Where God is concerned, the ends are directly related to the means – thus Jesus did not accept Satan’s invitations to accomplish his goal rapidly, but chose the way of the cross as opposed to making a spectacle of himself by way of miracles. Jesus told folks to keep the ways in which God healed them a secret and purposefully stayed out of the spotlight when others tried to usher him in. These are certainly not ways to ensure the greatest and fastest multiplication of followers, but are the ways of Jesus nonetheless.

I think you misunderstood me at least in part. First, we do find Jesus going to Matthew and Zaccheus and to the rich young ruler encouraging them to use their resources to help the poor and needy and to connect with those shunned by the Pharisees. In no way did he objectify them and I in no way wish to objectify poeple. Just the opposite. I want to help people see themselves as part of a what God is doing and help them realize that. My primary point wasn’t to be mercernary, but in the interest of spreading the Gospel most rapidly — raising laborers and planting churches. And I’m not aiming at the “cool and popular” but the poor and needy, whether they live in the suburbs or not and reaching as many of them and discipling as many of them as possible. God bless those called to go to central cities or Outer Mongolia or to learn new languages. I personally feel compelled on a personal level and from a strategic point of view to focus on the suburbs and on rural areas because that’s where I come from and where believe I can help see the greatest and fastest multiplication take place. Part of my comment had more to do with a neglect or even condemnation of the suburbs by many in ministry.

That being said, Jesus did not do this. We no where find him going to the materially blessed in order to try and make use of their resources. First, because this would be to objectify these people – their worth is found in what they have to offer. Second, it is an afront to the very nature of the Kingdom of God which always emerges and pushes forth from a posture of humbleness, meekness, and marginality.

Yes, financial resources ought to be stewarded well and leveraged to support Kingdom enterprises, but there is more to the equation. It is so very easy to let affluent suburbans feel like they are doing Kingdom work by throwing money and other resources at stuff. We need to be really careful here that the message of the gospel is always communicated primarily incarnationally.

Are people in suburban contexts broken and hurting, you betcha. For that reason alone the church ought to be there helping people to experience the full weight of the good news, but not because it is a good recruiting ground. This is the same mentality I chaffed against in high school when campus groups would try and engage the cool and popular kids because if they got converted everyone would follow suit. This is worldly, not Kingdom wisdom.

I hope that makes sense and that I am not coming across terse. I don’t mean it that way – just want to be sure we are engaging areas and people for faithful reasons and not merely strategic ones.

In your first comment, I think you touched on one aspect of suburbia that we overlook. We tend to be judgmental of suburbia for its materialism, isolationism, etc. But it’s also a great recruiting ground for the Gospel, which is perhaps one reason why so many mega churches are located there.

For many of the reasons mentioned above, people are no less hungry for the Gospel, and maybe more so, than those in the cities where poverty and crime and are easilty seen. But there’s a lot of emptiness in the suburbs and so people are reaching out. And Tom Nebel in “Big Dreams in Small Places” talks about how it’s easier to start churches in the suburbs and rural areas because you tend to have smaller communities. This means it’s easier to multiply churches and and to send laborers into cities, other countries and so on. And because of the suburbs’ wealth, a suburban church with a missional mindset is more likely and better able to assist churches and missions in poorer cities and countries.

In some ways, I see church planters and other “movements” disdaining the suburbs. Instead of turning up our noses at suburbia, we should see it as white for harvest and a strategy for rapid multiplication of churches and laborers.

Some thoughts anyway.

thanks for your thoughts man…

that’s one thought…

First off, thanks for your blog and your work. As a newly suburban-ite (powell, Oh) I’ve beginning to grow more and more sad with all the Lexus-owning, mansion having, people that surround me.

Second, I think the drawbacks of suburbia are obvious.

Third, I’m not sure what parts of the nature of the suburbs line up with the Gospel.

But that doesn’t mean we don’t keep on loving and living there…

Adam

To the extent that parents are more involved in the lives of their kids in suburban America, this is good news.

To the extent that large suburban homes are used for hospitality, this is good news.

To the extent that suburbs add to the economic infrastructure of of cities which are both urban and suburban, this is good news.

To the extent that suburbs feature different kinds of public space for all to potentially make use of, this is good news.

Just a of my thoughts.