My Mission Field

I was talking to a guy at Bible study this morning and he got to talking about how Christians must not separate themselves from the wicked because you know, that’s how we live out the Great Commission and all that.

I didn’t argue with him, because both he and I would pretty much be dealing with hypothetical situations instead of reality. Aside from teaching my theology class, I’m not making a difference in the lives of anyone outside my immediate family, and even that is hit-and-miss.

Here’s a mission field for me where I _definitely_ have a responsibility:

Wife and kids: 3 people (4 in May)
Siblings, in-laws, parents: 11 (13 by July; I’m around 6 on a regular basis)
My grandparents, aunts, uncles, cousins: 11 (I see about half of them regularly)
Co-workers: 18 (I know 12 of them fairly well and interact with them regularly)
Neighbors: 5 families, say 10 people minimum (I know none of them)

That’s quite a mission field! Some of those folks are Christians, of course. If I exclude them, and also exclude some situations that would be inappropriate (such as avoiding overly close relationships with women co-workers), I still have quite a large number. There are twenty people, easily, within my sphere of influence that need some type of discipling or something. Easily twenty people that need to see my good works and glorify God because of it. Twenty people to receive the light that my life should show (Matthew 5:15)

When I’m actually making a difference in the lives of people God has put me around, then maybe I’ll venture an opinion about who _else_ I should be actively involved with. But I’m not going to argue hypotheticals.

This entry was posted in Christian. Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to My Mission Field

  1. Karl Thienes says:

    It is nice to see other people who aren’t caught up into the whole “If I’m not preaching in some rice field in India then I can’t be a Christian” thing.

    As St. Seraphim of Sarov said, “If you aquire the [gifts of] the Holy Spirit, thousands around you will be saved.”

  2. mutt says:

    Off the topic (even though I agree with viewing where you are as your primary mission field)
    I found this article, and since I didn’t know have your email, I decided to put it here. It’s about Spurgeon-
    http://www.banneroftruth.org/pages/articles/article_detail.php?41

    signed
    mutt

  3. mutt says:

    since I have already gone OT (off topic) once
    I wanted to pass this along-
    On the issue of Limited Atonement,
    I had trouble understanding/accepting it when I
    first starting studying the reformers work, but
    I think the best arguement I have read thus far is found in R.C. Sproul’s book “A Grace Unknown”

    It basically states this:
    If Christ’s atonement was shed for the whole of mankind then we must accept Universal Salvation of all men.
    To say that it is only effected when man accepts is to utterly destroy the ability of Christ’s atonement of saving anyone.

    Because if Christ’s atonement was for all sins of all men and unbelief is a sin then you must (logically) conclude that salvation is Universal for all men (if they believe or reject)

    If you say that it is for all sin accept unbelief, then how do we conculed that it has the power to atone for any sin?

Comments are closed.