Ten Missional Myths

Ten Missional Myths May 23, 2012

A couple weeks ago, Steve Knight took notes during a talk I gave at the Funding the Missional Church conference, and he’s posted them on his new Patheos blog, Missional Shift. Here are the first 5; click thru to Steve’s blog to see the rest, plus my theological reflections on “missional.”

10. Missional is trying to put the conventional church out of business — Not so, says Dr. Jones.

9. Missional is anti-denominational — Many of us were surprised to hear Tony say this, but he clarified his personal position: “I am anti-denominational, for theological reasons.” But what Tony thinks is not what typifies all of the missional church, thank God! (grin)

8. Missional is a new way to “do church” — “Missional is a thorough-going theological re-evaluation, a thorough-going rethinking of church, what it means to be a disciple of Christ. … Everything should be re-thought in view of missional church.”

7. Missional has a spokesperson — Tony affirmed the broad spectrum of theological voices in the missional church conversation, which is the philosophy of this blog, as well.

6. Missional doesn’t appreciate church history — “Missional is more of a pastiche, a mosaic, a re-appropriation of church history in a different kind of fashion.”

Read the rest: 10 Myths About the Missional Church.

"Have you considered professional online editing services like www.CogitoEditing.com ?"

The Writing Life
"I'm not missing out on anything - it's rather condescending for you to assume that ..."

Is It Time for Christians to ..."
"I really don't understand what you want to say.Your http://europe-yachts.com/ya..."

Would John Piper Excommunicate His Son?

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!

TRENDING AT PATHEOS Progressive Christian
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • At some point, the “white guys decrying this NOT being a white guy” things seems a bit like a Christopher Guest mockumentary.

    That said, your insights on theological implications were fabulous. Wish you’d spend more time there, Tony – and less time fire-bombing.

  • I took good notes, eh Tony? 🙂

  • BTW — This comment was posted over on my blog: “So looking at #6, I am a little unsure what this means. It is a ‘re-appropriation’ of church history. Does this mean that the practices up of the church until now were flawed and thanks to the missional movement they have now been corrected? Or is it a different but equal approach? Not sure what to make of this.”

    Care to pop over and comment/reply to this question, Tony? Thanks.

  • All the theological “implications” are questions except the one about the secular/sacred boundary being thin everywhere. An apophatic theology for an ineffable church?

  • really “There ‘Aren’t Thin Places”