When I announced I’m deleting my Facebook account this week, the inquiries started flooding in: “Why are you deleting it?” “Isn’t it good for ministry contacts?” “Can you elaborate on this?” I figured I would share my reasoning at greater length than 140 characters (shocker, I know). Honestly, I find it kind of weird that people were so curious about this, but maybe that reflects my ignorance of the merits of FB. One warning, my reasons may not be your reasons. In other words, I’m not advocating that everyone “quit FB.” Like anything, it can be used for good or for ill, responsibly or irresponsibly. Here are my reasons for quitting FB (in no particular order):

#1 Reason I Quit Facebook

I want to streamline my communication an use my time wisely. Although I’m not an avid user of FB, I have noticed that it asks me for a lot of time: 1) Accept Friends (that I will never talk to) 2) Join Events (that I rarely go to) 3) Participate in Causes (i know nothing about) 4) Correspond with people (who I can email) 5) Comment on someone’s status, etc. As a regular emailer, Blogger and Twitter user, I have enough outlets for communication and correspondence. Add to that the growing social community sites that require my time (Acts 29, GCM Collective, Austin City Life), and I’ll probably be eliminating something else very soon.

#2 Reason I Quit FB

I see through the facade of multitasking and am concerned about its effect on my mind. A number of years ago I read a helpful article in Time on the illusion of multitasking. The article argued that it is neurally impossible to multitask. The brain can only focus on one thing at one time. When we multitask, we are actually dividing mental energy in lots of little bits, which slowly downgrades attention span and focused reflection:

“Decades of research (not to mention common sense) indicate that the quality of one’s output and depth of thought deteriorate as one attends to ever more tasks.”

If you don’t think this is true, just compare your pre-social media and post-social media devotional life. I want to cultivate a mind that can focus well on reading, writing, meditating, and thinking well and for the glory of God.

#3 Reason I Quit FB

I will be judged and rewarded (not rejected or accepted) by God on my use of time. The Scriptures are clear about our use of time, that is should be weighed (Lk 14:28), redeemed (Col 4:5), and not squandered (1 Cor 3). The older I get, the more I want to use my time for what matters most. I want to build rewards in heaven, not accumulate praise on earth. I do not want to be governed by efficiency but by love, a love compels me to eliminate some social media so that I can spend more undivided time with my family, church, and friends. I want to steward well the grace God has entrusted to me. This means a more focused life.

#4 Reason I Quit FB

I want to deepen in real friendship and community not chase dopamine bursts of false significance. After seeing The Social Network, I wrote a post about the The Social Network & the Decline of Friendship. In it confessed my tendency towards preferring the convenience of friends we can turn off over the inconvenience of friends we can’t. We prefer the dopamine rush of a virtual friend’s text, tweet, or FB message over the sacrifice and love of investing in a real friend’s joys, hardships, and concerns.

In summary, this is probably a decision that is part of new line of decision-making that will spill over into next year, a slow year. A year (and hopefully many years) of rich community, significant friendships, relished family life, deep thinking and devotion, and a more rewarding life all the way round.

This morning I read The Gadarene to my kids. The Gadarene is a graphic novel written by John Piper and illustrated by Drew Blom . It’s an excellent first launch into an uncharted genre for DG books.

As I read through the book, I thought to myself: “This is believable and a good example of making great culture.” The design is excellent.

Piper’s theologically fictionalized account of a demon-possessed man brings into focus Jesus real concerns in his healing ministry—social restoration and divine reconciliation.

I’ll be referring to this novel this Sunday as I preach from Luke 8 and 9!

As the holidays approach, many of us are increasingly aware of our budget limitations. We nod at the hope Retailers offer through early bird incentives, knowing its just not enough for Christmas this year. There’s an acute national sense that we just won’t be able to give as many Christmas gifts (or as expensive ones) this year. My family is drawing names to give one gift to a family member instead of showering one another with gifts from everyone this year.

Giving the Gospel to the Poor

But wait a minute. This isn’t what Christmas is about at all. Spending lots of money one another in order to have lots of things we don’t need. The original Christmas was quite the opposite. In Christmas, God poured out his deepest wealth to those of neediest poverty. He brought the gospel to the poor. Jesus’ birth was prophesied, delivered, and honored by the poor (Luke 1-3). When he was grown, baptized and ready to begin his ministry, he announced that his greatest gift, the gospel, would be for the poor. How did we get so far away from the actual gift of Christmas and its intended recipients?

Jesus was sent and anointed by the Holy Spirit to “preach the good news to the poor” (Lk 4:18-19). Following this tremendous sermon, Jesus immediately began to care for the poor (a word that head several lists of marginalized people in Luke). He came to preach and to prove the gospel to the socially marginalized: a mentally ill/demon possessed man and Peter’s mother-in-law who had a high fever. The Gospels chronicle Jesus’ joint ministry of preaching and proving the gospel, of announcing the age of salvation and accomplishing physical/spiritual salvation among the marginalized. But was this call unique to Jesus? Must all Christians care for the poor? Is it the responsibility of the Church or individuals?

Tim Keller’s article “The Gospel and the Poor” is tremendously helpful in addressing these and many other questions about ministry to the poor. Consider the following excerpts:

Must all Christians Care for the Poor?

The principle: a sensitive social conscience and a life poured out in deeds of service to the needy is the inevitable outcome of true faith. By deeds of service, God can judge true love of himself from lip-service (cf. Isa 1:10–17). Matt 25, in which Jesus identifies himself with the poor (“as you did it to the least of them, you did it to me”) can be compared to Prov 14:31 and 19:17, in which we are told that to be gracious to the poor is to lend to God himself and to trample on the poor is to trample on God himself.

Are the Poor the Responsibility of the Church or Within the Church?

God gave Israel many laws of social responsibility that were to be carried out corporately. The covenant community was obligated to give to the poor member until his need was gone (Deut 15:8–10). Tithes went to the poor (Deut 14:28–29). The poor were not to be given simply a “handout,” but tools, grain (Deut 15:12–15), and land (Lev 25) so that they could become productive and self-sufficient. Later, the prophets condemned Israel’s insensitivity to the poor as covenant-breaking. They taught that materialism and ignoring the poor are sins as repugnant as idolatry and adultery (Amos 2:6–7). Mercy to the poor is an evidence of true heart-commitment to God (Isa l:10–17; 58:6–7; Amos 4:1–6; 5:21–24). The great accumulation of wealth, “adding of house to house and field to field till no space is left” (Isa 5:8–9), even though it is by legal means, may be sinful if the rich are proud and callous toward the poor (Isa 3:16–26; Amos 6:4–7). The seventy-year exile itself was a punishment for the unobserved Sabbath and jubilee years (2 Chron 36:20–21). In these years the well-to-do were to cancel debts, but the wealthy refused to do this.

But that was Israel. What about the church? The church reflects the social righteousness of the old covenant community, but with the greater vigor and power of the new age. Christians too are called are to open their hand to the needy as far as there is need (1 John 3:16–17; cf. Deut 15:7–8). Within the church, wealth is to be shared very generously between rich and poor (2 Cor 8:13–15; cf. Lev 25). Following the prophets, the apostles teach that true faith will inevitably show itself through deeds of mercy (Jas 2:1–23). Materialism is still a grievous sin (Jas 5:1–6; 1 Tim 6:17–19). Not only do individual believers have these responsibilities, but a special class of officers–deacons–is established to coordinate the church’s ministry of mercy.

What to Give for Christmas

The Gospel shows us that God gave the most expensive gift to the least likely recipients. It reminds us that God poured out his deepest wealth to those who had very little. When we miss this, we become the poor, those who mistake many gifts for the meaning of Christmas. God calls both the individual and church to Christlike love and generosity. How can you recover the meaning of Christmas this season? Instead of hunting for early bird specials, look out for the poor, the marginalized. And don’t just give them materialism. Give the gospel hope that lasts well beyond the latest fashion and fading Disney toys.

This three part series explores three common errors people fall into when trying to become a missional church. It dovetails nicely with the recent series Transitioning to Missional Church.

See Part 1 & Part 2 of the series Transitioning to Missional Church.

In Part 2, we considered why missional church is theological not methodological, followed by some reflection on the challenges of transitioning to a missional church. In this third and final part of the series, we will offer some guidelines in becoming a more intuitive church, an organism with missional intuition, as opposed to an institution with some programs for mission.

Intuitive Missional Church

In order to avoid being a church with a mission and to become churches as mission, it is important that we cultivate a new intuition. Intuition is the ability to perceive something without having to reason through it. It is reflexive behavior, a way of living that is natural. If a people develop a missional intuition, then they will act missionally without having to reason through it. Mission becomes a way of living, not a project they execute or process they reason through. Here are a few ways to make disciples, lead, plant, and grow churches, for whom mission is intuitive.

Intuitive mission relies on Spirit-led prayer and repentance that begins with repentance over the sins of institutional, individualistic Christianity. Cultivate a community that sees repentance as good news not bad news. That sees turning away from sin and turning to Jesus as an everyday pattern. This can’t happen apart from a culture of prayer. Prayer isn’t an early morning event; it is every moment existence. Paul Miller notes that: “Jesus most dependent human that ever lived.” People who live prayerfully, dependently, will be more prone to repent and turn to Christ, as opposed to tack mission on as a work.

Intuitive mission discerns missional leadership patterns from Scripture instead of uncritically implementing business models of leadership. It’s not about getting the wrong people off the bus and right people on. We are all on the bus of mission, just arrange the seats with wisdom. Pastor your communities with wisdom and thoughtful reflection. Get leadership moorings from the gifts of the Spirit and offices of leadership in Ephesians 4. Don’t create programmatic position descriptions and build people around a ministry; build ministry around people.

Intuitive mission cultivates missional DNA through personal and communal forms of training instead of relying primarily upon professional, monological communication. Don’t just talk. Listen. Listen as a disciple, coach, teacher, & pastor to how and why mission is a challenge for your people. Some of our best changes have come from listening closely such as Shared Leadership, 3 Marks of Missional Community.

Intuitive mission spends lots of time with people not programs, so that we have networks of relationships in which we can authenticate the gospel we preach.

Intuitive mission does “everyday things with gospel intentionality”, instead of seeing mission as either an evangelistic or social justice event.

Bruce Wesley is kicking off Redeeming Marriage with his first talk “How Marriage Works”. Laying a biblical foundation from Genesis for marriage with insight.

• “They were naked and unashamed.” God’s intention for marriage is that we can be completely known and unconditionally accepted.
• Sin is Grade A selfishness. It refuses to believe that God knows what is best and insists in our own version of “best”.
• What we need most is not a more vibrant sexual life in marriage, more spiritual intimacy, better job. What we need most is redemption.
• Redemption not only forgives us for our selfishness but redirects us for serving our spouse.
• Love is constant, mutual awareness.

“Tear Down this Wall to Build your Marriage”

• A wall of static in a marriage is created when life becomes so busy that spouses “don’t talk like they use to.”
• Forgiven people should be forgiving people.
• Forgiveness is free & trust is earned.
• Your anger is your anger.
• Use your words to give life to your spouse. Build them up, encourage them. Dont tear them down.

Fights Worth Fighting

Marital Sanctity

• Dont ride in cars alone with members of the other sex
• Dont have deep soul conversations with members of other sex
• Dont counsel with the door closed
• Dont discuss deep issues of your marriage with members of other sex
• Affair Progression: Show attn/Express consideration/express empathy/accidental touch/response/private communication/sex

As I’m training our current elder candidates, I’ve been significantly encouraged and sharpened by their response to the calling and qualifications of godly eldership. We’re using Strauch’s Biblical Eldership and Bob Thune’s adapted, gospel influenced Study Guide (forthcoming) as a general guide to our training. While these tools are certainly helpful, what has been most significant is gathering with men who care about the deep things of life. As we meet, we’re collectively cultivating a centrist manliness that is neither hyper-masculine nor hyper-feminine but deeply biblical and Jesus-shaped. I sense a “third view” of evangelical manliness emerging from our discussions. Here are few highlights from our time so far.

Gravity and Joy in the Call

Our very first meeting was marked with a gravity and earnestness about being deep men, husbands, and fathers. We went around the table and shared our fears and hopes about the call of elder. I was struck by how seriously these men weighed the call and how personally they embraced the process. Regardless of the outcome, we all agreed that this process would make us better human beings, men, and leaders for our families and church. This really set the tone for a training that is deeply relational not merely theological. This tone has carried over into all our discussions. We leave each 6-7:30am time challenged, inspired, and often changed. I take notes throughout.

Centrist Masculinity Clears Away the Cultural Noise

Our most recent discussion revolved around male eldership and essential masculinity. While we debated both liberal and conservative readings of a host of biblical texts, the real traction began when we considered what an elder who treats (not just sees) women and dignified equals. What would it look like in a church for men to not just affirm masculinity in theory but for them to lead and care for women and children around them? How would it change social interaction, leadership, teaching, City Groups, Fight Clubs, and family life? We are challenging one another to a centrist manliness that flows from a deep conviction about how God has made us and a personal commitment to relate to others out of profound love, grace, and godliness.

Before this can truly happen, we observed that men need to clear away a lot of confusing cultural noise regarding how we interact with women so that we can relate to them as people made in God’s image who deserve godly, genuine attention not social disinterest or general disregard. We identified a few ways forward in cultivating deep, centrist masculinity.

• Men need to toss aside the inequality of women depicted in objectified advertising, internet porn, and sex-saturated film.
• Men need to cultivate a deep manliness that overflows in love and care for women through godly deportment and dignifying social interaction.
• Men need to be dependently prayerful, profoundly Scripture saturated, Jesus formed, and others oriented.

See Part 1 of the series Transitioning to Missional Church.

In Part 1 of this series, we established the difference between a church with a mission and church as mission. A Missional Church is church as mission not church with a mission. Missional is its nature not just its vocation.

Why Mission is the Nature of the Church

Why is missional the nature of the church? Because it is the nature God. Mission is not only an action of God; it is an attribute of God. God is a missionary God. That’s what the term Missio Dei means “the Sent God.” God has always been on a mission for his glory, that self-glorifying mission breaks out into creation, thru the fall, in redemption unto New Creation. In particular, we see the missionary nature of God in his sentness. Father sends the Son, Son sends the Spirit, Spirit sends the Church. The church is cut from the cloth of the missionary God. We have a family resemblance. We have a missionary nature because we have a missionary Father.

In other words, mission is the breath of the missional church. Mission is not a tack-on to your life; it is your life. You exhale mission because you inhale gospel. The gospel flows through you, pulsing at various strengths but pulsing, in order to pump the blood of Jesus through the body of Christ so that it can exhale the hope of mission. This missional breath affects everything—how we check the mail, how we structure our week, how we relate to neighbors, how we do our work, how we read the Bible, where we live, how we live, how we make your everyday decisions. Missional is radical, like taking up your cross and following Jesus. Missional church is a gathering of cross-bearing, Jesus-following disciples who are committed to his mission.

Missional church requires nothing less than a rethinking of our identity and our practice, of who we are and what we do. Therefore, in order to effectively embrace the challenge of moving from church with a mission to church as mission, new ecclesiastical structures are absolutely essential. The old church structures support mission as a task but not as an identity. They promote mission as an event but not as disciple-making, reducing mission to an option for the elite not essential for everyone.

Challenges in Transitioning to Missional

One of the greatest challenges in transitioning to a true missional church is syncretistic missional ecclesiology (SME). Syncretistic Missional Ecclesiology is the fusion of missional church values with institutional church structures. Many churches that attempt to make this transition, try to insert missional values into non-missional church structures. Leadership, decision-making, community structures all remain somewhat the same, while the leaders beat the drum of mission. At best, this will create more mission works but will fail to make missional disciples.

The nature of missional church requires more than cosmetic adjustments to our inherited forms of church. Missional ecclesiology requires an entirely new way of thinking about church, from the bottom up. Church plants and established churches have failed to recognize this important point. As a result, they have blended institutional church with missional church. This syncretism is both theologically and practically defective.

• Institutional mission relies on preaching, teaching, and writing to implement missional ecclesiology. Missional Church relies not only on a Sunday ministry of Word, but promotes a rest of week ministry of the word that is carried out by a speaking-the-truth-in-love community.
• Institutional mission adopts a program of mission during a set season of the year to implement missional ecclesiology. Missional Church does not see mission as a tack-on to your life; it is your life. You inhale gospel and exhale mission through ordinary rhythms of life.
• Institutional mission sees mission as the responsibility of a select group of people not the whole church including staff. Missional Church requires pastors and staff to live a missional life making disciples and redeeming social ill. It equips ordinary people to do ordinary things with gospel intentionality.
  

Missional Church has been quite the buzz in the evangelical church world. As with any buzz, it has a polarizing effect. People often adopt or reject the concept before they have properly understood it. This creates a bandwagon effect, uncritical early adopters who adopt an idea, jump on the bandwagon, without depth of understanding of what they have committed themselves to. Alternatively, there are the hypercritical naysayers, who naysay missional church as a fading fad. Ironically, the hypercritical naysayers commit the same error as the uncritical early adopters. Both responses fail to adequately investigate just what “missional church” is. This three part series will address the dangers in transitioning to missional church, either as a new church plant or an existing church.

Clarifying Missional Church

The missional church is not a church with a mission. All churches have a mission. Stated or unstated, all churches practice some kind of mission. It may be keep to the immoral out, to keep sound doctrine in, to pray for revival, or to send missionaries to the nations. Each of these churches is an example of church with a mission. The missional church, however is church as mission. In the words of Darrell Guder, the challenge “is to move from a church with mission to a missional church.”[1]
In light of this important distinction, it is critical that transitioning churches understand the difference between church with a mission versus church as mission. To clarify the difference, consider the following chart:

Church WITH a Mission                                                Church AS a Mission

What You Do         (Task)	Who You Are       (Identity)
Optional                  (Elective)	Essential               (Core)
Extraordinary       (Elitist)	Ordinary               (Everyone)
Project Focus        (Event)	People Focus       (Disciple)

Traditional churches view the church as a church with a mission, at best. This mission may be sending missionaries to the nations, transforming the church neighborhood, or guarding and promoting sound doctrine. While all worthy missions, these are all examples of church with a mission. They focus on a task to be performed not and identity of the church. As a result, the mission of the church becomes optional not essential, creating a first and second tier Christianity comprised of ordinary and extraordinary Christians who do mission. At best, this accomplishes some mission but often remains very project focused not disciple-making driven.

What then is a missional church? Guder writes: “With the term missional we emphasize the essential vocation and nature of the church as God’s called and sent people.”[2] Missional churches are missional in nature and vocation. Missional is who they are, and as a result, mission is what they do. It is not simply a both/and. If mission as nature does not precede mission as vocation, mission-as-identity before mission-as-task, then churches that attempt to become or transition into missional church will either fail or fall into syncretistic missional ecclesiology. A depth of understanding that mission is what we are before it is what we do will be absolutely essential to planting or transitioning a missional church.

This post is adapted from my recent talk Why Missional Church Doesn’t Have a Shelf Life

---

[1] Darrell Guder ed., The Missional Church: A Vision for the Sending of the Church in North America, 6. This was a landmark book for the missional church movement in North America. Many missional leaders and organizations can trace their roots to Guder’s seminal influence on American ecclesiology.

[2] Guder, The Missional Church, 11.

Cities aren’t just socially dense; they are also culturally influential. Joel Kotkin in his almost classic work, The City: A Global History, describes cities as places that are sacred, safe, and busy. They are centers of spirituality (sacred), commerce (busy), and security (safe).

The strength of a city depends on the strength of these three forces—the spiritual, social, and commercial. These three forces also combine to produce culture in a city—a mix of ideas, behaviors, and products. How do these culturally influential cities shape us?