the tangible kingdom: creating incarnational community (pt. 3)

| church planting, community, ecclesiology, emergent, emerging church, missiology |


The Tangible Kingdom: Creating Incarnational Community
Hugh Halter & Matt Smay

Jossey-Bass—Church Ministry | Leadership
179 pages

[part 2]

The issue of contextualization has seemingly reared its head again as John MacArthur and others have continued their rampage against the idea of contextualizing the gospel. Which, honestly, makes absolutely no sense to me—I can’t imagine what vacuum the gospel would have to be in in order to be considered pure, but that’s a separate issue. What Halter and Smay discuss in chapter 6 is the idea that it’s in our contextualization, it’s not solely about the context you are entering but rather the posture in which the telling/embodying is done.

Often times we are stuck in the idea that it’s okay to teach/train missionaries how to contextualize because we’re are sending them to “go over there” into the foreign land. But when it comes to our own culture and context, we often times do a very poor job of teaching people how to create entry points for the gospel in their own worlds. This is the beginning idea of missional living. Halter & Smay make a great distinction here between missional and incarnational (often times they’re seen synonymously).

Missional sentness is focused on leaving and everything related to going, but incarnational represents how we go and what we do as we go… God could have sent his son by asking him to set up a website and download spiritual information to every billboard in the world. But apparently he knew that information about him doesn’t help people understand or love him So the only option for the Father and for us is to embody the concept.

Unfortunately, in modern day evangelicalism, we’ve mastered the idea of going… but we’ve fallen way short of embodying the gospel and being the gospel to people. Instead, “we’ve prioritized the verbals over the nonverbals, the message over the method… the proclamation over the posture.” This is why the church is in such trouble in our society—we’re not living out the values of the gospel. We’re all talk and no substance. We’ve mastered the idea of belief-ism, but have yet to actually live out in tangible ways as a united community what that belief-ism is really all about. Our operating principle, our little cities seem to revolve completely around the idea of believing the right way. Those are the lines we’ve drawn (denominations) and the walls we’ve erected.

In the reconstruction of the church, it is essential that we re-discover and embody the ideals of incarnational ministry… otherwise we’re in for a long ride potentially seeping into a new “dark age” of the church.

2 responses
  1. //re:generate » Blog Archive » the tangible kingdom: creating incarnational community (pt. 4) |

    5.Jun.08 @ 5:21 pm

    [...] [part 3] …the traditional “Come to us” attraction model of church was successful in the past. People outside the church still appreciated our values… But when our values are opposite, or even different, it is much more difficult to find a way to be together… Cultural distance (a concept shared by Alan Hirsch in The Forgotten Ways) explains why there is room for some churches to stay the same, but also why most churches will need to make radical adjustments. It all depends on who you are called to reach. If your calling is to influence those with the most similarly held values, then you can keep providing the same thing. But if you want to influence the massively growing percentage of people who are much further from the gospel, you’ll have to provide, model, and invite people into an inclusive community that welcomes people with alternative values. (Page 72) [...]

  2. //re:generate » Blog Archive » The Tangible Kingdom (a review) |

    6.Jul.08 @ 2:22 pm

    [...] 1] [part 2] [part 3] [part 4] [part 5] join the conversation comments [...]