Category / Contextualization

by johnkking

Q&A: What do you consider “specialized training”?

Original Question: “Finally, I’m wondering what specialized training includes, given that the training (equipping) of the church is in view in this text. If we assume that being gifted definitionally entails no specialized training, then once the gifted train the church for service, can those so trained “become” gifted, or does being trained rule that out? Or is it just that such training is not “specialized”? Or perhaps the training—say, for crossing cultures—is simply irrelevant to the question of being gifted, so that those trained by the gifted may be equipped for service, but whether they’re gifted for it is another matter altogether?”

Answer: Obviously, I did not do a good job in my original post of being specific and clear in my communication. As I have noted earlier, I have no objections to “specialized training.” I actually spend lots of time pondering the kinds of specialized training that many followers of Jesus need to become more fruitful in their efforts to imitate him. My main objection is the tendency of the Global North church to require extensive formal education before people are considered for ministry positions. We have developed a “professional clergy” mindset which precludes participation in disciple making.

Last Friday I taught lesson 12 for the Perspectives on the World Christian Movement course. I told a couple of global stories of breakthrough which are happening. One comes from Africa and the other from the U.S. Both examples are early in the process of multiplication. I intentionally chose these because they are not so fully developed that they feel light years away. I shared about the use of Discovery Groups in the process and touched on some specific examples where some of the “least likely” people are being used by God in powerful ways. After my two sections were competed a young lady (probably in her twenties) shared with me that she had heard about DBS while working at a Christian university and done some research. She started some groups and found that they multiplied quickly and a couple of simple churches had started among a couple of sports teams. University officials became concerned about the “out of control” spread of new groups and took actions which forced the efforts to “go underground.”

My heart sank! “What were they thinking?” Why didn’t they rejoice?

Systems tend to be self-perpetuating, thus they are often resistant to change. Here in the Global North we have a strong, formal education system which has become self-perpetuating. Teachers need students. Require credentialing and you have steady work. Some of that is good; some becomes troubling to me. But my greater concern is our failure to recognize that you do not lead with the structures of a historically older system, when starting new works. Keep it simple. Keep it in smaller modules so people do not have to leave their families and employment to “get training.”

I conflated two distinct topics: gifting and education. Clearly Paul touches on both in the Ephesians 4 passage, so there is overlap. But our discussion of these matters are complicated by each of us bringing “baggage” to the table.

Paul’s focus is that every member of the body becomes equipped for ministry. Jesus insured that such was possible by gifting the global church with “apostles, prophets, evangelists and pastor/teachers.” It takes all four for the church to become all Jesus envisions. Every fellowship should examine itself to identify which of those four (or five) functions do we high light. Which are missing? What must be done to address our deficiencies?

by johnkking

Q&A: Is this “a Comprehensive Pauline Account of Leadership Gifts/Roles?

Original question(s): “Do you think Paul has clearly delimited distinctive roles in mind here? Relatedly, do you think this is a comprehensive Pauline account of leadership gifts/roles? These are general questions about what you think Paul is doing in this text, the answers to which will, I assume, relate to the way you are using the text to answer your DMM-specific question. Watson’s reduction to two categories at the end of the post seems to indicate that you take Paul’s categories to be sort of broad strokes that get at tendencies. Is that fair?”

My Response: Questions and answers always have a context. Greg and I both know that from our life experiences and our efforts to study the Bible. In 1 Corinthians Paul responds to numerous questions which he was asked via a letter that had been sent to him from the congregation in Corinth. Many commentators on those sections have wished to have the actual letter and additional background information so we could explore Paul’s responses in that greater and more detailed context. It is possible some of our teachings from those sections would be transformed by a clearer picture of the specific context which Paul and the Corinthian believers knew all too well.

I personally read Ephesians as a circular letter written for all the churches in the Roman province of Asia (along the coast of modern-day Turkey). While he spent the longest time in Ephesus of any of the places where he made disciples of Jesus and nurtured emerging communities of faith, Paul never refers to anyone there by name. This is so different than what he does in his other letters. I think Paul is addressing a broader context than is true of his letters written to Thessalonica, Philippi or Corinth. Ephesians speaks of “church” in a more universal sense, rather than a more particular sense, in my studied opinion.

When I think of Pauline writing about leadership and gifting, as a whole, I see more diversity than uniformity. Ephesians 4 is one of three diverse passages from his pen that list “spiritual gifts” (1 Corinthians 12 and Romans 12 are the other two). Laying these three lists alongside one another and it is striking how many different roles/functions are listed. While there is some overlap of these three, there is great diversity.

My personal reading of Ephesians as a circular letter prompts me to see those four or five roles (A.P.E.S-T) as leadership categories which take their unique distinctions from one another out of other more specific usages. Because of this nuanced reading, I often reference “apostolic, prophetic, evangelistic, pastoral.” While there are people who function fully, with incredible divine empowerment, in these roles, Paul seems to me to be addressing the need for everyone in the universal body of Christ to have exposure and training from all in order for us to be equipped for ministry. Not everyone in the church will become an apostle, but there is some apostolic thinking that will and can enrich their efforts to live out the life of Jesus. Not all will be prophets, but Paul certainly admonishes the people in the Corinthian church to “earnestly desire spiritual gifts” especially the gift of prophecy. While many of us may not feel as out-going (never met a stranger) as someone we think of when we read the word “evangelist,” all of us are to become evangelistic.

In this swirl of Spirit-empowered context, I addressed a specific question, from a specific context where the prophet, pastor and teacher roles are much more emphasized. The questioner is asking “What about those roles? DMM seems to be emphasizing the roles of evangelists and apostles, in working among the lost. What about the roles we talk about being used primarily among those who are already saved? Where are they in the DMM world of thought and emphasis?”

I wrote a response to a more specific question than many of the readers of my blog realized. I posted a link to that article in a social media in hopes that others would click through and consider what I have written. One friend responded at the place of that link, rather than here in the blog. Context matters, greatly. Many people don’t want to dig deep enough to discern the nuances that context can create. They want snippets here and there. Just give us quick easy answers, don’t make us think or dig too deep.

I will explore this further in some additional posts. I do not want to overestimate your interest, even if you have subscribed to this blog.

by johnkking

Q&A: What About a Pantheistic Culture?

Original Question: “With non-Christians, in a pantheistic culture like India, how do we help them see ‘our God’ through the process and not their false gods.” This is an excellent question which touches on a fundamental issue when considering the Discovery process.

Everyone operates from the default of a worldview. We all absorb answers from our culture to some foundational questions: Who am I? Where am I? What has gone wrong here? What, if anything, can be done about what has gone wrong? Flowing out of the answers our culture gives to these answers will be our sense of values and beliefs. Polytheistic cultures, like Hinduism and large sections of Buddhism have very scripted answers to these questions which reinforce and are shaped by their understanding of many gods and their dynamic interactions with these spiritual beings.

One of the primary resources for perpetuating a cultural worldview are the stories which are told. Epic dramas reflect the cultural answers to these foundational questions. Inviting people from such a culture to explore and discover from the alternative narrative of the Bible is actually the best way to help them experience transformation. In the biblical record there are numerous sections which have been described as “power encounters.” For example, Elijah and the prophets of Baal presents a show down between Israel’s God and the false gods of their neighboring nations. “Will the real god show up?” is the challenge Elijah presents.

What polytheistic people need is to get their fingerprints on the narrative of the one true God. They will certainly lean towards hearing us as presenting Jesus as another God to be added to their thousands of gods in the early stages, but there must be a seed of new possibilities planted in their hearts and minds. The Word of God is the power for salvation. The Holy Spirit has the divine strength to demolish strongholds. He has the capacity to overcome the objections we do not even know exist. When we lead a household of peace to discovery, we are acknowledging that He is able to do what we cannot. We are acting in faith that God’s ways are not our ways and His thoughts are much higher than ours.

Disciple making through Discovery has worked among every major world religion. The starting places may differ. The Scripture sets will be different. But God has given us remarkable evidence during the last thirty years of Kingdom Movements that could not have been imagined late in the 1900’s. We have much to celebrate because He continues to show Himself mighty to save!

by johnkking

Q&A: Why Start There?

Q&A: “Most of the Scriptures used are in the Synoptic Gospels. Can you show how this is worked out in the ministry of Paul? There seem to be some differences. Explain?“

Discovery is more easily accomplished by the use of narrative (story based) sections of the Bible. Do you remember the interaction between Phillip and Jesus? Philip said, “Lord, show us the Father and that will be enough for us.” Jesus answered: “Don’t you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, ‘Show us the Father’?” (John 14:8-9) Since watching Jesus is the best way to see God the Father the Gospels are foundational resources.

Evangelicalism has made much of the Pauline corpus, and rightly so. But, there are times we make this material oppositional to the Gospels, and that is not good. Having a good understanding of the differences between these two genres and their functional roles is important.

Disciple Making Movements are focused on getting the Good News of Jesus planted into families–especially families who have little or no access to the Bible. These are folks who have almost no knowledge of Jesus. As a result, we believe they should spend lots of their initial time in the Bible discovering what is revealed about Jesus. The Son of God is the only one who ever said that as he is lifted up he will draw people to the Father.

When you read through Acts, and pay close attention to what Paul writes in his letters about his early days in a new city, it is obvious that he also made much of the Gospel. Consider, for example, his comments about coming to Corinth: “And so it was with me, brothers and sisters. When I came to you, I did not come with eloquence or human wisdom as I proclaimed to you the testimony about God. For I resolved to know nothing while I was with you except Jesus Christ and him crucified“ (1 Corinthians 2:1-2).

Many of the questions and objections we encounter arise from the difference between starting towards faith and efforts to ground and mature those who are already believers. Are you reaching out to lost people? If so, we recommend spending lots of time in the Gospels. As they come to faith and simple churches emerge, there will be plenty of time to spend time with the letters written to churches.

by johnkking

Question 5: People?

“What do we learn about people?” is a question which opens participants up to discover the typical ways human beings interact with God and one another. Their answers often give insights into how they view themselves and other significant people in their lives.

When Jesus was asked about the greatest commandment he started off by calling for whole-hearted love for God and then added the second greatest command, “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Matthew 22:39). The people we are exposed to through Scriptures give us avenues to view our own heart condition from a safe distance. Exposing ourselves to others (via mutual accountability) can be scary until we learn whether or not they will deal with our inner secrets with truth and grace.

Through the pages of the Bible we see the human tendency to hide. We see our propensity to deceive as a form of cover up. We see that honesty can come at a high price, too. We are able to discover with how the Holy God deals with our sin, rebellion and cover ups. We get to explore what happens when people reject God’s grace. We do not have to suffer all the consequences of all the bad decisions we might choose. The characters in the Bible stories become cautionary examples.

But there are also models who are worthy of imitating. Coaching a discovery group to become conscious of people who will model exemplary responses to our Heavenly Father give us new ways forward. Repentance calls for changes in our choices. Sometimes we feel like our bad choice was the only way forward. But through Peter we learn that Judas’ actions are not the only option when we are convicted of our rejection or betrayal of Jesus. God has given us a incredible resource through the people we encounter within his Word.

Knowing what we should not do is often not enough. We need healthier ways forward. We need positive examples like Joseph, Daniel and Ruth. We need to watch Mary, Martha and their brother Lazarus to see how true friends interact with Jesus. While this question is not nearly as valuable as Question #4, “What do we learn about God?” it is still very significant. Pay special attention when participants shift from third person pronouns (“he,” “she,” “they”) and begin to use first person pronouns (“I” and “we”) to answer Question 5.

by johnkking

Reflecting on: Focusing on Groups

From: Focusing on winning individuals.
To: Focusing on groups — to bring the gospel into existing families, groups and communities.

90% of salvations described in the book of Acts describe either large or small groups. Only 10% are individuals who experience salvation by themselves. We also see Jesus focusing on sending out his disciples to look for households, and we see Jesus often reaching households. Note examples such as Zacchaeus and his entire household experiencing salvation (Luke 19:9-10), and the Samaritan woman coming to faith along with a great many from her entire town (John 4:39-42).

Reaching groups has many advantages over reaching and gathering individuals. For example:

  • Instead of transferring “Christian culture” to a single new believer, local culture begins to be redeemed by the group.
  • Persecution isn’t isolated and focused on the individual but is normalized across the group. They can support each other in persecution.
  • Joy is shared as a family or community discovers Christ together.
  • Unbelievers have a visible example of “here’s what it looks like for a group of people like me to follow Christ.”

(Copied from: https://2414now.net/2020/09/23/mindshifts-in-movements-part-2/)

This is one of the primary ways Christians in the Global North unintentionally undermine multiplication strategies. When we first encounter a spiritual seeker is a crucial juncture. If we view this person as only an individual, we will most likely work to disconnect her/him from the groups in order to connect them to ourselves and/or other groups. Likely we will invite them to other groups where we already have meaningful relationships. While this is not wrong, it is unwise. It is addition at its best/worst.

Before you start a one on one Bible study with an individual ask, “Who do you know who also has these spiritual thoughts?” Or maybe, “Which of your friends might be asking the same kinds of spiritual questions?” The goal is to remember that most people have family or friends and Persons of Peace will want their closest relationships to go on this spiritual journey with them, if at all possible.

As the copied material above indicates, this effort to see a whole family and/or group of friends come to faith together is absolutely essential when working in “closed” people groups. While we assume that is not so important here in the U.S., we may need to reconsider, especially if we are reaching out to refugees or immigrants. Just this morning I heard about a teenager who came to faith as an individual and his immediate family sent him back to their homeland (they are refugees from a nation which is overwhelmingly unreached) so he can be peer pressured into renouncing his faith. What if he had been encouraged to invite family members to participate from the beginning?

While the people you are contacting may not be like that teenager, what if their disciples are? Why not start a process which can be used anywhere in this world? Let’s use practices which honor the family and friendship structures which are already in place? Yes, some relationships will become oppositional, but let’s make sure it is not because of our failure to try to reach people in their existing groups.

by johnkking

Do I Recommend a Mash-up?

Question: Would you recommend a mash-up of DMM, T4T and 4 Fields training approaches? What if it is an attempt at a call for unity?

Answer: I appreciate the call for unity and the desire to cooperate. I highly commend a spirit of understanding one another and working together whenever possible.

The piece of this discussion which doesn’t get adequate consideration, in my opinion, is the history of why Disciple Making Movement (DMM) strategies were developed. History can arm us against making the same mistakes over and over again.

David Watson was trained in the same non-traditional missionary strategies as some of the first folks who developed T4T, 4 Fields and some of the other CPM approaches. But ALL six of his first indigenous church planters were martyred by the Bhojpuri within six months of being deployed. 

David was understandably distraught over these traumatic events. After months of being depressed and eventually becoming angry with God, the Holy Spirit pushed him back to Matthew 10 and Luke 10. David was not happy to be taken there, since he had spent much time there already. Finally, he begrudgingly started writing out a list of the directions Jesus gave the people he sent out (both the 12 and the 72).

As he was making that list he recognized two things. First, Jesus’ directions are quite different than traditional evangelistic strategies, especially since they were not “confrontational” (this is my word, not something I have ever heard David or anyone else use). Second, Jesus deploys people looking for a special category of person (“worthy man” or “Person of Peace”). They did not go to confront a village of its sin (ala street corner preaching). They were sent with a message about the coming King, but they proclaim it where they are welcomed. 

When Watson trained his second group that is what he did differently. He got a very different outcome, as we now know. 

T4T was the write-up of what proved fruitful in China (as I understand the history). 4 Fields and other strategies were developed for different contexts. I get that and I appreciate what was accomplished in those other settings. 

But globally the least reached people groups are in resistant regions or closed nations. I want to carefully recognize that and use the approach that works best for the least reached because they are always the bullseye (at the center) of what I want to see ultimately accomplished.

T4T is training heavy on the front end because it is designed to take traditionally formed believers and re-train and re-deploy them to see lost people won. I applaud that. 

I am cognizant that we have to help people who come to faith through Discovery Groups to intentionally discover how to live as strong communities of faith. That is when it more naturally happens. After they come to faith through Discovering God, they are ready to begin discovering what living together looks like, unless denominations or traditional believers are super-imposing outside standards on them. Yes, there are challenges when this is happening in a context where lost people have been radically impacted by some interactions with “church”—whatever connotations they have for that word. 

I am not adamantly against attempting a mash-up. But ultimately we are always going to have to answer whether or not we believe people can be discipled to faith. Some very vocal Calvinists flatly reject such a possibility. If we say, “Yes, it is possible,” then we will be at least okay with using Discovery as our evangelism strategy. If we say, “No,” then we are left with the necessity of doing some kind of “confrontational evangelism.”

I cannot overcome this theological divide. I can attempt to reason with such Calvinists, but here is a chasm that will result in us needing to love, honor and accept each other, but also truthfully acknowledge we are going to evangelize differently. 

The biggest difference is whether you call people to “make a decision of faith” quickly (what I call “confrontational evangelism”) or look for Persons of Peace and work through them to get their household into a Discovery setting (which is going to be a slower call to faith).

Increasingly more CPM folks use DBS as a follow-up Discipleship strategy with those who make a quick decision, or with those who will not make a quick decision, but are still spiritually open (Discovery is not their first choice, but a Plan B strategy). With DMM some form of Discovery is Plan A.

If God miraculously brings someone to faith quickly, DMM practitioners likely will go straight to passages about Jesus and later circle back to any passages which were skipped. We generally want folks to go through the “Creation to Christ” scripture set because God uses it to create a Kingdom worldview for willing participants. Also, it equips those who come to faith in knowing how to lead others to faith in a path they can replicate. 

T4T was developed where confrontational evangelism was typically not deadly. DMM developed where it was (see my previous post). Since most international Movements are in restricted access nations or regions, I believe DMM is the wiser course of action. For example, while Muslim people who would come to faith in the US might not be persecuted for that decision, I know if they eventually return to their home nation, they will need to be equipped to reach others. Leading them to faith in a way they can replicate anywhere in the world has many benefits. 

Strategically and theologically, I lean heavily towards DMM. To me it is the wiser way forward because of the kinds of reasons I have shared. As a result, I will not invest time towards creating mash-ups.

by johnkking

Reflecting on: Who Are the Best Catalysts?

From: “Hoping a new believer or group of new believers will initiate a movement.”
To: “Asking: What national believers who have been followers for many years might become the catalyst(s) for a CPM?”

This relates to the common idea that we as a culturally distant outsider will find and win a lost person(s) who will become the movement catalyst. While this can occasionally happen, the vast majority of movements are started by cultural insiders or near neighbors who have been believers for several or even many years. Their own mindset shifts and fresh understanding of CPM principles open up new possibilities for Kingdom expansion. (Copied from: https://2414now.net/2020/09/22/mindshifts-in-movements-part-1/)

When I shared this list with a friend who is a catalyst in the Middle, he shared:

“I find the last mind-shift something I still go back and forth on. On one hand, I agree with the fact that it is much easier for an insider to start a movement among his own people and those within in the church tend to be better insiders. On the other hand, I often have failed by identifying the wrong insiders who I end up fighting about DNA issues of multiplication and best practices when I initially thought we had traction (sometimes years into the work). Whereas, with those I led to faith as the outside missionary, I got to build the DNA from scratch and didn’t have to fight with the ghost of past tendencies. Since I was this person’s only spiritual father, whatever I modeled for them was the only way and was gold. Whereas, training existing believers sometimes DMM later on the line can be a fad that they move on from. Just some thoughts…. I have trained insider older believers who have worked well!!!!! However, my greatest experience of multiplication has been from new believers that didn’t know anything else!”

I appreciate my friend’s response, because it well illustrates the point Stan and Elizabeth made in the original post at the 24:14 site listed above. Helping long-time believers become DMM catalysts can be slow, tedious and is fraught with great risks. I often compare it to the challenge of buying an old home in a historic district, moving your family into the structure and then starting a massive remodel, while you continue to live there! Deconstruction is absolutely necessary. But it is even harder when that house has been in your family for generations.

My friend in the Middle East had lived there long enough that he speaks the language fluently, understands the culture deeply (he married a woman from his adopted nation) and has made numerous contacts through his side business. His experience is the exception, rather than the rule. Just as it takes listening to God, great wisdom and experience to identify Persons of Peace, it takes the same to identify and help potential Multipliers transition from Addition Paradigms toward implementing true Multiplication mind shifts.

[NOTE: I reserve the phrase Person of Peace for a lost person who will open his/her family/friends to a disciple maker. I suggest we use the term Multiplier to refer to someone who is already a believer who takes up this hard work of Deconstruction/ Reconstruction and begins to actively search for Persons of Peace within their own people group or a near people group. Yes, this is a special category of people, but they are different from the kinds of people Jesus sent the 12 and the 72 looking for in Matthew 10 and Luke 10 respectively.]

by johnkking

# 200!

A recent comment notes that I have not addressed how to catalyze Urban Disciple Making Movements. In my reply, I noted that this is true and noted that there are no known urban DMMs, yet.

There are rapidly replicating movements that are happening near major urban centers, but most of these are still happening among people with more of a rural mindset/worldview. Social scientists have long noted that urbanization radically impacts the way people see life, themselves and their relationships with others.

Some believe that the strong multi-generational family structure is radically altered by urbanization. It is intriguing to watch the response to some of these challenges that has arisen in China. The efforts to ride the wave of opportunity have separated many of their young professionals from parents and grandparents who still reside in the rural regions. With wealth, responsibility and distractions, many of these young professionals are choosing to break the cultural expectations by refusing to go “home” during their breaks. Laws have been passed which allow their parents to prosecute such lapses.

Planting the seed of the gospel into such families will not follow the same route as the rural settings of many of the movements in Africa. Some doubt it can happen at all.

Any honest strategist will tell you that we have much to learn about launching movements in megalopolises. Reaching the adult grandchildren whose parents and grandparents lived their whole lives in New York City will look very different than those in Buck Snort, Tennessee.

It will still take meaningful contact where God’s nature is overtly discussed. It will continue to require a Discovery process whereby worldview is shifted into a kingdom of God outlook. Discipling people to trust Jesus will continue to be a process. The tactics will shift, though.

by johnkking

Church as the Gathered

Here in the West, we think of church as “gathered.” No doubt, you must gather to accomplish some of the “one anothers” and other functions of church (as the body of Christ). But what we generally fail to recognize is how much our cultural individuality impacts how we understand “gathered.” We often overlook the household language of scripture.

The gospel was planted into existing households.

Church was not primarily isolated believers who come together to act like a quasi-family. The gospel took root in the families, friends and employees that were 1st Century Roman households. It is not that church took the household structure.

Because we start from an individualistic bias, we miss this. Because we start from an individualistic bias, our strategies and tactics are often damaging to households, and thus extractional. Yes, there are times when some members of a family will come to trust in Jesus and others will reject them because of that, but Disciple Making Movements want that whole household to hear the gospel, interact with the gospel and not make their decision just because they incorrectly view the gospel as a Western oppressive intrusion.

This is why we evaluate our approaches to insure that they can be reproduced within any existing culture that highly values close-knit, multi-generational families. This is why we work to disciple the whole household to faith. The last thing we want is for the household to feel like Christian families do when one of their children converts to the Moonies or another cult–“they kidnapped and brain-washed” her/him.

Too much of the church planting talk is about gathering unconnected individuals and trying to get them to act like family. Real movements come when the gospel is being planted into existing family/friendship structures where people are discipled to trust and obey Jesus.

[NOTE: I originally wrote this as a comment on an article by Felicity Dale (http://simplychurch.com/on-cpms-and-dmms/). She moved it and a couple of other comments to her main page and there has been some interesting dialogue there. I decided to re-post it here on my site so that my networks could interact with it, also. You probably ought to check out the other dialogue.]