Discussion Jumpstarter
Study leader reference - not a definitive answer
Question 9
Pablo criticizes the impulse to “jerk the missionary out, take him home, pamper him,” and says their decision was “not to run, even if it meant death”; how do you discern when staying is faithfulness versus presumption, and what does this expose about our comfort thresholds and theology of suffering?
Another way to ask: Pablo criticizes pulling missionaries out to keep them safe, and says they chose not to run even if it meant death. How do you know when staying is faithful and when it is being reckless, and what does this show about our love of comfort and our view of suffering?
Discussion Jumpstarter
Direct Answer
The transcript doesn’t give a neat formula, but it suggests discernment happens through humble self-assessment, communication with church leadership, and a willingness to suffer without romanticizing it; his critique exposes how quickly comfort and safety can become the hidden “non-negotiables.”
- He calls it a mistake to “jerk the missionary out, take him home, pamper him, and give him a good time.”
- He clarifies there can be a time to relocate: they moved from “Kusulí to… town” for more safety, but “we're still here… still working.”
- He describes a settled posture: “our decision was not to run. And even if it meant death.”
- He shows accountability to a committee: “we always would go to the committee… and we'd ask, ‘What's the word?’”
- The committee watched for breakdown: “If you can't handle it… tell us…,” and Pablo responded, “we can make it.”