First, a disclaimer – this is not political commentary, and I am normally against using military terminology to speak of our mission as followers of Jesus Christ. I understand that the Bible uses some military illustrations, and that is fine in the context of using daily reality to communicate and illustrate truth to believers. However, given the centuries of wars in the name of religion, we need to be careful in our word choice. To speak of crusades, campaigns, coalitions, targeting peoples and nations and even the phrase “spiritual warfare” can be intimidating and threatening to people who have been victimized and plundered by unwise, greedy and arrogant people who claim to be Christians.

This post may not interest some regular readers. I would, though, welcome input from you missiological types or anyone else.

Several phrases and ideas  often tossed out in the political arena when discussing US involvement in military actions around the world, especially since September of 2001, cause me to ponder their application for God’s mission in this world. I believe we can learn from anyone and anything, even if it’s only what not to do. The following is offered in that spirit.

Boots on the ground – As American air power unloads shock and awe, military experts constantly admonish that wars cannot be won without boots on the ground no matter how impressive and powerful today’s technological weapons may be. However, the number of boots on the ground can be greatly reduced by air power and other modern weaponry.  The world has changed. Even though there is still no replacement for the deployment of troops at some point to complete strategic objectives, far less numbers are needed in today’s world.

Human contact will certainly never be replaced as the primary means of communicating the love of God. But, does technology and mature strategic thinking allow us to send a few strategic and specially gifted people and teams rather than simply sending as many as possible without much thought to strategic partnerships and the creative use of gifts and abilities? It seems to me that we have sometimes felt the answer to every situation is simply to send as many missionaries as possible – boots on the ground. Given political and cultural realities, is that really the answer in the context of today’s world?

The mission is to make disciples of Jesus Christ, and the result is the establishment of indigenous assemblies of believers.  Can we work faster, more efficiently and effectively by partnering with indigenous workers or those from near cultures? Sending long term missionaries from Europe and North America is becoming more expensive and less effective in many cases. Do all the “boots” have to be Western or Northern?

Accurate Intelligence – I have no idea whether or not weapons of mass destruction existed in Hussein’s domain, but I do think we can learn from the debate.  Perhaps the debate could have been avoided by having hard, cold evidence open to examination. I understand security concerns, but if the evidence is there take key people behind closed doors and show them.  Would the existence or confirmed absence of such evidence have altered the US strategy? Could an occupation be avoided by alternate strategies and methods?

We can often do a better job of collecting solid information before we commit to send mass numbers of expat missionaries to a particular people and investing massive amounts of resources.  Too many missionaries remain blissfully ignorant of the very people and cultures they profess to love and with whom they desire to share God’s love.  Lack of study often dooms us to commit the past errors and promote more misunderstanding that understanding.  Read, observe and talk with other groups and missions. We aren’t enemies or even in competition for crying out loud! We even need to love and talk with people who don’t share our faith but do share a love for the people and culture where God has led us. It’s pure arrogance to think we cannot learn from people who do not share our faith. A learner’s spirit can even open doors to share our faith.

Accurate intelligence does not come from people who have been on a two week short term mission and now speak as experts on a particular people or culture. Or from missionaries who make a friend in a local culture that becomes their sole expert and source of information.  Only trust information that can be independently confirmed by multiple sources. Could this be what happened to those claims of weapons of mass destruction?

Exit strategy – How many times has criticism been leveled at administration planners for a flawed or failed exit strategy? Any biblical approach to making disciples should by nature of the task include an exit strategy. Unfortunately, there are many places in the world where expat missionaries have been present for generations, and local believers and churches are still dependent upon outside resources with no real plan for withdrawal of missionaries.

Rebuilding society – A great challenge for occupying powers is to assist the occupied people in rebuilding and/or restructuring society. The US has learned that boots on the ground and huge infusion of economic and other forms of aid do not necessarily win the hearts and minds of the occupied.  Other questions are challenging. For example, is it really the role of the US to establish a US style democracy in the rest of the world?

Great Commission questions are similar. Our responsibility is not to import our culture, but to deliver the Gospel, disciple, equip, and coach the transformed lives of those who put their faith in Christ. Any changes in culture will take place through the engagement of the transformed within their own society and not necessarily through foreign influences and pressures.

From the beginning missionaries should have a clear idea of roles, functions and how to establish biblical relationships to win the hearts and minds of those to whom they minister. When we fail to think strategically, fail to gather and heed reliable information before we engage, fail to have an effective and realistic exit strategy, missionaries risk getting mired down in ineffective ministry while pouring massive amount of money and other resources into a resulting church that is not genuinely indigenous and is instead increasingly resentful and seen as foreign and cultish by the local population.