JackHammer

The Bible is silent about deputation. That certainly does not mean that deputation is unlawful. Nor does it mean that we couldn’t be Scriptural and still do deputation. It is just to point out that deputation is an invention of man.

And I’m not persuaded that deputation is the best way to finance missionaries.

Of course, someone is sure, about this time, to parade out the “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” argument. But I’m not so sure that will work on this issue. Who says it ain’t broke? And what is that gray tape I see wrapped around its underside? Is it possible that we have been using this system so long, and this system is so ingrained in our way of thinking, that we no longer consider the problems inherent to the system?

Many of those who actively read and comment on this blog are Independent Baptists. Many believe that God works through the local church, that the only lawful authority for ministry is the local church. Those who hold this idea as doctrine (as I do) also believe that a missionary should be sent by his local church, and that his local church should be his authority while on the field.

And this brings up the first problem. Because, when a missionary has fifty supporting churches, he has fifty bosses. Granted, he can tell a supporting church to drop him at any time. He is not required to do what his supporting churches say. He can say, “this is what I am, and this is what I do, and you can take it or leave it.” He is not required to answer questions about his ministry, unless the questions come from his sending pastor. But the fact that he is not “required” to do any of these things does not mean he feels no pressure to do them. And who can blame him? After all, some if not all of his supporting churches have godly pastors and godly people. No doubt these supporting churches have good reasons for their expectations. It is only natural that a missionary would want his supporting churches to be happy with the job he is doing. Read the rest of this entry →

The central theme of missions, Scripturally, is not the deep burden of God from His love for lost men, but a deeply and more important motive—His desire to be worshiped.  It also speaks of why men are saved and what it is to be lost.  To be lost is to not be able to worship and praise and glorify God, and men are saved to worship and praise and glorify God.  I know this is no headline, but God, not man, is the center of God’s universe.  It is not consistent with a Biblical approach to believe, teach, or practice missions as though man were the central focus of missions. The conclusion is that doxology, that is, glorifying God, is the proper motive of missions; rather than soteriology.

The primary motive of God in the salvation of lost men in Scripture is “for the sake of His name.” There are many verses to back this up, these are just a few:

• 1 Samuel 12:22—”For the LORD will not forsake his people for his great name’s sake: because it hath pleased the LORD to make you his people.”
• Isaiah 48:9—”For my name’s sake will I defer mine anger, and for my praise will I refrain for thee, that I cut thee not off.”
• Acts 15:14—”Simeon hath declared how God at the first did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name.”
• Romans 1:5—”By whom we have received grace and apostleship, for obedience to the faith among all nations, for his name:”
• Romans 9:17—”For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth.”

There would be no reason for God to save people if He was not doing it for His glory, so that His name would be glorified, so that people would worship Him. God is concerned with the advancement of His glory. The Great Commission is the regaining of the authority of the Lord over all creation. His disciples obey His commission because He has all authority, and, therefore, out of recognition of His authority.

Spurgeon called Psalm 96 the “missionary hymn.” The children of Israel knew and were to have known that God had designs for all the children of men. It was always that through Abraham and his descendants God would bless all the families of the earth. No Jew could read this psalm and think that it was God’s will for them to remain exclusive. They were not to be of the world, but they were in the world, and they were to be multiplying the praise of God among men.

THE MANDATE TO MULTIPLY PRAISE (Psalm 96:1-3)

Sing It (vv. 1, 2a)

We are already being introduced to the evangelistic flavor by the phrase, “all the earth,” as this is the ultimate goal—to have the whole earth worshiping.  Read the rest of this entry →

The following letter is from a Robert Mickey, Jr., graduate of Fairhaven Baptist College that our church supports in Nakuru, Kenya.  Until recently, Nakuru was not affected by the riots in that country.  This is no longer true.  This letter is not about philosophy or money; it may give you a glimpse of life (albeit not normal) on a mission field.  I have removed some specifics. Updates will be posted on my personal blog, You Think Too Much.

It is difficult to put into words the magnitude of the humanitarian crisis that we are facing here in Nakuru.  We have spent the last two days trying to locate our people and then assess the needs that they have. We have found about 250 of our people in the various official and unofficial displacement camps that have been set up.  We have found others that are taking refuge in various homes in areas that are a bit safer.   For the last two days we have been feeding them and trying to get them basic necessities such as blankets, etc.  In all of the displacement camps the people are sleeping outside with no shelter from the elements.  The biggest of the camps houses almost 10,000 people and their situation is incomprehensible.  We could not even think of caring for all of them but feel a great responsibility to those members of our churches.  They are innocent in this conflict and their only crime is their tribal origin. Yesterday morning the remaining members of the Grace Bible Baptist Church voted to use the money they have been saving for the last three and a half years to put a ceiling in their auditorium to help buy food for our people who are suffering.  The amount they have saved in American dollars is nearly $2,500.  None of this money has come from the U.S. but only through their giving.  The people unanimously said we do not need the luxury of a ceiling in our building when our fellow members are suffering and dying.   Unfortunately this money will only last a few days and the need will undoubtedly last much, much longer.

I apologize for not updating everyone sooner concerning the situation in Kenya, but we have had a real problem trying to send out email.  I will quickly summarize what has happened but will not get into great detail at this time because I do not want to take away from the intention of this message which is the humanitarian crisis and help we need from you to help our people. I do intend to soon send out a more detailed explanation of the events.  I regret that some of what will be written below is very disturbing. Read the rest of this entry →

This article was written by Scott Dean, a graduate of Fairhaven Baptist College, who is serving in Ulanbaatar, Mongolia.  I also know many of the missionary examples he uses in this article and was encouraged by it myself.  I made a few adjustments to it to help it fit our WordPress blog.

It is said that David Livingstone only had the privilege of directly leading one African to our Savior, Jesus Christ. But the seeds he planted continue to grow today. A friend recently passed on to me a reference to Marvin Olasky’s article, “Fear God, work hard” in the November 10, 2007 issue of WORLD Magazine. In it Olasky points out that although Livingstone only saw one convert personally, the land of Zambia over which he traveled invites Christian missionaries to come to their country and has been a stable democracy for decades. Livingstone himself wrote in his journal, “Future missionaries will see conversions following every sermon. We prepared the way for them. May they not forget the pioneers who worked in the thick gloom with few cheering days except such as flow from faith in God’s promises. We work a glorious future which we are not destined to see.”¹

His quote reminds me of Jesus’ words to His disciples after His meeting with the woman at the well, “I sent you to reap that whereon ye bestowed no labour: other men laboured and you are entered into their labours.”²  Several years later His disciples would preach and see thousands added to the church. They certainly reaped a great harvest. But how many others had a part in sowing? We often take that verse as an encouragement to labor because we never know when we might reap. However, the verse is also an encouragement to labor because although we may never reap, others will reap where we have sown. Edward Judson made this observation about his father’s life, “The sacrifices of my father’s life were more fruitful than his labors. If you succeed without sacrifice, someone has sacrificed before you. If you sacrifice without success, someone will succeed after you.” Read the rest of this entry →

1. Marvin Olasky, “Fear God, work hard,” WORLD Magazine, November 10, 2007.
   [↩]
2. John 4:38 [↩]

I love to get home.  It’s warm and comfortable.  I feel a sigh of relief work through my body. Then I like staying home.  It’s not hard confronting the lazy-boy.  I also enjoy facing down my computer screen to write a blog—no rejections or sour looks.  I could just stay here, but I can’t.

The same could be said of the church building and the office.  I’ll teach my class.  I’ll grade the papers.  I’ll preach to a big group of friends.  I’ll stand and talk and talk and talk with another believer about the Bible.   I could just stay there, but I can’t.

We’ve got to go.  As the Father sent Jesus, so He sends us.   With the force of a command, the Lord said to go and preach the gospel to every creature.  We start with the first person and we work outward concentrically—Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria, uttermost parts of the earth.

It’s simple to understand, so why isn’t it being done?  I think it’s mainly the toasty confines that we prefer.  The world isn’t very cooperative.  We can’t make it happen.  The results are thin, hard to come by.  The spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak.  And how about rebellion?  Are believers supposed to be rebellious?  It sounds bad to think that we would rebel against the authority of Christ.

Before the Lord spoke the Great Commission, He reminded us that He possessed all authority in both heaven and earth.  It’s not like we’ve forgotten that, but just don’t act like that He has all authority.  Read the rest of this entry →

This philosophy of missions was developed by a friend of mine who is a missionary out of our church to Zambia, Africa.  I went to undergraduate and master’s classes with Dave Olson.  He then worked at our church; he pastored a small church in Nebraska; and he is now ministering in Kabwe, Zambia.  This is part two. Part one is here.

3.  Paul was Recommended

“And thence sailed to Antioch, from whence they had been recommended to the grace of God for the work which they fulfilled.”   Acts 14:26 

“And Paul chose Silas, and departed, being recommended by the brethren unto the grace of God.”  Acts 15:40 

What does it mean to be recommended?  The two verses teach two separate ideas about being recommended.  First, Paul was recommended to God, meaning to deliver to one something to keep, use, take care of, manage.  The church of Antioch realized that they had to commit Paul to God’s charge.  A local church does this as they regularly pray for their missionaries.  There must be a pleading with God that He will take care of and use each missionary.

Second, there is the idea of being recommended to others.  It is important for other churches to know that a missionary is equipped and ready.  No other church should support a missionary if that missionary is not recommended and in good standing with his sending church.  In Acts 15:40 it says, “being recommended by the brethren.”  This recommendation by the brethren stresses the importance for a missionary to have the support of his local church.

Other churches must look at the recommendation of the sending church before it considers the recommendation of a mission board.  Unfortunately, this is not the case among the majority of independent Baptists today.  The local church knows the missionary better than a board does.  Boards should not even take missionaries who have problems with their local church.  This undermines the local church, which clearly undermines the teachings of the New Testament.  Many boards supercede the authority of the local church in this area.  It is amazing that some boards are so quick to take a church’s recommendation and yet so slow to take a church’s criticism of a missionary.  Many boards adopt the missionary into their “church” family, and they speak for and take the place of the sending church.  Because of this wrong relationship, boards often take the side of the missionary instead of his sending church.  We must always remember that a truly Biblical recommendation is “by the brethren” of his local church.

4.  Paul Reaped

Paul knew firsthand that the law of sowing and reaping never fails.  Whenever there is sowing, there should be some reaping.  How much reaping is God’s business-“God… giveth the increase.“  It is important to notice that there is very little emphasis on or information about the number of converts in Paul’s ministry.  The emphasis was not on numbers, but on the power of God.  Paul always gave glory to the Lord for any results. 

5.  Paul Returned

“And when they had preached the word…they went…to Antioch, from whence they had been recommended to the grace of God for the work which they had fulfilled.”  Acts 14:25-26

Paul returned to his sending church after much missionary activity.  We call this furlough.  The issue was not whether or not they should return home.  Not returning to the sending church is not right.  Let us consider some facts concerning the missionaries’ return to their local church.

Where they Returned

Paul and Barnabas returned to their own church, “from whence they had been recommended” (Acts 14:26, 18:22-23).  When a missionary comes home on furlough, he should spend most of his time at his sending church.  Read the rest of this entry →

Scripture is not silent about financing ministry.  We have talked plenty about what we don’t see in Scripture, about the lack of any evidence of any sort of modern “deputation,” about the large gaps in Paul’s reported “support.” The Bible tells us very little about the particulars of missions support (I think on purpose). But the Bible does tell us in very certain terms where ministry money is to come from.

I realize that our theme is missions, and that our focus has been (apart from a couple of philosophical posts) primarily on money. But the intention in this post is to address the financing of ministry in general. What the Bible has to say about this applies to local churches all over the world. Since the principles were given to churches in Asia Minor, as opposed to, say, Texas, and since we would expect the churches in Texas to follow these principles, though given to churches in Asia Minor, we can safely assume that these same principles apply to churches in, say, Micronesia. And this universal principle is stated very clearly in 1 Corinthians 9:14…

Even so hath the Lord ordained that they which preach the gospel should live of the gospel.

In this brief focus on the financing of God’s work, I want to explain God’s plan for the money matters, and then apply that plan to some of the sticky issues facing us today, particularly in the realm of missions.

God’s Plan

God intends that we should reap what we have sown. Read the rest of this entry →

I want to start with disclaimers to derail what I would assume would occur with this post.  What makes this a difficult subject is that people are already invested in the present system and if changed could undermine support and livelihood.  I’m not saying that missionaries don’t have Biblical convictions about the way they did and are doing things regarding getting to the field.  They did and do.  I’m sure many missionaries would resent the idea that they are defending the way they’ve practiced based on continued flow of support money.  So let’s get it out of the way that I believe that you missionaries have reasoned this out Scripturally and didn’t get into it thinking that you went the path of tradition.

My goal really isn’t to affect present missionary support, but to think about how missionaries will get to the field in the future.  I like that churches support missionaries with their money.  Our church does and will support more.  However, this is not the direction that I’m primarily heading with our young people, that is, checks sent from churches.  I don’t want them planning on support from other churches.   Others might say that what I need to understand is that what I’m proposing just won’t work.  I’d like you to consider with me what is the Scriptural approach.

The title says “back to the future” because the model ”back” in the first century as found in Scripture could be the “future” of getting to the mission field.  Since Scripture is sufficient, I don’t believe we are to look into the Bible to justify something that we have done or do, but to find the very patterns there and make those our own.  Where we haven’t done that, I don’t assume there were evil intentions.  I figure they were mainly pragmatic or what some people would call “practical” reasons.  “And if it’s practical, well, it must be Scriptural, because God is practical, isn’t He?”  This logic defies the sole authority of the Bible, but it is commonly used.  God is more practical than us, especially because He knows everything, including the future.  He knows the problems that our swerves from Scripture can cause over several generations.  We may think we’re ‘OK’ because the situation looks good for 5, 10, 50, or 200 years.  The just shall live by faith, even in missions support.

THE TRADITIONAL ROUTE

The norm for getting to the field has been deputation, one hundred per cent support, leave to the field, stay three years, come back for one year of furlough (reporting and gaining new support), go back for three more years, and so on.  Missionaries are most often supported by numerous churches, anywhere from fifteen to one hundred churches at from ten dollars to one thousand dollars a month.  Missionaries will be on deputation usually from six months to three years, sometimes traveling the entire country to get support.  I don’t know how many churches on average must be visited to get one supporting church.  Missionaries tell me that they are often in churches of which they definitely wouldn’t be a member, but “that’s the way it goes” because “that’s just the way it is, I guess.”

Some of the missionaries would rather not have a few to many of their supporting churches.  Some of the supporting churches would rather not have certain  of their missionaries.  To get the support, usually missionaries take a pre-trip to the field to get some basic knowledge, experience, and some pictures for what is now the DVD (multi-media) and was once the slide show.  They have the requisite missionary card and maybe the brochure.  They market themselves.  Churches might expect it.  Of course, there are the incessant calls to pastors or at least their secretaries or answering machines that are par for the course.  The missionary must jump through the required hoops and this process often feels like a dog and pony show beneath the dignity of a human being.

SOME CONCERNS WITH THE TRADITIONAL ROUTE

The United States has sent out the bulk of the missionaries for the last 100 years because of Scriptural influences, tied into the financial status of the nation.  The amount of capital available in the U.S. has been greater than other countries.  The financial support flows from American churches to American missionaries in foreign lands.

But what if the American finances dry up?  They could.  We could easily reach the point where our economy will not sustain the rampant sinfulness.  And then what?  Do missionaries come home?  Do we stop sending new ones?  It seems that our missions support philosophy is tied into the success of the U. S. economy.  Can third world churches send out missionaries using our same model?  Why not?  Shouldn’t the right philosophy be able to be practiced everywhere?

Have you noticed that as money has gotten so involved in missions that the mission board has taken on a greater status?  We have all new categories of Christian “servants” with faux authority—the director, the chairman, the field representative, the field secretary, the home office manager, etc.—somewhat mirroring a government bureaucracy, siphoning off money that could go directly to the missionaries.  None of these roles even faintly appear in Scripture, and yet are now given a lofty status among Christian leaders.  I’m sure many of the men and women in these non-scriptural positions possess sincere motives and purpose.  Could something not found in the Bible be necessary to accomplish God’s work or are we merely propping up these organizations for their continued existence?

WHAT IS THE NEW TESTAMENT PATTERN?

The New Testament shows a model of tent-making, that is, the missionary laboring to support himself financially.  In Luke 10, we see Jesus send the seventy out without support to evangelize regions of Palestine.  He didn’t show support to be a necessity.  I understand that we find that Paul believed that it was his right to receive financial remuneration (1 Corinthians 9:14).  Paul got support from churches (Philippians 4:10, 15-18; 2 Corinthians 11:8, 9).  However, we have no record that he was sent from Antioch with promise of pay.   Scripture does not show that he had ongoing support from churches, but that it was hit and miss.  His regular support came from his own labor (1 Thessalonians 2:9; 2 Thessalonians 3:8).   His craft was making tents (Acts 18:3).   The pattern he took was to work the secular job of making and selling tents (perhaps repairing too) a part of the day and then carry on his preaching and teaching the other part in accomplishing his work.  He was likely taught his skill by his father as part of the child training that Jewish families practiced in order to pass on at least one means from which the son could earn a living.   He did the tent-making so that he would not be “chargeable” to those he served.  He didn’t want any strings attached to what he said and did.

WHAT HAPPENED TO TENT-MAKING?

At some point, Christian leaders started discouraing tent-making.  Some say it isn’t trusting the Lord.  Some have applied the term, somewhat derogatory, bivocational.  The man who must work in addition to his service is sometimes seen as a failure compared to the full-time man.  We must understand that Paul himself, the author of nearly half the New Testament and organizer of many churches, worked a job while he did his ministry.  Not only can it be done, but it is the way Paul did his missions work.

Instead of tentmaking, men are encouraged to go out looking for support.   Men find themselves making a presentation in a church that they don’t even want to be in.  They often find themselves attempting to minimize their doctrine so as not to be an offense, so that they can get their support.  By means of mutual support of one missionary, many churches are brought into cooperation that doctrinally and practically would choose not to be otherwise.  The deputation trail is an unrealistic trek.  There’s nothing like it in Scripture.  It is difficult on families.  Could they learn character?  Could they see examples of churches from which to learn?  It can be a positive experience to contented people who depend on God for strength and discernment.  It isn’t a way that Scripture lays out anywhere as a means of Christian growth.  For months, a family is not faithful to the assemblies of its own church or under the preaching of its own pastor or involved in the work of its own church.  And this is supposed to be the model of preparation for a field, to be out of the direct influence of its own church a few years right before the missionary takes off permanently.  And when he does come back, he’s back on the road again, away from his own church.  These are just some of the negatives of this system.

HOW COULD THIS CHANGE?

For the tentmaking to be the model, our young people will need means to earn a living to support themselves and their families.  To do so, they will need to train to make money.  We aren’t well equipped to do that in churches.   Churches often encourage members against secular work.  Based on stands of personal separation, many church parents don’t want their children to interact with the world in a pagan work environment.   As soon as children finish their Christian school or home schooling, they go off to Christian college, which also doesn’t get a young person ready to earn a living in the real world.  “Old Testament Survey” on the resume doesn’t often impress a secular employer.  The employer wants someone who knows how to make him money.

Young people leave Christian colleges and support from a church is about the only way to make it.  Parents, young people, and churches spend thousands of dollars for a college education, only to have a young person return that they have to support financially.  If not, since they have no marketable skill, they are the college graduates and even masters graduates who are flipping burgers at the local fast-food joint, which enables them to barely scrape by.  They might need two jobs to pay the rent in certain housing markets.  And how much time does that leave them to work in a church?  Very little.   I won’t go any further except to say we need to give our young people in some fashion the means to make a living that will allow time to give to ministry afterwards.  These are the kind of people with the greater potential as tent-makers to follow the model of the Apostle Paul.

This is a big subject.  I’ve barely brushed the surface, but it is something that I wanted us to think and talk about.  I welcome your comments.

This philosophy of missions was developed by a friend of mine who is a missionary out of our church to Zambia, Africa.  I went to undergraduate and master’s classes with Dave Olson.  He then worked at our church; he pastored a small church in Nebraska; and he is now ministering in Kabwe, Zambia.  This is part one.

The Bible is the basis of our faith and practice.  If we want to know what we should believe about any given topic, we should consult the Bible.  The subject of missions is no different.  Too many times we accept how churches do things as the Bible way of doing things.  We must remember that Bible policy should always outweigh church polity.

The term philosophy should not intimidate anyone.  Your philosophy is what you believe, and you will surely live what you believe.  If you are uncertain about what you believe, you will be uncertain about how to live.  If you do not know what you believe about missions, you will not know how to be involved in missions properly.  We need to get a Bible view of missions, not our own view or someone else’s view.  If our philosophy of missions is wrong, we should not be afraid to change it.

In the Bible we discover many wonderful truths about the subject of missions.  God has given us some great examples to follow in His Word.  Paul was not necessarily the first missionary, but he was an effective one.  Because there is much information on the life and ministry of Paul, he and his co-laborers provide an excellent model for modern missions.  It is very important to notice that Paul’ s activities are centered on the local church.  We will consider several relationships of Paul with the local church. Read the rest of this entry →

No doubt every missionary remembers when God finally made clear His call to the mission field. For some, this came after months of wrestling. For others, this call seemed to fit quite naturally with all that God was then doing. In every case, God did much to prepare for the calling He had in mind. God never calls where He does not equip. Having equipped, God grants clear direction and puts His mark of approval on this missionary venture.

And then, the fun really starts. There are survey trips to be taken, plane tickets to be bought, family pets to be disposed of, immunizations to be injected, one’s entire life to be packed in crates, lodging to be lined up, passports to be purchased, and (no doubt) a tear or two to be shed. You who make JackHammer a part of your routine could no doubt fill pages with the many, many things that must be done before “final boarding.”

Of the many unpleasant tasks that lie ahead for the future missionary, I can’t imagine that any is more unpleasant than the one where the future missionary picks up the phone for the very first time, and with trembling fingers, dials the number of some pastor in another part of the country, seeking the opportunity to come present his future work. On that day, he begins to display his skill at jumping through hoops while walking tightropes. Pastors everywhere seem to delight in making things as difficult as possible for the missionary seeking support. Read the rest of this entry →