. . . or am I
confused?
by D r . Don H i l l is support her own widows and orphans. To the world, the church’s first re sponsibility is evangelization. While orphanage ministries drain off thousands of dollars which might be used in the preaching of the gos pel to a. lost world, they also give to the donor a not altogether justifi able feeling that he is having a large share in the fulfilling of the Great Commission . . . Or am I confused? L et T he N ationals D o I t “ In these days of an upsurge of nationalism, our real need is not mis sionaries. On most of the mission fields of the world today there is a ‘Go home, Yankee’ attitude. But I am happy to inform you there is an an swer to this seemingly insurmounta ble problem. We have today, on our American university campuses, 100,- 000 foreign students who have come from every country of the world. If we will reach them for Christ they will return to their respective home lands to do the job the missionary cannot do.” I could not help but admire the zeal with which the missionary to the American university campus spoke. 1 appreciated the logic of his presen tation. But, unfortunately for him or for me, I had been too long on the foreign field. I knew that the handful of converts who would return to their respective homelands could not possi bly evangelize their countries. I knew that only a small proportion of them would put their service for Jesus Christ ahead of the lucrative jobs which await them because of their advanced American training. I knew some of them would face stronger prejudices against their ministry than the foreign missionary faces. I knew a majority of them would find it more difficult than the missionary to de scend economically and socially to a level low enough to reach the com-
T he attractive brochure I received the other day announced the birth of a new mission organization. Apparently this new mission is to carry on a ministry sufficiently unique to warrant its existence. But, though the brochure was at tractive, I was disturbed by its con tents. Unanswerable questions crowd ed into my mind. Do we really need more missionary societies? Are there no mission organizations working in Africa with which this person could carry on his ministry? Would not his entrance into an established mission both strengthen that organization and give to him all the advantages of a well-established work? W ill not the organization of this new mission in volve the setting up of a home office, the advertising and promotion of the society, and additional appeals for money from God’s people here in the homeland? . . . Or am I confused? R omans 1:16 It was a Tuesday afternoon in a small midwestem town. There were only about twenty of us in the mis sionary meeting. I had been in many such services before and so the fact of the preponderance of women did not bother me. But there was some thing the speaker said that did. She was telling about her ministry among the Jewish people. She told of the faithfulness of God for the past fifteen years in supplying the needs of the work. But she did not close without turning to Romans 1:16. Using “ to the Jew first, and also to the Greek [Gentile]” as her text, she earnestly exhorted God’s people to make sure their first ministry was to the Jew. She left most of her audi ence with a deep conviction that they were missing the will of God if they were not endeavoring to reach the Jew first.
Not for a moment do I doubt the sincerity of this missionary to the sons of Jacob. On the other hand, I am convinced that this is an un fair interpretation of Scripture. The Jewish people as a nation have been given their opportunity to hear the gospel. And now, as individuals, they have no more right to hear it than do the Gentiles. It is, therefore, wrong, woefully wrong, to build a ministry to the Jews on the basis of “ to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile.” A ministry to the Jew must be founded upon the same premise as a ministry to the Negro, the Navajo, the American university student, the unsaved businessman, or to any other person without Christ . . . Or am I just confused? T hat M otherless C hild “You can support an orphan in Jalampur for $2.00 a week. If you could but see one of these mother less, fatherless, half-starved children it would break your heart. Become a foster parent today and help us raise these children for Jesus.” With you, I am continually faced with appeals such as this in our Christian magazines. It is not that I would turn a cold, unsympathetic heart toward the widows or orphans of any country. But, frankly, I’m bothered. There are two things about this type of appeal which disturb me: (1) The disproportionate amount of money that is spent in the advertis ing and promotion of orphanage min istries. In some cases not more than 50 per cent of your money gets to the orphan. (2) I find nothing in the Word of God which even remotely suggests that the Church of Jesus Christ is responsible for the support of the widows and orphans of the world. There is, however, clear teach ing that the Church is obligated to
THE KING'S BUSINESS
14
Made with FlippingBook - professional solution for displaying marketing and sales documents online