Christian/Muslim relationships

I'm very interested in how Christians should relate to Muslims. I struggled with this last year in Turkey, and have continued to wade through it since.

Piper explains the recent outreach of Muslims to Christians in their "A Common Word Between Us and You." The entire document, as well as signatories, responses, and other news items can be viewed on www.acommonword.com

Hoping in God…and Why It Matters

Why are you downcast, O my soul?

Why so disturbed within me?

Put your hope in God,

For I will yet praise him,

My savior and my God. Ps. 42:5

Introduction

I don’t think it’s an overstatement to say that within the last 2 years no verse has ‘put ballast in my hull’ or fixed my eyes on the gospel of Jesus as has this one. Since my unwitting discovery of this Psalm, I have begun listening to sermons and reading books carefully for ‘hope in God’ language, but have been shocked with how little attention the doctrine gets within our culture. Initially, I was perplexed and not a little frustrated. I think now that there are two primary reasons why it has been largely neglected. 1) Cultural unfamiliarity/uncomfortability with the term ‘hope’. ‘Hope’ carries with it a strongly negative connotation. For instance, it wouldn’t be uncommon to hear a student who stayed up all night playing Halo instead of studying for an exam the next day say, ‘I hope I pass this test…’. He could pass it, but the odds are strongly in his disfavor. 2) ‘Hope’, even when understood within a proper biblical context, seems so far removed from any immediate solution. If a close friend of mine’s child died, a phrase like ‘brother, just hope in God’ doesn’t seem to help at all. ‘Joy’ and ‘peace’, while also involving future and eschatological elements, can be experienced and savored now and seem so fitting for just such crushing circumstances. But ‘hope’?

Response to 1): We aren’t hoping in baseball games or lottery tickets or relationships, we’re hoping in the One who says things like, ‘My purpose will stand, and I will do all that I please’, and about One of whom things are said like, ‘In the Lord alone are righteousness and Strength. All who have raged against him will come to him and be put to shame…’ (Is. 45:18, 24). When we hope in God, we hope in the only One/Thing capable of bearing the staggering weight of human expectation.

Response to 2): First, it feels distant but is in fact intimately immediate simply because it (as defined above) is the impetus for and foundation of every ‘more immediate’ action and emotional response toward God. Could we rejoice in or have peace about a God who couldn’t first demonstrate his Own self-sufficiency? Certainly not. Second, creatures must/will hope in something, and if we aren’t consciously Godward with our expectations, we run the risk of damnation. All that to say: the stakes are high.

The more I read Scripture and think on the subject the more I’m convinced that without stockpiling a ‘ready supply’ of Godward hope, we doom ourselves to a slow and torturous death.

D. M. Lloyd Jones/John Piper’s Ideas on Ps. 42:5

The first thing we are struck with as we read this song is the psalmist’s horrific state of spiritual depression, brought on primarily by his sense of utter abandonment by God. ‘My soul thirsts for God…When can I go and meet him?’ Then his enemies, like salt rubbed into a deep wound, assault and mock him by asking ‘Where is your God?’, strikingly reminiscent of Job’s friends as they berate him for invoking the wrath of God by his own wickedness. What is it that keeps him afloat? What gives him fortitude to let the accusations role off his back? What shines light on his ‘downcast’ soul (vs 5b)? To what does he cling as ‘all [God’s] waves and breakers’ sweep over him? His ‘hope in God’.

What is initially startling but ultimately admirable about the psalmist here is that while enduring incomprehensible oppression, he is seen talking to himself. D. Jones observed that most of us, in contrast, are guilty of too readily listening to ourselves. When we wake up and discuss with ourselves how we don’t ‘feel’ ready to fight sin or how we don’t ‘feel’ joy in the Spirit, we aren’t lending our ears to the right audience. The poet here doesn’t fall in that trap. No, he speaks to his aching soul…and he speaks what’s true. We might object though, ‘How can I hope in God?’ This does appear to be a tenuous question, for our sins are great and the anger of the ‘I AM’ is fearsome. But, it is precisely at this seemingly ‘hopeless’ realization at which the scene explodes with vitality (and, yes, especially ‘hope’) for us as A.D. earth-dwellers. Peter says it best when he writes: Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ! In his great mercy he has given us new birth into a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead…Through [Christ] you believe in God, who raised him from the Dead and glorified him, so your faith and hope are in God’ (1 Peter 1:3, 21). We’re in a Covenant with the Sovereign One, sealed in His Son’s blood. If ever there was a reason to hope and to preach that hope to again and again to ourselves and our brothers and sisters, surely this is it. In short, we hope in God through/because of the Gospel. So, brothers, do it. Hope in God because of the Gospel. Hope in God because hope of this sort (namely one rooted in the One who never trips on a hurdle or topples off a balance beam but is Sovereign over every sparrow and galaxy) cannot fail, for it’s been secured by a Covenant of infinite value since it was inaugurated by the Infinite’s blood. Hope in God because if we don’t hope in Him we’re hoping in a lesser thing that can’t bear the weight of expectation and will serve only to banish us from his presence. May it be said of us like those in Hebrews 11 that God is not ashamed to be called our God. We can be willing to sacrifice anything because our Hope is other-worldly.

Thinking about humility...

Hey guys, since everyone has been too busy to post anything (including myself), here is something brief to chew on.

A tentative definition of humility:

True humility is a constant acknowledgment of a higher and more infinitely valuable being that leads to a total re-orientation of one’s desires, thoughts, and actions.

This is in contrast to common notions such as humility being self mutilation in deed or in thought, the absence of thinking of oneself (potentially thinking of others first), or that humility is the lack of intelligence or a lack of various forms of talents and gifts.

In these notions all thoughts are still on us but in the former all thoughts are consumed in the magnitude of the almighty God.

Aaron

Aaron Browning, welcome to the blog. Jump right in!

On using the blog...

To read a post and see all its comments, click on the title of the post (in this case "On using the blog..."). Clicking on a post title changes the page to display only that post and all comments underneath.

Missions Philosophy...

“On Why Churches Should Consider and Assume a Personal-Extensive Missions Support Policy”

Thesis:

It is the aim of this article to raise awareness regarding the missions-support policy to which conservative churches (quite nearly) unilaterally adhere. The current policy, namely to support a surfeit of missionaries laboring on equally numerous and diverse fields, has several significant flaws which advocate that the policy as a whole be quickly abandoned, and which (if not addressed) threatens to undermine the holistic work of missions. The proposed remedy (i.e. thesis) simply stated is this: the Church, for reasons subsequently enumerated, should consider and readily assume a “Personal-Extensive” (as opposed to a broad-and-diluted) missions-support policy that the ultimate causation of and impetus for missions—the glory of God—might not be stifled/thwarted.

Reasons for the Shift in Missional Philosophy:

1. Argument 1: Adopting a personal-extensive policy aides the missionary’s deputation process.

While certainly the most elementary result, the above statement is by no means parochial. Without lapsing into an emotionally-based argument, the manifold evidence demonstrating both the length and rigor of deputation can be seen within Colonial’s own missionary family. Consider, for example, the Kirsteatters. After actively pursuing support for 2 years, they yet languish at the 38% benchmark. This isn’t a math lesson, but calculations reveal the simple fact that this taxing enterprise will not conclude in the foreseeable future. Not only has this placed tremendous strain on the Kirsteatters, but the family with whom they are partnering (and who is already serving in Kenya) recently sent an email pleading for immediate aid. While scores of opportunities for men’s, women’s, and children’s ministries exist, this family cannot independently bear the heavy ministerial demands. In short, the Kirsteatters should not still be in the United States. God called them to Kenya; they should, then, be in Kenya. Adopting a personal-extensive ministry would eradicate such ‘disfortunate’ (but far from uncommon) occurrences and would enable the catholic Church to fulfill Jesus’ commissioning (Mt 28).

2. Argument 2: Adopting a personal-extensive philosophy permits extended ministry of the supportee within the local assembly.

Permit me, by way of allegorical illustration, to relate the following Tale. Once upon a time, a prestigious country contracted a gruesome, potentially deadly, and seemingly irremediable infection. Upon hearing of their plight, a brilliant physician named Aysendeton, from a land ‘far far away’, set himself diligently to work on finding and developing the desperately-needed cure. After weeks of tireless labor, he perchance came upon a potion which seemed to stymie the aggressive illness. Hastily, for he knew he hadn’t a moment to lose, Aysendeton set sail for that noble land. After a particularly harrowing and tiring journey, Aysendeton, limited both by time constraints and his own physical weakness, stepped on shore of the disease-ridden country. Considering these limitations, rational persons would have undoubtedly proposed that rather than carting the skilled artisan ‘around the world’, as it were, it would be best to keep him localized that he might devote his full energies (or what little energies he had remaining) to instructing others both how to create and how to dispense the curative serum. Tossing good logic to the wind (whether the result of the sickness itself or merely too much sun no one knows to this day), however, the country’s fiduciaries did quite the opposite. Consequently, by the end of Aysendeton’s stay no one had received appropriate treatment and (even more tragically) no one was completely sure how to recreate the medication.

The above story’s (‘thinly veiled piece of propaganda’ might actually be a more appropriate genre description) correlation is plain. But, for sake of clarity, I’ll pen the key. The ‘prestigious country’ with the interminable illness is the American Church. As will be noted subsequently, the Western Church is drowning in its own luxury, completely unaware to the working of God or the demands of his Son’s gospel. We need Aysendetons (i.e. missionaries) to tell us that the here-and-now isn’t eternal. Rather than logically/strategically optimalizing a missionary’s involvement within one local assembly, we unnecessarily carve up their time between innumerable congregations. The end result (as the allegory makes plain) is that little to nothing comes of missionaries’ furloughs. We spread them so thin that no assembly receives ‘appropriate treatment’ and no one is ‘completely sure’ how to address the lethargy threatening to overtake, strangle, and damn ‘American Christianity’. Adopting a personal-extensive mission-support philosophy would permit missionaries to be ‘localized’ throughout their furlough, which might prove to awaken the church and thus fit the Church to accomplish that for which it was intended.

3. Argument 3: Shifting towards significant monetary support enhances the rest/recuperation of the missionary’s furlough.

Proof of the proposed argument is bound up in the previous allegory. Furloughs, by design, are meant to provide the missionary a reprieve from the taxing demands of cross-cultural ministry. Seldom is this aim met. In reality, missionaries spend a great majority of their ‘days of respite’ as nomads, traveling around the country to visit supporting churches and to garner additional support due dually to a constantly inflating global market and to the degenerating value of the US dollar. In short, adopting a personal-extensive policy proffers these servants much-needed rest.

4. Argument 3: Shifting towards significant monetary support heightens the cause of and passion for missions within the supporting local assembly.

As introduced in point 2, the 20^th century witnessed a tragic, cataclysmic downgrade of missional interest—and, correspondingly, missional involvement—within the United States. Furthermore, America was at that time the unquestionable primadonna spokesman of all Christendom. Even a relatively un-detailed perusal of Evangelicalism reveals a shocking disinterest in the things of Jesus. The weight of sin, reality of eternity, reverence for and submission to the King, fascination with and delight in the gospel and the Author of that gospel—these once foundational elements have come to be regarded as antiquated ‘relics’, optional truths to which one must not necessarily concede in order to retain the title: ‘follower of Christ’. Not that we should expect anything less, I guess. Jesus never intended his message to prosper and flourish in the midst of opulence; it is a religion of suffering. Stripped of that pivotal element and it morphs into religious theatrics. Missionaries—those having experienced the pain of opposition but the insurmountable joy of knowing their Redeemer in the face of that opposition—are needed in our churches now more (but are wanted by our churches less) than ever. Adopting a personal-extensive missions policy affords missionaries the opportunity to reawaken local assemblies to the authentic Jesus and to that Jesus’ purposes (missions in particular).

5. Argument 5: Shifting towards significant monetary support generates relational intimacy between the assembly and the missionary, establishing stricter accountability for the supportee and a more direct impact for the Body.

An entrepreneur investing $100 in a fledgling company might only casually follow his stock. The interest with which an entrepreneur investing $50,000 might take in that same company, by contrast, is an altogether different scenario. Hourly internet searches/updates, frequent calls, steady correspondence with the company’s promotional manager—none of these would be out of the question or considered excessive. The same principle would be true for a church with a heavily-supported missionary. As suggested in the above statement, relational intimacy would be the resultant milieu of an extended financing program, ending ultimately in rigorous accountability (for the missionary) and specific impact (for the Congregation). Consider this, Church.

Countering Possible Objections:

1. “Adopting such a policy would prove limiting to our church’s involvement in worldwide missions” or “A personal-extensive program would hinder our aim of supporting missionaries in every part of the world.”

In answer to the first: we too often (and have for too long) mistaken missional breadth for missional depth—an error (for the above reasons) which the Church can no longer afford to make. To the second: consider impetus for supporting missions at all; namely, is it for the sake of His or your name?

2. “Adopting such a policy could prove hazardous to the missionary if a rupture occurs in the home church (i.e. change of pastors, church split, etc.).”

While a formidable rebuttal I would ask: is such a rupture any less perilous for the home church itself and the stateside operations in which it is engaged? Should we shrink in fear and away from faith due merely to potentialities? If that is the case, Christianity might as well fold up shop, pick up its ball, and head home. (Understandably, this is a very general response. Particularities safeguarding against the potentialities should be discussed and ironed out between the missionary and the supporting church).

3. “Adopting such a policy could prove perilous to the cause of missions since deputation plays a significant role in preparing one for the severity of missionary life.”

I’ve heard this stated before…and think it would be too flattering even to comment on such a foolish postulation...so I won't.

Gleanings

Now that we have more than Wes and me in here we can start some more discussions. Two guys that go to the same church debating on a blog that no one reads would be pretty lame.
To provide some fodder for good discussion, take a minute and ask what you've gleaned from the classes and books you're studying in right now. Type up the gleanings that have been most beneficial to you or have raised important questions for you, then post it in the library (instructions are on the library page, with username and password). I know Wes is working on an article for us right now, and I'm putting together something from hermeneutics. Once we're all on board with a topic, conversation will be more profitable.