I heard a podcast the other day talk about three different aspects of truth. There is truth as proposition, matters of fact. There is truth as meaning, matters of intent. Lastly, there is truth as wisdom, matters of conduct.
One of the side effects of hyperfixating on propositional truths is the abandonment of nuance. When there is an objective fact to everything, binary, black-and-white thinking becomes the norm.
Such is the approach of this book. There are fifteen chapters. The first ten chapters are clearly more developed than the last five, which look like high school blog posts by comparison. So ignoring them and looking at the first ten, you'll see two contrasting approaches to mission theology and practice. ALL of these contrasts deserve there own book. In fact, over and over this book states that there's no time or space to give [insert subject] the attention it deserves. But it'll rush on anyway.
The formula for each chapter is pretty simple: there's a anecdote about the author's time in Japan that introduces the conflict, followed by a brief historical overview of the conflict. We'll highlight approach A, only to pick it apart piece by piece with arguments that come from very different starting points, therefore approach B is better. I'd be offended if I wasn't struggling to stay awake: it's so clear in the language of this book that the author is taking a defensive stance, not an inquisitive one. Perhaps he does have the superior way to think about missions, but that doesn't change the fact that this is a book about superior hermeneutics in disguise.