Postman's Body Syndrome

I heard not long ago that the average American citizen gains eight pounds over the holidays, but then loses only about four of them. That adds up over the years, leaving a lot of us wishing we could lose some of that weight. We know that if we could stop snacking and eat only at appointed mealtimes we might start to lose some of those unwanted pounds. If we should get serious about it and add about five miles of walking every day, we could really drop the weight. But, what about people who do both things, but don’t seem to lose weight?

I read an article in a running magazine about mail carriers whose jobs require them to follow this regimen but who are still overweight. They called it the postman’s body syndrome. The explanation for the phenomenon is that our bodies become very efficient at performing repetitive tasks. The amount of effort that our bodies expend in the beginning of an exercise program diminishes as we get in shape. The article was explaining why runners must change their routines, get out of their comfort zones, and challenge their endurance levels if they want to continue setting personal records and improving overall fitness. The runner who logs four miles every day on the same course can initially get in good shape, but then actually lose some of his fitness over time instead of continuing to lose weight, increase aerobic endurance, or build muscle.

I see the spiritual equivalent of this principle regularly – in me and in some around me. When a new believer begins to grow in Christ and practices spiritual disciplines, pursues godliness, and seeks to deny himself for Christ and His kingdom, great personal changes and advances are made. Yet after a while, these disciplines become such a part of his daily routine that very little effort is required to maintain them. In fact, it may be more of a bother to him when he misses them for some schedule-wrecking reason. His life’s comfort zone now includes prayer, Bible reading, and wearing outward Christianity wherever he goes.

Over time, the absence of any true exertion, challenge, self-denial, and fresh experience with Christ yields a spiritually flabby, easily winded disciple. This helps explain why we may be a little disappointed when we meet one of our Christian heroes. Perhaps there was a time when they led the charge, won great battles, shut the mouths of lions, or opened some mission field, but they have coasted since then. I think Paul saw the danger when he wrote, “Brothers, I do not consider that I have made it my own. But one thing I do: forgetting what lies behind and straining forward to what lies ahead, I press on toward the goal for the prize of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus. Let those of us who are mature think this way, and if in anything you think otherwise, God will reveal that also to you. Only let us hold true to what we have attained.” Philippians 3:13-16

When a Bible college or seminary professor is rude, when a pastor sins, or when a trusted friend who discipled you acts hypocritically, be patient and pray for them. In many cases, they sacrificed and served with radical commitment to Christ’s causes, and people idolized them and put them on a pedestal. They started to believe the wonderful things people said about them—as if they made it happen. They now find great comfort being around people who confirm what they had suspected all along—that they are specially gifted, choice servants that God has given the world. The difficulty is that there is much truth in what people say about them, but they have done it so well for so long that it requires little effort to keep the plate spinning on top of the stick. And so they coast.

I pray that I will never be satisfied with the spiritual equivalent of eating only at appointed mealtimes and carrying a mailbag four or five miles a day. I want to advance in godliness, pursue holiness, and develop spiritual fitness. I don’t want to rest merely in having attained what is admirable to those who are just beginning their race. And, to the degree that I have already done so, I repent. Pray for me, as I will for you.

Pray for the Persecuted Church

This time of year, many evangelical churches turn their attention to the international mission fields. There are several reasons for this renewal of missions awareness. Southern Baptists begin to promote and receive donations for the Lottie Moon Christmas Offering and send every penny of it to their international missionaries. This is also the time of year that US citizens begin to think of charitable donations on their annual tax returns and giving to missionaries before the year ends. In addition, November 8 is the International Day of Prayer for the Persecuted Church and we remember that some people are truly suffering for Christ today.

The Southern Church is growing and as it does so, light is shining into some dark places. The devil hates the advance of the gospel into areas that he has kept blinded for so long and so he fights hard to resist it. Yet, the gates of hell cannot prevail against the onslaughts of those who storm them in Jesus’ name. But, the hard-won advance comes at a high price. A missionary who serves in North Africa told me that as far as he knows, every Muslim he has won to the Lord has been martyred. He also told me that in one North African country the life expectancy of a new believer is forty-five days. This is not news to the new believers; they know that this is a possible outcome when they pray to receive Christ.

We hear such reports and we are sobered. We shake our heads in wonder and horror that such could be the case. Our mission agencies seek strategies and methodologies to protect their missionaries and the new converts. We do so because we live in such luxury, security, and ease that suffering for Jesus sake is virtually inconceivable. We react with grief to news of martyrdom as if it were an unforeseen, unimaginable tragedy.

We apparently have forgotten that Paul told Timothy, “In fact everyone who wants to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted.” Or that Jesus Himself said, “In the world you will have tribulation.” We haven’t time to rehearse all the passages that describe how God’s people throughout the Bible suffered for being His. Yet our lives are so isolated from the New Testament expectations for Christianity that when we see others faithfully serving and suffering for it, we tend to think that they brought it on themselves for being so radical. Hebrews 10 commends those who stood with the suffering believers during their hour of persecution. May we join the ranks of the suffering – or the ranks of those who identify with those who do – however the Lord chooses.

There is a great tragedy in suffering, tribulation, and persecution for Christ’s sake. However, the tragedy is not what we normally think it is. The greatest tragedy of suffering, tribulation, and persecution for Christ is that we are strangers to it. “In fact everyone who wants to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted.”

Memorial Day- September 21, 2009

Yesterday was one of those travel days you hope to avoid, and once you’re in the middle of one, you hope to forget it as soon as possible. At least it started out that way. I was trying to fly through Atlanta to make it home to see my bride and catch a bit of sleep before an early class today. My first indication of plans gone awry was the long lines and grumbling passengers when I arrived at the tiny but congested airport where I began my journey homeward. Terrific thunderstorms around the country coupled with resulting flooding in Atlanta had canceled my flight, but I was able to get rebooked on the 1:00 PM Atlanta flight- which left at 6:00 PM! I arrived in Atlanta after a kidney-punching flight and walked into an airport that resembled a scene from a made-for-TV disaster movie. Of course, all outbound flights were delayed for hours and while we waited, I slipped into my anthropologist role to study the people.

Five young men who would be flying to Louisville with me really caught my eye. They seemed both nervous and excited as they met and became friends, and with just cause, as they had just enlisted in the Army and were on their way to basic training and their military careers. I remember those days of Air Force basic training with all of its emotions and trials. Their young lives were about to radically change. At last, we all boarded and, while the atmosphere was thick with the tension of road-weary travelers, everyone behaved and kept their sanctification. Some even joked good-naturedly to ease the stress of those around them although no one could manage more than a slight smile at the effort.

Just before we pushed back from the gate, the captain came into the passenger cabin and informed us that our plane was carrying a fallen soldier home. He explained that the military escort was on the plane with us and said, “I know that you are tired and that this has been a long and trying day for all of you. However, I would like to ask that when we get to the gate in Louisville, if you would be so kind, please allow the escort to leave the plane first so he can deliver the body to the waiting military detail on the tarmac for a short ceremony.” Everyone seemed stunned and sobered by the news. No one spoke. Suddenly, in the time it took the captain to speak those words, our terrible travel experiences were put in perspective. All of the frivolity of returning vacationers, stress of tired passengers, and timetables of business people paled into insignificance. Below us in the plane was the body of a man who had gone into harm’s way and died serving our country.

The total and tacit agreement of respect was obvious and demonstrated as no one moved when the arrival chime sounded the clearance for us to gather carry-on bags and leave the plane. The escort left to fulfill his duty and responsibility, and then we began to deplane. As we did so, we noticed that the ramp outside was illuminated by a dozen patrol vehicles with their lights flashing, flanked by uniformed police officers standing at attention. One by one, the disembarking passengers stopped and gathered at the terminal’s glass wall to watch and “participate” in the ceremony to honor this fallen hero. The military detail marched to the plane to receive the flag-draped casket and then marched away to a respectful distance as two private vehicles drove up bearing family and friends. Our hearts were in our throats as we watched the family approach the casket that waited in darkness on the ramp. They reached up and placed their hands on it. Some reached hands under the flag, as if to get as close as they could. I wondered whether denial made them want to open it to prove that some horrible mistake of identity had occurred. I could not help but imagine the last time they would have seen him—all smiles and excitement as he was deployed. I wonder whether he suspected he might come home this way. I also wondered what the new recruits who were just beginning their military careers must have been thinking—surely this would not be the first time they considered this as a possibility. All of us have read news accounts of the many soldiers earning our freedom who came home this way.

Still, when you see it in the middle of the night, in the middle of an airport, amid the normally racing and rushing crowd now in seeming suspended animation, it shakes you. When you hear your heart pounding and breaking for a man and a family you never knew, in a vacuum of profound silence that you are sharing with yet other strangers in such an unplanned and unforeseen somber gathering, it grips you. It reorders your priorities. It reminds you of what is important.

We watched the precise and formal military detail complete their duties to receive this fallen soldier with the honor that he deserved . . . that he earned. Some rough and tough-as-nails-types watched with hearts full and eyes brimming. Others wept. Others waited until we got home.

When the hearse door was closed, we began to disperse . . . one by one. The move to go home was not en masse, but one at a time. It seemed that each one was praying before they left, or making a mental note about something important, or remembering a promise they thought they would never forget. Unfortunately, this kind of ceremony and the receiving of a loved one’s earthly remains happen often, but this seemed unique somehow. Surely, it was not just I who felt that God was near and moving. We went home, but not the same. We had each been changed by what we witnessed.

September 21 did not start out to be Memorial Day, but it was.

To all of you who are serving our country and willingly stepping into harm’s way for our sake, Thank You.

To all of you who have sent your sons and daughters, brothers and sisters, husbands and wives, and moms and dads, Thank You.

And, to those of you who have received your precious one back in such a solemn ceremony, and now pass the days remembering, Thank You.

It may not help, but I promise to remember, too.

Great Commission Resurgence

An advertisement for Ligonier Academy in Table Talk magazine reports that 16,000 pastors leave the ministry every year. Is that a staggering statistic to you, too? In addition to the ones who leave the ministry, think about the number of men who are forced out of churches, or those who remain but are burned- out while serving them. So many men have lost their focus or they serve in churches that have. This same phenomenon occurs in missions and denominational ministry as well. Some missionaries, and often the administrators who serve them, are tired of ministering in gospel-hostile places or of trying to convince others of the wisdom of a course of action. Some find themselves in poorly defined ministries with fuzzy objectives, yet taking the heat for not producing as others expect, and it is taking its toll. It might be funny in the comic strip Dilbert but it’s not in ministry.

We Southern Baptists are praying for the Great Commission Resurgence in our churches. We are praying for those on the task force whom we have charged with finding a way for us to be more faithful to the commission Christ has given us. Frankly, we all see that with the passage of time the structure of our convention is at best dysfunctional in some aspects and counter-productive to stated goals in others. An air of cautious excitement is blowing. We wonder whether we dare to hope that under God and by His blessing, our combined numbers, dollars, and efforts could cooperate to reach and teach the nations, as we should. I am one who dares to so hope and believe that the prompting for this renewed emphasis has a divine origin. The changes that will allow us to be more faithful to the Great Commission in the USA and the world will not be minor. Almost certainly, the changes brought by time will inform the way we divide tithes and offerings, organize ourselves by state and/or associational structures, and even organize our mission boards. I am not suggesting here what those changes should be, only that they seem inevitable.

In recent days, I have noticed an element that I had not sufficiently understood and appreciated in my zeal for needed change. It is patently obvious, and most of you are surely ahead of me in this. I have thought more of the ministers and families who are hanging on tenterhooks. While I believe that the resurgence and the changes it will require are essential and must be carried out, I am praying for many men and their families as well. I am praying for the families who know that Dad’s job is tentative at best. Many also know that Dad is at a point in his career when another ministry hiring him is not as likely as it once was, and that the current economic situation in our country only exacerbates their concerns.

Sadly, some talk about the changes saying, “It is time that the fruitless tree gets the axe.” Is it possible that the lack of fruit is due to the poorly defined ministry objectives they were given, or more likely, the fact that they are ministering in systems and structures that are no longer pertinent or viable in our times? Indeed, this is the very argument we are making to change them.

Of course, I am not arguing against the Great Commission Resurgence, rather I am arguing and praying for it. I am praying for its success and God’s blessing on those who seek to facilitate it. I am simply calling us to be sensitive to and pray for all those in state conventions or mission boards who have lost their jobs in these times or whose livelihoods are threatened by changes that are sure to come. Imagine the burden that the provider feels to not only meet the threat, but also to guard himself and his family from the root of bitterness toward those who threaten. This burden seems too heavy for them to bear alone, so the Word tells us to “Bear one another's burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ.” Gal. 6:2

I pray that the inevitable changes will not cause a spike in the 16,000 who leave the ministry annually. I hope it doesn’t sound too Pollyanna to say that I pray we can find places of ministry for those serving in positions that are changed or eliminated. I pray that God will show us how to incorporate every soldier into the effort – perhaps with new divisions, new deployments, and new leaders, or changes I cannot even imagine – but with us all still together for the glory of Christ and the advance of His kingdom.

Tweet Tweet

Who is the most godly Christian you know? Do you know anyone whom the New Testament would commend as an example for twenty-first century Christians? Is it one of those we consider to be the Christian superstars? Nope, not for me either. Although we are told to imitate Christ, it seems that some modern Evangelicals have exchanged the biblical expectations and guidelines for their own – even as they judge the secular world for having done the same. Consider Jesus, the Good Shepherd, the Suffering Servant, our Teacher and Model for this life and the next. Jesus is the Lion of the tribe of Judah and also the meekest example of humility and holiness. Can you honestly imagine Him walking the talk of many modern ministry-heavyweight-wannabe’s?

Like many of you, I reluctantly entered into the world of virtual social networking, primarily swayed by the argument that it would be a good way to stay in touch with friends and family. However, reading the Facebook updates and Twitter tweets that inundate the web through the day makes me suspect that their primary purpose is self promotion. Increasing numbers of Christians seem to be in a race to plaster their names across the Internet along with any clever thoughts that pop into their heads during the day. Does anyone really believe that these men just spontaneously decide to tweet or update that their wife is the greatest thing since night baseball, makes the best tacos, is a Supermom, or is a Proverbs 31 woman? Especially when they sound so remarkably similar to other tweets that just appeared from their colleagues? Perhaps I am just suspicious by nature, but I wonder whom they are really trying to convince or impress? I mean, honestly.

If we really concentrate, we might possibly be able to imagine a world where it would be okay to let our closest friends and family members know what we are eating tonight, what we are listening to, or relate something funny that we just saw. But many of the nervous Twitterers and frequent Facebookers have thousands of people in their networks. Could there be a crowd of several thousand people that really needs to know whether or not you are going to make this flight and how you feel about that, or what you and your wife will do on your date-night this week? Don’t get me wrong, I think we need to celebrate the achievements of our brothers and sisters, even beyond our close friends and family, and give honor and congratulations to the deserving. But where is the Christian virtue of humility?

Someone has said that humility is not thinking less of yourself, just thinking of yourself less. Enter Twitter and Facebook. Humility used to guide believers to wait and let others praise them and not do it themselves. The heroes of yesteryear who reluctantly received the crowd’s adulation have been replaced with shameless personal promoters who peddle their self-made brand to as many as possible by all means possible—under the guise of social networking. I will admit that these folks seem to be larger than life superstars with all the news that’s fit to tweet, if it’s all true, but seriously, all this genuflecting is making my pants baggy.

It seems that many of them have begun to believe their press clippings and book blurbs. It seems that many followers and “friends” have been sucked in, too. Recently, a ministry super leader tweeted about a speech he had made and folks began to chime in to congratulate him on his wisdom, citing sound bites from “his” speech that were well-known quotations from past Christian leaders. Sadly, there was no correction of the mistaken attribution. The only sounds were the echoing accolades, “one greater than Moses is among us.”

Even sadder is the growing number of young men and women who are wannabe’s. They actually seek counsel regarding how they can create and promote their personal brand. One young student recently asked me how often and what topics of his life he should tweet. Really?

Remember Jesus? I have tried to imagine Jesus tweeting and sending Facebook updates like many that I see.

“Just healed a blind man.”

“Lunching today with chief tax man in Jericho @Zacchaeus.”

“Walked on water this evening, disciples amazed I could calm a storm. lol.”

“Fed 5,000 men and their families with a boy’s lunch today.”

“Washed the disciples feet. Being intentional to exercise and model humility.”

“Check my reviews from the crowds last Friday. #Jerusalem”

Yet again, I see the vast gap between what I know about me and what I know about Jesus. I too have occasionally fallen into the pattern of tweeting every thought that flitted through my head and shared good news that was really more of a way to brag about how great or show how clever I am. I hope that the painfully slow progressive sanctification of my life has reached a level where I can put that to death and edify others, glorify Christ, and seek first His kingdom and righteousness.

He's Here, but I'm Not. I'm Here and Not There.

I am in Iqaluit, Nunavut near the Arctic Circle in Canada leading an ethnographic research team from The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. A NAMB missionary to Prince Edward Island has come with us for the week and he tells me that this is the very first Southern Baptist witness and intentional ministry effort in Nunavut. Nunavut was carved out of the Northwest Territory about ten years ago and represents about a fifth of the land mass of Canada, although it has only 29,300 people in an area the size of Western Europe. It is also home to the Inuit people, who were traditionally known as the Eskimos. I have a great interest in indigenous peoples and animism, and this place is ground zero for studying both. Much of what we know about animism was learned from the shamanism of this part of the world. You would think that I would be about as excited as I could get, but something even more exciting is going on elsewhere.

Sunday night, July 12 at 10:23, a red-haired, blue-eyed, 7 pound 12 ounce, 20 inch baby boy was born in Louisville, Kentucky. His name is Abraham Michael Sills and he is my first grandchild. It was hard to be here and not there to welcome him when he arrived. But being here and away from all the excitement and high fives also gave me sanctuary. I spent time in prayer and the Scriptures waiting for emails to come through giving me updates along the way. What a thrill it was to finally get the message from my daughter that he was here and healthy and beautiful. Bittersweet does not begin to express the emotions of the joy and pain.

I pray that God will bless him, keep him, save him in His perfect time, and use him mightily to advance the kingdom. I also pray that this week will be used by God to begin a work here that will swell to awakening throughout the Inuit people and beyond. Please join me in praying for both.

Waiting for Abraham

As is true in all aspects of life, blessings are bittersweet. So many new believers who rejoiced in their salvation have also reflected sadly on the family members who have died without Christ. Job promotions with pay raises often come with responsibilities that keep Dad from home as much as he was before. Young men who make the football team realize that it comes with two-a-day practices in the heat of the year. And the greatest blessings parents have are their children, who also bring pain and a strain along the way. My career allows me to influence pastors, missionaries, churches, and non-Christians all over the world. I get to travel to places that most people only dream about, but it also keeps me away from home more than I would choose.

Right now, I am about to pack for another trip. This time it is to Nunavut, Canada in the Inuit country of the far northeast. It will be the first Southern Baptist excursion into the territory. Iqaluit is almost to the Arctic Circle—a place where polar bears hunt people and where the true Eskimo people live (although the people prefer Inuit to Eskimo).

As fun as all that sounds, much bittersweet comes with it. My son and daughter-in-law are expecting my first grandchild, Abraham Michael. Although he is officially due the day I return, he could come any day now. I pray that he will wait until his Papi gets back, but I pray even more that his Mom will be safe and healthy and that Abraham will be normal and perfect—and that he will arrive to us in God’s perfect time, no matter what day that happens to be. Please pray with me that all will go well. I assure you that I will be with them in hourly prayer no matter where I am geographically, but how sweet it would be to be there when he comes.

Pray for the team I am taking, pray for Christopher and Carol, and pray for young Abraham.

Short Term Missions

I just returned from leading orientation for 100 IMB summer missionaries. These young people will be serving throughout the Peruvian Andes to extend the footprint of the IMB presence in Peru, represent their churches, and glorify God by extending His kingdom. While our orientation covered issues such as the worldview of oral cultures, spiritual warfare, Andean animism, and syncretism, the theme of the week was the missionary call.

Virtually every student there indicated a desire to surrender to completely God’s will. But they were also uncertain what that would look like. When I asked these radically committed young people how many knew that God had called them to serve as an overseas missionary and live in another country the rest of their career, only one or two raised their hands. Increasingly, young people see short-term missions as a viable option in their lives. I regularly hear young people expressing a desire to go for only a couple of years. Is that okay?

Two truths are at work in the answer. One, there is no substitution for the career field missionary. The missionary who knows the language, culture, laws, customs, worldview, and churches and testimonies of local believers is an essential and invaluable resource for short term missionaries. Two, short term missionaries are like the sunrise; it is going to happen every day until Jesus comes back whether you like it or not. Rather than debate about whether short term missionaries are the best utilization of human and financial resources, we need to strategize how best to employ them.

God educates short term missionaries and exposes them to cultures and worldviews in ways that would have been impossible in their home contexts. This exposure is often how God begins to reveal to them His missionary call on their lives. The late Ralph Winter said, “God cannot lead you based on information you do not have.” The information gained on short term missions experiences guides some to career service on foreign fields, others to return to the USA to pastor missions-minded churches, and still others to ministries mobilizing the church for missions.

As I point out in The Missionary Call, there is no biblical example of career missionary service if that means going to serve in one place for the rest of one’s life; rather the missionary call is dynamic and always developing. But I strongly affirm the wise stewardship of the career missionary model. Several of our seminary presidents have challenged their students to consider short term missions—especially while young and less encumbered. At least one well-known church in our convention encourages their high school grads to spend a year on the mission field before college. In this way, young people can see and consider the claims of Christ in their lives before their adult years and responsibilities begin to cloud their vision. Of course, this is also a legitimate way to serve Christ in itself. While the missionary call is a life-long call, the guidance for fulfilling that call may lead to the field for a time, to the pastorate, to a missions minister position, to missions mobilization, or to being a prayer warrior for missions.

I was so encouraged by the character and commitment of the summer missionaries that I met in Peru last week. I am also thankful for the SBC, IMB, and their missionaries to Peru who make short term missions possible for all these summer workers. I hope that they will keep the flame of missions zeal at a white hot fever pitch all of their lives, no matter where and how God leads them to fulfill it.

Reclaiming Contextualization

New missionaries often struggle to communicate God’s Word faithfully to other cultures—or at least they should. Some cultures have seven primary colors, others recognize only four, and some only have the ideas of shiny and dull. Given these realities, how would you translate Isaiah 1:18, “Come now, let us reason together, says the Lord: though your sins are like scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they are red like crimson, they shall become like wool” in a culture that doesn’t have scarlet, white, red, snow or wool? Which word best describes Jesus going to Emmaus, or Jesus walking on water in Zulu which has 120 words for walking? The Malagasy-speaking peoples of Madagascar distinguish over 200 kinds of noises and recognize over 100 colors. One missionary in the Congo consistently used a phrase for “crying out” to describe John the Baptist or the Old Testament prophets until one day he discovered that this referred to the kind of crying that little babies did in their cribs. We must acknowledge that faithfully rendering God’s Word in another culture and language is not an easy task.

Preachers and missionaries must continually strive to communicate the gospel so their hearers may understand the message and embrace Christ as their only hope of salvation. Effective gospel communicators take into consideration their cultural context, especially when preaching to the unreached or unchurched. Today, a controversial debate, pitting brother against brother, is brewing, and threatens to boil over. John MacArthur, Phil Johnson, and others speak of contextualization negatively and believe that it obscures the gospel. Mark Driscoll and others advocate what they call contextualization as the only way to make the gospel relative to people today. Unfortunately, the rhetoric swirls around the use of foul language and sexual references in the pulpit. The result is an inaccurate use of the term contextualization that threatens this essential tool of Christian communicators.

When someone argues that Paul never contextualized the gospel and so they do not either, it is obvious that someone has redefined the term contextualization. They have labeled the other extreme’s use of foul language or sexual themes in sermons as contextualization, and have thrown the baby out with the bath water. The reality is that these very detractors contextualize every Sunday. They preach in English, not Greek or Hebrew, they wear suits and ties, not robes or togas, and they illustrate their sermons with modern life, not from daily life of ancient biblical times. If we forbid contextualization as a threat to the gospel, we will be allowing ourselves the luxury of having something that our hearers may never have—a gospel that they can understand. When detractors of contextualization travel, even then they “contextualize” by eating available local foods, using the national currency, or driving on the left hand side of the road. When they preach or teach those with lower levels of academic attainment, they simplify the same sermon that they preached to a more advanced congregation back home. The problem is not the practice of contextualization; it is a misunderstanding of what the word means.

Some mistakenly believe that contextualization means making Christianity look just like the culture. However, contextualization is simply the process of making the gospel understood. The only reason to utilize filthy language or to reference explicit sexual behavior would be if the local culture communicated used filthy language in every conversation so much that no message would make sense without it. Television programs without such language would require subtitles for them, as they would not understand the message without filthy language and sexual anecdotes. Of course, this is not the case. In fact, much of what many call contextualization is simply an effort to be trendy and edgy. It may be effective, it may attract a hearing, it may not be offensive to the hearers, but that is not contextualization; that is marketing.

When these brothers are invited to preach in a traditional church or conference where all the other preachers wear coats and ties, they often refuse to “fit in” and insist on T-shirts, jeans, flip flops or sneakers. They hope to communicate that they are not “your dad’s old preacher” but rather they are in step with the culture. However, several truths are at work here. While suits and ties are not biblical, in certain venues they communicate respect for God’s Word and God’s presence. In another cultural context, a guayabera shirt could do the same, or even the casual clothes that they prefer. However, when they wear inappropriate clothing in another’s worship context, they communicate the opposite and seem disrespectful. When they utilize what many consider filthy language in their home ministries, they may make a case that it is the most appropriate and effective. However, when they communicate in a national forum—print or preaching—they are no longer in their home context and such language is inappropriate. It should not surprise them that it is both offensive and ineffective.

What kind of language and ministry communicates respect for God’s Word, recognizes His presence, and honors Him in how we worship? In one culture, suits and ties may be necessary while in another Hawaiian shirts may communicate the same. Among Anabaptist brethren, beards may be seen as essential for godly men. However, they must make some adjustment when contextualizing the gospel among many indigenous people who cannot grow facial hair. Some Christian traditions prefer to worship God by singing metrical psalms, but their missionaries must make adjustments or risk communicating that this is the only way to worship God.

Both sides of this burgeoning debate have sound theology, but they are presenting it in radically different ways. One defends controversial methods by citing the need to contextualize. The other responds by saying that contextualization is not only unnecessary, it is offensive, dishonoring to God, and brings reproach on biblical ministry. Sadly, none of the players in this ongoing, very public debate seems to understand the term. The resulting controversy and side-taking has led many to agree with their favorite in the fight and to embrace irresponsible “contextualization” or to reject the notion of contextualization altogether.

Paul wrote in Romans 10:13-15 that all who call on the Lord may be saved and then went on to ask a series of questions that point out the importance of hearing the gospel for salvation. Ultimately, he asked, “How shall they hear?” It would be pointless to preach the gospel in English to monolingual Mandarin speakers. Instead, we must preach the gospel in culturally appropriate ways that are faithful to God’s Word.

Years ago, another controversy surrounded this idea of contextualization. One camp argued that the local cultures should be allowed to determine what the content of the gospel should be and what Christianity should look like. The other side rightly argued that the Bible speaks to all cultures and is over them—informing all cultures and informed by none. No culture may change the gospel or any biblical instruction because they think it would be culturally preferable to do so. Yet, effective gospel communicators must take into account the target culture as they preach the gospel.

Because no missionary or preacher would ever want to change the gospel message in any way, many shrink back from the hard work of contextualization. However, if you do not contextualize, you are doing just that—changing the gospel. You become a modern-day Judaizer. You are in effect telling your hearers that they must become like you to be saved. While we do not want to remove the skandalon of the gospel, we do not want to add to the gospel our extrabiblical requirements. I have written elsewhere of a humble, illiterate indigenous believer in Peru who feared for her salvation because she had always been taught that literacy was required for church membership. She equated this with salvation and believed that her inability to read would send her to hell when she died.

When missionaries, and preachers, seek to contextualize the gospel, they may wonder how far is far enough and how far is too far. Paul gives us those guidelines. He wrote in 1 Corinthians 9:19-23 that he made adjustments in every lawful way so as to relate the gospel to his hearers in ways they could understand. He also gave the parameters in verse 23 where he wrote, “I do it all for the sake of the gospel.” The glory of God and reverence for His revelation should guide us in the limits of contextualization so that we never say or do anything that would bring reproach on Him or alter the gospel message. The goal of contextualization is to be culturally relevant and faithful to God’s Word.

Cultural relativism is another misunderstood term that helps us understand the process of contextualization. When secular anthropologists study cultures, they often see them as silos, distinct from others and as a universe in themselves. With such a mindset, they say that the culture that kills the second twin is not committing murder if the culture does not see it as such. This perspective is often called cultural relativism since these secular anthropologists believe that no culture can be fairly compared to another. Obviously, Christians do not embrace such nonsense; there is a God who has clearly communicated what is sin and what is not in every culture—no matter what the local culture may think.

However, in the extrabiblical matters, those aspects of life that God does not address with moral import, we have freedom. All things being equal, it is not more or less sinful to live in a house made of wood, bricks, bamboo, or mud. Nor does it matter to God whether we wear leather shoes, tennis shoes, wooden shoes, or no shoes. We can enter other cultures and communicate the gospel in ways that they can readily understand, making the adjustments that are necessary for them to “hear it”—especially regarding extrabiblical matters. Aspects that missionaries should contextualize include language, music style, musical instruments, and clothing style. Contextualization adjusts extrabiblical aspects in response to the culture; the message never changes.

The term glocalization refers to the ways that multinational corporations carry on the same business in many countries but with subtly nuanced changes. McDonalds still sells hamburgers in Malaysia but the girls behind the counter wear their little paper hats on top of their head-coverings and they call their product “beefburgers,” not hamburgers, to avoid offending the Muslims who would never eat ham. We don’t eat ham on our burgers either, but the culturally offensive name prevents Muslims from getting near enough to find that out. It is the exact same product but clothed in a culturally sensitive form. Contextualization is essential, not simply trendy or stylish, and it does not water down Christ’s message.

Critical contextualization provides the needed balance. On one hand, failure to contextualize at all adds extrabiblical requirements to salvation. On the other hand, allowing the culture to contextualize with no theological or biblical limits results in syncretism and aberrant expressions of Christianity. Preaching the gospel to people with a pagan worldview results in confusion. Preaching John 3:16 to a people who worship a tree or stars or ancestors with no biblical understanding of sin may result in a show of hands at the invitation, but they will not have understood the gospel and need for Christ.

Many missionaries provide a biblical worldview by teaching the grand narrative of God’s revelation through chronological Bible story telling. Some detractors of contextualization believe that we need only preach the gospel as we do back “home,” and this will be sufficient. However, in matriarchal societies, for instance, the mother is the most important figure. Women run the home, serve as rulers, and inherit from their female family members. If the father is even known, he is viewed as a biological necessity and not as an important person in life. When there is an important male figure, it will be the mother’s brother. How will we present the gospel here? Without studying to know the culture to contextualize the gospel, a sermon on God the Father would leave the hearers with a deficient view of God. In such cases, should we allow the culture to contextualize at will and preach God the Mother? Or, should we strike a compromise and preach God the Uncle? Of course, none of these would result in a biblical understanding of the gospel. The missionary preacher who has studied the culture must recognize the challenges and teach the culture the biblical view of God as Father. While such a practice flies in the face of modern anthropology, it is the biblical approach to properly contextualizing the gospel and Christianity among a people.

This is where the hermeneutical community brings the needed balance. As the believers in a culture have come to know the Lord, they join the preacher in studying the Bible to know how to contextualize it among them. Too many missionaries in the past have gone to both extremes, allowing sinful behaviors or forbidding neutral practices in cultures they did not understand. The discipled nationals can see sin that the missionary is unaware of and may never see, and they bring this cultural knowledge to the table. The theologically educated missionary can bring the parameters that 2,000 years of theological and biblical reflection provide—the fence around the process. Together the missionaries and the discipled nationals will find God-honoring, biblically faithful, and culturally appropriate expressions of Christianity for the culture. When studying a passage of Scripture, and how it comes to bear on a cultural practice, the hermeneutical community will see areas needing change and find functional substitutes to address the needs.

A truth in human interaction is “you cannot not communicate.” This awkward construction emphasizes that all our messages are interpreted and assigned meanings by the receiver. Failure to consider the local worldview and culture results in miscommunication. This is easily seen when a missionary asks a Hindu if he wants to be born again or have eternal life. The Hindu believes that he is trapped in an endless cycle of reincarnations and wants to cease his endless rebirths. The Hindu spurns the missionary’s invitation and he chalks it up to a hard heart. In fact, the hearer was interpreting the missionary’s message in a culture and worldview that the missionary did not take into account. To effectively communicate among culturally diverse others, we must learn their cultures and contextualize the gospel among them.

When the preacher or missionary does not understand the culture, language, or rules of the game in a society, his presentation of the gospel is often offensive for all the wrong reasons. When hearers reject the cultural misfit who does not understand them or their cultural heritage, they also reject the gospel without even knowing it.

The current debate between dear brothers in Christ—each of whom is defending what he believes to be the responsible approach to preaching the gospel—could be left for them to sort out since it need not involve us. However, the debate has grown beyond their two camps and is not happening in a corner; increasing numbers are listening, choosing sides, and shaping their own ministries to mimic their chosen champion. Undoubtedly, the edgy language proponents push the limits of preaching and influence demographic segments of the USA population that desperately need the gospel while the other side wants to preserve the sanctity of the gospel and pulpit ministry.

An East African proverb states, “When two elephants fight, the grass gets hurt.” Similarly, there are potential victims in this current struggle that are at risk, and we dare not overlook the danger. One is the pure gospel message. I am not arguing for the merits of presenting the gospel by using what my Bible-belt upbringing would call foul and filthy language. Neither am I jumping on a bandwagon going to the other extreme and pretending that the way I preach the gospel and what I wear when I do so ought to be fine for the entire world. My concern is presenting the gospel in culturally sensitive ways that are faithful to God’s Word. When the gospel is offensive for the wrong reasons, many people will reject it without ever hearing and understanding it. Another potential victim is the unity that Christ called us to maintain. Jesus said that this testimony of unity would proclaim to the world that the Father sent Him and loves us. (John 17:23) A final potential victim is the missiological method of critical contextualization. Preachers and missionaries must present the gospel in culturally appropriate ways or people will never understand the gospel message Christ sent us to proclaim.

As I taught on the exclusivity of the gospel in the Andean community of San Agustín, the elderly brother who invited me asked about his parents and grandparents. He explained that they believed in traditional religions and the syncretism of animism with Catholicism. Although their small village did not have a priest, one would come once a year or so to perform a mass. He told me that everything was in Latin and that his parents did not even speak Spanish, much less Latin. Then he asked me what happened to his parents when they died. “Where did they go?” I humbly explained that as I understand God’s Word, they did not go to heaven if they had not heard the gospel and been born again. He thought for a moment and responded, “I believe that those priests will have a lot to answer for one day.” I felt so superior and vindicated until God brought to my mind on my drive back home how many times I had preached the gospel in ways that made sense to me with little thought as to how well the people were understanding my message.

Of course, we must contextualize the gospel message so that our hearers can properly understand it. Shame on us if we ever debate that. The current debate may be over marketing techniques but let us never sacrifice the necessity of critical contextualization.

A Stream of Missional Consciousness

What’s in a name? New words and terminologies arise with increasing frequency these days. Five years ago, the word blog was a typo. Words, especially new words, are necessary tools of communication in a changing world. Every discipline must have a taxonomy that it uses to share ideas. The field of law is filled with legalese, both terms that date back centuries and those that are new. The worlds of music and medicine each have specific terms that enable communication and education. Missions is no different. However, the field of missiology is comparatively new and is as rapidly changing and developing as the world that it addresses. It is likely that the global dynamics characterizing our lives this month will be considered historical trends before they are fully developed. Globalization pushes the world toward a global village mentality even though it retains its mosaic of cultures. The burgeoning urbanization of the world creates many other challenges facing missionaries today. Not only are these dynamics more prevalent, they are constantly morphing. Moreover, the principle of acceleration means that information overload is an increasing threat to missionaries’ sanity—or what passes for sanity! Although the world of missions races to keep up, some terms simply cannot keep pace.

Someone has said, “Words do not have meaning, they have usage.” Learning the terminology utilized by practitioners in any ever-changing field is like trying to nail Jell-o to the wall. Consider the word cross-cultural. Years ago, we used this term to refer to crossing from one culture into another, whether that was a missionary or an idea. As the field continued to develop, missiologists needed terms of greater precision. Intercultural was coined to refer to interaction between cultures, and cross-cultural referred to those aspects that cross cultural lines, i.e. found in many cultures. For instance, a mother’s love for her children is a cross-cultural truth, but I participate in intercultural ministry when I reach out to the Quichua people. Confusion reigns where some use these terms synonymously. As missiology continues to develop, change, and subdivide in a world that is itself constantly changing, it is not surprising to see new words appear along the way.

One word that has been awkward throughout the years is the word missionary. Is it an adjective? Most Baptist churches prefer to describe themselves as missions-minded rather than missionary, because Missionary Baptist is a distinct Baptist denomination. Or, is it a noun referring to the one engaging interculturally in gospel ministry? In more gospel hostile parts of the world, some, who formerly would have gone by the term missionary, prefer “Christian worker.” Other times, “Christian worker” is preferred to avoid the negative, extra-biblical baggage that the word “missionary” connotes. What is the verb form of missionary, “to mish?” Whether due to its age, awkwardness, or negative baggage, the word missionary seems to be out among the trendsetters in the “hip”-set, and the new word missional is all the rage.

Missional is certainly not a new term, but the trendy use of it is. We once spoke of a missionary as one who was sent out by a missions-minded church to go to other cultures and do missions. (I still like that, but I have my own age, awkwardness, and negative baggage.) Those days are apparently long gone. Now, Christian workers go out from missional churches to engage in intercultural ministry—or something similar. In past years, some used the term missioner for the noun for missionary and missional to connote the adjectival form of missionary. Today, these usages are out of vogue but missional is back in. So, what does it mean? It depends on whom you ask.

Some have written in-depth, explanatory treatments of the proper understanding and use of the term missional to define precisely what they understand the term to mean, but it continues to mean different things to different people. Emotionally-charged labels, like liberal, are defined by the labelers and where they stand on the conservative to moderate continuum. Just as with countless other words in the English language whose meaning and usage change with time, missional is also a word that can be used verbally or adjectivally. For instance, some words like paint or glue can be verbs or nouns. Other words, such as hit, can be nouns, verbs, and adjectives. The missional madness is closely related to the endless emersions of emerging and emergent as a noun, verb, and adjective. I mean, really.

I do wonder what some of these “churches” emerged out of and whether they intend to remerge. Of course, it could also be that emerging emergents never actually emerged, as I understand the word. In fact, it could also be that emerging is a noun. I mean, a “church” could be an “emerging” in the same that my children are “birthings.” Where does it end? Or, does it ever end? From all I can tell, for the most part, many missional emergents, are theologically sound evangelicals. They love the Lord and His people, seek to advance His kingdom and bring glory to His name in the USA and around the world. I am not disparaging them; I only wish that their dictionary would settle down and that all of them would read it. However, other missional emergents define the church in terms that the New Testament would never recognize. The terms missional and emergent seem to mean everything and nothing, are defined nowhere, and are readily understood by those who are “really with it.” The emperor has new clothes.

When missionaries need new terms to communicate clearly, for the proclamation of the gospel, and the advance of Christ’s kingdom, we should coin them and embrace them. However, when some desire trendy, “hip” jargon simply to distance themselves from old-school missionaries who thought that tattoos were tribal markings and piercings were what jungle tribes sometimes did to missionaries, I hesitate to jump on the bandwagon. Call me a late adopter, but I am still thankful for missionaries who reach and teach the people groups of the world, proclaiming the gospel, planting churches, and teaching the Bible.

Axioms For A Great Commission Resurgence- Acts 1:4-8

By: Daniel L. Akin, President
SEBTS- Wake Forest, NC
From the April 16, 2009 Chapel Message

I. We must commit ourselves to the total and absolute Lordship of Jesus Christ in every area of our lives (Col 3:16, 17, 23-24).

II. We must be gospel centered in all our endeavors for the glory of God (Rom 1:16).

III. We must take our stand on the firm foundation of the inerrant and infallible Word of God affirming it’s sufficiency in all matters (Matt 5:17-18; John 10:35; 17:17; 2 Tim 3:16-17; 2 Peter 1:20-21).

IV. We must devote ourselves to a radical pursuit of the Great Commission in the context of obeying the Great Commandments (Matt 28:16-20; 22:37-40).

V. We must affirm the Baptist Faith and Message 2000 as a healthy and sufficient guide for building a theological consensus for partnership in the gospel, refusing to be sidetracked by theological agendas that distract us from our Lord’s Commission (1 Tim 6:3-4).

VI. We must dedicate ourselves to a passionate pursuit of the Great Commission of the Lord Jesus across our nation and to all nations answering the call to go, disciple, baptize and teach all that the Lord commanded (Matt 28:16-20; Acts 1:8; Rom 1:5; 15:20).

VII. We must covenant to build gospel saturated homes that see children as a gift from God and as our first and primary mission field (Deut 6:1-9; Psalm 127; 128; Eph 6:4).

VIII. We must recognize the need to rethink our Convention structure and identity so that we maximize our energy and resources for the fulfilling of the Great Commission (1 Cor 10:31).

IX. We must see the necessity for pastors to be faithful Bible preachers who teach us both the content of the Scriptures and the theology embedded in the Scriptures (2 Tim 4:1-5).

X. We must encourage pastors to see themselves as the head of a gospel missions agency who will lead the way in calling out the called for international assignments but also equip and train all their people to see themselves as missionaries for Jesus regardless of where they live (Eph 4:11-16).

XI. We must pledge ourselves to a renewed cooperation that is gospel centered and built around a biblical and theological core and not methodological consensus or agreement (Phil 2:1-5; 4:2-9).

XII. We must accept our constant need to humble ourselves and repent of pride, arrogance, jealousy, hatred, contentions, lying, selfish ambitions, laziness, complacency, idolatries and other sins of the flesh; pleading with our Lord to do what only He can do in us and through us and all for His glory (Gal 5:22-26; James 4:1-10).

(visit Dr. Akin's website to download the audio, sermon manuscript, or powerpoint)

Amen. Thank you, Dr. Akin.

Spring Break 2009- Ecuador

I just returned from a trip to Calderón, Ecuador. My wife and I took a short-term mission team from Ninth & O Baptist Church, Louisville, KY to minister there during Spring Break. One of the greatest blessings of the trip was being able to take my daughter-in-law Carol and my grandson Abraham. He wasn’t able to enjoy the trip in the same way as the rest of us since he is not born yet, but at least he didn’t have to stress about luggage and where to sit on the plane.

It is always wonderful to be back in Ecuador, and this time was no different. We worked with a small mission that we helped to plant last July. They now have a place to meet and many in the community are beginning to attend regularly. We taught the believers New Testament classes, focusing on the “I Am” sayings of Jesus in John’s Gospel and the timeline and significant events of Holy Week. We also taught them about Mormons and protecting the flock from cults. It was great to see them begin to grow and to show them how God’s Word speaks so clearly to their lives. We held evangelistic services in the evenings with praise and worship led by our brother Joselito. Some team members walked around the community inviting people to come to the services while others conducted a medical clinic. The children’s ministry touched our hearts as always, and on the last day, we were able to give out Samaritan’s Purse shoeboxes filled with gifts sent from believers in the USA.

We also went into Quito and ministered in the Women’s prison one day. It was so sad to see that many babies and little children must live there with their imprisoned moms since there is nowhere else for them to go.

The spiritual needs in Ecuador are vast and overwhelming when considering the task with human eyes. As we walked around our mission’s community and lifted our eyes to the houses packing the hillsides in all directions, we were saddened to hear Joselito explain that there is no evangelical work in this area. So many people need to hear the gospel and those who have heard need churches and trained leaders to teach them. Even our burgeoning little mission in the rapidly growing area outside the capital city holds challenges for those of us who long to see a healthy New Testament church there. Who will pastor this work and disciple the believers? Sadly, this is not a solitary situation. We went up on top of Pichincha volcano and had a breathtaking 13,500 feet above sea-level bird’s eye view of the city sprawling through the valley below. As we looked down on Quito with its 2 million people, we were sobered to think that there are very few evangelical churches, and many have no pastor.

One day we drove up to Otavalo and toured the countryside of Imbabura province. While we reflected on the natural beauty there, Joselito remarked once again about the dearth of evangelical work and witness. Ecuador boasts some of the most beautiful country in the world, peopled with some of the most beautiful people, yet they sit in darkness, steeped in ChristiAnimism and superstition. The cults are eating away at the soft underbelly of their animistic fears, easily ensnaring them in hell-bound systems of lies. Most of you reading this blog could go and teach and never come to the point of exhausting all you know about the Bible to ready and willing listeners.

On the last day of the children’s Bible club, we gave out Samaritan’s Purse Christmas shoeboxes. We were a little frustrated to learn that $1.00 had to be paid for each box since the brother in charge of distributing them throughout the country was forced to reroute trucks all over due to highway problems. Still, the kids’ reaction was worth the effort and expense. The kids were so thrilled to get the shoeboxes and many wrote thank-you notes. One little girl named Stefany wrote a note for me to send “to the United States.” It said, “Thank you for this gift. I am six years old and I like the gift that you sent very much. I live at this address . . .” At this point, she drew a picture of the street where she lives and where her little house is located on it. Her simple request and note captures the essence of her naïve innocence and the way she sees the world.

During the activities and worship, I looked around the tent we were using for a sanctuary at all of the children’s faces. Even through their smiles and singing, you could tell that many of them had already suffered some of the horrors that this fallen world offers. I could not help but reflect on the hard life that awaits most of them, even in the best-case scenarios of harsh poverty. I also thought about Stefany’s note with her address being a simple map showing the house where she lived. I wonder, what kind of map will she draw for where she lives one hundred years from now . . . or a million years . . . or a billion years? Will it be a house on a street paved with gold or in the fires of hell, amidst unutterable suffering? If she is in glory with most of the people who read blogs like this, will she be there because you went to tell her about Jesus or sent others who could? If she is in hell, will it be because you did not? Do not hide behind the doctrine of the sovereignty of God. No one believes that doctrine more strongly than I do, but He has chosen to use means, and we are those means. He said, “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you.” There’s the command. Jesus tells us where to go and what to do. You have the map to her house; I’ll meet you there.