Comments on: missional - how do we get there? http://www.swingingfromthevine.com/2008/06/27/missional-how-do-we-get-there/ digging deep, stretching up, reaching out Thu, 29 Jul 2010 21:22:07 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7.1 hourly 1 By: 50 Ways to Define “Missional” - VIII : Subversive Influence http://www.swingingfromthevine.com/2008/06/27/missional-how-do-we-get-there/comment-page-1/#comment-2421 50 Ways to Define “Missional” - VIII : Subversive Influence Fri, 04 Jul 2008 11:58:49 +0000 http://www.swingingfromthevine.com/2008/06/27/missional-how-do-we-get-there/#comment-2421 [...] Makeesha Fisher makes a reappearance on the list, stating an opposing view to Alan Hirsh’s, namely that “emergence often needs to occur before the paradigm shift toward a mission shaped faith can form.” She writes, [The] question of salvation is one example. If one holds to traditional evangelical notions of “how salvation occurs” (for example), living a truly mission shaped life is almost impossible in my experience. Making a missional paradigm shift is very hard when you believe the number one most important job of all Christians is to get people saved and by saved you mean “into heaven”. And the idea that our job is to get people saved comes from certain theological understandings of very core issues such as the atonement, what is the kingdom?, etc. that must be engaged/challenged (emergence) in order to understand and embrace the missional paradigm. … I honestly believe that a HUGE reason why missional is getting misunderstood or distorted or co-opted is BECAUSE these very people are holding onto certain theological understandings without examining them…without engaging. They’re taking their current beliefs about salvation and subsequent notions of evangelism and trying to paste on a missional label which ultimately equates to trying to stuff a size 9 foot in a size 6 shoe. … All of this to say - I think the question of “how do we get there?” is a good one and I genuinely believe an engagement of WHAT we believe has to occur. Perhaps a good place to start for folks trying to wrap their brains around missional is with their theology. Maybe this paradigm isn’t clicking because your theology just doesn’t fit. In which case, I’m not suggesting you have to change your theology necessarily but you might need to explore the possibility of dropping missional from your vocabulary because like a too small pair of shoes, it’s gonna cause you pain. [...] [...] Makeesha Fisher makes a reappearance on the list, stating an opposing view to Alan Hirsh’s, namely that “emergence often needs to occur before the paradigm shift toward a mission shaped faith can form.” She writes, [The] question of salvation is one example. If one holds to traditional evangelical notions of “how salvation occurs” (for example), living a truly mission shaped life is almost impossible in my experience. Making a missional paradigm shift is very hard when you believe the number one most important job of all Christians is to get people saved and by saved you mean “into heaven”. And the idea that our job is to get people saved comes from certain theological understandings of very core issues such as the atonement, what is the kingdom?, etc. that must be engaged/challenged (emergence) in order to understand and embrace the missional paradigm. … I honestly believe that a HUGE reason why missional is getting misunderstood or distorted or co-opted is BECAUSE these very people are holding onto certain theological understandings without examining them…without engaging. They’re taking their current beliefs about salvation and subsequent notions of evangelism and trying to paste on a missional label which ultimately equates to trying to stuff a size 9 foot in a size 6 shoe. … All of this to say - I think the question of “how do we get there?” is a good one and I genuinely believe an engagement of WHAT we believe has to occur. Perhaps a good place to start for folks trying to wrap their brains around missional is with their theology. Maybe this paradigm isn’t clicking because your theology just doesn’t fit. In which case, I’m not suggesting you have to change your theology necessarily but you might need to explore the possibility of dropping missional from your vocabulary because like a too small pair of shoes, it’s gonna cause you pain. [...]

]]> By: Mak http://www.swingingfromthevine.com/2008/06/27/missional-how-do-we-get-there/comment-page-1/#comment-2382 Mak Mon, 30 Jun 2008 02:04:43 +0000 http://www.swingingfromthevine.com/2008/06/27/missional-how-do-we-get-there/#comment-2382 I think I went on to explain what my experience has been with an evangelical expression of "salvation" - I think the people you're talking about already have a mission shaped faith that does not focus solely or even primarily on getting people saved. So what I'm saying is that the people you're talking about are already "there" in terms of a theology that is friendly to missional. The only theology within emerging that I have encountered is done in mission focused communities - that's EXACTLY HOW they are able and encouraged to emerge. so no, it's not at conflict at all, in fact, it's reinforcing exactly what I said. To suggest that people figure out their theology before engaging runs completely counter to the emerging way of working through theology. the emerging/emergent way is to engage theology within community - community that is Christian and non. I'm addressing the misuse of the term and suggesting that the reasons those abuses are happening are because certain people with certain theologies are trying to embrace missional without examining their underlying theology. Some people can "be missional" very easily because of their theological foundations. Others, cannot. I think maybe the problem here is that this is perceived as some sort of linear process whereas I'm not sure it always is but IF we are to talk about something that is linear in time and space, some sort of emergence often must happen in order to provide the right foundation for even thinking or talking about what it means to be missional. does that help explain where I'm coming from or make it worse? hehe... as for nationalism, well, we might have some disagreements there too LOL j/k I think I went on to explain what my experience has been with an evangelical expression of “salvation” - I think the people you’re talking about already have a mission shaped faith that does not focus solely or even primarily on getting people saved. So what I’m saying is that the people you’re talking about are already “there” in terms of a theology that is friendly to missional.

The only theology within emerging that I have encountered is done in mission focused communities - that’s EXACTLY HOW they are able and encouraged to emerge. so no, it’s not at conflict at all, in fact, it’s reinforcing exactly what I said. To suggest that people figure out their theology before engaging runs completely counter to the emerging way of working through theology. the emerging/emergent way is to engage theology within community - community that is Christian and non.

I’m addressing the misuse of the term and suggesting that the reasons those abuses are happening are because certain people with certain theologies are trying to embrace missional without examining their underlying theology. Some people can “be missional” very easily because of their theological foundations. Others, cannot.

I think maybe the problem here is that this is perceived as some sort of linear process whereas I’m not sure it always is but IF we are to talk about something that is linear in time and space, some sort of emergence often must happen in order to provide the right foundation for even thinking or talking about what it means to be missional.

does that help explain where I’m coming from or make it worse? hehe…

as for nationalism, well, we might have some disagreements there too LOL j/k

]]>