Here is a great link of a pdf that would not paste into the window: more evidence of my waning software skills...Free Burma. Period.
Friday, October 05, 2007
Free Burma
Here is a great link of a pdf that would not paste into the window: more evidence of my waning software skills...Free Burma. Period.
Wednesday, October 03, 2007
Burma right now, or why being Rip van Winkle is so very hard
I realize that I haven't written here in almost 6 months: so, my apologies. I'm supposed to be starting a sabbatical, and have had so much "busyness" just getting the thing approved (my tardiness coupled with Murphy's Law), getting my daughter off to college, NSO, writing papers for the first time in 15 years for a summer course, and trying to get the leadership of RGCF handed off in a responsible fashion: that when I heard about, and later saw, the violence in Rangoon: I was outraged, grieved, and most of all: awakened.
It's not as though the people of Burma got upset last week and decided, "Oh, what the hell: let's head to the streets to make our discomfort known." Folks: the oppression of the military began in 1962 with a military coup d'etat.
Suffice it to say, my eyes are wide open right now. I surfed around blogdom among some of the theologically sophisticated, and the evangelically-minded types, as well as some of the misnomered emerging folk: nothing. Nada. Zip. Exceptions: Scot McKnight, GetReligion, and Sojourners. Help me find some other blogger that knows Jesus and puts this kind of stuff on their site!
Here's another matter that made me alert: American media. Now, I need to state up front that I first saw the video on CNN; you can see the same video from this link. But, as I trolled around to other web sites, I was shocked to find the links to this slaughter of Burmese civilians stuffed way down on the web sites. Of course, how to look like Angelina Jolie or Kid Rock refuting Pamela Anderson's announcement of a miscarriage is prominently displayed.
Surf over to the English site for Al Jazeera or the BBC Asia-Pacific page, or the South China Morning Post, and there is no such ambivalence or reticence: this kind of political activity by the citizens of Burma is not merely news, but influences life in all of the communities these news sites serve from Asia to Africa...and even in "the nation of Texas"... well, at least one citizen there is now wide awake.
Lord: open our the eyes of our hearts that we might see you in all of your glory on the cross, all of the mystery of your resurrection, and pray we would not be silent nor slumber while injustice-especially the kind in Burma right now- continues. Amen.
It's not as though the people of Burma got upset last week and decided, "Oh, what the hell: let's head to the streets to make our discomfort known." Folks: the oppression of the military began in 1962 with a military coup d'etat.
Suffice it to say, my eyes are wide open right now. I surfed around blogdom among some of the theologically sophisticated, and the evangelically-minded types, as well as some of the misnomered emerging folk: nothing. Nada. Zip. Exceptions: Scot McKnight, GetReligion, and Sojourners. Help me find some other blogger that knows Jesus and puts this kind of stuff on their site!
Here's another matter that made me alert: American media. Now, I need to state up front that I first saw the video on CNN; you can see the same video from this link. But, as I trolled around to other web sites, I was shocked to find the links to this slaughter of Burmese civilians stuffed way down on the web sites. Of course, how to look like Angelina Jolie or Kid Rock refuting Pamela Anderson's announcement of a miscarriage is prominently displayed.
Surf over to the English site for Al Jazeera or the BBC Asia-Pacific page, or the South China Morning Post, and there is no such ambivalence or reticence: this kind of political activity by the citizens of Burma is not merely news, but influences life in all of the communities these news sites serve from Asia to Africa...and even in "the nation of Texas"... well, at least one citizen there is now wide awake.
Lord: open our the eyes of our hearts that we might see you in all of your glory on the cross, all of the mystery of your resurrection, and pray we would not be silent nor slumber while injustice-especially the kind in Burma right now- continues. Amen.
Tuesday, April 17, 2007
Quite sad about Virginia Tech events
It's been a very hard 24+ hours, like for so many others: learning more of the details regarding the massacre at Virginia Tech has become all the more difficult. One of our RGCF students is a graduate of Virginia Tech. He's hurting about all of this, and we'll meet up tomorrow for prayer.
Tuesday, March 27, 2007
Sharing the Gospel
I recently spoke to the RGCF at the March monthly luncheon about "sharing the Gospel." I distinguished sharing the Gospel from evangelism, the latter being a system or collection of philosophies, policies and practices that initiate a person into a communal life in the Kingdom of God. I take my cues regarding evangelism from the wisdom of William Abraham in his seminal and creative The Logic of Evangelism.
Now, in my presentation for RGCF, I attempted to describe sharing the Gospel as a spectrum of relational conversations about the reign of God, and what I omitted, the time not being available, is that any of those conversations are a form of generosity and hospitality.
I described the experience that Annette and I had in a conversation with a woman who was, by her own admission, a nominal Jew. She made several statements regarding some of the more notorious activities of the Christian church, e.g., the church's silence in response to Hitler. And we simply had to agree with her about all of her statements. Rather than react or get defensive, we did our best to affirm her descriptions. I recall that we also depicted a version of the penal-substitutionary theory of atonement. My sense following the conversation was that the woman understood us to have listened to her and did not attempt to refute or diminish anything she had to say.
Much to my embarrassment, I'd add that when we separated, I told Annette that at least we don't have any blood on our hands. :( I hope I never blow-up like that again...horrible
Back to the story: about a year later, Annette and I were accosted by this same woman: only now, she announced that she was a follower of Jesus! :) Turns out that our conversation was an exchange in a series of meetings with Christians who had listened carefully, did not dismiss anything that she said, and in general, treated her with dignity, as well as gently proclaimed that Jesus is the Messiah. She felt welcomed and cared for: she experienced the generosity and hospitality of Christian community. (Of course, there is much more to say regarding generosity and hospitality.) And, in the season that was right for her and for the Lord, she became united with the hope of Israel.
My point: participating in such conversations contributes to the movement of the person toward or away from Jesus and life in his reign. Anyone might desire "to close the deal" (what way to state that transition...), but the reality is more likely to be a conversation that continues to get the attention of the person on Jesus.
I'd add: such conversations have the added benefit of getting our attention on Jesus as well. I would suggest that such conversations become the occasions for us to meet up with the Lord. In fact, that may be one of the important motivations for sharing the Gospel: meeting up with Jesus.
How about you: what is your experience sharing the Gospel?
Now, in my presentation for RGCF, I attempted to describe sharing the Gospel as a spectrum of relational conversations about the reign of God, and what I omitted, the time not being available, is that any of those conversations are a form of generosity and hospitality.
I described the experience that Annette and I had in a conversation with a woman who was, by her own admission, a nominal Jew. She made several statements regarding some of the more notorious activities of the Christian church, e.g., the church's silence in response to Hitler. And we simply had to agree with her about all of her statements. Rather than react or get defensive, we did our best to affirm her descriptions. I recall that we also depicted a version of the penal-substitutionary theory of atonement. My sense following the conversation was that the woman understood us to have listened to her and did not attempt to refute or diminish anything she had to say.
Much to my embarrassment, I'd add that when we separated, I told Annette that at least we don't have any blood on our hands. :( I hope I never blow-up like that again...horrible
Back to the story: about a year later, Annette and I were accosted by this same woman: only now, she announced that she was a follower of Jesus! :) Turns out that our conversation was an exchange in a series of meetings with Christians who had listened carefully, did not dismiss anything that she said, and in general, treated her with dignity, as well as gently proclaimed that Jesus is the Messiah. She felt welcomed and cared for: she experienced the generosity and hospitality of Christian community. (Of course, there is much more to say regarding generosity and hospitality.) And, in the season that was right for her and for the Lord, she became united with the hope of Israel.
My point: participating in such conversations contributes to the movement of the person toward or away from Jesus and life in his reign. Anyone might desire "to close the deal" (what way to state that transition...), but the reality is more likely to be a conversation that continues to get the attention of the person on Jesus.
I'd add: such conversations have the added benefit of getting our attention on Jesus as well. I would suggest that such conversations become the occasions for us to meet up with the Lord. In fact, that may be one of the important motivations for sharing the Gospel: meeting up with Jesus.
How about you: what is your experience sharing the Gospel?
Friday, March 16, 2007
Psalm 46, Witness, & Intimacy with God
While in a prayer meeting a couple of weeks ago, the leader read from Psalm 46 to guide our prayers. When she read the following, the words triggered a couple of thoughts.
Two, the Psalmist describes God as a physical location that would protect against attack and store people and supplies in readiness for military assault. Protect and store: both. Ordinarily, one would not be surprised by a city within a fortress either.
What I sensed during our prayers is that to be with the Lord Jesus in a transparently public manner of living also leads to hostile or antagonistic opposition from others. And, it is precisely in such conflict that the Psalmist alerts us to the kind of intimacy with the Lord awaiting us. But, it's not an intimacy that insulates us from opposition to living in response to the Gospel: but, protection of some version gets proposed here; it sounds like reassurance and intimacy.
6 Nations are in uproar, kingdoms fall;
he lifts his voice, the earth melts.7 The LORD Almighty is with us;
the God of Jacob is our fortress.
One, who was the Psalmist addressing? Others within the fortress of God? Or yelling at (or over the top) to the nations approaching? If you return to the beginning or the end of the Psalm, you could plausibly make a case that the nations are addressed. The audience is not stated...so, for the moment: if it were the nations...
Two, the Psalmist describes God as a physical location that would protect against attack and store people and supplies in readiness for military assault. Protect and store: both. Ordinarily, one would not be surprised by a city within a fortress either.
What I sensed during our prayers is that to be with the Lord Jesus in a transparently public manner of living also leads to hostile or antagonistic opposition from others. And, it is precisely in such conflict that the Psalmist alerts us to the kind of intimacy with the Lord awaiting us. But, it's not an intimacy that insulates us from opposition to living in response to the Gospel: but, protection of some version gets proposed here; it sounds like reassurance and intimacy.
10 "Be still, and know that I am God;This might be worth considering for conversation: how does life together and sharing the good news lead you to know the Lord more intimately? How has increased intimacy with the Lord been true for you in the presence of opposition? What do you think?
I will be exalted among the nations,
I will be exalted in the earth."11 The LORD Almighty is with us;
the God of Jacob is our fortress.
Wednesday, January 31, 2007
Fuzzy on God? Part Deux?
I got into some conversations with several people since the original post; some were associated with the blog and the others were simply about the Trinity. A few observations on those conversations...
I do know that if you look at the IVCF Doctrinal Basis, you'll observe that it begins with a trinitarian depiction of God. In a conversation with a colleague last year, he informed me that he had initiated a reading group of young IVCF staff to discuss and learn together what it means to have faith in the triune God. While all of these staff had to sign a commitment to the above statement of faith, few had more than a slender understanding of what the doctrine meant and its implications for life and ministry.
These conversations reminded me of the Preface to Ted Peters' book on the Trinity, and I paraphrase here: "the Christian doctrine of God is the best-kept secret in the world."
What do you think are the implications for a lean understanding of the Trinity? Is this doctrine one that is so "academic" as to be useless for our season of humanity? Or is it a doctrine long overlooked but awaits some concentrated examination for our relationship with God, each other, and the world: and therefore become useful? And what would you mean for the word, "useful'?
- 99.9% of the people I talked with admitted that the only Christian doctrine of God was and is trinitarian. No: none of them used the phrase "Christian doctrine of God," but they (you?) all had that intent!
- But the same 99.9% also admitted some degree of confusion as to: why the Christian doctrine of God had to be trinitarian, or why the doctrine always seemed so impenetrable, or why the doctrine seemed irrelevant to discipleship (and I'd hazard a guess: irrelevant to worship and mission).
I do know that if you look at the IVCF Doctrinal Basis, you'll observe that it begins with a trinitarian depiction of God. In a conversation with a colleague last year, he informed me that he had initiated a reading group of young IVCF staff to discuss and learn together what it means to have faith in the triune God. While all of these staff had to sign a commitment to the above statement of faith, few had more than a slender understanding of what the doctrine meant and its implications for life and ministry.
These conversations reminded me of the Preface to Ted Peters' book on the Trinity, and I paraphrase here: "the Christian doctrine of God is the best-kept secret in the world."
What do you think are the implications for a lean understanding of the Trinity? Is this doctrine one that is so "academic" as to be useless for our season of humanity? Or is it a doctrine long overlooked but awaits some concentrated examination for our relationship with God, each other, and the world: and therefore become useful? And what would you mean for the word, "useful'?
Sunday, January 28, 2007
Fuzzy on God?
We were driving home from this morning's worship service, and began talking about God. I commented that my friend's message was the best biblical message about God that I had heard at the church he serves at. My wife responded that I should tell my friend what I meant by my comment that it was the best biblical message about Christ. I said, No. Not about Christ: about God. My daughter responded: Jesus. Christ. God. Three in one, right?
Her comment spawned several thoughts and recollections. One was a comment attributed to Gregory of Nyssa.
I recall first reading Gregory's statement, and thinking, "OK: what's the point?" The statement came in that Gregory was defending the Nicene Creed in responding to Arius and his colleagues . The aim was to reassert that Jesus was not a created pre-existing creature that Arius asserted, and if any of distinctiveness of the members of the Trinity could be understood, that came from the mutual relations that exist between the members. But, he implicitly wanted to simultaneously reaffirm for pastors, missionaries, and evangelists that use of the name "Lord" or "God" (I know: both are English words!) would encompass all of the persons of the Trinity.
So, when many (most?) people like my daughter speak about the "three-in-one" God, a kind of fuzziness of names and relations can be heard: frequently. It doesn't reflect well what Gregory and others have taught and handed down. And, I often wonder, how well do my family and friends know about the Trinity?
What do you think? As we consider matters of worship, prayer, ethnic identity, fellowship, gender, evangelism, racial reconciliation, and justice: in our journey of faith, how crucial/important is knowing God as three-in-one?
Her comment spawned several thoughts and recollections. One was a comment attributed to Gregory of Nyssa.
When I say God, I mean Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
I recall first reading Gregory's statement, and thinking, "OK: what's the point?" The statement came in that Gregory was defending the Nicene Creed in responding to Arius and his colleagues . The aim was to reassert that Jesus was not a created pre-existing creature that Arius asserted, and if any of distinctiveness of the members of the Trinity could be understood, that came from the mutual relations that exist between the members. But, he implicitly wanted to simultaneously reaffirm for pastors, missionaries, and evangelists that use of the name "Lord" or "God" (I know: both are English words!) would encompass all of the persons of the Trinity.
So, when many (most?) people like my daughter speak about the "three-in-one" God, a kind of fuzziness of names and relations can be heard: frequently. It doesn't reflect well what Gregory and others have taught and handed down. And, I often wonder, how well do my family and friends know about the Trinity?
What do you think? As we consider matters of worship, prayer, ethnic identity, fellowship, gender, evangelism, racial reconciliation, and justice: in our journey of faith, how crucial/important is knowing God as three-in-one?
Welcome!
Greetings!
Here is a test-drive preview of this new blog...my hope is that this point-size will be easy on the eyes. I'll try some different backgrounds, type-faces, and point-sizes; let me know if some version works better for you than others, OK?
I'm using a this blog as a way to stimulate prayer, further worship of God through Christ in the Spirit, and live such ways together that our lives declare the reign of God.
I look forward to your comments; I hope to reply to many of them!
Blessings,
Mike
Here is a test-drive preview of this new blog...my hope is that this point-size will be easy on the eyes. I'll try some different backgrounds, type-faces, and point-sizes; let me know if some version works better for you than others, OK?
I'm using a this blog as a way to stimulate prayer, further worship of God through Christ in the Spirit, and live such ways together that our lives declare the reign of God.
I look forward to your comments; I hope to reply to many of them!
Blessings,
Mike
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)