First, it is almost always used as a polemic. Individuals and churches who do not vigorously proselytize are denounced as watered-down, compromised and disobedient.

Second, it takes mission out of the realm of gospel and places it in the realm of law. The Great Commission becomes a rule that must be obeyed if one is to be considered a faithful Christian.

But mission in the New Testament did not begin with the apostles sitting down together and discussing how to obey the world mission command. Evangelism began with the “explosion of joy” (Newbigin’s term) emanating from the empty tomb.” Amen and amen!

I hope (and think) you are correct:

“SVM and UBF has many common grounds.”

If so, then UBF should be ending soon. SVM was a movement that rose and fell into obscurity. UBF should do the same.

“When the gospel finally broke through to the Gentiles, it happened through the most unlikely person. Saul of Tarsus had distinguished himself among the Pharisees for his ultra-strict keeping of the law (Philippians 3:4-6). He had zealously persecuted the Church because he considered the Christians to be a threat to Jewish religious supremacy. But the risen Christ personally appeared to Saul on the road to Damascus. Jesus chose him to be his instrument to carry his name to the Gentiles, a mission that Saul would never have chosen for himself (Acts 9:15). The calling of Saul, and his transformation into the Apostle Paul, is another powerful picture of God’s election. Once again, it appears that God chose Paul for this task to demonstrate that his gospel comes to all purely by grace.”

Could you please clarify the response of CIS leaders? When you say “few positive feedbacks”, does that mean that the response was mostly negative, mostly positive, or mixed? Because of the language barrier, I don’t know what is being discussed in the Russian language forum, but I would love to know. UBFriends  articles are now being read  by some in Latin America and  Korea too, but I have no idea how much it is being discussed or what kinds of opinions, if any, are being voiced.

Ben, thanks for your comment. Perhaps it is fair to say that “All prior Christian movements eventually failed,” if you define a movement as the work of human individuals and organizations. Yes, every organization eventually fails in one way or another, and those that do not reform eventually die out. But the gospel never fails. The gospel, in terms of missio Dei, is doing just fine.

I intentionally did not mention UBF in this article. This is not a veiled attempt to critique  UBF or any other  organization. It is part of my personal attempt to understand election and to construct  a coherent theology of mission. I am deeply grateful to everyone who reads UBFriends and partcipates in the discussion, because I am learning a great deal from all of you. And I appreciate your willingness to read my articles and give feedback. I feel weird, and somewhat selfish, posting so many articles on this topic, as if I am using UBFriends as my personal journal space. But at least a few people seem to appreciate it, so I won’t stop just yet.

As a historical note, I would like to point out that UBF does stand rather squarely in  the theological  tradition of SVM and the late 19th century American missionary movements. Sarah Barry, cofounder of UBF, participated in at least one  SVM event and signed the SVM pledge to become a missionary. Samuel Lee, our other cofounder, was discipled by the Navigators, which shares many similarities with  the early SVM. Many leaders of the Navigators were military men, and their philosophy of discipleship drew heavily on military models (and I do not mean that as a pejorative). The Navigators  were and are very singleminded in their  objective: raise disciples through one-to-one relationships and train them to raise more disciples in order to fulfill the Great Commission. God uses organizations like SVM and Navs to carry out his purpose. But I think that purpose is limited, because raising self-reproducing disciples is  only one aspect of building the church, and building the church is only one aspect of missio Dei. UBF has gone beyond SVM and Navigators to an extent; it has  morphed into  a de facto church. In my opinion, we are now experiencing a kind of identity crisis because our missions model (raise disciples on campus to raise more disciples on campus) doesn’t describe  what we have actually become. I don’t mean this as a criticism. God’s actual work in UBF has gotten ahead of our theology, which is a good thing. But now I think  we need to step back, re-evaluate, humble ourselves, understand what the Holy Spirit is doing among us, and formulate our mission theology in a more coherent and realistic way.

Without realizing it, might we may be following the footsteps of SVM by over-emphasizing mission (Matt 28:19), almost isolated from the context of missio dei?

All prior Christian movements eventually failed because of placing the emphasis on man’s response/obedience, rather than on God’s initiative. Might we be dangerously close to doing likewise?

I especially like the example of Paul, because it demonstrates so tangibly what he would later say in Romans that, “while we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son” (Ro 5:10). If only we could see that we were just like Paul, opposed to God and in rebellion to him, and that it was He who chose us, how much we would praise God for His grace in our lives! And out of the overflow of our joy for what He has done for us, we preach the gospel.