Mitch Schultz
Editor’s Note: Rev. Mitch A. Schultz served as a pastor and missionary for 38 years with The Christian and Missionary Alliance.
My father was from Holland, and my mother from Belgium. After two years of missionary training at the Brussels Bible Institute, they were sent to Irian Jaya (now Papua, Indonesia) on a cargo ship in 1958. Those two years of training earned them a diploma, not a theological degree. Beyond that, both had only a formal high school education. Yet, in their 38 years of missionary work, my father started a Bible school and a theological seminary. Despite having had little theological training, he was probably one of the most biblically sound men I know. [1] How was this accomplished by a man with little theological training? He realized that to be successful as a missionary in taking the gospel to lost people, he needed to know Scripture and know it well. So, he taught himself. My father was convinced that, apart from sound doctrine, he would fail as a missionary. He believed that to proclaim the gospel, he needed to know it well.
My father’s conviction places a burden on my heart I wish to address in this article. I am concerned that we are sending out missionaries with an overemphasis on contextualization over evangelism. And this, in turn, has resulted in too little emphasis on the theological training of missionaries. In reality, we need missionaries who are as well-trained as the pastors in those churches who are sending them. It would be unfair to suggest that all overseas workers are inadequately informed or theologically unprepared. Many are deeply grounded in sound theology and faithfully labor to make Christ known. Yet others have insufficient theological preparation—some recognize this deficiency, and others may not.
My prayer, therefore, is that this discussion will not be heard merely as a critique of others, but as a challenge to all of us to deepen our theological roots wherever God has planted us to serve him, whether at home or cross-culturally. I also hope it will prompt reflection among the institutions that prepare cross-cultural workers and the churches entrusted with sending and supporting them. If the missionary task is fundamentally theological, then those whom the church sends should be equipped with the theological depth necessary to carry it out faithfully.
The Burden: The Necessity of Contextualization over Theological Preparation.
For some time, I have observed missionaries come home and talk more about the means they use to connect with the lost through contextualization than about their primary call and commitment: simply proclaiming the gospel and the fruit of that commitment, namely, the salvation of souls.
It is important and even necessary that the missionary find ways to connect with lost people using creative means. The missionary may deploy a wide variety of vocational approaches to develop relationships and gain meaningful access to communities. Some work alongside local artisans or businesses, while others start their own businesses that let them live and work naturally within the community. Some help indigenous people establish sustainable gardens, while others teach principles for agriculture, the trades, or entrepreneurship. Still others use sports and recreation, coffee shops, medical and dental assistance, education, community development, construction, computer and technology skills, hospitality, and other vocational abilities through which to make their connections.
These approaches can create legitimate opportunities for missionaries to build trust, develop friendships, understand the culture from within, and engage people in meaningful conversations about the gospel. However, the vocation itself is not the mission; rather, it is to be a context for forming relationships and gospel witness.
There is a difference between connecting with the lost and evangelizing them. Connecting with them relationally involves using various methods of engaging people in the hope that somewhere along the way a door will pry open to proclaim the gospel. At that point, one still must think carefully about how to contextualize the gospel for the hearer’s understanding without changing the message of the gospel itself. I am sure that every missionary who labors at both connecting with the people of their target group and contextualizing the gospel for their understanding, loves the gospel and is convinced that it is the gospel, not their methods, that must eventually pierce sinners’ hearts and rescue them from sin. However, unless missionaries urgently and passionately abide by Paul’s mantra, “Woe to me if I do not preach the gospel” (1 Cor 9:6, ESV), they will see few responses to the gospel because they will rarely proclaim it.
“However, unless missionaries urgently and passionately abide by Paul’s mantra, ‘Woe to me if I do not preach the gospel’ (1 Cor 9:6, ESV), they will see few responses to the gospel because they will rarely proclaim it.”
The Problem: Overemphasizing Contextualization over Evangelism
I don’t believe this is by design. We have fallen into it accidentally. Two realities have diminished the emphasis on the gospel as the primary motivation for training and sending workers through doctrinal and theological equipping.
First, reaching people in some of the world’s least-accessible places has led churches and Christian institutions to develop creative approaches to bringing the gospel to them.
At times, however, this emphasis on creative access has come at the expense of sound theological training.
I have good friends who served in a North African country under the cover of a business within the energy sector. They served there for a decade, made friends with the local people, but were always gun-shy in proclaiming the gospel. Serving as evangelists was too dangerous. One day, one of their sons presented a Bible to a schoolmate who happened to be the son of a government official. Within a week, my friends, along with all their colleagues, were expelled from the country.
So here is the problem: To reach closed-access nations, we can place more effort into training our missionaries to be proficient in the tent-making work they will do, making theological training a lower priority.
Secondly, the urgency to get the job done quickly has lowered the bar for equipping the best possible workers.
The denomination I served under for 38 years (the Christian and Missionary Alliance) has as its underlying mission that we do all we can to “Bring back the King.” The scriptural basis for this is Matthew 24:14, “And this gospel of the kingdom will be proclaimed throughout the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come.”
My parents left their families, and everything familiar to them, for the jungles of Papua, Indonesia, with this urgency. The mission agency, also driven by this, asked them to get married two months early so they could travel as quickly as possible.
The urgency of Matthew 24:14 can rightly drive the church toward the nations. But urgency must never lead the church to lower the theological qualifications of those entrusted with proclaiming the gospel to the nations or to rush onto the battlefield without proper training.
The Remedy: A Theology of Sending.
What must the church do to ensure that missionaries receive the same depth of theological preparation expected of the pastors who send them? More fundamentally, what biblical theology of sending requires missionaries to be as thoroughly equipped to proclaim the gospel as they are to contextualize it?
To answer this, we must turn to Scripture. I present five challenges to denominations, churches, training institutions, and individuals committing their future to reaching the unreached.
1. Missionaries must be theologians.
Every missionary should be as well-trained and prepared for their calling as a pastor in the local church. Indeed, one might argue that the standard for missionaries should be even higher, given the unique challenges and dangers they may encounter in cross-cultural ministry. Paul’s exhortation to Timothy suggests an important principle: The greater the danger, the deeper one’s grounding in the gospel must be.
Paul writes: “Indeed, all who desire to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted, while evil people and impostors will go on from bad to worse, deceiving and being deceived. But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have firmly believed, knowing from whom you learned it and how from childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus” (2 Tim 3:12–15).
Paul does not prepare Timothy for the dangers of ministry by encouraging him to retreat from them, but by directing him more deeply into what he has learned and firmly believed. His confidence in the face of opposition is to be grounded in his knowledge of Scripture and the gospel. For missionaries who will often minister in contexts of spiritual opposition, cultural pressure, isolation, and even persecution, theological depth is not an academic luxury. It is essential preparation for faithful ministry.
Acts tells a fascinating story about a missionary named Apollos who was passionate about Jesus but lacked the knowledge to be an effective evangelist. To Priscilla and Aquila, passion and eloquence were not enough, so “they took him aside and explained to him the way of God more accurately” (Acts 18:26).
“To Priscilla and Aquila, passion and eloquence were not enough, so
’they took [Apollos] aside and explained to him the way of God more accurately’ (Acts 18:26).”
Every missionary I know is passionate for Jesus. Many, like Apollos, are eloquent and gifted. They carry a deep burden for the lost, but many are theologically weak. Imagine if missionary organizations assessed their workers’ biblical knowledge as much as they assessed their ministry's effectiveness.
Paul urged Timothy to “continue in what you have learned and have firmly believed” (2 Tim 3:14). As a good pilot undergoes a biannual review to keep his skills sharp, likewise, a missionary will work better if he is regularly tested and urged to deepen his biblical knowledge, as my father did.
2. Missionaries must be stewards of the gospel first.
Missionaries as stewards of the gospel first does not mean preaching the gospel before providing practical help. Gospel first simply means the gospel is the supreme reason for being there, and it remains the first priority even as other productive things happen in communities. It is the raison d’être, the reason for existing in the missionaries’ presence.
Missionaries can easily set the gospel aside because they may be effective in other endeavors. Too often, these are the stories they talk about most when they speak to their supporting churches. The English class is full of students. The sustainable garden is providing food for an entire village. Micro businesses enable local men and women to support their own families. The sports camp is producing champion-level teams. Nurses and doctors in Africa are providing excellent health care to local communities. Coaching businessmen is producing financially successful men and women.
The missionaries’ marching order is the Great Commission. But making disciples necessarily requires more than introducing people to Christianity. Jesus commanded his disciples not only to baptize, but also to teach them to observe everything he had commanded (Matt 28:20, emphasis added). Such discipleship requires missionaries with deep, comprehensive knowledge of Scripture to teach, explain, defend, and apply the Christian faith.
3. Missionaries must be more committed to proclamation than presence.
The missionary’s presence cannot be separated from a high commitment to evangelism (1 Cor 1:17–18). Ultimately, I believe this is a work of the Holy Spirit. Our job is to be evangelists; his job is to convict hearts, leading to repentance and regeneration. Even in hard places, we must preach the gospel. Gospel presence must be just that: the presence of evangelists who are deeply committed to preaching Christ and him crucified (1 Cor 2:2).
Paul’s example is encouraging to missionaries who feel inadequate before this calling. “And I was with you in weakness and in fear and much trembling, and my speech and my message were not in plausible words of wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power, so that your faith might not rest in the wisdom of men but in the power of God” (1 Cor 2:3–5).
4. Missionaries must be willing to risk their lives despite the limitations of gospel access.
I was reminded of this principle in a conversation with a missionary friend I had lunch with recently. I shared the theme of this paper with her, and she described two instances when missionaries were required to leave the countries where they were serving because the risks associated with their ministry had become too great. Their sending denomination determined that remaining in the country was no longer safe. Yet both missionaries were so deeply compelled by the gospel and so committed to the people among whom they had ministered that they eventually joined another mission organization and returned to the same country, willingly accepting the risks involved.
Such examples illustrate an important distinction between gospel access and gospel proclamation. Access may be restricted by political circumstances, cultural opposition, or threats to personal safety. Yet the biblical missionary impulse is not ultimately governed by convenience or the missionary’s security. Paul understood that proclaiming Christ could involve considerable personal cost. “I do not account my life of any value nor as precious to myself, if only I may finish my course and the ministry that I received from the Lord Jesus” (Acts 20:24).
Paul expressed the same conviction when he wrote, “I am ready not only to be imprisoned but even to die in Jerusalem for the name of the Lord Jesus” (Acts 21:13).
His willingness to suffer was not rooted in a fascination with danger, but in Christ's surpassing worth and the gospel's urgency. Earlier, he had described his ministry in these terms: “For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ and him crucified” (1 Cor 2:2). The missionary is not called to seek suffering for its own sake, but neither is he nor she called to abandon the proclamation of Christ simply because gospel ministry carries risk. This is not a death wish, but a willingness to die for the name of Jesus.
The missionary, therefore, does not merely bring a Christian presence into a community. He or she carries a message—a message of reconciliation through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Where circumstances make that proclamation difficult or dangerous, the missionary calling does not become less significant; rather, the costliness of the task may become more apparent.
The calling to missions, then, must include a willingness to lose your life for the name of Jesus.
5. Missionaries must be motivated by the glory of God.
Paris Reidhead, in his famous sermon “Ten Shekels and a Shirt”, spoke of his conviction that he had served the heathen with wrong motives. He concluded that God was saying to him, “I didn’t send you to Africa for the sake of the heathen; I sent you to Africa for My sake. They deserved Hell! But I LOVE THEM! And I endured the agonies of Hell for them. I didn’t send you out there for them! I sent you out there for Me!” He made this painful observation, “Christianity says, ‘The end of all being is the glory of God.’ Humanism says, ‘The end of all being is the happiness of man.’ I was there not for the sake of the heathen. I was there for the Savior who endured the agonies of Hell for me. But He deserved the heathen, because He died for them.” [2]
God's glory is both the beginning and the end of missions. The missionary seeks the salvation of the lost for God's glory, and the outcome of that work is a people who glorify God. “Let the peoples praise you, O God; let all the peoples praise you!” (Psalm 67:3).
Conclusion
The missionary is sent with one central message: the redemptive work of Jesus Christ. Whatever methods, strategies, or contextual means may be employed, the gospel must remain at the heart of the missionary task. Its message must be proclaimed to the sinner and its implications continually taught to the disciple. It comes with the risk of one’s life. Both those who send and those who are sent must therefore possess a clear and thorough understanding of this message, for it is through the faithful proclamation of Christ that God accomplishes his saving purposes among the nations.
Mitch A. Schultz - Fruitful Vine Ministry - Toccoa, Georgia
[1] A testament to this is the Bible commentaries he wrote on every book in the bible. They can be found at www.bible-commentaries.com.
[2] Paris Reidhead, “Ten Shekels and a Shirt,” sermon, SermonAudio Classics, listed as January 1, 1965, https://www.sermonaudio.com/sermons/10180222445.