In the first post in this series, I discussed the importance of missionaries setting the example before new believers. Now we come to the importance of keeping it simple.
Church planters must work diligently to keep the discipling process simple, such is the biblical way. Keeping it simple means teaching biblical depth. The same apostle who practiced teaching the whole purpose of God (Acts 20:27) was the same individual who desired the Word of God to spread rapidly and with honor (2 Thessalonians 3:1), and also planted churches rapidly. Contemporary church planters must not forget this aspect of Paul’s ministry. It can be rapid and it can be healthy.
An irony in the Kingdom is the deep teachings of the faith are not mysteries that only a few scholarly individuals know, but rather are simple enough to be grasped by every Spirit-filled believer and passed on to others. An amazing aspect of our Lord’s grace is He condescends to His people so that we ignorant and simple people can understand His truths. 
It is amazing that the great truths of the faith can be communicated by highly literate people to other highly literate people. And they can be communicated by the illiterate to other illiterate people. And when such truths are understood and applied to life, both groups are able to grow in their sanctification.
While we in the West spend a great deal of time writing blogs, articles, and books about the faith once for all delivered to the saints (myself included), may we never believe that the doctrines of the Scriptures are so complicated that only a few super-spiritual people can understand and communicate them to others. Remember, Jesus rejoiced in the fact that the Father did not make His revelation known to the wise, but the “children” (Luke 10:21). In my ministry on several occasions, I have been more impressed by the spiritual maturity, biblical knowledge, and depth of questions asked by some of the members of the churches where I’ve served, than with some of the excellent articulation of polysyllabic theological jargon that I have read and heard from outstanding scholars.
May we understand the truth that God has chosen the foolish of the world to shame the wise (1 Cor 1:27). If such is the case, then we should not be surprised that the religious leaders of the day were amazed by the character and teaching of the unschooled apostles (Acts 4:13).
Even Peter seemed to have confidence in his readers ability to understand the truths of Paul’s “hard” writings and avoid being “carried away” and losing their “stability” (2 Pet 3:15-18, ESV). If Peter can have such confidence in new believers, we can as well. For we know that “all Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness” (2 Tim 3:16, ESV). Therefore, church planters should not assume that just because it is THE book of Romans that these new believers are not able to understand such deep spiritual truths.
Here is a reality to ponder as we think about keeping the discipleship process simple: How old in the faith were the new churches to whom Paul wrote his letters? Or consider this matter: Can the whole council of God be communicated to new believers and elders be raised up from those believers in as few as three years, such as in Ephesus (and even in less time in other areas)?
In no way am I advocating that the Scriptures prescribe to us a timeline for church planting and leadership development processes. Also, I am not stating that our strategies today must be based on three years. However, we must be honest and say that Paul was able to experience such a work of the Spirit in polytheistic-temple to Artemis-Gentile-pagan-demon-possessed-Ephesus (see Acts 19; 20:17-38). Can such missionary practice happen again, and be healthy? Most of us today believe such is an impossibility.
We must communicate the depths of the Scriptures in simple ways that people in their contexts can understand and apply to their lives.
Keeping it Simple #1: the deep truths of the Scriptures are simple truths able to be grasped by Spirit-filled new believers
Keeping it Simple #2: the great mysteries that God has chosen to reveal to us are able to be understood and applied to life by the foolish and the illiterate alike
Keeping it Simple #3: high expectations for healthy disciples requires teaching the commands of Jesus and holding people accountable for obedience
Keeping it Simple #4: it is not necessary to use complex discipleship and leadership development models and complex preaching and teaching methods to see the Spirit work to bring about great maturity in Christ
Keeping it Simple #5: complex models and methods are not highly reproducible by new believers and new churches and are not likely to help facilitate the multiplication of disciples, leaders, and churches
Keeping it Simple #6: great pastors in great churches are not always highly educated according to the standards of their societies
Keeping it Simple #7: simple is not the same as watering down the truths of the Scriptures-simple is biblical
Questions to Consider
1) How complex are your methods for discipleship training, preaching and teaching, and leading in the ministry? Is your example an example that others can follow to grow in the Scriptures, and use to preach and teach the Scriptures to others?
2) Do you “SEE” the potential in the new believers while you are teaching them to obey all that Christ commanded?
3) Are you teaching the whole council of God to the new churches you are serving? If not, why not? If yes, are you keeping it simple? If not, why not?
4) Do you look on the fields of lostness in your area and “SEE” new believers to come from those fields? Most church planters do. But, do you look on the same fields of lostness and “SEE” pastors for new churches to come? If not, why not?
5) What is the biblical description of a fruit-bearing disciple of Jesus? Are those requirements the same requirements to be a fruit-bearing disciple of Jesus in your context? If not, why not?
6) What is the biblical description of a pastor/elder? Are those requirements the same requirements to be a pastor/elder in your context? If not, why not?
Here in Brazil one part of my disciple making is to use only the Bible. If I walk in to lead a Bible study and I set the Bible to the side and open another “Bible study” book, where is the Bible? It has been set aside.
Now, when using only the Bible I have learned that it is best to stick with one text per lesson rather than using lessons that jump all over the Bible. Multi-text lessons are difficult for a new disciple to reproduce because they just are not familiar with the Bible or the people of the Bible. When the new disciple studies just one text at a time he or she learns that text well and can actually reproduce teaching that one text relatively quickly. In one house church start we have a woman who takes notes on the lesson. After she gets home she opens the Bible and her notes with her husband who is not able to attend because of his work schedule. She literally reproduces the lesson hours after the study.
Simple is good!
Thank you, Stan for your story from the field! It is a good illustration for us all to remember.
Good post but there is one item that I’d be interested to get your feedback on. In John Nevius’ “Planting and Development of Missionary Churches”, he points out that Paul was able to have more mature believers, and even elders, in a short period of time due in part to the fact that Gentile God-fearers made up a significant core of the membership of these initial church plants. Granted they were surrounded by God-less paganism, but these God-fearers were one step removed from that worldview as they had significantly been schooled in the Scriptures and worldview of the Jews. Thus, it would not have taken as long before at least some of them were leadership material.
Nevius’ observation from 19th century China was that the Chinese he was working with were coming straight out of paganism, idol worship, etc. and thus it took a much longer time to these folks to attain to the Biblical maturity necessary to be appointed elders or pastors. After Nevius and his colleagues got burned by appointing elders prematurely, he moved to a system of intermediate type leadership roles as a stepping stone to church offices as we know them from the NT.
Thus, I question whether it is reasonable to expect mature believers who are qualified to be elders to emerge out of a non-Christian culture within a few years (my context is church planting in Thailand, a nation of folk Buddhists). Is it possible? Sure, God can do anything. And I know that you’re not giving 3 years (or any other number) as a recommended time frame, but our expectations for how quickly believers (and churches) mature and can take responsibility for themselves must depend upon context.
In North American church planting, 3-5 years may be reasonable but in Buddhist Thailand, it is going to take a lot longer. I’ve seen missionaries phase out of church plants here after just 4 years but sometimes what is left behind is a weak church that is able to keep going but lacks Biblically qualified leadership to see it through to maturity. Warm bodies are doing all the jobs that need to be done on Sunday morning but not much more.
Of course missionaries shouldn’t stay on for too long, as with the paternalism that Roland Allen criticized but might the danger today be phasing out too early in a kneejerk reaction to the paternalism of a previous era?
Excellent points, Karl. Yes, I am not advocating a precise timeline, rather I’m trying to get us to consider the possibilities, and evaluate our theology, missiology, and methods. Again, you are correct, the context (including background worldview) of the new believers and new churches will be a major factor in growth and leadership development. And, yes, major problems arise whenever we put people in leadership roles when they are not ready. There are no prescriptive timelines.
Yes, I would say at times Paul was able to work through the worldviews of the god-fearers, Jews, and Gentile proselytes. However, I do not think that in every situation such was the case. Roland Allen had a great deal to say against the argument that Paul was able to do things rapidly because of the background of his new churches.
I greatly appreciate your wisdom from this field on this point! Well done!