It has been asked whether missionaries should support themselves with secular employments (rather than accept full-time paid support) for the sake of being a good example to believers?  A missionary working full-time in the secular world without monetary support from home would be a benefit to the church in two ways:  1) gives an example of living out the Christian life in the secular world, with integrity and hard work and Gospel witness, and 2) gives an example of how one can do ministry and work in the secular world at the same time.Many Thai churches are very small (less than 50 people) and can not afford to support a full time pastor or church planter.  If the missionary church planter sets the precedent (whether intentionally or unintentionally) that “real” ministry can only be done by a full time paid professional, then the expansion of the church could be hindered as those with a heart for evangelism and serving the Lord think that they need to quit their job and go to Bible school before then can “really” be a minister of the Gospel.  For many Thai Christians with a heart to serve, and a call to ministry, bi-vocational pastoring and church planting is probably the most viable option that will not be a burden to them and their families, and beneficial to the planting and development of new churches.

When a church building goes up on the mission field, everybody feels good.  The missionary feels good.  The local believers feel good.  The church back home feels good.  Having a church building gives the impression that a church has been established.  It is a visible sign of the Christian faith in a community.  Everybody feels good that the Gospel is advancing and the presence of a church building is a sign of that advance.  Or is it?When the construction of a church building is largely funded by foreign money, the presence of a church building is not a true reflection of the strength and numbers of a local church.  Also, if missionaries (or their home churches) are always standing by ready to supply money for newly established churches on the mission field to build church buildings, then this desire to be helpful can foster two wrong ideas:  1)  church buildings are necessary in order to be a “real” church and, 2) if you need money, look to the missionary (or the well intentioned short-term visitors from their home church).  When the foreign missionaries and their churches are seen as sure sources of money, then the local believers’ motivation to give financially to their own church is lessened and local believers are less likely to make decisions that the missionary doesn’t agree with.  If they do, then there is the fear that perhaps the money supply will be cut off.  In this way, independent decision making and partnership in the Gospel as equals is diminished.  A patron-client relationship harkening back to the days of colonialism is unintentionally nurtured.

There are not a few church groups in Thailand who are desperate to get a building regardless of how small their group is.  Scripturally, there is nothing wrong with having a building in and of itself but when a small group of believers gets the idea in their head that they need to have a building to be considered a “real” church, then much of their time can become focused on finding money in order to get a building.  But does a church need a building in order to be a “real” church?  According to the Bible, the church is the body of Christ, and all believers are members of that body (Eph. 5:29-30).  The church is people.  Nowhere in Scripture do we see the term “church” equated with a building.  Certainly, if a group of Christians wants to get together on either an occasional or regular basis (such as a weekly worship service), they need someplace to meet.  In Acts, we see people meeting both in the temple and in homes (Acts 5:42) but there is no Scriptural mandate or prohibition about the type of buildings that believers should meet in.   As for those groups of believers in Thailand who end up focusing on getting money for a building in order to be a “real” church, their time and money would best be spent elsewhere - specifically, focusing on growing in Christ and sharing the Gospel with others.  Scripturally, evangelism and discipleship are much higher priorities than getting a “proper” church building (which, I might add, does not even make the list of necessary elements of having a church in the New Testament).

As a young missionary, I like talking to veteran missionaries to get their perspective on things.  At our recent OMF Thailand annual conference, our guest speaker Larry Dinkins spoke on cross cultural evangelism and overcoming barriers in communicating the Gospel to Buddhists.   Larry & his wife Paula came to Thailand as new missionaries in 1981 where they did church planting and theological education until 2002 when they needed to go back to the U.S. for Paula to receive treatment for cancer in her bone marrow. The treatment for Paula’s cancer has been successful and she is in remission.  As a result Larry and Paula have been acting as mobilizers and recruiters for OMF in Southern California as well as the Midwest.  They are involved in Thai churches in the U.S. and have made numerous trips back to Thailand as well.  After listening to Larry speak at the conference, and later in a recorded lecture, I became curious and sent him an email, asking, “If you could go back to your first term on the mission field, knowing then what you know now, what would you do differently?  How would you go about planting a church in Central Thailand if you had to do it all over again?”   Larry was kind enough to email me back and here’s a bit of what he had to say:

It is important to be practical and realistic in ministry, especially when it comes sharing the Gospel and establishing new churches.  But is it possible to be too practical?  It certainly is when the desire for results and finding methods that “work” outweigh a desire to search the Scriptures and find out what are God’s priorities and God’s methods for building his church.I have just started reading the 9Marks July/August 2009 eJournal on pragmatism in missions.  One of the first articles, “Pragmatism, Pragmatism Everywhere!” by Andy Johnson frames the discussion well and is a must read.  Johnson puts into print what I have been thinking about for some time:  Is there some sort of disconnect in the minds of missionaries and other Christians who claim to uphold the authority of Scripture yet deny it in practice?

In recent years there has been a lot of talk about church growth in the evangelical world.  Everyone wants to know how to make their church grow and there is no shortage of suggestions for how to do it.  What is the key to making your church grow?  Is it using a cell church model?  house church model?  more user-friendly sermons?  better music?  more skits?  candles?  bigger parking lot?  more exciting youth programs?  powerpoint?  more lay leadership? something else?Protestant missionaries have been in Thailand for over 180 years yet the number of Christians in the country is still less than 1%.  So, the question has been asked, when so much time, money, and effort has been put into evangelization, how come the church has grown so slowly?  Again, many suggestions have been put forth.  Perhaps we haven’t contextualized the Gospel well enough.  Or our evangelism has been too Western.  Or we have used a poor model of church.  Or there is a lack of indigenous worship music.  Or we haven’t been letting the Spirit lead.  Or church buildings don’t look Thai enough.  Or we haven’t emphasized house churches.  Or we haven’t found the right redemptive analogy.  Or whatever.

It is always good to know that someone is speaking from experience and not just theory.  Therefore, following on from my previous post about Nevius’ thoughts on finding local leaders, I wanted to share Nevius’ account of how he and his missionary colleagues made the mistake of appointing elders too hastily:“Twenty years ago our mission in considering this subject reasoned on this wise: We are Presbyterians, and our churches should be organized from the first on Presbyterian principles.  If we cannot get men for elders as well qualified as we should like, we must take the best men we can find, men who seem sincere and earnest Christians, and who may develop in character and ability to fulfill the duties of elders by having the duties and responsibilities of this office laid upon them.  With these views and expectations several churches were formally and constitutionally organized.  It was found, however, in not a small proportion of cases that the elders did not, or could not, perform their official duties, and were an obstruction to any one else attempting to do so.  They were placed in a false position, injurious to themselves and the churches of which they had the nominal charge.  Some were hardly able to sustain the character of an ordinary church member and others were in a course of few years excommunicated.  We then took action as a Presbytery, determining that

I love reading stories of people and events in church history because many times the past gives me a different perspective on the present.  History helps me to peel back my contemporary blinders a bit and see things in a new way.  I recently finished reading a little book called, “The Planting and Development of Missionary Churches” by John Nevius, first published in 1886.  Nevius was an American Presbyterian missionary working in 19th century rural China.  Although relatively unknown outside of mission circles, Nevius is well known for developing the three self principles of planting churches on the mission field, namely that churches must be self-supporting, self-governing, and self-propagating.  These principles were applied to great effect in the evangelization of Korea and are well-known in the mission world.  As far as Nevius though, I had heard of him but never read the man himself.  I wish that I had run into his writing sooner.  What I found most fascinating about Nevius’ writings is how Biblical and how practical his advice is.  I find that too much modern missiology is not very well anchored in Scripture, and as a result there is a lot of sociology, anthropology, and psychology but not much Bible.  Nevius speaks from years of experience as a missionary in China and, as most missionaries, is concerned about what are the most effective ways of doing ministry.  However, unlike too many modern pastors and missionaries, his advice about about what should be done about various challenges and obstacles to church growth is informed by the pages of Scripture rather than sociological studies, surveys of the unchurched, or over reliance upon methodology.  He gives practical advice, to be sure, but his advice is hemmed in ahead and behind by Scriptural principles, not the latest business management book or some radical

We are working alongside a Thai pastor and his church to plant new churches in the surrounding area, particularly the nearby town of Nong Doan.  That means that we spend time with neighbors, building relationships to share the Gospel in word and deed, and spending time with church members to disciple them and to do visitation and evangelism together.  A good part of our time, however, is taken up with Thai language study and taking care of our son Joshua, who is a very active little boy.  Please see the About Us page for further details.

 

We arrived in Thailand in December 2006 and studied at OMF’s Thai language school through June 2007.  At the beginning of July 2007, we moved to the small town of Phra Phutta Baht, located along the highway about two hours north of Bangkok.  Phra Phutta Baht means “Buddha’s footprint” and the Temple of the Buddha’s Footprint is the focal point of the town.  In the city of Phra Baht, we work alongside a local Thai pastor and his church (the only church in Phra Baht!) to do new church planting in some of the rural towns surrounding Phra Baht, nearly none of which have any church at all.

 

Enjoy this slideshow of photos from our life and ministry in Thailand. We will wrap up our time in the States this month and fly back to Thailand on Sept. 30th. To those of you who are praying for us and for the Thai people - Thank you.

 

 

A lot of people have asked us how big is our town in Thailand and we finally have the answer. We recently received a CD with a ton of maps and statistics on Christianity in Thailand and we are including below a map of the province of Saraburi.We live in the district of PhraBaht in Saraburi province, about two hours north of Bangkok. PhraBaht has 72,000 people and 75 reported Christians. The church that we work with in PhraBaht is the only one in the district and there are only 20-30 people in attendance at the Sunday worship service at that church. I know that there are some Christians in PhraBaht who go over the border to nearby Lopburi province to worship but that is still a lot of people unaccounted for. However, I will save for another time my comments on the necessity of cleansing the church roles and making a reasonable judgment about the credibility of a person's profession of faith.The focus of our church planting work at this time is focused on nearby Nong Doan district, a lower class farming community. Nong Doan has 14,000 people and according the the statistical figures that I received, no Christians. However, I know of