Fruitful Near-Culture Workers Use a Variety of Ministry Methods
The near-culture workers we interviewed personified one of our Fruitful Practice statements in the area of communication methods: “Fruitful workers use a variety of approaches in sharing the gospel.”
All of those we interviewed were skilled at selecting which of various approaches would be best for each situation. Also, we found it interesting that none of the interviews specifically mentioned any of the methods which are making the rounds among Western agencies for sharing Jesus with Muslims (e.g., Camel method, T4T, Any3, Discovery Bible Studies, Simply the Story, etc.).
It is likely that at least some of them were using one or more of those methods or were aware of these methods, but none felt any of these important enough to mention by name. And while some interviews mentioned activities that sounded similar to these well-known methodologies, we cannot be sure whether they had been taught the methods mentioned here or simply discovered them on their own.
What was clear, however, was that these workers did not feel it necessary, or even beneficial, to use only one method when sharing the gospel. No one directly said, “I use different methods at different times.” Instead, they described their ministry in terms like this: “No I don’t have really a plan how to preach the gospel. It depends on the circumstances and the people, and the place, and what he knows about his religion.” Another person said, “And also how to reach people through the Qur’an as well, which is one of the methods that we focus on here. It’s one of the methods, it’s not the method.”
The workers clearly felt the need to be flexible and take each case locally and individually. If there was any one ‘method’ they consistently talked about, it was the direct leading of the Holy Spirit. Several we interviewed spoke of saying certain things or going certain places as a direct result of what they felt the Holy Spirit showed them to do. For example, one person said, “There are situations that the Holy Spirit leads and one approach may not be real relevant in all situations unto all people, so there are different approaches.”
However, in other cases, some workers seemed to decide how and when to share Jesus based on their innate sense of cultural or relational appropriateness. Whether led by the Spirit or by cultural intuition, the common factor was that these workers were clearly not wedded to a single methodology.
Each of these near-culture workers exhibited some awareness of their personal preferences in ways to share the gospel: sharing their own testimony, reaching out through inner healing, building bridges to known concepts, sharing Bible stories, etc. However, in the end, it was clear there was no ‘one-size-fits-all’ pattern.
Several mentioned that they would sense where the other person was and tailor their presentation to that individual. They often mentioned sharing Jesus along the natural flow of conversations.
These interviews with near-culture workers were a strong confirmation of what our overall research has shown—that is, the fruitfulness of using a variety of approaches to sharing the gospel. This should cause us to carefully reconsider the Western focus on methodology and technique in sharing the gospel. Perhaps it is simply a manifestation of our culture rather than good practice.
Fruitful Near-Culture Workers Emphasize Heart Values
As we analyzed the interviews, one thing became very clear: the near-culture workers in our study were fruitful primarily because they value certain things: growing intimacy with Jesus, persevering on mission with God, honoring and respecting others, and treating others as individuals.
The first two fruitful practices highlighted in this study were focused on how they relate to God, not about how to do ministry. Opposition will come, and these fruitful workers have learned to turn to Jesus when it does. Therefore, the most important ability for any worker is to be able to persevere enough to abide in Christ in all circumstances.
Many people in the fields of educational and sociological research currently call this character trait “grit.” Deborah Perkins-Gough of Penn State University says that in the area of professional or educational achievement, grit is a combination of resilience, hard work, and having focused passion over the long term (2013).
It is no surprise that recent educational research has shown that IQ and skill are not the most important predictors of whether a student will ultimately be successful. More importantly, it is also no surprise that the Bible has something to say about perseverance as the key to success. This quality of perseverance, or grit, is considered a blessing which comes as a result of being tested and not falling away (cf. James 1:4, James 5:11, Heb. 12).
In confirming the teaching of scripture, secular scholars have provided us a reminder that perseverance is not something one is born with, but is rather something that is learned through time. Interestingly, Paul said the same thing (see Rom. 5: 3-5). Our research confirms that grit, or perseverance, is indeed key to the lives of these fruitful, near-culture workers, and it was clear that intimate times of prayer makes this possible.
The next two Fruitful Practices we looked at are also personal and are connected to the two Fruitful Practices above by the key word “relating.” In this case, the relationship is to society and individuals in that society, rather than to God. However, once again, the practice is about a heart attitude, rather than a ministry technique.
These workers were willing to do whatever it took to show that they were trustworthy members of their new community. They had taken the time to learn what conveyed honor and respect and sought ways to show respect in tangible ways. They were aware that people in different cultures show respect in different ways, and they were willing to do whatever was necessary to convey that respect.
They used the technique of observing and participating with the local people; however, more than that, it appeared to be a heart value. These workers demonstrated a willingness to step in and do whatever would speak to the local worldview.
We can now link these to the third finding, which showed that fruitful workers used a variety of ways of presenting the gospel. They did not stick doggedly to a particular technique; rather, they demonstrated a belief that different ways work for different people. They were also aware of the voice of the Holy Spirit in the moment and were willing to go the direction he would lead.
This might be a good time to note a nuance of difference: while near-culture workers were aware of the cultural differences, they did not appear to be trying to reach, say, the Ansari people group, as much as seeking to reach Ansari people.
Their interviews gave a very personal, intimate view of those they were reaching, whereas Western workers tend to speak of their people in a group sense. While this may seem a small distinction, it could have large implications for both mobilization and strategy.
In short, while all of these near-culture workers were aware of the need to build bridges between themselves and locals, they knew that no single technique could get them there. Instead, they seemed committed to a heart value in which they were willing to bridge the gulf by honoring the local culture and cooperating with the Holy Spirit. Foundational to this was their intimate walk with the Lord and the character that had been produced through spending time with him in prayer.
In general, Fruitful Practice research is behavior oriented, but there are times when our qualitative side, rooted in interviews and conversations with real-field workers, offers limited insights into the reasons behind the behaviors. It seems to us that the best way to connect the key Fruitful Practices (behaviors) in this data set is by considering the heart attitudes or values from which they seem to have originated.
Conclusion
Through this study, we offer a look at the practices of near-culture church planters who are fruitful in the Muslim world. The fact that opposition and perseverance through prayer ranked as the highest Fruitful Practice is new in the research done within Fruitful Practices so far.
Also, while it may be counterintuitive, these near-culture workers were also keenly aware of cultural differences and were keen to convey respect and honor by being culturally appropriate.
Finally, they were not committed to one particular method of sharing the gospel. Instead, they felt the need to be flexible and share the gospel in ways they felt were appropriate to the individual.
As an outgrowth of these first three findings, we have proposed that heart values seem to be the main indicator of fruitfulness in the lives of these workers. We have grounded the practices in the factors that seem to be motivating them. If the drivers are the heart motivations and not the behaviors, then the question will be: How do we teach people to be fruitful? Do we train hearts, behaviors, or both? We should give careful consideration to these as we both train near-culture church planters and partner with them on multicultural teams.
References
Allen, Don, Rebecca Harrison, and Eric and Laura Adams. 2009. “Fruitful Practices: A Descriptive List.” International Journal of Frontier Missiology, 26(3): 111-122.
Cole, Neil. 2005. Organic Church. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Garrison, David. 2004. Church Planting Movements. Arkadelphia, Ark.: WigTake
Perkins-Gough, Deborah. 2013. “The Significance of Grit.” Educational Leadership. 71(1):14-20.
The Exchange is a part of CT's
Blog Forum. Support the work of CT.
Subscribe and get one year free.
The views of the blogger do not necessarily reflect those of Christianity Today.
