OK, obviously i'm a BIG short-term mission fan. i wouldn't be directing this network if i wasn't! i've been thinking lately that the question was NOT IF you should go on short-term mission trips, but that it was more about the HOW you go now.
not everyone shares my opinion. it would be a scary world if everyone did! i recently had the opportunity to teach a class on STM teams @ vanguard college in edmonton. i showed the students an episode of "travel the road" (http://www.traveltheroad.com/), a missionary reality show, to provoke a discussion about the need for flexibility and adaptability while on short-term mission trips. after the class ended, one of the young ladies approached me, very upset about the video. in her opinion, the short-term missionaries hadn't done "enough" (witnessing, disciple-making) to even warrant their trek that particular day/episode. another young man joined the discussion, offering his thots that it didn't matter what they accomplished, it was simply important that they went.
i decided to continue the discussion in class the following day. it turned into a heated debate! on one side, we had a group of people who believed that in going on STMs, if you can't stay around and make disciples, you shouldn't even bother going. the other side argued that it was important to just GO, obeying and fulfilling the Great Commission, even if it meant you made no disciples.
tough arguments. i can see the validity on both sides. how can you not go, just because you can't stay for months and disciple people? isn't it better that you give someone the opportunity to hear the Gospel? then again, are we actually disobeying the GC by not "making disciples" as Jesus commanded? maybe it's better to leave people with their own beliefs if you can't stay around to help them walk thru their new faith.
ultimately, when you're doing a STM trip, it is best to work through a church or missionary that can be there to follow-up and continue to teach those who make decisions for Christ. then at least you went, and someone else discipled. if it all gets done, does it matter who did it? paul didn't think so, and said as much in 1 Corinthians 3:6 - "I planted the seed in your hearts, and Apollos watered it, but it was God who made it grow."
sounds like everyone has a job to do. i'm OK with that! any thots?
2 comments:
Hey Matt
Interesting debate. Here are my two cents:
I would like to know the opinion of people who are new to the Christian faith. What do they think of missions...as we 'lifers' tend to think of it as going overseas and doing programs that lead people to know Jesus personally?
In recent years, having met a few new Christians, I've discovered the ones who are interested about "missions" are just happy to GO and share. Its not that they dont care about follow up, but a) they may not have been in the church long enough to see the lack of discipleship that occurs after the team is gone; and b) they know from first hand experience that coming to Christ was a step by step process. They didn't just hear the word of God once and suddenly believe and live the 'holy, righteous' life! They talk of how it took them a long time to come to truly accepting Him as Savior. So, I think in their minds the 'just going' is vital! They share stories of how they met strangers on the street who impacted them with conviction, or saw drama presentations that remained vivid in their minds.
All of these events contributed to them finally discovering Christ...one day.
So, I have to side with the argument that just going is a worthwhile agenda.
Would I say that those who are worried about discipleship are wrong? Not at all. It is of course essential. But then perhaps those who are going on STM should rather be considering doing LONG term missions in which they become the ones who STAY and disciple. However, I would hazard a guess that the people who are suggesting we need to disciple are the first ones to find an excuse why it’s not 'their gift'.
Interesting!
Here's a thot:
What if no one went at all, because there was no available discipleship?
Well, then we certainly wouldn’t be seeing people come to know Jesus.
But, what if a team went and at least SHARED the Good News?
At least then someone is hearing, and slowly getting to know, in order that one day they can believe.
Romans 10:14,15
How, then, can they call on the one they have not believed in? And how can they believe in the one of whom they have not heard? And how can they hear without someone preaching to them? And how can they preach unless they are sent?
Is it not a bit audacious of us to suggest that because we aren’t the ones to disciple, there is no point in going at all? Where does the work of Holy Spirit come into this whole process? Do we “western, enlightened Christians” really need to be the ones who walk these people to the baptismal tank? Or is there room for God to do a work with the seed that was planted from our prayer infested short-term efforts?
I hear the argument of both sides, but I am curious to know if the side that argues against STM because of the lack of long term discipleship doesn’t in someway become more of a selfish argument on many levels, rather than a legitimate concern that the Word of God is preached….
You know, the Word that will not return void? The Word that is sharper than a double edged sword.
The Word that does not need us!
(yah, that one)
Okay, so I didn’t realize I was so passionate about this topic. Ikes! I don’t want to discredit the argument of the one girl in the class Matt, because I know she may have a sincere argument. If her concern is rooted in sincerity, than I believe she would actually understand the other side of the coin if she realized what NOT GOING would actually mean.
The end.
I believe that for short term missions to be effective, We need to go with the intent being to lift up and encourage the local missionaries. We in the long run are not doing much good if there is no follow up, or if we create more work for the missionaries then we are worth. When we leave, the missionaries and the people they are helping should be looking forward to our return. In many cases, the local church has no history, no older saints to look up to, or lead by example. It is a real boost to them to receive the encouragement.
We do not go to build buildings, we go to build relationships, and in turn, the kingdom. If its only about the building, stay home and send the money! I guess the question is , Why would we consider sending a short term team where there is no possibility of follow up when there are so many missionaries looking for help. And if there are local churches there and we are not working with them , Do we have problems with submission ?
Blessing John
Post a Comment