Mr. Esler, perhaps you're asking the wrong question to begin with. You might get a different response from leaders if you asked, "how much confidence do you have in the Holy Spirit to use the means he has ordained to accomplish his purposes?". This of course begs the question, what is the means that God has ordained to obey the Great Commission? What your question really reveals is that many leaders do not believe that the church is the institution that God intends to use to fulfill the Great Commission.
I think you are right (God will use the church) with one caveat. How the word "church" is used is very important. Missionary teams are a part of the church. A good exercise I often utilize when reading the scripture is to attempt to insert the word "local" whenever the word "church" is in the text. It often does not work well. What you will find is that "church" is more often referring to the body of all believers, not particular congregations. This brings greater clarity to how the church is being utilized in the Great Commission. There is a sort of sloppy ecclesiology at work among many preachers in which they coopt the word "church" to mean "local church" when convenient. The missionary band that Paul led was, of course, an expression of the church but it should not be confused with an example of a local church. I like to remind pastors that Paul was a missionary, not a pastor. Thus, while I agree that the church is the God ordained means for accomplishing the Great Commission, let's start with a good definition of what that means in the New Testament.
BTW, this is why I don't use the word "parachurch." There is no such thing as a "parachurch."
Thank you for your thoughtful response! I feel like I could talk to you all day on this topic. Maybe I'll join my colleagues and come to the next Missionexus and we can meet.
I agree with you that there is some sloppy ecclesiology among many preachers, I would argue though that the default use of church always has the local church in mind and is only occasionally in reference to something larger.
Thank you for your leadership in missions and engaging in these important topics. You are much appreciated.
I just did a quick analysis on this using Logos. Of the 106 (or so) references to church, 25 are the church universal, 75 are local, and 6 could go either way. I was careful to be liberal with recognizing the "local" mentions. So... I stand corrected on "more often it refers to body of all believers." However... many of these local passages are in the book of Corinthians, Revelation, and scattered in the opening and closing sections of the books (greetings and goodbyes). The 25 church universal passages are the ones we hear preached most. They deal with the substance of theological issues like the Bride of Christ, the purpose of redemptive history (Ephesians), and so forth. So, we may hear these preached more than we do the greetings and goodbyes. In any case, the argument, I believe, stands. Where it is most important is in framing the missionary band (modeled by Paul and others) as the de factor means which God used in the New Testament to spread the Word across the known world. Blincoe does a good job of discussing this on his blog. Here is a sample article: https://robertblincoe.blog/separate-administrative-structures-in-acts-13-second-of-two/
Mr. Esler, perhaps you're asking the wrong question to begin with. You might get a different response from leaders if you asked, "how much confidence do you have in the Holy Spirit to use the means he has ordained to accomplish his purposes?". This of course begs the question, what is the means that God has ordained to obey the Great Commission? What your question really reveals is that many leaders do not believe that the church is the institution that God intends to use to fulfill the Great Commission.
I think you are right (God will use the church) with one caveat. How the word "church" is used is very important. Missionary teams are a part of the church. A good exercise I often utilize when reading the scripture is to attempt to insert the word "local" whenever the word "church" is in the text. It often does not work well. What you will find is that "church" is more often referring to the body of all believers, not particular congregations. This brings greater clarity to how the church is being utilized in the Great Commission. There is a sort of sloppy ecclesiology at work among many preachers in which they coopt the word "church" to mean "local church" when convenient. The missionary band that Paul led was, of course, an expression of the church but it should not be confused with an example of a local church. I like to remind pastors that Paul was a missionary, not a pastor. Thus, while I agree that the church is the God ordained means for accomplishing the Great Commission, let's start with a good definition of what that means in the New Testament.
BTW, this is why I don't use the word "parachurch." There is no such thing as a "parachurch."
Thank you for your thoughtful response! I feel like I could talk to you all day on this topic. Maybe I'll join my colleagues and come to the next Missionexus and we can meet.
I agree with you that there is some sloppy ecclesiology among many preachers, I would argue though that the default use of church always has the local church in mind and is only occasionally in reference to something larger.
Thank you for your leadership in missions and engaging in these important topics. You are much appreciated.
I just did a quick analysis on this using Logos. Of the 106 (or so) references to church, 25 are the church universal, 75 are local, and 6 could go either way. I was careful to be liberal with recognizing the "local" mentions. So... I stand corrected on "more often it refers to body of all believers." However... many of these local passages are in the book of Corinthians, Revelation, and scattered in the opening and closing sections of the books (greetings and goodbyes). The 25 church universal passages are the ones we hear preached most. They deal with the substance of theological issues like the Bride of Christ, the purpose of redemptive history (Ephesians), and so forth. So, we may hear these preached more than we do the greetings and goodbyes. In any case, the argument, I believe, stands. Where it is most important is in framing the missionary band (modeled by Paul and others) as the de factor means which God used in the New Testament to spread the Word across the known world. Blincoe does a good job of discussing this on his blog. Here is a sample article: https://robertblincoe.blog/separate-administrative-structures-in-acts-13-second-of-two/