MY MISSIONARY STORY
by Isaac Yoder

The mission I took part in had a 20-year history. It started in the fall of 2004 by another missionary, and the mission came to a close in the spring of 2025, lasting a full 20 years. During the 20 years, there was a brief nine month period of time when that mission executed the mission system designed by the Lord and later employed by the apostles in the book of Acts. In the first century, the dominant mission model, perhaps the only mission model en route at that time, was the two by two model initiated by Jesus. This model is, hands down, the best mission model out there, now or ever. The nine months, when the mission was executing the two by two mission model, were by far the smoothest, most efficient, and most blessed time during the 20 years. I love the story I took off the mission field with me, but it hurts to even think about all that effort that was exerted during the other times in that 20 years.

Culture runs deep, really deep, even church culture. When I was growing up and during training for the ministry, from time to time, I would run into the two by two mission model, but it never dawned on me that this was the optimal mission model, even in the 21st century. In frustration, a Chinese man once yelled out, “We don’t do it this way!” So why did I NOT go to the mission field as two by two? It was just like that Chinese man saying, “We just didn’t do it that way.” Were I to speak on missions, I’d speak on the two by two model. Were I to teach on missions, I’d teach on the two by two model. The only challenge is the two men getting along.

In defining the two by two mission model, it would be two men, suited to be on the same team, assigned to work together in the same mission. At Lystra, Paul and Barnabas apparently were taking turns to speak to the crowd. When Paul and Barnabas had their infamous, mud-slinging argument that led to their breaking apart, they were walking together down the same road and not on opposite sides of a city or country. After they split apart, Paul got another missionary partner named Silas, while Barnabas took Mark. A missionary family, with dad, mom and fifteen children has nothing to do with the two by two mission model. A missionary couple, man and wife, has nothing to do with the two by two mission model. Two missionaries meeting up for coffee once a month is not the two by two system. Neither is it having one work on west side of a large city while the other works on the east side. The two by two mission model is completely unrelated with the Mormons and JWs. The two by two system has nothing to do with being accountable to a mission board, and yes, there is a place for mission boards. And it’s not a veteran missionary training an apprentice, only to send him off later. It’s two men, married or single, working in the same mission. You don’t need to be employing the two by two mission model by hap-chance. Would you scour the globe, you could most definitely find some employing the two by two mission model, but this model is not being taught and executed by principle on a wide-scale basis. Further, seven men on the same team or a number of married couples in the same mission will demand professional management. The energy and effort need to be put in training the nationals, not managing the enormous mission team. The two men need to come out of the same culture so that they can have the same thought patterns, and the men they train and pair up as two by two also need to come out of their same culture. To make the two by two mission model work, men in administration would have to move on this. (There were multiple reasons the original missionary partner wasn’t replaced, but the story and methodology were proven.)

The main reasons that the two by two mission model works so phenomenally includes, but is not limited to, accountability, the working together of spiritual gifts and long-term results. During my time as a missionary, there was no one who could put me on edge faster than another American missionary in China, right there in my backyard, because I knew they understood my vocation. Paul and Silas came from the same culture and were accountable to one another. Furthermore, God does not make supermen. The two men on the same team would rely on one another. On a mission team, I’d be better suited to play the role of Silas. The big reason for this mission model concerns results. It’s happened that missionaries from tough mission fields come back without long-term fruit. And mission work does not have to rely on top talent. You employ two men, one who can play the role of Paul and the other who plays the role of Silas, put them together as one team, and the amount of long-term fruit will drastically increase.

Click here for the lesson.