THE PURPOSE OF MISSIONS
THE PLAN OF MISSIONS
THE POWER OF MISSIONS
THE PROMISE OF MISSIONS

often try to excuse themselves from their responsibilities to practice missions by saying: "I don’t believe in mission work." Others, "I don’t believe in encroaching on the work of the Holy Spirit." And other equally foolish statements. But these and the many other excuses are nothing, more than that, for there is no scriptural justification for God’s people and God’s churches not to do some mission work. There is no person or church so poor financially but that they can do some mission work. In many instances the poverty may be traced to this very cause-failure to use for God’s glory what is already possessed. The unfaithful steward has taken from him even what he has (Matt. 25:24-30).

The simple, shameful truth is that Christians are prone to be concerned only with "me, my wife, and my son John," and unless they are stirred up and made to recognize their duty, they will continue all their lifetime in this unconcerned and backslidden condition. Sad but true, many Christians are saved all over, except for their pocket-book, and that is something that is supposed to never be consecrated to the Master’s use. Someone has well summed up this shameful idolization of money in the following poem called—

I bought gasoline; I went to the show;
I bought some new tubes for my radio;
I bought candy and peanuts, nut bars and ice cream;
While my salary lasted, life sure was a scream.

It takes careful spending to make money go round;
One’s methods of finance must always be sound.
With habits quite costly, It’s hard to save;
My wife spent ten "bucks" on a permanent wave.

The church came round begging. It sure made me sore!
If they’d let me alone, I’d give a lot more.
They have plenty of nerve! They forgot all the past!
I gave them a quarter the year before last."

—Author Unknown.

Why is there not more mission work being done in this age of plenty? It is because of unconcern! Unconcern for the souls of countless millions who are still in the black pit of sin and unbelief. The reason for much of this unconcern is that so much of paganism has been Christianized in name, while professing Christendom has been paganized in practice. One cannot expect a person who has never been saved himself to have any burden to carry the good news of salvation to others.

And even among those who recognize the importance of Christians and churches being missionary, there is a sad lack of the scriptural practice of missions. The present day practice of missionary work in the main leaves much to be desired from the standpoint of the Divine commands and apostolic examples. It is indeed tragic when man gets in his mind that he can improve upon the plan of God, or when he thinks that God’s plan has become obsolete. Such a person needs to consider the confession of Daniel, who said: "We have sinned, and have committed iniquity, and have done wickedly, and have rebelled, even by departing from thy precepts and from thy judgments...O Lord, righteousness belongeth unto thee, but unto us confusion of face, as at this day" (Dan. 9:5, 7). If we profess to be Christians, we should prove it by our obedience. "Why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say?" Luke 6:46, is still the Lord’s searching question to those who depart from His revealed way. On the subject of missions, A. J. Gordon has said:

"For ye, brethren, became followers [imitators] of the churches of God which in Judaea are in Christ Jesus," says the apostle. I have no doubt that the church at Antioch is our inspired model as a missionary church as truly as a gospel church. That church, under the immediate guidance of the Holy Spirit, set apart and sent forth its own members as missionaries of the cross. And I have the strongest conviction that, if every church would do the same today, we could multiply our missionary activity a thousand fold. "But single churches would be unable to undertake such a work," it may be said. "How many do you count me for?" asked the Macedonian general, as his soldiers expressed their fear of going into battle against great odds. "How many do you count me for?" asks the Holy Ghost, who still abides in the church with his undivided presence and his undiminished power. If it were not for this last consideration I would not broach this subject at this time. Christ, in the person of the Holy Spirit, dwells in every church in the fulness of his presence. "Where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I in the midst of them," is the Magna Carta of the local church. Christ is not divided; he has not distributed himself among his churches, giving a part of himself to each, so that only by a union of all the churches can we secure the presence of the whole Christ. Herein is the immense difference between spiritual force and physical force. You can obtain a hundred horse-power by harnessing a hundred horses into one team; but you cannot secure a hundred church-power by uniting a hundred churches into one society; and for this reason: by separate church action that sense of weakness and dependence is promoted by which Christians are driven to take hold on God; by united church action that sense of denominational strength is nourished by which Christians are led to take hold of one another. My brethren, need I tell you that responsibility is the mother of activity—that necessity is the spring of prevailing prayer? Therefore I affirm that the greatest problem which we have to solve is that of putting the weight of spiritual obligation, which belongs to every church and to every Christian, upon every church and upon every Christian. And I believe that our divinely appointed church polity was ordained for this very purpose, and if rightly carried out can effect it as no presbyterian or episcopal government can do. —E. B. Gordon, A. J. Gordon, A Biography, pp. 242-243.

In many present day religious circles, it has become stylish to only send money to missionary works when no other place can be found to use it. This attitude is founded upon the idea that missions are unimportant, and are only good to help cut down on the income tax that individuals must pay. The Scriptures emphatically denounce such an idea, and only the grossest ignorance can condone such. We need only cite Matt. 28:18-20 to show that the chief business of the New Testament church is missions, either local or foreign. F. J. A. Hort says: "But the work of the Ecclesia in relation to the world is itself a missionary work; and it is to the Ecclesia itself as the missionary body that Christ’s charge is ultimately addressed." —The Christian Ecclesia, p. 34.

Matthew 28:18-20 is called The Great Commission, but it is actually more than a commission, for a commission is the authorization to perform certain duties, or to act for another. But while this is all that, it is more. This is actually the command to fulfill this duty, and no church is measuring up to its purpose of existence if it neglects its missionary responsibility. The importance of this command cannot be overemphasized. Perhaps this is the reason why it is repeated so many times, for in at least five places in the Gospel Accounts and Acts it appears, each appearance supplementing the others, yet all harmonizing. For comparative purposes, let the reader consult Matthew 28:18-20; Mark 16:14-16; Luke 24:46-48; John 20:21-23 and Acts 1:8.

The importance of this command is to be seen in that these are not all variations of one and the same commission, but are actually three separate and distinct commissions. These are distinguished as follows: (1) That found in John 20:19-24, which was spoken on the evening of the resurrection Sunday in Jerusalem or Bethany, and was delivered to the disciples, Thomas being absent. The number of the disciples is not given, but it is very probable that a larger number was there than just the apostles, else this term or "the eleven" would have been used. The content of this commission: (a) The Lord spoke peace to them (v. 21). (b) He gave them a continuing command to go forth for Him (v. 21). (c) He gave them the Holy Spirit to direct them as a body. This does not refer to individual possession as such, since every born-again person receives the Spirit at the moment of salvation (Rom. 8:9, 14, 16). The Spirit was given to the disciples in collective capacity—i.e., to the church. This promise was not fulfilled on the day of Pentecost, for Pentecost was merely the manifestation of it. Here, the promise was that the Spirit would be in the church, while in Acts 2, He came on the individual members of the church: "sat upon each of them" (v. 3), and so they were all under the complete control of the Holy Spirit. (d) He commissions them to declare the terms of salvation and to give assurance of the same to those who meet the terms (v. 23).

(2) The second commission is that which is found in Matthew 28:18-20 and Mark 16:14-16. Mark states the time only that it was "afterward" (v. 14), while Matthew’s account gives no time element whatsoever. However, it is obvious that a considerable time had elapsed between the first commission and this one, for there had to be time enough for them to travel from the Jerusalem area, where the first commission was given, to the mountains of Galilee where the second was given (Matt. 28:16), a distance of thirty or forty miles. This commission was delivered upon a mountain in Galilee (Matt. 28:7, 10, 16; Mark 16:7), to the eleven (Matt. 28:16; Mark 16:14), plus over "five hundred brethren at once" (1 Cor. 15:6). The content of this commission was: (a) To go into all the world (Mark). (b) To make disciples of all nations by preaching the Gospel to them, (Matt., Mark). (c) To baptize those who have thus been made disciples (Matt.). (d.) To then teach them the "all things" of the Christian faith (Matt.).

(3) The third commission is that which is given by Luke in Luke 24:46-53 and Acts 1:3-12. It was delivered forty days after the resurrection of Christ (Acts 1:3-4), "not many days" (ten to be exact) before the baptism of the church body in the Holy Spirit (Acts 1:5). This was delivered upon Mount Olive (Acts 1:12), near Bethany (Luke 24:50), to the apostles (Acts 1:2), although there is nothing to indicate that the apostles were alone when spoken to, and Acts 1:14-15, when read in the context strongly suggests that there were others also present.

Be that as it may, the content of the commission was thrice repeated, and in the present day of laxity and unconcern it needs to be constantly repeated. Mission work is the life blood of the Christian church, and where it has been neglected, there has quickly followed moral and spiritual stagnation, corruption of worship, and eventually atheism or paganism. It is simply a matter of moving forward or slipping backward. There is no standing still.

The church which is not a missionary church will be a missing church during the next fifty years, its candle of consecration put out, if not its candlestick removed out of its place. As ministers and churches of Jesus Christ, our self-preservation is conditioned on our obedience to the great commission. Now it is preach or perish! Evangelize or fossilize! Be a saving church, with girded loins and burning lamp, carrying a lost world an its heart day and night; or be a secularized church, lying on the heart of this present evil world, and allowing it to gird you and carry you whithersoever it will. Which shall it be? —A. J. Gordon in E. A. Gordon’s A. J. Gordon, A Biography, p. 250.

At no time in history has mission work so prospered as it did in the First Century, yet probably no age since has had the obstacles and impediments to overcome that the First Century Christians did. Travel was generally by foot or by boat, painfully slow in either case. There was the language barrier, the impoverish state of most Christians, the lack of availability of the written Word of God. Yet, Christianity prospered, and prospered greatly so that Paul could write to the church at Rome just shortly after the mid-century mark "I thank my God through Jesus Christ for you all, that your faith is spoken of throughout the whole world" (Rom. 1:8). Some would object that this meant only the Roman or civilized world, as the Greek kosmos sometimes does, but even granting this, it is still a remarkable example of the speed with which the Gospel was disseminated. What then is the answer? It prospered because it was done in obedience to the divine command, it was done after the pattern of the divine command and the apostolic example, and it was done in dependence upon the divine power.

Today, there are more visionaries than missionaries, and these are more concerned with propagating their own, or their denomination’s pet ideas, or with making a name and a kingdom for themselves than with disseminating the Gospel and establishing new converts in The Faith. It is little wonder that the Spirit of God does not bear witness in power with many so-called missionaries, when we consider their teaching and preaching in the light of the Bible. Most evangelism, which is basic to missionary work, is done purely in the energy and wisdom of the flesh. It is not only apart from the power of the Spirit, but it is actually a repudiation of the ministry of the Spirit in many instances. We would not be misunderstood: we certainly believe in personal witnessing where the Spirit is leading, but to nag and worry a person until he makes a profession of faith simply to get rid of a pestiferous "soul winner" does not make true Christians. All it makes is a hypocrite with a false hope, and resembles what is condemned in Matt. 23:15. The idea that "you can win anyone if you work at it long enough," is a blatant denial of John 1:13: "...which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God." Arguments, reasonings, tricks and gimmicks do not regenerate. Only the Spirit of God does that (John 6:63), and He does this only in harmony with the faithful presentation of the Gospel, in a total dependence upon Him to make the application of the Word, and accomplish the quickening of the spiritually dead soul.

Mission work is on a par with the teaching ministry, and the only reason for not doing missionary work is ignorance or a selfish unconcern for the welfare of souls, and for obeying God. The writer confesses to never having been a missionary in the general sense of the word, and therefore he cannot know of much which is necessary to know on the missionary field. Nevertheless, one has only to read the New Testament to find the divine ideal outlined, and it is to this that every bona fide missionary must conform his ministry if he is to have the smile of God upon his labors. Four things need to be noted in this matter, the first of which is—

The purpose of missions may be briefly defined as proclaiming the Gospel to the world in order that lost people may hear, believe and be saved, then uniting the new converts into scriptural churches, and teaching them the things of God so that they may in turn proclaim the Gospel, make converts, etc., thus carrying on the process. The missionary responsibility of the churches may be found inhering in many passages of Scripture such as Romans 10:14-15: "How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? And how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear without a preacher? And how shall they preach, except they be sent? As it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things!"

This passage sets forth some very pertinent questions concerning mission work. Indeed, it gives the very purpose of mission work. How can the lost call upon the Lord for salvation when they have neither heard of, nor believed on, Him? And how can they hear, of Him and believe on Him unless someone carries the Gospel to them? And how can missionaries go unless they are sent? How this refutes the foolish reasoning of many that anyone can go out and be effective witnesses of the grace of God if they just have a zeal to do so. The Lord did not imbibe the philosophy that many have that "the woods are fully of souls, just go out and win them." No! His command in Matthew 9:38, which is based in the truth of Romans 10:15, is: "Pray ye therefore the Lord of the harvest, that he will send forth laborers into his harvest." No missionary will ever accomplish any lasting good unless he has a genuine call of God to go, and even then, the Holy Spirit does not allow him to choose his own field in which to labor. The missionary is not only sent out, but he is also sent to, the field by the Lord. See the implied frustration of Paul when the Spirit of God kept vetoing his choices of fields of labor in Acts 16:6-10. Jonah was perfectly willing to be a missionary so long as he could choose his own field, but he had no desire to preach to "those old ungodly Gentiles," yet God had called him to that specific field. In this instance may be seen the danger in which a person puts himself when he hardens himself against the calling or direction of the Lord. In this present rebellious age, it is a wonder indeed that more Christians are not swallowed by sea monsters.

The passage above cited is also a refutation of the fatalistic view that those who are going to be saved, will be saved irregardless of whether they ever hear and believe the Gospel or not. Faith, without which God does not deign to save any one, still "cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God" (Rom. 10:17). Many have misrepresented Calvinism as teaching such fatalism, but this is a travesty upon good men and sound doctrine, for Calvinism has always taught that God ordained the means as well as the end, and it is the responsibility of true believers to make use of the means, and to leave the accomplishing of the end to the Lord. If no other incentive were given, this would be enough to obligate every church to be missionary.

God’s purpose for missions has never been mere social betterment, nor propagation of secular education, neither the settlement of racial problems, yet, where the Gospel has been preached, believed, and put into practice, these things have been the natural fruits. On the other hand, those visionaries who have gone out with the idea in mind of correcting social evils, elevating the spirituality of people by giving them a secular education, or trying to force every one into a "speckled bird" society and religion which has as its rule, not the Bible, but the standards and creeds of the world, have accomplished little, if any, lasting good, for they have completely reversed the order of mission work, and, in many cases, have gone directly contrary to God’s revelation of His will.

Probably no greater missionary from the ranks of mortal men ever trod the face of the earth than the Apostle Paul, yet his missionary work was, at all times, completely subservient to the Holy Spirit’s leading. His first word after the Lord revealed Himself to him as the One Whom he was persecuting, was, "Lord what wilt thou have me to do?" (Acts 9:6). Sadly, most so-called missionaries have never submitted themselves unto the Lord to ask "What wilt thou have me to do?" We live in a day of human inventions, which are never sufficient for success, and so, it is a day of human incompetency.

Paul’s call by God and the purpose contained therein may be perused with profit. Paul had a true missionary call, he always manifested a true missionary concern, he followed a true missionary’s curriculum, and consequently, God confessed him to be a true missionary by blessing his labors. Let us note carefully Paul’s account of his call, as recorded in Acts 26:16-18: "But rise, and stand upon thy feet: for I have appeared unto thee for this purpose, to make thee a minister and a witness both of these things which thou has seen, and of those things in the which I will appear unto thee: Delivering thee from the people, and from the Gentiles, unto whom now I send thee, To open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me."

"I have appeared unto thee for this purpose..." Here is the divine call that came to Paul, and while there may not be the shining light from heaven and the audible voice today, yet the true minister of Jesus Christ has a personal call from the Lord no less than did Paul. Multitudes of ministers and missionaries today will argue that God does not personally call men to serve Him, but that it is simply a personal choice. We can only answer "You mean, so far as you know, He don’t," for this writer, together with many others, is conscious of having received a personal call to special, full-time service to the Lord. Too many modern missionaries and ministers are in the ministry for personal gain, either material or mental-for pay or popularity or pride. But true servants of God are called to preach the Gospel. If some question why they have never felt such a personal call, if so be that such a call exists, the answer lies in the fact that it is God’s sovereign prerogative to call whomsoever He pleases, and He so exercises this right. But above and beyond this, He never calls a man to preach false doctrine. This is the devil’s call. Here is, no doubt, the answer to the absence of a divine call to many so-called ministers and missionaries—they are too unsound to be God-called missionaries.

This purpose breaks down into two duties: (1) "To make thee a minister" of the truth of God, some of which Paul had already had revealed to him, and part of which were yet to be revealed. (2) "To make thee ...a witness" of these things. Paul’s work was to be unto the edification of the saints, as well as unto the evangelization of sinners, and that missionary who concentrates solely on either of these duties is only partially obedient to the Lord’s commission.

Precious is the promise given to the missionary in verse 17. The First Century missionary faced a formidable task, and one which would be doomed to fail but for the power of God. Nor could the missionary expect to find some "branch" of professing Christianity in every town that he visited. At that time, Christianity was but a very minor religious sect from an insignificant eastern country. On the other hand, the religions of the Gentiles ran the gamut of paganism, while the Jews themselves constituted an even greater hazard to the missionaries than did the Gentiles. But God’s promise was true, even as it is today. He promise is still "Call upon me in the day of trouble: I will deliver thee, and thou shalt glorify me" (Ps. 50:15).

The purpose as respecting the Gentiles is more fully developed in verse 18. Paul was to be the apostle to the Gentiles, and therefore he was: (1) To open their eyes. Both Jew and Gentile are blind concerning spiritual things. It is written of Israel: "For this people’s heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them" (Matt. 13:15). This indictment is quoted from Isaiah 6:9ff, and is repeatedly cited in the New Testament of all mankind’s willing blindness to God’s Truth. The world needs to have its eyes opened to spiritual things, but it never will except as the Word is preached, and the Spirit implants it in hearts. (2) "To turn them from darkness to light," for the tangible darkness of Egypt (Ex. 10:21-23) cannot approach in intensity the spiritual darkness which encompasses this alienated world today. (3) "And from the power of Satan unto God..." This present evil age is under the domination of Satan, and he deals with them as he pleases so long as they are in rebellion against the "Seed of the woman" (Gen. 3:15). The devil works in many and diverse ways to turn people from the truth, and he cares not what variety of wickedness and unbelief they may choose, so long as they reject the Lord as Saviour. Many he deceives by questioning the integrity of God’s Word, as he did with Eve (Gen. 3). Others he ensnares in a love of public acclaim, as he did King Saul (1 Sam. 15:30). Still others, as the Pharisees, he takes captive in their pride and self-righteousness (John 12:43). He sows the cares of this world and the deceitfulness of riches in many lives in order to choke out the word that has been sown (Matt. 13:7, 22). It is only through the instrumentality of the Word of God that the Holy Spirit convicts lost sinners of their true condition, and leads them to faith in the crucified Christ (1 Pet. 1:23; Eph. 6:17; John 16:8). Here, then, is a reason why men need to be turned from the power of Satan unto God: they cannot be saved otherwise. Here also is a powerful incentive to mission work. If men are "born again ...through the word of God" (1 Pet. 1:23), if "faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God" (Rom. 10:17), then he who would serve God in capacity as a missionary, must needs be a declarer of God’s Word.

The desired end for which Paul was to be sent unto the Gentiles, was "that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me." This is the same desired end for which God calls men to the mission fields today, and should be the end desired by every missionary who goes forth into the "field."

Where God’s purpose concerning missions has been disregarded, there has almost always followed a tragic effect. A case in point is China. Before the turn of the century, the door was opened for mission work in China, but of those whom God called, many refused to go, and of those who surrendered to go to China, many could not get financial support. Today, the door to China is closed, and multiplied millions are in spiritual darkness, and daily thousands are going out into a Christless eternity. Why? Because God’s people were either too unconcerned or else were too selfish to obey God’s command to do mission work. Many churches, like the church at Philadelphia, have an open door set before them, Rev. 3:8. Of those which do, many refuse to enter that door, and many even seek to close the door of the church against Christ, as did the church at Laodicea (Rev. 3:20).

Presently there are many doors open in South American countries, in the African nations, in Korea and in other places. In the thirty years since this writer first began writing this, many countries that were then open to the work of Christian missionaries, have begun to close their doors to them. India is a case in point. What will God’s people do about these opportunities? How much worth does the average Christian place upon a soul? To the average Christian, the salvation of souls on the mission field is not as important as having a new car or a big television set. Yea, even a package of cigarettes, or a favorite magazine comes before missionary work. If every church member would but give the amount that is wasted each week on cigarettes, magazines, candy and soda pop, to the cause of missions, how much could be accomplished. This writer once challenged the members of the church of which he was then pastor to try giving to missions the amount that would otherwise be wasted on frivolous things. A box designated Missions was set in the foyer of the church building, and every one was surprised, including the pastor, at how much came in, for the income for this purpose in a church that never had much over one hundred in attendance, and averaged much less, was enough to send substantial offerings to two missionaries each month. This plan was used for many years to support mission work which the regular church budget could not have supported, yet none of the members even missed what they gave.

Too many Christians have lost their vision. They have forgotten their purpose on earth, and Christians are less percentage-wise in the world today than for the last several centuries simply because they have failed to propagate their own species. What was originally the main purpose of the Lord’s churches has too often become a mere sideline or hobby with the churches.

Even in the ranks of those who have felt a personal call to mission work, and who have moved on the field, there is a woeful lack of scriptural purpose in the majority of cases. In all too many cases, the first step toward a fulfillment of the scriptural purpose has been taken, but nothing more is done. Some missionaries are satisfied to only do evangelistic work, but this can never meet the demands of the Lord. Missionary to Mexico Milton Martin has well said:

Winning souls to Christ is only part of the Great Commission. Indoctrination completes the Great Commission. The Great Commission can only be completed through a local group of organized believers, baptized, adhering to Scriptural principles and practices. Therefore the end in foreign missions must be and has to be the establishment of New Testament Churches ...At this point a term must be inserted which is not from the Bible but defines Paul’s steps with a local church. The word "indigenous" is defined by dictionaries as follows: "Produced, growing, or living naturally in a country or climate; not exotic; hence, figuratively, native, inherent." Applied to mission work, the word indigenous means that, as a result of missionary effort, a native Church has been produced which shares the life of the country in which it is planted and finds within itself the ability to govern itself, support itself, and reproduce itself ...Is it not time that we realized that the methods of the New Testament cannot be improved upon and are adequate for this modern age? Is it not time that we placed the emphasis on the local Church again as it was in the days of the New Testament?! —Article: "Missions In the New Testament Way," in The Orthodox Baptist, December, 1966, pp. 3, 4.

Every child of God ought to reproduce by witnessing of the grace of God, for everyone who has been born again is fitted to "Return to thine own house, and shew how great things God hath done unto thee" (Luke 8:39). However, this is but the first step, for the evangelist should always lead the new convert into the truth as concerning his duties to be baptized into a scriptural church, and to grow in grace and knowledge, and to become, in turn, himself a witness of the saving grace of Jesus Christ. Too many evangelists think that they have reached the pinnacle of success when they have "won a soul to Christ," and that God can receive no more, or at least no greater glory than that which has been brought about. But while the Lord is truly glorified when He saves a soul, yet His Word says, "For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God has before ordained that we should walk in them" (Eph. 2:10). And again, "Herein is my Father glorified, that ye bear much fruit: so shall ye be my disciples" (John 15:8). This gives no excuse to the person who supposedly wins a soul to Christ, to then walk away from that little lamb, leaving him to be devoured by spiritual wolves, and so, to never produce the fruit for which he was saved.

The world might be filled with saved persons, yet the Lord receive little glory if these never grew in grace, nor bore the fruits of the Spirit to any degree. Lot was indeed saved (2 Pet. 2:7), yet his life glorified God but little, but it was Abraham, a man who had grown in grace, who had an abiding testimony, whose faith still testifies to us today, that glorified the Lord Who had saved him.

Perhaps the reason why many are more zealous at "winning souls" than at teaching them, is because it is always more gratifying to the flesh (with which we all must constantly contend) to boast "I won a soul," than to say "I helped establish a soul in the truth." It is native in man to take pride in his own works, and teaching and training of new converts does not produce as apparent or as climactic results as "soul winning" does. For this reason many specialize only in that which elates their pride even though the Lord enjoins much more. Such need to remember that born again souls are "His workmanship," not the evangelists, and so, the glory is solely God’s.

The missionary is first to make disciples, but then to baptize and teach them. This is something that is not so satisfying to the fleshly mind as is the former, but it is part of God’s command, and cannot be ignored with impunity. Also this requires church action, for this command was not given to the disciples as individuals, nor yet to them as apostles, but to them as the representatives of the church. Nor was this given just to the Jerusalem church. This is evident because (1) If it were given to individuals as such, the death of those persons would mean that the commission was at an end. (2) If it had been given to the apostles as such, then the words "I, myself, am with you all the days until the consummation of the age," as the inspired original reads, could not have been true after the death of John, the last of the apostles. (3) Nor was this given to the Jerusalem church alone, because it too passed off the scene in time. Not, however, before it had faithfully carried out the whole of the commission for a time, so that, as a result, other churches were birthed in numerous places to carry on the commission. The failure of the Jerusalem church in time no way affected the commission because it was given to the Jerusalem church as the first and representative of all churches, and there were many daughter and granddaughter churches on the scene, to whom the commission had fallen, before the church at Jerusalem passed off the scene.

It is doubtful if even a tithe of modern missionaries could truthfully say with Paul, "I take you to record this day, that I am pure from the blood of all men. For I have not shunned to declare unto you all the counsel of God," Acts 20:26-27. This passage would seem to put a different complexion upon the matter. Paul suggests that to shun to declare all God’s "counsel" (Greek boule, "will, determination...project, plan, intention..." —Liddell and Scott Abridged Greek Lexicon) is to be guilty of men’s blood, a Biblical phrase suggesting great guilt before God because it involves great harm done to others. How solemn, then, is the duty to be sound, not only on the plan of redemption, but also on the plan for the lives of the redeemed. We will close this section with the following comprehensive quotation which sums up the matter we believe.

The purpose for which a church exists is missions. Take out of a church the missionary idea and you have a ship without a port, an athlete without a goal, a soldier without an order, a life without an objective. You have a barren tree that cumbers the ground, an empty house over whose door is written "Ichabod." Limit the gospel in its scope or power and you cut its heart out...Christ lived and died for all men. The business of the church is to make Him known to all men. Our Christian religion revolves around two foci: "Come" and "Go." Every one who accepts the invitation "Come" must hear immediately the imperative command "Go."...It is the driving wheel of the machinery of a church or denomination. Stop that wheel and the machinery is motionless and useless. It is the authority for Christian education. Colleges and seminaries were founded to fit men to "go." When they cease so to function they ought to be revitalized or buried. —G. W. McDaniel, The Churches of the New Testament, pp. 116, 117.

This is another field which has been sadly ignored, or else brazenly perverted by modern missionaries and missionary churches, yet God’s plan for the method of missionary work is every bit as clear in the Scriptures as is His command to do it. In a day of human invention and human pride and rebellion, we often hear extra-scriptural plans for mission work justified on such pleas as "We have found a better way," or "The First Century method will not work now," or "I don’t think it is important how we do it so long as we do it." But are not these the rankest rebellion against God? Do they not disparage God’s wisdom? Do they not elevate man’s wisdom above the wisdom of God? Yea, verily! And they cannot but be to God’s dishonor. There are numbers of independent Baptist missionaries on the field, each sent out by the authority of one church, and supported by the voluntary offerings of other churches, which are standing refutations of these excuses.

Even in the so-called Limited Commission, the Lord made it very clear to the Twelve concerning the plan to be followed. From Luke 9 we note that He Himself chose who were to go (v. l). He gave them their power and authority (v. 1). He was the One Who sent them out (v. 2). He gave them their message to preach (v. 2). He gave them the method to follow and promised the means to do so (vv. 3-4). He left no room for compromise (v. 5). Those who would not receive the message and the method which they had, were to be rejected and left to judgment (v. 5). They reported back to Him when they had finished their work (v. 10). The same can be said of the later, and more comprehensive Commissions. They were equally clear and authoritative, and left no room for the inventions of men.

Even those churches which are so diligent to keep the observance of the ordinances pure and to purge the church membership of every disorderly member, will often support with their finances any and every person who claims to be a missionary, irregardless of his message or method. This is inconsistent, to say the least. If we cannot, in good conscience, accept an individual’s preaching, or his practices, or the ordinances that he administers, or the organization he is associated with, then we cannot accept his missionary work either. Let us not be misunderstood. We may well rejoice at every soul that is genuinely born again through the ministry of one using unscriptural methods, yet we cannot condone such methods simply because God condescends to save men in spite of practices that are contrary to His Word.

If some say, Who are, we to judge the actions of another?" we must answer that every Christian and every New Testament Church has the responsibility to judge whether one can, with good conscience, work together with another person or group in the Gospel. To judge authoritatively whether a man’s or a church’s work is good is the Lord’s responsibility alone, yet every person has a personal duty to determine, as nearly as possible, whether a given program is in harmony with God’s Word. To engage in anything that one thinks is wrong, becomes sin to that individual whether the thing is intrinsically wrong or not, because it constitutes outright rebellion on his part when he does it even though he thinks it to be wrong. Paul was inspired to write, "He that doubteth is damned (literally ‘is judged.’) if he eat, because he eateth not of faith: for whatsoever is not of faith is sin" (Rom. 14:23).

At the same time, the Bible demands a certain amount of discernment on the part of the saints because we are commanded to "Try the spirits, whether they are of God" (1 John 4:1), and again, "If there come any unto you and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed: For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds" (2 John 10-11). This demands judging or discerning, yet always, as here, the standard is the Word of God.

Certainly this last passage relates to the doctrine of Christ’s person and work, but is it any less a rebellion to repudiate God’s Word when it clearly lays out God’s plan for missions? Is a man any the less rebellious who lets reason be his rule in the matter of missions, than the man who follows reason rather than God’s revelation in the matter of some other doctrine?

We doubt not that many of the missionary programs in the world today were started by pious and sincere men, but neither piety nor sincerity is any substitute for obedience. The Lord said, "If ye love me, keep my commandments" (John 14:15). Obedience is both a proof and a fruit of love. Alas, how varied and flimsy are the excuses given for not obeying God’s command in the matter of missions.

The plan for mission work is not a veiled nor hidden plan. Neither must we search in many passages in order to piece it together. Two Scriptures only are needed to set it forth so clearly that even a child can understand it. Other passages may supplement and strengthen the testimony, but Acts 13:14 and Philippians 4:15-17 clearly show what God’s plan for mission work is. From these two passages, we may note the following things: The absolute authority for the sending forth of a missionary is the Holy Spirit: "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. 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" (Acts 13:1-2).

This forever does away with the false notion that missionary work is for just any one who may want to see a new part of the country. "Whereunto I have called them" makes it clear that this was not just a pet project of Paul and Barnabas. The Holy Spirit, in His omnisapience, had chosen those whom He wanted and would use in the dissemination of the Gospel and the planting and edifying of churches. It is a fact not recognized by the majority of missionaries and preachers, that no matter how beautiful and fruitful a given field of work may appear, it will not be personally profitable to the individual unless that is where God wants him. Ecclesiastical ambition is totally inconsistent with the leadership of the Holy Spirit.

The Holy Spirit then is the One Who chooses the missionaries. It might be added that not only does He choose the missionary, but He also chooses the field in which He wants that particular missionary to labor. Here again, the wisdom of man is found faulty. Too many missionaries think that missionary work is missionary work, wherever it is, and that it makes no difference where one goes, so long as one goes on the mission field. But even the great Apostle Paul, a man especially chosen to be the apostle to the Gentiles (Acts 26:1618; Rom. 11:13), was not allowed to choose his own field of labor, for it is written, "Now when they had gone throughout Phrygia and the region of Galatia, and were forbidden of the Holy Ghost to preach the word in Asia, After they were come to Mysia, they assayed to go into Bithynia: but the Spirit suffered them not. And they passing by Mysia came down to Troas. And a vision appeared to Paul in the night; There stood a man of Macedonia, and prayed him, saying, Come over into Macedonia, and help us. And after he had seen the vision, immediately we endeavored to go into Macedonia, assuredly gathering that the Lord had called us for to preach the gospel unto them" (Acts 16:6-10). Were there no lost people there? Did the Lord have something against Asia or Mysia that He would not allow missionaries to preach there? No, for other missionaries labored in those areas, and even Paul passed through this self-same area on his second journey. There is, however, a right and a wrong time and right and a wrong place, as well as a right and wrong man, for every missionary call.

The second thing to be noted, is that the men who were called to this were qualified in many ways to do the job to which they were called. Note the character of these men. Barnabas is mentioned first, perhaps because he had been a Christian longer. He first comes to our attention through an act of generosity when he sold his land and brought the proceeds to the apostles to be used for the church (Acts 4:36-37). The church historian Eusebius says that tradition had accounted him to have been one of the seventy missionaries sent out by Christ in Luke 10:1 (Ecclesiastical History, Book I, Chapter 12). Next, he is seen as a man of courage and insight, for it was he who met the newly converted Saul of Tarsus, and discerned in him a true child of God, and a disciple of the Lamb, and it was him who introduced Sau1 to the apostles (Acts 9:27). In Acts 11:22-24 he is seen engaged in local mission work when he was sent out by the Jerusalem church to strengthen the new converts at Antioch. He is declared to be "a good man, and full of the Holy Ghost and of faith," and the added phrase "and much people was added unto the Lord" (v. 24), would seem to imply that he was a fervent evangelist as well as an edifier of the churches (v. 23). Barnabas’ integrity and honesty stands out in Acts 11:30 where he was entrusted with the collection for the relief of the Jerusalem saints. From Acts 12:25, the next mention of him, until he is last heard of in Cyprus (Acts 15:39), he is seen as the faithful and fervent missionary.

Paul was also a man of character. What a vast change was wrought by grace when Saul, the bloody persecutor became Paul, the persecuted preacher of peace. Paul was an humble man when once grace had wrought its perfect work, and his life might well be characterized by his own words when he was converted: "Lord, what wilt thou have me to do?" (Acts 9:6).

But more than this, he was a bold defender of the Christ from very early in his Christian life. He "straightway preached Christ in the synagogues, that he is the Son of God," he "confounded the Jews which dwelt, at Damascus, proving that this is very Christ," and "he spake boldly in the name of the Lord Jesus, and disputed against the Grecians" (Acts 9:20, 22, 29).

Paul was also a busy man, a prudent man and one who was concerned lest any action of his should make the gospel of none effect. For this reason he often worked at the tentmakers trade to support himself and his missionary companions while preaching (Acts 18:3; 1 Cor. 9:6, 15).

In all these things, both these men stood out as men of high character, and thus it should be, for the missionary as well as the bishop "must have a good report of them which are without; lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil" (1 Tim. 3:7).

Before a man may expect the Lord to use him, he must realize that not only is his life to be above reproach, but he is to show himself faithful in what is committed unto him. "Moreover it is required in stewards, that a man be found faithful" (1 Cor. 4:2). Both Barnabas and Paul had proven before that they could be faithful in little things, hence, God committed great things unto them. He who refuses small, seemingly insignificant places of service will probably never know God’s call to great service. Both Paul and Barnabas were already busy when God called them to the mission field. The conduct of these two men was good, the only exception being that which is recorded in Acts 15:37ff, and this only goes to show that they were both thoroughly human.

Another fallacy that needs to be combated is that if a man is a failure at every other occupation, he should enter the ministry. Or, on the other hand, that those in the church who are too ignorant or too lazy or too proud to do anything else, should be given a big title, a little encouragement, and sent out as representatives to the mission fields. This is folly! There are too many "representatives" "observers" and various other kinds of pious loafers on the mission fields whose salaries would be much better spent on Spirit-called and Spirit-led missionaries. This sort of deadwood needs to be cleared out, and the money used in a better way. All of the men mentioned in Acts 13:1-2 were men who were qualified for such work, and none should be sent to the mission field by churches but those who are qualified for the work.

Acts 13:1-2 sets forth the qualification for those who are called of God to be missionaries, and while we doubt not that some God-called missionaries never measure up to these standards, yet these are the ideal qualifications toward which every missionary ought to strive with all his being. Summed up briefly the missionary should be: (1) A saved person. (2) A scripturally baptized member of the church sending him out. (3) Qualified to exercise the duties of a missionary. These two men were already "prophets and teachers" (v. 1). (4) Active in the church of which he is a member. These men were ministering when they were called (v. 2). (5) Dedicated and willing to deny self. Paul and Barnabas were fasting when the Spirit called for them to be set apart to the work (v. 2). (6) Submissive to the Spirit’s leadership in all things. These men were to be separated "for the work whereunto I have called them" (v. 2).

The third thing of importance to be noticed is that such mission work is intimately connected with the local church, which is God’s chosen vehicle of truth (1 Tim. 3:15f), and the place of His glory (Eph. 3:10, 21).

While the Saviour was with his disciples, in person, he retained in his own hands all authority in his kingdom. But, before his ascension to the Father, he clothed his church with the executive authority in his kingdom. So that, not even an inspired apostle, or all of them together, ever attempted to perform a church act, except as ministers or servants of the churches. The apostles did not presume to appoint a successor to fill the vacancy occasioned by the fall of Judas, but this was done by the church, composed of men and women. But, did this Jerusalem church, established by Christ Himself, send out missionaries? Yes; for it is said in Acts: "Then tidings of these things came unto the ears of the church which was at Jerusalem: and they sent forth Barnabas, that he should go as far as Antioch" (Acts 11:22). Yes; this model church sent out a missionary to a heathen city to preach the Gospel. This was a foreign mission. Thus, we have seen that the church organized by the personal ministry of Christ, was a missionary church. —D. B. Ray, Baptist Succession, p. 99.

It is to be noted that the Holy Spirit worked in two directions in calling to the mission field. First, He called the missionaries themselves, as is evident from the statement "whereunto I have ca11ed them," and then he called upon the church to recognize the missionaries and to send them out: "Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto..." The calling of the missionaries was a past fact when the Spirit spoke to the church. The church is the Lord’s only authoritative body on earth, and the Lord never directs in things contrary to His revealed will, and, as He has authorized and empowered His church to be His witness in the world, what reason does any person have to expect Him to bless any mission work which bypasses and disparages His blood bought body?

To form "boards," "associations," "fellowships," or whatever else they may be called, and then give them the authority which the Lord gave only to His churches, is nothing short of presumption. Some may argue that "association," and "fellowship" are both used in the New Testament in conjunction with mission work, but to take a scriptural word and apply it to an unscriptural practice, in no way validates that practice. The concept of men forming themselves into a body and usurping the authority of the church to send out missionaries is something totally foreign to New Testament practice and precept.

Nor may it be argued that it is matter of insignificance which way it is done. The uniform practice of the churches of the New Testament was to work in and through the churches, and only in recent times have men begun to disregard the local church’s duty to send out and to support missionaries. Not until after the Reformation times did men begin to use manmade organizations for the sending out of missionaries, and, as Baptist churches were planted in America, some of these also formed such bodies. One of the earliest and most prominent of these was the Philadelphia Association, which was formed by the Pennepek, Middletown, Piscataqua, Cohansey and Welsh Track churches, and the Philadelphia mission in 1747. This organization, did not originate as a competitor of the churches, nor as an authoritative body.

At first, in many places, these began in simple annual meetings for religious exercises simply, but they naturally drifted into organic bodies including other objects as well. The Baptists were very jealous of them, fearing that they might trench on the independency of the Churches and come in time to exercise authority after the order of presbyteries, instead of confining themselves to merely fraternal aims [Subsequent history has shown that their fears were justified—DWH.] This has always been the tendency in the voluntary bodies of Christian history, and for this reason Associations will bear close watching at all times, as they are simply human in their origin. Thomas Armitage, History of the Baptists, p. 715.

The "Baptist General Convention" was organized in the United States in 1814, followed in 1845 by the "Southern Baptist Convention," and by the "Baptist Missionary Union" in 1846. Most of the present missionary "boards" "associations" "fellowships," etc., are of much later date, but they all have one common factor; viz., they require participating churches to delegate authority and send finances to the headquarters to send out and support missionaries, something not to be found in the Scriptures either in precept or precedent. Churches indeed have authority to send out missionaries, but that authority is not redelegatable.

Christianity is the most emphatic missionary force in the world, and every Christian church is a divinely appointed missionary society, of the primitive type. If every Church were instinct with the life of its Divine Head, and true to the purpose for which it was instituted, no other missionary organizations would be needed to send the Gospel of the blessed God to the ends of the earth. In apostolic history, no others were known, and yet they went everywhere preaching Christ, and filled the world with the Gospel of His salvation...In most of our churches there are missionary and other benevolent societies of various kinds, acting in concert with larger external societies. The wisdom and expediency of this course may well be questioned. Indeed, it is a humiliating confession that it is the apathy of the churches touching the objects contemplated, which at all justifies the existence of such organizations within them. They, at times, accomplish great good, and their intention is always good. But the Church was instituted by Divine Wisdom for these very purposes, and is an organization better fitted for their accomplishment than any other can be. —E. T. Hiscox, The New Directory For Baptist Churches, pp. 270-271, 273.

Aside from the fact that the Lord has ordained that "now unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places might be known by the church the manifold wisdom of God, According to the eternal purpose which he purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord" (Eph. 3:10-11), these man-made organizations are inefficient, for they require a part of the mission funds for their own maintenance. Their inefficiency ranges from their being able to put most of the funds on the mission field, down to one such board which admits that "less than ten percent" of that which is given to missions ever actually reaches the mission field. Some will be shocked at these figures. Others will not believe them, but common sense tells us that any organization which must hire workers, which has advisory or screening boards which are paid a salary, must receive funds from somewhere, and these are generally channeled from the mission funds, and are considered a legitimate part of mission expenses. But even if the funds could be obtained elsewhere, it would still be an inefficient method, for the same funds used for these salaries could be better sent to missionaries on the field if the New Testament mission plan were but followed.

Even such organizations which are able to get most of the funds to the field are still shamefully inefficient when compared with the New Testament mission plan, for under this plan, no other organization than the church is needed, the missionary being sent out by the church of which he is a member, and sister churches assisting by sending financial support to him, or to his account at his home church. Thus, not a penny is lost or wasted, but every bit of the financial support reaches the mission field. This is God’s plan, and it cannot be improved upon by man.

Why do Christian people continue to support the board system of missions when it is obviously contrary to God’s will? Most people do so out of ignorance, and this ignorance is sometimes preyed upon and encouraged by the advocates of these man-made organizations. A great many people have no idea that there are real, independent Baptist missionaries still in existence, yet almost every major section of the world has some of these successfully laboring for the Lord. Some people prefer the term "unaffiliated" since the word "independent" has been so abused, and made to cover almost every shade of practice and affiliation that it has come to mean almost nothing, though "unaffiliated" means not dependent as well. Those who do find out about such unaffiliated Baptist churches are often warned against them, and told that they are some sort of "wildcat" splinter groups, or that they are unsound in the faith, yet only a little over two hundred years ago there were no other kinds of Baptist churches except these independent churches, and most independent Baptist churches today are much more conservative in doctrine and practice than are the different groups of associated Baptists. Their strict adherence to the Scriptures is what compels them to not join in unscriptural, man-made organizations.

Dr. Mosheim, the celebrated Lutheran church historian, says that the ancient churches were "independent with respect to each other; nor were they joined by association, confederacy, or any other bonds than those of charity," (Ecclesiastical History, Cent. 2, Part 2, Chap. 2, para 2.) And G. H. Orchard, the Baptist Historian likewise says: "The Christian societies, instituted in the cities of the Roman empire, were united only by the ties of faith and charity. Independency and equality formed the basis of their internal constitutions," (Concise History of Baptists, p. 22.)

Advocates of these mission boards do all in their power to keep the average Christian ignorant of those who do missions in the New Testament way, for otherwise many would be spiritual enough to see that the board system is unscriptural, and wise enough to see how inefficient it is, and would come back to the Bible plan of missions. At this point, lest any should accuse the writer of being a malcontent, and against every thing and every body, it should be honestly and joyously admitted that many churches which support such unscriptural programs are, in other ways, sound in the faith. For this we rejoice and thank God, but we believe that to be completely honest and obedient to the Lord, such a church should drop the shackles of "machinism" and get back to the Bible way of missions.

To the Antioch church, the Spirit said "Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them." The church responded obediently and immediately, and "when they had fasted and prayed, and laid their hands on them, they sent them away" (Acts 13:3). Here is: (1) Ungrudging obedience. "Having fasted and prayed," (A participle there was no delay in the matter.) (2) A spirit of concern. They fasted that they might first be in the right spirit themselves, and then prayed that God’s blessings would be upon the missionaries. (3) A recognition of the call, and a setting aside to that office. "...laid their hands on them..." The laying on of hands was an official recognition of a Divine call to a specific work. (4) Church authority. "...they sent them away." There is no such thing today as a "free-lance" missionary with Divine authority. Even in apostolic times, there were few, if any, missionaries who were called of God to go out but who were backed up by church authority. God expects missionaries to submit themselves to a church, and to be sent out by it. There are several reasons for this. First, God has decreed that "to Him be glory in the church by Christ Jesus through all ages, world without end" (Eph. 3:21). Second, The authority of a church would prevent false disciples from so readily going out simply to make merchandise of people. Third, this authority made the missionary answerable for any deviation from truth or morality, and provided an executor of discipline for any such deviation. Fourth, it provided fellowship and help for the missionary and his family.

A further proof of the church’s authority in this, is the fact that they reported back to the church concerning their labors. "And thence sailed to Antioch, from whence they had been recommended to the grace of God for the work which they fulfilled. And when they were came, and had gathered the church together, they rehearsed all that God had done with them, and how he had opened the door of faith unto the Gentiles" (Acts 14:26-27). On his second missionary journey, Paul was again sent out by the Antioch church, this time with Silas as his partner. "And Paul chose Silas, and departed, being recommended by the brethren unto the grace of God" (Acts 15:40). Paul’s third missionary journey also began at Antioch, and, while it does not expressly state that he was sent out by the church, this is the only safe conclusion, since the example has already been twice given, and no contrary example is recorded.

The question also arises as to what capacity the missionaries sustained when they were sent out by the Antioch church. Were they merely separated members but with authority to preach, baptize, teach, etc., or were they separated so as to constitute a church m transit with inherent authority? Nothing in the meaning of the word church, nor in its scriptural usage would forbid its being used of a group in transit. In Chapter twelve of this work, historical examples of this very thing are cited, as when whole churches removed from one locale to another. Nor would the case with missionaries be much different. Missionary groups, if they were comprised of only two or three scripturally baptized believers could constitute a church, for Jesus said, "Where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them" (Matt. 18:20). Such an arrangement might be convenient at times for the sake of taking care of business or unforeseen circumstances that might arise in mission work on foreign fields.

However, though there seems to be nothing in Scripture which would indicate that such a group of missionaries could not go out in capacity as a small missionary church, indications are that the New Testament missionaries went out as an arm of some church, authorized to preach, baptize, teach, etc., but still responsible to it as members. The fact that Paul and his companions reported back to the church that sent them out indicates this.

Such an arrangement would be wise for several reasons. (1) Being responsible to such a church, there would be little danger of one or two unspiritual persons dominating and leading the group astray, as there might be if they constituted a small mission church. (2) There would no doubt be a closer bond of fellowship, and a greater feeling of responsibility toward them by the mother church, resulting in greater concern for them, if they were still considered as members. (3) The missionaries themselves would feel a greater encouragement in knowing that they were not alone in their endeavors, but that the home church was lifting them up before the throne of grace. (4) As the home church would hear of the blessings poured out on the missionaries, and upon their work, they would be made to rejoice in the part that they have in the Great Commission, and would be encouraged to put out more efforts. Nothing so deadens a church’s missionary zeal as never knowing what their mission offerings are being used for, nor what is being accomplished through them. On the other hand, nothing encourages a church like having a missionary write that souls are being saved, new converts are being taught, and churches established under his ministry because those at home are praying and supporting him in the work.

The Lord does not necessarily call a missionary from every church, for if he did, there would be many churches which would be unable to support a missionary by themselves. Several of the churches in the New Testament did not have any missionaries like the Antioch church did. But those who do not have missionaries called from among themselves still have a duty to "be witnesses...unto the uttermost part of the earth" (Acts 1:8), and this they do when they stand behind the missionaries from other churches with their prayers and finances. Therefore, while Acts 13:1-4 sets the standard for the qualifications for missionaries, and for the authority back of missionaries, the responsibility of other churches is given in Philippians 4:15-17.

The practice of the church at Philippi earned for them the high commendation of Paul (2 Cor. 8:1-5), for while it was a poor church, and an afflicted church, it was also a generous church. Upon at least three occasions, this church sent offerings to alleviate Paul’s needs, two of these times being during his short stay in Thessalonica, and just shortly after the Philippian church was organized (Phil. 4:16; Acts 17:1-2, 10), and the third time being just prior to the writing of the epistle to them. Later some of the other churches of Macedonia, and perhaps of other places as well, stood with Paul in the work (2 Cor. 11:8-9). What a great difference between this noble little church, and many churches today which must be begged and begged before they will lay out any money for the Lord’s cause, yet the saints of Macedonia begged Paul with great and earnest entreaties for the privilege of sharing in the work that he was doing (2 Cor. 8:4). They did this because they had first given themselves wholeheartedly to the Lord, and this led them to give to help Paul (v. 5). Granted, this passage refers to the offering being taken up for the poverty-stricken Jerusalem saints, but this does not detract from the fact of the Philippians’ generosity. Indeed, it only adds to the luster of it. How tragic that so many modern churches consider missions a burden. They rob themselves of blessing by never having learned by experience that "It is more blessed to give than to receive" (Acts 20:35).

As in the Antioch church we have the example of how a missionary is to be sent out, so in the churches of Macedonia, and especially in the one at Philippi, we have the example of how to support a missionary. It is especially noteworthy that the support for Paul did not go through any missionary board or headquarters where most of it would be kept to "oil the machinery" of the board, but that it was sent by the most direct way to the missionary himself. "But I have all, and abound: I am full, having received of Epaphroditus the things which were sent from you, an odour of a sweet smell, a sacrifice acceptable, wellpleasing to God" (Phil. 4:18).

When God’s people get back to the Bible way of mission work, they may expect to be truly "a sacrifice acceptable, wellpleasing to God," but not until then. Nor can it be argued that the present day boards and headquarters stand in the same relationship that Epaphroditus did, for he was nothing more than a mere postman or messenger, who took not a cent of the money sent to Paul. But what could we say of the man who, given a sum of money to deliver to another, kept part of it for himself? Would he not be a thief? Is a body of men that does so any the less so? What of a man who, entrusted with the wealth of another to invest in the most efficient way, should lose much of it by sheer carelessness, or give much of it away, or invest it in inefficient and unprofitable schemes? Is it not all but certain that his stewardship would be taken away? Is a church which knowingly invests in inefficient and unscriptural mission programs any the less open to condemnation? Who will deny it?

It is time for Christians and churches to wake up to the fact that each one of us shall have to give account of our stewardship, and what can be the answer of those who have departed from the Bible plan for missions. They must stand shamefaced before the Lord’s searching eye at that day. It is time that the inventions of men were junked, and we returned to God’s way that He might be glorified in His churches.

Let no one mistake this. He who goes out to convert the world, sets out upon a mission doomed to failure, for it is no man’s job to convert the world, nor, for that matter, to convert even one person. If people are not converted by the Lord, they are not converted at all, notwithstanding how much the missionary may talk to them, or plead with them, or how many ‘decisions" may be made. There is much that goes under the name of evangelism in these days, which shall be found to be nothing more than wood, hay, and stubble when the judgment fire shall test men’s works (1 Cor. 3:11-15).

Where some have overemphasized the sovereignty of God to the point of making God appear as a despotic tyrant, and man as a mere machine with no will of his own, the vast majority have swung to the opposite extreme and have exalted man to the position of the master of the world, with a will that is free and able to do whatsoever it pleases, without exception. But such a position finds no substantiation in the Scriptures. Many overzealous persons have assured lost people that "you can be saved any time or any place that you want," and many lost persons, assured of such limitless opportunities of the will, have gone out into a Christless eternity. It is folly to teach lost people that they have the inherent ability to be saved any time and place they want, when the Scripture gives no such hope. Indeed, it teaches the opposite. "Seek ye the Lord while he may be found, call ye upon him while he is near" (Isa. 55:6). "For he saith, I have heard thee in a time accepted, and in the day of salvation have I succoured thee: behold now is the accepted time; behold, now is the day of salvation" (2 Cor. 6:2). "No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him" (John 6:44). "No man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father" (John 6:65). "Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God" (John 1:13). See also Proverbs 1:24-31.

The present day ministry is more often characterized by human eloquence and dynamics than by the power of the Holy Spirit. But these are unnecessary if the individual be called, led and filled by the Spirit of God. To resort to such low methods of persuasion is a tacit confession that the Spirit of God will not honor one’s labors. Paul said that "Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect...And I, brethren, when I came to you, came not with excellency of speech or of wisdom, declaring unto you the testimony of God...And my speech and my preaching was not with enticing words of man’s wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power, That your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God" (1 Cor. 1:17; 2:1, 4-5).

This is not to say that God does not use human instrumentality, nor is it meant to excuse the careless or slipshod presentation of the Gospel, which is deplorable whenever and wherever it is found. But it must be realized that the effectiveness of the Gospel message is dependent wholly upon the power of the Holy Spirit, and not upon human eloquence or ingenuity. God often makes use of the crudest of human instruments that the accomplishment and glory might all be His, as it is written: "For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called: But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty; and base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are: That no flesh should glory in his presence" (1 Cor. 1:26-29).

There is both a human and a divine side to missions; God condescends to use human means, but not apart from the divine power, and without this divine power, human instrumentality shall accomplish nothing lasting, appearances to the contrary notwithstanding. The authority behind the Great Commission is the Lord’s, for He says, "All power (Greek exousia=authority) is given unto me in heaven and in earth" (Matt. 28:18). The executive power, or ability necessary to carry out this commission is of the Holy Spirit, as it is written: "But ye shall receive power (Greek dunamis=ability), the Holy Ghost having come upon you" (Acts 1:8), literal rendering. These two Greek words then manifest that authority as well as ability to execute this command, has been given, and the New Testament church has everything it needs to fulfill the Lord’s will in this matter. The Lord says, in effect, "Go, I have authorized it, and as you go, the Spirit shall empower you." This authorization and enablement makes unnecessary all the fads and fancies of men. All of their inventions and ingenuities are intrusions on, and corruptions of, the work of the Lord. Those who bypass the power of God in favor of the inventions of men are doomed to failure from the very start, and in such presumption, are liable to the censure of the Lord.

Now a man may, without the Spirit’s help, decide to became a missionary. He may pick a place to work. He may make himself a hail-fellow-well-met with those among whom he works. He may convince them of the wrong of their ways, and may get some "decisions," and may unite these together into a body, but all this does not mean that his work is acceptable in the Lord’s sight, nor that it will endure. A missionary friend of this writer wrote that on the same field where he was laboring, there was a missionary whose denomination had had a missionary work there for almost one hundred years, yet not a single church had been established, the adherents of the mission, if indeed they were even true believers, had not progressed at all in sanctification or doctrine, and the only evidence that any work had been done was the erection of mission buildings. Such is ever the result where men go in the wisdom and strength of the flesh, and are not led of the Spirit. "Not by might, nor by power, but by my spirit, saith the Lord of hosts" (Zech. 4:6).

The ministry of the Holy Spirit is necessary to: (1) Call the right individual to the mission field (Acts 13:2). It cannot be denied that some people are more qualified for any given field of labor than others. (2) Choose the field of labor for the individual. It is not enough to go to the mission field. One must go to the right field (Acts 16:6-10). (3) Conquer the natural enmity of the people of that field against the one who preaches the Gospel. Satan stirs up enmity against those who preach the truth, as we notice from the book of Acts in almost every instance of mission work. (4) Convict the lost by empowering the Word as it is proclaimed (John 16:8). (5) Convert those who hear the Gospel proclaimed (John 3:3, 5-8). (6) Constitute the new believers into a "spiritual house" or church by His indwelling them as a body (1 Pet. 2:5; 1 Cor. 3:16; John 14:16-18; Eph. 2:21-22). (7) Create in believers the likeness of Christ through daily sanctification (1 Cor. 6:9-11).

"Ye shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you" was the Lord’s promise, and it was this power which made the ministry of the early churches so fruitful. Not once in the centuries intervening has there been such a demonstration of the Spirit and of power. Yet, not one of the First Century missionaries had the education or eloquence to sway the multitudes, but they did so because "with great power gave the apostles witness of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus: and great grace was upon them all" (Acts 4:33).

Someone has well said that the book of Acts would be more aptly called, not "the Acts of the Apostles," but "the Acts of the Holy Spirit," inasmuch as we find the ministry of the Spirit so prominent in the Book. Robert Lee, in The Outline Bible, takes Acts 1:8 as the key verse, and outlines the Book in this way: (1) The Lord at work in "Jerusalem," Chapters 1-7. (2) The Lord at work in "Judaea and Samaria," Chapters 8 and 9. (3) the Lord at work even unto the "uttermost part of the earth," Chapters 10-28.

Considering these divisions, we find that in each case the Holy Spirit took the lead and directed in this work. Here then is the secret of the success of the early missionaries: their work was completely subservient to the Spirit’s leading. There can be no mistakes this way, no blunders, no failures. O that modern ministers and missionaries and churches could learn this!

This aspect of the power of missions is not pleasing to carnal man, for he likes to reap much of the glory for himself. But this is not possible where the power of the Holy Spirit is recognized as the energizing force. Nevertheless, this acknowledgment shall be for the believer’s greater and more lasting profit, for the relinquishing of all glory and honor to the Lord shall bring rewards from Him at the judgment seat of Christ.

At the same time, it must be realized that though the real power in mission work is of the Holy Spirit, the Lord has ordained that those whom He has called to mission work are to be supported by those who stay on the home field and labor there. Such a relationship was sustained between William Carey and Andrew Fuller, the latter of which agreed to "hold the rope" while the former "went down into the well." This Fuller did, being indefatigable in the cause of missions in Great Britain in the last century, who "did more to keep the Churches alive to the subject than any half-dozen men in his times," (Thomas Armitage, History of the Baptists, p. 585).

It is clear that any failure in the matter of missions is not due to the lack of power of the Lord, but because the Lord’s people have not risen to their responsibility to support those whom the Lord has called to the mission field. Many will urge the cause of missions only so long as it does not inconvenience them, nor cost them anything. God’s power is unlimited, as are His resources, but He has chosen to work through His people. God does not need a steamship or airplane ticket to get to the foreign mission field, but the missionary does. God is not subject to hunger, and therefore needs no money for food, but the missionary and his family does. Therefore, one cannot rightly recognize the importance of missions without, at the same time, seeing his own responsibility in the matter. It is never "someone else’s responsibility." Here is the principle problem with many people; they are unwilling to recognize personal responsibility regarding mission work. They wrongly assume that the Commission only obligates preachers and missionaries to "go into all the world."

It is fitting, therefore, that contemporaneous with the study of missions, there should be a faithful study of the vitally related subject of Christian stewardship...That the church of Christ has either been ignorant of its stewardship, or has forgotten the duties which stewardship involves, accounts for any lack of means to carry on God’s work in the world, which now exists, or ever has existed in the past. —C. A. Cook, Stewardship and Missions, pp. 14, 37.

The power of missions is from the Lord. The responsibility to carry out missions is given to believers with the authority and ability to do so. Men may neglect their responsibility. They may abuse the power put at their disposal. They may, through unbelief, refuse to use God’s means. But the fact still remains that the Lord has given a divine plan for the work of missions, and He has promised power to those who follow His plan. If man chooses to do otherwise, he has none to blame for his failure and loss of reward but himself.

The first promise of mission work that was given to the early disciples was enduement of power for the work they were to do. "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" (Luke 24:49). "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. For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence" (Acts 1:4-5).

As formidable as mission work may appear to the human eye, it is not beyond the power of the Holy Spirit if He is followed completely in the matter. Thus, the Lord’s promise to Paul was that He would deliver him "from the people, and from the Gentiles, unto whom now I send thee" (Acts 26:17). And so it was fulfilled. Paul was persecuted in almost every place that he preached, yet "out of them all the Lord delivered me" (2 Tim. 3:11). Human strength may fail. Human wisdom may fall far short. Human ability may be insufficient, but the authority, ability and wisdom of the Holy Spirit is sufficient for every need of the missionary.

There is the promise of rewards at the Lord’s return for those who have faithfully labored at mission work. However, the promise goes beyond the matter of rewards, or rather, there are rewards before the coming of the Lord. If any one has a genuine love for the Lord’s House, he will want to see it prosper and grow. There are numerous promises in the Scriptures to the effect that our testimony, whether it be on the foreign or local field, shall result in the building up of the congregation. This was the result of Peter’s testimony on the day of Pentecost. "And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves from this untoward generation. Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls" (Acts 2:40-41). This was also the result on another occasion. "Howbeit many of them which heard the word believed; and the number of the men was about five thousand" (Acts 4:4). It was so with Barnabas. "Then tidings of these things came unto the ears of the church which was in Jerusalem: and they sent forth Barnabas, that he should go as far as Antioch. Who, when he came, and had seen the grace of God, was glad, and exhorted them all, that with purpose of heart they should cleave unto the Lord. For he was a good man, and full of the Holy Ghost and of faith: and much people was added unto the Lord" (Acts 11:22-24).

These individuals all rejoiced in seeing their missionary endeavors crowned with the Lord’s success. This is a promise of present blessings to any who faithfully declare God’s word, whether his field of endeavor be local or foreign. However, foreign fields are more apt to be a special blessing to the one who labors there, for the conversions are generally from paganism, and hence they appear more remarkable than the conversion of one who lives in a supposed "Christian" land, and who perhaps has been a nominal Christian before his real conversion.

There can be no doubting that mission work has its promise of future rewards as well, for any one who is familiar with the Lord’s dealings with men knows that no one ever serves the Lord without being amply rewarded. "If any man serve me, let him follow me; and where I am, there shall also my servant be: if any man serve me, him will my Father honour" (John 12:26).

God’s promise to those who faithfully discharge their stewardship is that at the Lord’s coming every one will have his proper praise of God. This is applicable alike to preacher, teacher, missionary, deacon and layman. "Moreover, it is required in stewards, that a man be found faithful. But with me it is a very small thing that I should be judged of you, or of man’s judgment: yea, I judge not mine own self. For I know nothing by myself; yet am I not hereby justified: but he that judgeth me is the Lord. Therefore judge nothing before the time, until the Lord come, who both will bring to light the hidden things of darkness, and will make manifest the counsels of the hearts: and then shall every man have praise of God" (1 Cor. 4:2-5).

Every man must answer for his own life and actions as a Christian, and only those who have faithfully obeyed the Lord will receive His praise and reward. This alone should be enough to move us to faithfulness. It is not how faithful we have been in men’s eyes that will matter, but how faithful we have been by God’s standard. Therefore, since the command to do mission work is so obligatory upon every believer and every church, each one needs to examine his life in this light.

The promise of mission work is the same as in any other field of labor for the Lord. "And Jesus answered and said, Verily I say unto you, There is no man that hath left house, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my sake, and the gospel’s, But he shall receive an hundredfold now in this time, houses, and brethren, and sisters, and mothers, and children, and lands, with persecutions; and in the world to come eternal life" (Mark 10:29-30).

The indolence and unconcern of many for the cause of missions is totally at variance with the Lord’s commissions. Therefore, all neglect of mission work is disobedience to the Lord’s command, and there can be naught but censure for that. On the other hand, obedience is a manifestation of salvation. "He became (aorist past tense) the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey (present tense) him" (Heb. 5:9), i.e., their present obedience to Him is a manifestation that sometime in the past He became their Saviour. And obedience gives assurance of reward. "And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be" (Rev. 22:12). The reward is not according to accomplishment, but according to the character of the works-whether they have been faithfully and obediently done, and according to the ability given.

Mission work is too often considered a minor and insignificant part of the church’s responsibility, when, in reality, it is the primary duty of the church. The four great divisions of church responsibility as given in Matthew 28:19-20, to "Go," "make disciples," "baptize them," and "teach them," are all intimately connected with mission work.

Another promise of faithful mission work is the perpetuity of the Lord’s churches. Some professing Christians, it is true, have no concern whether the church of which they are members lives or dies, but all dedicated believers will want to see their church live on, and this can only be done by having a missionary zeal. One of the favorite sayings of James F. Dew, editor of The Flag Of Truth (out of Fort Worth, Texas), was "Every church is headed either for the mission field or the graveyard."

The New Testament church is to be a missionary body. It cannot long exist if it ceases to be so, nor does it deserve to exist. It can never fulfill its commission from the Lord without being missionary. It can never be the recipient of the fullest blessings of the Lord unless it is missionary. When all is said and done, there is no way of evading the missionary responsibility of a church. And a church only tries to evade it to its own confusion, loss of reward, spiritual stagnation, and eventual death. Let each pastor solemnly ponder the great cost of neglecting the preaching of missions. Let each church member consider his own loss in refusing to prayerfully support this great cause. That church and that individual Christian whose concern goes no further than self, might well meditate on the following poem.

I looked upon the sea and, lo, t’was dead,
Although by Hermon snow and Jordan fed.
How come fate so dire? The tale’s soon told—
All that it got it kept, and fast did hold.

All tributary streams found there their grave
Because that sea received but never gave.
Oh, sea that’s dead, teach me to know and feel
That selfish grasp my doom shall seal.
And help me, Lord, myself, my best to give
That I may others bless, and like Thee, live.

—Author unknown.

The choice is a simple one—it is propagate or stagnate. There is no middle ground. There is no standing still. A church must move forward, or it will slide backward. It must make the choice, and to do nothing is to choose the worse part.