I disagree and since you don't have a defining authority supporting you my opinion is just as valid as yours.
Jesus’ sacrifice was sufficient for salvation, but the suffering of missionaries is needed in order to bring the Gospel to unbelievers.
I'm sorry bringing the gospel to unbelievers is classified as a work and is adding to Christ's sacrifice, you have just contradicted yourself twice in one sentence.
You still haven’t indicated how you can reconcile all of the other Bible passages that clearly indicate the atonement of Christ was complete and sufficient.I have you just refuse to see the truth. Father of five and I have both shown you more than enough evidence.
What’s your defining authority for your interpretation of Col 1:24? Please cite your reference.
Suffering of missionaries is not a necessary component of individual salvation - you are confusing what is needed in order for a person to be redeemed. This passage clearly is saying that servants of Christ will suffer on this earth because of the evil opposition to the Gospel.
You seem to be suggesting that if a missionary doesn’t face suffering every time he/she presents the Gospel then the listeners will not be able to become believers because the formula for salvation is Christ’s suffering plus the suffering of the missionary.
“I have you just refuse to see the truth. Father of five and I have both shown you more than enough evidence.”
Neither you nor Father of five have offered an interpretation of Hebrews 9:12, which states that Jesus secured our redemption forever. I’m interested in discussing Bible verses and understanding where other viewpoints are coming from.