Mission Then vs. Missional Now

There’s no telling what you’ll find on Twitter these days:

“mission” Then:
get out there to talk
get out there to teach
get out there to judge
get out there to save
get out there with a closed posture of protecting myself
get out there to bring back into the church

“missional” Now:
get out there to listen
get out there to learn
get out there to accept
get out there to be saved
get out there with an open posture of Christ
get out there to be the church

[ht: Makeesha]

Advertisements

4 thoughts on “Mission Then vs. Missional Now

  1. evan says:

    that is so true.
    thanks for posting this.

  2. Steve says:

    What about getting ‘commissional’? Your version sounds very passive. When Jesus said, “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you”, it was a very proactive, directed commission. He didn’t say to go listen to people, to learn from them, or to be saved.
    My problem with the whole missional/emergent/postmod movement is its deconstructive nature. All that has been learned or said or done is by definition wrong, and is to be deconstructed or abandoned. Now we’re deconstructing the Great Commission as well. Great. What do we eliminate next, prayer? Atonement? Christ himself?

  3. Rick says:

    I’ve had my run-ins with the dsconstructs, too, so it’s not that. My problem is usually that posting a list of generalizations like this swings a pendulum too far one way or the other. Instead, can I take one side and balance it with the other side – instead of versus, make it a both/and. That’s the kind of deconstruct that I think will be meaningful and will end up doing the Great Commission or whatever other charge better than just preach it teach it robotic lectures with no regard for where a person is already.
    Ultimately, asking questions or looking for another perspective, for me, is different from deconstructing. It might lead to tearing some stuff down, but hopefuilly just the things that need to come down anyway.

  4. Steve says:

    No argument. It’s presented as an ‘either/or’ and that concerns me a bit. If we can listen and learn as we present the gospel, that’s a good thing, and will make us more effective messengers. It’s always hard to present Scriptural, doctrinal truth in a coherent and meaningful manner. My struggle is how to have a living faith that reflects God and gives Him the glory, while at the same time being faithful to His Commission to reach a world that rejects Him. You can do that in a loving, relational way, but can’t skimp on the hard truths of the Word. Easy to say, hard to do.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s