VOLUME 22 - NUMBER 1 (April 1999)
THE WORLD CHRISTIAN MOVEMENT
[Image]
EVANGELISM VS. EVANGELIZATION
By Albert James Dager
------------------------------------------------------------------------
For false Christs and false prophets shall rise; and shall show signs
and
wonders, to seduce, if it were possible, even the elect. (Mark 13:22)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
PART TWO
Warfare Language
A vital part of the corporate prayer methodology of world evangelization
is
warfare language that uses militaristic terms to describe its strategy.
Some
examples: "Take it by force," "Gather the troops," "Call to warfare."
Militancy is at the heart of the Sentinel Group and the March for Jesus.
It
is essential to the modern concept of spiritual warfare.
In Confronting the Powers, C. Peter Wagner describes spiritual warfare
as
having three levels:
* Ground Level: Person-to-person, praying for each other's
personal
needs.
* Occult Level: deals with demonic forces released through
activities
related to Satanism, witchcraft, astrology
and many other forms of
structured occultism.
* Strategic-Level or Cosmic-Level: To bind and bring down
spiritual
principalities and powers that rule over governments
41
The strategic warfare designed to bring down principalities and powers
involves corporate prayer gatherings festooned with liturgical practices.
Several nations have had such prayer gatherings to bring down the spiritual
powers over them. They are led by Christian leaders from all over the
world,
affiliated with various organizations we have mentioned, such as
InterVarsity Fellowship, Campus Crusade for Christ, YWAM, etc.
This is the new worship form for dominionism. There are gatherings for
every
nation, every city, every block, to take control of that area through
spiritual warfare.
During national gatherings, flags of the nations are carried in procession
to invoke God's power over the nations. Many of the participants wear
ethnic
clothing and play ethnic cultural music in order to show God that they
are
in unity. Unity is crucial to having the fire fall so that they can
have the
power to conquer the nations. When we are in unity then God will save
our
cities and cleanse our land.
The Gathering of the Nations
The Gathering of the Nations is a meeting designed to move God to take
authority over the demonic forces of any nation in which a Gathering
is
held.
Wagner's terminology is used in claiming that the Gathering of the Nations
is strategic level spiritual warfare over territorial spirits.
There have been several Gatherings, and they all operate on much the
same
theme and plan of action. It would be beyond the scope of this writing
to
address them all. An example is the Gathering of the Nations held at
Whistler, British Columbia, June 28 to July 2,1995, hosted by Watchmen
for
the Nations.
According to Rich Carey, pastor of Vineyard Christian Fellowship in
Blackfoot, Idaho, this Gathering was called prophetically by a "prophet"
from Cairo, Egypt. The Scriptures he says God gave for the Gathering
are
Isaiah 66:18 and Zechariah 10:8. Said Carey:
It is safeguarded by four spiritual "fathers"-Pastor
Bob Birch,
Pastor Jim Watt, Dr. John White, and Peter
Jordan of YWAM. The
leadership of this gathering includes Dr.
Mohsen Demian and Pastor
Gideon Chiu, and worship leaders David Garrett,
David Ruis and
Brian Doerksen. Others involved include Bob
Jones, Reuven Doren
[both of Kansas City Fellowship notoriety],
Melody Green Severight
[Keith Green's widow who has squelched Keith's
writings on Roman
Catholicism], Alistair Petrie and John Dawson
YWAM leader noted
for his writings on "taking your city for
Christ."]42
At this Gathering of the Nations the theme centered on American Indian
and
Hawaiian ethnicity. It was video taped by Crossroads Christian
Communications, from 100 Huntley Street, headed by David Mains who
was in
attendance.43 The video reveals the following scenes from that
Gathering:
A team from New Zealand, led by David Garrett of Scripture in Song,
led much
of the worship using log drums, an Australian didgeridoo, and conch
shells.
They taught the people how to do a "haka"-a dance-mime used by Maori
warriors to build up their courage.
During one Hawaiian warfare chant a leader stripped off his shirt and
beat
his chest as a show of strength against the demonic powers.
Many did "carpet time," having been "slain in the spirit," while there
could
be heard groans, screams and shrieks, similar to those at the "Pensacola
Outpouring."
Reuven Doren asked the nations to forgive the Jewish people for failing
to
be the light to the world and the priests to the nations. This is a
reference to the Abrahamic Covenant, which we will be addressing shortly.
Doren then blessed the native people in his role as priest to the nations.
Many confessed the generational sins of their ancestors, conflicts between
races, sins of fathers toward their children, whites against other
ethnic
groups. One woman confessed the sin of having a poor image of herself.
She
then stated, "In the name of Jesus I release everyone here from bondage,
from poor self-image. I set you free to love your parents and to love
God
your true Father and Mother!"
And no one corrected her.
No one can release anyone else from "bondage." And our heavenly Father
never
speaks of Himself as Father and Mother. What gives anyone the right
to call
Him other than what He calls Himself? This woman needs to repent of
her
radical feminism.
While a man played and sang Psalm 150 in a middle eastern language two
women
did a modified belly dance, sans costumes. (They did wear clothes.)
Another man played two saxophones at once, while people "tripped out."
On one occasion a woman took the microphone to thank God for the Catholic
Church which she once hated. The Catholic Church, she said, brought
her
healing, and she asked that God would pour out a blessing on the Catholic
Church.
In all, the Gathering was a hyper-charismatic display of unbridled emotion
and unbiblical teaching passing itself off as spiritual warfare.
Another important element to this spiritual warfare is the blowing of
the
shofar-the ram's horn. At this gathering it was said, "When I blow
the
trumpet the veil into the heavenlies will break!" It was also stated
that
the shofar speaks "the wild voice of God"; if you listen you will hear
God
speaking.
The procession, blowing the shofar, corporate chanting, music, singing
and
ethnic cultural displays are said to be "prophetic acts." Performing
these
prophetic acts engages the people in "prophetic espionage."
At the conclusion, Gideon Chiu led the participants in prophetic works
cleansing the land, cleansing the air and in identificational repentance.
Identificational Repentance
The idea of identificational repentance is to stand in the gap as a
substitute for a corporate people in order to nullify so-called
"generational curses."
In essence, it is to identify oneself with a corporate group of people
to
confess that group's social sins ("m a white man who killed an Indian
and
stole his land). This is the basis of the Reconciliation Movement.
Identificational repentance, blowing of the shofar, and cleansing of
the
land were incorporated into the Promise Keepers Washington D.C. gathering,
Standing in the Gap.
Space does not allow me to convey all that I witnessed on the video
tape of
the Whistler Gathering. Suffice to say that it was fraught with Manifested
Sons of God false doctrine, erroneous, unbiblical attempts to manipulate
God
and free-for-all spiritual pandemonium.
For all this, the only dissimilarity between it and the Promise Keepers
D.C.
Gathering was that the latter was more reserved due to the need to
not alarm
the millions of rational people, believers and non-believers, who viewed
it
telecast live. But the same spiritual warfare elements could be seen
in
both.
Winning People Groups
It is the consensus of the World Christian Movement that, in order to
win
the nations to Christ, it is first necessary to win all people groups
within
the nations to Christ, not as individuals, but as whole people groups.
Donald McGavran, whose essay, "The Bridges of God," appears in the
Perspectives Reader, states:
Since the human family, except in the individualistic
West. is
largely made up of such castes, clans and
peoples, the
Christianization of each nation involves the
prior
Christianization of its various peoples as
peoples.44
It is of the utmost importance that the Church
should understand
how peoples, and not merely individuals, become
Christian.45
On one hand, McGavran seems to acknowledge that individuals must be
won to
Christ:
We wish to make this quite clear. The Christianization
of peoples
is not assisted by slighting or forgetting
real personal
conversion. There is no substitute for justification
by faith in
Jesus Christ or for the gift of the Holy Spirit.46
On the other hand, he takes this away with this statement:
It is important to note that the group decision
is not the sum of
separate individual decisions. The leader
makes sure that his
followers will follow. The followers make
sure that they are not
ahead of each other. Husbands sound out wives.
Sons pledge their
fathers (sic). "Will we as a group move if
so-and-so does not
come?" is a frequent question. As the group
considers becoming
Christian, tension mounts and excitement rises.
Indeed, a
prolonged informal vote-taking is under way.
A change of religion
involves a community change. Only as its members
move together,
does change become healthy and constructive
47
What McGavran is proposing is an appeal to a whole group to consider
the
practical advantages of becoming Christians. Where is the Holy Spirit
in
this? If so-and-so does not come, does that mean that the group will
not be
Christianized?
The following is a truly incredible piece of psychobabble:
Peoples become Christian as a wave of decision
for Christ sweeps
through the group mind, involving many individual
decisions but
being far more than merely their sum. This
may be called a chain
reaction. Each decision sets off others and
the sum total
powerfully affects every individual. When
conditions are right,
not merely each sub-group, but the entire
group concerned decides
together.48
"Group mind"? "Chain reaction"? This is what McGavran calls a "People
Movement." How does this equate to regeneration of the the spirit and
true
conversion to Jesus Christ?
Did Jesus command us to "make all nations his disciples," or to make
disciples of all nations? There is a vast difference in how this is
phrased.
The Gospel has always been for individuals, to bring them to faith in
Christ. So why do the "World Christians" insist upon converting entire
nations? Remember what we said about semantics. We will find that those
within the World Christian Movement use biblical terms, but their definition
is contrary to the clear teaching of Scripture. Thus their convoluted
application of Matthew 28:19-20.
Donald McGavran states that extracting individual converts out of their
culture, no matter how pagan, should not be done. He wants whole people
groups to come to Christ within the context of their own cultures.49
Ralph Winter implies that world evangelization is a "secret mission"
of the
Church that we have missed from the beginning because we never understood
it.50
Such a statement further proves that evangelization is not the same
as
evangelism, because evangelism has never been a "secret mission."
The Abrahamic Covenant
Winter, and others involved in the World Christian Movement, state that
Israel was first entrusted with the Gospel, but failed to present it
to the
nations. It began with Abraham who failed in his mission to be a blessing,
all the nations, they say, by not taking the Gospel to the nations.
The World Christian Movement's teaching on the Abrahamic Covenant is
extensive and given in too great a detail to express fully here. The
essence
of the teaching, however, is pretty well summed up in the following
statements by Ralph D. Winter:
[Some Bible commentators] agree that Abraham
was to begin to be
blessed right away, but somehow they reason
that two thousand
years would have to pass before either Abraham
or his descendants
could begin "to be a blessing to all the families
on earth." They
suggest that Christ needed to come first and
institute his Great
Commission that Abraham's lineage needed to
wait around for 2,000
years be before they would be called upon
to go [to] the ends of
the earth to be a blessing to all the world's
peoples (this could
be called "The Theory of the Hibernating Mandate.").
Worse still,
one scholar, with a lot of followers in later
decades, propounded
the idea that in the Old Testament the peoples
of the world were
not expected to receive missionaries but to
go to Israel for the
light, and that from the New Testament and
thereafter it was the
reverse, that is, the peoples to be blessed
would not come but
those already having received the blessing
would go to them. This
rather artificial idea gained acceptance partially
by the use of
the phrase, "Centripetal mission in the Old
Testament and
Centrifugal mission in the New Testament."
Fact is, there is both
in both periods, and it is very confusing
to try to employ an
essentially mickey mouse gimmick to explain
a shift in strategy
that did not happen. The existence of 137
different languages in
Los Angeles makes clear that now, in the New
Testament-and-after
period, nations are still coming to the light.
A more recent and exciting interpretion (see
Walter Kaiser's
chapter four) observes that Israel, as far
back as Abraham, was
accountable to share that blessing with other
nations. In the same
way, since the time of the Apostle Paul, every
nation which has
contained any significant number of "children
of Abraham's faith"
has been similarly accountable (but both Israel
and the other
nations have mainly failed to carry out this
mandate).
The greatest scandal in the Old Testament is
that Israel tried to
be blessed without trying very hard to be
a blessing. However,
let's be careful: the average citizen of Israel
was no more
oblivious to the second part of Gen. 12:1-3
than the average
Christian today is oblivious to the Great
Commission! How easily
our study Bibles overlook the veritable string
of key passages in
the Old Testament which exist to remind Israel
(and us) of the
missionary mandate: Gen. 12:1-3,18:18, 22:18,
28:14, Ex. 19:4-6,
Deut. 28:10, 2 Chron. 6:33, Ps. 67, 96,105,
Isa. 40:5, 42:4, 49:6,
56:3, 6-8, Jer. 12:14-17, Zech. 2:11, Mal.
1:11. 51
I included all the references cited by Winter in order that the reader
may
check them out for himself to see if they apply to what Winter says.
Actually, some do indicate that Israel was to proclaim the glory of
God to
the nations, but some of those he cites are in reference to Christ's
millennial reign. Others, such as Genesis 12:3 refer to Abraham's seed
in
whom the nations of the earth will be blessed. But how will they be
blessed?
Paul makes it clear that the seed to which the prophets referred was
Jesus:
Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises
made. He saith not,
And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And
to thy seed, which is
Christ. (Galatians 3:16)
While Israel was to proclaim to the nations the greatness of God, it
was not
in an overt missionary endeavor. Rather, we see that God commanded
Israel to
destroy the nations within the land He gave them, and to keep themselves
separate spiritually and, in many cases, physically.
Many from the nations did come to Israel because they heard about the
great
exploits-the signs and wonders God performed for Israel to establish
them in
their land. But the land was their inheritance as long as they remained
obedient. It was due to Israel's disobedience that God dispersed them
throughout the nations with the full knowledge that they would succumb
to
the evils of those nations' gods.
The reason He retained Judah in the land was in order to bring forth
the
seed, Christ, in due season. After Christ came and was rejected by
Israel
the nation's identity with YHWH was destroyed with the temple in A.D.
70.
Only with Christ was the overt command given to "go ye into all the world."
The idea that Abraham and Israel failed to fulfill the Great Commission
in
their time was formulated, or at least popularized, by Helen Barrett
Montgomery (another woman teacher) in the early 20th century. Ralph
Winter
attributes the social movement of that time to her ability to accomplish
much in the way of teaching:
The amazing and powerful social movement which
allowed her to do
these things-and which amplified the effect
of what she did-was
probably the most significant movement in
history for the
completion of the Great Commission.52
The movement to which Winter alludes is the Women's Suffrage Movement,
which
elevated women to equal status of men in society. It also emboldened
women
to take more significant roles in the churches, striking out on their
own in
the fields of missions and teaching. Winter labels this rebellion against
God's Word as "probably the most significant movement in history for
the
completion of the Great Commission." To equate a social upheaval with
God's
design in order to use women in roles contrary to that allowed in His
Word
is an indication of how far removed from God's Word Winter's movement
is.
Of course, much of what Montgomery taught is biblical. Strange fire
is still
fire. Her teaching on missions, found in the Study Guide for the
Perspectives course, outlines her belief that the Abrahamic Covenant
is the
basis for world missions today. She taught that throughout history
everyone
from Abraham to the present had failed to complete the Great Commission
because the world had not been fully evangelized.
She chastised the Church for failing to bring about what she considered
total evangelization. And she warned that should the Church fail, God
might
replace it with something else:
The Gospel will not fail. The Lord Jesus shall
see of the travail
of his soul and be satisfied. The kingdoms
of this world shall
become the Kingdoms of our Lord and of his
Christ. But the Church
may fail, may be set aside for another instrument.
Today is the
day of salvation for our Protestant churches.
If we harden our
hearts and close our eyes and refuse the plain
call of God, other
generations may see in us another Israel whose
narrowness of
vision was condemned by the very Scripture
in which is our
boast.53
Jesus said that He would be with us even unto the end of the world (Matthew
28:20). Significantly, this is His closing statement to the Great
Commission. The critics of the Church, as opposed to the churches,
fail to
see that the Church has not failed; those who remain true to Christ
will
minister the Gospel wherever He sends them. When we see the fleshly
attempts
to complete what these people think the Church has failed to do, we
understand that, deep down, it is not the Church that has failed in
their
eyes. It is Christ and the Holy Spirit that have failed. As with most
religious minds, God doesn't work hard enough or fast enough to satisfy
them. Thus they succumb to false teaching and ungodly alliances to
take over
for God. They even go so far as to subordinate the New Covenant in
Christ's
blood to their concept of the Abrahamic covenant:
With this we understand once and for all that
the God of Abraham,
Isaac and Jacob is the missionary God of the
mission-covenant, the
"Secret Mission!" Furthermore, these prominent
references
inaugurate the major narrative story of the
Bible, which is
essentially the unfolding story of the Secret
Mission of God to
all the nations ('Fulfillment"). It is not
just the story of a
nation blessed by God ("Fullness") in preparation
for a task to be
fulfilled 2,000 years later. We soon see that
this covenant is in
one sense the only Covenant in the Bible.
It constitutes the grand
plan, the only plan. 54 (Emphasis Ours)
Some may say that Winter was careless in his words. But one with his
knowledge of Scripture cannot so easily be dismissed. In effect, he
does
subordinate the New Covenant to the Abrahamic Covenant. Thus, the World
Christian Movement infers that Jesus also failed, but commissioned
His
disciples to take up the cause to evangelize the world as fulfillment
of the
Abrahamic Covenant.
If their agenda is contrary to Christ's command, could it be that they
are
following the direction of another spiritual entity? Perhaps it is
premature
to ask that question given the scant evidence provided so far. It is
merely
posed as a rhetorical question to bear in mind as further evidence
unfolds.
Traditional Missions Passe'
It stands to reason that if today's World Christian Movement sees all
of
God's history of evangelization as a failure, the blame must lie at
the feet
of those who have gone before. Old methods have failed; it is time
for a new
approach to the task.
It appears as if the new tack of incorporating social and political
action
as necessary elements of evangelization is the result of guilt placed
upon
American missions leaders for their failure by Third World evangelical
leaders. As C. Peter Wagner stated above, it was first addressed publicly
by
Horace Fenton of the Latin America Mission. Ralph R. Covell, also writing
in
Perspectives, says of those who do not regard socio-political action
as a
mandate, that they preaching a different Gospel than that which Paul
preached. He also states:
Many evangelical Third World leaders are reminding
us that
American missionaries are not able to see,
let alone understand,
the oppression under which their people live.
Silence signals
acquiescence.55
This isn't entirely true. While there are cases of missionaries who
are
unqualified and, thus, err in their attempts at evangelism, history
is
replete with examples of missionaries who have suffered right along
with
those to whom they ministered. For example, missionaries in China,
both
during and after World War II, faced persecution first by invading
Japanese
and then by Communist rulers. Missionaries in predominantly Catholic
countries have suffered along with their converts at the hands of the
Roman
Catholic Church and its political allies. If they suffered in silence
it was
because they did not perceive as their duty the overthrow of regimes.
They
ministered God's love quietly and humbly among those whom He gave them.
This is not to say that there have not been problems-serious ones-with
traditional missions. Many missions accompanied colonial expansion
of
Western nations. They were seen as a benefit to the colonial powers
who
encouraged them as a means to civilize the people they colonized, and
to
make them more complacent in accepting their fate as colonial subjects.
As a
result, indigenous believers were looked upon then, and continue to
be
looked upon today by Western missions agencies, as unworthy to inherit
the
mission fields in which they were raised.
Traditional missions organizations, especially in the U.S., still perceive
Western oversight as the only valid means of missionary work. And the
World
Christian Movement is correct in accusing Western missions of trying
to
westernize the cultures into which they moved.
What is forgotten, however, is that traditional missionaries are responsible
in the first place for the Latin American leaders' salvation. But today
the
Gospel is not sufficient; now missionaries must learn that their
shortcomings in the socio-political arena are responsible for the suffering
of the masses.
This guilt trip comes courtesy of the "World Christians" who comprise
the
World Christian Movement. Indeed, Ralph D. Winter implies that the
Communist
philosophy has, in many ways, derived from Christian tradition: ...
Just as a modicum of Christian faith in some
ways strengthened the
hand of the Barbarians against the Romans,
so the Chinese today
are awesomely more dangerous due to the cleansing,
integrating and
galvanizing effect of the Communist philosophy
and cell structure
which is clearly derived from the West, and
in many ways
specifically from the Christian tradition
itself.56
Is Winter saying that communism is derived from Christianity, or that
its
cell structure is derived from Christianity? No matter, for neither
are
derived from biblical Christianity.
Scripture affirms the owning of private property and the master-slave
(or
employer-employee) relationship. There is not a hint of communism in
the
Scriptures. Some suggest that the first-century Church in Jerusalem
practiced Communism because they held all things in common in the care
of
the Apostles. This is ludicrous, and originated in Communist propaganda
designed to neutralize opposition from Christians. In the first place,
the
Church is not an earthly government; in the second place, this was
unique to
the Jerusalem Church due to the necessity of close dependency upon
one
another in the face of persecution.
Nor is the "cell structure" found in first-century Christianity. Every
assembly was autonomous, while looking to the apostles and the Scriptures
for instructions. The church "cell structure" is an invention of David
Yongi
Cho, of Korea, whose "church" numbers in the hundreds of thousands.
Cho's
success in church growth through the cell structure is a model for
aggressive pastors all over the world who seek larger congregations.
The
cell structure is tied to a central authority whose oversight is
authoritarian, not unlike the way Roman Catholic parishes are tied
to the
Vatican. This would be a separate study, and I don't wish to digress
beyond
this point.
At the same time the World Christian Movement is critical of "traditional"
missions efforts, it relies heavily upon those efforts to bolster its
appeal. And if we look deeply enough, we will see that the World Christian
Movement is just as Western in its oversight. Only instead of sending
qualified elders who have a record of soul winning and church planting
in
their native lands, they recruit students in "specialty" fields, most
of
which have to do with social action rather than with evangelism.
SPECIALIZATION
K.P. Yohannan, recognized missions expert, wrote in 1991:
At the time this chapter was written, InterCristo,
the leading
evangelical placement organization, listed
just over 5,000
overseas openings for missionary positions.
Only 86 of the
openings were for pioneer evangelism and church
planting among
Unreached people. Another 492 were for church
positions that
included church planting as well as
chaplaincies, urban
evangelism, child evangelism, discipleship
and worship.
But 4,422 of the 5,000 positions were for other
specialties,
mostly social services! More than 89 percent
of the current job
openings in missions were for non-evangelism,
non-discipleship job
descriptions!57
"This is the day of the missionary specialist,"
proclaims
recruiting literature for missionaries at
mission conventions for
Christian students. 58
It is estimated that the cost to train a single missionary family, whether
for evangelism or for social service, is in the hundreds of thousands
of
dollars:
...A typical missionary educated in the United
States, for
example, spends four years in college ($60,000);
two years in
seminary or Bible school ($40,000); one year
raising support
($20,000)-none of which shows formally in
the mission education
process. These numbers double for married
couples, of course, so
the actual cost of training a missionary family
might easily run
as high as $450,000 to $500,000.59
Furthermore, the budgets required to send American missionaries overseas
and
to sustain them equate to billions of dollars. And most will not be
on the
mission field past one year, while many will never go to the mission
field
at all! Yohannan's projections for maintaining the American missions
status
quo are not promising:
As we do future planning, the cost of supporting
Western
missionaries becomes increasingly higher.
If the average cost of
supporting a North American missionary couple
were to increase to
only $75,000 a year by A.D. 2000-and if we
don't have any increase
in the number of missionaries sent-it will
cost $5.6 billion just
to stay even!
However, a world population projected at six
billion in A.D. 2000
requires hundreds of thousands of new missionaries
to be
sent-perhaps as many as one million gospel
workers in order to
reach everyone.
Since the United States gave only $1.9 billion
to all foreign
mission causes, including relief and development
aid, in 1989, it
is hard to imagine one of the richest nations
on earth picking up
the tab for the missionary force needed to
reach a world
population of six billion in A.D. 2000.60
Perhaps we can now see why the World Christian Movement insists that
we all
subject ourselves to the poverty level so they can meet their goals.
Yohannan suggests that the best way to evangelize the world is to train
native missionaries to plant churches and disciple the people in their
own
lands. This would not only make missions more affordable; it would
greatly
reduce the need for social action. The indigenous missionaries would
be
primarily involved in saving souls, which Yohannan also sees as the
only
legitimate reason for missions:
The cutting edge of biblical, New Testament
missions is
proclamation, conversion and disciple-making
that leads to the
establishment of local churches. Any time
this basic task is
confused with political or social action,
missions lose the
essence of their integrity and power.
The New Testament apostles turned the world
upside down not by
digging wells or building hospitals, but by
proclaiming the Word
of God, which is sharper than any two-edged
sword.61
While the World Christian Movement seems to champion indigenous
missionaries, it is in partnership with the evangelistic and social
action
missionaries from the West. The Movement does not suggest leaving the
indigenous believers on their own and trusting the Spirit of God to
work
through them without oversight by the Movement's numerous affiliated
agencies, particularly through their youth missionaries. The World
Christian
Movement is still Western in the upper echelons of its infrastructure,
and
there is no indication that that will change.
CLOSED DOORS
The biggest problem facing missions today is not rejection of the West
by
individuals, but by government leaders. Says K.P. Yohannan:
In modern Africa there is an almost universal
wall against Western
evangelistic missionaries. The newly independent
nations of Africa
are demanding that Western missionaries bring
humanitarian and
secular skills into the economy. If missionaries
cannot justify'
their presence in the cause of nation-building,
visas will not be
granted.62
In such cases it is understandable that evangelists might incorporate
some
secular skill into their efforts. But, as Yohannan says, the jobs they
perform cannot interfere with the primary purpose to win souls.
Another tactic used is that of engaging in social work. But even that
has
its pitfalls:
Substituting social work. This is by far the
most popular
substitute for evangelism on the mission field
today. Since most
Third World nations refuse to welcome foreign
evangelists, many
missionaries and sending agencies have changed
their image in the
host country. They now seek to come to the
mission field as
agricultural and development workers, child-care
providers,
medical missionaries and teachers.
But fearful that even this humanitarian work
will be used as a
ruse for evangelism, some nations, such as
Nepal, require these
missionaries to sign non-proselytizing agreements,
Under these
contracts missionaries promise not to evangelize
or make
converts.63
The impact of the anti-Western movement among
the Third Word
family of nations has been devastating.
Before perestroika and the sweeping changes
in Eastern Europe, at
least 119 nations prohibited or restricted
Western missionaries,
and an average of four new countries were
being added to the list
each year. Currently 3.8 billion people live
in these
restricted-access countries, and 4.8 billion
will live in them by
the turn of this century....
If present trends continue, by A.D. 2000 over
77 percent of the
entire world population could live in nations
closed to
identifiable missionaries from Western countries.
64
This is news we don't readily hear from the gung-ho "we're going to
win the
world for Christ" group. In truth, we can see why missions leaders
want to
substitute, or at least qualify as equal with the Gospel, involvement
in
social and political action. In order to garner the financial support
they
need to keep operating they must convince the rank-and-file Christian
that
they are following the Great Commission in spite of their inability
to do
so.
Would it honor God to sign non-proselytizing agreements in order to
get a
foothold in a nation and confine themselves to social and political
action?
We can also see why they regard as already evangelized those peoples
who
have been reached by Roman Catholic missions. It makes their work seem
close
to accomplishment if they count those peoples as already having been
"Christianized."
CONTEXTUALIZATION
The manner in which evangelism is presented as promoted by the World
Christian Movement, is by "contextualization"-that is, being sensitive
to
the needs of different cultural groups in order to present the Gospel
within
the individual context of those groups. 'This is accomplished through
the
use of psycho-neural linguistics. John Stott explains contextualization
in
this manner:
The Gospel is thus seen to be one, yet diverse.
It is "given," yet
culturally adapted to its audience. Once we
grasp this, we shall
be saved from making two opposite mistakes.
The first I will call
"total fluidity." I recently heard an English
church leader
declare that there is no such thing as the
gospel until we enter
the situation in which we are to witness.
We take nothing with us
into the situation, he said; we discover the
gospel only when we
have arrived there. Now I am in full agreement
with the need to be
sensitive to each situation, but if this was
the point which the
leader in question was wanting to make, he
grossly overstated it.
There is such a thing as a revealed or given
gospel, which we have
no liberty to falsify.
The opposite mistake I will call "total rigidity."
In this case
the evangelist behaves as if God had given
a series of precise
formulas that we have to repeat more or less
word for word, and
certain images that we must invariably employ.
This leads to
bondage to either words or images or both.
Some evangelists lapse
into the use of stale jargon, while others
feel obliged on every
occasion to mention "the blood of Christ"
or "justification by
faith" or "the kingdom of God" or some other
image.
Between these two extremes there is a third
and better way. It
combines commitment to the fact of revelation
with commitment to
the task of contextualization. It accepts
that only the biblical
formulations of the gospel are permanently
normative, and that
every attempt to proclaim the gospel in modern
idiom must justify
itself as an authentic expression of the biblical
gospel.
But if it refuses to jettison the biblical
formulations, it also
refuses to recite them in a wooden and unimaginative
way. On the
contrary, we have to engage in the continuous
struggle (by prayer,
study, and discussion) to relate the given
gospel to the given
situation. Since it comes from God we must
guard it; since it is
intended for modern men and women we must
interpret it. We have to
combine fidelity (constantly studying the
biblical text) with
sensitivity (constantly studying the contemporary
scene). Only
then can we hope with faithfulness and relevance
to relate the
Word to the world, the gospel to the context,
Scripture to
culture.65
Again, semantics is at play. The words sound good; they seem to imply
that
"wooden" conveying of the Gospel is ineffective. But they also imply
that
images'' such as ''the blood of Christ'' are not always relevant to
the
cultural context when evangelizing. Indeed, Stott suggests that Scripture
must be made conformable to the culture if it is to have any meaning.
Obviously he does not wish to offend anyone with the Gospel; therefore
it
takes studying the contemporary scene to make sure that however it
is
presented, the gospel of the World Christian Movement does not fail
for
having offended. But what does Peter say?
Wherefore also it is contained in the scripture,
Behold, I lay in
Sion a chief corner stone, elect, precious:
and he that believeth
on him shall not be confounded. Unto you therefore
which believe
he is precious: but unto them which be disobedient,
the stone
which the builders disallowed, the same is
made the head of the
corner, And a stone of stumbling, and a rock
of offence, even to
them which stumble at the word, being disobedient:
whereunto also
they were appointed. (1 Peter 2:6-8)
Likewise, Paul did not offer much hope for the world as a whole:
For the preaching of the cross is to them that
perish foolishness;
but unto us which are saved it is the power
of God. For it is
written, I will destroy the wisdom of the
wise, and will bring to
nothing the understanding of the prudent.
(1 Corinthians 1:18-19)
The Gospel is offensive to every culture of man. It was offensive to
the
Hebrew culture which should have been ready to receive it with gladness
the
truth is that the Gospel is offensive to most people. There are few
who
surrender to it:
Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is
the gate, and broad is
the way, that leadeth to destruction, and
many there be which go
in thereat:
Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the
way, which leadeth
unto life, and few there be that find it (Matthew
7:13-14)
Contextualization is explained in the following from the Lausanne Committee
Addressing two traditional approaches to the Gospel-the first, study
of the
Biblical texts without regard to the reader's culture, the second,
discovering what the text meant in its original language and how it
relates
to the rest of Scripture - the Committee offered a third, "superior"
approach:
A third approach begins by combining the positive
elements of both
the "popular" and the "historical" approaches.
From the
"historical" it takes the necessity of studying
the original
context and language, and from the "popular"
the necessity
listening to God's word and obeying it. But
it goes further than
this. It takes seriously the cultural context
of the contemporary
readers as well as of the biblical text, and
recognizes that a
dialogue must develop between the two.
It is the need for this dynamic interplay between
text and
interpreters which we wish to emphasize. Today's
readers cannot
come to the text in a personal vacuum, and
should not try to.
Instead, they should come with an awareness
of concerns stemming
from their cultural background, personal situation,
and
responsibility to others. These concerns will
influence the
questions which are put to the Scriptures.
What is received back,
however, will not be answers only, but more
questions. As we
address Scripture, Scripture addresses us.
We find that our
culturally conditioned presuppositions are
being challenged and
our questions corrected. In fact, we are compelled
to reformulate
our previous questions and to ask fresh ones.
So the living
interaction proceeds.
In this process of interaction our knowledge
of God and our
response to his will are continuously being
deepened. The more we
come to know him, the greater our responsibility
becomes to obey
him in our own situation, and the more we
respond obediently, the
more he makes himself known.
It is this continuous growth in knowledge,
love and obedience
which is the purpose and profit of the "contextual'
approach. Out
of the context in which his word was originally
given, we hear God
speaking to us in our contemporary context,
and we find it a
transforming experience. This process is a
kind of upward spiral
in which Scripture remains always central
and normative. 66
We see that, in the eyes of the Lausanne Committee, Scripture must be
approached with one's personal cultural context in mind in order to
properly
understand what God is saying. The "concerns" of one's culture, of
course,
include socio-political issues. Because God's Word does not actually
mandate
our involvement in sociopolitical issues, we must read that mandate
into the
contextualization of the Gospel. Subtle, but very effective in advancing
the
"evanglization" process.
The greatest evil, as the new evangelical. put it, is to take Western
culture along with the Gospel. Ralph Winter tells us to listen to the
cry of
the lost:
But if we would stop and listen we would hear
a thousand voices
from around the world screaming at us, "Give
us your faith without
your Western clothing (and vices)."67
Is this true? It may be, where certain cultures have been propagandized
by
anti-Western elements against the "ugly American." But generally, cultures
all over the world are trying their hardest to copy Western culture.
Why is
MacDonald's found in virtually every nation on earth today including
Russia
and China? Western clothing is so popular manufacturers can barely
keep up
with the demand. Western movies are hot items all over the world. Why
is the
Gospel not viable in its own right, simply because it has been so identified
with Western culture?
Speaking at InterVarsity Fellowship's Urbana Missions Conference, in
February, 1997, Winter stressed the need to "de-Westernize" the Gospel.
According to Winter, the key task of the West should be to allow other
cultures to develop their own distinct kind of Christianity. "If they're
reading the Bible, they will even out and become orthodox," he said.
"The
Bible will correct more than foreign missionaries."68
If this is true, why do cults from Roman Catholicism to Mormonism to
Jehovah's Witnesses, and even the Unification Church of Sun Myung Moon
remain entrenched in damnable heresies in spite of their strong use
of the
Bible?
Utilizing contextualization, the Fuller School of Missions promotes
the idea
of group decisions. They believe that if leaders can be made to understand
the Gospel within the context of their specific culture, their influence
upon the masses within their culture will result in wholesale conversions
to
Christianity.
Donald McGavran states in his book, Bridges to God, that people all
over the
world can be evangelized by targeting the "unreached people groups."
He also
defines what he calls "spontaneous people movement," or "group decision."
He
theorizes that every group can be won to "the Cause of Christ" if we
could
know their "heart language"-if we can contextualize the Gospel to be
meaningful to them. If we can find the picture the symbolic language
to
communicate to a people, we can substitute the Gospel.
But what does Scripture say?
So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing
by the word of God.
(Romans 10:17)
It is the preaching of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, specifically, that
leads
men to salvation. Wherever the Gospel of Jesus Christ is preached the
Holy
Spirit draws men to the Father. This is the "calling" wherein Jesus
said,
"many are called, but few are chosen" (Matthew 22:14).
The Gospel does not present a Western cultural milieu. It stands alone
as
God's Word, made alive by the Holy Spirit who leads us into all truth.
The
need for contextualization is a myth promoted by Western religious
leaders
who, in their own right, detest Western culture for its perceived
exploitation of the poor. It fits into the liberal social milieu that
hates
everything Western.
This is not a defense of Western culture, which admittedly is as ungodly
as
any other culture. It is, rather, a challenge of contextualization
which
will lead to its own subset of evils.
The truth is that, without proper guidance, and relying upon any cultural
context, Western included, error will result. In the case of allowing
people
in heathen animistic cultures to place the Scriptures within their
own
context, the errors could be particularly evil. In response to Winter's
remarks, one delegate from Ghana argued that such an approach in a
pantheistic culture would just mean adding one more god to the pantheon
and
devaluing the significance of Christ.69
But Winter and the new evangelization leaders don't want to think of
that.
Instead, they insist that the only way to be effective in reaching
their
goal is to scrap any hint of Western culture from their efforts.
Urbana Director Dan Harrison stated that multicultural teams are emphasized
because they are both "morally correct" and the most effective means
of
missions work. Also preferred arc teams made up of the so-called Generation
X, aged 18 to 30.70
If multicultural teams are "morally correct," does that mean that non
multicultural teams are immoral?.' What does morality have to do with
it'.'
The Holy Spirit is the one who leads any ministry authored by the Father
To
be immoral, one would have to be it sin-acting contrary to God's Word
The
Jewish evangelists of the first century would be immoral according
s this
reasoning.
Is it not significant that believers from virtually every culture throughout
the centuries never had the Gospel contextualized for them, yet they
believed through the proclamation of God's Word? We did not need a
contextualized gospel to accommodate our world view or our culture.
Just as
John Wimber's theory that the Gospel is ineffective without signs and
wonders is debunked by the history of true evangelism, so the theory
of
contextualization of the Gospel is debunked by the history of true
evangelism.
Contextualization of the Gospel is what leads to a mishmash of religious
confusion. People might "accept" Christ, but still go to their Buddhist
temple or Shinto shrine. They might be Muslims and pray toward Mecca
five
times a day, but they would think they are praying toward Jesus if
the
Gospel can be contextualized to fit their cultural frame of reference
so
that there is no offense.
Does this seem far-fetched? Consider that one of the most prominent
leaders
among Christians in modern times, the late Norman Vincent Peale, was
a 33rd
Degree Mason who, when visiting the Orient, would meditate in a Shinto
shrine. Consider that, in some Catholic Countries, voodoo is actually
practiced inside Roman Catholic churches under the watchful eyes of
Roman
Catholic priests. In fact, contextualization of the Gospel in Rome
resulted
in a blending of pagan and Christian symbols and practices. It is the
reason
pagan holidays are observed today, yet dedicated to Christ, contrary
to His
Word not to do as the heathen do.
The work of the World Council of Churches is basically contextualization
of
the Gospel. The WCC has been expert at utilizing psycho-neural linguistics,
using biblical terms with altered meanings. This has allowed for
non-offensive elements of Scripture to remain, while eliminating the
most
essential doctrines of the Faith for the sake of unity. And the unity
they
seek is not just with other professing Christians, but with members
of all
faiths.
John Paul II, the most popular pope in history, is celebrated for his
tolerance and ecumenical outreach to all religions, not to bring them
to
Christ, but to affirm the elements of "truth" they all allegedly contain.
There are many throughout the world who call themselves Christians and
are
members of Bible-believing churches while at the same time being devout
Freemasons or members of pagan and even New Age groups. In truth, every
cult
contextualizes the Gospel to fit its world view.
Even the World Christian Movement has contextualized the Gospel to fit
its
leaders' beliefs of what Jesus meant when He gave the Great Commission.
That Urbana leaders wish to use such young "missionaries" from Generation
X
is a telling factor. It reveals the general approach of the new
evangelization process to use youth to accomplish its goals, rather
than
relying upon mature elder-quality men gifted by the Holy Spirit in
evangelism and apostolic ministry (church planting). But, then, when
we
consider the history of the World Christian Movement we see how this
transference from evangelism by godly elders to evangelization by youth
came' about.
CONCLUSION
As our series on the World Christian Movement expands, we will be addressing
some serious issues. Among them will be the ecumenical stance that
the
Movement has embraced, including the Roman Catholic influences. We
will also
be addressing the Kaleidoscopic Global Action Plan of the Global
Evangelization Movement. The Plan includes listing opposition to the
world
evangelization movement, making it difficult for them to continue;
massive
redistribution of wealth everywhere; international environmental concerns;
support of U.N. social agencies; and many other topics.
We believe that the final picture will reveal that the Gospel is taking
a
back seat to social and political concerns due to the influence of
liberal
elements within the World Christian Movement. And that influence is
so
great--as is the Movement's influence among the world's churches-that
virtually every Christian's life will be touched to some degree.
It is our belief that this is the most important issue on deception
with
which we have dealt in the twenty-two years of our ministry. Considering
the
importance of such writings as those on Promise Keepers, Holy Laughter
and
Pensacola, that's saying quite a lot, we know. However, it appears
as if all
these others were merely small parts of this greater whole. The leaders
of
the World Christian Movement expect adverse reactions to the ideas
that come
out of their think tanks. But they are prepared to deal with those
reactions. Nor are they overly concerned. They know that opposition
is
sparse and lacking in resources to get their message out to enough
people to
seriously hamper their efforts. They also know that once opposition
has had
its say, people tend to forget, or they choose to believe those in
whom they
have placed their confidence. Everyone wants to spread the Gospel;
anything
that appears to be in opposition to that goal will be looked upon as
satanic
in its origins. We realize that this could include us.
Yet, again, we wish to stress that we are not judging everyone associated
with the Movement, or involved in these organizations. We are not against
missions; we support missions financially and with whatever encouragement
we
can offer.
It is our hope that those who read this series on the World Christian
Movement will recognize those areas in which they may participate without
compromising the Gospel, and which to avoid. It i6' offered in love
toward
our brethren involved in true evangelism.
May we not be deceived into offering to God strange fire that looks
like the
real thing.*
AFFILIATED ORGANIZATIONS
Following is a list of some of the organizations involved in the world
evangelization movement. It is by no means an exhaustive list, but
should
give the reader some idea of the extent of the movement's influence
within
the Christian community.
* AD 2000 and Beyond
* Adopt-A-People Clearinghouse
* AlterNet of The Urban Alternative
* Association of Church Missions Committees
* Bethany World Prayer Center
* Billy Graham Evangelistic Association
* Bread for the World
* Call to Renewal
* Campus Crusade for Christ
* Catholic Renewal Movement
* Celebrate Jesus 2000
* Christ for the City
* Christian Community Development Association
* Christian Information Network
* Christian Interactive Network
* Concerts of Prayer
* End-Time Handmaidens
* Esther Network International
* Ethnic America Network
* Evangelicals for Social Action
* Every Home For Christ
* Forest Home Christian Conference Center
* Fuller Theological Seminary
* Gathering of the Nations
* Generals of Intercession
* Global Harvest Ministries
* Global Mapping International
* Global Mission to the World 2000
* Global Resource Ministries, Inc
* Gospel Light
* Great Commission Center
* Heal the Land
* Intercessors International
* Interdev
* International Fellowship of Intercessors
* InterVarsity Christian Fellowship
* Jesus Film Project
* King's Kids
* Lausanne Global Prayer Strategy
* Leadership Foundations
* Lighthouses of Prayer (World Prayer Center)
* Lydia Fellowship
* March for Jesus
* Mission Agencies Nework of North America
* Muslim Prayer Focus
* National Evangelistic Census
* National Houses of Prayer
* New Life 2000
* Pax Christi
* Prayer Room Network
* Prayer Support Networks
* Promise Keepers
* Renewal International
* Renovare'
* Rocky Mountain Prayer Network
* Sentinel Group
* Spiritual Warfare Network
* Southern Baptist Convention
* Foreign Mission Board
* Strategic Interactive Global Network
* United Prayer Track
* Urban Alternative
* Women's Aglow
* World Methodist Council
* World Prayer Center
* World Vision
* Wycliffe Bible Translators
* Youth With A Mission (YWAM)
* Young Life
* Youth for Christ
CONTINUE TO PART THREE
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOTES
41. C. Peter Wagner, Confronting the Powers, pp.21-22.
42. Rich Carey, Pastor of Vineyard Christian Fellowship, Blackfoot,
ND,
email letter to constituents.
43. Stewart Wilson, Pastor of Vineyard Christian Fellowship, Victoria,
B.C.,
Canada, email letter to constituents.
44. Donald McGavran, "The Bridges of God, Perspectives Reader, Op. Cit.,
p.
B-139.
45. Ibid., p. B-138..
46. Ibid., p. B-139.
47. Ibid., p. B-140.
48. Ibid.
49. Rick Wood, "A Church-Planting Movement Within Every People," Mission
Frontiers Bulletin, May-June 1995, p.14.
50. Ralph D. Winter, "The Secret Mission, Mission Frontiers Bulletin,
Vol.8,
No 3MArch 1986, p.10.
51. Ralph D. Winter, "Four Men, Three Eras, Two Transitions: Modern
Missions," Perspectives Reader, Op. Cit, pp. B-33-34
52. Ralph D. Winter, Introduction to The Missionary Message of the Old
Testament by Helen Barrett Montgomery,
Perspectives Study Guide, Op. Cit., p. A-1.
53. Helen Barrett Montgomery, Ibid., pp. A-6-7.
54. Ralph D. Winter, "The 'Secret' Mission, Mission Frontiers Bulletin,
Vol.8, No. 3, March 1986, p.10.
55. Ralph R. Covell, "Missions in the Modern Milieu," Ibid., p. B-218.
56. Ralph D. Winter, "The Kingdom Strikes Back," Ibid., pp. B- 10-11.
57. K.P. Yohannan, Why the World Waits (Lake Mary, FL: Creation House,
1991), p.62.
58. Ibid., p.78.
59. Ibid., p.43
60. Ibid., p.47.
61. Ibid., p.68.
62. Ibid., p.27.
63. Ibid., pp.34-35.
64. Ibid., p.31.
65. John R. W. Stott, "The Bible in World Evangelization," Op. Cit.,
pp.
A-5-6.
66. The Lausanne Committee for World Evangelization, "The Willowbank
Report," Ibid.,p. C-168.
67. Ralph D. Winter, Editorial Mission Frontiers Bulletin,
September-October, 1996.
68. Ted Olson, News "Missions Leaders Seek to'De-Westernize' Gospel,
Christianity Today, February 3,1997.
69. Ibid.
70. Ibid.
CONTINUE TO PART THREE
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This article sponsored by: Hebrews928@aol.com
link to CONTENDERS WEB SITE