SBC MISSIONS METHODOLOGY

[Hardsheller]

Anthro

You Wrote - "As the history of Southern Baptists are REPLETE with (e.g. with slavery), they later changed some over the very thing they once fought for on supposed Biblical grounds with me in the trial! I will spare you the rehash of SBC history along these lines that indicates this to be a long, sad, sad thread of continuity among them."

As you continue to write, we are beginning to get more and more of a profile of who you are and where you have been. So you were once an SB Missionary? Or did this "court trial" that you refer to happen in a local church?

I am interested in your concept of Missions/Evangelism methodology as I have been involved in Missions for over 20 years in non-SBC places.

Please elaborate.

 

[Anthro]

I was not with the IMB but doing missions to transnational communities in the U.S. under a huge SBC church at the time. Thankfully, many in the IMB have supported contextual approches to evangelizing for some time, and do. Others no, or less so. That said, there are some places in the world where the unbendable rule to plant indigenous BAPTIST churches does not fit well; nor any individualistic approach, etc.

Get a load of this: At my trial, I even used http://www.tconline.org/Stories/April01/April01_friend.html from the IRB magazine in support of my position to evangelize in a contextual way, but these Pharisaical ones would have none of it. I would never want to say that all SBCs are this way, thank God, as the example of the above missionary even shows.

The 16th century figure Roger Williams, who founded what turned into Baptists in America, had his share of trials and ostrcizations from ruling religious persons of his day. As it turned out, he was right. The SBC started over the issue of slavery. The Northern Baptists were right. On matters of succession, the SBC has ostracized some and later turned and reversed their position, etc.

As it later turned out, I was right over this issue. The main person involved in my "trial" is now gone from that church.

If I had a magic wand I would wave it such that every Christian in the U.S. had to take the following course on missiology, which I took in 1986: http://www.perspectives.org

[ April 25, 2003, 02:33 PM: Message edited by: Anthro ]

 

[Squire Robertsson]

Anthro: it is the very diversity of methods God uses to reach the world that there is such a diversity of mission outreachs (be they based directly out of a local church, through a mission board or other mission organization). In earlier years, we saw the founding of such outreachs as the China Inland Mission under Hudson Taylor and Africa Inland Mission under C.T. Studd. CIM and AIM were organized because Brothers Taylor and Studd became unable for many various and sundry good reasond to serve under the established "Boards" of their day. Further, we would not still be reading of Georg Meuller of Bristol if he had operated in the "accepted" fashion of his day.

 

[Anthro]

Amen. Amen a hunderd times over. And boy oh boy, I bet we could list out many more folks to further your illustrate your good point.

What I call "one-size" or "one-method" evangelism is the problem. Non-specialized Boards should never specialize in one method, and should be ready to adapt.

While the core message (the Person of Christ) is eternal, the methods and other parts of the message, I have learned, can, AND SHOULD, be tailored to the cultures and many other factors of the your audience.

Example: Evangelizing Muslims, evangelizing Papuans, evangelizing Mexican Catholics, evangelizing Buddhist--all of these require particualrized approaches.

 

[Squire Robertsson]

True, but one's goals are determined by one's presupositions. In my case (and this shared by many of the brethren so I'm not standing out in a cornfield.), my goal as a missionary is to sow the seed ("preaching") of the Gospel, nurture (discipling) such growth as God causes in my field, and planting (or helping to plant) NT Churchs. Keeping in mind that in all

God has not called Christians to succeed. He calls us to be faithful.
D. C. Innes

I know of a missionary in the mountains of Northwest Mexico. The brother hasn't "preached" for years on the field. He is too busy going from village to village training and exhorting Believers as they carry out the work of the ministry.

 

[Anthro]

Well of course the whole point it to get the gospel across. Shall I use the same message and words and methods to win Mexican Catholics as I would Muslims as I would Vodousaints in Haiti? It is ignorance, pure fooolishness, or Pharisaism on the part of the one who would.

In many ways, I am really only talking about Sound Missiology 101.