I have provided below I have provided below written forms of these mantras in Sanskrit  (Romanized) only as English and Nepali translations are readily available in Bibles. 

f[kzLr oUnu ewy ea=

'kkykse~

l pkí';L;s'ojL;] izfrewfr% d`RLUuk;k% l`"VsjkfndRrkZ p A

;r% lOoZeso rsu ll`ts] flagklu jktRoijkØekfnfu

LoxZeRr;ZfLFkrkfu nz'k;knz';kfu oLrwfu]

lOokZf.k rsuSo rLeS p ll`ftjs A

l lOosZ"kke~ vkfn%] lOoZs"kke~ fLFkfrdkjd'p A

l ,o e.Myh:ik;kLruks eZw)kZ fdap lOoZfo"k;s]

l ;n~ vfxz;ks Hkosr~ rnFkZa

l ,o e`rkuka e?;kr~ izFkeFk mfRFkrks·xz'p A

;r bZ'ojL; d`RLua] iw.kZRoa resokoklf;rqa

Øq'ks ikfrrsu rL; jDrsu lfU/ka fo/kk;]

rsuSo LoxZeRr;ZfLFkrkfu lOokZ.kh Losu lg

lU/kkif;rwŒps'ojs.kkfHkys"ks A

;h'kq 'kkafr 'kkafr 'kkafr%

lnk 'kkykse~ AA

Khrist Vandan Muul Mantra

Shalom

sa cha drashas seshva rasya

pratimoortihi kratsanayaha

srishteradikarta cha

yata sarva meve tena sa sraje

sihasan rajatva parakramadini

svargamartya sthitani

drashaya drashayani vastuni

sarvani tenev tasme cha

sa srajire sa sarvesham adihi

sarvesham sthitikarakashcha

sa eva mandali rupa yastanor

moordhadha kincha

sarva vishaye

sa yada agriyo bhaveta tadartham

sa eva mirtanam madhyat

prathamat uthitograshcha

yata ishvarasya kratsanam

poornatvam tameva vasiyitum

krushe patitena tasya

rakten sandhim vidhaya

tenev savarga martaya sthitani

sarvani sevena saha

sandhapayi

tunchesvarenabhilesye

Yesu shanti shanti shantihi

sada Shalom

I have provided below I have provided below written form of this mantra in Sanskrit  (Romanized) along with an English translation. See attached PDF for Devangari script.

f=,d ijes'oj egkea=

gjs firk gjs firk ] firk firk gjs gjs

gjs iq= gjs iq= ] iq= iq= gjs gjs

gjs vkRek gjs vkRek ] vkRek vkRek gjs gjs

f=,d ijes'oj gjs gjs ] f=,d ijes'oj gjs gjs A

TriEak Paremeshwar Mahamantra

Hare Pita Hare Pita, Pita Pita Hare Hare

Hare Putra Hare Putra, Putra Putra Hare Hare

Hare Atma Hare Atma, Atma Atma Hare Hare

TriEak Parmeshwar Hare Hare,

TriEak Parmeshwar Hare Hare.

Father, who takes away the sins

Son, who takes away the sins

Holy Spirit, who takes away the sins

Triune God, who takes away the sins.

THE TROUBLING SITUATION

Tweeting, re-tweeting, status-updating, going viral, texting, Skyping, blogging, chatting, DMing, IMing -- it is the world of social media today (but maybe not 5 minutes from now).  It is a world that has taken over what it means to be human, to be a friend, to be present, to stay-in-touch, to follow Christ. Not, I suppose, the whole world over, but much of it.  Perhaps more that you think. Do keep in mind that I'm writing as someone who spends much of his time with immigrants, many of whom have spent the last couple decades in refugee camps.  And, I never had to teach anyone how to use Yahoo Messenger, and they turned me on to the world of text messaging.

The evolution of social media has been and is so rapid that significant changes to it are literally occurring all the time. It isn't possible to keep up. And yet, this is our world now. And as Lars Dahle points out in his excellent article "Media Messages Matter: Christ, Truth, and the Media", (a Lausanne 3 Advance Paper), "a critical and creative engagement with the plurality of media messages is an integral part of making the case for the truth of Christ in a globalized world." I agree that to ignore the media world today is tantamount to retreating from the world Christ has called us to be engaged redemptively with. But the problem is that we do not know how to engage well.

This seems to me to be especially the case when it comes to social media.  And by that, I mean just about everything: Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Skype, mobile devices that can do just about anything, blogs, and so much more (even the Lausanne Global Conversation) are all a part of this rather ambiguous world. But, we in the body of Christ simply don't know how to deal with this reality.  I became convinced of this during the past several months in my experiences with short-term missionaries that we hosted here in the field. My long-term staff had loads of frustration with volunteers who were expected to be fully engaged with their immediate surroundings that were frequently texting, Tweeting, checking their Facebook profiles, snapping and uploading photos, and more.  Blog articles and other kinds of messages were often posted online that were not always sensitive, fully accurate, kind, or wise. 

Of course, I haven't been immune.  Recently, I upgraded to one of those mobile phones that can do all and be all. I find myself inundated with media as a result -- texts, tweets, emails, pics, and even phone calls.  It has become so clear to me that this is a significant issue, that I've suggested some of our mission agency's leaders that part of the summer missionary orientation be devoted exclusively to the topic of social media.

WOODLANDS CHURCH'S FACEBOOK FAST

So then I heard about what Woodlands Church in Houston, TX was calling for -- a national day of fasting from social media.  In the words of their pastor, Kerry Shook, "We're forgetting the amazing power of connection found in looking into someone's eyes, giving them our undivided attention, sensing their body language and being in their space . . . the transformative effect of an embrace, a handshake or a hand on someone's shoulder. As much as we want to tell ourselves otherwise, rewarding and healthy relationships take time and effort."

As I reflect on this, I recognize that there is a very important insight in this concept of fasting from social media. Namely, that the integration of spiritual discipline with our social media activity is necessary for the Christ-follower who desires to be led by the Spirit rather than overcome by the world of social media.  But the "Facebook Fast" does not go far enough.  It is an echo of my frustrated missionary colleagues who say to their younger counterparts, just turn off your phone.  It isn't a true integration of the Christ-life with our social media activity, but rather more of a separating of the two.  It may perhaps have the effect of relegating the Christ-life to a totally distinct sphere of existence. If you want to commune with Jesus or really be engaged in what He's doing in the world, you must unplug.

And I agree with the concerns.  I also agree with a friend of mine who is a rather well-known missiologist who sees in the evolution of social media a great tactic of Satan to disconnect missionaries from the immediate, physical context of their ministry and thus create all kinds of difficulties related to missionary retention, cultural adaptation, incarnation, and more.  But, I feel in my hear that unplugging isn't the answer.  This is an important historic juncture for the Church -- it's movable type, motor cars, and microchips and my call is to incarnate. To engage the world as it is because that's the ripe harvest.  Not to form a commune in Wyoming and wait for Jesus to come.

But if we are to engage the social media, we must do so with the Christ-life.  We must consider what it means to integrate spiritual disciplines with our social media activity.  And for this, I call upon (with my small, small voice that depends on your re-tweeting, commenting, posting, and otherwise sharing to gain volume) those spiritual formation heavyweights in the Church to really engage this issue with us.  I am not one of those, but I have some thoughts that I hope will get our conversation really going.  The question is:

WHAT DOES A SPIRITUALLY DISCIPLINED ENGAGEMENT OF SOCIAL MEDIA LOOK LIKE?

And, I must confess, I don't know the answer.  I've never seen it. And, as these thoughts are basically new to me today, I've never really practiced it with any intentionality.  But as the practice of spiritual disciplines (like prayer, fellowship, meditation, etc.) is about the Christ-follower moving towards a greater imitation of Christ in their own historiocultural contexts, I offer the following six reflections upon how this movement should look as it relates to social media:

1. We must move from triviality to truth (Titus 1:9-10, 3:1-9)

The lure of triviality is very strong in the social media world.  Every second, countless vain messages in every conceivable form flood our networks.  The Christ-follower must recognize such things for what they are and move away from them.  Moreover, we should strive not to add to the triviality by producing and posting even more of the same.  Truth should be a goal in our engagement with social media.  I appreciate the criterion that Lars Dahle has provided in this regard. The Truth that Christ-followers share is (1) clear and consistent, (2) corresponding with reality, and (3) possessing the power to transform lives. What will my Facebook profile look like if I move from triviality to truth?

2. We must move from narcissism to prayer and worship (Matthew 5:3, 2 Tim. 3:1-7)

Perhaps the original sin of social media is it's seemingly inherent narcissism.  Self-interest is built-in to even the names of sites like MySpace, Facebook, and YouTube.  Some have seen Twitter as the narcissistic social media tool par excellence in which people "follow" the 140-character updates of friends, celebrities or strangers who "tweet" about everything from standing in line at the coffee shop to sleeping in late.  It actually seems to sometimes transcend mere naval-gazing because through Twitter we're actually trying to get others to look at our naval with us. So much social media activity is driven by the a natural sinful desire to get others to look at us, listen to us, respond to us, pay attention to us.  The Christ-follower must move away from this and seek to use social media to shift the attention of the nations towards the only one worthy of such devotion.  The spirituality behind our social media engagement should be, "He must increase; I must decrease" (John 3:30).

Of course, there is a challenge in the fact that this is "social" media. That is, we are talking about media that is designed to facilitation communication between people. The assumption is that people really do want to connect with me, get to know me, and otherwise utilize social media to facilitate a relationship with me.  So there is a balance to be maintained. I should be sharing my life through these means (1 Th. 2:8), but this must always remain penultimate for us.

3. We must move from lust and licentiousness to self-control (1 Th. 4:3-8)

Much has been written and said about the dangers of sexual immorality on the internet.  I won't add to that here except to remind us all that with the rapid evolution of social media comes ever-increasing availability of sexually perverse materials and opportunity for immorality.  This, of course, calls for self-control.  But, beyond that is the attitude of licentiousness that seems to permeate social media everywhere.  There is a kind of anarchy -- an antinomian spirit that dominates.  People feel free to be dishonest and abusive while commenting on a YouTube video or sending a Facebook message; others feel it is always appropriate to receive and send text messages (even while driving or during a worship service); still others ignore the possible negative consequences of what they post on their blogs or elsewhere.  Christ-followers must move towards self-control and must consider regular fasting as a means to facilitate this move.

4. We must move from greed to giving (2 Cor. 9:5-11)

Simply put, consumerism is not difficult to find in the social media world.  Many engage with the desire to make money or get stuff.  We must be careful and instead seek to utilize social media as an opportunity to exercise the spiritual discipline of giving.  As a matter of fact, social media can provide a great way to facilitate stewardship in the Global church as never before.  We must prefer this concept -- social media as a potentially great facilitator of Kingdom stewardship-- over the spirit of greed that see social media primarily as a means to get stuff and make money. 

5. We must move from distractedness to intentionality and mission (John 20:21)

6. We must move from noise and superficiality to shalom and presence (Psalm 46:10)

I want to address these last two together in part because I've been writing a long time now and I'm tired. But also because I see them as so closely related that I'm really not sure where one ends and the other begins.  The point is that social media tends to distract us (the chime of an incoming text for example), make our lives generally noisier, and gradually erode our connection to our immediate physical context.  This has a devestating impact on our ability to be still and simply rest in the presence of God.  It likewise hinders our ability to become truly incarnate and thus missional.  Ultimately, while incarnation may require the engagment of social media, it always will mean that the Christ-follower enters fully a specific, historic and physical context.  How do we move away from the noise and towards shalom and God's presence?  How do we move away from disconnect and towards incarnation and mission?  

__________________________________

Okay, there you have it.  I really got to rambling today, eh?  Well, for those of you who have made it thus far, congrats!  Please do leave me your feedback.  This must be only the beginning of the conversation.  The Church in the World needs to reflect on these things now! Please take time to answer the key question, "What does a spiritually disciplined engagement of social media look like?" 

Today I'd like to begin by commending to you the Lausanne Advance Paper entitled "People at Work: Preparing to be the Whole Church" by Willy Kotiuga. Kotiuga has provided the Church with a stimulating article that highlights an extraordinarily important topic -- namely, what does it mean to be a follower of Christ in the workplace.  This was a particularly helpful read for me as it forced me to think through the kind of discipleship that I should be engaged in as a pastor of Christ-followers who are spending 40+ hours each week in a "secular" work environment.  Thus so much of their faith, their imitation of Christ, their spiritual growth, and their participation in God's mission will take place there. I must confess that the bulk of my discipleship is focused on what happens in the home and in the community. Almost none on the workplace. Somewhat subconsciously, I have set those 40 hours to one side -- as something that is essentially in the way of real life. Kotigua has helped me to recognize anew that such is not the case.  The time Christ-followers spend at work is and ought to be of significant value for God's Kingdom and purposes.  I have a responsibility as leader in the Church to equip God's people to engage fully their workplace with the message of Jesus Christ.

Stages of Discipleship for Christ-followers who are in the Workplace:

Perhaps it is too daunting a task to think in terms of transforming believers who are not missionally engaged at their workplaces into those who are.  It is for me anyway.  In particular, I'm thinking about the many Bhutanese-Nepalis that I pastor who work at various factories and warehouses around the Chicago suburbs.  I recognize that these are mostly new believers who work alongside non-believers from their own cultural background as well as other people from many nations.  To simply tell them to become missional at work is just too far a leap.  I want to suggest instead some rather loose "stages" of discipleship.  When I consider this, it seems much more doable.  Allow me to explain:

1. Non-believer -- Of course, we must begin here. This is simply an individual at a workplace who does not follow Jesus Christ.  My discipleship goal with them is share the message of Jesus with them.

2.  Disconnected Disciple -- This, I think, is where I think a lot of Christians are.  Kotiuga speaks a lot about the fact that many followers of Christ do not make the connection in their minds and hearts between their faith in Christ and their work.  He points out that many see work as a "necessary evil" that essentially gets in the way of their Christian life. He points out a "gap" between theology and praxis and a disassociation between church and work. For those at this stage, I must help them to see that their faith is indeed tremendously relevant to their work.  Think of the role of Mordecai in Esther's life to help her realize that her faith in God was deeply relevant to her role as queen.

3. The Disciple of Christ-like Character -- At this 3rd stage, we see followers of Jesus who have become convinced that their faith is relevant to their work.  As a result, these disciples strongly desire to imitate the character of Christ in the workplace.  My responsibility at this point is to help them to grow in areas of personal integrity, showing love and kindness towards others, being respectful towards those in authority, abstaining from inappropriate behavior that co-workers may commonly engage in, maintaining a good attitude about work, and more.  Think of people like Rebekah (Gen. 24), Boaz (Ruth 2), and Uriah (2 Sam. 11) whose faith in God was manifest in acts of kindness, generosity, self-control, and integrity in their work.

4. The Disciple of Excellence -- As one matures in their imitation of Christ's character in the workplace, very naturally, they will find themselves pursuing excellence in their work.  In the spirit of Joseph in Egypt, they will become increasingly convince that their relationship with God should be reflected in the level of care, dedication, and energy that they put towards their job.  My responsibility at this point is to encourage this as Paul did when he exhorted the Colossians, "Whatever you do, work heartily as to the Lord and not to men" (Col. 3:23).  And, like Joseph, the disciple at this stage cares little about the nature of the work (whether slave, prisoner, or governor), but seeks excellence in each task.

5. Missional Disciple -- Ultimately, spiritual growth will lead to mission.  This, of course, is the goal we started out with.  I want to see followers of Christ whom I pastor to become fully engaged as ambassadors of His in their workplaces.  As it was often in Daniel's case, I think often we will see that the disciple who is strive to imitate Christ and pursue excellence at work will experience natural opportunities to share their faith with others.  However, this may not happen often or at all.  I must disciple people at this stage in their maturity to start thinking and behaving missionally at their workplace.  They must begin to (1) pray for co-workers, supervisors, clients, and others; they must find opportunities to (2) worship and read the Scripture at work; (3) they must enter into authentic relationships with those who don't know Christ and be faithful to share their faith in the context of those friendships; (4) they must seek to "plant" the Church in that workplace in some way.  "Planting" the Church at the workplace can be as simple as praying regularly with another Christ-follower.  In other cases starting a weekly Bible study during a lunch break or actually planting a full-fledged church at the workplace may be more appropriate.  The point is to create communities of faith for Christ-followers at that workplace.  It is important for us to move away from the notion that we must invite our co-workers to "come to our church".  Instead, we recognize that God has sent the Church (i.e. me and you) to them in order to be the Church for them.

Okay, I hope that is as helpful to you as it has been to me.  Practically, I'm thinking through these things as a way to evaluate where specific people in my congregation are and how I can help move them on to the next stage of maturity.  Again, don't forget to check out Kotiuga's article.  And, I'd love to read your comments.  In particular, if you can think of a stage in there that I might be overlooking, please share that in the comment section.

Just doing some work and noticed something in need of correction. The below link has the following quote:

"Centuries before the revelation of the Ten Commandments to Moses by God as described in the Old Testament, the Vedic Seer Adi-Manu, the first Man created by Brahma to civilize the world, has described the ten 'attributes of Dharma.'"

However, it generally agreed that the Manusmriti ( मनुस्मृति) to which this "Hindu Voice" refers dates from 200 BC at the earliest (or as late as AD 200).* Even the earliest date of 200 BC is significantly post-Old Testament which was already translated into Greek by that time. The later dating is even post-New Testament.

Note that by this I don't intend to dispute the value of the so-called "10 principles of Dharma" elucidated in the Manusmrti, but rather to challenge the notion that they predate the 10 Commandments of the Torah (Old Testament). Here's the link:

10 Principles of Dharma enunciated in Manu Smriti: "Patience, forgiveness, self-control, non-stealing, cleanliness and purity, restraint over the senses, wisdom, knowledge, truth and calmness (UnitedHinduFront@hotmail.com)

Actually, for the one who is interested in considering Dharmic principles, I would refer them to the Atharva Veda (12-1-1) (which, by the way, is also later than the Torah). The AV presents 6 principles of Dharma: 1. Satya (Truth) 2. Rta (eternal justice) 3. Diksa (communion) 4. Tapas (austerity) 5. Brahman (prayer) 6. Yajna (sacrifice) Consideration of these principles is vital in understanding the nature of God, our status as fallen and separated from Him, and our need for God to graciously provide salvation. One may then meditate upon how Sanantan Putra, Prabhu Sri Yeshu, is the provision of God for the salvation of all peoples -- how these six principles are fulfilled in Sri Yeshu. Blessings.

* Avari, p. 142; Flood (1996), p. 56; Keay, p. 103; Hopkins, p. 74; Kulke and Rothermund, p. 85; Encyclopedia Britannica Concise, retrieved 2007-06-24

Contextualization & Hinduism: Why Contextualize? Foundation 4

     First, let me just apologize for the delay in posting.  Life has been interesting these last few weeks.  But, let’s jump right back into it shall we?  For those of you who may be just joining us, what I’m doing here – broadly speaking – is attempting to write just a whole bunch of stuff on contextualization generally and the practice of contextualization among Hindus in particular.  And, I’m trying to begin by laying down a number of theological foundations in answer to the question, “Why should we pursue contextualization in mission?”  Today, I want to provide a fourth and (for now[i]) final foundation to consider.  I encourage you to take some time to consider all four of these foundations together (see links on the right) so that you can get a real sense of the cumulative weight of Scripture on this topic.

Our Need of the Whole Community of Christ

     Here’s what we’ve already established:

·         We want to be like Jesus.

·         We want to reach all people groups.

·         We want to please God.

And we’ve seen how these desires are inextricably tied to the pursuit of contextualization.  That is, the imitation of Christ necessitates an imitation of His incarnation; the Bible believes that contextualization is necessary for reaching the lost; and God is pleased with the long term preservation of at least certain elements of the unique glory and splendor of each and every nation.

     But as we study the Scripture, we note that these three desires cannot be attained nor even meaningfully pursued in isolation from the whole body of Christ.  The word of God teaches that without cooperating “together with all the saints” we cannot attain to “all the fullness of God” (Eph. 3:14-19[ii]).  Likewise that if we want the “world to know” about Jesus Christ we must become “perfectly one” (John 17:20-23).  Finally, that pleasing God isn’t possible apart from a unified church.  For that is where God commands his blessing (Ps. 133).

     So, I submit to you that we followers of Christ need each other.  We need the whole Church.  I cannot imitate Christ without you.  The U.S. Church cannot reach the world without the Nigerian Church.  Asian Christians cannot please God without European Christians.  And I submit further, that without a sincere and global pursuit of contextualization, that kind of partnering and joining together cannot happen—the whole Church cannot be truly whole.

     I say this with 1 Corinthians 12 and a broader-than-typical view of contextualization in mind.  Regarding the latter, I am convinced that when the pursuit of contextualization is motivated solely by evangelism, it is somewhat less than authentic.  We can be justly accused of precipitating a kind of “bait and switch” when we lure in unsuspecting men and women by a contextualized evangelistic message or event only to impose conformity to Western, “established” forms of discipleship and “doing church” once someone has professed faith.  Contextualization, however, is even more for followers of Christ than for those who don’t know Him.  Note that only one of the three previously mentioned Biblical foundations for contextualization is focused on sharing the gospel with non-Christians.  If one could hypothetically conceive of a cultural context that was 100% Christian, pursuing contextualization would still be every bit as critical as it would be for that small band of Christ-followers living in a place where the vast majority of people don’t know Jesus.  Disciples of Jesus must pursue the incarnation in their unique contexts.  The must seek to preserve and enhance those particular deposits of glory and splendor, that God has already made and continues to make in them, with which He desires to be praised and reflected now and even into eternity.  The Word made Flesh must be realized by the people of Christ in every generation, nation, culture, and village—and that for the sake of the whole Church becoming whole.

     And so I come to 1 Corinthians 12, a very familiar passage that I hardly need to say much about.  We are the body of Christ.  And each of us – Mokilese, Garung, Rajbansi, Beja, Punjabi, Korean—are a part of it.  And we need each other.  And if I try to make feet conform to the function and method and appearance of noses, I am essentially saying to the rest of the body, “I don’t really need you, I just need more of me.”  Contextualization says feet can be feet and noses can be noses – and, indeed, should be.  Contextualization says, the body of Christ is whole when each part is fully what God intends it to be and is that in relationship with all the other parts.  We must recognize that if that doesn’t happen, we’re in trouble.  As Paul poignantly asks, “If all were a single member, where would the body be?” (1 Cor. 12:19)

You can view the program below:

Aklilu Abebe TV Interview from hailuyohannes on Vimeo.

Aklilu's wonderful ministry is just one facet of the tremendous work that we see the Lord Jesus doing through TIBM every single day.  I don't do this often in a blog post, but I do encourage you to prayerfully consider supporting in diligent prayer and sacrificial giving Aklilu or any of the rest of the TIBM team.  You can find out how to do so by clicking on the "Joining the Mission" tab at the top of this page.

Thanks and blessings to you!

David Wood of Acts 17 Apologetics has recently posted "An Open Letter to Dearborn Police Chief Ronald Haddad" on the Answering Muslims blog.  In his posting, he asked that people help him to publicize this letter.  Since I also find the recent actions of Haddad and others in Dearborn (Michigan, USA) to persecute Christians disturbing and despicable, I wanted to be sure to post that open letter here. What follows is Wood's full posting:

"Welcome to Dearborn, the city where Muslims are free to assault Christians, where hate messages abound, where Christians are arrested for holding discussions on public streets, where police harass and bully Christians who try to distribute copies of the Gospel. Leading the charge for Sharia in Dearborn is Police Chief Ronald Haddad, who refuses to return our illegally seized video cameras. As of this posting, it's been two and a half weeks since Haddad's officers stole thousands of dollars worth of video equipment, and more than two weeks since he was informed that his actions were illegal. There's been no response from Haddad yet. Please help me publicize his campaign against the Constitution." 

1.   On the Distinction between Clergy and Laity

     In the opening section of his paper, Gidoomal states that one of the primary reasons why a Biblical vision of stewardship has suffered a “setback” in our era is due to the “problematic distinction” and “age-old wall” between what he classifies as sacred and secular vocations.  The paper doesn’t greatly elaborate on what exactly is found to be problematic about the distinction.  Moreover, the concept doesn’t obviously carry through the length of the paper nor do much to influence its conclusions.  However, since it is mentioned as a major reason for why Christians aren’t embracing a Biblical view of stewardship, it must be considered important to the author.

     It seems that Gidoomal is suggesting that distinguishing qualitatively between those vocations traditionally associated with the term “clergy” and those of the “laity” is Biblically illegitimate.  Actually, he uses the labels “sacred” and “secular” – terms somewhat loaded to begin with.[i]  Of course, Gidoomal may not have meant this, but since it is certainly possible to arrive at this conclusion from his paper, I want to respond.

     I believe that the Bible is quite consistent throughout the Canon in both describing and prescribing this distinction – that there is and should be a qualitatively significant distinction made between clerical and lay vocations.  Even pre-Moses, the office of priest (Gen. 14:8) and prophet (Gen. 20:7) are recognized as having legitimacy.  There is a formalization of Levites as a clerical tribe focused on the tabernacle/temple cultus that begins shortly after the exodus of God’s people from Egypt (Ex. 32:28-29). Of course, it is the office of prophet that receives the most attention throughout the Old Testament – a less formal, but nevertheless a very distinctly clerical vocation.

     In the New Testament, the office of priest is assumed by Jesus Christ as the “Great High Priest” (Heb. 4:14) and all those who follow him as members of a “royal priesthood” (1 Pt. 2:5).  However, the role of prophet continues (Mt. 11:9, Luke 1:67, Acts 11:27, Acts 13:1, Acts 15:32, Acts 21:10, Acts 21:9, Rom. 12:6, 1 Cor. 12:28, Eph. 4:11, 1 Tim. 1:18, Rev. 1:3, Rev. 11:10), and is joined by several new clerical roles including apostle, evangelist, and pastor/teacher (Eph. 4:11).  Paul states clearly in Ephesians that God has especially gifted individuals to serve in several clerical positions.  Now, we must be sure to point out that performing a clerical vocation in Scripture didn’t always mean not also serving in a lay capacity – Jesus the carpenter and Paul the tent-maker are joined by Amos the farmer and Daniel the government official.  This kind of bi-vocationalism isn’t found in all Biblical clerics, but at least we see it precedented.

     To be sure, the notion that the clergy should do all the “spiritual work” must be rejected.    This unfortunate misapplication, which is all too often derived from the recognition of a clergy/laity distinction, does not illegitimatize the foundational fact that God has indeed established that distinction.  Quite the opposite is true, as Paul states that the reason for God appointing clergy is to “equip the saints for the work of ministry” (Eph. 4:11-12).  Facilitating the resourcing and mobilizing of every Christian to accomplish God’s purpose in creation and redemption is exactly what God has in mind in the calling forth of pastors, evangelists, and other clergy.  In my view, it would be very appropriate for the upcoming congress to affirm the Biblical legitimacy of the clerical vocations (particularly those mentioned in Eph. 4), and to call on the clergy to renew their commitment to (1) fulfill their responsibility to equip all the saints of the work of ministry and (2) resist the temptation and pressure to “do it all themselves.”

2.   On the Omission of any mention of the Lausanne Global Conversation

     Gidoomal provides some very helpful comments on the topic of technology and the Internet.  These must be read and seriously reflected on by Christ-followers who intend to be engaged in Kingdom work during this next generation.  The list of websites provided is very valuable and the “essential ingredients” section is a must read for Christian web developers.  However, I find that this section makes a surprising and glaring omission.  That is, there is no mention whatsoever of the Lausanne Global Conversation (LGC).  I find it difficult to believe that the Lausanne leadership is fully behind the LGC when it is not being written about in this advance paper.

     When I attended the pre-congress gathering for the U.S. delegation in Dallas earlier this year, the LGC was presented in a thoroughly exciting way.  The concept of having a central place on the web where the global Church could engage, converse, and share resources with each other was compelling.  I have personally bought into the vision and have sought to encourage as many people as I can to do the same.  In several cases, I have actually created accounts for people and then showed them how to use them just to encourage their participation (I actually did this for my entire staff and have since called two meetings in which I give them a designated amount of time focus on a specific topic and engage on the LGC, then we gather together to discuss).  Now however, I feel I need to be convinced that Lausanne believes that the LGC can become all that we have envisioned it to be.  I long to see all of those key Lausanne leaders (and especially the members of the working group that produced this paper) actively participating in the site, posting resources, engaging meaningfully in conversations, forming their own groups, and otherwise modeling the kind of participation that we all hope to see from the global Church.

     So, at Cape Town, we simply must engage in dialogue about the LGC.  Several questions must be asked and answered by the congress:

What must we do to make the LGC the absolute best resource that it can be and needs to be to become the primary web-based facilitator of Biblical stewardship for the whole Church?

What must be done so that the LGC can be universally appreciated as an essential tool for the local church?

How can the LGC effectively partner and integrate with other good stewardship and networking sites so as to avoid needless duplication and the necessity of an individual Christian having to manage a large number of different web profiles?  In particular, how do we identify sites that are comparable to the LGC and effectively integrate and partner with them?  (e.g. My Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube are all integrated so that I don’t need to update all, but they update each other.  In particular, the existence of World Wide Open as a site distinct from LGC is an example of needless duplication.  These should be fully integrated.)

How does the LGC become the central and best place to go for the hypothetical Cameroon-focused workers mentioned in the Gidoomal article?

What must be done before and during the congress to ensure that, at the very least, every individual, local church, and organization represented in Cape Town has an active profile on the LGC before the congress comes to a close?

How do we resource the LGC so that it can be all the God wants it to be for the global Church today?

     Finally, at Cape Town, there must be a great and impassioned call for each delegate to utilize the LGC as a primary channel for engaging in global partnership, conversation and stewardship so that we can, as never before, truly become the whole Church taking the whole Gospel to the whole world!

Shalom, 
I am Rabbi Daniel Akans, the president of MBI. In response to your issues with MBI here. I have no idea where you got this information. This is why we have such a difficult time with christians. You use your own fabricated ideas to try and produce the illusion of truth in order to pretend to know the truth. Shame on you and your agenda. I hope you are someday able to educate in order to give an educated opinion. As a believing Jew, you give christians a bad name. By the way, MBI is not so small. Again you are not aware of the facts.... 
Rabbi Daniel Akans

Note that Akans accused me of using my “own fabricated ideas” and not being “aware of the facts.” I replied to his comment as follows:

In response to Rabbi Akans. Thank you for your comment. You have said, "I have no idea where you got this information." That is puzzling to me since I included links to your website and quoted directly (as anyone can check). Of particular interest to me was your list of the "errors of Christianity". I see this list as a series of attacks upon historic Christianity and have simply taken the time to respond to each point. Feel free to actually debate these points with me or else remove the list from your site. If, of course, messianic.com isn't an official website of MBI, I welcome you to disavow it in this context.

http://www.messianic.com/articles/errors.htm

Thus far, you have accused me of fabrication. Please specify what I have fabricated. As for my agenda, it is to bring the hope and wholeness of Jesus Christ to people of all nations. I'm sorry that you find that shameful. 

Finally, according to your own website, MBI consists of about 16 congregations in the U.S. I suppose size is a matter of perspective, but I don't think I'm speaking too wildly to describe your organization as small. It isn't meant to be a slight.[ii][iii]

     Unfortunately, Akans chose not to respond to my questions.  However, edits were made to the “list” that included a kind of disclaimer which reads: “This chart points out historical institutional errors which have been followed unknowingly by many.” I appreciate that amendment and consider it an improvement upon what had previously been a rather unfair generalizing of Christians and Christian theology.  Nevertheless, the list is still greatly flawed in a number of respects.  My previous comments on this list still warrant answers from Akans and MBI.  You can read those here:

The Christ-Follower & The Law (Part 4 of 5): A look at Messianic Bureau International

The Christ-Follower & The Law (Part 5 of 5): Another look at Messianic Bureau International

     Looking at the list as it now appears on MBI’s site, I would classify the first and fifth “errors” (on the Christian side of the chart) as basically critiques of institutional Catholicism.  These do not at all reflect the views of the vast majority of Evangelical, Reformed, Pentecostal or Anabaptist denominations.  It is unfair to represent them as doing so.  The second and fourth “errors” primarily relate to the very Biblical concepts of contextualization and the believer’s freedom which I have explained in the above posts.  The third and sixth “errors” are not reflective of any major Catholic or Protestant denomination that I know of.  On the contrary, I believe that by listing these as “errors” MBI is hinting at their own aberrant views on the Law and the inspiration of Scripture.  But again, I’ll simply refer you to my previous articles linked above.

     Now, since I wrote about MBI in 2009, the list of so-called “errors” has been expanded to include a seventh, eighth and ninth item.  Let me just briefly comment on them below.

“7. Messianic Jews forced into Gentile Assimilation”

     For me, this is a particularly curious accusation.  Especially in light of the newly added “disclaimer” which states that the list reflects “historical institutional” errors.  That is, MBI is suggesting that Christians have instituted policies throughout history that have forced Jewish followers of Jesus to assimilate to Gentile culture and customs.  I assume that MBI does not mean simply that this has happened once or twice at some point in history.  Rather this appears to be a claim that most Christian institutions throughout history have had policies forcing this assimilation.  If this is the case, I call upon MBI to produce evidence to this effect.  I personally cannot speak from the perspective of all Christians.  However, as a member of the largest non-Catholic denomination in North America, I can say that Southern Baptists have never had such a policy.  Further, as a part of the Lausanne Movement which represents well the heart of global Evangelicalism, I can say that Lausanne has never had such a policy.       

     As a matter of fact, there is a rather large number of Messianic Jewish congregations within Evangelicalism and even within the Southern Baptist Convention. Actually, there are more Southern Baptist Messianic congregations than there are congregations associated with the Messianic Bureau International.  The Southern Baptist Messianic Fellowship (SBMF) website lists at least 30 congregations and a number of Messianic Jewish ministries in their network.  Since the SBMF has as one of their stated objectives “to encourage Jewish believers that their ethnic and historical heritage need NOT be lost upon their commitment to Yeshua”, I find that this accusation that Christians are somehow forcing Messianic Jews to assimilate to be simply at odds with the facts.  It is also worth noting that on MBI’s list of “Major U.S. Messianic Organizations”, the SBMF is not mentioned.  It does however list the International Federation of Messianic Jews and, of course, MBI both of which have fewer congregations than the SBMF.  Not that I want to emphasize size as an essential marker of significance, but one does have to wonder what exactly is meant by “major” on the MBI site.  Should list rather be entitled “MBI Recommended Messianic Organizations”?

     A final word here on assimilation.  It is clear that the MBI has a formal policy of assimilation built upon the assumption that gentiles must become Jews in order to be recognized as part of God’s people (cf. article 14 of their statement of faith, note the phrase “those believers who were formerly gentiles”).   So, while MBI falsely accuses Christian institutions of having a consistent, historical pattern of forcing Jewish followers of Jesus to assimilate to non-Jewish culture, they themselves actually do have this as a stated policy and belief.  It is clear that MBI believes that all believers of Jesus Christ must assimilate to “Hebraic” culture in order to be considered legitimate.  It causes me to wonder how far this goes.  What is the MBI’s position on circumcision? Will they, for example, ordain as a minister one who is not circumcised?  Can one who is not circumcised be considered a member in good standing?

“8. Replaced Israel with non-Biblical concept of church”

     I hope that the problem with this so-called “error” is readily apparent to most of our readers.  Forget about the whole “replaced” issue and hone in on the fact that MBI believes that the Church is a “non-Biblical concept.”  The Greek word ἐκκλησία appears more than 100 times in the New Testament.  In most of those appearances, the word is referring to the Church—the global and historical body of Christ-followers.  Now, I don’t mind the debate over whether or not the Church is Israel or that Israel is something that exists at least somewhat distinctly from the Church.  However, to say outright that the Church does not exist as an institution of God flies in the face of Biblical witness.  It calls into question MBI’s position on the inerrancy of the New Testament. 

     On their website, MBI says that they believe that the New Testament is inerrant.  However, there is not much elaboration on this point.  I’d like to know if the MBI would agree to the “Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy.”  Further, I’d like to know if MBI or Akans would be willing to state clearly whether or not they believe any major Christian denominations are legitimate. 

“9. Anti-Semitism: Called Jews ‘Christ-killers’ and relegated them to a rejected people”

     Again, claiming that anti-Semitism is a matter of institutional policy for most Christians is unfair.  Still, of the nine so-called “errors” listed, this is the one that I have the least amount of trouble with.  Far too many who call themselves Christian have had anti-Semitic tendencies.  Despite the fact that I know of no major Christian denominations today that have policies of anti-Semitism, I agree that there are too many individuals that do.  The term “Christ-Killer” is rightly applied to Jews only if it is applied to all peoples.  I am truly a “Christ-Killer” because of my own sin.  I’d like to reference and commend to you here the “Ethical Statement Relating to Jews and Gentiles” of the Southern Baptist Messianic Fellowship, quoted below in its entirety:

Ethical Statement Relating to Jews and Gentiles:

Since we believe that Yeshua is the true Jewish Messiah Who takes away the sin of the world, and that we are Scripturally obligated to present this "good news" to everyone, we resolve that:

1.       We will try to present the message of redemption through the atonement of Messiah Yeshua with love and compassion to Jews and Gentiles throughout the world.

2.       We strongly condemn anti-Semitism and all derogatory statements or actions against any ethnic, racial, or religious groups.

3.       We will abstain from the use of trickery or deception in presenting the message of salvation through Messiah Yeshua. Also. it is not our intent to forcibly present this message during our attendance at traditional Jewish places of worship. Religious gatherings, or at public or private events which are organized by the traditional Jewish community.

4.       Since it is commonly accepted in the Jewish community at large that "it is not what you believe that makes you a Jew, but who you are." Those of us who are Jewish and believe that Yeshua (Jesus) is the true Messiah of Israel will continue to identify ourselves as Jews.

5.       Those of us who are Jewish believers in Messiah Yeshua and follow the cultural ways of our ancestors will not claim to represent Traditional Judaism.

Who is “Rabbi Dr. Daniel Akans”?

     Before I leave the topic of Messianic Bureau International, I’d like to just take a moment to inquire publicly about the man who currently serves as the president of MBI, Daniel Akans.  A number of very serious concerns have been brought to my attention.  To be fair to Akans, I will not repeat any of them here as I have not been given any kind of evidence to substantiate the accusations that have been made against him.  They may very well have been completely fabricated. Let me say clearly that there is a significant difference between the various theological concerns that I have raised on my blog and accusations of wrong-doing regarding an individual’s personal life and conduct.  Aside from what was in my opinion a rather snippy comment that Akans posted on my blog a year ago, I don’t have any direct knowledge about his personal character and activities.  In light of that, I would like to just publically give Mr. Akans an opportunity to answer a few questions that will perhaps shed light on who he is as a person.  I ask here because I have not been able to find very much in the way of biographical information about Akans on the MBI site.

1.       Mr. Akans represents himself as “Rabbi Dr. Daniel Akans (PhD).” I am interested to learn more about the nature of Akans’ doctoral work.  In which institution did he study?  What was his focus of study? Is his dissertation available for review?

2.       Is Mr. Akans currently licensed as a counselor of any kind in the state of Michigan?  Has he ever been?

3.       Under Akans’ leadership, will MBI be relocating in any sense outside of Michigan?  What is the purpose of this?

4.       What does the MBI equivalent of “church discipline” and/or “member assimilation” look like practically?  Is ostracism from an individual’s family members every encouraged or enforced? How would Akans respond to an accusation of sociological cultism in this regard? 

5.       Does Akans know of any doubts that have been raised about his personal character or conduct that he would be interested in addressing here?

Again, it is not my intention to unfairly cast doubt upon the personal character of Akans.  He may well be a man of great character and honor.  Having worked for a number of years in cross-cultural ministry, I can attest to the fact that behavior deemed immoral or deviant in one cultural context may be perfectly acceptable in another.  However, I do want to give Akans every opportunity to address publicly any issues of a sociological or personal nature that he may feel have unfairly criticized by others.  Since my MBI-related posting a year ago, as insignificant as my blog is, it has become a kind of landing point for people who have concerns about MBI and Daniel Akans.  From that perspective then, it makes some sense for Akans to use this venue to respond to the theological issues that have been raised as well as any personal issues that he’d like to speak to.

     Okay, that’s all.  At this point, I still cannot recommend Messianic Bureau International as being a healthy, Biblical expression of the Christian faith (Messianic or otherwise).  For those interested in Messianic Judaism however, I do commend to you the Southern Baptist Messianic Fellowship (referenced above), a great organization called “Chosen Peoples Ministries”, as well as the old standard “Jews for Jesus.”

In our Nepali and Hindi Christocentric Satsangs, the following mantra is always used at the beginning of the service. Ringing the bell and then beginning this Trinitarian chant provides a great and solemn call to worship.  It is called a “vandan”, that is, a salutation.  We begin our time of devotion and worship by saluting and acknowledging the one Triune and living God – our creator and savior.

I have provided below written forms of this mantra both in Sanskrit (both Devanagari [Pooja font] and Romanized scripts), followed by Nepali and English translations (Romanized).

f=,d ijes'oj oUnu

(TriEak Parmeshwar Vandan)

'kkykse~

lukru Jh firk] iq=] ifo=kReus ue%

lukru Jh firk ijes'ojk; ue%

lukru Jh ;g'kwvk elhgk[k ue%

lukru Jh ifo=kReus ue%

lukru Jh f=,d ijes'ojk; ue%

lukru Jh firk] iq=] ifo=kReus ue% A

Romanized Sanskrit:

Shalom

Sanatan shri Pita, Putra, Pavitra Atmane namah

Sanatan shri Pita Parmeshwaraya namah

Sanatan shri Yeshua Masihakh namah

Sanatan shri Pavitra Atmane namah

Sanatan shri TriEak Parmeshwaraya namah

Sanatan shri Pita, Putra, Pavitra Atmane namah

Romanized Nepali Translation:

Shanti

Anantan Pita, Putra, ra Pavitra Atma, Hami topailai pujan gardaychoo

Anantan Pita Parmeshwar, Hami topailai pujan gardaychoo

Anantan Yeshu Abishekakaran, Hami topailai pujan gardaychoo

Anantan Pavitra Atma, Hami topailai pujan gardaychoo

Anantan Tin-Ekma Parmeshwar, Hami topailai pujan gardaychoo

Anantan Pita, Putra, ra Pavitra Atma, Hami topailai pujan gardaychoo

English Translation:

Peace

Eternal Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, We worship you

Eternal Father, We worship you,

Eternal Jesus Messiah, We worship you,

Eternal Holy Spirit, We worship you,

Eternal Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, We worship you

“I’d like to say a special word of thanks to Anil Yesudas and his organization, Adhyathma Vatika, for the teaching, mentoring and encouragement that I have received in my own pursuit of contextualization and walk with the Lord Jesus.  So many of the resources that we utilize in our Christocentric Satsangs are things that I learned from Anilji.  His tireless and faithful work as a devotee of the Lord Sri Jesus Christ in the Indian cultural context is a true inspiration and excellent example for anyone who desires to imitate the incarnation of our great God and Savior.  I strongly and unhesitatingly recommend the work of Brother Yesudas and encourage all to visit his website.”

Rev. Cody C. Lorance

Contextualization & Hinduism: Why Contextualize?

     Last week, I stressed the Biblical emphasis of obedience over against pragmatism in our mission methods.  That is, we should prefer to conform to God’s will rather than pursue numerical “success” in missions.  Today, I’d like to very briefly outline several reasons why such a preference should compel us to pursue contextualization in mission.  Now, while my particular area of interest is in contextualization among Hindus, these principles are universal in application.  The question is, “Why should we pursue contextualization in mission?” Let me provide four Biblical reasons.

1.       The Imitation of Christ

     As followers of Jesus, we want to be like him (Rom. 8:29, 1 John 3:2), and the simple fact is that Christ practiced contextualization in his own earthly ministry.  The prologue of John tells us that Jesus, the Word, became flesh and dwelt among us.  The incarnation of Christ consisted of God taking on human flesh, human limitations, human culture, human ethnicity, human context.  And the Lord didn’t go to every culture and every nation at every time in history.  He went to one place, one culture, at one time.  In particular, he went to the Jewish people of Galilee about 2,000 years ago.  Furthermore, he didn’t go as a foreigner.  Rather, he spoke the language, ate the food, wore the clothes, practiced the traditions and customs, knew the songs and dances, celebrated the festivals and in every way lived as a full member of that context.  To be sure, there were elements of the culture and society that Jesus challenged, but always emically – as an insider.

     Mark records a revealing incident (chapter 6) in which Jesus spoke in the Nazareth synagogue.  The critical crowd that listened to him responded to Christ’s convicting speech not as though rejecting an outsider, but, on the contrary, as neighbors shocked at the seemingly audacious remarks of one of their own.  “Is not this the carpenter,” they marveled, “the son of Mary and brother of James and Joses and Judas and Simon? And are not his sisters here with us?” (Mark 6:1-3).  Clearly, the Scripture teaches us that Jesus went “all the way” in contextualizing his self, his method, and his message to his mission field.  Those of us who desire to imitate Christ in our mission praxis must take very seriously the importance of imitating His incarnation.  From this perspective then, the pursuit of contextualization becomes spiritual discipline for the missionary.

2.       The Desire to Reach the Nations

     With Paul, so many of us can say that the love of Christ constrains us to engage in this ministry of reconciliation that we call world evangelism and missions.  Our hearts are broken for a lost and dying world whose only hope is the risen Christ.  Since this is the case, we must carefully listen to the Holy Spirit speaking through the Scripture on the topic of contextualization.  For it seems clear that the Bible believes that pursuing contextualization is necessary for reaching the lost.  Where do we see this?

     Brian K. Petersen has detailed a number of helpful examples in his article on the subject including God’s covenant with Abraham, the use of circumcision, names of God, and references to Daniel’s cross-cultural ministry (Petersen, 2010).  Any of these, along with a number of New Testament examples could be explored in great detail for their many significant implications for this topic.  However, I want to just focus on Paul’s own explanation for why he engaged in the pursuit of contextualization in mission.  In his first letter to the Corinthians, Paul writes:

     For though I am free from all, I have made myself a servant to all, that I might win more of them.  To the Jews I became a Jew in order to win Jews. To those under the law I became as one under the law . . . that I might win those under the law.  To those outside the law I became as one outside the law . . . that I might win those outside the law.  To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak.  I have become all things to all people, that by all means I might save some.  I do it all for the sake of the gospel, that I may share with them in its blessings.  (1 Cor. 9:19-23)

     Why did Paul engage in contextualization?  Very clearly, it was his inspired opinion that doing so would result in winning more people to Christ.  Now, let me say here that it isn’t my intention to contradict last week’s warning against preferring numbers to obedience.  Note here that Paul’s ultimate motivation is to share in the blessings of the Gospel, not simply to achieve numerical success.  Having said that, there is little doubt that Paul believed that contextualization would result in a greater sharing of those blessings as more people would be won to Christ.  In actual fact, there may be something deeper going on here than the accumulation of more converts.  What is clear is that the opinion of the Bible, and thus of the Holy Spirit, is that more people will be won to Christ as His ambassadors imitate His incarnation – the self-emptying, culture-adopting, flesh-crucifying incarnation—as they engage in mission.

I’ll save the next two reasons for contextualization for next week.

Works Cited

Petersen, B. K. (2010). A Brief Investigation of Old Testament Precursors to the Pauline Missiological Model of Cultural Adaptation. Rethinking Hindu Ministry II: Papers from the Rethinking Forum , 14-27.

Over the course of the next several Tuesdays, I’ll be posting brief articles related to the topic of contextualization among Hindus.  These articles are intended to provide some introductory thoughts for the reader on this topic. 

Contextualization & Hinduism: Obedience v. Pragmatism

     Today, the United States has more Hindus than any other non-Asian nation in the world with estimates ranging from just under 1 million to nearly 1.5 million (Wikipedia, 2010) (Adherants, 2005). Canada, similarly, is home to an additional 330+ thousand Hindus (Wikipedia, 2010).  As it has often been noted, the Hindus of North America live, work, study, and worship in every major and midsized city—as well as many of the smaller ones—on the continent; tend to be employed in highly skilled and well-paying professions; and represent many of the least-reached people groups in the world. Surely no missiological consideration of people groups in North America is complete without paying careful attention to such a large, influential, and unreached demographic block.  However, we must note that while, as missiologist H.L. Richard has noted, it has become “geographically easy” for North American followers of Christ to reach out to many Hindus, the particular challenges presented by the Hindu-Christian encounter have rendered us largely ineffective in this endeavor (Richard, 2010).

     In this series of articles, I would like to present a summary of what I have found to be some of the most essential points related to the topic of contextualization of Christian discipleship among Hindus. This is not intended at all to be an exhaustive treatment of all points relevant to this topic nor of the particular points that I will raise here.  Rather, as I have worked as a follower of Christ seeking to make disciples among Hindus in North America for several years, I have become convinced that the proper pursuit of contextualization is indispensible for faithful disciple-making among them.  Let me be very clear, I believe that the pursuit of contextualization is a MUST for Christ-followers who seek to faithfully proclaim His salvation to their Hindu friends and neighbors.  Let me briefly expound on that point.

     There is no shortage of anecdotal evidence provided by Christian opponents of contextualization who may point to story after story of Hindus who decided to follow Christ  even though the gospel was presented in what might be described as very “non-contextual” ways.  I myself have heard such stories – including first-hand testimonies – dozens of times.  And I have often been tempted to respond by seeking to provide counter-testimonies that seem to demonstrate the superior power of contextual methods to create converts.  However, the underlying assumption of this kind of contest – that God prefers those mission methods, whatever they may be, that produce the most results— is false.  While statistical efficiency is a nice thing to see in our mission endeavors, obedience to the Spirit’s leading and conformity to His will are always to be preferred.  Let me devote the remainder of today’s post to a brief defense of this statement.

Obedience v. Pragmatism in Scripture

     A number of Old Testament stories that illustrate this truth come to mind.  One of the first is the account of Abraham and Sarah seeking to fulfill God’s promise of a son (Gen. 15:4-6) by their own devices.  It made practical sense for Sarah to give her servant girl to Abraham as a wife, so that’s exactly what they conspired to do (Gen. 16:1-4).  After all, if Abraham was going to fulfill God’s purpose of becoming the father of a countless people, he would need to start somewhere—and marrying the young and healthy Hagar seemed to be their best bet.  In retrospect, however, we know that God’s desire was produce an heir through Sarah.  And so, Isaac was to be preferred over Ishmael, the child of promise over the child of pragmatism. 

     Later when Abraham was commanded to sacrifice Isaac, it made no practical sense whatsoever.  By that time, however, Abraham had learned his lesson and raised a sharpened knife over his bound son.  Ready to plunge the blade into Isaac’s flesh, Abraham reasoned that God could raise the dead and preferred the obedience of faith over pragmatism.

     Other examples from the Old Testament abound.  If we had time we could consider the story of Gideon or the negative example of Jonah.  A particularly poignant illustration of this truth is found in the rejection of King Saul.  We see King Saul rejected because he preferred the pragmatic over the obedient.  Upon his defeat of the Amalekite army, he was to devote to destruction everything that breathed (1 Sam. 15:3).  But Saul reasoned that sparing the Amalekite king and the best of the livestock as a sacrifice to God made much more sense.  Samuel’s pained cry rings through the pages of Scripture, “What is this bleating of sheep in my ears and the lowing of oxen that I hear?” (1 Sam. 15:14) The prophet is clear, God prefers obedience – “to obey is better than sacrifice and to listen than the fat of rams” (1 Sam. 15:22b).  Saul’s pragmatic choice to set aside the best of the livestock for some kind of grand worship service is called “rebellion” and is likened to “divination.”  His presumption is considered as wicked as idolatry (1 Sam. 15:23).

     In the New Testament, there is Jesus who surprisingly and consistently downplays the significance of the masses of people who swarm about him (e.g. Mark 1:38, John 6:26), and instead rejoices in small, seemingly insignificant acts of faithful obedience (e.g. John 6:70, Mark 12:42-43).  This develops into a full-blown pattern in Acts as we seen only passing references to large numbers of people believing (2:41, 2:27, 4:4, 5:14, 6:1, 8:6, 19:10, etc.) which are strategically used by Luke to emphasize the importance of following the Holy Spirit’s leading, direction and timing in mission (Acts 1:4 [thru ch. 8:1], 1:8,  6:1-6, 8:1-4,  8:26-29, 8:39-40, 9:6 & 19-22, 9:10-19,  10:19, 13:1-4, 16:6-10, 18:9-11, 18:21, 19:21-22, 20:22, 27:21-26). 

     Overall, I believe that the emphasis of Scripture is very clear.  God wants His people to obey his voice – to prioritize obedience over against pragmatism.  There will be numbers – seasons of exponential increase that sometimes serve as signs of God’s favor and blessing (this is often the way large numbers are used in Acts).  However, the obedient and faithful path isn’t always the most expedient or statistically impressive.  If we compare Amos’ statistical failure to Jonah’s impressive city-wide revival, we may be surprised to find God preferring the prophet that no one wanted to listen to (Amos 7:12-13).  We must not confuse the greater numbers who followed after Jeroboam as a sign of God’s favor on the northern king’s novel worship system (1 Kings 12:20, 25-33).

     As we begin this series of weekly articles on contextualization, we must from the outset commit ourselves to the obedient path.  What does Scripture compel us to do?  How can we conform our mission to the will of God?  This must be our preference over any question of pragmatism, efficiency, or statistics.

_________________________________________________

Adherants. (2005, April 8). The Largest Hindu Communities. Retrieved May 13, 2010, from Adherants: http://www.adherants.com/largecom/com_hindu.html

Richard, H. (2010). Good News for Hindus in the Neighborhood. Rethinking Hindu Ministry II: Papers from the Rethinking Forum , 32-35.

Wikipedia. (2010, May 11). Hinduism by country. Retrieved May 13, 2010, from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hinduism_by_country

Today, I’d like to “re-blog” something that I’ve found elsewhere on the web.  If you are among the millions that are involved in the Short-Term Missions mania that is sweeping through the Western Church, you will find this especially helpful.  It is a blog article by Mark Rodgers that was published on the Gospel Coalition website back in March 2010.  It includes a good, brief annotated list of some helpful resources for preparing teams for cross-cultural STM trips.

Excerpt:

Thanks for reading!

      Let me take the opportunity today to share with you all a question that I recently received from a friend engaged in work among South Asian Hindus in a North American city.  Since responding to this email, I’ve found myself feeling the need to share my response with several others.  Perhaps, you also will find reflecting on this question and my response to be helpful.

First, here is the question that I received:

Dear Cody,

     Yesterday evening at our church prayer meeting, I mentioned my plan for this Sunday's lesson, and someone prayed that the [South Asians we are reaching out to] would repent of following after the wrong gods and turn to Jesus.
     That got me to thinking about the issue of repentance. Without some understanding of the need for repentance, what does "following Jesus" mean? I acknowledge that God meets people where they are; whatever small steps we may take towards Him are all valuable. The Holy Spirit initiates everything, and in fact, "No man can come to the Father unless the Father draws him."
     Still, when you have a moment, please share your thoughts on the place of repentance in coming to Christ. My sense is that when we mention the word "sin" "sins", Hindus think of really awful things like murder, and do not think of themselves as sinners. One Sunday I was with the children in the church's "Children's Church" program, and each child was to draw the silhouette of his/her hand on a piece of paper, then write on it one sin they had committed and then tack the hand onto a large cross. The Hindu children denied everything! They did not lie; they did not take someone else's things; they obeyed their parents.
     When we were in South Asia, it seemed to us that Hindus thought of sin in terms of failures in their religious ritual observances. The moral sins they seemed to gloss over as "mistakes." These were excused more readily.
     It's great sharing with you, but perhaps I should not trouble you...

Jaya Masihi,
[A Friend]

And now, my response:

Dear Friend,

     I appreciate the chance to hear your reflections on these things.  Of course, the issue of how repentance fits into salvation isn’t exclusively a South Asian one.  That is, I don’t know that people from Hindu backgrounds are especially handicapped in understanding their need for a savior, their sinfulness, etc.  Honestly, this subject is one that I’ve wrestled with in every ministry context I’ve been in – Americans, Chinese, Burmese, Ethiopians, Nepalis, etc.  How repentant does a person need to be?  How sinful do they need to think they are?  I’m not even sure if I’ve really figured this out in my own heart as it applies to my own life.

     Nevertheless, there are a few thoughts that come to mind that I think might be helpful for you to reflect upon.  I know I could write pages on all these, but I’m going to try to make myself be brief.

Centered Set v. Bounded Set

The first thing I’d point you towards is Paul Hiebert’s work regarding “Centered” and “Bounded” sets.  You may be familiar with this already, but I’ve found it extraordinarily helpful in thinking about my mission field.  It helps me to forget about drawing artificial lines between who is saved and who is not – as if I can know.  It reminds me of my call to make disciples rather than converts.  From this view, repentance no longer becomes a question that primarily bears upon a person’s “profession of faith”.  Rather, it is an issue of critical importance throughout the life of that disciple.  From this perspective, I am reminded that for Shanti (a new follower of Jesus) to turn away from false gods was not just something that she did.  It is something that she must do, continually and for the rest of her life.

     If the concept of centered and bounded sets is unfamiliar to you, I strongly suggest that you check out the following resources.  First, there is Hiebert’s original, ground-breaking article.  Second, you can watch this brief summary video on the topic.

Guilt, Shame, Fear

     Repentance is an appropriate emphasis that really does transcend cultures.  However, it may be the case that Western theology has tended to favor a particular interpretation of “metanoia” that emphasizes “guilt/innocence” in a way that is difficult for people from other cultures to quickly grasp.  Here’s the announcement of Jesus:

“καὶ λέγων ὅτι πεπλήρωται ὁ καιρὸς καὶ ἤγγικεν ἡ βασιλεία τοῦ θεοῦ: μετανοεῖτε καὶ πιστεύετε ἐν τῷ εὐαγγελίῳ.”

“The time is fulfilled.  The kingdom of God is at hand.  Repent and believe the gospel.”  (Mark 1:15).

     We could translate the last sentence more literally as, “Change your mind and believe in the gospel.”  Certainly a mind-change about behavioral morality should be a part of that, but must that be the primary emphasis?  What if the person we are sharing with can much more easily grasp the concept of shame and honor?  Of fear and freedom and power?  I think a key is to come to understand what is the “bad news” as, in this case, South Asians understand it.  Where has sin and Satan taken hold of the people and the culture?  This is point where we must preach the gospel vigorously.  I recommend taking a look at chapter 5 of my book Ethnographic Chicago, which talks about spiritual conflict in a folk Hindu context.  I guess my point is that rather than work so hard to get Ethiopians, Nepalis, Pakistanis, or Burmese to agree with us as to what their problem is and why they need a Savior, why not discover what they already believe to be the problem?  Why do they think they need a savior?  Whatever the answer is found to be, does the gospel say anything about that?  Did Jesus die for that?

Sinfulness in Hinduism

     On the issue of sin itself.  If I find myself in a situation where I have a Hindu telling me that they aren’t sinful, I need to find a humble way to explain Hinduism to them a little better.  Let me explain.  Some time ago, I got word that a few of the older men in our Nepali community were feeling hesitant to continue coming to our Satsangs because of our frequent use and broad application of the Sanskrit/Nepali term “paapi” (meaning “sinner”).  I came to understand that this term had a very narrow application among Nepalis.  It referred to criminals and to the absolute dregs of society.  Once I discovered this, I took the time to teach about the word from a Biblical perspective.  I warned against the dangers of comparisons and told the story of the Pharisee and the tax collector.  The story, which I told in a very interactive way, was very well-received.  I also used that teaching time to remind everyone of a famous Hindu mantra.  It was a mantra that most were somewhat familiar with, though many have not taken the time to consider the meaning.  The most memorable line of the mantra goes like this:

“Paapoham paapakarmaanam paapaatmaa paapasambuva”

Which means, “I am a sinner by birth and deeds, my soul is depraved by sin; I am conceived in sin.”  John Calvin couldn’t have said it better himself.  I also had a conversation personally with a Hindu man about this topic.  I found that he was hesitant to disagree with Jesus’ assessment of his soul.  And he seemed downright embarrassed to discover that a mantra he had heard all his life confirmed the fact that he indeed was a sinner.  Of course, it still doesn’t mean that he’s going to understand sin primarily as an issue of guilt that must be atoned for or misdeeds that must be confessed.  He may more easily conceive of sin resulting in shame and separation from God and/or leading to his victimization by and bondage to evil spirits.  I’m okay with that.  What I’m praying for is that he’ll see his need to be saved – his need for God’s Muktidata (salvation-giver).

Airport Pick Up

     Let me close with a  story that illustrates well for me what I think needs to happen in people’s hearts:

     It was a Tuesday, a couple weeks ago. I was in the international terminal at Chicago O’Hare awaiting the arrival of flight 37 from Seoul which carried a bunch of Koreans and a few Bhutanese-Nepali refugee families. I was there to pick up a young Hindu couple who I end up being related to through my Nepali sister’s family. Anyway, we had to wait a long time for them to clear customs and I found myself pacing back and forth throughout the terminal.
     Well, I walked all the way down to the far end of the building and then pivoted back towards the area where some of my Nepali friends were sitting (they had come to help me greet the new arrivals). They were sitting in an area near an escalator that led to the intra-airport train that took people to domestic terminals. As I began making my way back to that seating area, I saw a small group of people quickly emerge from one of the gates and hurriedly proceed towards the escalator. Leading the group was a middle-aged woman wearing a blue IOM (International Office of Migration) vest and rather impatiently commanding her followers to hurry along. She was followed by a young (mid to late twenties) Nepali couple who were each holding small children (toddlers) in their arms. The husband was mustached, maybe 29, and speedily walking about 10 paces behind the IOM worker. He was intently following, occasionally giving a nervous look back to his wife who was perhaps another 10 steps behind him. The IOM worker was halfway up the steps before the Nepali man reached the bottom of the mysterious moving staircase. He hesitated for a couple seconds at then, prompted by the impatient IOM worker, lunged onto the first step.
     A few seconds later, his wife reached the escalator. I was now maybe 20 yards away and saw her look down at the moving stairs and simply freeze. Somehow, in that second, I knew her. She was my sister. She was Nepal. She was all nations. She was Jesus. I knew her heart. And I was Jesus. And I was the Church. And I was her brother. And I was my same, old, sinful self. 
     I moved quickly now as I heard the IOM worker, now at the top of the escalator, somewhat angrily barking at the woman to come up the stairs. I saw her husband looking back helplessly as the machine carried him further and further away from his bride. In seconds, I was standing at her side. “Topailai dar lagyo?” I asked gently. She turned to see a big, white, American speaking to her in her heart language. Her eyes were filled with tears, her face was simple and pretty, her arms we tired from holding her baby for hours – she exuded fear from her whole being. And yet, without even a tinge of surprise to hear me speaking Nepali and with absolute trust, she replied, “Yes,” with a graceful tilting of her head. 
     I reached my arm over the handrail that divided us and firmly gripped her right arm. Her small frame gave off no resistance as I gently but forcefully led her forward. In a second, she was on the step. A few seconds later, she was gone – off to face an airport train, a connecting flight, and countless other scary and imposing challenges.  I took a deep breath and turned towards my Nepali friends. Only one word came to my mind, “Bichaara.” I figure that there is no good English word for this. It means something like, “I feel pity and love and compassion with and for that person.”
     I have not been able to escape that moment. Those few seconds, for some reason, landed so powerfully upon me. Later in the day, I couldn’t help by cry as I relayed the story to my wife. My feeling has been that somehow, God was able to compress everything that I am into that one interaction. That is who I am. That is who I want to be. That is what I want my life to consist of.    

     The following Sunday I relayed that story to our community during the Satsang.  Then I explained that sin leaves us in the condition of that young woman.  Scared, paralyzed, helpless, separated from the one who loves us (God).  We look down at the moving steps and realize that we can do nothing, absolutely nothing to close the gap between ourselves and God.  Then there is a voice in our ears.  “Are you afraid?” it asks.  And that’s Jesus.  And he’s down at the ground-level with us.  And he has learned to speak our language.  We are afraid.  But, just like that young woman, we have an opportunity to trust him.  And if we say, “Yes.”  If we trust our lives to him, he’ll reach out a gentle and firm hand and take us to our Father.    

     Well, so much for brevity.  Thank you for reading through my Blog-pistle today.  May the Lord bless you as you serve Him!

Hey everyone! Just wanted to let you all know that the audio files from this year's "Mission At Your Doorstep" conference in Wheaton, IL are now available for free download.  I especially recommend the sessions by Dr. Soong-Chan Rah which were very good.  There's a little something from me available as well.  Enjoy!

http://www.wheatonbible.org/On_Your_Doorstep

   It was almost dawn when they saw it.  It was still quite dark, the wind was still gusting, and the waves were still tossing the boat back and forth, but there it was—in the distance a figure was moving upon the water.  Terror gripped them when they realized that it was a man—a ghost, it seemed.  Funny, here was the same group of men who had just days ago been out in the villages casting out demons.  Their report to Jesus must have included tales of the evil spirits that had fled.  Now, at the end of themselves, they shrieked in terror at the sight of a single spirit. 

     Jesus knew they were afraid.  Here they had been struggling for hours, 12 men at the oars and they had barely made it half-way across the sea.  Jesus, in just a few minutes, strolled upon the sea effortlessly – gaining on them, heck, it seemed at first that he would pass them altogether—the wind and waves seemed to have no affect on Jesus, let alone the fact that you just aren’t supposed to be able to walk on water.  But, as he neared the boat, Jesus took pity on his beloved disciples, shouting, “Take courage, it’s me! Don’t be afraid.”

     The disciples cast skeptical looks at each other while they continued to wrestle with the oars.  “Only one way to find out,” thought the impetuous Peter.  “Lord, if it’s really you, tell me to come to you on the water.” “Come,” replied the Lord.

     And then, before the disciples fully knew what was going on, there was Peter slowly creeping towards the mysterious figure on the water – walking on the water! The wind was still raging, so perhaps only the seasick tax collector, Matthew, hanging his head over the side of the boat witnessed the whole ordeal.  There was Peter walking towards the ghost.  A moment later he was looking disoriented and panicky at the sight of the wind and waves.  And then he was sinking.  A desperate hand was extended, a cry for help, and then there was Jesus firmly clasping the fisherman’s hand.  Now, the two were making their way back to the boat, now climbing into the hull—Peter, wet and panting, practically falling in. 

     And then there was the Lord.  Standing there in the middle of the boat like a conquering hero.  Quite obviously now to everyone, not a ghost.  And quite clearly no mere man.  The oars were still now, like the sea which had all of the sudden grown strangely calm.  The fierce wind had just as quickly become nothing more than a gentle, whispering breeze as the morning sun began to peak up over the Golan Heights in the distance.  The disciples gaped, then knelt, then gave their spent and broken selves over to worship—“Truly you are the Son of God!” someone said.  That seemed about right.

It wasn’t long now before the boat reached the shore. They dropped anchor at Gennesaret, near Capernaum. The disciples, bleary-eyed and racked with pain from hours of strenuous work, stumbled out of the boat and onto the beach. Their heads were spinning as they watched Jesus, the Son of God, wondering, “What’s next?”
And then someone recognized them. “It’s Jesus of Nazareth!” they heard a voice call out in the distance. As Jesus made his way towards the town, the Twelve followed closely behind and watched as the news of his arrival rapidly spread. Soon the crowds were swelling again. People were bringing the sick and afflicted, even carrying them on mats. They were pressing in, begging just to touch the edge of his cloak – this they did and were healed.
Jesus then made his way towards the synagogue of Capernaum. The disciples began noticing people from the night before and must have wondered if the whole world was now clamoring to see him. And then Jesus stopped. They were at the synagogue now and Jesus was standing looking at the crowd. Thousands had gathered—the multitude seemed countless, greater than the day before. A voice broke in, “Rabbi, when did you get here?”
The Twelve looked on as Jesus delivered a stinging rebuke to the crowd. He began to say things that the disciples weren’t sure they really understood, but couldn’t help but believe—after, well, everything. And then the grumbling began. It started slowly but it soon infected the whole crowd. Now people were shouting at and arguing against Jesus. Fact is, it all happened so fast and the disciples where so physically and emotionally drained, that they weren’t exactly sure of everything that took place that day. Somehow, someway, they found themselves at the end of the day—alone with Jesus. All they knew was that during the course of that day thousands had walked away from their Rabbi—what had only a short time ago seemed like the greatest spiritual awakening in generations had dwindled into nothing in a matter of mere hours.
Now, after all that time, they were finally alone with Jesus. They finally had some peace and quiet. But none of them, it seemed, could either speak or sleep. The sleep they had been so long deprived of now seemed to elude them further. Their bodies ached with soreness as their muscles slowly stiffened. The sensation of being on that storm-tossed boat was still felt by some of them as they sat in silence. Their minds were cluttered with images of Jesus multiplying bread and walking on water and the sound of his voice, “Come away with me. You give them something to eat. Don’t be afraid. I am the bread of life. Whoever feeds on this bread will live forever.” The rollercoaster of the past couple of days had left them feeling utterly and completely wasted, confused, and broken.
“You don’t want to leave too, do you?”
Jesus’ words had broken the silence. They looked up at him and saw that wildness that was always in his eyes. Just then something seemed to click for a number of them. This Jesus-thing was simply not what they thought it would be. Maybe they’d never get their heads around it completely. Clearly, Jesus was not at all interested in following their game plans or the culturally acceptable scripts. As long as they followed him, he would continue to inspire, surprise, frighten, and confuse them. One day, he might even get them killed. But, what had been said about him last night on the boat was true—he really was the Son of God, the Christ sent from above. And they, or most of them, really did believe. Leave? No, this was it for them. Whatever fallback plans they had, had gotten lost somewhere between Capernaum and the middle of the sea of Galilee.
And so, after a moment, there was Peter, speaking again for them all—and, they had to admit, this time doing a pretty good job:
“Where are we gonna go, Jesus? Who else are we going to turn to? You have the words of eternal life. The bottom line is, we believe you. We know you are the Holy One of God!”

“Come as you are”

            Chris went to bed on Saturday night reflecting on what a big day it had been for the small Indian church which met at his house.  Chris was an associate pastor of a suburban church which had done a great job of reaching the mostly white, middle class population by allowing people to “come as you are.”  When the church directors noticed that several Indians had started attending regularly, they asked Chris to help form a group that would someday become a sister church.

            It had only been a few months ago that Chris first met with the six Indian believers.  As they shared their testimonies, Chris learned that they were all in their 20s, had been raised as Hindus and had decided to follow Jesus in college or shortly after.  Most were children of immigrants and had lived in the United States all their lives.  When the group expressed a desire to reach out to the Hindu community (a significant minority), Chris’s suggestion of starting a house church was met with enthusiasm.  Chris was to lead until God raised up a pastor among the Indians.  After some discussion, every other Saturday afternoon at Chris’s house seemed to be the best time and place for the group.

            The reason for excitement on this particular Saturday was that it had been the first time Hindu visitors had come.  Hari, who had been a believer for four months, was the only one of the group whose family lived nearby.  Hari’s parents were tolerant of their son’s new faith and wanted to visit his church.  Chris thought their visit had gone well overall, although they seemed to be confused when Chris told them they did not need to take off their shoes or that the fruit and flowers which they had brought were not appropriate on the altar.  Well, Chris reflected, Hari’s parents did not leave as Christians but they had witnessed true worship for the first time.  Perhaps on their next visit they might even realize that they did not need to wear fancy clothes to impress God.

            The next night, Chris received a frantic call from Hari, asking that they meet as soon as possible.  Chris and Hari met over coffee the next morning.  Before Chris could share his excitement about Saturday, Hari blurted out, “My parents were so offended by their visit that they are demanding that I stop coming.  In fact, they want me to stop being a Christian completely if all churches are like ours.”

            Hari went on: “They asked so many questions I couldn’t answer.  Why do we meet every other Saturday when there’s nothing special about Saturdays and if there is, why do we only meet every other week?  Why do we meet at a house instead of a holy temple of God?  Why do we dress so casually when God wants our best?  Why do we leave on our shoes when they bring in dirt and make things unclean and impure?  What was wrong with the gift of fruit and flowers my parents brought to God?  Why don’t the rest of us bring offerings to God other than money?  My parents think God does not accept our worship since we ignore these simple things.  They think God will be more pleased with me if I worship him the Hindu way.”

            After a moment, Hari said, “I still want to be a Christian and I still want to go to church, but I want to worship God in a respectful and honoring way.  Is there any way we can make our church look more Hindu?”  Chris replied. . .

“Come as you are”

            Chris went to bed on Saturday night reflecting on what a big day it had been for the small Indian church which met at his house.  Chris was an associate pastor of a suburban church which had done a great job of reaching the mostly white, middle class population by allowing people to “come as you are.”  When the church directors noticed that several Indians had started attending regularly, they asked Chris to help form a group that would someday become a sister church.

            It had only been a few months ago that Chris first met with the six Indian believers.  As they shared their testimonies, Chris learned that they were all in their 20s, had been raised as Hindus and had decided to follow Jesus in college or shortly after.  Most were children of immigrants and had lived in the United States all their lives.  When the group expressed a desire to reach out to the Hindu community (a significant minority), Chris’s suggestion of starting a house church was met with enthusiasm.  Chris was to lead until God raised up a pastor among the Indians.  After some discussion, every other Saturday afternoon at Chris’s house seemed to be the best time and place for the group.

            The reason for excitement on this particular Saturday was that it had been the first time Hindu visitors had come.  Hari, who had been a believer for four months, was the only one of the group whose family lived nearby.  Hari’s parents were tolerant of their son’s new faith and wanted to visit his church.  Chris thought their visit had gone well overall, although they seemed to be confused when Chris told them they did not need to take off their shoes or that the fruit and flowers which they had brought were not appropriate on the altar.  Well, Chris reflected, Hari’s parents did not leave as Christians but they had witnessed true worship for the first time.  Perhaps on their next visit they might even realize that they did not need to wear fancy clothes to impress God.

            The next night, Chris received a frantic call from Hari, asking that they meet as soon as possible.  Chris and Hari met over coffee the next morning.  Before Chris could share his excitement about Saturday, Hari blurted out, “My parents were so offended by their visit that they are demanding that I stop coming.  In fact, they want me to stop being a Christian completely if all churches are like ours.”

            Hari went on: “They asked so many questions I couldn’t answer.  Why do we meet every other Saturday when there’s nothing special about Saturdays and if there is, why do we only meet every other week?  Why do we meet at a house instead of a holy temple of God?  Why do we dress so casually when God wants our best?  Why do we leave on our shoes when they bring in dirt and make things unclean and impure?  What was wrong with the gift of fruit and flowers my parents brought to God?  Why don’t the rest of us bring offerings to God other than money?  My parents think God does not accept our worship since we ignore these simple things.  They think God will be more pleased with me if I worship him the Hindu way.”

            After a moment, Hari said, “I still want to be a Christian and I still want to go to church, but I want to worship God in a respectful and honoring way.  Is there any way we can make our church look more Hindu?”  Chris replied. . .

The Theological Impetus for Global Partnership

     Now, this post today, just perfectly fits the title of my blog – “Ramblings.”  Because, you see, what is moving me to write this is just simply my frequently rambling mind.  I’ve had some thoughts on global partnership—new to me—that I need to write down . . . to discipline myself to write.

     First, there is the critical issue that faces the 3^rd Lausanne Congress on World Evangelization (just one of six issues):

Partnering in the Body of Christ: Toward a New Global Equilibrium

     Now the practical question for me as a mission leader is, Why?  Why should I lead my team and seek to mobilize others to enter into partnerships within and outside of the denomination, within and outside of the nation?  It is honestly just very challenging to me to assess the value of such partnership.  And, if I look on a larger scale, how do I convince my local Baptist association or the Southern Baptist Convention as a whole to engage in meaningful partnerships with churches, agencies, and associations from other parts of the world?

     TIBM has “partnering with others” as one of our seven central tasks.  So it is something that we do.  And with certain of those partnerships, it is not difficult to convince me that the relationship is important and valuable, but if you ask me to articulate why, I’m not sure I could do so convincingly.  More fundamentally, I’ve had trouble articulating why partnership as a practice is inherently right and good and to be passionately pursued by all Christian churches, agencies and organizations.  I mean, if it is only a matter of trying to keep us from bickering at each other, well, then partnership is reduced to a mere necessary annoyance – like filing your taxes.  Even if the value of partnership is only practical – sharing “resources and best practices” – well, I suppose that is good, but doesn’t that potentially reduce the impetus for partnering to the desire to seek relationships of convenience?  So that if I cannot be convinced of the practical benefits of such an arrangement, there is really no reason to enter into it.

     Is there more? Is there a deeper, essentially ontological, compellingly theological reason for engaging in global partnerships?  Is there an inescapably Biblical demand that relegates all pragmatic motivations and hesitations concerning partnership to the dim background?  Well, of course, I have a thought.  Consider Paul’s prayer in Ephesians 3:

I believe that one of the things that Paul’s prayer declares is that it is impossible for local bodies of Christians to reach (or even significantly approach) spiritual maturity without engagement in genuine relationships with Christians outside that local group.  Look with me at this text:

1.         The Desired Result is Spiritual Maturity – note Paul’s “so that” in verse 19.  Everything that Paul is praying is “so that” something will result in the beneficiaries of his prayer.  It is “so that you may be filled with all the fullness of God.” Which is a wonderfully evocative way of speaking of spiritual formation, maturity, sanctification – God’s work to transform us into the image of Jesus Christ.

2.         The Cause of the “So That” – It is clear that Paul believes that when a Christian is enabled to comprehend (the Greek word καταλαβέσθαι means literally to “eagerly seize”) and know the multidimensional, knowledge-surpassing love of God, the result is spiritual maturity—the “so that” of verse 19.

3.         The Essential Conditions of Comprehending – Note that Paul’s prayer assumes that this comprehending and knowing of God’s love is only possible “together with all the saints” (v. 18).  This fellowship is presented here as a necessary condition for which Paul is praying on behalf of his readers without which, the apostle is convinced, grasping the love of God and thus spiritual maturity is an utter impossibility.

4.         The Plurality of You – The Biblical demand for partnership comes into full relief when we recognize that the “you” of Paul’s prayer (v. 16, 17, 18, and 19) is plural (preserved nicely in the Nepali Bible as “timiharu”).  That is, the “you” being rooted and grounded in love in verse 17 is the local body of believers that has received and is now corporately reading Paul’s epistle.  Thus is it a local body of believers for whom Paul is praying in verse 18 when he says, “I pray that you [all] may have power to” comprehend and know the love of God.  It is this plural you then that must enter into relationship, dialogue, and indeed partnership “together with all the saints” – Christians from outside that specific community – “so that” spiritual maturity may result in their body. 

     What we are left with is an inspired prayer that sees spiritual maturity as only attainable when local bodies of Christians are engaged in meaningful partnerships with other communities of faith outside their immediate context.  That is, we may say confidently from this text that any given mission team, church, agency, denomination, or Christian organization will be unable to be all that God would have them be as evangelists, medical missionaries, church planters, Bible translators, campus ministers, Christian educators, relief workers, worshippers, intercessors, disciples, or Jesus-followers apart from the pursuit of global partnership as a corporate spiritual discipline.  Or, to put it positively, the active pursuit of ever-deepening global partnerships by local bodies of Christians enables those communities to better (and increasingly so) comprehend and know God’s love which results in dramatic spiritual transformation and growth.

     This is true, I assume, because there is actually only one body of Christ in the world (4:4) with one triune God indwelling, ruling over, and guiding that whole body (4:4-6).  That the gifts of Christ are distributed among all parts of that body (4:7ff) further testifies to the fact that it is when that global body is peacefully bonded together (4:3), pursuing and gradually arriving at the unity of faith (4:13) that the Church of Jesus Christ in the world functions as it should (4:16).  It is when the whole Church builds itself up in love (4:16) – which it cannot do outside of the exercise of the spiritual discipline global partnership – that it “grows up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ” (4:15).

     Whew! Okay, then, think about that for awhile.  I’d love to read your comments.  Also, I strongly encourage you to engage the global conversation on this topic at http://www.lausanne.org/global-conversation/more-partners-at-the-family-table.html where you can read several articles, watch a video, explore resources, and interact with others.  Blessings! 

Here's an article that highlights several church starting efforts in Illinois, including that of TIBM.  It appeared in the Illinois Baptist in November 2009.

Church starting emphasis features church planters, baptisms and a juggler By Marty King, editor SPRINGFIELD | Wednesday evening’s session of the IBSA annual meeting had the feel of an international missionary commissioning service as 31 Illinois church planters and their spouses paraded into the hall, which was filled nearly to capacity. Each planter introduced himself, his spouse and their church start, and shared a prayer request.  As they stood across the front of the room, facing the audience, IBSA executive director Nate Adams announced, “Illinois Baptists, these are your Illinois church planting missionaries,” and the audience erupted in an extended standing ovation. As the audience and planters took their seats, eight of the planters and their supporters joined Adams on a stage filled with images of planting, sowing and harvesting including shovels, a tiller, a wheelbarrow, bags of dirt and seeds.  Adams then interviewed the planters, some of whose churches are well established while others are just starting. Roberto Cruz explained that he is in the beginning stages of starting three Spanish-speaking churches in Cobden, Carlyle and Carbondale while Chet Daniels is starting a church in Champaign to reach college students.  “We want to plant churches, that plant churches, that plant churches,” Daniels said. Ron Gray started Connection Community Church on the southside of Chicago, sponsored by Broadview Baptist.  Gray said he is starting a Southern Baptist church for four reasons.  “Number one is doctrine, and number two is the Cooperative Program where a small church can be part of a worldwide global ministry,” he said. “Number three is the SBC’s emphasis on missions, and the fourth reason is that Southern Baptists showed up.  They showed up in New Orleans after Katrina and they showed up in Illinois to help me plant this church.”  Gray concluded by announcing that he had brought his church’s first gift to the Cooperative Program to the annual meeting. One of the most entertaining testimonies of the evening came from John Stillman and Ken Schultz who started Crosswinds Church in Plainfield.  Both laymen were members of Friendship Baptist Church, Plainfield several years ago when a visiting missionary talked about God using laypeople to start churches.  Stillman, a nuclear engineer, and Schultz, a Christian entertainer and juggler, knelt in the church parking lot “as God called us into ministry to start a new church,” Stillman said. Friendship’s pastor Odis Weaver, standing behind the co-pastors, said the experience has changed his mind about church starting.  “At the time Crosswinds started, I was thinking a lot about what we were going to lose – some of our best leaders, givers, and prayers – the cream of the crop,” he said.  “But I realized that we have to leave it up to God, and eventually He brought us new people to replace the ones we lost.  Now we’re looking at starting another new church.” Schultz humorously demonstrated how church planters require support from churches and associations by using Weaver and Dan Eddington, Three Rivers Association’s director of missions, to steady himself as he mounted a unicycle and juggled three long knives. Brian Price started Love Fellowship Church, also in Plainfield, in 2003 and now averages over 120 worshippers on Sunday morning.  “We had tremendous ups and downs during those years, and sometimes I wanted to walk away, but I don’t focus on that because God has showed Himself faithful,” he said. Dressed in decorative clothing typical of some of the people groups he is trying to reach in the Chicago area, Cody Lorance shared about the multiple churches he is starting for immigrants from Ethiopia, Burma and Nepal.  Lorance said he and his wife had intended to apply as missionaries through the International Mission Board after finishing college in Chicago’s west suburbs, but “that was our plan,” he said. “The Lord stopped us at our next door neighbors who were from India, and we realized, for us, the ends of the earth means Chicago.  We have such a heart for these people, many of whom have never heard the gospel.” Soe Rah is a native of Burma and said when he came to Chicago, he prayed God would lead him to a believer who would help him start a church to reach other Karen people.  “God brought me to Cody,” he said.  During the service, Lorance baptized five new believers from the church Rah pastors in Glen Ellyn. Also during the service, IBSA president Kevin Kerr baptized a new believer who came to Christ in another Karen church start in Rockford, sponsored by First, Machesney Park. Scott Nichols, pastor of Crossroads Community Church in Carol Stream, described how his church plant merged with a struggling, established church several years ago, and today runs over 200 in worship attendance, meeting in a new building.  “Three weeks after moving into our new building, our associate pastor felt called to start another new church, which he is doing in Palos,” Nichols explained. Those attending the Wednesday evening session were given a bean as they entered the auditorium.  At the conclusion of the evening, Adams asked them to take the bean home and “place it in an existing planter, water it and every time you see it as it grows, let it serve as a reminder of the need for church plants and planters in Illinois.”

© 2010 - Illinois Baptist State Association

Just wanted to quickly let you all know about an online resource that I like so much that I was actually willing to pay for it.  It is called Animoto.  It is a web-based tool for quickly creating music videos using pictures and music that you download yourself.  The editing takes place automatically and the end result is really fantastic.  Here's an example of a video I made with Animoto: