Skip to main content

Local Mission vs. Worldwide Mission

The other day a colleague of mine heard her pastor preach a sermon saying something like, 'Mission isn't about going somewhere else, it's about reaching people here at home!' We have also heard the same from mission boards here in the UK. 'We want to focus more on local mission.'

Why the switch from overseas mission to local mission?

I think there are several factors we need to consider:

  1. Our God is too small, to paraphrase J. B. Phillips. We believe God can help us reach folk in our neighbourhood, but the idea of going somewhere completely different, with another culture and language, seems too far fetched. Also, deep down we may believe that, actually, they are OK with their beliefs and practices, and we have little to share with them. This is tantamount to believing that each region has its own god, and ours is only in charge of the local patch.
  2. We have believed the lie that short-term is better than long-term mission. This has turned mission service into mission tourism, which is also fine, and better than getting sun-soaked on a beach in Greece, but does little to further the Kingdom. The trouble with focusing on short-term mission is that it ticks a box, and we think we've done something significant. Really?
  3. We have heard that the church is growing elsewhere, but not here. This makes us think that we need help, rather than wanting to send people to serve elsewhere. But this is not a universal truth. There are still many many unreached areas of the world. If you believe the church is growing elsewhere, then look into where it is growing (Korea, sub-Saharan Africa, etc.), and stop sending folk there! Only kidding. But seriously, there are many places in Asia, for instance, where the gospel has not yet begun to have an impact.
  4. I also suspect that our failure to send folk overseas means we have lost faith in the gospel, and therefore our local mission is also doomed to failure. It's not about getting people through the door into church, but about going to where they are, to the 'next village' as Jesus said (Mrk 1:38). We can't spend all our time in the local synagogue.
I could go on, but I think you have got my point. When will we get our vision back? When will we start believing in the God of Sinai, who made the mountain shake as he revealed his word to us there on that summit? (Exo, Heb, with thanks to Craig Blomberg for the idea). 

Comments

  1. Yes! As George Verwer used to say: "We have swallowed 'grasshopper theology!'" That is, the spys went into the promised land and saw all the difficulties and forgot abour our miracle working LORD! Grace, Scott

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Flow Chart for Bible Translation (a Relevance Theory Approach)

One of the current theories behind modern translation work is Relevance Theory. [1] Here is a flow chart that explains the process often used to produce a draft when using such an approach: *Make sure your translation committee makes the decision as to what kind of translation they want. A domesticated translation is one that submits to dominant values in the target language [2] whereas a foreignized translation is one that is happy to import foreign terms and ideas from Hebrew, Greek, or the language of wider communication such as the Greek term baptizo . The chart looks something like this: Text                                   Communicated Ideas                  Context A sower went out to sow  A farmer went out to sow grain   People scattered/threw seed etc. The text has very little information, but behind i...

Asset Based Bible Translation (ABBT)

Many of you will have heard of asset-based community development (ABCD). How can Bible translation programmes be asset based, rather than deficit based? The best way to look at this is a comparison table: Deficit based Asset based Driven by outsiders Driven by the community Outside funding Community funded Done to meet a need Done to help the community grow Quality control done by a consultant Community checked and approved Control from outside-in Lead by stepping back Products not accepted? Products are accepted Little engagement Engagement with products Scientific Organic Not sustainable Sustainable Of course many translation programmes these days are neither one nor t'other, they are somewhere between these two extremes. Nevertheless, this illustrates a point, and shows that the current ...

The Problems and Pitfalls of Proof-Texting

Why is it wrong to proof-text when making an argument?  Proof-texting is when someone simply quotes a verse from the Bible, out of context, to make a point. This can be in a book, a conversation, an essay, or a sermon, to give some examples. I just did a quick read of some other blogs on this topic, and none of them wowed me, so I thought I'd write my own. Then I had an even better idea: why not get you to tell me why proof-texting is problematic? In other words, I want to crowd-source the problem, and get lots of input. Since it is my suggestion, and I already did some research, let me get the ball rolling. Proof-texting is problematic because: It ignores the original context of the verse. There are actually two types of context: The literary context of the verse, that is, the verse is situated in a passage (that might be making an entirely different point) of Scripture that has a certain genre. For instance, the book of Acts is narrative, which means it is descriptive of what hap...