• Resolution 27. Resolved, to labor, while I remain on earth, to one end: the communication of the gospel to an unreached people, encoded in scripture and through culture.
• Near > Far. Laboring up close to reach the unreached is better than laboring at a distance.
• Men > Money. Laboring to win souls is better than laboring to raise money to win souls.
• Warfront > waiting. Attacking the universal need is the best action in the absence of specific assignment.
• Pull > Push. Personally going to an unreached people group is the best first step toward mobilization.
  
  Near > Far
  Physical location matters for three reasons.
  First, physical location affects the spiritual realm. Let us think in terms of war, for we are indeed at war with the Enemy. Where is the front line of the war for the Kingdom of God if not with the unreached people groups of the world? In lands without the gospel there is unbroken darkness that feeds the most souls to hell and causes them to suffer under long-established strongholds. There the army of God must guard less and actively engage more, taking new territory, bloodying its sword more frequently. The unreached lands call the most for the violent to take the kingdom of heaven by force. Now spiritual warfare is best conducted by physically being present, because physical areas have significance in the spiritual realm, and our physical presence has weight—that’s why we prayer walk. Therefore to engage the enemy in the physical area where he is most concentrated is the best way to wage war against him.

Second, physical location is a major component of the action that brings faith to life. Consider two men who prayed for it to rain gold on a mountaintop. The one who really believes God will answer his prayer will take a sack and go to the mountaintop to wait. He will go to the place where he will best be able to work in accordance with the act of God, when God acts. In the same way, if I deeply want the unreached to be reached and I pray for them to be reached, I will change my location in accord with my prayer, that I might better experience (and even contribute to) the working of its completion.

Third, there is a certain common sense to relocating to lucrative areas. Consider that unemployed people of many countries will immigrate to America in order to find jobs, even if they have no job lined up or waiting for them when they arrive. Why is this? Because they know that it is simply more likely that they will find a job in the States than in their home country. Why do we in the business of harvesting souls not use the same common sense, if I want to win souls as much as foreigners want to make money? There is money to be had in their countries, but they are pursuing greater wealth. There are souls to be won in the United States, but I will pursue the greater impact.

Men > Money
Clearly, financial contributors and senders are crucial to church planting and church growing. However, the issue at hand is how to bring the greatest possible increase. I assert that more good can be done through causing men to join the Kingdom than by gathering material resources or support (including money) for the Kingdom. The souls of men are the substance by which the Kingdom grows, and for this reason ought to be the focus of my efforts.

In the Bible we see that “men are God’s method.” They are the substance of the kingdom. Christ said, “Seek first the kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things shall be added unto you as well.” “All these things” speaks of material, but His kingdom is “not of this world.” Souls are the only things that are eternal in nature—they are the commodity of the kingdom. Christ also said, “ask the Lord of the harvest to send out workers into the harvest.” He did not say that plowshares or pruning hooks were few, but workers. It is the sweat of men that is emphasized as the way to advance the kingdom. Also, if we consider the greatness of the Kingdom in terms of the building a Royal Palace for the Lord on earth, we ought to remember that “He does not dwell in a house built with hands,” but he will “put My Spirit in your hearts.”

Thinking pragmatically, men are also the greatest asset to the Kingdom. Consider missionary mobilization as an example. One method of raising money is to work a secular job and donate many of the proceeds to missions. However, my likely income as a worker in the United States will be less than $85,000, whereas the total expendable income of evangelicals in the United States is $850 billion, less than 1% of which they currently give to missions. Appealing to the Church to give out of this large, untapped surplus will most likely raise more money than one secular job could. I can raise even more money by producing individuals each of whom will seek out his own support. An army of missionaries each asking God to provide sending monies will probably be more effective than one voice seeking the same. Therefore multiplying the men of the Kingdom is the most logical way of its advancement.

What this means is that I must trust God for material support and labor to win souls, instead of laboring for material support and trusting God to win souls. “But money is necessary!” – you see I do not deny that; I only say that men are more crucial, ought to therefore be the center of the mark. If there are no swords in the land, blacksmiths are more important than steel, for steel can be found more easily than the skill to craft it into a weapon. If there are blacksmiths, the people can scour the land for bits of steel; but what good is steel if there are no blacksmiths? How about in farming? If materials are the fertilizer, men are the very crops.
Therefore recruiting souls is more important than raising any material support by which to recruit souls, and thus ought to receive my focus.

Warfront > Waiting

First, I should note that the Church is synonymous with the Kingdom in this present age. God has willed that, during this age before Christ himself returns and fully establishes His Kingdom, that it be solely embodied in the Church. So the extent of the life of the Body is now directly proportionate to the his Kingdom. I can more precisely say that “my mission is the growth of the Church.”

Scripture tells us that the Church has many members with different roles, and that each must serve in his specialized role for the best overall the function—even if certain roles appear less important than others. “For as his share is who goes down to the battle, so shall his share be who stays by the baggage” (1 Samuel 30:24). “If there were all one member, than where would the Body be?” (1 Corinthians 12:19). The economists of the 1700’s confirmed this truth when they learned that in factories, productivity is maximized through the specialization of roles. To use the wartime paradigm, the Church is analogous to modern army with communications specialists, medics, helicopter pilots, computer analysts, and footsoldiers; it is less similar to an ancient army consisting of only footsoldiers. Therefore the way in which I can personally bring the most benefit to the Kingdom may not be the same as the universal priority. It is possible to bring the greatest advancement of the gospel to unreached peoples by serving according to a specialized capability to meet a lesser need, rather than serving with less capability toward meeting the greatest need. To use the wartime paradigm: Say that while on the way to the front line of the battle, I see a wounded soldier with dire and immediate need for medical care. If I have medical skill and if I am filled with a compulsion to stop and help, then I am justified in stopping my advancement to the front line.

However, only God can assign me a specific role in the Church. Any appointment outside the general priority must come only from the one who blew the original trumpet (one one who outranks him—but there is none). To deviate my course myself by saying, “I am not suited for that” is to doubt the dimensions of Christ’s inheritance in the saints. Has God revealed his will to me, or do I merely find this role easier than that one? If this is the basis of my conclusion, it is the faulty assumption that God values my pleasure above his glory. Will I not venture outside the temple because I know from God that I am in the place he has appointed for me to best serve the Kingdom, or because I do not know where that place is, but I would rather not soil my white priestly robes in the meantime? Self-evaluation of what I consider to be “for me” or “not for me” is insufficient to alter the general command—it must be from God, not from myself. “The son can do nothing of himself, unless it is something he sees the father doing” (John 5:19). In fact, whether it is self, other humans, or spirits, nothing in the earthly realm has sufficient authority to alter the command, except God, who issued it.

This assignment must be through special revelation from God (which can take many forms). If the present nature of my abilities (such as spiritual gifts) inhibits me from contributing to any part of the general process, then this would be an obvious means of the Spirit communicating what my assignment is (or is not). “The pen is mightier than the sword” –but if God has given me a pen, a little common sense tells me not to try to wield it on the battlefield! God may also, seemingly arbitrarily, speak to me through his Word, through prayer, through other believers, through visions, or through any other means, to deliver his commission; but whatever may be the medium by which I perceive the inclination to “deviate,” I must ascertain that it is God’s command. I do not undertake here to explain how to discern God’s intentions; I assume that it will be certain when the Spirit has indeed communicated it, for “my sheep hear my voice.” Therefore if I diverge from the road to the “front lines,” it must be due to a clearly revealed understanding of that intention.

To the extent that God’s revelation does not overrule the universal priority, I remain bound to that priority. If I have no revelation—if I cannot tell whether the greater need in “A” is weightier than my unique skill at meeting the need of “B”—if my gifts and abilities are not so directed as to point me apparently toward an exclusive method of growing the church or deny to me another— then the most responsible course of action is to go for the method I know to be the most generally effective. There are several reasons for this. In the absence of revelation there is nothing between me and Resolution 27 and must push for the “greatest possible.” (Has he said, “Be a medic in a hospital in the United States,” or just, “Be a medic”? Unless God clarifies I must be a medic for the sickest people with the least medical care.)

Furthermore, any niche through which I can further accomplish Resolution 27 is found through (1) seeing a need and (2) being convicted about it (remember the medic analogy)—and both of these come fastest through obedience to the general rule. First, my exposure to more desperate and immediate needs is likely to increase as I go to the area of greatest overall need, the specific conviction of the Spirit will be more likely. Second, revelation (conviction from the Spirit) usually follows obedience, according to the pattern of scripture. “But get up and enter the city, and it will be told you what you must do” (Acts 9:6). “He who has my commandments and keeps them is the one who loves me; and he who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I will love him and will disclose myself to him” (John 14:21).

So then, however much of the general command has not been cancelled by revelation still applies to me, and I must run to the warfront with all of my might.

Pull > Push
Just like it is better to write by pulling the pencil than by pushing it, it is better to “bring” someone to the mission field than to “send” them.

First, I ought to be very careful with the idea that I am exempt from the thing I am calling others to join. It seems like it would be easy to fall into self-righteous hypocrisy if my work day in and day out was “go forth,” while I had never been myself. I would acknowledge that in some cases mobilizing without going is possible (the Student Volunteer Movement has some examples). This does not seem to be normal, though. Personally going to the mission field is in some sense winning the right to mobilize others later on. It is the seed from which mobilization most naturally flowers.

Also, eyewitness accounts are more persuasive than any other kind of source. Vivid details of the lost, pictures freshly captured, will move hearts to answer specific needs more than the general “ought to” that already hangs thick in our society. Eyewitness accounts are also more informed, able to direct funds and volunteers toward the most crucial spots, in the right timing.

Finally, finding new needs is a better work than focusing on current supplies, because it takes more faith. We are to attempt to meet the needs and trust God to provide as we stretch beyond our apparent ability. To pull back and say, “Let’s just work on what we have” smells dangerously like self-trust, and supposes God’s ability to be limited. God wants radical faith that jumps and trusts Him to chase us and catch us in the nick of time. I want the faith of George Mueller who opened the orphanage and let God provide day by day, rather than wait for God to provide before he began. To pull others behind me as I plunge into the lost areas without secured support requires more trust than to wait until everything is lined up, then push the people into the area from behind. It is good to see how the funds and people are possible, but “blessed are those who believe without seeing.”

So those are my reasons,
and I will go
until the Lord directs me
otherwise.