 | |
Pray for the Bennetts in Australia as they with God's help and for His glory are seeking to establish: Western Plains Baptist Fellowship, and Gilgandra Baptist Fellowship as New Testament Baptist churches. |
|
SOME THOUGHTS ON MISSIONS
David C. Bennett, D. Min. Acts 13:1-3 Now there were in the church that was at Antioch certain prophets and teachers; as Barnabas, and Simeon that was called Niger, and Lucius of Cyrene, and Manaen, which had been brought up with Herod the tetrarch, and Saul. 2 As they ministered to the Lord, and fasted, the Holy Ghost said, Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them. 3 And when they had fasted and prayed, and laid their hands on them, they sent them away. A few years ago I had a debate with a Roman Catholic priest and a Muslim on air at our local radio station. I arrived at the station several minutes before we were to be on air so I sat outside the studio in the lounge area reading my Bible. As I was reading the priest walked in and said Reading the good Book? I answered in the affirmative and he replied We have the Big T, Tradition. This Roman Catholic was right up-front with the fact that tradition held a higher place than Scripture in the Roman Catholic organization. In consideration of the title to this paper, SOME THOUGHTS ON MISSIONS, upon what do Baptists in truth rely when it comes to the subject of missions and the missionary, tradition or the authority of Scripture? Even though Baptists are not Protestants we wholeheartedly agree with Martin Luthers stand Sola scriptura. This ...was the rallying cry of the Protestant Reformation. For centuries the Roman Catholic Church had made its traditions superior in authority to the Bible. This resulted in many practices that were in fact contradictory to the Bible. Some examples are prayer to saints and/or Mary, the immaculate conception, transubstantiation, infant baptism, indulgences, and papal authority. Martin Luther, the founder of the Lutheran Church and father of the Protestant Reformation, was publicly rebuking the Catholic Church for its unbiblical teachings. The Catholic Church threatened Martin Luther with excommunication (and death) if he did not recant. Martin Luther's reply was, Unless therefore I am convinced by the testimony of Scripture, or by the clearest reasoning, unless I am persuaded by means of the passages I have quoted, and unless they thus render my conscience bound by the Word of God, I cannot and will not retract, for it is unsafe for a Christian to speak against his conscience. Here I stand, I can do no other; may God help me! Amen! Following on the heels of the above statement let us give due consideration to a sound answer to the guiding question, Is it necessary to be scriptural in our methods and programs? If independent Baptists believe Sola Scriptura in methods and programmes then according to the New Testament Scriptures it might be asked; what are we to understand by the word Missionary? This question is asked for interestingly the title missionary does not appear once in the New Testament? As one person once wrote me concerning another subject that is not in the Scriptures it is true Sunday school does not appear either but the Sunday school is not the subject here, missionary is! J. C. Thiessen says The words apostles and missionary mean the same thing: one who is sent. Apostle is from the Greek; missionary, from the Latin. Kane says much the same The word missionary comes from the Latin word mitto, which means to send. In the New Testament the Greek word is apostello, which means the same thing. If it doesnt appear in the New Testament then why do independent Baptists use the title, missionary? Wikipedia says with a disclaimer that the following article has some issues but that article said A missionary is a member of a religious group sent into an area to carry on ministries of the word, such as evangelism and literacy, or ministries of service, such as education, social justice, health care and economic development. The word "mission" originates from 1598 when the Jesuits sent members abroad, derived from the Latin missionem (nom. missio), meaning "act of sending" or mittere, meaning "to send". Interesting! Independent Baptist Professor Aaron Strouse writes Historically, the Roman Catholic Church misapplied many Biblical concepts using Latin restatements. This package of the religious/secular academic model has been followed by many believers as they attempt to carry out the Great Commission. Is this what Bible believing independent Baptists have done when it comes to the area of the title missionary? First consider; I. THE BIBLICAL MEANING As noted earlier the word missionary is not found in the Bible but is rather derived from the Latin, meaning one sent and The Roman Catholic emphasis upon tradition is rooted in the fact that those things which have been done historically have a visible edge in a persons mind. In other words, since they have continually seen in print and heard a particular fact, it must be true! Have Baptists fallen for Roman Catholic terminology? In the New Testament the word corresponding with the Latin word missionary is apostle which means one sent forth from another or literally one sent. In the end does it really matter whether those sent out by the local church is a missionary or an apostle? Looking at the word apostle one usually thinks of the original twelve apostles. They were men who were personally called by God and sent forth to deliver and proclaim a message. Look at Matthew 10: 2, 5, and 7. Verse 2 says Now the names of the twelve apostles (apostolwn) are these... Verse 5 These twelve Jesus sent forth (apesteilen), and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not. Verse 7 And as ye go, preach (khrujssete), saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand. These twelve men were personally chosen by the Lord and sent forth as messengers to preach a given message. Now in that original sense there are no apostles today. Is this why we do not use the Bibles Greek word apostle but rather the Latin word missionary? In Biblical Bible Translating on page 16 Dr. Charles Turner says There is an emotional meaning attached to the word apostle. This is true as stated earlier when most people hear the word apostle they immediately think only of those twelve men who held that prominent position. However, when the scriptures are studied is there justification for not using the Greek word apostle for those now so commonly called missionary? Now is a good time to relate the fact that the Scriptures emphasis on men as apostles is not relegating a woman to a lesser position. The Lord Jesus chose men and yes, women played a big part in his ministry but not as apostles. A couple of verses that show the high position of women in the Lords ministry are; Mark 15:40 There were also women looking on afar off: among whom was Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James the less and of Joses, and Salome; 41 (Who also, when he was in Galilee, followed him, and ministered unto him;) and many other women which came up with him unto Jerusalem. Luke 8:2 And certain women, which had been healed of evil spirits and infirmities, Mary called Magdalene, out of whom went seven devils, 3 And Joanna the wife of Chuza Herod's steward, and Susanna, and many others, which ministered unto him of their substance. Women loved Him and served Him but they were not chosen to be one of the original twelve apostles. Also reflect on the fact that from Acts 14 men not women were addressed as apostles as albeit they were not of those original twelve. Note the following passages; Acts 14: 4, 14 But the multitude of the city was divided: and part held with the Jews, and part with the apostles (apostoloiv). 14 Which when the apostles (apostoloi), Barnabas and Paul, heard of, they rent their clothes, and ran in among the people, crying out. Barnabas is classified as an apostle, Gods messenger. 2Corinthians 8:23 Whether any do enquire of Titus, he is my partner and fellowhelper concerning you: or our brethren be enquired of, they are the messengers (apostoloi) of the churches, and the glory of Christ. Over-looking his favouring the critical Greek text Albert Barnes states that The word apostles here is used evidently in its proper sense, to denote one who is sent out to transact any business for others, or as an agent or legate. These persons were not apostles in the technical sense: and this is an instance where the word is applied in the New Testament to those who had no claim to the apostolic office. It is also applied in a similar way to Apollos and Barnabas, though neither, strictly speaking, was an apostle. That is they were not of those original twelve. Philippians 2:25 Yet I supposed it necessary to send to you Epaphroditus, my brother, and companion in labour, and fellowsoldier, but your messenger (apostolon), and he that ministered to my wants. An apostle is a messenger. Hebrews 3:1 Wherefore, holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling, consider the Apostle (apostolon) and High Priest of our profession, Christ Jesus The Lord Jesus Christ was Gods messenger of salvation. Kane writes that A missionary is essentially one sent. God sent His Son into the world that through Him the world might be saved (John 3: 17). A missionary is one sent by the Lord Jesus Christ to proclaim the message of salvation. The literal meaning of the word missionary is one who has been sent. Thus Jesus, who was sent by the Father, was the first missionary of the Christian Era, The man Christ Jesus was the Apostle or in todays terms the Missionary, sent by God the Father to proclaim a message which resulted in His death for sinners. 1Thessalonians 1:1; 2: 6 Paul, and Silvanus, and Timotheus, unto the church of the Thessalonians which is in God the Father and in the Lord Jesus Christ: Grace be unto you, and peace, from God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ. 2:6 Nor of men sought we glory, neither of you, nor yet of others, when we might have been burdensome, as the apostles ( apostoloi) of Christ. Paul included Silvanus and Timothy in this word apostles. So again why do Bible believing independent Baptists not use the Bible term apostles when referring to those God sent messengers. As Dr. Turner said There is an emotional meaning attached to the word apostle. Plus if we would use apostle rather than missionary it just might highlight some of the unbiblical traditions that independent Baptists have allowed to take on board in their missions programmes. For instance the sending women forth as a missionary; is it tradition or is it Biblical? Ruth Tucker writes that ...public opinion throughout much of the nineteenth century was opposed to the idea of women missionaries. She continues Nevertheless, beginning in the 1820s single women began to trickle overseas. Ruth Tucker gives four reasons why women would leave the security of family and homeland to go to a strange people in a strange land. They were (1) there were few opportunities for a woman to be involved in full-time ministry at home and in the churches (2) the mission field had an attraction for adventure and excitement (3) many came from the poor working-class and going into missions raised their station in life and (4) feminism. R. Pierce Beaver refers to the surge of American women into missions as the first feminist movement in North America, Then there is the patron saint of Southern Baptists, Charlotte (Lottie) Diggs Moon. Thousands of dollars are raised each year by the Southern Baptists for missions through the Lottie Moon Christmas Offering. Ruth Tucker says Lottie Moon was a shining example of Christian womanhood and sexual equality... This equality certainly had an effect on the mission fields! Southern Baptists as well as many so called independent Baptist mission agencies have collective meetings of the missionaries on the field sometimes known as the field council. This man-made system is all due to the equality of the single women on the field. Anyway, in Lottie Moons day women had no voice in these meetings but Lottie believed Simple justice demands that women should have equal rights with men in mission meetings and in the conduct of their work. Is this the New Testament pattern or tradition? The teaching in the independent Baptist schools is to blame for much of this tradition of sending single women to the mission field. The schools are also very responsible for the churches accepting mission agencies and the field council equality meetings. The following is not trying to be critical of the ladies personally but these ladies are quoted simply to stress the fact that tradition has usurped the Bible in the matter of missions. In an independent Baptist mission agencys magazine one lady wrote I sat nervously as the missionary flipped through her slideshow presentation. I felt a strange tugging in my heart. God? Are you calling me? With great fear and some guilt, I remember quickly praying, please dont make me be a missionary. Ill do anything else for you, just not that! The magazine then quotes another lady who reveals she ...felt like she was supposed to be a missionary. No matter what feelings one may have can ladies fulfil the requirement of Gods New Testament messenger as given in the Scriptures? II. THE BIBLICAL MESSENGER What is a modern day apostle? Definition: A modern day apostle is a man sent out by his local church who often times crosses language and cultural boundaries to proclaim Gods message of redemption to the nations of the world and as a result New Testament local churches are planted. Remember Barnabas and others were also called apostles as they were sent out of local churches with Gods message, Acts 14: 4, 14 But the multitude of the city was divided: and part held with the Jews, and part with the apostles. 14 Which when the apostles (apostoloi), Barnabas and Paul, heard of, they rent their clothes, and ran in among the people, crying out. Note the beginning in Acts 13: 1-3, 5 Now there were in the church that was at Antioch certain prophets and teachers; as Barnabas, and Simeon that was called Niger, and Lucius of Cyrene, and Manaen, which had been brought up with Herod the tetrarch, and Saul. 2 As they ministered to the Lord, and fasted, the Holy Ghost said, Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them. 3 And when they had fasted and prayed, and laid their hands on them, they sent them away. 5 And when they were at Salamis, they preached the word of God in the synagogues of the Jews: and they had also John to their minister. It was men the Lord chose and men that the local church sent out. Does a woman fulfil the Biblical qualifications of a New Testament apostle, messenger? Well, consider how one independent Baptist agency views the role of women on the mission field? Its policy states that Based on...the pattern in Acts, we will follow the principle that men are to be leaders of the field council/team. Where they ever got field council from Acts is hard to understand but they find it somewhere but never give chapter and verse! They continue, While only men are responsible for preaching in the church and the major authoritative doctrinal teaching (1 Timothy 2:12), women are encouraged to exercise their spiritual gifts in the church planting process. As members of a missionary team, they are to be viewed as respected co-workers, legitimately exercising their vote in decisions relating to the ministry of the team. Where is the Scripture for this but that doesnt really matter as this is the way we have done it for years. Now when it comes to women (a touchy area for some) Cross states It is a well-known Baptist distinctive that they have always considered the Scriptures to be clear on the fact that the preaching of the gospel is reserved for men. What was the primary purpose of those sent out by the Lord Himself and then by the local church in Acts 13; but to preach the gospel with obedience to baptism following. If those sent out by the church at Antioch were the first missionaries as most Baptists claim they were; can a woman perform the same task? Oh, we are told Baptist women only give testimonies to a mixed audience BUT they do not preach! Cross quotes pastor Edwin T. Dahlbergs liberal statement that; We should now in the equality of Christ and the gospel place the gavel of the church in feminine hands also, in order that there may be added to the convention rostrum, the pulpit, and the highest policy-making councils … the radiant grace and initiative of our finest church women. (CHURCH WOMEN IN THE SCHEME OF THINGS, page 1.) This is where it eventually leads. Cross then quotes American Baptist Dr. Reuben E. Nelson, saying, While Baptists do not have a large percentage of women who are ordained, the practice is common enough to raise the question as to why the practice is sanctioned. … If a woman member of the church gives evidence of being called to the ministry … exhibits such gifts as make her capable in preaching and pastoral work, she is ordained on the same basis as a man… the fact that three of our greatest presidents have been women has drawn attention to the capability of consecrated womanhood. You may call them Bible women, church planting assistants or even use the Latin missionary but is it sanctioned by tradition or the Bible? If it is not Bible then as Baptists, it should be stopped! Some principles gleaned from Acts 13, 14 and other New Testament passages for our thinking on missions are: 1. Barnabas and Paul were a part of that local church in Antioch. This would naturally suggest they were saved and baptised for the New Testament knows nothing of someone accepting the Lord Jesus and not following through with baptism and joining themselves with a local church. 2. Barnabas and Paul were active in the Lords work at home, v. 2. God uses those who are willing and are already active in His service. 3. Barnabas and Paul were men who were sent away by the local church to do a work to which God had called them. 4. Barnabas and Paul preached the word. 5. Barnabas and Paul were men and God always called men to be pastors (1 Timothy 3: 1) and it was men who were designated the title apostle whether before or after Acts 13. 6. Only men are called by the God of the Scriptures to preach. Any independent Baptist I personally know would agree with that statement. So why are so many independent Baptists so sensitive to hearing that a woman cannot be a missionary in the Biblical sense!? Reginald Matthews admits There is not a woman missionary referred to in the Book of Acts but yet he defends women being missionaries by saying the ye in Acts 1:8 refer to all believers. But note what he wrote earlier in his book; The Holy Spirit never directs contrary to the principles clearly taught in the Holy Scriptures. If women missionaries are not found in the book of Acts and the Holy Spirit never directs contrary to the principles taught in the Scriptures why defend women missionaries? One reason perhaps is because, that is the way it has always been done. It does not seem that it is the Scriptures that define missions today but the philosophy that the end justifies the means. It is not that the title missionary is bad but rather that using the word has opened a Pandoras Box of issues that continue to this day. III. THE BIBLICAL METHOD Luke 9:1, 2 Then he called his twelve disciples (men) together, and gave them power and authority over all devils, and to cure diseases. 2 And he sent them (aposteilen) to preach the kingdom of God, and to heal the sick. Acts 13:1-4 Now there were in the church that was at Antioch certain prophets and teachers; as Barnabas, and Simeon that was called Niger, and Lucius of Cyrene, and Manaen, which had been brought up with Herod the tetrarch, and Saul. 2 As they ministered to the Lord, and fasted, the Holy Ghost said, Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them. 3 And when they had fasted and prayed, and laid their hands on them, they sent them away. 4 So they, being sent forth by the Holy Ghost, Is there a Biblical method of sending our messengers unto the uttermost parts of the earth? Has God laid down some principles by which His churches can follow in the implantation of missions? Does it take more than the only organization Jesus established to accomplish this task? It seems so, for many independent Baptists have come to believe that missions cannot be achieved without the use of mission agencies. Is this by the Bible or tradition? One (I am sure well meaning) independent Baptist mission agency states that they ...did not invent missions, or even the idea of a missions agency. In the New Testament it was churches helping churches. That is exactly what we are attempting to use as our pattern. There are distinctive principles that help to make us what we are. 1) We make no distinction in our business meetings between pastors, missionaries and evangelists. 2) We make no distinction between foreign and home missions. 3) We do not operate as an alumni association for a school. 4) We do not approve missionaries for the work the Lord has called them to do. This is the job of their local church. We are using the word endorse. That is, we can choose to agree with a church in the matter of helping missionaries who are sent from that church, in the work the Lord has called them to do. However, one synonym Microsoft Words thesaurus gives for endorse is approve. Most if not all independent Baptist mission agencies work in much the same way. It is the agency that must approve the missionary even if they use another word for approve. Another agency claiming to be independent Baptist says it ...is committed to the centrality of the church in Gods plan, and exists to serve local churches and their missionaries. Note the difference they make between the church in Gods plan and the local churches. This is a clue to what follows. The statement continues by saying that the local churches that seek their assistance ...in the service and administration of their missionaries do so in a spirit of partnership and cooperation that allows their missionaries to link strategically with missionaries of other local churches. They add that the missionary ...is accountable primarily to his sending church and, secondarily, to his supporting churches and on top of those relationships there is ...a relationship through which the mission is entrusted with the responsibility to oversee and coordinate the missionarys ministry. Words, words! Who is in charge here, the local sending church or the agency? It is not politically correct to say but These organizations, many of which are bigger than the local church, attempt to come along side (para) the local church to assist with some aspect of the Great Commission, whether it be a para-church Bible college that assists with Bible teaching, or a para-church mission board that assists with missions. By their refusal to be under a local church, these para-church organizations say through their actions (regardless of their words) that the small local church is incapable and incompetent to carry out the Great Commission without the aid of the bigger and stronger para-church organization. I. K. Cross wrote opposing the Southern Baptist Conventions mission programme but most of his arguments against the SBC programme are much the same as those that could be and should be laid against those which claim to be independent Baptist. He writes first about how we Baptists found ourselves where we are today. I think it is well known that foreign mission activity among Baptists in America began with two men, Adoniram Judson and Luther Rice. As the thing worked out, Mr. Judson and his family became the foreign missionaries and Luther Rice became the man on the American continent responsible for organizing the forces and raising the funds. In a measure it is unfortunate that our foreign mission work in this country had its beginning with these two men, because they were Congregational ministers who were only converted to the Baptist faith after sailing to foreign shores. It is fortunate indeed that they found out their error and received scriptural immersion, but it is in a measure unfortunate that Luther Rice so soon after being in the Congregationalist movement became the man who laid the foundation work for foreign mission activities among Baptists in America. In reading the account of his activities in this field it is easy to see that the methods he apparently learned among the Congregationalists he applied to Baptist missions. Pursuing these methods, he set about organizing local missionary societies with state and sectional societies over them. It seems that it never once occurred to him that the business of missions is the responsibility of the churches themselves, or that the churches of the Lord Jesus Christ were the proper organizations to perform the functions of his mission societies. Cross continues against what he considers as unscriptural in the Southern Baptist Conventions mission programme by quoting Article IX of their constitution reads: ALL MISSIONARIES APPOINTED BY THE CONVENTIONS BOARDS must, previous to their appointment, furnish evidence of their piety, zeal for the Masters kingdom, conviction of truth as held by Baptists, and talents for missionary service. Now I want you to get what is involved in this clearly in your mind. First, the missionaries ARE NOT SENT OUT BY THE CHURCHES, they are APPOINTED BY THE MISSION BOARDS. A missionary working under the program of the Convention must be APPROVED BY THE BOARD before he is ever appointed to a mission field. He must furnish evidence TO THE BOARD of his qualifications before he can become a missionary of the Southern Baptist Convention. THE BOARD determines his qualifications, THE BOARD appoints him, THE BOARD sets his salary, THE BOARD assigns his field of labor, and if he does not give satisfaction to THE BOARD, THE BOARD fires him. Where do the churches get in on the program? They get to pay the bills. This is a long way from the way it was done when Barnabas was sent out by the church at Jerusalem, Acts 11:22. It is a far cry from the way the church at Antioch was instructed by the Holy Spirit to send out Barnabas and Paul, Acts 13:1-3. THERE IS NO INSTANCE IN ALL THE NEW TESTAMENT where A SINGLE MISSIONARY was sent out (or appointed) under a setup that LOOKED ANYTHING LIKE the policy of the mission boards of the Convention. If this board system of missions could be sustained by the Scriptures our churches would support it, but, until it is placed back in the hands of the churches from whence it was taken we want no part of it. This is true not only the Southern Baptist Convention but the truth that so many Fundamental local churches have entrusted the mission board with administrating the Great Commission. Where did Baptists get the idea that they needed a parachurch organization to assist in sending missionaries? The first mission board was Episcopalian, therefore rooted organically in the Roman Catholic Church. This first mission board was founded on July 27, 1649 and was called A Corporation for the promoting and propagating the Gospel of Jesus Christ in New England. In 1701, the second board was founded also in the Church of England. The third board was founded in Denmark and no denominational basis was mentioned. The fourth mission board was founded by the Moravians at Hernhutt and was based on the Episcopalian government. Finally, the Baptists made their presence felt with William Careys board being founded in 1792; but this board was not truly a local church agency. Careys agency followed the Episcopalian parachurch pattern. The mission board idea is actually, though indirectly, rooted in the Roman Catholic Church. In this matter even the Baptists seem to go back to Rome! Shame on us! Can Baptists not think outside the Roman square and depend solely on the authority of the Scriptures? I like the definition one gave of independent Baptists and that is they are Baptists who are independent in everything but their thinking. IV. THE BIBLICAL MESSAGE The Great Commission, Matthew 28:18-20, is given howbeit in different words in three of the other Gospels and once in the Book of Acts by the resurrected Lord Jesus. In John 20: 19 -23 it says Then the same day at evening, being the first day of the week, when the doors were shut where the disciples were assembled for fear of the Jews, came Jesus and stood in the midst, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you. 20 And when he had so said, he shewed unto them his hands and his side. Then were the disciples glad, when they saw the Lord. 21 Then said Jesus to them again, Peace be unto you: as my Father hath sent me, even so send I you. 22 And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost: 23 Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained. These disciples were told by the the Apostle and High Priest of our profession the Lord Jesus Christ that He was sending them out as His Father had sent Him out into this world. In this going they were to preach the gospel and people would either have their sins remitted or retained by their response to the gospel they preached. Matthew 28: 18-20 and Mark 16: 14-16 will be considered next. Matthew 28: 19 and 20 says Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: 20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen. Whether one believes the local church existed before Pentecost or came into existence on Pentecost; all if not most independent Baptists believe Biblical evangelism or missions is but the implementation of the Great Commission in any locale until the end of the church age (Matt. 28: 19, 20). The Matthew passage has neither the words great nor commission but it does outline what the Lord directs His churches to do in reaching all nations. The first is to teach (maqhteu>sate) which means to instruct or to disciple. Acts 14:21 And when they had preached the gospel to that city, and had taught (maqhteusatev instructed, discipled) many, they returned again to Lystra, and to Iconium, and Antioch. Todd Sawtelle goes into more depth writing that Matthew 28:19 contains one verb, teach, (maqhteu>sate _ aorist imperative), which means to make a disciple. With this one verb there are three participles attached. Go, found at the beginning of verse 19 is an aorist participle (poreuqete>v), which indicates action antecedent to the main verb. Two present tense participles are included: baptizing (bapti>zontev: meaning immersion) and teaching (dida>skontev). The ongoing teaching must endeavor to involve all things whatsoever I have commanded you. Also known as .all the counsel of God. [Acts 20:27]. Christ had earlier stated that man needs every word. [Matthew 4:4]. These present participles in Matthew 29:19 and 20 indicate ongoing concurrent action at the time of the main verb. John Broadus says To make a person a disciple is to bring him into the relation of pupil to teacher, taking his yoke of authoritative instruction (11:29), accepting what he says as true because he says it, and submitting to his requirements as right because he makes them Mark 16:14-16 tells us that Afterward he appeared unto the eleven as they sat at meat, and upbraided them with their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they believed not them which had seen him after he was risen. 15 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. 16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. Consider the substance of these two passages. It establishes that the messengers of Christ sent forth were: (1) to go into all the world (Mark) (2) to make disciples of all nations by preaching the Gospel to them, (Matt., Mark) (3) to baptize those who have been made disciples (Matt.) and (4) then teach the disciples all things of the Christian faith (Matt.) which includes the New Testament assembly. The last two incidents are in Luke 24: 46 -53 and Acts 1: 3-12. Luke 24: 46 -53 states that He ...said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day: 47 And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. 48 And ye are witnesses of these things. 49 And, behold, I send the promise of my Father upon you: but tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be endued with power from on high. 50 And he led them out as far as to Bethany, and he lifted up his hands, and blessed them. 51 And it came to pass, while he blessed them, he was parted from them, and carried up into heaven. 52 And they worshipped him, and returned to Jerusalem with great joy: 53 And were continually in the temple, praising and blessing God. Amen. In Acts 1: 3- 12 we read Until the day in which he was taken up, after that he through the Holy Ghost had given commandments unto the apostles whom he had chosen: 3 To whom also he shewed himself alive after his passion by many infallible proofs, being seen of them forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God: 4 And, being assembled together with them, commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which, saith he, ye have heard of me. 5 For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence. 6 When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel? 7 And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power. 8 But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth. 9 And when he had spoken these things, while they beheld, he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight. 10 And while they looked stedfastly toward heaven as he went up, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel; 11 Which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven. 12 Then returned they unto Jerusalem from the mount called Olivet, which is from Jerusalem a sabbath day's journey. Both passages are self-explanatory but in the Luke passage the messengers are to preach repentance and remission of sins to all nations. In Acts before His ascension the Lord said His churches would be witnesses first at home, then surrounding areas, working out and unto the uttermost part of the earth. The members of this Jerusalem church were not obedient to this command so the Lord sent a man by the name of Saul making havock of the church and from this many of those in that church were scattered abroad and everywhere they went they preached the word Acts 8: 3, 4. The messengers of Christ are to preach the Word of God whether by obedience or correction as in Acts 8: 4. Our message is the death burial and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ trusting to God that the hearers will repent and turn in faith to Christ for remission of sins. Note verse five of Acts 8 tells the reader that it was a man, Philip the deacon evangelist that went down to Samaria preaching the word. That is of import since some might use Acts 8: 3 to perhaps justify sending women as missionaries, messengers or apostles. If the messengers God sent forth during His life and those the Holy Ghost called for the work in Acts 13 were men, are women Biblically qualified to go as a Biblical messenger of the local church. Who should preach the gospel? Though women can evangelize one on one with their personal witness, the Scriptures do not permit women preachers. So what is the conclusion of the whole matter but to Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man. Therefore the first thing in this matter of keeping His command to go into all the world to preach the gospel is to understand, THE BIBLICAL MEANING of the Latin word missionary is the Greek word apostle. None of the original twelve apostles or those called apostles later in Scripture was a woman; they were all men. Now it must be added that the word missionary is not bad just because it is not in the Bible but it has been used as a means for the churches to send women out as messengers when only men are to be sent! If the churches had used the word evangelist, apostle, or preacher the sending of women would not have occurred at least among the independent Baptist churches; or so I think! The second is hinged right on to the first and that is, THE BIBLICAL MESSENGER is to be only a man. Just as pastors and deacons are to be men so are the messengers of the local churches. Third, THE BIBLICAL METHOD is by the calling of the Holy Ghost and sending forth by the local church as in Acts 13. The only organization Jesus ever established is the local church and it is capable to do all He has commanded it to do. Fourthly, THE BIBLICAL MESSAGE of those He calls and the church sends out is to preach the gospel, baptizing those who become disciples and teaching them all things as they are formed into a local church. Now the churches have been doing what they have been doing in missions for hundreds of years so it is not the intent of this writer to necessarily change the mind of the reader with this one article. However, it is my intent to provoke an honest reading of the Scriptures and prove in your own mind that which is tradition and that which is biblical. May God bless your study of the Book on this subject of missions. |
