WHAT DOES HERMENEUTICS HAVE TO DO WITH MISSIONS?
STATEMENT
Hermeneutical principles derived from a firm commitment to the sufficiency of Scripture should drive faithful missions. Poor hermeneutics lead to the poor exegesis of Scripture that has fueled common, unbiblical practices in modern missions. Most missionaries want to be guided by Scripture, yet bad hermeneutics can lead to careless evangelistic methods, unbiblical understandings of conversion, and unhealthy churches. Poor hermeneutics ultimately does damage to disciple-making among the nations. Missionaries should master sound hermeneutical principles and exegetical skills before and throughout their service to continuously evaluate their methods and goals against Scripture.
Article Written by Brian Parks“Look to the nations, watch and be utterly amazed for I am going to do something in your days that you would not believe even if I told you.” Habakkuk 1:5
That’s the verse headlining the first chapter of one of most influential missiology books published since the early 2004 [1]. It’s meant to preface the author’s account of how new methods in church planting and missions were suddenly producing dramatic results in many traditionally resistant places around the world. What a great verse to headline stories of God’s saving power being poured out to redeem thousands of the lost and see hundreds of new churches planted!
Except, Habakkuk 1:5 has nothing to do with a fresh wave of God’s mercy in missions. Rather, in its context, the verse is announcing the frightening plan of God to raise up Babylon to go and brutally punish wicked Judah.
Perhaps the author could be forgiven for snatching the verse out of context just to build anticipation for the exciting news he was about to reveal, if it weren’t for the fact that poor interpretation of Scripture is a hallmark of many of our day's most popular missions methodologies.
Christians are committed to obeying Jesus and his word. God commands his people to obey him, neither adding to or taking away from his word (Deut 4:2). This claim wouldn’t stir much controversy with God’s people down through the ages. Yet, the interpretation of what exactly God means to command through his word is where Christians begin to differ. If hermeneutics are the principles of interpreting Scripture, then it makes sense that our hermeneutics play a crucial role in understanding how we should obey our Lord’s command to make disciples of all nations. Sound hermeneutics are the foundation of faithful missions practice. Bad hermeneutics will lead us to be unfaithful to his call to take the gospel to the nations.
Wayne Grudem defines hermeneutics in his Systematic Theology:
In order to help people to avoid making mistakes in interpreting Scripture, many Bible teachers have developed “principles of interpretation,” or guidelines to encourage growth in the skill of proper interpretation. The word hermeneutics (from the Greek word hermēnēuo, “to interpret”) is the more technical term for this field of study: hermeneutics is the study of correct methods of interpretation (especially interpretation of Scripture) [2].
Wherever there is unbiblical missions work happening, bad hermeneutics is almost always at the root of the problem.
Common Examples
Let’s consider some of the most common bad mission practices rooted in bad interpretation of Scripture. I’ll explain the practice and then offer a brief review of the hermeneutical problems:
1. Insider Movement Methods
Some Muslim converts are taught that they should continue to visit the mosque and publicly identify themselves as Muslims based on 2 Kings 5:18–19, 1 Corinthians 7:24, or 1 Corinthians 9:19-23 rather than identify themselves as Christians and claim Christ as Lord. These passages are a cornerstone for some proponents of what’s called the “Insider Movement.” Advocates of IM encourage or approve of new converts remaining within their birth religion and community, often referring to themselves as “Muslim follower of Isa (Jesus)” or “Hindu follower of Jesus.”
How They Interpret:
In the 2 Kings passage, Naaman has been healed by Elisha and converted to worshiping Yahweh. As he returns to Syria he asks if he can be pardoned for bowing in the temple of Rimmon when accompanying his king, who leans on him. Elisha says, “Go in peace.” Naaman’s permission to bow before the Syrian god Rimmon is used to justify new converts continuing to participate in the religious practices of their birth religion like going to the mosque or Hindu temple. 1 Corinthians 7:24 says, “So, brothers, in whatever condition each was called, there let him remain with God.” IM advocates use this verse in similar ways. In 1 Corinthians 9:19-23, Paul teaches, “… I have become all things to all people, that by all means I might save some.” This passage is cited as justification for extreme contextualization, including participating in non-Christian religious practices.
The Hermeneutical Problem:
Naaman’s situation is unique. He is a foreign military commander, his act is likely a duty of office, and he explicitly states his intention not to offer sacrifice to other gods from that point forward. Elisha’s “Go in peace” is more likely an affirmation of God’s grace to a new convert in a complex situation, rather than a blanket endorsement of participation in idolatrous worship.
In Corinthians, Paul’s instruction pertains to social and vocational status, not religious allegiance. Paul is addressing converts who might feel compelled to change their social circumstances (like a slave seeking freedom) upon conversion. He explicitly differentiates this from religious practices by urging believers to separate from idolatry and false worship throughout his epistles (e.g., 1 Corinthians 10:14-22, 2 Corinthians 6:14-18). To the use of both we can say, the rest of Scripture unequivocally condemns idolatry and participation in pagan worship (e.g., Exodus 20:3-5, Deuteronomy 7:25-26, 1 Corinthians 10:14-22). The New Testament consistently calls believers out of idolatrous practices and affiliations. With reference to 1 Corinthians 9:18-23, Paul adapted his presentation and approach, not his fundamental beliefs or religious practices.
2. Rapid Church Planting Methods
Rapid church planting strategies such as Church Planting Movements (CPM) Discipleship Making Movements (DMM), and Discovery Bible Studies (DBS) are justified based on an urgent call to save the lost and the drive to manufacture the rates of growth seen on the Day of Pentecost and throughout Acts. These methods, among other things, often run the risk of placing new converts in leadership, which contradicts Scripture and doesn’t allow enough time for new Christians to mature and demonstrate the fruits of repentance.
How They Interpret:
Some of the misinterpreted verses among the rapid church planting advocates are Luke 10:5-7, Matthew 10:12-15, and Matthew 24:14. The Luke 10 and Matthew 10 passages are used to push the importance of finding a “person of peace” as the gateway for the gospel to an entire network or community. Other verses CPM advocates often point to are passages describing the rapid growth in the early church in Acts (Acts 2:41, 4:4). They see these as the normative model for church growth, implying that if modern missions aren’t seeing similar rapid, exponential growth, they are doing something wrong.
Matthew 24:14 says, “And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come.” Whole coalitions of mission groups are built on this reference. They believe that the verse teaches that worldwide proclamation of the gospel to every people group is a prerequisite for the return of Christ. This justifies their focus on rapid methodologies.
The Hermeneutical Problem:
Looking for a receptive person to share the gospel with isn’t wrong and can be helpful and yet we should remember that Jesus’ instructions were specific to the twelve apostles and later the seventy-two in a particular historical context. CPM movements create entire strategies around what were situational instructions during Jesus’ ministry. An exclusive focus on the need to quickly find a “person of peace” can lead to a pragmatic, rather than Spirit-led, approach to evangelism, and an overemphasis on immediate receptivity rather than faithful proclamation regardless of response. It can also lead to a superficial understanding of conversion if the person of “peace” is merely cultural acceptance rather than spiritual conviction.
Interpretive errors are made with Matthew 24:14 when “world” and “nations” are understood to mean a global scope. “World” in Matthew often referred to the Roman Empire or the known world of Jesus’ time, not every individual or people group living globally. Instead of viewing Matthew 24:14 as a precise “trigger,” most evangelical scholars believe it is an ongoing encouragement for the church to continue spreading the gospel faithfully, rather than a formula to accelerate Christ’s return. This frames missions as obedience rather than as a countdown to the end.
Rapid church planting and movement methodology often lead to superficial discipleship, weak ecclesiology, advancing immature believers in leadership, and a compromised gospel.
3. CPM and DMM
Some missionary methods are prescribed solely based on historically descriptive passages in Acts. For example, some argue that missionaries must give their energies to fields that are presently showing fruit because Paul went to Macedonia instead of Asia (Acts 16:10).
How They Interpret:
In Acts 16:10, Paul is summoned to Macedonia in a vision. He immediately departed from Troas and journeyed to Macedonia. This is often used to justify going to unreached areas and expecting divine guidance for “breakthroughs” or to justify rapid deployment and immediate response to perceived opportunities, sometimes without adequate preparation or theological grounding.
The Hermeneutical Problem:
While valid for the missionary call, DMM and CPM advocates can sometimes apply Acts 16:10 as a prescriptive method for all evangelism, suggesting that if a community is “resistant,” one must seek a new “Macedonian call” rather than persevere in difficult soil. It can encourage a pursuit of “open doors” over persistent engagement. Paul’s vision was a specific divine revelation, not a general principle for missionary decision-making.
4. Prosperity Gospel
How They Interpret:
There is a proliferation of the prosperity gospel in missions is often based on bad interpretations of Old Testament promises applied to new covenant believers. While not primarily an evangelical missionary methodology, the prosperity gospel has influenced modern missions throughout the world.
The Hermeneutical Problem:
Context is ignored when interpreting New Testament passages about money and provision from God or God’s promises to “ask and you will receive.”
Bad Hermeneutics
Bad hermeneutics is not a new phenomenon. In fact, it’s as old as Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden. When the Serpent said, “Did God actually say, ‘You shall not eat of any tree in the garden’?” (Gen 3:1) his intention was to lead Eve into a false interpretation of God’s Word. Bad hermeneutics played a role in the first act of disobedience in human history. And so it continues to affect missions today.
Bad hermeneutics is not just a modern problem either. The hyper-Calvinism of late 1700s England was rooted in bad hermeneutics and prevented many from even considering being a missionary or giving to missions work knowing that God would take care of things. Thankfully, few evangelicals today would question that the Scripture teaches every Christian’s responsibility to care about and support missions in some way.
But before we cast stones at bad missions practices, we need to acknowledge that missionaries doing damaging work almost always have good intentions. They have a genuine desire to see people converted to Christ and churches planted. Many simply follow what they’re taught. But their interpretation of Scripture has led them to adopt goals and methods that undermine faithful missions work. Consider Paul’s warning to the Corinthian church that everyone will have their ministry practices assessed by Christ on the day of judgment (1 Cor 3:14–15). It’s right to carefully assess the hermeneutics undergirding any missions practices we support.
To that end, here are four ways bad hermeneutics undermines faithful missions work.
1. Bad hermeneutics compromises the sufficiency of Scripture
Scripture is a sufficient authority for all things related to faith and godliness—and that includes missions work. But God’s Word will only be sufficient if it is interpreted properly. Bad hermeneutics renders Scripture functionally insufficient.
2. Bad hermeneutics often gets the gospel wrong.
The gospel is the message of God that leads to salvation. So getting the message wrong will hinder people from being born again and coming to Christ. Any interpretive approach that argues that the gospel primarily means to rescue people from material poverty is deluded. Furthermore, in reality, such assertions tend to enrich clergy and leave the congregation unchanged, both materially and spiritually. What’s more, any evangelistic practice that simply requires people to say the words “Jesus is Lord” (Romans 10:9) and then encourages missionaries to move on to the next village will lead to many false conversions.
3. Bad hermeneutics leads missionaries to teach new converts to disobey God.
When 1 Corinthians 9:22 (“... become all things to all people”) or other biblical narratives are misinterpreted and Hindu converts are encouraged to call themselves “Hindu Yeshu Bhaktas” rather than “Christians”, the missionaries are leading new converts astray. Rapid church planting movements that declare evangelistic Bible discussions a church mislead their people about what the Bible teaches is a true church.
4. Bad hermeneutics leads to a legacy of unqualified indigenous leaders who teach false doctrine.
Missionaries leave a legacy of teaching and discipleship that will affect the churches among a particular people for decades, if not centuries. Paul urged Timothy and Titus to put leaders in place who knew how to rebuke false teaching in the church (1 Ti 1:3, 2 Ti 2:2, Ti 1:10-11). When bad hermeneutics are passed from generation to generation, it will warp a church, which is supposed to be “a pillar and buttress of the truth” (1 Ti 3:15).
What Can Be Done
So, what can be done to ensure that missionaries go to the field with good hermeneutical skills?
1. Missionaries need sufficient biblical and theological training before they are sent.
In a church’s eager rush to christen someone as a missionary, it’s easy to skimp on assessment. But churches should be vigorous in their assessment of potential missionaries. They need to make sure a person has the biblical grounding and interpretive skills to do missions work well. A willingness to go and a bit of fundraising skills are simply not enough. A solid evangelical seminary is good place to learn. But attending a healthy church where there’s faithful expositional preaching will usually offer a great (often better) foundation, especially if you are given opportunities to preach or teach. That’s how many future missionaries learn the fundamentals of how to interpret God’s Word well. Simeon Trust runs excellent seminars for learning how to study the Bible.
2. Missions agencies’ theological and methodological commitments should be carefully vetted.
If a missionary or church is considering a mission agency, they should carefully vet the agency’s statement of faith, philosophy of ministry, and on-the-field strategies. They should ask agency leaders about the most controversial issues in missions: the Insider Movement, disciple-making making movements (DMM), orality, and so on. They should make sure their missionaries know what a healthy church is.
These things require some careful research; most of them are covered in one place or another in this book. Learn about what’s being debated in missions circles today. These issues might seem confusing and not all that important now, but it’s better to understand these things on the front-end rather than find out you disagree with the agency you’ve chosen only after the missionary arrives on the field.
3. Once on the field, make sure missionaries join a true church with faithful preaching.
Not all true churches are healthy, but rather than avoid them, help them become healthy! Even missionary teams in remote areas can covenant together as a church and gather regularly for preaching and worship. Regularly sitting under good preaching will help missionaries stay sharp and continue to grow in their hermeneutical skills.
Conclusion
Scripture is God’s inerrant and authoritative Word. Any faithful missionary must believe this. But merely believing these truths doesn’t necessarily mean a missionary will know when a text is being misinterpreted or misapplied. Good hermeneutics grounds and guides all good missions practice. If we want to obey Jesus, we must get our hermeneutics right. After all, every missionary and the sending congregations behind them want to hear those words of commendation from our Lord one day, “Well done, good and faithful servant” (Matt 25:21).
Recommended Resources
GCC article “Know What Your Missionary Is Doing”
Southgate Fellowship Statement (see particular affirmations/denials pertaining to Scripture vis-a-vis Missions)
TGC Talk by Kevin DeYoung - Why Accurate Bible Interpretation Matters
TGC Article by David Garner - High Stakes: Insider Movement Hermeneutics and the Gospel
footnotes
[1] David Garrison, Church Planting Movements: How God Is Redeeming a Lost World (WIGTake Resources LLC, 2004).
[2] Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1994), 109.
