Posted tagged ‘Bruce Ashford’

Bruce Ashford to be Dean of College at Southeastern

December 11, 2008

I just received word that Dr. Bruce Ashford will be the new dean of the College at Southeastern effective Jan. 1, 2009.  Ashford has been serving as director of the Center for Great Commission Studies at Southeastern Seminary since 2005 and teaches courses in theology, philosophy, and missions. He is an active member of Summit Church in Durham, speaks at churches and in other venues all over our Convention, and blogs at the best SBC blog–Between the Times.  Ashford has been a vocal proponent of a Great Commission Resurgence (GCR) in the SBC in his teaching, speaking, and blogging, and I consider him to be the kind of leader we need in our Convention as a man who exemplifies the wedding of piety, doctrine, and practice.

I had the privilege of recently spending time with Dr. Ashford in my visit to Southeastern Seminary and was greatly encouraged to learn of where Ashford has been, what he is doing, and (now) how he is going to lead the College at Southeastern.  Once again, SEBTS, under the leadership of Dr. Akin, continues to chart the gospel-driven course with the right kind of men not only for the time being but for years to come.

Bruce Ashford on Church Planting Movements

August 26, 2008

Bruce Ashford is the Director of the Center for Great Commission Studies and associate professor of philosophy and intercultural studies at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary.  He is also on the team of the best SBC blog, Between the Times, and has written some very helpful articles on a theologically-driven missiology as well as contours of a great commission resurgence.  While I would like to commend all his articles to you, allow me to post an exerpt speaking to church planting movements.  You may recall that I wrote briefly about a word-driven movemental Christianity and raised several questions regarding David Garrison’s paradigm that is being used (seemingly uncritically) by the IMB (and others).  Dr. Ashford writes (emphasis mine):

In recent days, much has been said about Church Planting Movements (CPM), and rightly so. David Garrison defines a church planting movement as, “a rapid multiplication of indigenous churches planting churches that sweeps through a people group or population segment.” Evangelicals, including Southern Baptists, have long been praying for and working towards the birth of CPMs among the unreached people groups of the world, and indeed, even in our own country.

But there is much work left to be done to ensure that, here in the United States and across the oceans, our methodology is driven by the Scriptures. It must be biblical theology that gives church planting methodology its starting point, trajectory, and parameters. Of the many substantial missiological issues that cluster around CPM theory, here are two that must be treated:

First, in regards to CPM as a goal: As laid out in Part Three of this series, our ultimate goal, above all others, is the increase of God’s glory. No goal that we have should subvert this goal. For this reason, we are concerned not only with rapidity, but also more importantly with the purity of the gospel and the health of the church. On the one hand, if the church multiplies rapidly, but is not healthy, the long-term picture is bleak. An inordinate emphasis on rapidity will likely lead to reductionist methods of evangelism and discipleship that will harm the church in the long term and actually curb its growth. On the other hand, if the church is “doctrinally pure,” but not seeking to multiply, the long-term picture is bleak. Or maybe it would be better to say that a church cannot be doctrinally pure without praying for, and working toward, the healthy and rapid growth of God’s church.

A final note regarding CPM as a goal: CPMs are not the only worthwhile missiological accomplishment. Sometimes, God does not grant such a thing or He does not grant it immediately. In Hebrews 11, we read of men and women of great faith whose reward was not a CPM; instead, their reward was torture, destitution, affliction, and martyrdom. Many faithful workers who labor in prayer and in deed, hoping with all that is within them to see a CPM, never see the birth of a CPM. This does not mean that their labor is in vain. If they have labored for the glory of God, then He is pleased with their efforts. (Also, it should be pointed out that the early church experienced its most explosive growth only after many years of prayer and work. See Rodney Stark’s The Rise of Early Christianity.)

Second, in relation to leadership development: The rapid reproduction of the church will lead to some challenges in leadership identification and development. If multiple churches are planted in a short period of time, the churches are faced with the question of how recent is “too recent” for a believer to be recognized as an elder. Further, in a context where the church is persecuted, how will these elders train for pastoral ministry? Also, how will they be discipled if they are not able to read? These are not hypothetical scenarios; there are multiple church planting situations, globally, that are facing these challenges at any given time. We must take seriously the biblical teaching concerning the church, discipleship, and elder qualifications and work hard to apply it in challenging situations such as the one above.

Dr. Ashford is hitting on many of the things I have attempted to bring up but only in a more articulate and substantive way.  There’s no question that we all want to see a movement where churches are being planted and multiplied, but pragmatism cannot and must not win the day when it comes down to what drives our methodology.  As Ashford explains, we must have a theologically-driven missiology, one where the Word of God does not merely play a supporting role but is the driving force behind the movement.