perez, son of Tamar ... by David GrantNot self evident. No need for those propositional, self evident ... by Allen BarnesHuh? by Jim Wrightfood-4-thought: as you are in Christ, Jim, how may it be ... by MarshallPropositional and objective? Often. Self-evident? Hardly, ... by Jim Wrighttestimony; witness. by MarshallRelated StoriesThe Appeal: ‘Eastern vs. Western Thought,’ Is a Bunch of SkubalonBecause Elders Need More Time In Word & PrayerThe Lord Jesus (The Logos) and His Teachings (The Logos) are One!

Vertical Missional Myopia

For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world,in the things that have been made. Romans 1:20

Often, this scripture is used in an accusative way for the unbeliever who is not seeing what God reveals to them through nature or “the things that have been made.”

I think we miss something here though. Believers primarily look up towards the sky, the planets, the stars, tree branches, mountain tops, and the like and shout “Look! Can’t you see.” They have vertical myopia.

The things that have been made include the horizontal plain. At eye level, we look into each others eyes, we extend the hands of fellowship, we put our feet in motion towards and for our fellow man and “see” the image of God in people. There is a general revelation that comes from seeing God’s image shine through humanity.

Each of us, regardless of our spiritual maturity can learn something of God from one another. In fact, I think it’s crucial. We use our fingers to point upwards instead of outwards or inwards. We’re give to proclamation at the expense of demonstration. We lift our hands in praise, but balk at extending our hands outward to hug, heal, and harken others to the Gospel. The very construction of houses of worship are designed to bring your eyes upward toward God and away from your neighbor. How are we suppose to engage each other if we’re always focused in the vertical?

Mission is 3 dimensional. Mission is motion. Mission is God-Man centered. Jesus’ very nature is vertical & horizontal. “In Him we live and move and have our being.” Acts 17:28

Every twitch reveals something about God. How much more so and act of kindness towards our neighbor? And so the church is vertically myopic. A few questions:

How much eye contact do you make each day with people? Enough?

Should mission ever be sedentary and vertical only?

What, in your opinion, is curative for Missional vertical myopia?

 
CommentsCurative? Maybe a focus on the greatest commandment according ... by David WoodsRelated StoriesDisenfranchised Disciple MakersPut These 7 Mission Words In OrderBread Machine Discipleship