Skip to content

Tag: mission

Published on Leave a comment on What’s On in Eastbourne

What's On In Eastbourne?

Join us for a week of free events from 26 March - 3 April.  Full details here.  Listings below...

We are a group of churches in Eastbourne opening our doors wide in the week running up to Easter.  We have well-known personalities, fascinating stories, engaging speakers and important issues - all welcome!

.

Fri 26th March 10am:  Coffee with Carswell

Bishop Wallace Benn in conversation with author and speaker Roger Carswell.  All Saints Centre

.

Fri 26th March 8pm:  Can there be forgiveness?

PC Billy Burns forgave the man who shot him in the face.  With Roger Carswell.  All Souls church

.

Sat 27th March 8pm:  Real Science, Real Faith?

Geneticist, Professor Sam Berry & Rev. Dr Steve Jeffery discuss science and belief.  All Souls church

.

Sun 28th March 8pm:  Is Christianity Good For The World?

Rev. Dr Mike Reeves on how the atheists are onto something!  Holy Trinity church

.

Mon 29th March 8pm:  An evening with Fiona Castle

Widow of entertainer Roy Castle, in conversation with Rev. John Cheeseman.  Holy Trinity church

.

Tues 30th March 8pm:  Zimbabwe, cricket & faith: Henry Olonga

An evening with Henry Olonga, international cricketer and singer.  All Saints church

.

Wed 31st March 1.10pm:  When Cancer Calls: Coping with Grief & Suffering

Listen & Lunch with Rev. David Bourne.   Holy Trinity church

.

Wed 31st March 8pm:   An Evening with Jonathan Aitken

The politics, perjury and prison of Jonathan Aitken and how he found God in the depths.  All Saints church

.

Sat 3rd April 3pm:  Touch Rugby for men & women, aged 11+

All ages, all abilities, men and women welcome.  Demonstration and coaching provided.  With half-time talk.  Gildredge Park

.

Published on Leave a comment on What's On in Eastbourne

What's On In Eastbourne?

Join us for a week of free events from 26 March - 3 April.  Full details here.  Listings below...

We are a group of churches in Eastbourne opening our doors wide in the week running up to Easter.  We have well-known personalities, fascinating stories, engaging speakers and important issues - all welcome!

.

Fri 26th March 10am:  Coffee with Carswell

Bishop Wallace Benn in conversation with author and speaker Roger Carswell.  All Saints Centre

.

Fri 26th March 8pm:  Can there be forgiveness?

PC Billy Burns forgave the man who shot him in the face.  With Roger Carswell.  All Souls church

.

Sat 27th March 8pm:  Real Science, Real Faith?

Geneticist, Professor Sam Berry & Rev. Dr Steve Jeffery discuss science and belief.  All Souls church

.

Sun 28th March 8pm:  Is Christianity Good For The World?

Rev. Dr Mike Reeves on how the atheists are onto something!  Holy Trinity church

.

Mon 29th March 8pm:  An evening with Fiona Castle

Widow of entertainer Roy Castle, in conversation with Rev. John Cheeseman.  Holy Trinity church

.

Tues 30th March 8pm:  Zimbabwe, cricket & faith: Henry Olonga

An evening with Henry Olonga, international cricketer and singer.  All Saints church

.

Wed 31st March 1.10pm:  When Cancer Calls: Coping with Grief & Suffering

Listen & Lunch with Rev. David Bourne.   Holy Trinity church

.

Wed 31st March 8pm:   An Evening with Jonathan Aitken

The politics, perjury and prison of Jonathan Aitken and how he found God in the depths.  All Saints church

.

Sat 3rd April 3pm:  Touch Rugby for men & women, aged 11+

All ages, all abilities, men and women welcome.  Demonstration and coaching provided.  With half-time talk.  Gildredge Park

.

Published on Leave a comment on Cold Contact Evangelism? [Thawed out Thursday]

I first wrote this 2 years ago.  The comments here are well worth reading - especially Missy's, for whom door-to-door was her way into the Christian life.  I've slightly updated the post.

.

A friend of mine recently asked which was better - 5 sessions of 5 pairs spending two hours door-knocking; or those 5 pairs having neighbours round five times in a season?

Some responses:

  • Good thought!  See especially here where Rory Shiner discusses Gospel intentionality as a good 'third way' between cold-contact and friendship evangelism.  He (like my friend) has been very impressed by the Crowded House churches.
  • The personal investment involved in such hospitality is often far greater than the fear factor involved in door-to-door.  In this sense door-knocking, though appearing to be the more impressive, can often be more of a cop-out.
  • A deep sharing of life is surely a far superior context for sharing the faith!

But having said that

  • The context for sharing my faith is, fundamentally, not my friendships (though clearly that is ideal).  More fundamentally the context for sharing the faith is resurrection, pentecost and second coming. Christ is risen - this is my authority to speak of Christ.  The Spirit has been poured out - this is the power to do so.  He is coming - this is the urgency.  I realise my friend would not wish to disagree with this but it's still good to remember what is, at root, my authority for speaking.
  • There are millions in this country alone who don't have Christian friends (at least Christian friends who are willing to share their faith).  Friendship evangelism will not reach them.
  • If it's a question of 'effectiveness' - stranger evangelism 'works'. I have prayed with people on the street to receive Christ.  I have seen them continue on with the Lord.  And this is precisely what we should expect given the point above regarding resurrection, pentecost and second coming.
  • Think of the beginnings of the Salvation Army or David Wilkerson (Cross and Switchblade) - there was no bridge upon which they built their ministry apart from the declaration of the word.  Now they committed themselves to those who responded and very meaningful relationships blossomed (along with ministries that often lost their confidence with the power of the word proclaimed plainly!).  But the footing on which those relationships were placed was the proclamation of the gospel to strangers.
  • Jesus did both - He did blow into town and speak to strangers.  And He also went to dinner parties and built into very significant relationships.
  • We are to sow on all the soils (Mark 4).

The advantages of cold-contact evangelism seem to be:

  • It mirrors the urgency of the message.  To me, this is absolutely vital.  Will people really understand the nature of our message if we don't communicate it in a 'Wisdom cries aloud in the streets' kind of way?
  • It mirrors the summoning nature of the message.  We communicate the gospel powerfully when we call people to Christ.  Immediately it becomes apparent that we're not discussing a moral philosophy or religious programme but summoning people to a Person.
  • It more closely reflects the profligacy of the gospel offer.  None are disenfranchised, you go after everyone in your area!
  • It gets down to brass tacks fast.

Dinner-table evangelism has these advantages:

  • It’s more corporate.
  • Church life is modelled in front of the unbeliever.  (John 13:34-35)
  • The gospel’s less likely to be seen by the unbeliever as a gnostic, disembodied teaching.
  • It models 1 Thes 2:8 and 2 Cor 4:5 – sharing life and serving those we evangelise.

This doesn’t mean you can’t have life-sharing, serving, door-knocking nor a dinner party that quickly gets down to brass tacks but these seem to be the considerations.

We need to make sure that those who we invite are not simply our friends (Luke 14:12-14!) and that we target those who are not only beyond the walls of the church but beyond our friendship groups and comfort zones.  Door to door is never to be an end in itself but the basis on which a relationship will ensue.  It should never be "Gospel apart from relationship."  But if it were ever a choice between "Gospel => relationship" or "Relationship => Gospel" (and many people want to make it a choice) then I can't imagine how, theologically, we could ever justify the latter over the former!

.

.

Published on Leave a comment on Remembering Karl Barth

Karl Barth died 41 years ago today.

Here are a few of my favourite quotes from him:

On his own theology:

My whole theology, you see, is fundamentally a theology for parsons. It grew out of my own situation when I had to teach and preach and counsel a little. (From a radio broadcast made shortly before Barth’s death. Quoted from William Willimon, Conversations with Barth on Preaching, Abingdon Press, 2006.)

On the reason for theology:

The normal and central fact with which dogmatics has to do is, very simply, the Church’s Sunday sermon of yesterday and to-morrow, and so it will continue to be.” (Church Dogmatics I/1, p91)

On theological method

Jesus Christ, as he is attested to us in Holy Scripture, is the one Word of God whom we have to hear, and whom we have to trust and obey in life and in death.  (Article 1 of the Barmen Declaration)


On the bible:

“The Bible says all sorts of things, certainly; but in all this multiplicity and variety, it says in truth only one thing – just this: the name of Jesus Christ… The Bible becomes clear when it is clear that is says this one thing… The Bible remains dark to us if we do not hear in it this sovereign name… Interpretation stands in the service of the clarity which the Bible as God’s Word makes for itself; and we can properly interpret the Bible, in whole or part, only when we perceive and show that what it says is said from the point of view of that… name of Jesus Christ.”  (Church Dogmatics I/2, p720)

At bottom, the Church is in the world only with a book in its hands. We have no other possibility to bear witness except to explain this book.” (God in Action, p107-8)

On creation and covenant

Creation is the outward basis of the covenant and the covenant is the inward basis of creation.  (Church Dogmatics III/1, ch41)

On church:

The essence of the Church is proclamation.  (Homiletics, p40)

On the Christian life:

"Ye shall be witnesses unto me" (Acts 1:8) – this is enough for the one to whom Christ speaks and who has heard Him. Whether strong or weak, willing or unwilling, successful or unsuccessful, the Christian is a witness, irrespective of whether the miracle occurs, or whether it occurs visibly or invisibly. In all circumstances and with the whole of his existence he is a responsible witness of the Word of God. He is called to be this. As such he is set at the side of God in the world, and therefore set over against the world.’ (Church Dogmatics IV/3, p609)

On proofs for God:

Note well: in the whole Bible of the Old and New Testaments not the slightest attempt is ever made to prove God. This attempt has always been made only outside the biblical view of God, and only where it has been forgotten with whom we have to do, when we speak of God. What sort of attempts were they, after all, where the attempt was make to prove a perfect Being alongside imperfect ones? Or from the existence of the world to prove the ordering Power? Or the moral proof of God from the face of man’s conscience? I will not enter into these proofs of God. I don’t know whether you can at once see the humour and the fragility of these proofs. These proofs may avail for the alleged gods; if it were my task to make you acquainted with these allegedly supreme beings, I would occupy myself with the five famous proofs of God. In the Bible there is no such argumentation; the Bible simply speaks of God simply as of One who needs no proof. It speaks of a God who proves Himself on every hand: Here I am, and since I am and live and act it is superfluous that I should be proved. On the basis of this divine self-proof the prophets and apostles speak. In the Christian Church there can be no speaking about God in any other way. God has not the slightest need for our proofs. (Dogmatics in Outline, 38)

On apologetics:

The great danger of apologetics is “the domesticating of revelation… the process of making the Gospel respectable. When the Gospel is offered to man, and he stretches out his hand to receive it and takes it into his hand, an acute danger arises which is greater than the danger that he may not understand it and angrily reject it. The danger is that he may accept it and peacefully and at once make himself its lord and possessor, thus rendering it inoccuous, making that which chooses him something which he himself has chosen, which therefore comes to stand as such alongside all the other things that he can also choose, and therefore control.” (Church Dogmatics II/1, p141)

On assurance (this is perhaps my favourite Barth quote):

“We might imagine the conversation...  The man to whom [the Word of grace is spoken] thinks and says that he is not this new, peaceful, joyful man living in fellowship. He asks leave honestly to admit that he does not know this man, or at least himself as this man.

The Word of grace replies: ‘All honour to your honesty, but my truth transcends it. Allow yourself, therefore, to be told in all truth and on the most solid grounds what you do not know, namely, that you are this man in spite of what you think.’

Man: ‘ You think that I can and should become this man in the course of time? But I do not have sufficient confidence in myself to believe this. Knowing myself, I shall never become this man.’

The Word of grace: ‘You do well not to have confidence in yourself. But the point is not that you can and should become this man. What I am telling you is that, as I know you, you already are.’

Man: ‘I understand that you mean this eschatologically. You are referring to the man I perhaps will be one day in some not very clearly known transfiguration in a distant eternity. If only I had attained to this! And if only I could be certain that even then I should be this new man!’

The Word of grace: ‘You need to understand both yourself and me better than you do. I am not inviting you to speculate about your being in eternity, but to receive and ponder the news that here and now you begin to be the new man, and are already that which you will be eternally.’

Man: ‘How can I accept this news? On what guarantee can I make bold to take is seriously?’

The Word of grace: ‘I, Jesus Christ, am the One who speaks to you. You are what you are in Me, as I will to be in you. Hold fast to Me. I am your guarantee. My boldness is yours. With this boldness dare to be what you are?’

Man: ‘I certainly hear the message, but…’

In this perplexed and startled ‘but’ we see the attack, and who it is that is attacked.” (Church Dogmatics, V/2, p250)

.

Do you have a favourite Barth quote?  Why not leave it in comments.

.

“My whole theology, you see, is fundamentally a theology for parsons.  It grew out of my own situation when I had to teach and preach and counsel a little.

Published on Leave a comment on The mission of the church

Check out this definition of the church's mission.

‘The Church's commission, which is the foundation of its freedom, consists in this: in Christ's stead, and so in the service of his own Word and work, to deliver to all people, through preaching and sacrament, the message of the free grace of God.’

That's it.  That's the mission of the church.  Proclamation.

Now, without cheating, see if you can guess where this comes from.  And when.

Any guesses?

.

.

Well maybe you think these are the words of some one-eyed fundamentalist, divorced from any pressing social or political needs.  Perhaps you think this definition represent a cowardly retreat from the social and political realities of the day?

Well the year was 1934, the place was Germany and this is article 6 of the Barmen Declaration - the document that founded the German Confessing Church.

And into that context, this determination to view the church's mission simply as gospel proclamation proved to be the most provocative political challenge possible.  This is precisely because it refuses to engage with the world on its own terms.  The Nazis are confronted because the Confessing Church occupies itself with its one true Fuhrer (Christ), its one true Reich (God’s Kingdom) and its one true commission: delivering ‘the message of the free grace of God’.  Far from creating an ‘ecclesiastical ghetto’ for the Confessing Christians, this single-minded determination to let the Gospel set the agenda for the Church brings it into its most significant contact with the surrounding culture.

Barmen is profoundly political.  But it is so by refusing any other agenda but the Gospel of Jesus Christ.  Nothing could be more explosive.

A few years later, Karl Barth (who authored Barmen) was back in his native Switzerland.  (Interestingly it was his lectures on preaching that were the last straw for the Nazis, the Gestapo bursting in and forcibly deporting him.  Apparently his last words to his students on the train platform was the admonition: "Exegesis, exegesis, exegesis!")  Anway, a young pastor from Brandenburg wrote to him in distress.  He had been sacked after preaching against Mein Kampf from the pulpit.  The pastor expected sympathy.  Instead Barth replied that the pastor had made a "decisive mistake":

Your job, when you stand in the pulpit, is to again make well the sick church of Germany.  That can be done only by the Word alone.  You are to serve that Word and no other.  But you can’t do that if you seize on Mein Kampf… Was it not a shame, each minute that you wasted with this book instead of reading the Bible?   (William Willimon, Conversations with Barth on Preaching, p248-249)

Interesting huh?

.

Published on Leave a comment on Good news for the poor

Isaiah61

Social engagement or evangelism-only? 

.

What is the mission of the church?

 

Here are three factors that unnecessarily polarize the debate:

.

1) We think in terms of church programmes.  We frame the whole debate in terms of how many of our 15 scheduled hours of church-run activity must be devoted to helping the needy each week. 

.

2) We look for justification in the wrong theological doctrine.  One crowd stresses the doctrine of creation, the other the doctrine of salvation - and then we proceed as though these are separate agendas, separately addressed by the Lord.  We need to begin with a doctrine of God from which flows a single creation-salvation programme in the Gospel of the Son.  Here's a paper where I attempt to do this. 

From this approach I think it becomes obvious that evangelism simply is the mission of the church.  But it also means that social engagement does get worked out on the basis of and from within that proclaimed gospel.

.

3) Even though I'm a believer that "the mission of the church is evangelism" I submit that our side is probably most to blame for unnecessary polarization.  The sad fact is that many of the evangelism-only crowd are also middle-class-only.  We don't really believe that the Good News is for the poor.  (Which is not really a methodological problem - it's a spiritual and theological problem).

But the debate is not about who we should minister to!  We should all agree that we must minister to the poor.  And we can hardly deny that Jesus had a decided bias to the outsider!  The debate is about what form that ministry takes and what makes it Christian.  Well then let's have this debate while we all move onto the housing estates and with the love of Christ compelling us, let us all minister to the poor. You can knock on doors and lead off by addressing practical needs.  I'll knock on doors and lead off with Jesus.  I still think my way's much more faithful and I'll try to persuade you.  But I also reckon that you will end up gospelling some of your contacts.  And there's no doubt that I'll end up debt counselling many of mine. 

But let's at least make sure we've got the same mission field in mind.  Let's first be clear that we must reach the poor.  Then let's discuss how.

.

Published on Leave a comment on Changing world – changing ministry

A video briefly existed here charting an alarming rate of decline in birth rates in the west combined with incredible Muslim birth and immigration rates. 

Apparently the statistics are absolutely unreliable.  See here.  Thanks to Daniel Blanche for pointing this out.

Sorry to spread the error. 

Anyway - it's still true to say that through immigration the unreached are reaching us.  Therefore:

Rejoice that the Lord is sending the mission field to us

Believe the gospel

Preach the gospel

Understand Islam

Take up your cross 

Have babies

Believe the gospel

Preach the gospel

.

Published on Leave a comment on Look at the fields – they are ripe for harvest

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AZiMlwXU6fQ

 

 

Gospel for Asia (UK site here) sends native missionaries into the Asian harvest field at a fraction of the cost of sending westerners.  100% of your money goes to the field.  You can sponsor a missionary for £20 a month.  Think about it.

.

Published on Leave a comment on The context is key. The context is mission.

In preaching through 1 Corinthians recently I listened to a lot of sermons on chapters 9 and 10.   Two themes in particular were hammered home by preachers. 

In chapter 9 there's the olympic training regimes (v24-27).  In chapter 10 there's 'glorifying God' in all circumstances (v31).  But so often the context of these verses is ignored.

So in chapter 9 we read this:

24Do you not know that in a race all the runners run, but only one gets the prize? Run in such a way as to get the prize. 25Everyone who competes in the games goes into strict training. They do it to get a crown that will not last; but we do it to get a crown that will last forever. 26Therefore I do not run like a man running aimlessly; I do not fight like a man beating the air. 27No, I beat my body and make it my slave so that after I have preached to others, I myself will not be disqualified for the prize.

That'll preach won't it?  Go into strict training people!  There's a medal held out.  Be an Olympian Christian.

And what did all these sermons mean by being an Olympian Christian?  Personal holiness.  Devotional disciplines.  You know the drill.

But what is the context?  Verses 19-23 - becoming all things to all men so that by all possible means we may save some.  It's a missionary context.  Beating our bodies and going into strict training is a description of how we order our lives with evangelistic priorities.  This Olympian spirituality is an outwardly focussed determination to move out into the world for the salvation of others.  That's quite a different sermon.

In chapter 10 we have that famous verse:

31So whether you eat or drink or whatever you do, do it all for the glory of God.

What does this mean?  How would it look like lived out?  Well if you listen to these sermons it's mainly about personal holiness.  Devotional disciplines.  You know the drill.

But again, what is the context?  It's eating and drinking in the context of food sacrificed to idols.  The context is a world full of unChristian and anti-Christian cultures and practices which, nonetheless, the Christian is compelled to engage.  And so verse 33 says:

I try to please everybody in every way. For I am not seeking my own good but the good of many, so that they may be saved.

It's about adapting all things, even eating and drinking, to the end that Jews, Greeks and the church of God is built up (v32).  Effectively verse 33 explains verse 31.  Doing all for the glory of God means doing all for the good of many, so that they may be saved.  This makes sense of the 'glory of God' which is not a static quality but an outgoing salvific movement. 

To have your life ordered by God's glory is not simply to do your daily devotions - it's to live in outgoing invitation for the salvation of others.  Verse 31 is not some abstract call to look pious at all times.  We know what 10:31 looks like - it looks like Paul's ministry.  It looks like 9:19-23.  It looks like the missionary determination to become all things to all men that some may be saved. 

So please, keep the context in mind.  And remember, the context is mission.

.

Published on Leave a comment on A theology of preaching – part 1

Go to theology network for my paper on preaching in full.  Here I'll post it in chunks.  Be good to talk about it if you want to comment... 

Introduction

It is often said that the real issue in preaching is not ‘How to?’ but ‘How can?’  How can a preacher stand before a congregation and dare to speak ‘In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit’?  The ‘How can?’ is by far the more pressing question.  And yet, in the textbooks, at the conferences and in preaching groups it seems the ‘How to?’ is the perennial concern.  Notes or full script?  Powerpoint or no?  Topical sermons or lectio continua?  These questions abound.  Even issues like ‘how to address the heart?’ or ‘how to preach wisdom literature?’ threaten to drown out proper theological reflection.  All the while the ‘How can?’ question stands above our practice demanding an answer. 

Our silence on this issue could simply reflect the pragmatic spirit of our age.  We want to know what ‘works’ so we can copy it.  But I suggest there is a deeper problem.  Fundamentally we have an impoverished theology of revelation which fails to appreciate what evangelicals from another age held dear – namely that God Himself addresses us in preaching. 

Consider this classic statement of reformed faith from the Second Helvetic Confession:

“The Preaching of the Word of God is the Word of God. Wherefore when this Word of God is now preached in the church by preachers lawfully called, we believe that the very Word of God is proclaimed and received by the faithful.”

Luther would agree:

“Tis a right excellent thing, that every honest pastor’s and preacher’s mouth is Christ’s mouth, and his word and forgiveness is Christ’s word and forgiveness… For the office is not the pastor’s or preacher’s but God’s; and the Word which he preacheth is likewise not the pastor’s and preacher’s but God’s.”

 Or consider this from John Calvin:

“When a man has climbed up into the pulpit… it is [so] that God may speak to us by the mouth of a man.”

The reformers viewed preaching as God’s own word proclaimed in His name, by His power and with His authority.  More to the point this is the bible’s own teaching, as we’ll see.  Proclamation of the word of Christ is not simply an explanation and application of the bible.  It is itself a divine encounter in which the Spirit again confronts the hearers with the omnipotent force of God’s own Word.

In the face of such an audacious claim, the ‘How to?’ must be put on hold.  This paper seeks a theology of revelation that is able to address the question ‘How can a preacher dare to speak the word of the LORD?’  What is the nature of divine revelation such that this is even possible?  Once we have we addressed this we will find that the ‘How to?’ has been decisively and much more faithfully shaped.

..

 

Twitter widget by Rimon Habib - BuddyPress Expert Developer