Integrating Missionally

“It seems that when Christianity is popular, Christians are content with the idea of a firewall separating Church and State. It’s only when Christianity begins to lose it’s influence over the population at large that Christians begin to campaign for the State to adopt a Christian character.” That is the opening statement from Razib Khan’s December 22 article entitled “Less Religion = More Religious Activism” from his blog Gene Expression.

Data from a research team from Erasmus University in the Netherlands shows some interesting results. Looking at survey data from 18 Western countries, they found:

1. The fewer Christians in a country, the greater the support among Christians for a greater public role for religion.
2. The polarization of views between Christians and non-religious on a public role for religion is greatest in countries where there are fewest Christians.

The reasoning behind this increased activism are at least two fold. Some of this can be attributed to specific factors in Europe relating to religious pluralism. Even if a society is very secular, if the dominant religious orientation is uniform, then its background assumptions spreads through one’s daily life. One can therefore be a “cultural” Catholic or Lutheran, with an attachment to the exoteric forms associated with the religion, without being a believer. But when you have religious pluralism people are going to disagree strenuously about exoteric forms. This applies even to the post-religious; an American atheist from a Jewish background may have a different attitude toward Christmas than an American atheist from a Catholic background. In other words, as European societies have become less Christian over the past generation, they’ve also had to face more religious pluralism. Christians will become more assertive and aggressive in direct response to Europe’s growing Muslim community, which wishes to contest the tacit monopoly that Christianity has long had in Europe as the Faith.

Another issue which might be at work is that as nominal or marginal believers fall away, the set of individuals who remain committed Christians are more religious and exhibit more fidelity to their identity than before. This may result in a group of Christians who are much more cohesive and can engage in collective action out of proportion to their numbers. Whereas before more marginal and nominal members of the community might have served as a check on excessive activism, today those individuals may no longer be part of the Christianity community.

The power of an organized Christian community is clear in a society such as South Korea. Though only around 30% of the population is Christian, with almost half the population not having a religious affiliation at all, Christians have been over-represented in positions of power. The growth of the Christian religion has been rapid, but has slowed over the past 15 years. It seems possible that it may be nearing its “natural limit.” But that does not mean that it won’t be influential in the years to come.

So what do you think of the study and its conclusions? If the results of this study are true, as Westerners, do get more aggressive because we feel we are fighting back against the enemy (Satan)? Or are we just defensive, fearful of loosing our place?

Study Source:
Achterberg, P., Houtman, D., Aupers, S., Koster, W., Mascini, P., & Waal, J. (2009). A Christian Cancellation of the Secularist Truce? Waning Christian Religiosity and Waxing Religious Deprivatization in the West Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 48 (4), 687-701

Popularity: 3% [?]

From Fox News. Watch and tell me what you think about this.

PS…If you can’t see this video in the feed, please click the link to watch the video.

Popularity: 5% [?]

The following is a guest post from Dr. David Dunbar, President of Biblical Theological Seminary in Hatfield, PA.

With these words St. Paul (1 Cor. 13:12) contrasts the limitations of our present spiritual vision and understanding with the fullness of knowledge that will be ours at the return of the Lord.  This metaphor may be helpful as we consider the last of Biblical Seminary’s theological convictions.

The Necessity of Cultural Engagement

We are committed to ongoing engagement with culture and the world for the sake of our witness to the gospel, and to continual learning from Christians in other cultural settings.[1]

There are three points I want to make about this statement:  1) culture as the context for mission, 2) culture as a way of seeing, and 3) the need for cross-cultural learning.

1. Culture as context

By “culture” we refer to the traditional ways of thinking, speaking, and acting that characterize a particular group of people. In our highly mobile Western world, we must think of culture not as a single entity but as a complex interplay of contrasting and even competing ways by which different groups construe their world.

This diversity of cultures is one reason the church in North America must now think of itself as a missionary church. We are surrounded by groups of people who do not share our way of viewing the world. To bring the gospel to our world we will need to engage in the missionary task of translation.  We must communicate the truth about Jesus in ways that are faithful to Scripture and effective in crossing cultural boundaries.

Tim Keller, pastor of Redeemer Presbyterian Church in Manhattan, understands this challenge better than most. “When Paul spoke to Greeks, he confronted their culture’s idol of speculation and philosophy with the ‘foolishness’ of the cross, and then presented Christ’s salvation as true wisdom. When he spoke to Jews, he confronted their culture’s idol of power and accomplishment with the ‘weakness’ of the cross, and then presented the gospel as true power (1 Cor. 1:22-25).”[2] In affirming one gospel, Keller nonetheless argues that different “forms” of the gospel are appropriate to people of differing cultural backgrounds.

So, in the context of his own ministry in New York City, Keller recognizes that people with religious backgrounds understand the concept of sin as an offense against the law of God.  These people can therefore be reached with the more traditional evangelical summary of the gospel which presents the cross as divine provision for human sin and guilt.

But Keller notes, “…Manhattan is also filled with postmodern listeners who consider all moral statements to be culturally relative and socially constructed. If you try to convict them of guilt for sexual lust, they will simply say, ‘You have your standards, and I have mine.’ If you respond with a diatribe on the dangers of relativism, your listeners will simply feel scolded and distanced.”[3]  For this audience Keller finds it more effective to speak of sin not as guilt but as idolatry.

My point is not to argue the rightness or wrongness of Pastor Keller’s specific approach to preaching, although I agree with much of his article. The point is rather to emphasize the missional challenge we face. Careful interpretation of Scripture must now be combined with careful interpretation of culture(s) if we are to witness faithfully to our generation.

Read the rest of this entry »

Popularity: 9% [?]

A Spring Harrow

This is a highlight of a message I preached May 23, 2009 at Mission Fellowship Church in Middletown, DE.

Isaiah 41:8-16
Context: Is. 41:1-20

In this section of the chapter, Isaiah reminds Israel that Yahweh was the decisive actor in their life. At the begining and end of the chapter, Isaiah uses a speech of disputation, presenting the arguments of Yahweh over and against the ideological claims of Babylon. To do this, Isaiah invites the reader to imagine a courtroom scene, a law court, where different witnesses bring evidence about the identity of the one true God. Evidence is presented for Yahweh. There is no compelling evidence offered for the Babylonian gods leading to the verdict that Yahweh is the real God.

Between the two disputation speeches, Isaiah presents a series of salvation oracles that offer an assurance of Yahweh’s caring, attentive presence in the midst of Israel. The mode of speech completely focuses on on Israel’s needs.

While these two different type of speeches seem to move in opposite directions, together they all the community of God’s people to see and experience Yahweh as the one who makes the decisive difference in their lives. The massive, powerful Yahweh moves history, manipulates nations, and empowers His people. This is where we intersect our text.

God will not let go of his chosen people. He empowers them to risk (8-10)

“But you, Israel, are my servant.
You’re Jacob, my first choice,
descendants of my good friend Abraham.
I pulled you in from all over the world,
called you in from every dark corner of the earth,
Telling you, ‘You’re my servant, serving on my side.
I’ve picked you. I haven’t dropped you.’
Don’t panic. I’m with you.
There’s no need to fear for I’m your God.
I’ll give you strength. I’ll help you.
I’ll hold you steady, keep a firm grip on you. The Message translation

We are held in the firm grip of God’s almighty hand. He is our rock, strength, support, and stability. Knowing that, not intellectually but experientially, empowers us to live a dynamic, audacious faith. In knowing through our relationship with God that support structure, we now have a launching pad with which we can take God-sized risks. We know that there is a net below us that will catch us were we to struggle so we can risk it all in obedience to God.

What also helps is knowing we are called. Called people know they are called. Called people live out their calling empowered by the all-powerful God. A strong, secure foundation and a true sense of calling not only empower us to live a risky faith, they drive us to live a risky, audacious faith. It is not something we might do, it is something we have to do.

These are the people that God will use to re-shape the world (14-16)
“Do you feel like a lowly worm, Jacob?
Don’t be afraid.
Feel like a fragile insect, Israel?
I’ll help you.
I, God, want to reassure you.
The God who buys you back, The Holy of Israel.
I’m transforming you from worm to harrow,
from insect to iron.
As a sharp-toothed harrow you’ll smooth out the mountains,
turn those tough old hills into loamy soil.
You’ll open the rough ground to the weather,
to the blasts of sun and wind and rain.
But you’ll be confident and exuberant,
expansive in The Holy of Israel!

The insignificant will become a strong force. The lowly worm and fragile insects are transformed into a sharp-toothed harrow. A harrow is an implement for cultivating the surface of the soil. This distinguishes it from the plough, which is used for deeper cultivation. Harrowing is often carried out on fields to follow the rough finish left by ploughing operations. The purpose of this harrowing is generally to break up clods and lumps of soil and to provide a finer finish, a good soil structure that is suitable for seeding and planting operations. Coarser harrowing may also be used to remove weeds and to cover seed after sowing.

God wants to transform the insignificant into a instrument that can break apart the rough ground and prepare it for the seed of the Gospel. We don’t often enjoy the hard work of breaking up hard soil, but it must be done for the seed to be productive. It is the same in our culture. God transforms empowered, called people into dirt-busters, powerful instruments of His redemptive plan.

Ironically, God has only one verb in the Hebrew – “to make”. All the other verbs are associated with Israel. Therefore, Yahweh energizes, authorizes and empowers; Israel appropriates the “making” of God, taking initiative and responsibility as it carries out a re-shaping and re-making of culture.

As the church, if we can truly know in our hearts the empowerment and calling God has given to us and live our lives out of that calling and empowerment, we could see culture re-shaped into the Kingdom of God. It would not be perfect, as we are imperfect people. But it would have a God-like quality about it where people strive for justice, live out kindness and walk humbly with God.

We need to note, however, that Isaiah is not talking about a Christian political power taking over. We should not be fighting for a “Christian” government. There are two reasons (at least) for this. One is that you cannot legislate morality. You can attempt to legislate behavior, but a kingdom lifestyle is not formed by a legislative act. It is formed by an encounter with God. In addition, a “Christian” government does not result the transformation of people. People are only transformed by the power of the Triune God working in their life.

What Isaiah is talking about, and what we need to be striving for, is this: the gospel of Christ, proclaimed in human weakness triumphs over opposition and our timid faith. And it overcome the powers of this world. The growth of the early church was not a result of any kind of power structure. It was a result of humble people living out an authentic love for God and others. They were grounded in God’s love and calling and were freed and empowered to live a radical, audacious faith that was evident among the peoples of the world. In doing so, they transformed the world in which they lived. In that, we can also see the world transformed.

Popularity: 3% [?]

Read the rest of this entry »

Popularity: 4% [?]