Do CPM’s (Church Planting Movements) help or hinder DMM’s (Disciple Making Movements)?
Jesus said, “Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.” Matthew 28:19,20
Jesus never said to “go make churches.”
I think, that for the most part, that those who have a desire to plant churches and those that have a desire to make disciples, have a genuine conviction to see the Kingdom of God expand, to see culture transformed, and see many come to Christ. But, what if one of them were to inadvertently get in the way of the other or even hinder the other?
The Apostles or first disciples of Jesus did not start with a building or a gathering. Was that was a hindrance or a help? What do you think? The Apostles and first disciples of Christ did begin with evangelism. They planted themselves and the Gospel into communities and made disciples from which gatherings were formed. The task remained the same throughout the New Testament era, namely to “make disciples.” In fact, I fail to see anywhere in the New Testament where they had a desire to multiply churches in the sense of location based institutions.
If one of these two camps had a propensity to get in the other’s way, I believe it would have to be the church planters. Am I wrong?
I think Church Planting Movements hinder Disciple Making Movements. Do you?
Missionary in the Andes Mountains Cloud Forest Region of Ecuador. My last name, "Labrador," is the word that's used for "Vine Worker" in the Spanish Bible, and it's OK with me. 
Carlos on Leading Edge Missiology and Ecclesiology?
Eli on Leading Edge Missiology and Ecclesiology?
They are virtually the same thing. You can’t truly make disciples without also starting churches. The local church is what disciples are baptized into in the name of the Father, Son, and Spirit. Then the learning community or body is the best place for the disciple to be taught to obey everything Jesus commanded.
Nathan,
Thanks for the comment. One question:
Are we really baptized into “the local body?” ~ “For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body—Jews or Greeks, slaves or free—and all were made to drink of one Spirit.” 1 Corinthians 12:13
I think your wording, “You can’t truly make disciples without also starting churches,” is quite appropriate. But a point of clarification:
You’re not saying that we must start churches in order to make disciples, are you?
Great follow up question Miguel. Thanks for the opportunity to clarify. No, I’m not saying we must start churches in order to make disciples. However, a growing and maturing disciple who is disconnected from the family of God / the Body of Christ / the Bride / etc. isn’t actually growing or maturing.
So, “church planters” like myself are simply beginning with the end in mind. We recognize that the best thing for new disciples is to baptize them and teach them in the context of the local church. I’m sad to say that there are many others who identify themselves as church planters and they are simply doing marketing and scooping up already believers and launching a big worship gathering and hope a few disciples are made along the way. Worse, there are some who start a church because there was a big disagreement in their church that caused a split and now there are two churches.
Regardless of the method, I believe God can and does use those forms of “church planting” as well, but a better approach is when someone who is committed to making disciples also carefully considers some long range planning. After all, if you make disciples then they will make disciples, right? So, when there are several disciples in an area, they become the assembly.
As far as baptism is concerned, we are baptized into the church but except for a couple of occasions the use of “church” in the NT is referring to a local expression of the church. So, yes, we identify with Christ in baptism and with His Body but where it really plays itself out is on the local level. I don’t submit to the elders of a church in Kansas, I submit to the elders of my local church. I can’t be held accountable or serve or gather with members of a church in Ecuador, but I can in NYC.
My point here was to say that the local church is the agent that does the actual baptism yet that baptism then identifies us with the Church. Hope that makes more sense.
When you say “baptism”, do you mean water baptism? If so, where in the NT do you see that we are “baptized into the church” through water baptism?
Water baptism is being identified (the original greek meaning of “baptisma”), and joining with Christ, in His death and then resurrection as we put to death the old nature and rise with Him in newness of life.
Or have I misunderstood?
They shouldn’t. At the same time, we aren’t called to plant churches (and I teach church planting at a seminary). We are called to make disciples. But if we are truly making disciples, truly identifying people in Christ and with his people, the natural result will be the proliferation of new churches.
Church planters who have a “gather believers” as opposed to a “make disciples” mindset will always be rowing upstream. I’m not sure that we can start true church planting movements. True church planting movements are messy and denominational and plans to produce new churches on some type of schedule are probably doomed to be more energy than Spirit led. The Spirit of God will produce church planting movements when the people of God get serious about making disciples of the nations.
Marty,
I’ve been accused of being silly and semantical for raising this issue, but I find your use of the word “mindset” accurate.
Both corporate and individual mindsets have driven church planting movements in a multitude of directions. I think though, that the general tendency is to to build first and ask questions later.
Hey Miguel,
I generally agree with a lot of what you’ve said. But I think in this case it depends on one’s definition of what a CPM is.
For us at MUP (and others who are similar to us), a CPM would (probably, as I understand your definition) be pretty much the SAME as a DMM.
I note in passing that the disciples DID begin with a gathering – the gathering in the upper room. The believers at Pentecost were added to the community. And certainly other “gatherings” (=churches, generally meeting in homes) were planted by the Apostles in other cities (thus the folks that Paul wrote his letters to).
Anyway a CPM begins with making and multiplying disciples. The disciples thus made gather for the purpose of community, fellowship, corporate worship, praying for each other, the “one anothers” of Scripture. You can’t be a disciple in the church without gathering with other believers. (“Forsake not the fellowshipping together” or however that goes.)
A CPM isn’t about multiplying “churches” (e.g. physical locations, buildings, etc) but rather about disciples who make disciples who make disciples. (At least, our understanding and interpretation of a CPM is that way, and that’s what we teach others to do. That’s the training being held next week here in Dallas for example.)
Justin, thanks for your thoughts.
I can completely agree with your definition of a CPM ~ “Disciples who make disciples who make disciples.”
In the original post, I did say that, “I fail to see anywhere in the New Testament where they had a desire to multiply churches in the sense of location based institutions.”
Practically speaking though, and in my experience, I have seen and sensed far too many that would rather plant a flag first and then branch out to make disciples. I think the natural order of things is to make disciples and then facilitate, if necessary the gathering of those disciples.
Perhaps, there are other definitions of CPM’s out there that are similar to yours, but I not seen demonstrated in the “real world” all that often. The propensity is to lay brick and mortar first and the Gospel second.
I think if you look at any effort to plant churches using brick-and-mortar you would see they fail what is for me (and those like me) the primary test of a CPM – rapid, multiplying reproduction of disciples!
I find it interesting that not only are there plenty of disciples that do not attend church, but there are plenty of church goers that are not disciples! Discipleship has to be emphasized first. Too often the emphasis is on joining.
Jim, thanks for your comment.
I’m inclined to agree with your statement, “Discipleship has to be emphasized first.” How would you respond the argument which says, “but you need a place and a people to launch a DMM?”
Only when we assume the former is possible without the latter. When we realize the former is only possible through the latter things work out as they should.
I have seen church planters get so focused on churches that they cease to effectively make disciples, if they ever effectively made disciples.
I have also seen disciple makers who were so focused on disciples that they never effectively assembled them together consistently over time and therefore did not effectively disciple them into a church.
Both sides have pitfalls to be aware of, but if you’re not committed to making New Testament disciples, to seeing a disciple making movement, you won’t achieve a church planting movement either.
I wrote an article entitled “Our Mission” which looks at the mission Jesus gave us. Many people think the task is global evangelization. I find the task to be global disciple making. Here’s a link to the article, if you are interested. http://rockymeadow.files.wordpress.com/2010/09/our_mission.pdf
Blessings!
To indicate that a church planter would get in the way of a disciple maker is to misunderstand the nature of the church in general – the local church is the expression of the disciples of Jesus in a given locale. If anything, the disciple maker who fails to operate within the Biblical boundaries of the local church, has his own mission outside of the Bride of Christ, and is unsubmitted to God’s delegated authority, gets in the way of the Church that Jesus Himself is building.
Brent, thanks for the first time comment.
I think the general assumption in both church planting and disciple making is that there are no churches or disciples in the areas that we wish to effect these actions. If that is true, it’s impossible be be operating within the boundaries of a local church where none exist. If that means operating within the boundaries of a distant local church, then I might be inclined to agree with you.
Curious though, what are the “biblical boundaries” of the local church?
Well this depends upon how your are defining church planting….if you are planting a church building and your aim is to plant more and more buildings then you are not helping anyone.
However if you are making desiples, there are biblical example of the apostles holding meetings with the disciples they had made…so whether this is a building…in a field, on a river bank or in caravan…if you are holding a meeting in the name of Christ you are having ‘church’.
Naturally the more decile you get it becomes more convienient to move to a more solid meeting place for reasons such as weather or meeting size.
As these desiples grow in faith, they should go out and make their own disciples. Logically as people are moving out new meetings should begin to spring up in new places which may naturally evolve into a new ‘church building’ which may be affiliated with the first.
However theoretically even with the new did not evolve in to a traditional church…it could be a house church….but theoretically stil a church plant.
If the aim is to create space for people to grow and continue to be discipled …I don’t see an issue. If you aim is to create more chUrches for numbers sake….don’t bother.
cause to wonder for where “church planting” could be coming from? Are we simply missing the non-corporate context of Paul’s “planted” from I Corinthians 3? Do church buildings named after various saints infuse some to be about planting churches? It’s been suggested before, Paul of Tarsus did plant the Word in many places, though never a church.
the “M” is where the conflict runs deepest, such as the common assumption…
Movement = Holy Spirit [not true]
the healthiest ekklesia today boast no church planter, no “movement” status/affiliation; no armory of acronyms.
Miguel, I think we missed what Jesus was getting at. He didnt tell us to plant churches or make disciples the way the church has done both thru the centuries. We’ve reduced his macro commands to make disciples down to a system of control and abuse, while we’ve elevated his micro commands of love and caring for one another to programs and movements. Once we started that tradition, it became a way of thinking and expectations that God would work that way. He’s such a gentleman that He will work with us even when we do His work for Him and do it according to our understanding.
It doesnt change the fact though that He has His way, and the proof that we know His way is that we dont get off track taking the credit, thinking its us that is getting things done, building an industrial religous complex and treating our brothers like they are bastard children of our Fathers concubine.
I think Jim Wright got closest to what the Lord was saying. We know that baptism is not a means to salvation, rather its a testimony of it, with of course incredible spiritual significance. Why would God seem to make baptism the chief objective then, when we have to translate it into disicpleship making and church planting. Its not covert language for make disciples or plant churches, as we have translated it to mean.
It is however, for those who’s minds are not quite renewed to think of the kingdom as a spiritual kingdom, mystical language, instructing us to immerse ourselves and one another,and new converts in knowing Him in each of the unique attributes and character qualities of the Godhead. Quite simply, and too simply for the wise and worldly, the name of the Father, Son and Spirit is The Lord Jesus Christ. He knew we would think that we knew Him, like the 12 did, but he also knew,as they later found out that in His resurrection, He reveals Himself to those who have eyes to see, and thru the breaking of bread with them. These are patterns of mystery to the natural mind.
He showed us with his life and the record of the early church that living daily lives of relational discipleship, helped by the gift ministers and underwritten by his indwelling spirit is the defacto baptism in the name of the F, S and S. He is the fullness of the Godhead. He is who we are rooted and grounded in, and growing up into His likeness. The F, S and S are Him, and each person of the Godhead have attributes we need to be immersed in to know Christ completely.
Knowing Him is the same wording used to describe sexual intimacy between husband and wife.
We dont know Him corporately that way, which is His ultimate objective, but we stop short, being content to know Him intimately as individuals or our little ( or mega) church.
Our love of control, programs and our capacity to usurp the headship of Christ at every level of life has fooled us into believing that its our work to make disciples and plant churches. They are not our work. They are the results of the work, which Jesus said is to trust Him.
If we would expend half the time and energy in doing daily what He told us regarding our responsibility for discipling our children, loving our wives, caring for our own poor, immersing our own brethren in the knowledge of F, S and S, caring for the widow and orphans that fill our churches et al, we would not have time to argue, divide and craft theology as to why that is necessary.
And to come back to Jims question about water baptism, and maybe at the same time to start a parallel discussion that relates to what Jesus said about baptism into ‘the name’, check out how disobedient all the disciples were in Acts when they baptized new believers in the name of The Lord Jesus Christ, and not F, S and S. Not one instance of them obeying the supposed command to baptize in the name of F, S and S.
They got it.
Water baptism into Christ, in His name, which is the Lord Jesus Christ, by which we are commanded to do all things, is the outward sign of all of His work in and among us, daily, generation-ally and forever.
Ive said it many times before that we should just quit trying to prove we know what we are doing and get down together at His feet, and learn from Him. We have messed up His house so bad trying to fix the mess each preceding generation of well intention-ed leaders made. For me, the buck stops here.
I’ve decided to put my gifts and skills on the altar, while I work, and ask Him to transform me and mine like He did with the first disciples. We need to be endued with power from on high, and my sense is that He is waiting for us to find the nearest upper room and get in there and wait for Him.
Sure, keep working if He tells you to, but dont make the mistake of expecting our feeble work to produce the kingdom we all greatly desire. He will not give His glory to another.
Sorry for the length. Im late to leave and shot from the hip without re reading.
blessings all
Greg
Sometimes it becomes hard to understand what some western preachers refer to as Church planting. To some of us in Africa: Church Planting is when a believer Christ share the Gospel of Christ plus his\ her own transformed life, with the non-believers. The few who believe the massage first, begin to assemble in one place and from there; Personal and group discipleship would begin. However, discipleship could become a challenge when you get many more converts at the same time. Therefore: to me; Church planting and discipleship goes and should go together. After all, Christians are students of Gods word
for ever. For sure; discipleship should be the goal or every Church planting agent. But still you can’t disciple “nothing” You have to have the believers first, because Jesus’ command was disciple believers.
We are planting “discipleship” groups in the Southern Andes in Ecuador. Would love to connect with you by email.
Bob Burton