Andrew

This is really good. If I was going to modify it, it might to be rethink whether ‘strategy’ is the right word for your second category—because depending on how you define it, some aspects of ‘strategy’ are matters of right and wrong. So the overall strategy of gospel ministry is a biblical given—Prayer, Proclamation and People is one way of expressing it. This is something to fight for.

But the practical, day-to-day implementation of this strategy—what is often referred to as ‘tactics’—is in the famous words of Daryl Kerrigan “a bit iffy”.

Come to think of it, I’m only agreeing with you that we ‘fight for the God-given biblical principles’—so long as we recognize that some of those biblical principles are also methodological ones.

TP

@ Tony.

I agree 100% with what you are saying.  I think I was using strategy in a 5 year goal planning sense.  If we as a staff team have to make decisions about where we go next, we should first outline all the Biblical principles and be agreed on them AND THEN we can discuss the plans.  I call it strategy, but you may be right - tactics may be a better word. 

God is the general and provides the overall strategy. We are field officers who apply tactics as we plant churches, start ministries, publish books etc..

@Everyone

After writing this post mid-last week I read Pete Ko’s blog talking about Driscoll’s “Vintage Church”.  He has four levels of certainty.

Decide for, Debate for, Divide for or Die for.

These may fit in as sub-levels in my first two points:

1. Fight for the truth (choose whether “to die for” it OR “divide over” it)
2. Argue for what works (“debate for” it OR “decide for” it if it doesn’t matter too much )

I’m very interested in Driscoll’s approach.  I’d like to read his book.
There are some truths more worth fighting over than others and some tactical decision more worth arguing over than others.