Comments on: a missional rant

By: matt

matt — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 15:59:07 +0000

i agree with you allen. i think the term missional has positive value, i just feel like many individuals are beginning to replace Christian with Missional.

By: Allen

Allen — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 15:43:48 +0000

It seems to me that the sudden rise of the term “missional” and how virally it has spread among church planters and book writers makes it seem more like a passing fad than a legitimate theological counterpoint. More than likely, we’ll all be talking about the latest churchy terminology this time next year. However, if calling your church “missional” gets people to start living like Christ, then the term does have positive value. But I wholly agree that this should be, by default, how we should live as Christians, regardless of what term we use to define ourselves and our church.

By: matt

matt — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 04:42:01 +0000

I agree Dusty that many Christians stop any sort of pursuit and obedience to Christ after baptism. I just don’t think we should come up with a new name for Christians who are actually acting like Christians. I think we should just realize the others aren’t true Believers. If they were, they would be Christians who act missionally.

By: Dusty

Dusty — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 02:09:24 +0000

Agree! One is first a believer in Christ, That should be all one needs to have a heart to be missional, Love of Christ. A desire to live for Christ will have natural results. Missional is that result.The problem is that the believer stops a his or her’s baptism, it’s a birth which means we are to grow. It’s not fire insurance.