Needed: The Most Urgent Unreached List 6


Strike the MatchMissiologists and mission agencies operate from two unreached people group lists: 1) global unreached people groups; and 2) global unengaged-unreached people groups.

The global unreached people group list receives a high strategic priority when it comes to global disciple making.

The global unengaged-unreached people group list receives an even higher strategic priority when it comes to global disciple making.

However, I believe a third list (representing the highest priority) is needed, one that takes into consideration the work of the Spirit among the peoples across 2000 years of Church history.

A list is needed that provides an answer to the question: “Among the people groups in the world today, which groups have had no followers of Jesus in the last 2000 years?”


Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

6 thoughts on “Needed: The Most Urgent Unreached List

  • Andrew DIPROSE

    hello I listened to your podcast. I appreciated it.

    I tried to comment on it but I am not sure if the comment came through.

    I would like to interact by email on those matters.

  • David Rogers

    J.D., Please don’t take this comment as negative. I am generally sympathetic to the idea you are proposing here, and am glad you are addressing it. But are not people groups, and the factors that cause us to define different people groups as unique people groups, fairly fluid from a historical perspective? In other words, don’t gene pools and bloodlines change and evolve down through the centuries, languages evolve, customs evolve, etc.? Don’t people migrate and intermarry? For example, isn’t it true—at least to a certain extent—that people groups living in one place today are not the same people groups who lived in that place centuries ago. And are there not many people groups—by the metrics we use to define people groups today—who throughout history have long since disappeared? For instance, what about the nations listed in the Table of Nations in Gen. 10? Would there be any way to say to what extent each of these have been evangelized down through the centuries? Are not most people down through history a mixture of the bloodlines of these nations rather than clearly a member of one or the other?

  • JD Post author

    Excellent point, David, and well made! Fluidity is one of several challenges to historical research. What I am suggesting is not a hard-and-fast rule, but rather where we do have clear historical facts, then we need to use them wisely. Some historical information is unattainable or was never recorded; so, we will never know the answer. As I mentioned in the podcast, if it is possible to get the uupg list from 3000 to 400, then that gives us a better focus when it comes to prioritization and use of resources. Such a list is not perfect, but it reveals a higher level of urgency for some groups.