Christians don’t have to talk long with each other to realise that what
one person means by the words ‘mission’ and ‘evangelism’ may be very different
to what someone else means. This is not too suprising, since the church
contains a broad spectrum of views. But what about amongst evangelicals? Can we
agree on what these two terms mean? My experience is a clear no. There are huge
ranges in what people perceive mission and evangelism to be. That’s why in
church life, if we want to try to avoid misunderstanding and conflict about the
nature of our mission, we must first do the hard work of defining our
terminology.
In my experience, there are at least four major views amongst
evangelicals regarding what mission is. They are:
View 1 – ‘overseas mission’
Mission is something that is done overseas and missionaries are people
that we send overseas to ‘preach the gospel’ (ie evangelise).
View 2 – ‘saving souls’
Mission is God’s work of ‘saving souls’ - both overseas and in
View 3 – ‘evangelism and
social action’
Mission is God’s work of bringing about his kingdom in this world. This
includes both evangelism and social action. However, while issues of justice
and mercy are important, they are secondary to the most important task of all -
the ‘saving of people’s souls’. In fact, most acts of service and mercy are
only really a means to an end – ie we do this in order that they people might
come to faith.
View 4 – ‘bringing the
Mission is God’s work of bringing about his kingdom in this world.
Everything that contributes to this is important. God’s kingdom impacts every
area of human life and endeavour. This includes evangelism, which is the centre
or heart of mission. As David Bosch has written, “Evangelism is calling
people to become followers of Jesus. It is enlisting people for mission - a
mission as comprehensive as that of Jesus.” Thus, mission is the wider
concept, incorporating all that God intends to transform in this world.
Which view do you hold? It’s critical to know because that will in
large measure shape our understanding of what is important in the life of the
church and for us as individuals.
Where does our understanding of mission come from? A good percentage of
our missiology (theology of mission) stems from our escatology (view of the
last things) and the way we define such terms as ‘
Dwight Moody is recognised as the greatest English-speaking evangelist
of the late nineteenth century. Though not well educated, Moody had the gift of
the gab and with it, a tremendous nous for marketing and selling. At an early
age he became a highly successful shoe salesman, and concurrently developed a
large Sunday School for poor children in
1. Moody’s view of salvation
Dwight Moody was primarily concerned with the ‘saving of people’s
souls’ - the ‘spiritual salvation’ of people.
This had major consequences for the way he saw his faith, because it
created a dualistic way of viewing life, where certain things are seen as
‘spiritual’ and other things as ‘secular’.
Some of the implications of this secular/spiritual split include:
a. certain activities are considered more ‘spiritual’ (and therefore
more significant) than others. If God’s priority is evangelism, then those who
are preaching , running crusades, overseas on missionary service etc, doing
what is closest to God’s heart, are more important than others. Everyone else
is able to find their significance by either contributing financially to ‘the
work of God’, praying for missionaries, or by developing a ‘ministry’ of their
own.
b. only valuing work so much as it contributes to ‘ministry’. Work is
primarily useful because it gives us an opportunity to ‘witness’ to our
non-Christian workmates, and earn some money in order to ‘serve God’ (or support
others in ‘ministry’).
c. acts of service and mercy toward others are essentially a means to
an end. By doing these things we hope to attract people to Christianity and so
‘save their souls’. Likewise friendship is seen mainly as a means to an end - we
need to build friendships with non-Christians so that we earn the right to
share the gospel with them.
d. ‘salvation’ becomes mainly an individualised and privatised faith,
with little direct relevance to the public sphere of life.
This is a huge contrast to the theology of
late 18th and early 19th century evangelicals such as the
Clapham Sect (William Wilberforce et.al), Earl of Shaftesbury, and John Newton.
2. Moody’s eschatology
Historically there have been three predominant views of when the second
coming of Christ will occur - all taking
different interpretations of Revelation 20, where the ‘saints reigning with
Christ for a thousand years on earth’ is mentioned. The three views are known
as premillenialism, postmillenialism and ammillenialism (from the word
‘millenial’ – referring to a thousand).
Premillenialism - understands
scripture to state that things will get worse here on earth until finally Jesus
returns and brings about a millenium (a thousand year reign of Christ on this
earth).
Postmillenialism - understands
scripture to state that God begins the thousand year rule of Christ on earth
before the end of history. God’s purposes are progressively coming about,
perfecting the world and bringing it closer to it’s final fulfillment.
Amillenialism - understands
scriptural references regarding a millenium to be figurative (ie not a literal
thousand years).
Up until the time of Dwight Moody most evangelicals were either
post-millenial or ammillenial. In the early part of the 19th century there had
been a great optimism amongst evangelicals about the potential for God to
transform society and they were at the forefront of much of the social action
occuring in the western world. However, many things contributed to a change in
the way the future was perceived. In the
He was the first major evangelist to do so, and it set a precedent for
succeeding generations. This change in eschatology had major implications for
how Moody viewed evangelism. He believed that the world was getting worse, and
that only the Second Coming of Christ would save it. This led for a pessimism
that became more and more disinterested in addressing the social ills of
society and more and more concerned with ‘saving souls’. As Moody himself said,
‘I look upon this world as a wrecked vessel. God has given me a lifeboat and
said to me, ‘Moody, save all you can.’
Conversion began to be seen in an increasingly narrow perspective and
also led to a very static view of a person’s salvation. Once in the lifeboat, a
person was safe, the act of conversion was complete, and this was irrevocable.
What got the person into the lifeboat was a simple act of personal choice to
accept Christ. One result of this theology was that increasingly evangelicals
became less and less committed to seeing evangelism and social action as two
sides of one coin, and concerned themselves only with ‘saving souls’.
3. Moody’s view of eternal
life
The culmination of Moody’s dualism and pre-millenialism, was the way he
understood certain terms such as eternal life. Eternal life was something
which, while we are able to possess now, related mainly to the quality of life
to be experienced after death. While
Moody encouraged Christians to ‘live a life worthy of the calling’, his
messages gave every encouragement to accept Christ because of the wonderful
benefits involved, with the responsibilities being mainly limited to a strict,
personal moral code. Although an element of life-quality was maintained,
eternal life came to be seen more in terms of its everlasting nature, and restricted
to the ‘spiritual’. So eternal life came to viewed as largely futuristic (you
‘purchase your ticket here and now but don’t get to go on the ride until you
die’).
As the twentieth century has progressed, most evangelicals have
continued to hold to a strongly premillenial position, anticipating
catastrophic events which will lead to a rapture of Christians (delivered out
of the evil of this world) and a time of immense tribulation for those
remaining on earth. Much has been written by evangelicals, seeking to link
current events with passages of prophecy, helping to see (supposedly) that we
are very close to the second coming.
It is easy to see that in this environment, where the deterioration of
the world is an inevitable and clear
sign that the end of this age is near,
how it is difficult to engender motivation to do any more than ‘save
people’s souls’. As one author has put it, “Why work for peace if war is a
sign of Christ’s coming? Why feed the hungry if we are to expect famine?”
(Wes Granberg-Michaelson)
In the last couple of decades, among some evangelicals, the lifeboat
mentality has been moderated somewhat, either by premillenialists who recognise
that a responsible Christian response to the desperate needs of the world
cannot be isolationist and one of ignorance, or by others who have begun to
reject premillenialism out of hand, in favour of the amillenial position.
This has led to increased involvement by evangelicals in the world - in
issues of mercy, justice, and in the structures and forms of culture.
However, most of the split between ‘secular’ and ‘spiritual’ has only
been accentuated.
How does this compare with a
biblical perspective?
1. Shalom and the Hebrew
view of life
If we lived in
When Jews reflected on what God’s intentions for his world were, the
word that summed it up was ‘shalom’. To us, shalom is often viewed as being a
Hebrew synonym for peace, and used as a greeting by Jews. However shalom in the
Old Testament is an overarching term summing up the well-being in life when God
is at the centre of things. This well-being is meant in the widest sense of the
word - prosperity; bodily health; contentedness in going to sleep, leaving to
go somewhere and at death; good relations between people and between nations;
salvation, etc. Shalom touched all areas of life and conversely, God cared
about all areas of life.
When the Jews thought of salvation, they thought of shalom - God’s
wholeness, complete well-being. All of life was totally connected and God
should be experienced and related to, in all aspects of life.
2. Jesus and the
The shalom the Jews aspired to in the Old Testament, was clearly part
of the worldview of Jesus. It was when the Kingdom of God/Heaven was
established that this shalom would become a reality. (John’s Gospel uses the
term ‘eternal life’, which is essentially a synonym for ‘
The Jews of Jesus’ day were also familiar with the term ‘
However, what Jesus understood the kingdom of God to be was very
different to that of his contemporaries. A thorough reading of the gospels in
regard to Jesus’ statements about the
Furthermore, we can easily get confused, as to when exactly this
kingdom will occur. One minute he states that the
Most evangelical scholars have come to agree that it is a bit of both.
When Jesus talked about God’s kingdom, he viewed it as something that was
already here, but that which wouldn’t come in its fullness until the end of
this age. In other words, it is both a future event and a present reality. This
is known as the ‘already but not yet’ tension.
The death of Jesus was the seed of God’s kingdom. It was critical to it
coming about. His resurrection was proof that God’s kingdom had begun and would
eventually rule the day. And the life of Jesus was a living demonstration of
the kingdom, which he did in a thousand different ways. But Jesus was also
fully aware that while he had come to bring abundant and full life, an aspect
of it would only be experienced in the life to come. That’s why he described
the kingdom as being like a mustard seed, something that would grow from very
small beginnings, but would eventually reign supreme.
It is this ‘already but not yet’ tension that preserves us from one of
two extremes:
* being so taken up with the glories of heaven that we lose any vision
of what God wants to do in the here-and-now – apart from ‘saving people’ so
they can enjoy the life to come. (This is a tendency of the premillenialist.)
* or becoming so comfortable with this life that we live as though this
is all the life there is. (This is a tendency of the postmillenialist.)
The eschatology of the New Testament seeks to hold this tension in
balance. On the one hand we are a people of hope. Our hope is in the ultimate
fulfillment of God’s intentions for us and this world. We are people of the
‘age to come’ living in this present age. On the other hand, we recognise that
God has already begun to build his kingdom (his new society). He wants to
transform us and our world here and now. Sure it won’t all happen in this life,
but much of it can. His shalom can be experienced in ever-increasing measure
right here-and-now. We live in this life, in the light of the fact that we are
people of the age to come.
This places a new light on the Sermon on the Mount. It is really the
manifesto of life in the kingdom - a
description of what life in God’s new society is like. It is not a pipe dream,
nor a description of the afterlife – an impossibility in this life. It
describes what happens when God begins to transform us/when his mission is
fulfilled/when shalom is achieved/ when his kingdom ‘comes’.
3. The nature of Jesus’
mission[1]
Right at the beginning of Jesus’ ministry, Luke sets out for us the
nature of his mission, by describing an incident where he is asked to read from
the Prophets in the synagogue one Sabbath. We are not told whether Jesus
himself chooses the passage or whether it was chosen for him, but what he reads
is of deep significance. Isaiah 61:1-2 was regarded as describing the task of
the Lord’s Anointed One (Messiah). We know it well:
“The Lord’s Spirit has come to me, because he has chosen me to tell
the good news to the poor. The Lord has sent me to announce freedom for
prisoners, to give sight to the blind, to free everyone who suffers, and to
say, ‘This is the year the Lord has chosen.” (Luke 4: 18-19 CEV)
Luke tells us that when Jesus finished the reading he closed the book, sat down, and with
everyone’s eyes on him, simply said, “What you have just heard me read has
come true today”. The incident is full of drama, finally resulting in Jesus
coming close to being killed. However, the significance of his quoting Isaiah
61 is immense. In Luke’s account it forms the mandate for Jesus’ mission.
As John Stott notes, this mission was both universal and comprehensive
in nature. It’s universal because its to all people. The Jews looked forward to
the coming of the kingdom because they expected it to be a day of vengeance,
where their enemies would be ‘dealt to’ by God. It’s interesting to note that
when Jesus read these excerpts from Isaiah aloud, he completely missed out the
phrase, “and the day of vengeance of our Lord”. As far as Jesus was concerned,
his mission had nothing to do with nationalistic hopes. It was a mission to all
peoples, regardless of race, gender, colour or religious heritage. This is
further reinforced by the examples Jesus goes on to quote (verses 24-27). In
fact it is these statements about his mission being for the Gentiles that leads
the crowd to drive him out of town.
The extent of Jesus’ mandate was clearly visible as well. His concern
was for all of life - for humankind as a whole - physical, emotional, mental,
relational, would all be transformed. The good news he brought was a good news
for the whole of our lives - not just some isolated ‘spiritual’ area. It has to
do with the quality of our living.
In Luke’s account, straight after the incident at the synagogue, Jesus
begins to teach and heal. After a brief time in
4. The life of Jesus – the
example of life in the Kingdom
If the synagogue incident lays down the mandate for Jesus’ mission, his
next three years demonstrate what life in God’s kingdom is about. They are an example of what we too should be
working toward if we are committed to helping bring about the
As we read the gospel accounts, we quickly gain a sense of what was
really important to Jesus. It includes:
a. freeing us from addictions – spirits, substances, the need to look
good and impress, activism, consumerism etc.
b. healing and restoring our relationships, resulting in us being able
to enjoy meaningful, rich and intimate relationships with others.
c. learning how to celebrate life, God and each other.
d. enjoying, respecting and stewarding creation (responsible use of
resources).
e. finding fulfilment in living for others (incarnational servanthood).
f. working for true justice for all people.
g. learning to display mercy.
h. developing our creative gifts to the fullest.
i. finding significance in all we do and are - work, leisure,
relationships etc.
j. empowering others to be all they were intended to be.
k. working toward the development of loving, caring and unified
communities.
We return to the various views of mission mentioned at the start of
this article. How do we evaluate them?
View 1 - ‘overseas mission’
Although God’s mission includes the need to go cross-cultural (if it is
to be for all peoples, as Jesus
understood it), it most certainly cannot be limited to that. Whatever part of
the world we called to be involved in God’s mission, the issues are essentially
the same - how can we demonstrate and share God’s whole good news?
Cross-cultural missioners are not exceptional beings. They may certainly be
‘set apart’ for a particular task, which may even involve them requiring
financial support from a home church, but they, like everyone else in the body,
are simply seeking to live out the kingdom in the context God has called them
to be a part of.
View 2 – ‘saving souls’
God’s mission is not one of ‘saving souls’, it is one of saving whole
people, relationships, structures, communities, societies, creation. Salvation
involves all of our being. His shalom is intended for all aspects of life. Of
course, in order for us to be instruments of his peace, we must learn to submit
to his rule. Real life can only be found in him. As we experience this ‘eternal
life’ we are able to impact the rest of creation in a whole variety of ways,
and so be involved in God’s redemption of this world.
Our acts of service and mercy, our efforts for justice, our struggle
for real relationships, our stewardship of all God has entrusted us with (time,
gifts, money, the environment, each other), our fight for meaning, value and
dignity for all people.... all these express the nature of the kingdom we
serve.
View 3 – ‘evangelism and
social action’
God’s mission can’t be separated into pieces. His transforming power
touches all of life. It is integrationist in character. Neither evangelism nor social action have a
life of their own - they are very much connected. Furthermore, to limit his
mission to two aspects - evangelism and social action, is far too simplistic.
What about his desire to restore and rebuild relationships, to infuse ‘work’
with value and meaning, to free our creative and artistic gifts and abilities
etc, etc. There are simply too many areas outside the direct orbit of
‘evangelism’ and ‘social action’, to reduce mission to these two aspects alone.
As for the prioritising of evangelism, above all other aspects of
mission, again it risks being dualistic in nature, as if it is possible to
‘save a soul’ without at the same time redeeming the enviroment that the person
lives in. It is simply not possible to have evangelism without a social
dimension or to have Christian social action without an evangelistic dimension.
View 4 – ‘bringing the
We are left with the view that mission is the total task God has set
the church for the salvation of the world. This needs to be seen in its
entirety. Evangelism (the call to enter into life with Christ - and with his
people) is best seen, in the words of David Bosch, as “the core, heart or
centre of mission...If you cut the heart out of a body, that body becomes a
corpse. With evangelism cut out, mission dies; it ceases to be mission.”
This mission encompasses all that God intends for his creation. When
God invades our lives, his Spirit impacts all that we are and do. His shalom
(peace/wholeness) progressively becomes a reality in our relationship with God,
with others, with his creation, in the way we view work and leisure, in the
structures we are a part of etc etc.
We need to recognise that we can only share as much of the good news as
we are in fact experiencing ourselves. So our call is to embody the gospel and
to be involved in something of the breadth of God’s mission.
APPENDIX 1: Terms helping us
to see the holistic nature of God’s mission
Kingdom of God/Heaven -
God’s rule, his new society, his counter-culture. It is a term relating
to time, not geography - the time when Jesus exercises his sovereign rule. The
Eternal life -
John’s term for the
Salvation - a
comprehensive term for the benefits of life with God (life in his
kingdom/eternal life). These benefits are wholistic in nature (physical,
relational, mental, emotional and spiritual). This provision from God for our
human situation is also progressive. It involves past salvation (eg Eph 2:8);
present salvation (eg Phil
Note: As can be seen, these three terms are very closely related and
almost interchangeable. All three are holistic (referring to the whole of our
lives) and cover all three tenses - past, present and future. They are also all
intensely eschatological in nature – that is, they all only make sense within
the framework of the Age to Come.
While these terms may have communicated well in Jesus’ day, to
different groups of people, neither is particularly helpful to us - kingdom
because we don’t really appreciate the totality of the rule of ancient kings
and queens, and eternal life because it has been so abused, so that it is
immediately associated with the afterlife, and with our ‘spiritual’ existence.
So maybe a more helpful term for us would be ‘God’s new society’.
APPENDIX 2: Looking forward
to ‘V-Day’
One of last century’s well-known theologians, Oscar Cullmann, uses an
illustration from the Second World War, to illustrate the already, but not yet
tension. On
D-Day, Cullmann writes, is for the
We stand, in between D-Day and V-Day. There is no question that God’s
kingdom will eventually reign supreme over all. He calls us, his people, to be
involved in bringing it about. Jesus’ illustrations of the mustard seed and the
yeast helps us to see how this can happen.
“What is God’s kingdom like? What can I compare it with? It is like
what happens when someone plants a mustard seed in a garden. The seed grows as
big as a tree and birds nest in its branches...It is (also) like what happens
when a woman mixes yeast into three batches of flour. Finally, all the dough
rises.” (Luke 13: 18-21 CEV)
From a somewhat inconspicuous start, God’s kingdom has grown, and will
continue to grow into something very substantial. The way it grows is similar
to that of yeast in bread, by permeating it. Those of us who are a part of his
new society, are called to penetrate the societies we are a part of, making a
difference in a highly significant way.
[1] For some people, the word ‘mission’ comes with such loaded baggage as to render it totally unhelpful as a term. So another way of considering the question, “What is God’s mission?” is to rephrase it, “What is God’s intentions for this world?” In other words, if God was given full space, what type of world would he bring about? What is on his agenda for change?
All of life is on God’s heart to be redeemed. God intends to see his kingdom rule in every area of life.
Questions relevant to God’s intentions for this world include: