Biblical Theology of Missions Review
Biblical Theology of Missions Review
Biblical Theology of Missions Review
__________________
A Book Review
Presented to
__________________
In Partial Fulfillment
__________________
by
Jeffrey A. Manning
and comprehensive a treatment of the subject as this one, said J.F. Shepherd of George
reasons. First, given the fact that the book was published in 1972, his statement means
that others before it in all of Christian history were not as comprehensive as his. Second,
it is significant even during Peters own time because of his stance as a conservative
evangelical during the battles concerning the centrality and authority of the Bible.
Speaking from his tenured experience as a teacher of theology and missions, this book is
his comprehensive attempt to show that the Bible is a record of theology in mission
Summary
The book itself is divided into three major sections encompassing eight chapters.
The first section, Biblical Foundation of Missions, discusses the missionary theology
and (1) Jesus Christ, (2) the Nature of God, (3) the Old Testament, and (4) the New
Testament. The first of these sections (Jesus Christ) is a key to understanding the rest of
about Jesus. In this sense, Peters is arguing more from a systematic standpoint rather than
a biblical-theological one. This is interesting given the title of the book. If he had done
the latter he would have reversed the order and began with the Old Testament. His
2
3
purpose is to make Jesus both the example and focal point of the missionary task. Peters
makes the case in the next section that there is theocentricity in missions rather than one
that is about man, the world, or the church. He says, the glory of God forms the
highest goal of missions because the being and character of God are the deepest of
missions(57)
Peters lays the remaining foundation for this section by developing the biblical
case for missions found in the Old and New Testaments. To this he begins by
highlighting the Protoevangelium found in Genesis 3:15, the Noachian covenant, and the
national religion of Israel. This is an attempt at surveying the Old Testament in hopes of
answering the question of whether Jesus found substantiation for a missionary thrust in
the Old Testament. Peters believes that He did since Jesus continually spoke of Himself
spent on explaining the national religion of Israel. It is with Israel that Peters believes that
God expresses His particularity for a people but for a universal promise (89).
Continuing on, Peters hold that the New Testament can simply speak for itself.
To establish the theology of missions in the New Testament one simply accepts the New
Testament for what it is, he writes (131). He focuses on the underlying theological
concepts found in the activities of the Twelve Disciples and also of Paul. Primarily,
Peters continues the concept of the universality of Gods promise. He feels strongly that
anything other than this ideal is a fabrication and not found in Scripture (148).
Part two begins with the missionary task and ends with the church and its mission.
Under subheadings, Peters says that the missionary task is spiritual, biblical, one of faith,
and one of human tasks. This is wrapped up in a two-fold mandate that is delineated by
4
God to man. The first is of Adam as a representative of the race and the second is of the
apostles as representatives of the church of Jesus Christ. Peters tends to use successive
lists and for Israels mandate he says that theirs is evangelization, discipleship training,
church planting, church care, and benevolent ministries. He makes a note that they are to
be concerned with the whole man but that the mandate is primarily spiritual. It may be
that his distinction is too separated. He goes on at length to discuss the Great Commission
but makes it clear, as he did in the beginning, that the Commission itself is not the
In the second portion of the second section, Peters deals with the church and its
mission. Being from a Mennonite background, he shows his view of the church to be that
of an Anabaptist. It is very much that of a New Testament church, not being so much
institutional but more as a living being. His assessment is one that points to the practical
tasks of the church from biblical exegesis as well as a historical analysis to show how
these tasks have been transmitted throughout the history of the church.
Part three, the instruments and dynamics of missions, is Peters discussion over
how the task of the missionary is carried out to the nations. To this point, he has
identified a lot of principles and definitions. He continues this trend in this chapter but it
is over the specific offices and ministries that God has given such as apostles,
missionaries, pastor-teachers, and evangelist. They are to all have the ministry of the
and the work of the Holy Spirit. Fleshing it out in more practical terms, Peters considers
the implications of the Gospel. This includes the difficulties of mans sin and opposing,
5
submission to him.
Critical Evaluation
Positively, it can be said that this text is one of the most comprehensive text solely
on the biblical theology of missions. Peters began as Christopher Wright did in his book
The Mission of God, making the case that the Bible is not just theology but a recording of
theology on mission. He clearly believes the Bible to be authoritative and Jesus to be the
centerpiece of mission theology. In many ways, Peters shows his cards as a conservative
evangelical who believes the mission of God to be more about the spiritual man than the
physical, although he holds up both. Through and through, he tries to uphold many of the
biblical themes in unity, providing many kinds of list from the biblical text as well as
practical applications that are easy to remember and readily available for the reader to
access.
Negatively, there were a few points or themes that Peters seemed to lean to
heavily upon. First, it seemed at times that the book was driven more by his
dispensational theology. He did not state it upfront but it was clear which theological
system he claimed. Although not a problem in itself, it just seemed to come through the
text more than expected such as his use of words like dispensation, epochs, and even his
discussion on a national Israel. Probably revealing it even more is the background from
which he comes from as a Mennonite as well as the more lengthy comments on the faults
of those involved in the Reformation concerning the atonement and missions. Secondly,
in a similar vein of thought, Peters actually revealed in some of his own critiques some
6
contentions with certain positions and then a lacking in areas that seemed to need more.
Peters expresses in the Preface that this book is not a polemic but an exposition (10). Yet,
one finds the writer contending with differing positions concerning doctrines. It does not
intended purpose of the text. More specifically, it may be more helpful to contend with
those positions that are further outside of a conservative evangelical position. Peters later
discussion on non-Christian religions comes at a very late point and seems somewhat
meager.
Conclusion
All in all, this is a great text. Even as a text written in the 1970s, A Biblical
Theology of Missions is one that still applies greatly to today, mainly because Christians
still face very similar problems concerning missions. Many have relied too heavily on a
Concerning the transmission of a high view of Scripture, one can be thankful for Peters
text due to the battles over inerrancy for many during this period. Even more so, the
effect that the doctrine of the Word of God would have had on the state of missions if
those like Peters had not stood strongly against the tides of liberalism. A great strength of
this text is that it puts the biblical text at the forefront where Jesus can shine and where
the pastor, missionary, or otherwise layman in the church can understand the mission of