There has been a lot of discussion recently of the death of John Allen Chau, a young missionary who violated Indian laws to go the remote North Sentinel Island to proclaim Christ to the isolated people who lived there and was immediately killed. He was aware of the danger of his actions and said that while he did not want to die he felt the call of God to take the gospel to these people who did not know Jesus.
I am not a missiologist and will leave the in-depth insights to others, but I have a few thoughts I’d like to share.
1. The ultimate commitment of all Christians is to carry the gospel to all peoples in the world. It is the duty of the church of Jesus Christ to evangelize those villagers.
2. Christians should abide by the laws of the land and live in peace, but if a law says that it is illegal to share Christ with anyone, the Great Commission supersedes that law.
3. Having said that, there are serious questions about the wisdom and strategic efficacy of Chau’s approach. He evidently landed on the island and shouted messages to these people in English – a language they likely do not understand. I respect his desire to preach the gospel to people who haven’t heard it but if what I read is correct there might have been a better way.
4. As Christians, we have a dual duty. We grieve with a family who lost their son and honor a brother in Christ who lost his life. We also should seek to learn lessons from this. We should not heap judgment or condemnation on Chau but we can learn from his failed effort.
5. It is understandable that the secular press views this action with derision, scorn, and contempt. They view taking the gospel to these primitive folks as a form of cultural violation. What has surprised me is the scorn and contempt I have seen some Christians direct at John Chau. Whether he did ministry in the best possible way, he is a brother who was killed for the gospel. The condemnatory and demeaning attitudes displayed by some Christians on social media was disconcerting.
6. There has been a lot of “fake news” out there about this – just plain nastiness. The facts seem fairly clear. Chau got a fisherman to take him close to the island, kayaked to the island to try to take the gospel to these people, and was killed.
7. The idea that God would never call us to risk our lives in carrying the gospel to the ends of the earth is a uniquely American/Western idea. Risking life and limb to proclaim Christ has been the NORM in history and in the world today. Our comfort and ease is the exception.
8. Chau’s tragic death highlights the value of cooperative missions. Our missionaries go to dangerous areas but while the board cannot remove all peril they can help them deal with what they face. An oversight board would certainly have not approved a mission such as this. Boards can be institutional, frustrating, limiting, and all that, but they can also provide wisdom and protection.
9. We can never know what God put on John Allen Chau’s heart and now that is between him and the Savior in whose arms he rests. What he did was foolhardy but look how often God called his people to foolhardy acts in Scripture. Most often, he protects his people but sometimes even the obedient met messy ends. There are not guarantees that serving God is safe.
I worked through some of this earlier this year when a mini-war roiled up in the area that I go to in Senegal. There was a massacre, an attempted bridge bombing, jungle fighting, and a murder in close proximity to the villages I am seeking to evangelize. I had to decide whether I would go to minister to the Ehing people if there was real danger. My medical problems rendered the decision moot – by the time I was healthy enough to make a brief trip in September things had settled down.
I had decided, though, that God has called me to minister to the Ehing people. When I read Paul’s resume in 2 Corinthians 11, I see that he was in constant danger and it was only by the grace of God that he lived as long as he did before his martyrdom. The idea that I would only go to Senegal if it was “safe” is contrary to my call. When a friend of mine, Bill Hyde, was killed by terrorists in the Philippines, I was privileged to share in his funeral with Jerry Rankin, president of the IMB. I asked Dr. Rankin and he said that almost every one of our missionaries served in dangerous situations. The areas that need Christ today are hard places!
We cannot carry the gospel to the ends of the earth and demand ease, comfort, and safety while we do it.
It is right and good that we examine the tactics and strategies of John Allen Chau as the days go forward and ask ourselves what could be done better, what he did wrong, and how we can obey the Great Commission most effectively. I think in the final analysis we will likely find his heart pure and his motives noble, but his methods flawed.
But right now we should mourn a brother and remember that the gospel is a call to sacrifice. It is a dangerous calling. Martyrdom is part of it.
Our bodies are living sacrifices for Christ. Sometimes living sacrifices have to pay the ultimate price.
This is foreign to our experience as Americans, but we are the oddity in church history and experience.
Dave – I have received vile death threats in my efforts to reach the Jewish people with the Gospel. I have also seen a former anti-missionary come to faith. The question that must be asked is do we believe in the Great Commission or not.
Did the young man make mistakes in planning and preparation? YES
Was his heart and motivation pure? YEA
I wondered who would tackle this one. Dave Miller thinks like I do on this and I would agree with him in general here, although I would tend to be a bit less charitable based on present information.
The lone ranger, highly obsessed, self-called missionary seems particularly American to me. Does this man deserve to be in the canon with Adoniram Judson, Lottie Moon, and others? I think not. There are innumerable ways today to deliberately present oneself in a hostile environment such that death is certain. Should it be rewarded? I think not.
Clearly, we should be sympathetic towards a family that has lost a member.
Odd that this is juxtaposed here with Mark Terry’s good words about emeritii mssys whose legacy may be overlooked but never questioned.
William, John was with the same missions agency as my daughter, All Nations Family. He had been preparing to work in this area in many ways. His missions family was praying for him. He was there alone, but not alone. They are devastated by his death. Christianity Today has a good article on this.
Cathy – Thanks for this information. Missions is a work that very few truly understand. The IMB is not infallible as is no group. My concern is that he was alone in this first launch venture.
Hadn’t seen that story or the org’s blog on the death. Apparently his experience was a series of short term trips with some stateside training. No doubt more details will emerge.
Tragic, any way you look at it.
“The lone ranger, highly obsessed, self-called missionary seems particularly American to me.”
What a condescending and arrogant statement.
So, you know who is self-called. WOW. A shame he didn’t ask you first about God’s call for his life.
Actually seems right unAmerican to me. And I guess he was highly obsessed like Paul, Stephen, Jim Elliot, and many others.
Maybe decaf?
Not so quick with that bit of sarcasm. This fuzzy and subjective business of “calling” has reached its zenith in modern American Protestantism. In a sense, we are all self-called. Splintered churches and mobile Christians who circulate among congregations like millennialis circulate among different employers make it almost impossible for a genuinely divine calling to be recognized by the assembly independent of a self-declared calling which is then perfunctorily affirmed by a church as part of an application process.
Independent operators, independent for-profit sending or imprimatur organizations abound. It used to be mail order credentials, now it’s online. I’d await more information before the verdict is in but I see this all the time in people presenting themselves for seminary training without any or much local church connection, Lone Ranger church planters, and the like.
I’m not prepared to list this tragic case with your grouping above.
I admit to feeling that it is somewhat tawdry to have these discussions. The brother is dead. His family and friends grieve. One only hopes that others in their zeal take steps to avoid a similar ending.
That is possibly true in this case. But it could be said of you or me or Dave or anyone else. The truth is, we don’t know. Jesus was full of grace and truth but we’re not so good at both most of the time. Most lean one way or the other. I tend to lean toward truth and have to be reminded of grace occasionally. In this case , since we don’t know the truth, and we have no tangible reason whatsoever to doubt God’s call on his life, let’s l
remember this young man of God with grace. Why throw a dead soldier under the bus?
William – His planning and preparation were poor. However, the only difference between this young man and the Auca 5 was that he was alone. May his naive lone wolf mentality result in the same harvest for the Kingdom.
There were many differences.
Dave, thanks for your post about David Allen Chau. While, we admire his zeal, we also bemoan his lack of preparation and planning. As far as I can discover, he did not study missions. Beyond that, he was not affiliated with a missions agency. So, what does that mean? It means he had no training and no supervision. Approaching an isolated and hostile tribe would present a challenge for a well-trained, veteran missionary who had appropriate supervision. Years ago I took a course on First Aid. Our instructor stated that much harm is done by well meaning people who have not been trained to help the injured. This young man meant well, but he chose the wrong approach. In situations like this it is best to work with and through a person or persons who belong to an affinity group. That would be a member of a nearby tribe with whom the indigenous people are friendly. This person would speak their language or a similar language. That allays the fears of the tribesmen. It you study the situation in which the Auca Five died, they encountered the same problem. They could not communicate with the Auca warriors, who saw the missionaries as a threat to their village. Of course, the result was tragic in both cases. William mentioned Charles Brock and Jim Slack, whom I wrote of in a recent post. They were both well-trained and served with the Foreign Mission Board (now IMB), meaning they worked under appropriate supervision. Of course, we grieve along with his family and friends, but this is a case study in what not to do.
That is the balance we need to maintain. We grieve for a brother martyred and we learn from errors he made.
I would hope that in the decades since the Auca 5 tragedy we have learned something about how to deal with indigenous peoples. We venerate Jim Elliott and the others – and we should. Their courage should inspire us but I am not sure their STRATEGIES should be models today.
Maybe we have learned something about engagement since then? Again, I am not an expert in missiology, but I’m just spit-balling here.
I don’t know enough about the situation to defend or detract, but it does seem in the case of the Sentinelese (but only based on my limited reading) that there is no affinity group, no one with whom these indigenous people are friendly, and no one who knows how to speak their language. I definitely stand open to correction from anyone who has more accurate information.
His name was John.
Such as…?
You’re smart enough to find this on your own, if interested. Famous book traces Elliot’s journey.
https://www.amazon.com/s/?ie=UTF8&keywords=through+gates+splendor&tag=googhydr-20&index=aps&hvadid=241911318898&hvpos=1t1&hvnetw=g&hvrand=5594865678284227942&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvqmt=b&hvdev=c&hvdvcmdl=&hvlocint=&hvlocphy=1016030&hvtargid=kwd-367591385&ref=pd_sl_702codekhe_b
Link to “Through Gates of Splendor” by Elizabeth Elliott.
Dave – I have the book. Read most of her books. This is a question that William needs to answer on his own.
I have met Elisabeth Elliot. I have been to Ecuador and to the jungle area where they began their work. You stated there are differences. You need to explain.
I was at a ball game all yesterday hence the slow response. While I don’t believe I need to do anything more here and have probably done too much already in light of the tragedy, I’d note that a categorical statement that the “only” difference is that he was alone is undermined by education, training, maturity, strategy, preparation, etc. I didn’t put JE in this discussion but think maturity level and other differences are quite plain. I suppose one could classify the whole thing under some broad category and declare victory. I don’t question the overall goal of taking the Gospel to an unreached group.
As Beth Moore might put it, I read TGofS, and older mssy classics and biographies when you were in pull-ups. 😉
I’ll say again, having a clinical discussion about this from the comfort of Texas, or Georgia, or Oklahoma seems tawdry to me. I feel badly for even participating in it.
My last contribution on this, absent new information. I do wish Mark Terry, Joseph Patrick, or some other seasoned overseas mssy would address the issues raised here in a separate article.
As Beth Moore might put it, I read TGofS, and older mssy classics and biographies when you were in pull-ups. ?
Do you realize how utterly condescending that sentence this is? I have been a missionary for almost 20 years and in ministry for almost 45 as a PK. My life has been threatened multiple times and yet still I go because I am called.
If Beth Moore can talk about guys in pull-ups, so can I. I thought she had a great line. Miller doesn’t like the 😉 stuff but it communicates attitude. Take it as such. A guy is dead, his body floating somewhere in the Andaman Sea. I’m not agonizing over your being offended and wish you well.
I am not so sure that when Jesus said “go into all the world” he meant to only do so if you are part of an approved missionary organization. Organizations are a means to an end, not the fabric that makes up the end.
Try to keep up…no one said that missions organizations are a gospel imperative or something.
We spoke of the ADVANTAGES of them not the immortality of independent missions.
One advantage of working with a missions organization is that the organization provides training and supervision. A supervisor provides advice and mentoring. Think how Paul mentored Timothy and Titus. A supervisor restrains the impulses of inexperienced missionaries. When I was a young missionary, my supervisor gave me lots of helpful advice.
Mark Terry, I agree. But some act like unless you are ordained or approved you are not called and should not be out there, whether in the nations or here at home. But Jesus didn’t mention missionary organizations. We created them to help… but sometimes bureaucracy and the mentality that goes along with that can get in the way. Not making a big deal out of this, just responding to the few people above who are making a big deal out of this guy being an unauthorized lone wolf.
Dave, William Thornton said, for example, “The lone ranger, highly obsessed, self-called missionary seems particularly American to me. ” That sounds like he thinks that only people in missionary organizations are proper. There are a few other posts with attitudes like that. So, I responded.
We tend to read extreme meanings into what is said. It is a very common foible among social media conversations.
Thanks Dave, I’m just trying to “keep up.”
Dave, William said what he said. We read the meaning he stated. His statement was extreme, and out of place at this time, not our response.
Seems that discussion of Chau going it alone without a sending agency is unfounded. According to All Nations Family — which says it is “an international Christian missions training and sending organization” — says John Allen Chau, “who had studied, planned and trained rigorously since college to share the gospel with the North Sentinelese people,” is “one of its missionaries.”
http://allnationsfamily.org/all-nations-grieves-reported-death-of-humble-cou-rageous-missionary-on-remote-indian-ocean-island/
I stand corrected on that point. I tried to find that information on the internet earlier today, but I did not turn up anything. I do stand by my comments that his approach was flawed, fatally flawed, and a competent supervisor would have forbidden that approach.
I make no defense of his approach, neither comment on whether a competent supervisor would have approved or forbidden it — only that according to the All Family statement he is one of their missionaries. I know nothing of them other than what I just found on their website.
It is one of the realities of missionary work today. When my folks were missionaries back in the early 70s, there was a handful of sending organizations. FMB (now IMB), TEAM, CIM, AIM, and a few others. Now, there are 12 million – with varying degrees of competence.
I have trouble believing his sending agency blessed this mission.
Their press release (that I’ve seen) suggests they did. On the other hand, I am sure there are things they could say that they are not going to say (at least not now).
Well said. Yes we should develop ways to share the Gospel in unique and dangerous scenarios, even then we cannot limit where we go only to places we feel safe. We have to put that in God’s hands. Sometimes He calls us home.
I can’t think of many situations where Jesus or the disciples deliberately forced themselves where they were not wanted. They certainly braved opposition, even deadly opposition, to reach people willing to listen, but it seems to me if people collectively said “go away”, they went away.
Most of Acts was the preaching of the Gospel where they were unwelcome, wasn’t it? The Sanhedrin forbade the proclamation of Christ and they went on. The question here is approach.
This is another area of tension in Scripture. In Acts the early church risked their lives to share the Gospel and yet at other times they fled to save their lives.
You don’t hear a lot of preaching on the occasions of flight.
If you preach on a flight, TSA will likely arrest you.
Bill Mac, do you think the “shake the dust off your feet” passages would apply in cases like this?
Robert: that’s what I was thinking. Sure, there was always opposition from some, but typically those preaching always had some willing to listen. By everything I read, these dozen or so people did not want anyone on their island. It also seems from the account that they made it clear to this young man and if he had heeded, he might still be alive. Do any of us force our way into people’s houses to preach to them?
We are assuming that they are rejecting the gospel, when in fact, they may just be terrified by outsiders. Shaking the dust off is for those who have heard the Gospel, and refuse to repent. The Sentinelese people are not at that point yet.
Is this boy a martyr? This is a real, non-sarcastic question. I guess it depends on how you define it. He was not killed, in my opinion, for being a Christian.
He died attempting to evangelize the lost. Yes, he is a martyr. Was he bright in his methods? That is certainly up for debate, but the definition of martyr is to die bearing witness. He did.
Please take my push back just in the interest of respectful back and forth. But if a street preacher was hit by a car and killed, or an evangelist died of a heart attack in the midst of a crusade, we would certainly mourn it as a tragedy, but would we call them a martyr? My understanding of a martyr are those killed specifically because they are Christians.
Then the proverbial dust shaking should definitely not apply here… yet.
Joel: Fair enough, but my main point remains. Do we violate No Trespassing signs in our witnessing efforts? Do we force our way into homes? We can all do more, no doubt, and that may be the good that comes out of this tragedy if it reminds us of that.
Dave, speaking to your point 3 above…If he was shouting in English that is like casting your pearls before swine. We are called to go and tell…implicit in this command is to communicate…how, if neither party understands, is the Gospel communicated? In our 32 years on the field we saw a large number fail because they could not (or would not) communicate in the target’s heart language.
Slightly off topic, but I had a conversation with a KJVonlyist who said we needed to teach people English first so they could read the King James bible.
It has been two or three years since I have commented on this blog, but I simply must. I don’t know about you guys but I searched my soul very hard over this story. Not what he did but what I am very unwilling to do. Except for some unruly deacons and WMU presidents on occasion and a few sleepless nights I have never suffered for the Gospel of my Jesus. In fact at 75 I look back and realize, maybe, because of the Churches God has allowed me to pastor or the opportunity to be employed by NAMB, or the joy of serving as EVP and teaching in a Christian College, ministry has been very good to me and my family financially and every other way. Because of this I feel very unworthy to provide commentary on this issue. “Fool hardy”… by whose standard…mine… yours…IMB. There seems to be a bottom line here…his God called him to go and he was obedient. God chose to take him to heaven…nuff said. To the best of my knowledge this issue has nothing to do with Southern Baptist. Also to the best of my understanding this blog’s mission statement talks about events in the SBC. This make me wonder why it appeared as a post on “Voices”. IMO it never should have been posted. I fail to see to what end.
I must admit a bias. In the past year I have been in the hospital 8 times, 2 more heart attacks and 7 stents. That is added to 3 prior heart attacks and two open heart surgeries. This has caused me a great deal soul searching. Have i done enough, Is my savior pleased with me? How will I fare when I stand before Jesus at the judgement seat. I’m smart enough to know the is not very far away.
Missions is very much an item of interest to Southern Baptists and there is nothing that restricts us to discussing ONLY SBC topics. We discuss topics of interest to Southern Baptists, but are not limited to talking ONLY about Southern Baptists.
Dave, thank you for that correction. That was a secondary concern. My main concern is why would we call it fool hearty if he was actually following the leading of The father. Im glad that IMB has a good strategy to keep our missionaries as safe as possible. If he was truly following the expressed will of God then my strategy is not relevant. It seems from what I have heard he truly believed this was God’s calling on his life and he was obedient to that call. For me that ends the matter
Darwin – Your sincere heart touched me. May I share with you two things my dad shared? One involves me and one is anecdotal and common knowledge.
Daddy used to say in sermons – I can’t go everywhere but where I can go I must go. And where i can’t go, I must help others go. About me, he said that he used to beg God to not send him to NYC and so He sent his daughter (January 2000-November 2002, including 9/11). Help send others and don’t forget to pray for us.
D.L. it’s great to hear from you. I had wondered where you went and what was going on in your life. Regret that you have had so many health issues. God bless you.
I have been reading your post…always enjoy them
Mr. Payton, John’s death has challenged me, too, to look and see that I am holding back in many areas. Am I truly convinced that people are dead in their sins, headed for eternal hell? I am sorry to hear of your own physical suffering and am praying right now for the Lord to encourage your heart.
I would reiterate a point that I made in the blogpost.
“It is right and good that we examine the tactics and strategies of John Allen Chau as the days go forward and ask ourselves what could be done better, what he did wrong, and how we can obey the Great Commission most effectively. I think in the final analysis we will likely find his heart pure and his motives noble, but his methods flawed.
But right now we should mourn a brother and remember that the gospel is a call to sacrifice. It is a dangerous calling. Martyrdom is part of it.”
William raised this point in a comment. Maybe we should let the dust settle here before we engage in too much judgment.
I totally agree and hope Williams retracts His ill-timed and inappropriate statement.
You are persistent if not gracious.
Dave your original post was very gracious and I appreciate your effort to be fair in this and all posts you write. William was extremely ungracious in his comments. Not sure why you are defending him. To call someone self-called, super obsessed, and whatever else, without any basis is the height of ungraciousness.
I could say the same thing about William and have just as much basis to do so since I don’t know him.
He gets a pass for an obvious lack of grace. Am I missing something? Are we all playing by the same rules here?
Praying for you during your time of surgery and recovery. May God provide His healing power in your life and bless you and your family during these days.,
You overreacted and crossed the line in your response to his observations. Disagree but remain civil. It is better that way.
Dave I totally agree we should delay judgement on this. I would add that we should delay engaging this until there is more info. I would respectfully disagree it is, “”good and right” that we should examine his tactics . IMB has already considered the issues years ago and has given us the greatest, safest and most effective mission strategy known to man. In addition I would think that the people who should be examining this would be his sending agency. Let’s let his family, friends, and sending mourning grieve for awhile, and gain more information and go from there. Just my opinion of course
Oops should be “sending agency mourn and grieve”
Thinking about this again this morning. I remembered the incident in Mark 9:38-41. The disciples have seen people who have heard Jesus and are now ministering in His name, but are not part of the “approved” group. John asks if they should make them stop? Jesus basically says to leave them alone… I wonder about the parallel in the modern world with “approved” ministers who are “ordained.” We act like if someone is not approved by some group, they are “lone ranger[s], highly obsessed, self-called…” as one poster above said. Maybe they are just on fire for God? Jesus said if they are not against us, they are for us.
Just some food for thought.
Mark 9
38 “Teacher,” said John, “we saw someone driving out demons in your name and we told him to stop, because he was not one of us.”
39 “Do not stop him,” Jesus said. “For no one who does a miracle in my name can in the next moment say anything bad about me, 40 for whoever is not against us is for us. 41 Truly I tell you, anyone who gives you a cup of water in my name because you belong to the Messiah will certainly not lose their reward.
Amen
`Maybe there was a better way. To this point on one has found it and maybe no one even tried. As I understand it he went to the island, was hit by an arrow shot by a youth and swam back to the boat. He then returned and was killed. Biblically he should have walked after he was not received the first time. Maybe he could have lived to work on strategy a bit to avoid being arrowed again. In the end, “before his own master he stands for falls.”
We do not know what was in this missionary’s heart. The national media certainly does not understand or appreciate the concept of Christian missions.
Some may have considered Jonah a self-appointed missionary. And he could have easily been tortured and killed.
Virtually every one of Jesus’ 12 disciples eventually died as a result of their missionary work. A missionary dying does not necessarily mean failure.
Perhaps God calls some to go and die. We should be careful to judge.
Sometimes we are to hide from danger, or protect ourselves from danger; sometimes not.
David R. Brumbelow
David! I saw a man on an Operation Christmas Child video named Mark Brumbelow. Any relation?
Bill Mac,
Yes, he’s my brother.
David R. Brumbelow
I knew there couldn’t be that many Brumbelows running around. It was a very touching story.
Bill Mac,
Thanks.
What they and their church have done with Samaritan’s Purse and the Christmas Shoeboxes is incredible.
David R. Brumbelow
David, well said
Whether he did this the right way or not, one good thing has come out of it. The world, and Christians, are talking about this tribe of unreached people that most of them had never heard of before now. Let’s pray that all the publicity leads to more people focusing on best strategies for getting the gospel to them, and more people praying for this people group. Much like Jim Elliot, this man’s death could lead to these people eventually coming to Christ.
One thing I now know… There are a tribe of unreached people we are called to reach. We now know where they are and we can start praying and begin seeking God’s direction in how to obey His word to this people we now know about,
This death put a spotlight on people Christ died for I had no idea were even there.
Go and make disciples. Can’t get around it now that we know. To do less us to disobey.
What that looks like for me I’m not sure but it is on my prayer list for God to use me someway, somehow in reaching them.
These people also likely lack any immunity to diseases that we shrug off but could wipe them out completely. That is why in part, it is illegal to make contact with them. The latest estimate’s I have read suggest there are about a dozen of the Sentinelese left. Also from what I have been able to see, no one knows the Sentinelese language, so it is unlikely this young man received language training.
Bill Mac, to me this is an interesting dilemma. As you, from what I’ve read no one knows the Sentinelese language. It would seem that someone somehow would have to go among them to ever learn it. What other options would there be?
Robert: That’s true, and if the Sentinelese were open to mingling with strangers and willing to teach their language, there would be no problem. That’s how societies have met, traded, and shared knowledge, resources and language for all of our history. But they clearly aren’t open to that. They don’t want strangers on their island and don’t want to teach their language. And there is still the non-immunity to disease consideration.
No one is questioning this young man’s zeal or heart. But we have to be very careful to hold this incident or approach up as something to be admired or emulated.
These things may be true but how do you apply the GC to This?
Without Christ their eternity is hell. I’d personally choose having them die hearing and possibly coming to Christ than dying healthy and end in eternal torment.
I don’t have all the answers but I do have the GC.
Bill Mac, thanks. I am thinking of this more generally, than whether Chau’s specific methodology was ill-advised. Contact must be made to learn the language of any group in order to (eventually) preach the gospel to them. If a people will never allow it, then those who tried have done all they can do.
I’m not unsympathetic to the “lack of immunity” consideration, but wonder whether people otherwise actually consider what germs and illnesses they carry into new places as they jet around the world. I realize the case of the Sentinelese is different than usual, but movement of people to different places around the world always carries with it some of that possibility.
There should be also some consideration, should it not, “For what shall it profit the Sentinelse, if he shall keep his whole world, and lose his own soul?”
Robert and Jon,
Again, if these folks were willing to make contact, teach their language, listen to what this young man had to say, then the immunity issue (and even perhaps violating the law) would become less of an issue. But they clearly are not, and they seem to have made it clear to this young man that they were not, while he still had a chance to walk away alive.
India is a sovereign nation and it is their right to restrict access to North Sentinel Island. They seem to have granted the Sentinelese sovereignty in some sense over the island and have given them the right to enforce it. I heard someone suggest yesterday that the islanders might be punished for killing Chau, but I can’t see how that is going to happen.
It appears that the North Sentinelese are under the jurisdiction of India from India’s point of view, but not from their own. I tend to view them as a sovereign people unto themselves, so their killing of those they see as a threat might be viewed as according to their own law or standards. While India might have the power to do something if they wished, I don’t see that they provide any governance to or over these people, so should just stay out of the matter. John Allen Chau did what he thought he needed to, however heroic or ill-advised, and the Sentinel Islanders did what they thought they needed to, however right or wrong it appears to outsiders. The matter should be considered concluded.
“You guys might think I’m crazy in all this but I think it’s worth it to declare Jesus to these people. Please do not be angry at them or at God if I get killed.” – John Allen Chau
https://www.christianitytoday.com/news/2018/november/missionary-killed-north-sentinel-isolated-island-tribe-chau.html
David R. Brumbelow
Franklin Graham ‘s response to the death of missionary John Chau. Maybe we can learn from his merciful spirit.
Pray for the family of 26-year-old American missionary John Chau who was killed by tribesmen on India’s extremely remote North Sentinel Island a few days ago. This young man went there with a heart to share God’s love with the people, though it cost his earthly life. His family said that John had “nothing but love for the Sentinelese people.” They also shared that they forgive those reportedly responsible for John’s death. May God bless and comfort them.
John challenges all of us in the notes he left, saying: “I pray none of you love anything in this world more than Jesus Christ.” (Franklin Graham post on FB)
I am not sure we have all the story. One thing about it, John Allen Chau will not be one of those who did nothing but talk. I salute this brother … He was in the arena and not the grandstands.
This is the problem with this whole story, and the same thing came up at men’s study last night. It seems that because this young man’s motives were good (and I can’t think of anyone who has argued otherwise), and because he died, then this attempt cannot be criticized. We often decry the “touch not the Lord’s anointed” mentality that we see in evangelical circles these days, and this just seems like the same thing.
Well it probably shouldn’t be critized by anyone who isn’t in the arena of evangelism. I personally care nothing for the opinion of someone who doesn’t DO evangelism on evangelism. However, those who are personally doing evangelism I do listen to.