I’ve seen a shift whereby evangelism into the disciple making process. I’m not sure if this accounts for this lack of reference to evangelism, however. If it does, a footnote would be helpful.
THANKS Ted, these are helpful reflections. I agree with the shift you mention, to collaboration. Kärin Primuth is helping in the processing of the networking, which increases the chances something might happen!
While most of us will not have a problem with anything in the Seoul Statement, (there are a few corrections that would clarify what they mean to say) I thought the same as you when I read it yesterday morning.
It seems focused like a doctrinal statement (and position statement on Sexuality and Gender). And, I guess they need to be clear (and some “affirming” folks may leave Lausanne.)
Yet they didn’t take the approach I have been hoping would happen to reframe HOW we talk about what we believe the Scriptures teach…getting away from some of the “Christianese” and describing a God who is loving (I assume they did not include the love of God b/c the Cape Town Commitment was drenched in it — for good reason) and drawing all humanity to himself….I don’t think they talked about the generosity of God - (but I need to read it again).
I wish they had done position papers on some of the issues they included, and kept the statement for other things. If it is true (as some have said in provocative fashion) that the greatest stumbling block to the advance of God’s name among the nations is the church (meaning to me, the fact that we don’t easily/ever? consider doing “church differently” and resist new approached (like the elderly pastor controlling the church in So. Korea!) clear new translations (like the main Chinese Bible) it seems like Lausanne could say that in a way that the church leaders who are here might be able to agree.
That’s off the top…I need more time to process these things.
I’ve seen a shift whereby evangelism into the disciple making process. I’m not sure if this accounts for this lack of reference to evangelism, however. If it does, a footnote would be helpful.
THANKS Ted, these are helpful reflections. I agree with the shift you mention, to collaboration. Kärin Primuth is helping in the processing of the networking, which increases the chances something might happen!
While most of us will not have a problem with anything in the Seoul Statement, (there are a few corrections that would clarify what they mean to say) I thought the same as you when I read it yesterday morning.
It seems focused like a doctrinal statement (and position statement on Sexuality and Gender). And, I guess they need to be clear (and some “affirming” folks may leave Lausanne.)
Yet they didn’t take the approach I have been hoping would happen to reframe HOW we talk about what we believe the Scriptures teach…getting away from some of the “Christianese” and describing a God who is loving (I assume they did not include the love of God b/c the Cape Town Commitment was drenched in it — for good reason) and drawing all humanity to himself….I don’t think they talked about the generosity of God - (but I need to read it again).
I wish they had done position papers on some of the issues they included, and kept the statement for other things. If it is true (as some have said in provocative fashion) that the greatest stumbling block to the advance of God’s name among the nations is the church (meaning to me, the fact that we don’t easily/ever? consider doing “church differently” and resist new approached (like the elderly pastor controlling the church in So. Korea!) clear new translations (like the main Chinese Bible) it seems like Lausanne could say that in a way that the church leaders who are here might be able to agree.
That’s off the top…I need more time to process these things.