I want to affirm again the relationship between dynamic new church planting and dynamic theology. Now, lest any misunderstand, I would also affirm that dead theology never plants churches and certainly not dynamic healthy churches. So, let’s consider the question, “why does theology need to be central in church planting?”
First, there will never be any churches effectively planted if the theology of the lost condition of people is not central in our ministry. This is so evident in the letter that Paul writes to the planted chuch in Rome, “For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith, as it is written, ‘The righteous shall live by faith.’ “(Rom. 1:16 ESV). I remember Dr. Richard Longnecker stating that Paul’s letter to the Romans was a theological tractate based on his teaching during his evangelistic church planting journeys. So both in the introduction to Romans and in the development of Paul’s doctrine of salvation including condemnation, justification, propitiation, and glorification his effectiveness in church planting was solidly based on his fully-orbed theology. Is yours and mine?
Second, the churches that we plant will not endure long without solid biblical theology. Paul was so convinced of this that he wrote letters to churches he had planted, to those he had not planted, to apostolic helpers (such as Timothy and Titus) constantly affirming the importance of biblical doctrine. Particularly in what we call the pastoral epistles he hammers home the fact that “I am writing these things [doctrine which includes practice] to you so that, if I delay, you may know how one ought to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, a pillar and buttress of the truth” and then he gives the great confession of faith: “ Great indeed, we confess, is the mystery of godliness:
He was manifested in the flesh,
vindicated by the Spirit,
seen by angels,
proclaimed among the nations,
believed on in the world,
taken up in glory.” 1 Tim. 3:16 (ESV)
Third, the health of the church will be dependent upon a clear theology. Now when I speak of a clear theology I am including both right doctrine (orthodoxy) and right practice (orthopraxy) so that is exactly what is meant by the “apostle’s doctrine” in Acts 2:42a. The great scholar of the history of doctrine, Jaroslav Pelikan pointed this out stating, “When the Old Testament speaks about ‘instruction’ or the New Testament about ‘the doctrine,’ this includes teaching about both confession and conduct, both theology and ethics. A separation between them is fatal…” (Pelikan 1971, 2)
Implications:
1. Biblical doctrine needs to be the basis of all that we do and say in church planting. So the question comes to us as church planters, “Is the priority of biblical doctrine evident in our ministry?”
2. Biblical doctrine means teaching “all the counsel of God.” (Acts 20:27) So the question comes to us as church planters, “Are we teaching all the Word of God and not just those sections that we like?”
3. Biblical doctrine needs above all to be taught to leadership in church planting. So the question comes to us, “Are we taking time to develop leaders with solid doctrine including knowing and being?”
4. The test of Jesus is both orthodoxy and orthopraxy as he looks at the planted churches in Asia Minor in Revelation 2 and 3. So the question comes to us as church planters, “What does our Lord think about the church or churches we are planting as he looks at them?”
References Cited
Quotes are from the English Standard Version (ESV). 2007. Wheaton, IL: Crossway
Bibles
Pelikan, Jaroslav. 1971. The Christian Tradition: A History of the Development of Doctrine. Vol. 1.
Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
No comments:
Post a Comment