Ernest Goodman, “The Anthropological Approach to Missions,” Missions Misunderstood, argues the opposite side of what I discussed in “God wants it done” (22 June). While I certainly understand Goodman’s cry that we not lose missions as our identity when trying to solve the task, I still believe that the Great Commission was a task given to us to be completed. The challenge before us is: the missionary task is not EITHER a problem to be solved OR an identity in Christ. It’s both.
When we fail to grapple with the challenges, the problems, the tasks in enabling the “whole church to bring the whole gospel to the whole world” and instead focus on simply making “missions our identity” – we all too easily slip down the slippery slope into our life-as-witness to anyone who might happen to see. (And mostly, since we spend our lives indoors, in the company of people like us, those who see us are all too rarely those who need to see our witness.)
And as regards Matthew 24:14 – I don’t think we’re saying Christ “cannot” come back: that would indeed (probably?) be a heresy. But I don’t think I’m wrong in interpreting the verse to say Christ “will not” come back. Jesus knew that God had a time for the end, that no one knew the time except God—and that it would be AFTER the completion of the Great Commission. Just because Jesus himself didn’t know the specific time, doesn’t mean he didn’t know certain things would happen first.
I think I hear Goodman’s heart. But I think he’s wrong. Mission absolutely IS a task to be finished—and one that the church has been failing miserably to do.
{ 5 comments… read them below or add one }
I too read Goodman’s article, and found the wee history lesson helpful. How did theorists view mission in years gone by? That was helpful, if a bit too short since that was new info for me. Somewhere along the article I never found the thread of how mission is identity- seemed to be more stated conclusion rather than a developed argument.
Thanks for your balanced review here : [both and, task and identity]
I agree (as I said on a comment for the referenced article). Both/And. I agree also that it is both task and identity. Jesus didn’t simply leave us with the command “be witnesses,” but to be witnesses to ALL creatures and ALL nations. The fact that He mentioned “all” in the context of these commands indicates it is very much a task to accomplish. While I would take issue with the type of people group emphasis that many try to wrest from Scriptures, there is no doubt that, in some sense, this task includes some form of people groups as a target. More basically, it includes all who are divided from the Gospel. The task is every person among ever people everywhere.
Concerning Matthew 24:14, it should be kept in mind that there are a good number of people who do not believe that is appropriately applied to this age, but to the Tribulation. There is enough significant disagreement about that passage that it may be unwise to draw the finish line with it. While it is a task to accomplish, it seems to me that it is a task that cannot fully be measured, and therefore may not be “accomplished” with the endpoints we have in mind. I believe (and many would disagree) that we are to work toward accomplishing the task given in this age, but that the Father likely doesn’t have the same threshold for His Son’s return as we do. It will be a surprise of sorts.
Brian,
I’m sorry I glossed over the good part of my post. Thanks for bringing that to my attention.
I see that I left it unclear. I’ll try to remedy with another post.
Hopefully, it will be shorter this time…
Justin,
How did I know you would disagree? At least you did it respectfully.
The fact that mission is our identity doesn’t mean it isn’t an activity- something that requires much effort on our part. It really isn’t a “slippery slope” toward doing nothing; it’s still going. But my argument is that we go because that’s who we are in Christ. It’s supposed to be “normal” for us to go to all nations and make disciples. Apathy and indifference are not supposed to be “normal” for Christians.
You’re worried that referring to mission as anything but a task will “let people off the hook.” But after a generation of “tasking” people with “finishing the job,” how’s that working out for us? As you mention, not so well. More of the same will probably get the same results. I’m going to mobilize and train churches with missionary as their identity, not their chore.
Debtor Paul,
You mention that the use of “all” in Matthew 28 indicates that our mission is a finite task. How so?
-E.G.
Ernest: I like our conversations because they are indeed respectful
. Actually, I do agree that we should go because of a missionary identity. I don’t think I’d say that we should “task” people with “finishing the job” but rather that we as Christians – because of our identity in Christ, because God is a missionary God – should *engage* the remaining task. One is a chore handed to us (and in my original post I dealt with the difference between habits and the task remaining) whereas the other is a significant completeable task that will take all of us working together. I think there is a difference. I think you ought to look at my old post on habits vs. the task remaining – we may not be as far apart as on the surface it might seem! 
I’m not sure now where I should be commenting!
I’m not saying that “all” makes it finite in the sense of “measurable.” But the fact that the commission is to preach to and to disciple “all” indicates that there is some type of “end point” in mind. I do not believe that we can know that Jesus is waiting for us to “complete” this before He returns. Until “all” are “reached” we still have a commission, a task. Let us trust that as we are filled with the Spirit that He is providentially guiding our commission-related strategy and that, at times, He will “specially” direct. The presence of strategy to accomplish the commissioned task is not the absence of the Spirit’s leading, even if He isn’t “specially” leading at all times.