Why we shouldn't set a date to finish the Great Commission

Interesting article..
---
"..building self-sustaining churches led by local Christians
which are not dependent on foreign funds, foreign jargon
and foreign campaign."
- from the article.

Greetings Michie,
Thank you for your valuable thoughts on this. We have had similar discussions and similar conclusions in our own groups, agreed with you above all on the emphasis on moving with caution in regions where missionaries and churches may face persecution, and even more so to make sure the growth of the church in such regions is as organic and indigenously driven as possible. So that it arises naturally and in harmony with the surrounding community, without any trace of being pressed upon from the outside. This in fact has come to define most of our missions in the MENA region. (Middle East and North Africa)

We are largely based in the US and broader North America and Oceania, and generally do not send missionaries or prepare ministries directly from our countries in origin to go to MENA countries. Instead, our most successful and well received missions have been sparked by individuals originally from those countries, who had migrated to Europe but converted to follow the Gospels, and then went back home on their own initiative to found churches. The key difference here, besides of course deep knowledge of the local cultures, languages and customs, is the voluntary nature of the missions in this form, and proceeding at a pace that is natural and organic. Instead of being imposed from the outside, our missionaries in this case, of their own initiative, had moved from for ex. Turkey, Syria, Iraq, Algeria, Tunisia, Lebanon or Afghanistan to European countries, this of course dispels accusations of impositions from the outside since these individuals came to Christian countries in the West on their own.

In their new environments, millions then embrace the love and Good News of the Gospel in Christian lands, converting and leading church movements of their own--coming to us, instead of us going to them--and then again of their own will, return back to their home MENA countries, open churches and preach to the locals. This is a reason why our entire missions efforts in the US have been heavily focussed and re-centered upon the European missions, not only to rebuild and build new churches in Europe (and help to feed the spiritual hunger of esp younger generations returning to the flock). But also because we have a unique, once in a millennium historic opportunity to indirectly, and effectively bring the Gospel to the MENA region in a way we could not do directly ourselves. If we try direct missions ourselves, we are often seen as interlopers from the West due to the complicated history of contact in the region, not to mention all the challenges of language, culture and social relationships there. In Europe, however, when we come from America or Australia to worship and raise our families in EU nations, we are simply returning to the lands and planting roots in the lands of our own ancestors, and there are able to preach and help convert migrants from MENA countries, who are mostly there anyway as temporary refugees or workers heading back home after some years.

We are therefore, simply ministering to them in the native faith of historically Christian countries, removing any indication of cultural imposition on their homelands from the outside. They therefore become emissaries of the faith in their own lands when they return to MENA, connecting to ancient Christian traditions in the MENA region as well but doing so with a sensitivity and awareness of the modern context. They are able to find a "sweet spot" as one of my own fellow ministers has termed it, often syncretic elements of the church and local Muslim traditions but ultimately, still staying true to the Word of the Lord, providing Bibles in the local languages and maintaining their own churches in ways that are in harmony with local customs. And they do at their own pace, and with the full support and communication with the local peoples.

This is a good base principle for our missions anywhere, to proceed organically and with sensitivity, and to help the church plant true roots that in harmony with the community. The Berber Christian growth and revival across North Africa, and the new Syrian and Turkish churches especially have benefitted greatly from this approach. But it is a good guiding system especially in any regions where ministers might face persecution or more to the point, where local countries may feel threatened and recoil at a perceived imposition, as you have well described. Paul himself was well aware of the importance of indigenous missionaries, and in being sensitive to local sentiments and concerns. And thus it is often best to avoid grand announcements or open statements of ambition, and to instead proceed calmly and sensitively. Thank you for raising this important topic.