In the last century, evangelism and social responsibility were divided. This is because the emergence of a new trend of liberalism and the concept of evangelism were reduced by emphasizing only proclamation and church growth. As evangelism and social responsibility became dualized, the conflict and confrontation between the two sides intensified, but as time went on, there was a change in the need to fulfill social responsibility even within the evangelical camp. This is because he realized that the true renewal of the church and the true form of primitive Christianity cannot be restored without emphasizing social responsibility.
Through the Wheaton Conference in 1966, he recognized the fact that he had been indifferent to social issues, and through the Lausanne Conference in 1974, the relationship between evangelism and social participation was newly established. Through the Lausanne Declaration in 1974, a clear change of direction was achieved as it stipulated that we must bear evangelism and social responsibility for world evangelization.
The 1982 Grand Rapids Report explains the historic foundation for evangelism and social responsibility to become Christian missions and reveals that the two have three kinds of relationships. The first is that social activities are a natural result of evangelism, and the second is that social activities can become a bridge for evangelism. Third, it is revealed that social activities are partners in evangelism. This report stipulates that evangelism has a logical priority and the relationship between evangelism and social responsibility as partners.
The Manila Declaration of 1989 clearly declares the priority of evangelism in relation to evangelism and social responsibility. Nevertheless, the Declaration tried to balance social responsibility as well. In particular, the expression "requires the whole church to preach the whole gospel to the whole world", which first appeared in Paragraph 6 of the Lausanne Declaration, changed its order in Part 2 of the Manila Declaration, and the whole Gospel appeared first. This is a very important change. Suggests. The Manila Conference shows a change in the Lausanne camp's understanding of church-centered missions by putting the whole gospel ahead.
The revised position on the relationship between evangelism and social responsibility in the 3rd Cape Town Declaration of 2010 shows that the revised position on the relationship between evangelism and social responsibility is moving toward holistic mission rather than prioritization of evangelism. The change of the Lausanne camp, as shown in the Cape Town Pledge, was intended to overcome theological misunderstandings that could be derived from the priorities of evangelism that have been continually asserted. Throughout the Cape Town pledge, the expression of the priority of evangelism was completely excluded. This is a clear change in Lausanne's position, which emphasized the priority of evangelism. It shows that the Lausanne camp is shifting from "priority of evangelism" to total mission. As the necessity of holistic missions was emphasized through the Lausanne Congress, it was progressed in a narrow way, leading to a new era in missions.
Mission had a mission policy and direction suitable for that era. Previously, missionaries visited missionaries to mission fields with unreached people groups. Now, the days have passed when you must go to the area to meet an unreached people group. There are diaspora of certain races everywhere in the world. It is a common view of ministers that their gospel capacity is far higher than that of native natives. Migrants have a high influence on relatives in the mainland, making them ideal for use as a bridgehead for evangelization of their own country.
One of the big trends of modern missions is the paradigm shifting from "traditional and geographic missions to those with racial and ethnic concepts". Due to human-made disasters such as natural disasters and ecosystem destruction, economic or educational needs and opportunities, it has long been focused on migrant missions due to frequent international movements. War and political refugees are also contributing to this. Now, mission cannot be limited to geographic concepts. We must open our eyes with the same emphasis on refugees, migrants, who are approaching us with the same aspirations as missions sent abroad for missions in other cultures.
There are more than 3.7 million foreigners who have migrated to Korea for any purpose (the South Korean population is 51 million). The number of refugees is 68,761 (as of April 20, 2011). The number of foreigners in Korea is not small. Now we need to reexamine our missionaries. Our mission also requires the concept of space and time to fit this. For domestic foreigners from creative access areas, an area where mission is difficult, a strategy of intensive mission is needed by assigning experienced missionaries who know the culture and the language. In the 21st century, a change in the mission paradigm was given, in which the Korean church should handle refugee and migrant missions. In particular, refugees who are indifferent to Korea and who are environmentally poor will be able to change easily if someone becomes their friend. This is the method of holistic mission that Jesus used.