The latest book I read is by Steve Saint, the son of Nate Saint, who was one of the missionaries killed by Aucu people many years ago. The book is entitled “The Great Omission,” a play on words about the great commission. The book is based upon his work among the Aucu people and various other groups worldwide. His main point is to challenge the way we do missions and to suggest that some of our missionary tactics are unhelpful and downright contradictory to our goal of evangelizing the world.

Our church had a missions conference recently and the missions committee asked me to preach on a section that is commonly used for missions: Romans 10:14-15. The theme was to be God’s love for the least reached people of the world since the conference was focusing on the 10/40 window. I was more than happy to take up this topic, but as I began my study I quickly came across a problem: Paul is not talking about missions. So could I still use this section for missions?

The latest issue of Christianity Today (May 2007) includes a fascinating article with Ram Gidoomal entitled "Christ, my Bodhisattva." Ram grew up in a Hindu environment but then got saved while he was in England, where he still lives. The point of the article is the need to contextualize the gospel to Hindu's. For example, there are practical problems.

"I recall my first visit to a church here, my first church ever, St. Paul's Onslow Square. I went to the evening service, so none of my friends or relations would see me going. The first thing I looked for on walking in was the shoebox. I wanted to take my shoes off: This is holy ground, and you're asking me to come in with my dirty, filthy feet and go into the presence of God? This is not right: this is not holy. I must take my shoes off. But they told me that there was no place for shoes. So I went to sit on the floor, in the proper location of respect, and the usher said to sit on the wooden bench. Then the organ blasted out and I thought, Who has died? Because organ music was just for funerals in my mind. It was an alien experience." 

 But the more interesting question is how to actually communicate the faith. "So I decided, When they talk about sin, I think of karma, and I believe Jesus died for my karma, so I am going to accept him on those terms."

Now I am all for contextualizing the gospel so that people can understand it. But one can certainly take it too far. I think (at this moment anyway) that this statement could be helpful for people to understand the gospel, but not as a statement of the gospel to stand by itself. But I am being too picky? Do you think that this would be a good statement of the gospel?