[ Previous ] Home Page | 1996 Index | 1997 Index | 1998 Index | Next ]
Megatrend 9:
50 new global plans yearly
by Justin D. Long
In 1985, Ralph Winter and Donald McGavran proposed "Mission 2000," aiming to plant a church in each of the world's unreached peoples by AD 2000 through the formation of 100,000 local church mission fellowships in Western countries. In the same year, the Seventh-Day Adventists' Global Strategy Committee inked out a strategy for 15 million Adventists in 210 countries to reach the world based on segmentizing the Peoples of the world into approximately 5,000 population groups of 1 million each. FEBC, HCJB, TWR and ELWA announced their "World by 2000" program with a goal of giving everyone on Earth the opportunity to hear the Gospel; 2 years later the goal would be modified to target all major trade languages with over 1 million speakers, then all minor trade languages, and later the world's 6,500 "heart" languages. World Ambassadors of Maranatha Christian Ministries promoted its plan to evangelize the world through conversions among the 200,000 international non-Christian students from 170 nations; their slogan, "Reaching international students to reach the world" with a goal of training 15,000 such leaders per year. The Association of International Mission Services was launched in the same year; in 1988 it announces its program, "Operation Unreached," to match churches with people groups.
In 1986, the Assemblies of God launched its "Reaching the World's Cities by AD 2000," with a goal of evangelizing every city on earth. Meanwhile, Campus Crusade initiates its Worldwide Student Network with a goal of evangelizing by AD 2000 all the world's 30,000 tertiary-level universities and colleges with 60 million students. The Southern Baptist Sunday School Board launched the Good News World program, aiming to place Scriptures in the hands of everyone in the world in 1994 to prepare for worldwide revival in 1995.
In 1987, Pope John Paul II announced a new office in Rome, "Evangelization 2000," with the aim of winning 1.5 billion new Christians as "a present for Jesus on his 2,000th birthday." In the same year, World Literature Crusade changed its name to Every Home for Christ and proclaimed a goal of systematically placing 2 gospel booklets in every home in the world, one country at a time, by AD 2000. The North American General Conference on the Holy Spirit and World Evangelization had over 50,000 participants in the Roman Catholic/Protestant charismatic renewal (51% Roman Catholics), and launched a magazine called "AD 2000 together" with its front page motto of "Bringing the majority of the human race to Jesus Christ by the end of the century." Campus Crusade launched another new initiative, "New Life 2000," billed as a "comprehensive strategy to take the gospel to every culture on every continent by the year 2000, to present the gospel message to 6.5 billion people, to see 1 billion people receive Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour." The Assemblies of God launched their "Decade of Harvest" and the Church of God (Cleveland) launched its "Decade of Destiny." Finally, David Shibley wrote, "Let's pray in the harvest" on the topic of "the missing key to world evangelization." And that's only part of what happened in those three years, and doesn't touch 1988!
In 1900, there had been just 250 global plans to evangelize the world since AD 33. By 1970, that number had doubled to 510. In the 26 years between 1970 and 1996, the total had more than doubled again, reaching 1,190. By 2000, we project that total "world evangelization plans" will climb sharply to 1,400, and double again by 2025 to 3,000.
About 12% of these plans revolve around prayer; 16% around "pre-evangelistic" activities; 11% around personal evangelism; 35% around preaching and proclamation; 3% around discipling and persuasion-oriented evangelism; 4% around church planting; and 16% around training, leadership and networking. About 43% are organized, formal plans, 11% with massively-detailed blueprints.
Do we really need plans?
Generally speaking, yes. A lone evangelist operating in a specific region may not need much of a plan: he simply travels from one village to the next. But to coordinate $100 billion worth of logistical supplies, support, printed materials, audio tapes, medicines and the like, yes, plans are definitely needed.
Why are there so many plans? Some plans are formed because their leaders are convinced that they have finally hit on "the way" to evangelize the world. Others are formed to meet a definite need. Still others are formed because denominations believe they have a responsibility to evangelize the world. Is it right to have all these plans? Those convinced they have "the way" would say no: they believe only one plan is necessary--theirs. But most believe that having a multitude of plans is actually a form of "multitasking" or "multichannelling": if one plan fails, another will probably succeed. We can examine the analogy of the Internet: each message has multiple routes to get to its destination; if one "hub" is rendered for one reason or another inoperable, then the message isn't held up--it can take another route. But, astonishingly, most of the "hubs" of world mission don't cooperate with other hubs. In fact, most of the executives of our 543 20th-century global plans are ignorant of most of the other plans: that is, they are unaware of other plans being implemented. It is as if we were back in the old days when users of Compuserve couldn't send mail to those on America Online, or vice versa.
What is the status of all these plans?
As early as 1988, as documented in "788 plans to evangelize the world" (David Barrett & Jim Reapsome), all of these wonderful plans were in trouble. 32% were alive and making progress, but 51% had fizzled out and were dead. 17% were in the process of fizzling. Why? What were the reasons? There were at least 340 of them, and these have been placed on our web page (see http://www.goshen.net/gem). Some had to do with external causes, but the clear majority had to do with our own faults and failings: corruption, absence of followup, inadequate giving, logistical snags, inadequate research, poor administration, affluent styles of leadership... the list goes on and on.
A global plan with its thoughtful work on strategy can develop many options and possibilities for reaching World A--opportunities to break through the barriers and bring the Gospel to the lives of the unevangelized. Unfortunately, many global plans are more interested in immediate accomplishments, and so look for less difficult fields, or "go where the Spirit is evidently presently at work" (e.g. where another ministry is reaping huge numbers of converts and we want to get in on the action). This "reaction mode" is one of the biggest diluters of impact.
Back in the very late 1800s, just before the turn of the century, numerous plans were announced to evangelize the world by 1900. They failed, and there was a tremendous recession of energy afterwards. Today, as 2000 looms close, there has been a tremendous effort to evangelize the world. Again, we totter on the brink. It +MAY+ be possible to plant a single church in each of the World A peoples of population 10,000 or more by the end of the century--but there will have to be significantly more energy than there is presently being shown. And certainly, 1 billion people will still not have heard the Gospel. On a personal note, this editor has listened to a great deal of talk which can, if not read clearly, suggest our responsibility is limited to planting an indigenous church among each people group, not to taking the gospel to each individual. This may be the scope of "mission" but certainly not the scope of "evangelism" or "closure." We cannot claim the task complete when 20% of the world still has not heard, even if we have succeeded in planting a small congregation of 10-12 in 2,000 people groups.
Be that as it may, one of the things we must begin planning for now--both in the large and small agencies, both in those involved in large networks and those not--is how to deal with the inevitable "recession" of energy that will occurr after 2000. Without the "lightning rod" of AD 2000 that attracts so much attention, missions efforts will surely suffer some degradation in interested Christian participation. After the dawn of the new century many will feel a new optimism about life that will translate into a desire to do new things, many of them having little do with missions: set new goals for the new millenium, rise to new material heights, etc. Many people mobilized by the thought of closure at 2000 will lose interest. We must find ways to keep their spirit alive.
Make an honest appraisal of your plan. Under 5 obstacles, your plan is in good shape and will probably achieve its goals by AD 2000. Between 5 and 9 obstacles, your plan's got problems and will likely fall far short of its AD 2000 goals. 10-19? You're in serious trouble: your plan is a fizzle. 20-50? Virtually insurmountable difficulties: it's time to perform major corrective surgery, and yes, you're risking a patient that will die on the operating table. Over 50 obstacles? Its on the verge of collapse.