One of the hallmarks of Christianity in the twentieth century is its fall in the Western and rise in non-Western parts of the world.[1] It has been suggested that a decline in the West is due to the churches irrelevance to postmodern culture.[2] It seems that “the traditional propositional and proclamational forms of evangelism implemented during the modern era are diminishing in their effectiveness to bring people into God’s Kingdom community”.[3] One form of ecclesiology which was rewarding in one era changes as another one begins[4] and those Churches that are unwilling or unable to adapt find themselves captured in the particular culture from which they commenced. For churches to be effective, it is imperative that they have an “understanding of the times”[5] and communicate the gospel in language, imagery and ideas that make sense to the audience. An approach to ecclesiology must be developed, that is both accordant with ancient Christian faith, yet relevant to this new time in culture.[6] We must ask, what does a missional ecclesiology look like in the postmodern West? This paper seeks to answer that question by arriving at an understanding of missional ecclesiology within a postmodern context and consider the practical implications for the contemporary church situated in the West. To do this, first, this essay outlines the historical developments and theological rationale for a missional ecclesiology. Second, Western postmodern ideologies are examined, three dominate revolutions (within philosophy, communications and science) responsible for postmodernism are highlighted and the resultant effect on societal thinking is suggested. Finally, a practical response for the contemporary church in the west is offered and conclusions are drawn against the proposed question.
Missional ecclesiology
Functioning faithfully as the church God intended requires a foundational understanding of the nature and mission of the church. Often the pragmatic West addresses what the church ought to do, before reflecting on what the church is. Emphasising practical methodology over theological ontology.[7] This is where the study of ecclesiology proves valuable. “Ecclesiology is a theological discipline that seeks to understand what the church is”.[8] Missional ecclesiology approaches this from a missional perspective, where the church is accepted as a community of ambassadors called, equipped and sent into the world to accomplish the redemptive plan of the Trinitarian God. Missional ecclesiology, therefore, “is the discussion, not only of what the church is called to do but also be”.[9] It seeks to define the churches missional participation in God’s overarching mission which is to redeem the world within a specific periodic context.[10]
Historical development
Historically, the missional concept derives from a paper delivered by Barth at a Missionary Conference in Brandenburg (1932).[11] Shortly after, missiologist Hartenstein adopted the phrase ‘Missio Dei’ as an expression for the divine Trinitarian sending of God, the Son and the Holy Spirit into the world.[12] Later Newbigin, after returning from the mission field, added to the missional conversation in his book The Open Secret[13] which observed the West as no longer a Christian society but a mission field. He examined the issue in Foolishness to the Greeks,[14] posing a pertinent question, what is involved in a missionary encounter between the gospel and a modem Western culture? A movement that sought to answer that question arose in the 1980s and became known as The Gospel and our Culture Network (GOCN). Shaped broadly by the observations of Newbigin, and under the leadership Hunsberger, the GOCN circulated articles that brought the ‘mission and culture’ conversation into the field of popular inquiry. Although a historical understanding of missional ecclesiology helps introduce the essay topic, nevertheless, it must also be asked, does missional ecclesiology have theological rationale?
Theological rationale
Although many theological observations contribute to the study of missional ecclesiology,[15] this paper focuses on two foundational rationales stemming from a missional hermeneutic, namely, the Missio Dei (the mission of God)[16] and Trinitarian sending.[17]
the Missio Dei (the mission of God)
Foundational to the understanding of missional ecclesiology, is the idea that God has His own overarching mission within all of creation – known as the Missio Dei.[18] The Mission of God (the Missio Dei) describes the sovereign act of the Triune God sending His Son into the world, who in turn sends the Holy Spirit, in order to redeem fallen humanity.[19]The bible presents the concept of Missio Dei as its grand meta-narrative, the overall story and overarching perspective.[20] As Wright puts it, mission is “a major key that unlocks the whole grand narrative of the canon of Scripture”.[21] It is “not just one of a list of things the Bible happens to talk about…it is what it is all about”.[22] Importantly, this theocentric understanding of mission insists that God is the starting point of the missional intercourse, not the church.[23] However, this shift in the agent of mission (from the church to God) appears to reverse.[24] As God is reinstated, He invites the redeemed church to partake in His redemptive mission of reconciling His creation to himself.[25] It appears that “the entire pageant of redemption is subsumed under the rubric of mission, and the ecclesiastical dimension of the redeemed as God’s instrument of his mission is subsumed under this head”.[26]
Trinitarian sending
Moreover, recent developments in missional ecclesiology assign the missional nature of the church to the outworking of the Triune God.[27] Niemandt suggests that the Missio Dei is rooted in Trinitarian theology because it “begins in the heart of the Triune God”.[28] Scriptural evidence for this appears in John 20:21. Here, Jesus speaks to his disciples and says “peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, even so I am sending you. And when he had said this, he breathed on them and said to them, ‘Receive the Holy Spirit’” (emphasis mine).[29] Here, Jesus details the Father’s sending of Him. In turn, this results in His sending of the Spirit who actively participates in the sending of His people. Milne summarises this by saying, “the entire mission of Jesus in the world has in reality been the mission of the Father in and through him, the Sender in the Sent…the mission of the church is nothing other than the continuation of the mission of its Lord”.[30]Moltmann parallels this observation and suggests that the community of the church is like the Christian faith itself, a Trinitarian experience of God.[31] It is clear that mission is part of God’s Trinitarian identity, and if the church is the people of God, then this sending activity is not what the church does, it is who the church is. In Niemandt words, “the church should not be seen as having a missions’ program. Instead, God’s mission for the church is that the church does what it is and then organises what it does.[32]
In addition, it is argued that understanding mission as life force in the Trinity, leads to a change in the understanding of the relationship between church and world.[33] Trinitarian missional ecclesiology conceives that the church can be both saved from the world by God and sent into the world for God. The church becomes “the church in the world – the world becoming the larger horizon of God’s activity”.[34] Guder describes this aspect of contextual relevance by describing the gospel as “fundamentally missionary in nature and translatable into a particular context”.[35] However, not everyone agrees. Flemming observes that many evangelicals fear contextualisation, suspecting that it will lead to syncretism (the blending of different beliefs).[36] Goheen, however, thinks that contextual dialogue must be embraced, otherwise, the fear of syncretism may lead to irrelevance. His solution is a “‘faithful contextualization’ that helps avoid the twin problems of syncretism and irrelevance”.[37] This concept of contextualisation (missional lifestyle and practice occurring within its own periodic, social and cultural context)[38] is also advocated by Guder who observes that “missional ecclesiology is contextual and will develop within a particular cultural context”.[39] Newbigin furthers this by emphasising contextualisation as “the most urgent task facing the church in the West”.[40] Gonçalves agrees, suggesting that “understanding the relationship between gospel, church, and culture is of primary significance”.[41] Alternatively, “if the church fails to listen to its cultural context, it is not only destined to irrelevance, but it also loses the benefit of the insight available from human insight”.[42] Ed Stetzer thinks that the key to ‘faithful contextualisation’ lies in the churches ability to ‘break the code’ of the current cultural context the church finds itself, namely, postmodernism.[43]
The postmodern West
But what is postmodernism? Defining with exactness what philosophers mean by postmodernism is challenging.[44]Concise definitions of postmodernism are hard to arrive at.[45] Few generations have been able to evaluate and appraise their own philosophical disposition.[46] Nevertheless, an attempt is vital for the effective and fruitful outworking of missional ecclesiology within the twenty-first century Western society.
Although postmodernism is a complex topic (with a multiplicity of definitions),[47] most commentators agree that it is a condition of paradigm thinking[48] that stems from revolutions in art, science, philosophy, and communication (also known as postmodern turns).[49] These developments shifted society toward a new culture with new values, and in turn, forged in the minds of people differing views on reality based upon Western postmodern paradigms.[50] Typically, postmodernism is defined as the negation of modernism[51] (which is centred around a rational, individualistic and factualistic paradigm) and a move toward postrationalism (rejecting the idea that truth is purely rationale or absolute), postindividualism (rejecting the idea of the self-determining individual) and Postnoeticentrism (rejecting the idea of a purely intellectual knowledge based apprehension).[52] Others have defined postmodernism as “a style of thought which is suspicious of classical notions of truth, reason, identity and objectivity, of single frameworks, grand narratives and ultimate grounds of explanation”.[53] This essay, however, seeks to understand more clearly, three dominate revolutions (within philosophy, communications and science) responsible for postmodernism and the paradigmatic shifts that occurred as a result of these developments.
The philosophical revolution: individualism to community
Grenz, in A Primer on Postmodernism notes the influence of well-known postmodern philosophers, Jacques Derrida, Michel Foucault, Jean-François Lyotard and Richard Rorty on the current postmodern philosophical paradigm.[54] It is suggested that philosophers such as these helped shift society “away from the distinction between the subject and the object”.[55] Subject and object were no longer considered separate. Life was viewed as a conversational interaction of all things. Heidegger also “challenged the subject/object distinction by arguing that self cannot be fully understood apart from a relationship to others and to his or her cultural surroundings”.[56] Importantly, “this view resulted in a shift from individualism to community”.[57] Individuals were now entwined in social networks, they were not autonomous selves, but instead, they were considered in interrelationship with all things.[58] Interestingly, it is within this mesh of relationships that the concept of relativism is developed.[59] Since “it is not possible…to see things apart from their dependent enmeshment with all things…everything becomes relative to everything else”.[60] Eventually, this results in pluralism. Since there are limited connecting aspects to the world, there must be many ways, not one. It appears that postmodern philosophical thought gave rise to a paradigmatic shift from individualism to community.
The communication revolution: word-based to image-driven
After the 1950’s a revolution in communication arose. Prior to this, communication occurred primarily through knowledge. “Words that dominated the ways of knowing were ‘reading’; ‘writing’; ‘intelligence’; ‘analysis’; ‘clarity’ and ‘explanation’”.[61] During the postmodern turn communication altered to more emblematic forms. Personal participation and experience became important and the impact of the visual began to be introduced.[62] This impacted economics and eventually work turned into art. “In a postindustrialist postmodern economy, goods were produced not to supply pre-existent basic needs, but to supply needs that were themselves created by advertising and marketing strategies. What gets marketed is not an object so much as an image”.[63] Sweet thinks that the church at this time “entered a world where story and metaphor were at the heart of spirituality”[64] (not just intellectual faith that places reason and order at the heart of religion). He concludes his view by stating “the modern world was word-based. Postmodern culture is image-driven”.[65] Postmodern thought is the result of a shift in communication, from word-based to image-driven.
The scientific revolution: mechanistic to mystery
During the twentieth century, a scientific revolution was triggered by a number of hard science developments. The smashing of the atom challenged the high estimate of human reason and the accompanying mechanistic worldview.[66]Similarly, a shift in cosmological understanding occurred and the world, previously considered to be standing still, was accepted as a world that was in perpetual motion. This advanced the idea that the world was, in fact, more complex and mysterious than had first been assumed. In turn, this challenge to the mechanistic worldview opened the door to the postmodern concept of mystery. Consequently, what arose was a new found openness to other religions, cults and occults. Humanity stopped looking for rational explanations for their religious experiences, and instead, embraced phenomenological pluralism. The postmodern condition, therefore, started the “recovery of two neglected forms of religious discourse – the prophetic and the mystical”.[67] Increasingly postmodernists desired something ‘other’ or ‘beyond’ the present world system.[68] Jaichandran et al. think that “something of the ‘beyond’ suits the postmodern discontentedness well”.[69] It is evident that a postmodern worldview accepts that mystery, with its emphasis on intricate uncertainty, is pivotal to the new way of thinking.[70] Times have changed and the postmodern era has begun.[71]Nevertheless, “is postmodernity a ‘culture’ into which the Gospel may be translated, or is it a condition from which the Gospel must be liberated?”.[72] This paper assumes the gospel should be translated. Nevertheless, the question of how needs to be addressed.[73] As Goheen correctly asks “what might this look like in the local congregation today?…what does a missional ecclesiology look like in the postmodern West?[74]
Contemporary church response
Relational community
Scholars, as mentioned earlier, outline the shift from individualism to community. Consequently, this essay suggests that effective missional ecclesiology, amongst Western postmodern thinkers (who embrace postindividualistic thoughts), must include an emphasis on relational community. Something that society is in desperate need of. Although sociological observers highlight advances in technology and the global interconnectedness that results from it, nevertheless, it appears that many in society are still isolated, lonely and in need of depth in interpersonal relationships.[75] This suggests that “missional ecclesiology, within a postmodern era, requires a strong emphasis on community and relationships if it is to be fully effective”.[76] People today are looking for a safe and accepting community in which to work out their identity. Richardson writes, “people come to Christ primarily in the context of community. Belonging comes before believing. Evangelism is about helping people belong so that they can come to believe. So our communities need to be places where people can connect before they have to commit”.[77]
In ecclesiological practice, this means that friendship comes before agenda. In a postmodern culture, relationship is crucial for conversion and authentic relationship arise within interpersonal connections not tainted by ulterior motives or hidden conversion seeking agendas (but rather it is driven by genuine love and concern).[78] McLaren asserts that “good evangelism is the process of being friendly without discrimination and influencing all of one’s friends toward better living, through good deeds and good conversations”.[79] Kraemer believes an authentic environment such as this can lead to an effective and fruitful form of ‘chattering the gospel’.[80] But to do this, Kok et al. advise that the church in the West must be ecclesiologically “incarnational instead of attractional”.[81] That is, the contemporary church in the postmodern West should carry Jesus’s incarnational ethos into everyday authentic relationships and isolated communities. This paper agrees, and therefore, advocates for a missional-incarnational ecclesiology that focuses on the development of authentic and highly relational communities in order to ‘chatter’ the gospel effectively amongst postmodern thinkers.
Creative approach
Another postmodern turn that requires practical consideration is the communication shift from word-based to image-driven. The image-driven concept means that, in the postmodern West, “the battle for allegiance is a battle for people’s spiritual and moral imagination”.[82] These concepts of image-driven ecclesiology suggest that creative metaphors, symbols and expressions have become the language of postmodern thought. It appears then that the creative communication of religion is a useful tool amongst postmodern thinkers. It offers a gospel story that can be seen, touched and felt. Appropriately then, the contemporary church in the postmodern West does well to have an active involvement in arts and media alongside the full use of social media technologies to help promote creative gospel communication. Furthermore, the creative image-driven approach to ecclesiology opens the door to symbolic communication. Webber advocates for this recovery of symbolic communication and argues for creative church spaces, music as an auditory stimulant “evoking an experience with the transcendent” [83] and “symbolic communication through the arts”.[84]Although historically there has been hostility toward religious communication through the arts,[85] Swenson agrees and argues practically for the “modifying of traditional methodologies and the incorporating of creativity within media, music, and technology”.[86] It appears then that creative ecclesiology and the “emphasis on the creative arts by evangelicals is a positive move toward communication skills that will impact postmoderns”.[87]
Pneumatological emphasis
Final practical considerations must now centre around the scientific revolution that led to the postmodern resistance toward rational, mechanistic explanations of religious experiences. The resultant postmodern openness to mystery, the phenomenological embrace of the prophetic and the desire for something ‘beyond’ may point toward the success of pneumatological emphasis (emphasis on the Holy Spirit) by contemporary churches in response to postmodernism. Griffin also believes that an emphasis on spirituality may prove successful amongst postmoderns. He supports this by observing that postmodern thinking tends to lean toward mystical perception, and therefore, is likely to embrace supernaturalism.[88] Similarly, Carson notes that “people are likely to be helped into adopting a new position by something other than, or more than, careful argument…aesthetics, personal relationships, mysticism, unexplained leaps and coincidences…are commonly viewed as being as determinative for what a person believes”.[89] Based upon this openness to paranormal influence, it may be that miracle encounters, supernatural healing and the emphasising of the Holy Spirit will speak to the assumptions of postmodern thinkers and translate the gospel into ideas widely understood within that period. Observing this idea, Granberg-Michaelson finds it intriguing that “Pentecostalism is a postmodern faith”.[90] He notes that Pentecostalism (with its pneumatological emphasis) appears to relate to the postmodern need for “spiritual experiences that defy the logic and rationality of modern Western culture”.[91] He further suggests that “speaking in tongues makes its own sense in a culture where words can’t be trusted and rhetoric is always being de-constructed”.[92] Importantly, he later accentuates the importance of trusting and emphasising miracles in the postmodern culture.
Back to the future
It is interesting to note that Hunter observes this suggested postmodern approach to missional ecclesiology (with its emphasis on relational community, creative approach and spiritual experience) as something historical – old, not necessarily new. Modernist gospel communication adopts Roman logic and emphasises left brain linear and information dominance. Within modernism “the Gospel is explained, the listener accepts Christ and they are then welcomed into the church (presentation, decision and assimilation)”.[93] Conversely, postmodern gospel communication is more closely aligned with historical, mystical Celtic thinking (as opposed to logical Roman thought) where “left brained dominance gives way to right brained dominance, linear dynamics to the conceptual and intuitive”.[94] Hunters observation that a shift is necessary, from Roman to Celtic gospel communication, seems to align with Webbers insights. Webber also picks up on the need for a shift in ecclesiological thinking. However, rather than suggesting a movement in thinking from left to right, or from Roman to Celtic, he suggests that in order to go forward, the church must go back. Interestingly, he observes major similarities shared between the first century and twenty-first-century church eras,[95] and as a result, leads him to advocate for a return to the early church model as a way to bring renewal during the postmodern era. His observation suggests that the contemporary church in the West can respond to postmodernism by returning to first-century ecclesiological methods and allow for the the future to run through the past.[96]
Conclusion
What does a missional ecclesiology look like in the postmodern West? This paper has sought to answer that question by arriving at an understanding of missional ecclesiology within a postmodern context and the practical implications for the contemporary church situated in the West. Having laid out the historical developments and theological rationale for a missional ecclesiology, this paper attempted to assess three dominate revolutions responsible for postmodernism and the change in societal thinking that occurred, namely, the philosophical, communication and scientific revolutions. It is evident that the paradigm shifts that occurred leading up to (and during) the period of postmodernism offer great insights into how contemporary churches can address the postmodern mindset. If the philosophical revolution shifted individualism to community, then an appropriate practical response by the contemporary church must be the development of authentic relational communities as a vehicle for Gospel communication. Similarly, if a revolution in communication shifted truth perception from word based to image driven, then an appropriate practical response by the contemporary church should be the use of symbolic creative metaphors (images, video, sound and media). Also, if scientific revolutions shifted thinking from fact based mechanistic thought to the acceptance of mystery, then an appropriate response by the contemporary church would include the emphasising of spiritual experiences ‘beyond’ logic and ‘apart’ from mechanistic rationale. The promotion and practice of supernatural healing, miracles and pneumatology may prove valuable in the postmodern West. Moreover, contemporary churches may find it useful to communicate the Gospel postmodern thinkers using a right brain dominance approach, where linear dynamics become conceptual and intuitive. Also, due to the observation that there are similarities between the first century and twenty-first-century church eras, this essay advocates for a return to first-century ecclesiological methods as a way to bring renewal during the postmodern era. The emphasis on community, symbol and pneumatology appear to be historically classical and not contemporarily new. Therefore, allowing the future to be influenced by the past and embracing a form of ‘ancient-future faith’ may prove valuable. What does a missional ecclesiology look like in the postmodern West? Postmodern missional ecclesiology emphasises authentic relational community, creative symbolic metaphors, pneumatology and the working of miracles – factors that appear to be consistent with first-century Christian tradition and practice.
[1] Young-Gi Hong, “Models of the Church Growth Movement,” Transformation 21, no. 2 (April 1, 2004): 101.
[2] Cory E. Labanow, Evangelicalism and the Emerging Church: A Congregational Study of a Vineyard Church, Explorations in practical, pastoral, and empirical theology (Farnham, England ; Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2009), iv.
[3] Terry Swenson, “Interplace: Incarnating Christ’s Kingdom Community in the Emerging Culture by a Missional Approach That Creates Safe Spaces for Sharing Stories and Developing Organic Relationships,” Doctor of Ministry(March 1, 2009): iv.
[4] Robert E. Webber, Ancient-Future Faith: Rethinking Evangelicalism for a Postmodern World (Grand Rapids, Mich: Baker Books, 1999), 13.
[5] 1 Chronicles 12:32 NKJV
[6] Webber, Ancient-Future Faith, 20–21.
[7] Robinson W. Mitchell, “Mission: A Mark of the Church? Toward a Missional Ecclesiology,” 2008, 9.
[8] Cornelius J.P. Niemandt, “Trends in Missional Ecclesiology,” HTS Teologiese Studies / Theological Studies 68, no. 1 (January 11, 2012): 1.
[9] Ibid.
[10] Michael W. Goheen, A Light to the Nations: The Missional Church and the Biblical Story (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2011), 4.
[11] David Jacobus Bosch, Transforming Mission: Paradigm Shifts in Theology of Mission, Twentieth anniversary ed., American Society of Missiology series no. 16 (Maryknoll, N.Y: Orbis Books, 2011), 399.
[12] Arthur G McPhee, “The Missio Dei and the Transformation Ofthe Church,” Vision: Α Journalfor Church and Theology 2 (2001): 7.
[13] Lesslie Newbigin, The Open Secret: An Introduction to the Theology of Mission, Rev. ed. (Grand Rapids, Mich: W.B. Eerdmans, 1995).
[14] Lesslie Newbigin, Foolishness to the Greeks: The Gospel and Western Culture (Grand Rapids, Mich: W.B. Eerdmans Pub. Co, 1986).
[15] Niemandt, “Trends in Missional Ecclesiology,” 2.
[16] Christopher J. H. Wright, The Mission of God: Unlocking the Bible’s Grand Narrative (Downers Grove, Ill: IVP Academic, 2006), 62.
[17] Ibid., 45.
[18] Craig Van Gelder, “Rethinking Denominations and Denominationalism in Light of a Missional Ecclesiology,” Word & World 25, no. 1 (2005): 30.
[19] Tim Sheridan and Jurgens Hendriks, “The Emergent Church Movement,” Nederduitse Gereformeerde Teologiese Tydskrif 53, no. 3–4 (February 6, 2013): 8.
[20] Richard Bauckham, Bible and Mission: Christian Witness in a Postmodern World (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2003), 92.
[21] Wright, The Mission of God, 17.
[22] Ibid., 22.
[23] Todd Hiestand, “The Gospel and the God-Forsaken:,” Evangelical Theological Society (2007): 2.
[24] Craig Van Gelder and Dwight J. Zscheile, The Missional Church in Perspective: Mapping Trends and Shaping the Conversation, The missional network (Grand Rapids, Mich: Baker Academic, 2011), 4.
[25] Ibid.
[26] Mitchell, “Mission: A Mark of the Church? Toward a Missional Ecclesiology,” 19.
[27] Peter Althouse, “Towards a Pentecostal Ecclesiology: Participation in the Missional Life of the Triune God,” Journal of Pentecostal Theology 18, no. 2 (January 1, 2009): 213.
[28] Niemandt, “Trends in Missional Ecclesiology,” 2.
[29] John 20:21 ESV
[30] Bruce Milne, The Message of John, The Bible speaks today (Leicester, England ; Downers Grove, Ill: Inter-Varsity Press, 1993), 246.
[31] Jürgen Moltmann, Sun of Righteousness, Arise! God’s Future for Humanity and the Earth, 1st Fortress Press ed. (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2010), 26.
[32] Niemandt, “Trends in Missional Ecclesiology,” 3.
[33] Alan J. Roxburgh, Missional: Joining God in the Neighborhood, Allelon missional series (Grand Rapids, Mich: Baker Books, 2011), 55.
[34] Craig Van Gelder, The Ministry of the Missional Church: A Community Led by the Spirit (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2007), 18.
[35] Darrell L. Guder, The Continuing Conversion of the Church, The gospel and our culture series (Grand Rapids, Mich: W.B. Eerdmans Pub, 2000), 81.
[36] Dean E. Flemming, Contextualization in the New Testament: Patterns for Theology and Mission (Downers Grove, Ill: InterVarsity Press, 2005), 216.
[37] Mike Goheen, “Gospel, Culture, and Cultures: Lesslie Newbigin’s Missionary Contribution,” Philosophia Reformata66 (December 2, 2001): 4.
[38] Flemming, Contextualization in the New Testament, 19.
[39] Darrell L. Guder and Lois Barrett, eds., Missional Church: A Vision for the Sending of the Church in North America, The Gospel and our culture series (Grand Rapids, Mich: W.B. Eerdmans Pub, 1998), 11–12.
[40] Newbigin, Foolishness to the Greeks, 3.
[41] Kleber de Oliveira Gonçalves, “Missional Models of a Church for Postmoderns in Urban Contexts,” 2014, 9.
[42] Shane Clifton, Pentecostal Churches in Transition: Analysing the Developing Ecclesiology of the Assemblies of God in Australia (BRILL, 2009), 41.
[43] Ed Stetzer and David Putman, Breaking the Missional Code: Your Church Can Become a Missionary in Your Community (Nashville, Tenn: Broadman & Holman, 2006), 89.
[44] Jerry Pillay and Machiel Greyling, “Are We Going Back to Our Roots? The Restoration of Early Church Ecclesiology in the Modern Church Today,” Studia Historiae Ecclesiasticae 44 (March 13, 2018): 3.
[45] Swenson, “Interplace,” 7.
[46] Bill T. Arnold, 1 and 2 Samuel: The NIV Application Commentary from Biblical Text– to Contemporary Life, The NIV application commentary (Grand Rapids, Mich: Zondervan, 2003), 61.
[47] David F Wells, Above All Earthly Pow’rs: Christ in a Postmodern World (Grand Rapids, Mich.: William B. Eerdmans Pub. Co., 2006), 67.
[48] Jill M. Hudson, When Better Isn’t Enough: Evaluation Tools for the 21st-Century Church (Herndon, Va: Alban Institute, 2004), 16–17.
[49] Kevin J. Vanhoozer, ed., The Cambridge Companion to Postmodern Theology, Cambridge companions to religion (Cambridge ; New York: Cambridge University Press, 2003), 6.
[50] Webber, Ancient-Future Faith, 15.
[51] Douglas Groothuis, Truth Decay: Defending Christianity against the Challenges of Postmodernism (Downers Grove, Ill.: IVP, InterVarsity Press, 2001), 40.
[52] Arnold, 1 and 2 Samuel, 61.
[53] Terry Eagleton, The Illusions of Postmodernism (Oxford, UK ; Cambridge, Mass: Blackwell Publishers, 1997), vii.
[54] Stanley J. Grenz, A Primer on Postmodernism (Grand Rapids, Mich: William B. Eerdmans Pub. Co, 1996).
[55] Webber, Ancient-Future Faith, 22.
[56] Martin Heidegger, John Macquarrie, and Edward S. Robinson, Being and Time (New York: HarperPerennial/Modern Thought, 2008).
[57] Webber, Ancient-Future Faith, 23.
[58] Ibid.
[59] Relativism is the theory that knowledge, truth, and morality exist in relation to culture or societal context, and therefore, are not absolute.
[60] Webber, Ancient-Future Faith, 23.
[61] Ibid., 24.
[62] Ibid.
[63] Vanhoozer, The Cambridge Companion to Postmodern Theology, 8–9.
[64] Leonard I. Sweet, Post-Modern Pilgrims: First Century Passion for the 21st Century World (Nashville, Tenn: Broadman & Holman, 2000), 86.
[65] Ibid.
[66] Theory which explains phenomena and life in purely physical terms capable of complete explanation by the laws of physics and chemistry.
[67] Vanhoozer, The Cambridge Companion to Postmodern Theology, 16–17.
[68] Ibid., 18.
[69] Rebecca Jaichandran and B D Madhav, “Pentecostal Spirituality in a Postmodern World” (2003): 49.
[70] Webber, Ancient-Future Faith, 35.
[71] Rick Richardson, Evangelism Outside the Box: New Ways to Help People Experience the Good News (Downers Grove, Ill: InterVarsity Press, 2000), 52.
[72] Vanhoozer, The Cambridge Companion to Postmodern Theology, 22.
[73] Gonçalves, “Missional Models of a Church for Postmoderns in Urban Contexts,” 9.
[74] Goheen, A Light to the Nations, 9.
[75] Swenson, “Interplace,” 15.
[76] Richardson, Evangelism Outside the Box, 27.
[77] Ibid.
[78] Swenson, “Interplace,” 22.
[79] Brian D. McLaren, More Ready than You Realize: Evangelism as Dance in the Postmodern Matrix (Grand Rapids, Mich: Zondervan, 2002), 15.
[80] Hendrik Kraemer, The Christian Message in a Non-Christian World (Edinburgh: Edinburgh House Press, 1938), 304.
[81] J. Kok and C. J. P. Niemandt, “(Re)Discovering a Missional-Incarnational Ethos,” HTS Teologiese Studies / Theological Studies 65, no. 1 (January 1, 2009), 6.
[82] Richardson, Evangelism Outside the Box, 52.
[83] Webber, Ancient-Future Faith, 112.
[84] Ibid.
[85] Abraham Kuyper in his Lectures on Calvinism argues that the ‘alliance’ of religion and art represents a lower stage of religious development. He states that “Calvinism has…abandoned the symbolic form of worship, and refused, at the demand of art, to embody its religious spirit in monuments of splendor”.
[86] Swenson, “Interplace,” iv.
[87] Webber, Ancient-Future Faith, 113.
[88] David Ray Griffin, God and Religion in the Postmodern World: Essays in Postmodern Theology, SUNY series in constructive postmodern thought (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1989), 4.
[89] D. A. Carson, Becoming Conversant with the Emerging Church: Understanding a Movement and Its Implications(Grand Rapids, Mich: Zondervan, 2005), 102.
[90] Wesley Granberg-Michaelson, Future Faith: Ten Challenges Reshaping Christianity in the 21st Century, Word & world books: theology for Christian ministry (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2018), 92.
[91] Ibid.
[92] Ibid.
[93] George G. Hunter, The Celtic Way of Evangelism: How Christianity Can Reach the West– Again, 10th anniversary rev. and expanded ed. (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2010), 53.
[94] Ibid.
[95] Pillay and Greyling, “Are We Going Back to Our Roots?,” 9.
[96] Webber, Ancient-Future Faith, 7.