He was speaking in reference to some unengaged people groups not having any Christians from that people group in existence. I agree. That’s why I made reference to nationals in the “countries” where those unengaged people groups exist.

There are many unengaged people groups in Indonesia. The reality is that Indonesian Christians from other people groups in that country would be much more in tune with the cultures, languages-dialects, and belief systems of those unengaged people groups than people from outside the country. They would be likely be received with more openness by the unengaged people than would foreigners from the west.

But certainly western missionaries could and should partner with the national Christians to emphasize the need to engage those that are unengaged and work with the national Christians to develop a strategy for reaching them. That would be MUCH more effective than the westerners just going in on their own in the initial stages.

God bless.

Additionally, we believe that structural change will win the day and assist in fulfilling the Great Commission. Structures will not change people or cause people to fall in love with the Lord or with the lost. We can adjust structure all we want but when we open the door next Sunday we will still have the same people. The structural change will not cause people to commit to the continuation of the Mission of Christ.

Money and structures become excuses to justify failure and a way to blame God for a failure to go, baptize, teach and make disciples. True leaders work with God to find solutions rather than attack a brother or complain and make excuses for today’s circumstances.

And don’t tell me how unbiblical a process this would be when the IMB itself relies more on secular experts in evaluating the “called-ness” of its missionaries than on the word of the churches that send them prayerfully.

This is all about money from the President of the IMB and their share of it. And as for Frank’s comments, I believe that Paul rebuked Peter for misleading the Gentile Christians in front of the Jewish Christians. There is ample Biblical precedent for rebuking a brother for bearing false witness or otherwise acting in an unBiblical way.

“Tom” is apparently unaware that he is guilty of the very thing he is accusing others of, namely, unsubstantiated hyperbole, making aspersions, judging motives, & slander. Be careful, brother! As a former missionary, I am offended by his unfounded castigations of our agency caring more about protecting “the system” than the Great Commission. If its “about the money,” it is NOT a money grab but a conviction that more evangelicals should share based on the data clarified by Globalmind. How can we know what we know and it not break our hearts and cause us to plead to use our money differently? Two cents of every dollar to reach 95% of the planet?? Please, for whom is it really “all about the money”??

To respond to James Hunt who wonders if the lion’s share of the money is spent on “support structures” rather than field ministries and budgets (great question), the answer is No. As a former trustee of imb, know that 86% of imb money supports the field. Only 14% is used in what you might call overhead, the necessary support structures any organization or business needs (employees, trustees, mobilization materials/efforts, light bills, missionary training, etc.). Compare that with Samaritan’s Purse, your own church, or any other non-profit and you’ll be pleasantly surprised at imb’s efficiency and stewardship. The house is in order. But if its not, rest assured the current leadership would be willing to examine its own house and sacrifice for the sake of the lost.

Rick K’s questions are good. Briefly, the imb does send people in catalytic roles to assist nationals to reach their own. You are right, that is the primary way the task will be accomplished. But the imb is also rightly focusing on the least reached and the unengaged so that EVERY tribe will be represented. Many of those do not yet have national believers who can be trained/mentored. Somebody (imb personnel) has to go reach that first person in their tribe. What a privilege and responsibility that a Southern Baptist would have the means to achieve that honor and an obedient heart to do so! May our SB tribe increase ONLY SO THAT the nations will be blessed because of us!

There is one thing that I would like to speak to, however. Dr. Rankin said that the GCRTF can only deal with structural change. I disagree. I think that they could serve as a catalyst for grassroots movement and transformation if they would choose to do so. Jon Akin pointed to the need for that as well. That is encouraging. That is exactly what needs to happen. Initiating structural change and calling it a GCR without having a corresponding groundswell of grassroots transformation is a recipe for many to see the GCR ultimately as a failure. I don’t want to see that happen, but I am afraid that is where we are headed if we don’t hit hard the need for a bottom-up change. Please keep calling us to that.

Eph. 4:2,3
Sam in Va