How to Think About Worship (Part 1)

           No ministry of the church has greater potential for shaping the lives of its constituency than the corporate worship experience. When people consistently gather together to affirm God’s role in their lives and to allow the Spirit to speak in fresh ways through the word, a remarkable transformation can occur. In a worship setting, followers of Christ should be edified and mobilized for more effective mission in the world. Seekers should find a genuine connection which draws them closer to the One who is Life and Truth.

Unfortunately, such life-changing experiences are not typical in worship, especially in the North American church. “If we are honest, we will admit that our services can easily slip into meaningless rote, driven more by habit than spiritual passion, and that many people attend every week and leave unchanged.”[1] Why does this happen? Could it be that transformation is not occurring because the limited nature of our experiences in worship do not fully express Christ’s great command to “love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your strength, and with all your mind” (Luke 10:27)?[2] When people are either unprepared for worship, disengaged from worship, or restricted in worship—then the experience becomes less than what God intended.

The purpose for this project is to provide a biblical and theological foundation for the practice of worship in the Churches of God, General Conference and to encourage ministry leaders who seek to improve the quality of the worship experience they design and implement. This writer values what can be learned about worship from Christ’s followers in other cultures. Interviews conducted with ministry leaders in cross-cultural settings will be cited to demonstrate not only how worship varies but what we can learn from one another.[3] Some differences in worship practice reflect the culture in which those churches reside. A portion of this writing will emphasize the importance of respecting and adapting worship to the dominant culture of the worshippers. At the same time, caution must be exercised so that worship does not become captive to the culture.

Worship is often associated with our feelings. People may evaluate or describe the influence of a worship service by the presence or absence of certain emotions. But biblical worship results in more than just good feelings. “It leaves us with changed hearts and calls us to changed lives. Very simply, to experience God’s presence is to be transformed from the inside out.”[4]

More important questions than “how did I feel about it?” are:

·       Did it glorify God?

·       Did we experience God as we gathered together in worship?

·       Did it build up individual Christians as well as the corporate community to be Christlike?

·       Did it align us with God’s mission of what He is doing in the world?[5]

Fulfilling that kind of criteria depends (in part) upon the extent to which scripture has informed one’s expectations about worship.

A Theological Basis for Worship

The Old Testament reveals the God of Israel who was different from all the other gods known to mankind. For example, He was (1) the One and Only God worthy of worship; (2) personal and active revealing Himself in history; (3) presently available through symbols or objects such as the ark of the covenant and places like the holy of holies, the tabernacle and the temple; and (4) in spirit form rather than a specific image.[6]

Most significant of all in the Old Testament was the persistent nature of God in taking the initiative to reveal Himself. The variety of names by which He is known (such as Jehovah, Elohim, etc.) indicates just some of the ways He surpasses all other gods. For this reason, the term “glory” (kabod = weight, honor) is often associated with God. He alone is worthy of our praise and worship.[7]

Three worship words are commonly associated with the New Testament church. Latreia refers to the formal practice of worship, especially sacrifice. The word describes worship that envelopes life. It is used of the prophetess Anna who “worshipped night and day, fasting and praying” (Luke 2:37). The Roman Christians were urged to offer their bodies “…as a living sacrifice, holy and pleasing to God—this is a true worship” (12:1). Latreia as an image of worship which holds nothing back from God is a radical concept.[8]

Leitourgia is an active word, suggesting service or work. It was used of practical service offered by one person to another, such as when Epaphroditus ministered to Paul’s needs (Philippians 2:25); and the collection received for the saints in Jerusalem (Romans 15:27; 2 Corinthians 9:12). Leitourgia was the word used in regard to Zechariah’s service to God as a priest (Luke 1:23). It was likewise used to simply describe congregational worship at Antioch, “while they were worshiping…”(Acts 13:2). Worship as leitourgia describes how God acts in new ways and works through Christians to serve others in very practical ways.[9]

The third word is proskuneo focuses on experience. It is rooted in the actions of “kissing, bowing or falling down to worship a deity” and expresses the emotion and action of using one’s whole body to worship.[10] Proskuneo frequently occurs in Matthew’s gospel to describe those falling down to worship Jesus, such as the magi with the infant (2:11), and a leper (8:2). In his conversation with the Samaritan woman in John 4, this is the kind of “worship” discussed. In Acts 10:25, Cornelius falls down and worships Peter when he arrives in Caesarea. Revelation describes constant and repeated proskuneo where worshipers are on their knees (Revelation 4:10; 5:14; 7:11; 11:16; 19:4). 

These biblical expressions and descriptions suggest that worship is not only multifaceted but also difficult to understand. In describing the essence and nature of worship, Franklin Segler has summarized biblical worship in the following manner. It is (1) both revelation and mystery. While God has made Himself known in various ways, one can never fully comprehend Him; (2) a celebration of God’s powerful and redemptive acts in history, especially through Jesus Christ; (3) life. If everything belongs to God, then worship is not something reserved for specific acts on the Lord’s Day but to be expressed every day in all we do; (4) a dialogue in the sense that it includes both His revelation and our response; (5) an offering of oneself.  The worshiper’s primary objective should not be to receive blessings but to give oneself more completely to a worthy God; and (6) eschatological fulfillment in the sense that worship always anticipates that final gathering around God’s throne.[11]

It becomes apparent that worship is not something that happens to us. It is never the result of passivity. One must approach worship intentionally with a keen desire for God, as expressed by the Psalmist:  “As the deer pants for streams of water, so my soul pants for you, my God. My soul thirsts for God, for the living God” (42:1-2a).  Stated more forcefully, people “…ought to come starved for God…(He) is mightily honored when a people know that they will die of hunger and thirst unless they have God.”[12]

While worship may include many things, at the heart of every definition of worship is the idea of our response to God’s revelation of who He is and what He has done.[13] In fact, “…the God who has acted in history continues to act within the worshipping community in a saving and healing way as the community remembers, proclaims, enacts and celebrates with thanksgiving.”[14] This makes worship the most important expression of our Christian faith. It is ultimately more important than even evangelism or missions.

Jesus was quite clear in John 4:23:  God is seeking worshipers, not more evangelists. “The true goal of evangelism is to produce more and better worshipers….The biblical goal of evangelism is to produce worshipers, not just to save the lost from the fires of hell or to enlist more recruits.”[15]

John Piper agrees that worship rather than missions is the goal of the church. “Missions exists because worship doesn’t. Worship is ultimate…because God is ultimate….When this age is over, and the countless millions of the redeemed fall on their faces before the throne of God, missions will be no more. But worship abides forever.”[16] In this perspective, the goal of evangelism and missions is to increase the number and diversity of worshipers throughout the world so that God may receive the maximum glory and honor that is due Him.     

[to be continued....]

---

[1] Bob Rognlien, Experiential Worship—Encountering God with Heart, Soul, Mind and Strength (Colorado Springs, CO: NavPress, 2005), 25.

[2] Rognlien, 46.

[3] Interviews were limited within the Churches of God, General Conference and conducted with a Haitian pastor, Bengali ministry leaders in both Bangladesh and India, an American missionary and his Brazilian wife serving in Brazil, and a Navajo lay leader in New Mexico.

[4] Morgenthaler, Worship Evangelism:  Inviting Unbelievers into the Presence of God (Grand Rapids, MI:  Zondervan, 1995, 1999), 52.

[5] Kreider, “Worship and Mission” seminar.  New Haven, CT:   Overseas Ministries Study Center, 26 March 2007.

[6] Phil Harrold, “Biblical Foundations of Christian Worship,” Plenary Session #1, CM 586: Christian Worship. Winebrenner Theological Seminary, January 24, 2006.

[7] Harrold, 24 January 2006.

[8] Kreider, 26 March 2007.

[9] Kreider, 26 March 2007.

[10] Kreider, 26 March 2007.

[11] Franklin M. Segler, Understanding, Preparing for, and Practicing Christian Worship, 2^nd ed.  (Nashville, TN:  Broadman & Holman Publishing, 1996), 7.

[12] John Piper, Let the Nations be Glad! The Supremacy of God in Missions, 2^nd ed.  (Grand Rapids, MI:  Baker Academic, 2003), 227.

[13] Paul Basden, gen. ed., Exploring the Worship Spectrum—6 Views, (Grand Rapids, MI:  Zondervan, 2004), 13. Also, see Morgenthaler, 47, 88;

[14] Robert E. Webber, Worship Old & New (rev.)(Grand Rapids, MI:  Zondervan, 1994), 262.

[15] Morgenthaler, 39.

[16] Piper, 17.

Do You Love the City? (Part 3)

Practical Implications for Urban Ministry

            Seeing the city as a strategic center for kingdom outreach begins with a godly perspective of the city. The Old Testament book of Ezekiel ends with the words, “And the name of the city from that time on shall be, ‘The Lord is there’” (48:35). While the prophet is describing the restoration of God’s people to Jerusalem following their captivity in Babylon, followers of Christ today can be encouraged by the reminder that—regardless of the city—God is there.

            If the church accepts the reality that God is already at work in the city, then the church can more easily see the potential for making a difference. Most international urban centers are fraught with systemic problems that cannot be resolved with just another church program. Instead of echoing the despair voiced by so many skeptics, the church can be a beacon of hope by working with community leaders toward improving how the city functions on behalf of its residents. Linthicum describes Christians as being advocates in and for the city:

The church is to be the people of action—those who call the city’s structures and systems to accountability, who defend those oppressed and exploited by those systems, and who minister to those who are deceived but who benefit from that city’s principalities. We Christians cannot bring into being such a city, but we can work, pray, proclaim, and be on the side of the angels! To do so means that we must commit ourselves to work toward the transformation of our city’s inner spirituality. That transformation happens only through the Gospel. This is the vocation or mission of the church of Jesus Christ in each city of the world (1991, 144).

While spiritual issues may lie at the core of urban needs, effective ministry seeks to address the physical consequences of evil as well as the spiritual needs. Of course, the church actively pursues this approach to ministry, not for the purpose of increasing their membership rolls, but simply because Christ’s transforming love demands it of those who have already been changed by the gospel. By doing so, the church serves as a prophet (speaking and acting on behalf of justice and mercy) and as a priest (representing God to the people and interceding on their behalf).

            Intercessory prayer is one of the normal spiritual practices of any church. The urban church values this form of prayer as a primary force for good. The typical public prayers in worship might (among other things) request God’s protection and blessings upon the church family and express a desire for the city to be reached with the message of Christ. But such prayers tend to be self-serving and limit the scope of what God wishes to accomplish through His body as well as in the city (Linthicum 1991, 49). Is there a better, more biblical model to follow in praying for the city?

Jeremiah’s letter to the exiled Judean leaders in Babylon called for a more extensive approach to prayer: “…pray to the Lord on its [the city’s] behalf, for in its welfare you will find your welfare” (29:7). Linthicum applauds this model prayer and adds these specific instructions: “…the prayers of God’s people are to cover all aspects of a city. This includes praying for the city’s economic health, for safety from conflict, for an end to violent crime, for a reformation of the political process, for the well-being and happiness of all who live in that city, and for justice for all, but especially justice for the poor” (1991, 163). Such prayers are pro-active rather than defensive-oriented (protecting God’s people against an evil city) and encompass a wide range of urban needs which impact all its citizens. This approach toward prayer recognizes the spiritual conflict facing the urban church and engages the enemy in every battle. It also recognizes that God is not just concerned about the spiritual needs of the people but every felt need. So must His people.

Aggressively ministering to the city may require some of Christ’s followers to reverse the church’s historic flight to the suburbs. There are signs that with inner city revitalization taking place in many North American cities, younger generations are choosing to live in city centers to benefit from closer proximity to their work as well as to cultural events. The church should pursue this strategy by encouraging a portion of their members to prayerfully consider this option. But their purpose for living in the city must be very intentional and redemptive. As Tim Keller points out, “If Christians go to urban centers simply to acquire power, they will never achieve cultural influence and change that is deep, lasting, and embraced by the broader society. We must live in the city to serve all the peoples in it, not just our own tribe. We must lose our power to find our (true) power. Christianity will not be attractive enough to win influence except through sacrificial service to all people, regardless of their beliefs” (2006, 39). Choosing this path is risky. Modeling a Christ-like spirit in the city is countercultural.

Living in the city with a missionary-mindset can be beneficial for both the church and the community. Bakke affirms, “There is a relationship always between the presence of the godly and the preservation of urban communities” (1997, 39). When churches fled the city, they not only abandoned the mission but also allowed other non-Christian religions to become more easily established, often in buildings where Christ was once proclaimed (Conn and Ortiz 2001, 320)! Returning to the city opens the door for meaningful ministry once again and communicates to the residents that the church has not given up on them. Ministering through occasional forays into enemy territory does not make a lasting impact. But putting down roots in the community with a long-term commitment and building relationships through serving needs as Jesus did will make a difference.

In the days of Nehemiah after the city walls of Jerusalem were rebuilt, an effort was made to intentionally recruit one of every ten godly people to live in the city (11:1-2). Their presence would be a good influence on other residents. Ten percent could provide the necessary “tipping point” to insure that Jerusalem would maintain the historic values of the faith recently instilled in them once again (Bakke 1997:45). Tim Keller shares a similar viewpoint about impacting greater New York City by increasing the percentage of Christ followers in the metro area (2006, 38). Continuing to ignore the city by being prejudiced against it because it is too corrupt or too difficult will simply marginalize the church’s influence and forfeit opportunities for global impact (Charles 2009, 20).

Not everyone wants to relocate to the inner city. “…Living in a concrete jungle or squalid slum is far less attractive, and undesirable as a place of ministry” when compared to many of the more exotic locations where this generation of God’s people are focused in ministry (Johnstone 1998, 243). But Greenway reminds us, “The question is not whether we prefer to live in cities. The question is whether we will go where workers are needed and where God wants us to go…. Cities offer unique opportunities to reach great numbers of people with the gospel of Jesus Christ and extend his kingdom on earth” (1999, 119). The masses of people and the diversity of languages and cultures make the city one of the most strategic mission fields in the 21^st century.

The need to establish the gospel and a reproducing church among unreached people groups today is no less important. But urban areas of the world may provide open doors to some of these hidden peoples when groups of them relocate to a city for greater economic opportunities. Since people in transition are more open to the gospel, could it be that the massive migration of people to urban centers around the world is a part of God’s providential strategy to expose all the nations to the gospel (Greenway 1999, 117)? Many of them migrate to western cities from countries where doing traditional mission work is either illegal or very restrictive. In addition, major population centers referred to as “gateway cities” have been identified in Africa and Asia  “…as portals to unreached and least-evangelized peoples of the world” (Gailey and Culbertson 2007, 166). As a result of the world coming to the city, the mobilized church can close the gap on reaching the unreached.

There is a difference between the churches’ potential for kingdom impact in cities in North America and those in other areas of the world. While churches do exist in most, if not all, of the cities of the 10/40 Window, few of them “…have sufficient numbers of believers and churches to effectively evangelize their city” (Grigg 1995, 22). The global church must make a more concerted effort to plant reproducing churches in these strategic cities of the world, knowing that the faith historically expands out beyond the cities.

In regard to urban areas in North America, Tony Campolo takes the position that many inner city churches are already serving their communities well but are still not doing enough. “…Too often they do not see the larger role that they are being called to assume. Seldom do they realize that the Church is called to be the lead institution that can govern the direction and the character of social change in urban America. Rarely are they aware that the hour has come for them to step out of their societal background and claim control over the destiny of America’s cities. Often these churches already have the human and material resources to get the job done. They must be made to realize that to whom much is given, much is expected” (2000, 60-61).

For many Americans, a mission harvest awaits only a block or two away. Geographically close but culturally distant, their Jerusalem may look more and more every day like Samaria or the ends of the earth, but God is still there. And He is already at work to effect life change and community transformation through people who will love the city as He does.

           

Reference List

Allen, Roland.  1927. Missionary methods: St. Paul’s or ours? rev ed.. London: World Dominion Press.

Bakke, Ray.  1987. The urban Christian: effective ministry in today’s urban world. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.

------. 1997. A theology as big as the city.  Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.

Barrett, David and Todd Johnson.  2005. Annual statistical tables. International Bulletin of Missionary Research 29, no 1 (January); 28-30.

Bosch, David J.  1991. Transforming mission: paradigm shifts in theology of mission.  Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books.

Campolo, Tony.  2000. Revolution and renewal: how churches are saving our cities.  Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press.

Charles, Duky.  2009.  The importance and strategic role of the city in missio dei. Lausanne World Pulse (May): 16-20.

Conn, Harvie M. and Manuel Ortiz.  2001. Urban ministry: the kingdom, the city and the people of God.  Downers Grove, IL:  InterVarsity Press.

Gailey, Charles R. and Howard Culbertson.  2007. Discovering missions.  Kansas City:  Beacon Hill Press.

Greenway, Roger S.  1978. Apostles to the city: biblical strategies for urban missions.  Grand Rapids, MI:  Baker Book House.

------.  1999. Go and make disciples: an introduction to Christian missions.  Phillipsburg, NJ: P & R Publishing.

Grigg, Viv.  1995. Spiritual warfare and the poor in the gateway cities. In Praying through the 100 gateway cities of the 10/40 window, eds. C. Peter Wagner, Stephen Peters and Mark Wilson, 22-27. Seattle, WA: YWAM Publishing.

Johnstone, Patrick.  1998. The church is bigger than you think: the unfinished work of world evangelization.  Ross-Shire, Great Britain: Geanies House.

Keller, Timothy J.  1993. An evangelical mission in a secular city. In Center city churches: the new urban frontier, ed Lyle Schaller, 34-41. Nashville, TN:  Abingdon Press.

------.  2006.   A new king of urban Christian. Christianity Today (May): 36-39.

Latourette, Kenneth Scott.  1975. A history of Christianity beginnings to 1500. Vol. 1. Rev. ed.  New York:  Harper & Row Publishers.

Linthicum, Robert C.  1991.  City of God, city of Satan.  Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

Maluga, Tom.  1999. Multiplying churches to take cities for Christ: New life for the city through church planting and prayer. In A heart for the city, ed. John Fuder, 171-186.  Chicago: Moody Press.

Newbigin, Lesslie.  1989. The gospel in a pluralist society.  Grand Rapids, MI:  William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

Pier, Mac.  2009. Greater New York and the five boroughs: prayer. Lausanne World Pulse.  (July): 24-31.

Roberts, Bob Jr.  2007.   Glocalization: how followers of Jesus engage a flat world.  Grand Rapids, MI:  Zondervan.

------.  2008.  The multiplying church: the new math for starting new churches.  Grand Rapids, MI:  Zondervan.

Schnabel, Eckhard J.  2008.  Paul the missionary:  realities, strategies and methods.  Downers Grove, IL:  IVP Academic.

White, Randy.  2006. The road to urban mission in the new global city.  Common Ground Journal: Perspectives on the church in the 21^st century. 4, no. 1 (Fall): 37-48.

Do You Love the City? (Part 2)

Biblical Foundations for Urban Ministry

The word “city” occurs more than 1,200 times in Scripture, and at least 100 cities are mentioned by name—many of them significant in size and influence. “…Abraham’s city of Ur numbered 250,000. Ancient Ninevah was so large that it took three days to cross it on foot (Jonah 3:3). Babylon at the time of Nebuchadnezzar was an amazing city with eleven miles of walls and a water and irrigation system…not equaled again until the end of the nineteenth century” (Linthicum 1991, 21). These are prominent cities, and it is the nature of cities for their influence to expand far beyond their geographical boundaries. Roger Greenway states that, “whatever happens in cities affects entire nations. The world goes in the direction that cities go” (1999, 113). This is certainly more true today than 4,000 years ago.

At first glance, the city appears to be antithetical to everything that is godly. In the Old Testament, cities like Babel (Babylon), Sodom and Gomorrah, and Ninevah all have a negative history. Only Jerusalem is presented in a positive light.[1] But that does not mean God wanted His people to ignore opportunities for ministry in the city in those times (as this paper will later prove).

While in rebellion against God, the murderer Cain built the first city, which he named for his firstborn, Enoch (Gen 4:17). The later construction of the city tower of Babel was in direct violation of the command of God (Gen 1:28; 11:4). In response, God instituted the diversity of languages, which confused the residents of Babel and caused them to disperse over the face of the earth.[2] Babel eventually gave rise to Babylon—a city-state that casts a dark shadow over the people of God in the Old Testament and even serves as a symbol of evil in the New Testament (Linthicum 1991, 24). Yet God would later reveal Himself through His people in a place like that.[3]

The wickedness of the ancient cities of Sodom and Gomorrah was a great offense to God (Gen 13:13; 18:20), and He destroyed them both by fire (Gen 19:1-29). Multiple references to Sodom and Gomorrah are found in Scripture as evidence of God’s judgment upon the wicked cities. They repeatedly serve as examples of what happens to the ungodly (such as Deut 29:23; Jer 23:14; Matt 11:23-24; 2 Pet 2:6; Jude 7). Missionary theologian Lesslie Newbigin asserts that “the picture of Lot and his wife fleeing Sodom has been an immensely powerful one in shaping Christian imagination” (1989, 237). It fosters the notion that Godly people flee the city![4] However, it is noteworthy that Abraham intercedes for the city in spite of its many ills (Gen 18:22-33). He serves as a model for all who would pray for God to preserve their city.

The prophet Jonah did not share Abraham’s compassion. When called to warn the great and evil city of Ninevah of God’s impending judgment, he rejected that call and sought to evade both God and his responsibility (Jonah 1:1-3). Ninevah’s wickedness was legendary, and its atrocities against Israel were especially offensive to Jonah. But Ninevah is described as “a great city to God” (Jonah 3:3)[5], and He has great compassion for it in spite of its tendency toward evil. Jonah eventually (but reluctantly) obeys, and the city responds in repentance (3:6-9). As a result, God spares the city from destruction—an act that displeases and angers Jonah (4:1). His selfish ethnocentrism is revealed in the closing verses of the book as he waits in the suburbs, expressing more concern over his own comfort than the fate of the city. Jonah’s distance from the city and his contempt for it epitomizes the attitude of so many in the modern church who do not look at cities with God’s eyes (Maluga 1999, 186). Like Jonah, they seem more focused on the problems rather than the potential for transformation.

The writings of the prophet Jeremiah also reveal God’s heart for another wicked city: Babylon. It was here where the people of God would be forced to live for 70 years. God spoke through Jeremiah to remind the people that, though He was responsible for sending them into exile, He had not abandoned them or forgotten them in their plight. In chapter 29, God gave His people specific instructions on how to conduct their lives in the city: “Build houses and live in them; plant gardens and eat their produce. Take wives and have sons and daughters; take wives for your sons, and give your daughters in marriage, that they may bear sons and daughters; multiply there, and do not decrease. But seek the welfare of the city where I have sent you into exile, and pray to the Lord on its behalf, for in its welfare you will find your welfare” (29:5-7).

The exiles were encouraged to put down some roots in the city, pray for the city and be a blessing to the city. More surprising than hearing they were to be in captivity for a long time was the affirmation that they could find God in (what they perceived to be) a godless city! The comforting assurance of God’s activity (29:11) seems out of place when one considers the context of city life: “For I know the plans I have for you, declares the Lord, plans for welfare and not for evil, to give you a future and a hope.” As Linthicum states, this is an important and powerful reminder for city-dwellers today: “Why are you in the city in which you find yourself? You are there, Jeremiah suggests, for one reason and one reason alone. You are in your city because God has called you there. You are in your city by God’s design, by God’s will. Whether God’s plans for you in that city turn out to be plans for your peace and not for your disaster depend on whether you can see yourself as being called by God into your city, and then whether you can seek to live faithfully according to that call” (1991, 148). God can and does work through His people on behalf of their city no matter what the circumstances are.

In the New Testament, the city was the focal point of ministry in the early church. The church was birthed in a city. Just prior to His ascension to heaven, Jesus commissioned His disciples to be witnesses “…in all Judea and Samaria and to the end of the earth” (Acts 1:8), but they were to begin in Jerusalem—a city! As the gospel of Jesus Christ spreads out from there, cities such as Antioch, Philippi, Thessalonica, Corinth, Ephesus, Athens, and eventually Rome become centers of church expansion. In fact, “it is no exaggeration to say that the book of Acts deals almost entirely with cities; missionary work is almost limited to them” (Conn and Ortiz 2001, 128). Church historian Kenneth Latourette confirms this perspective by saying: “At the outset, Christianity was predominately urban. It moved along the trade routes from city to city. By the second decade of its second century in at least some parts of Asia Minor, it had spread widely into towns and even into the countryside, but its strength was in the cities which were so prominent a feature of the Roman Empire” (1953, 75). But, in addition to following the trade routes, was there any other strategy that resulted in this focus on the city?

The Apostle Paul—the church’s premier missionary—initially pursued a strategy in keeping with his own ethnic heritage. When he and Barnabas began their first missionary journey, they “…proclaimed the Word of God in the synagogues of the Jews” (Acts 13:4). In seeking out Jews, they “…were bound to focus on cities: in the provinces outside of Judea, Jewish communities could only be found in cities” (Schnabel 2008, 282). Going where a Jewish audience could be found meant going to the city. Later, as Paul turned away from the Jews to give primary attention to Gentiles, cities continued to be the center of activity. Eckhard Schnabel describes Paul’s evangelistic ministry in the city as focusing on five specific areas:  “…synagogues, marketplaces, lecture halls, workshops and private homes” (2008, 288). He concentrated on urban areas, not only because of the masses of people, but for their potential of influence on the surrounding region.

For this reason, Paul had an urban strategy. He was selective where he chose to focus his attention. “He concentrates on the district or provincial capitals, each of which stands for a whole region: Philippi for Macedonia (Phil 4:15), Thessalonica for Macedonia and Achaia (1 Thess 1:7), Corinth for Achaia (1 Cor 16:15; 2 Cor 1:1), and Ephesus for Asia (Rom 16:5; 1 Cor 16:19; 2 Cor 1:8.…These ‘metropolises’ are the main centers as far as communication, culture, commerce, politics and religion are concerned” (Bosch 1991, 130). As a result of this strategy, churches were planted in the cities, villages and countryside of each specific region.

Establishing churches in major cities was essential to Paul’s plan. However, it was not enough just to plant a church. “Most of Paul’s letters were written to city churches as primers on how the church can effectively carry on ministry in a city” (Linthicum 1991, 22). To be effective, they had to understand their unique context (Linthicum 1991, 66). Every city was different, and thus, every church was different. Paul either personally invested sufficient time in some of these Christian centers (such as Corinth or Philippi), or sent a co-worker who would (such as Timothy to Thessalonica), so that the believers would be discipled and grow toward maturity. These congregations were expected to possess a vital faith that would be passed on to the surrounding areas (Allen 1927, 18). This “trickle-down” approach resulted in a rapid spread of the gospel as the message originally accepted in the city was then disseminated to outlying areas.

However, some of the New Testament churches did not fare so well in fulfilling this purpose. Instead, the influence of the city seemed to have overwhelmed their mission. The Corinthian church, with its numerous problems, is an example. In writing about the effectiveness of the churches in the cities of Asia Minor (Rev 2-3), Linthicum states, “Some of these churches were seduced by their cities, in one way or another allowing the Gospel to conform to the world rather than becoming agents to enable the world to be transformed by the Gospel” (1991, 310). This is always a danger—regardless of the setting. But “if the city shapes the church, we can be sure that the church will no longer be the servant of God with redeeming power for the salvation of men, but will have become a slave to the secular thinking and lifestyles of the urban society” (Greenway 1978, 12). The effective church remains conformed to the image of Christ so that it can provide a transforming influence.

What is commendable about the Asia Minor cities is “…they assumed a pro-active role toward their cities, rather than a reactive role. The essential response of these seven urban churches was to engage the interior spirituality of their cities” (Linthicum 1991, 310). This engagement with their cities is exemplary for churches today. Urban communities should not just be localities where congregations have a presence through worship but areas where the body of Christ is resident, engaged with the culture and making a difference for the kingdom. This requires ministry leaders having the ability to interpret the community as well as interpret the Scriptures so they can address the essential issues of life in the city (Bakke 1987, 62).

This pattern of beginning in the cities and spreading to outlying areas is how the early church “…turned the world upside down…(Acts 17:6). For much of Christian history, the church was an urban phenomenon. “…The church saw cities as gifts of God, royal routes to the evangelization of the world” (Conn and Ortiz 2001, 79). When the modern missionary movement of the 18^th century began to spread to the coastlands of Africa and Asia, cities continued to receive the primary focus with the expectation that the faith would spread outward (as it did in Paul’s day). However, it did not permeate the beyond the coasts sufficiently. Vast interior populations were remained untouched by the gospel. For this reason, the missionary focus turned toward the interiors of continents and, more recently, to the unreached or hidden peoples of the world.[6]

As a result, it has been suggested by some that the attention given to these more remote areas of the world has been at the expense of urban mission (Roberts 2007, 58). Numerous urban church strategists decry this perceived abandonment of the city at a time when the cities of the world have exploded with unprecedented population gains. In emphasizing this urban challenge as a major unfinished task for the church today, missiologist Patrick Johnstone writes, “We have been winning the countryside and losing the cities, and all the time our rural constituency has been draining away to the cities” (1998, 243). History indicates that the key to reaching the countryside has always been to reach the cities first (Roberts 2008, 130). In the words of Ray Bakke, “large cities are both magnets, drawing the nations into them, and magnifiers, broadcasting the gospel out into the hinterlands” (1997, 168). The gospel never flows from the rural areas to the city. It begins in the city. “The engine for societal change is in the cities,…used wisely, it could be the dynamo for the growth of the Kingdom” (Johnstone 1998, 241).  If that is true, ministering in cities must be a major focus of the overall strategy for fulfilling the Great Commission in the 21^st century.

---

[1] For example, Isa 2:2-4 depicts how the peoples of the earth would be drawn to Jerusalem as God’s glory was made manifest in the holy city (Conn and Ortiz 2001, 90-91).

[2] One could interpret God’s action at Babel as His opposition to cities in general. That is not the issue here. He dispersed the residents of Babel for their attempt at self-sufficiency apart from Him and for their direct disobedience to His command to fill the earth. Bob Roberts makes the point that while the garden is the metaphor for creation, “…the metaphor for the future is the city. The ultimate city the Bible describes is…a perfect city because it belongs to God” (2007, 61). Therefore, apart from the image of the city as a wicked place, there is the image of the holy city where God dwells and our much anticipated destination (Newbigin 1989, 237).

[3] See Jer 29 explanation on p. 6-7 of this paper.

[4] Was it ever God’s will for a city church to close their doors and relocate to the suburbs? The Jesus who prayed, “I do not ask that you take them out of the world, but that you keep them from the evil one” (Jn 17:15) is the same Jesus who can protect His people in the city.

[5] The English Standard Version (ESV) provides this meaning in the footnote.

[6] This shift in focus was in large part due to the desire of missiologists to “finish the task” of world evangelization by making sure that every unreached people group had the opportunity to hear and respond to the gospel of Christ. It was not that they believed the city was unimportant, but that a reproducing church was already present in urban areas. Places where the message of Christ had never been proclaimed needed to be reached!