In Genesis 1:28, God commands humanity to “be fruitful, multiply, and fill the earth.” This is a physical multiplication and filling of the world. In the New Testament, Jesus commissions His apostles to “go and make disciples of all nations” (Matthew 28:19), which seems like a spiritual multiplication—filling the world not biologically but with the gospel. Is this seen as a deliberate biblical pattern or typology? In what ways did the apostles fulfill this spiritual fruitfulness and multiplication, and do Christian traditions see a theological link between the original creation mandate and the Great Commission? I’m especially interested in perspectives that view the apostles as spiritually “fruitful” by preaching the gospel and establishing churches across the world.

I just noticed that while we are told that the great commission applies to all believers in the sense that we are to share the gospel, we don't normally baptize those we help believe. Instead, we bring them to church to be baptized by our clergy. Is there any basis for this practice? Note: If your denomination allows your laity to baptize other people as a normative/regular thing, this question is likely not relevant to you. I would love to hear answers from denominations where clergy would normally administer the sacraments.

Why do Mormons travel in pairs (husband and wife, two young women, or two young men) instead of a group? Does a pair that consists of a brother and a sister ever go on a missionary trip together?

Why do Jehovah's Witnesses travel in pairs instead of a group and go proselytizing door-to-door? What is the typical arrangement (friend and friend, sister and sister, brother and brother, husband and wife, etc.)? Are these people paid by the Watchtower to minister?

Concerning the end of the world and when this will happen Mark 13:10 says: > And the gospel must first be preached to all nations. (NIV) Has the gospel been preached to all nations?

The 10/40 window term is used by Christian missionaries to loosely define areas of the world with the "highest level of socioeconomic challenges and least access to the Christian message and Christian resources on the planet" (Source: Wikipedia entry ["10/40 window"](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/10/40_window)) . However, is the 10/40 window term sort of quaint and grossly oversimplified? The reason for asking the said question is because apart from the glaring error of the 10/40 window not including the nation with the highest population of Muslims which is Indonesia, it also does not include very poor Central American and some South American nations. Furthermore, the computer internet technology advancements that started around 1995 have led to smartphones and rapid growth of the internet so a lot of poor nations even have access to the internet. Finally, it really seems like is it a gross oversimplification because a lot of European nations that are culturally Christian like France, Sweden, Germany, Norway, Denmark, Eastern European nations, etc. have a lot of nominal Christians and atheists but said nations are not in the 10/40 window.

If Mathew 28:19 (and the Great Commission therein) is considered an authentic verse, why aren’t there any instances in the NT where the apostles actually baptized someone using the Trinitarian formula (i.e., “in the name of Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit”)? >Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, (Mathew 28:19, NKJV, 1982) I'm looking for explanations given by defenders of Trinitarianism.

One argument in favor of Catholicism that I see as particularly convincing is that Catholics have done the best job of fulfilling the great commission. This is born out in the fact that Catholics have over a billion members worldwide, larger than any other Christian group. Matthew 28:19-20: >Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.” (NIV) Since Catholic's have done the best job fulfilling Christ's command, doesn't this mean they are closest to Christ's teaching and thusly the true Church?

Jesus gave the great commission to His disciples (Matt 28:19-20). And Jesus instructed His disciples to tarry in Jerusalem until baptized with the Holy Spirit, and received and clothed power from on high that they will be witnesses of Jesus beginning from Jerusalem to the end of the earth. The Gospel is yet to be preached to the end of the world, and the "power from on high" is as necessary now as it was then.

Spiritual experiences can play a very important role in shaping an individual's worldview and religious convictions. Just a single profound mystical experience can dramatically change a person's entire view on life and be the turning point that leads them to embrace an entirely new religious path. Without going too far, the best example in my opinion can be found in Christianity itself, in the conversion of the Apostle Paul, who went from persecuting the Church to becoming the greatest Apostle of all time, all because he had a dramatic "Road to Damascus" encounter (Acts 9). But spiritual experiences are not exclusive to Christianity. People have reported profound spiritual experiences in all sorts of religions. And people who have had these experiences usually interpret them as evidence and confirmation of the truthfulness of the religion they follow. Of course, whether this interpretative leap is justified or not is a whole different question, but the fact remains that many anchor their religious beliefs in profound experiences they've had throughout their spiritual walks. And this brings me to the question in the title: How do Christians approach the evangelization of a person who has deep convictions about a different religion because of profound spiritual experiences they've had while following said religion? How to argue against a strong conviction that comes from a profound spiritual experience someone has had in another religion? _____ ### Appendix: examples of spiritual experiences in other religions ##### ##### 1) Hinduism, Buddhism and Eastern Spirituality in general - [Kundalini awakening](https://psychology.stackexchange.com/questions/26179/explanation-for-the-spinal-energy-and-other-kundalini-awakening-symptoms) - [Samadhi](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samadhi) - [Siddhis](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siddhi) - [Krishna Consciousness](https://www.yogapedia.com/definition/5821/krishna-consciousness) - [Tummo](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tummo) ##### 2) [New Age spirituality](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Age) - [Astral projection](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astral_projection) - [Reiki](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reiki) - [Communication with spirit guides and other entities](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Age#Spirit_and_channeling) - [Manifesting their own reality (Law of Attraction)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_attraction_(New_Thought)) - Mystical experiences through the consumption of psychedelic drugs: ayahuasca, DMT, mushrooms, etc. (sometimes in the context of [shamanism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shamanism)) ##### 3) Witchcraft & the Occult - [Magic](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magic_(supernatural)) : spell casting, etc. - [Mediumship](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mediumship) - Having [spirit spouses](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spirit_spouse) ##### 4) Mormonism (*) - [Inner witness of the Holy Spirit authenticating the Book of Mormon](https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/83925/has-any-latter-day-saint-published-a-very-detailed-description-of-how-the-holy-s) (*) There is some [controversy](https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/84344/are-there-any-christian-denominations-that-consider-lds-mormons-to-be-christia) about whether LDS are considered to be Christians by other denominations.

I noticed that the Apostles stayed in Jerusalem for a long time while others sort of acted like missionaries as a result of being scattered... except the Apostles. >And there arose on that day a great persecution against the church in Jerusalem, and they were all scattered throughout the regions of Judea and Samaria, except the apostles. (ESV Acts 8:1) This seems extra strange being that Jesus said: >Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age. (ESV Matthew 28:19-20) I am not so much interested in traditions that give reason for their staying in Jerusalem. Rather, are there any scriptures that would explain this unexpected behavior?

Acts 4:23-31 (ESV): > 23 When they were released, they went to their friends and reported what the chief priests and the elders had said to them. 24 And when they heard it, **they lifted their voices together to God and said**, “Sovereign Lord, who made the heaven and the earth and the sea and everything in them, 25 who through the mouth of our father David, your servant, said by the Holy Spirit, > > “‘Why did the Gentiles rage, > and the peoples plot in vain? > 26 The kings of the earth set themselves, > and the rulers were gathered together, > against the Lord and against his Anointed’— > > 27 for truly in this city there were gathered together against your holy servant Jesus, whom you anointed, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, along with the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel, 28 to do whatever your hand and your plan had predestined to take place. 29 **And now, Lord, look upon their threats and grant to your servants to continue to speak your word with all boldness**, 30 **while you stretch out your hand to heal, and signs and wonders are performed through the name of your holy servant Jesus.”** 31 **And when they had prayed, the place in which they were gathered together was shaken, and they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and continued to speak the word of God with boldness**. This is an account of a powerful visitation of the Holy Spirit to the early church in response to fervent communal prayer. And what was the outcome? Extraordinary power and boldness for preaching and witnessing -- exactly what the church needs to carry out the great commission. With such a powerful divine assistance at the church's disposal, it would seem very strange to me if Acts 4:23-31 were an isolated case. **Question**: Have other group visitations of the Holy Spirit similar to Acts 4:23-31 been reported in church history? If so, what was the aftermath of said visitations? Did revival follow as a result?

> 38 And Peter said to them, “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. 39 For the promise is for you and for your children and for all who are far off, everyone whom the Lord our God calls to himself.” 40 And with many other words he bore witness and continued to exhort them, saying, “Save yourselves from this crooked generation.” 41 **So those who received his word were baptized, and there were added that day about three thousand souls**. [Acts 2:38-41 ESV] How was Peter able to preach the gospel in such an effective and impactful way that thousands converted in a single day? What was his secret? What is the secret to bring about revival? Do any denominations teach the principles to become revivalist Christians, so that the Christian may be an effective soul winner in a world where naturalism and skepticism are so rampant?

If the end goal is the preaching of the gospel to every human on the planet, then it shouldn't be too hard to come up with very efficient and effective methods to do so. For example, God could send hundreds of millions of angels to preach the gospel around the world, and in a matter of minutes every person would be evangelized. Or God could give dreams and visions to every person simultaneously, revealing to them the truth of the gospel, causing unprecedented large scale conversions all over the globe (by the way, there is anecdotal evidence that [this appears to be happening to Muslims](https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/79535/is-there-any-scriptural-support-for-claims-about-jesus-appearing-to-muslims-in-d) to a lesser degree). And likewise, one could creatively think of myriads of other possible ways in which the gospel could've been preached sooner, faster or more effectively. Yet, God has decided to use human vessels as His main instruments to carry out the great commission. Why? Since I don't intend this question to be opinion-based, I would prefer answers that draw on reputable sources pertaining to the subject matter, e.g., the works of reputable theologians. Alternatively, if a denomination has an official denominational answer to the question, I would be interested in knowing about it too.

When Jesus told His disciples to baptize in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, I think that those who believe that God is a Trinity of Divine Persons see this as one God and not three distinct beings. How do Unitarians interpret this, if the Person referenced as the Son by Jesus is just Himself (i.e. not divine) and not the Second Person of the Trinity, is that Person interchangeable with other prophets? Why baptize in the name of the Father and anyone else?

As Christians, both individually and collectively as the church, we are called to make and grow followers of Christ but when Jesus says this is he telling us to mainly target Non-religious people or people of other (non-Christian) religions. The focus is not whether we such make disciples, but whether we should focus more on the non-religious or on people of other faiths or if they should be treated the same. I want the answer strictly from Baptist or Methodist denomination.

Mar 16:15 And he said to them, "Go into all the world and proclaim the gospel to the whole creation. The Apostles were told to "Go into all the world", yet the Bible records Peter and John going to Samaria once (Acts 8), and Peter going to Caesaria once, and only after being convinced by a vision (Acts 10). All other times, the apostles are recorded as being in Israel/Judea (Acts 9:26-27, Acts 11:1, Acts 15, Acts 16:4). When explicitly told to "go into all the world", why did the apostles instead, stay home? Or how did the Apostles obey the command to "Go" by remaining in Israel? In answering this question, please do not cite "tradition". Instead, please rely on the Bible which is "breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness".

The Bible has been translated into more languages than any other book by far. Wycliffe Bible Translators and others continue to do this in more and more languages. This is seen by many to be part of the fulfillment of the Great Commission. So, is there any specific projection of when Bible translation into all the languages of the world (~6,000) will be complete?

The following passage relates the "Great Commission" that Jesus gave to 11 disciples: https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%2028:16-20 But Paul, a man who never met Jesus during his life, seems to have taken up the mantle all by himself: > 13I am talking to you Gentiles. Inasmuch as I am the apostle to the > Gentiles, I take pride in my ministry 14in the hope that I may somehow > arouse my own people to envy and save some of them. 15For if their > rejection brought reconciliation to the world, what will their > acceptance be but life from the dead? 16If the part of the dough > offered as firstfruits is holy, then the whole batch is holy; if the > root is holy, so are the branches. In Acts 10, Cornelius comes to Peter, and he is already following God. And then Peter baptizes him. OK, but that's hardly "going out and making disciples of all the nations". In Acts 15, Peter seems to recall that he (alone?) was supposed to be apostle to the Gentiles. He concludes by saying: > 19“It is my judgment, therefore, that we should not make it difficult > for the Gentiles who are turning to God. 20Instead we should write to > them, telling them to abstain from food polluted by idols, from sexual > immorality, from the meat of strangled animals and from blood. 21For > the law of Moses has been preached in every city from the earliest > times and is read in the synagogues on every Sabbath.” So it was only then decided what the gentiles should do. Which means that this whole time, it was mostly Paul converting the gentiles. What happened to the 11 apostles? Where are their epistles? Who were they converting among the gentiles? According to the Great Commission, they should be baptizing them in the name of the trinity. Why was Paul given the job? Is part of the explanation that the Great Commission was added later to the Gospel of Matthew?

It is accepted by church tradition that St. Thomas the Apostle *somehow* came to India, but it is unclear to me how he managed to get through the language barrier. Did India have any contact with the West at this time? Could St. Thomas have an interpreter or something to ease the language barrier? Broadly speaking, how do missionaries do missionary work without previous exposure to the people's language? Can missionaries just communicate the gospel using body language or pictures?