John Newton Webb
John Newton Webb is British and has served in Japan with OMF since 2010. From 2016, he has worked as the pastor of Hiragishi Izumi Christ Church. He is also on the board of Hokkaido Bible Institute. In his spare time, he writes poetry in English and Japanese and translates Japanese poems into English. He is married with two children.
Mission Round Table 20:1 (Jan-Apr 2025): 24-30
To read articles in this edition, visit this post on Mission Round Table 20:1.
The Lord Jesus had a brief but fruitful ministry in Samaria (John 4), but following his ascension into Heaven, many people were converted and churches started there. How did this happen? Not by the apostles’ careful planning, but through the gospel proclamation of scattered believers (Acts 8:1–8). Paul had no plan to plant a church in Macedonia, but the Lord led him there to preach the gospel and the church in Philippi was born. This past Christmas, eighty-six non-Christians came to the church where I work and heard about the coming of the Saviour. But the person who seems to be most eagerly seeking the Lord is a man who turned up to a normal Sunday service the week after Christmas, having picked up a church leaflet. In this article, we will largely be considering our role in planting churches, but we must begin by remembering that it is Jesus Christ himself who will build his church, and not always according to our plans, methods, or hopes. Our first responsibility in church planting is to be on our knees before our God in worship, repentance, and persevering prayer.
Without taking our eyes off Christ, we will now look at our responsibilities in church planting, thinking about them biblically, asking hard questions of commonly held assumptions, and pointing towards practical application. My ministry context is Sapporo, Japan, where I have been pastoring a church for the last eight-and-a-half years, and I will refer to situations there and in other parts of Japan. At the same time, I will focus on fundamentals that are widely applicable.[1]
Evangelism
When Jesus or the apostles arrived at a place, their first activity was normally to proclaim God’s salvation; the same was true for the scattered believers referred to in Acts 8 who spoke about Christ in Samaria. As a church is a gathering of Christian believers, church planting begins with evangelism, that is, with verbal proclamation of the good news about Jesus, accompanied by a lifestyle and deeds that adorn the message. This requires gospel-confidence, the assurance that the gospel of Christ remains “the power of God for the salvation of all who believe” (Rom 1:16), and that the Holy Spirit is at work. “Consequently, faith comes from hearing the message, and the message is heard through the word of Christ” (Rom 10:17). As people are saved, they become the “living stones” out of which the church is built (1 Pet 2:4–5).
Researching the area we are seeking to start a church in, contextualising our ministry to the people living there, and planning how to proceed are of great importance in the building up of a church, but, with a few obvious exceptions,[2] it is a mistake to think that they are activities that must, in some sense, be completed before evangelism begins.
Japanese Christians commonly assume that you need a certain level of relationship with someone before you can tell them about God. The example of the New Testament shows this to be untrue, and experience shows the damage it can do. In most cases, believers find it harder to share the gospel once a relationship is built, and the non-Christian often feels tricked or that Jesus cannot be that important since their friend hasn’t mentioned it until now. It also robs the non-Christian of the chance to watch the believer’s life as a witness to Jesus. At the individual level, speaking about Christ and getting to know the person to whom you are speaking are best done concurrently.[3]
Contextualisation is similar.[4] It is difficult to claim that a Christ we have hitherto concealed is the Lord of all, and it denies the power of the Holy Spirit to say we can’t proclaim Christ until we have found precisely the right clothing for him. In any case, at what point can we say we have sufficiently contextualised the message of Christ? Contextualising the gospel and gospelising the context go hand-in-hand, and it is as we proclaim Christ in a particular setting that we can begin to truly understand that setting and know best how to speak into it.[5] Proclamation is also how people are saved, the church is started, and the way we see how God is going to recreate these people into his image.
The question is sometimes asked whether a church’s evangelism will be relationship-based or events-based, but this is a non-question and such an either/or distinction narrows the biblical witness. In the Gospels and Acts, we find the gospel being preached to both large crowds and small gatherings, and also being shared one-to-one. One approach does not exclude the other. In fact, although the local context might change the emphasis, to reach an area with the gospel both personal relationships and public proclamation are essential.[6] Furthermore, relationship building and evangelistic gatherings can and should be mutually supportive; those we are building relationships with can come and meet Christian believers and hear more of the gospel, and we can build relationships with those who come to events.
The New Testament, of course, knows nothing of handing out flyers, or of English (Aramaic?) classes, kids’ clubs, or Christmas services, but as Paul made opportunity for people to gather and hear about the Christ (Acts 19:8–10), so any means which is not deceptive (1 Thess 2:3) may be used to provide opportunities whatever our contexts.
We seek to equip and encourage every believer to tell the people around them (those they already know and those they don’t) how much Jesus has done for them (Mark 5:20). And we recognise that there are many people who will not hear about Jesus in this way, and so we also create opportunities for others to hear.[7] In our context, these have included (for example) special evangelistic services, a Mums and Toddlers’ group, Christmas events, Harvest Festivals, Men’s socials, lectures on historical Japanese Christians, and many others. We also regularly distribute gospel tracts (written by church members) and information leaflets about the church. Our aim is that everybody in our area has the opportunity to hear about Christ.[8]
Community
Whether through volunteering at a school or being part of a community project or organisation, being involved in the community provides an opportunity to meet local people and know your area better. In a country like Japan where proactive religious groups are often viewed with suspicion, community involvement can also serve to reduce suspicion. I used to volunteer at the local school library. One time, a parent at the school said to one of my fellow library volunteers, “My child got a flyer for an event at the church. It looks fun and my child wants to go, but I don’t know if it’s safe.” The volunteer replied, “The pastor volunteers at library here and is a friend of mine. It’s safe for your child to go.”
The Lord has blessed our church with an unusual opportunity—we were invited to join the local business association. One of the aims of the association is to contribute to the flourishing of the local community, and a member of the steering committee who attended some of our events felt we were doing more than anyone else to encourage this and recommended that we join. After prayer and careful discussions, we joined and this relationship has enabled us to feature in the catalogue of local organisations, participate in the local summer festival and other events, and leave church information in local shops. These things are normally not permitted to churches in Japan. At the monthly social, I am able to stand up and introduce the church and meet and speak evangelistically with many different people. It also brings us a level of trustworthiness that lowers the barrier to attending church.
As well as participation in activities outside the church, the church can also effectively serve the community by creating ministries that meet local needs. For example, a breakfast club for children, a drop-in café for the elderly, marriage seminars, advice on job-hunting (or any area where someone in the church has sufficient expertise). Without any planning, our church has become a place of counselling for those with mental health issues; people started coming and continue to turn up. Some come just once. I meet with others regularly, and some now attend church services. We have been able to pray with them, share the gospel, refer them to appropriate medical services, offer some counselling, save some from taking their own lives, and a few have started attending a Bible study.
However, we must be careful to not compromise our faith or proclamation in order to gain a standing in the community. Awareness of the importance of community engagement is increasing amongst many pastors here, but I have heard a few pastors phrase it in a way that suggests a good reputation in the community is the mark that we are being good witnesses. However, there will be times of favour and times of persecution.[9] Our primary responsibility is always to live and speak faithfully for Christ.
Community involvement is an opportunity to serve our neighbours, build relationships, show the love of Christ, and share the gospel. It can also be an important component in building a church that is rooted in the local community. “Live such good lives amongst the pagans that, though they accuse you of doing wrong, they may see your good deeds and glorify God on the day he visits us” (1 Pet 2:12).
Discipleship
In Paul’s prayers for the Ephesian church, he shows clearly that the power and wisdom for growth in Christ is the Lord’s, which he delights to pour out on his church in answer to prayer (Eph 1:15–23, 3:14–21). “From (Christ) the whole body, joined and held together by every supporting ligament, grows and builds itself up in love, as each part does its work” (Eph 4:16). Discipleship is from Christ, in Christ, and towards Christlikeness; it is God’s will and purpose for the church. Discipleship is the process through which the church and each individual believer becomes “mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ” (Eph 4:13). Before it is about techniques or training, it is about Christ.
The Bible’s teaching on discipleship is multi-faceted and profound. Our discipleship of believers must be equally broad and deep. For the sake of the present discussion, however, we will focus on the theme of equipping for service.
The call of the gospel is not just to salvation, but to a life worthy of that call (Eph 4:1), and the context for a church’s growth into that life is humility, love, and the unity of the Spirit (Eph 4:2–6). The Lord Jesus himself gives gifts to his united people for their maturing (Eph 4:7–11), and Paul spotlights the gift to the church of those who proclaim his word to his people (v 11). Alongside prayer, the primary responsibility of the church leader in building up the congregation is the faithful teaching of the Bible.[10] In other parts of the Scriptures, many purposes are given to the preaching of God’s word, but here Paul begins with “to prepare God’s people for works of service.” Though the extent to which this is true is often overstated, there is a tendency in Japanese churches towards the pastor doing more than he ought and the “works of service” open to the congregation being overly restricted. However, the will of the Lord Jesus is that each member is equipped to serve in the diversity of their gifts. Churches grow through the ministry of every member.
In our church, people naturally think of service as being primarily things that one might be put on a rota for, and particularly things done during the Sunday service. However, praying with someone, meeting someone for coffee and encouraging them, welcoming a new person, playing with children, or helping someone move house are equally important acts of service.
We will here home in on two related areas that are particularly vital to equipping a church for the long-term.[11] The first is leadership—biblical, not business.[12] Jesus himself provides the church with leaders, and God has created the church in such a way that leaders are needed for its health (Eph 4:1–16, Heb 13:7, 17, etc.). However, neither a “one church-one leader” model nor a sharp distinction between those who lead and those who don’t captures the fullness of the Bible’s teaching on church leadership.[13] A vital part of building a church is examining, preparing, and appointing leaders, and then respecting their leadership. Many churches have foundered because leaders were not raised up from the congregation, or because they were appointed but all real responsibility and authority remained with the missionary or missionary team, or because leaders were rashly appointed and proved unworthy for the task.
The appointing of elders is an essential stage for a maturing church (Titus 1:5; etc.), but if we think more broadly about leading, we can also see the value of giving responsibility to church members in different areas of church life. One church we have close links with and that has a high level of maturity amongst its members is notable for the way it hands over the leadership of specific ministries to church members. If we can stretch our definition of leadership a little further, more mature believers discipling less mature believers also requires equipping and responsibility being handed over (Titus 2:3–5; etc.).
The second area is teaching others to teach (2 Tim 2:2). All believers are called to, and are able to, teach one another (Col 3:16), but there is also a specific gift of teaching given to some, and those who have it to any degree need to be developed and encouraged to use their gifts faithfully. Whether this be preaching, leading Bible studies, delivering Sunday School messages, giving evangelistic talks, or opening the Scriptures in other settings, godly, gifted, and willing teachers of the word will be a great strength to any fellowship. It is never a waste of time to invest in the training of teachers.
At a recent pastors’ conference, I was advocating for developing preachers from the congregation, and a few of the participants expressed concern about the damage that might be done by unqualified preachers. This is a legitimate concern, but the biblical qualifications for teaching do not include graduating from Bible College and being ordained. Rather, they are reliability, faithfulness to the apostles’ teaching, ability, and holiness. I asked a senior Japanese pastor who has raised up many lay preachers in his church—four of whom have gone into full-time pastoral ministry—to share his experience. He emphasised the importance of devoting time to each one, thorough training, and keeping them accountable. The answer to the potential danger of lay preachers teaching unhelpfully is not to deny them the chance, but to test them and equip them well.
Japan has many pastorless churches, and many churches are closing each year. There is much prayer and discussion at the moment about how to support and “replant” struggling churches. One key is surely the discipling of multiple teachers and leaders within congregations. Not only does that make it easier for a church to continue without a full-time pastor, but it also gives churches greater capacity for serving other churches. Pastor, theologian, and rural church researcher/advocate Yamaguchi Katsumasa writes,
Especially in rural churches with no pastor, we cannot do without the nurturing and work of the lay preacher. It is impossible for one pastor to pastor and evangelise multiple churches/areas. However, in Japan the stereotype of one church one pastor is stubborn and hard to change. Neither pastors nor believers are attempting a reform… But the raising up of lay preachers is an urgent work.[14]
Returning to the full range of works of service, fanning into flame the gifts of every believer, encouraging them into good works, and entrusting them with real responsibility are keys to building a healthy church. And returning to the even fuller range of discipleship, may we be able to say about our ministries, “We proclaim him, admonishing and teaching everyone with all wisdom, so that we may present everyone perfect in Christ” (Col 1:28).[15]
Throwing off a church plant mentality
“The reason that we’re so active in evangelism is because we’re a church plant.” “I suppose we do Sunday services this way because we’re a church plant.” I heard many of these sorts of sentiments expressed when I came to pastor Izumi Church (which started in 2009) in 2016. Talking to the believers who thought like this, I discovered a mistaken ecclesiology and a large set of unbiblical assumptions about the difference between having a missionary leader and local pastor.[16] Working through these issues led me to reassess the church and church plant distinction.
My conclusion was that the distinction between church plants and churches is mistaken and unhelpful. If you plant a chrysanthemum, as soon as it begins to grow you have a chrysanthemum. Whether it is a tiny shoot or in full flower, it is nonetheless a chrysanthemum. There may be significant differences between a new church and a more established church (for example, a lower number of mature believers, a greater need for outside help, more rapid change, etc.), but I do not find in the Scriptures a fundamental difference between the two.
In the model where a church plant graduates into a church at some point in its life, we may ask at what point this would be. The answer that is often given is independence. Financial independence, legal independence, independence from a missionary organisation or mother church, and so on. But we must ask where in the Bible independence is used as part of the definition of a church, or as a mark of a mature church. Rather, the New Testament surely values interdependence over independence and never thinks of a church as immature because it is still dependent on outside help.[17]
This is not simply a semantic issue. A church plant-mentality can adversely affect a church’s growth. As in the examples given above, common assumptions about church plants include the following. (1) They are more proactively evangelistic than a mature church (and therefore that once independence is reached the evangelistic drive will lessen). (2) They can’t mature beyond a certain point until they are independent. (3) There are certain essential functions of a church that they can’t perform. More assumptions could be added. One particularly damaging attitude is that the way things are done in a younger church is temporary. Of course, many things are—a growing church will and must change—but this attitude can lead believers to relativise Bible teaching that they don’t like. I have, on more than one occasion, had someone say in response to clear biblical teaching, “that will change when we’re a proper church.”
A few years ago, I talked these issues through with our church members and encouraged them to no longer think of us as a church plant, but just as a church. As a result, we have seen church members invest more in the church, grapple more seriously with the Bible’s full counsel about church life, and have more confidence in what we believe and do as a church. While the verb “to church plant” may be valid, the noun “church plant” seems confusing and largely meaningless.[18]
Related to the distinction often made between a church and a church plant is the sharp distinction between a missionary church leader and a national church leader. This also needs rethinking in light of the word of God, and secondarily, in light of its helpfulness. As touched on above, missionary leadership (often supported from overseas) is frequently equated with the church being immature, and a church-supported national church leader with the church being mature. Again we ask, where in God’s word is this distinction made?[19]
I believe in local leadership and that it is healthy for churches, where possible, to support their own workers. However, I also believe that it is unhelpful to emphasise a missionary/pastor distinction.[20] Again, it can lead to believers relativizing the Scriptures or dismissing teaching because it comes from foreign lips. I have been told such things as, “But Japanese people don’t like being told about sin” (i.e. you shouldn’t talk about it here). I have also heard criticism that an element introduced into our Sunday services was too Western, even though it was something we learned from other Japanese churches and that I have never seen done in the West!
The distinction also contributes to the mistaken view that missionaries evangelise and pastors disciple, whereas both should surely do both. Recently, a couple of young (and very gifted) Japanese pastors have publicly voiced a view that it is not possible for foreign missionaries to effectively disciple Japanese believers.[21] These are wise men with much experience (including that of working closely with missionaries) and their views reflect past and present failings of missionary work here. However, to say it is not possible overlooks the work of the Holy Spirit, makes shared cultural background of greater importance in discipleship than the Scriptures, and implicitly discourages missionaries from discipling believers. Irrespective of who is leading the church, all congregations need careful and thorough discipling.
Emphases and practical application will change with the age of the church and the gifts and experience of the leaders, but unnecessary emphasis on distinctions between foreign leaders and native leaders, or between church planters and pastors, can lead to churches having wrong expectations, imbalances in the church’s activities, and leaders neglecting important parts of their roles.[22]
Throwing off a church model mentality
Beginning at the birth of a church and continuing throughout its life, there are many issues that demand us to think through what sort of a church it is or is going to be. How will it be led? When and in what form will believers gather? How will it engage with the local community? Where will it devote its energies? One approach to answering these questions has been to select a church model (e.g. cell church, multi-site church, “traditional church”,[23] incarnational mission community, etc.) and attempt to build the church according to that model. However, I think the “model” approach has weaknesses that can hinder the healthy development of a church.
The variety of proposed models is bewildering, and the names of some models mean quite different things depending on one’s church background. Each one has normally been developed in a particular cultural context, and whilst some are very adaptable, others may not fit a different culture.
More concerning is that reliance on a particular church model may blind us to biblical elements of church that the model does not bring out. In many cases, the model, rather than God’s word, may have become the ultimate guide to church life. We may note that the Bible does not give us a church model, nor even a range of models. The apostles clearly thought that many things were more important than models. Though this may not always be the case, a model-directed approach to building a church can also lack flexibility and discourage creative thinking. We can learn from many of these church models, but it seems unwise to tie ourselves to one particular model, especially in the early stages when we do not know who might constitute the church, or what particular challenges and opportunities might be presented to us.
A better approach is to simply prayerfully ask, “How can we apply the Bible’s full teaching on church in this situation and at this time?” This is a harder course than choosing and sticking to a particular model, but a more profitable one, and one that enables the church to find an appropriate expression of its identity as God’s people in its particular setting, and also to adapt and change in line with its changing situation. The community we are trying to reach is ever changing with different challenges and opportunities arising, and the members, gifts, maturity, and needs of the church will also be in flux. This approach also encourages ongoing reflection about what the church is, should do, and can do. By keeping our eyes firmly on the Scriptures and regularly turning to it for guidance, we see areas where the church is weak, Bible teaching we are neglecting, and beliefs and practices that could be improved. Even good things sometimes need to be replaced by better things.
One church here began as a house church with the intention of always being a house church and, over time, a network of house churches. However, after some time evangelizing and getting to know local people, the leaders realised that this approach did not fit the context and changed to renting rooms and seeking to build up a single congregation that would in time plant other churches. Interestingly, visitors to this church often comment on its “at home” feel. On a smaller scale, reflection on Colossians 3:1–17 and other passages about church fellowship led us to reconsider how we did our church small groups so that they would come closer to fulfilling the full scope of the Bible’s teaching on fellowship.
I have witnessed cases where struggling churches have stuck doggedly to a particular model and ended up closing, other cases where churches have got comfortable in their ways and have not pursued further growth, and others where adherence to a static model has served some members well but excluded others. In a similar way, a church that is focused on reaching young families may miss opportunities to engage with the elderly and vice versa. As we saw earlier from Acts 8, the church God is building may be very different from the church we envisioned we would start. Constant reference to Christ the cornerstone and God’s word the foundation is the way to build a God-glorifying church.
A final reflection
As I have written this article, I have been acutely aware of my own failures and weaknesses in leading Izumi Church, and also to the challenges of starting and building a church. Just how do you raise up leaders and teachers in a country where so few younger people are coming to Christ? I am also reminded of the great joy of seeing the Lord at work saving the lost and remaking his people into the image of his Son. As Christ said, “on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it” (Matt 16:18). All my confidence is in him.
[1] Japan is an open country where churches are free to work. Work in CAN contexts will differ significantly.
[2] For example, where the church planter has as yet no shared language with the local people, or in situations of intense persecution.
[3] I hope it is obvious that I am not arguing against the importance of contextualisation. This is something we work hard at and, amongst local Japanese pastors here, our church and preaching are considered to be well contextualised. I am also not denying the need for preparation for cross-cultural work. On the latter, see David Harley, “Training and Attrition,” Mission Round Table 17, no. 1 (January–April 2022), 16–25, https://omf.org/mrt-training-and-attrition (accessed 27 February 2025). There are two phenomena we see when contextualisation becomes overly dominant in our thinking. One is that new missionaries are so concerned that they might make a cultural mistake that their evangelism becomes paralysed. The second is that some missionaries think they have found “the way” to contextualise the gospel and end up not teaching the full counsel of God.
[4] Japanese theologian 丸山忠孝, in his superb book on Christ and Japanese culture, 十字架と桜 (東京: いのちのことば社, 2019), points out that most books on Christianity and Japanese culture look at the question, “How does Japanese culture view Christianity?,” putting culture as the standard and judge for viewing God. He argues that the more important question, and the one that truly reflects Christ’s lordship is, “How does Jesus view Japanese culture?” In other words, cultural engagement begins with Christ, not with culture, and he is to be Lord in all interactions between the two. How then do we contextualise? 丸山’s answer is profound and I can’t do it justice in a footnote, but here is a taster, “We must face up to history, responsible to the God who rules history. We must not flee our responsibility but serve our neighbor who lives with us in history.” (Translation, and all others in this article, mine. His definition of history includes the present culture.)
[5] This requires deep humility, ears constantly open to God and to our neighbour, a willingness to learn and adapt, and a knowledge of the full range of the ways the Bible speaks. I am neither advocating a blindness to culture nor an arrogance that thinks we already know how to live and speak in a foreign culture.
[6] In some contexts, speaking to a crowd may be impossible.
[7] Recently, since some people are moving away and other members are in ill-health, we are reconsidering our capacity to run some events. One church member expressed concern that we might be in danger of stopping evangelism, but this certainly won’t be the case. What will change is not our being evangelistic, but the way in which we evangelise. I re-emphasised that even if a church has just two or three members, those members can and must be speaking of Christ in the place the Lord has put them. Events are good, but we are not reliant on them.
[8] The nine people who have been baptised at Izumi Church since we started working here have first come to church in a variety of ways. Four were invited by church members, one by a short-term missionary, one received a tract at the station, one received church leaflets through her door, one came via a flyer to an English class. One, who had been wanting to know the “true God” for twenty years, saw there was a church near her new home and took the brave step of turning up at a Sunday service, and some months later put her trust in Christ at another Sunday service. All of these people heard the gospel multiple times through evangelistic events, one-to-one Bible studies, Sunday services, and in conversation.
9 Contrast Acts 2:47 and 14:19.
[10] It also includes setting an example by your life, which requires opening up your life and spending quality time with believers.
[11] In some cultures, Japan included, there is a danger of overemphasising works of service, but our discipleship must include teaching the “whole counsel of God” and include, for example, training in holiness, building a biblical worldview, teaching on prayer, family life, work, evangelism, etc.
[12] Though he overstates his case in places and not all his conclusions are equally convincing, a basic argument for plural leadership that can be found in Alexander Strauch, Biblical Eldership: An Urgent Call to Restore Biblical Church Leadership, expanded edition (Colorado Springs, CO: Lewis & Roth, 1995). This book has been translated into Burmese, Chinese, Indonesian (as a booklet), Korean, Mongolian, and other languages.
[13] This is not the place to go into this issue in depth, but while the New Testament teaches the role and authority of particular leaders within the church, we may question whether the clergy-laity distinction accurately captures the Bible’s teaching. For this reason, I avoid the term “lay leaders” in this article. For this, too, see Strauch.
[14] 山口勝政, 閉塞感からの脱却—日本宣教神学 (東京: 株式会社ヨベル, 2012), 24.
[15] I have emphasised the discipleship of leaders and teachers, but we must not focus on them to the neglect of discipling other believers. One Japanese pastor observed with concern that though there is (rightly) much emphasis on pre-baptismal Bible study, many churches do not provide any post-baptismal Bible study. Another pastor I know, realising that he was not effectively discipling his whole congregation, introduced a cell church system wherein he disciples the cell group leaders and they disciple their group members.
[16] I am using the word pastor here as shorthand for “church leader” rather than assuming a particular structure of church leadership.
[17] A brief side point on independence. In one area of Japan, an overemphasis on independence has led struggling churches to keep their problems to themselves with other churches not being able to approach them with offers of help. The result has been that some have closed and others are in danger of doing so. A pastor from that area has recently written, “Emphasising each church’s independence and making a rule of non-interference in other churches has created an insurmountable wall. I think it has left our fellowship and co-operation superficial.” He also wrote that this situation “has, in a profound way, taught us a vital perspective on the future of rural mission. That is, the value of honestly sharing difficult situations and actively seeking prayer and co-operation, and the value of a stance of co-operation and relating to other churches with love and courage in response to God’s word, ‘There is no fear in love.’” This was written by Pastor 菅原豊 in an open letter.
[18] A few years ago, I was talking to the leader of another mission organisation at a conference, and he told me that he is trying to jettison the verb too, in favour of “to make disciples”. He said they are no less committed to the church or to starting new churches, but that he has found that talking about church planting often leads to an early emphasis on buildings, models, structures, and finance, whereas the more directly biblical command “to make disciples” leads to an emphasis on evangelism and discipleship. As people are saved and nurtured in the faith, they are, in Christ, “built together to become a dwelling in which God lives by his Spirit” (Eph 2:22).
[19] We might also consider the oft-noted internationality of church leaders in Acts.
[20] For a different perspective (not within a cross-cultural context), see David Whitehead, “How is a Church Planter Different from a Pastor?,” Redeemer City to City, 23 November 2023, https://redeemercitytocity.com/articles-stories/how-is-a-church-planter-different-from-a-pastor-1 (accessed 27 February 2025). While I agree with some of the points made, I do not accept them all.
[21] These are good friends of mine. In private conversation, their comments are less absolute and they are certainly happy that we are discipling our church, but their concerns about poor discipleship done by missionaries are very real.
[22] In the Japanese context, there are some pragmatic reasons why it may be better not to use the term missionary at all, at least outside the church. The word for missionary (宣教師) is more readily associated with the cults (especially the Mormons) and therefore arouses suspicion, whereas the word pastor (牧師) or church worker is associated with the Christian church, and a pastor is seen as a valuable member of the community and someone who could be approached to talk about spiritual matters. Some missionary colleagues who work at a church with no pastor recently expressed frustration that relatives of church members and other local people wanted to talk about funerals or personal issues with a pastor but not with missionaries. Identifying as the pastor of Izumi Church, I have never experienced this resistance; people come to talk about many things.
[23] I lament the recent trend to view “traditional” modes as necessarily negative. If we may quote Gustav Mahler (though he was talking about music), “Tradition is not the worship of ashes, but the preservation of fire.”
