EDITORIAL:  “CONVICTION OR COMPROMISE IN
MISSIONARY METHODS?”

By George G. Robinson

Published in Global Missiology, October 2014 @ www.globalmissiology.org

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

“Too slow and introspective!”  “Too fast and theologically shallow!”  The missionary task has long been fraught with difficult decisions and ensuing controversy.  One person’s conviction may appear to be compromise to another.  What one missionary deems to be biblical, simple and reproducible, another may critique as being unbiblical and unworthy of reproduction.  Where is the balance?  Or is balance even a worthwhile goal when it comes to a task that demands such urgency and has such high stakes in view? 

This issue of Global Missiology could not possibly answer these age-old questions.  What we have attempted to do, however, is create a platform for the conversation.  Most of the articles found in this issue address issues of missiological conviction.  And a few make claims of biblical compromise.

The Featured Articles in this issue revolve around the oft-heated discussion surrounding “church planting movements”.  The term has been around since Garrison first coined it back in the late 90’s, but the concept goes back, some suggest, to the book of Acts.  While few evangelicals would suggest that they are opposed to mass numbers of people surrendering to Christ, many in the global missionary community have become disenchanted with the thought that CPMs are the mark of orthopraxy.  Jackson Wu* has been teaching in theological education for a decade in an area that is often credited as the best example of a CPM.  And yet he pushes back on the concept and its historicity.  To bring balance to the discussion I took the liberty (with permission of course) to send Wu’s critique to David Garrison for a response.  I’m grateful that David took the time to contribute.

In our section on Contextualization, we have two articles that should stimulate some good dialogue as well.  Doug Coleman* gives a biblical/theological response to proponents of “Insider Movements”, a missiological method that has itself created quite a stir.  Coleman’s response is based upon an exposition of Acts 15 and Paul’s interaction with the Jerusalem Council.  Next is Ed Smither’s intriguing historical analysis of orality based upon precedents set by the Celtic community.

Under Contemporary Practices we have articles that address reaching Muslims and Hindus respectively.  Ant Greenham gives a thoughtful critique of the traditional apologetic approach to reaching Muslims arguing that evangelistic efforts should focus on acceptance of the biblical Jesus. While Muslims who come to Christ will necessarily have to reject Islam, Greenham argues against the necessity of an initial theological rejection of Islam as prerequisite to evangelism.  Next is Brian James’ article describing how a biblical/theological understanding of hospitality is necessary to shape HBB churches in their rejection of their preexisting caste-based social constraints.

In our final section we have two Book Reviews that tie into the theme of “Conviction or Compromise”.  First Paul Akin takes a look at Michael Goheen’s Kuyperian-shaped missiology in “A Light to the Nations”.  Then finally Ryan P* interacts with Robert Logan’s treatise for rapidity in his book “Be Fruitful and Multiply”. 

We trust that you will be challenged to both think and act with biblical/theological conviction after reading this issue.  And our desire is to facilitate a charitable and fruitful conversation towards that end.  After you read an article you can use the Twitter hashtag #globalmissiology to get the conversation going.  Also, be sure to follow us at @globalmissiolog.

Blessed to be a blessing,

George G. Robinson (D.Missiology)

Assistant Editor, Global Missiology

Associate Professor of Missions & Evangelism

Headrick Chair of World Missions

Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary