Semester Project Ideas

This post is actually just an update- it's not a reflection on an article or anything.

We're comming up on the end of the semester pretty fast. I only have two weeks until Christmas break. So, time to get crackin' on my project. I took a look at my concept paper (from way back in August- woah) to figure out what I had been planning on doing for a semester project.

It's going to look something like this:

1. Presentation sort of thingy: (prezi? power point?)

• Specific Mock Ministry plan
• Cultural information about my country of choice
• Apologetics stuff, as it relates to the culture of said country
• Possibly a reflection on the class as a whole 

2. Short movie (or prezi-movie)

• 5ish minutes 
• Showcase for the country I pick
• Mission information
• Cultural info (sort of an overlap of the presentation)
• Practical ways for people to get involved. 

Problems: Case for Christ didn't really have much to do with apologetics- so, I need some way to incorrperate stuff from that. Also, I haven't made a movie in forever, so I don't know how great my tech skills are anymore. Also, this is a LOT of stuff to cover. You've got aplologetics, the book on culture stuff, the history and evidence for Christ, info on my specific country, application/tying in of everything, AND a reflection of the class as a whole. So, it'll definatly take me the whole two weeks. Right now I'm just trying to figure out how I'm going to organize all of that, and fit it into a presentation that doesn't bore people out of their minds. I want it to be fun and interesting, but also really informative. 

So, here's where I need feedback. Let me know if you have ideas- or comments or something. I'm going to try to do the "gathering" of info early on, so that the way it gets expressed (via movie, power point, etc) won't be set  in stone. 

Lemme know what'cha think. :) 

Washington

When I went to Ravi's sight today, I wasn't expecting a history lesson- but that's sort of what I got. Os Guiness wrote this post- entitled "The Golden Triangle of Freedom". Since I don't want this to just be a summary of the original, I'm gonna expand on some things that came to mind while reading. Feel free to comment :) (And by the way, here's the link... http://www.rzim.org/just-thinking/the-golden-triangle-of-freedom/)

When you see words like Freedom...Faith...Hope...Love...Virtue... What comes to mind? Maybe it's people in your life that have emulated these values, or incidents in which these words came alive. Maybe a time comes to mind when these were absent, or scarce. Just sitting here, letting those words roll around in my head- I see our country. I don't take credit for this connection though- Guiness brought the subject up. His article focuses on George Washington- and the pillars of character that he embodied.

War is a nasty thing. It's harsh and ugly. It's cruel and sad. For some, it brings out the worst. For others, such as Washington, it brought out the best. I love the quote Guiness included in this article-

       Abraham Lincoln wrote later, “Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man, give him power.”

Washington was certainly given power. Something that most people aren't aware of- he was offered the Crown several times, and refused. That's right, we could have been our own Monarchy. The decision of one man, a really long time ago, changed that. The whole Golden triangle thing goes like this- When you have faith, you also gain virtue, and your actions defend freedom. It goes the other way too. Freedom requires virtue to function properly, and it's hard to have any sort of virtue without faith. I'm not 100% sure on Washington's faith, but he obviously had virtue, and knew what it would take to defend freedom.

It's humbling to think about. I've never been in a situation like that (I don't think any of us have), but to think that a little virtue on the part of this one guy changed the entire course of history... woah. It makes me think... are we really so different from George? We make power into this huge thing reserved for kings, politicians, and celebrities, but in reality- I think you and I have a lot of power. And you know what else? I think we abuse it.

Before you protest, or tune out, let me elaborate. There are different kinds of abuse. When it comes to power, you can use it for a negative, or you can not use it for a positive. You follow? George had faith. And therefore virtue. His actions reflected that. He chose to not use his power for something negative (and in doing so, resulted in a positive). But what about you and me? What about the God given abilities and yes, even power, that we've been blessed with? What happens when we choose to not use those for a positive, what ever it may be? It's sort of scary to think about. If George's one action steered America away from a Monarchy, don't you think that the dozens of decisions we make (or don't make) every day, have some sort of lasting impact?

We may not be a president. Or king. Or celebrity. But I grantee you this- we all have power. We have the power to do right, and fight for freedom. But we also have the power to do wrong. Decisions may seem little- but they can have lasting impacts. So what now? How do we work on our use of power? I think it goes back to that Golden Triangle. As we work on our Faith with Christ, we gain virtue. As we gain virtue, our actions naturally defend freedom. That virtue helps to steer our use of power toward positives. And what's more? When it comes to Christ, those actions can have eternal impacts.

I challenge you. Heck, I'm challenging myself- take a look at your power. How are you fighting for freedom and virtue and faith today?

Thanks for reading. Stay tuned for more Ravi Posts :)

China: More than Meets the Eye

Lots of great stuff today. This post is basically about the Church in China (with some general mission stuff on the side). The lecture was over an hour long, so I'm just going to include some of the stuff he went over (the lecture was done by Doug Birdsall- a colleague of Dr. Kuzmics). He starts with some general mission stuff, and then goes into more specific stuff (concerning Asia).

First, some scripture.
Luke 10:
At this point, Jesus's ministry has been going really well. He's speaking with the 72, giving them specific instructions about how to build the church. After sending them off, they come back really excited. In verse 17 they say, "Lord, Even the Demons submit to us in your name!" You'd think that Jesus would respond in Joy, or something along those lines. His people have been doing great things for his name, so shouldn't he be congratulating them? That's what we think should follow, but it doesn't.What he does say is this:
             “I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven. ¹⁹ I have given you authority to trample on snakes and scorpions and to overcome all the power of the enemy; nothing will harm you. ²⁰ However, do not rejoice that the spirits submit to you, but rejoice that your names are written in heaven.”

Jesus isn't saying that driving out demons is a bad thing. He just shifts the focus from works, to salvation. When it comes to missions, (Birdsill's words): "Who we are in Christ is more important than what we do for Christ".  I LOVE this. Mission work is great, in fact- it's at the center of God's heart, but even Christ puts Mission work second to salvation. The point is a relationship with Jesus. Mission work is just a means to an en]  

Or take for example Martha and Mary. If I was hiring people for a Missionary Position, I'd go with Martha. She's hardworking, dedicated, loyal, etc. So why does Jesus pick Mary? It's sort of humbling. He explains that even though doing things is good- being with Jesus is better. That relationship with Christ is something working hard can't produce. In the words of my youth pastor Jon Duey- it's about Drawing Closer, not Working Harder.  

Another thing that I've heard a thousand times, but ceases to get old: Your theology will drive your doxology. What you think- study- believe, drives how you act. It's the same way with mission work. Without a sturdy, solid theology, mission work falls apart. 

Shifting gears a bit.... China. 

When you hear the word China, what comes to mind?? 
Communism?
Factories?
Technology?
Red?
Mulan? (At least, that's what comes to my mind...)

China may be some of those things- but it's boundaries extend far beyond our stereotypes. It is a seriously complex society- billions of people- hundreds of cultures and languages- and recently: millions of Christians. 

Here in America, we're really blinded. We think fancy Churches and Sunday morning attendee's make a Christian nation. Honestly? We're pretty far behind. I'm confident that when I get to heaven, America will be the minority. Not that I'm ok with that- I desperately want the people of this nation to know Christ- but it's a truth I've had to face. Right now the fastest growing Churches are in Asia. It's a hotspot for miracles, revivals, and new Christians. They're sending missionaries, growing churches, and producing Christians at a rate of 10,000 a day. It's mind blowing. Here's a link to some reading on the Church in China: http://www.chinapartner.org/church-china

What used to be one of the slowest growing Churches in the world has boomed like never before. In the course of about 50 years, millions have come to faith. Two main events showcase this boom.
     1. 1949- Communistic Revolution- "Foreign Devils" (Christians and other foreigners) are removed. 
     2. 1989- Missionaries have slowly been integrating themselves back into the population, and the Tianaman square massacre takes place.  http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/asiapcf/06/01/tiananmen/
This basically marks the death of "true" communism, and ushers in an age of growing Christianity.

There are three parts to the Church in China:

A. The "Registered" Church. If you're ever in China, and you see an actual Church building- it fits under this category. Not that these are bad, but sometimes they have to compromise a bit in order to be recognized by the government. 

B. House Churches. This would be groups of people gathering in homes to study God's word. Often they meet in secret, and are persecuted if found out. Though the Tianaman square incident led to the death of true communism, communistic ideals still prevail, and this sort of a Church has become rampant as a result of Government persecution. 

C. Urban Intelectual House Churches. This one is a bit different from just "House Churches". These are gatherings in the city, and are primarily made up of College educated individuals. There have even been reports of Bible Colleges being set up because of these groups. Beijing is the intellectual center of China, and houses a huge chunk of these "intellectual" House Churches.  

There has also been a growing commitment to missions. In America, I think that sometimes we forget that we're not the only country besides Europe to send out missionaries. There's this thing called Movement to Jerusalem, which is based in China, and aims to send over 100,000 missionaries to the middle east.  

As a whole, this lecture has put several things into perspective for me. (I've also been reading the book Radical, and that's given me TONS of insight. Read it. It's incredible. But back to China...) Taking a look at other countries is always humbling. We may think we're high up on the totem pole, but in reality, America is below a lot of countries as far as Christianity goes. We're an important player, but we need to remember our fellow brothers and sisters in Christ that live overseas. We all have a common goal, and a common leader. 

Next time you step into one of those fancy churches, say thanks to God for that privilege. It may feel like a small thing- but the fact that we have places to worship- beautiful, expensive, giant- churches, is incredible. It's an enormous blessing. There are millions, if not billions of Christians who don't have that. They meet in homes, in secret, in fear of persecution.  God has blessed us beyond compare. Don't forget that.

Also, to recap the beginning part of this lecture- Mission work is great. Wonderful. At the center of God's heart. But- first comes being with Jesus- drawing closer to him. When we get that part right, the doxology of mission work just kind of falls into place. 

Stay tuned- I hope to have another "Ravi" post up soon. Thanks for reading. :)

Stars

Just read this great article on RZIM (Ravi Zacharius Innternational Ministries). He's got this blog called "Just Thinking" where leading apologists and missionaries share insight. It's pretty great.

Here's a link to the article I'm focusing on in this post: http://www.rzim.org/just-thinking/of-shining-stars/ (By Andy Bannister).




Have you ever been out in the country on a cold clear night, and looked up to see millions of beautiful lights shimmering against a black sky? It's pretty incredible. I'm fortunate enough to live in the country, so stars are something I get to see often. They serve as a great reminder of God's incredible power, and of our purpose as Christians.

In his post, Bannister starts by giving a description of stars just like I have, and then presents this passage of scripture:


Philippians 2:12-16a 
Therefore, my dear friends, as you have always obeyed—not only in my presence, but now much more in my absence—continue to work out your salvation with fear and trembling, for it is God who works in you to will and to act in order to fulfill his good purpose. Do everything without grumbling or arguing, so that you may become blameless and pure, children of God without fault in a warped and crooked generation.Then you will shine among them like stars in the sky as you hold firmly to the word of life.


I really love this passage- not only because it's Paul (Who's a beast), but because of the imagery he gives.

Before reading this passage, the stars were more connected with God's omnipotence, rather than my own life. One of my favorite peices of scripture comes from Isaiah 40-

"Lift up your eyes and look to the heavens:
    Who created all these?
He who brings out the starry host one by one
    and calls forth each of them by name.
Because of his great power and mighty strength,
    not one of them is missing."

After reading this article though, I see that they have a double meaning. Not only are the stars a testiment to God's greatness, it alludes to the potential he's given all of us. We were made in his image- and have the opportunity to tap into his great power.

More than that though, they provide a metaphor for our Christian lives. They show us HOW to tap into that potential power.

Some more connections: 

I wish I could say this is my insight- but Andy Bannister is a lot smarter than I am, and the following similarites are his reveleation.

1. Stars by themselves aren't so great. One star all by it's lonesome doesn't really mean anything. Put hundreds of them together- and you can practically read by the light. It's the same thing with Christians- we're made for community.

2. They don't stand still. Stars aren't idle. They have patterns, but they move. It should be the same with us. An idle spiritual life means spiritual death.

3. They follow a fixed point (the North Star). It's the only one that really doesn't move. (And if it does, well, remember- this is just a metaphor. It's not perfect). I don't think I can even come close to paraphrasing Bannister's Idea well, so here's the quote on this one:

(Referring again to stars)
In particular, they rotate, slowly wheeling around a singular fixed point in the night sky—the North or Pole Star. Significantly, Christians together tell the story of hope in darkness when their axis is God alone—not an issue or a common interest—but the person of Christ who was born, died, and was raised. The expectant Christian story continues to be told, as it was to the magi long ago, when the Christ child is the fixed point, our north star, our pole star, and when it is he who determines how we move and turn.

Sometimes I sit and think about creation. I'm no one to try and speculate why God has created things- but I feel like God intentionally puts things in our lives to help us understand. Our minds can't quite grasp him all the time- but he gives us pictures- metaphors- to help us out. Pretty epic.

I leave you with this final quote from Bannister. It's more on the unity of the stars (and us), and I think it's a good way to end this post.

Likewise, it is Christ’s story that makes the collective light of Christianity shine brightly amidst the darkness. It is Jesus himself, around which everything turns, who is heaven’s bright sun, whose radiance glows brighter than the brightest star, so much so that the new heavens and the new earth need neither sun nor moon. The splendor of this sight is worth beholding indeed.

Case for Christ

So, I know It's been quite a while since my last post. Sorry about that.

Just a warning: post's are going to be a bit different for second quarter. They're most likely gonna be a bit more personal reflection, and less logical stuff.

Today's post is about Case for Christ (By Lee Strobel). It's fantastic. Seriously. I may be a Christian, but this book is extremely prevalent. It has given me a solid foundation of "proof" to slide underneath my faith. It's not like it's holding my faith up (In fact, that would sort of defeat the purpose of faith, if it needed proof), but it's great to match up the historical Jesus with the Jesus of faith. I guess I always knew they were the same, but it's definitely powerful to see the proof, and walk through the history of it all.

I love the versatility of this book. Strobel startsout as an atheist, and ends up a believer, which challenges other non-beleivers to do the same. But honestly- it's great for everyone. Whether long time believer, or atheist- the book is helpful.

The entire thing consists of interviews of experts on a wide variety of topics (From biblical archaeology to the New Testament). They are set in a logical order, in order to build a legal case for the existence of Jesus. Strobel has a legal background, and experience in journalism, so it's air tight. It would take a major skeptic to read this and not be impressed with the evidence.

I think my favorite thing about this book though is Lee's personal journey from Atheist to Christian. In each chapter you can see his skepticism melting away. He's almost this "Saul" type figure- determined to stomp out Christianity, and doubtful to the bone. In one of his other books, Case for Faith, he sort of gives us a glimpse into his transformation...

“To be honest, I didn't want to believe that Christianity could radically transform some one's character and values. It was much easier to raise doubts and manufacture outrageous objections that to consider the possibility that God actually could trigger a revolutionary turn-around in such a depraved and degenerate life.” 
― Lee Strobel, The Case for Faith: A Journalist Investigates the Toughest Objections to Christianity

By the end though, he's one of the Nation's leading defenders of the faith. He now has a whole set of "Case" books, all of which answer objections and build up evidence for Christianity (To name a few: Case for Christ, Case for the Creator, Case for Faith, and Case for the Real Jesus).

I challenge you to read them. They're light reading- nothing heavy. And what really matters- they truly are life changing. It sounds cheesy, but take the time to read one, and you'll see what I mean. It's hard to read something like that, and not absorb the passion for Christ that Strobel has. Check them out.

Link: http://www.amazon.com/Lee-Strobel/e/B001H6KH8G

Inclusivism: Part 2

We're approaching the end of the Apologetics section of this blog. In fact, this will probably be my second to last post. After I finish Nash's lectures I'm going to slow way down on the blogging. I'll be listening to a "Theology of Missions" series, and I'll most likely only do about one post each week. 

Today won't be too long- it's just a continuation of the other Inclusivism stuff. 

John Sanders- Claim: All humans are saved until they reject the Gospel. 

Implications: People who've never heard the Gospel can be saved. Universalism for the unevangelized. Any movement to show people the Gospel would be harmful- because if they never hear it, they automatically get accepted- but if they have the choice, and refuse, they've been condemned. 

This pretty much says that Christian mission work is useless. We'd be better off letting everyone go their own way, rather than telling them the truth. 

This is crazy. It doesn't make any sense logically, let alone biblically. In fact, this is completely contradictory with the Gospel. 

My two cents: 

Nash is totally right here- this idea is ludicrous. But, I think he leaves something important out. 

I think the reason that Sanders goes this route is because his focus is messed up. He's got his eyes on Salvation, as if that was all there was to the picture. It sounds blasphemous to say, but Salvation really doesn't mean that much. Before you say anything, let me explain. Salvation is lesser, compared to a relationship with Christ. You see, salvation comes as a result of that relationship. Jesus has to come first. The point of Christ isn't just to be saved- it's to love and honor and serve him- the creator of the universe. Yes, Salvation is important, BUT, when we take our eyes off Christ, and just look at the saving part- we miss a lot of vital stuff. We miss precious time to develop our relationship with Christ, and we miss opportunities to bring others to Christ. Sander's view seems like it's for the greater good... right? It's actually kind of selfish. It sort of says, "I'm going to worry about me and my salvation, and I don't need to go share with anyone because as long as they don't have to choose- their ok". See? It really takes away from everything Christ stands for. Christ calls us to be love, to serve, to make disciples... not to sit idle at home and leave the world in the dark. (And I know you could argue semantics of the definition of salvation again, but for simplicity sake, let's just say it means the saving of a soul. Heaven instead of Hell.) 

Back to Inclusivism- The Book of Acts = great stuff. (This is a personal favorite book of mine. If you haven't read it, you need to). 

Nash talks for a while about this, but I'll just give some major highlights I think are cool. This book is literally filled to the brim with stuff that contradicts Inclusivism, and more than that, it's major spiritual food. 

In chapter 20:26-27 it says, "Therefore, I declare to you today that I am innocent of the blood of any of you. ²⁷ For I have not hesitated to proclaim to you the whole will of God."

My bit: 

Lets think about the implications of this for a moment. It's sort of an if-then statement. Meaning? If we do hesitate to proclaim the whole will of God, if we're passive about sharing our faith, if we do it half-heartedly, or don't take it seriously--- we have blood on our hands. Think of it this way: A man is walking by a bridge and sees a child hanging off the edge, above a very deep lake. The child cannot swim, and is about to fall. If it was your child- and the man kept walking- allowing your child to die- what would you think? At least some of the blame goes to the man, who had the power to help, but did nothing. Now, when it comes to sharing Christ with people, it's not like we're solely responsible for the faith of every person we know. But, take time to think about this... If you have the opportunity, day after day, week after week, month after month, ect. to share Jesus- and you never do... well, you think about it. We, as beleivers, have the obligation to share- to make disciples. Christ didn't say that it was our fault if people rejected him, or that we were responsible for everyone. But he did say that we need to try, if nothing else. We need to give it all we've got, because the price isn't just physical life- it's spiritual life. It's eternity. And I apologize if it sounds like I'm preaching from the pulpit. This is definitely convicting for me too. It's encouraging to think though- we've got the holy spirit on our side. In fact- he's the one who really does the saving. But I'm ranting... Sorry. Point? Don't be passive about sharing your faith. It matters. 

2nd example... 

In Chapter 26 it says something like this: "I am sending you to open their eyes, and turn them from darkness to light." 

Key word here is sending. It's not optional. The God of the universe has given us a mission- to share the light of Christ with the world. Any suggestion that people don't need to hear it for it to be true is completely blasphemous. And if they say it's not- refer them to this. 

Third example (From Philippians though. This book has some great stuff too, and it's by the same author... I think). 

Paul pretty much gives his testimony in this book- and it's great. He's a great example of why inclusivism doesn't work. He attests to personal salvation- explaining how he was in the darkness- in sin- and was saved through Christ. If inclusivism were true, then that darkness Saul felt was salvation, and was no different from the light. Personal testimony tells us this just isn't so. 

..........

So, a lot more personal commentary than I was planning on today, but it's an interesting topic, so I don't regret spending the time on it. I would say stay tuned, but I'm not sure when my next post is comming. Keep an eye out on facebook, I'll be sure to put a link to my next post. Feel free to comment on this one too. Thanks for reading. :) 

Inclusivism: Part 1

Lots of good stuff in this lecture. Sort of something you'd think would be rare, but again, like pluralism, I think a lot of people have this sort of liberal view. Another thing- you'll notice a lot of reference to scripture. That's because Pluralists don't consider the Bible to be truth. With them we had to go the logic route. When it comes to Inclusivists- they're claiming to be Christians, and therefore also claim to believe scripture to be true. Nash's entire case is pretty much using scripture to break down their argument. Granted- if they ever give up, and resort to believing that scripture is untrue- then you'll need to go a different route. For now though, here's what Nash has:

A. Inclusivism: No one can be saved apart from Christ, but- you don't have to know about it or believe in him to be saved.

B. "General Revelation"- A general idea of God's existence or our own mortality (things like that) that can be taken from nature. You could almost call them presuppositions. Sometimes they are things we instinctively know. But they're not specific. Hence the "general".

"Specific Revelation"- The biggest example would be the Bible- God's inspired word. It's not a general inkling of God's existence- it's his specific story.  It's not limited to this though- miracles, the work of the holy spirit, visions, charismatic gifts, etc. are also examples.

Further reading: http://carm.org/questions/about-bible/what-general-and-special-revelation

1. Is there anything in scripture, at all, to support General Revelation?
Absolutely not. Romans 1 explains that the only real reason for General Revelation is to give man-kind a fair chance at discovering God- and Special Revelation. That way- no one can blame God for not being saved. He's practically handing us his existence on a platter- but it's our choice what to do with that.

2. Claim: The content of the Christian Gospel is culturally relative.
False. Paul- in just about every one of his letters- says over and over again- a relationship with Jesus is the only way to Salvation. Some try to claim that this Gospel works for certain people, or can be "applied" to certain cultural groups (such as the Corinthians or Philippians  etc.). The implication in that would be that regardless of who believes it, the truth can be preserved. This is heresy. People who claim this are not only slaves to a paradigm- they cannot be Christians. Yes, the death of Christ saved sinners- but we've got to enter those gates. He's not forcing us in.

3. Isn't faith what matters? Regardless of what it's in?
No. Jesus matters. Faith is important- but Jesus precedes that. If you put your faith in anything but Christ- you are putting your faith into nothing. This completely tears out the heart of the Gospel.

Note: Here Nash goes on a rant about the Vatican, and the Pope, talking about their shift to Inclusivist views. This lecture was recorded in 2001, so I did a little research to check the accuracy.  I trust Nash to make this claim, because I'm guessing he's researched the crud out of it. As for the claim holding true today, I have no clue. I tried to do some research, and found a whole bunch of random stuff. My head is spinning. Feel free to comment though, if you know anything about the Vatican's current stance on this.

C: What about Old Testament believers, they were saved without Christ right?
Yes, but now that Christ has come, things have changed a bit. We're considered a part of the New Testament set of believers, so we need Jesus. Period.

D. Here Nash talks about Holy Pagans. I have notes on it- but I'm not even going to type them out. People who are nice enough to read this thing don't want a 10 minute rant on this topic. It's not that interesting. Really. If you want to hear about it, here's the link: http://www.biblicaltraining.org/inclusivism/christian-apologetics

E. Infant Salvation: What about babies that die? Since they don't believe, are they condemned?
(I find it interesting that Nash includes this in here. It is applicable, but considering he wrote an entire book on the topic, I'm just surprised he doesn't take more time on it. Here's his short and condensed version...)
No. Infants are the elect of God- they are his personal creation- his work of art. At this point- they haven't sinned. (This doesn't exclude natural sin- the kind we're born with. I'll get to that in a second). Because infants are the elect of God, if they pass away as infants, they go to heaven. Salvation is totally the work of God- nothing we do saves us. In the same way that God saves us, he chooses to save these infants- who cannot choose to accept or decline his salvation. He gives them the faith to be saved.

I'm splitting this into two parts because this was all I could get typed today. More tomorrow on Inclusivism.