The Progress of Missions: The God-ward Perspective
December 23, 2008 – 5:17 pmIn Chapter 12 of For the Sake of His Name, Dr. David Doran tackles the subject of the call of God to missions. He introduces the material on “the call”, by presenting a question posed to Hudson Taylor [see MM's intro to this series: "The Progress of Missions: Intro"] by a Chinese gentleman regarding why English missionaries had not brought the truth about Jesus to China sooner:
One day, when talking with his missionary friend, Mr. Ni raised the question, “How long have you had the Glad Tidings in your country?”
“Some hundreds of years” Hudson replied. “What? Hundreds of years? My father sought the Truth,” he continued sadly “and died without finding it. Oh why did you not come sooner?”
To this question, and the issue of the progress of missions, Dr. Doran offers the two perspectives that the Bible reveals: the first is the God-ward Perspective.
The God-ward Perspective
From a God-ward perspective we must be careful to answer this question in a way that guards both God’s right to rule and His goodness. By His right to rule [emphasis mine], I mean the fact that God rules over the affairs of men in such a way that history is under His control, and the progress of missions is clearly a part of history. While Bible-believing people have come to differing conclusions about the extent of God’s sovereignty, it seems that biblical faith demands that we confess that the “king’s heart is like channels of water, in the hand of the LORD; He turns it wherever He wishes” (Prov 21:1). If this is true, and it is, that certainly has implications regarding the spread of the gospel, the concept of restricted access countries, and a host of other missions-related issues.
A clear illustration of God’s sovereignty over the task of missions is found in the ministry of the Lord Jesus Christ. In Matthew 10:5-6 we find Him giving an unusual commission to His disciples:
These twelve Jesus sent out after instructing them: “Do not go in the way of the Gentiles, and do not enter any city of the Samaritans; but rather go to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.”
Of course, this was a temporary command from the Lord about the Gentile mission, but it provides a clear basis for recognizing that God has the right to direct the timing and scope of the missions mandate. In fact all of Old Testament history provides proof of this principle.
Sadly, some in our day seem determined to think that such sovereignty is somehow unjust or unfair. If God could have done something about the condition of the lost who have not heard, He certainly would have done it. And, if He could have and did not do it, then God is unjust. In fact, William Carey, who has been called the father of the modern missionary movement, encountered such an attitude from a Brahmin in response to Carey’s attacks upon idolatry and false gods. As Carey pressed home Paul’s message to the Athenians of repentance over their idolatry (cf. Acts 17), the Brahmin objected that it is God who should repent for not having sent the gospel sooner.
What does one say to such an objection? Should we tell this worshiper of false gods that the True and Living God really wanted to send the gospel but He couldn’t find anyone who would obey Him? In other words, call this pagan to turn in faith to a God whose followers do not follow! But that is not how Carey responded. Instead he pressed the battle with the Brahmin and asserted God’s rights as the sovereign Creator. In essence, Carey argued that God could have sent the gospel sooner had He chosen to do so, but He did not do so for reasons based on the good pleasure of His own will (cf. Eph 1:11).
As I write these words, it is almost as if I can hear the objections that will be shouted at this printed page! How could William Carey say such things about God? The answer, quite bluntly, is that Carey knew what the Bible teaches about God more thoroughly than our man-centered world does! He was simply pressing home the truth of Paul’s message to the Athenians - “Therefore having overlook the times of ignorance, God is now declaring to men that all people everywhere should repent” (Acts 17:20). Don’t miss the significance of the simple words, “God is now.” In other words, Paul is declaring that God is now, after the exaltation of Jesus Christ, engaged in this global (”all people everywhere”) evangelistic mission (”should repent”). This is a new phase of God’s dealings with humanity, which implies there was a time before this in which God was doing something different. It was God’s actions in that earlier time that Carey was rightly defending.
But I said that we need to, when looking at this from the God-ward perspective, guard not only God’s right to rule, but His goodness [emphasis mine]. The man-centeredness of our day causes us to question whether those two can exist together - can God be a sovereign ruler and unqualifiedly good? I believe He can because I believe the Scriptures teach both. God’s goodness is never to be questioned, even if He withholds the gospel from nations, because He has righteous reasons for doing so. The Apostle Paul also provides the answer to this question. Preaching to the pagans at Lystra, Paul urges them to turn from their idolatries with these words:
Men why are you doing these things? We are also men of the same nature as you, and preach the gospel to you that you should turn from these vain things to a living God, WHO MADE THE HEAVEN AND THE EARTH AND THE SEA AND ALL THAT IS IN THEM. In the generations gone by He permitted all the nations to go their own ways; and yet He did good and gave you rains from heaven and fruitful seasons, satisfying your hearts with food and gladness. (Acts 14:15-17)
Here we find our two issues: God’s sovereignty (”He permitted all the nations to go their own ways”) and God’s goodness (”yet He did not leave Himself without a witness”). The answer to how God can still be a good God when He does what He does with regard to the evangelization of the nations is found in the fact that man is accountable for having rejected Him. What Paul is saying here is that the pagans were not without a sufficient witness to God’s existence. This is exactly what he argued in Romans 1:18-21,
For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
God has provided a clear revelation of Himself to all people, but mankind’s response has been to reject this revelation. This revelation is so clear that it leaves man “without excuse” (v. 20).
So God not only has the right to govern the progress of missions according to His own purposes, but He is right in all of His dealings with mankind. Any and all who are lost eternally are so because of their own sinfulness and because they have rejected the witness of Him given through general revelation. If God permits some of the nations to sit in darkness in terms of gospel preaching, it does not mean that He has left “Himself without a witness” (Acts 14:17).
The final post in this series will present the man-ward perspective of the progress of missions.
1 Trackback(s)