Summary: This page explains our position on not being associated with a "regular" (non-local church) mission board.
(1) My experience with GFAM. (2) My particular reasons for not being under any "regular" mission board.

Why we are not under a "regular" mission board

by David R. Cox

CONTENTS: My days under GFAM. My Reasons for not being under a mission board.

Introduction: I went through a typical Christian university as a Missions Major, and received the "standard fare" for missionaries. Upon graduating, I looked for a mission board, and was under that Fundamental mission board from 1983 through 1999. Through bitter experience I suffered the reality of life under a mission board. My experiences were not unusual as I compared notes with other missionaries, and I have heard of literally hundreds of fundamental missionaries starting out under "regular mission boards" and later leaving these boards to go out under local churches (i.e. they did not leave the ministry, but continued serving the Lord as a missionary, but not under the unbiblical para church organization of a mission board). This page explains my answer as to why I left the mission board for a local church structure. I wish to "liberate" this explanation from attacks against the board I was with, because in all truth, I still think it is the best mission board around (as they go), but the issues and problems that I see in this area are wide spread, and are biblically wrong (not just the group I was with, but the entire system of mission boards). Even though changing boards may have temporally alleviated some of our problems, they would always come back because the system is flawed because it is not biblical. This is why we did not leave one board to go with another. The system is flawed and has an unbiblical foundation which means any mission board is going to have the same problems.

My days under GFAM (Gospel Fellowship Association Missions)

I do not wish any harm to those in GFA, but I must relate the truth as I see and understand it. I do not seek vengeance or have anything "against anyone" there, but nonetheless the problems I had were problems. Considering the large number of good missionaries that have left that board and are still faithful to the Lord and in the ministry, it appears that neither my leaving nor the literally dozens of missionaries that leave every year or two have "solved the problem". I conclude that the problem must not have been principally with me if they continue to have so many missionaries leave each year. I see the problems as indicators of broader and deeper problems in modern Christianity, therefore I provide some details so that you can understand why I believe and hold to positions that I do. As such I feel my time in GFA allowed me to meet some very spiritual and godly people, and as such, I still feel GFA is the best of the "regular" mission boards around, although I would not go with them or any other mission board again if I had to do it all over again.

Those who have gone to Bob Jones University (or a similar Christian school) understand what I say when I say there is a certain institutional mentality that goes along with these Christian ministries. You fit in, or you get squashed (thrown out or run off or expelled or asked to leave or not come back). 

I do not wish to "air out dirty laundry" here, and in the end analysis, every minister has to do things in a way that according to his own conscience and the word of God, he feels he is obeying God's commands. At times what one Christian discerns as God's will is not what another discerns as God's will. I will refrain from getting in the details of our leaving GFA. We mutually parted company, (GFA gave us a letter of recommendation that our supporting churches continue to support us, and that our leaving was not because of any kind of "disciplinary action").

Now there are problems in Christianity, and I would like to defend my position of why I am not under a mission board (and will not be in future). Some pastors recommend to me from time to time that I "get back under a mission board", so that we can raise money much easier that way. Unfortunately "easy" and "financially lucrative"  is not my primary interest, but obeying God. 

These are the conclusions that I came to being under a mission board at the time. From 1984 through 1999 I was under a good fundamental mission board, and from 2000 through the present I am under a local church, so I feel I can speak from experience on both counts. I feel that God revealed much to me through this experience, and both I and my ministry are much better off for having gone through the ordeal.

My Reasons for not Being under a Mission Board

These are the reasons I see why mission boards are not necessary, and moreover, they are really unbiblical.

(1) Mission boards are not biblical. The New Testament model which sets our only precedent and example is a local church sending out, overseeing, supporting, administrating, and being the sole help, authority, and only organization handling funds.

(2) Boards need infrastructure that is duplicated and unneeded - Mission boards need overhead and infrastructure expenses that a local church does not.

(3) Boards promote themselves, not the Lord's work - Mission boards promote "their ministry" by using missionaries, and their first concern and most important priority is not the work of the Lord.

(4) Unbiblical Concept of Discipline and Loyalty - In a nutshell, loyalty is always first to their organization, then to the Lord. Nobody "bad mouths" their board and stays with them, and this is in spite of the presence of serious problems in the board.

(5) Mission boards have not grasp the thrust of NT missions. For all the rhetoric that mission boards put out that they have a corner on the understanding of how God has commanded us to do NT missions, they don't have a clue.

(6) Competition between mission boards and missionaries for mission funds - Mission boards spend money heavily, but they only get their "piece of pie" from the same place as the missionaries (tithes and offerings of God's people, specifically designated for missions). (see explanation) Mission boards spend money heavily, but they can only get operating expenses (their "piece of pie") from the same source as the missionaries (tithes and offerings of God's people, specifically designated for missions).

I have observed that mission boards spend money as a business. A well known Baptist mission board back in the 70's raised several million dollars for a new headquarters for their organization. Others do likewise. In the end analysis, mission boards are in competition with missionaries for the same funds. Just because there exists mission boards is not to say that there will be more money donated from God's people. 

Something that greatly bothers me as a missionary, is that missionaries rarely have success raising large lump sums of money (except those missionaries who are professional money raisers, who have no shame or humility about boasting of all they have done). Why is it that an individual missionary often cannot raise $6,000 for a vehicle, yet a mission board can easily get pledges from churches for $10,000 to $50,000 from one church for a new building?

After all is said and done, we must realize that all that mission boards "do" for missions and missionaries, they do by taking money away from missionaries. The money has to come from somewhere, and whether the board raises its own money (as a missionary) or whether they "skim off the top" of the missionary's income, mission boards live as parasites off of missions.

Last updated: 02/02/08
Mail problems with this website to:
Visits: