Module 4!

Wow, here it is - module 4. It seems like yesterday that I started the World Christian Foundations program, and yet on the other hand, it seems like I'd never get here. I still have a long way to go - but this first post of material I've learned in my first 3 lessons marks a key point for me. It's a commitment that yes, I will finish this program. The light at the end of the tunnel shines brighter with each page I turn!

I LOVE the way Module 4 kicked off ... with an overview not only of the module, but of the entire program. "From First Things to Formulation" allowed me to really understand the reasoning behind some of the approaches taken in the course. Those of you who know me realize that I have to get a context and understand the connections between things. I can't just follow a program without asking tons of questions. So I've often wondered why we covered such a large period in Module 3 (200 AD - 1945!); why "contextualized theology" was bantered about but not discussed in detail; and so on. Finally, in this lesson, I believe I 'got it' from a big-picture perspective. What I learned is that I was wanting to study the trees; WCF hoped that I would catch a vision of the forest and go back and study certain trees in detail.

One of the big things I understood from this is that "indigenous theology" isn't a phrase to be scared of but represents something that is essential for a solid indigenous church. Basically, the church must learn how to apply Scripture to specific problems of a culture. They must learn to trust Scripture for themselves - and the church in the West must learn to trust the Holy Spirit in their lives. Sure, we can guide and help them learn to study the Bible ... but if we expect them to take our theology carte blanche, without surveying Scripture and assessing truth from their worldview, we are essentially establishing ourselves as the experts, as the revelation, rather than Christ and His Word. I like what J.I. Packer says about this:

When a version of Christianity ... is exported ... the major trouble is likely to b enot that it inclues idiosyncrasies but rather that it ignores matters of importance.

That really helped me get my mind wrapped around the idea that western theology is going to be inadequate for, say, a people group whose experience is nomadic or one who practices a lifestyle similar to the Essenes or one who has mores like those of ancient Israel. Scripture won't be inadequate - it is wholly adequate to all of life in all times and cultures - but our systematic theologies won't help them determine what to do about the polygamy in their society, for example. For that, they must "work out (their) own salvation with fear and trembling".

This helps me grasp the need for an emphasis on Bible translation and indigenous worship forms. We must help the people make the faith their own - even as they are united in its distinctives to all other Christians in all other places. Unity and diversity - the church.

Lessons 2 and 3 afforded me a quick review of Modules 1-3 ... good reminders of important lessons learned, but more than that good "big picture" definitions of important words like culture and worldview. It was also a reminder that we are in a war - conflict is depicted at every level of life, even that of organisms. There is an "intelligent evil" that works to actively hinder the advance of the kingdom of God. Thus, we have to remember that we must seek transformation at the worldview level, not just the institutional or surface levels. Along those same lines, I continued the self-evaluation of my own culture and learned to my surprise that even such things as decision making are truly cultural!

A couple of quotes I enjoyed:

Hesselgrave: Culture is "different answers to the same human problems."
Winter: Theology "is the art of coming to justifiable disagreements".

I began developing questions for my graduate research paper and seeking historical parallels that might be useful. All in all, 3 lessons that were very valuable!

Housekeeping Note

No, I'm not going to give cleaning hints here (many of you are breathing a sigh of relief, knowing I'm not a Good Housekeeping winner). Instead, I wanted to brief you on what's going on with my studies and this blog.

With the final post below, Changes, I have completed the blogging for Module 3. I have to write a term paper - the topic will be related to women working with immigrants in the late 1800s. After that, I will be taking a brief break before resuming studies in Module 4, sometime in early 2009 if the Lord wills.

Module 4 will be my final module of study. I will have to write a Graduate Research Paper and complete a Capstone Project, in addition to keeping up with the regular lessons. So you can see I need a lot of prayer!

I confess that I haven't done as good a job on this blog as I would have liked. The lessons lack the detail I would prefer, and often barely scratch the surface. But that is how I feel in this study program - there is so much to learn, and even the hours of reading I spend barely begins to cover the depth of what there is to learn. So to boil that down even further for these lessons seems overwhelming to me. I think sometimes I've gotten it right by grace alone and written something helpful; other times, I probably left you scratching your head. Thanks for bearing with me regardless!

I'll continue to post on my primary blog (http://surpassingglory.blogspot.com) things that the Lord gives me to encourage kingdom workers and whomever God sends by. Meanwhile, The Big Picture will be here for reference, and I will resume this blog with Module 4. If I can figure out how, I will post my term paper - once it is written.

Thanks for your prayers and support!

Changes!

The world change dramatically between 1912 and 1945. Prior to 1914, people talked in terms of empire: The British Empire, the Ottomon Empire, etc. By 1945, two world wars had decimated the empires and people spoke in terms of nation-states. Prior to 1914, there was an optimistic perception that the world would only get better and better - it was a time of "high hopes". World events - two wars and a depression - shattered this optimism. Values were questioned and people were confused. People struggled to find a "new normal".

Hope dashed by war. Confusion. Financial trials. Questioning of values. Sounds a lot like our era, doesn't it? The headiness of the end of the cold war came to an abrupt halt on Sept. 11, 2001 ... and we've been trying to find our own "new normal" ever since.

The study of missions and church history has encouraged me greatly in the face of facts like this. Because no matter what type of leader, no matter what governmental structure, no matter what conflict among nations -- God's kingdom has made progress. And that progress is exponential! Consider:

• In 1430, 1 out of every 100 people were committed Christians - or 99 unbelievers to every believer.
• It was 1790 before 2 out of every 100 were committed believers.
• By 1940 the number was 3 out of every 100. Each advance is more rapid - by 1960 4/100; 1970 5/100; 1980 6/100; 1983 7/100; 1986 8/100; 1989 9/100; 1993 10/100; and 1995 11/100.
• Today that number is closer to 14/100. That means that for every believer there are only 7 unbelievers -- while only a generation ago (1960) that ratio was 1:25. That's progress!

Consistently, the number of people committed to God has grown faster than the general population - since the day of Pentecost. Current expansion rates are 3 times the rate of population growth. The task is obviously much closer to our reach today than in 1430. And God has blessed us with tools unheard of at that time - television, radio, film, printed and spoken Scripture in multiple languages. But there is much work to do, and we cannot shrink back at this juncture. For example, if every congregation in the world adopted and made serious efforts to reach one of the unreached people groups, there would be 500 churches focused on each of the remaining unreached people groups. Imagine the speed with which the Gospel could penetrate the world!

God is always on His throne - working for His glory. Even in the atrocities of the Holocaust and the darkness of 1914-1945, He remained sovereign with a purpose beyond human eyes. He directed spiritual battles we can only imagine. He kept His purpose intact throughout those years. The nation-states that emerged laid foundation for tremendous advance in kingdom understanding. And the church continued to make progress against the gates of hell.

The Proper Focus of Missions

Barely 1% of all missions giving in the US goes to unreached people groups, so that should obviously be our focus - right?


But then ... where the Gospel has been planted and the church is still in development, the plants must be cultivated. Isn't our 12% of giving to focus on evangelizing reached people valuable?


And can we have a valid ministry abroad without meeting needs here?


What about our church - can we ignore building a strong local body of believers?


These questions illustrate that a commitment to missions sometimes raises more questions than we expect. When we are truly committed to advancing God's kingdom in the world we will find the temptation to either an overly broad or restrictively narrow approach.


Some churches adopt a people group and ignore all other missions efforts. Others throw missions money at everything that comes along. Most are trying to find a balance, seeking to maximize their places in God's kingdom purpose.


A historical study of missions reveals the importance of balance in the advance of the kingdom of God. Protestant missions was really a "latecomer", not blooming for two centuries after the Reformation. A young man named William Carey was among the earliest who caught a vision for man's responsibility in God's kingdom purposes - and was told famously to "Sit down" because God could evangelize the heathen without his help. Carey sat down only long enough to write a treatise on missions - specifically calling for the use of "means", or missions agencies, to spread the Gospel.

As so often in church history, the fringe led the way - those missions agencies filled a role the churches weren't filling, and soon came a distinctly western phenomenon: The denominational mission board. Protestantism was engaged in mission at last!

And yet the story was far from over. It seems the lesson needed to be learned again every couple of generations - the task isn't finished. The initial focus was on the coastlands ... then came the cries to come home because the task was complete. God raised up Hudson Taylor and others who called for advances to the inlands ... and again, the cries were soon being heard that the job was done. Later cries came to go to the frontiers and then a young man named Cameron Townsend was convicted of the lack of Scripture in indigenous languages. Wycliffe Bible Translators was born and the foundation was laid for the modern-day emphasis on people groups - and the awareness that there are still many unreached groups. At each stage of missions advance there has been a call to retreat - it seems as though God raises up someone with a vision just when the church thinks the job is done.

What's my point? Simply that in our humanity it's easy to think that what we are emphasizing or prioritizing is the end of the story. Not true! Instead, we need to see ourselves like the Israelites - in Numbers 2, God directs the structure of their camp. There were four sides with three tribes on each side. The large numbers of Israelites meant that when they moved, they used a lot of space. Surely it was easy for them to travel about with only the people in their tribe or at the most from their side of the camp. It probably took a lot of effort to cross the camp and talk to people at the opposite edge. And yet God consistently speaks to them as one, directing regular gatherings of the tribe's leaders and of the entire congregation. He insisted that while they needed to be organized for the best possible advance of the group, they also had to recognize their common goal and shared identity.

It's the same with us. God's kingdom advance requires strong churches, solid ministries in our Jerusalems, the training and preparation of the church in new areas - and advance into unreached people groups. We can't have a focus that is too narrow or too scatter-shot. We must check ourselves and our churches to be sure that we are fitting in to God's kingdom in way He has arranged - and that we are recognizing and honoring the common goal and shared identity of those who are working in other areas. It's the key to kingdom advance!

Self-determination vs. Guidance

Some of the reading for Module 3 has focused on the history of the native churches in the lands where the Gospel spread. Unfortunately, in far too many cases the story is short - an indigenous church (in a non-western form) failed to develop or thrive; the national believers were accused of following a "foreign" religion and discouraged or even persecuted (witness: Japan).

Scripture is clear throughout the New Testament: As the church spread, it didn't have to remain Jewish in form. The Acts 15 Jerusalem Council and Paul's conflict with Peter in Galatians 2 underscore the truth that Gentiles didn't become Christians by adopting Jewish forms. Furthermore, the church depicted in Corinth, Antioch, and other Gentile locales looks quite different from the Jerusalem-oriented church of Acts 2-7. And the throne room scenes in Revelation depict believers with their ethnic distinctions still visible to John the onlooker. Clearly, the unity Christ desires for His church doesn't require uniformity.

Yet the idea proposed by some scholars as a solution raises questions as well. Partially as a reaction to the former attempts to westernize native churches, some propose a radical self-determination, one that is completely devoid of guidance from the missionaries who bring the Gospel. In this model, the Holy Spirit and Scripture are presented as the only guidance needed by new converts.

The example of the New Testament church challenges this concept as well. In Acts 15, 1 Corinthians, Romans 14 - indeed, most of Paul's letters - the apostles give guidance in lots of specifics, but leave room for self-determination in other areas. Jude exhorted his audience to earnestly defend the faith that was "once for all delivered to the saints" - drawing a bold line around certain elements that are to be indisputable (Jude 1:3). Paul's tender care for the churches, extensive times of teaching (for example, in Ephesus), and priority on training leaders and warning about false doctrines underscores the responsibility he felt for the doctrinal development of the churches. Furthermore, Paul wrote in Ephesians 4 that pastors/teachers are God's gift to the church to build them up until they achieve unity of faith and are no longer swayed by strange doctrines.

Can we trust the Holy Spirit and Scripture in the lives of new believers from other cultural backgrounds? Absolutely! Should missionaries make every decision? No! Yet somewhere in between "all or nothing" is a Biblical approach to indigenous churches. Training leadership in specific doctrinal points forms a solid foundation for a church. Fretting over which instruments are allowed is less helpful.

A sound indigenous church will perpetuate the faith "once for all delivered to the saints". But it may do so in a form very different from what you and I are used to - and that's okay. It's just a reflection of our creative God!

The Good, the Bad, and the Somewhere in Between

Our study of missions and church history brings us to an interesting era in the church - one that leaves no easy answers. As the Protestant church was awakened to its need to be on mission, Western nations were busy with a mission of their own: Colonialism. Many missionaries "rode the coattails" of their nations' colonial interests ... and found themselves facing some challenging questions.

There was much good done ... schools and hospitals by the thousands were started out of a genuine desire to help people. As Ralph Winter observes, "Overall, the Christian movement ... brings blessing to all the families of the world." Despite the sometimes selfish interests of their national leaders, the Christians who jumped at the chance to "go" made a positive difference.

And yet, they frequently faced questions of paternalism and nationalism raised by the actions of their home countries. They had to decide whether to be a missionary first, or an American/Briton/Dutchman first. Their decisions weren't always perfect; in the case of the American West, for example, we find many examples of missionaries who failed to treat the American Indian with dignity and respect. The long-term consequences of such actions were devastating for both Native American culture and the Gospel.

Other times, however, the willingness to challenge their own country's assumptions led to significant opportunities to transform their "mission" into a blessing. Some missionaries used their position to bring radical change - William Carey's fight against the practice of widow-burning in India, for example, resonates as one of the high points of the era.

And then there were all those times somewhere between bad and good, those times when missionaries treated the people with love and respect but failed to allow them the chance to develop their own unique worship forms. Their theological or form-based assumptions led to a different type of imperialism, one that communicated, overtly or subtly, that to be Christian was to be Western. The effects of this cannot be overstated; in many of those countries missionaries were later banned and Christians persecuted because they followed a "foreign" religion. Often it took decades for the church to recover - and in some cases, like Japan, it never has.

The lessons from colonialism were learned the hard way, when two world wars led to a dissolution of the empires and the rise of many independent nations. In many ways we still fight that battle today, as nations are becoming far less "nationalistic" and more focused on ethnic distinctions. And yet we have a great opportunity to learn from history. As we go into these nations - sometimes on the heels of our own nation's military or diplomatic successes - we can encourage the development of an indigenous church ... one that might not look like us, but that will have a solid foundation for survival and relevance once we are gone.

Elements of Renewal

Jesus told Peter that the gates of hell could not prevail against the church, built upon the Rock. He promised that the Gospel would be preached to all people groups before His return, and gave His Spirit to ensure completion of the task.



So what happened? If the Greek language and culture could sweep a large swath of the globe in just a few years under Alexander the Great, why have nearly 2000 years of church failed to see the true globalization of Christianity?



Simply put: There is another, frequently-forgotten aspect to the Gospel. It's the simple truth that we are in a spiritual battle. True, the war has been won - but our enemy is angry, because he knows his time is short. So he thwarts the advance of the Gospel any way he can ... sometimes with direct onslaughts like extreme persecution and genocide; other times by exploiting the sins and weaknesses of the saints; sometimes by stirring seeds of dissension within fellowship; still other times by distraction to "good" things - anything to shift our focus off Jesus and the race set before us. Frankly, he doesn't care what we do as long as we don't advance the kingdom of God. Because every day that the Gospel is delayed from reaching that final people group is one day longer that he gets to roam the earth and have some degree of perceived power (perceived, because even he falls under the sovereignty of God).



Yet mission historians see an overall advance of the Gospel, albeit not without setbacks. Jonathan Edwards viewed the history of the church as a series of pulses - outwardly pulsing toward advance and renewal, then inwardly contracting ... with each outward pulse pushing the church forward beyond the last point. Kenneth Scott Latourette sees similar phases, which he calls renewal and recession.



Richard F. Lovelace studied the various renewal movements throughout church history and found several common elements:

• Dependent prayer


• Outpouring of God's Spirit


• Increased awareness among laity

Each renewal seems to have started with an emphasis on prayer. Even Pentecost - perhaps the greatest renewal ever - came after the disciples spent 10 days in the Upper Room, praying and waiting on the Spirit. And when the Spirit came, He didn't prioritize the leadership ... instead, He empowered the church and brought to the laity an increased awareness of spiritual matters, an increased sense of responsibility and purpose. Even where leaders were unsupportive, the Spirit's power on the laity was profound. And the fruit was dynamic:

• Doctrinal awareness of basics of redemption (justification, sanctification, indwelling Spirit, spiritual
• Awareness of mission
• Dependent Prayer
• Community of Believers
• Theological integration (applying faith principles to life)

Ralph Winter adds another sign of renewal: Lots of creativity in the body of Christ. New forms of worship, new music, new ways of doing "church". Sometimes things that are on the "fringe" are determined to be emotionalism or false; yet the presence of activity is a sign of life. Jonathan Edwards addressed the topic in Religious Affections, still the best work I know of to help delineate authentic works of God from their counterfeits. And even Edwards was cautious of criticizing some things considered "fringe"; he counseled emphasis on Scripture and watching for fruitfulness.

The bottom line of renewal is a return to what should be normal. Being on mission is always normal. Our reliance must always be on God's spirit not a method. God is going to use the average, every day Christian - not just leaders - including unexpected vessels like women and youth movements. There will be things to watch out for - and things to celebrate.

And the kingdom will continue to advance against the gates of hell.