Archive - Church Planting RSS Feed

How can a man know that he is pardoned?

There is a text which says, “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shall be saved.” I believe on the Lord Jesus Christ; is it irrational to believe that I am saved?

“He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life,” saith Christ, in John’s Gospel. I believe on Christ; am I absurd in believing that I have eternal life?

I find the apostle Paul speaking by the Holy Ghost, and saying, “There is therefore now no condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus. Being justified by faith, we have peace with God.”

If I know that my trust is fixed on Jesus only, and that I have faith in Him, were it not ten thousand times more absurd for me not to be at peace, than for me to be filled with joy unspeakable?

It is but taking God at His Word, when the soul knows, as a necessary consequence of its faith, that it is saved. I took Jesus as my Saviour, and I was saved; and I can tell the reason why I took Him for my Saviour.

To my own humiliation, I must confess that I did it because I could not help it; I was shut up to it. That stern law-work had hammered me into such a condition that, if there had been fifty other saviours, I could not have thought of them,—I was driven to this One.

I wanted a Divine Saviour, I wanted One who was made a curse for me, to expiate my guilt.

I wanted One who had died, for I deserved to die.

I wanted One who had risen again, who was able by His life to make me live.

I wanted the exact Saviour that stood before me in the Word, revealed to my heart; and I could not help having Him.

I could realize then the language of Rutherford when, being full of love to Christ, once upon a time, in the dungeon of Aberdeen, he said, “O my Lord, if there were a broad hell betwixt me and Thee, if I could not get at Thee except by wading through it, I would not think twice, but I would go through it all, if I might but embrace Thee, and call Thee mine!”

Oh, how I loved Him! Passing all loves except His own, was that love which I felt for Him then. If, beside the door of the place in which I met with Him, there had been a stake of blazing faggots, I would have stood upon them without chains, glad to give my flesh, and blood, and bones, to be ashes that should testify my love to Him.

Had He asked me then to give all my substance to the poor, I would have given all, and thought myself to be amazingly rich in having beggared myself for His name’s sake.

Had He commanded me then to preach in the midst of all His foes, I could have said,—

“There’s not a lamb in all Thy flock
I would disdain to feed,
There’s not a foe, before whose face
I’d fear Thy cause to plead.”

Spurgeon, C. H. (2009). C. H. Spurgeon’s Autobiography, Compiled from his diary, letters, and records, by his wife and his private secretary: Volume 1, 1834-1854 (111–112). Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc.

Check out bcwe.org

Is there really fruit here?

d

I Corinthians 4:3-5 But with me it is a very small thing that I should be judged of you, or of man’s judgment: yea, I judge not mine own self. 4 For I know nothing by myself; yet am I not hereby justified: but he that judgeth me is the Lord. 5 Therefore judge nothing before the time, until the Lord come, who both will bring to light the hidden things of darkness, and will make manifest the counsels of the hearts: and then shall every man have praise of God.

Check out bcwe.org

Getting the nationals to take ownership of the ministry!

The following is a discussion between two great missionaries. Keith Shumaker in Burkina Faso is sharing with Kevin Hall in South Africa some of the ways to get the national men and women to take ownership of the ministry there. Read this and let me know what you think. Ask any questions and we will discuss it with you in the comment section below.

Keith is answering the question of how to get the nationals to take ownership of the ministry. This is the sort of discussion that might take place in a class at the Our Generation Training Center!

This is a real battle in the ministry. I have tried to teach ownership in the ministry to many of the men here. They understand the principle easily but don’t always want to live it and follow it.

It is easier for them (as for all of us) to be leaches. It takes a real man of God that is driven and not afraid to work to take real ownership. It will mean many times personal sacrifice for them.

Most missionaries can float, be lazy, work half hearted because they have their support. A national in a third world country can’t unless he stays a leach.

I did have a pastor, Konate, tell me this morning, “I am looking at some villages or small towns near here so that our church can start a work without any help from the outside”.

I have told them on many occasions that I dream of the day when our churches can start a work without any help from America. I guess he wants to take the challenge.

The work will never really grow if they don’t take responsibility. It will always be an inferior church like Paul said the Corinthians were.

You need to really help teach their people how to give. It is hard for Sippo to teach his people how to give. They will say he is in it for the money. Have special services where you teach on giving or print some material to give them.

I tell them that I can only support a few works. If they continue to take, we will not be able to do more. I have really preached hard lately about evangelizing the world. Trying to give them a burden for the lost. If they get a great burden, I believe they will begin to take responsibility or ownership.

Use examples of other churches. Not just American churches. They think that American church can do it but they can’t. Prove to them others are doing it.

Living Water Baptist Church just bought a moto for Pastor Konate. I lead them in that but I didn’t pay it. We had enough money in the bank to do it. The people got excited. It will be good example to use in the other churches.

You must create a desire in them. A desire for ownership. Some will never get it. In my case the majority don’t but a few will.

Don’t get frustrated, keep teaching, preaching. It is like hitting a rock. Doesn’t seem like it will break but one day it does. Many give up right before success comes.

You have to give them responsibility and ownership. Many missionaries don’t want to. They make them feel inferior. They don’t make them feel equal.

I was accused of being a ball-hog. It hurt but it was true. I was afraid things would mess up but they will never take ownership if I don’t give them a chance.

Pastor Konate did a great job in my absence. When I got back he stopped leading. He became the servant again. I had to have three different talks with him. I had to tell him that I needed him to lead. That I couldn’t lead the church like it needs to be lead. I told him he can though. He has seen the importance. That I need him. He has really taken ownership.

You can teach it, and you need to but I think it is as important to show them and give them ownership.

I want to tell you that it isn’t easy. I have struggled with this. Some of my pastors are leaches.

I have a few that seem to really get it. I hope that the ones that get it will be a testimony to the others and the new ones coming along.

Check out bcwe.org

Overseas internship

The following material that is being quoted is taken from here! At the Our Generation Training Center we have all of our students spend 6 months living and studying overseas. I think that there is much to be gleaned from the following article!

The American bubble that is mentioned is a great danger. The spending so much on time communicating back to the states and home is also a great danger. I am afraid that this modern technology can make it harder to adapt to the new culture and your new home.

Educators are thrilled to see more American college students venturing abroad — perhaps 300,000 this year alone.

Now if they can just get them to venture out of the “American bubbles” that can make the streets of study-abroad hot-spots like London, Barcelona and Florence, Italy almost feel like exclaves of Tuscaloosa or Ann Arbor.

They’re trying.

After decades of laissez-faire and faith that just breathing the air in foreign lands broadens horizons, American colleges and international programs are pressing students harder to get out of their comfort zones.

It’s happening in popular destinations as well as more exotic spots in Asia and Africa, where there are fewer Americans, but language and culture barriers make them even more tempted to stick together.

And it’s happening online, where one study found Americans on study abroad spent more than four hours per night communicating back home via the likes of Skype, Google Chat and Facebook.

Their tools: less free time, mandatory local internships, signed promises students won’t speak English, and even “Amazing Race”-style solo scavenger hunts — like one where wide-eyed Nebraska students were dropped off their first morning in China in a distant corner of their new city with $5 and instructions to find their way back home alone.

“Unless something is set up that really forces them to get involved in that environment, they really don’t,” said William Finlay, a University of Georgia sociologist who became so frustrated with the bubble leading trips to Italy that he set up a new, intensive program that takes Georgia students to work in impoverished South African townships.

“We push them to do things that are uncomfortable,” Finlay said. “Sometimes they get overwhelmed.”

Once reserved for a wealthy and adventuresome elite, it’s now reaching a wider, more diverse population which often has less travel experience.

But also like higher ed, study abroad is getting more expensive, and facing pressure to demonstrate its educational worth.

That’s harder on the short-term and summer trips — less than a semester — that account for most of the growth, and at the “safer” destinations of Western Europe that remain the most popular.

The danger is that it’s become easier to head off on what’s supposed to be a voyage of discovery and fail to immerse oneself in the local culture.

“People want real outcomes, said Mark Lenhart, executive director of CET Academic Programs, which sends about 1,100 students per year from feeder colleges like Vanderbilt and Middlebury to programs in seven countries. “They want to come home with big improvements in their language and a really deep understanding of the place.”

That means giving at least some students a nudge, says Lenhart, whose programs make students live with local roommates.

On his own study abroad experience in China years ago, Lenhart remembers the Americans sticking together, fueling each other’s griping about the amenities. When they’re sharing a room with a local and can only speak in Mandarin, they think twice about going to the trouble to complain.

Historically, most study abroad has taken place in so-called “island” programs, where Americans live, study and often party together. U.S. colleges like keeping a close eye on the education side of the experience, particularly if they’re awarding course credit. Island programs, educators say, remain popular and valuable for many students — particularly those new to study abroad.

Marie Hankinson loved her semester in London, but admits parts of the experience didn’t feel all that different from being back on campus at Syracuse University. She lived with four Syracuse classmates, took classes with fellow Syracuse students in a Syracuse-owned building from Syracuse-affiliated faculty.

“Our social circle was pretty much other people in the program,” says Hankinson, who says she met a few Brits through the local university union but rarely hung out with them elsewhere. Still, she says her time abroad was a great introduction to international travel that will push her to visit more exotic destinations in the coming years.
“I wanted to go abroad, but I’ll be honest, I wanted to speak English as well,” she said.
Many students want something different.

With little knowledge of the country or Arabic, he took a full year away to study in a Moroccan university where he was the only American.

He was grateful his program didn’t mollycoddle him. Moroccans were welcoming and he resisted the temptation to hang out with his compatriots.

“I know Americans pretty well. I didn’t go there to learn about them,” he said.
Hug, who now works for a Chinese freight company, says his last two employers seemed especially interested in him because of the self-reliance he showed studying abroad.
For students who aren’t so driven, a creative push from an educator can help ensure they learn something about both themselves and their host country.

In China, students from Beloit College in Wisconsin are assigned to become a regular at some local spot, — a park, a restaurant, a corner shop — returning there repeatedly to get to know the neighborhood and people there.

University of Nebraska professor Patrice McMahon won’t go so far as her colleague who dropped students off on the far side of a city in China. But she does give ice-breaker assignments — getting their picture taken with a monk, or taking a note card with an unknown Chinese word around town until they can figure out from locals what it means.

“Our students are from small towns in Nebraska,” McMahon said. “They’re really nice kids. But they haven’t had a lot of opportunities to just figure things out.”

The people who run study-abroad programs say not every student responds. But most welcome the push. “I always ask them, ‘Did you make some friends (in the host country)?’” said Kelsi Cavazos, study abroad adviser at the University of Texas at Arlington.

Most have, “but they always say it was hard to break free of the Americans.” The technology bubble can both help and hurt. Fifteen years ago, study abroad programs misjudged cell phones as a danger, assuming students would use them to stay tethered home, says Mary Dwyer, CEO of IES, a nonprofit consortium that sends students abroad for 200 colleges.

In fact, cell phones have transformed study abroad by helping students meet and mix with locals. Technology’s also handy in emergencies, and using it to report back to friends and families can facilitate reflection— the modern-day travel diary. But technology can also be a crutch, and suck up valuable time.

A University of California-Santa Barbara researcher found one group of students averaging 4.5 hours per day online, and 83 percent of their contacts were with other Americans, either at home or in the country they were visiting. Other studies paint a somewhat less alarming picture.

Still, some educators are taking needles to the technology bubbles. One Australian program makes students leave their iPods and sometimes all electronic devices back home on field trips, to help them focus on their experiences.

Others — dumbfounded to see students busy posting pictures when they should be taking them — purposefully choose day-trip destinations where they know students won’t find Internet cafes.

“You could say there’s a spiritual shift,” said Sonja Bontrager, who leads her students from Carson University in Kansas on a semi-formal “technology fast” during the early stages of their travels in Guatemala.

She says the ritual bonds the group together and makes them pay more attention to their surroundings. She remembers the group huddled under shelter during a rainstorm at forestation project. Normally, students with time to kill would turn habitually to their smart phones.

Without that option, one noticed a column of unusual ants, and soon the whole group was on hands and knees examining the ground. “It just makes people more aware,” Bontrager said.
When the connection home is set aside, “it’s not that they’re just left with emptiness. It’s that other things can come in.”
In many cases, it isn’t the students who are to blame for the tether — it’s parents.
“I wish parents would say, ‘You’re going abroad for the semester, let’s not talk every day, let’s talk once a week,’” Lenhart said. “If they could cut those ties a bit, it would serve them well.”

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/travel/2011/09/25/overseas-studies-gets-students-out-their-american-bubbles/?test=faces#ixzz1Z4STTSdh

We are constantly looking to improve what we do in our overseas study at the Our Generation Training Center. We have been guilty of allowing too much “island or bubble” study. We also know that they have used technology as a way to hide out. But it has been helpful and many have returned to the field as missionaries over the years.

Check out bcwe.org

Mission boards fighting with Missionaries!

Over the years that I have been in the ministry I have seen problems between missionaries and pastors back in the USA. I have seen the problem between the mission agency and the missionaries. I thought that it was interesting that this problem is not new nor are the causese. Read the following article and see what it says. Think on it either as a missionary or a pastor!

One regrettable incident marred BMS history early in the nineteenth century. The “Serampore Controversy,” named for the major mission station in India, alienated veteran missionaries and for a number of years caused schism in the mission work.

Several factors led to that unhappy conflict.

Upon Fuller’s death, leadership passed to younger hands, and BMS headquarters were moved to London in an effort to enlist nationwide support. The new leaders did not personally know Carey, Ward, and Marshman.

They also held quite different views of mission administration.

Whereas Fuller had treated the missionaries as trusted friends and colleagues, leaving all important policy decisions to be made on the field, the new leaders took a more directive approach.

In 1818 John Dyer of Reading was employed as corresponding secretary and, thus, became one of the first Baptist ministers to hold a full-time paid denominational post. Dyer wrote rather curt and commanding letters to the missionaries, who were not accustomed to be so addressed.

Carey later complained that Dyer’s letters “resembled those of a Secretary of State.” Clearly the trend was toward greater control and policy making at the home base rather than on the field.

One point in dispute was control of mission property. Carey and the other pioneers had to shape their mission methods and policy de novo, by trial and error. They had no backlog of missionary history or precendent to draw on, no earlier colleagues on the field to guide them. Unlike most modern foreign missionaries, they made learning trades a priority so they could earn a livelihood and become financially independent of the sponsoring society as soon as possible. All of the Serampore triumvirate earned far more than a living, and they plowed the excess back into printing presses and other mission property. While all property was used for mission work, the missionaries insisted upon retaining title and control over properties purchased from their own earnings. To what extent society funds may have gone into properties held by the missionaries was sharply disputed.

The new leaders made rather sweeping accusations; in retrospect, their charges seem unnecessarily harsh. Carey, Ward, and Marshman were accused of having “amassed extensive property, and thereby enriched themselves and their families, while they had been unmindful of the great cause to which they originally devoted themselves.” Marshman and Ward returned to England to meet with the officials, but their efforts at peace proved fruitless.

Carey wrote, “We are your brothers, not your hired servants. We have always accounted it our glory to be related to the Society … and we shall rejoice therein so long as you permit us, but we will come under the power of none.” In 1827 the BMS and the Serampore Mission parted ways.

Never again was Carey in fellowship with the society he had helped to form.

McBeth, H. L. (1987). The Baptist heritage (297–298). Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman Publishers.

Check out bcwe.org

Page 3 of 30«12345»102030...Last »