The Great Commission is described as the church’s

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

The Great Commission is described as the church’s “marching order,” specifying its responsibility to “go and make disciples of nations, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. “ the heart of Christianity lies the desire to see the Church coming into line with the norms and practice of Jesus and the Apostles. The Church has a mindset geared towards the Church advancing in its witness to the world by planting churches ‘in every town and village’ Daniel (2001:65) and to being a powerful witness to the world, fulfilling the commission of Jesus to go and make disciples of all nations (Mt 28:19). In this research work I propose that church planting is God’s primary means of enabling the Church to fulfill this great commission and that church planting is not an isolated activity or an addendum within the life of the church, but rather that flows out of a healthy Biblical Church model.

This study aims to show God not only has a definite plan to impact the world with the Gospel of Jesus Christ, but He has given a clear strategy to accomplish this. There is a very definite pattern that God has laid down which was clearly manifested in and through the life of Jesus Christ, and was passed on to His disciples to accomplish the redemption of the world.

Daniel (2001:65) “The heart of Apostolic Christianity is to fulfil the commission given by Jesus to “make disciples of all nations” by planting churches, training leaders and functioning as the priesthood”

Oswald Sanders in his book Spiritual Leadership asserts that real leaders are in short supply and that God is searching for leaders. The Bible illustrates that God is seeking for people who wholeheartedly follow after Him, and earnestly desire to serve Him. Though they may have many shortcomings and flaws, like Moses, Gideon, and David, God still uses them as spiritual leaders who lead His people to fulfill His plan.1 Sanders observes that every church’s generation has stringent demands of spiritual leadership which requires a leader to be “authoritative, spiritual, and sacrificial”2 He affirms that spiritual leaders are not elected, appointed, or created by church assemblies, but rather by God alone who forms them. God searches a person’s heart, shapes his/her life, and calls him/her to take up the leadership position in His time. God’s sovereignty in leaders’ lives should always keep them humble with the knowledge that they are merely servants of God. True spiritual leadership is only found in giving oneself in service to others. Henry and Richard Blackaby also observe that many churches or Christian organizations have great potential for growth and success, but the key is leadership some churches may be losing their influence in the world because of their lack of leadership. Spiritual leaders are intrinsically different from secular leaders. They may use similar methods, but spiritual leadership includes spiritual dimensions which are sometimes absent from secular leadership.

 

The aim of the study

I show that the pattern and the means for discipline the nations is clearly laid out in God’s Word and clearly manifested in the life of Jesus, His disciples and in the early Apostolic Church. The purpose of this project is to show that the Church is called, not merely to evangelize the world, but to establish churches in every geographical area as a living witness to Christ. The mission of each local church, in turn, is to replicate the same process of evangelism in their surrounding area with a view to planting more local churches, which in turn would perpetuate the process.

 

Statement of the problem

Despite the fervent effort of the church to influence the thinking and behavior of their congregants, the message of the church and the conduct of Christians, is symptomatic of a major failure of the church to make disciples.  Leadership plays a crucial role when implementing the great commission (establishing a church). Well functioning leaders determine the level of success of a church planting situation. Therefore this project evaluates leadership and church planting in line with the great commission Jesus gave his disciple. “To go and make disciples of all nations” church planting. This research takes a critical look at the challenges in church leadership with respect to these divine instructions.

 

Significance of the Study

The project concentrated on one of the many factors involved in church planting leadership. Other important factors greatly influences on church planting such as evangelizing, training the new converts to be disciples, developing body life through church planting, worship full of life, biblical preaching, helping people through counseling etc. But as stated, the focus for this study will be on the leadership factor.

Limitation of the study

This project is not necessarily about church administration and leadership. It is predicated on the assumption that a bilateral relationship between the spiritual and the sociological will facilitate growth but it does not prescribe or explain the methods and quality of leadership that would enable the church to accomplish this goal.

 

Definitions of some terms

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CHAPTER 2

Literature Review

In order to better understand the leadership style of Jesus and how He trained His disciples one needs to better understand the term leadership. A review of the literature will show that Christian leadership differs significantly from other leadership styles and characteristics. There are many similarities between secular and sacred leaders but there are major differences as well.

Leadership Defined

To better understand the definition of leadership Bennis and Nanus has surveyed the literature and offered these insights:

Decades of academic analysis have given us more than 350 definitions of leadership. Literally thousands of empirical investigations of leaders have been conducted in the last seventy-five years alone, but no clear and unequivocal understanding exist as to what distinguishes leaders from non-leaders, and perhaps more important, what distinguishes effective leaders from ineffective leaders and effective organizations from ineffective organizations.

According to Gary Yuhl leadership is defined:

…in individual traits, behavior, influence over people, interaction patterns, role relationships, occupation of an administrative position, and perception by others regarding legitimacy of influence

Yuhl continues with a sampling of definitions over the last 50 plus years:

Leadership is ―the behavior of an individual when he is directing the activities of a group toward a shared goal.‖ (Hemphill & Coons, 1957, p. 7).

Leadership is ―interpersonal influence, exercised in a situation, and directed, through the communication process, toward the attainment of a specified goal or goals. (Tannenbaum, Weschler, & Massarik, 1961, p. 24).

Leadership is the ―initiation and maintenance of structure in expectation and interaction. (Stogdill, 1974, p. 411).

Leadership is the ―influential increment over and above mechanical compliance with the routine directives of the organization.‖ (Katz & Kahn, 1978, p. 528).

Leadership is ―the process of influencing the activities of an organized group toward goal achievement.‖ (Rauch & Behling, 1984, p. 46).

Leadership is a process of giving purpose (meaningful direction) to collective effort to be expended to achieve purpose. (Jacobs & Jaques, 1990, p. 281).

Leaders are those who consistently make effective contributions to social order, and who are expected and perceived to do so. (Hosking, 1988, p. 153).

The best one can say regarding these definitions is that there is no one right‘ definition. Yuhl‘s own definition is no different:

Leadership is defined broadly as influence processes affecting the interpretation of events for followers, the choice of objectives for the group or organization, the organization of work activities to accomplish the objectives, the motivation of followers to achieve the objectives, the maintenance of cooperative relationships and teamwork, and the enlistment of support and cooperation from people outside the group or organization.18

Leadership has been defined differently throughout the years. The common element of all the definitions is influence in a relationship or group. There are different ways, manners, and means to exercise this influence depending on the particular situation. There is no general theory of leadership that explains all aspects of the processes. Most theories of leadership focus on a narrow perspective and examine only one part of the entire process. This paper will discuss the various line of leadership theorylater in this section. Now, this project will focus on the subject matter at hand; leadership in the Church.

 

Leadership and the Church

There are a tremendous amount of books and articles being written by pastors, missionaries, other church staff, and theologians with regard to leadership as well. Here is a sampling of how believers define leadership:

  1. ―Spiritual leadership is moving people on to God‘s agenda.‖ Henry and Richard Blackaby, Spiritual Leadership.
  2. ―Leadership is a dynamic process in which a man or woman with God-given capacity influences a specific group of God‘s people toward his purposes for the group. Dr. J. Robert Clinton.
  3. Leadership ―begins with God himself as the ultimate model of leadership. The underlying premise is that, throughout the Bible, God has demonstrated principles for leadership that can be used profitably by all people who are in a position to lead others –whether in business or ministry, in the school or in the home. Ken Boa.
  4. ―Transforming leaders are those who are able to divest themselves of their power and invest it in their followers in such a way that others are empowered, while the leaders themselves end with the greatest power of seeing themselves reproduced in others.‖ Leighton Ford.
  5. ―What is Christian leadership? It is leadership motivated by love and given over to service. Ted Engstrom and Ed Dayton.
  6. ―A Christian leader is someone who is called by God to lead; Leads with and through Christlike character; and demonstrates the functional competencies that permit effective leadership to take place.‖ George Barna.
  7. Quoting John Mott spiritual, leadership is: ―Leadership in the sense of rendering maximum service; leadership in the sense of the largest unselfishness; in the sense of full-hearted absorption in the greatest work of the world: building up the kingdom of our Lord Jesus Christ.‖ Oswald Sanders.
  8. ―Leadership is influence—nothing more, nothing less.‖ John Maxwell.
  9. ―Leadership is servanthood.‖ Calvin Miller
  10. Shepherd is a metaphor for Christian leadership. ―Shepherd is a

felicitous metaphor for human leadership because both occupations have a comparable variety of diverse task that are constantly negotiated.‖ Tim Laniak.

Christian leadership definitions are much more specific than their secular counterparts. Blackaby defines the spiritual leader‘s task as moving people away from their own plans toward God and His purposes, depending on the Holy Spirit while remaining accountable to God, and at the same time having a positive impact on the culture at large. Spiritual leaders seek God‘s will by modeling themselves after Jesus Christ and His relationship with the Father.

Robert Clinton focuses on the spiritual dynamics that shape the Christian leader. The Lord uses the patterns and processes in life to mold, shape, and form us to become better prepared as leaders. The end result is being spiritually fit to do the specific job God has assigned to the leader.

Leighton Ford specifically identifies Christian leadership as ‗transformational.‘ He believes that a higher order of leadership is necessary today. It is not enough forleaders to promise rewards in exchange for performance. Transformational leaders motivate by raising values, transcending self-interest, and taking great risks.

Engstrom and Dayton believe Christian leadership is different than secular leadership in its motivation. Being controlled by Christ raises the standard for leadership. The best leaders are those who model attributes of selfless dedication, courage, decisiveness, compassion, and persuasiveness. These traits reflect Jesus‘ role as a servant (Mark 10:45).

George Barna combines the Christlike character of a leader with core competencies that all leaders must possess. He is convinced that leaders must have a call by God to servanthood and possess the characteristics of Christ inwardly and outwardly. One must have core competencies that include casting vision, directing energy and resources, building teams, developing strategy, and being responsible for outcomes. Barna goes on to say that the focus must be on God‘s call as a leader not the competencies that leaders possess. Without a true calling from God a leader‘s skill set has no spiritual value or meaning. The end result is people are merely following a person instead of God. Barna also removes much of the subjective nature of ―God‘s call‖ of a leader by providing eight traits that a Christian leader must possess in order to lead God‘s people.

  1. Oswald Sanders in his classic work on leadership, draws a contrast between natural and spiritual leadership. He compares and contrasts military and political leadership with spiritual leadership. There are many similarities but spiritual leadership is unique. A spiritual leader must exercise the gifts and qualities of the Holy Spirit. One must have an overwhelming conviction that God is calling the believer to a task that is greater than self. Sanders goes on to say that, ―spiritual goals can be achieved only by spiritual people who use spiritual methods

Church Planting

In Planting Growing Churches for the 21st Century (1998), Aubrey Malphurs has two chapters with great relevance for the present project. Chapter Five has the title “Understanding Who You Are” and underlines the importance of personal assessment for church planters. Both the personal value and the organizational value of assessment are described in detail. The purpose of this kind of assessment is, according to Malphurs, to discover our divine design and to develop a personal ministry mission statement. Based upon this assessment, one can design a personal training plan. Malphurs discusses the strengths, the limitations and the weaknesses of personal assessment. The primary areas for assessment are, according to Malphurs, spiritual gifts, passion, temperament, leadership and ministry lifecycle.

In his book, Missional Reformation for Discipling Nations, Olowe, writing from the empirical knowledge of God Embassy Church, Kiev Ukraine highlights the organization of the church on small groups and systematic training of members for discipleship and ministry. Olowe detailed the spiritual progress of some members of the church, many of whom came into the church as addicts, alcoholics, prostitutes, and generally with hopeless situations. However, these people were saved, discipled, and became productive members, church planters and influencers of their communities, which this author believes should be the task of every church.

 

 

 

CHAPTER 3

LEADERSHIP IN CHURCH PLANTING, THEOLOGICAL AND THEORETICAL CONSIDERATIONS

Introduction

When forming a theoretical and theological foundation for my research, I used a tri-fold approach. First, after touching some of the church’s main objectives, the main factors influencing a church planting initiative are described. Secondly the hypothesis about the leadership factor is presented together with the hypothesis model. This forms the core theory of the dissertation. Lastly the theory is tested in the light of the New Testament teaching.

The Objectives of the Church

The Church is the primary expression of God’s Kingdom on earth. Through the Church God’s manifold wisdom shall be made known to the principalities and powers in the heavenly places (Eph 3:10), the lordship of Jesus Christ proclaimed (2 Cor 4:5) and the kingdom of God heralded with signs and wonders (Mt 10:7-8). God is a reconciled God and the church has been commissioned to proclaim this to the world for acceptance of God’s salvation in Jesus Christ (2 Cor 5:18-20). Those who by faith receive Jesus as their savior shall be baptized to Christ becoming members of His body, which is the Church. (Gal 3:27-28) The gospel is unique. No competitors are accepted. There is only one way to God (Jn 14:6). There is only one name that saves (Acts 4:12), and there is only one gospel. If anyone tries to introduce another gospel than salvation by grace through faith in Jesus Christ, he is anathema (Gal 1:8). The gospel shall be preached for the salvation of the whole world. This great commission is given to the Church (Mt 28:18-20). The Church, the secret of Christ (Gal 3:4) is God’s instrument for preaching the gospel and winning the lost.

 

One of the most effective methods for the Church to reach its objective to disciple all nations is to plant new churches. Forming new communities of believers has proved to trigger church growth and vitality. Some will say that it is the most effective method.

In church growth literature, it is stressed that the most effective method of evangelization is church planting. This is also true in areas where many churches already exist, as in Scandinavia….

…Wagner claims in his book about church planting (Wagner 1990) that growing denominations without exception focus on church planting. Examples from the US are Assemblies of God, The Church of the Nazarene, The Southern Baptists and Vineyard which all are experiencing growth, have church planting as one of their primary goals. Some preliminary figures indicate that we will find the same coherence in Norway (Jenssen 1995, 216).7

Developing a program for planting new churches should be the primary focus of churches and denominations that want to be a part of Jesus’ plan to reach the lost.

The Commission

The Great Commission is an order from Jesus Christ to go to the people where they are, preach the gospel, baptize the converts and teach them to keep everything that Jesus has commanded (Mt 18:16-20). When the first Christians carried out this commission, they planted local churches in every place the gospel was preached. The church became the center for training disciples and the base for sending new generations of laborers into the fields. The Commission was given to the apostles as a group (Mt 28:18). They were to make disciples of all people. This is a corporate effort. Paul underlines this when he writes about the spiritual offices – the Gifts of Christ (Eph 4:11). But the New Testament also focuses on the responsibility of the individual Christian leader both in laying the foundation and in continuing the building process.

 

Identification of a Disciple

One should not assume that every church leader operates with a clear

understanding of who a disciple is. This explains why church leaders do not develop the

same kind of disciples. In other words, the divergent notions of the concept of

discipleship have resulted in a diversity of disciples. For instance, a church leader could

regard a new convert as a disciple, while another leader’s notion of a disciple could be

someone who sings in the choir, or teaches a Sunday school class, or even a volunteer in

a church ministry. It would not be surprising if in some other cases a church leader refers

to members of his congregation as his or her “disciples.” What these divergent views

suggest is that the church is yet to come up with a common understanding of the concept

of a disciple. However, until the church understands without any doubt who a disciple is,

it is very likely that the church would be producing different kinds of products in the

name of disciples. Incidentally, disciple making is the sole responsibility of the church,

and if there is no clear understanding of who a disciple is, there would be problems in

raising one.

The Church Planter

The Calling

It is absolutely imperative that God takes the initiative when a church is to be planted. In the Kingdom of God there is no room for free-lancers. Everything must happen in perfect harmony with the Head. When the first apostles were sent forth, God had first called them (Acts 13:2). Paul also mentions this calling when he talks to the elders in Ephesus (Acts 20:28). When Paul teaches about the spiritual offices in the book of Ephesians, he names the offices δωρεας του χριστου – The Gifts of Christ. The spiritual offices are Christ’s gifts to the church.

The primary goal of Jesus Christ

The primary goal of Jesus Christ was to redeem the world from sin. His objective was to

lay down His life in order to give eternal life (Jn 17:3). “The thief comes only to steal and

kill and destroy. I came that they may have life and have it abundantly” (Jn 10:10). His

objective was to go to the Cross where He would open up the way for all men to be

saved.

Just as there was a process involved in the life of Jesus to get Him to the point of going

to the Cross, so too was there a process in the life of the disciples, of preparing them to

continue the work that Jesus would begin. His long-term goal was to train His disciples

not only to lead people to salvation but to establish a pattern of lifestyle and ministry that would facilitate the planting of churches which would in turn enable the Church to take

the Gospel to the world.

But there was a process. There was a plan. As we observe Jesus through the eyes of

the Gospel writers we become aware that Jesus had a very definite modus operandi.

As Coleman (1963:18) says:

His life was ordered by His objective. Everything He did and said was

a part of the whole pattern. It had significance because it contributed

to the ultimate purpose of His life in redeeming the world for God.

This was the motivating vision governing His behaviour. His steps

were ordered by it.

His first task was to choose a group of men (disciples) that would become His close

companions. His purpose was to impart His way of life to them and teach them how to

minister to people. The ministry of the disciples would not be an end in itself. Their

ministry was ordained to lead men and women to Christ; it was to make disciples of all

nations; it was to partner with Christ in building His Church (Mt 16:18).

  1. The time-frame for training

In order to appreciate the pattern of the ministry of Jesus it is necessary to establish a

basic time frame. This will help with the observation of the definite pattern that He

worked to in order to fulfil His mission on earth. At first glance it may appear that the

ministry of Jesus was almost haphazard, however He was working to a definite plan

The Equipment

Because of the fact that the work to be done is the work of the Lord, the church planter as well as every minister of the Word must be equipped by The Holy Spirit. Through the fruit of the Spirit the character is formed. The work of The Lord must be carried out by persons with a Christ-like character. Through the gifts of The Spirit we get the power and anointing to do the task effectively.8

The mission

The mission of the church planter is to preach the gospel in places where the gospel has not been previously heard (Rom 15:20). In western society where the gospel has been preached for centuries, this means that all Christians should always seek to reach new generations and groups of people with the gospel. One of the most effective ways of reaching out is to plant a church near the people to be won.

The Church Planter and His Network

The Sending

The New Testament clearly teaches that to plant a church is not a private enterprise that a person carries out on his or her own initiative (Rom 15:18-19). In Romans 10:15 Paul says: “And how shall they preach unless they are sent?” Someone must send the church planter into the mission field. The inward calling is God’s initiative. The outward calling is the confirmation from the Body of Christ. This was also the pattern in the life of The New Testament church (Acts 13:1-4). Teamwork

To plant a church is teamwork. No single person can do this alone. When The New Testament presents the church planting efforts done by the early church, the pattern is that it was carried out by teams. 9

Networking

In the same way that teamwork is necessary for the church planters, it is necessary for the newly planted church to have relationship with other churches. This relationship is seen in several places in The New Testament. The church at Antioch was in a network both with its mother church in Jerusalem (Acts 11:19-30; 12:25; 15:23) and with the daughter churches planted by apostles sent out from her (Acts 14:26-28).

Factors Influencing a Church Planting Project

Several factors influence a church-planting project. I will focus on the following four:

  • A set of right values — why do we plant churches.
  • A well defined vision — what do you see when picturing the new church.
  • A functional strategy — how will you get where you want.
  • The leadership factor.

 

A Set of Right Values

Planting of new churches is not to be regarded as an option alongside with other possible evangelistic activities a church can engage in. Effective church planting needs to be anchored in the church’s core values. Aubrey Malphurs describes the importance of core values in this way:

The organization’s central beliefs are the driver sitting behind the wheel of the ministry car. While a ministry is vision-focused, it is values-driven. The primary beliefs are the ministry’s shaping force; they influence much if not all that it does as well as how it does it. They guide all that the ministry seeks to accomplish and define how everyone accomplishes it. They comprise the bottom line for what the institution will and will not do; they are the deeply ingrained drivers behind all of its behavior. This includes such vital areas as the decisions made, risk taken, problems solved, goals set, conflicts resolved, and priorities determined. (Malphurs 1996, 42)

To plant new churches is a time consuming undertaking that need to be given the necessary focus in order to succeed. As Malphurs points out, the values direct the priorities and church planting needs to be one of the top priorities.

The priorities are important because they signal not just what is important, but what is most important to an organization. In weak institutions the priorities are unclear. This may be the result of a conflict in priorities, or it could signal a tired, dying organization…. Good organizations can identify their priorities because they understand their values. Their values directly affect their priorities. (Malphurs 1996, 47)

A well defined vision

To plant a church is a divine initiative. God starts the process and he gives the vision. This has always been the Kingdom pattern. The way a vision is given or formed can vary, but it leaves a clear picture or a deep impression of what God wants to do through the person. The vision can be a hint to begin with, just enough to stir a person into action. The details become clearer as the person start the journey in obedience. Some individuals, however, can see everything perfectly clear from the start. The vision can be for a limited time span or it can cover your whole lifetime.

A God-given vision can develop in different ways. When God gave Abram the picture of the future, He did it in several steps. He asked Abram to leave his country and family to start a pilgrimage leading him to the Promised Land (Gen 12:1-6). When Godgave Abram the promise to become a big nation, his name was changed to Abraham – the father of many nations. Through a prophetic act offering animals and birds, God showed Abraham the future of his descendants, first as slaves in Egypt and then as inhabitants of the Promised Land (Gen 15:8-21). God used the stars and the sand of the ocean to give Abraham a picture of the multitude of his descendants (Gen 15:5, 22:17). God often uses images of developing a vision. When people let God lead them, He shows the direction and expects an act of obedience. Then He provides more details until the picture is seen clearly.10

A vision11 can be described as a picture of the preferred future. A definition of what a vision is could focus on the process of developing the vision, on the completed task when the vision has become a reality or on both. Markus Pfeiffer includes both the process and the image of the future in his definition.

Vision is seeing an idea or image of a God desired future or outcome (for life, family, business), imparted to His Chosen and open vessel. Vision is based on an accurate understanding of God’s character, of yourself and of circumstances. When you “see” what your destiny, calling, purpose and mission is, you have a “Vision”12.

A God-given vision is formed through input from different sources. Character and personality together with education and spiritual maturity are essential elements. A clear understanding of God’s calling and destiny for one’s life based upon an intimate relationship with Jesus is crucial when forming a clear vision. Prophetic revelation, either through dreams and visions or through prophetic words from other people adds to and directs the vision (Acts 9:15-19, 16:9-10, 20:23, 21:10-11). Personal prophecies haveto be in harmony with the inner voice in one’s spirit.13 When God leads a person, that person will be the prime person God speaks to. Prophecies from others confirm what God has already spoken to an idividual.

A vision can be changed over time as some of the vision becomes a reality. Malphurs is right when he says.

…the vision is more subject to change. It is dynamic, not static. Over time, the vision must be renewed, adapted, and adjusted to the cultural context in which the congregation lives. The change takes place only at the margins of the vision, not at its core (Malphurs 1999, 133).

When planting a church, it is most important to write the vision and make it known. It will give others a clear picture of what the new church is aiming at, what it will look like, and what will be the main objective of the new congregation will be. Knowing the vision will also make it easier for people who want to join the church-planting project. They need to ask: “Is the vision of the planned church congruent with my own vision? Can I give my time, effort and money to this ministry? Malphurs underlines the importance of communicating the vision. He writes:

It is most important that you communicate to the people the vision, as well as the mission and values. I refer to it as casting the vision. Like a fisherman who casts a lure into the water, hoping that as he reels it in, some fish will follow, so the visionary casts the vision into the congregational waters, hoping that when he reels it in, his people will follow. Vision casting is fishing for men. However, nothing happens if the vision isn’t cast, if nothing is communicated. (Malphurs 1999, 149)

A functional strategy

Through a functional strategy the vision becomes reality. When developing a God-given vision, it is equally important to seek God for a strategy to accomplish the thingsHe has shown us. Through the vision you see what to do. The strategy tells the person how to do it.

When God commanded the Israelites to conquer Jericho, He gave them the strategy:

You shall march around the city, all you men of war: you shall go all around the city once. This you shall do six days. And seven priests shall bear seven trumpets of rams’ horns before the ark. But the seventh day you shall march around the city seven times and the priests shall blow the trumpets. It shall come to pass, when they make a long blast with the ram’s horn, and when you hear the sound of the trumpet, that all the people shall shout with a great shout; then the wall of the city will fall down flat. And the people shall go up every man straight before him (Josh. 6:3-5 NKJ).

Is it possible to find a strategy for church planting in the New Testament? No and yes. No, if one is looking for a step – by – step method on how the Apostles took on the task to fulfill the Great Command. The initial expansion of the Church was a result of unplanned events, like the persecution that broke out after the stoning of Stephen (Acts 8:4-5, 11:19-21). Personal initiative and personal guidance was behind these evangelistic efforts. The initiative that led to Paul’s and Barnabas’ first missionary journey was taken by the Holy Spirit through the church in Antioch (Acts 13:1-3). In contrast, the plans for the second journey was changed because of personal preferences (Acts 15:36-41). If one are looking for underlying principles and general patterns, these principles and patters where often discovered by the Apostles after they had seen how the Holy Spirit worked. The meeting of the Apostles in Jerusalem is an example (Acts 15:1-29).

Amberson describes this combination of spontaneity and strategy.

While spontaneity comes through very clearly in the beginning of churches in the New Testament, still a sense of some deliberate plan of action also seems to be present. In that which these Christians were and which they did – whether it was done intentionally or unintentionally, whether it was a deliberate strategy or an unorganized plan of action – some elements for building a church planting strategy 56

can be recognized because they were the element behind the planting of churches in the New Testament (Amberson 1979, 42).

Amberson continues by describing two of these elements:

Some of these discernible elements for church planting were related to the Christians themselves, that is, who they were or the kind of people they were as God’s people. They were a people of prayer, boldness, and flexibility…. They allowed God to lead them and use them by his Holy Spirit.

Other discernible elements were related to methodology – that which they did or engaged in as a natural outflow of who they were, they involved themselves in the worship of God and expressed their sense of fellowship with each other as fellow Christians in sharing the needs of physical life. In addition, they communicated the message of the gospel through preaching, witnessing, and teaching as well as ministering to the physical needs and dealing with the problems of people.

…………………………………………………………………………………..

They preached about Jesus, witnessed about what he had done for them, and exhorted people to make decisions. They took advantage of that which happened to them as opportunities to witness and even sometimes were so flexible that most inappropriate circumstances became opportunities to communicate the gospel. They preached and witnessed to people wherever they found them and sought a point of common ground or contact through which men might be open to the message (Amberson 1979, 42-43).

The Pauline strategy for missions and church planting had several vital elements as can be seen from what is recorded in the book of Acts and from what he writes in his epistles.

  • A distinct target group–the heathens (Rom 15:16; Gal 2:7-9)
  • Not to build on a foundation laid by others (Rom 15:20; 2 Cor 10:13-16)

 

  • Church planting efforts concentrated on the cities and greater population centers (Acts 11:24-25, 18:1-11, 19:1-10; 2 Cor 12:12; 1 Cor 9:2)

 

  • Initiator was Christ. The initiative was not Paul’s but Christ’s (Rom 15:18; 1 Cor 3:6-7; Col 1:29)

 

  • Manifestation of signs, wonders and the power of the Holy Spirit evident (Rom 15:19; 1 Cor 2:1-2)

 

  • Christ always the foundation

57

 

  • Christ preached (1 Cor 3:11, 1:23).

 

  • Ordained local leaders to continue the work in the ministry in the newly planted churches (Acts 14:23)14

 

  • Mentored leaders to assist him in his ministry and to oversee the churches (2 Tim 3:10-11

 

  • Continued contact with the churches he had planted and gave them spiritual guidance (Acts 15:36; Gal 4:19)15

 

  • Finished his calling strong (2 Tim 4:7)

 

These principles are relevant for all times. The general principles laid out in the New Testament are a necessary foundation when forming a working strategy for church planting today. In addition to the important biblical strategies, church planters need to also bear in mind that each instance is different from another. Paul also used different strategies to reach different peoples with the gospel.

A strategy is necessary in order to carry out the vision. In Reframing Organizations, Bolman and Deal writes about agenda setting, vision, and strategy.

In reflecting on his experience as a university president, Bennis (1989, 20) arrived at a deceptively simple observation: “It struck me that I was most effective when I knew what I wanted”….

…Effective leaders create an “agenda for change” with two major elements: a vision balancing the long-term interests of parties involved and a strategy for achieving the vision recognizing the full range of competing internal and external forces….

…A vision without a strategy remains an illusion (Bolman and Deal 1997, 179-180).

When developing a strategy for reaching a specific group of people, Malhpurs suggests constructing a profile person. Some find it helpful to construct a profile person. This person can be either a cartoon character or a real-life man and woman who are typical of your target group. Saddleback Valley Community Church created Saddleback Sam for this purpose. Willow Creek Community Church came up with Unchurched Harry and Mary. The advantage of such a creation for an established or planted church is that it helps the church’s people know whom they have targeted (Malphurs 1999, 160).

The Leadership Factor

When Paul describes his role as a church planter in Corinth, he underlines the importance of leadership and teamwork to successfully start a new church: “I planted, Apollos watered, but God gave the increase (1 Cor 3:6 NKJ)”.

At the same time, Paul gives the most important factor of success: “So then neither he who plants is anything, nor he who waters, but God who gives the increase (1 Cor 3:7 NKJ)”.

Without Paul and Apollo there would not have been planted a church in Corinth at that time. God blessed their work. The same is the case every time a church is to be planted. In the previous paragraphs some important factors when planting churches has been presented – values, vision and strategy.

New Testament Perspectives

To plant a church is to launch a complex and challenging mission. It involves sociological and psychological aspects. Insight from these disciplines will be of great help for a church planter. He or she can also gain much from the study of management and leadership. But in order to understand what church planting and leadership in this connection is all about, we must go to The New Testament. Theological considerations are necessary. A study of the premises laid by Jesus and the teaching and practice of the first Christians and the apostles is essential. The planting of a church is basically an 59

initiative made by God. He is not passively watching what is done. He is actively partaking in the outreach by calling the workers and equipping them for the task. In the Bible is found the God – given pattern for church planting and how leadership is involved in this.

In the following, an attempt is made to give an answer the question: Do we in the New Testament find a model for church leadership that should be applied by all Christian churches and that we could call “The New Testament Model for Church Government”. When discussing this question in the following sub-chapter, two widely acknowledged New Testament scholars are chosen. One is Gordon D. Fee (1991) and the other is J. Rodman Williams (1996). These theologians come from a Pentecostal/Renewal background and give different answers to the question.

Hermeneutical Considerations – Use of the Text

The Questions

When developing a model for leadership and church government, we must address the important question about how to use the New Testament text. Do the narrative portions of the NT have normative power? Does the Bible present a certain model for us to be copied today, or does it give us certain principles with a certain freedom of implementation? Should the church be organized with apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers (Eph 4:11)? Or should the church have a pope, archbishops, bishops and priests? Perhaps a group of presbyters is the right leadership structure? Is the church to function as a theocracy or as democracy based upon the common priesthood of all believers? 60

Three possible answers to the question

  1. One way to answer the question is to say that in the Bible one find a clearly defined pattern for church government and leadership. From the narratives of how the Apostles appointed elders in the new churches and the requirements listed for a person to become an elder (Acts 14:23, 15:6, 20:17-28; 1 Tim 3:1-7; Tit 1:5-9), one can define a New Testament model for church government and leadership. The church should be led by a board of elders based on the plurality of leadership principle. One of the elders might have the main responsibility as a primas inter pares, the first among equals. An elder must be a man. We find many different variations of this view, but they all claim to find in the New Testament a model for church government that is normative for us today. The strange thing is that those who choose this way end up with a great variety of implementations of the one normative New Testament model.

 

  1. Some answer the question by saying that it is impossible to find a model for church government and leadership in the Bible. One has to look to the early church and follow their example. They build a church structure where the office of the apostles and the other spiritual offices were taken care of by the bishops and the priests. Church history should be our guide.16

 

  1. The third answer is to look to the New Testament for principles for church government and leadership. The New Testament documents say much about character and qualifications necessary for those in leadership positions in the church, but they don’t give us a fully developed structure. Jesus is building his Church (Mt 18:17-19), and He does this by calling and equipping persons to exercise leadership through servant hood not through lordship.

 

Two positions

Gordon D. Fee in his Gospel and Spirit, Issues in New Testament Hermeneutics (1991) is a spokesman for the latter of the three ways mentioned above while J. Rodman Williams finds in the New Testament a model that is normative for us today. He argues for his position in the comprehensive work Renewal Theology, Systematic Theology from a Charismatic Perspective (1996). In his research, Fee did not find a developed model for church government in the New Testament. He writes:

The New Testament is full of surprises, but perhaps none is so surprising as its generally relaxed attitude toward church structures and leadership; especially so, when one consider how important this issue became for much of later church history, beginning as early as Ignatius of Antioch (Fee 1991, 120).

Fee continues:

…the very fact that such diverse groups as Roman Catholics, Plymouth Brethren, and Presbyterians all use the Pastoral Epistles to support their ecclesiastical structures should give us good reason to pause as to what the NT “clearly teaches” on these matters…. This is one of the things that make Acts such a different kind of “church history” from its successors. There is scarcely a hint of church organization or structures (1:15-26 and 6:1-6 play quite different roles). At some point, for example, leadership in Jerusalem passed from the Twelve to James (cf. 6:32 and 8:14 with 11:2; 12:17; and 15:13), without so much as a word as to how and why. At the local level, in 13:1-3, those who appear to be in leadership are “prophets and teachers”, while in 14:23 elders are appointed for each congregation. This is hardly the stuff from which one can argue with confidence as to how the early church was “organized” – or whether it was! (Fee 1991, 121 + footnote 3)

Williams on the other hand, is clear when he describes a New Testament leadership model that should be followed today:

Leadership in the church is invariably plural. For example, in Hebrews 13:17 is this injunction: “Obey your leaders and submit to them; for they are keeping watch over your souls, as men who will have to give account”. The leaders are unmistakably the elders or pastors who “keep watch”. To the leaders, not to a single leader, the church is enjoined to render obedience…. As we have earlier observed, in the Book of Acts there is invariably a plurality of elders. E.g., Paul and Barnabas “appointed elders…in every church” (14:23); “the apostles and the elders were gathered together” (15:6); Paul “called to him the elders of the church” (20:17). Elders – in the plural – are the leaders in the local church. In the Epistles again there is plurality of leadership: e.g., “Let the elders who rule well” (1 Tim 5:17); “Appoint elders in every town” (Titus 1:5); “I exhort the elders among you” (1 Pet 5:1). There is no suggestion of one elder being over a church; the leadership is always plural. There may be a duality in eldership – elders who, in addition to ruling, “labor in preaching and teaching” (1 Tim 5:17). However, again, no one elder, whether called pastor or teacher, overseer or minister of the word, is the leader of a given church. All the elders are ordained, set apart, to work as a unity under the one lordship of Jesus Christ (Williams 1996, 217-218)… 62

…. The church in Jerusalem of course also had the apostles (“apostles and elders”) with James as the leader among them. But even there they worked in conjunction with the elders; there is no suggestion that the apostles were over them (Williams 1996, 218 footnote 279)…

…. Plurality of leadership is the New Testament picture. With neither governing person nor governing body above another, it means that every body of elders is much like the original group of apostles, whose only authority was the Lord Himself. Serving Him unitedly is the high privilege of those He calls to leadership in His church (Williams 1996, 219).

Fee handles the question of how to organize the church as an adiaforon, a concept that the New Testament documents are not quite clear about. The Bible focuses on character, personal qualifications and spiritual gifting not on organizational forms. The principles described in the New Testament can function well in different organizational frameworks. The New Testament models are descriptive, not normative.

Among the Free Evangelical Congregations and in the Pentecostal Movement in Norway, a position like the one represented by Williams is the most common. After the Second World War, a development has taken place towards a congregationalistic model. In the rest of the churches in Norway church government more or less has been a non – dogmatic question. Churches that have developed from a Charismatic or Faith background have for the most part adopted a form of government in which the pastor is the prime leader with other ministers in subordinate positions working together with him. Churches that have been influenced by the apostolic movement in which the founding pastor is still in charge, in recent years have begun to call him apostle.

The question of leadership in light of the character of the church

The Christian church over the years developed a distinction between the leaders and the people, between the clergy and the laity. This distinction can not be found in the New Testament. The clergy was a group of men ordained and set apart. The ministers had 63

a special set of rules for their lives, and they had special privileges. In order to find support for such a model, one must go to the Old Testament in which the kings, priests and prophets has a special anointing that ordinary people did not have. In the Roman Catholic Church this sharp distinction between clergy and laity achieved its clearest expression. Williams discusses this distinction between the pastor and the pastored.

Accordingly, it is a mistake to regard only certain persons in the church as ministers. In some churches the pastor is frequently referred to as “the minister” implying that other persons do not minister at all. It is significant historically that whereas the Reformation stressed the priesthood of all believers, there was not the same emphasis on the ministry of all believers. The Second Helvetic Confession (1566), for example, declared: “The ministry… and the priesthood are things far different from the other. For the priesthood is common to all Christians; not so is the ministry.” Surely there is a difference between ordained ministry of the word and other form of ministry; however, “the ministry” is common to all Christians (Williams 1996, 160).

Fee agrees with Williams and puts it this way:

Thus leadership in the New Testament people of God is never seen as outside or above the people themselves, but governed by the same set of “rules” They are not “set apart” by “ordination”; rather, their gifts are part of the Spirit’s work among the people (Fee 1991, 131).

When developing a model for leadership in the Christian church, two factors must be kept in mind: First, the Church under the New Covenant is a body of people in which everyone is anointed by the Holy Spirit to know the heart of God and to do the works of the ministry. Second, not everybody have the same gifts, calling, task and equipment ( 1 Cor 12:4-11, Eph 4:11). God appoints some to be leaders on different level and he instructs the rest of the church to obey them.

The church is εκκλησια, a people called out by God. They gather together in various places for worship and instruction. The church is a royal priesthood with open access to the throne of the Father (1 Pet 2:9-10). The church is God’s family and 64

household with the Spirit of adoption indwelling in them (2 Cor 6:18; Eph.2:19). The church is God’s temple, the dwelling place for God himself (1 Cor 3:16-17). It is the Body of Christ with Christ himself being the head (Rom 12:4-5). With this New Testament concept of the church as a background, it will be totally wrong to have a leadership model in which the church is one group and the clergy another group and that the church member have to enter before God through a priest or to have him as a representative before God.

On the other hand, God calls and equips those whom he calls to leadership positions in the church. In Romans 12, Paul describes different gifts. In this passage he says, “He who leads” (Greek: ο προισταμενος, v. 8). In other words, some have the gift to lead. In 1 Cor 12:28 Paul lists some of the equipping gifts — apostles, prophets and teaching along with the gift of administration. In Eph 4:11 all the five ministry gifts are listed. The main objective of the ministry gifts is to edify the church so it can “grow up” and mature after the image of Christ. The New Testament leadership is a servant leadership caring for the people. Fee states:

Language of “ruler ship” and “authority” is altogether missing in the NT passages, which speak about leadership, except as Paul refers to his apostolic authority in his own churches (Fee 1991, 134 footnote).

Structure and Ministry in the New Testament

To conclude the discussion about leadership structure in the New Testament, Fee states:

As already noted, one of the truly perplexing questions in New Testament studies is to determine the shape that leadership and structure took within the earliest congregations of God’s new covenant people. The difficulties here stem from the lack of explicit, intentional instruction, noted at the beginning of this study. The reasons for it are related to the twofold reality of their eschatological 65

existence and their experience of the Spirit, not to mention the simple fact that one seldom instructs on something that is generally a given (Fee 1991, 139).

It is beyond the scope of this dissertation to do a detailed study of the ministry gifts, only for some general notes. Leadership in NT was accomplished on two levels–local leadership and itinerant leadership. When the apostle had founded a church, he had authority in that church. When he moved on, the local leadership was placed in the hands of the elders. Fee comments:

Since the earliest congregations grew out of Judaism, the (chiefly lay) elders of the Jewish synagogues almost certainly served as the model for the early Christian communities (Fee 1991, 139).

When Paul had founded the church in Corinth, the church looked to him for guidance and help. He exercised spiritual authority in the church. He strongly opposed other apostles who tried to influence “his” churches (2 Cor 10:12-18). When problems or special challenges occurred in the churches in which Paul exercised apostolic authority, he sent his representatives to work on his behalf (1 Tim 5:17-22; 2 Tim 2:2; Tit 5).

The ministry of a teacher or a prophet could either be local or itinerant. The local teaching ministry was taken care of by the elders. An example of an itinerant teaching ministry is Apollos. The prophets mostly carried out a traveling ministry. The evangelist preached the gospel on new places and cooperated with the apostles when a church was founded (Acts 8:14-17).

When discussing the independence of the local church from outside authorities, Fee comments:

Because of the authority vested in the apostle as founder of churches – either by the apostle himself or as the case of Epaphras one of the apostle’s co-workers – there does not seem to be any other outside authority for the local churches. That is, apostles apparently did not assume authority in churches they had not founded. 66

Paul’s considerably more restrained approach to the church in Rome in contrast to his other letters serves as evidence.

Moreover, even though there is a form of collegiality among the “apostles” and the “elders”, Paul at least did not consider any one of them to have authority over him, although he felt a kind of urgency that they all were in this thing together. Thus, there appears to have been a kind of loose plurality at the top level, with recognition of each other’s spheres and ministries as given by God (Gal 2:6-10).

Apart from the authority of the apostles over the churches they had founded, there seems to be very little interest in the question of “authority” at the local level. To be sure, the people are directed to respect, and submit to, those who labor among them and served them in the Lord (1 Cor 16:16; Hebr 13:17). But the interest is not in their authority as such, bur in their role as those who care for others (Fee 1991, 140).

Fee concludes his discussion about leadership structures with a timely warning:

As to structures themselves, it is my guess that the model that emerged was the result of transference of roles, in which there arose at the local level a more permanent, single leader, but now based on the model of the itinerant apostle. This bothers me none, as long as the model of a single pastor wielding great authority in the local church is not argued for as something biblical in itself. The danger with this model, of course, is that it tends to focus both authority and ministry in the hands of one or a few persons, who cannot possibly be so gifted as to fill all the needs of the local community. Furthermore, leadership, especially of the more visible kind, can be heady business. For me the great problem with single leadership is its threefold tendency to pride of place, love of authority, and lack of accountability. Whatever else, leadership in the church needs forms that will minimize these tendencies and maximize servant hood (Fee 1991, 142-143).

This author would conclude that we in the Bible do not find a ready developed model for a leadership structure in the Church. We find principles and we find different practices. When we apply the Biblical principles that Christ calls and equips the leaders, and each one is serving according to the ministry that is given to each one respecting and teaming together with the others – the implementation of the principles can vary from time to time and from church to church. But the life flowing in the structures would be the same. The ideal leadership model is the one where the apostle or the pastor has the prime responsibility working together with the other leadership gifts complementing each 67

other. This model can be called Body Leadership since the same principles can be found in the way the human body functions.

The Leadership Factor – A Description of the Hypothesis

The hypothesis of this thesis concerns leadership and church planting and has two parts. By investigating church planting projects in Norway through a survey performed on a sample number of churches planted in the given period, the hypothesis is tested.

H1: Training, structure and function as success factor.

A well trained, well structured and well functioning kind of leadership is one of the most important factors of success when planting a new church.

H2: The Leader’s personality type as a qualifying factor.

Leaders with certain personality types will be more fitted as church planters than leaders with other personality types.

The ministry project of this dissertation focuses on the leadership factor in church planting. There are also other important factors that are not analyzed because they are beyond the scope of the project. When studying the Bible and looking back on my experience and other pastors and leaders, it is my belief that the Leadership Factor is the most important single factor of success in a church planting project. But since the survey exclude these factors; the hypothesis has to say that leadership is an important factor, not the most important factor.

The elements in the hypothesis H1 are defined in the following way:

Well Trained

This part of the survey focuses on the general question of education for persons entering into the ministry as well as the church planting specific training of the leaders. A 68

training program for church planters needs to develop the leader and his or her ability to lead others. A mere theoretical approach will not do this. In addition to the classroom – based teaching, the emerging leader should have the chance to be involved in church planting where he can see how others do it.

In the personal development part of the training, character building, charismatic gifting, leadership qualifications and an awareness of God’s calling on the person’s life should be in focus.

Well Structured

When measuring the structure of the leadership, the following dimensions will be the focus of the project: (1) the formal and informal training and education of the leaders and their mentor relations (if any), (2) the internal and external structure of leadership.

The leadership model that is best suited when planting a new church is the one that is based on what the Bible teaches concerning the spiritual offices/spiritual gifts, and how these shall function in the Body of Christ. Different members have different equipment and functions. Few other issues have caused so much discussion, strife and church splits in history as the question of church government. This author does not think that any form of church government per se can guarantee that the leadership has a biblical standard. Leadership is rooted in personal character qualities and carried out in a framework of structural and intra-personal factors. If these factors are of poor quality, no model of church government can remedy the flaws.

Some leadership models will look for charismatic gifts and spiritual qualifications using the New Testament practice as the ideal. Other models will be of a more institutional flavor, stressing the need for denominational education and ordination. Some 69

will develop a flat level leadership structure in which the congregation participates in decision making in a democratic way. Others would claim that there is only one leader in the church – the pastor. All the others should help him fulfilling his vision.

Some would say that the best leadership model is what could be called Body Leadership based upon the Bible’s teaching about the spiritual offices and the spiritual gifts (Eph 4:11; 1 Cor 12:28-30; Rom12:3-8 et al). Christ as the head of the Church calls and equips the persons He will set in leadership positions. The different leaders execute their leadership with different level of authority. This model in its biblical perspective is developed earlier in this chapter.

The leadership network is another dimension in a well-structured leadership. A leader should always develop relations with other leaders and be part of a leadership network. Some relations with other leaders will be on a peer-to-peer basis. In an open, honest and transparent relationship with fellow servants the leader get invaluable support, correction, input and help to handle leadership challenges. Other relations will be with older, more experienced leaders in a type of mentoring relationship. To have a mentor should be a life long experience for a leader. Even when the leader himself has become a mentor of others he himself needs to be mentored. This type of networking and mentoring relationships is a New Testament pattern (Acts 11:11; 15:2ff; 16:1-3; 2 Tim 3:10-11).

A leadership network could be inside of a denomination or between leaders of independent churches or denominations. A network based on denominational membership or other formal factors will be of limited use. For a relationship between leaders to function as intended, it must develop between leaders of same heart and same 70

vision. Therefore no denominational barriers or church boarders should hinder close network relations to develop between leaders. The whole body of Christ will benefit from this. Leaders in a church-planting situation need support, help, correction and advice. Through this leadership network they will have access to invaluable recourses of wisdom and knowledge. Prime New Testament examples are the Paul – Timothy and the Paul – Titus relation.

The ideal situation is that the new church is planted as an outreach from an existing church or denomination where this relationship between leaders already exists. This was the case when Paul planted the new churches (Acts 14:26-28). When planting an independent church without this relation to a denomination or existing church, the leaders in the new church should get in touch with other leaders seeking to develop a helpful relationship. To plant an independent church in cases in which the leaders themselves are also independent is a risky endeavor and should be strongly dissuaded. Planting a church should not be used as a possibility for a leader or for leaders to realize their fleshly ambitions or prove their ability to succeed without any help from others. I have seen enough new churches being planted by leaders cultivating their independence and self-reliance in a way that led the newborn church into doctrinal delusion, authoritarian misuse, economic disorder, moral scandals or total havoc. An open, sound and honest relationship with other leaders could have prevented this.

Well Functioning

When trying to identify a well functioning leadership for church planting, the survey focuses on some important factors: The divine initiative, the leader’s character, 71

leadership style, the leader’s gifting, the leader’s accountability and how the leaders handle conflicts.

An awareness of the divine initiative is essential for a Christian leader. When tough times come, mere will power or personal strength will not take us through. A sense of divine destiny and appointment will. When the leader is attacked, we can depend on God to defend us and not be involved in carnal strife. When we do not know the answer to challenges, we know that He who called us will give the wisdom. When uncertainty concerning the future and which way to choose threatens to stop us, we can depend on God’s guidance. When God takes the initiative, He will supply the resources necessary to complete the mission.

A well functioning leader will have the right leadership style. The Bible mentions some leaders having a way of leading that will never produce healthy new churches. John is warning of Diotrephes who want to have the preeminence (3 Jn 9). That kind of leader will never produce growth and well-being. In the midst of people seeking their own, Paul found a teachable disciple with a heart devoted to serve others (Phil 2:19-22). Timothy had the right heart to develop a good leadership style.

Leaders create what they are. What they say and do is important, but the most important thing is what they are. And what the leaders are flows out from the heart of their character. This is one of the reasons why inexperienced persons and spiritual children should not be given leadership positions in the church (1 Tim 3:6) Serving under the mentorship of a mature Christian leader is ideal. Then the amount of responsibility can be given as the character of the coming leader is tested and formed. 72

To be a leader in the church is to do Kingdom work. The leader needs to be equipped accordingly. In addition the education and personal character, the leader need to receive the gifts and anointing from the Holy Spirit that is necessary for doing the work of the ministry (Acts 1:8). To do Kingdom work in one’s own strength is a waste of time and effort. To do Kingdom work under the anointing of the Holy Spirit equipped with gifts following the service God has called the leader into, is the most meaningful and satisfying thing a person could devote his life to.

The leaders’ accountability is an important element in a well functioning leadership. A leader must be a part of a team and he must dare to be transparent to those around him. When the leader does something wrong or execute poor judgment, he or she must invite trusted people to correct. A leader must have a teachable mind even when what he or she hears hurts (Prov.27:6). A leader should be accountable towards his fellow leaders or mentor, knowing that the leader himself is not the final authority. God is. And God speaks into the leader’s life through other people.

Success

To measure success is not easy. The standard for success differs from person to person, from group to group and from culture to culture. To measure success in church planting should be a lot easier.

A church that is successfully planted is easily identifiable. The new congregation is living in peace and love, having God’s presence in their midst, experiencing personal and numerical growth, and they seek to serve and to win people for Christ (Acts 2:44-47, 9:31; 1 Cor 14:26). 73

In this ministry survey the success factors is linked to growth in membership, assimilation of new members, member mobilization and membership turnover and service based on Spiritual gifts.

The methodology used to test hypothesis H2 is described in chapter four

 

 

Theory, Hypothesis and model – H1

The theoretical discussion behind the following model is given in chapter 3. The model of hypothesis H1 is presented in figure 2.

74 75

Figure 2. The Model – Hypotheses H1

The theoretical discussion and the related hypothesis are organized in accordance with figure 4.1. In the following subsections, the internal coherence between the church planting leaders’ training, structure and function is discussed. Next the effect of the leaders’ training, structure and function on the church planting is described individually and as a unit. The effect of external resources and networking of the leaders is discussed. Lastly the coherence between internal growth and external growth is described.

Theoretical definitions

Church Planter: The church planter in this model is a Christian leader or a group of Christian leaders who took responsibility to plant a new church and who participated in this research survey.

Leadership training: Leadership training is the formal and informal education and training that the leaders have prior to entering into the church planting project. Possible mentor relations are also included. 76

Leadership structure: Leadership structure is the internal structure of the leadership and possible external relations.

Leadership function: Leadership function is how leaders are chosen in the new church. Elements in this process are the need for a divine calling, vote of confidence, spiritual gifts, talents, personal maturity and ability to resolve conflicts.

External resources: The external resources are assistance and support given by a network or denomination to the leaders. This assistance could be material through economic or human resources or immaterial through advice and follow-up.

Church planted: The church planted is the newly planted churches taking part in this survey.

Internal growth: Internal growth is the spiritual health of the church and its members.

External growth: External growth in this study is divided into numerical growth and outreach. Numerical growth is the number of nominal members and number of actual members/church attendees. In the statistical analysis the median of these two figures was used. Outreach is the outward directed ministry of the church such as evangelization, church planting and missions

 

The Church Planter

This paragraph presents the hypothesis connected to the preparation and ministry of the church planter and its effect on the church that is planted. Before a leader begins the great and difficult task of planting a new church, the person needs preparation. This preparation has to do with the leader’s personality – his or her maturity as a person and as a Christian. It also has to do with his or her formal and informal training. The way the leadership is organized within the church is of crucial importance. In this study this attribute is called “structure”. It is of vital importance that the leadership functions in the right way. The three attributes of the church planter – training, structure and function each has a separate influence on the outcome of the church planting effort.