Myth #1: The world has already been reached with the Gospel.
Over a hundred years ago, during the "Great Century of Missions" (1792-1914) the Student Volunteer Movement that sent out hundreds of missionaries during its existence chose this motto: "the evangelization of the world in this generation". With tremendous zeal and an abundance of optimism they set their hands to the plow, along with thousands of other missionaries, to evangelize the entire world.
Of the outcome of their efforts, only Heaven knows. We are left with mere speculation of the fruits of their labors, however bountiful they were; but, we are not ignorant of the fact that they did not fulfill their motto. The reality of the spiritual condition of the world that we live in today is startling. While Islam is the fastest growing religion in the world today, spreading its belief of violent conquest and destruction of infidels - you and me, let us not forget that over 2.5 billion people in the world today are still unreached with the Gospel. This equates to 40% of the world's population! There are over 6,000 people groups in today's world that have no witness of the Gospel.[1] These statistics speak to us of the overwhelming need for missionaries to be sent so that these peoples will hear.
The conclusion is that there are abundantly more lost people today that are perishing for lack of knowledge than in the Great Century of Missions. The Church still has a tremendous task before her.
Myth #2: The church has been planted about everywhere; the local believers in each country can finish the job.
This myth sounds good on the surface, but both statements above are, of course, false. First off, there are still many countries where no indigenous church exists, specifically those countries in the 10/40 Window. The believers that exist in these countries are not from every distinct cultural group and/or people group within that given country. Therefore, for these believers to go into unreached areas, they face a similar set of obstacles that our missionaries would face.
Most of the 6,000 unreached people groups are still unreached for a reason. Often their geographical location with harsh climates and disease-infested regions or rough mountainous terrain are deterrents to the conducting of missionary work, not to mention political barriers.
Additionally, we often falsely assume that local believers are by nature evangelistic, and want to reach their neighbors with the Gospel. It can not be said that every believer in our churches is active in sharing their faith here in North America. And the same complacency exists in third world countries. Many times local believers feel absolutely no responsibility to evangelize. Reasons include lack of teaching, lack of spiritual motivation, persecution for doing so, or a combination of these factors. Often times prejudice of a country's lower classes keeps these unfortunates from receiving the Gospel-even by local Pentecostal believers who are supposed to be "filled with the Spirit".
We must not assume that the local believers will finish the job. If the local church is not or will not do it, "how shall they hear without a preacher"? The only way a person will make it to Heaven is by receiving the Lord Jesus Christ as their Savior and repenting of their sins. Without this salvation experience, upon death they will be consigned to eternal punishment. We must act to reach them and proclaim the glorious Gospel.
Myth #3: It is the national church's responsibility to finish the job.
Excuse me for saying the obvious, but here I go anyway: The true Church is not marked by representatives of one country (like the American Church) or even from developed countries. It is a church comprised of all nations (or more accurate from the Greek: all ethnic groups). When our Lord gave us the Great Commission, he did not single out local churches or even national churches. He simply said, "Go, and teach the Gospel to all nations." The command is from Christ to all believers, and then, all believers to all the world. Therefore, each Christian is equally responsible for sharing the Gospel, regardless of race or origin. We can not put off our responsibility of involvement in foreign missions because we feel it is someone else's responsibility. The putting off of responsibility for whatever reason, while it is culturally acceptable even in many churches, does not eradicate the responsibility of every local Christian and every local church to obey the Master's bidding to evangelize the entire world.
The responsibility is the Church's; we are responsible because Jesus made us responsible. Paul said, "I am debtor both to the Greeks, and to the Barbarians; both to the wise, and to the unwise." Paul recognized that inherent in the Great Commission is the passing of responsibility from the Lord to the Church to establish the Church in the whole world. Paul viewed himself as a debtor-one that owed his life to the heathen. We are no less debtors. We owe the world our lives. The debt is not to be paid just by the national church in whatever country, but by us all. Can we truly say that we are fulfilling our part in the Great Commission? Are we continually and persistently "paying our debt" to the world by bringing them to Jesus?
And finally, while in many parts of the world a national church does exist, this church is not always developed into spiritual maturity. We strive to make missionary churches independent in the areas of government, finance and evangelism. Many times a church in the foreign field may be independent in the areas of government and finance (self-supportive), but may not have yet caught the "Macedonian Call" of missionary vision themselves. Maybe they could finish the job, but many times they are not doing so.
Myth #4: National evangelists in each country are more capable than foreign missionaries, and so missions dollars are better spent on them that in the support of our own foreign missionaries.
A fairly recent published book entitled The Revolution in World Missions, written by K.P Yohannan, founder of Gospel for Asia,makes the case that the American church should support national ministers, "native missionaries", in third world countries rather than send their own foreign missionaries, because this method is cheaper and supposedly more effective. This belief of supporting nationals instead of sending foreign missionaries existed since the very beginning of the American Pentecostal movement.
E.N. Bell, editor of the Word and Witness, an early Pentecostal newspaper, who went on to become the first General Superintendent of the Assemblies of God, believed in the support of national workers because he believed it was effective due to the national worker's familiarity with the language and culture.[2]
While national workers are familiar with their own culture and language probably better than one of our own missionaries ever will be, this mode of support has many shortcomings. There are basic inherent dangers through this type of missions support.
First, the use of foreign dollars to support national workers may have a "welfare" effect upon the national workers. What in the beginning was done by the national worker for God may now be done for a salary. This can dramatically affect the national minister's zeal for soul winning. The use of foreign funds in the paying of national workers does not promote financial independence or spiritual maturity, but rather, it often produces a debilitating dependence, that may become an unwillingness to work if not "paid" to do so. If foreign funds are ever "taken away" from the national worker(s) disastrous results may occur.
Also, there is often little or no accountability by the national worker in the use of funds sent to him, nor are we certain of the ability of the national worker to even manage money. For these reasons and more, the Assemblies of God changed their policy in the very beginning of its missionary enterprise. The problems that permeated this approach outweighed the benefits. Conversely, by sending our own missionaries, who can in turn evangelize the masses and teach the converts to be responsible, the foreign church receives a firm foundation.
The case for supporting national workers vs. sending our own missionaries need not always be an either/or situation, granted a strong relationship and accountability exists between the donor and the national worker, but I do believe that we should take seriously our responsibility to send our own and support them prayerfully and financially.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
In these brief few lines we've looked at a few missionary myths and hopefully, I've given you some things to think about. I would like to conclude with a question: Why send missionaries out from our churches at all?
I've already pointed out some possible perils of supporting national missionaries instead of sending our own missionaries, but I want to bring us full circle to the Great Commission itself.
Most important of all, sending out missionaries is biblical. Christ said, "As the father hath sent me, so send I you." A missionary is a sent one. It is God's method of bringing the Gospel of Jesus to the world. Why not rely on radio and other possible forms of technology (some say)? Because God chose by the foolishness of preaching to save the lost, and the medium is by sending a preacher: "how shall they hear without a preacher?" Testimonies abound from national believers that without flesh-and-blood messengers, the Word was not reaching them. When the Word was modeled by missionaries in sacrificial and loving service, the Gospel became real to them. And after all, radios don't exist everywhere.
God was the first to "go on mission" in the Garden of Eden, and thereafter sent messengers in the form of real people, prophets, to perform His will. And finally, He sent His only begotten Son. Now, He calls us to go to "all nations". Following in the footsteps of Jesus entails a willingness and obedience to go where He leads us. And because He is the "Lord of the Harvest" He reserves the right to govern where and when He sends His ambassadors, His messengers.
Finally, if our churches simply send sums of money instead of our sons and daughters, our vital commitment to missions will decrease. When the senders are connected with the sent, missions becomes real to those in our churches. We play a part. We share in their struggles. We share in their burdens and visions. We uphold their hands as they faithfully labor to bring the full Gospel of power and purity to the lost. We rejoice to see holiness churches established in foreign lands. And, we mourn over their loss of life as they engage in the dangerous profession of foreign missionary service. They inspire us, challenge us, and compel us to reach beyond ourselves. For these reasons and more, we must continue to support and send our own. To conclude in the words of our Great Commander, "Pray ye therefore the Lord of the harvest, that he will send forth labourers into his harvest."
[2] This Gospel Shall Be Preached, A History of the Assemblies of God Foreign Missions to 1959, Gary B. McGee, Gospel Publishing House, 6th printing, p. 79.
Dear Friends of the Ministry,
"Four Missionary Myths"