The following is a story from India and as this story demonstrates; if we allow God to use us, He will.

Jyoti has a passion for oral learners and has trained hundreds of women who are now starting and leading Bible storytelling groups. But after attending the Disciple Making Movement training in Delhi, November 2011, she realized she wanted to be part of starting a Disciple Making Movement among the middle and upper class in her city, located in a state in north India– a social strata where the church has yet to see breakthrough.

So Jyoti started a neighborhood English class for women. In the middle of each lesson,  she would somehow insert a simple statement about God and what he meant to her. The women were touched and began asking her to pray for them. Soon she was starting every class with prayer and the ladies were opening up about family problems.

Then Jyoti taught the women that they could pray for themselves — anytime, anywhere. That was a turning point. They began to tell how Jesus was giving them peace and making their lives happier. Their self-image was being restored.

Amita, a widow who was so depressed she wouldn’t even make eye contact with people, began speaking boldly and sharing her new hope in the Lord. And when she asked for a Bible, Jyoti took the opportunity to introduce the whole group to the Discovery Bible Study. The women dove into the discussion of the scriptures. “It’s amazing how they have begun understanding God in a personal way,” says Jyoti.

Because of social and religious pressure from their upper class community, these women will not be permitted to go to a traditional church — but they can easily be discipled in the informal DBS group. And Jyoti is finding that these ladies have influence in their social strata. In fact, she sees great potential for this Discovery Bible Study to multiply and someday become the citywide movement she longs to see.

In a recent visit to South Africa I spent two weeks traveling in areas where Animism is the primary worldview, regardless of what religion is practiced.  Animism, at its most basic, is the belief that there is a spiritual world and a physical world, and one can control or affect the physical world via the spiritual world.  It is a mechanical system that believes if one says or does certain things (prayers, incantations, sacrifices, curses and charms), then the spirit world is impacted and this has direct effect on the physical world.  The Animistic Worldview does not promote a belief in a Creator, but recognizes there are good and evil spirits whose favor must be bought, earned or stolen through power and/or deceit; whose anger or evil must be appeased and/or used for self and against others; and that some people have the capacity or power to coerce the spirits to do their bidding (shamans, witch doctors, spiritualists, warlocks and witches).

One new revelation for me during my discussions about Animism with David Broodryk of South Africa was that in the Animistic Worldview there is a fixed amount of stuff and energy in the world.  This means that for one person to gain, another has to lose.  If one wants to be less poor or more rich, then one has to take from others or through the spiritual world cause the transfer of stuff from one person to another.  Most hexes and curses are for this purpose.

In recent years I have seen the Animistic Worldview gain de facto ground in modern Christianity in America.  There are books, sermons, and attitudes that reveal a strong tendency among Americans to think that if they say or do certain things, then God will respond in certain ways.  If we tithe, God will bless us.  If we pray, God will do what we ask.  If we wear or display certain medallions or symbols, God will protect us.

It seems we have forgotten that the life of a Christian is about conforming to God’s will, not God conforming to our wills.  Faith is being obedient to God regardless of the outcome for me personally.  Prayer is not about getting God to do things for me or us; it’s about changing our attitudes and actions to please God, getting to know Him better, and serving others more effectively.  Ministry is being used by God to answer the prayers of others through service.  And worship is not just about going to church to receive a blessing; it’s about being the church every day and presenting our lives as living sacrifices that are individually and collectively pleasing to God and a blessing to others.

Politically, I am seeing a significant worldview shift in America.  When I was growing up in the 50’s and 60’s, when one saw someone who was successful, the thought was not “How can I get what they have?” – the thought was “How can I learn what they know and create that for myself?”.  The basic worldview was based in a Creator who created us in His own image, which included knowledge and creativity, and the ability to create new stuff, wealth, energy, and a better life.

Today, we have Occupy Wall Street, which is grounded in an Animistic Worldview that believes, “In order for me to have the stuff I want or deserve, I must take it from others who have that stuff.” There is a fixed amount of stuff and energy, so for me to be happy and healthy I must take what I want or need from others by any means available.  As a matter of fact, those who have stuff have it because they took it from others, so it’s perfectly OK for me to get stuff by taking it from them.

At its root, any form of socialism or progressive-ism is an Animistic Governmental System that attenuates the flow of stuff and energy from those who have to those who don’t have in a way that promotes law and order in a worldview that says it’s OK to take what you want if you have the power to do so.  In effect, government becomes the shaman or witch doctor that causes the redistribution of wealth at a level that keeps both the rich and the poor happy.  This system causes a loss of creativity and accountability that is at the core of a worldview that acknowledges a Creator who endows His creation with the ability to create – not simply in the physical world, but in the world of ideas and service to others.  The Animistic Worldview fosters deceit, control, low accountability and hatred.  A Creative Worldview generates openness, cooperation, high accountability and care for others.  Idealistic?  I hope so!  How else can we set goals for ourselves and our society?

Those who subscribe to a Creative Worldview are engaged in society, making sure everyone has the opportunity to learn and be creative in knowledge as well as service to others.  This produces the stuff we need, and we are open to sharing it with those who don’t have because there is no end to resources when we are creative.

The shift from a Creative Worldview to an Animistic Worldview will destroy America.  This shift takes place as American Christians practice de facto Animism in our homes, businesses, churches, and political systems across our great nation.  Our political system grew out of a Creative Worldview.  As the Animistic Worldview replaces the Creative Worldview in America, America will go the way of many countries that are rooted in an Animistic Worldview – poverty, and class warfare brutally controlled or used by government or rebels to shift power and resources from one group of people to another in order to empower and enrich those who are in control or who gain control.

Dear God, help us to know you better and serve others more effectively!

Blessings!

I am adding this foreword to this article to clarify my stance on Insider Movements.  I am in opposition to Insider Movements that subjugate the Gospel to culture and/or redact culturally offensive material from the Bible.  (There are some other minor issues that I would not personally practice, but these two are primary and are deal-breakers for me.)  For the most part everything I do and teach is compatible with those who practice Insider Movements.  Unfortunately, the term “Insider Movement” has become identified by traditional Christians and leaders with those who subjugate the Gospel to culture and/or redact culturally offensive material from the Bible.  This means the term has become problematic and raises high passion on all sides of the yelling match (it is not a conversation).  I have dealt with the term “Insider Movement” from the negative side of the argument, including the reasons that cause me to reject the terminology.  It is up to those who embrace the “Insider Movement” terminology to clearly state what they do and do not believe and practice.  I certainly understand that traditional Christians and leaders often say one thing and do another.  But, when the accusations come, it is up to us to Biblically defend our beliefs and practices.  History and tradition have tremendous weight, and those of us who stand against that weight are forced to defend our beliefs and practices, even though the accusers are not held to the same standard.  

Blessings!

David Watson

——–

There is a disturbing trend in missions known as Insider Movements.  I am not going to address all the good things that have come out of Insider Movements. In fact, I have contributed to the body of knowledge related to Insider Movements, and I have incorporated into my work many of the things I have learned from Insider Movements.  I want to address two aspects of Insider Movements that cause me to be in opposition to Insider Movements as they are currently being expressed – The subjugation of the Gospel to culture; and the redaction of culturally offensive material from the Gospel in order to appease a culture.

Insider Movements start with culture and subjugate the message of the Gospel to a particular culture.  Truth starts with the Creator and His message via His Holy Spirit to mankind and through His expression of Himself as the Son of God, Jesus.  (This sentence is an inadequate expression of the nature and function of the Holy Trinity)   The primary authoritative source of God’s communication with mankind is the Bible.  If, because of culture, we choose not to present the entire Word of God to those from any given culture because parts of the message may be offensive, then what we are presenting is NOT the Gospel and it is potentially heretical.  Yeah, I get progressive revelation.  But this is not the same as letting God’s story unfold in all its beauty and ugliness as expressed by mankind, regardless of cultural bias.  It’s changing the story to make it acceptable.

By the way, much of the Western church is guilty of Insider Movement mentality.  We don’t talk about hell.  We avoid controversial issues like homosexuality, adultery, divorce, abusive relationships, the murder of unborn children, and much more.  We don’t demand obedience to the Word of God, love for God and our neighbors, and holiness as the normal expression of devotion to God for those who call themselves Christian.  You can add to the list the things we don’t address from the Bible with new and other Believers, as well as seekers.  Our doctrines have become watered-down, and in some cases heretical, to appease the sensibilities of our Western culture.  Is it a surprise that our mission efforts are following the same trend?

I know.  Insider Movements are trying to be culturally sensitive.  Culturally Sensitive Expressions remove or never incorporate Western or other-culture expressions of leadership, worship, governance, and etc.  Culturally Sensitive Expressions ask the question, “How do we obey the Word of God in our context, regardless of what it may cost us?”  It is not being culturally sensitive to change the message of the Bible, which was given to us by God.  It is being heretical.  This is true whether you are removing the “Son of God” language to appease Muslims, or if you are saying the commandments of Jesus were just for the 11 Apostles and we don’t need to worry ourselves about obeying them in our churches today, or if you are teaching that there is no hell.

Muslims will die for one letter of the Quran.  What message do we send when we are willing to change and/or ignore entire passages of the Bible in order to be culturally sensitive?  Why will we fight for “grace”, “mercy” and “forgiveness”, but ignore “repentance”, “obedience” and “good works”?  Has our desire to be culturally sensitive in order to reach people for Christ taken us away from Christ and made it impossible for us to lead people to Christ?

The most disturbing issue related to Insider Movement mentality is the willingness or demand to redact the printed Word of God in order to be sensitive to the culture.  Whether it’s the removal of the “Son of God” language, the changing of the “Father God” (gender) language, or the removal of anything that someone may consider offensive; any change to the Word of God begs the question, “Where does it stop!?”  There is a difference between scholarly interpretation/translation of the Bible with peer review and changing the thrust and meaning of the Bible to appease culture.  The Bible should address the sinful and/or misguided worldviews of mankind, not comply with them.  God is the standard, not our culture(s).

The moment we put any culture above the message of God, we become a hindrance to that culture knowing and obeying God within their context.  We become the source of heresy.  We must come back to the central doctrine of Scripture – it is given by God for us to obey.  God’s love language for mankind is certainly grace and mercy.  But mankind’s love language for God is obedience to all the commands of Christ.  Anything less or anything else takes us from God, not to God.  When we are moving from God, how can we show others how to find God?

Blessings!

A friend shared this quote with me.  Thought you would appreciate it.

“Jesus Christ lived in the midst of his enemies. At the end all his disciples deserted him. On the Cross he was utterly alone, surrounded by evildoers and mockers. For this cause he had come, to bring peace to the enemies of God. So the Christian, too, belongs not in the seclusion of a cloistered life but in the thick of foes. There is his commission, his work. ‘The kingdom is to be in the midst of your enemies. And he who will not suffer this does not want to be of the Kingdom of Christ; he wants to be among friends, to sit among roses and lilies, not with the bad people but the devout people. O you blasphemers and betrayers of Christ! If Christ had done what you are doing who would ever have been spared’ (Luther).” 

— Dietrich Bonhoeffer (Life Together: The Classic Exploration of Faith in Community)

Paul said in Corinthians, “My message was not with persuasive words, but in the demonstration of the Spirit and power, that your faith should not rest on the wisdom of men but on the power of God.” (I Cor. 2:4-5) 
Our team recently conducted about 120 interviews in countries in West and Central Africa to certify what God was doing and to get first-hand accounts of what was making it happen.  To everyone’s amazement, they found that 70-80% of the time, some form of miracle (dreams, visions, healing, deliverance from demons, etc.) was used to launch the church planting process. The story below illustrates God’s amazing power!
From our director in West Africa:

I am Haji. I am 53 years old living with my family in Western Africa. Almost a year ago I had to drive away my second eldest son because he became a Christian. I threw him out of my family because I felt that denying the Muslim faith and becoming a Christian is the worst anyone can ever do, especially the son of a renowned Muslim in our community. People who even try to tell me about Christ become my archenemies and are targeted in the community.
One day I became deathly ill. I called my wives and elder sons and began to share my properties amongst them. While I remained helpless, after every medical treatment and all the sacrifices recommended through divinations, my son Mohamed heard about my illness and came with two people who were pastors. Though I earlier rejected them, when they prayed for me in the name of Jesus, I was raised from the illness within 3 days. Now I stand healthy and strong, Jesus has taken death away from me. Since then they told me the story of Jesus and I gave my life to Him. I am now supporting my son in his theological training to become a pastor.

Shame on me (us?) for being surprised that the God of the Bible is still writing His story with demonstrations of power!

Humor in Western media is often built on conflict and the mismanagement of conflict.  We have a generation of leaders who grew up watching television and cinema personalities using sarcasm, pithy comebacks, personal attack (emotional and/or physical), and clandestinely-getting-even as a cultural norm for dealing with conflicts involving family, friends, workmates, and strangers.   These methods of dealing with conflict may be humorous on the screen, but the results in real life are disastrous, ranging from strained relationships to devastated relationships to broken relationships to revenge (the intentional harming of another because of perceived or real harm from him/her).

Conflict is a normal part of human interaction.  It’s going to happen!  We make mistakes that impact others.  We choose to misbehave or sin in a way which results in hurting others emotionally and/or physically.  How we respond to conflict or events that may lead to conflict defines who we are.  How we respond to conflict will determine if we grow as leaders or not.  In fact, dealing with conflict appropriately is a prerequisite for deepening and maturing relationships, and growing as a leader.   Inappropriately dealing with conflict causes loss of trust and a pulling away from the relationship.  Appropriately dealing with conflict builds trust and leads to deeper, more meaningful relationships.

Some inappropriate ways of dealing with conflict or problems include:

• Ignore the problem. Problems won’t go away, ignoring them makes things worse.
• Disrespect the other person.  Disrespect begets disrespect, closes down communication, destroys existing trust and builds mistrust.
• Complaining.  (Everyone needs a place to vent.  This is not the same as complaining.  Venting is a verbal process that allows us to put things in perspective and in order.  Venting should be done in private with a trusted person who will keep information confidential.  I don’t generally vent to my wife because she becomes protective and it causes her to dislike or have reservations about the person who is the other side of the problem.  If the other side is a friend or a colleague you can understand why this can be a problem.  I cause her to have negative feelings about the person based on my venting, not on a rational evaluation of the problem in the context of the whole relationship.)
• Delay dealing with the problem. (It only gets bigger)
• Being indirect in your reactions, actions, and communications.  This leads to misunderstanding, dragging others into the problem, and slows resolution of problems if they are solved at all.
• Retaliate! (This starts feuds)
• SHOUT loud enough so that sensible people will go away and avoid the confrontation.
• Resort to personal attacks instead of dealing with the issue(s) at hand.
• Anything physical, including rude gestures.
• Being critical.
• Don’t listen.  Just make your point as forcefully as possible.
• Don’t listen.  Think of a good comeback for the last statement.
• Don’t listen.  You don’t like what is being said.
• Don’t listen.  Do all the talking so you don’t have to listen.
• Build support for your side of the argument.
• Drag others into the argument.
• Don’t let others have their say or share their side of the issue.
• Assigning motives for another’s behavior. It is not possible for us to know another person’s motives until and unless they share them with us.  (Even when there is a history of bad behavior or bad decisions we must never assume we know the motives behind the behavior or decision.)
• Sarcasm of any kind never communicates properly.
• Dealing with a problem during the heat of emotion.  (High emotion causes high emotion which stops listening and causes bad decisions and bad behavior.)
• Drag past experiences into the argument instead of dealing with the current issue.  (This is less likely to happen if we have dealt with previous issues appropriately.)
• Using superlatives like “always” and “never”.
• Using threatening or defensive body language.
• Using insulting, abusive and/or profane language.
• Taking the fight public.  (Having a third party present during serious discussions is different from taking the fight public.)
• Using email, instant messaging, or text messaging to address any problem.  (In person is best, video or audio conferencing is acceptable if a face-to-face meeting is not possible.)

I’m sure you can add to this list from your experiences.  Please leave comments to update this list.

Sometimes we react confrontationally, aggressively and openly (name calling, embarrassing another, arguments, shouting matches, nose to nose stare downs, gathering allies, and even physical violence).  Sometimes we take action passively (defensiveness; avoiding contact; snide,  mean or cutting remarks; sarcasm; spreading rumors; gossip; back stabling or back biting; attacks on another’s integrity; sabotaging projects; or causing physical, economic, or emotional harm indirectly in a way that cannot be traced back to us).

A common phrase I am hearing more of lately is, “He threw me under the bus!”  I have a problem with this statement because:

• It’s violent
• It assigns negative motives of intentional harm to another
• It suggest little possibility of recovery from the event
• It is almost always followed by a declaration of how to throw the other person under the bus

Anger, embarrassment, frustration and disappointment are all honest emotions.  But, we must understand that we may be mistaken about what caused the emotion.  And, even when we have a legitimate reason for our emotions, we can choose how we deal with them.  Dealing with these emotions appropriately is the first step to a fair fight.  When we deal with these emotions inappropriately through ineffective communication (which includes not dealing with our emotions), we elevate the emotion to a point of willingness to fight or cause harm to another directly or indirectly.  Our emotional energy has to go somewhere.  The more we don’t appropriately deal with our emotion(s) and the situation that is causing the emotion(s), the more likely our emotional energy will erupt in an inappropriate and untimely manner, causing harm to relationships and resulting in conflict than will be more difficult or impossible to resolve.

Some ways to deal with our emotion appropriately include:

• Owning the emotion.  Identify and accept that we are angry, embarrassed, frustrated, or disappointed. I am emotionally handicapped.  I am a thinker not a feeler.  When something gets bad enough or good enough to force emotions from me I have to spend a lot of time sorting out the feelings and work on how to communicate what I am feeling.  This takes time.  Feelers often tend to dump their emotion on others quickly, without analyzing what caused the emotion and why they are feeling the way they are, or what the results the dump will be.  Feelers need to process before spilling their guts or they will exacerbate problems.  Both feelers and thinkers need discipline when dealing with emotions and difficult situations.
• Ask help-me-to-understand questions, don’t assume or assign motives.  Assuming motive is never appropriate. Don’t assume motives.  Ask!  Don’t use the “Why?” question, because it communicates accusation.  State, “Help me to understand your thinking in this.”   I was on the freeway one night and the car behind me was following with its high beams on.  When I slowed down to let the car pass, it would slow down and stay behind me.  Soon there was a fuel stop and I exited to get away from this guy, but he followed me to the fuel stop.  With a little fear and a lot of anger I jumped out of my car ready for a fight, but decided to ask if there were a problem as politely as I could.  A little old lady got out of the car and exclaimed, “I’m so sorry about my headlights!  They’re stuck on high and I was looking for the next place to get help.”  We must not assume we understand why people are acting in a way that irritates, frustrates, or makes us angry.
• Discuss the problem with a trusted ally who will help you through the issues, and keep your confidence.  With serious problems this may mean a professional counselor who is impartial and will help you deal with your stuff before you try to deal with the problem.
• State your problem, and then give the other person time to deal with their emotions before you continue.  You may have to ask, “Do you need time to process this?”  If they are demonstrating high emotion or are trying to hide their emotions, you may need to say, “I want to give you time to process this.  Let’s meet and talk in an hour or so.”  High emotion ramps up the situation and makes it hard to hear what the other person is saying.  High emotion often causes us to think and/or say things we will regret.  High emotion is a component of fighting, but is not good for problem solving.  Cool heads solve problems.  Hot heads cause problems.
• Give meaningful feedback regarding emotions.  Don’t assume you understand or are being understood.  Use sentences like “I’m frustrated because…” or “I’m angry about…”.  Be reflective in regards to another’s emotions.  Use sentences like “I understand you are angry about…” or “Can you help me to understand your frustration regarding…?”

 I would appreciate your comments on how you deal with negative emotions.

Another problem I have observed in disagreements (fights) is the well-meaning third party who wants to defend one of the participants in the disagreement or who simply jumps in to defend a friend or teammate.  Fighting for or defending others impairs their development in leadership.  Don’t do it and don’t allow it.  When there is disagreement, only the parties involved should be addressing the situation unless the situation has degenerated to a point that no one is listening, and then a mediator may be appropriate.  (Mediators are impartial)  People who are not a part of the problem and who infuse themselves into defending or trying to solve the problem on another’s behalf actually compound the problem.  Now there are three, instead of two, involved in the problem.  The person who isn’t represented becomes more frustrated, and the person who is being defended can take a passive role, which will stunt his/her leadership development.  Leaders must learn how to deal with problems on their own.  They can seek advice, but they must deal with the problem on their own.  Defending or representing a person in a fight takes away their opportunity to grow, even if the fight isn’t fair.  Third parties can debrief the fight, but should never participate in a fight.  Debriefing is a learning activity.  Participating causes more problems.

It is important for leaders to understand that mistakes are always in the past.  Solutions are developed and are always in the future.  We cannot change the past, but we can influence the future by the decisions we make.   Accountability and problem solving are about the future, not the past.  When there is a problem we must seek solution, even when the problem is repetitive bad behavior or poor decision-making.  Try to state the problem as simply and directly as possible.  The fewer words used to characterize the problem, the more likely we are to quickly and efficiently solve the problem.

It is important to find ways for both sides of the problem to be valued and have a voice in the problem-solving discussion. We must watch ourselves to determine if we are unresponsive and/or uninterested in the other’s perspective. This can manifest itself when we do more talking than listening. Other ineffective ways of communicating include being dishonest, hostile and/or critical. Avoid controlling or manipulating another while communicating. Remember!  The goal of communication is to make our thoughts and feelings known and understood. We cannot control the other person’s response or actions.  We need to remember that attempting to be right and to win the argument is ineffective. It may be tempting to try to “win”, but the relationship will lose.

Good communication is honest, open, and direct.  It leaves no doubt as to the purpose and the meaning of our words. We have to overcome our cultural bias and/or fear of stating our true thoughts and feelings.   This should be done in a gracious and respectful way. Allow the other person to speak and respond while we listen. Listen to what the other person is saying and try to understand and interpret it correctly.  Ask questions for information and clarity when you don’t understand or doubt what is being said.  Good communication requires us to make sure others understand us and that we understand them.  Good communication leads to trust, which is a primary ingredient for problem solving.

The Bible has a lot to say about how to avoid problems and how to deal with problems.  Take a look at the following.  As you read through them ask God to show you how to apply them to your current problems with other people.  (All Scripture quotes are from the NIV)

Rom 15:7             Accept one another, then, just as Christ accepted you, in order to bring praise to God.  

1 Cor 1:10           I appeal to you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree with one another so that there may be no divisions among you and that you may be perfectly united in mind and thought.

Col 3:13               Bear with each other and forgive whatever grievances you may have against one another. Forgive as the Lord forgave you.  

Phil 2:3                 Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit, but in humility consider others better than yourselves.  

Eph 4:29              Do not let any unwholesome talk come out of your mouths, but only what is helpful for building others up according to their needs, that it may benefit those who listen.

Gal 6:2                 Carry each other’s burdens, and in this way you will fulfill the law of Christ.

Gal 6:4-5              Each one should test his own actions. Then he can take pride in himself, without comparing himself to somebody else, for each one should carry his own load.

1 Cor 12:25-27   … there should be no division in the body, but that its parts should have equal concern for each other. If one part suffers, every part suffers with it; if one part is honored, every part rejoices with it.  Now you are the body of Christ, and each one of you is a part of it. 

James 5:16          Therefore confess your sins to each other and pray for each other so that you may be healed. The prayer of a righteous man is powerful and effective.

Gal 5:15               If you keep on biting and devouring each other, watch out or you will be destroyed by each other.

Rom 12:10          Be devoted to one another in brotherly love. Honor one another above yourselves.

Gen 42:21            They said to one another, “Surely we are being punished because of our brother. We saw how distressed he was when he pleaded with us for his life, but we would not listen; that’s why this distress has come upon us.”

1 Th 5:11             Therefore encourage one another and build each other up, just as in fact you are doing.

Heb 3:13              But encourage one another daily, as long as it is called Today, so that none of you may be hardened by sin’s deceitfulness.

Heb 10:24            And let us consider how we may spur one another on toward love and good deeds.

Mat 18:21-35  Then Peter came to Jesus and asked, “Lord, how many times shall I forgive my brother when he sins against me? Up to seven times?”  Jesus answered, “I tell you, not seven times, but seventy-seven times.  “Therefore, the kingdom of heaven is like a king who wanted to settle accounts with his servants.  As he began the settlement, a man who owed him ten thousand talents was brought to him.  Since he was not able to pay, the master ordered that he and his wife and his children and all that he had be sold to repay the debt.  “The servant fell on his knees before him. ‘Be patient with me,’ he begged, ‘and I will pay back everything.’  The servant’s master took pity on him, canceled the debt and let him go.  “But when that servant went out, he found one of his fellow servants who owed him a hundred denarii. He grabbed him and began to choke him. ‘Pay back what you owe me!’ he demanded.  “His fellow servant fell to his knees and begged him, ‘Be patient with me, and I will pay you back.’  “But he refused. Instead, he went off and had the man thrown into prison until he could pay the debt.  When the other servants saw what had happened, they were greatly distressed and went and told their master everything that had happened.  “Then the master called the servant in. ‘You wicked servant,’ he said, ‘I canceled all that debt of yours because you begged me to.  Shouldn’t you have had mercy on your fellow servant just as I had on you?’  In anger his master turned him over to the jailers to be tortured, until he should pay back all he owed.  “This is how my heavenly Father will treat each of you unless you forgive your brother from your heart.”

James 5:9            Don’t grumble against each other, brothers, or you will be judged. The Judge is standing at the door!

Rom 12:16          Live in harmony with one another. Do not be proud, but be willing to associate with people of low position. Do not be conceited.

1 Pet 3:8              Finally, all of you, live in harmony with one another; be sympathetic, love as brothers, be compassionate and humble.

Blessings!

Another Guest Post from David Broodryk.  I spent the last three weeks with David in South Africa.  We discussed many of the topics covered in this post.  David is working hard to develop Disciple-making approaches for a post modern culture.

Discovery and the Inductive Approach

There are two main approaches to Bible study.  One is inductive.  The other is deductive.  Discovery groups work with an inductive approach.  They fail when using a deductive approach.  The struggle we have in particularly Christian-background cultures is that most seminaries and churches teach a deductive approach to scripture.  When this Christian baggage is carried into our Discovery groups, it causes serious problems.

The Deductive approach

A deductive approach begins with generalizations, conclusions or doctrines and moves for support of these by using scripture.  In other words, it begins with a prior belief and then attempts to make scripture support this predetermined belief.  Deduction is subjective and often prejudicial.  It is narrow by nature and is concerned with testing or proving hypotheses.  It produces Christians who dictate to the Scriptures, rather than disciples who listen to the Scriptures.

When we talk about placing the Word of God in the hands of ordinary people, many church leaders express a fear that heresy will develop (A fascinating return to pre-reformation thinking!).  This fear arises from their deductive training.  A deductive Bible study or sermon begins from a point that the teacher is trying to make, and then uses a number of scripture verses and examples to support that conclusion. Most Western churches are built on this deductive approach to scripture.  So are most cults.  A cult begins when a powerful leader begins with a premise and then brews a concoction from scattered pieces of scripture to construct support for his premise.   Cults are formed when God’s people become too lazy to form their understanding of truth on Scripture itself, but rely on a strong teacher or denomination to interpret scripture for them.  Cults use the deductive approach in order to keep people ignorant of the scriptures and dependent on the leaders of the cult.  This “top down” approach is the root cause of most heresies.  The result of the church adopting this approach to scripture is that most churches are “heresy management centres.”  They are continually trying to counter heretical deductive reasoning with truth arrived at by using the same deductive approach.  The result is all kinds of arguments about often petty issues that ignore the simplicity of plain obedience to scripture.  The best defence against heresy in small groups is not a deductive process, but rather an inductive approach to scripture.

This is not to say that there is no place for the deductive approach.  Not all deductive study is dogmatic or heretical (making scripture say something it actually does not say).  At its most basic level, deductive Bible study is simply instruction in Biblical doctrine.  As long as doctrine is formed by correctly handling scripture, it is of some benefit.  Of course, in deductive Bible study the student places a lot of trust in his teacher to guide him through the doctrines.  This creates a problem in our “insight-based” culture.  Too often, leaders under pressure to reveal their “latest insight” fall into weaving a web of interpretations that appear to support their desired view.  They deceive themselves and their audience by impressing their own thinking into the Bible rather than allowing the Bible to impress it’s thinking on them.  They are less concerned with what the scriptures say than they are about protecting their own personal insight.  The result, regardless of the teacher’s intent, is that the listeners are misled (2 Peter 3:16).  It is therefore vital that we teach believers to be like the Bereans, who tested what they heard against the scriptures (Acts 17:11-12).  This is the strongest defence against heresy.  Scripture teaches this practice, continually warning us to guard against fables, babblings and contradictions that are falsely called knowledge (1 Timothy 1:3-4; 6:3-5; 6:20-21; 2 Timothy 2:17-18; 4:3-4).  The only way to truly test what Scripture says is to use an inductive approach.

The Inductive Approach

A better approach in a small group is an inductive approach to scripture (what we call a Discovery Group).  An inductive approach is objective and impartial. It demands that we first examine the particulars of the Scriptures and then make conclusions based on those particulars. It begins with the plain text of scripture, and encourages participants to read the passages and draw conclusions directly from what the text itself says.  Inductive reasoning, by its very nature, is more open-ended and exploratory.  It uses questions asked by a facilitator in order to elicit thought and learning.  It is a highly effective learning method, especially in a self-correcting group process.  Facilitators of an inductive study group are trained to ask questions, not provide answers.  People are trained to study the scriptures.  They are taught to ask questions which help them understand what is going on, what is being said, and how that relates to the rest of the passage.   Inductive Bible study on the basic level is simply careful instruction in the meaning of the Biblical text.  It produces students of Scripture rather than students of doctrine.

A simple inductive study involves three steps:

1)      Observation of the scripture (what does it say?)

2)      Interpretation of the scripture (what does it mean?)

3)      Application of the scripture (what will I do in response?)

The purpose of inductive Bible Study is not to build doctrine (although over time people do begin to form doctrinal understandings based on the scriptures they have read).  Rather, it is textual in nature, demanding careful examination of the Biblical texts in order to know what they mean and how we should apply them to our lives.  The primary purpose of the inductive approach is to lead students into a knowledge and understanding of scripture that moves them towards practical application (2 Timothy 3:15-41).  The ultimate goal of a faithful Bible teacher should be to raise his students up to his level of understanding and obedience, so that they may eventually instruct and correct him (Ephesians 4:11-16).

A common objection to the simple inductive process is that people will become so focused on the details of the text, that they overlook the larger picture.  It is true that a person or group looking at one text or passage can interpret that passage incorrectly.  In our post-modern age of personal insight and personal application that is a valid concern.  However, the objection ignores the fact that over time, the group will self-correct if taught correctly.  Any imbalance is corrected over time through a balanced approach to the entire body of Scripture.  As new scriptures are introduced, the group learns a vital principle of interpretation – that scripture interprets scripture.  Without fail, they adjust and grow in their understanding of scripture at a deeper level than the deductive approach would ever have produced.

How Deductive reasoning destroys groups

The biggest failure of the deductive approach is that it does not lead naturally to obedience.  Rather, it most often leads to disagreements and arguments between group members.  This sometimes happens so subtly and suddenly, that an inexperienced facilitator is easily caught off guard.  Christians, especially, are so programmed to think deductively that some of them almost never “get it.”  For example, let’s look at an all-too-common interaction when Christians attempt the Discovery process:

Facilitator: What is this passage in Genesis 1 saying?

John (unbeliever): It says to me that God made everything (inductive conclusion).

James (new believer): This passage tells me that God made everything around me.  If that is true, then we have a responsibility to look after it.  This week, I will make a point of picking up litter and looking after the world that God created (inductive conclusion and obedience statement).

John (unbeliever): It seems to be saying that God made everything in six days and then rested on the seventh day.  I have been working a lot lately, but if God saw the need to take time to rest, then I also need rest.  I will take time this week to rest and spend time with my family (inductive conclusion and obedience statement).

Mary (believer): Well, I don’t believe God made the world in six literal days.  If you allow me, then I can show you that the days were not literal, but figurative.  Also, Jesus did away with the Sabbath.  In Hebrews it says . . . (approaching scripture with a doctrinal premise and using scriptures to try prove a point).

Facilitator: Mary, let’s try to stick with this passage and learn what God is saying to us through it – how we can obey Him.

Mary (gets offended): Well, if you don’t want to hear what I have to say then tell me so.  I think it is important for these new believers to understand what the Bible really says!  They can easily fall into error, you know!

What is taking place in this interaction?  The unbeliever and new believer easily follow the inductive approach.  They deal with the passage before them and instinctively follow the process of “simple truth simply obeyed.”  The believer enters the discussion loaded with deductive reasoning and defensive doctrine.  She believes that she is the defender of truth.  Unaware of the consequences of her actions, Mary continually interferes with the work of the Holy Spirit in the lives of the others present.  She uses her doctrines to avoid simple obedience.  Her statements muddy the waters, making it difficult to see the simple truth in the scriptures before the group.  The ideal is to never have unbelievers and believers together in the same group.  In reality, this is not always possible.  In this case, Mary will need to be confronted gently until she changes or leaves.  Left unchecked, her behaviour will destroy the group.

How deductive reasoning destroys replication

The inductive process keeps the Word of God as the central authority in the group.  This is easily replicated.  The group does not need a Bible expert to lead the group – they simply need a Bible.  Members of the group quickly understand this and develop a boldness to start groups of their own.

However, when the group falls into a deductive mode, members become passive.  Stronger leaders that dominate the conversation quickly emerge.  These leaders become the “experts and defenders” of Biblical truth.  Members of the group stop participating for fear of being shot down by the experts.  Replicating the group becomes impossible, or at best extremely slow, because each new group needs another expert in order to survive.  Groups based on deductive reasoning cannot effectively replicate.

 Inductive rules

A simple set of rules have helped us to keep the Discovery groups faithful to the inductive process.  These rules guide the group discussion. 

Rules for a Discovery Group:

1)      The passage preaches, not any person.  Stick with the passage of scripture in front of the group – no “hyperlinking” to other passages!

2)      No individual may impose his or her “insight” on others – stick with the plain and simplest meaning of the passage in front of the group.

3)      Any individual may challenge any other individual in the group with one simple question, “Where does it say what you are saying in this passage of scripture?”

The rules are not fool-proof.  We still have people resorting to deductive reasoning.  But the rules have helped us to stay reasonably faithful to the process – even in a churched context.  In order to work, every member of the group must “own” the rules.  Every member of the group becomes a policeman of the process.  And yes, people with a Western church background are by far the most difficult to manage in this process!

Curriculum Design

It is vital that those who design and determine curriculum, have a deep understanding of the inductive process.  Curriculum cannot be scripture-based – it must be scripture-only.  Curriculum designers cannot begin with a premise and then attempt to piece together passages that support that premise.  The meaning must flow from the simplest interpretation of the passages.  This becomes even more complex when working with various translations, cultures and languages.  The basic test for curriculum designers is, “Does the simplest interpretation of this text inside the target culture and language, using the translation that people will be reading, consistently lead to the desired truth discovered and obeyed?”  Application is often personal, but the interpretation should be consistent.  This kind of curriculum is something that is only arrived at through careful research, practical testing, intensive review and a dynamic process of continued self-correction.

Conclusion

The Discovery process is a powerful method for leading people to become obedient followers of Christ.  But in order to work, it needs to stay with an inductive approach to scripture.  Curriculum designers must stay engaged through a dynamic process of testing and self-correction. Outside leaders must carefully train the inductive method.  Facilitators must ensure that the approach to scripture remains inductive.  Any member of the group that enters into deductive reasoning can potentially destroy the process.  When every person in the process becomes a guardian of the inductive process, it never leads to heresy, but rather releases the life-transforming power of the gospel.

Following is a guest post by a team member, Paul Watson.  Paul’s article has included my treaching and his application and thought in a well written article.  I hope you enjoy it, and find it helpful in your ministry.

Blessings!

Small Groups that have the DNA of a Gospel Planting Movement by Paul Watson on February 18, 2010

The following quote was sent to me by a friend in the UK.  Thought you would appreciate it.

Blessings!

—-

“The matter is quite simple. The Bible is very easy to understand. But we Christians are a bunch of scheming swindlers. We pretend to be unable to understand it because we know very well that the minute we understand, we are obliged to act accordingly. Take any word in the New Testament and forget everything except pledging yourself to act accordingly. ‘My God,’ you will say, ‘if I do that my whole life will be ruined. How would I every get on in the world?’ Here in lies the real place of Christian scholarship. Christian scholarship is the Church’s prodigious invention to defend itself against the Bible, to ensure that we can continue to be good Christians without the Bible coming too close. Oh, priceless scholarship, what would we do without you? Dreadful it is to fall into the hands of the living God. Yes, it is even dreadful to be alone with the New Testament.” 

                     - Soren Kierkegard, Provocations: Spiritual Writings of Søren Kierkegaard, ed. Charles E. Moore (Farmington, PA: Plough, 2002), p.201.