Well, at least, not the way we mean it when we say it. What we usually mean is, “The people there are virtually unreachable,” or “Our resources are better spent elsewhere because there are areas in which people seem more ‘ready’ than in _________.” It’s a way of trying to get the most bang for our buck or missionary. It’s also sometimes our way of avoiding tough ministry.

I get it. I just don’t agree that we can judge, scientifically, where the Gospel is likely to take root and multiply. I don’t mind using it as one among several factors. I just don’t believe we can we forsake entire people groups on such data. It betrays a lack of belief in what the we read in the Scriptures about Nineveh repenting en masse, Jesus teaching on soil types and mustard seeds, the Great Commission and the spread of Christianity recounted in the book of Acts.

stream of consciousness

Here are some things on my mind this Friday:

-I’d rather have a long meal at a good restaurant with Emily (my wife) than nearly anything else.
-To me, the best blogs are well written, have great content, and a clear sense of why people read it. I’ve been blogging for several years now, and I know how easy it is to get pulled off track.
-Having said that, it’s also a blogger’s prerogative to mix it up a bit–if for no other reason than to stir their own creativity. Long term, it’s probably a win for the readers.
-Do you think people can develop truly close relationships with people exclusively online–meaning, they’ve never met? I think so…with some hesitation.
-The new Junot Diaz book is out. I love his writing, despite the fact it’s content can get rather harsh at times. He knows how to tell difficult stories.
-If our opinion of the media continues to decline, where will we get news? To me, epistemology (how we know what we know) is going to be a fascinating field in the years to come.