Missional Loft

Resources for Integrating Faith, Life & Mission

Apathetic Christians, Joining Mission of God

Seven Reasons Christians are Unconcerned About Missional Theology and Missional History

Introduction

In an era where the church grapples with declining attendance, cultural irrelevance, and internal divisions, missional theology—rooted in the concept of missio Dei, or the “mission of God”—offers a compelling framework for renewal. This theology, popularized after the 1952 Willingen Conference, reframes mission not as a church program but as God’s Trinitarian initiative to redeem creation, inviting believers to participate actively (Bosch 1991). Drawing from biblical narratives like the Abrahamic Covenant (Genesis 12:1–3) and the Great Commission (Matthew 28:19–20), it emphasizes holistic engagement: proclaiming the gospel through words and deeds amid everyday contexts, from neighborhoods to global crises. Yet, despite its biblical depth and historical resonance—from early church apologetics to Paul’s contextual flexibility—many Christians remain unconcerned, viewing it as abstract or unnecessary. This disinterest stems from entrenched barriers like institutional inertia, theological misconceptions, and cultural distractions, in direct contrast to the missio Dei‘s vibrancy integrated with themes of divine providence, spiritual warfare, and covenantal blueprints. Research reveals a stark reality: evangelical churches often prioritize maintenance over mission, leading to stagnation (Pikkert 2017). Addressing these seven reasons uncovers pathways for revival, urging the 21st century church to reclaim its sent identity. By exploring these, we not only diagnose apathy but ignite a call to embody God’s reconciling work, fostering communities that echo His eternal mission in fractured worlds. This reflection equips readers with scriptural, historical, and scholarly insights for transformative action.

 

1. Entrenched Attractional Church Models

Many Christians remain unconcerned with missional theology because traditional attractional models—where the church focuses on drawing people in through programs, events, and services—have become deeply ingrained, fostering a consumerist mindset that prioritizes comfort over outward engagement. As highlighted in the Missional Loft article on Paul’s missional flexibility, the early church adapted the gospel to diverse contexts (1 Corinthians 9:19–23), but modern Western churches often invert this, expecting the world to conform to their structures rather than the church incarnating the gospel locally. This inward focus stems from a post-Christendom hangover, where churches assume cultural dominance and invest resources in polished Sunday experiences to “attract” seekers, sidelining the missio Dei’s call to sentness (John 20:21). Evangelicals, in particular, critique this as a dilution of evangelism, yet perpetuate it through seeker-sensitive strategies that yield shallow commitments (Pikkert 2017). The Loft’s exploration of early Christian apologetics underscores how the first believers defended faith missionally amid persecution (Acts 17:22–31), not by insulating but infiltrating culture. However, fear of irrelevance traps churches in maintenance mode, ignoring historical precedents like the Abrahamic Covenant’s blueprint for blessing nations (Genesis 12:1–3). Scholarly analysis reveals this as a barrier to adoption, with surveys showing 70% of U.S. evangelicals viewing church as a “weekly event” rather than a missional community (Barna Group 2019). Consequently, missio Dei feels extraneous, as leaders equate numerical growth with faithfulness, overlooking Jesus’ model of scattering disciples into harvest fields (Matthew 9:37–38). This complacency erodes theological depth, reducing history to anecdotes while neglecting providence’s unfolding in Emmaus-like encounters (Luke 24:13–35). To counter this, churches must pivot to relational immersion, as in the divine economy’s stewardship (Ephesians 1:9–10), reclaiming history’s lessons from Bosch’s paradigm shifts. Without such reckoning, unconcern persists, stunting kingdom advance amid urbanization’s cries. Ultimately, attractional inertia betrays the Trinitarian sending—Father, Son, Spirit, church—that defines missio Dei, calling believers to risk vulnerability for redemptive witness. Embracing this demands deconstructing silos, fostering hybrid models blending worship with outreach, and discipling laity as everyday missionaries. Historical missional movements according to Hunter’s The Celtic Way of Evangelism, How Christianity Can Reach the West . . .Again, like the Celtic church’s incarnational villages, model this hybridity, proving adaptation yields fruitfulness. As Guder argues in Missional Church (1998), the church’s essence is missional or it ceases to be church. Thus, unconcern here is not mere oversight but theological amnesia, urging a return to God’s cosmic oikos for holistic healing as Christian believers attend God’s oikonomia– His divine economy.

 

2. Misconceptions of Missio Dei as Liberal Social Gospel

A pervasive misconception portrays missional theology as a veiled liberal social gospel, prioritizing activism over evangelism, which alienates conservative Christians wary of diluting doctrinal purity. The Loft article on original sin and the believer’s role counters this by linking sin’s fractures to God’s redemptive mission (Romans 5:12), yet evangelicals often conflate missio Dei‘s holism with secular progressivism, fearing it supplants conversion with cultural accommodation (Pikkert 2017). Rooted in 1960s ecumenical shifts at Uppsala, where mission veered toward humanization without explicit Christology, this critique gained traction among evangelicals like John Stott, who prioritized verbal proclamation (Lausanne Covenant 1974). However, the Loft’s divine echoes piece reveals God’s Word as embodied proclamation (John 1:14), balancing rhema and logos for transformative witness, not mere benevolence. Biblical history debunks this: prophets like Isaiah fused justice with gospel (Isaiah 58:6–7), while Jesus healed and preached seamlessly (Luke 4:18–19). Yet, post-WWII reactions to colonialism bred suspicion, with missio Dei labeled “theological mischief” for de-emphasizing church agency (Engelsviken 2003). Journal studies show 55% of U.S. pastors view missional emphases as “too social,” correlating with stagnant outreach (LifeWay Research 2021). This unconcern ignores Paul’s flexibility in blessing Gentiles (Galatians 3:8), mistaking contextualization for compromise. As Wright critiques in The Mission of God (2006), such dualism severs creation care from salvation, echoing fall’s arrogation (Genesis 3:6). To bridge this, churches must reclaim integral mission, as in the Loft’s Abrahamic blueprint, where blessing nations demands ethical deeds (Micah 6:8). Historical precedents, like Wilberforce’s abolitionism fused with evangelism, affirm holism’s evangelical roots. Guder (2000) argues this misconception fosters passivity, urging seminaries to integrate social ethics with soteriology. Without correction, unconcern breeds isolationism, forfeiting missio Dei‘s cosmic scope (Colossians 1:20). Embracing it requires dialogues unpacking synergies, like the synergism in Wesleyan grace enabling active obedience (Philippians 2:12–13). The Loft’s spiritual warfare article warns temptation’s enslavement derails mission (Ephesians 6:12), paralleling this doctrinal snare. Thus, reframing missio Dei as Trinitarian fidelity—Father’s sending, Son’s incarnation, Spirit’s empowerment—dissipates fears, restoring urgency. Evangelicals must heed Bosch’s (1991) call for paradigm shifts, blending orthodoxy with orthopraxy for vibrant witness in pluralistic arenas.

 

3. Theological Illiteracy and Neglect of Trinitarian Foundations

Theological illiteracy undermines concern for missional theology, as many Christians lack grounding in Trinitarian doctrine, viewing missio Dei as esoteric rather than foundational to faith. The Loft’s omnipresence article grounds divine action in God’s relational presence (Psalm 139:7–8), yet surveys indicate 65% of evangelicals cannot articulate the Trinity’s missional implications (Barna Group 2020). Emerging from Willingen’s Trinitarian pivot, missio Dei posits mission as intra-Trinitarian sending (John 20:21), but biblical literacy gaps—exacerbated by sermon-lite pulpits—render it abstract. Historical amnesia compounds this: post-Constantine Christendom domesticated mission, sidelining patristic emphases like Irenaeus’ recapitulation through Christ’s obedience (Against Heresies). Journal analyses link low literacy to resistance, with ill-equipped laity dismissing missional history as “academic” (Missiology 2022). The Loft’s divine economy traces redemptive history via covenants (Genesis 12:1–3), but without such narratives, believers default to individualism, ignoring communal sentness (Acts 13:2–3). Wright (2006) critiques this as hermeneutical failure, severing Old Testament missiology from New. Evangelicals, per Pikkert (2017), fear Trinitarianism’s ecumenical taint, echoing 1970s schisms. Countering requires catechesis reclaiming providence’s Emmaus unfolding (Luke 24:25–27), as in the Loft’s road narrative. Guder (1998) advocates missional hermeneutics, teaching Scripture as God’s story. Barriers persist via youth programs prioritizing felt needs over doctrine, yielding generations adrift. Historical missional vanguards, like Moravians’ Trinitarian piety fueling global outreach, model vitality. As Bosch (1991) warns, illiteracy births ecclesial atrophy, urging pulpits to preach sending as Trinitarian essence (John 5:17). Embracing this demands resources like Franke’s Manifold and Minor (2019) for a plurality of theological witnesses. The Loft’s music metaphor hears missio Dei in everything (1 Chronicles 16:24), but deafened ears from illiteracy mute it. Thus, unconcern signals deeper famine (Amos 8:11), resolvable through immersive Bible studies fusing history with practice. Seminaries, bible teachers and pastoral sermonizers must prioritize equipping leaders for theological depth amid digital distractions. Ultimately, literacy revives concern, transforming passive pews into prophetic voices echoing God’s eternal symphony.

 

4. Institutional Inertia and Clergy-Laity Divide

Institutional inertia, coupled with a clergy-laity divide, stifles missional adoption, as hierarchical structures concentrate authority, discouraging congregational agency in God’s mission. The Loft’s Abrahamic blueprint empowers all believers as blessers (Genesis 12:2–3), yet 80% of church budgets fund staff and facilities, per denominational reports (Barna 2021), perpetuating passivity. Rooted in post-Reformation professionalization, this divide echoes critiques of ecclesiocentric missio Dei (Engelsviken 2003), where clergy monopolize “mission” via programs, alienating laity from historical precedents like Pentecost’s democratized sending (Acts 2:38–39). Paul’s co-laborers (Romans 16:3–5) model mutuality, but modern silos foster dependency, as Guder (1998) laments in Missional Church. Journal studies cite inertia as top barrier, with resistant vestries fearing disruption (Practical Theology 2020). The Loft’s Paul article urges flexibility (1 Corinthians 9:22), but bureaucratic red tape quashes innovation. Evangelicals, per Pikkert (2017), cling to this for control, ignoring spiritual warfare’s communal armor (Ephesians 6:10–18). Historical shifts, like Pietism’s lay revivals, bypassed hierarchies for fruitfulness. Bosch (1991) calls this “paradigm paralysis,” urging flattened structures. Unconcern thrives in echo chambers, neglecting Emmaus’ disciple-making (Luke 24:32). Reversal demands vocational theology, equipping all for marketplace mission (Colossians 3:23). Franke (2019) advocates polymorphic ecclesiology, diverse expressions honoring missio Dei. Barriers erode via coaching networks, fostering risk-taking. The Loft’s sin article counters enslavement with renewal (Titus 3:5), paralleling institutional bondage. Thus, inertia betrays priesthood of believers (1 Peter 2:9), resolvable through decentralized initiatives like house churches. Leadership pipelines must prioritize blending seminary-like instruction with experiential apprenticeships. Ultimately, dismantling divides unleashes laity, echoing Loft’s echoes for embodied Word (John 6:63), revitalizing concern amid stagnation.

 

5. Cultural Accommodation and Comfort Zone Resistance

Cultural accommodation lulls Christians into comfort, resisting missional theology’s call to prophetic tension with surrounding narratives. The Loft’s apologetics piece models defense amid pluralism (Acts 17:28), yet prosperity gospels domesticate missio Dei, equating blessing with ease (Deuteronomy 8:3). Amid affluence, 60% of evangelicals report no non-Christian friends (LifeWay 2019), per surveys, prioritizing assimilation over incarnation (John 1:14). Historical parallels: Constantinian compromise diluted witness, as Bosch (1991) traces. Wright (2006) critiques consumer Christianity warping covenants into self-help (Genesis 3:5). The Loft’s temptation narrative warns of worldly seduction (Luke 4:5–8), mirroring modern escapism. Pikkert (2017) links this to missio Dei missteps, fostering isolation. Unconcern blooms in bubbles, ignoring warfare’s vigilance (1 Peter 5:8). Counter via discomforting practices, like Loft’s Emmaus walking (Luke 24:15). Guder (1998) urges exile mindset, reclaiming history’s exilic faithfulness (Jeremiah 29:7). Barriers persist via media echo chambers, but missional cohorts build resilience. Franke (2019) calls for contextual humility, adapting without capitulation. Thus, accommodation forfeits saltiness (Matthew 5:13), reversible through immersion sabbaths. Theological instruction must train for cultural exegesis, echoing Paul’s Athens (Acts 17:22). The Loft’s music hears rhythm in chaos (Matthew 24:14), but comfort muffles. Reviving concern demands prophetic discomfort, embodying Loft’s divine action (Colossians 1:17) for kingdom irruption.

 

6. Fear of Failure and Risk Aversion in Uncertain Times

The pervasive fear of failure within contemporary faith communities significantly undermines their engagement in the missio Dei, the mission of God to reconcile and redeem the world. This fear often manifests as risk aversion, particularly in times of uncertainty, where the instinct to preserve institutional stability overshadows the call to bold, transformative action. The Loft’s providence article offers a compelling perspective, suggesting that the doubts expressed by the disciples on the road to Emmaus (Luke 24:21) were not dead-ends but opportunities for spiritual growth and renewed faith. Yet, as Barna’s 2022 research indicates, 75% of pastors grapple with anxiety amid declining church attendance and cultural relevance, a statistic that underscores the paralyzing effect of fear on missional endeavors. The post-COVID era has exacerbated this, with virtual platforms creating isolated communities that struggle to embody the collective resilience seen in the early church, such as when the apostles faced arrests yet persisted in their mission (Acts 5:40–42). David Bosch (1991) traces this risk aversion to Enlightenment-era illusions of control, which foster a desire for predictable outcomes over faithful obedience. Similarly, Christopher Wright (2006) connects this hesitancy to a lack of covenantal trust, as exemplified in Hebrews 11:1, where faith is defined as confidence in the unseen. Pikkert (2017) argues that embracing the missio Dei counters these fears, yet phobias about rejection in evangelism remain a significant barrier. The Loft’s emphasis on spiritual warfare equips believers with perseverance, drawing from James 1:2–4, which frames trials as opportunities for maturity. Guder’s (1998) call for experimental ecclesiology encourages churches to test innovative approaches without fear of failure, while the incarnation itself (Philippians 2:7) models God’s willingness to embrace vulnerability. By adopting safe-fail prototypes, as Paul’s adaptability suggests (1 Corinthians 9:22), and embracing the uncertainties of plurality, as Franke (2019) advocates, churches can overcome litigious cultural barriers. Faith communities that model trust (Proverbs 3:5–6) and implement debrief rituals to process failures can reverse this betrayal of their sentness (John 20:21). Leadership must normalize narratives of failure, drawing inspiration from historical martyrs and the call to hear the gospel afresh in redemptive care (Romans 10:17), fostering risk covenants that embolden missional courage.

 

7. Disconnect from Historical Missional Precedents

The disconnect from historical missional precedents fosters a lack of concern, as modern believers often see missional theology as a passing trend, overlooking apostolic practices of contextualizing the gospel. The Loft’s apologetics initiative revives early defenses (1 Peter 3:15), but biblical illiteracy, as warned in 2 Timothy 3:16, cuts off access to theological roots. Engelsviken (2003) critiques this “missio Dei amnesia,” while Bosch (1991) traces the evolution of missional paradigms. Wright (2006) calls for a missional hermeneutic to reconnect Scripture with God’s mission, and Pikkert (2017) notes evangelical blind spots. God’s covenant connects Abraham to Revelation 7:9, grounding mission in history. Guder (1998) urges immersion in this legacy to avoid reinventing mission, neglecting Pentecost’s Spirit-driven missiology (Acts 2:4). Timelines of God’s economy (Ephesians 1:10) and narrative integration, as Franke (2019) suggests, counter this. Youth curricula often prioritize novelty, but heritage pilgrimages can bridge this gap, restoring identity (Galatians 3:29) through storytelling and historicized education, like all encompassing music (Psalm 96:3), to fuel missional fidelity.

This historical disconnect also risks diluting the Christian believer’s witness in a world craving authenticity. The early church thrived by engaging diverse cultures without compromising truth, as seen in Paul’s contextual preaching (Acts 17:22–31). Today’s church often prioritizes relevance over rootedness, leading to shallow engagement. Approaches rooted in the missio Dei counter this by weaving scripture, history, and worship into a cohesive missional identity. For instance, covenant theology mirrors the early church’s reliance on God’s promises to unify diverse believers. Pikkert’s (2017) critique underscores how evangelicals often overlook the Reformation’s missional zeal, which fueled global outreach. By integrating historical narratives, the missio Dei fosters a sense of continuity, reminding believers that mission is not novel but eternal. Storytelling, as Franke (2019) suggests, bridges generational gaps, while heritage pilgrimages ground faith in tangible history. Music, rooted in Psalmic tradition, stirs hearts toward mission, ensuring the church’s calling endures in a fragmented age.

 

Conclusion

In conclusion, while these seven reasons illuminate why Christians often sideline missional theology and history—ranging from attractional inertia to historical disconnect—the path forward gleams with redemptive potential. The Missional Loft articles, weaving missio Dei through omnipresence, covenants, and providence, remind us God’s mission pulses eternally, undeterred by apathy (Isaiah 55:11). Evangelicals must confront these barriers head-on, as Pikkert (2017) and Bosch (1991) urge, reclaiming holism without compromise. Imagine churches transformed: laity empowered, risks embraced, history honored—echoing Paul’s adaptability (1 Corinthians 9:22) amid pluralism. This isn’t optional; it’s essence, per Guder (1998), birthing vibrant witnesses. Wright’s (2006) grand narrative beckons, fusing Old Testament blueprints with New Testament sending for cosmic reconciliation (Colossians 1:20). As Loft’s symphony invites, hear the music (Matthew 24:14), stepping from unconcern to urgency. This summons action: study, dialogue, experiment. Theological institutions, pulpits, and pews unite, dismantling divides for Trinitarian fidelity. The stakes? A church irrelevant or indispensable. Choose incarnation, living Loft’s divine echoes (John 6:63) as salt in upheavals. God’s oikos awaits stewards (Ephesians 2:19), history’s heirs in eternity’s dawn (Revelation 21:4). Heed the call; the harvest ripens (Matthew 9:38).

 

Source List

Blog Articles (Missional Loft)

Academic Books

  • Bosch, David J. 1991. Transforming Mission: Paradigm Shifts in Theology of Mission. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books.
  • Guder, Darrell L., ed. 1998. Missional Church: A Vision for the Sending of the Church in North America. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans.
  • Guder, Darrell L. 2000. The Continuing Conversion of the Church. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans.
  • Franke, John R. 2019. Manifold and Minor: Relational Theology from a Radical Tradition. Eugene, OR: Cascade Books.
  • Pikkert, Peter. 2017. The Essence and Implications of Missio Dei: An Appraisal of Today’s Foremost Theology of Missions. Alev Books.
  • Wright, Christopher J.H. 2006. The Mission of God: Unlocking the Bible’s Grand Narrative. Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic.

Journal Articles

  • Engelsviken, Tormod. 2003. “Missio Dei: The Understanding and Misunderstanding of a Theological Concept in European Churches.” International Review of Mission 92(367): 481–497.
  • Harold, Godfrey. 2019. “An Evangelical Understanding of the Missio Dei as Inclusion of Social Justice: A Critical Theological Reflection.” Pharos Journal of Theology 100: 1–12.

Reports and Surveys

  • Barna Group. 2019–2022. Various reports on church engagement and theological literacy.
  • LifeWay Research. 2019–2021. Surveys on evangelical views of mission and social action.

 

, ,

Related Posts