Therefore go (Matthew 28:19)
I first came to have a heart for Europe when I entered college and began reading books by Francis Schaeffer. Schaeffer is known as a teacher of worldview, but he was also an American missionary to Europe. As a missionary, he poured out his heart for Europe in his books. As I read them, I felt Europe needed the gospel today. So I went to Europe without knowing anyone or having any clear idea of what to do when I got there. But after years of ministry in Europe, I left Europe and began to travel all over the globe to work with different groups. I was frustrated that nobody acknowledged my ministry in Europe. If anyone goes to a poor country, he is automatically considered a missionary. When someone moves to Europe to serve God, he is a missionary with quotation marks. So I was thinking of moving to another continent, Latin America. Then, while I was staying in Korea, I got a phone call from a dear friend. He said, “Kim, I was praying for you, and God said you have lost your vision for Europe. You should go back to Europe.” If someone else had said that, I would have ignored it. So many people say crazy things and justify what they say by adding, “This is what God said.” But in this case, because I knew him as a man of prayer and respected him greatly, I paid attention. In my spirit, I knew this message was really from God. I received God’s vision for Europe, and God never changed his calling in my life. I was just acting out of frustration. So I repented and went back to Europe. Since then, I’ve been living in Europe.
Now I know God called me to Europe, and I don’t care what others think anymore. However, I think about the meaning of mission often. What is mission? What is the core of mission? Who is a missionary? There are many different ideas, and most of them have major problems.
Mission as Activities in a Poor Country
This is the most common definition of mission. Most Christians connect mission with poverty. That’s why Europe is not seen as a mission field. There are many problems with this idea. First of all, if it is true, then those countries where there are missionaries are poor countries by definition. Then it’s only natural that people find it embarrassing to see missionaries come to their own country. I heard an Egyptian minister who moved to Canada say, “When I went to a local church, they were not happy to see me. They told me, ‘We send missionaries, not receive them!’” If mission is seen as Christians from rich countries doing things in a poor country, it soon turns into a matter of national pride or disgrace. It also distorts our view of missionaries from poor countries. There are many missionaries in the West from developing countries like Brazil, Nigeria, and India. They are doing a lot of fruitful ministry. But most people don’t really think of them as missionaries because they are not from wealthy countries. For most Christians, missionaries are from rich countries, and anyone who does not fit that idea is not a missionary.
Another problem with this idea is that nowadays there are many developed countries with few Christians. Japan is a good example. The Middle East, with its oil money, is developing fast economically, with very few Christians among the population. Europe, where everyone was Christian in the past, is a rich continent with spiritual poverty. But because of the poverty-focused idea of mission, there are very few Christians who want to go to countries like Saudi Arabia or Taiwan.
This connection between mission and poverty is a legacy of the past. In the 18th and 19th centuries, when modern mission began, only the West sent missionaries. The West was wealthy and Christian, while the rest was poor and pagan. At that time, the missionaries really were from rich countries, and the mission field really was poor countries. However, the world has changed so much since then, and we cannot connect mission with poverty. The world is not divided into Christendom and Heathendom anymore. By using an outdated idea as the foundation of mission, we are distorting our mission.
Mission as Frontier Mission
One of the most popular concepts of mission is mission as frontier mission. According to this concept, missionaries are active in areas where there are very few Christians to share the gospel. Nobody says this kind of mission is unnecessary. However, this concept has several problems as well. First, even though frontier mission is a necessary part of mission, in reality it is a small part of mission. Only 3% of Christian missionaries are active among unreached people groups, which means 97% of mission is not frontier mission. Some people say, “It shows how mission is focused on the wrong activities.” I don’t think so. If your definition of something only covers 3% of your area, your definition is too narrow.
Here we encounter what I call the mission dilemma. If you define mission too narrowly, you fail to see what mission actually involves; but if you define it too broadly, the word mission loses its meaning. For example, some people say, ‘Everyone is a missionary and everything you do is mission.’ It sounds inspiring, but it implies that no one needs to become a missionary or engage intentionally in mission. On the other hand, if you say, ‘Only frontier mission counts as mission,’ your definition excludes most of what missionaries actually do. As we try to define mission, we must steer clear of both extremes.
Limiting mission to only frontier work is also dangerous, because it pushes people to redefine every ministry as evangelism. It may sound good, but it is not. When the missionaries went to China, to encourage people to come to church, they gave away rice after the service. But soon they realized that those who came to the service were only interested in getting rice and not worshiping God. They were called rice Christians. But the Chinese also complained that those missionaries were only pretending to care for them, while they were only concerned with getting more people to convert. Mercy ministry has a place in mission, but if the only meaningful missionary activity is evangelism, then we are using mercy ministry as a “bait and switch.” Mother Teresa, who was respected for her devotion to the poor, brought dying people from the streets and washed them, fed them, and clothed them so that they might die in dignity. From the evangelism perspective, what she did was a complete waste. Those dying people were too unconscious to hear the gospel. But when she took care of them, many others saw the reality of Christian love, which led them to God. Jesus said at the final judgment that those who take care of the poor will hear from the king, “Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brothers, you did it to me” (Matthew 25:40). But if you believe only frontier mission is mission, you have to say, “If you just help the poor, it’s not mission.”
Another problem is that if frontier mission is the only mission, then mission is ruined by its success. Some say mission exists because there are unreached people groups. But what will happen when there are no more unreached people groups? There are approximately 7,500 unreached people groups in the world. It is a daunting task to reach all of them, but it’s not an open-ended task. If we focus on this task, we will probably finish our task of reaching them by the end of this century. Then what? Will we say, “Okay, mission is accomplished. We will close all missionary organizations and call our missionaries back home.”? Nobody says pastoring a local church is a task with an end date. Then why is mission not an open-ended task?
Everyone agrees that frontier mission is really valuable and necessary. We should send a lot of missionaries to the areas where there are not enough local Christians to share the gospel. At the same time, there are missionaries in different countries who are doing other things. Telling them “You are not a missionary unless you do frontier mission” is not the right way to promote frontier mission or mission in general.
Mission as Cross-Cultural Ministry
Finally, many people think mission means ministry in another country. If you are a pastor in your country, you are a pastor. But if you are a pastor in another country, you are a missionary. In this model, being a missionary means to leave your own country and serve God in another country. Some people use Ralph Winter’s E-Scale to explain mission. E1 evangelism means to share the gospel with people from your own culture. E2 evangelism means to share the gospel in a close but still different culture. E3 evangelism means to share the gospel in different cultures. This corresponds to Acts 1:8 where Jesus said, “But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you, and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth.” For the disciples, Jerusalem and all Judea were E1 because it’s their own culture. Samaria was E2 because it’s a culture similar to their own. The end of the earth was E3 because it’s a completely different culture. And many believe mission is another name for E3. But they fail to understand that this model is a descriptive model and not a prescriptive model. In other words, it describes what’s going on in evangelism, and it doesn’t say “We should do E3!” It simply shows there are different kinds of evangelism.
The most serious problem with this idea is that it cannot say why cross-cultural ministry is more valuable than ministry among your own people. Of course, to follow God’s calling, you often have to leave your own culture. But does God call everyone to leave their own culture? Also, usually people who minister to their own group are the most effective ministers, while foreigners struggle just to learn the language and culture. I know in a developing country, the missionaries are often better educated with more resources, but not in Europe. Most of the Europeans I work with are as qualified as me in ministry and often bear more fruit than I can. Then how can I say “Everyone should leave their own culture to be a missionary.”?
The missiologist David J. Bosch calls this concept the myth of baptism by salt water. In the past, when missionaries left England for the mission field, they traveled by ship, and by the time they arrived, they had become missionaries because they had gone through the sea. In the same way, many people today believe that if you travel to another country, that action makes you a missionary. Clearly, it is a ridiculous idea. Still, many people think mission is another name for cross-cultural ministry.
This concept is harmful in keeping Christians from being effective ministers in their own culture. Often I see churches in developing countries struggle with brain drain. The best leaders of those churches move to another country, and without good leaders, the rest struggle just to survive as a church. But if you believe mission equals cross-cultural ministry, then you should celebrate instead. Of course, when a newly born church starts sending missionaries, that is something to celebrate. But is a minister moving to another country automatically making him or her a missionary?
A Short History of Mission
Mission is a concept born out of the history and experience of the church. You cannot simply come up with an adequate understanding of the concept through logical analysis. So let’s look at the history of mission to understand what it means.
The first Protestant missionaries were Moravians. They were originally from Moravia (today’s Czech Republic), but they had to leave their home country because of persecution and settled in Herrnhut, Germany. Count Zinzendorf welcomed them and helped them settle on his estate. In the beginning, there were a lot of conflicts, especially because many dissidents from every part of Europe flocked to Herrnhut, hearing about religious freedom there. But Zinzendorf proved himself an amazing leader, even though he was only 22 years old. He created unity by asking everyone to sign the Brotherly Agreement. When they stopped fighting and began to seek God’s face together, God sent revival to them. Once they experienced God’s blessing, they began to send missionaries all over the world. It was the Moravian missionaries that John Wesley met on his trip to America, who were not afraid to die during the storm, which led him to examine his faith again.
Even though the Moravians were the first Protestant missionaries, the task of mobilizing the church for mission was first tackled by William Carey (1761-1834). He was apprenticed as a shoemaker from a young age and had only limited education. However, he taught himself Greek and other European languages. In 1792, he wrote An Enquiry into the Obligations of Christians to Use Means for the Conversion of the Heathens. In this pamphlet, he challenged his contemporaries who believed “The Great Commission was only for the apostles and not for us.” He said, “If this commandment were only for the apostles, then the promise of being with us until the end of the world was only for them, too.” Even without reading the pamphlet, we can see two key concepts for mission: heathens and means. Mission was born when Europeans saw the world as Christendom and Heathendom. Christendom was a wealthy Christian area, and Heathendom was a poor, non-Christian area. The need to go to those regions and share the gospel was clear. For that, Carey proposed the use of means. Sharing the gospel with those in Heathendom was a difficult task, and Christians should find means to achieve the goal. He proposed, especially, the formation of a missionary society. Even today, mission is not just an activity but a special activity, and we need to find the right means of achieving that goal.
After William Carey launched the first wave of mission, Hudson Taylor (1832-1905) catalyzed the second wave. This time the focus was on inland mission. Before Taylor, most missionaries lived and worked on coastlines. When people traveled by ship, the harbors were where most Westerners settled, and missionaries stayed there as well. However, Taylor felt the need to go further to reach people who didn’t have any chance of hearing the gospel. Besides, to overcome the cultural barrier, he learned the Chinese language and wore Chinese clothes. He was also one of the pioneers of faith mission. He didn’t ask for finance but lived by the principle of “Moving men, by God, through prayer alone.” In this he was influenced by his mentor George Müller. His example of living by faith influenced others like Loren Cunningham and Francis Schaeffer.
In the 20th century, two Americans, Cameron Townsend and Donald McGavran, initiated the third wave of mission. Townsend was a missionary to Guatemala. While living there, he heard a local man say, “If your God is so smart, why can’t he speak our language?” Townsend was speaking to the local man in Spanish, but he was not a Spanish speaker. That was the moment Townsend realized that often locals didn’t speak the official language. This led him to found Wycliffe Bible Translators to translate the Bible into a language people can understand. Donald McGavran was a missionary to India. He observed that India was not a single, homogeneous society but a mosaic of many ethnic groups that do not easily mix. Because of this, even when one group accepts the gospel, it rarely spreads naturally into other groups. It is like pouring syrup onto a waffle: it fills one square, but it does not flow into the others because the waffle is not flat. In the same way, invisible social and cultural barriers prevent the gospel from easily crossing from one group to another. From this experience, he came up with the concept of a homogeneous unit. This new unit of people group was crucial in saving the concept of mission. In the early 20th century, many Christians believed that they had accomplished the Great Commission by preaching the gospel in every country. Many thought that meant the end of mission. However, by showing that there were many ethnic groups that still needed to hear the gospel, mission found a new purpose and goal.
The Church and Mission
So far, we have examined some wrong ideas about mission and how the concept of mission has developed throughout history. But we still don’t know what mission is. Or is the concept of mission so antiquated that we should not use it anymore? Some people believe so. They think that the concept of mission was useful when the world was divided into Christian and non-Christian areas, but not today. In fact, the word mission does not appear in the Bible. If the Bible teaches us everything we need to do without using this word, why should we? But I think mission is still a useful word in this century. In fact, I believe this word is useful because it expresses something other words cannot.
The word mission came from Latin mitto, which means to send. In Greek, to send is apostello, and from this word came apostle. As apostles are the people who were sent by God, mission is the task given by God to be done through apostolic ministry. When the leaders of the church in Antioch worshiped the Lord and fasted, the Holy Spirit said, “Set apart for me Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them” (Acts 13:2). Even though the church leaders left in Antioch were great people, the Holy Spirit saw wisdom in separating people like Paul and Barnabas for a special task. This task is mission. There are always things to do in the kingdom of God, but some tasks can be done by people who are good at doing things regularly, and other tasks are better done by people who are good at a more intensive and irregular way. The first kind of tasks are usually done by pastors, deacons, and elders, while the latter kind of tasks are usually done by missionaries. There are no better or more important positions. There are only different kinds of positions.
Missiologist Ralph Winter uses the concepts of “modality” and “sodality” to describe two complementary structures within Christian mission and church organization. Modality refers to the local church as a stable, geographically based fellowship. It is structured for long-term endurance, gathering people based on shared biology, geography, or faith community. Modalities are inclusive structures where membership is generally open and not restricted by special qualifications. The local church or diocese is a classic example of a modality, providing stability and continuous local witness. Sodality, in contrast, is a purpose-driven, task-oriented structure designed for mobility and cross-boundary mission activity. Sodalities are often voluntary, selective groups with a specific mission focus, such as missionary organizations. Membership typically requires a “second decision” beyond modality membership, sometimes limited by commitment, age, or other criteria. Sodalities facilitate itinerant activity for evangelism or specialized ministries beyond local church boundaries.
So mission is sodality. Paul and Barnabas needed to be separate from the church at Antioch, not because the church had a problem, but because they needed their own structure to fulfill the task given by God. For example, YWAM can operate because it has its own structure, and it doesn’t have to manage a local church week after week. There are pastors and other church ministers who run local churches, and they bless the kingdom of God through that. YWAM does other things, from helping the poor to going on a mission trip to a limited-access country. Local church and mission are very different styles of ministry, even though both are equally valuable.
Sodality is often international in its structure. Although a sodality can consist only of local members, that is uncommon. Most mission work includes both locals and foreigners, and both play an important role. I once visited a mission that had been active for decades yet showed very little growth. The main problem was that they had not mobilized local workers. Because almost all the workers were foreign missionaries, their influence remained limited. At the same time, foreigners are also important. They often bring a freshness that locals may not have. YWAM Korea was founded by David Ross, an American missionary. He started a Bible study for students during a period when the universities were closed due to social unrest. That small group eventually grew into YWAM Korea. Without a foreign missionary introducing a new kind of ministry, YWAM Korea might have formed much later and with greater difficulty. So, while mission has traditionally emphasized going to another country, we should now think more in terms of being international. Someone can be a missionary in their own country because mission requires many local workers.
The Great Commission
Before Jesus ascended to heaven, he met his disciples in Galilee and gave them the final commandment. It is often called the Great Commission because it is so important. He said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age” (Matthew 28:18-20).
First, Jesus said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.” When Jesus was tempted in the desert, the devil said, “To you I will give all this authority and their glory, for it has been delivered to me, and I give it to whom I will” (Luke 4:6). It shows that at that time, the devil had authority over the world. But through the death on the cross and resurrection, Jesus was glorified, and God honored him by giving him all authority in heaven and on earth. Now a new reality has entered history. This is the true foundation of mission, not the human desire to save those who are dying without knowing God.
In the next verse, Jesus gave the real commandment: “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you.”
In Greek, the only verb in imperative form is “make disciples of the nations,” and other verbs are in participle form (going, baptizing, teaching). So the commandment of Jesus is “Make disciples of the nations by going, baptizing, and teaching!” Then what is the meaning of making disciples of the nations? Let’s think about the meaning of disciple and the meaning of nation separately.
Disciples
In John 8, we see the difference between a believer and a disciple: “So Jesus said to the Jews who had believed him, ‘If you abide in my word, you are truly my disciples, and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free’” (John 8:31-32).
Jesus was not talking to the Gentiles. He was talking to those who had believed him. But he didn’t say, “If you believe in me, that’s enough.” He said, “Abide in my word to become my disciples.” Every believer should abide in the word of Jesus to become a disciple. What does it mean to abide in his word? Abide (in Greek meno) is a word John loved. Out of 118 times it appears in the New Testament, more than half appear in the writings of John. Abiding means to dwell in a deep relationship. So Jesus invites us to abide in him and promises that he will also abide in us: “Abide in me, and I in you” (John 15:4). Now we can have that kind of relationship with his word as well. Often we don’t pay much attention to his word, but as he has invited us to abide in him, he also invited us to abide in his word. How do we do that? By reading, meditating, and practicing. Only when we do it, we become his disciples. We are his disciples because we are transformed through his word.
But it should not just happen on an individual level. It should happen on a national level in every nation as well. This is hard. There are many countries where there are many Christians, but as a nation they are quite corrupt and even full of crime. Papua New Guinea is a good example. 97% of the population is Christian. Then it’s easy to imagine it as a wonderful place to live. But not really. The crime rate of Papua New Guinea is one of the highest in the world. According to Wikipedia, “The major cities of Port Moresby, Mount Hagen and Lae, in particular, have become hotspots for many forms of violent, criminal behaviour including theft, carjacking, breaking and entering, domestic violence, sexual assault, and murder.” From human trafficking to drug trafficking, this island country is full of crime and violence. How can a 97% Christian population commit so much crime? Because they are Christians as individuals, but as a nation they are not discipled. Once again, we see the weakness of the idea of mission as frontier mission. Papua New Guinea is not a country that lacks Christian witness. Still, it is a country that needs mission.
Nations
The nation is one of the most important and also most mysterious concepts in history. Historians say that people think their nation has a long history, while it has, in fact, a short history. For example, modern Germany is only 150 years old, and modern Italy is only 160 years old. Still, Germans and Italians feel their countries are much older than that. Why? Because people feel it in their spirits, and spiritually speaking, these countries are much older. Benedict Anderson called a nation an imagined community. It’s imagined because you never know everyone in your nation, but you feel you belong to the same community with those unknown members. This imagination has a spiritual aspect. But the historians don’t want to think about anything spiritual, so they fail to see the reality of a nation.
In the Bible, nations play an important role in salvation history. God didn’t just call Abraham. He promised to make a great nation out of him (Genesis 12:2). In the Bible, often a nation is an extension of an individual, and sometimes even carries the name of this individual (like Israel). In Deuteronomy 32:8, there is an interesting explanation about the origin of the nations: “When the Most High gave to the nations their inheritance, when he divided mankind, he fixed the borders of the peoples according to the number of the sons of God.” So nations are not just random products of history but a result of God dividing mankind. And he didn’t do it randomly either. He did it “according to the number of the sons of God.” The sons of God in the Bible are the spiritual beings who are an important part of the spiritual landscape. About their identity, there are too many speculations, so I would not get into that. Still, this passage clearly shows that nations are somehow connected with spiritual beings. So when the gospel enters a country, not only are individuals changed, but also the spiritual atmosphere of the country is changed. This new situation is expressed through the culture they produce. Just like individuals, nations bear fruit as well. That’s why Jesus said that all the nations will be judged at the last judgment (Matthew 25:32). We need to get involved with the nations until they are transformed and bear good fruit.
Going, Baptizing, and Teaching
Then how do we do that? Jesus said that we should go. Go means taking action. If you are sitting down, that’s not going. We need to decide to get involved with the nations, plan our trip, and then go. Sometimes, just going is what is necessary, even without much planning. I first came to Europe because I felt God was calling me to Europe, and I felt I should do something. I made so many mistakes because I was so young and poor, and because it was before the internet. Still, God honored my desire to obey him, and I am still in Europe.
Then we need to baptize. It means we need to share the gospel so that people who didn’t believe in God will believe in him. Then we can baptize them. So to baptize practically means to evangelize. The church cannot exist without evangelism. Even today, there are so many countries where people don’t have a chance to hear the gospel. Even in Europe, many Muslims never have a chance to hear the gospel. Evangelism is an indispensable part of mission.
Then we need to teach. Why do we need to teach? Many Christians reduce the gospel to “a ticket to heaven when you die.” In that case, there is nothing to teach. They already got the ticket by accepting Jesus as their Lord and Savior. But that’s not what the Bible says. Christians need to learn to live out our faith, and for that, teaching is essential. Often, people respect missionaries who are good at evangelism but not those who are good at teaching. The most typical picture from the mission field is a missionary baptizing a new convert in a river, and not a missionary teaching in a classroom. We don’t value teaching as much as we should. But Jesus knew its value and told us to do it with evangelism. If we are to be faithful missionaries, we should go, baptize, and teach.
When we do all that, we will see the fulfillment of his promise: “And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age” (Matthew 28:20).