How is it that, after all these years, we still have multiple lists of unreached peoples? I continue to maintain that we should be asking, “Can’t we all just get along?” My friend, Justin Long, recently wrote an article at his site, “The Devil is in the Details.”
I responded to him, “Thanks for the time you invested in setting this down on paper, Justin. Or — I guess I should say… on screen. :-) Your title, in my opinion, is more telling than all of us might realize, at least at first. ‘The Devil is in the definitions.’ We can smooth it over all we want, but to me, Satan has to pump his fist a la Kirk Gibson in the 1988 World Series. You *have* to see it at
http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=3364800
Believe it or not, I happened to watch that game *live*. I remember seeing him pump his fist at 2nd base and my eyes instantly misted with emotion — and I’m not even a big baseball fan! :-) Well all that to say this: to me, like it or not, Satan *had* to pump his fist Friday morning in Cape Town. Everything had been set exactly right. Paul could have walked up on the stage and said practically *anything* and we’d all given it a standing ovation. Anything, except what he said. Which was — here’s a *new* list, with *new* data (and it didn’t help any that inconsistencies *jumped* out at us all). I confess: I looked around to the other five members of my table group, none of which was U.S. of American, and lowered my head, and gently shook it, then just apologized. The really wild thing was — they all had to think about it for a second whether or not they’d accept my apology on behalf of Lausanne, Paul, and the USA. (They eventually *did*, but it took about 15 seconds to say so.)
To me, we *can* fix this.
But I can’t figure out how this happened. Lausanne III had gotten so many things *right*. How did this sneak past them? Did Doug Birdsall sign off on it? Was it because we’ve lost some of our senior leadership on the Strategy Working Group (by senior, I mean “experienced” not “aged”)? So a “new guard” came in without regard for what had gone on before? I happened to be in the room in 1995 when Luis Bush brought together about 25 researchers from all over the globe. I remember the reaction from our Indian brothers (sub-continent of India) when Luis said, “Nope, we need a list with 2000 or fewer unreached groups.” The guy from India humbly said, “But sir, I have here a list larger than 2000 groups just within India!” Luis said, “The USA public won’t stand for it. We can’t get our arms around that many groups. Besides, I’m convinced there will be big marketability for a list of around 2000 people groups as we approach the year 2000.” The room was stunned. But in the months that followed, everybody stayed at the table, and at the “Launch” meeting later that year, the Joshua Project List of Unreached Peoples rolled out to a fairly big fanfare (with 1739 groups listed, by the way). Patrick was there. The IMB was there. Wycliffe was there. Caleb Project was there. ACMC was there. Even Brigada was there. (OK… I’m only listing Brigada with those other guys because I’m hoping some search engine will think it’s for real. :-) ) What I can’t for the life of me figure out is — didn’t anyone tell Paul that somebody had fought all this fight before? *15 Years* before?
The way to fix this whole thing is to embrace the JoshuaProject list
and add a column of data to it — or even several columns — from Paul’s list. Let’s build on what we already have. There’s no need to have a new website serving up a new list. Let’s start with the known. And Build. (It doesn’t help matters that the Finishing the Task (FTT) list didn’t provide sources, didn’t give more than just a few columns of info, and cheated so many people out of the group they were following. [Shaking my head.]) Pure and simple — this was a dropped ball. To fix it, we need unity, not what happened at Cape Town.
I understand there’s a meeting happening next month in California. I’m praying for that get-together, hoping it can not just heal this, but pole-vault it forward.
Somebody’s going to be able to use this someday as a powerful lesson in the importance of gathering the *legacy of history* prior to trying to force a future following. [end]
So what’s your response? How do you resolve this entire discussion in your own mind? (That it’s irrelevant? … unimportant? :-) ) One Brigada reader already wrote, “I vote that concern over UPG lists should be very important to us, because UPG’s seem so important to God. After all, Jesus isn’t setting up his eternal kingdom on the New Earth until individuals have been re-born from every tribe, nation, language, and people still in existence. As to whether there should 32, 236, 1, or 0 deaf groups listed, I don’t know. Socio-economic factors, literacy, and other within-human-control factors don’t seem to be the types of groups mentioned in the Bible.”
Another Brigada participant responded, “This did not sneak by everyone. Many have been trying for a long time to bring attention to the need for corrections in the FTT [“Finishing the Task”] lists, as well as to the errors and confusion in definitions and presentations. As an American, I too have been making apologies for leaders of this initiative (though very well-meaning) who have not always honored the voices of Global South and other leaders of global and regional networks focused on Unreached Peoples. For me, this issue is bigger than one initiative. If we as Westerners believe God has shown us something, could we humbly go to our fellow co-laborers around the world and submit it as a consideration, trusting that God has already (in most locations) raised up mature, spiritual leaders who may have the bigger piece of the Lord’s discernment where it affects their regions and cultures? Better yet, might we ask how we can serve the vision God has given them?” Good questions. To Paul’s credit, he’s definitely wanting to involve an international audience. Of this, there is no doubt. During that session in Cape Town, however, several seemed to have missed his point.
What’s your own take?
[Edited 13 of November: As it turns out, someone must have shown the above piece to Paul, the presenter at Cape Town. He called me just 48 hours after this Brigada went “to press” and invited me to attend the meeting in California. I made it clear — his humility, along with his commitment to ‘fix’ this, seems quite remarkable. More later.
Doug]
This did not sneak by everyone. Many have been trying for a long time to bring attention to the need for corrections in the FTT lists, as well as to the errors and confusion in definitions and presentations.
As an American, I too have been making apologies for leaders of this initiative (though very well-meaning) who have not always honored the voices of Global South and other leaders of global and regional networks focused on Unreached Peoples.
For me, this issue is bigger than one initiative. If we as Westerners believe God has shown us something, could we humbly go to our fellow co-laborers around the world and submit it as a consideration, trusting that God has already (in most locations) raised up mature, spiritual leaders who may have the bigger piece of the Lord’s discernment where it affects their regions and cultures? Better yet, might we ask how we can serve the vision God has given them?
your mention of “the deaf groups” caught my eye. Mainly because for past 15 years I have been advocating to any and all who would listen that they are a much ignored mission field. While its true that the Bible doesn’t single out socio-economic factors such as literacy etc the fact is that the Deaf are a distinct group. Primarily because they use a different language and also because they quickly form a community once they identify each other. Its great to see that Joshua Project and other missions are recognizing them as a mission field and a mission force.
I believe that they should be recognized as a people group in need of the Gospel. However I have a problem with trying to count how many different “unreached groups” of deaf there are within a country. In the contacts I have had it seems that most Deaf from varying cultural or language groups can communicate with each other. Again it also depends on their level of sign language ability etc. But the idea of trying to put a number of unreached deaf groups boggles my mind !!
You make a great point, Shirley. I’m with you exactly. Ever since working at a camp for deaf kids when I was 15 years old, I’ve had a special place in my heart for them. I took sign language in college and have never forgotten my burden for them. But at the same time, I’ve always thought of my deaf friends as part of the community. Granted, they have special needs, but I didn’t think of them as some kind of tribe that needed a special mobilizatoin force. They need *us* (members of the local church that live near them). For this reason, and because of the fact that they don’t congregate in deaf “quarters” of cities, I maintain that it’s a mistake to list them as an unreached people group in a country like Germany or Australia. But if we list them, I’m not upset by it. I just think it creates a sense of partitioning. It makes us believe, falsely, that they will need a special missionary force apart from the community of believers in the local church nearby. You know?
p.s. I, too, will be at the FTT meeting.
OK Justin. Help me figure out how to share these comments please. :-)
2010/09/05Good input Marti. Heart of the matter stuff. Greg, thknas, too, for jumping in. Roland, your input helps me: Realizing that not every ministry feels called to reach the unreached now helps me level my reaction some. I think, in this item, I was mainly struggling to react to the discussion I mentioned in the original item. (See if you missed it.) Danny, believe me, just to confirm we’re on the same page here I wasn’t at all trying to trivialize or trash people group thinking. Rather, I was trying to put into words a kind of apologetic for ongoing pursuit of turning stats on unreached into stats on reached. So Danny, it sounds like we’re in agreement, although maybe I didn’t say it well enough up front. The point is I still maintain that unreached people group thinking has its proper place at the top of our priorities for getting the gospel out to the world.Thanks for the input. Others?(Watch for a summary of these items to be included in my blog over at the Lausanne site, once we’ve fine-tuned this topic.)
2010/09/05Good input Marti. Heart of the matter stuff. Greg, thanks, too, for jumping in. Roland, your input helps me: Realizing that not every ministry feels called to “reach the unreached now” helps me level my reaction some. I think, in this item, I was mainly struggling to “react” to the discussion I mentioned in the original item. (See if you missed it.) Danny, believe me, just to confirm we’re on the same page here — I wasn’t at all trying to trivialize or trash people group thinking. Rather, I was trying to put into words a kind of “apologetic” for ongoing pursuit of turning stats on “unreached” into stats on “reached.” So Danny, it sounds like we’re in agreement, although maybe I didn’t say it well enough up front. The point is — I still maintain that unreached people group thinking has its proper place at the top of our priorities for getting the gospel out to the world.Thanks for the input. Others?(Watch for a summary of these items to be included in my blog over at the Lausanne site, once we’ve fine-tuned this topic.)
We have been working on a way to fix the UPG list mania since 2007, Visit Etnopedia.org http://en.etnopedia.org/wiki/index.php/Main_Page
The project not only gives people a way to participate in the UPG list, but it is being translated into several major languages.
We also have placed the FTT list on Etnopedia to serve that movement. See it here.
http://en.etnopedia.org/wiki/index.php/Research:Finishing_the_Task
Ok it’s not an Access database that can give a global perspective, but it has 20 people from around the world contributing to the effort.
If you have a correction,, just click “Edit”
Blessings in Christ