Mission Issues

If the gospel in Samaria was the first great breakthrough for the Christian community, then the second breakthrough, the first Roman accepting Christ, was equally important. If I’m not mistaken (I’m fairly sure that I’m right, but I couldn’t confirm it), it was Lesslie Newbigin who first referred to the three-fold conversion taking place in Acts 10 & 11. The story starts with two visions. Cornelius, a Roman centurion, had a vision in which he was told to fetch Peter from a house in Joppa. He immediately sent three people to fetch Peter. The following day Peter also had a vision. He saw a large sheet coming down from heaven containing all kinds of animals and reptiles. He was told to eat the food, but Peter responded by saying: “I have never eaten anything impure or unclean.” God answered: “Do not call anything impure that God has made clean.” (Acts 10:13-15).
Shortly after the men from Cornelius turned up and after sleeping over, they went to Cornelius. After hearing what Cornelius had to tell him, Peter said: “I now realise how true it is that God does not show favouritism but accepts men from every nation who fear him and do what is right.” (Acts 10:34-35). This could be considered as the first conversion in this story - Peter making a 180 degree turn from his previous viewpoint.
After hearing about Jesus, Cornelius and his household also came to repentance - the second conversion. At that time another Pentecost experience took place: “While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit came on all who heard the message. The circumcised believers who had come with Peter were astonished that the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on the Gentiles. For they heard them speaking in tongues and praising God.” (Acts 10:44-46)
Now Peter and the others returned home, probably thinking that the church leaders in Jerusalem would be very excited about the news. But this was not so. Peter was severely criticised for what he had done. Only after Peter had told the entire story, did the church accept what had happened and their response was: “So then, God has granted even the Gentiles repentance unto life.” (Acts 11:18). This could be considered as the third conversion taking place in this story: First Peter, then Cornelius and his household and then the entire church in Jerusalem. And in between, because this is a major breakthrough in the expansion of Christianity, we find a third (and last) Pentecost experience.
Formerly I would have stopped the story at this point, saying that from Acts 10 - 28 we find the story of Christ being proclaimed to the ends of the earth. But lately I have seen that there is much more to this story. I will come to that in my next post.

In a previous post, I mentioned that the great breakthroughs in the spreading of the gospel (to Jerusalem, to Judea and Samaria and then to the ends of the world) are all linked to a certain “ Pentecostal” experience. I thought that it would be important to clarify this statement.
Fredrick Bruner, in his excellent book on A theology of the Holy Spirit, first opened my eyes to this. In Acts 8:4-17 we read how the gospel was first spread amongst the Samaritans. Keeping in mind the feeling of animosity between the Jews and the Samaritans, it is not surprising that the proclamation of the gospel amongst this group is such an important event. This is also the only account that is found in the book of Acts where people had come to repentance but had not received the Holy Spirit as well at the same time. In Acts 8:14-17 we read: “When the apostles in Jerusalem heard that Samaria had accepted the word of God, they sent Peter and John to them. When they arrived, they prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit, because the Holy Spirit had not yet come upon any of them; they had simply been baptised into the name of the Lord Jesus. Then Peter and John placed their hands on them, and they received the Holy Spirit.”
The gospel had been proclaimed to them by Philip and the Samaritans had accepted Christ as Saviour. For some strange reason God did not bestow the Holy Spirit upon them at the same time and instead chose to give the Holy Spirit to them, only after Peter and John had lain their hands upon the new believers. (The only other place in Acts where the Holy Spirit is linked to the laying on of hands, is in Acts 19:6, when Paul arrived in Ephesus.
Bruner’s solution to this, an argument which I find convincing, is that God had to do something special to break down the ill feelings between the Jews and the Samaritans. Most probably God realised that, if word had reached the Jewish Christians that the Samaritans had come to repentance, the church in Jerusalem would not have taken it seriously. Because Peter and John had been present when the Spirit was given to these believers - in fact, not only present but instrumental through the laying on of their hands - it was impossible for the Jewish believers to deny what had happened in Samaria. To deny this would be to tell their church leaders that they were liars.
And therefore, when the first boundary is crossed outside Jerusalem, God gives a special experience, almost a kind of mini-Pentecost, as sign that the Samaritans were now also truly considered to be part of the family of Christ.

I’ve been on the road the past few days and where I had been it wasn’t possible to get onto the internet.
Before I continue with the message in Acts about the different regions where the gospel was spread, I first want to say something more about Acts 1:6 and Acts 1:8.
In Acts 1:6 the apostles asked: “Lord, are you at this time going to restore the kingdom to Israel?”
Through this question, the apostles demonstrate their lack of understanding for God’s plan for the world. In this short sentence, they are basically making three serious errors, which I usually describe as:

• The “who” error
• The “when” error
• The “where” error

The “who” error
The apostles still expected Jesus to do all the work. Jesus had come to earth. Jesus had died. Jesus had been resurrected. And now Jesus had to complete the work by making the kingdom come. The answer that Jesus gives them is: “…you will be my witnesses…” For this, the Holy Spirit was given.  God, in His wisdom, chose not to send legions of angels or even to leave Jesus on earth to do the work. It is the task of the believers, making use of the power of the Holy Spirit, to proclaim the kingdom of God to all nations.

The “when” error
“Lord, are you at this time going to restore the kingdom to Israel?” Jesus answers them: “It is not for you to know the times or dates the Father has set by his own authority.”
This answer is clear enough. But I think that there is something much deeper in the question that was asked. The apostles had experienced the power of God. They had been chosen by God. As far as they were concerned they were ready to go to heaven. Therefore, in their way of thinking, the logical thing would be for God to bring an end to everything. Those who have been saved will go to heaven and those who had not been saved will be left behind. But this is an extremely selfish way of thinking. From the start it was God’s intention that all nations would be saved. As God had said to Abram: “…all peoples on earth will be blessed through you.” A Christian is saved, not (only) to ensure that he / she has everlasting life, but (also) to help other people to find the same salvation.

The “where” error
“Lord, are you at this time going to restore the kingdom to Israel?” The apostles were still focussed on Israel, not realising that God had the entire world in His mind. From the start (Abram) God wanted the whole world to be saved. Israel was merely the tool that He intended to use to proclaim God to all the nations. And therefore Jesus answers: “…you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth.”

The next question which arises is how we should understand the book of Acts. Where Luke 9:51 forms the key to understand the Gospel of Luke, so Acts 1:8 forms the key to understand the book of Acts. However, to understand Acts 1:8 one first has to understand Acts 1:6: “So when they met together, they asked him, “Lord, are you at this time going to restore the kingdom to Israel?”
At the end of the Gospel of Luke (24:49), the disciples were commanded to remain in Jerusalem to await the power which God would give them: “I am going to send you what my Father has promised; but stay in the city until you have been clothed with power from on high.” Obviously the disciples (still) didn’t understand what God’s plan was and therefore they ask the question: “Lord, are you at this time going to restore the kingdom to Israel?” In other words, they are still awaiting an earthly kingdom instead of a heavenly kingdom.
Jesus answers them: “It is not for you to know the times or dates the Father has set by his own authority. But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth.”
This verse then forms the key to understand the rest of the book, as the structure of Acts is built according to the structure of this verse:

• Acts 1-7: The gospel in Jerusalem
• Acts 8-9: The gospel in Judea and Samaria
• Acts 10-28: The gospel to the ends of the world

It is interesting to see that these three “breakthroughs” are all linked to a certain “Pentecostal” experience

From Luke 9:51 onwards everything in this book is focussed upon Jerusalem. Acts starts the story in Jerusalem and everything, from there, is focussed upon the world.
Schematically, one could illustrate this development in the following way:

To really understand what the author Luke is trying to accomplish, one has to understand the larger structure of these two books.
The Gospel of Luke tells us the story of what Jesus had come to do on earth. The climax of this story, obviously, is the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus Christ (which happened in Jerusalem.)
The Gospel ends with the words in Luke 24:48-49: “You are witnesses of these things. I am going to send you what my Father has promised; but stay in the city (Jerusalem) until you have been clothed with power from on high.” In other words, Luke ends with the command from Jesus that they have become witnesses of what they had seen. The book of Acts starts with the same command (Acts 1:8 ) and tells us how the church accomplished this mission.
Or it could be said in another way: The Gospel of Luke tells us what Jesus had done. The book of Acts tells us what Jesus did and will do through His church in the world.

While en route to Russia recently, I stayed over in a North African country for two days. I decided not to mention the name of the country as I do not want to jeopardize the Christian church in that country in any way. While I was there I was (unexpectedly) asked to present a lecture on mission at a YWAM training base about 100 kilometres from the city where we were staying. I agreed to do this and had to make do with very little sleep that night as I prepared what I would be teaching on the following day. Fortunately I had the basic thoughts in my mind (and some notes on my laptop) and it was more a matter of organising things in the form of a lecture.
I have long been interested in the Gospel of Luke and the other book written by the same author, Acts. In 1988 I attended a synod meeting, consisting primarily of Black church leaders with a few White people in between. This was not a good meeting. This was at the height of the racial tension in South Africa. The meeting took place in a Black township outside Pretoria (Mamelodi) and the tension was clearly visible even at this meeting. One political activist attending the meeting was known to proclaim openly that if any White person should agree with him, he had not been radical enough.
It was at this meeting that David Bosch was asked to lead the daily Bible study. He chose to do it from the books of Luke and Acts and sub-titled the Bible studies: Two books for our time. Never before nor since have I experienced such depth and such practical guide lines in a Bible Study. David Bosch later published his research on these two books in an Afrikaans publication which he sub-titled: Good news for the poor … and the rich and later, when he published his Transforming Mission, he devoted the entire chapter 3 to these two Bible books. (Just as a matter of interest: The same radical Black person at the synod was afterwards asked to thank David Bosch on behalf of the synod for the Bible studies and he said something like: I would never have thought it possible that a White man would be able to lead us in a Bible study in such a way that I could agree with him, but David Bosch did exactly this! I thought this was quite a compliment.
In my lecture I did not follow Bosch’s guidelines. I followed another route which I will try and explain over the next few days on this blog.
I’m not, first of all, a New Testament scholar, but in the books and commentaries I consulted, one verse stands out in the gospel of Luke as the central verse and this is Luke 9:51: “As the time approached for him to be taken up to heaven, Jesus resolutely set out for Jerusalem.” As I proceed, it will become clear why this verse is so important.
Jerusalem plays an extremely important part in both the gospel of Luke as well as in Acts. The following examples will help to illustrate this:

• The gospel starts and ends in Jerusalem
• Jesus is dedicated to the Lord in Jerusalem (Luke 2:22)
• Jerusalem is indicated as the place where Jesus would complete His earthly mission (Luke 9:31)
• From Luke 9:51 Jesus’ journey to Jerusalem starts
• Jerusalem is the city where Jesus died, was resurrected and ascended to heaven
• Jerusalem is the end of Jesus’ mission on earth
• Jerusalem is the starting point for the disciples’ mission to the world (Acts 1:8 )

One of my friends who formerly commented regularly on this blog, informed me some months ago about a documentary that had been made about the Swazi monarchy. It is called “Without the king.” In one of the other blogs I read daily I was recently reminded about this movie again and after an extensive search, I was able to find a copy from Amazon in Canada. A short trailer of the movie is also available here.
So, what are my views on the movie? I would describe the movie in two words: Excellent and biassed. We are given a fairly honest look at some parts of Swaziland - the monarchy on the one hand and on the other hand the upcoming generation, many of whom are living on the outskirts of the main towns, Mbabane and Manzini, in the hope of making a better living in the towns but devoid of any means to produce their own food and therefore living in great poverty if they should fail to find some form of occupation.
However there are also other groups of which nothing is shown in the documentary - the business people earning good salaries and living a stable life and the traditionalists in the rural areas, staunch supporters of the monarchy and who are mostly subsistence farmers (the people whom I work with mostly in our church.)
What was the aim of Michael Skolnik in making the documentary? Was he trying to warn the world of a possible revolution in the country? If so, why did he not also speak to the intelligentsia, many of whom are also disillusioned with the monarchy and would probably have been a better choice to influence world leaders rather than having to listen only to aggressive people, many of whom were obviously intoxicated while being interviewed? If his intentions was to give the world a picture of what is going on in Swaziland, (the good and the bad) then it would have been better if people from other backgrounds could also have been included.
A few remarks on some of the more sensational things shown in the documentary: At one point it is said that people are so poor that they have to eat intestines from cows and chicken heads and feet. Although this is not my personal favourite, for many Swazi people this is a delicatessen which they enjoy eating. Frozen chicken pieces are sold in stores in packages which include the head and feet. It is also said that churches are empty because people even fear to pray. That is absolute rubbish! Churches in Swaziland are small and not well attended, even though it is considered to be a Christian country, but this has absolutely nothing to do with fear to pray!
As I watched the movie I thought back to the Apartheid years in South Africa within which I grew up. Being within the privileged minority makes it very difficult to listen to people criticising the system. Many documentaries were made about that time and many books were written, most of which were banned in South Africa until 1994. One example of an excellent movie about the South African Apartheid system is The power of One (which I first heard about on a visit to the USA in 1999). However even this excellent movie, as is the case with Without the king, fails to give a balanced view of what really went on in the country.
To me this movie was upsetting as I realise that people on the ground are really getting upset with certain things happening in Swaziland and that a revolution is not impossible. Let’s just pray that it never happens.

Well, I’ve returned to my home after my time in Russia. I often compare the Russians to the people in Swaziland, the one difference being the colour of their skin. There’s a few other differences as well. The one is the Russian’s love for flowers, something which I have seldom if ever noticed in Swaziland. The Russians just love flowers and in spring people selling flowers have a blooming (pardon the pun) business. The other difference is the Russian’s love for dogs. In the building where the Bible Centre in Samara is situated (they rent some rooms in an office block) a big dog wanders around. It was a stray and the people in the office block started taking care of him. One things I have always noticed in Swaziland is that nearly everybody does have at least one dog but very few dogs are in a good condition. Most of them are extremely skinny and look unhealthy.
But in many other aspects these two groups of people are much the same: things like poverty, their musical ability (the Swazis are better, but the Russians are also good), their almost simple faith in God. And yet a few things happened on my visit to Russia that did show me that, in spite of the things God is doing through our church in Swaziland, we still have a long way to go in other aspects. On three occasions I was invited to share with groups of Russian church leaders the story of our ministry in Swaziland, how it had started and what God is doing for us and through us. On two of these occasions I was deeply humbled when the people who were present asked me for our bank details as they would like to collect money to help us in our ministry. What impressed me about this was that I know something about the financial situation of most of the Protestant churches in Russia. Their expenses are huge (in most cases they do not have their own church buildings and they have to rent buildings, mostly theatres or something similar for their weekly gatherings) and their income is low. Nobody would blame them if they felt that they would rather use the money which they receive just to survive. This is the reason why it surprised me so much that, in spite of their own poor financial situation, they are still willing to offer to help others. This made me think of the words of Paul in 2 Corinthians 8:2-3: “Out of the most severe trial, their overflowing joy and their extreme poverty welled up in rich generosity. For I testify that they gave as much as they were able, and even beyond their ability.”

I’m still in Russia. This morning it started snowing, whereas, since we had come, it had been fairly warm. It cooled off during the night and when I woke up this morning the landscape had been transformed into a beautiful fairytale scene, with snow covering the trees and the ground and millions of snowflakes falling to the ground.
I had been in a discussion yesterday with a woman who is busy with a certain ministry here in Samara in Russia. What really touched me, was to see the passion and enthusiasm she has for this ministry. It is clear that she absolutely loves doing this work. I can honestly say that I have the same feeling towards my work in Swaziland. A few months ago someone was telling me that he needs to take a break from his ministry on regular occasions in order to energise himself to continue with the work. Granted: We are all created differently. Some people need breaks more regularly than others.
What I do realise however is that in the countries where the most missionaries are working and which are usually also the poorest countries, like those in Africa, Asia and Eastern Europe, the local people do not have any understanding for our Western need to “take a break” in order to energise ourselves again. I am given six weeks leave every year. Two weeks are used each year when I visit Russia to teach at this Bible centre. The other four weeks I usually take during December when I try and spend some special time with my family. All the other paid workers in our church in Swaziland have the same privilege. Yet I have never found anyone of them ever asking for official leave. It’s not as if they are working day and night. On the contrary, all of them are working at a much slower rate than I am used to (which probably also explains partly why they don’t easily get heart attacks,) but what I do notice - and this is the point I’m trying to make - is that they seem to be energised through the work that they are doing and not through other things which take their mind off the work.
And this made me think how important it is to enjoy the ministry to which God has called us. Obviously there are times when things are not always going well. Obviously there are times when one will get despondent. And surely there is a need to “take a break” from time to time, even if the main reason would be to spend more quality time with our families. But looking yesterday at the way in which this young woman radiates her passion for the ministry she is in, made me realise that, ultimately, we need to get our strength and energy for mission, not through things that take our mind away from our mission, but from the work itself that we are doing.

I’m still in Russia with a fairly full schedule - teaching during the day and meeting with local church leaders during the evening and trying to catch up with my email and other administrative work at night.
While in Northern Africa, on my way to Russia, we stayed over with a prominent local church leader in that country. As in most countries where Christians are in the minority, most of the Christians are very poor. We passed through an area where about 90% of the people living there are Christians, but I can assure you that neither sticks nor stones nor Bible verses will convince any outsider to live there! The smell is awful! The living conditions cannot be imagined by anyone living in the type of housing that we are used to. Yet they have started a church in this area which is flourishing and growing and where thousands of people are attending.
In contrast to this the church leader whom we stayed with had a meeting with other church leaders while we were there. They were busy making arrangements to receive a very prominent female TV evangelist in their country who would be conducting some seminars. (Fortunately I can’t remember her name.) She had told the local church leaders that they will have to fetch her at the airport in a rented vehicle. She specified that it should be the very latest model Mercedes Benz. When enquiring about accommodation they offered to find place for her in a five-star hotel. After informing her about the facilities available in the hotel she told them that she’s not satisfied with that and she wants something better. Eventually they found her a seven-start hotel at a modest $800 per night where she will be staying while in this country!
I nearly became sick when I heard this. I’m not saying that she should live in the area I described above. But where does this person get the audacity from to demand the latest model luxury vehicle in which she should be transported and then sneer at the mention of a five-start hotel which isn’t good enough for her? How is it possible to demand accommodation at a price per night that the local Christians will not even deserve in a whole year?
As I listened to this story I just realised how easy it is for Christians to become so comfortable in their personal circumstances that they cannot relate at all to those whom they are called to serve. And in any case, how can you serve someone if you are visiting those people with a proud attitude instead of with a humble spirit? I couldn’t help thinking of the words of Jesus in Mark 10:42-44: “You know that those who are regarded as rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their high officials exercise authority over them. Not so with you. Instead, whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant, and whoever wants to be first must be slave of all.”I can hardly think that demanding to be chauffeured in the very latest model Mercedes Benz and demanding to be accommodated in a seven-star hotel complies with what Jesus expected from his disciples.