Jun 26, 2009
Saying every Christian is a missionary can be downright offensive.
Telling missionaries to India, for instance, that I’m also a missionary is like telling bereft parents I relate because my dog died.
Subscribe to 22 Words
Recent Comments
- Will on How to become a wine expert and other advice for inexperienced wine lovers
- Stephen May on It’s not a slide, it’s a proto-steampunk ghetto park bench for one.
- Stephen May on Who or whom? A clear, simple answer from a professional grammarian
- Stephen May on Elitists in Minnesota town Lino Lakes approve English-only resolution
- Will Adair on How to become a wine expert and other advice for inexperienced wine lovers
Sponsors
Categories
- Arts in General (24)
- Bible (66)
- Blogging (153)
- Brevity (25)
- Constructive Criticism (268)
- Faith (210)
- Food & Drink (54)
- Language (214)
- Literature (104)
- Love (86)
- Miscellanea (286)
- Movies (14)
- Music (155)
- parenting (153)
- Personal (182)
- Questions (255)
- Quotes (41)
- Recommendations (129)
- Sports (8)
- Uncategorized (8)
- Visual Art (27)
- Writing (56)
Archives
- July 2010 (107)
- June 2010 (79)
- May 2010 (89)
- April 2010 (62)
- March 2010 (21)
- February 2010 (25)
- January 2010 (32)
- December 2009 (47)
- November 2009 (63)
- October 2009 (45)
- September 2009 (40)
- August 2009 (40)
- July 2009 (40)
- June 2009 (37)
- May 2009 (47)
- April 2009 (51)
- March 2009 (40)
- February 2009 (31)
- January 2009 (44)
- December 2008 (47)
- November 2008 (54)
- October 2008 (50)
- September 2008 (41)
- August 2008 (45)
- July 2008 (51)
- June 2008 (51)
- May 2008 (66)
- April 2008 (74)
- March 2008 (71)
- February 2008 (19)
Reader Recommendations
Some of the books and music that you, the readers, have recommended here over time:
Twitter Recommendations
Theme based on Derek Punsalan's Grid Focus.
That’s probably because there is suffering for missionaries in India when there is little to no suffering for “missionaries” in America. Are we willing to suffer for the Gospel? Don’t waste our lives?
I’ve heard it said (but can’t remember who by): when everyone is a missionary, no one is.
There is a “going” to missions. And I don’t mean going across the street.
(Not that I’m minimizing going across the street to share the Gospel, I just wouldn’t call that being a missionary, but an evangelist).
So, how far down the chain of Acts 1:8 do you have to go before you become a missionary? Jerusalem isn’t apparently…, Judea — is that far enough?, what about Samaria? Must one go to the ends of the earth to be a missionary…I’m not trying to be difficult…just wanting to know how you would defend your assertion biblically.
“Missionary” is not a Biblical word, hence making it difficult to defend Biblically.
One can, however, defend it from a Missiologic point of view.
Probably the easiest thing to say is, “If you have to learn another language to talk about God, then you are a missionary”.
I would recommend taking the Perspectives Course for a helpful overview of “People Group”, “Unreached People Group” and many other helpful ways to think about how we are to approach this multi cultural world.
excellent insight.
I’m with Brian (both in his content and in not trying to be difficult).
Maybe “missionary” is a term that needs a revamp–or maybe a replacement: maybe “church planter” or such? In other words, maybe we need more specificity, so that those who remain in their own cultures realize they have a responsibility to be missionaries.
so I guess the questions begs, what is more difficult sharing the gospel to a people who have never heard and are longing for it or sharing it to those who think they know and have ignored it? Or are they both equally difficult and just different?
It’s kind of like calling losing a beauty pageant because of your opposition to gay marriage persecution.
Well said!!
Wow, Lee (and MK), I’m glad to see that being mocked for weeks on pretty much every channel, magazine, and newspaper for standing up for Biblical Truth isn’t persecution. I’m sure that you have had to face more persecution than that. Way to stand up for your sister in Christ.
Well said Garrett.
Let us love and stand behind those persecuted for righteousness sake. One need not have a murder attempt to be persecuted.
Matthew 5:10
“Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness’ sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
Matthew 5:12
Rejoice and be glad, for your reward is great in heaven, for so they persecuted the prophets who were before you.
Brian and Laura raise an interesting point. Does missionary work include sending high school kids to a third world country to build a school, or should it be restricted to the primary goal of preaching the gospel?
No.
If you don’t learn another language, you probably are not a missionary.
I thought there was some deal about crossing cultures too. SO when one of the lovely ladies who sent her kids to private school goes down to a mission to teach new teenage moms how to play with their babies, and shop for groceries and cook, isn’t that a cross cultural ministry, being empathic and trying to understand street culture…
Lowell,
I have to say that learning another language is a ridiculous way to determine whether or not one is “probably a missionary”. My father has spent 30 years (just in my lifetime) visiting other countries such as: Papa New Guinea, Russia, Zambia, Australia, Lithuania, Brazil, etc. to teach people about God, and (as a native Texan) he has yet to learn any language other than English. Or what about those who learn Spanish to teach God’s Word to their next door neighbor here in the States? If you are willing to go anywhere God needs you to, He will provide a way for His words to be taught, regardless of any language barrier or the geographic location. All we have to do is be willing to talk to others about Him. Thanks.
so, you’re saying that just because I was born in Mexico, moved here at 15 and because I speak the language fluently, if I decide to go to Mexico to do God’s work, I would not be doing missionary work? That seems a rather limiting definition. You don’t have to learn a new language. In addition. Having to suffer and be persecuted is not a definition to the word missionary. True, I wouldn’t call the life of an India missionary and ours the same since he/she faces more persecution due to the place and culture he/she lives in. Nevertheless, our basic purpose and end goal is the same, namely to reach those who are lost with respect to God, whether they be lost because they’d never heard of Him or because they’d chosen to not hear Him anymore.
This is good…straight to the point
The term “missionary” isn’t in the Bible. “Christian” is. There are Christians who go and Christians who stay. One isn’t better than the other. We were all promised tribulation in this world.
Also, the one who is offended that we can legitimately call ourselves missionaries may need to read 1 Cor. 13 and not be so easily offended. Christians should give each other the benefit of the doubt and take what each other say in the best possible way and not be critical.
Best answer I’ve read so far!
of course we have to be critical. This is the point of this blog. What we have to be is critical with love. We must respect each other’s opinions and respond, sometimes in complete opposition, with love. What’s the point of having a discussion if we are afraid to be critical of each other’s argument. We’d get no where.
If it is the “suffering” factor:
Is there a significant difference also in the definition of a Christian?
If missionaries are to a greater degree missionaries if they suffer “martyr”-type sufferings…are Christians also to a greater degree Christian by the same token?
I know this isn’t what was said. It’s just the first question that came to mind in the context of the criteria of “suffering”.
It seems that any believing missionary who feels personal affront on such grounds, might need to do some evaluating of the motives of their service, and even, perhaps, of the source of their perseverance…
Responses are welcome.
I understand that missionary can be a term that means crossing culture, but what all do you define as “crossing culture”? Another question to ponder: Is a missionary more than someone who is sent and is on mission with God? Maybe we should preserve the term “missionary” for crossing a certain “e” level of culture and say that the rest of everyone who is sent or is on mission with God is just “missional.” This certainly should be considered more. We should think of this more before saying that a person who views themselves as sent to a culture (but is not the same as someone suffering more in another place) is not a missionary. For instance: Because I have 1 or 2 well behaved kids, am I not as much a parent as someone who has 5 kids who are more difficult to manage? Or is it simply a matter of my parenting being less taxing than theirs? Definitions certainly need to be clear no doubt. I do definitely respect the problem of calling a church-attender a missionary. This can be helpful when we communicate to people and lead.
Can we say this: “God has called ever believer to a specific location and vocation to do ministry, whether that is 5 miles away or 5000″? None of us is truly at home until we see the kingdom.
It is amazing, though, that God has “called” so many people to stay within the 5 miles, while billions of people are within the 5000 never having heard the name of His beloved Son.
Usually the goal of this usage is to raise the sights of the home stayers by giving them a highly respected model and a vision for the need across the street.
If you’re saying that a missionary to Uzbekistan or Mozambique would be offended by the comparison, than perhaps there’s a problem with their sense of call and standing with the Lord. Mature Christians understand and embrace the fact that they are models for others.
We are all on mission with different assignments and different levels of faithfulness to our assignments.
I think the reason people say “every Christian is a missionary” is to emphasize the fact that we are all supposed to be sharing the Gospel no matter what context we’re in. But I can understand too how a universal application of that term could be offensive to people who are sacrificing so much to be literal missionaries.
I see where you are going with this post – I understand your point. I must disagree with you, however.
Is baseball player any less of an athlete than a football player simply because his sport is less violent and his body suffers less?
Further, what would happen if baseball players accepted the fact that they are not athletes? They would stop acting like athletes. They would stop training like athletes. Their skills would deteriorate. Major League Baseball would be destroyed.
All Christians should consider themselves missionaries, regardless of how much suffering they experience, regardless of their circumstances.
I am a missionary to India and whenever I report back to our supporting churches or invited to speak to other congregations I emphasize the very thing that you denounce here. I want to help them see that they are missionaries too and that their “mission field” is where God has placed them (their home, neighborhood, workplace, city, etc). Otherwise, you end up advocating a Christian version of “special forces” through whom God carries out His mission, while Christian “civilians” sit around and sing their praises.
Great response! This is it exactly!
I’d be a bit bummed to meet a missionary who’d have a chip on his shoulder about American Christians who live “at home” calling themselves missionaries.
And why would you tell another missionary that you’re a missionary, too? If you’re a Christian, shouldn’t that go without saying?
In the end, if either party has pride about being a “missionary” (or any other title, for that matter), he’s missed the point and should repent.
I believe this is a fairly correct quote from C.H. Spurgeon: A Christian is either a missionary or an impostor.
First: I am a “Missionary” in Mongolia … However, we don’t refer to ourselves with that term here for a variety of reasons. We are “International Development Workers” … or something along that line.
Second: Every Christian should be a part of the Acts 1:8 process of spreading the Gospel to the world.
Third: In my 13 years in the pastorate, I used to be one of those people who quoted Spurgeon in calling every person a missionary.
Fourth: Not wanting to have a chip on my shoulder at all, I don’t quote Spurgeon on that one anymore because learning and crossing into a culture and a language that is pretty much the opposite (in SO many ways) of my own culture and language is WAY different than getting into “Bar Culture” or “Biker Culture”.
Fifth: People need to cross into “Bar culture” and “Biker Culture” with the Gospel and should be encouraged by that.
Sixth: Ralph Winter/USCWM’s “E-Scale” is incredibly helpful in understanding the different ways we are supposed to cross different cultures with the Gospel.
I will stop here, lest you think I’m going to make 22 points…
I spoke to a guy from Cuba in Philadelphia, a guy from Mexico who only spoke Spanish, an African American who belonged to the “Hebrew Israelite” tribe, a man who spoke Punjabi from India, and said hello in Chinese to a few people while handing them a gospel tract in Mandarin. The situation here is different from foreign missions in many ways, but in others they have come to us.
I laughed at this one – even though I’m a missionary to France rather than India.
The distinction between missionary and evangelist should not be made on grounds of offense or pride. It should be made so the church can effectively do what it is supposed to do.
When the distinction isn’t made, you end up with churches like mine, which say, “Why should we pay to send you to the middle east when there are people who don’t know Christ walking down the street outside?”
Wow, I would hope that the missionary to India would not be so prideful in his/her calling, that he/she would react in such a way as to be offended.
I’ve been involved in cross-cultural ministry in two developing countries. Some people think I sacrificed a lot by going to “difficult” places, but I know how to thrive without a lot of creature comforts and can honestly say I enjoyed many aspects of the simpler life.
Perhaps the bottom line is there is no better place for me to live than exactly where God leads me.
Being on the topic of constructive criticism, I think you have sacrificed clarity for brevity. I think you need to define missionary. (If you have make the word missionary a hyperlink to it.)
I am going to assume you mean the statement made tritely. In this case I think your analogy is too weak. For those who claim to be able to relate to vocational missionaries because “ALL” Christians are “missionaries,” that is like saying I know what God feels like being my Father because I am a Father.
With that assumption it is sickening to even pretend to make the statement. Vocational missionaries are in a place of honor because they are called to be vessels used for great honor. They have to go through circumstance that are not desirable to give the gift that is most to be desired.
Thus if what you meant was for us to show great honor to every missionary and to minister to them by compassion not comparison, then I give a hearty AMEN! (Even think you could fit that statement into 22 words.) ;)
Desiring God to Continue His Work Through You,
Matt
Obviously, you most excellently touched the proverbial nerve here, Abraham Christian. Funny that after hundreds of years of Missionary implying crossing bridges of language and culture and evangelism referring to telling co-workers and neighbors the gospel, we now don’t want to talk about evangelism and we don’t want to give to those reaching the unreached peoples, so instead we say “Everybody’s a missionary.”
I certainly don’t want to misrepresent your statement here, but are you implying that people say “Everyone’s a missionary” because we don’t want to give to “real” missionaries?
I find this statement to be terribly offensive, as you have managed to label many who have participated in this forum. You have made an accusation of deceit and you have no idea how much I (or anyone else here, for that matter) give to those who are reaching the unreached.
adam,
if i read dana correctly, it’s that some (perhaps many) people who use that statement do so for greedy or lazy purposes, not that all people who use that statement say so for ill motives. i think most of us agree, that our indwelling sin often uses such truths (“every Christian is a missionary”, in the sense that we are all to be on mission) to avoid what we are called to (labor, sacrifice, etc.).
Amen, Abraham. A true word has been spoken.
Saying it doesn’t make it true. We SHOULD live as missionaries.
I agree with you Abraham.
I don’t have a problem with saying we’re all missionaries, so long as we come up with another word for Christians who cross cultures to take the gospel overseas. Otherwise ‘missionary’ becomes so all-encompassing, it doesn’t really mean anything anymore (or just becomes a synonym for Christian or evangelist).
The issue is not whether all Christians should be seeking to reach our communities with the gospel. We’re probably mostly agreed on that. The question is, should we have a different name for those who go and cross cultures to do that? I think so. Not because those who go are better than those who stay, but just because having a word for those who go helps in communication.
I don’t think Abraham’s point here is that the missionary to India (or wherever) would necessarily be offended by someone telling them that ‘everyone is a missionary’. I think it’s more about our own attitude in saying that: Are we recognising and respecting that being a cross-cultural missionary takes a lot more sacrifice and adjustment than just going across the street to share the gospel with a neighbour?
I know witnessing in our own culture takes sacrifices too – but it’s more about sacrificing our pride or anxiety what people will think about us (at least it’s for me, especially in a media culture that is growing increasingly hostile against Christians and spreading prejudices against ‘dangerous evangelical fundamentalists’).
I am a missionary candidate, and thinking about leaving friends and family and a church that has, on the whole, not proven to be very good at staying in touch with its missionaries once they’re gone is not exactly a piece of cake – and that’s even without taking into account the whole support raising and culture adjustment thing.
I’m not complaining or trying to be admired for these sacrifices. I know they’re part of God’s plan for me, and that’s okay. I also know that others have sacrificed a lot more for Christ than I probably will in all my life.
The point I’m trying to make is just that there really is a difference between being a missionary at home (perhaps the word ‘missional’ really is an alternative here, I don’t know) and abroad.
I might be able to say even more on that subject, but this is a very long comment already (I console myself with the fact that as I am such a rare commenter, I save up my allotment of words…).
And, hey, at least I used paragraph breaks ;-)
Dear Abraham,
Why?
Sincerely,
Seth
If we think of a missionary as someone who takes the Gospel to people who are in a different culture–and from many people’s perspective a difficult culture, then you might be right.
But if it means someone who takes the Gospel to anyone who is not a Christian, then I don’t think there is a problem.
Matthew 28:18-20 does not seem to make a distinction.
Those who are living in affluent American suburbs without Jesus face the same eternal suffering as those who live in poverty here and elsewhere.
Not to sound too harsh on the issue, but they can get over themselves. There either is a priesthood of all believers or there isn’t. Some are doing harder work than others, but the same essential work should be done
I think that being “churched” has drawn a line between how we label this person and this gifting and that person and that gifting, and instead of realizing that the duty of all believers is to fulfill the great commission, we polarize those who go further from those who stay. So, I ask this, if you live where I do, and go to Dearborn to preach the Gospel to the Muslims, which is only 20 minutes from me, is that disqualify me from being a missionary because it’s only around the corner?
I mean, you will face persecution, been there, you will need to know another language in most cases, been there, and you do need to become familiar with a foreign culture, been there..
So when do you crossover from being a Christian fulfilling the great commission to a missionary in need of support from the Baptist Missions Board of America? Or, do you just go…
Also, I think the original post is assuming a conversation has taken place. One person has said something like, “Yeah, I know what it’s like; I’m a missionary, too.”
Yet missionaries in different parts of the world really don’t know what it’s like for those in other parts of the world, especially when the cultures are very different. And it would certainly be wrong to act as if those of us in America know what it’s like to serve in Rwanda…
I appreciated your post, Abraham. My husband and I were missionaries in Siberia and like “Bernie,” we used to say to people that they can be missionaries wherever they are. We said that when we were raising support and even half way through our term. Having completed our term, I wouldn’t say that anymore.
People can argue semantics and question my motives if they want, but there is a huge difference between sharing Christ here at home and moving to another country and culture to do it. Both are so necessary, but I think it is essential to understand the difference. Missionaries need a certain kind of support and “back-up” that they don’t receive when people don’t understand the kind of challenges that being a missionary entails.
I’ll give you an example: when we were overseas, a good friend sent me English magazines and, as simple as it sounds, this was a huge blessing to me – to have something to read in my own heart language and to know that someone on the other side of the world remembered us. One day she sent me an email and told me that she wouldn’t be able to send me magazines anymore because the postage cost too much. Two weeks later, she wrote me and told me about the U.S. soldier her family had “adopted” and would be sending care packages to. I’m glad that soldier was blessed by their care packages, but I remember thinking that my friend completely missed the fact that we were soldiers too, just in a different war.
I have to admit, the grief element in your analogy (bereft parents vs. losing your dog) really hit home for me too. The most common reaction we get when people find out we were missionaries is, “Wow, that must have been so exciting.” I appreciate people’s interest and know they are just making conversation, but imagine saying that to a soldier just returning from Iraq. I realize the soldier/missionary analogy breaks down at a certain point, but it’s still close. I’m thankful for the ground we gained and the victories won, but we came home feeling more wounded than we did victorious, and I know we’re not the only missionaries to feel that way. Maybe that’s not right, but it’s true nonetheless, and I think churches and Christians need to know that.
I resonate with you one hundred percent. As an adult who grew up on the mission field, it is not so much the “lumping” of all mission work together that hurts as much as the belittling of the pain that you personally experience on the mission field.
All Christians are missionaries in the sense that all Christians are members of the body of Christ, who is on mission.
I send money to a missionary in India and I don’t go myself. We are partners in ministry. God has blessed me to live in a country where (for now) money is easier to come by, I have a bigger discretionary income than most people in the world, and where the biggest deterrent from the gospel being preached is not money.
My battle is hard. The Indian may be killed for his faith, but I have to fight apathy, worldliness, and temptation in unique ways too.
It is different, I know, but there is no tier system to being a missionary based on how much you sacrifice.
I haven’t read all the comments so forgive me if someone else has alread said this but: as a missionary (to a country that has had the Gospel but now rejects it and one that I have to learn a new language to communicate in) on deputaion I have found that many people use the words “I am a missionary to my neighbor” as an excuse to not support those who are sacrificing so much to GO.
It’s like saying I’m a pastor because I preach the gospel … to myself and my family, I’m a bartender b/c I mix drinks for my friends, and I’m a graphic designer because I like to layout pictures and text on flyers for my church.
Missionaries cross cultures and do it full time (through financial support of others). If you give money to “missionaries” in India — you’re a supporter, mobilizer, partner — not a missionary.
For clarity:
It’s not about sacrifice.
I haven’t sacrificed anything, really – at least in my mind. I would agree with those who say that there should be no distinction based on sacrifice. If we’re all being obedient to God, sacrifice is not the point. I would have a problem if we all went around like so many soldiers boasting about our scars. That makes it all about the wrong person.
However, I do agree with the notion that if a word (i.e., missionary) takes on an incredibly broad definition (i.e., every Christian) it becomes a very unhelpful word, to say the very least. A word that means everything, can end up meaning nothing.
Crossing the cultural barriers that comes with entering into another language, ideology, world view and religious perspective that is radically different from your own is NOT the same as crossing ideologies that are very similar to your own.
One is not better than the other. Some are called to one over the other. We’re all called to live “missionally” in that sense. We’re NOT all called to be “Missionaries” in the cross-cultural sense of the New Testament idea of Apostle. In that sense it’s NOT the same, it’s most literally worlds apart.
The word missionary isn’t in the Bible anyway, for what it’s worth…
Also, I am in no wise offended by those who have a more universal, Spurgeon-esque understanding of the word “Missionary”. I’m just a fan of clear vocabulary.
Bernie
So now we learn there IS a group of people who get offended if someone else says, “All Christians are missionaries”?
There is something off the bubble with that.
Such an offended one needs bigger life problems than they apparently have.
I can see disagreeing about the semantics, but offended? Makes me want to have a pointless argument about prevenient grace. (Not)
“MIssionary” isn’t a biblical word. Paul was an Apostle, and yet didn’t speak to everyone in other languages. All Christians should be suffering persecution, so that wasn’t it either.
Pretty much, we are all called to work towards the Great Commission. If you live in Africa, and are so concerned about me referring to myself as a Christian, you are puffed up with pride and are focusing on yourself, not God.
“Missionary” is the same kind of category as “soldier” or “businessman.” There are many different types. You could say that everyone is a missionary because “missionary” means “sent one” – it implies someone sent on a mission to evangelize. Then you need to further ask: are you a home evangelist, a home cross-cultural worker, or a foreign cross-cultural worker? Those are different variations within the category of “mission”; they are varying levels of challenge.
1. The very worst kind of grief is yours. It is incomparable.
2. Context. Location does not define vocation. (Neither does language learning, nor, by extension culture learning, define what you do with that learning.)
3. Offense. A function of fear-based perception, not of love. Let it go.
23rd word: I would that all accepted their mission from God and sought the healing of his brother’s mind.
Another element that occurred to me was the “professional” vs. the “amateur” nature of the activity. By this I mean, is mission your full-time occupation? Granted we could say that every Christian is a missionary, or that every Christian is or should be an evangelist. But there are some people who do it full-time: it’s their occupation. One problem I’ve found is that if we think everyone is a missionary, then we forget that some people need to make their living as a full-time missionary…!
Yes. That and the fact most people think that a missionary is just a super Gospel share-er and not the highly trained, experienced professional that they are.
Without definition, the word missionary does become problematic. A friend of mine is struggling with the implications of this as interpreting by those deciding the “mission budget” at her sending church.
My friend of mine who works in a strategic support role, based in the States (as I do, myself). She wrote me asking for advice. The church is frustrated that all the people they support who used to live in grass huts in the jungle now work in mission HQs. They don’t want to support administrators, they want to support missionaries.
So now they are going to make finance decisions on the basis of who is accomplishing the most face-to-face on the ground, in evangelism. Whoever is leading the most people to Christ, that’s who they want to support. Problematic?
I totally agree, Abraham. Sometimes 22 words is enough.
EVERYone is a mission and a missionary at various times in their lives as GOD ordains.
As a mobilizer for cross-cultural and international missions, I’ve been thinking about the use of the word “missionary” for a long time. My current thinking – subject to change – is distilled down to about a page in an article entitled “What is a Missionary?,” at http://www.davidmays.org/missionary.html.
I can understand their pain. It comes from having a professional mindset. “Missionary” has become a professional title for many people, which is understandable. Kind of like telling a Preacher that his/her view of scripture is on par with the average lay person. Equating everything with “opinion.”
But, regardless of their professional pride being hurt, the truth is that everyone is a missionary. It would greatly help the Kingdom if everyone viewed themselves as misisonaries.
Who cares what you call it as long as the gospel is being preached.
Apostolos – “sent one,” so if you are sent next door or across the globe to a UPG, as long as Christ is preached, that is what is important. It’s the message that matters…not the title of the one carrying it, especially when the title is one not found in the scriptures.
“Telling missionaries that I’m also a missionary is like telling bereft parents I relate because my dog died.”
True. IF the value of souls here equates to the value of a dog, while souls elsewhere are more valuable.
And how does that work for missionaries FROM India that come to the United States?
(Don’t you love it when you make a post that’s THIS provocative?)
I would revise Tim’s statement by saying that it’s true if the value of *American* souls here equates to the value of a dog. And that may be accurate. ;-)
OK, seriously. Abraham makes a good point. But on the flip side, the missionary from India probably has the right to say “all Christians are missionaries” to you (John Doe American).
I was actually just thinking about the meaning of the word missionary the other day (and wrote about it on my blog). It’s interesting to read what other people think. To me, the word missionary has layers of long-term committment and responsibility that make me hesitate to apply it to myself, despite the fact that I’ve learned another language and will soon be serving cross-culturally.
[...] are missionaries. Consider Abraham Piper’s wonderfully concise post entitled: “Saying every Christian is a missionary can be downright offensive:” Telling missionaries to India, for instance, that I’m also a missionary is like telling [...]