Let me be clear concerning the belief I hold. I believe the Great Commission Resurgence (GCR) Task Force is working with the best intent. They are missions-minded. Each of them can give statistics to prove their hard work and great results.
Though we share the goal of getting the gospel to the ends of the earth, we hold different opinions in relation to the best way to improve our stewardship as a convention.
As I see it, we already embrace the thoughts and vision presented in component one of the task force’s progress report (see Acts 1:8). The responsibility to take the gospel to the ends of the earth is already our task set forth by Christ Himself. That is the case with or without a GCR.
Changing the structure of the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC) and how it funds this task will still not change the heart of SBC church members.
Reinventing the North American Mission Board is a lofty and worthy goal but not at the expense of souls in the rural areas of North America.
Focusing on areas through a population gauge as the body of Christ is just wrong. Jesus left the multitudes to minister to the individuals, not the stereotype or the cultural curve.
Jesus said if one sheep leave, He would leave the 90 and nine to retrieve the one. Of course, it will cost more to take the gospel to a man in rural Alabama than it will to share with 100 residents in a metro high-rise. Good stewardship does not mean neglect the one to go to the 100.
Let me end by saying if there were only one point I could disagree with in the GCR report, it is component two.
Anytime it is suggested we should leave the one to go to the 100 I am appalled.
If this one point doesn’t cause you to question the motives of the GCR Task Force, it should.
Brett Clements
Centre, Ala.
Share with others: