E-Book, Englisch, 288 Seiten
DeYoung / Gilbert What Is the Mission of the Church?
1. Auflage 2011
ISBN: 978-1-4335-2693-0
Verlag: Crossway
Format: EPUB
Kopierschutz: 0 - No protection
Making Sense of Social Justice, Shalom, and the Great Commission
E-Book, Englisch, 288 Seiten
ISBN: 978-1-4335-2693-0
Verlag: Crossway
Format: EPUB
Kopierschutz: 0 - No protection
Kevin DeYoung (PhD, University of Leicester) is the senior pastor at Christ Covenant Church in Matthews, North Carolina, and associate professor of systematic theology at Reformed Theological Seminary, Charlotte. He has written books for children, adults, and academics, including Just Do Something; Impossible Christianity; Daily Doctrine; and The Biggest Story Bible Storybook. Kevin's work can be found on clearlyreformed.org. Kevin and his wife, Trisha, have nine children.
Autoren/Hrsg.
Weitere Infos & Material
What in the World Does Jesus Send Us into the World to Do?
MISSION, AS WE TRIED to demonstrate in the previous chapter, is not everything we do in Jesus’s name, nor everything we do in obedience to Christ. Mission is the task we are given to fulfill. It’s what Jesus sends us into the world to do. And if we want to figure out what Jesus sends disciples into the world to do, we think the best place to look is the Great Commission.
A Few Other Options First
Before we state our reasons for focusing on the Great Commission, and before we get to the Great Commission texts themselves and how they support our thesis above, it might be helpful to examine a few other passages that are sometimes pushed forward as offering a different and fuller mission identity for the church. As you’ll see, our problem is not with applying these texts to our contemporary context, or even with using them to shape our missional identity. Every passage of Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for us (2 Tim. 3:16). But—and here’s the rub—every passage is profitable only if understood and applied in the right way.
Genesis 12:1–3
We begin with Yahweh’s call to Abram:
Now the LORD said to Abram, “Go from your country and your kindred and your father’s house to the land that I will show you. And I will make of you a great nation, and I will bless you and make your name great, so that you will be a blessing. I will bless those who bless you, and him who dishonors you I will curse, and in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed.” (Gen. 12:1–3)
Everyone agrees that this is a pivotal text not just in Genesis but also in God’s grand plan of redemptive history. After a host of curses (Gen. 3:14, 17; 4:11; 5:29; 9:25) and lots of sin run amok, Genesis 12 bursts onto the scene with the promise of universal blessing. At last, here’s a spot of good news and a beautiful revelation both of God’s mission and of marching orders for Abraham.
But whereas everyone recognizes Genesis 12 as a key passage in the unfolding of God’s plan of salvation, others also see it “as one of the most important places in a missiological reading of the Bible.”1 What they mean is that Genesis 12 reveals the heart of God’s mission and ours—namely, to be a blessing. Reggie McNeal argues that in this “simple but far-reaching covenant . . . the people of God are charged with the responsibility and enjoy the privilege to bless everyone.”2 Likewise, Christopher Wright maintains that “it would be entirely appropriate, and no bad thing, if we took this text as ‘the Great Commission’. . . .There could be worse ways of summing up what mission is supposed to be all about than ‘Go . . . and be a blessing.’ ”3 Later he concludes, “The Abrahamic covenant is a moral agenda for God’s people as well as a mission statement by God.”4 In missional thinking, Genesis 12 is more than a promise. It’s more than a revelation of God’s ultimate mission in redemptive history. It is a command for the children of Abraham to help the nations experience all the good gifts that God longs for them to enjoy.5
At first, a closer look at the grammar of Genesis 12 seems to support a “missional” understanding of the text. There are two imperative verbs: “go” in verse 1 and “be a blessing” at the end of verse 2. So, contrary to the ESV translation, it looks as though Abraham has two commands: go and bless. Wright makes much of the grammar, arguing that “both [verbs] therefore have the nature of a charge or a mission laid on Abraham. . . . ‘Be a blessing’ thus entails a purpose and goal that stretches into the future. It is, in short, missional.”6 But it’s curious that Wright builds so much on this foundation when earlier he acknowledges that “it is a feature of Hebrew (as indeed it is in English) that when two imperatives occur together the second imperative may sometimes express either the expected result or the intended purpose of carrying out the first imperative.”7 In other words, the second grammatical imperative may not have the force of an imperative, but rather of a purpose or a result of obeying the first imperative. In fact, our English translations8 all render the end of verse 2 “you shall be a blessing” or “so that you shall be a blessing” or something similar. There are several other places in the Old Testament where an imperative verb should be translated as a result clause, rather than a command. Take Genesis 42:18 for example, where Joseph says, “Do this and you will live.” Both “do this” and “live” are imperative in form, but “live” is also clearly to be understood as the result of “doing this.” It’s not another command. We think this is how the second imperative in Genesis 12:1–2 should be translated—as a result clause, rather than as a command.9 This means, to quote Eckhard Schnabel, “Abraham does not receive an assignment to carry YHWH’s blessings to the nations; rather, the nations are promised divine blessing if and when they see Abraham’s faith in YHWH and if and when they establish contact with his descendants.”10
In talking about Hebrew grammar we quickly realize two things: (1) most people reading this book are ready for us to stop talking about Hebrew grammar, and (2) we are not experts in Hebrew grammar. Some (but not all) Hebrew scholars may disagree with the last paragraph. But even if the verb should be translated as a command, or even if it has that force no matter how you slice it, we still think the “missional” reading of the text says too much. Even if Abraham is told, “Go be a blessing,” the entire story of the patriarchs demonstrates that God is the one doing the blessing, quite apart from any blessing strategy on the part of Abraham. True, God’s blessing may be dependent (in a proximate way) on Abraham going. And true, Abraham’s obedience to God results in blessings on the nations. True, Abraham and his kin are interacting with Gentiles all throughout Genesis as the chosen family is the means of blessing for some peoples and cursing for others. But Abraham does not leave Ur intent on blessing the Canaanites. After Genesis 12, the narrative follows different individuals and nations whose plusses and minuses prove the promise of God that whoever blesses Abraham will be blessed, and whoever curses him will be cursed. God blesses Abraham’s family despite themselves, and he blesses those who treat Abraham well despite Abraham’s failures. This is not to suggest that Abraham’s obedience is irrelevant for God’s promised blessing. He has to go in order to be a blessing. Our point is simply that the obedient going is not going out to serve Amalekites and help them grow crops and learn to read. There is plenty of blessing to go around, but there is no evidence Abraham ever takes his call in chapter 12 as a commission to go find ways to bless the nations.
This doesn’t in any way mean it’s wrong for Christians to bless others, but it does mean we should not take Genesis 12:1–3 as a moral agenda or as another Great Commission. The call of Abram is not about a community blessing program. It’s about God’s unilateral promise to bless fumbling Abraham and bless the nations through faith in the promised Seed that will come from his family tree. Even when the blessing is connected to obedience, it is not the obedience of missional engagement but Abraham’s obedience in leaving his land, in circumcising his offspring (Gen. 17:10–14), and in being willing to sacrifice his son (Gen. 22:16–18). The emphasis in Genesis is on the chosen family as recipients of God’s blessing, not as the immediate purveyors of it.
Most crucially, the New Testament does not understand the call of Abram as a missional charge. Clearly, it is a glorious mission text announcing God’s plans to bless the whole world. But the blessing is not something we bestow on others as we work for human flourishing. Rather the Abrahamic blessing comes to those who trust in Abraham’s Offspring. This is Paul’s understanding in Galatians 3:9 when, after quoting Genesis 12:3 (“In you all the families of the earth shall be blessed”), he concludes, “So then, those who are of faith are blessed along with Abraham, the man of faith.” If there are missiological implications from Genesis, their emphasis is not “go and bless everyone” but rather “go and call the nations to put their faith in Christ.”
Exodus 19:5–6
We now turn to the well-known passage where God prepares Israel for his presence at Mount Sinai:
Now therefore, if you will indeed obey my voice and keep my covenant, you shall be my treasured possession among all peoples, for all the earth is mine; and you shall be to me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation. These are the words that you shall speak to the people of Israel. (Ex. 19:5–6)
Some argue that the language of “kingdom of priests” indicates that we are intermediaries for the presence of God in the world. The logic usually works like this: “The Bible says we are priests. And what do priests do? They mediate God’s presence. So what is our mission? We are supposed to be a kingdom of priests mediating God’s blessing to the world.” Reggie McNeal, commenting on Exodus 19, puts it like this: God “created a people to serve as his ongoing incarnational presence on the earth.”11 Christopher Wright puts it this way:...




