Mission and the Triune God: A Critical Theological Engagement with Timothy C. Tennent’s Trinitarian Missiology
In the late twentieth century, missiology witnessed a significant revival grounding missions theologically rather than simply focusing on the practice of missionary activities. Among several scholarly writings within that broader shift, Timothy C. Tennent’s work Invitation to World Missions: A Trinitarian Missiology for the Twenty-First Century (2010) made a major contribution. In this, he counters the anthropocentric missional concepts and offers a theologically vigorous account that begins with missio Dei. This is crucial in missiology because it integrates biblical theology, Trinitarian doctrine, cultural engagement, and evangelical theology of religions in the light of global mission amidst changing dynamics.
For Tennent, “mission” is “God’s redemptive, historical initiative on behalf of His creation,”[1] and the term “missions” refers to “all the specific and varied ways in which the church cross cultural boundaries to reflect the life of the triune God in the world and, through that identity, participates in His mission, celebrating through world and deed the inbreaking of the New Creation.”[2] Therefore, “mission” is God’s initiative, and “missions” are the expressions of church’s participation. Tennent has several key theological imperatives that define the mission of God in this book, but the following essay is a critical engagement on four of them, from chapters 4 to 7, in the light of contemporary missiological discussion. I argue that while Tennent’s Trinitarian grounding of missio Dei is theologically rich, coherent, and an integrated framework, it is also overly totalizing and idealizing. For the sake of clarity, I will first summarize his key claims and later critique them.
First, in chapter 4, Tennent argues that mission is foundational to the Bible itself because God, who is revealed in it, is a missional God. The Scriptures unveil God’s salvific plan as a divinely composed narrative that ends in Christ and extends to all nations. God’s covenant with Abraham (Gen. 12) is an important Old Testament revelation of His mission set against the background of the human Fall and human pride (Gen. 1-11). God calling Abraham and commissioning him to “go” tells that “God is the source and initiator of mission” and He is the sender with authority. It also unveils God’s vision for all nations because Abraham was sent so that all people of the earth would finally get blessed. In fact, the rhetorically repeated God’s covenant with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob is to show the orientation of mission from personal to national, and then from national to global. God choosing Israel is intrinsically missional because Israel is to be a blessing for all the nations.[3]
Furthermore, God’s sovereignty over the nations, Israel’s call to declare God’s glory among nations, messianic promises, eschatological visions, suffering servant songs, key psalms, and prophetic eschatology weave the Abrahamic promise into a consistent story line of canon. God’s mission story continues in the New Testament mission of Jesus and extends His reign over all the nations through the Great Commission of making disciples. Therefore, mission is not an addition but is deeply embedded in God’s redemptive work even from the Old Testament. Therefore, Tennent says that “even the Old Testament understands the fulfillment of the missio dei within a larger eschatological framework … ultimately follow the broad contours of creation -> covenant -> Incarnation -> Cross -> Resurrection -> Pentecost -> return of Christ -> eschaton/New Creation.”[4]
Second, in chapter 5 he advances in arguing that the church, by its very nature, is missionary, and it does not merely do mission. He says that a historical survey of Christian faith across centuries and cultures shows that despite enormous variety, Christians have always kept their faith on the lordship of Christ, reverence to the canon, and the preaching of the gospel cross culturally. Therefore, mission is not a later development in the church, but it is its very nature. Further, Tennent frames the church’s mission in the wider understanding of the missio Dei rather than an isolated view of the “Great Commission.”[5] He clarifies that “Great Commission” should be understood in light of multiple post-resurrection commissioning texts from Mark, Luke, John, and Acts, and not purely with Matthew 28:18-20. These texts should not be treated in isolation as proof texts; rather, they should be read within their respective Gospel contexts and must be understood as complementary voices within the single story of the sending Father. Each Gospel, when read in its theological contexts, anticipates and concludes in a universal mission.[6]
For example, Matthew’s gospel begins with a genealogy that starts with Abraham and includes gentile women and continues with the visit of the Magi and follows with several other universal narratives. This shows that the mission to all nations in Matthew’s gospel is a development of God’s promise to Abraham that all the earth will be blessed. Moreover, Jesus’ universal authority grounds the church’s call to make disciples of all nations implying all people groups and all ethnicities.[7] Likewise, the gospel of Mark also anticipates a universal mission because of the themes that emphasize the preaching of the gospel to all nations and Jesus’ ministry in the Gentile regions. Further, mission in this gospel is framed by suffering and persecution, which implies that “mission occurs in the context of hostility and oppression.”[8] In short, for Tennent, mission is the very being of the church and not a specialized program.
Third, in chapter 6, Tennent argues that for mission to remain faithful to missio Dei, the church should recover a definite theological understanding of culture. While culture is discussed a lot in contemporary missiology, Tennent says that a proper theological treatment is still lacking.[9] He argues that if our mission is to participate in God’s universal redemptive purposes, then culture cannot be treated either neutrally or as an autonomous sphere;[10] rather, it should be treated within the broader framework of the Trinitarian theology.[11] He explains that Christ entered history as a first-century Jewish man, and He was fully embedded in the local cultural context and therefore, Christ was neither against the culture nor culturally an abstract principle.[12] Further, Tennent says that with the resurrection of Christ, the New Creation has already begun and therefore Christian engagement with culture should be framed in that reality.[13] He advances his argument under four theological viewpoints.
First, since God is the source of human social life, culture is reflected in His relation to nature. Therefore, culture is rooted in this creation. Second, sin distorted the culture, and therefore all cultural systems manifest both God’s creative goodness and rebellion against Him. Third, while God’s revelation occurred in a particular culture, His self-disclosure happened through the Incarnation of the Son via language, history, and his fully engaged life. Therefore, culture is transcultural in nature. Finally, through the resurrection of Christ, the New Creation has entered into history and the church lives between the “already” and the “not yet.” Therefore, we should neither reject culture completely nor accept it uncritically.[14] In sum, Tennent argues that culture should be affirmed as creation and critiqued in light of fallen nature. We should engage with culture through the Incarnation and orient it toward the consummation of the world in the New Creation.
Finally, in the seventh chapter, Tennent contends that in the light of contemporary religious pluralism and globalization, evangelical theology of religions should be grounded in Trinitarian missiology and Christocentric “revelatory particularism.” Tennent advances his argument by first placing the theology of religions within the doctrine of God the Father. Since God is the sovereign Creator and Lord over the whole universe, other faiths do not live outside of His reign. Therefore, all truth claims come under his judgment. Further, since all revelation is from God, the relationship between the general revelation and particular revelation is fundamentally theological and epistemological (that means it is not simply sociological) because it is about how God reveals himself rather than how societies shape religious life.[15]
Tennent then critiques classical exclusivism, inclusivism, pluralism, and postmodern relativism as inadequate to justify the biblical witness and proposes a theologically grounded framework in which Christ’s exclusive salvific work is affirmed along with God’s sovereign work, universally, through general revelation.[16] Evangelical theology of religions, Tennent contends, should preserve the historical truth that Jesus is the revelation of God and the only Savior; and simultaneously, it should also affirm God’s general revelation that prepares and confronts all humanity ultimately. He calls this “revelatory particularism” that stresses the “importance of revelation (both in Scripture and in Jesus Christ)” and at the same time emphasizes “the primacy of Jesus Christ.”[17] Further, “revelatory particularism” should be articulated within a Trinitarian context so that the church could be faithful to missio Dei.
The doctrine of the Trinity, says Tennent, is “the foundation and the goal of all Christian theologizing.” God, the Father, is the “source of all revelation.” This keeps the general revelation active among other religions. Christ, the Son, is the “apex of God’s revelation and the ultimate standard by which all is judged.” This creates the space to practice interreligious dialogue. God the Holy Spirit, “as the agent of the New Creation.” This places revelatory particularism in an eschatological framework and encourages us to fully participate in the New Creation.[18] In sum, “revelatory particularism” in a Trinitarian framework helps the church to actively participate in interreligious dialogue amidst religious pluralism and globalization.
Taken together, the above four key arguments, we can say that for Tennent, the mission of the church is not a secondary activity but it is its very nature because it belongs to God and the biblical narrative is intrinsically missional. The church is a missionary community by ontological necessity because mission flows from the very nature of God, His Triune identity. While participating in God’s mission, the church should engage with culture, and that requires theological discernment. Moreover, in the context of religious pluralism and globalization, evangelical theology should root its theology of religions in Trinitarian missiology and Christocentric revelatory particularism. In sum, for Tennent, the doctrine of God, church’s identity, cultural engagement, interreligious dialogue are all integrated in the framework of Trinitarian missional theology. Having said this, I will now make a brief critique on these theological positions.
First of all, Tennent’s construction of missio Dei in light of Trinitarian theology and its integration with ecclesiology, cultural theology, and theology of religions is commendable for its theological abundance and coherence. Trinitarian theology has become a significant framework to do theology during the twentieth century. It looks at the Holy Trinity as the fundamental and foundational doctrine that forms the basis for reading the Bible and understanding all points of theology.[19] Tennent identifies it in the works of Lesslie Newbigin and Kwame Bediako and affirms that missio Dei should be explicitly set in the Trinitarian framework to have “profound implications for the transmission, reception, and assimilation of the Christian gospel into the lives of people, societies, and nations.”[20] He builds on this framework and grounds the mission within the biblical metanarrative, which is noteworthy. Of course, Christopher J. H. Wright and David Bosch have already expounded mission in a Trinitarian framework, and Tennent joins with them.[21] Nevertheless, his theological arguments advance the discussion on missio Dei, yet with some challenges as well.
While Tennent’s intention in affirming mission as the foundational theme is significant, such an extreme approach could invite some tensions. Reading the entire Scriptures exclusively from a missional perspective could undermine the richness of God’s revelation and sometimes fall into the danger of eisegesis. Overstretching mission so broadly or overly totalizing the missional hermeneutic perhaps risks the mission becoming meaningless. This is why David Bosch gives a caution, citing from Neill, that “if everything is mission, nothing is mission.”[22] Further, certain pivotal practices of the church, such as worship, sacraments, contemplation, etc, also would become secondary in view of its missionary nature.
Tennent’s treatment of the election of persons or the nation Israel in the Old Testament for the blessing of other nations seems to undermine significant centripetal visions of nations. At the same time, God choosing one for the sake of many is a theological problem for missions, “the scandal of particularity,” as some scholars call it. Regarding this, Lalsangkima Pachuau says that election should be read and understood in the light of vocation of service and not an exclusive privilege. This has to be the key hermeneutic for gospel-culture and mission.[23]
With regard to the church, Tennent’s claim that the church is by very nature missional is definitely an expression of God’s ultimate purpose for the church. However, such ontological language risks idealizing the church. History witnesses the atrocities of the church, especially during the colonial period. In that case, even the church should come under the judgement of God. Lesslie Newbigin makes it clear that if the church fails to demonstrate its preaching, the gospel of Christ, then the church comes under severe judgment of God.[24] Further, while Tennent’s Trinitarian theology of culture places Christian cultural engagement within the inaugurated eschatological framework of the New Creation, the question arises whether such a framework is substantially sufficient in actual understanding. When we say culture as creation and at the same time it is also fallen because of sin, then how exactly we clarify which is good and which is fallen in a specific culture? In fact, some churches consider their own culture as good and label the practices of the marginalized as fallen. This needs to be dealt deeply especially with the political and structural issues of the society.
Finally, Tennent’s argument that evangelical theology of religions be grounded in Trinitarian missiology and “revelatory particularism” is commendable, as he seeks to balance the universality of God’s revelation and the saving work of Christ at the same time. He sincerely intends to avoid both exclusivism and inclusivism. However, even though he replaced classical paradigm of exclusivism with “revelatory particularism,” from a practical view it still seems to fall into exclusivism. This is because salvation is tied to Christ alone. Further, how does the Spirit, as the agent of New Creation, work among other faiths in a transformative way? Particularly, the preaching of the gospel, both in word and deed, has become a challenge to the church. In such a context, how does the church discern or understand the Spirit’s work in the world.
In conclusion, Tennent’s theological positions are theologically rich. His integration of mission with Trinitarian theology is helpful in understanding the church as a missionary church and offers theological approaches to how the church should engage with culture and have the dialogue with other faiths while being faithful to both God’s universal revelation and Christ’ particularism. At the same time, a few critical questions still remain with regard to the risk of an extremely totalizing missional hermeneutic. Even with regard to the idealization of the church and the practical discernment of culture’s fallen nature. Nevertheless, his viewpoints significantly advance the evangelical conversation when missional ideas from other contemporary missiologists are incorporated. Ultimately, his work challenges the church around the world to not do the mission for the sake of doing it but to rediscover its vocation in the Triune God.
Bibliography
Bosch, David J. Transforming Mission: Paradigm Shifts in Theology of Mission. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 1991.
Newbigin, Lesslie. The Gospel in a Pluralist Society. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1989.
Pachuau, Lalsangkima. God at Work in the World: Theology and Mission in the Global Church. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2022.
Schwöbel, Christoph. “The Renaissance of Trinitarian Theology: Reasons, Problems and Tasks.” In Trinitarian Theology Today, edited by Christoph Schwöbel, 1–30. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1995.
Tennent, Timothy C. Invitation to World Missions: A Trinitarian Missiology for the Twenty-First Century. Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 2010.
Wright, Christopher J. H. The Mission of God: Unlocking the Bible’s Grand Narrative. Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2006.
[1] Timothy C. Tennent. Invitation to World Missions: A Trinitarian Missiology for the Twenty-first Century (United States: Kregel Publications, 2010),54.
[2] Tennent, Invitation to World Missions, 59.
[3] Tennent, Invitation to World Missions, 105-113.
[4] Tennent, Invitation to World Missions, 114-124.
[5] Tennent, Invitation to World Missions, 125-127.
[6] Tennent, Invitation to World Missions, 127-130.
[7] Tennent, Invitation to World Missions, 130-139.
[8] Tennent, Invitation to World Missions, 139-140.
[9] He engages with H. Richard Niebuhr’s Christ and Culture and says that while his fivefold typology, ranging from “Christ against culture” to “Christ the transformer of culture,” is significantly influential, Niebuhr’s framework is finally inadequate because it is treated from a secular anthropological perspective rather than theological interpretation. Such treatment makes a dichotomy between Christ and culture and places God in a supracultural category and thus undermines the doctrine of incarnation. Furthermore, Tennent critiques that Niebuhr’s model assumes a Christendom context and such assumption is not relevant today in the post-Christendom multicultural context. Tennent, Invitation to World Missions, 159-164.
[10] Tennent explains various issues with how secular anthropologists treat culture and points out the distinctiveness of Christian understanding of culture. The primary difference is that secular anthropologist’s study or treat culture from a naturalistic perspective and whereas Christians treat it from a theological perspective (especially in the light of the doctrine of God, sin, revelation, and eschatology). Tennent, Invitation to World Missions, 168-175.
[11] Tennent, Invitation to World Missions, 175.
[12] Tennent, Invitation to World Missions, 163.
[13] Tennent, Invitation to World Missions, 174.
[14] Tennent, Invitation to World Missions, 171-183.
[15] Tennent, Invitation to World Missions, 194-195.
[16] Tennent points out that while exclusivism is committed to the authority of the Scriptures, it creates a fundamental gap between Christianity and all other religions. This undermines the reality of God’s general revelation. Further, inclusivism undermines the biblical connection between God’s will for universal salvation and the call for a conscious repentance. Pluralism and postmodern acceptance are theologically problematic because while pluralism dissolves objective revelation by relocating truth claims in subjective experience, the postmodern acceptance redefines truth from a sociological perspective that undermines the historical claims of Christianity. Tennent, Invitation to World Missions, 197-212.
[17] Tennent, Invitation to World Missions, 220.
[18] Tennent, Invitation to World Missions, 223.
[19] Christoph Schwobel, “The Renaissance of Trinitarian Theology: Reasons, Problems and Tasks” in Christoph Schwobel (ed.), Trinitarian Theology Today (Edinburgh: T and T Clark, 1995), 1.
[20] Tennent, Invitation to World Missions, 73.
[21] David Bosch. Transforming Mission: Paradigm Shifts in Theology of Mission (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 1991), 493 and Christopher J. H. Wright. The Mission of God: Unlocking the Bible’s Grand Narrative (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2006), 24, 62.
[22] Bosch. Transforming Mission, 511.
[23] Lalsangkima Pachuau, God at Work in the World: Theology and Mission in the Global Church (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2022), “Fully God and Fully Human,” https://research.ebsco.com/plink/9bdd93c5-a4cb-381f-893e-be0032c1c2be.
[24] Lesslie Newbigin, The Gospel in a Pluralist Society (Michigan: Eerdmans, 1989), 140.
Sukeerthy Voola 