Had
a good discussion with a room full of leaders in Nashville last week, talking
about what it means to be an “apostolic” church movement.
Here are some of our thoughts:
1. Unfortunately apostolic is
usually defined in governmental terms of “who is in charge” rather than in
missional terms of what are we called to do.
2. The starting point of any
apostolic discussion should be the mission, not the authority structure.
3. Authority structures exist to
serve and protect mission. The mission dies not exist to prop up the authority
structure.
Biblical apostolic teams should:
1. Provide visionary leadership for
health, growth and expansion
2. Equip people to be more effective
in ministry
3. Provide governmental leadership
in times of crisis and emergency

Should apostolic leadership provide more than just 'vision'? Shouldn't apostolic leadership also be demonstrative?
Posted by: Jameel Yaqub | October 08, 2009 at 07:39 PM
That's good!
RE Authority structures exist to serve and protect mission. The mission dies not exist to prop up the authority structure.
It's the tail wagging the dog syndrome. It's amazing how us christians can get things back to front! Mission first, mission first, mission first....
Posted by: Iain | October 13, 2009 at 04:51 AM