I am writing an article that will be "attached" to John 20:21 in the forthcoming HCSB Study Bible. Here is my first draft of the article. What would you add, delete, or change?
Your input is solicited with one caveat: I cannot add more than one additional paragraph without deleting others. It is, after all, not one of those ginormous study bibles. And, I can't / won't use your words, but feel free to share a paragraph if you want-- or just a suggestion.
The Missional Church
"Peace to you! As the Father has sent Me, I also send you."
Most believers readily grasp the idea of Jesus being sent to the world. While speaking to His disciples at the well of Samaria, Jesus said, "My food is to do the will of Him who sent me." In John chapters 4-8 Jesus spoke of being sent by His Father on 14 separate occasions, such as saying, "I have come down from heaven, not to do My will, but the will of Him who sent Me" (6:38) and "I am the One who testifies about Myself, and the Father who sent Me testifies about Me" (8:18). Paul wrote of the same truth in Romans 8:3 referring to God's "sending His own Son in flesh like ours." When Jesus says, "the Father has sent me," it is not a surprise. The fact that Jesus was the "sent one" is one of the most fundamental identifications of Jesus.
Believers know that they are sent on mission into the world. The word "sent" is replete through Paul's epistles as he mentions those such as Timothy and Titus who have been entrusted with a message, a mission or both. In the book of Acts, sending is a common occurrence as well. Ananias is sent to pray for Paul and open his eyes. Paul and Barnabas are sent out from the church in Antioch as missionaries with the gospel. "As they were ministering to the Lord and fasting, the Holy Spirit said, 'Set apart for Me Barnabas and Saul for the work that I have called them to.' Then, after they had fasted, prayed, and laid hands on them, they sent them off" (Acts 13:2, 3). Most know that Jesus "sent" some, but often do not consider the breadth and depth of that sending.
To understand the depth of this "sentness," consider that the source of our missional identity is located in the nature of God. Further consider that this sending is as central to God's nature as His love, forgiveness, righteousness and holiness. It must be since we are given example after example of it in His Word. Without God's sending nature we would know little else of His other attributes. Without His sending nature, we would not see the "groom coming from the bridal chamber" in creation (Psalm 19) culminating in Jesus "present[ing] the church to Himself in splendor" in the gospel (Ephesians 5).
God's sending is as tangible as any other attribute of the God. And sending does belong to the Godhead: The Father sent His Son and the Holy Spirit. The Father, Son and Spirit sends the church. We are to be missional, we are to live sent. Our sent and sending identity is connected ontologically with the very existence of the church. That is, just as it is the nature of God, it is in the nature of the church. When Jesus proclaimed, "As the Father has sent Me, so send I you," His mandate was a commissioning act for all believers. It is a missional task described by Peter in his first letter. "But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for His possession, so that you may proclaim the praises of the One who called you out of darkness into His marvelous light" (1 Peter 2:9).
The concept of a missional church is recognition that God is a sending God and we, the church and individual believers, are to live sent. The missional church is shaped by the idea that every believer is to live on mission. Being sent means that we all move outside the walls of our church buildings and our Christian homes in order to engage the people with the gospel. The missional nature of the church calls for us to engage in and support the work of the international missionary to take the gospel across the world and the local mission-shaped believers to take the gospel and show the love of Christ across the street. There is a sentness inherent to being a follower of Jesus.
We are not sent on mission alone. God's people join Him on His mission. The mission of God in the world is one and we are commanded and empowered to participate on that very same mission. We know this because Jesus promised, "I am with you always, to the end of the age" (Matthew 28). We are sent on a mission with the Sender.
Missional churches engage the people with the redemptive message of the gospel. To do so, the churches emulates Christ in the engagement of the mission. He came announcing that he would serve the hurting (Luke 4) and save the lost (Luke 19:10). We are called to join him on that mission and show and share the good news of Jesus to a world Jesus loves.
The missional church engages and inhabits the culture while seeking to remain separate from its sin and sinful structures. Jesus Christ was a thoroughly Jewish, 1st century man who engaged believers, doubters, scoffers, friends, and foes, yet never sinned. He was truly in the world without being of the world. We can engage the greedy without becoming greedy, the hateful without becoming hateful, and the proud without becoming prideful. The existence of temptation should not hinder us from missional living.
Last, being sent by Jesus as the Father sent Him means that the seed of the gospel will take root. The seed of the gospel must be sown in the soil of the culture, which necessitates Christians being engaged there. Scripture calls us salt and light and that requires presence and proclamation.
The sending nature of the Father, the commission by Christ, and the empowerment of the Spirit creates a missional church. As believers, we should revel in the invitation by Christ to join His missional people.
AS looks like an important word in that sentence. God sent Jesus to obey, to suffer and to die. Jesus sends us in the same manner. (He even just showed his disciples his hands and his side, to emphasise the point...)
Ed, good stuff, all true... maybe a little to theological for most. Some will love what you've written but those are not the folks that I think you desire to inspire or change their way of seeing this.
I'd love to see you get a little more practical and in our faces about the fact that we have the capacity to say "no" to the mission. Because many of us have said "no" thinking others will pick up the mantle, we find ourselves in this :"within one generation" situation. The mission is not optional. And the goal is not to just prove the truth of the mission. Guys like you have such a great voice to compel us to take up the mission.
I'm starting to teach through the books of Acts and it occurs to me that a huge point to notice is that those few decided to answer the call, but they didn't have to.
And if they stayed at the big church in J-town and remembered all that Jesus said, wrote songs about it, got really passionate in our memory of Jesus... it would have died when those people died. And that is what's happening all across america right now.
Love ya Brother! Keep pushin'!
Near the end where you talk about the Missional Church engaging culture is a place that I feel could be expounded on, as it is still a stumbling block for many small churches (in my limited experience). There is this idea that we have to be counter-cultural, which I agree with, but some how that takes the form of us being separated from culture - I suppose for fear that we will be judged if we are seen eating with tax collectors and prostitutes.
Pages have been written on engaging culture, with Radical Reformission being one of my favorites, but for the person that uses this article as their sole understanding of being missional and engaging the church, I would like to see a little more added to that paragraph with either guidelines for application or simply more encouragement to do so.
I hope I didn't exceed the word limit for comments on your blog. As it is in it's current form, it is a great read and quite informative. Thanks for all you do. - PK
How exactly does one go about "attaching" an article to a Scripture verse?
We don't Go on a mission. We ARE on a mission. It is a lifestyle, not an event.
Effective witnesses are not effective because of WHAT they know – but WHO they know, and how much they want others to know Him, too. Dawson Trotman
It needs to be said that though the missional movement is new to us - it is thoroughly NT!
You mean you will use MY words again (SBC 2006!) and not give me credit?? HAHA! Hey thats okay with me!!! You go!!! I want to remain nameless to God's glory!!! HaHa!! I have a lot to say about the subject, learned it from the best!!(you!) Want to post send me..
He sends with content. Don't change!
He sends in context. Contextualize!
He sends to communicate! Incarnate!
Hope this helps!!!
Committed until Jesus embeds all cultures everywhere!
I feel a bit like someone giving batting stance tips to Derek Jeter, but I guess you did ask.
The first thing I thought while reading was that if you want people to better "consider the breadth and depth of that sending" it would be great to have a few more references. I realize that they may simply need to be parenthetical but it would open up additional opportunities for readers to research other passages.
If including multiple passages is not feasible I would try to at least include the additional Acts passage of 26:17-19 "sending you to them to open their eyes and turn them from darkness to light" and Gal. 4:4-6 which speaks to both God sending the Son and the Spirit. I would also expand the Acts 13 to include v 4. Additionally, when speaking of the sending of the church perhaps including Jesus' sending of the 12 (Lk 9:1-6) and the sending of the 72 (Lk 10:1-24) would be helpful. Lastly, when speaking of the missionary nature of God, perhaps you could reflect back briefly on that nature as exhibited in the OT through the same sending motif? However, that may be more than you want/can do in this piece.
Thanks for all your work!
Ed,
I don't know if you want to add a sentence about the incarnation. You covered the sending thoroughly, I think since this a Bible, the idea of the incarnation is a sending, literally the in-fleshment of God amongst sinful humanity, God becoming Flesh. I think when we are missional we do just that we particpate in the incarnational aspect of Jesus' Ministry.
Love Your Blogs!
This is super and thanks for taking on the task Ed.
Missional is very much about a sending God who sends us into our culture(s) to engage people with the gospel. But I’m concerned that missional is slowly taking on an entirely task orientation where the “being sent” overshadows the missional imperative that "the way of Jesus" (as Alan Hirsch puts it) informs and radically transforms our very existence as Jesus followers.
Without an emphases on this transformative aspect, it is too easy for Jesus followers to “programitize” things and call it being a missional church. Somehow we must communicate that missional is not just about being sent, it is also (maybe more importantly) about being.
Hopefully this makes some sense.
Excellent input from many! I think I do want to emphasize the "as" a little more-- it means "in the same way" and I can add a sentence about that.
Rick, I like that. I can add some about the way of Jesus.
PK, I am thinking of adding "culturally relevant, counter culture, community for the Kingdom." That might get at it.
And, will also use several of the other comments.
Thanks.
Ed
*
I would love for you to clearly distinguish between missions and missional. If this distinction continues to suffer teh abuse of blurring (being down by emerganet language), then the unique and necessary work of world missions, reaching all peoples, get minimized and undersupported.
In this verse, we see essentially John's version of the Great Commission. Each gospel, and Acts 1, have some version of this idea.
Thanks.... (PS It's not too theological....that's the point of s study bible entry :)
I would ask you to make sure you help people distinguish between 'missions' and 'missional' as the recent emergin language blurs this distinction to the point that the unique and necessary task of cross-cultural, world evangelization gets minimized and under supported.
In this verse, we essential see John's version of the Great Commission, the idea of which is in each Gospel and in Acts 1.
BTW, your article is NOT too theological...that's the point of a study Bible entry. Thanks!
I would ask you to make sure you help people distinguish between 'missions' and 'missional' as the recent emergin language blurs this distinction to the point that the unique and necessary task of cross-cultural, world evangelization gets minimized and under supported.
In this verse, we essential see John's version of the Great Commission, the idea of which is in each Gospel and in Acts 1.
BTW, your article is NOT too theological...that's the point of a study Bible entry. Thanks!
"When Jesus proclaimed, "As the Father has sent Me, so send I you," His mandate was a commissioning act for all believers."
I disagree. Christ was speaking to the apostles and commissioning them - not all believers.
The only factor that strikes me is that "missions" is something that should be done by disciples. If our churches are led by folks who demand discipleship of themselves, and openly expect true discipleship among their members, you then have a platform which can follow through on being missional without its being merely another program somebody dreamed up.
Or not. What do I know?
TITLE: Overcoming Agoraphobic Faith
Ed if you remember the pastor's conference on Marketplace ministry then the title will make sense. The early church cut their ministry teeth in the "agora" as it was the center of their culture and the place where people lived their lives.
Ross said "I disagree. Christ was speaking to the apostles and commissioning them - not all believers."
In Matt. 28:19-20 (the Great Commission) Jesus also commands them the teach those who become disicples because of their witness to "obey everything I have commanded you." Which would include obeying the command He just gave to go and make disciples.
Ross, Ross, Ross... are you saying that Jesus' commission died when those guys died?
Ed, that's what I meant by "theological." I'm not an anti-intellectualist. I want to learn as much as I can and go as deep as I can. But doesn't "theology" mean "what we know about God?"
We must interpret scripture missiologically, not just theologically. The question has to be, "Because we know this to be true, what must we do?"
We as Sou. Bapt. cannot take pride in being right. We must MOVE in the right direction.
They can put Ross' comment on the tombstone on many a denomination. Hopefully not ours.
As respects the command to go and make disciples, that seems a command to the church .. the Body of Christ .. not just the guys standing there. I don't think any one of them went into all the world, and I doubt that all were disobedient.
God's command to multiply and fill the earth was obviously to mankind, not just Adam and Eve. I don't think Eve could have hung around long enough to have several billion babies, herself.
Same thought with the GC.
"Ross, Ross, Ross... are you saying that Jesus' commission died when those guys died?"
I don't think I said that at all. Ed is writing a commentary on John 20:21 for a study bible and I think context is important. I would think a better commentary on this verse would be an explanation of the apostolic office. There is much confusion in the church today about this temporary office.
We tend to read everything in the Scriptures as if it was written to and about us and that can be dangerous (I'm not saying that Ed's commentary is dangerous). For instance, in this case Jesus goes on to breathe on the disciples to receive the Spirit and grant them the power of the Keys (authority to forgive sins). Would you say that is a normative experience for all Christians at all times?
Well, this isn't another comment but I'm trying to unsubscribe from the comment string, and nothing else seems to work.
Let's see if this does.
:)
A first-time post on your excellent blog (and a big British fan too). I don't know if you've come across Andreas Köstenberger's work on John, especially his big first book (Mission of Jesus and Mission of the disciples). He makes some excellent exegetical points on this v., especially that the sending language here has to do more with the authority of the sender and the obedience of the one sent, than the manner of what the disciples are sent to do. (Striking, for instance, that when Stott deals with this verse in the Lausanne material, to indicate the breadth of activity that Jesus did he immediately moves out of John into the Synoptics) Sent, in John, is predominantly (I think Köstenberger would say, is exclusively) a reference to the cross.