My Family

My Family

THE BIBLICAL UNDERSTANDING OF THE MISSION OF GOD

MYANMAR INSTITUTE OF THEOLOGY

THE BIBLICAL UNDERSTANDING OF THE MISSION OF GOD

BY
VICTOR KUI LONE

SEMINARY HILL, INSEIN
MARCH, 2009


Myanmar Institute of Theology

THE BIBLICAL UNDERSTANDING OF THE MISSION OF GOD




A
THESIS
SUBMITTED TO THE
MYANMAR INSTITUTE OF THEOLOGY
IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF
THE REQUIREMENTS FOR
THE DEGREE OF

MASTER OF THEOLOGY


BY
VICTOR KUI LONE

SEMINARY HILL, INSEIN
MARCH, 2009

THE BIBLICAL UNDERSTANDING OF THE MISSION OF GOD

This Thesis has been seen and approved by

Date………………………………….

Prof. Dr. Cung Lian Hup
(Supervisor)

ACKNOWLEDEMENT

First and foremost, I give my deepest thanks to God who guides me throughout my study at Myanmar Institute of Theology and who gives me grace to fulfill this work out of many problems and difficulties. This work is really done and finished by the abundant grace of Jesus Christ in God through the Holy Spirit.
Second, I give my heartfelt thanks to Prof. Rev. Dr. Cung Lian Hup, my supervisor, and Professor of World Mission and Academic Dean, for his patient guidance throughout this work. Without his supervision, this work will not be materialized. I extend my thanks to all my lecturers and professors, staff members and workers at this institute. I have done my Master of Theology program through their various helps.
Thirdly, I also give my thanks to all the members of my mother church- That Dun Baptist Church- for their help throughout my study by all means. My study will not be successful without their prayer. And I also extend my thanks to all those who support me in various ways by various means.
Finally, but not the least, I give my special thanks to my parents and all of my family members, relatives for their prayer and words of encouragement. Thus, I do thank my mother, Daw Tlim Kol, and my wife, Rhai Thing Mai Hay, for encouraging me from the back.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDEMENT
INTRODUCTION
CHAPTER ONE: THE BIBLE AND MISSION
1.1 The Concept of the Mission of God
1.1.2 Mission as Missio Dei
1.1.3 The Purpose of the Mission of God
1.1.4 The Bible as the product of God's Mission
1.1.5 Israel with a Mission

1.2 Biblical Indicatives and Imperatives in Mission
1.2.1 Humanity with a mission
1.2.2 The Mission of the Servant

CHAPTER TWO: THE GOD AND MISION
2.1 The Biblical Mission as The living God
2.1.1 The living God makes Himself know in Israel
2.1.2 The living God makes Himself know in Jesus Christ
2.1.3 The living God confronts Idolatry
2.1.4 The missionary of Jesus


CHAPTER THREE: THE PEOPLE OF MISSION
3.1 God's elect People: Chosen for Blessing
3.1.1 God's model of redemption
3.1.2 Mission in the Pauline writings
3.1.3 The Missionary Thrust of the Prophets
3.1.4 Biblical election and Mission
3.1.5 Biblical Monotheism and Mission

3.2 The Span of God's Missional Covenant
3.2.1 God's Mission and God's Priesthood: Exodus 19:4-6
3.2.2 God's Mission and God's Presence: Leviticus 26:11-13
3.2.3 God's Mission and God's Prognosis: Deuteronomy 27-32

3.3 The Life of God's Missional People
3.3.1 Missional ethics and covenant
3.3.2 Missional responsibility of Israel

CHAPTER FOUR: THE ARENA OF MISSION
4.1 Mission and God' Earth
4.1.1 Creation and God's Mission
4.1.2 Humanity in God's Image
4.1.3 Jesus and the Kingdom of God

4.2 God and the Nations in the Old Testament
4.2.1 The nations as Witnesses of Israel History
4.2.2 The Nations blessed with God' Salvation

4.3 God and the Nations in the New Testament
4.3.1 The Mission of Church
4.3.2 The Great Commission as the New Covenant
4.3.3 Theological Significances of Mission of God

CHAPTER FIVE: THE IMPACT OF THE MISSION OF GOD IN MYANMAR
5.1 The Mission of God in Myanmar
5.1.1 The concept of God in Myanmar Context
5.1.2 The Contextualization of the Mission of God in Myanmar
5.1.3 The Mission of God and Dialogue
5.1.4 God's Universal plan of salvation

CONCLUSION

BIBLIOGRAPHY

................................

INTRODUCTION

The God of Mission has been inaugurated since the beginning of the Earth. God makes mission for fulfillment His Kingdom. Thus, God started mission of His creation, He made Humankind in His own image and assign them to rule the whole creation. All creatures are equal in value of life before God. Humans are to preserve the Earth as God's agents. Therefore human needs to know and believe their Creator God because knowing God is finding God's will. God make known His will to Human beings through mission. God used many great people such as Abraham, Moses, and David etc…. in the Old Testament for His mission.
It is true that salvation was not omitted in creation. God implements His redemptive mission through the chosen people in order to fill the Earth as His will. God's mission doesn't end in creation, but continues as a redemptive action, throughout history. Noah and his family were saved by God. Abraham was elected and sent to a new land for making great nations in number. God begins to fulfill His mission by forming a special people – Israel – with whom He will have intimate relationship and through whom He will bless all nations (Gen 12:1-3; Exodus 19:3-6).
In addition, He reveals His gracious nature to the Israelites and rules over them as their king (Exodus 34:4-7; Judge 8:23). But they repeatedly rebel, rejecting God as king and preferring to serve idols (1 Sam 10:19; Ezek 20:16). In this regard, the organization of this research is divided into four major focal points of the worldview of Israel in the Old Testament, which are also foundational to a Christian worldview when understood in relation to Christ: The God of Mission; The People of Mission; and The Arena of Mission.
In Chapter One, the author surveys some steps toward the Bible and mission. Likewise, the research is moving on to consider the primary agent of the mission of God, namely, the people of God. It is obvious that Christian will follow the order of the biblical narrative as they walk first with Old Testament Israel. They were chosen in Abraham, redeemed out of Egypt, brought into covenant relationship at Sinai and called to a life of ethical distinctiveness from the nations. Each of these great successive themes is rich in missional significance. Thus, the research will be reflecting on: (a) election and mission; (b) redemption and mission; (c) covenant and mission; and (d) ethics and mission.
In Chapter Two, the author notes how Israel came to know the uniqueness of YHWH through their experience of God's redemptive grace, especially in the key events of the exodus and the return from exile. However then, it will also note the converse-how Israel and other nations came to know YHWH through exposure to God's judgment. And we will be moving on from the Old Testament, we will see how the New Testament fills out the knowledge of God by recognizing his identity in the person of Jesus of Nazareth as Lord and Christ.
Moreover, the author draws why biblical monotheism is missional, and how a missional hermeneutic illumines our reading of these great biblical monotheistic affirmations regarding YHWH and Jesus Christ. We cannot leave our survey of monotheism and mission, however, without attention to its dark side- the conflict with gods and idols. Therefore, the research will reflect on how Christian mission should address the continuing reality of idolatry, drawing on the nuanced tactics that we find in the mission practice and writings of the apostle Paul.
In Chapter Three, the author examines the missiological implications of biblical monotheism. The identity, uniqueness and universality of YHWH, the God of Israel, and the directly related claims that the New Testament makes for Jesus have enormous implications for mission. Indeed, Christian mission would have no foundation at all apart from these biblical affirmations about the one and only living God who wills to be known to the world through Israel and through Christ. But we cannot do full Justice to biblical monotheism without seeing it in conflict with the gods and idols of human construction that consume so much biblical rhetoric.
In Chapter Four, the author moves to the wider canvas of the world itself—the earth, humanity, cultures and the nations. So it will explore first the missional implications of the goodness of creation and the connections between creation care and Christian mission. The Wisdom tradition in the Old Testament is the most international of all biblical literature and provides a rich source for reflecting on a biblical theology and missiology of human cultures. The biblical world is a world full of nations, by God's creative intention.
In the last part of this study, Chapter Five, the author explores the impact of the Mission of God in Myanmar and Myanmar Christian towards Buddhism and Buddhist. And it will be reflecting on: (a) Dialogue; (b) Contextualization of the Mission of God in Myanmar; and (c) God's Universal plan of salvation. As propagating God’s mission in the soil of Myanmar region, applying the method of dialogue; contextualizing Christ in Myanmar context; and perceiving God’s universal plan of salvation are the core of mission.

CHAPTER ONE

THE BIBLE AND MISSION

1.1 The Concept of God's Mission
As for Abraham himself, he stands out as one of a number of Old Testament Characters who were striking examples of missionary spirit and effort. In him began a long procession of missionares which has now covered 4,000 years. His divine call (Gen. 12:1) furnishes a worthy model for that of any modern missionary, while his heroic rescue of the victims of King Chedorlaomer’s raid (Gen.14:1-16)and his importunate pleading for sinful Sodom (Gen. 18:22-33) are fine instances of missionary zeal, courage and devotion. Joseph, too, was a great missionary, sent by God down to hearthen Egypt, and used of Him for the physical salvation of the millions of that nation and the adjoining countries.
In Moses we see a true missionary leader, trained and disciplined by God for a great and difficult undertaking which called for his renouncing wealth, social position and worldly pleasure, and giving himself in unselfish abandon to the service of those who sorely tried his spirit and spurned his devotion. Like the other Old Testament prophets and leaders, he saw only dimly what the New Testament clearly reveals of the fullness of God’s grace to all mankind; and yet something of the extent of the divine purpose was made known to him by God in the words; “As truly as I live, all the earth shall be filled with the glory of the Lord” (Num. 14:21).
Bosch argued that such an attempt to table a list of some faces of mission is filled with danger because it suggested what mission exactly is. He said that if we confine the Missio Dei in a narrow definition we will fall into "one-sidedness and reductionism." He warned us not to interpret mission (and evangelism) either too narrowly or too broadly. Bosch suggested that mission in its multidimensional aspects should perhaps be interpreted only by means of poiesis, that is , by using metaphors, images, events, …etc to be credible and faithful to its origins and character. He then gave a creative and imaginative interpretation of mission of his own based on "six major salvific events" of Jesus Christ as depicted in the New Testament- the incarnation, the cross, the resurrection, the ascension, Pentecost, and the Parousia.
Bosch said that the six Christological salvific events cannot be seen in isolation from each other because they are intimately interrelated and interdependent. The emphasis here was on the wholeness and indivisibility rather than on separated events of the whole event of Jesus Christ. Mission is Missio Dei, which originates the missions of the Church. It is not the Church which carries out mission but it is the Missio Dei which constitutes the Church. The mission of the Church needs of constant transformation and re-interpretation in order to transform its paradigm shift.
The Missio Dei sets the Church under the cross. The Great Commission of Matthew 28:18-20 would be the most widely used principal missionary text among most local evangelicals." God takes the initiative in mission, for the effecting of salvation through Christ. The Abrahamic promises, the Davidic kingship, motifs that culminate in Jesus' coming and mission.
Believers are charged to preach the gospel of the kingdom to all the nations to be his witnesses to make them Christ's disciples, and to be his witnesses to the ends of the earth. In the pursuit of this mission, the church is promised the presence of Jesus and aid of the Holy Spirit. So again, the mission of the church flows from the mission of God and the fulfillment of God's mandate. Mission, then, in biblical terms, while it inescapably involves us in planning and action, is not primarily a matter of our activity or our initiative. Mission, from the point of view of our human endeavor, means the committed participation of God's people in the purposes of God for the redemption of the whole creation. The mission is God's. The marvel is that God invites us to join in.
Mission is, primarily and ultimately, the work of the Triune God, Creator, Redeemer, and Sanctifier, for the sake of the world, a ministry in which the church is privileged to participate. Mission has its origin in the heart of God. God is a fountain of sending love. This is the deepest source of mission. The recognition that mission is God's mission represents a crucial breakthrough in respect of the preceding centuries. It is inconceivable that we could again revert to a narrow, ecclesiocentric view of mission. Mission is, rather, the communication of the good news about the universal and coming reign of the true and living God. The purpose of the sending is good news from God to mankind. Mission and proclamation go together, and the purpose of the sending and proclaiming or witness is that individuals might believe.
There are, therefore, many views of mission. This comes to the fore in, for instance, the Seoul Declaration of the Asian Theological Association. We can distinguish: Missio ecclesiae: the expansion of the church as a unique salvific institution, Catholic, high church, and anti-ecumenical, Misio Christi: the proclamation of the saving death and justifying resurrection of Christ, which he commanded his disciples to give (Matt. 28:16-20), as in the Lausanne Covenant of 1974 and the Seoul Declaration of 1975, and Missio Dei: God's "missionary" relatedness to the world and humanity, which was later implied in the ideas of neo-universalism, "realized evangelism," and "wholism."
The God-centred mission is evident from the continuous emphasis upon the sole Godhead of God:" I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God" (Isaiah 44:6, 44:8; 45:5). Thus the absoluteness, unity and singularity of God are stated over and over again. God through Isaiah also clearly expresses His attitude toward idolatry with pronouncements and scathing remarks. This is the positive witness Israel is to uphold in this world. In the midst of religious humanism and idolatrous apostasy, God's people are to uphold ethical monotheism.
God's mission is to bless all nations through this people whom he has chosen, redeemed and bound to himself in covenant relationship. But that divine purpose calls for human response. The ethical challenge to God's people is, first, to recognize the mission of God that provides the heartbeat of their very existence and, then, to respond in ways those express and facilitate it rather than deny and hinder it. Three texts in particular, which are acknowledged as having a programmatic status in their own contexts, will command our attention for the wider light they shed on ethics and mission: Genesis 18, Exodus 19 and Deuteronomy 4. The people of God in both testaments are called to be a light to the nations. But there can be no light to the nations that is not shining already in transformed lives of a holy people.
Mission today is the action which tries to discover God's action in the world: to discover God in the serve God and serve God and not "to bring Christ" to the world. So also the Church, like Christ, must practice kenosis, self emptying in this service. Even more radically opposed to the Church's role in mission is the tendency of "out-churchism." The Reformed Dutch theologian and missionary J. C. Hoekendijk asserts that mission is realized with the proclamation of the "shalom" in hope; so the "mission" is "pro-mission" in the service of the world building up peace-"shalom" that leads to intercommunion and participation. With this service to the world people are coagulated and so the Church happens as an event and not as a structure."
The mission Dei is moved forward through the prophetic promise of a messiah. The New Testament reports and interprets the Christ-event as the fulfillment of the messianic promise (Matt. 3:2-3; Luke 2:22-23; 3:4; 4:1-19; John 3:16).
God's strategy may be summarized in terms of three stages:
(1) The election and sending of Abraham so that "by you all the families of the earth shall bless themselves" (Gen. 12:3), along with the covenant binding Israel to be the instrument of salvation for the nations.
(2) The sending of Jesus Christ (John 1:14) the divinely appointed Messiah, who continues the strategy of pars pro toto.
(3) The sending of the church as an extension of the mission of Jesus Christ (John 17:18; 20:21). Each "sending" is from apposition of vulnerability and weakness in obedience to God's call to bring healing and salvation to all peoples (Deut. 15:15; 16:12; 24:18; 26:5; Phil. 2:5-8; John 17:18).
The different versions of the "missionary mandate" contain common elements as well as characteristics proper to each. Two elements, however, are found in all the versions. First, there is the universal dimension of the task entrusted to the Apostles, who are sent to "all nations" (Mt. 28:19); "into all the world and … to the whole creation" (Mk 16;15); to "all nations" (Luke 24:47); "to the end of the earth" (Acts 1:8). Secondly, there is the assurance given to the Apostles by the Lord that they will not be alone in this task, but will receive the strength and the means necessary to carry out their mission. The reference here is to the presence and power of the Spirit and the help of Jesus himself: "And they went forth and preached everywhere, while the Lord worked with them" (Mark 16; 20).
Again God's sovereign freedom and divine initiative in redemption are stressed, and again Christ's role as the agent and means of God's will is prominent. The mystery of his will has been revealed in Christ. But in Ephesians as nowhere else in the New Testament, this mystery is interpreted specifically as God's purpose, revealed in Christ, that Gentiles as well as Jews should be members of the one body (Ephesians 3:3-6), gathered into one church under one Lord for the common praise of God and a united witness to his word (Ephesians 3:9-13).
To say of God that he was a living God was the elementary and primordial reaction of man in face of the experience of the power which, imposing itself on the entirely of his being, could only be envisaged as a person, that is, as a living being. It is to the power and succour of that person that the Israelites appeal when they are men aced in their won personal life, chay Yahweh ( ‘ Yahweh’s life ) , and when Yahweh himself wishes to confirm by an oath the dependability of his treats or promises he introduces it by the affirmation of his life:
“I am living, says the Lord Yahweh…… I will make the effects of my oath fall upon his head” (Ezek 17:19), but also: “I am living, oracle of the Lord Yahweh; I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked” (Ezek 33:11).

Life is what differentiates Yahweh from other gods; before it is expressed in a well formulated monotheism, the faith of Israel is confident of the feebleness of the gods of the nations and contrasts that weakness to the living God; the gods of the nation are stupid and foolish while Yahweh is the true God and the living God (Jer 10:9-10). Yahweh does not die: “Thou shalt not die” cries the prophet Habakkuk (1:12).
The idea of God as living also implies that Yahweh is the one who gives life; “As true as Yahweh lives, who has given us this nephesh ‘soul’ (Jer 38:16). It is be cause they see in the living One essentially the source of life that believers regard as the supreme aspiration of piety the ability to approach the living God ( Ps 42:3; 84:3); and finally it is belief in the living God which will lead to the affirmation of victory over death.
Anthropomorphism is found throughout the Old Testament; it is by no means a “ primitive” way of speaking of God and it easily harmonizes with a highly spiritual theology, as, for example, in Second Isaiah: God speaks (Gen 1:3), hears (Exod 16:12), sees (Gen 6:12), smells (1 Sam 26:19), laughs ( Ps 2:4; 59:9) , whistles (Isa 7:18); he makes use of the organ suited to these functions: he was eyes ( Amos 9:4) , hands (Ps 135:5), arms ( Isa 51:9; 52:10; Jer 27:5) , ears ( Isa 22:14), and feet (Nah 1:3; Isa 63:3) which he place on a footstool ( Isa 63:1-6).
Moreover, His bearing is described with the help of the most realistic anthropomorphisms: he treads the wine- press like a gape- gatherer (Isa 63:1-6), he rides on the clouds (Deut 33:26; Hab 3:8), he comes down from heaven to see the tower of Babel and to scatter its builders with his own hands (Gen 11:7), and he himself shuts the door of the ark behind Noah (Gen 7:16). Figures of speech borrowed from military language are particularly frequent. Yah- weh is a gibbor (‘mightly one’) and an ish milchanmah (“Warrior”) (Exod 15:3; Ps 24:8; Zech 9:13).

1.1.2 Mission as Missio Dei
Missio Dei is a Latin theological term that can be translated as the "sending of God." mission is understood as being derived from the very nature of God. The missionary initiative comes from God alone. In 1934, Karl Hartenstein, a German missiologist, coined the phrase in response to Karl Barth and his emphasis on actio Dei (Latin for “the action of God”). When kept in the context of the Scriptures, missio Dei correctly emphasizes that God is the initiator of His mission to redeem through the Church a special people for Himself from all of the peoples (τα εθνη) of the world. He sent His Son for this purpose and He sends the Church into the world with the message of the gospel for the same purpose.
The Mission Dei is defined as God the Father sending the Son, and God the Father and the Son sending the Spirit. Moreover, the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit originate the missions of the Church. The term mission Dei, "the mission of God," has a long history. It seems to go back to a German missiologist Karl Hartenstein. He coined it as a way of summarizing the teaching of Karl Barth, "who, in a lecture on mission in 1928, had connected mission with the doctrine of the trinity. Barth and Hartenstein want to make clear that mission is grounded in an intratrinitarian movement of God himself and that it expresses the power of God over history, to which the only appropriate response is obedience. So the phrase originally meant "the sending of God" – in the sense of the Father's sending of the Son and their sending of the Holy Spirit. All human missions, in this perspective, are seen as a participation in and extension of this divine sending. God's mission emanates from the power of the Resurrection (Eph 1).This also means that God' mission should be tested and tried.
The mission of God is world centered and not Church centered. It is the way in which God is to pour out his Spirit on all flesh (Acts 2.17). The gospel is to be preached to all creatures. And the arena of God's mission is the world (John 3.16). We have to distinguish between mission (singular) and missions (plural).The first refers primarily to the mission Dei (God's mission), that is, God self revelation as the One who loves the world, God involvement in and with the world, the nature and activity of God, and in which the church is privileged to participate. Missio Dei enunciates the good news that God-for –people. Missions, the missiones ecclesiae: the missionary ventures of the church refer to particular forms, related to specific times, places, or needs, of participation in the mission Dei.
Mission is not the apostolic road from Church to Church, but the triune God moving into the world. It is the mission of the Creator seeking the restoration of the integrity of all that had been made and judged to be good (Gen 2:3). It is the mission of God who took the world seriously and judged it, yet on the Cross reconciled it to Godself. It is the mission of God the Spirit at work both through Christ's disciples in the world (Acts 1:8). It is also the spirit at work both through Christ's disciples in the world (Acts 1:8). It is also the Spirit that blows freely (John 3:8) and calls even those who do not know the divine name (Cyrus) into God's mission (Isaiah 44:28-45:7).
Cardinaal Tomko's concerns over the "radical derivations of the theory of the Missio Dei" are justified. During the 1960s Johannes Hoekendijk, the WCC's Secretary for Evangelism, led in studies using Missio Dei to signify exclusively God's hidden activities in the world independent of the church and its mission. Mission has its source in the nature and purpose of God. God's saving purpose can be traced through the calling of Abraham and his descendants into covenant relationship for the blessing of the nations. This saving purpose is expressed supremely in the sending of God the Son to be the Savior of the world. God's saving strategy stands over all history and points to the goal, the kingdom of God.
Certain statements of the Mission Dei have been indispensable in sustaining faith in God's purposes and hope for the consummation. Isaiah projected this vision – "For the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the Lord as the waters cover the sea" (Isaiah11:9) and there will be "new heavens and a new earth" (Isaiah 65:17; cf. II Pet. 3:13). John's Revelation depicts the outcome of God's redemptive program – shalom – in which the unity the peoples of the world could not achieve is now realized through God's gracious provision in Jesus Christ (Revelation 5:9-11). The picture is filled out in Revelation 21:1-7. These vision statements have both present and future dimensions. The Christ-event demonstrates and fulfills the mission Dei.
According to Bosch, it is the fundamental biblical understanding of mission that mission is entirely and exclusively God's activity. And that it is not just something the Church or any particular organization does. Further, mission is primarily understood in terms of the doctrine of Trinity, not in terms of ecclesiology or soteriology. In this new image, mission is first and foremost viewed as the triune God's movement toward the world, in which the Church is privileged to participate.
The phrase missio Dei initially had a tremendous impact in ecumenical circles, but it later took on so many different meanings and interpretations that it became merely a slogan rather than a guiding principle. The next step in the development and implementation of missio Dei was the Conference of the International Missionary Council in Accra, Ghana (1958). The focal point of this Conference was the Church’s response to God’s action in the world. The emphasis shifted to missio Dei as “the work of the Triune God entrusted to the Church in each place by Jesus Christ.”
In other words, mission is "God manifesting his glory in the sight of the nations by saving his people. The Servant of the Lord in Second Isaiah is a missionary. He is portrayed a "an extraordinary and yes, a useless, for he can neither talk nor see" (Isa. 42: 18-20; 48: 8-13). Bosch meant to emphasize here that mission is "what God is doing to and through the Servant, not what the Servant does." However, "human mediation" is never "excluded or passive." That means, Bosch asserted, "The more we recognize mission as God's work, the more we ourselves become involved in it." To this, Luke adds the work of the Spirit, who accomplishes God's mission. Inherent in the biblical understanding of mission is the conviction that the real author and sustainer of mission is God. This is particularly clear in the witness of the Old Testament. The Servant of the Lord in Second Isaiah, for instance, is a missionary who travels great distances to proclaim the gospel.
Bosch criticized some missionary advocates who tended to relegate the success of mission almost exclusively to human works. Bosch argued that this was partly due to a deficient interpretation of the Great Commission (Matt. 28: 18-20). He thought this text was, particularly in Protestant circles, interpreted primarily as a "command," overstressing the auxiliary verb "go." Bosch explained that this happened particularly when the Great Commission was confined only to verses 19 and 20a, and when we ignored the fact that "the commission proper" follows on the statement of authority given to Christ in verse 18 and is dependent on "the promise," in verse 20b, of the abiding presence of him who is "the real missionary." It can be summed up thus:
"We regard our mission as movement which participates in God's mission (Missio Dei) to gather up all things in Christ-and so we lead to set up a variety of sign of Shalom of God in the world."

It is really need to have Shalom for all people in the world.
In the final analysis, 'Missio Dei' means that God articulates himself, without any need of assisting him through our missionary efforts in this respect". In fact, it is unnecessary for the world "to become what it already is since Easter: the reconciled world of God". It therefore does not stand in any need of the missionary contribution of Christians. After all, God is not imaginable without the reconciled world, neither the world without God's dynamic presence.

1.1.3 The Purpose of the Mission of God

The name Yahweh, judged by the context in which it is first given (Exod 3:14) and the special attention devoted to it in the present passage (Exod 5:22-6:8), signals a divine presence to save. The name Yahweh, one is led to expect, will introduce a new chapter in God’s work in the world. In his reply to Moses, God as Yahweh describes his intention. Yahweh’s initial design for his people is deliverance; “ I will bring you out from under the burdens of the Egyptians, and I will deliver you from their bondage, and I will redeem you with an outstretched arm and with great acts of judgment (Exod 6:6). These three statements resemble, by reason of parallelism, lines of Hebrew poetry. Three synonyms are used to elucidate Yahweh’s action. ‘I will bring out’ is in the causative form of ‘go’ and might be rendered; “I will cause you to go out.”
The causative is also employed in the following verb: deliver, it is the common verb used to refer to God’s actions of rescue. The verbal form is repeated with considerable frequency (135 times). The word rendered “redeem” has its linguistic home in regulations governing trible peoples and property. A redeemer was one whose responsibility it was to buy out the property of a kinsman who had forfeited it, or who was on the verge of forfeiting it, perhaps because of debt. The prophet Jeremiah purchased a piece of land from his cousin Hanamel and so acted as a redeemer (Jer 32: 6ff). A more familiar example is Boaz, who as a near relative buys the property of Naomi (Ruth 2: 20; 4: 4-6, 9). Or the redeemer might buy out a kinsman who had become the slave of a foreigner (Lev 25: 47-54), or avenge the blood of a relative who had been murdered. The sense of restoration to a former state or the healing of tribel brokenness is an underlying component of the term. In Exodus 6 the redeemer is Yahmeh, and the deliverance is spacified to be of large proportion: ‘ from the burdens of the Egyptions’ and from “their bondage”.
Throughout the history of the church various Christian groups, because of a perverted understanding of predestination, would adopt a similar attitude: If God wished the heathen to be saved he would see to it the biblical model of mission. Putting these perspectives together, a missional hermeneutic means that we seek to read any part of the Bible in the light of

1. God's purpose for his whole creation, including the redemption of humanity and the creation of the new heavens and new earth.
2. God's purpose for human life in general on the planet and of all the Bible teaches about human culture, relationship, ethics and behavior.
3. God's historical election of Israel, their identity and role in relation to the nations, and the demands he made on their worship, social ethics, and total value system.
4. The centrality of Jesus of Nazareteh, his messianic identity and mission in relation to Israel and the nations, his cross and resurrection.
5. God's calling of the church, the community of believing Jews and Gentiles who constitute the extended people of the Abraham covenant, to be the agent of God's blessing to the nations in the name and for the glory of the Lord Jesus Christ.
   

Kirk develops a theology of mission with the foundational principles of missio Dei and describes the Church’s response. “This means that God’s mission is carried out in both the world and the Church; to a lesser degree in human history untouched by the Gospel, to a greater degree where the Gospel is believed and obeyed.” Kirk follows both the history of and the contemporary discussion on partnership. His basic understanding and theological conviction is expressed in the following terms: It may therefore be even harder to lay hold of the notion that ‘partnership in mission’ also belongs to the essence of the Church: partnership is not so much what the Church does as what it is. Churches (theologically) belong to one another, for God has called each ‘into the fellowship (koinonia) of His Son Jesus Christ our Lord’ (1Cor.1: 9).
Furthermore, Partnership is therefore not a nice slogan that some clever committee has dreamt up; it is the expression of one, indivisible, common life in Jesus Christ. Kirk argues that koinonia is the closest biblical expression for partnership and sees four characteristics of discipleship in the New Testament that express this idea: first as a common project, second as a sharing of gifts, third as the sharing of material resources, and fourth as a sharing in suffering.
Interestingly enough, Kirk stresses the fact that this partnership in suffering based on the incarnation of Jesus Christ is expressed in another word as solidarity, which became a predominant concept in Latin American ecumenical circles and in Liberation Theology in the 1970s and 1980s. Kirk expands on the obstacles to partnership, raising very concrete and practical issues like dependency and freedom, mutual learning in trust, shared responsibility in the sharing of finances, and the exercise of power and accountability. He underlines that cooperation in mutual commitment to mission in Christ as the way to improve north-south relations.
Through Israel, God is busy with the nations. The emphasis is on what God does. This does not imply that Israel is excluded or passive. It is a perversion to suggest that if God is the primary "agent" of mission, people are inactive, or vice versa. That would be to argue that God's activity is the enemy of human freedom, that the more one emphasizes God's actions the less one can emphasize ours. Rather, the more we ourselves become involved in it. This is what Paul means when he says, "I worked harder than any of (the other apostles) – though it was not I, but the grace of God that is with me" (I Cor. 15:10). If, however, we separate God's work from human activity, we soon land ourselves in come fatalists; if wee stress only the second, we become fanatics and arrogant zealots.

1.1.4 The Bible as the Product of God's Mission
A missional hermeneutic of the Bible begins with the Bible's very existence. For those who affirm some relationship between these texts and the self-revelation of our Creator God, the whole canon of Scripture is a missional phenomenon in the sense that it witnesses to the self-giving movement of this God toward his creation and us, human beings in God's own image, but wayward and witness to the ultimate mission of God.
Furthermore, the processes by which these texts came to be written were often profoundly missional in nature. Many of them emerged out of events of struggles or crises or conflicts in which the people of God engaged with the constantly changing and challenging task of articulating and living out their understanding of God's revelation and redemptive action in the world. Sometimes were highly polemical struggles with competing religious claims and worldviews that surrounded them. So a missional reading of such texts is very definitely not a matter of 1. Finding the "real" meaning by objective exegesis, and only then; 2. Cranking up some "missionlogical implications" as a homiletic supplement to the text itself. Rather, it is to see how a text often has its origin in some issue, need, controversy or threat that the people of God needed to address in the context of their mission. The text in itself is a product of mission in action.
Obviously all the New Testament documents hang together around their recognition of Jesus of Nazareth as Savior and Lord. But also in the case of the Old Testament we can see that many of these texts emerged out of the engagement of Israel with the surrounding world, in the light of the God they knew in their history and in covenantal relationship. People produced texts in relation to what they believed God had done, was doing or would do in their world. The historical narratives portray the long and sorry story of Israel's struggle with the culture and religion of Canaan, a struggle reflected also in the pre-exilic prophets. Exilic and postexilic texts emerge out of the task that the small remnant community of Israel faced to define their continuing identity as a community of faith in successive empires of varying hostility or tolerance.
Moreover, wisdom texts interact with international wisdom traditions in the surrounding cultures, but do so with staunch monotheistic disinfectant. And in worship and prophecy, Israelites reflect on the relationship between their God, YHWH, and the rest of the nations sometimes negatively, sometimes positively – and on the nature of their own role as YHWH's elect priesthood in their midst. The point being made here is simply that the Bible is in so many ways a missional phenomenon in itself. Indeed, as David Filbeck has observed, this missiological thrust provides theological coherence to the Bible, including the relationship of the Testaments. In short, a missional hermeneutic proceeds from the assumption that the whole Bible renders to us the story of God's mission through God's people in their engagement with God's world for the sake of the whole of God's creation. The Bible presents itself to us fundamentally as a narrative, a historical narrative at one level, but a grand metanarrative at another.
1. It begins with the God of purpose in creation.
2. Moves on to the conflict and problem generated by human rebellion against the purpose.

3. Spends most of its narrative journey in the story of God's redemptive purposes being worked out on the stage of human history.


4. Finishes beyond the horizon of its won history with the eschatological hope of a new creation.

This has often been presented as a four-point narrative: creation, fall, redemption, and future hope. The whole worldview is predicated on teleological monotheism: that is, the affirmation that there is one God at work in the universe and in human history, and that this God has a goal, a purpose, a mission that will ultimately be accomplished by the power of God's Word and for the glory of God's name. This is the mission of the biblical God.
Richard Bauckham says it is important that "the Bible does not have a carefully plotted single story-line, like, for example, a conventional novel. It is a sprawling collection of narratives." Thus, it is not an aggressively totalizing story that suppresses all others – the accusation that post modernism makes against all metanarratives. To read the whole Bible in the light of this great overarching perspective of the mission of God, then, is to read with the gain of this whole collection of texts that constitute our canon of Scripture. It has long been my belief that this is the key assumption of a missional hermeneutic of the Bible.
However, even if we accept returning to the introduction that Jesus offers us a Messiah-focused and mission generating hermeneutic of the scriptures, we may still query the claim that somehow there is a missional hermeneutic of the whole Bible such that "mission is what it's all about." Quite clearly the whole Bible is not just about evangelism, and I am certainly a fundamental part of biblical mission as entrusted to us.
To be sure, evangelism is something we do and it is validated by clear biblical imperatives. But it will not bear the weight of the case for saying that the whole Bible can be hermeneutically approached from a missional perspective. The common opinion that the Bible is a moral code book for Christians falls far short, of course, of the full reality of what the Bible is and does, The Bible is essentially the story of God, the earth and humanity; it is the story of what has gone wrong, what God has done to put it right, and what the future holds under the sovereign plan of God. Nevertheless, within that grand narrative, moral teaching does have a vital place. The Bible's story is the story of the mission of God.
The same is true of the missiological focus of the Bible. To say that the Bible is "all about mission" does not mean that we try to find something deeper and wider in relation to the Bible as a whole. In a missiologicaal approach to the Bible we are thinking of
1. The purpose for which the Bible exists
2. The God the Bible renders to us
3. The people whose identity and mission the Bible invites us to share
4. The story the Bible tells about this God and this people and indeed about the whole world and its future.

This is a story that encompasses past, present and future, "life, the Universe and everything." There is the closest connection between the biblical grand narrative and what is meant here by biblical mission. There are no immutable and objectively correct "laws of mission" to which exegesis of Scripture gives us access and which provide us with blueprints we can apply in every situation. The Bible records the development of God’s plan for the salvation of people worldwide. God chose one man (Abraham) to father one particular nation (Israel) through whom God’s blessing would go to all nations. Israel was to be God’s representative in bringing the nations of the world to know him (Gen 12:2-3; 22:18; Exod 19:5-6; Isa 49:6; Zech 8:22-23). The Bible has played, and continues to play, a notable part in the history of civilization. Many languages have been reduced to writing for the first time in order that the Bible, in whole or in part, might be translated into them in written form. And this is but a minor sample of the civilizing mission of the Bible in the world.
This civilizing mission is the direct effect of the central message of the Bible. But a central message there is, and it is the recognition of this that has led to the common treatment of the Bible as a book, and not simply a collection of books – just as the Greek plural biblia ('book') became the Latin singular biblia ('book'). The Bible's central message is the story of salvation, and throughout both Testaments three strands in this unfolding story can be distinguished: the bringer of salvation, the way of salvation and the heirs of salvation. This could be reworded in terms of the covenant idea by saying that the central message of the Bible is God's covenant with men, and that the strands are the mediator of the covenant, the basis of the covenant and the covenant people.
Our primary task is to find ways to transmit that text effectively within our community and to interpret it responsibly and faithfully, even the most difficult parts of it. It remains the Word of God. The canonical process continues, but in a rather different way – once the First Testament and the ultimate revelation of God's Words in the person of Jesus Christ. One of the great lessons we can learn from the experience of ancient Israel in the religious life is that memory serves to lead to the continuing experience of the presence and activity of God.


1.1.5 Israel with a Mission
The God revealed in the Scriptures is personal, purposeful and goal-orientated. The opening account of creation portrays God working toward a goal, completing it with satisfaction and resting, content with the result. And from the great promise of God to Abraham in Genesis 12:1-3 we know this God to be totally, covenantally and eternally committed to the mission of blessing the nations through the agency of the people of Abraham. In the wake of Genesis 3 – 11 this is good news indeed for humanity – such that Paul can describe this text as "the gospel in advance" (Gal 3:8). From that point on, the mission of God could be summed up in the words "God is working his purpose out as year succeeds to year," and as generations come and go.
Then, against the background of human sin and rebellion in Genesis 3 -11, we encounter Israel with a mission, beginning with a mission entrusted to them from God for the sake of God's wider purpose of blessing the nations. Israel's election was not a rejection of other nations but was explicitly for the sake of all nations. This universality of God's purpose, that nevertheless embraces the particularity of God's chosen means, is a recurrent theme and a constant theological challenge (to Israel as much as to contemporary theologians). With Israel, of course, we embark on the longest part of the biblical journey, and the great themes of election, redemption, covenant, worship, ethics, and eschatology all await our missiological reflection.
Israel's mission is a God-appointed mission. God is explicit in His emphasis that He is the source and Originator of this mission. He created Jacob, He formed Israel He redeemed His people; He is the Creator and Redeemer, the King and holy One of Israel. Over and over these phrases and designations recur. Israel is not a self made people nor a nation of a self-appointed destiny; Israel is "the people whom I formed for myself that they might declare my praise" (Isaiah 43: 21). Israel must place herself at the disposal of God and live for Him. He will not alter His choice nor will Israel find rest and meaning in life until the nation will yield herself to God.
Moreover, Israel's mission is a God-centered mission. As God is the Originator of the mission of Israel, so He is its center and content. Israel existed principally in Old Testament times for the purpose of upholding ethical monotheism in the midst of, a sea of henotheism, polytheism, and philosophical monism. Spiritual complacency and indifference are the main results of their impact. In various ways God seeks to divert the attention and affections of Israel from idolatry and to redeem her from this evil to make her a witness to Himself in an idolatrous environment. First, God repeatedly calls to mind His great deeps of redemption and protection which He has wrought in behalf of Israel. This should keep Israel humble and grateful and close to the Lord. His challenge is: "Remember." Second, God employs the mental weapon of irony, pointing to the folly of idolatry. Dr. H. R. Ironside comments on 46: 1:
"When Cyrus attacked Babylon and the city fell, the idolatrous priests loaded their helpless gods upon carts to wheel them away and set them up somewhere else. Idols who could not deliver their worshipers had to be delivered by them from absolute destruction".

Israel is to be God's missionary in the world. Israel is God's servant, preacher, priest, and mediator on behalf the nations. Israel's existence, then, was for missionary service. "Out of all the nation, the whole earth is mine" (Gen 19:5), with these phrases at its core, our text avoids any narrow exclusivity in God's relationship with or intentions for Israel. On the contrary, it affirms the universality of God's ownership of the whole earth and interest in all nations. But in the same breath it affirms the particularity of Israel's unique identity as YHWH's treasured personal possession, as his priestly kingdom and holy nation.
The effect of this double affirmation is that Israel is going to live on a very open stage. There will be nothing cloistered or closeted about Israel's existence or history. For good or ill (as the narratives and prophets will show), Israel was visible to the nations, and in that posture they could be either a credit or a disgrace to YHWH their God. Here, however, at the start of that historical journey in the midst of the nations, God's desire is that they should live consistently with their status as his treasured possession, in priestly and holy conduct. The life of God's people is always turned outward to the watching nations, as priests are always turned toward their people in the world is part of the mission of God to the world itself that universally belongs to him. Once again we observe the connection between ethics and mission. Israel's calling to be holy is not set over against the nations and the whole earth but in the context of living among them for God.
In Genesis 12: 2 begins the actual promise to Abraham. Its essential word, which is varied not less than five times, is the word "blessing." This blessing concerns Abraham first of all; but it also concerns those on the outside who adopt a definite attitude toward this blessing. One does not approach the substance of the Old Testament ideas a bout blessing if one proceeds primarily from the notion of a magically effective manistic "strength of mind" which is poured out like a fluid. This idea is pre-Israelitic in spite of some rudiments retained especially in the cultic vocabulary. Yahweh in freedom gives or withholds blessing; for men the effectiveness of this blessing depends strictly on their transmission of the creative, divine word of blessing.
Meanwhile, the substance of Yahweh's blessing in the Old Testament is predominantly a material increase in life, especially in the sense of physical fruitfulness (Gen. 1: 22). The promise of innumerable descendants is a primary ingredient in the promise to the patriarchs (Gen. 13-16; 15-5; 17-5f.; 18-18; 22.17; 26.4, 24; 28.14l 35.11). In the "name" that Yahweh will "make great" (i.e., famous), one has seen correctly a hidden allusion to the story of the Tower of Babel: Yahweh now intends to give what men attempted to secure arbitrarily.
The promise given to Abraham has significance, however, far beyond Abraham and his seed. God now brings salvation and judgment into history, and man's judgment and salvation will be determined by the attitude he adopts toward this work which God intends to do in history. The thought of judgment, however, is here almost overarched by the words of blessing (notice the singular "him who" curses you in contrast to the plural "those who" bless you).
Therefore, our narrator does not yet consider God begins here primarily as "what a sign that is spoken against" (Luke 2.23) but as a source of universal blessing. The question has been raised at vs. 2b and 3b whether the meaning is only that Abraham is to become a formula for blessing that his blessing is to become far and wide proverbial (cf. Gen. 48.20). In favor of this conception (which reckons with a remnant of the magical-dynamic notion of blessing one can refer to Zech. 8.13. It is hermeneutically wrong to limit such a programmatic restrictively.
First, where Yahweh presents himself to the faith of the Old Testament, he does so as the God of Israel, who will not tolerate any other God. And even more clearly than the beginning of the Decalogue it underlines the fact that this “ God of Israel” is a relationship that has existed from the beginning of time, in the sense, for instance, that the Babylonian god Shamash was the sun god by definition.
While relating the “servant” to the earlier teaching about the “seed” ( Isa 41:8; 43:5; 44:3; 45:19; 25; 48:19; 53:10; 54:3; 59:21; 61:9; 65:9, 23; 66:22) and to the “covenant” already given (Isa 42:6; 49:8; 54:10; 55:3; 56:4, 6; 59:21; 61:8), not to mention “Abraham” (41:8; 51:2; 63:16) or “ Jacob” ( 41:21; 44:5; 49:26; 60:16) or “David” and the “everlasting covenant” ( 55:3; 61:8), Isaiah carefully systematized to a large degree the total plan, person , and work of God in the short scope of twenty-seven chapters. No wonder his theology has so profoundly effected men over the centuries.

1.2 Biblical Indicatives and Imperatives in Mission
A missional hermeneutic, then, I not content simply to call or obedience to the Great Commission (though it will assuredly include that as a matter of nonnegotiable importance), nor even to reflect on the missional implications of the Great Commandment. For behind both it will find the Great Communication –the revelation of the identity of God, of God's action in the world and God's saving purpose for all creation. And for the fullness of this communication we need the whole Bible in all its parts and genres, for God has given us no less. A missional hermeneutic takes the indicative and the imperative of the biblical revelation with equal seriousness and each in the light of the other.
Such mutual interpretation of indicative and imperative n the light of each other means that, on the one hand, biblical missiology (like biblical and systematic theology) revels in exploring the great indicative themes and traditions of the biblical faith in all their complexity and remarkable coherence. But biblical missiology recognizes, on the other hand, that if all this indicative for those who claim this worldview as their own. Conversely, a misional hermeneutic of the whole Bible will not become obsessed with only the great mission imperatives, such as the Great Commission, or be tempted to impose on them one assumed priority or another (e.g., evangelism or social justice or liberation or ecclesiastical order as the only "real" mission). Rather we will set those great imperatives within the context of their foundational indicatives, namely, all that the Bible affirms about God, creation, human life in its paradox of dignity and depravity, redemption in all its comprehensive glory, and the new creation in which God will dwell with his people.
A missional hermeneutic, then, cannot read biblical indicatives without their implied imperatives. Nor can it isolate biblical imperatives from the totality of the biblical indicative. It seeks a holistic understanding of mission from a holistic reading of the biblical texts. And since the Christian faith is inherently incarnational, in the sense of God taking a concrete human form in a specific social context, the Christian mission – if it wishes to be incarnational – also has to be specific and contextual. In our reflections on the missionary dimensions of the biblical message, we must therefore be willing to be challenged by the rich variety of the biblical accounts. And yet, that power seeks to manifest itself in our missionary ministry. Still we may, with due humility, look back on the witness of Jesus and our first forebears in the faith and seek to emulate them.

1.2.1 Humanity with a mission
In the mission of God, of the people of Israel, of Jesus, and of the disciples, we touched upon some of the aspects of what the Bible sees as the mission of humanity. Now we need to bring them all together to articulate the mission of humanity as understood by the biblical writers. Having been created by God, in God's own image, all humans have a mission, and they share that mission with God. Mission belongs to all. All humans are called and sent to be creative, life-affirming, liberative, and compassionate in their relationships with other humans and with other living and nonliving beings in the universe. All humans have the responsibility "in the garden of Eden to till it and keep it" (Gen. 2:15).
A responsible relationship with the environment that sustains human life is required of all humans. God enters into a covenant with Cain, and later in a highly dramatic way enters into a relationship of shared mission with Noah. The covenant Noah encompasses the whole of humanity, not just the chosen people of God-Hebrews in the Hebrew Bible and Christians in the New Testament. God's call to peoples and nations to walk in God's way is not limited to one people or one nation. The call goes out to all, Hebrews, Philistines, and Syrians as well (Amos 9:7).
Furthermore, all humans are invited to be involved in the liberative mission of God. God's offer of liberation is not limited to one people or one nation. It is offered to all humans in every part of the world. Such a universal offer of liberation comes with a call to engage in the act of liberation in one's own setting. Here again there is a democratization of God's mission as it is shared with humanity. Such a universal and liberative mission for all humans is again presented to us in the teachings and ministry of Jesus, especially in his vision of the Reign of God. All are invited to the feast of the Reign of God.
Such a vision demands that we view the mission of humanity as that which is practiced in a setting of dialogue and engagement with one another. All bring their gifts to the feast, and in a sharing of all gifts, the mission is shared with God. In serious and compassionate engagement with one another, humans exercise their God-given mission. The Bible ends with a picture of the new creation, in which all the nations bring their honor and wealth into that city of God that has no walls or gates but is open to all.
In the past, Christians have instinctively been concerned about great and urgent issues in every generation, and rightly included them in their overall concept of mission calling and practice. These have included the evils of disease, ignorance, slavery and many other forms of brutality and exploitation. Christians have taken up the cause of widows, orphans, refugees, prisoners, the insane, the hungry – and most recently they have swelled the numbers of those committed to "making poverty history."
Faced now with the horrific facts of the suffering of the earth itself, we must surely ask how God himself responds to such abuse of his creation and seek to align our mission objectives to include what matters to him. However, our care for creation should not be merely a negative, prudential or preventive reaction to a growing problem. A much more positive reason for it is that. The list is depressingly long.
1. The pollution of the sea, rivers and lakes
2. The destruction of rainforests and many other habitats, with the terrible effect on dependent life forms

3. Desertification and soil loss
4. The loss of species – animals, plants, birds, insects – and the huge reduction of essential bio-diversity on a planet that depends on it.
5. The hunting of some species to extinction
6. The depletion of the ozone layer
7. The increase of "greenhouse gases" and consequent global warming
All this is a vast and interrelated impending catastrophe of loss and destruction, affecting the whole planet and all its human and nonhuman inhabitants. To be unconcerned about it is to be either desperately ignorant or irresponsibly callous.
If, on the contrary, biblical religion is not inaugurated at the moment of first creation but within the course of human history, then there is a radical shift in emphasis. By contrast with the creation-based model of religion just described, we now see
(a) that God does not act alone but within an elaborate human network of politics, economics, and social customs;
(b) that God does not impress us so much with his power as with his mercy and tolerance toward human weakness, ignorance, and even deliberate sin;

(c) that the setting of God's action is no longer the unimpeded, open arena of nothingness as at first creation, but the muddy water and polluted atmosphere of human life;

(d) that God's action turns out to be immeasurable, for no one can determine that height and depth of his motivating love (Eph. 3:18); and

(e) that God's great redemptive acts (the mirabilia Dei) could, in fact must; be repeated over and over again.

This delegated authority within the created order is moderated by the parallel commands in the complementary account, "to work……and to take care of" the Garden (Gen 2:15). The care and keeping of creation is our human mission. The human race exists on the planet with a purpose that flow from the creative purpose of God himself. Out of this understanding of our humanity (which is also teleological, like our doctrine of God) flows our ecological responsibility, our economic activity involving work, productivity, exchange and trade, and the whole cultural mandate. To be human is to have a purposeful role in God's creation.
1. Human beings are to be treated as having an essential value derived from their being created in the image of a personal God. This value is primary; it is neither given nor can it be taken away by human beings it can only be recognized.

2. There is no absolute right of private property. The biblical view of creation means that human beings have been made stewards of what belong fundamentally to God; The land [the basic means of production of the time] shall not be sold in perpetuity for the land is mine with me you are but aliens and tenants (lev 25:23; also Exod. 19:5 Ezed. 46:18). Human beings have been set within creation to till it and keep it (Gen.2:15), that is to care for it with tenderness, sensitivity and sympathy so that it will yield enough for every living being (including animals). The idea that the material means of life could be owned and used by some to the detriment of others is unacceptable. In biblical terms the unjust stewards will be sent away into exile far from the inheritance they were meant to share with those in need.


3. Human beings are help accountable before God for the way they manage life in community. Justice for the poor is a matter of human ethical decisions for which people will be help responsible. There will be no excuse that they were just following impersonal market forces. In other words responsibility for the welfare of people cannot be subordinated to the detached working of economic pressures: The economy was made for humankind for the economy so the son of man is lord even of the economy (Mark 2:27).

1.2.2 The Mission of the Servant
Jesus clearly identified himself as the messianic Servant. According to Roger E. Hedlund, the Servant is one, endowed with God's Spirit, who brings justice to the nations (Isaiah 42:1). The Servant is Israel (Isaiah 49:30, or a representative to Israel (Isaiah 49:5), who is also sent to the nations(Isaiah 49:6). The Servant is the remnant (Isaiah 49:22-260. the servant is obedient (Isaiah 50:4-5). The servant is one who suffers (Isaiah 50:6). The Servant I the suffering Redeemer (Isaiah 53:3) whose death atones for the sins of others (Isaiah 53:65-6; 10-12). The Servant (Isaiah 42:6, 49:6) incarnates Israel's mission. Legrand understands the Servant as a missionary figure, but the "missionary" is Israel. The mission to the nations is explicit, but is conceived through the life and salvation of Israel. God's salvific activity is addressed to the nations through Israel.
The purpose of this suffering and death is most clearly spelt out in some of the references to Isaiah 53, which speaks of the Servant's role of suffering for the sins of his people, dying on their behalf, and thus 'making many to be accounted righteous'; thus Jesus would 'give his life as a ransom for many' (Mk. 10:45), and his 'blood of the covenant' would be 'poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins' many for the forgiveness of sins' (Mt. 26:28). This is sacrificial language, and the goal of Jesus' death is to be the final sacrifice which would make possible the forgiveness of sins and the restoration of fellowship between man and God, thus ending man's rebellion and bringing in the kingdom of God.
The mission of God is expressed in the Servant Christ (John 13,1-16; Phil. 2.5-11), and so in a servant Church the Christian gospel becomes fully credible when it expresses itself not just in words but in loving action and service. Much of this service is simple and unspectacular, but its essential basis is that it must be the disinterested service of direct love. Such is the pattern of Christian service to the world is participation in the mission of God which he fulfils by showing his love to the world by sending his Son. The mission extends God's salvation to the entire world. First of all the Servant is Christ, for the church as always understood it so – especially in Isaiah 53. The servant is also Israel. Third, it is the remnant – the church within the church, the righteous Israel of faith within the commonwealth. Finally, the Servant is an individual, the coming Redeemer.
The servant's mission is to "bring forth justice to the nations" (Isaiah 42:1). It is to "open the eyes that are blind, to bring out he prisoners from the dungeon, from the prison those who sit in darkness" (Isaiah 42:7). The servant mission will achieve justice in the earth oppressed". This says Scott "consists of doing justice for the poor and oppressed. It is God's intervention, says Miranda, to serve the cause of justice and to save from injustice and oppression. This mission of establishing justice God entrusts to Israel, says Guiterrez.
However, it is the Creator himself, according to Isaiah (Isaiah 42:5), who has acted and who will act again (Isaiah 42:9). Israel is part of his plan (Isaiah 43:10; 44:1, 21) which reaches out to embrace all nations (Isaiah 43:8-9; 45:5-6, 22-23). The purpose of the election of the servant is the service of God (in service to men), thus "making known to all men the character and will of God." The church has commonly referred this passage to Christ. He is the one who will bring justice to the Gentiles, for God's Spirit is upon him. Jesus, in fact, fulfilled this Scripture, according to Matthew 12:17-21.
Legrand understands the Servant a missionary figure, but the "missionary" is Israel. God's salvatic activity is addressed to the nations through Israel. The first conclusion which Rowley draws is that the servant is Israel, called to be a missionary community. Servant can no more be separated from Israel than Christ from his church. For carrying out his mission, "God chooses them that are serviceable". Election is for service. The mission is based on the election. It is observed that the four Servant Song of Second Isaiah (Isa 42:1-4;49:1-6;), the Servant – whether understood as a representative individual, the entire people, or both –will restore justice and light to the nations, so that God's "salvation may reach to the end of the earth" (Isa 49:6).
Isaiah 42:1-4 is a divine word to the servant. In 49:1-6 and in 50:4-9 the servant himself speaks. Isaiah 52:13-53:12 contain a divine promise relating to the servant together with a reflection of the congregation on his suffering. God singles out the servant as his chosen one, equips him, and his mission. "He shall bring forth justice to the nations." Isaiah 42: 2-3 describe the mode of his activity: "A bruised reed he will not break," also the goal of his activity: "till he has established justice in the earth."
1. Isaiah 49:1-6. Here the Servant himself speaks. In Isaiah 49:1-3 he refers to his having been chosen by God. Then he reviews his prior work in behalf of Israel, which he would have has to regard as a failure, were he not able to reply on God (v.4). Now, however, he has received a far greater commission from God: "I will give you as a light to the nations!" (Isaiah 42: 5-6).

2. Isaiah 50:4-9. The servant speaks of his office that has a verbal character. Through it he is supposed to help the weary (v.4). This office, however, is exposing him to suffering that he does not try to evade (vv. 5-6). For he trusts patiently in the sure help of God. Who will intercede on his behalf (vv. 7-9).


3. Isaiah 52:13-53:12 begins like 42:1-4. God endorses the Servant whom he has chosen and with an allusion to his humiliation assures him of success and exaltation. The conclusion is once again a divine word concerning the Servant-God will exalt and reward him for his vicarious suffering and death.

It is not possible here to enter into the extensive discussion that has taken place concerning the songs of the Servant of the Lord. Claus Westermann stated that the office of servant in the ministry of Moses and the prophet Jeremiah comes closest to the songs of the Suffering Servant. It has always been recognized that these songs point forward to the New Testament more clearly than any other text of the Old Testament.
As the new people of God, re-established in the land, they are properly to be described as "Jacob my servant"(Isaiah 44:1), knowing themselves to belong to God, so that they will rename themselves accordingly (Isaiah 44:5). The glory and the blessings which belonged to the past are renewed (Isaiah 51:1) and there will be no future shame for the people whom Yahweh has saved (Isaiah 45:17). The purpose of Yahweh is made known through Israel. The limit of God's purpose is not reached in the restoration of Israel, but in the extension of his saving power to the ends of the Earth (Isaiah 49:6). The exaltation of servant of God has done( Isaiah 52:13-53:12). The fortunes of Israel, so deeply experienced by the prophet, are seen to be part of the larger purpose of God. Her restoration will be a recovery of that Zion which is the place of God's dwelling as central to the life of the world( Isaiah 2:1-4;Micah 4:1-4).
“Thou art my Servant, Israel. So the Servant here must still be Israel, difficult as that is to understand. The Servant must be the whole people of God as it is represented by the remnant (Isaiah 46:3).”

However, when we recall that the New Testament conception of the Church is in continuity with the OT conception of the corporate personality of Israel, we find a clue to the puzzle of this verse. Then again, whenever a congregation regains its understanding of what it means to be the servant-people of God, it also regains its understanding of the world mission of the Church.
A light for the nations is repeated from Isaiah 42:6, and now its significance is made crystal clear. For since Isaiah 42, we have learned that it is God who forms the light, not man (45:7; cf. 60:3). Moreover, since light and salvation are set down in parallel, the one word illumines the meaning of the other. And yet, paradoxically, the salvation that Deutero-Isaiah speaks of can be conveyed to man only in the body of the Servant Israel (cf. Luke 2:32; Acts 13:47).
Here we have Israel preserved in the dungeon and darkness of Babylon, "waiting for the consolation of Israel," to use the words of Luke 2; 25 at this point. Deutero-Isaiah tells her three things about her present situation: (1) Her time of consolation or comfort has come (40: 1-2), (2) God is now about to use her despite her state of rebellion, because he has forgiven all her sins. (3) God is now preparing to make use of her even while she suffers rejection in Babylon, and will do so in such a manner that her suffering will become his instrument for the world's redemption.
Jesus appears, not just as the Saviour of Israel in fulfillment of prophetic expectation, but also as an embodiment of Israel as they should be. Matthew makes this point dramatically in his opening chapters, first by applying the Exodus verse Hosea 11:1 to Jesus, and then by telling the story in a way that makes Jesus re-enact Israel's history: the "Exodus from Egypt, the crossing of the Red Sea, the temptations in the desert, even the arrival at Mt Sinai to receive the "law", Perhaps most pointedly, it is Jesus on whom the Spirit descends (Matt. 3:16), although the prophetic expectation was of an outpouring of the Spirit upon Israel.
Where Israel had failed the temptations in the desert, Jesus now remains faithful to God. Luke emphasizes Jesus' role as the Saviour promised by the prophets. In line with prophetic expectation, he presents Jesus as the Saviour not just of Israel but of the Gentile nations as well. This perspective dominates Luke's whole presentation of Jesus, in both his volumes (compare Luke 2:30-32 with Acts 28:17-28). God’s true servant learnt obedience and perseverance through the things he suffered (Isaiah 50:4-11). The exiles were to prepare to return (Isaiah 52:1-12).Just as people were startled at the sight of the servant’s great suffering, so would they be startled at the sight of his great glory. The sufferer would become a conqueror (Isaiah 52:13-53:12).
In Isaiah 49-57 the central figure is the “servant of the lord”, who combined in his people Israel, the prophet and prophetic institution, and the Messiah in His role as Servant. Again the climactic description and his most important work were located at the middle point of this ennead: 52:13-53:12.The salvation affected by this servant had both objective and subjective aspects (54:1-56:9); indeed, its final and concluding work would involve the glorification of all nature. In order, emphases on the persons of the Godhead are father, “Servant” (Son), and Holy Spirit. In work, they are Creator- lord of history, Redeemer, and sovereign Ruler over all in the “eschaton.” The five major forces in Isaiah’s message are God, the people o f Israel, the event of salvation, the prophet, and the world of God. Finally, this message even has several distinctive stylistic features.
The theme of Isaiah’s call returns in this section as the holiness and righteousness of God are praised repeatedly, “ God is “ the holy One’’ (Isaiah 40: 25; 41:14,16, 20; 43: 3, 14; 47: 4; 48:17; and it continues in the later sections in 49:7). He also is righteous ( sedeq) , i.e., straight, right , and faithful to a norm, His own nature and character. His righteousness could best be seen in His work of salvation, for the prophet often joined His righteousness and His performance of the covenant promise together ( e.g., Isaiah 41: 2; 42: 6-7; 46: 12-13; note later 51: 1, 5, 6, 8; 54:10; 55:3; 62:1-2) Only of God could it be said, “ He is right” (Isaiah 41:26) or He is “ a righteous God and Savior” (Isaiah 45:21) , who declares “ what is right” ( v.19) and who brings men near to His righteousness ( 46:13) .
Repeatedly Isaiah stressed the fact that God had “created”; “made”; “spread out” “stretched out , “ established”, and “ founded” the heavens and the earth. In this vocabulary, so reminiscent of Genesis 1-2, he established God’s ability to create as part of His credentials as rightful lord of man’s present history and final destiny (Isaiah 40:15, 17, 23-34; 42;5; 43:1-7; and later 54:15-16). No wonder He was called “King” on four occasions. He was “King of Jacob” (Isaiah 41:21); “your king,” O Israel (Isaiah 43: 15); “King of Israel” (Isaiah 44: 6) ; and as 52: 7 summarized, “ Your God is king.” Isaiah also used the additional royal titles of “ Shepherd” ( 40:9-11), “ Witness,” “ Commandment- Giver,” and “ Leader” in Isaiah 55: 3.In a real turn of events , the prophet Isaiah had God take the cup of God’s wrath from Israel’s lips and put it to her oppressor’s mouth instead ( 51:22-23; cf. the seventh century prophet Nahum ( 1:11-14). Further- more, a new exodus and redemption were envisaged for the future (Isaiah 52:1-6). This is “good news” to Zion. Then all the ends of the earth would see God’s salvation (Isaiah 52:9-10; cf. 40:9).
This servant who would personally rule, a fact that would startle all the kings of the earth (Isaiah 52:15), would also be the One who would suffer on behalf of all humanity so as to make God’s atonement available. The first advent of this Servant would amaze many, but His second advent would catch the breath of even the kings of the earth (Isaiah 52:15) ----therein lay the mystery of the Servant. His rejection followed: men would reject His message (Isaiah 53:1), His person (V.2), and His mission (v. 3) . But His vicarious suffering would effect an atonement between God and man (VV.4-6; and though He would submit to suffering (v.7), death (v.8) and burial (v.9), He would subsequently be exalted and richly rewarded (VV. 10-12). On the servant of the Lord, then, was laid the iniquity of all humanity.











CHAPTER TWO
THE GOD AND MISSION

2.1 The Biblical Mission as The living God
Historians of the religion of Israel offer us various reconstructions of the stages by which it is assumed Israel became truly monotheistic. It seems clear that from a very early stage Israel had a conviction that to be Israelite required an exclusive attachment to YHWH as their God. This is sometimes called "mono-Yahwism.” Whether this commitment to YHWH originally included the conviction that YHWH was the only deity in reality (as distinct from the only deity Israel was to worship), and if not, by what stages and by what date such a conviction eventually took hold, is matter of continued and inconclusive debate. However, it seems to me that the extent to which affirmation of YHWH's uniqueness and universality penetrated all the genres of Israel's texts allows room for believing that there was a radically monotheistic core to Israel's faith from a very early period, however much it was obscured and compromised in popular religious practice.

2.1.1 The living God makes Himself know in Israel
Abraham is told to "go from your country and your kindred and your father's house to the land that I will show you (Gen.12:1-3)." This severance of a person from the immediate surroundings or this preference for one person over other members of the same gamily becomes a pattern of life in the book of Genesis. It occurs at major transitions. God singled out Seth instead of Cain (Gen. 4:4, 25-26), Noah's family, who alone "found favor in the eyes of the Lord" (Gen. 6;8), Shem over Noah's tow other sons (Gen. 9;25-27), Isaac rather than Ishmael (Gen. 21:1-21), Jacob rather than Esau (Gen. 25:23).
"So I have come down to rescue them from the hand of the Egyptians and to bring them up out of that land into a good and spacious land, a land flowing with milk and honey-the home of the Canaanites, Hittites, Amorites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites(Ex 3:8 (NIV)"

Although God's action is highlighted in the biblical account of these incidents, the setting of special need and the style of deliverance belong to the secular sphere of life. The context of God's choice gradually became more sacred as secular features were absorbed within the sanctuary and within Israel's styles of worship: the Levites, politically the least significant of the tribes, were picked to be priests (Gen. 49:5-7; Deut. 33:8-11); Samuel, who radically changed Israel's political system, was born after a promise at the sanctuary of Shiloh (1 Sam. 1:17); David, the youngest of Jesse's sons, was selected over all his older brothers and anointed king (1 Sam. 16:11-13).
Once we arrive at royalty a new chapter begins in the history of "election." The special word bahar begins to appear with prominence and frequency. This Hebrew word quickly became a technical term for a special act of God, singling out one person, place, or people from all the rest for a special purpose. The criteria for this choice rested first with human need, perhaps destitution, and second with God's hopes and plans for Israel. Bahar took sole possession of this secular and now sacred area of action. It is something of a truism that in the Bible God is known through what God does and says. So the combination of the mighty acts of God and the words, through which those acts were anticipated, explained and celebrated form the twin core of so much of the Old Testament literature.
Two mighty acts in particular, at either end of Israel came to know their God – the exodus and the return from exile. In both cases we will consider some of the key truths that Israel associated with these events and how they relate to the uniqueness and universality of YHWH. This in turn shapes and informs our understanding of this dimension of God's mission – his will to be known for who he is. The exodus stands in the Hebrew Scriptures as the great defining demonstration of YHWH's power, love, faithfulness and liberation intervention on behalf of his people. It was thus a major act of self-revelation by God, and also a massive learning experience for Israel. Indeed, even before it happened, the prophetic word of God through Moses in anticipation of it emphasizes this as part of its purpose.
YHWH wills to be known. Exodus 5:22 – 6:8 is a pivotal text in the developing story. Since Moses' arrival in Egypt and his demands on Pharaoh to grant freedom to the Hebrew slaves, things have gone from bad to worse (Ex 5:1 – 14). As the oppression becomes more severe, the leaders complain to Moses, and Moses in turn complains to God. He accuses God of failing to deliver on his rhetoric of salvation at the burning bush (Ex 5:15-23). In response God offers a renewed clarification of his identity (Ex 6:2-3) and a concise but comprehensive summary of his redemptive intentions (Ex 6:6-80. Exodus 6:6-8 is God's mission statement in relation to this whole narrative.
On the warranty of his own name and character ("I am the LORD" is repeated at the beginning and end, vv. 6,8), God promises to do three things for Israel.
1. To liberate them from the Egyptian yoke
2. To enter into a mutual covenant relationship with them
3. To bring them into the land promised to their forefathers
The only thing that Israel will do in the whole scenario is that they will come to know YHWH conclusively as God through these events: "Then you will know that I am the LORD you God, who brought you out from under the yoke of the Egyptians" (Ex 6:7). The following months and years would see Israel on a steep learning curve, but by the end of it their worldview would be changed forever. They would know who was truly God in Egypt (and everywhere else).
So the anticipated outcome of the exodus was that Israel should know YHWH as God and should also know some fundamental truths about his character and power. This indeed is how Deuteronomy looks back on the great events of that generation. Those events constituted an unprecedented and unparalleled revelation of the identity and uniqueness of the Lord, the God of Israel. And they had been planned for exactly that purpose. Three lessons stand out for attention, two drawn from Exodus 15 (1) that YHWH is incomparable and (2) that he is sovereign; and one drawn from Deuteronomy 4: that YHWH is unique.
Similar rhetoric is used elsewhere in the Old Testament to express wonder and admiration for YHWH as the God without equal. The affirmation that there is no god like YHWH ("none like him" or "none like you") declares him to be beyond comparison:
1. In keeping promises and fulfilling his word ( 2 Sam 7:22)
2. In power and wisdom, especially as seen in creation (Jer 10:6-7, 11-12)
3. In the heavenly assembly (Ps 89;6-8)
4. In ruling over the nations (Jer 49:19; 50:44)
5. In pardoning sin and forgiving transgression (Mic 7:18)
6. In saving power on behalf of his people (Is 64:40
And because there is none like YHWH, all nations will eventually come and worship him as the only true God (Ps 86:8-9). This is the missional dimension of this great truth, which we will pick up and expand in chapter fourteen and fifteen.
So an important truth that Israel came to know about YHWH through the exodus is that he is incomparably greater than other gods. This is affirmed with such superlative intensity that it is tantamount to the more truly monotheistic claim. That is to say, the simple reason why YHWH is incomparable is that there is nothing in reality to compare him with. YHWH stands in a class of his own.
In the Old Testament the nations are seen in relation to Israel, the elect people of God (Deut 28:10; Isaiah 56:6-7). Israel, we have seen, was elected to serve God. Freytag points out that the concept of "Gentiles" was a negative counter-concept to the "people of God" and that the Gentiles also belong to God by right of creation. In connection with the failure of his servant Israel, the Bible portrays the nations as becoming passive instrument in the accomplishments of the purpose of God. Although all the physical descendants of Jacob were God’s chosen people Israel in the physical and national sense, not all were God’s people in the inward and spiritual sense. Only those who turned from their sins and trusted in the saving mercy of God could be called the true Israel, the true people of God. This was so in Old Testament as well as New Testament times (Isa 1:4-20; Rom 2:28-29; 9:6-8; Gal 6:16).
Yet even these, the true people of God, did not experience the full blessings that God intended for his people. God’s purposes for Israel found their perfect fulfilment in the Messiah, Jesus. The nation Israel was Abraham’s natural offspring (John 8:37); the few faithful believers in Israel (often called the remnant) were his spiritual offspring (Rom 9:6-7; Gal 3:29); but the Messiah himself was the perfect offspring, the one in whom all God’s purposes for Israel were fulfilled and through whom people of all nations are blessed (Gal 3:16; cf. Gen 12:1-3). When people through faith are ‘in Christ’, they become Abraham’s offspring through Christ and inherit God’s promises through Christ. This is so regardless of their nationality (Gal 3:14, 29; Eph 3:6). The true people of God include all who have faith in him, not just those who belong to Israel. Like Abraham they are saved by faith, and therefore are spiritually his true descendants (Rom 4:11-12,16; Gal 3:26-29; 4:26-28; 6:16; 1 Peter 1:1; 2:9).
The divine call and Abraham's response are eloquently summarized in 12:1-9. Briefly and simply, these paragraphs tell of the LORD's command to Abraham to leave home, the journey that Abraham undertook in obedient faith, and the acts of worship that followed his later experiences. This story is typological in that it is the first in a series of episodes in which God speaks and the patriarch usually responds in faithful obedience, a pattern repeated many times in Genesis, not just in the Abraham cycle but also in the Isaac and Jacob cycles as well. Like his grandson Jacob and great-grand-son Joseph, he had to leave his home to find God's blessing in a foreign land.
The later patriarchs were in many respects following in their forefather's footsteps. It was Abraham who first set out on this pilgrimage of faith. And the narrative draws attention to the new epoch that is inaugurated by a number of allusions to the primeval history. Five times in vv 2-3 Abraham is said to be "blessed" or a "blessing" to others. This harks back to the first great blessing of mankind at creation (Gen 1:28) and its renewal after the flood. Abraham's God-given success will be so evident to others that he will become "a blessing," that is, men will invoke blessings on themselves: "may the LORD bless me as he blessed Abram." Those who so invoke God' said are assured by him: "I will bless those who bless you." So Abraham will become a source of blessing to all who seek it. Indeed, in him "all the families of the world will find blessing.
Unlike his father, Terah, who stays in Harran, he goes on to Canaan. There in its heartland of Shechem the LORD appears to him: indeed, this is the first time in Scripture the LORD is said to have appeared to anyone. He promises Abraham: "To your descendants I shall give this land." Abraham's response is immediate: he builds an altar. Briefly it is related that he moves on to another important holy site near Bethel, and there he stays, pitching his tent, building an altar, and worshiping the LORD. The scene closes with him moving towards the southern border of Canaan, the Negeb. His actions, however briefly related, are an acted prophecy. They foreshadow the day when Israel will take possession of the whole land and worship the LORD there.
David himself was promised "a great name" (2 Sam 7:9), and he made Israel "a great nation." But that did not exhaust the scope of these promises. Ps 47:10[9] encourages all the princes of the peoples to acknowledge the God of Abraham. The prophets, of course, look forward to a day when all men will recognize God's presence in Israel (e.g. Isa 2:2-4), when the curse of Babel will be reversed so that "all of them may call upon the name of the LORD" (Zeph 3:9). But most interesting are the specific allusions to Gen 12 in Isa 19:24, where Israel is going to be a blessing in the midst of the earth alongside her archenemies Egypt and Assyria. Jer 4:2 also makes reference to these promised. If Israel repents, he says, "then nations shall bless themselves in him, and in him shall they glory." The NT looks on the advent of Christ as ushering in the age in which all the nations will be blessed through Abraham (Acts 3:25; Gal 3:8). And his faith is held up as a model of God's dealings with all men (Rom 4; Gal 3); in particular his willingness to forsake his homeland is an example to us who should look for "the city … whose builder and maker is God" (Heb 11:8-10).

2.1.2 The living God makes Himself know in Jesus Christ
Although he existed with the Father from eternity, the Son willingly took human form to fulfill his Father’s purposes for the salvation of human beings and the conquest of evil (Rom 8:3; Gal 4:4-5; Heb 2:14-15). When Jesus was born in Bethlehem, the Son of God added humanity to the deity that he already had. His entrance As the Son of God, Jesus shares in the deity and majesty of the Father; yet he is also humbly obedient to the into human life involved the supernatural work of God in the womb of the virgin Mary, so that the baby born to her, though fully human, was also the unique Son of God (Luke 1:30-31, 35; 2:42,49).
There was often a difference between the way believers spoke of Jesus’ Sonship and the way Jesus himself spoke of it. Believers usually spoke of it in relation to Jesus’ divine person and his unity with the Father (Matt 16:16; John 20:31; Col 1:13; 1 John 2:23; 4:15). Jesus also spoke of it in this way, but in addition he emphasized the meaning of his Sonship in relation to his earthly ministry and complete submission to his Father (Mark 13:32; John 4:34; 5:19; 7:16; 8:28,42; cf. Heb 5:8). The Father sent the Son to be the Saviour of the world, and the Son’s obedience to this mission meant that he had to suffer and die (John 3:14-16; Rom 5:10; 1 John 4:9-10). The Son completed that work, being obedient even to death (John 17:4; Phil 2:8), and God declared his total satisfaction with the Son’s work by raising him from death (Rom 1:4).
However, the mission that the Father entrusted to the Son involved more than saving those who believe. It involved overcoming all rebellion and restoring all things to a state of perfect submission to the sovereign God (John 5:20-29; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 1:10; 1 John 3:8). That mission extends to the whole universe, and will reach its climax when the last enemy, death, has been banished for ever (1 Cor 15:25-26). The conquering power of the Son’s victory at the cross will remove the last traces of sin. The Son will restore all things to the Father, and God’s triumph will be complete. God will be everything to everyone (1 Cor 15:24, 28).
The magnificent prophecies of Isaiah 40-55 assert again and again that YHWH is utterly unique as the only living God in his sovereign power over all nations and all history, and in his ability to save. Therefore Paul, or the composers of the early Christian hymn which he may be quoting in Philippians 2, by deliberately selecting a Scripture from such a context and applying it to Jesus, was affirming that Jesus shares the identity and uniqueness of YHWH in those same respects. So sure was this identification that he (they) did not hesitate to insert the name of Jesus where the name YHWH had occurred in the sacred text. By doing this they 1. gave to Jesus a God title 2. applied to Jesus a God text 3. anticipated for Jesus God worship.
The missional implications of this opening point about Jesus should be clear. If the mission of the biblical God includes his will to make himself known in his true identity as YHWH, the living God of Israel's faith, then by identifying Jesus with YHWH, the New Testament sees Jesus as central to that self-revelatory dimension of God's mission. But there is far more to this than formal identity, as we now explore.
Paul's application of an Old Testament text about YHWH to Jesus in Philippians 2:10-11 is the most notable but far from the only example of its kind. There are a considerable number of other places where Paul quotes Old Testament Scriptures in which YHWH/ho kyrios stood, when he (Paul) is referring to Jesus. Nor is Paul the only New Testament writer to do so. The author of Hebrew, for example, launches his epistle with a whole salvo of God texts applied to Jesus. Many of these applied Scriptures are functional- that is, they speak of things that YHWH does or provides or accomplishes.
By such scriptural quotation those function are then attributed to, or closely associated with, Jesus. As with the simple expressions of identity (maranatha, Kyrios lesous), Paul did not originate this practice. Nor did the early church. It goes right back to Jesus himself. For the Gospels preserve numerous ways that Jesus in word, deed and implicit claim linked himself with the unique functions of the God of Israel. We will look at four key ways that the activity of YHWH is described in the Old Testament: as Creator, Ruler, Judge and Savior. And in each case we will see how Jesus is described in the same way.
This is what makes it so astonishing and so profoundly significant for Christian identity and mission that the New Testament portrays Jesus and his earliest followers calmly demanding that Jesus must be viewed within the same frame of reference and with the same exclusive suite of functions and claims as YHWH himself. From a missiological angle, if these are the prerogatives and functions that YHWH exercises in fulfillment of his mission, then it will be of critical importance to any concept of Christian mission to understand how the mission of God in Christ is exercised in these terms. Now that God’s purposes had been fulfilled in Jesus Christ, the New Testament writers discovered in the Old Testament writings greater truths than the original writers were aware of (1 Peter 1:10-12).
While accepting the original meaning of the writings, the New Testament writers expanded that meaning because of the fuller revelation that had come through Jesus Christ. Promises may have already been fulfilled in the Old Testament, but now they had a greater fulfilment in the New (Deut 12:9; 25:19; Josh 21:45; Heb 4:1-10). Psalms, prophecies and songs may have been written at first concerning some Old Testament person or event, but now they had new meaning because people saw them as foreshadowing's of Christ (cf. quotations from Psalm 2 in Acts 4:25-26; 13:33; cf. quotations from Psalm 45 in Heb 1:8-9; cf. quotations from Psalm 69 in John 2:17; 15:25; 19:28-30; Acts 1:20; Isa 7:14 in Matt 1:23).
The New Testament writers saw Jesus the Messiah as the fulfilment of all God’s purposes for Israel. He was the great descendant of Abraham through whom Israel received its supreme glory and through whom people of all nations are blessed (Gen 12:1-3; Gal 3:16).Since Jesus was the one to whom the entire Old Testament pointed, he fulfilled the Old Testament (Matt 4:14-16; 8:17; 12:17-21). The New Testament writers were so convinced of this that they spoke of a ‘fulfilment’ even when they saw only a striking similarity between Old and New Testament events. For example, as Israel came out of Egypt, so did Jesus (Hosea 11:1; Matt 2:15).
Although Israel repeatedly failed and suffered God’s punishment, the people still hoped for a glorious future. Jesus Christ, the true fulfilment of Israel, not only suffered for his people’s sins, but he completed perfectly what Israel had failed to do (Isa 53:4 with Matt 8:17; Isa 42:1-4 with Matt 12:18-21). The New Testament fulfils the Old in that Jesus Christ became all that Israel should have been but never was (Isa 53:5-6 with 1 Peter 2:24-25; cf. Zech 9:9-11 with Matt 21:5; 26:28-29). Like Israel in general, David’s kingdom in particular failed to fulfil God’s purposes. He looked for the day when God’s people would enjoy his blessings in a kingdom of righteousness. The ideals that David longed for found their fulfilment in David’s great descendant, Jesus the Messiah (Ps. 40:6-8.)
It has long been recognized that Matthew emphasizes the basic Christian conviction that Jesus fulfilled the prophetic hopes of the Scriptures. Jesus fulfils the law not simply by obeying it but by bringing it to the end for which it was intended. His teaching eloquently stated in the sermon that follows, is not a synthesis of the old law but a new revelation fro new age. Matthew casts the aura of fulfillment over his entire portrait of Jesus. The chief means is his studied used of Scripture. Through his so-called fulfillment texts, the evangelist applies the label of fulfillment to practically every dimension of Jesus' life: his origins (Mt. 1; 22; 2:23), the initiation of his mission in Galilee (Mt 4:14-46), his ministry of healing (Mt 8:17; 12:17-21), his entry into Jerusalem (Mt 21:4-5), his deliverance to death (Mt 25:54-56).
Even hostility to Jesus falls under the spell of fulfillment in the threats of Herod (2:17), the rejection of his teaching (Mt 13:14-15), and the fate of his betrayer (Mt 27:9-10). These texts are only a fraction of the scriptural citations and allusions in the Gospel story but they stand out because the evangelist introduces each of them with a standardized formula, which explicitly states that Jesus' life "fulfills" the promises and hopes of the Scriptures.
The genealogy that opens the Gospel (Mt. 1:1-7) plants Jesus deep within the heritage of Judaism. Jesus is subtly cast as a new Moses in the way that Matthew describes the dramatic circumstances of his birth and his teaching from the mountain top. Throughout the Gospel, titles forged in the Hebrew Scriptures are applied to Jesus: Emmanuel, Christ, Son of God, Son of David, Son of Man, and Servant – to name some of the major ones. By drawing on this fund of Old Testament materials, the evangelist proclaims that Jesus indeed fulfills the promises of the covenant to Israel and brings its history to its intended climax.
The Matthean Jesus is evidently present in the community. He is the "Emmanuel, .. God with us" (Matthew 1: 23) who fulfills the covenant promise of God's ongoing loyalty to his people. He is present where the community gathers in faith (Matthew 18:20) and will remain with the community as it begins its mission in the world (Matthew 28:20). He is the exalted Son of man to whom all authority has been given (Matthew 28:16). The entire Gospel story is a proclamation of this abiding presence. The miracle stories affirm that the risen Jesus continues to effect healing, liberation, and forgiveness within the community. Thus the leper is cleansed from his illness (Matthew 8:2).The centurion successfully intercedes on behalf of his servant (Matthew 8:21) and the drowning Peter all cry out for rescue to the "Lord" (kyrie), a title that in Matthew's Gospel clearly designates the power and divine authority of the risen Jesus. The Jesus who affects forgiveness of sins for the paralytic is in fact "the Son of Man on earth".
The Lord is also present in the community's mission. The call to the Twelve remains the remains the marching orders for Matthew's own community (Matthew 10:1ff.). The rebuffs and persecution the missionaries experience is a share in Jesus' own ministry and experience (Matthew 10:24). Conversely, hospitality shown to one of these "little ones" is hospitality shown to the risen Christ who sends them and abides with them (Matthew 10:40-42). This same abiding Lord and glorified Son of Man is the one who sends the community out on mission at the end of the Gospel and promises to remain with the missionary church (Matthew 28:16-20).
The same Lord present in the community of its mission will 'come" as Son of Man at the end of time to gather the elect and to effect judgment on all peoples. The force of that conviction can be felt in Mt. 26:64, where Jesus declares to the high priest: "I tell you, hereafter you will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of power, and coming on the clouds of heaven." The word "hereafter" (or more literally, "from now on") implies that in the triumph of resurrection, the exaltation of the Son of Man and his coming has already begun. In the destruction of the temple veil (Matthew 27:51) and the raising of the holy ones from death signs of the future judgment are now visible.
But the Gospel clearly expects the full consummation of the end and the victorious judgment of Jesus as Son of Man to be a future event. It is then that the Son of Man will separate the wheat from the weeds (Matthew 13:36-43). Matthew's amplification of judgment material in Matthew 24-25 shows this was an important part of his theological perspective (Matthew 24;30-31, 37-44; ). The judgment that has already been felt in Israel's experience will be shared by all the nations of the earth (Matthew 25:31-32).
Jesus' entire ministry his privileged sense of piety, his interpretation of the law, his association with the lawless, and the source of his healing power – was put in question by public crucifixion at the hands of the Romans and with the consent of the religious authorities of his own people. Thus resurrection is rightly interpreted by much of early Christian theology as the vindication of Jesus. "God has made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom you crucified (Acts 2:36)". Through God's saving power not only is Jesus' mission in all its facets validated, but his very person is disclosed as exalted, chosen, transcendent. The resurrection event reveals to the early community the awesome identity of Jesus as the Christ, as Son of God, as Son of man, as Lord of the universe. The Christological authority implicit in the graceful words and actions of Jesus of Nazareth was now explicitly revealed as the authority and mission of God's Son. This dynamic gives birth to the mission theology, properly so called, of the New Testament.

2.1.3 The living God confronts Idolatry
The Lord removed Israel "out of his sight" because they fell into false religious practices borrowed from the nations (2 Kings 17). The prophets opposed idolatrous influences; therefore they worked to restore the missionary presence. Combating idolatry can take many forms. Within the ministry of the apostle Paul, for example, we may observe the different approach adopted when, (1) he tackles idolatry in the context of dense theological argument of an epistle and (2) he is confronting it in evangelistic engagement with the worshipers of other gods, and again (3) he is wrestling pastorally with questions raised within the church about surrounding idolatry. And to these we may add the prophetic conflict with idolatry, which exposes its futility but does so primarily for the ears of the people of God.
Writing to Christians, and speaking of idolatry objectively as a phenomenon, Paul pulls no punches. In his sharp analysis of human rebellion against God in Romans 1:18:32, he sets idolatry firmly within the realm of that which incurs the wrath of God. Idolatry is alienating, darkening, degrading, divisive and deadly. Paul's attack on idolatry is theological, intellectual, spiritual, ethical and social. Mission requires that we engage in such discourse when appropriate, for we have no liberty to dilute the lurid colors of Paul's exposure of idolatry here. The good news of the gospel has to be seen against the horrendously bad news of what human addiction to idolatry actually is. However, to repeat: the context here is tight theological argument, the prelude to Paul's full exposition of the gospel as " the power of God for the salvation of everyone who believes: first for the Jew and then for the Gentile" (Rom 1:16). These words are written by Paul to Christians, as words of teaching and warning. It is the result of deliberate suppression of the truth about God that is known and available to all humans. It involves the inversion of the creation order, exchanging the worship of the living God for the worship of images of creation.
In the first instance the prophetic message was a condemnation of idolatry particularly that practiced by the false prophets and priests in Jerusalem in the pay of wealthy landowners and traders. Their theology pf peace where was no peace (Jer.6:16; 7:1-20; 8:11; Isa 57:21; Ezek. 13: 10) was the consequence of and idolatrous view of God. It arose as the promise of a false liberation to justify idolatrous people's submission in the face of injustice and oppression. The idolatrous have to carry their idols whereas those who know God truly are carried lifted and liberated by him (Isaiah. 46:1-6).
The implication of idolatry is the constant danger of a practical atheism among God's people: namely the service of a God who tolerates evil in whatever from. The only God who can be known truly is the one who protects the weak and vulnerable. This is not a matter of superbly executed liturgies or fine theological insights but a humble following of God's paths of righteousness and compassion. God’s law-code given to Israel expresses in writing the timeless truth that Yahweh alone is God; there is no other. No image of any sort should be an object of worship, whether used as a symbol of the true God or as the representative of some other (false) god (Exod 20:4-5; 34:17; Isa 42:8). They dishonour God through hiding his glory, and mislead people through giving them wrong ideas of God (Deut 4:15-18; Rom 1:21-23).
According to J. Andrew Kirk's emphasis on idolatry in Israel that Abraham, the father of Israel, came from a land of idol worshippers, but he renounced idols when he came to know the one true God (Josh 24:2,15). Some of Abraham’s relatives, however, who did not share Abraham’s faith, continued to have private household gods (Gen 31:19). The penalty that Israelite law laid down for idol worship was death (Exod 22:20; Deut 13:2-5; 17:2-5). Yet the people of Israel repeatedly fell into idolatry through copying the practices of the people around them (Judg 2:12; 10:6; 17:3-6; Jer 44:15-19). Because they did not know what Yahweh looked like, they copied the forms of the gods of other religions (Exod 32:4; Deut 4:12; 1 Kings 12:28; Hosea 13:2). The form of idolatry that Israel most frequently fell into was Baalism (2 Kings 17:15-16). In addition the people sometimes took objects that had played an important part in God’s dealings with Israel and wrongfully made them into objects of worship (Judg 8:27; 2 Kings 18:4).
At different times the kings of Judah carried out reforms in which they destroyed all the idols in the land (2 Chron 31:1; 34:4). But idolatrous tendencies were so deeply rooted in the lives of the people that they were never entirely removed. In the end they were the reason why God destroyed the nation and sent the people into captivity (2 Kings 17:7-18; 21:10-15). The period of captivity broke the people’s association with the idols of Canaan, and when the Jews later returned from captivity, idolatry ceased to be a major problem (Ezek 36:22-29; 37:23; Hosea 2:16-19). God’s messengers condemned idolatry not only among Israelites, but also among Gentiles.
As people observed the created world they should have recognized that there was a Creator, and responded by offering him thankful worship. Instead they turned away from the Creator and made created things their idols (Rom 1:19-23). God’s prophets mocked these lifeless idols and denounced both those who made them and those who worshipped them (Ps 115:4-8; Isa 2:8; 40:18-20; 41:6-7; 44:9-20; 46:1-2,5-7). The reason for the prophets’ condemnation of idols was not just that idols were lifeless pieces of wood or stone, but that behind the idols were demonic forces. Idols were enemies of God and were disgusting and hateful in his sight (Deut 7:25; 29:17; 32:16-17; Ezek 36:17-18; 1 Cor 8:4). When people turn to believe in the true and living God, they automatically turn away from their idols (1 Thess 1:9). Any refusal to turn from their idols shows that they have not really repented (Rev 9:20). A common tendency among those who worship idols is a feeling that they are free to practise all kinds of sins, since a lifeless idol is unable to punish them (Rom 1:23-32; Eph 4:17-19). The self-satisfaction that comes from performing some act of idol worship produces a moral laziness and a relaxing of control over lustful desires.
This is no doubt why the Bible often links idolatry with immorality (1 Cor 5:11; 10:7-8; Gal 5:19-20; Rev 9:20-21; 21:8; Num 25:1-2) and because immorality is a form of covetousness, idolatry is linked with covetousness (1 Cor 5:11; Eph 5:3,5). Idolatry is linked also with wrong beliefs concerning Christ. Jesus Christ, the Son of God who died for sinners, is the true God who gives believers eternal life. The substitutes invented by false teachers are false gods, and therefore believers must keep away from them (1 John 5:20-21). There is one God, one only. He is the one who created all things. The Old Testament pictures God as righteous. The heathen gods are not generally righteous. That is, they are not righteous in any moral sense. Pagan gods are usually deceitful, immoral, licentious creatures whose only law is their own caprice.
The essence of idolatry is the desire for control and for power, often thought of as embodied in the name of the deity. Thus far, God has simply been known by the relationships he has entered: he is 'the God of Abraham and the Fear of Isaac' (Gen. 31:42). The Israelites' persistent temptation will be to idolatry, to use their God for their own ends, even when this does not involve exploiting the divine name. So they take the ark into battle as a talisman (1 Sam. 4:3-4), build royal prestige out of the cult (Amos 7:10-17;2 Kings. 16:10-16), flaunt their God-given strength in the world (2 Sam. 24; Is. 39), use the prophets to legitimize their expansionist ambitions (1 Kings. 22) or bolster their national security (Jer. 7:1-15); above all, as Paul saw it, they seek to establish their own righteousness (Rom. 10:3), by putting themselves forward as 'a guide to the blind, … a corrector of the foolish, a teacher of children …' (Rom. 2:19-20).
At the time of Jesus, the widespread view was that Jerusalem was secure, because the Lord would finally defend city, land and people against any threat, whatever the quality of Israel's life and obedience. So, once again, as Jesus foresaw (Mark 13), Israel's God became Israel's enemy, and the great city was destroyed. The 'Jacob' in Israel finally win, just as Jacob prevailed in his battle against the 'man', and forced his opponent to display his power by dislocating Jacob's hip (Gen. 32:25).
Israel is repeatedly warned not to be like the nations in their idolatry (Deut. 12:30; 18:9; 2 Kings. 17:150) and numerous prophetic oracles are directed against the nations, proclaiming divine judgment of the utmost severity (Is. 13-23; Jer. 46-51; Ezek. 25-32). A key role is assigned to the Servant of the LORD who will be a light for the Gentiles and bring justice and salvation to the nations (Isaiah. 42:1, 6; 49:6; 51: 4-5; 61:1-2). Prophets also envisage the pilgrimage of the nations to Mt Zion, 'the mountain of the LORD' (Isaiah. 2:2-4; 25:6-8; 66:20: Jer. 3:17; Mic. 4:1-3; Zech, 8:3, 14:16-19).

2.1.4 The Missionary of Jesus
Jesus had always anticipated a wider mission to the Gentiles (Matt 8:11-12; 21:43; 28:19; John 10:16; 20:21). He told his disciples, and through them the church, to look upon the initial work in Palestine as the foundation for a wider reaching work into the Gentile world (Luke 24:46-47; Acts 1:8). He encouraged a sense of urgency in this mission by saying that he would return and bring in the new age only after his followers had preached the gospel worldwide (Matt 24:14). The New Testament record of the expansion of the early church shows the sort of work the church must be prepared for if it is to fulfill its mission. Through their witness the gospel spreads (Acts 8:4-6; 11:19-21; Col 1:7). But God wants more than to save people. He wants to see them baptized, made disciples of Jesus, instructed in Christian teaching and built into local churches (Matt 28:19-20; John 17:20-21).
Although all Christians should bear witness to Jesus, God chooses and equips certain people for the specific task of breaking into unevangelized areas with the gospel (Acts 9:15; Rom 10:14-15; 15:20; 2 Cor 10:16). As a church recognizes such gifted people, it may send them out to devote their whole time to preaching the gospel, making disciples and planting churches. In doing so, the home church becomes a partner with its missionaries in the gospel (Acts 13:1-4; Phil 1:5). Biblically speaking, the Church is the Body of Christ, which ministers the mind and word of Christ demonstrates His concern and love for mankind in the world.
The ministry of Christ, the thrust into the world by the Church which is His Body (Eph. 1:22-23) comprises the following aspects.
1. the ministry of mission – the proclamation of the good news for the salvation of a person's soul;

2. the ministry of service – the work of Christ meeting the physical and material needs of people;


3. the ministry of reconciliation – the restoration of broken human relationships that people may live in peace together.

The preaching of the nearness of the kingdom of God the call to repent and believe the good news (mark 1:14-15) is now further extended by the commission to proclaim repentance and the forgiveness of sins in the name of the crucified and risen Messiah (Luke 24:46-7). It has been suggested that in the transition from Jesus mission to that of the disciples the core of the message was change from the kingdom of God to the person of Christ. This assertion arises largely from the polemical need felt by some to distance themselves from the Christ-centeredness of the gospel message. It involved God himself suffering because of the refusal of his people to understand his purposes for his world. Such was people's hostility that God himself was done to death.
The inauguration of the kingdom through suffering and sacrifice was vindicated in Jesus resurrection from the dead and the testimony of those to whom he appeared alive: God integrated this injustice into the plan of salvation. God did not annihilate the murderers but showed the final salvation of Jesus and his cause though his resurrection and followers. Without the resurrection our faith in him cannot be justified; without followers' faith in him would be impossible. So following means witnessing and following in the way of Christ means witnessing to the point of death (martyrdom): He said this of (Simon Peter) to indicate the kind of death by which he would glorify God. After this he said to him' "Follow me… this is the disciple who is testifying to these things and has written them and we know that his testimony is true (John 21:19-24)." We have seen that Jesus regarded himself as playing the central role in bringing in the kingdom of God.
Hitherto Israel, the nation, had been the special people of God. Now, Jesus taught, the true people of God will be both wider and narrower than Israel: Gentiles will find a place at the banquet, while some Jews will not (Mt. 88:11; cf. Mt. 22:1-10). John the Baptist had warned that to be Jewish was not in itself a guarantee of salvation (Mt. 3:8-10), and Jesus took up the same theme, In numerous metaphors and allusions the impression is given that the true Israel is now focused in himself and in those who respond to his call to repentance. Christian mission proceeds from Jesus and his mission. As portrayed in the Gospels, says Peters, "He shines forth as the Ideal Missionary, the Apostle of God."
Jesus, then, is the missionary Christ; He is the Messiah of Israel and the Savior of the world. In Jesus God disclosed himself. So it is to Jesus that we look to understand mission in the New Testament. In the Old Testament the activity of God revealed his missionary nature. There he acted in a particular way in and through Israel. In the New Testament God acts in and through Jesus in a climactic way. The New Testament discloses God in action in Jesus Christ. The God who acts has now acted in the person of his Son (Heb. 1:2). As we pass from the Old Testament to the New Testament, it is to stand in "the fullness of time" (Gal. 4:4 KIV).
In all these passages the notion of Jesus Christ as the counterpart of Adam, as the last Adam, the true eschatological Man who shares God's glory and bears God's image, serves to ensure the complete "glorification" of those who as children of God belong to him as his brothers and sisters. This will become full reality at the time when all evil forces will be subjected and God will hold the entire cosmos under his sway.
The "Gentile factor" has its roots in the teaching and ministry of Jesus. Jesus' proclamation of the fulfillment of time and the appearance of God's kingdom (Mk 1:14-15; Mt 4:17), an announcement that belongs to Jesus' commission to the disciples as well (Mt 10:7; Luke 10:9), was bound to encompass the world on the basis of promises and expectations such as Isaiah 2:2-5 (Micah 4:1-5), Isaiah 49;1-6 and Zechariah 8: 20-23. Thus he challenged the true Israel to be light of the world and salt of the earth (Mt 5:13-16). The following observations confirm the view that the apostolic Gentile mission has its roots in Jesus' word and praxis.
(1) If Jesus foresaw his rejection at the hands of the Jewish leaders ensconced in the temple, it is not impossible to assume that he replaced the OT expectation of the nations streaming to the temple with a mission that would actively take the messianic salvation to the nations.

(2) If Jesus expected to die and then be raised from the dead, it would be natural for him to leave his messianic mission to his disciples.

(3) Jesus' teaching suggests both that God's rule has taken effect among his disciples and that it has not jet taken full effect in the world at large, thus implying a period of worldwide evangelism.

(4) There was no debate in the early church over the Gentile mission as such. Only a discussion about the status of the converted Gentiles and their relations to the converted Jews, and there was no discussion whether they should wait for the nations to stream to Jerusalem at the consummation.

As the followers of Jesus proclaim the Good News, they cannot limit themselves to Israel; as the eschatological messianic salvation has dawned, the nations worldwide are now invited into the kingdom of God. The coming of God in Jesus Christ determined what mean's history shall be. The coming of God in the Holy Spirit regulates the tides of this history. That is also why the Christian faith announces an end-event when this action of God entering into time will have reached fulfillment, and time itself is no more because death is swallowed up in victory: (I Cor. 15:54).
Jesus Christ is the content of the gospel-the good news of what God has done. The Holy Spirit is the missionary of the gospel. It is he who makes the gospel explosive in men's lives and in human affairs.
"Until Jesus was glorified," says John (John 7:39), "the mission of the Holy Spirit could not be launched." But when Jesus was glorified, the Spirit came. He came to lead men to see the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ (II Cor. 4:6).

Acceptance of the Christian witness must be prepared for by the Holy Spirit in the lives of men. Apart from that preparation, they will neither understand nor believe. C.S. Lewis gives to the story of his conversion the title Surprised by Joy. It is always a surprise when one suddenly sees life according to a new pattern, when, within the soul, one's knowledge of Jesus catches fire and becomes a living awareness, when the will accepts the mastery of Christ and is satisfied.
The content of Jesus' ministry has important consequences for the community's mission. The keynote text of Luke 24:47 had summarized the community's proclamation as that of "repentance and forgiveness of sins," a message that will reverberate throughout the sermons in Acts 2:38; 3:19, 26;8:22;10:43;13:38; 17:30:20:21;26:18,20. The same theme is announced by Zechariah in his canticle on John's preparatory ministry:
"….for you will go before the Lord to prepare his ways, to give knowledge of salvation to his people in the forgiveness of their sins" (Lk.1:77). This is exactly how john is depicted in Luke 3:3:"……he went into all the region about the Jordan, preaching a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins" (cf. also John's own words in Lk. 3:7-14, which spell out the meaning of genuine repentance).

Jesus' ministry, too, is one of "transformation and forgiveness." The inaugural scene at Nazareth again provides the lead to Luke's presentation: Jesus' mission is to peach good news to the poor, liberation for the captives and oppressed, healing for the blind. This is precisely what Jesus does as his dynamic ministry begins to unfold after the Nazareth incident (Luke 4:31ff.). The Greek term for forgiveness, aphesis, has the connotation of "release," a freedom from the bondage of sin. The Lucan Jesus not only directly forgives sins, as in the cases of the paralytic (Luke 5:20), the "woman of the city" (Luke 7:47-48), and his own executioners (Luke 23:34), but he "release" those bound with the physical burdens of pain and illness, which the biblical mind recognized as part of the legacy of sin. The case of the woman bent double-found only in Luke (Luke 13:10-17)- is typical of this liberating dimension of forgiveness. When Jesus is challenged by the ruler of the synagogue for curing on the Sabbath, he openly declares the priority of his mission: "Ought not this woman, a daughter of Abraham whom Satan bound for eighteen years be loosed from this bond on the Sabbath day?" (Luke 13:16).
Jesus the Christ will faithfully endure his sufferings and enter his glory despite the threats of evil. The call for conversion is also an essential part of Jesus' mission of salvation. Not only are broken bodies and broken spirits made whole, but lives without purpose are invited to make a full commitment to the kingdom of God. The metanoia that is to characterize the community's preaching (Luke 24:42) and which had been a hallmark of John's message (Luke 3:3), is also the purpose of Jesus' mission:" I have not come to call the righteous but sinners to repentance" (Luke 5:32). The demands of discipleship are an intensive form of this call to metanoia. The would-be followers of Jesus should calculate the cost and realize the need to renounce every obstacle to complete commitment before setting out on the way of discipleship (Luke 14:25-33).
The liberating and transforming mission of Jesus in the Gospel story defines what the community's message of "conversion and forgiveness of sin" is about. The tone of the sermons and the healing power of the apostles and missionaries in Acts will be Luke's way of showing that the commission of the risen Jesus is faithfully carried out by the community formed in his name. Into the midst of this people – saturated with Scriptures, sustained by memory and hope, waiting for God – steps Jesus with a mission. Jesus did not just arrive. He had a very clear conviction that he was sent. The voice of his Father at his baptism combined the identity of the Servant figure in Isaiah (echoing the phraseology of Isa. 42:1), and that of the Davidic messianic king (echoing the affirmation of Ps 2:7).
Both of these dimensions of his identity and role were energized with a sense of mission. The mission of the Servant was both to restore Israel to YHWH and also to be the agent of God's salvation reaching to the ends of the earth (Is 49:60. The mission of the Davidic messianic king was both to rule over a redeemed Israel, according to the agenda of many prophetic texts, and also to receive the nations and the ends f the earth as his heritage (Ps 2:8). Jesus' will was to do his Father's will, so he said. God's mission determined his mission. In the obedience of Jesus, even to death, the mission of God reached its climax. For "God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ"(2 Cor 5:19). Despite the geographical restrictions of Jesus' ministry, the evangelist clearly signals the universal potential of the Jesus-event. Simeon's canticle sounds the theme in the infancy narrative:
"a light for revelation to the Gentiles and for glory to thy people Israel" (Lk.2:32). The universal theme is trumpeted again in the Isaiah quotation that introduces the preaching of John: ". . . all flesh shall see the salvation of God" (Luke 3:6).

God's "salvation" is what Simeon recognized in Jesus as the infant Messiah was brought to the temple (Luke 2:30). And Paul will echo Isa. 40:5 again at the conclusion of Acts when he turns from the Jews to the Gentiles: "Let it be known to You then that this salvation of God has been sent to the Gentiles; they will listen" (Acts 28:28). God's salvation embodied in Jesus will be brought to the end of the earth in the mission of the community.
Although Jesus the prophet does minister within Israel, the style of his ministry retains the limitless potential announced at Nazareth. He befriends and shares table fellowship with tax collectors and sinners (Luke 5:27-32; 15:1-2). More than any other evangelist Luke emphasizes Jesus' association with women –a stunning crossing of a social and religious barrier in the patriarchal society of his day. The Lucan Jesus opens to "official" outsiders such as the Gentile centurion (Luke 7:1-10) and Samaritans. The latter outcast group is a special concern of Jesus in Luke's story. Jesus planned to exercise his mission there (Luke 9:52), and despite their rebuff he will not allow his disciples to take vengeance on Samaritan villages (Luke 9:53-55). Twice in the Gospel, Samaritans are used as examples of virtue (Luke 10:30-37; 17:11-19). Jesus reaches out to lepers (Luke 5:12-15). And care for the poor is a constant theme of his preaching (Luke 16:19-31;1 8:18-27).
There can be little doubt that Luke sees the connection between this expansive dimension of Jesus and the efforts of the church to move beyond its own frontiers. In Acts 10:38, as Peter is on the brink of accepting the Gentile Cornelius into the community, he recalls how Jesus "went about doing good and healing all that were oppressed by the devil, for God was with him." Luke gently urges his own community to make the same connection by placing the story of Jesus' ministry in tandem with the story of the community's missionary efforts.
The Pentecost story will climax in the formation of a community that prays and breaks bread together (Acts 2:43-47). Luke shows that the plan of God is to incorporate "all flesh" within the people of God; no arbitrary boundary can be used to exclude from hi household those "who fear God and act uprightly," (Acts 10:34). Therefore one of the central roles of mission as envisage by Luke is the formation of community among diverse peoples bound together in faith and love.
Luke gives particular attention of Jesus' gracious table fellowship with sinners and outcasts. The meal becomes a provocative theater in which the Lucan Jesus disclose God's embrace of all peoples. The guest list in the Gospel stories invariably includes the "unwanted." Jesus dines with Levi the tax collector and his unsavory friends and earns the disapproving murmurs of Pharisees and scribes (Luke 5:29-32). Jesus is characterized as "a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners" (Luke 7:34; cf. 15:1-2). His death and resurrection are marked by meals with his baffled disciples (Luke 22: 19-20; 24:13-35, 41-43). This announcement of salvation for all finds its ratification in the boundary breaking proportions of Jesus' ministry as presented by Luke. The centrifugal force of Jesus' mission can be felt in the dramatic inaugural scene at Nazareth in Luke 4:16-30.12. The quotation is from Isaiah 60:1-2. The disciples gathered in Jerusalem at the end of the Gospel (Luke 24:33) not only continue Jesus' mission in the post-Easter period but are, in one sense, the final result of that mission. The purpose of Jesus' mission is to restore Israel (Luke 1:68-79), to fashion God's people.


CHAPTER THREE
THE PEOPLE OF MISSION

3.1 God's elect People: Chosen for Blessing
Genesis 12:1-3 are (1) the use of the piel of brk in verse 25, "The LORD Almighty will bless them," matching the same form as "I will bless you" in Gen 12:2b), and (2) the phrase "will be a blessing" (hyh with the beraka (v.24)). In Genesis 12:2d this combination is in the form of an imperative with intention ("be a blessing" or "so that you will be a blessing"). In Isaiah 19:24 it is a prophetic affirmation about Israel, Egypt and Assyria combined (they will together "be a blessing in the midst of the earth").
So these foreign nations come not only to experience blessing but to be "a blessing on the earth." In other words, both dynamic movements in God's word to Abraham are at work here. The recipients of the Abrahamic blessing become the agents of it. The principle that those who are blessed are to be the means of blessing others is not confined to Israel alone, as if Israel would forever be the exclusive transmitters of a blessing that could only be passively received by the rest from their hand. No, the Abrahamic promise is a self-replicating gene. Those who receive it are immediately transformed into those whose privilege and mission it is to pass it on to others.
The identity of Israel is already being redefined and extended in the direction that the New Testament will bring to climactic clarity in Christ. The multinational nature of that community of people through whom God plans to bless all nations of the earth is here already prefigured. So also is the similarly self-replicating nature of Christ's mandate to his disciples to go and reproduce their own discipleship among the nations, "teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you." Or, as we might add, blessing them as the Lord has blessed you." Yet again, the Abrahamic promise can stake its claim to be not only the "gospel in advance" but even more so, the Great Commission in advance.
Once again we find that a missiological reading of a text like this points us first backward to the Abrahamic promise and the inherent universality that it programmed into the genes of Israel, them forward to the messianic fulfillment in Jesus Christ, and then forward yet again to its missional implications for those who are disciples from all nations to be agents of blessing to all nations, "a blessing on the earth."
The Hebrew word for election, bahar, became a technical word, so important in Israel's tradition that no series of synonyms ever substituted for it. From its many occurrences in the Old Testament (the verb alone, 164 times) two essential characteristics emerge: (a) bahar "means a careful choice occasioned by actual needs, and thus a very conscious choice and one that can be examined in light of certain criteria"; important among these norm would be "an act of an especially intimate relationship"; (b) bahar implies a special purpose or mission, especially when people are involved. The theology of Israel's election can be traced back of earlier secular moments of Israel's history. First the Hebrew word bahar occurs in a number of nonreligious settings, yet always with a sense of "a careful choice…..[and] actual needs"; for example, Gen. 13:11: Lot chose the Jordan Valley after a careful scrutiny of its "well-watered" condition. Josh. 8:3: "Joshua chose thirty thousand mighty men of valor [to] lie in ambush against the city" and be ready for the crucial moment of the battle. Exodus 19: 3-6. In this nutshell we find a summary of the purpose of the covenant presented from the mouth of YHWH himself. Israel is commissioned to be God's people on behalf of the earth which is God's."
Palm 67 is based on the Aaronic blessings of Numbers 6:24-25. "The LORD blesses you and keeps you: The LORD makes his face to shine upon you, and be gracious to you." But it goes beyond that to the Abrahamic hope of Genesis 12:3, which shines forth in Psalm 67: 2: "That thy way may be known upon earth, thy saving power among all nations." The psalm begins with Israel, then moves beyond to distant peoples: "Let the nations be glad and sing for joy."

3.1.1 God's Model of Redemption
The exodus was an event of missionary significance because God's redemption of his people was set in the midst of the nations. Israel's celebration of her deliverance kept alive what God had done. The recitation, in story form (Deut. 26:5-9), served as religious education for succeeding generations of Israelites. Joshua's review of God's dealings with his people sounded the note of grace and stressed the call of Abraham from polytheism to the service and worship of one God:
"Your fathers lived of old beyond the Euphrates, Terah, the father of Abraham and of Nahor; and they served other gods. Then I took your father Abraham from beyond the River and led him through all the land of Canaan, and made his offspring many …" (Josh. 24: 2-4).

Faith must be kept alive in Israel that there might be recital of God's saving acts among the nations. God does not forsake his chosen people whom he has redeemed. Nor does he forget his covenant with mankind. The world of nations is the object of his love, and is never lost sight of throughout the Old Testament. This is further emphasized as we turn to a consideration of the missionary nature of the covenant
The deliverance of Israel from Egypt is the central redemptive act in the Old Testament and the heart of the Old Testament kerygma. The event became central in Israel's worship and was celebrated in song and sacrament and sermon. "You yourselves have seen what I have done (Ex 19:4)". It was a matter of historical fact and recent memory. Only three months ago they had been suffering genocidal oppression. Now they were liberated. "And I did it, "says God," and carried you here to myself." Before anything is said about what Israel has to do, God points to what he has already done. The initiative of God's redeeming grace is the prior reality on which all that follows will be founded-including the giving of the law, the making of the covenant, building of the tabernacle and moving forward to the Promised Land. The life they now live, they live by the grace of God.
Biblical ethics then must be seen as response to biblical redemption. And since we have now seen how closely Israel's ethical agenda is connected to God's mission investment in their existence, we must place biblical mission on the same foundation. Whatever mission calling we may have flows from the grace of God in our own lives and the grace of his plans for the future, for us and for the world. Mission as a dimension of our obedience also flows from grace- the grace of redemption accomplished and grace of God's future purposes.
In Bible days a slave could be set free from bondage by the payment of a price, often called the ransom. The whole affair was known as the redemption of the slave (Lev 25:47-48). The words ‘redeem’ and ‘ransom’ are related to the same root in the original languages. The Bible speaks of redemption both literally (concerning everyday affairs) and pictorially (concerning what God has done for his people) (Ps 77:15; Titus 2:14).
Under Israelite law, both people and things could be redeemed. In family matters, all Israelites had to redeem their firstborn. Since God had preserved Israel’s firstborn during the Passover judgment, they rightly belonged to him. Therefore, the parents had to redeem their firstborn by a payment of money to the sanctuary (Exod 13:2, 13). In matters of property, if people became poor and sold land they had inherited from ancestors, either they or close relatives had to buy the land back (redeem it) as soon as possible (Lev 25:25; Ruth 4:3-6). If Israelites vowed to give God their children, animals, houses or land, they could redeem those things, again by a payment of money to the sanctuary (Lev 27:1-25).
Moreover, If a farmer was under the death sentence because his ox had killed someone, his relatives could redeem him (since the death was accidental) by a payment of money to the dead person’s relatives (Exod 21:28-30). In all these cases there was the idea of release by the payment of a price. Often God is said to have redeemed Israel; that is, to have delivered Israel from the power of its enemies (Jer 31:11; Micah 4:10). The greatest of these acts of redemption was at the time of the exodus, when God delivered Israel from captivity in Egypt (Exod 6:6; 15:13; Ps 106:9-10).
Centuries later, after Israel (Judah) had been taken captive to Babylon, there was a ‘second exodus’, when God again redeemed his people from bondage (Isaiah 44:22-23; 48:20).In these acts of redemption of Israel there is no suggestion that God paid anything to the enemy nations, as if he was under some obligation to them. Nevertheless, there is the suggestion that redemption cost God something; for he had to use his mighty power in acts of judgment to save his people (Exod 32:11; Deut 4:37-38; Isa 45:13; 52:3; 63:9).
Besides being an everyday practice, redemption was a fitting picture of God’s activity in saving sinners. Those who sin are slaves of sin and under the sentence of death, and have no way of releasing themselves from bondage (John 8:34; Rom 6:17,23; 1 John 5:19; cf. Ps 130:8). Jesus Christ came to give his life as a ransom for those under this sentence of death. His death brought forgiveness of sins and so released them from sin’s bondage (Matt 20:28; Rom 3:24-25; Gal 3:13; Eph 1:7; 1 Tim 2:6; Rev 1:5). Sinners are therefore redeemed by the blood of Christ. The ransom price he paid for them was his life laid down in sacrifice (Heb 9:12; 1 Peter 1:18-19; Rev 5:9). They are freed from the power of sin in their lives now (Heb 2:14-15), and will experience the fullness of their redemption when their bodies also are freed from the power of sin at Christ’s return. That event will bring about not only the final redemption for humankind but also the release of the world of nature from sin’s corrupting power (Luke 21:28; Rom 8:21-23; Eph 4:30).
Sin no longer has power over them, and they must show this to be true by the way they live (Rom 8:2; Gal 3:13-14; 4:4-7; cf. Titus 2:14). Yet, though free from sin, Christians are not free to do as they like. Because they have been bought with a price, they are now, in a sense, slaves of God. They must therefore be obedient to him, their new master (Rom 6:16-18; 1 Cor 6:19-20; 7:22-23). When people are redeemed from the bondage of sin and the curse of the law, they come into a new life of liberty as the sons of God.
The just man Abraham intercedes for the people of Sodom (Gen 18:16-33). Through him Israel and all humanity will be blessed by God (Gen 12:1-3; 15:1-6;17:1-8;22:15-18). A political leader and mystic, Moses delivers Israel from the Egyptian oppression, interprets God's saving activity, and mediates the Sinai covenant (Exodus). The book of Judges recognizes the salvific role of various "judges" (Judge 3:15), Shamgar (Judge 3:31), Gideon (Judge 8:22; 9:19); kings have the task of saving the people (Hosea 13:10) and of defending the helpless (Ps 72:4). The everlasting dynasty promised to David will make him an agent of salvation for his people (2 Samuel 7; Ezek 37:24-25).
Jesus’ death on the cross was the great act of redemption of which the Israelite Passover was but a picture (cf. Exod 12:5 with 1 Peter 1:18-19; cf. Exod 12:46 with John 19:36; cf. Exod 12:21, 27 with 1 Cor 5:7). Once Jesus had died, the Passover was of no further use. It was replaced by a new remembrance ceremony, the Lord’s Supper (Matt 26:17-30; 1 Cor 10:16; 11:23-26). Nevertheless, the New Testament refers to the requirements of the Passover to provide a lesson for Christians. Just as the Passover festival meant that Israelites removed leaven from their houses, so the sacrifice of Jesus Christ means that Christians should remove sin from their lives (1 Cor 5:7-8).
The Old Testament introduces the notion that God's redemptive strategy is tied to the coming of the Messiah (Isaiah. 11:1-9; 42:2-4, 53; 61:1-3). The Synoptic Gospels emphasize the continuity between Old and New Testaments – that which was promised is now being fulfilled (Luke 4:16-19). When the incarnate God enters the human scene, it is as a baby (John 1:14), signifying both identification and vulnerability. Jesus inaugurates his public ministry by proclaiming the reign of God (Matt. 4:17; Mark 1:15) and embodies that reign, demonstrating its power and interpreting its meaning for the lives of his listeners. That embodiment projected a new way of being. He came as one who serves and who was self-emptying (Phil. 2:5-8), but his was a transforming presence. "From his ministry emerged a new people from and in the midst of all nations," observes David Shank."
Through that strategy of persuasion through his suffering Servant, God created a like-minded people who are servant to all peoples for their blessing and salvation. The strategy of Christian mission is nothing more – nor less – than participation in carrying out God's own strategy. Its shape is that of a cross". The risen Christ commissions that "like-minded people" to continue the mission of redemption in his name (Matt.28:18-20; John 20:19-22). They will take their strategic clues from their Messiah leader. The coming of the Messiah leads to crisis and calls for decision. Stephen represented to the religious leaders the Christ-figure. This they rejected and, consequently, martyred Stephen (Acts 6:1-8:10). Later Paul would interpret his own metanoia in light of that martyr witness to Jesus Christ (Acts 22:17-21).
The meaning of this blessing and the function of Christ as its agent are further exhibited in the reference to redemption through his blood through Christ's life-giving death, the effect of which is the forgiveness of our trespasses (Ephesians 1:7-8. ,Col. 1:14). For Paul "redemption" meant more than pardon for past offences; it meant freedom from the power of sin. For him grace itself was a gift of power capable of effecting a total inner transformation. All Things United in Christ (Ephesians 1:9-10). The election of Israel as the agent of God in universal redemption is reaffirmed in the New Israel (e.g, 1 Pet 2:9-10), the Body of Christ, which is the partaker of the New Covenant of Christ’s blood. In Christ God has inaugurated the new age, foreseen of old; entrance into it is by faith and by the sharing of Christ’s cross, for in him our sins are forgiven and our alienation from God done away.
Thus God in Christ has completed the history of Israel; he has reversed the work of Adam, fulfilled the promises to Abraham, repeated the deliverance from bondage, not indeed from Pharaoh but from sin and Satan, and inaugurated the new age and the new covenant. Yet Christ is the sign and seal of its coming. Hence he is the climactic event in a unique series of events, to be comprehended only by what has happened before, but at the same time the new event which marks a fresh beginning in human history.
3.1.2 Mission in the Pauline Writings
Paul's Epistles were written in the context of mission. Roman, we have we have seen offers a theological elaboration of the apostolate (Rome 1:5; 16:25-27). This is easily demonstrated in the case of the New Testament. Most of Paul's letters were written in the heart of his missionary efforts: wrestling with the theological basis of the inclusion of the Gentiles, affirming the need for Jew and Gentile to accept one another in Christ and in the churches as the gospel took root in the world of Greek polytheism, confronting incipient heresies with clear affirmations of the supremacy and sufficiency of Jesus Christ, and so on. Because they were written to explain the significance of the evangel – the good news about Jesus of Nazareth, especially his death and resurrection. Confidence in these things was essential to the missionary task of the expanding church.
In their struggle with heretical teaching, Jude, 2 Peter, and 1-3 John display an essential prerequisite for mission: zeal for the faith once for all entrusted to the saints (Jude 3). John's second and third epistle deal with the issue of extending or refusing "hospitality to false teachers". But it is Hebrews and 1 Peter that contribute most to a biblical theology of mission. Addressing a congregation in danger of reverting back to Judaism, the author of Hebrews contends that God's final revelation occurred in his Son, Jesus (Heb. 1:1-3), and that his readers neglect 'such great salvation' at their grave peril (Heb.2:3). Christians are portrayed as running a race following their forerunner, Jesus, into heaven (Heb.6:20; 12:1-3, 12-13), and as pilgrims and exiles in search of a homeland, a better country, and a 'city prepared by God' (Heb. 11: 13-16; 12:22).
As followers of the one who endured great hostility from sinners (Heb.12:3), believers are not to be afraid to suffer and identify openly with their crucified Lord (Heb.13:13; 10:25-26). The believing community is shown to fulfill the calling of OT Israel which was to 'proclaim the excellencies' of God as a mediatorial body (Heb.2:5-9; cf. Is. 43:21). Believers' mission is to take the form of verbal witness (Heb.2:9; 3:15), under girded by a holy, spiritually separated life (Heb.1:13-2:20), a God-glorifying response to suffering (Heb. 2:13-25; 3:8-18b), and proper submission to earthly authorities (Heb.2:13; 3:1; 5:1,5). Paul was a missionary sent by a church into unevangelized areas, and his example shows that missionaries must have plans and goals. Through his evangelistic activity, church leadership, theological insights and extensive writings, Paul had an immeasurable influence on the development of Christianity. He spread the gospel and planted churches regardless of national or racial barriers, and in so doing he changed the traditional views of God-fearing people.
Paul does not shrink from the implication to be drawn from the equal outpouring of the Spirit on Jews and Gentiles alike: God has abolished the distinction between them, and offers salvation to all on the same basis faith in Jesus Christ (Rom. 3:27-30; 10:11-13; Eph. 2:11-22). As a missionary, therefore, though he felt impelled to offer the gospel first to Jews (Rom. 1:16; Acts 13:46), he felt equally under obligation to all (Rom. 1:14-15). Paul cannot bring himself to say this. It would amount to saying that 'the word of God has failed; (Rom. 9:6). Instead, he consistently applies to the church – that is, the mixed Jewish and Gentile congregations to whom he writes – the great covenant ideas and terms which had previously belonged to Israel.
The same applies to the way Paul interpreted mission. Primarily, it is the gospel that is the power of God for everyone's salvation (Rom. 1:16). And yet, Paul does not allow himself a moment's rest as he traverses the Roman Empire, preaches ceaselessly, and establishes churches. His strategy focused on preaching to and evangelizing Jews as well as Gentile proselytes and God-fearers in local synagogues. Paul's aim was to establish Christian congregations in strategic (urban) centers from where the gospel could spread further to the surrounding regions.
From the time of his conversing and calling on the road to Damascus, the gospel, the good news of salvation in the Lord Jesus Christ, became the determinative focus of Paul's whole life (Acts 9). His encounter with the risen Christ led to a 'paradigm shift' in Paul's thinking: if Jesus was the crucified and exalted Messiah, the divine curse on him was 'for us', 'in order that in Christ Jesus the blessing of Abraham might come to the Gentiles' (Gal. 3:13-14), and the Law was dethroned as the primary way of approaching God (Rom. 3:21- 7:25).
While Paul's ministry was primarily to the Gentiles, he ardently prayed for the salvation of his own people, the Jews, and believed that there remained a future for ethnic Israel in God's redemptive purposes (Rom. 9-11). It was Paul's ambition to go where the gospel had not yet been preached (Rom. 15:20-21). The New Testament stress on God's initiative in salvation, the centrality of the love command, the emphasis on reconciliation and community, the overture to the marginal and the needy, the church's sense of confidence in God and its ecstatic piety – all these essential features of early Christian proclamation find their initial and decisive impulse in Jesus' own message.
By means of that mission Paul also contributed to the remarkably early transposition of the new faith from the limited sphere of Judaism into the broader frame of the Gentile world, thereby making it possible for Christianity to survive and flourish as a distinct movement after AD. 70. Nevertheless, in his missionary labors Paul himself achieved the planting of the gospel only in certain principal cities along the northeastern are of his Mediterranean world. He neither inaugurated the opening of the faith to Gentile, nor did he initiate their inclusion in the Christian communities. Thus Paul both proceeded in his missionary activities and surveyed them in a manner confirming the presence of a geographical factor in his conception of what he was about. Mission was for Paul in part a geographically definable accomplishment.
The sources also bear witness to a second defining dimension of the Pauline mission, namely Paul's commitment to founding and nurturing Christian communities as the central goal of his missionary endeavors in any particular region. Paul did indeed engage in missionary preaching stage by stage in his journeys. And he actively sought individual conversions as part of his calling, but these evangelistic functions were pursued as necessary preliminary steps in a larger missionary objective to form communities of believers region by region throughout his part of the world. It is hardly accidental that Paul did not picture himself as a maker of bricks but as a builder of builder of buildings (1 Cor 3:10). His mission was focused on corporate achievement. Pauline mission is that it found its fullest sense of completion neither in an evangelistic preaching tour nor in individual conversions but only in the presence of firmly established churches.
Don Fleming pointed out that Paul based his missionary plan on the establishment of churches in the key cities of a region; the plan would work only if those churches were strong and healthy. He emphasized the transforming work of the Holy Spirit in people’s lives (2 Cor 3:17-18; Gal 5:18-24; Eph 5:15-20), the loving consideration that Christians should have for each other (Rom 14:13,19; 1 Cor 10:24; Gal 6:1-2; Phil 2:4), the importance of right teaching in the church (2 Cor 4:1-2; 2 Tim 2:15,24), and the need for the public life of the church to be orderly, God-honouring, and spiritually helpful to all (1 Cor 11:17-22; 1 Tim 5:16-17; Titus 1:5). Ephesus and Corinth were the two churches that gave Paul the most concern on these matters. They were also the two places where he stayed longest. After his three years in Ephesus he moved north to Macedonia (Acts 20:1), from where he travelled further through the region, possibly as far as Illyricum (Acts 20:2; Rom 15:19). He then travelled south to Corinth, where he spent a further three months (Acts 20:3).
In preparation for this visit to Rome, Paul wrote (from Corinth) a lengthy letter to the Roman church, setting out in systematic fashion the basics of the Christian faith. Just as Paul had wanted to make sure that the church in Corinth was strong before he moved west to Rome (2 Cor 10:15-16), so he wanted to be sure that the church in Rome was strong before he moved farther west to Spain (Rom 15:23-24). There he met the leaders of the Ephesian church, warning them of troubles that lay ahead for their church (Acts 20:17,28-30). After visiting Christians in a number of other ports, Paul reached Jerusalem (Acts 21:15; about AD 57).
In the early church, so it would seem, many Greek-speaking Jewish Christians appreciated this creative tension. They got involved in mission without viewing it as something they did in their own power. In the story Luke tells us in the book of Acts, mission is first and foremost the work of God; to be more precise, for Luke it is accomplished by the Spirit. Under no circumstances does this, however, exclude human mediation, and Luke recounts the unreserved commitment of many Christians to mission. Paul goes further and identifies his own mission with the international mission of the Servant of the Lord. This is a missiological hermeneutic of the Old Testament if ever there was one.

3.1.3 The Missionary Thrust of the Prophets
As the prophet par excellence, Moses also serves as the model for prophets to come .According to Deuteronomy 18:18, God promises to raise a series of prophets to convey his will to his people but adds that these prophets will be "like" Moses. Little wonder, then, that one sees similarities between the OT depiction of Moses and the New Testament portrayal of Jesus in his prophetic role.
A prophet who is spokesman for God (Exod 4:15-16; 7:1), whether by vision or otherwise, and is given insight into the mind of God, and declares what he has "seen" as a message to the people. It is not the mysterious mode of reception of the prophetic revelation that is emphasized, but rather the deliverance of the message itself for God. The biblical prophet must be distinguished from the prophetes of the Greeks. The prophets, however, were not interpreters. They uttered the actual words that God had given to them, without any modification or interpretation on their part (Deut 18:18).
According to Hedlund, the prophets were God' spokesmen to ruler and people. The prophets announced the Word of the Lord. This proclamation was by deed a well as word. The prophets ministered in times of tragedy and triumph in Israel's history. And he continues to observe that Prophets exercised a calling of warning and guidance, of denunciation and encouragement to people and ruler. The prophetic ministry directed toward the people of God Carried strong missionary implication. God' redemptive outlook for the peoples of the world is articulated by the prophets. The prophets worked to keep this hope alive in Israel, as may be seen in prophetic word and action.
Freedman states that God is active in the call of the prophet (Isaiah 6; Jeremiah 1; Ezek 2:1-3). The phrases "oracle of the Lord" (ne um YHWH), " thus says the Lord" (ko amar YHWH), and "the word of the Lord came to me" (wayehi debar YHWH elay), make it clear that the prophet does not speak about God. God sends his prophet, is involved in the life of the prophet, and moves into history through the prophet. But God transcends the prophet and his proclamations through the prophet. It is through the prophets, for Freedman, that God denounces both houses of Israel (Amos 2:2-4; Isa 8:14). God accuses Israel of social injustice through Amos and Micah, of defection to strange gods through Hosea and Jeremiah, of violation of the sanctity of God by political intrigue through Isaiah, of violation of the Sabbath through Ezekiel. Doom I decreed. But punishment is always preceded by God's warning and offer of mercy (Amos 4:1-12; 5:4-7,15; 7:8; 8:2; Isa 5:25; 9:11).
Ezekiel 25-32 contains a series of "oracles against the nations (Isaiah 13-23; Jeremiah 46-51; Obadiah). The oracles are introduced by the standard formulas, "the word of the Lord came to me," "thus says the Lord God"; then come the details of the punishment followed by the purpose or the result. It is sometimes said that the prophets were forth-tellers and not foretellers. Such a separation, however, is not warranted. The prophets were forth-tellers, speaking forth the message of the Lord, as well as announcing the future.
Under the first heading are included Joshua, Judges, 1-2 Samuel, and 1-2 Kings. These books are rightly classified as "former prophets" because the history they contain conforms to the biblical definition of prophecy as a declaration of the wonderful works of God (Acts 2:11, 18). This does not mean they are less than true history, but that the process of selection of things to record was performed to show how God was at work in and for his people and how the moral principles of divine providence worked out over the centuries. The former and the latter prophets complemented one another. The "former" prophets set forth the history of a particular period in Israel's life; the "latter" prophets interpreted particular phases of that history. The one is necessary for the proper understanding of the other. John the Baptist, last of the prophets under the Old Covenant and forerunner of the Prophet of Nazareth, Jesus the Christ. Beginning with judgments on Israel, the prophets climaxed their ministry by stressing the individual's value in the sight of God; Whose Kingdom would consist of regenerated individuals.
At the outset they viewed Israel as Yahweh's favorite child, but they finally learned that Israel was God's servant, whose sufferings would show the nations the consequences of sin, and cause them to turn with grateful hearts to the God of all nations. The canonization of the prophets probably began in the era of Nehemiah. It was closed and fully recognized between 180 and 130 B.C., in time to strengthen the Jews against the incursions of Hellenism fostered by Antiochus Epiphanes and the renegade Jews who aided him.
The prophets saw that the community was impaired by Israel's sins. Instead of remembering gratefully Yahweh's gracious deeds and living in a faithful relation to him and in a responsible relation to other members of the community, the people preferred to go their own way, serving the attractive gods of the world and following the devices and desires of their hearts. Israel was not "whole" with Yahweh righteousness and justices were lacking and the "peace" or welfare of the community was destroyed. Yahweh's zeal to uphold the covenant expressed itself in wrath, as the pre-exilic prophets testified in the historical crises of their day. But his purpose for his people was salvation. He willed the restoration of the health, wholeness, and welfare of the community in order that "Not my people" might become "My people" in a new covenant relationship. His saving purpose would be realized in the new covenant the "covenant of peace" and in the new age which he would introduce.
True prophets denounced the false prophets as being appointed by themselves, not by God. They were not God’s messengers, but spoke according to their own selfish desires (Jer 14:14; 23:21-22; Ezek 13:1-3,17). Instead of rebuking the people for their sin and so running the risk of becoming unpopular, the false prophets assured the people that God was pleased with them. The truth was that the people were heading for judgment, and the corruption of the prophets was only adding to that judgment (Jer 23:11-17; Ezek 13:8-16,22).The test of a prophet, whether he was true or false, was not whether his predictions came true, for even the predictions of false prophets could come true. The test was rather whether he led people in the ways of God (Deut 13:1-5; Jer 23:21-22, 29-32).
Nevertheless, if a prophet made a bold assertion that his prediction would come true and it did not, he was clearly a false prophet (Deut 18:22). If prophets were truly God’s messengers, their chief concern was not with foretelling events, but with leading people to repentance and obedience (Micah 3:8; 7:18; Zeph 2:1-3). They often opposed false religious practices, not because the practices themselves were wrong, but because the people carried them out in the wrong attitude. Religious exercises were no substitute for morality. They were of value only when the people were doing God’s will in their daily lives.
Though God would accept his people’s worship only if they conducted themselves with righteousness before him and justice to others (Isa 1:12-17; Amos 5:21-24; Micah 6:6-8). We could go on and show other details of the Old Testament message that are missionary. We find, for example, that the Old Testament is concerned with the fundamental problems of all mankind, and not just those of one group. The prophets often forgot national boundaries as they carried out their ministry. It was too big, too vital to be limited to one people, even the "chosen people." But we don't believe it is necessary to go farther. The message of the Old Testament clearly has a missionary character.
God has revealed himself in the words of the prophets the history of his people and the nations and supremely in the life of the son as a God who upholds justice and does not tolerate exploitation. Life in the Promised Land should be a life lived in the presence of God and marked by the fulfillment of the requirements of justice towards others. The land is the place and occasion for communion with God and communion among human beings it should also be a place where God's commandments are observed for it is a manifestation of God's fidelity.
Another distinction, this time real and therefore of considerable importance, should be mad within the prophetic movement and is of a historical character: that between the pre-exilic and the post-exilic prophets. As we shall see, the former were concerned in effect with every aspect of life: fidelity to the cult, external and internal politics, social problems, the fate of non-Israelite people. This interest in every sphere of life is, however, markedly reduced in the case of the post-exilic prophets: their preaching is increasingly directed to elements within the Jewish community with accents which are sometimes close to legalism: there is mention of the cult, the priesthood and sacrifices, but not so much to challenge the validity of their present forms as to improve them. In prophecy we have the struggle for the people of God and its mission, because faith is accompanied by a vision of the breakthrough of a new and more righteous world and of the conversion of nations ( Isaiah. 2.2-5; Micah 4.1-5), for which the prophet turns to both individuals and communities, calling on them to be converted.

3.1.4 Biblical election and Mission
In the Old Testament God’s election applied particularly to his choice of Abraham and, through Abraham, to his choice of Israel to be his people (Gen 12:1-3). From this people he produced one man, Jesus the Messiah, chosen by him before the foundation of the world to be the Saviour of the world (Luke 9:35). ‘The elect’ is therefore another name for the people of God (Matt 24:22; Luke 18:7; 2 Tim 2:10).God’s activity in determining beforehand what will happen, particularly in relation to people’s destiny, is sometimes called predestination.
All who believe in Jesus, whether Jew or Gentile, are the true people of God, the true descendants of Abraham (Rom 9:6-9; Gal 3:14, 26-29). God has chosen them to receive his salvation, and together they form God’s people, the church (John 6:37, 44; Eph 1:4-6; 2 Thess 2:13-14; 1 Peter 2:9). God's mission of world redemption begins (Genesis 12:1-4).Genesis 12:1-4 begins equally positively with Abraham in fact doing exactly what YHWH told him, so we read on with anticipation to see how God will keep his word also, and (though we will have to keep reading for a long time) how that mysterious concluding word of universal blessing will be accomplished. The mission is launched. Abraham obeys God's command; God's promise is thereby released into the history of the nations. Another interesting feature of Genesis 12:1-3 is the balancing way the three narrowing dimensions of Abraham's leaving (the first imperative) are set against the three broadening expressions of how and for whom he is to be a blessing (the second imperative).
On the one hand, he is to leave his land (the widest sphere of his identity), his wider kindred and then his immediate extended family. On the other hand, he is to be a blessing. The object of this blessing is at first unspecified (except that it will include the fact that he himself individually will be blessed), then it progresses to those who bless him, and finally issues in for all the kinship groups on earth. God's love to Israel was spontaneous and free, exercised in defiance of demerit, having no cause saves his one good pleasure. He made it his delight and satisfaction to do Israel good (Deut. 28:63; 30:9) simply because he resolved to do so.
It was true that in delivering Israel from Egypt he was keeping a promise made to the Patriarchs (Deut. 7:8), and there was a necessity of the divine character in that, for it is God's nature always to be faithful to his promises (Number . 23;19; 2 Tim. 2:13); but the making of this promise had itself been an act of free unmerited love, for the Patriarchs were themselves sinners , and God chose Abraham, the first recipient of the promise, out of idolatry (Jos. 24:2f.). Here too, therefore, the cause of election must be sought, not in man, but in God. Israel was sent to serve God with such a missionary purpose among nations. Israel's life was intended to model the kingdom of God in the midst of the nations through observing the social and moral obligations of the law of Moses as well as its religious injunctions(Lev 18:1-5; Deut 28:1-10).
Just at the moment of Israel's deepest humiliation and despondency we see the nations approach Israel and confess: "The Lord…….is faithful, the Holy One of Israel…..has chosen you" (Is 49:7). As the nations journey to Jerusalem, Israel remains the center of the center and the recipient of "the wealth of the nations" ( Isaiah 60:11). Even in Second Isaiah, which represents the high-water mark of Old Testament universalism, there are traces of this Israel-centeredness.
Israel, however, is not just another nation among nations. Rather, Israel stands in a special relationship. "You only have I known of all the families of the earth," says Yahweh (Amos 3:2). The essence of the Old Testament covenantal religion is that Yahweh chose Israel to be his people. Between election in the Hebrew Scriptures of Jesus and election in the formulations of theological systems there sometimes seems to be a great gulf fixed. Few and narrow are the bridges from one to the other. From the range of text that Wright has now considered, the following affirmations can be made about election in the Old Testament.
The election of Israel is set in the context of God's universality: Far from being a doctrine of narrow national exclusivism, it affirms the opposite. YHWH, the God who chose Israel, is the God who owns and rules the whole universe, and whatever purpose he has for Israel is inextricably linked to that universal sovereignty and providence. The election of Israel does not imply the rejection of other nations: On the contrary, from the very beginning it portrayed as for their benefit. God did not call Abraham from among the nations to accomplish their rejection but to initiate the process of their redemption.
The election of Israel is not warranted by any special feature of Israel itself: When the people of Israel were tempted to think that they were chosen by God on the grounds of numerical or moral superiority to other nations, Deuteronomy very quickly removed such arrogant illusions. The election of Israel is founded only on God's inexplicable love: There was no other motive than God's own love, and the promises he made to Israel's forefathers (which included, of course, his promise in relation to the nations). We might paraphrase John 3:16, in a way that John would doubtless accept, "God lo loved the world that he chose Abraham and called Israel."
The election of Israel is instrumental, not an end in itself: God did not choose Israel that they alone should be saved, as if the purpose of election terminated with them. They were chosen rather as the means by which salvation could be extended to others throughout the earth. The election of Israel is part of the logic of God's commitment to history: The salvation that the Bible describes is woven into the fabric of history. God deals with the realities of human life, lived on the earth, in nations and cultures. His decision to choose one nation in history as the means by which he would bring blessing to all nations within history is neither favoritism nor unfairness.
The election of Israel is fundamentally missional, not just soteriological. If we allow our doctrine of election to become merely a secret calculus that determines who get saved and who does not, we have lost touch with its original biblical intention. Election is of course, in the light of the whole Bible, election unto salvation. But it is first of all election into mission. Psalm 67 shows us that election does not mean that God has his favorite but simply that he has a chosen channel of blessing for all. Election has to do not with God' goal for humanity, that his blessing is restricted to some and denied to others. It has to do with his means of extending that blessing to all.
God choose Abraham and Israel for priestly service among the nations. The biblical doctrine of election has important ramification for mission. Its originates in God's choosing Abraham (Gen 12) and Israel(Deut 7:6-8).Yet God chose Abraham, a "wandering Aramean"(Deut 26:5) from an idolatrous family(Josh 24:2), true representative of the fallen human race, to be the recipient of his revelation. Its purpose is functional: election is for service. As Bosch notes, God as revealed in history is the One who has elected Israel.
The purpose of the election is service, and when this is withheld, election loses its meaning. Primarily Israel is to serve the marginal in its midst: the orphan, the widow, the poor, and the stranger. Whenever the people of Israel renew their covenant with Yahweh, they recognize that they are renewing their obligations to the victims of society." According to Genesis 18:19,we find its ethical agenda connected on the one side to Abraham's election and on the other side to God's mission. We need to examine first the specific ethical content of the phrases" the way of the Lord's and "doing righteousness and justice."
Abraham was chosen to be teacher, specifically a teacher of the way of the LORD and a teacher of righteousness and justice. Already Abraham is anticipating the role of Moses as teacher, just as we have seen that he anticipates Moses as an interceding prophet. The expression "keeping the way of the LORD," or "walking in the way of the LORD," was a favorite metaphor used in the Old Testament to describe a particular aspect of Israel's ethics.
Genesis 18:19 opens with God's affirmation of the election of Abraham. "I have known him" – which is frequently used for God choosing to bring a person or people into intimate relationship with himself. God then states the ethical purpose of his election. "for the purpose that YHWH may bring about for Abraham what he has spoken/promised to him (Gen 18: 18.)" This one verse thus binds together election, ethics and mission into a single syntactical and theological sequence located in the will, action and desire of God. It is fundamentally a missional declaration, explaining election and incorporating ethics. Both Genesis 22:18 and Genesis 26;4-5 make that link connecting God's intention to bless the nations to Abraham's tested obedience of Abraham is to be the model for his descendants so that the mission Abraham can be fulfilled.
There is no biblical mission without biblical ethics. That is God's election of Abraham is the intended to produce a community committed to ethical reflection of God's character. And God's mission of blessing the nation is predicated on such a community actually existing. This is an extension of link between Abraham's election for blessing others, and Abraham's own personal obedience to God. Abraham will be a 'father of many nations' (Gen. 17:4-6), and God intends him to be a blessing to 'all nations on earth', not merely Israel (Gen. 12:3; 18:18; 22:18; 26:4;28:14). Likewise Israel was to fulfill a mediatory role between God and the nations (Exod. 19:4-6).And while Yahweh sustains a special relationship with Israel, his rule extends to the entire universe.
In addition, this rule even involves using pagan nations and their rulers as his instruments to chastise rebellious Israel, such as the Assyrian Shalmaneser (2 Kgs, 17:1-230 or Nebuchadezzar king of Babylon (Jer. 25:9; 27:6; 43:10). In fact, God's treatment of Israel serves as a public display of his own character (Deut. 29:240): the laws demonstrate his wisdom (Deut. 4:6); the Exodus and other mighty acts his power (Lev. 26:45; Deut. 7:19; Jos. 4:24; Ps. 77:14); Israel's election his gracious, faithful love (Deut. 7:7-9; 10:15); his discipline of Israel his impartiality and holiness (Deut. 8:20; Jer. 46:12; Ezek. 38:23); and the universal offer of salvation his righteousness (Ps. 98:2; Is. 62:2). The ultimate purpose of Israel's existence is to reveal the greatness of God's name (2 Sam7:23; 1 Chr. 22:5; 2 Chr. 6:33; Is. 12:4).
Election, and the covenant relationship based on it, which distinguished Israel from all other nations, was a motive to grateful praise (Ps. 147:19f.), loyal keeping of God's law (Lev. 18:4f.) and resolute non-conformity to the idolatry and wrongdoing of the unelected world (Lev. 18; 2f; Deut. 14:1; Ezk. 20:5-7, etc.). Also, it gave Israel grounds for unfaltering hope and trust in God in times of distress and discouragement (cf. Is. 41:8-14;Ps. 106:4). Within the chosen people, God chose individuals for specific tasks designed to further the purpose of the national election –i.e. Israel's own enjoyment of God's blessing, and, ultimately, the blessing of the world. God chose Moses (Ps. 106:23), Aaron (Ps. 105:26), the priests (Deut. 18:5), the prophets (Jer.1:5), the kings (1Sa. 10:24; 2 Sa. 6:21;1 Ch. 28:5), and the Servant-Saviour of Isaiah's prophecy 'my elect' (Is. 42:1). God's use of Assyria and 'my servant' Nebuchadrezzar as his scourge (Is. 7:18 ff.; 10:5ff. Jer. 25:9), and or Cyrus, a man ignorant of God, as benefactor to the chosen people (Is. 45:4),]'
Paul presents divine election as a gracious, sovereign, eternal choice of individual sinners to be saved and glorified in and through Christ. Election 'by grace's (Rom .11:5;cf. 2 Tim. 1:9) is and act of undeserved favor freely shown towards members of a fallen race to which God owed nothing but wrath (Rom. 1:18ff.). Election is a sovereign choice, and not by any works of man, accomplished or foreseen (Rom. 9:11), or any human efforts to win God's favor (Rom. 9:15-18). God chose us, says Paul, 'before the foundation of the world' (Eph. 1:4; 2 Thess. 2; 13; 2 Tim. 1: 9). This choice was an act of predestination (Eph. 1:5, 11), a part of God's eternal purpose (Eph. 1:9), an exercise of loving foreknowledge whereby God determined to save (Eph 2:11, 14), Isaiah 40:5, 19:23 and 2:5 depict a future messianic period. Isaiah 42:6 and 49:6 constitute a challenge to Israel to resume her missionary calling as a light for the nations and to carry the light to the ends of the earth – quite different from a summons to Jerusalem.

3.1.5 Biblical Monotheism and Mission
Monotheism derived from the Greek monos (single, only) and theos (god), monotheism is the belief that there is only one God. Monotheism is also generally understood as involving belief in a personal, transcendent creator of all else that exists, and thus monotheism must be distinguished from the various forms of nonpersonal monism (ultimately there is only one reality). Monotheism is usually associated with Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, all of which affirm that there is one eternal Creator God. However, the three faiths differ substantially in their respective understandings of the nature of the one true God. Central to Judaism is the Shema, the creedal statement found in Deuteronomy 6:4 – "Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is One." Jesus reaffirmed this confession in Mark 12:29-30, and the unity of the one eternal God formed the foundation of the early Christian community as well (1 Cor. 8:4, 6; Eph. 4:6; 1 Tim. 2:50). Nevertheless, the early church came to recognize that within the unity of the one eternal God there is a fundamental distinction among the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, resulting in the doctrine of the Holy Trinity. Both Judaism and Islam reject the doctrine of the TRINITY and the deity of Jesus Christ.
The challenge for Christians missiologically is twofold: (1) to encourage those from polytheistic, pantheistic, or animistic worldviews to come to an understanding and acceptance of the biblical God as the one, eternal, sovereign God; (2) to encourage non-Christian monotheists to embrace a fully biblical understanding of the deity of Jesus Christ and the triune nature of the one God. In an effort to be faithful to the teaching of Scripture and to build on common ground, ministry among Muslims, Jews, and Sikhs should emphasize the oneness and unity of God.
While remaining consistent with the teaching of Scripture, ministry among non-Christian monotheists should explore new terms and fresh formulations for communicating the biblical understanding of the Holy Trinity. And especially we are grateful for Bauckham's clarification of what we mean by the uniqueness of YHWH. For the Old Testament texts clearly did not mean that YHWH was one called "transcendent uniqueness," YHWH stood sui generis, entirely in a class of his own as the God, the sole Creator of the universe, and Ruler, Judge and Savior of the nations. And the New Testament repeatedly makes exactly the same affirmations about Jesus of Nazareth, putting him in the same texts to do so.
So when we speak misssiologically of the uniqueness of Christ, we are not engaged in some kind of horizontal comparison of Jesus with other great founders of religions. It is not that we line them up together and at the end of such a comparative process we come to the conclusion that, somehow, Jesus is better than all the rest, or, less competitively, that "Jesus is the one for me." Rather we are engaged vertically in tracing the scriptural roots of the identity, mission and accomplishments of Jesus deeply into the uniqueness of YHWH, the Holy One of Israel.
Christocentric biblical monotheism is profoundly missional, insomuch as it says with equal strength that YHWH is God in Heaven above and the earth beneath, and there is no other; and that Jesus is Lord, and there is no other name under heaven given to humanity by which we must be saved.
3.2 The span of God's Missional Covenant
The Bible has its own understanding of the relationship between the particular and the universal, and it is in that relationship that the church's universal mission belongs and has meaning. Mission is a sending from the one human person Jesus Christ into the entire world as his witnesses. Mission takes place on the story of Jesus to the universal coming of God's kingdom. It happens as particular people called by God go from here to there and live for God here and there for the sake of all people. The Bible is a kind of project aimed at the kingdom of God, that is, towards the achievement of God's purposes for good in the whole of God's creation.
The language of justice and torah in Isaiah 42 is reminiscent of the Sinai covenant, but it is the Davidic covenant that is referred to in Isaiah 42:6 and Isaiah 49:6, the mission of the servant of YHWH is, among other things, to be a " covenant for the people" – a mysterious phrase and something of an exegetical crux, but it is surely to be understood through its parallelism with " light for the Gentile [ nations]" (Isaiah 49: 6, which further explicates it in terms of YHWH's salvation going " to the end of the earth").
So we find then that in its Old Testament development, the anticipated new covenant picks up themes from all of the preceding covenants-Noah, Abraham, Sinai and David, and in several places expands them to include the nations within the ultimate scope of God's saving covenantal mission. The whole history covenant between Yahweh and Israel had from the beginning a universal dimension. The nations are real witness. Yahweh's saving actions, the punishment and the restoration that he imposed on Israel were at the same time a preaching to the nations. Israel believed themselves to be in a unique relationship with YHWH, a relationship that they likened to the treaty covenants between nations and empires in their wider international world.
A new vision of the future begins to emerge as several prophets look forward to a new era of covenant relationship in which the old imperfections would be eradicated and God's intentions for Israel and his mission through tem would be fulfilled. This hope leads us straight to Jesus, in whom, according to Jesus himself and his first interpreters, that new covenant was inaugurated. Covenant is one of several major components in Israel's essential theological self-understanding. God's covenant expresses God's concern to redeem mankind, to replenish the earth, and to renew society. The biblical idea of covenant is impossible without broader concept of the reign of God in Jesus Christ. The covenant with Noah is a universal salvation. As the nation's life went on, the arrived of monarchy led to another development in the covenant relationship, as God initiated the particular covenant with David and his successors on the throne. The failure of so many of the kings of Israel and Judah, however, called into question the viability of God's whole project in and through Israel.

3.2.1 God's Mission and God's Priesthood: Exodus 19:4-6
"Now if you obey me fully and keep my covenant, then out of all nations you will be my treasured possession. [For (or indeed)] the whole earth is mine, and you will be a kingdom of priests and a holy nation." (Exodus 19:5-6). Exodus 19:5-6 is a key programmatic statement by God, coming, like a hinge in the book of Exodus, in between the exodus narrative (Exod 1-18) and the giving of the law and covenant (Ex 20-24). It defines the identity of Israel and the role God has for them. It functions as a narrative and theological preamble to the promulgation of the Sinai covenant in the rest of Exodus and Leviticus, so that we must view all the specific details of that covenant from the perspective of this word of orientation. This is a crucial, context-setting orientation to all that follows. Further, it sets Israel's identity and role in the historical context of God's past action on behalf of Israel, and in the universal context of God's ownership of the whole earth.
There we observed both the universality of its reference to the whole earth and all nations alongside the particularity of its description of Israel as YHWH's special personal possession (segulla). In both respects it has remarkable affinity with the Abrahamic covenant. We will return yet again to the same text in chapter eleven, when we consider the ethical implications of Israel's call to be a holy nation. Here we are concerned simply with the first part of the double identity that God gives to Israel – to be a "priestly kingdom". To understand what it meant for Israel as a whole to be called God's priesthood in relation to the nations, we have to understand what Israel's priests were in relation to the rest of the people. Priests stood in the middle between God and the rest of the people. Wright stated that priests then had a twofold task:
Teaching the law (Lev 10:11; Deut 33;10; Jer 18:18; Mal 2:6-7; Hos 4:1-9): Through the priest God would be known to the people. This was a major duty of Old Testament priests, the neglect of which led to moral and social decay and the prophetic anger reflected in the words of Hosea and Malachi above.
Handling the sacrifices (Lev 1-7): Through the priests and their work of atonement the people could come to God. The priests did the actions with the blood at the altar and made the declaration of atonement to the worshiper. The priesthood was thus a two-directional representational or mediatory task between God and the rest of the Israelites, bringing the knowledge of God to the people and bringing the sacrifices of the people to God. In addition to these twin tasks, it was of course a prime privilege and responsibility of the priests to bless the people in the name of YHWH (Num 6: 22-27).
It is thus richly significant that God confers on Israel as a whole people the role of being his priesthood in the midst of the nations. As the people of YHWH they would have the historical task of bringing the knowledge of God to the nations, and bringing the nations to the means of atonement with God. This dual movement in the priestly role (from God to people and from people to God) is reflected in prophetic visions concerning the nations, which included both centrifugal and centripetal dynamics. There would be a going out from God and a coming in to God. ON the one hand, the law or the justice or the light of YHWH would go out to the nations from Israel or from Zion.
On the other hand, the nations could be pictured as coming to YHWH or to Israel or to Jerusalem / Zion. The priesthood of the people of God is thus a missional function that stands in continuity with their Abrahamic election, and it affects the nations. Just as Israel's priests were called and chosen to be the servants of God and his people, so Israel as a whole is called and chosen to be the servant of God and all peoples. John Goldingay connects the text with Genesis 12:1-3. The fact that Exodus 19:3-8 is a form of reworking of Genesis 12:1-3 reminds us that this designation links with YHWH's lordship over the whole world and works toward the world's inclusion rather than its exclusion. The stretching of the royal priesthood to include other peoples (Rev. 1:6) is in keeping with the Abrahamic vision.
Although the action is taking place between YHWH and Israel alone at Mount Sinai, God has not forgotten his wider mission of blessing the rest of the nations of the earth through this particular people whom he has redeemed. Furthermore, since the exodus itself had been explicitly motivated by God's faithfulness to his promises to Abraham (Ex 2: 24; 6:6-8), the full weight of that great theme in Genesis is echoed here. Israel as "priest" mediates God to the nations. The kingdom reaches beyond Israel to encompass the peoples of the world, all of whom are the objects of God's concern. Israel was elected by God to be preacher, example, prophet and priest for the nations.
The priesthood of the old covenant could not affect the reality of reconciliation portended by its sacrificial function. Its character was preparatory; it portrayed the principle of propitiatory sacrifice but not the fulfillment of that principle. Its imperfection, which aroused the longing for and the expectation of the provision of the perfect priesthood, was apparent for the following reasons. (1) In the midst of its activity a new priesthood of a different order, that of Melchizedek, was prophetically spoken of (Ps. 110:4). If the existing priesthood had been perfect, there would have been no point in announcing another order of priesthood (Heb. 7:11). (2) During the period when the old or Mosaic covenant was given, the inauguration of which would mean the placing of God's law in the hearts of his people and the removal of their sins forever (Jer. 31:31ff.). Clearly, "if that first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no occasion for a second" (Heb. 8:7). (3) The very multiplicity of the priests of the old order involved the necessity for a priestly succession because in endless sequence they were carried away by death, and thus "were prevented by death from continuing in office" (Heb. 7:23).
This pointed to the need for a priest whose priesthood was perfect and everlasting, one who would be "a priest for ever" (Ps. 110:4) (4) Not only were the priests of the old order mortal, they were also sinful, and thus themselves in need of redemption and reconciliation. Consequently, before offering sacrifices for the people they were obliged to offer sacrifices for their own sins – an action which plainly attested the imperfection of their priesthood (Heb. 5:3; 7:27). (5) The endless repetition of the sacrifices offered by the priesthood of eh old order itself demonstrated the inadequacy of those sacrifices to deal fully and finally with sin. (6) The very nature of these sacrifices gave further evidence of their inability to achieve what they foreshadowed. The animals offered up were slain in the sinner's stead, symbolizing the transference of his sin to an innocent victim and his atonement by the substitution death of that victim. But an irrational, uncomprehending brute beast can never be a proper substitute for man, who is made in the image of God. That is why "it is impossible that the blood of bulls and goats should take away sins" (Heb. 10:4).
The purpose of the old order of priesthood was to teach the people that atonement for sins requires the provision of an innocent victim in the sinner's place and the shedding of blood as that victim dies the death due to the sinner. The Leviticus order could not accomplish this atonement, but it kept alive the expectation of the coming of the perfect priest and the offering of the perfect sacrifice in fulfillment of the gospel promises contained in the Scriptures of the Old Testament. The new order of priesthood is that of Melchizeddek, and it is comprehended in the (Heb. 7).
The perfection of his priesthood is confirmed by the fact that it is forever (Ps. 110:4), that the sacrifice he offered is once for all (Gen. 7:27), and that, his work of atonement completed, he is now enthroned in celestial glory (Heb. 1:3); 10:12; 12:2). This means that in contrast to the first Adam, who suffered defeat and dragged down the human race in his fall, Jesus, "the last Adam" (I Cor. 15;45, 47), took our humanity to himself to the glorious destiny for which it was always intended. The perfection of his priesthood is established by the sinless ness of his earthly life as the incarnate Son, our fellow human being.
The goal of the exodus from Egypt was to establish a holy nation, a kingdom of priests ( Exodus 19:6). Moses is viewed as the founder of the priestly order who was faithful when tested ( Exod 33:7-11; lev 8:1 ff.; Deut 33:8). The role of the priest was not merely to sacrifice, but to instruct the people in the ways of God. In Exodus 24 Moses ascended Mt. Sinai to receive directions regarding the building of the tabernacle and the institution of the priesthood. Exodus 28 speaks of the preparation of Aaron’s consecration which was then executed in Leviticus 8-10, Leviticus summarizes the great task of the priesthood:
“You are to distinguish between the holy and the common, and between the unclean and the clean, and you are to teach the people of Israel all the statutes which Yahweh has spoken to them by Moses” (Lev. 10: 10-11; cf. Ezek 44: 23).

Moreover, a clear distinction was made between priests and Levites, the latter being appointed to minister over the tabernacle and the furnishings (Number 1:47ff). However, the Levites are integrally connected with another basic witness in the Pentateuch. In Exodus 32 Aaron the priest led the people astray into idolatry. The treat of false worship was present even at Sinai. Both Exodus 32 and Deuteronomy 10 derive the special role of the Levites from their zeal for Yehweh.

3.2.2 God's Mission and God's Presence: Leviticus 26:11-13
The presence of God in the midst of his people was one of the most essential and most precious features of the covenant. The covenantal context of this promise here in Leviticus 26 is very clear. "I will put my dwelling place among you, and I will not abhor you. I will walk among you and be your God, and you will be my people" (Lev 26:12). It is conditional on Israel's obedience: "If you follow my decrees and are careful to obey my commands (Lev 26:3)". But it is also grounded in the historical redeeming grace of God (Lev 26:13). This double basis is essentially the same as we saw in Exodus 19:4-6. Eden restored – for all. However, we immediately remind ourselves of the purpose for which this covenant with Israel existed in the first place. It was part of God's long-term mission to bring blessing to all nations and all creation.
Indeed, the language of Leviticus 26 up to this point is replete with echoes of the Genesis portrait of creation under God's blessing (especially fruitfulness and increase) or of the rolling back of the curse (in peace and the absence of danger). Even the phrase "I will walk among you" uses a very rare form of the verb halak (the hithpael). And thereby, what would be true for Israel in covenant blessing-the enjoyment of God's presence – would eventually be true for all who would enter into the same blessing through the outworking of God's covenant with Abraham. Ultimately, God's presence among his people must point to the blessing of his presence in all the earth. So the presence of God, dwelling and walking among his people, is, on the one hand, the goal of God's own acts of redemption and, on the other, the fruit of his people's response of obedience. It is God's covenant presence.
Richardson views on the promise of God to his people is that God will be present with them (Ex.3.1-14;33: 12-19; Matt. 1.23; John 1.14; Rom.8). Man cannot escape the presence of God (Ps.139.7-12). In John's Gospel, as in the great commission, presence and witness are closely linked. The role of mission is to reveal the God who is already present. The word 'presence' is preferred to mission by some because it does not imply confrontation over against others in the world. But the concept of mission as presence is also biblical and should have its place in a theology of mission. The Christian will seek to fulfill the mission of God by being present in different situation and not basically by preaching within it.
Wright points out the act of fulfilling the covenant, YHWH will bring creation itself to fulfillment: "I will make you fruitful and multiply you." The promise of Lev 26:9-13 thus brings together creation, exodus, covenant and presence. In the covenant, YHWH is bringing the purpose of creation itself to completion in the experience of blessing and of the very presence of God. Another connection here is between the creation (and especially the Garden of Eden) as the original temple of God.
The presence of God in Israel's tabernacle and temple looked backward to his presence in Eden, and forward to his ultimate presence among all nations in a renewed creation (Rev 21-22). Overshadowing all these blessings was the greater blessing of having God making his home among them. This did not simply mean that he would dwell in the tabernacle. He would walk among them as if the Garden of Eden had been restored. They would enjoy close and daily fellowship with him. As a result, they would be his special people, sure of his ownership and protection. That would give them a rightful status and confidence in the world.
But, now, they could walk tall, 'with heads held high'. In speaking the same language of blessing and curse (Matthew 5:1-12; 23:1-30; Luke 6:20-26), Jesus applied this to his disciples. In doing so he clothed the forms of obedience and the forms of disobedience with fresh garments. As 'heirs of the prophets and the covenant God made with your fathers' (Acts 3:25), we can know the greater blessings to which the old covenant merely pointed. For God 'has blessed us in the heavenly realms with every spiritual blessing in Christ' (Ephesians 1:3).
Yahweh's reference to what he has done emphasizes that the people of Israel, for whom he has done it, have experienced it at first hand: They have seen for themselves
(1) what he "did to the Egyptians," a summary of the entire proof-of-the Presence narrative from the first of the mighty acts through the deliverance at the sea;

(2) the at he "lifted them on eagles wings," a summary of the proof of his
Presence through the variety of guidance and provision in the wilderness; and

(3) that he has brought them to himself, to the mountain of his special Presence, to Sinai/Horeb.

That community, and entity new to the narrative of Exodus in its sequential development to this point, but the entity all the same because of whom and in a sense from whom Exodus originated, is described here by three separate but interrelated images. Israel's affirmative response will first of all mean the genesis of a people who will be Yahweh's own "special treasure." The second and third images are introduced, as was Yahweh's statement of his work for Israel, with an emphatic "you yourselves," a deft underscoring of the motif of uniqueness stressed by "special treasure." Such a people will be Yahweh's own "kingdom of priests."
The phrases "special treasure," "kingdom of priests," and "holy people" are closely related to one another, and although they each refer to the whole of the people who will pay attention to and follow the covenant, they are not to be taken as synonymous, either all three of them or the second two of them. Israel as the "special treasure" is Israel becomes uniquely Yahweh's prized possession by their commitment to him in covenant. Israel as a "kingdom of priests" is Israel committed to the extension throughout the world of the ministry of Yahweh's Presence.
Israel as a "holy people" then represents a third dimension of what it means to be committed in faith to Yahweh: they are to be a people set apart, different from all other people by what they are and are becoming – a display-people, a showcase to the world of how being in covenant with Yahweh changes a people. In concept, it began evolving with the birth of Israel as a people of faith in covenant with Yahweh. As a summary used in the cultic context of covenant renewal services, it certainly predates the Deuteronomistic period. Whether it also predates the monarchy is unlikely.

3.2.3 God's Mission and God's Prognosis: Deuteronomy 27-32
We began with the great prologue to the Sinai covenant in Exodus 19. Exodus 19:7-8 records that the people of Israel declared their wholehearted intention to do all that the Lord commanded. They repeat their commitment in Exodus 24:7. But by the time we reach the end of Deuteronomy, they have already on several signal occasions proved their inability to keep this promise (Ex 32 – 34; Num 14). It is a tragic story in which the dissonance between the people's enthusiastic acceptance of the covenant and their utter failure to keep it had become painfully glaring.
Failure and curse: The Pentateuch ends with the gloomy prediction that this would not be the end of Israel's stiff-necked resistance to God's guiding. Their long future would be as wracked with recalcitrance as their short past. At its simplest, Deuteronomy's anticipation of the future history of Israel was that, although Israel had been called and given every possible incentive to live in loyalty to their covenant paradoxically begins and ends with failure: it opens by looking back to the failure of the generation of the exodus to go and take the land that God set before them, and it ends with the anticipated failure of the generations to come. Israel's endemically stiff-necked nature would lead to rebellion and disobedience. As a result, the curses that were an integral part of the covenant (Lev 26; Deut 28) would fall, including the terrible threat of scattering among the nations. However, with great amazement and wonderful rhetoric (Deut 30), Moses points beyond that judgment to offer the sure and certain hope of restoration and new life if the people would return and seek God once more.
Israel and the nations intertwined in the story: Since Deuteronomy is a record of covenant renewal just prior to entry into the Promised Land, it set this future anticipation in a thoroughly covenantal framework. And since the covenant with Israel was made in the full awareness that all the earth and all the nations belong to God, we should not be surprised to see that the nations are woven into this future projection in some highly significant ways – ways that are further taken up in the New Testament's understanding of God's mission for the world.
First, the nations witness Israel's failure and judgment and are shocked by it. They ask for, and are given, an explanation (Deut 28: 37; 29:22-28). Second, the nations are also the human agents through whom God executes his judgment in fulfillment of the covenant curses (Deut 28:49-52; 32:21-26). At this point the nations are enemies of Israel but also agents of God. Third, in the amazing inversion and paradox of Deuteronomy 32, God vindicates his people in the midst of the nations, in such a way that the nations are finally called on to praise YHWH and to rejoice with his people (Deut 32:27-43). It is not explained how this mysterious reversal will take place. The different scenes are simply set side by side.
1. The nations will be enemies whom God will use to judge Israel.
2. Yet God will also finally defend Israel against these very enemies.
3. And God will ultimately lead all – Israel and nations together – to the praise and worship of the Lord God.

Thus, the history that will see the judgment and restoration of Israel will also see the judgment and blessing of the nations. Each sequence will be intertwined with the other. And the total sequence will be the outworking of the covenants in history.
Restoration of Israel and ingathering of the nations: It is clear that Jesus linked his own mission to the hope of the significance of his ministry. N. T. Wright, for example, suggests that Matthew has shaped his Gospel not merely in terms of the five books of the Torah (a common scholarly view) but specifically in terms of the sequence of thought in the great final section of Deuteronomy 27-34. In doing so, Matthew brings out the significance of the story of Jesus "as the continuation and climax of the story of Israel, with the implicit understanding that this story is the clue to the story of the whole world." It was, however, the apostle Paul who made the most use of Deuteronomy in his theological and missiological reflection.
Not only did he see in the continued suffering of Israel a kind of prolongation of the curse of exile (a view shared by many first- century Jews), but he also saw in the death and resurrection of Jesus as the Messiah the climax of the judgment and the restoration of Israel respectively. The failure of many of his contemporary Jews to respond to the message of Messiah Jesus had led to the extension of the good news to the Gentiles (Acts 13:44-48; Rom 11). Rather, in order to portray how he relates this ingathering of the Gentiles to God's ultimate purpose for Israel, Paul picks up a rhetorical pun in Deuteronomy 32:21 and develops it into a theology of history and mission.
Paul argues that the ingathering of the Gentiles (the "no people") through his mission endeavors will arouse jealousy among the Jews, so that ultimately "all Israel," extended and inclusive of believing Jews and Gentiles, will share in salvation (Rom 10:19-11:26). Clearly Paul reflected deeply on Deuteronomy and on the Song of Moses in Deuteronomy 32 especially. He quotes its final doxology, calling on the nations to praise God with his people (Deut 32:43), in his exposition of the multinational nature of the gospel and its implications for the need for crosscultural acceptance and sensitivity between Jewish and Gentile Christians (Rom 15:7-10).
The Sinai covenant, then, which provides the backbone for so much of the law and the prophets, has extensive missilogical significance. When we seek to read these massive building block texts of the Torah through the lens of a missional hermeneutic, we have to take account of
1. The status and role of Israel – as God's covenant priesthood in the midst of the nations.

2. The central privilege of the presence of God in the midst of his people, constituting their distinctiveness from and their witness to the nations.


3. The anticipated failure of Israel that in the mysterious providence of God would result in opening the door of grace and salvation to the nations.

These international and missional dimensions of Israel's covenant at Signal eventually influenced and shaped the mission of Jesus and Paul in theology and in practice, and continue to have relevance for the church as the new covenant people of God in Christ.

3.3 The life of God's Missional people
The key phrase, linking Moses with David turns out to be the spirit of the Lord, the divine force by which extraordinary acts were accomplished. This charismatic spirit, by which God broke into human life, formed a key element of Mosaic religion. It inspired and sustained God's extraordinary hopes among the people Israel. The other key element was human life with emphasis upon its weak evolving and compromising character. The biblical tradition joined Moses with David by the bonds of human flesh.
This earthly link could be weak and fallible (Num. 20;2-13), painful and purifying (Judg.21;25),as sensuous and intriguing as any Byzantine court (2 Sam. 6-21;25) as sensuous and intriguing as any Byzantine court (2 Sam. 6-21; 1 king 1-2). Moses and Aaron, because of their impatience with the Israelites, "a stiff-necked people" (Exod. 34:9), were prevented by God from leading the people into the Promised Land (Num. 20;2-13) Judges were raised up to deliver Israel from a bondage that bad been brought on by abandoning the Lord. The Lord left the oppressor-nations in the Promised Land to test Israel (Judge. 2:10-23). A key moment in the drama of the judge Ehud is described with barracks humor, when the servants of the Moabite king fail to intervene in his behalf because "they thought, 'He is only relieving himself in the [water] closet.'"(Judge. 3:12-30). A transition to royalty was more and more necessary because "everyone did what was right in their own eyes."(Judge 21:25.).
The people insist that the traditional leadership of charismatic judges be dropped in favor of royalty, because "you are old and your sons do not walk in your ways." Moreover, they wanted Samuel to "appoint for us a king to govern us like all the nations." It was not divine revelation nor any other spiritual motive but emulation of foreigners that called for the new and radical institution of royalty (1 Sam. 8:5). Divine qualities, which are the determining factor of continuity for David, reach back to Moses on Mount Sinai: "The Lord, the Lord, a God merciful and gracious … abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness" (Exod. 34:6).
God was the controller of history. His repetitive activity in judgment and salvation, bondage and deliverance, reached its climax in one great act of judgment and salvation at Golgotha. There God gave absolute deliverance to those who were in hopeless bondage. He completed the pattern that he had been working out for all people through the history of Israel. In Christ he brought his plans to fulfilment (Exod 6:6-8; Isa 11:15-16; Hosea 2:14-15; 1 Cor 5:7; 10:1-13; Rev 5:9; 15:3).

3.3.1 Missional Ethics and Covenant
The focus of God's faithful dealing with His people and their response to Him is in the covenant relationship which He established with them. A covenant was a binding obligation between two parties, and in the case of a covenant in which Yahweh was involved, it wears always He who took the initiative and who was the dominant partner in the relationship. The basic terms of a covenant were, "I will be your God and you shall be my people" – it was a corporate relationship to Him out of which various obligations sprang.
The covenant with Noah included promise of blessing to his descendants and to all flesh (Gen 6:18; 9:9-17).The covenant with Abraham was based on the promises of God, with the seal of circumcision as a reminder of God's undertaking and men's obligation (Gen 17:1-14). The covenant with the people of Israel after the Exodus was linked the stipulation of obedience on the part of thee people (Exodus 24:7f). Under Joshua the people renewed the covenant with promises of obedience (Josh 24:24f). God made a covenant with David and His descendants (2 Sam 7:12-17) and the way in which this demonstrated His faithfulness is brought out most strikingly in Psalm 89.
The fact that Yahweh had entered into covenant with His people in these different ways was the basis for much exhortation to the people to be true to Him. The Book of Deuteronomy constantly dwells upon His faithfulness and the obligations of the covenant nation. The penalties of unfaithfulness also are brought home. The northern kingdom went into captivity because of its failure to observe the covenant (2Kings 17:15-38), and the southern kingdom had to reform itself drastically when reaffirming the covenant under Josiah (2 Kings 23:1-4). It was Jeremiah's great achievement that he saw that outward reform could not go far enough and that unfaithfulness to an outward covenant was unavoidable.
Hence the dramatic new spiritual prospects opened up through his prophecy of the new covenant (Jer 31:31-34). The religion of the Old Testament was dominated by the law. No Israelite could conceivably be ignorant of the fact that he was under obligation to be faithful to God. But when Yahweh had revealed Himself in the way that He had revealed Himself in the way that He had, the call to obedience could never be divorced from the invitation to faith. This translates the Hebrew noun berith. The verbal root means either "to fetter" or "to eat with," which would signify mutual obligation, or "to allot" (1 Sam 17:8), which would signify a gracious disposition. Compare this with the Hittite "suzerainty covenant," in which a vassal swore fealty to his king out of gratitude for favors received.
In the OT, berith identifies three different types of legal relationships. (1) A two sided covenant between human parties who both voluntarily accept the terms of the agreement (for friendship, I Sam 18:3-4: marriage, Mal 2:14; or political alliance, Josh 9:15; Obad 7). God, however, never "enter in" to such a covenant of equality with men. (2) A one sided disposition imposed by a superior party (Ezek 17:13-14). God the Lord thus "commands" a berith that man, the servant, is to "obey" (Josh 23:16).
In the original "covenant of works" (Hos 6:7 ASV), he placed Adam on probation, bestowing life, should he prove faithful (Gen 2:17), Humanity failed; but Christ, the last Adam (1 Cor 15:45), did fulfill all righteousness (Matt 3:15; Gal 4:4), thereby earning restoration for all who are his (3) God's self-imposed obligation, for the reconciliation of sinners to himself (Deut 7:6-8; Ps 89:3-4). The covenant then constitutes the heart of all God's special revelation; when put into writing, the "Book of the Covenant" becomes the objective source for man's religious hope (Exod 24:7). Scripture consists of the "Old Testament" and the "New Testament."
God's revelations of his covenant exhibit historical progression (note plural "covenants,"( Rom 9:4):
(1) the Edenic (Gen 3:15), God's earliest promise of redemption, though at the cost of the bruising of the heel of the seed of woman;

(2) the Noachian (9:9), for the preservation of the seed;
(3) the Abrahamic (15:18), granting blessing through Abram's family;
(4) the Sinaitic (Exod 19:5-6), designating Israel as God's chosen people;
(5) the Levitical (Num 25:12-13), making reconciliation through priestly
atonement;

(6) the Davidic (2 Sam 23:5), with messianic salvation promised through David's dynasty;

(7) the present new covenant in Christ, which is internal reconciling, direct, and with finished atonement (Jer 31:33-34; Heb 8:6-13); and

(8) the future covenant of peace, when our internal salvation will reach out to embrace external nature (Ezek 34:25), when direct spiritual communion will become "face to face" (20:35; 37:27), and when divine forgiveness will achieve the goal of peace among all nations (34:28).

Successive kings of both Israel and Judah failed to live either by the standards of Sinai or the ideals of Zion. The covenant relationship was strained to breaking point. Indeed some prophetic voices declared that it has indeed been broken, and only an act of God's amazing grace could ever salvage it. But that was the trademark of YHWH, God of Israel – acts of grace beyond belief and certainly beyond deserving. And so there developed a growing longing for God to act in a new way, to make a fresh start, to inaugurate renewal of the covenant in such a way that it would not fall prey to the failures of a disobedient people. Only once is this described in the precise terms "a new covenant" (by Jeremiah), but the idea that God's new future would include features of he original covenants, renewed and permanently established, is found across a range of texts.
All of the covenants we have surveyed had dimensions and expectations that looked beyond the boundaries of Israel alone, recognizing that YHWH as the covenant God of Israel was also the sovereign God of all the earth and all nations. For they read their existing Scriptures in the light of their belief that Jesus was the Messiah and that through him the promised new covenant had been inaugurated, along with mission to the nations as its inescapable corollary.
In Jeremiah, The one text that explicitly used the phrase "a new covenant," Jeremiah 31:31-37, gives no clear indication of its universality that is, that it will involve or include other nations in its scope. The passage comes in a section of Jeremiah known as the Book of Consolation (Jeremiah 30-33), in which the prophet is absorbed with bringing comfort to the people of Israel through the message of their restoration after exile. This should not be taken, however, to imply that Jeremiah had no interest in or awareness of any promise from God in relation to the nations at large. He was, after all, called to be some seriousness. At least two other texts have the nations in view, with a wider offer of God's blessing or salvation.
In a quit remarkable small oracle (Jer 12:14-17), the nations around Israel are offered exactly the same hope of restoration and establishment on exactly the same conditions (repentance and true worship) that Jeremiah elsewhere held out to Israel. As for Israel itself, if only they would truly repent, then not only would the judgment of God be suspended on Israel but the blessing of God would be released. And in striking allusion to Genesis 12:3, that will mean Abrahamic blessing for the rest of the nations (Jer 4;1-2).
The book of Isaiah uses the language of covenant to express future hope in explicitly universalizing ways that include the nations. That is why Moses can urge Israel to live according to God's law with a motivational eye on the watching nations. They will see the difference, and questions will be asked – questions that, significantly, include the nearness of God in the midst of this people. This strategically placed piece of covenantal motivation makes a powerful and missiologically significant connection between the presence of God, the ethical obedience of his people, and the observation of the nations. God's presence requires ritual cleanness. Rituals cleanness is the burden of much of Leviticus. In Israel's ritual worldview, everything in life could be divided into two broad categories: the holy and the profane. God and anything specifically dedicated to God or associated with him holy. And God himself could only dwell in the presence of what was clean.
There was the strongest emphasis on this superiority which Israel, as the possessor of a divine covenant, enjoyed over all other people: but at the same time humility and seriousness were inculated, humility at the thought of their own unworthiness and seriousness in the duty of perfectly fulfilling their covenant obligations. God had chosen Israel to be his people, saved them from slavery in Egypt, and taken them into a close relationship with himself, all in fulfilment of his covenant promise made to Abraham. Everything arose out of the sovereign grace of God (Exod 2:24; 3:16; 6:6-8). But if the people were to enjoy the blessings of that covenant, they had to respond to God’s grace in faithful obedience.
The people understood this and promised to be obedient to all God’s commands (Exod 24:7-8). The law that God gave to the people of Israel at Sinai laid down his requirements for them. Through obedience to that law the people would enjoy the life God intended for them in the covenant relationship (Lev 18:5; cf. Rom 7:10; 10:5; Gal 3:12). The Ten Commandments were the principles by which the nation was to live, and formed the basis on which all Israel’s other laws were built (Exod 20:1-17).

3.3.2 Missional Responsibility of Israel
The missional responsibility of Israel is to live in wholehearted obedience to God's covenant. Deuteronomy 4 thus returns at the end (Deuteronomy 4:40) to the place where it began (Deuteronomy 4:1-2) – urging Israel to obedience. But now we are able to see two things in much greater depth.
1. the motivation for Israel's obedience (the great things YHWH had done in the past)

2. the goal of Israel's obedience (Israel's well-being in the land in the future as a nation of godliness and social justice, and thereby as a witness to the nations)

We can now summarize the covenantal and missional logic as follows:
1. Israel is summoned to live in wholehearted obedience to God's covenant law when they take possession of the land (Deuteronomy 4:1-2).

2. Failure to do so will lead to the same fate as befell those who were seduced into idolatry and immorality by the Moabites at Beth Peor (Deuteronomy 4:3-4).

3. Covenant loyalty and obedience will constitute a witness to the nations whose interest and questions will revolve around the God they worship and the just laws they live by (Deuteronomy 4:5-8).
4. This witness, however, would be utterly nullified by Israel going after other gods, and so they must be strenuously warned against that through reminders of their spectacular past and warnings of a horrific future if they ignore the word (Deuteronomy 4:9-31).

5. Above all, let them remember that alone among all the nations they have had unique experience of the revelation and redemption of God, on the basis of which they have come to know YHWH as God in all his own transcendent uniqueness (Deuteronomy 4:32-38).


6. Let them then demonstrate their acknowledgement of all these things in faithful obedience (Deuteronomy 4:39-40).

7. Therein lies their future security as a people, and thereby also hangs their mission as the people chosen by God for the sake of his mission.


A very strong echo of the thought of this passage is found in the record of Solomon's prayer of dedication of the temple in 1 Kings 8. The missional hope expressed in the prayer that God would respond even to the prayers of the foreigner, in order that "all the peoples of the earth may know your name and fear you" (1 Kings. 8: 43), is turned into a missional challenge to the people that they must be as committed to God's law as God is committed to such a worldwide goal. The Deuteronomic historian clearly endorses the ethical and missional logic of his foundational text. May [the LORD] uphold the cause of his servant and the cause of his people Israel according to each day's need, do that all the peoples of the earth may know that the LORD is God and that there is no other, But your hearts must be fully committed to the LORD our God, to live by his decrees and obey his commands, as at this time. (1 Kings 8:60-61).
The close relationship between the covenant name of the Lord and the judgment upon the people for their sins – whether religious or cultic or social – underscores a great Old Testament truth, that election by Yahweh carries the responsibility to live according to his revealed will. In Amos, the people's sins are related to the law of Yahweh. But there is another side to the responsibility of election. Since Yahweh has chosen Israel, he has a special responsibility to them. While sinful Israel cannot count on any special leniency because of election (Amos 9:7f), but rather will be held to an even higher standard of moral responsibility than the other nations, nevertheless Yahweh will not completely destroy the house of Jacob. But Amos ends on a happier note. He foresees clearly that Yahweh's covenant has not been destroyed. The "tottering hut of David" (Amos 9: 11) will be repaired, raised up, rebuilt "as in the days of old." But the covenant goes beyond that. Yahweh does not just simply patch the nation like a cosmic junk dealer. He promises, through Amos, something far more glorious in prosperity, stability, and security.








CHAPTER FOUR
THE ARENA OF MISSION

4.1 Mission and God' Earth
The God who creates is the God who blesses. He blesses all living creatures, animal and human (Gen 1: 22, 28), so commanding them to exercise the dynamism to reproduce and increase conferred on them in their being created. The blessing is effective through time, in the genealogy of Genesis 5 (it is renewed after the flood, Gen 8:1,7), and in space, in the spread of the human race over the earth through Noah's sons (Genesis 10), and in the line through Shem that leads to Abraham. The formula of Gen 1:28 and 9:1-7, is taken up again in Gen 35:11 when the promise is confirmed to Jacob. "Blessing is a continuing activity of God that is either present or not present.”
Theologian of the Exile, he was God's instrument, Cyrus is God's shepherd (Isaiah 44:28); and God's anointed (Isaiah 45:1). All these events have taken place because:
"I am the Lord, who made all things" (Isaiah 44:24); "I am the Lord, there is no other; besides me, there is no "God" (Isaiah 45:5); "I form light and create darkness, I make weal and create woe, I am the Lord who does all these things" (Isaiah 45:7). The cry "I am He," "I am YHWH," rings through Deutero-Isaiah (Isaiah 41:4; 43:13, 15; 45:3-7). The creator God works wonders in the desert (Isaiah 41:18-19; 44:3-4; 49:11).
Because he is the creator, he is the Lord of the universe and the Lord of history. Because he is the creator, he is also the rescuer.
Genesis 12 comes after Genesis 1-11. This innocent observation not only relates to the point just made about the pivotal nature of the opening verses of Genesis 12, it also reminds us of the importance of paying attention to the context of any text. The primeval narrative introduces us first to the great work of God's creation of the universe. Then it portrays men women, made in God's image, that are entrusted with the task of caring for the earth and enjoying God's blessing in that task.
When God's human creatures choose to rebel against their Creator, distrusting his benevolence, disobeying his authority and disregarding the boundaries he had set for their freedom in his world. The result of this human seizure of moral autonomy is radical fracture in all the relationships established in creation. Human beings hide from God in guilty fear. Men and women can no longer face one another without shame and blame. The soil comes under the curse of God and the earth no longer responds to human touch as it should. The serpent's head will be crushed. Adam and Eve are clothed. Cain is protected. Noah and his family are saved. Life goes on, and creation is preserved under covenant. Things are very badly flawed, but the whole project is still moving forward.
Great would be the multitude, though perhaps not as great yet as it ought to be, of those Christians who care about creation and take their environmental responsibilities seriously. Smaller, however, would be the number of those who would include the care of creation within their biblical concept of mission. The explicitly Christian environmental and conservation agency A Rocha, founded in 1983 in Portugal but now at work internationally on every continent, certainly adopts a theology that affirms strongly that their work is not only biblically mandated but also a legitimate and essential dimension of Christian mission.
A biblical theology of mission that flows from the mission of God himself must include the ecological sphere within its scope and see practical environmental action as a legitimate part of Christian mission. Although given authority over nature, people are not to treat nature according to their own selfish desires. They do not have unlimited right over nature, for they are merely the representative of God in administering what God has entrusted to them. God is the owner of nature (Ps 24:1-2), and people are answerable to God for the way they treat it (Gen 2:15; Ps 8:6-8).
According to the gracious permission given them by God, people may use nature for their own benefit. God allows them to take minerals from the earth, to enjoy the fruits of plant life, to cut down trees to build houses, to eat the meat of animals, and to kill insects and animals that threaten their lives (Deut 8:7-10; 12:15; Josh 6:21). But God does not give them the right to desolate the land solely for monetary gain, or destroy life solely for personal pleasure. Their attitude to nature should be a reflection of the care over nature that the Creator himself exercises (Ps 104:10-30; Matt 6:25-30; 10:29).
Of course, God gave specific laws to the people of Israel concerning their attitude to nature in the matter of farming. He told them to rest their land one year in seven. If they failed to, he would force them to rest it by driving them from it (Lev 25:3-7). God assured the Israelites that he would use nature as a means of blessing them when they obeyed him, but of punishing them when they disobeyed him (Deut 11:13-17; 28:1-24; 2 Chron 7:14).
It seems that God so created the natural world that, when people act towards it without restraint, they help bring ruin to it and to themselves (Isaiah 24:5-6). Christians know that human sin affected nature from the time of the rebellion in Eden (Gen 3:17-19), but they know also that when they are finally delivered from the effects of sin, nature also will be delivered (Rom 8:19-23). Not only should they purify themselves because of the likeness they will one day bear to Christ, but they should also help towards the healing of nature in view of the full glory God has planned for it (Phil 3:20-21; Titus 2:11-14; 1 John 3:2-3).
The missionary comes with the good news that the God who seeks his own is a good and loving God who wants only man's fulfilment. The missionary is the indispensable link in that communication circuit.In the creation account in Genesis we learn something of God's nature as power and love. God loves man. That is the central message in missions. We see that mirrored early in the first book of the Bible when God bends over to breathe life into Adam (Gen. 2:7). God's love was so rich and risky that he entrusted all this earth to us.

4.1.1 Creation and God's Mission
A Christian human beings, therefore, we are doubly bound to see active care for creation as fundamental part of what it means to love and obey God. The creation narrative appoints humans as the viceroys of creation with an assignment to care for God's property, the sphere with which his love takes shape for humans, regardless of what they think of him, for all the biotic and a biotic creation, regardless of whether it can think of him. This is much more than an invitation, it is a mission: Go to all of my creation and tend it, since it is the recipient of my love. Thomas Starkes suggests that the first missionary commission is the mandatum dominii terrae [command to have dominion over the earth] in Genesis 1:28, the assignment to care for the world.
In the Old Testament the first picture of God is that of the Creator of the universe. This is a concept so familiar to us that we fail to grasp its significance for others. Now it is true that many heathen do have a more or less vague idea of a creator. But others do not. It is worth noting how Paul began his famous sermon on Mars Hill in Athens. Even though he was addressing a cultured Greek audience, he saw fit to begin with, "God that made the world and all things therein" (Ac 17:24). He knew that Greek religion had no such creator. There is an almighty God over all, a God who created all these things. "The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handiwork" (Ps 19:1). The Creator is the Redeemer of Israel. It is one God, not many, who creates the world, permits its freedom to fall, acts to redeem what has fallen, and brings the whole story to fitting consummation.
If God owns the universe, there is nowhere that does not belong to him. There is nowhere we can step off his property, either into the property of some other deity or into some autonomous sphere of our won private ownership. Such claims were made in relation to YHWH in the Old Testament (Ps. 139). The risen Jesus thus claims the same ownership and sovereignty over all creation as the Old Testament affirms for YHWH. The whole earth, then, belongs to Jesus; it belongs to him by right of creation, by right of redemption and by right of future inheritance – as Paul affirms in the magnificent cosmic declaration of Colossians 1:15-20. So wherever we go in his name, we are walking on his property. There is not an inch of the planet that does not belong to Christ. Mission then is an authorized activity carried out by tenants on the instructions of the owner of the property.
So our mission on God's earth is not only authorized by its true owner, it is also protected, nurtured and guaranteed by him. We go in his name. We act on his authority. There is therefore no place for fear, for wherever we tread belongs to him already. There is no place for dualism either. We know of course that the Bible also affirms that the evil on exercises a kind of lordship and power over the earth. Whatever authority Satan exercises is usurped and illegitimate, provisional and subject to the final limits set by the earth's true owner and Lord, the lamb who reigns from the throne of God (Rev. 4-7). So the simple biblical affirmation "The earth is the LORD's" is nonnegotiable platform for both ecological ethics and missional confidence.
The priestly writer introduces God who was there before creation: "from everlasting to everlasting thou art God" (Ps 90:2; 93:2), God who speaks and whose word must issue into order. The God who creates is in Deutero-Isaiah, also the God who redeems. He redeems or rescues precisely because he is creator, the word to create (bara), used only with God as subject in the Old Testament and Deutero-Isaiah (Isaiah 40:26,28;41:20:42:5:43;1,7.15:45;7). God, the creator and sustainer, is the theme of Psalm 104 (linked closely with Genesis 1) and of the hymns of the praise of the creator which are the basis of Job 9:5-14; 26:5-14. It is important for the theology of mission that we pursue further this distinction between "creation" and "salvation." If biblical religion were based upon God's act of creation, then we would conclude
(a) that God normally acts alone in solitary divine splendor, as he must have done in making the world out of nothing;

(b) that God achieves at once whatever he decides and is known most of all for his omnipotence;

(c) that God acts within a perfect situation, for he can produce nothing unworthy and so the refrain rings out: "And God saw that it was good" (Gen. 1:4,10,18,21,25,31);

(d) that the details of God's creative action throughout the universe can be measured by scientific instruments; and

(e) that God's first creative act is unique and can never be repeated.

4.1.2 Humanity in God's Image
Wright stated that God instructed the human species not only to fill the earth but also to subdue it and to rule over the rest of the creatures. He also defined "the words kabas and rada (Gen 1: 28)" are strong words, implying both exertion and effort, and the imposing of will upon another. However, they are not, as contemporary ecological mythology likes to caricature, terms that imply violence or abuse. The idea that these words could ever imply violent abuse and exploitation, and the implied accusation that Christianity is therefore an intrinsically eco-hostile religion is relatively recent.
By far the dominant interpretation of these words in both Jewish and Christian tradition down through the centuries has been that they entail benevolent care for the rest of creation as entrusted into human custodianship. Even apart from that analogy, Genesis describes God's work in regal terms, though without using the word king. God's creating work exudes wisdom in planning, power in execution and goodness in completion. Wisdom, power and goodness are the very qualities that Psalm 145 exalts in "my God the King," in relation to all his created works. There is exercised toward all that he has made. "These are, of course, royal qualities; without using the word, the author of Gen 1 celebrates the Creator as King, supreme in all the qualities which belong to the ideal of kingship, just as truly as Psalms 93 and 95-100 celebrate the divine King as Creator."
So the natural assumption, then, is that a creature made in the image of this God will reflect these same qualities in carrying out the mandate of delegated dominion. Whatever way this human dominion is to be exercised, it must reflect the character and value of God's own kingship. The image is a kingly pattern, and the kind of rule which God entrusted to human kind is that proper to the ideals of kingship. The image of God is not a license for abuse based on arrogant supremacy but a pattern that commits us to humble reflection of the character of God. For it we resemble God in that we have dominion, we must be called to be "imitators of God" (Eph 5:1) in the way we exercise it. Indeed, far from giving us a free hand on the earth, the Imago Dei constrains us. We must be kings, not tyrants; if we become the latter we deny and even destroy the image in us.
Psalm 145 tells us that God is gracious, compassionate, good, faithful, loving, generous and protective, not to humankind only but to "all he has made. God's characteristic act is to bless, and it is God's constant care that ensures that the cattle, the lions, and even the birds are fed and watered (Ps 104; Mt 6:26). If this is how God acts, then how much more is it incumbent on us, made in his image and commanded to like him, to exhibit the same solicitous care for the creation he has entrusted to our rule? Therefore we humanity was put on the earth with a mission-to rule over, to keep and to care for the rest of creation. This enables us to see ecological concern and action as a valid part of biblical Christian mission. Here we look in a little more depth at the meaning of this mandate God gave us.
In creating human beings in his image, God has given them a dignity and status that make their relation to him unique among his creatures (Ps 8:3-8; Matt 10:31; 12:12). The story of Adam and Eve shows something of the dignity and responsibility that God gave them (and all human beings through them) as being in God’s image. But the fact of their being in God’s image means they are not unlimited; they have no absolute independence. They fall into sin when they yield to the temptation to rebel against God and set themselves up as the ones who will decide what is right and what is wrong. They are not satisfied with their unique status as the representative of God; they themselves want to be God (Gen 3:1-7).
The first thing the Old Testament tell us about man is that he was made in God's image (Gen 1:26-27). With all his weaknesses and his failures, man is still the crown of creation. He is the only creature who has been able to personal control. No wonder the psalmist wrote, "…. and all of you are children of the most High" (Ps 82:6). Now it is not easy for us who look on the outward appearance to see God's image in man. Men have always resisted this idea of the unity of mankind.
Partly it is because of pride, the sort of pride that makes a prosperous man deny his poor relations. But even more it is because it means responsibility. If all mankind is one, then every ruler is responsible to his people, the noble to the commoner, and the privileged to the less privileged. We are all of the same stuff. Then, too, those in foreign lands who don't have the blessings we enjoy in Christ do have a just claim on us. It doesn't matter that their race and culture are different from ours. They are still of the same blood. What the Old Testament really does teach is the unity of the human race. We all have a common ancestor. In him we all were made in God's image.
According to Don Fleming, the perfect man is Jesus Christ. In contrast with Adam and Eve, Jesus shows what people in God’s image should really be. Jesus accepted the limitations of humanity, yet found purpose and fulfillment in life, in spite of the temptations. As God’s representative he submitted in complete obedience to his Father, and so demonstrated, as no other person could, what true humanity was (John 8:29; Phil 2:8; Heb 2:14; 4:15).
There was yet a higher sense in which Jesus reflected the image of God, a sense that could be true of no ordinary person. Jesus was not merely in the image of God; he was the image of God. As well as being human, he was divine. He was the perfect representation of God, because he was God. He had complete authority over creation, because he was the Creator (John 12:45; 14:9; 2 Cor 4:4; Col 1:15-16; Heb 1:3). All people may exist in the image of God, but the only ones who will bear God’s image fully are those who by faith become united with Christ. Only Christians will be human as God intended.

4.1.3 Jesus and the Kingdom of God
The Kingdom/Reign of God can remain a creative Christian contribution in interreligious dialogue if grounded in its biblical meanings. It need not be used as a pretext for replacing orthodoxy with orthopraxis, as Paul Knitter has proposed. In Jesus the kingdom of God had come into the world. The rule of God was seen in the miracles by which Jesus the Messiah delivered from the power of Satan people who were diseased and oppressed by evil spirits (Matt 4:23-24;). This victory over Satan was a guarantee of the final conquest of Satan when the kingdom of God will reach its triumphant climax at the end of the world’s history (Rev 20:10).
The kingdom of God is the rule of God; and it may be seen in its power over nature and in the lives of people. The final consummation of God's kingdom is pending, but its power and active presence are evidenced now. The rule of God requires obedience of all in and under his domain. God's rule extends to all of our relationships: with himself, with other people, and with nature, or creation. Dyrness suggests at lest six implications of the kingdom of God for development: (1) dignity of the person, (2) community goal-setting, (3) need for mutual sharing, (4) dissatisfaction with the existing situation, (5) ability to master the environment, and (6) hope.
The "Reign" or "Kingdom" of God is the master-symbol or the heart, of Jesus' own understanding of his mission and message. It represents the historical process of transforming this world and bringing it, inch by inch, closer to Jesus' vision of how people will live with each other and construct their societies when they really take God' message seriously. Wherever people truly love God by loving their neighbors as themselves, there the Reign of God is taking shape. Mission includes the naming of Jesus as the sign of the Reign of God. The second shift that took place is the move from "Reign of God" to "Church in Society." Bosch quotes Alfred Loisy as writing, "Jesus foretold the reign and it was the Church the came. Though Jesus lived with the tension between nationalism and universalism, and though he had resolved most of it, the disciples had to go through the same tension in their mission. We see this in the book of Acts, beginning with the story of Peter and Cornelius in Acts 10.
The inclusion of Gentile Christians in the community of faith was not an easy process. It had to be discussed and resolved in the first ecumenical council of the church in Jerusalem (Acts 15). The decision in this first council was a historic one because it publicly and powerfully acknowledged the universal character of the mission of the church. Once such a "universalization" had taken place, the Christological thinking of the church developed in a much larger, universal and comic framework. For example, Paul's letters to the Colossians and the Ephesians bring out the cosmic character of the gospel.
The kingdom of God, both as a gift and as a task, stands forth as the most comprehensive biblical expression for the goal of Missio Dei. In the perspective of the coming kingdom, other terms that the triune God – Father, Son, and Holy Spirit – continues to be the main actor in mission. God does not turn responsibility for mission over to the church; he himself carries it to completion, with or without the church's cooperation. Therefore the life of the church does not express either the source or the fullness of mission.
Throughout the Bible the kingdom of God is the rule of God. It is not a territory over which he reigns, but the rule which he exercises. It is defined not by a geographic location, an era of existence, or the nationality of a people, but by the sovereign rule and authority of God (Exod 15:18; Ps 103:19; 145:10-13). Jesus likewise understood God’s kingdom as God’s rule rather than as a territory or a people. Those who seek God’s kingdom seek God’s rule in their lives (Matt 6:33); those who receive God’s kingdom receive God’s rule in their lives (Mark 10:15). Those who enter the kingdom of God enter the realm where they accept God’s rule (Matt 21:31).
As Jesus proclaimed the kingdom, he healed those who were diseased and oppressed by evil spirits, and in so doing he gave evidence of his power over Satan (Matt 4:23-24). But the important aspect of the kingdom that the Gospels emphasize is that it came into the world through Jesus. The kingdom of God and the kingdom of heaven are different names for the same thing. The Bible uses the expressions interchangeably (Matt 19:23-24). Matthew, who wrote his Gospel for the Jews, usually (but not always) speaks of God’s kingdom as the kingdom of heaven, whereas the other Gospel writers call it the kingdom of God (Matt 19:14; Mark 10:14; Luke 18:16).
When God's reign or kingdom is spoken of it may refer to his continuing rule over Israel or the world (Psalm 97; Daniel 4. 34) or to a future apocalyptic state of affairs (Daniel 2.44) . Usually it is said to belong to the future (Matthew 6. 1o; Mark 14.25); sometimes it appears to be already present (Luke 11:20); most often it is spoken of in parables 'the kingdom of God is as if a man should scatter seed….," (Mark 4.26 ff). The extent to which Jesus was wedded to the apocalyptic view of the kingdom is now a matter of dispute and depends on the genuineness of individual sayings, In any case Jesus seems to have avoided describing the kingdom concretely in proper response to his preaching, and thus for they recognition of the power and consequence of God.
"Jesus preached the kingdom of God, and what came was the church." This state of affairs was so formulated by the French modernist A. Loisy at the turn of the century. If the nucleus of the message of Jesus is the kingdom of God, then the status quo's institutional system of coordination is placed in question. To be sure, it was not Jesus' intention to establish a church. The consistent focus of his message on the imminent arrival of the kingdom of God excludes such an intention. It is also the case that he probably never intended a mission to the Gentiles; the New Testament periscopes that report a ministry of Jesus in Gentile territory or to "Gentiles" (e.g. Matt 8:5 – 13par, John 4:46-53; Mark 7:24-30par) are secondary, and originated in a Gentile Christian context.
The preaching of the historical Jesus was directed to the people of Israel (cf. Matt 10:6; 15:24). This people are called to repentance; even where Jesus' message transcends these boundaries, it is still the people of Israel who are the real addressees, for example in Matthew 8:11-12. The content and goal of the preaching of Jesus' disciples – like that of Jesus himself – is the call to repentance, the preparation of the Jewish people for the coming kingdom of God. This has parallels in the message of John the Baptist and remains bound to the context of the Jewish people of that time. Only after Jesus' death was the call to repentance made universal, the Gentile mission launched, and the church of Jews and Gentiles established.
The Church needs the Reign of God for its identity, and the Reign needs the Church for its realization. Of course, it needs other things besides the Church as well. And though the Reign of God, as preached by Jesus the Nazarean, represents a reality that will always be beyond our comprehension, we can be sure of one of its essential characteristics. Edward Schillebeekx concludes that when we say that the purpose of Jesus' preaching was the Reign of God, we mean that Jesus' primary concern was "the well-being of humankind." Gloria Dei vivens homo – the glory of God is the well-being of God's creatures (Iraeneus).
Thus, in Jon Sobrino's more biblical terms, the Reign of God means life –God's intent that there be life, that all peoples (and we can add, all creatures may have life and have it more abundantly. So although the Reign of God cannot be "reduced" to earthly well-being, it must include, or strive for, such well-being. Otherwise it is not the Reign preached by Jesus. The Reign of God therefore might be defined as the utopian vision of a society of love, justice, equality, based on an inner transformation of humans. It is a society in which people will act and lives together differently because they will be and feel themselves differently. Stanley Samartha expressed disappointment that Melbourne gave little attention to the kingdom of God in a religiously plural world. Christopher Duraisingh, the WCC's new secretary for mission and evangelism, prefers the goal of a "world embracing shalom" rather than a "world embracing church," and would prefer that the "shalom of the kingdom of God" be the goal of mission.
The whole thrush of the mission of the Jesus was the Kingdom of God or the Reign of God. But the reign of God is established precisely by the giving of the Spirit. The Kingdom of God that Jesus preached and inaugurated in himself by his passion, death, resurrection is a much the Kingdom as the reign of the spirit. To enter the kingdom of God, then, is essentially to accept God's rule. And as such it involves a new relationship with God. So Jesus taught his followers, those who through his ministry entered the kingdom of God, to regard God as their Father. This very personal image of the disciple's relationship with God occurs very frequently in the Gospels, and is one of the most distinctive and novel features of Jesus' teaching.
The Kingdom of God is not confined within the limits of the Church and its activities. It embraces the whole of human life. It is the Christian transfiguration of the social order. The Church is on social institution alongside of the family, the industrial organization of society, and the State. The Kingdom of God is in all these, and realizes itself through them all. During the Middle Ages all society was ruled and guided by the Church. Few of us would want modern life to return to such a condition. The Church is indispensable to the religious education of humanity and to the conservation of religion, but the greatest future awaits religion in the public life of humanity.

4.2 God and the nations in the Old Testament
Whether or not human deliverers are portrayed, God's role is preeminent. It is the divine warrior-not Moses primarily- who saves the people at the sea (Exodus 15:1-21). Judges and kings have the task of delivering the Israelites. Yet the Scriptures acknowledge that God took the initiative in rising up these deliverers for the people (Judge 2:16, 18; 3:9, 15). It is God who saved and saves both individuals (2 Sam 12:7:22:18, 44, 49; Psalms 25:5;27:1) and the nation as a whole (Exodus 6:6; Deut 7:8;13:5; Isaiah 41:14; 43:14;44:24; Psalm 78;1).
Hence the Psalms pray for deliverance (Psalms 69,77,79, 80) and praise the Lord as the God who has kept and will keep Jerusalem safe (Psalms 46,48, 76,87). The names of Joshua (Num 13:8, 16) and others make them living witnesses to the saving power of God, Israel's faithful protector. The Lord heals the people like a doctor (Exodus 15:26; Num 21:4). He feeds them with water (Exodus 15:22-25; 17:1-7). "The Day of the Lord" is above all a day when the Lord works some striking deed of salvation in favor of Israel.
The prophets, facing widespread hypocrisy, insisted that God would reject the ungodly among his people (Jer. 6:30; 7:29). Isaiah foretold that only a faithful remnant would live to enjoy the golden age that was to follow the inevitable judgment on Israel's sins (Is. 10:20-22; 4:3; 27:6, 37:31f.). Jeremiah and Ezekiel, living in the time of that judgment, looked for a day when God, as part of his work of restoration, would regenerate such of his people as he had spared, and ensure their covenant faithfulness for the future by giving each of them a new heart (Jer. 3l: 31ff.; 32:39f.; Ezk. 11:19f.; 36:25ff.). These prophecies, with their focus on individual piety, pointed to and individualizing of the concept to life, and for concluding that, while God had chosen the whole nation for the privilege of living under the covenant, he had chosen only some of them (those made faithful by regeneration) to inherit the riches of the relationship to himself which the covenant held out, while the rest forfeited those riches by their unbelief.
The New Testament teaching about election assumes these distinctions; see especially Rom.9. The New Testament announces the extension of God's covenant-promises to the Gentile world and the transference of covenant-privileges from the lineal seed of Abraham to a predominantly Gentile body (Mt. 21:43) consisting of all who had become Abraham's true seed and God's true Israel through faith in Christ (Rom. 4:9- 18;9:6f.; Gal. 3:14ff., 29;6:16; Eph. 2:11ff.; 3:6-8). Faithless Israel was rejected and judged, and the international Christian church took Israel's place as God's chosen nation, living in the world as his people and worshipping and proclaiming him as their God.

4.2.1 The nations as witnesses of Israel History
If one imagines the metaphorical intention is Abraham's attempt to "buy" the salvation of the city for the lowest possible "price" in terms of the numbers of righteous who might be in it, then the "bargaining" goes in the reverse direction to what might be expected. It is Abraham who makes the initial "bid" that the whole city should be spared if fifty righteous people could be found there. Abraham's intercession, however, did not entirely fail. The terms on which God would have spared the whole city had not been met. But Abraham's first request, that God should not "sweep way the righteous with the wicked" (Gen 18:23) was indeed granted. Lot and his daughters were rescued from the cataclysm. And, we may presume, those who had cried out against Sodom and Gomorrah (possibly meaning the villages in surrounding lands that were being oppressed by them) were delivered through the destruction of the wicked cities.
There is a certain irony in the biblical narrative that records Abraham being called out of the land of Bible not into some heavenly paradise but into the land of Sodom. So it is this context so the wickedness of Sodom the investigation being conducted by God with his two angels and the likelihood of divine judgment upon the cities of the plain, that the conversation of Genesis 18 is set. This is the mission goal that sheds light on God's renewed promise to Abraham and Sarah of a son in the first half of the chapter (Gen 18: 10- 14). It is almost as if God cannot do the one (judgment) without setting it in the context of the other (redemption). The immediate particular necessity is investigation and judgment. God, on his way to act in judgment on a particular evil society, stops to remind himself of his ultimate purpose of blessing all nations. The ultimate universal goal is blessing. The story is a further reminder to us just as it is presented as a reminder by God to himself (Gen 18: 17-19) of the centrality of Abraham in the biblical theology of the mission of God. For Abraham discovers YHWH to be far more accommodating than he probably expected.
Abraham here assumes a role that will later be carried to greater depths by Moses (Ex 32-34; Num 14; Deut 9) and to heaven itself by Christ-that of prophetic and priestly intercessor. Furthermore, it is yet another example of the role of Abraham as an instrument of blessing to the nations-even if in this case the cities in question had sinned themselves beyond the possibility of blessing or reprieve. Astonishing as it may seem, Sodom and Gomorrah had Abraham praying for them and pleading for them to be spared the judgment of God-a very different response to the one displayed by Jonah by many Christians as they contemplate the wickedness of the world around them. If we listen to YHWH, we learn that Abraham's exchange with YHWH teaches the kind or response expected from YHWH's elect so that the divine blessing may be mediated to the nations (Gen 12:1-3). That is to say, we learn the mission significance of intercessory prayer.
The salvation which God provides is for all people. God's initiative in history brings to mankind the possibility of salvation and initiates mission. A Blauw states, "this universality is the basis for the missionary message of the Old Testament. The Old Testament makes frequent reference to the nations (Gen 12:3; Exodus 19:5; Deut 32:43; 2 Kings 19:19; Mic 4:2). What God does in Israel is set in the midst of the nations (Exodus 14:4; Jer 22:8; Ezek 20:22). The nations are the people of the world. In particularly those people surrounding Israel in her Old Testament history. Salvation history which centers in the people of Israel is particular consequence to the other people. The covenant with Noah is a universal covenant (Gen 9:9).
The only lasting kingdom is the kingdom of God (Dan 2:44; 4:30,34). God’s people may well love the nation to which they belong (Jer 8:18-22; Matt 23:37; Rom 9:3) and be loyal citizens (Rom 13:1-7; 1 Peter 2:13-14; cf. Jer 29:4-7), but their first allegiance must always be to God (Exod 20:3; Mark 12:17; Acts 5:29). Israelites of Old Testament times made such a clear distinction between themselves and others that their usual word for ‘nations’ (plural) developed the special sense of ‘other nations’ (often translated ‘Gentiles’ or ‘heathen’) (Deut 18:9; Ps 2:1; Isa 11:10; 30:28; 36:18; 49:22; Jer 10:1-5,10).
Israelites of New Testament times made the same mistake as many of their ancestors in thinking that their nationality guaranteed their salvation (Matt 3:9; Rom 9:6). God accepts people into his family on the basis of their faith, not their nationality (Luke 4:25-27; Rom 2:28-29; 4:1-3,16-17). This truth is clearly demonstrated in that vast international community known as the Christian church. The concern of this community is to win people of all nations for Christ and promote a true fellowship in which there are no national or racial barriers (John 17:20-23; Gal 3:28; Eph 2:13-16).

4.2.2 The Nations blessed with God' Salvation
Salvation is entirely the work of God. It cannot be a human work, because human beings are helpless sinners. Pagans, who have rejected the light of God, are sinners (Rome 1:18-32), but so are Jews, who claim to know God (Rome 2:1-29). All people are sinners (Rome 3:1-20), and therefore if God is to declare anyone righteous, it must be entirely by his grace. The basis of God’s gracious salvation is the sacrificial death of Jesus Christ on the sinner’s behalf (Rome 3:21-31). Abraham was justified by faith; his salvation had nothing to do with good works, law-keeping or rituals. Abraham might therefore be called the spiritual father of all who believe (Rome 4:1-25). Believers have confidence because of what God has done for them through Christ (Rome 5:1-11); they no longer fear the power of sin, because God’s grace is always sufficient to overcome it (Rome 5:12-21). This does not mean that believers may be careless about sin.
On the contrary they should live as those who share Christ’s conquest of sin and whose behaviour is characterized by righteousness. They have new life in Christ (Rome 6:1-23). Christians are free from the law. They realize that if they try to put themselves back under the law in order to triumph over the sinful human nature, the result will be frustration and despair (Rome 7:1-25). The same Spirit gives believers confidence in every aspect of salvation, whether in the present life or in the glorious triumph of the age to come (Rome 8:12-39).
But Israel is called to be both a saved nation and a saving nation. It is in Abraham's seed that all the peoples on earth will be blessed (Gen. 12:3; Gal. 3:8; 14, 29). Being seen les in national and political terms and more in spiritual terms, salvation becomes more universal. Gentiles will share its blessings (Is. 45:23-24; 49:8-12; 60:1-12). While there are many prophetic oracles of doom addressed to surrounding cities and nations (Amos 1:3-2:3; Jer. 46-51), through the Servant of the LORD, whether regarded as an individual or as the whole nation, God will bring 'a light to the Gentiles, and salvation to the ends of the earth' (Is. 49:6; cited in Acts 13;47). At that time all the nations will stream into Zion, 'the city of the Lord; (Is. 2:2-3; 60:3; 14). In the last days 'everyone who calls on the name of the LORD will be saved, for on Mount Zion and in Jerusalem there will be deliverance' (Joel 2:32). In the prophets the emphasis is less on salvation as deliverance from trouble and more on salvation as restoration to divine favor by penitence.
Israel learned about God from the experience of being sent into exile, when we consider how they shared with other nations in knowing God through exposure to his judgment. At the point, however, when the prophetic word assured them of God's gracious intention to bring an end to the exile and restore them to their own land and to renewed covenant relationship with himself, there was another huge burst of learning to be done.
God’s salvation, as the Old Testament spoke of it, had a broad meaning. It referred to deliverance or preservation from disease, dangers, sufferings, death and the consequences of wrongdoing (Exod 14:30; Judg 2:11-16; Ps 34:6; 37:40 ;). The means of God’s salvation may have been a warrior, a king, or some other national leader (Judg 3:9; 2 Kings 13:5), but in the highest sense the saviour was always God (1 Sam 14:23; Isa 33:22; 43:3-11; Hab 3:18). This salvation is so great that no words can describe it fully.
The Bible therefore uses many different pictures of salvation in an effort to help people understand what God has done. One picture is that of the courtroom, where God the judge declares believers righteous and acquits them (Rom 3:26; 8:33). Another picture is that of slavery, which shows that God has freed believers from the bondage of sin (1 Peter 1:18-19). The picture of new birth shows that God gives life to those who are spiritually dead (1 Peter 1:23), and the picture of adoption shows how God places believers in his family and gives them the full status of sons (Rom 8:15). A further picture is that of God’s turning those who are his enemies into his friends (Rom 5:10-11). The picture of a sacrificial offering expresses further aspects of salvation; for example, the death of a sacrificial victim in the place of the sinner (Heb 9:26), and the presentation of an offering to turn away God’s anger against sin (Rom 3:25). But regardless of whatever picture the Bible uses, it emphasizes constantly that salvation is solely by God’s grace, and that people receive it through faith and repentance (Acts 5:31; 16:30-31; 20:21; 1 Cor 1:21; Eph 2:8-9).
There are past, present and future aspects of salvation. The past aspect is that believers already have been saved because of Christ’s death for them. The present aspect is that believers continue to experience the saving power of God in victory over sin in their daily lives (1 Cor 1:18; Phil 2:12; 2 Tim 1:8-9). The future aspect is that believers will experience the fulfilment of their salvation at the return of Jesus Christ (Rom 8:24; 13:11; Phil 3:20). All through the Old Testament His justice is balanced with mercy and compassion. We see it even in close association with His judgment. We see it in the covenant He made with Noah and all mankind right after the flood (Gen 9:15-17). We see it in the law, "showing mercy unto thousands" (Ex 20:6). We see it in the Psalms and in the prophets (Ps 119:64; Mic 7:18). How the world needs this mercy and compassion.
Finally, the Old Testament shows us a God who is sincerely interested in His creatures, especially in man. There is nothing farther from the Old Testament view of God than the idea that He created the world, established its laws, "set it going and then went fishing." It is not only in such New Testament passages as John 3:16 that we find God's concern expressed for mankind. It is found throughout the Old Testament. Even in the special covenant He made with Abraham (Gen 12:3; 18:18; 22:18) and repeated later to Jacob (Gen 28:14), He did not fail to mention the blessing it would bring to the entire world.

4.3 God and the nations in the New Testament
The Gospel clearly states that Jesus is the Messiah, the Davidic Son of God, who carries out the promises to Israel. The infancy narrative is particularly important in this regard. Gabriel's message to Mary announces that Jesus will inherit "the throne of his father David"(Luke 1:32) and the fruit of her womb "will be called holy, the Son of God" (Luke 1:35). Zechariah's canticle picks up the same theme (Luke 1:68-79). The angels declared to the shepherds that "to you is born this day in the city of David a Savior, who is Christ the Lord" (Luke 2:11), and Simeon gives thanks for having seen the salvation of Israel "prepared in the presence of all people" (Luke 2:30). In fact the whole atmosphere of the infancy narrative roots Jesus' origin in the hopers of Israel. Zechariah, Elizabeth, Mary, Joseph, Simeon, Anna, the shepherds form a gallery of Old Testament figures, steeped in the longing of God's people for salvation. Their Spirit –filled expectations of salvation demonstrate that the birth of Jesus is the climax of the promises to Israel.
The rest of the Gospel carries through this sense of continuity with the past. The Jesus who comes for baptism is designated as God's beloved Son (Luke 3:22) and the genealogy (Luke 3:23-38) traces his lineage back through the Davidic line to Abraham, Adam, and God himself. The whole history of salvation is preface to Jesus. Jesus rightly declares that the messianic promise of Isaiah 61is fulfilled in the inauguration of his mission (Luke 4:17-22). The story that follows is vivid display of his salvific work.
Luke gives special emphasis to the prophetic cast of Jesus' ministry. Yahweh's messengers to Israel had been repeatedly rejected by a stubborn people. Because humanity resists God's Word, it is inevitable that the Christ "must" suffer.
"Behold I cast out demons and perform cures today and tomorrow, and the third day I finish my course. Nevertheless I must go on my way today and tomorrow and the day following; for it cannot be that a prophet should perish away from Jerusalem" (Luke 13:32-33).

That necessity is stated by Luke more than once not only in explicit declarations (Luke.17:24; 18:31-34; 24:7, 26, 44; Acts 17:3; 26:22 -23)but in the deliberateness with which the Lucan Jesus moves toward his death in Jerusalem (Luke 9:51; 13:33).
Therefore Jesus' ministry is the climax of God's salvific work with his people Israel. Like the prophets in the past Jesus suffers rejection and death. But Luke does not conceive of Jesus as strictly one more in the ongoing stream of messengers. He is the Son (Luke 20:12), God's definitive Word. Jesus the prophet moves through suffering and death to glory. He completes his messianic work in spite of trial and therefore initiates the promised age of salvation. The community formed in Jesus' name is therefore the messianic people (Luke 22:28-30), heirs to the promises of Israel and continuing God's work of redemption in the world through the power of the Spirit. The salvation-history framework forged by Luke (and other New Testament writers) allows continuity to run from Israel to Jesus to the church. This framework finds a codified expression in Luke's phrase "beginning at Jerusalem" (Luke 24:49).
God has entrusted to his people the task, or mission, of spreading the message of his salvation to the world. The people who carry out this mission are therefore called missionaries. Mission is necessary because sin has cut people off from the life of God and left them in the power of Satan (Gen 3:24; Rom 1:21-25; John 3:19; Gal 5:19-21; 1 John 5:19). God, however, has made a way of salvation (John 3:16; 14:6; Acts 4:12; Rom 5:17), but if the people of the world are to receive this salvation, God’s people must first of all tell them about it (Rom 10:13-15; 2 Cor 5:18-19).


4.3.1 The mission of Church
The word 'church' (ekklesia) occurs only twice in the Gospels. In Mt. 18:17 it refers to the local group of followers of Jesus gathered together to settle disputes among its members, while in Mt. 16:18 it foreshadows the New Testament view of the universal church as Jesus' continuing representative on earth. But other terms imply the same idea of a defined community: they are, e.g., God's 'little flock' (Lk. 12:32; cf. Mk. 14:27; Jn. 10:16), his family (Mk. 3:34f; 10:29f; Mt. 10:25), and the guests at his banquet (Mk. 2:19; Mt. 8:11; 22:1-14).
By introducing the theme of missiology, Andrew J. Kirk mentioned that the general tasks of the Church's mission can be summed up in the following list. The order is not intended to suggest priorities.
1. Stewarding material resources of creation
2. serving human being without distinction
3. Bearing witness to the truth as it is in Jesus
4. Engaging in seeing God's justice is done in society
5. Engaging in seeing reconciled and liberated community
Whereas Catholics have always a hold a high view of the Church, Protestants tend forward a low view of the Church, Generally, and this view on church is closely related to interpretation of the relationship between Church and mission. In the course of the twentieth century, the concept of that relationship gradually changed in both circles. Referring to Jurgen Moltmann, Bosch said that the theology of mission gave a profound and shaping impulse to the renewal of the theological concept of the Church. Bosch asserted that with respect to the shifts in Protestant thinking concerning the relationship between church and mission, the international missionary conferences played quite an important role. It was however not until the Tambaram conference of the IMC (1948) that the integral relationship between church and mission was for the first time recognized. The emphasis was shifting from "a church-centered mission (Tambaram) to a mission-centered church." By the time the Willingen meeting of 1952 was convened, there had already been a global consensus that the Church is essentially missionary.
As regards Catholic thinking, Guder stated that the Second Vatican Council (1962-65) claimed that "the Church on earth is by nature missionary since, according to the plan of the Father, it has its origin in the mission of the Son and the Holy Spirit. Bosch said that the biblical motif behind the emerging conviction about the nature of the Church can be found in I Peter 2:9. In this regard, he gave his translation of Barth as follows: Here the Church is not the sender but the one sent. Its mission (its being sent) is not secondary to its being; the church exists in being sent and building up itself for the sake of its mission.
This vision contradicts the old theological saying extra ecclesiam nulla salus (outside the Church there is no salvation). It is true that God has wrought the salvation of this world by the death and resurrection of his Son, and that salvation is therefore, intimately linked with Christ's body, the Church. The Church is indeed the agent of salvation. According to him, the purpose of election is, therefore, not to restrict salvation but to make it universal. Yet the Church is also the people of God's mission. This people are buried like seed, like leaven, like salt in the earth of common humanity.
The foundation and motivation for the mission for the mission of the Church is the demolition by the Lord of all history and the God of all Creation of every wall of partition in and through Jesus Christ. Thus understood, the mission of the church is both the product of the mission of God in Christ and the instrument for its realization. The church has a positive responsibility with respect to the social order. Human salvation and social salvation are interpenetrating processes. The Church exists in order to insist on constant change in society and civilization, in order to bring them more into conformity with the order of God.
Finally, the biblical narrative introduces us to ourselves as the church with a mission. As Luke 24:45-47 indicates, Jesus entrusted to the church a mission that is directly rooted in his own identity, passion and victory as the crucified and risen Messiah. Jesus immediately followed this text with the words, "You are witnesses" – a mandate repeated in Acts 1:8, "You will be my witnesses," It is almost certaion tht Luke intends us to hear in this an echo of the same words spoken by YHWH to Israel in Isaiah 43:10-12.
Israel knew the identity of the true and living God, YHWH; therefore they were entrusted with bearing witness to that in a world of nations and their gods. The church's mission flows from the identity of God and his Christ. When you know who God is, when you know who Jesus is, witnessing mission is the unavoidable outcome. Mission arises from the heart of God himself and is communicated from his heart to ours. Mission is the global outreach of the global people of a global God.
In contemporary ecclesiology, the perception that the Church is "the people of God" has led to a new understanding of the Church as "a pilgrim church." Bosch said that The biblical motif that lies in this new image is that the Church is ek-klesia, i.e., called out of and sent into the world. Referring to John Power, Bosch said that the Church as a pilgrim aims at two things: while "fleshing out "something of the conditions which are to prevail in the Reign of God, the Church pilgrimages toward it.
Further, the Church is understood as a "sacrament, sign, and instrument" in both contemporary protestant and Roman Catholic circles. The Church boldly claims itself as a sign or even sacrament of the coming unity of humankind; it does so not only because of its intrinsic relationship with Christ, who is the real sign of that unity but also God has elected the Church to be in Christ the sign or sacrament of the unity in His Reign. In fact, all three metaphors, Bosch asserted, indicate something that is beyond them.
Moreover, in respect to the relationship between the Church and the world in the post-modern thinking of both protestant and Roman Catholic circle, Bosch discussed a six fold understanding of the relationship between church and the world: 1. The ultimate goal of the Church is not church but the glory of God. 2. The Church is not identical with the kingdom of God, but "the seed and the beginning of that kingdom… the sign and instrument of the reign of God's that is to come." The credibility of the Church as a sacrament of salvation for the world depends only on whether it can show a glimmer of God's Reign to humankind. 3. Referring to Barth, Bosch described the Church as the people of God opposing yet engaging the world and as a community in solidarity with the world. 4. because it life I closely linked with "God's historical plan" for the redemption of the whole world. 5. The Church's "life-in-mission vis-à-vis the world is a privilege." 6. Pneumatologically, the Church is "an abiding place of God in the Spirit… as movement of the Spirit toward the world en route to the future." Thus, in its missionary activity, the church encounters humanity and a world in which God's salvation has already been operative secretly, through the Spirit. This may, by the grace of God, issue in a more humane world which, however, may never be seen as a purely human product – the real author of this humanized history is the Holy Spirit.
Those who supported the wider understanding of the concept tended to radicalize the view that the Missio Dei was larger than the mission of the church, even to the point of suggesting that it excluded the church's involvement – as we have seen in the previous section. In the volume prepared by a WCC study committee on "The Missionary Structure of the Congregation", it could, for instance, be said, "The church serves the Missio Dei in the world … … (when) it points to God at work in world history and name him there". It appeared that God was primarily "working out his purpose in the midst of the world and its historical processes". It seems the church has become unnecessary for the Missio Dei: "We have no business in 'articulating' God.
The mission of the church, then, has all the dimensions and scope of Jesus own ministry and may never be reduced to church planting and the saving of souls. It consists in proclaiming and teaching, but also in healing and liberating, in compassion for the poor and the downtrodden. The mission of the church, as the mission of Jesus, involves being sent into the world-to love, to serve, to preach, to teach, to heal, to save, to free.
These reflections bring us in close proximity to another Lukan passage that has, for good reasons, been dubbed the real Great Commission of the third Gospel: Luke 4:16-21. Indeed, within the overall structure of Luke, these verses are at least as important as the more explicit Great Commission in Luke 24:46-49. The words Jesus quotes from Isaiah (Luke 4:18-19) are set within the context of the dramatic story of Jesus first public ministry in his hometown, Nazareth, and they introduce at least three crucial Lukan missionary motifs: the centrality of the poor and other marginalized and oppressed people in Jesus (and the church's) ministry; overcoming vengeance by forgiveness and peace; and moving beyond the confines of Israel, first to the Samaritans and then to the Gentiles.
Paul’s aim was not merely to preach the gospel or make converts, but to bring people into a relationship with Jesus Christ that would change their lives. The life of Christ was to be reproduced in the lives of Christ’s people (2 Cor 5:17; Eph 4:17-24; Col 2:6-7; 3:1-4). From the Christians within each church, Paul appointed suitable people as elders, in order to give leadership to the church (Acts 14:23; 20:28). As independent units, each of them answerable to Christ as head (Eph 1:22-23; 4:15-16), churches then had the responsibility to evangelize the areas round about. For this reason Paul usually chose important towns along the main highways and trade routes as centres in which to plant churches. Once strong churches were established in these centres, the gospel would spread quickly to the surrounding regions (Acts 13:49; 16:11-12; 19:10; Rom 15:19-20; 1 Thess 1:8).
Andrew Kirk believed that the church's mission is a response to the mission of God in the world it is supremely important to know who God is. As Christians living and ministering in situations of acute deprivation have constantly said it is not easy to find appropriate language to speak about God in the midst of so much innocent suffering. A prophetic and mystical language is being born in this soil of exploitation and hope.
We said earlier that because the church's mission is a response to the mission of God in the world it is supremely important to know who God is. As Christians living and ministering in situations of acute deprivation have constantly said it is not easy to find appropriate language to speak about God in the midst of so mush innocent suffering thus Gutierrez: From the viewpoint of theological reflection the challenge is to find a language about God that grows out of the situation created by the unjust poverty in which the broad masses live, despised races exploited social classes marginalized cultures discrimination against women.
Theoretically the motivation is good: the Church is one thing, a unity and its activities should not be fragmented; mission is everybody's business all the time and all we do for the Lord is mission. In point of fact there is nothing in the Church which is everybody's business. To designate everything done for God as mission is to give a valuable term an imprecision which renders it useless, and to leave a void at the place from which the term is taken. Our participation in mission is a humble one. The mission is not ours. To participate in His mission is our total calling. That calling is to discern God at work in the signs of our time. That is what shapes our missionary strategies. That calling is also to understand the situation of men and women and their societies – their need of God. That is what shapes our missionary concerns.
Between the beliefs, practices, and attitudes which characterize the church and those which constitute the totality of life under other religions, there are innumerable differences. When the Christian today both defends and advocates his faith in witness to non-Christian, he remains faithful to the distinction expressed many time in the New Testament between the Israel of God (ekklesia, church, people of God) and the "nations of the world "(panta ta ethne, Gentiles, hethen, pagans). Two factors determine the Christian's attitude toward other living faiths. First, he is a member of the church. Second, the church is the instrument of God's mission to all his creatures. In addition to these, however is the equally essential perception that the church is a distinct historic people, called together by God, without respect to natural and national differences, for the double purpose of embodying the regenerate human life in Christ. The church is more than an association for the pursuit of certain religious ends, more than an organization for promotion of a desirable way of living.
In recent years the Church has been experiencing a 'crisis' with respect to the foundation, aim and nature of mission, leading to a 'failure or nerve,' an 'almost complete paralysis,' and a 'withdrawal' from missionary activity. Having given a thorough analysis of New Testament and historical 'paradigms' of mission, he arrives at what he calls 'an emerging ecumenical missionary paradigm.' This new understanding of mission is 'comprehensive'23—as Bosch acknowledges, there is the danger of 'viewing everything as mission'—but nevertheless it helps us to understand the Church's work in the world. While we do not have the space to address Bosch's work in any great depth, there are some aspects of it which are of particular relevance to our reflection.
Bosch sees mission as being fundamental to the Church's nature: 'the Church exists in being sent and in building up itself for the sake of its mission.' As it participates in the mission of God's love, the Church finds itself in an 'abiding tension' between being 'the sole bearer of a message of salvation on which it has a monopoly,' and being 'an illustration—in word and deed—of God's involvement with the world.' The latter of these two 'foci' helps the Church stay humble, recognising it doesn't have 'all the answers;' it 'anticipates' God's future reign, rather than embodying it fully: the Church is an 'eschatological community.' The former—usually 'evangelism' or 'proclamation'—is closer to the way many evangelical groups define mission (so, university Christian Unions have annual 'missions' which are basically evangelistic events).

4.3.2 The Great Commission as the New Covenant-Matthew 28:16-20
The missionary nature itself springs from the God who is the source of Christianity. The Great Commission is given to us by each of the four evangelist (Matt 28:18-20; Mk 16:15-16; Luke 24:46-49; John 20:21-22) and in the Acts of the apostles (Ac 1:8). It is reiterated in the charge to Paul a recorded in Acts 26:13-18. To Bible believers it has far-reaching implications. It constitutes an identification of the believers with Christ in accomplishing the divine purpose as unfolded in the missionary thrust of the Old Testament and incarnated in the Lord. It is the command to preach the gospel to every creature, the marching orders to evangelize the world, the divine authorization to be ambassadors of Christ to every nation of the world. The emphasis in Matt 28: 19 is on "making disciples," this being the main verb of the verse; the others are subordinate: going, baptizing, and teaching. The word for "disciple" is matheteuo, meaning a follower, a learner.
As disciples we are always identifying with and learning from the Christ. Note that now they are not sent "to the lost sheep of the house of Israel" but to the whole world, to all of the Gentiles, ethna, a universal mission of discipline. This is the beginning of Jesus' reign, the sign that the Son of Man is in heaven. They were inclined to make the "success" of mission almost completely dependent upon their own zeal and hard work. Perhaps this is, in part, what lies behind the tendency- particularly in Protestant circles –to interpret the Matthean version of the Great Commission ( Matt. 28:18-20) primarily as a command and, with that, to overemphasize the auxiliary verb "go" (Greek: poreuthentes). As I have argued elsewhere, this is based on a faulty exegesis. This happens particularly where the Great Commission is, for all intents and purposes, limited to Matt 28:19 and 20a, that is, where we ignore the fact that the commission proper follows on the statement of authority given to Christ in Matt 28:18 and is dependent upon the promise, in Matt 28: 20b, of the abiding presence of him who is the real missionary.
The cumulative force of this reiterated command is evident, leaving no double in the mind of the believing and obeying disciple of Jesus Christ that the evangelization of the world is the unquestioned will and plan of the Lord. It is the divine imperative written in bold letters into the nature of Christianity and defined in a plain commandment by the Lord Himself. Such is the first impact of a study of the Great Commission. The Great Commission authoritatively states the Christian duty of world evangelization.
The primary historical significance of the Great Commission lies in the fact that it gives to the church the pattern and purpose of missions. It defines and delineates the missionary task. We have in the Great Commission a compass, a charter, and a plan. A comparative study of the parallel passages is most illuminating and instructive. It yields precious truths and principles to guide the church in world evangelism and to define in specific terms the missionary aspect of the churches' ministry.
The six fold command in the gospels and Acts expresses one central concern of Christ: the concern of world evangelization; it declares one central purpose: the purpose of gathering a people for the name of the Lord from among the nations to constitute the church, the body and the bride of Christ, the temple and household of God; it prescribes one central strategy: the heralding of the gospel of Jesus Christ by Spirit-equipped witnesses making disciples among all nations. In addition to this common core, each one of the evangelists emphasizes a unique aspect or several aspects of the missions' activity and movement.
David J. Bosch stated the Great Commission from Luke that Luke (Luke 24:46-49) understands mission as: fulfillment of scriptural promises;
“of Israel; proclaiming the message of repentance and forgiveness; intended for all nations; beginning from Jerusalem; carried out by "witnesses"; and accomplished in the power of the Spirit”.

And John's version of the Commission (John 20:21) underscores the intimate relationship between Jesus mission and that of his disciples: they have to emulate him. The Commission follows directly after he has shown them his hands and his side (John 20:20); this undeniably suggests that, as I have argued above, mission will take place in the context of suffering and opposition. ''Righteousness'' for Matthew finds its final authoritative definition in the teaching of Jesus, who is the one teacher (Matthew 23:8, 10).
Indeed, the Gospel of Matthew provided the church with an excellent handbook containing that teaching. And it is thus the particular responsibility of the church to hand on that teaching and to see to it that new disciples make it their way of life. The commission of the disciples is followed by a promise that must have cheered the hearts of those to whom so much responsibility was being given. The promise is that, "I am with you," words that recall the promise of Matthew 18: 20 as well as echo especially the identification of Jesus as Emmanuel, "God with us" (Hag 1:12; Gen 28:15; Exod 3:12; Josh 1:5, 9; Isa 41:10).
Where Yahweh was formerly with his people, Jesus is now with his people, the church. Jesus, though not physically present among them, will not have abandoned them. He will be in their midst, though unseen, and will empower them to fulfill the commission he has given them. And the promise of Jesus' continuing presence with them is not restricted to any special circumstances, nor is it made simply for the immediate future. He will be with them "all the days until the consummation of the age." Jesus promises his disciples that he will be with them until the end of time as presently known. The promise thus applies not only to the future of he disciples themselves but to their successors and their successors in the church. The risen Jesus is central to the existence and proclamation of the church.
At the same time we cannot just simply ignore the teaching of Jesus Christ in Matt 7:21 not every one who say lord, lord will enter the kingdom of heaven but only who does the will of the lord who is in heaven. As we can understand that the medieval Rom catholic missionaries who used Luke 14:23 go out to the roads and country lances and force them to come in so that my house will be filled as a missionary text we also seriously take the theology of social Gospel whose missionary text has been I came that they may have life and have it abundantly (John 10:10). We regard the Great commission Matt 28:19-20 s the prime missionary text and prime mover for missionaries in the history of the church. Meanwhile we think that Macedonia call Acts. 16:9 is also an important missionary text even for the 21 century of the third millennium.

4.3.3 Theological Significances of Mission of God
In attempting to flesh out the mission Dei concept, the following could be said: In the new image mission is not primarily an activity of the church, but an attribute of God. God is a missionary God. It is not he church that has a mission of salvation to fulfill in the world; it is the mission of the Son and the Spirit through the Father that includes the church. Mission is thereby seen as a movement from God to the world; the church is viewed as an instrument for that mission. After having stated that the church is missionary by its very nature, since "it has its origin in the mission of the Son and the Holy Spirit", the Council's Decree on Mission defines missionary activity as "nothing else, and nothing less, than the manifestation of God's plan, its epiphany and realization in the world and in history". Jacob was the first in Bible history to hear the assurance "I am with you," a promise later repeated to many of the nation's leaders, Moses (Exod 3:12), Joshua (John 1:5), and Gideon (Judge 6:16); indeed Emmanuel, "God with us," (Isa 7:14; Matt 1:23) speaks of God's continuing presence with all his people, "for he has said ' I will never leave you or forsake you," (Heb 13:5).
More than this, though, Jacob is assured of protection, "I will guard you wherever you go," a sentiment reechoed in the priestly blessing, "The LORD bless you and keep (guard) you" (Num 6:24), and in the Psalms (Psalms 121, 23). The mission of God, in these terms then, is clearly reconciliation at all levels of existence. This is the essence of an "ecomissiology", a vision for mission that includes not only a renewal of relationships between humans and humans, but also between humans and their environment." To participate in mission is to participate in the movement of God's love toward people, since God is a foundation of sending love.
Bosch suggested that in establishing a biblical foundation for mission, our starting point should not be the "contemporary missionary enterprise" that had to be justified, but the biblical concept of "What being sent into the world signifies." It also means that any biblical authorization for mission should not be extracted from isolated missionary texts but from "the thrust" of the central message of Scripture. Against this general background, Bosch proceeded to give the outlines of a "biblical theology of mission." However, Bosch reminded his readers that being faithful to the biblical foundation of mission did not mean applying it on "a one-to-one basis" to our own situation.
With reference to the post- Willingen period, Neill boldly proclaims, "The age of missions is at an end; the age of mission has begun". It follows that we have to distinguish is identical to the Mission Dei; our missionary activities are only authentic insofar as they reflect participation in the mission of God. The church stands in the service of God's turning to the world. The primary purpose of the missiones ecclesie can therefore not simply be the planting of churches or the saving of souls; rather, it has to be service to the Mission Dei, representing God in and over against the world. In its mission, the church witnesses to the fullness of the promise of God's reign and participates in the ongoing struggle between that reign and the powers of darkness and evil. Since God's concern is for the entire world, this should also be the scope of the Mission Dei. It affects all people in al aspects of their existence. God's own mission is larger than the mission of the church. The Mission Dei is God's activity, which embraces both the church and the world, and in which the church may be privileged to participate. Mission is God's turning to the world in respect of creation, care, redemption and consummation. It takes place in ordinary human history, not exclusively in and through the church.
Mission includes evangelism as one of its essential dimensions. Evangelism is the proclamation of salvation in Christ to those who do not believe in him, calling them to repentance and conversion, announcing forgiveness of sin, and inviting them to become living members of Christ's earthly community and to begin a life of service to other in the power of the Holy Spirit. Still, what God has provided for us in Jesus Christ and what the church proclaims and embodies in its mission and evangelism is not simply an affirmation of the best people can expect in this world by way of health, liberty, peace, and freedom from want. God's reign is more than human progress on the horizontal plane.
Humanitarian service alone is not the mission of the people of God. The service which God demands includes witness. It seems more biblical (and evangelical) to define mission as "mission= witness + service" although that definition is not without its own difficulties. Witness is essential. The biblical idea is that service should point to God. The presence theory of mission, which holds that existence of the church as a worshiping, serving community of God's people in the midst of the world is a potent witness, is vulnerable to the present secularizing tendencies. The presence of the people of God, active in the world, is that people may know God's saving presence.
Life in the Promised Land should be a life lived in the presence of God and market by the fulfillment of the requirements of justice towards others. The land is the place and occasion for communion with God and communion among human beings. It should also be a place where God's commandments are observed for it is a manifestation of God's fidelity. The God who defeats the oppressive power of Pharaoh and who thereby emancipates Israel from slavery is characteristically the God who delivers from oppression; correspondingly, Israel is characteristically a people delivered, though it is clear that YHWH's readiness to deliver is not confined to Israel (Amos 9:7).
God is holy as the supreme and majestic one who exists apart from all else and rules over all (Exod 15:11; Isa 40:25; John 17:11; Rev 4:8-9; 15:4). Any vision of such a holy God overpowers the worshipper with feelings of awe, terror and unworthiness (Job 40:1-4; Isa 6:1-5; Hab 3:3:16; Rev 1:17). Since holiness means separation from all that is common, it includes separation from sin. Therefore, God’s holiness includes his moral perfection. He is separate from evil and opposed to it (Hab 1:12-13). The Bible usually speaks of this moral holiness of God as his righteousness (Ps 11:7; 36:6; Isa 5:16; Heb 1:9; 1 John 3:7). God’s attitude to sin is one of wrath, or righteous anger. He cannot ignore sin but must deal with it (Ps 9:8; Isa 11:4-5; Jer 30:23-24; Rom 1:18; 2:8;). But God is also a God of love, grace, mercy and longsuffering, and he wants to forgive repentant sinners (Rom 2:4; Titus 3:4; 2 Peter 3:9; 1 John 4:16). All this is possible only because of what Jesus Christ has done on behalf of sinners (Rom 3:24). The God who is the sinners’ judge is also the sinners’ saviour (Ps 34:18; 50:1-4;1 Tim 2:3; 2 Tim 4:18; Titus 3:4-7).
Yahweh judges all nations: this is implicit in the opening cycle of indictments against the surrounding nations (Amos 1-2). He is everywhere (Amos 9:2) and in all natural phenomena (Amos 9:5f). Yahweh not only brought up Israel from Egypt, but also the Philistines from Caphtor and the Syrians from Kir (Amos 9:7). This God, who rules heaven and earth, is the God with whom all nations must deal. Amos speaks of Damascus as threshing Gilead (Amos 1:30) – literally driving threshing sleds with pieces of iron or flint imbedded in their underside over the wounded and dying bodies of the conquered. Gaza sold a people into slavery to Edom, as did Tyre. These acts of inhumanity are sins against the God who made all people.
He likewise sits in judgment upon Israel for similar sins of inhumanity. Yahweh is a God of moral perfection, and he requires moral behaviour of all people. He gives a general revelation to all, and all will be held accountable for their actions. God has revealed himself in the words of the prophets the history of his people and the nations and supremely in the life of the son as a God who upholds justice and does not tolerate exploitation. Thus, for example, Hosea included and discussed the whole story of the relationship between God and his people in his poem on Israel’s failure to understand that the blessings of the soil of Canaan were gifts from Jahweh. This was a great intellectual achievement.
However that may be in detail the ultimate concern discernible in the Old Testament and, hence, the ultimate vantage point from which to coordinate its theologies gravitates around the universal dominion of Yahweh in justice and righteousness. Its interpretation represents the elementary task of Old Testament theology. To this dominion, all other kinds and degrees of relationship between Yahweh and reality, quantitatively and qualitatively, and their own correlations as well, are subservient. They are not insignificant and must not be ignored. But their place in the whole and, hence, the degree of their reflect implementations or manifestations of Yahweh’s universal dominion in justice and righteousness.


CHAPTER FIVE
THE IMPACT OF THE MISSION OF GOD IN MYANMAR

5.1 The Mission of God in Myanmar today.
Myanmar is a multi-cultural and multi-religious country of which Christianity is only a minority religion with 6% of the population of Myanmar. Because of its long and effective existence in history of Myanmar, Buddhism has become the greatest major religion of Myanmar with 87% of the population of the country. In fact, Buddhism is deeply rooted in Myanmar. As Christianity is the minority religion in Myanmar, Myanmar Christians need to reconsider their peaceful co-existence with the Myanmar Buddhists to make their existence more meaningful and to do their mission more effectively. To do so Christians in Myanmar should have understanding and inclusive attitude towards Buddhism and Buddhist people.
Dr. Ling asserts that the Christian mission in Myanmar today may need to be reconsidered in line of the New Testament idea of kenosis. For him, reconsidering the concept of kenosis would help Christians in Myanmar to better understand whether the Church in Myanmar should continue doing mission in the dogmatic from of proclamation. This from of the Christian mission often faced with problems first in its engagement with the Myanmarese Buddhist community and second its in confrontation with the government-sponsored Buddhist mission program known as, "Buddhist Taungtan Tatana." To transform these problems it is imperative that Christians in Myanmar better do an incarnatioanal type of the Christian mission a mission that does not do proselytizing but that engages people in acting out the Christian faith in service to others. The proselytized form of mission is much concerned with statistical church growth making aggressive efforts to Christianity. Its aim is not really service to the people but conquest of the people. Contrary to this type is as indicated earlier the incarnational type of mission that concerns for serving people not winning people to the church. Such a type of mission is ecumenical in spirit and does not look down adherents of other faiths. Nor does it treat people of other faiths as heathen or pagan an attitude that characterizes much of the western missionaries activities for too many centuries. Such a western missionary's traditional type of the Christian mission that calls for forceful conversion to Christianity has already made enough annoyances to the myanmarese Buddhists in the past.
We therefore need today a mission that does not look down on the non-Christians and that is not bent on condemning the good non-Christians to hell. This does not mean that we Christians have to conceal our belief. It rather mans that we share that gospel of Christ with love, tolerance and humility. The Christians should always be looking for points of contact, embracing truth wherever it is encountered, and inviting those with whom they enter into dialogue to consider Jesus as the answer to humankind's universal quest for salvation. The real purpose of Christian mission is not to gain a statistic but to serve. The hope of the Christian mission is not, "what can people do for our church?" but "what can the church do for people?" Such a "but to serve" mission requires listening and acting rather than telling and conceptualizing. Its approach is practical and incarnatinal rather than theoretical and propositional. The mission is a matter of being there and caring, instead of going there and unloading. What is needed is empathy not polemics. If the churches in Myanmar really want to be understood, it must seek first to understand others. If the churches really want to do the real Kenotic form of eh mission of Christ, they will need to give to the world without expecting anything in return. That is what the nature of the 'incarnational type of mission' is really meant. Only such a kenotic type of mission would be able to make the gospel more acceptable to people of other faiths especially the Buddhists in Myanmar and be able to better bring them to the knowledge of Christ.
The experience we have today in relation to the Christian mission is the fact that the proselytized or conversionist method of mission which many churches and local missionaries used has been observed to have caused more problems and conflicts than peace and harmony of religions. In fact, together with Hans Kung who says, "there is no world peace without peace among religions, and no peace among religions without dialogue between religions," it is strongly felt that the churches in Myanmar need to focus more and more on the incarnational type of mission, in which the ideas of kenosis, diakonia (diakonia=service) and koinonia (koinonia=fellowship) are integratedly developed. The word, 'diakonia' refers to the act of healing and reconciling, binding up wounds and bridging chasms, and restoring health to the organism of the church.
The mission of the "Good Samaritan" is the best example of it. Mission to the lepers and mission to the blind are good examples of diakoniac mission of the Christian Gospel is strongly stressed. That is a 'must' for the church in Myanmar. Koinonia means 'fellowship' and in this form of mission, 'friendship with others' would be most essential. Such an activity of being in 'friendship with others,' at both personal and communal levels, was seen part of the activities of the early Christian Church. Doing mission in the form of 'friendship' may be successful, as a Myanmar proverb goes, "pokko hkin hma, ta-ya mien", literal meaning, "where there is intimacy, there is mutual trust." The point here is the fact that the churches in Myanmar may need not an annoying or proselytizing mission that calls for the arrogant statistical conversions but rather a service or friendship mission that is carried out with a genuine Christian love and humility.

5.1.1 The concept of God in Myanmar Context
A close examination of the biblical view and testimony simply does not allow for such an easy identification. Serious biblical reflections and theological expositions prove that the conservative view of faith in God is a narrow view which gives very little room for God to execute His plan of salvation. Religious plurality has challenged many theologians both from the East and the West to look at the Bible deeply and think of the question: "is salvation possible only through the church?" In the process of biblical research, new theological insight and understanding is discovered that God's saving power is extended beyond the border of the church towards all human beings of different faiths and ideologies.
This new theological insight and understanding is based on the Christian faith in God the creator and on God's spirit as indwelling in human beings. God is the sole creator- the God of the universe. The psalmists extol the work of God the creation (104: 136), and witness the compassion, mercy and providence of God in all that God created (8:145:9:140:27-30). In the concept of the early Jews God is not only the creator of the world, but also its maintainer. The world order and the laws of nature are at God command, and they will only be able to continue if what God has ordained is to be practiced as intended. The Life-giving breath is understood as part of God's Spirit inherent in men and women at creation. In Genesis 1:27, it is also said that God created men and women in His likeness. This is assumed to be the likeness in spirit and not the human physical form. For god is not a created being.
God, therefore, could not be described in human form, though God is spoken of in anthropormorphic terms such as God walking and talking to Adam and Eve (Gen. 3:8). Thus from both the biblical and the anthropological point of view, human person is closely related to the spirit of the creator God. This is affirmed in the word of Job which stated that "the Spirit of God has made me and the breath of the Almighty gives me life" (Job. 33:4). For the sake of the universal affirmation we would like to draw assistance from insights of a Buddhist source. This source is given by a Buddhist nun Josephine Leo Fungming of Hong Kong in her description of the meaning of the word "Buddha".
However there are two kinds of Buddhists' belief in Myanmar. They are normative Buddhism or traditional Buddhism known as Theravada Buddhism, and the non –normative Buddhism which is mixed with the worship of nats or spirits. Theravada Buddhism refuses to identify Gautama Buddha with God. He was not God or a god. He was a human being who attained full enlightenment through meditation and showed his followers the path of spiritual awakening and freedom from suffering. Therefore in the Theravada Buddhist's view Buddhism is not a religion of God. The Buddhist, who holds this view, would like to be thought of in this way. To them Buddhism is a religious of wisdom, enlightenment, and compassion. They believe that this Buddha-nature or Buddha-mind, i.e., the enlightened mind is inherent in all people.
The difference between the Theravada Buddhism and Christianity is that Buddhism sees the true inherent by the Buddha-nature, whereas Christianity sees the true identity of human person in the image of God within. In this Buddhist tradition the meaning of the Buddha-nature manifests itself in the concrete experience of wisdom and compassion. For the Christian the activities of knowing and loving are the fruits of the Spirit of God within human beings. The non-normative Buddhism, which is mixed with the worship of nats and devas, i. e., lower and higher spirits like to address the Buddha as God. They also like to express their belief that the nats and devas could save them in the time of crisis.
Bearing witness alone is not sufficient in today's Christian mission. Serving human beings alone is not enough in today's mission; but words and deeds may prevail in our mission if they go hand in hand in inviting alone, but it should include both word and deeds. We have aid in our introduction by giving an example of the situation in Bangladesh that the people of Myanmar are very clever in explaining an event or a phenomenon which might be sensitive to other people. Likewise, there might be a better way or an alternative approach, I believe, to share the Good News of Jesus Christ to the Buddhists in Myanmar as Christianity is regarded as a potted plant with European soil, although the Buddhists in Myanmar believe that the potted plant will never fully bloom for them in this beautiful land.

5.1.2 The Contextualization of the Mission of God in Myanmar
The Mission of God in Myanmar Contextualization is essential and inescapable work of mission in Myanmar today. But any approach regarding with mission need to be biblical based. L. Harold De Wolf said, "The Church and the mission are not electives of the Christian life. To be in the church and to participate in the Christian mission to the world belong to the very nature of Christian existence." This means that to be a Christian means to be an ambassador between unbeliever and Christ. Many pluralists urge that salvation can be found in other religions. Contrary to this, according to Jesus teaching, salvation depends on Christian faith (John 3:16). If salvation depends upon Christian faith, it seems that without faith, there is no salvation. It is still questionable that whether non-believer can have such faith or not.
Jesus also said, "I am the Way, the Truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father, except by me (John 14:6)". Concerning this verse, Barclay suggests, "Suppose we are in a strange town and ask for direction". Suppose the person asked says: "Take the first to the right, and the second to the left". Cross the square, go past the church; take the third on the right, and the road you want is the fourth on the left. "The changes are that we will be lost before we get halfway. But suppose the person asked says: "Come I will take you there". In that case the person to us is the way, and we cannot miss it."
It is true that contextualization properly applied means to discover the legitimate implications of the Gospel in a given situation. It goes deeper than application. Application I can make or need not make without doing injustice to the text. Implication is demanded by a proper exegesis of the text Harvie Vonn Writes that contextualization is 'the process of conscientization of the whole people of God to the hermeneutical claims of the Gospel….." Hesselgrave defines contextualization as follows:
"Contextualization can be thought of as the attempt to communicate the message of the person, works, word, and will of God in a way that is faithful to God's revelation, especially as it is put forth in the teachings of Holy Scripture, and that is meaningful to respondents on their respective cultural and existential contexts. Contextualization is both verbal and nonverbal and has to do with theologizing; Bible translation, interpretation, application; incarnation lifestyle; evangelism; Christian instruction; church planting and growth; Church organization; worship style…indeed with all of those activities involved in carrying out of the Great Commission."

Sherwook Lingenfelter explains contextualization this way; "The idea of contextualization is to frame the Gospel message in language and communication forms appropriate and meaningful to the local culture, and to focus the message upon crucial issues in the lives of the people. The contextualized indigenous Church is built upon culturally appropriate methods of evangelism; the process of disciplining draws upon methods of instruction that are familiar and part of local traditions of learning. The structural and political aspects of leadership are adapted from patterns inherent in national cultures rather than imported from denominational organizations in the home countries of missionaries."
The need for mission in Myanmar is to show that life is more important than work. In Christianity, "Live to work" is emphasized. This means that one needs to live in order to work. Living is priority to working. But in some religions, "work to live" is emphasized. This means that one needs to word in order to live. Working is priority to living. Here, without life, how can one work. Thus, it is absolutely wrong to teach that work is more important than life. The need for mission in Myanmar is because of Christian hope. In some religions, there is a Teaching of endless process of reincarnation. That is called karma in Buddhism. According to Karma, the present life is created band shaped by the past life. As such, one can no longer do his present life better because of his past life. Thus, in this case, the poor do not have any hope for the betterment of their future lives since their lives had been predetermined by their past lives. Contrarily, in Christianity is there great hope that can give one a peaceful mind to anybody including the poor and the needy. Only Christian gospel can give the poor in Myanmar hope in their lives. As Paul says:
"We rejoice in the hope of the glory of God. Not only so, but we also rejoice in our sufferings…..And hope does not disappoint us because God has poured out his live into our hearts by the holy Spirit, whom he has given us (Rom 5:2-5).

According to the logic of mission wherever the gospel is preached, the situation in that placed will surely be changed. Right because some corner part of Myanmar where the gospel is not preached, the living standard of the people is very low. Mission is not only to bring good news but also to uplift the living standard of the people who are in need of help, in low living standard. As such, the church must be active in sending missionary to the regions where the gospel is not preached yet in order to uplift the low living standard of the local people.
The Christians in Myanmar are challenged by the gospel to transform the society, through our life style, our selfless love and our patient suffering. According to Paul, this transformation can only take place through the obedience of individuals and communities to the Gospel of Jesus Christ, whose power changes the lives of men and women by releasing them from the quilty, and consequences of sin, enabling them to respond with love toward God and toward others ( Rom 5:5). It is clearly learned that injustice, exploitation, and oppression mark social, economic, political, and religious systems not only in Asia but also in many parts of the world. Most of the people in Asia are destitute, and their plight is maintained by the rich and the powerful. As such, according to the Wheaton Consultation held in June 1983, the urgent need for Christians in the present circumstances is to commit us to acting in mercy and seeking justice. The Christian gospel can transform all these demonic systems in the world. David J. Bosh also said, "Solidarity with the poor, the needy, the persecuted, and the oppressed is a central and crucial priority of Christian mission"15 Vinay Samuel is right when he said, "One of the most significant responses to mission today is to see Mission Transformation"

5.1.3 The Mission of God and Dialogue
The mission of the church is to adopt a posture of service to people of other faiths. The church may not forget for a single moment that it can and must live as the representative of what God in Jesus Christ promised to all the people of the world religions who know nothing of what God has done for them. To engage in mission is therefore to engage in dialogue with people of other faiths, a dialogue in which both sides introduce their deepest convictions and in which Chris-tians do not in the process reduce their confession of faith to a list of general truths.
Through Jesus Christ Christians know what, as far as God is concerned, the situation of people of other faiths is and where their salvarion lies. In this sense people of other faiths, whether they know it or not, need the help of Christians. Before we examine how dialogue functions within the theology of mission that we have mapped out, let me mention a few more details about what dialogue is all about. Dialogue is best understood when one looks at the types and goals of dialogue. The Roman Catholic document "Dialogue and Proclamation" lists four types of dialogue.
(a) The dialogue of life, where people strive to live in an open and neighborly spirit, sharing their joys and sorrows, their human problems and preoccupations.

(b) The dialogue of action, in which Christians and others collaborate for the integral development and liberation of people.
(c) The dialogue of theological exchange, where specialists seek to deepen their understanding of their respective religious heritages, and to appreciate each other's spiritual values.

(d) The dialogue of religious experience, where persons, rooted in their own religious traditions, share their spiritual riches, for instance4 with regard to prayer and contemplation, faith and ways of searching for God or the Absolute.


Myanmar owes very much to their Buddhist monks, for the Buddhist monks have been active in the building of the nation, in works of mercy, hospitals and schools. Even today the monastery schools are still common to the rural people. The monks were and still are also the founders of the nation's moral life teaching the people the way of the Buddha, resulted in the production of literature, music, painting and sculpture. These are a blessing to modern Myanmar and the world. Christians must be the first to acknowledge and thank God for all the good the Buddhist monks have done for the people of Myanmar.
Surprisingly, Buddhists often practice what Jesus commands. It is dangerous to think that only Christians can perform acts of mercy. This monopoly-psychology is arrogant both in the sight of man and of God," says Kosuke Koyama. In Myanmar culture, person to person relationship is more important than dialogue to religions. One's relation to a person plays a greater role in dialogue or conversation with that person than one's knowledge to the other's religious belief. When there is peace between persons, there is good dialogue. When there is tension between persons, there is only diatribe. Without knowing the name of Jesus, they give the hungry food, the thirsty drink, take a stranger home, clothe the naked, nurse the sick and visit the prisoners. They may be quite surprised to know what Jesus is going to say them in the end.
The sections will be divided into three categories: (a) what the Christians in Myanmar can possibly do; (b) what the Buddhists in Myanmar can possibly do, and (c) what all religious communities in Myanmar can possibly cooperate. All statements in each category are strictly confined to Myanmar context.
What the Christians in Myanmar can possibly do for dialogue?
(1) Repent past Christian missionaries' wrongdoings or mistreatments and ask non-Christians for forgiveness, and change the Christian attitude of indifference to what other religions think, believe and practice.

(2) Renounce the absolute claim or supremacy of Christian faith over other religions including Buddhism, and recognize whatever good, valuable and truth claimed by other religions and see neighbors of different faiths as equal seekers after truth.


(3) A void offensive views on non-Christians and their religions including Buddhists and Buddhism as demonic, false, inferior, powerless and hell-bound,... etc., and avoid 'holier than thou' religious mentality and denounce comparison of Christianity with other religions in terms of good and bad.

(4) Rearticulate the exclusive forms of missionaries' teachings in terms and ways relevant to other religious terms and ways of expression , and reconstruct commonalities, parallels and difference of Christianity and other religions with a view to help provide a common ground for all religions.


(5) Relate other religious worldviews, concepts and elements of other faiths to the Christian faith and consider them seriously as vital components in doing the Christian theology in Myanmar, and avoid a hermit's tradition of religious isolationism and try to engage more and in a closer relation to or in creative dialogue with adherents of other faiths and religious traditions.


What the Buddhists in Myanmar can possibly do for dialogue?
(1) Remove the Buddhist nationalists' understandings of Christianity as religion of Western colonists and as the embodiment of Western culture, and avoid using of Buddhism either as a political channel of dominance or as a socio-cultural unifying factor.

(2) Avoid using of views on Myanmar Christians that understand them as aliens or enemies to Buddhism and Buddhist community, and bury historical past of the wrongdoings of the Christian missionaries with all their mistaken religious conceptions and understandings on Myanmar Buddhists and Buddhism.


(3) Renounce all exclusive Burmese Buddhist concepts, views and philosophy such as 'to be an authentic Burmese is to be a Buddhist; 'let us go our own way, your religion is good for, mine is for me;' and 'Buddhism as universal' and change the Burmese Buddhist concept of non-interference in what other religious people think, believe and practice, and renounce the absolute claim or supremacy of Buddhist faith and practice over minority religions such as Christianity, Hinduism, Islam and primitive religions in Myanmar.

(4) Maintain and live out the salient teachings of the Buddha on compassion, love, tolerance, and non-violence to affect every sector of life in the religiously pluralistic society of Myanmar, and relate Christian worldviews, concepts and elements of Christian faith to the Buddhist faith, and consider them seriously as vital components in interpreting and practicing Buddhist faith in Myanmar.


(5) Void a hermit tradition of religious isolationism and try to engage more and more in open relation to or in creative dialogue with adherents of other faiths and religious traditions.


What all Religious Communities in Myanmar can possibly cooperate?
(1) Develop the idea of a dialogical dialogue to promote harmony and peace between religions, and explore broader concepts of religious harmony and cultures of religious diversity from each religious tradition and experiences.

(2) Promote mutual learning and sharing so that each religious tradition may develop a culture of religious cooperation and peace, and exchange ideas, concepts and worldviews between religions so that each religious tradition enriches itself by learning and sharing from the other.


(3) Build mutual trust, mutual recognition, and mutual respect among adherents of religious, and transcend all traditional, doctrinal and racial boundaries, which each religion often claims impasse.

(4) Develop a working relationship that can promote both 'intra' and 'inter' religious cooperation and thereby find a better common living across those religious traditions, and attempt to address common issues, problems and concerns in the society and look for ways to establish a network of creative friendship and solidarity at different levels.


(5) Do whatever religious mission only in the form of humble dialogue or tow-ways communication, but neither in the form of monologue nor in the form of teacher-student relationship, and always avoid extreme, one-sided, aggressive, offensive and exclusive religious languages, motives and expressions.
The dialogue of life is aimed at promoting harmonious living in communities of pluralistic religious persuasion. This is done in the most spontaneous but intentional way of living among people of other traditions and beliefs. In such a dialogue one also detects an experience of solidarity and mutuality.

5.1.4 God's Universal plan of salvation
In God's offer of salvation of humankind, Jesus Christ is central; His mediation of salvation is unique and universal. The same God who creates all and gives revelation and salvation in ways known only to God, can and does subsume God's universal salvific will in the Son Jesus Christ, according to Christian faith. This is our faith and conviction, based on the life and testimony of Jesus Christ, respectfully, yet unequivocally.
The letter to the Ephesians gives us a striking picture of the goal of God's mission – the final unity of everything in creation within the one life of Christ. The life of Christ is seen as a powerful force of unity breaking through all the hostile division within the human family and within the world of creation. This is now seen to be the secret purpose of creation – a secret which God has at last unveiled in Christ – as we can look forward with certainty to the ultimate unity of all things within Christ's love (Ephesians 3: 7-21). God's saving act in Christ was not a response or reaction to mythical or historical events or powers, but proceeds from his own gracious will, entirely a matter of the divine initiative.
As Christ existed before creation (Ephesians 1:4 ; John 1;1-2; Col. 1:15-20; 1 Cor. 10: 3-4; Phil. 2:5-11; Heb. 1:1-4; 1 Pet. 1:11, 20; Rev. 13;8), and believers are "in Christ," so the church participates in the program of God that began before time. Insight into the saving plan of God is not a matter of human discovery or speculation (Ephesians 1:9-10), but has been revealed through God's act in apostles and prophets (Ephesians 3:5) and definitively in the Christ event. When we human beings first become aware of ourselves, we live in a world that, while it continues to be God's good creation, is already in rebellion against its Creator. We can achieve a better understanding of God's work of salvation by looking first at what is promised to God's people by the prophets. For the sake of brevity, I will analyze the verse in Isaiah which is generally considered to include the fullest account of the good news prior to the writing of the New Testament.
Firstly, it is the announcing of peace; Shalom is usually translated by the word 'peace'. The root meaning of the original is 'completeness', in the sense of possessing a fullness of welfare and health (Ps. 38;3; Isa. 38:16-17), prosperity for the whole community (Job 15:21; Ps. 72;7; 37:11; 122:6) and security (Job 5:24). Above all it means being in a right relationship with the God of the covenant, when God, having no cause to judge or rebuke his people, is delighted with every aspect of he community's life (Isa. 54:10; 53;5; Jer. 29:11; Mal. 2:6). The Messiah is the agent of shalom (Isa. 9:6-7).
Secondly, it is the bringing of good news; the content of the message is God's deliverance and care (Isa. 40:9-11), his faithfulness and saving health (Ps. 40:10), his victory over his enemies (Ps. 68:11) and his salvation (Ps. 96:2). Though the message is for all, those who will hear it with most delight will be the poor, the afflicted, the broken-hearted, captives, captives and prisoners (Isa. 61:1). The good news is for both Jew and Gentile (Isa. 40:5; 49:6; 51:4). God himself is the supreme evangelist (Isa. 55:11).
Thirdly, it is the message of salvation; in many of the psalms 9:9; 35:10; 82:3; 140:12; 146:7 and in Zephaniah 2:3; 3:12, 19-20, those who wait for God's salvation are impotent in every sense – they are the materially poor, the physically disabled, the persecuted and oppressed. Salvation comes to mean deliverance, redemption or release from all evil and wrongdoing, both collective and individual (Ezek. 36:29; 37:23). The mediator is God's special servant who bears the sins of the people in his own person (Isa. 53). The God who has entered into a special relationship with the people of Israel, who has rescued them from forced labors in Egypt, who has given them a liberating code of practice to live by and a fertile hand to live off, will exercise his legitimate rule. The authority of this God extends over the whole universe, over all the nations, over Israel and over individual lives.
Judah’s exile in Babylon was like the divorce of a wife from her husband, but God would now forgive her and take her back (Isaiah 54:1-17). The exiles would find full satisfaction, not by trying to make life comfortable for themselves in Babylon, but by returning to Jerusalem (Isaiah 55:1-13). No matter what expressions of salvation people of Old Testament times experienced, the fullness of salvation awaited the coming of Jesus Christ, the Prince of Peace (Isa 9:6; Luke 1:79). The peace he brought is an everlasting peace (Luke 2:14; John 14:27 16:33; 20:21-22). It is available to all people now and will reach its fullest expression in a restored universe at the end of the age (Isa 9:7; 65:17-25; Rev 21:1-5,22-24).
Ephesians begins with a song of redemption and then follows in Ephesians 1:15-23 with one of the most cosmic Christologies (Col.1) to be found in the New Testament. Paul wants us to know about the church by knowing about the head of the church. For the church derives her life, her nature, and her mission from the person of Jesus Christ. As Kart Barth has put it that It is not the community which is called a body, or compared to it, but Christ Himself. He is a body. By nature He is not simply one (for a body is the unity of many members), but one in many. It is not that [body] is a good image for the community as such, but that Jesus Christ is by nature (body)...The community is not (body) because it is a social grouping which as such has some thing of the nature of an organism….It is (body) because it actually derives from Jesus Christ, because of Him it exists as Him body. We accept on faith the fact of the universality of the church because we recognize it as an expression of the universal intention of God in Jesus Christ. In choosing a people, God intended to reach out to the whole world. As Johannes Verkuyl has reminded us concerning Israel: "In choosing Israel as segment of all humanity, God never took his eye off the other nations; Israel was the pars pro toto, a minority called to serve the majority. God's election of Abraham and Israel concerns the whole world."
Despite the geographical restrictions of Jesus' ministry, the evangelist clearly signals the universal potential of the Jesus-event. Simeon's canticle sounds the theme in the infancy narrative: "a light for revelation to the Gentiles and for glory to thy people Israel" (Luke 2:32). The universal theme is trumpeted again in the Isaiah quotation that introduces the preaching of John: "… all flesh shall see the salvation of God" (Luke 3:6). God's "salvation" is what Simeon recognized in Jesus as the infant Messiah was brought to the temple (Luke 2:30). And Paul will echo Isaiah 40:5 again at the conclusion of Acts when he turns from the Jews to the Gentiles: "Let it be known to you then that this salvation of God has been sent to the Gentiles; they will listen" (Act 28:28). God's salvation embodied in Jesus will be brought to the end of the earth in the mission of the community. The centrifugal force of Jesus' mission can be felt in the dramatic inaugural scene at Nazareth in Luke 4;16-30. The quotation is from Isa. 60:1-2a:
"The Sprit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to preach the good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed, to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord.”

It designates those on the periphery-the poor, the captives, the blind, the oppressed- as the recipients of Jesus' Spirit-filled ministry. This announcement of the salvation for all finds its ratification in the boundary-breaking proportions of Jesus' ministry as presented by Luke. The fact that God saves those who do not know Jesus Christ does not in any way take the necessity or urgency of proclaiming Jesus Christ for the Church is the universal sacrament of salvation. Without the Church, the Christ-Spirit event, God's supreme revelation and salvific gift of life and wholeness to humankind cannot be mediated to the world. The Reign of God, Jesus Christ, and the Church are not mutually exclusive realities but essentially related and interdependent and at the service of one another and the concrete expression and continuation of each other.
Our respect, love, and esteem for and sharing and collaboration with other religions and religionists need not lead us to dilute or dilute or distort out faith in the salvific revelation of God in Jesus Christ and his unique and universal significance. Doing so ultimately will be an act of disservice to the world and infidelity to God's will and gracious offer of salvation and impoverishment of the riches of God's salvific revelation. What is required then in the contemporary world is not a relativized theology of mission and Christology, but that the Church strives to become truly Church, namely, God's Reign, as a clear sin, a forceful instrument and a convincing invitation to all to share in the unsearchable riches of God's salvific revelation in Jesus Christ.
Here the promise of salvation is not merely 'for you [Jews] and for your children' but also 'for all who are far off' (Acts 2:39; 28:28; Gal. 3;8), that is, Gentiles, who in Christ have been brought near to God through the blood of Christ (Eph. 2:13, 17).Salvation is universal in the sense that no-one is excluded from the invitation of Jesus for people to come to him and so find soul relief (Matt. 11:28-29) or from the gospel call to 'repentance and faith (Acts 20;21).
There is no difference between Jew and Greek – the same Lord is Lord of all and bestows his riches on all who call on him, for "Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved" (Rom. 10:12-13, citing Joel 2:32; 3:5). Salvation is not experienced by all without exception, but it is offered to all without distinction of race, status, or sex, so that for those in Christ Jesus 'there is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no "male and female" [Gen. 1:27]' (Gal. 3:28). God's desire is that all people be saved (1 Tim. 2:4). It may be that when God is described as 'the Saviour of all people, especially (malista) of those who believe' (1 Tim. 4:10), he is depicted as the gracious benefactor and preserver of all humans (Matt. 5:45) during this life (in which he dispenses what is often called ' common grace'), and of believers in the life to come. However, it is possible that malista means 'namely', in which case 'all people' are 'those who believe.'
Throughout Scripture salvation is portrayed as both corporate and individual, but the Old Testament tends to emphasize the former and the New Testament the later. The common Pauline expression 'in Christ' combines union with the risen “Christ' and also 'in (the body of) Christ', the church. The word Paul describes as "the gospel in advance" ("all nations will be blessed through you") is first heard in Genesis 12:3. It is the climax of God's promise to Abraham. It is also a pivotal text not only in the book of Genesis but indeed in the whole Bible. So important is it in Genesis that it occurs five times altogether, with minor variations of phraseology (Gen 12:3; 18:18; 22:18; 26:4-5; 28:14).
And the story of how that blessing for all nations has come about occupies the rest of the Bible, with Christ as the central focus. In a creation spoiled by sin and the curse, history will be a hope filled story of how God will bring about for Abraham what he ha promised him (Gen 18:18). So the Abrahamic covenant is a moral agenda for God's people as well as a mission statement by God. In Christ alone through the gospel of his death and resurrection, stands the hope of blessing for all nations.
Exodus 19 remains as a witness that God did enter a covenant with a historical people at a particular time and place. He formulated his claim on them in terms of commandments which they understood: 'Thou shalt not kill', 'Thou shalt not commit adultery'. This biblical witness remains a warning against spiritualizing the covenant and the demands of the law. The thunder of Sinai continues to address the church in terms of obedient acts to one's fellow humans, done in response to God's claim, and measured by God's criteria.
Many Christians believe that salvation is only in Christianity. And some Christians even understand that salvation belongs to Christianity. And they try to give the parcel of salvation to those who have not yet received. It is not true to say that salvation is only in Christianity. For clearer understanding, let us see the nature, steps and layers of salvation. Salvation cannot be confined to life after death only, to which most Christians understand and try to imply in their evangelistic efforts, Salvation can have different dimensions; embracing physical, mental, spiritual and eternal in one reality. All these dimensions constitute the deep process of "salvation."
Every religion is not happy with such external bondages: oppression, exploitation, discrimination, infliction, and various kinds of violence; threatening human dignity, value, right and freedom. And at the third layer and also the deepest layer, salvation is necessary in life after death. For this step, good morality, ethical religiousness, and being spiritual will be indispensable. Every religion is trying to reach a perfect happiness when they pass away from this earthly life. This means that all religions are on the way toward perfect salvation, to which Christian call "eternal life." The destination of every religion is "perfect salvation" which will be reached when people die.
Salvation is a hot topic among Christians in Myanmar. U Khin Maung Din thus says that the problem for Myanmar Christian theology is the desire for salvation. Generally, Myanmar Christians (apart from very few pluralists) accept that salvation comes to all through Jesus Christ. However, the one-sided exclusivists insist that all who do not accept Jesus as Lord and Saviour are eternally lost, whereas the inclusivists avoid saying this and allow the saving grace of God in the people of other religions.
Nevertheless, one thing is sure that the Myanmar Buddhists will not accept this exclusivist notion. It will be a hindrance for mission among the Myanmar Buddhists and even becomes a danger for Christians in Myanmar. In this case, Newbigin's contribution is found in his statement: 'Can non-Christians be saved is a wrong question to be asked. For him, it is a question to which only God has the right to answer because it is God who alone knows the heart of every person that he or she has the faith which is acceptable to Him. It is His concern that. We are bound to become judges of that which God alone knows. Perhaps Newbigin wants to warn Christians not to take God's place.
Christians, especially exclusivists, often emphasize that salvation will happen in life after death. Yet Newbigin says that by concentrating on what happens to the soul after death we are dealing with an abstraction. For him, salvation is not simply the salvation of a few individual souls but the restoration of the whole life of humankind in the context of renewed creation. It is not salvation of souls out of this creation but restoration of this creation including the whole life of humankind. Newbigin's understanding of salvation, therefore, is much deeper than that of the exclusivists, incluvists and pluralists. It seems that this contribution of Newbigin can encourage Christians in Myanmar to establish unity and peace among them and Myanmar Buddhists.
God's salvific act is also seen in other religions. Buddhist belief for example, is genuinely salvific as seen in the history of the Burmese reign during the eleventh century. When King Anawrahta came to the Burmese throne, he saw that the country was in total misery under the religious control of the Aris monks who were morally corrupt. For example, they made a law that the bride be sent to people were simple and were afraid of the consequences that might occur if they did not obey the law, they had to suffer greatly under those Aris monks. Thinking that it was a religious rite they had no choice but to obey.
Moreover, when King Anawrahta came to the throne of the Burmese people, he abolished the corrupt religious system and introduced the Budhist's faith with the help of a monk named Arahan, known as Shin Arahan. From that event we may infer that God's Spirit works differently in different times and places. In the East God's Spirit enlightened Gautama Buddha for the sake of enlightening others to a new path in life. Christians need to understand that God's salvific act through Jesus Christ is not only for the sake of the Church, but also for the sake of all people and the whole creation.
Christians today are in tension between evangelism on one side, and pluralism on the other side. This means that we should not ignore any of them. Both are essential for us to be recognized and practiced to a certain extent. We are demanded to do evangelism without hurting the dignity and value of other religions. This fact should not be the reason behind our evangelistic campaigns. That Christianity is the best is what Christians believe, not other religions do. The Christianity will be the best for only the Christians who they believe so. This is our own norm, own belief. Other religions that belong to other religious do not see Christianity as the best. For them, the religions which they belong to each of them will be the best. That they believe theirs s the best is not the best for the Christians. If a Buddhist says that Buddhism is the best among religions. Christians will not agree.
Therefore, to propaganda that Christianity is the best, all other need to come to Christianity should not be the reason behind evangelism. We should not do evangelism with that reason. We are doing evangelism not because other religions are not good as much as Christianity. This is not our reason. We should have proper understanding on several factors which should be guiding principles behind our evangelistic efforts. The followings should not be our reasons behind our evangelistic efforts.
In order to communicate Jesus' Good News to the Burmese, the Christians need to be humble and show His love. To follow Jesus' way is the essential part for missionaries and Christian workers in Myanmar although the contextualization in mission is a must, Christians should attempt work from the Burmese real world view and their real beliefs and practices, not Theravada Buddhism in doing contextualization in missions. The important point is that Christians should be aware of their culture as they present the gospel to the Burmese. God has created the Burmese. They are His people. One day they will become the brothers and sisters in Christ. Only the disciples of Jesus Christ can open their hearts to receive the true Gospel, and bring them to the Eternal God.
We Christians in Myanmar should risk witnessing to the gospel of Jesus as he commands without thinking about any outcome of mission. Our motivation is from our being obedient to the will of God, not from the Church, nor from what Guder called "the benefits neither of the gospel nor from any other human success". It is humbly but boldly encouraged that we Christians in Myanmar embrace the relationship of tension between the Church and the world, and the paradox of claiming the Church as missionary and dialogical. However, we consider, as Bosch suggested, our involvement in the dialogue and mission as an adventure, hoping for surprises as the Holy Spirit guides us into a better understanding of what mission is in Myanmar.
It was time for the repeated summons of Psalms that the news of YHWH's salvation should be proclaimed and sung among the nations, and for the vision of the prophets that YHWH's salvation should reach the ends of the earth, to move from the imagination of faith into the arena of historical fulfillment. These reflections on the kingdom ministry of Jesus and its relationship to the mission perspective of the early church might be synthesized as follows: Jesus and his mission are ultimately decisive for the character, the scope, the urgency, and the authority of the early church's Christian mission. And thus it is that Paul explains the new Israel of God, “even us whom he has called, not from the Jews only but also from the Gentiles” (Romans 9:24).
In this new chapter of God’s relationship with the Human family, in which righteousness is based on faith, the people of God is a people in which “there is no distinction between Jew and Greek” (Romans 10:10). As indicated by Paul’s frequent quotation of prophetic texts to support his argument, this conception of the people of God breaking with a strict ethnic definition is rotted deeply in Hebrew prophecy, a conception mediated in the postexilic period within apocalyptic circles. As the same time as Paul makes his case for this spiritual understanding of the Israel of God, he also hastens to observe that the new people of God is threatened by t he same temptation on which the first Israel stumbled, pride of election. Therefore he goes on to teach a lesson that speaks urgently to every age down to our own, a lesson in what I earlier called “biblical realism”: God, in an act that was at once judgment and mercy, broke off some of the branches of the original Israel, in which place the Gentiles “a wild olive shoot” were grafted on.




CONCLUSION

Mission is carrying out God’s work among people who are struggling to live with dignity and wholeness and in harmony with nature. It has been understood as the sending of missionaries to making disciples according to the so-called “Great Commission.” Mission includes proclaiming the love of God, “Missio-Dei”, and the liberation work of Jesus Christ through his passion, death, and resurrection to the world. Affirms the Church’s mission is derived from the mission of God through the Mission of Christ- the path of the cross. The cross provides the model for Christian mission. It symbolizes solidarity with the marginalized and resistance to all forces that are out to destroy life and the integrity of creation.
Moreover, mission is, quite simply, God’s mission (Missio Dei) which constitutes the church and purifies it, the participation of Christians in the liberating mission of Jesus, wagering on a future that verifiable experience seems to believe. It is the good news of God's love, incarnated in the witness of a community, for the sake of the world. Mission includes evangelism as one of its crucial elements. Likewise, evangelism is the proclamation of salvation in Christ to those who do not believe in him, calling them to repentance and conversion, announcing forgiveness of sins, and inviting them to become living members of Christ's earthly community and to begin a life of service to others in the power of the Holy Spirit.
Meanwhile, the Christian faith is intrinsically missionary. It is argued that missiology is purely neutral, in my opinion, it is not neutral, but views the world from the standpoint of Christian theology. Actually, a necessary foundation for mission lies in God's self- communication in Christ. Mission is an ambivalent enterprise which remains an act of faith. The entire Christian existence is a missionary existence. On the other side, Mission is God's mission. Missions are particular forms of participation in God's mission. In other word, mission is thus God's "Yes" to the world. The church-in-mission is a sign in the sense of pointer, symbol, example or model. It is a sacrament in the sense of mediation, representation, or anticipation.
In the Bible, the Israelites, who were the model actor for the Christians, were socially and politically oppressed. Yahweh raised Moses as liberator and called together the people not only to leave Egypt, but also to take them to a better land; God took sides with the oppressed and led them to a new future. Likewise, in the history of Israel, the exodus became the paradigmatic event that provided the basic principle of interpretation of God’s action in the life of the nation. It provided the resources for Jesus’ understanding of life and mission, as well as for the interpretation of it that emerged in the apostolic Church. Jesus’ vision of the Kingdom of God is set in the context of imminent historical judgment; the resurrection is an act of creation ex-nihilo and is thus a profound scandal for the world.
Generally, it has been noticed that God created human beings so that we might have fellowship with Him and serve as faithful managers of His creation (Gen 1-2). And just as God sends Jesus and Jesus sends the church, so the church sends Christians. In this regard, the mission of God is getting wider. In particular, we can simply discern that today, we are being sent out by this church. But each Christian is also sent out. That which God first invited us into, we now work with God to extend that invitation to others. That sort of mission can be done by anyone, anywhere, but God often calls people to go to different cultures and different places. Even Jesus himself went out from heaven and came to this earth.
It has long been my belief that one of our tasks for today is to accept a plurality point of views of mission, and therefore a plurality of forms of missionary activity, provided they can be broadly justified. Missionary history itself suggests this course, for it has itself never been limited to one concept of mission. The present also suggests this course, characterized as it is by a host of varied situations. The challenge of alternatives, the need for which is felt particularly in responsible missionary circles, can also be accompanied by a pluralistic attitude. If nothing else, it at least makes it possible for people, whose only form of variety has been to say the same things in different ways, to listen to some new questions.
Furthermore, dialogue is an action in a new form of mission and for the purpose of mutual understanding and enrichment, for dispelling suspicions and prejudices, and for harnessing moral and spiritual values to eradicate social evils and promote and foster social justice. The Buddhists may feel that Christian mission is most undesirable and incompatible with dialogue. Buddhism has strong missionary zeal like that of Christianity. Therefore, both the Christians and Buddhists should therefore need to come to a common understanding about the nature of their missions and its compatibilities with dialogue and harmony. It is important to find out what both can do together for harmony and peace between religions and for human society. It is clear that the church must understand the biblical mandate for its mission while it is on the move into the world, helping the needy, and bringing the gospel of Jesus Christ to others (believers and unbelievers).
In addition, dialogue is engagement of peoples in mission and mission is engagement of peoples with and in Christ for the expansion of God's kingdom of justice, peace and integrity. Christians must engage in dialogue for mission with people of other faiths, assuming that God is already at work in them. The purpose of dialogue is to understand each other better in the mission of Christ. Through dialogue, ways of cooperation in different fields can be discovered, and people of different faiths can even be enriched by each other to understand their own doctrines better. In this respect, Christians must start and end dialogue from a position of active faith in the Lordship of Christ. Dialogue is, however, not incompatible with mission and does not exclude evangelism. Dialogue cannot cancel out the fundamental missionary nature of Christianity.
Thus it is evident that in order to construct a theology in mission, contextualization is an inescapable and extremely important work of today's mission. But contextualization without biblical based, and Holy Spirit led, is very dangerous for the church in Myanmar. Because this approach leads to syncretism that lets the essence of the gospel is lost. Finally, we need to be careful and cautious in doing mission that is the great commandment of Jesus Christ. Any approach concerning mission need to be biblical based. Let us Christians start acting together with each other and with other believers for the sake of our suffering poor neighbors beside and around us in the country. It may equally be witnessing the values of the Reign of God –love, justice, and peace – to other believers.
In this pluralistic country, especially in Myanmar, we Christian are only minority and Buddhist is the most majority. So we essentially need to live peacefully with people of other faith especially the Burmese Buddhists people so that our Christian may not be a threat or alien for our own country. We Christian need to widen our knowledge of God so that our fellow Burmese people may hear and know the good news of God. On the other hand, the church should not live in the isolated community by showing the blessing of God among themselves alone. God does not want Christians to live away from the world, but He wants us to go into the world. The church should not ignore the injustice and other issues around us. The Christians should correct the social, economic, and educational corruption of the community in their full capacity.
Moreover, the church should listen to the cry of the oppressed, the exploited, and the alienated ones who formed the majority of our community. The ways and means the church could bring God's justice is to witness Christ with humility, love and service to the community so that others will see God though the deeds of his servant community. Mission is rather to fulfill the great commission given to it by the risen and ascended Lord (Matt 28:18-20).
In addition, we can speak of the church’s mission but it is actually God’s mission. He is reclaiming what is rightfully his as King of the universe. The scope of God’s mission is the whole wide world: all who suffer from sin and its affects, including a groaning creation waiting to be restored. Jesus Christ is the prime missionary. He was sent as the Father’s regent to establish the Kingdom, and confirmed in his messianic role by the Holy Spirit at his baptism. He preached that gospel as a reality, not an ideal. He made that reality come about with his effective words and powerful deeds. The gospel of the kingdom is that God is in control — through the past and present mediation of Christ the King.
The church is God’s mission agency. Our responsibilities are: to proclaim the good news of the Kingdom; to teach, baptize and nurture new believers; to respond to human need by loving service; to seek to transform unjust structures of society; and to strive to safeguard the integrity of creation and to sustain the life of the earth. We will understand our task when we see it as an extension of God's mission in participating in mission. If the Church's mission is essentially participation in God's mission, then we must reflect on the nature of God's mission to the world in order to understand our own. In the same way, we 'put into practice' God's rule through the proclamation of Jesus as Lord, and through living the life of the kingdom as disciples. However we must recognize that, first, “God builds God's kingdom.”
Making an essential paradigm of doing mission in Myanmar the Church need to understand the full meaning of salvation from Missio Dei: in terms of liberation or salvation of deprived and oppressed people from poverty, domination, political tyranny, racial discrimination, economic injustice. In like manner, our salvation must be interpreted in the context of the well being our human community. On the whole, if the gospel of Jesus Christ or God’s mission is to be meaningful in our time, it must be closely related to the present struggle for justice and peace amidst oppression. Indeed, God’s mission as away of human salvation which is the struggle for freedom from oppression as subjugated people become conscious of their situation and work to transform the conditions of their existence.
Finally, Christianity is at its essence, missional. It is clear that mission as central to the gospels and acts. Likewise, the missionary task is to herald God’s saving victory over his creation as Jesus Christ has been declared Son of God by the mighty act in that he rose from the dead. However, our understanding of mission can no longer be limited to evangelism, or social action, but must be an outflow of these theological convictions of a living God who has acted　in redeeming the whole creation to himself. Therefore, the form of the mission of God (Missio Dei) takes place through restoration, and the continued redemption of His people, the carriers of the mission. This more holistic view of mission is then to be played out through the entire world, including people and creation: “The Whole of Creation is God’s Mission (Missio Dei) field.”





BIBLIOGRAPHY


Ackrord, Peter R. Exile and Restoration: A Study of Hebrew Thought of The Sixth
Century. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: The Westminster Press, 1968.

Alexander, T. Desmond. New Dictionary of Biblical Theology. Leicester: Inter-
varsity Press, 2000.

Anderson, Gerald H. Mission Trends No-1: Crucial Issues in Mission Today. Grand
Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eeedmans Publishing Co., 1974.

Augsburger, Myron S. The Communicator' Commentary: Matthew. Texas: Word
Books Publishers, 1982.

Baker, David W. Dictionary of the Old Testament: Pentateuch. Downers Grove,
Illinois: Intervarsity Press, 2003.

Baukham, Richard. Bible and Mission: Christian Witness in a postmodern World.
Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 2003.

Boring, M. Eugene. The People's New Testament Commentary. London: John Knox
Pres, 2004.

Bosch, David J Witness to the world: The Christian Mission in Theological
Perspective. Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1980.

________."Reflections on Biblical Models of Mission" in Toward the Twenty-
first Century in Christian Mission, ed. Janes M. Phillips and Robert T. Coote. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co, 1993.

________. Christian mission and Modern Culture: Believing in the future. Valley
Forge, Pennsylvania: Trinity Press International, 1995.

________. Transforming Mission: Paradigm Changes in Theology of Mission.
Maryknoll, New York: Orbis Books, 1991.

Bowker, John. The Oxford Dictionary of World Religions. Oxford: Oxford
Commentary Press, 1997.

Brueggemann, Walter. An Introduction to the Old Testament: The Canon and
Christian Imagination. Louisville, Kentucky: Westminster John Knox Press, 2003.

Burrows, William R. Redemption and Dialogue. Maryknoll, New York: Orbis Book,
1993.

Buttrick, George Auther. The Interpreter' Dictionary of The Bible: An Illustrated
Encyclopedia (Nashville, Tennessee: Abingdon Press,1962), 429.

Childs, Brevard S. The Book of Exodus: A Critical, Theological Commentary.
Philadelphia: the Westminster Press, 1974.

Christensen, Duanel. Word Biblical Comentary, vol.6A. Dallas, Texas: Word Books
Publisher, 1995.

Cook, Harold R. An Introduction to Christian Missions. Chicago: Moody Press,
1971.

Dingrin, La Seng. "A Study of David J. Bosch' Theology of Mission and its
Reading into a Myanmar Context" in RAYS: Journal of Theology, vol.9. Yangon, Myanmar Institute of Theology, 2008.

Douglas, J.D. The Illustrated Bible Dictionary: Part Two. Intervarsity Press:
Sydney, 1980.

_______. NIV Compact Dictionary of the Bible. Grand Rapids, Michigan:
Zondorvan Publishing House, 1989.

Dun, Mary. "The Concept of God in Myanmar Context" in Called to be a
Community: Myanmar's in search of New Pedagogies of Encounter, ed. Samuel Nun Lin, Than Win and Peter Joseph.Yangon: ATEM,2002.

Durham, John I. Word Biblical Comentary, vol.3. Dallas, Texas: Word Books
Publisher, 1995.

Eichrodt, Walther. Theology of the Old Testament, vol.1. London: SCM Press LTD,
1961.

Engen, Charles Van. Mission on the Way: Issues in Mission Theology (Grand
Rapids, Michigan: Baker Books,1996),255.

Federici, Tommaso. " Pneumatological Foundation of Mission" in Following
Christ in Mission: A foundation Course in Missiology, ed. Sebatian Karotemprel. Bombay: Pauline Sisters Bombay Society, 1995.

Fleming, Don. Bridgeway Bible Dictionary. Brisbane: Bridgeway Publications,
2004.


Freedman, David Noel. Anchor Bible Dictionary, vol.5. New York, Bantam Double
Day Dell publishing Group, 1992.

Gilliland, Dean S., The Word among us: Contextualizing Theology for Mission
Today. London: Word Publishing1989.

Hagner, Donald A. Word Biblical Comentary, vol.33B. Dallas, Texas: Word Books
Publisher, 1995.


Hedlund, Roger E. God and the Nations: A Biblical Theology of Mission in the
Asian Context. Delhi: Indian Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, 2002.

Hup, Dr. Cung Lian. "A Brief Survey of Mission in Myanmar from a Missiological
Perspective," in Our Theological Journey: Writing in Honor of Dr. Anna May Say Pa, ed. Festschrift committee. Yangon:MIT, 2006.

J. Robert Nelson, "Christian Theology and the Living Faith of Men" in Christian
Mission in Theological perspective, ed. Gerald H. Anderson. New York: Abingdon Press, 1967.

Jonge, Marinus De. Christology in Context: The Earliest Christian Response to
Jesus. Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1988.

Kirk, J. Andrew. What is Mission?: Theological Explorations. London: Darton,
Longman and Todd; Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1999.

Knight, George. F. Deutero-Isaiah: A Theological Commentary on Isaiah 40-
55.Nashville, New York, Abingdon Press, 1965.

Knitter, Paul F. "Missionary Activity Revised and Reaffirmed" in Christian Mission
and Dialogue, ed. Paul Mojzes and Leonard Swidler. New York: The Edwin Mellen Press, 1990.

_______. Introducing Theologies of Religions. Maryknoll, New York: Orbis Books,
2002.

Lasor, William Sanford. Old Testament Survey: the Message form, and Background
of the Old Testament. Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1982.

Langmead, Ross, Mission Studies: Journal of the International Association for
Mission Studies,vol.25. Leiden: Koninklijke Brill, 2008.

Laymoon, Charles M. The Interpreter's: Commentary on the Bible (Nashville, New
York: Abingdon Press, 1971.

Ling, Samuel Ngun. Communicating Christ in Myanmar: Issues, Interactions and
Perspectives. Yangon: Association for Theological Education in Myanmar Ecumenical Sharing Centre, 2005.

Lwin, Dr. Tint. "Reflections on contextualization" in Myanmar Journal of
Theology, vol.3. Yangon: ATEM, 2004.

Martin, Ralph P. Dictionary of Letter New Testament and Its Developments.
Downers Grove, Illinois: Intervarsity Christian Fellowhip, 970.

Matzken, R.H. "Standing under the Missionary Mandate" in The People of God and
the ends of the Earth, ed. F. J Verstraelen . Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdman Publishing Company, 1995.

Miller, J. Lane. The New Harper's Bible Dictionary. New York: Harper and Row
Publihers, 1973.

Minear, Paul S. "The Covenant and the great Commission" in Mission under the
cross, edited by Norman Goodall. New York : The Friendship Press, 1953.

Moreau, A. Scott. Evangelical Dictionary of Theology. Grand Rapids, Michigan:
Baker Books, 1984.

Muelder, Walter G. "Christian Responsibility with Respect to Revolution" in
Christian Mission in Theological Perspective , edited by Gerald H. Anderson . New York: Abingdon Press, 1967.

Nan, K. Zau. "Evangelism Redefined: A Quest for New Paradigm of Evangelism
for the Church in Myanmar" in Missio Dei: Journal of Mission and Evangelism,vol.2. Yangon: MIT, 2008.

Nile, D.T. "The Work of the Holy Spirit in the World" in Christian Mission in
Theological perspective, ed. Gerald H. Anderson . New York: Abingdon Press, 1967.

Nyunt, Moe Moe. "Burmese Reaction to Christianity" in RAYS: Journal of
Theology, vol.9. Yangon: MIT, 2007.

Oden, Thomas C. The Living God: Systematic Theology, vol.1. New York: Harper
and Row Publishers, 1987.

Oo, Stephen Than Myint. "How should We Stand?: Some Newigin's Potential
Theological Contributions to Christian in Myanmar" in Myanmar Journal of Theoloy.vol.3,ed.Samuel Ngan Ling, aw Than Win& Peter Joseph. Yangon: ATEM, 2004.

Peter, George W. A Biblical Theology of Missions. Chicago: Moody Press, 1972.

Rad, Gerhard Von. Genesis. Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1956.

Richardson, Alan. A Dictionary of Christian Theology. London: SCM Press LTD,
1969.

Scherer, James A. Gospel, Church and Kingdom: Comparative studies in World
Mission Theology. Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1987.

Shenk, Wilbert R. "Mission Strategies" in Christian Mission in Theological
Perspective, edited by Gerald H. Anderson. New York: Abingdon Press, 1967.

Soggin, J. Alberto. Introduction to the Old Testament: From Its Origins to the
Closing of the Alexandrian Canon. Philadelphia: the Westminster Press, 1976.

Starkes, M. Thomas. The Foundation for Missions: An Inspirational Overview of
Christian Missions. Nashville, Tennessee, 1981.

Stott, John R. W. "The Biblical Basis of Evangelical" in Mission Trend No. 2:
Evangelization, ed. Gerald H. Anderson.New York: Paulist Press, 1975.

Strecker, George. Theology of the New Testament. Louisville: Westminster John
Knox Press, 2000.

Stuhlmueller, Donald Senior and Carroll. The Biblical Foundations for Mission.
Maryknoll, New York: Orbis Books, 1983.

Tenney, Merril C. The Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible, Vol. 2. Grand
Rapids, Michigan: The Zondervan Corporation, 1976.

Thangaraj, M. Thomas. The Common Task: A Theology of Christian Mission.
Nashville: Tennessee Abingdon Press, 1999.

Tilson, Everett. "God's Word and the Aim of Christian Mission" in Christian
Mission in Theological perspective, ed. Gerald H. Anderson. New York: Abingdon Press, 1967.

Tippet, Alan. Introduction to Missiology. Pasadena, California: William Carey
Library, 1987.

Tomko, Jozef Cardinal. "Christian Mission Today" in Christian Mission and
Religious Dialogue, ed. Paul Mojses and Leonard Swidler. New York: The Edwin Mellen Press, 1990.

Wenham, Gordon J. Word Biblical Commentary, vol.2. Texas: Word Books
Publishers, 1994.

Westermann, Claus. Handbook to the Old Testament. Minneapolis: Augsburg
Publishing House, 1976.

Wright, Christopher J.H. The Mission of God: Unlocking the Bible's Grand
Narrative. Nottingham: Inter-varsity Press, 2006.

on 13 December 2008.