I started this “Apostolic Imagination: Re-Thinking Missions” series earlier this year. I am presently writing a book with Baker Academic titled Apostolic Imagination: Rethinking Contemporary Missions, and wanted to share some of my thoughts with you before its publication. Context is king. In case you missed the previous posts, I’ll link them below:
Rethinking Contemporary Missions
Rethinking Language in Mission
Rethinking Function in Mission
Rethinking Identity in Mission
Since purpose, function, and identity are related, is there any connection between these three and the location of apostolic activity? Does geography factor into such Kingdom labors? Is the apostolic imagination influenced by place?
A friend once asked if the Church should talk about least reached places and not just least reached peoples. My response was such language may be used if we recognize that only people–and not geographic locations–can be regenerated. Jesus did not die for the boundaries of my city. He did not come to seek and save towns and villages (Luke 19:10). Rather, he preached the Kingdom of God to towns because people resided in those locations and were in need of redemption (Luke 4:43). Social structures and lasting social change occurs as residents are transformed first by the gospel. Nineveh was not spared because unjust organizations became just. She was saved because inhabitants repented of sin and believed (Jon 3:5, 10).
Paul was not thinking about the redemption of the geo-political areas called Jerusalem or Illyricum, but rather people, when he wrote:
“From Jerusalem and all the way around to Illyricum I have fulfilled the ministry of the gospel of Christ; and thus I make it my ambition to preach the gospel, not where Christ has already been named, lest I build on someone else’s foundation, but as it is written, ‘Those who have never been told of him will see, and those who have never heard will understand’” (Rom 15:19-21).
We may travel to another country, or exotic location down the street, and call it missions. Our Church culture allows us to do this while fooling ourselves into believing we are like the Apostle Paul. But is relocating for any type of Kingdom service truly reflective of the apostolic imagination? Is this what the early believers had in mind?
Simply transferring one’s location (short- or long-term) for ministry is not the same as following in the apostolic footsteps. The apostolic imagination is concerned with lostness and sanctification. It is concerned about the gospel speeding ahead and being honored (2 Thes 3:1) and new churches receiving the whole counsel of God (Acts 20:27). What does this mean on a practical level in relation to location?
The primary location of the work of the missionary is to be among unbelievers. Where does the foundation not exist? Where has Christ not already been named? This is the starting point.
After people begin to enter into the Kingdom, they must be taught to obey all that Christ commanded (Matt 28:20). The apostolic imagination aches for the sanctification of new believers. The desire is to present everyone mature in Christ (Col 1:28). While this means partnership; it does not mean permanency.
Years ago, John Nevius described missionaries like scaffolds on a construction site. They are present until local churches are established with their own elders, but then those apostolic workers relocate elsewhere so that “those who have never heard will understand” (Rom 15:21).
The apostolic imagination requires the Church to consider the matter of location. However, such geographic thoughts are consumed by the lost men and women who reside in those locations. The Church does not go because She is able to travel to a new place. Her expectation is not to plant churches because another worship expression is needed in this or that community to attract the young Christian families.
The world is a big place. Jesus has built His Church in many locations throughout this world, yet 5 billion remain outside the Church. As wise Kingdom citizens, we must be apostolic in our thinking when it comes to location.
Where should we go? The apostolic answer, 2000 years removed from Matthew 28:18-20, is not simply anywhere.
Thanks for this JD…one practical comment: It would be very helpful to have a date with your posts. Then people can quote it better, know if you saw Platt’s post on this before you wrote too (for example). Love to hear more from you on these issues. Looking forward to the book.
Thank you for your helpful comments!
The original definition of ‘least-reached’ did and does include an element of both people and place… ‘least-reached’ “refers to those people who have no access to a church in their
own language, culture or in proximity to where they live.” For some, it is related to a particular people group. For others, there may be a church in the language or culture, but there are communities that have not access to it.
May we, as the church, hear the voice of the Lord of the harvest and courageously go to those communities of people who have no access to a church in their own language and culture.
Greg, the date is in the top left, under the title of the post. Sorry about the small font. It needs to be larger. No, I have not read Platt’s article on this topic. I’ll have to check it out. Thank you for mentioning it, brother.
Thank you, Steve.
Pingback: Roundup #175 – JustinLong.org