Why I didn’t see the Biblical basis for missions sooner

In my last post, I wrote about my question concerning how premillennialistic beliefs effect missions involvement. Having studied some more, I’ve come to a surprising realization. When I first read John Piper’s book, Let the Nations be Glad, I was stunned to discover a Biblical rationale for missions that went beyond saving souls or simply obeying God (both good, of course). I was stunned to find a way of looking at the Bible that made the Bible seem like it was oozing missions from every verse. The whole Bible testifies to God’s plan to save the nations, yet I’d rarely been presented with anything other than the Great Commission as a rationale for missions, making it seem like an afterthought. My belief in a Bible that was all about God’s desire to redeem the nations was reinforced when I took the Perspectives on the World Christian Movement class a couple years later.

Along with being blown away at how the Biblical text shows that God always intended to redeem some from every people group, I was mystified as to why I had never been taught that before. I had always been taught about the Great Commission and people’s need to hear of God, but I had never had anyone even give me a peak of what now seems like, in the words of Dumbrell, a “theological blueprint for the redemptive history of the world.” Why is it that no one had ever taught me (and I had never seen) that God has always planned to redeem some from every people group? Why aren’t we teaching people that missions is God’s heart and goal? Why is it an afterthought that’s based more on compassion for people than ensuring that God’s purpose in the world is achieved?

My stunning realization now that I’ve studied theological systems a little – I was never given the broader rationale for missions because it doesn’t exist in dispensational theology, and that’s what I’ve been exclusively exposed to in church. Dispensational theology teaches that national, physical Israel is God’s main purpose in history. The Church – and the salvation of the Gentiles, it seems – are a “parenthesis” in God’s plan that only occured because Israel rejected Jesus’ offer of an earthly kingdom, which is currently delayed as a result of their rejection. The Church is a temporary situation between God’s two dealings with national Israel. It seems as if dispensationalists believe that God didn’t always plan for the Church (and the Gentiles) to be a part of the plan of redemption; the Church and salvation of the Gentiles is a mystery (or afterthought) that occured only because of Israel’s rejection of Christ’s supposed offer of a physical Kingdom.

The broader Biblical basis for missions that I’ve come to believe in is, in contrast, influenced by covenant and new covenant theology. Covenant theology (CT) and new covenant theology (NCT) believes that God’s promises to Israel sometimes refer to a physical, national Israel, but sometimes refer to a spiritual Israel. That may not sound like a big deal, but it is. To CT and NCT proponents, Genesis 12:1-3 is a key text that shows how God has always planned to redeem some from all peoples. Abraham (and Old Testament Israel) are seen as a conduit of God’s blessings to all nations, not the only ones who God ever intended to bless (and redeem). Dispensationalists, on the other hand, interpret the passage “literally,” seeing the promise as being unto Abraham’s physical descendants. Accepting that the passage indicates God’s intention to redeem some from every nation undermines dispensational theology, since it shows the salvation of the Gentiles was as much the goal as the blessing of national Israel.

Numerous other Old Testament passages that I’ve come believe speak to God’s plan to redeem the nations have the same problem in dispensational theology – God can’t be revealing a plan to redeem all if that’s never been His intention, if the Church and the Gentiles are a parenthesis and an afterthought. And that is why I (and many, many others) have never been taught the Biblical basis for missions – because it doesn’t exist in somebody’s theological system.