The Bible On "Being Sent"
Here is a list of examples of "being sent" and who is doing the sending that I have found in the NT. In Matthew 10:5 Jesus sent out twelve disciples to preach to Israel alone. In Matthew 10:40, anyone who receives the disciples message of the kingdom receives Jesus who sent the twelve. In 15:24 Jesus said he was sent from his Father to Israel. In 23:37 Jesus laments Jerusalem because they rejected the children of God who were sent by God to preach to them about the things of God. In Luke 4:18 Jesus proclaims about himself that he was sent by God to preach. In 4:26 Jesus mentions when Elijah was sent by God to only one widow to provide her needs. In 4:43 Jesus said he was sent to preach about the kingdom. In 10:1 Jesus sent seventy-two disciples two by two, out to preach. In 10:16, we find that to reject Jesus is to actually reject the one who sent him. In John 3:34, we find that God sent Jesus. In 4:38, the disciples reaped a harvest of people for the kingdom out of Samaria where others had previously sown God's Word. In 5:30 Jesus sought the will of the one who sent him - God. In 6:29 God commands people to believe in the one he has sent - Jesus.
There are many more instances in the Gospels where "being sent" is being talked about, but we understand the gist of it from the above examples. There is nothing prescriptive so far concerning "being sent" for long term missions, pastoring, or about church life, church planting, or church leadership.
Now moving on to Acts, in 8:14 we find a revival sprung out in Samaria as Philip the evangelist preached; many were brought into the kingdom of God; a church had been started. Upon hearing this, the apostles in Jerusalem sent two other Apostles, Peter and John, to further minister to the new saints there. They taught there for an indefinite period of time and left. End of story as we know it. Did they raise up any leaders before they left? Did they appoint elders? How would this new church survive? Unfortunately so little information has been given to what actually happened. It's hard to draw any strong dogmatic conclusions concerning church practice, planting, and leadership from this story. In fact, after this God called Philip to leave as well with no further mention concerning the "church" there or their leaders. So let's move on.
In 11:19-27, the persecuted Christians who had left Jerusalem of their own accord had gone everywhere preaching Jesus. In Antioch, a church had been started because many believed the preaching of Jesus. So the church in Jerusalem sent one man to minister to them, Barnabas; a direct contradiction to those who propose a minimum of two must be sent for Gospel work; though I personally would always recommend a minimum of two. He was there indefinitely, then left to find Paul in another city [so there was no leadership as far as we know for a period of time], and returned with Paul to serve there a year ministering to the saints. We also find at this point that some prophets from Jerusalem joined Paul and Barnabas in Antioch, but we don't know if these prophets were sent or not. We can only make assumptions at best.
In 13:1-4, the church leaders in Antioch prayed and fasted and the Holy Spirit spoke to them to send out Paul and Barnabas for a particular work that we are not told about. We can gather from further texts in Acts that this work was preaching Jesus, equipping saints, planting churches, and at times raising up elders in churches as a team for an indefinite period of time. But God was the one who spoke and sent them out. The church merely agreed that God had indeed spoken and was sending them out [13:4]. One may ask, “If the Holy Spirit was the one sending them alone, why didn’t He speak directly to Barnabus and Saul?” He did; he spoke to them all and Barnabas and Paul are included in all. “While they were worshiping the Lord and fasting, the Holy Spirit said, "Set apart for me Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them." In addition, Luke records in verse one that this was a church. Where did it come from? Who set it up? An average intellect would know that just a few chapters earlier [Acts 11:19] the Christians who left Jerusalem because of persecution fled everywhere so it’s quite possible or rather highly likely that this church was started by some Christians who landed in Antioch. Regardless, a church started apart from being sent out from the apostles in Jerusalem. BUT, the fruit of the apostles was definitely evident in the church in Antioch and for this we can be thankful. Much fruit is borne in the lives of God’s people from one another and this fruit lasts on into new seasons of our lives.
In chapter fifteen, Paul and Barnabas return to Antioch from their journey of preaching Jesus to the nations and are then sent by their church to Jerusalem to deal with a doctrinal issue. So they dealt with the issue accordingly and then the Jerusalem church sent them back, but with two others, leaders Judas and Silas. In 15:33 there seems to be some discrepancy as to who exactly was sent out, but we know for sure that the church sent out Judas back to Jerusalem. In 15:35-41, we have a very interesting transaction occur. Paul tells Barnabas, apart from the counsel and authority of church leadership [as far as we know], he wanted to return to all the cities that God had previously just sent them by the Holy Spirit's command and the churches blessing. Barnabas thought it was a good idea, again apart from the churches counsel, but wanted to take John Mark with them, but Paul completely disagreed. So they separated from one another, Paul taking Silas and Barnabas taking Mark. But, another very interesting detail was the churches position on the matter. They sided with Paul, prayed for him, commended him to the grace of God and by all appearances, seem to admit Barnabas as having departed from the apostolic team of evangelists, although two teams for the Gospel’s sake had been formed. Also, we don't find Barnabas recorded as a teacher anymore in the church at Antioch. Calvin and Henry agree upon the churches favor of Paul and dissatisfaction with Barnabas. This is the first instance [in regards to being sent out] so far of a churches authority being disagreed with. What happened to Barnabas and Mark? Were they excommunicated, or shunned, or not used for the furtherance of the kingdom anymore? Barnabas is seen again later serving with Paul in 1 Corinthians 9:6 and Mark is mentioned in Colossians 4:10 where he is told to be welcomed in love from the Colossians by the Apostle Paul himself.
In Acts 6:3 the apostles had the congregation [not themselves or elders] pick seven deacons to serve in the local church. In 19:22 Paul sent, of his own accord, two leaders who were his helpers on a journey of Gospel preaching into Macedonia while he stayed in Ephesus. In 1 Corinthians 4:17 Paul said he had sent them only Timothy to teach them the apostles doctrine. In 2 Corinthians 12:17 Paul mentions he had increased the number of those sent and had personally sent several people to help them, one of them being Titus. In Ephesians 6:22 and 2 Timothy 4:12 we see Paul sent Tychicus to see how they were doing. In Colossians 4:8 Paul sent Tychicus and Onesimus to them to pass along some news of Paul's' well-being. In 1 Thessalonians 3:22 Paul sent Timothy alone to teach them until they were established.
In Titus 1:5 Paul told Titus that he was left in Crete to put in order in the church things that were not in order. Paul had worked there, but left some things undone on purpose that Titus might take up the mantle. Also he was told himself to appoint elders in every town in the area. This was his commission from the apostle alone for him to do this by himself; not church leadership or a congregation. In addition, this means that some of the churches went without a plurality of elders or no elders for a period of time; a direct contradiction for those who insist there is no church where there are no elders.
In 1 Timothy 4:14 Paul references Timothy's pastorate that was given by the laying on of hands by the elders of the church. Here we find this gift given by God above [Ephesians 4:11], but administered in this case by a plurality of elders.
In Acts 14:23 Paul and Barnabas appointed elders in all the churches they had just planted in Asia. The church leaders did not do this work nor the congregation, but the apostles. Note that these “churches” were called churches before the appointment of elders. This is not ideal, but a fact nonetheless.
Acts 11:30, 15:4, 6, 23, 20:17, 1 Timothy 5:17-19; James 5:14, and 1 Peter 5:1 all mention a plurality of elders governing churches, but don't mention anything about how they were appointed or sent. It’s indicative that a plurality of Elders was the norm in 1st century New Testament churches.
In what we commonly call "the great commission," Jesus said the authority to call the shots in this world had been given to him. He said, "Go out preaching, teaching and baptizing." This commission was from Jesus to whom all authority had been given from God above. So we sow, and some of us reap, but God causes the growth. Do we add these to existing churches or start new ones? Yes. Once God saves, a church has been planted. We see this occur over and over and over again in the Book of Acts. Some are naive to believe they must be placed into existing churches. When God grows, the kingdom of God has been believed and new life has sprung forth. Perhaps, some reasons elders of a local church would not plant anew like God has already done in the NT is pride and fear. Pride because they want to build their kingdom and have another notch under their belt under the title, fruitfulness; or pride in that they think some will fall away if they are not "under" their leadership. And fear because they cannot entrust to God what God has already begun to do and that is grow. If God began to grow a soul, let the church take root there in that place with the sower, reaper, and "new creation." If you want to send leaders then great. Do it. If you want to send one, then great. If you want to send two, then great. If you want to send ten, then great! But God forbid we continue to grow our kingdom or that we attempt to put God in a box through a particular method. Let another church form in their own context and with their own gifting. Thus kingdom multiplication will start and will always prevent second and third generation Christians. Perhaps our concern with Jesus' way of building the kingdom is a fear of great apostasy, but our methods have not stopped that yet. Remember the parable of Jesus about the good seed sown by God's people and the weeds sown by the enemy [Matthew 13:24-30]? What did Jesus want us to do about that? Nothing! The servants ask, "Do you want us to go and gather the weeds [the apostate]? But Jesus said, 'No, lest in gathering the weeds you root up the wheat along with them. Let both grow together until the harvest, and at harvest time I will tell the reapers, Gather the weeds first and bind them in bundles to be burned, but gather the wheat into my barn.'" We sow and reap and expand, but God causes the growth. Then in the end he will destroy the wicked apostates.
In conclusion to what the Bible speaks about being sent out, we find not one model to follow. There are some things we can affirm though. Churches ideally have a plurality of elders. Churches are autonomous and are not held accountable to another church; there is no hierarchical structure in place. Contrary to popular belief, sometimes one person is the sender for Gospel work and sometimes one person is sent for Gospel work; although I do find it wise to have at least two sending and at least two being sent out. Samaria, Crete, Lystra, Iconium and Antioch all had church leadership issues that would be called into question today by many church governments. Basically, they did not have leadership for a time of their existence as churches and their elder appointments all contradicted the other. Also contrary to popular belief, we find not one example of extensive assessment for Gospel work. Character is proven and ability to teach to tested. Many church assessments are pages and pages long and take years to complete. In Total Church, the authors mention the mystical assumption that many churches have placed on church planters,
“Church planting is part of normal church life. At present church planting carries a certain mystique; church planters are portrayed as a unique kind of rugged pioneer. But we need to create a culture in which, at the very least, transplanting is normal. Every local church should be aiming to transplant. Every local church should be raising up church planters.”Everyone should be seeking to see the church to grow through church planting and churches should be transplanting much more frequently.
0 comments:
Post a Comment