Feed My Sheep

I was deeply touched when a friend directed me to this video. Narayanan Krishnan is a Brahmin Hindu from a privileged family who had a bright future ahead of him as an award-winning chef, but gave up a coveted position in Switzerland after witnessing devastating hunger and privation in his hometown of Madurai, India. Krishnan founded his nonprofit organization, Akshaya Trust, in 2003 at the age of 22. Seven years later, he had already served more than 1.6 million meals to India's homeless, mentally ill and destitute. In addition to providing three meals a day every day, which he often hand-feeds to those who are too weak to feed themselves, Krishnan also provides baths, shaves and haircuts as needed to the nearly 400 people that he serves. And on top of all that, he gives love - hugs, smiles and encouragement - to these "untouchables," rejecting the caste system which teaches that they are unworthy of his notice. As you watch the video, you can see the deep joy and satisfaction this man feels, knowing his work is truly changing lives. Krishnan may not be a Christian, but for me, his ministry of compassion answers the ubiquitous question "What would Jesus do?" to a T.

Vanesa Delfino, a student at Riverside Community College, was feeling disconnected from God. She visited the La Sierra University Church and heard a sermon on service given by Pastor Chris Oberg in which she related an experience her family had shared of feeding the homeless in Los Angeles. Vanesa immediately decided that she would make sack lunches and deliver them daily to the homeless in her Riverside neighborhood. She and her sister have been doing this for ten months now, and the happiness Vanesa feels when she describes her outreach is almost tangible. She has found the love of God by selflessly serving others.

How about you? How is God's love for you (and yours for Him) made manifest to those with whom you come in contact every day? How do you relate to the homeless and needy in your neighborhood - do you reach out, or walk away? Do you rely on others to care for the destitute, or is the love of God so pervasive in your life that you simply must share it?

Narayanan and Vanesa are bringing the Kingdom of Heaven to earth. I can't help but wonder how changed our world would be if each one of us seriously considered what we can do to share God's love with others on a daily basis - if we, too, reveled in the joy of service to "the least of these." (Matt. 25:40)

Dispassionate Spirituality, or Why we aren't being fruitful...

(This article was originally posted at Adventist Today)

Since the creation of the Earth, growing things has been relatively straightforward.  Take a seed, put it in the ground, make sure it gets enough water and sunlight, and a few months later you’ll be eating well.  Sure, you can get more sophisticated, but these are the basic elements for physical, and spiritual growth.

My Beautiful Wife is currently teaching herself, and our kids, to be tomato ranchers.  A couple of months ago, they picked out a variety of tomato seeds, planted them in some starter soil, and made sure they stayed warm and moist.  Since then, they have shared almost two-dozen tomato plants with friends, family, and neighbors.

Read more »

Exporting Adventism

Overseas not long ago, I had an interesting interaction with an Adventist pastor. I had just finished telling him about a person who had expressed to me a desire to begin keeping Sabbath and to be baptized. I would have expected him to be thrilled with the news, as this individual had been an ongoing ‘project’ for him for some time. To my surprise the pastor appeared disappointed, annoyed, and even a little angry.

Read more »

Egocentric mission or inclusivist gospel?

I've just finished reading an article in Adventist World about the "Roadmap to Mission" draft document to be edited and presented at the Annual Council of the General Conference Executive Committee in October 2009.

According to Mark Kellner's report, the document affirms that

"[t]he goal of Seventh-day Adventist evangelistic and outreach work among adherents of world religions is to bring people into a saving faith in Jesus Christ..."

Read more »

Relevance, Part 2

Image by Lawrence OP via Flickr

When I look around at others, and I try to understand people's motives for church attendance, I am often baffled. I don't really understand why people choose to attend a weekly church service – or get involved at a deeper level. But my not understanding probably says more about me, then it does about the people I'm trying to understand.

Typically, I am not a joiner. I tend to not just go along because everyone else is doing something. As a certified introvert, I tend to prefer my own company over that of others. So, when I see groups of people gathering – for anything, not just church – I am left a little confused as to what their motives, or intentions are.

Read more »

Relevance, Part 1

Twenty-five years ago when I was wrestling with spirituality and religion, I struggled to find meaning.  After dabbling in various religions (e.g. Buddhism, Disco, Scientology, New Age, bowling leagues, and narcissism), I began to re-read the Bible.

My rationale for reading the Bible, wasn't in a search for truth, but rather to expand my rich literary background.  I considered myself well-read, and so, even though I was approaching this from an agnostic's skepticism, I thought it would be good to round out my knowledge.  Instead, I found God.

Read more »

Doing it alone?

Do you ever get the impression that Adventists are evangelising the world completely on their own? That the burden of taking the gospel to the whole world is the task of Adventists all by themselves?

This issue struck me (again) yesterday as I was watching the latest Mission Spotlight. As I reflect on all the material we produce describing and praising the denomination's mission work, I find it hard to remember much talk at all about what other Christians are doing in spreading the gospel. Why is that?

Is it because we think we are the only ones who understand the true gospel?

Is it because we think that God is only using us to spread the gospel?

Is it because, deep down, we think that all other Christians are "Babylonians" and that we can't work with them?

Are we afraid that, if we worked with them — or at least saw ourselves as carrying out a similar task — we would have our uniqueness diluted and "the truth" contaminated?

I would love to see our Mission Spotlights referring to the work of other Christians in spreading the gospel. All groups are going to report on what they are doing themselves — that is entirely appropriate. But wouldn't it be good, just sometimes, to know that we are not out there alone? That other Christians are also spreading the gospel? That the burden is shared by others? And that, maybe together, we have a better chance of spreading the Good News of the kingdom throughout the world (see Matthew 24:14)?

The cLAim Project

cLAim: Background

cLAim is a major evangelistic project that combines the resources of the Southern California Conference (SCC) and the It Is Written (IIW) television ministry. The initial concept began to take form when SCC President Larry Caviness met with Shawn Boonstra, Speaker/Director for IIW. The 117 Adventist churches and the 9 Adventist companies in the Greater Los Angeles area have been told that they will support the project.

Detailed plans including pastoral assignments, member and lay group responsibilities, training sessions, and meeting locations can be viewed on the Southern California Website. The projected cost for the program will exceed $1,000,000.

Because cLAim has generated significant interest among Adventist bloggers, pastors in the Greater Los Angeles area were asked their opinion of the project. It was understood that these pastors would not be named. This article is published with their unanimous approval, and is based on interviews with more than ten pastors.

cLAim: The Genesis

On several occasions, Larry Caviness, President of the Southern California Conference (SCC), has told pastors that often, before he goes to work, he climbs to the top of a hill behind his home in Glendale. From that perspective, he prays for the people who live in the LA area.

When Elder Caviness became president of the SCC, the conference was in financial distress. Cash reserves were low; funds were not adequate to meet North American Division salary guidelines. The Conference struggled to pay its debts. He set about to correct these problems, and he did so.

The pastors surveyed believe that the time, energy and resources that had to be directed to put the Conference toward righting the financial imbalance made it difficult for Conference administrators to adequately fund evangelism and education. (A decade ago about 50,000 individuals attended Conference churches. Today, membership is around 40,000.)

Elder Caviness is on record as advocating an aggressive evangelistic program now that the financial house is in order. No pastor surveyed disagrees with the proposition that evangelism is important. There is, however, significant unease with regard to the process that came to involve the IIW team.

When a call came from Shawn Boonstra outlining what an IIW evangelistic campaign had to offer the SCC, Caviness concluded the call was providential. IIW offered to conduct an outreach in LA similar to those planned for Phoenix, Arizona and Portland, Oregon. (One pastor theorized that as the conversation between Boonstra and Caviness continued, a strategy was agreed on.)

Caviness then shared the plan that he and Boonstra had developed with the Conference administrative team. Then he took the proposal to the Conference Executive Committee and received approval. He did not discuss his plans with the pastors who had to enthusiastically support the evangelistic program if it was to be successful. Caviness informed pastors, “This is what we’re going to do.”

The pastors that attended a cLAim meeting at the White Memorial Church, knowing the conference had committed them to participate in the Boonstra project, hoped that they and others might influence the campaign planning and preparation. However, the presenters did not ask for or consider any input. Pastors reported that the meeting was chaotic and filled with tension. The bottom line was that the conference administration imposed its will.

Several of the pastors interviewed have spent twenty or more years in the Conference and have participated in previous evangelistic campaigns. George Vandeman conducted a reasonably successful evangelistic series at the LA Sports Arena. On the other hand, the Carter Report Shrine Auditorium meetings were a fiasco. These pastors reported that the cLAim project is similar in scope and planning to that failed campaign.

cLAim: Major Concerns

Several pastors are aware of a study that Jim Park did for his Doctoral thesis at Fuller Seminary in which he examined the effect of the It Is Written Buena Park Satellite evangelistic program. They wondered if those who planned the Claim LA project read Jim’s thesis.

One pastor expressed the view that perhaps God would have led a different way if a wider group had been consulted. He had experienced previous citywide evangelist programs. In his opinion, these meetings had never benefited local churches. Local church evangelism was far more effective. He also noted that creative strategies for the use of satellite communication were not considered. It seemed to him that it was going to be a big event that attracted mostly SDAs.

Another pastor commented, “Whoever was doing the sales pitch made it sound really good, and the President didn’t think through the implications before signing on the dotted line. And so we’re in it for more than a million dollars.” Pastors are happy that the money comes from an extra-ordinary tithe donation and not from the Conference budget!

Conference Vice President James Lee apologized for not having involved pastors in planning. Consequently, it should be no surprise that pastors and parishioners feel “out of the loop”. Another pastor commented, “Shouldn’t there be a sign-off with the pastors on such a large project as this is?” Another said, “The fear is we haven’t learned anything from our past failures. We keep doing these things over and over again.”

“Here’s how I look at it,” responded one pastor. “It’s not the way I’d have chosen to do it. It’s not the best use of the money.” This pastor argued that regional evangelism only marginally benefits the churches closest to the IIW evangelistic meeting sites.

One pastor argued that Mark Finely was a more effective leader than Boonstra in that he better understood and appreciated the responsibility local pastors had to assume if an evangelistic series was to be a success.

A pastor queried, “Is the IIW staff going to sit down to learn what’s going on in the local churches? Does IIW assume that “one message fits all”? Do these people assume that we don’t know anything? If we were given the resources and support, we could bring the Gospel message to our communities in ways that are tailored to meet specific needs. Can’t we be trusted to achieve a common goal?”

cLAim: Feedback to the Conference President

Pastors were asked what they would say to Elder Caviness if he asked them for advice on the Claim LA project. Here are their responses:

“Scale back. Maybe one meeting at the Shrine Auditorium. If they select another location, that’s OK, too.”

“Next time, call in the pastors and ask what they think would be effective in our area. Each area of our city has its own culture, traditions, and needs.”

“Your team’s not with you on this one. You will be going on this alone.”

“The majority of churches will not respond. Parishioners know it won’t produce the desired results.”

“Push the pause button; it’s radical. Find out what the pastors will support.”

“Convene a symposium on evangelism to explore what pastors think will be effective where they work. Accept the pastors as trusted team members. Let them make the decision on how to spend the one million dollars and the emphasis the outreach should take.”

“Consult with the pastors who have been successful evangelists and see what they say. I’m disappointed that again administration thinks they can speak for the field.”

Pastors had numerous suggestions for how one might approach evangelism in their areas of Greater Los Angeles:

“The Conference should be divided up into smaller sections than cLAim proposes. Take the money that is allocated to the cLAim project and divide it up according the percentage of the population in each of these smaller segments. Put a couple of pastors in charge of each area and hold them accountable.”

“Pastors are the ones who know what is needed in their areas and are best equipped to address those needs. Trust them. Let the pastors use their gifts and talents to reach out for Christ. The pastors are the boots on the ground and know what will work in their areas. The Conference administrators do not have this information. The Conference administration would have limited control. This is a positive!”

“Statistics show that people come to Christ before age thirty-two. Boonstra’s meetings are addressed to the fifty-five and older. If you look at the ideal converted family from a financial viewpoint, it is two young professional wage earners with children. This is not the kind of family these meetings will attract.”

“MINISTRY magazine (July 2008) reports that 0.5% of Adventist growth in America comes from evangelism. This is what Boonstra does. More than 70% of membership growth happens because of personal evangelism. This is what pastors and church members accomplish at the local level. Why do we put so much of our resources into a method that has such a small return and so little into a method that is effective?”

“What we do every week is being discounted. Boonstra is being brought in to rectify the problem of decreasing membership. His message doesn’t support the pastors and church members that are working hard to meet the needs of everyone in their communities. Many of these people are far from God.”

“I don’t believe it is realistic to expect people to drive out of their area to attend meetings that have little relevance to them. In addition, it’s not realistic to expect people, within the context of current gas prices and rush hour traffic, to travel more than fifteen or twenty minutes from where they live.”

Pastors do not believe Boonstra’s prophetic emphasis has the attraction it once did. It does not speak to contemporary society. Several pastors expressed their concern that their neighbors might connect them with the handbills that are mailed out.

One pastor asked why it was not possible to bring the pastors together and let them be creative. According to him, the lack of convenient meeting places and city traffic demand a new approach. “Be creative,” was the plea.

“If we approach our communities with Jesus’ methods, we will work to create a model for community services. We will show God’s love by our actions. It’s time we show people what we can do for them, not what they can do for us.”

Pastors reflected on what had happened during the Carter Report. They supported the Carter Report and put everything in their churches on hold. This effort ended in such a disastrous way that those meetings had a personal, long term, negative effect. For them, trust in the church’s leadership was the issue.

cLAim: Political Dynamics

“Is Caviness trying to pastor the whole conference? Is this his role? He’s designed a master plan.”

Pastors brought up what they term the political dynamics associated with evangelistic meetings. How a pastor cooperates with and supports the evangelistic effort becomes a mark of his/her loyalty.

One pastor expressed his concern that those who critique evangelistic efforts are branded as foes. “I care about people, and I want people to come into God’s kingdom and be God’s people. I have no desire to tear down the Adventist Church. But if I’m not on the band wagon, then I’m labeled as uninterested in evangelism.”

There seems to be a carrot associated with cLAim. Conference VP James Lee is understood to have announced that some $109,000 is available to churches in LA Metro Region that “support” the project. To get the money, the pastor must have this “support” approved by Lee and the Region Director. (One pastor noted that if the money were available only to those who are willing to bow and scrape, he would not participate.)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

cLAim: Personal Reflections

When I reflect on these extended conversations with pastors in Southern California Conference, I am led to several conclusions:

First, not one person used the phrase “Claim LA.” It was always, “The Boonstra meetings.” This leads me to conclude that this evangelistic campaign is off to a bad start.

Second, the pastors appreciate what Elder Caviness has done for the SCC. They like him as a person and respect him as an administrator. He has a reservoir of good will that he can draw upon. He can use this good will to turn the cLAim project into something that has a higher potential for acceptance and success.

Third, most of the pastors recognize that cLAim is a done deal. Conference decision-making practices are an ongoing concern.

Fourth, pastors have not bought into the cLAim product. Consequently, the challenge for administrators is to talk to their sales force. Listen to what each person says. Invite these talented and dedicated ministers to help them. They may be surprised at the result.

cLAim: Summary

The pastors in the Greater LA area support evangelism and want to see new people join their churches. Their concern is that any evangelistic program that has a lasting benefit will be based on meeting the needs of the community where their churches are based.

Pastors desire and value an opportunity to have input into whatever is done in their community. They believe it is important to broaden the dialogue to include the resources, creativity and diversity of gifts and people that are part of every church.

They also are committed to present a message that is centered on Jesus’ love for people and promotes a grace-centered gospel that awakes hope and offers assurance of salvation through faith in Jesus Christ.

There is concern that traditional evangelists center their messages more on prophetic topics and doctrine than on the Gospel. Until there is credible evidence to the contrary, this concern will continue to be a barrier that divides traditional evangelists and pastors. Boonstra is considered to be a traditionalist.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

cLAim: Reporter’s Note

To date, neither Larry Caviness, President of the Southern California Conference, nor James Lee, Director of the Southern California Evangelistic Department, has responded to my phone calls and/or the following email letter in which I invited James Lee to verify the facts and respond to the comments that follow.

Dear Mr. Lee,
Larry Caviness directed my inquiry to you. My name is Andy Hanson. I am gathering information about the cLAim evangelistic effort for an article that will appear in the November/December Adventist Today magazine. My reporting will undoubtedly lack balance and a degree of factual content if I don’t make official contact with you, either by phone or email. Your response to the following questions is requested.

You may decide that sufficient information is available on the SCC website. You might prefer a phone interview, you may decide to simply answer any or all of the following questions by return email, or you may wish to write a general response. Whatever you decide, my submission deadline is Monday, September 29.

QUESTIONS

Who initiated the idea of the evangelistic series?

How did the SCC decide that the time was right for cLAim ?

Are you the man primarily responsible for planning and organizing the cLAim campaign?

Why was Boonstra’s It Is Written evangelistic team selected to lead the evangelistic series?

Jim Park did an extensive longitudinal study of the It Is Written evangelistic meetings in La Habra. Have you read his report?

One of the concerns of pastors is that Boonstra emphasizes prophecy and doctrine rather than a broader gospel message. Is this a concern?

Are 500,000 television sets tuned in to IIW, in LA and Ventura Counties, or is this the number of possible viewers?

Billy Graham held his crusades at the invitation of the pastors and churches in a given area. After the invitation was extended, the Billy Graham organization required that a specific percentage of churches and pastors in the area pledge their cooperation. Was a similar process followed for the Boonstra cLAim meetings?

It has been reported that pastors feel blind-sided by the Claim LA project. The blogs report that the pastors were not consulted nor were they part of the planning sessions. It appears that pastors do not feel in the loop. Have you sensed this at all? What has been done to make pastors and local congregations feel involved in decision-making?

Have your Evangelistic Countdown goals been met up to and including the August 15, ’08 deadline?

How is cLAim being funded?

There has been considerable comment on blogs and in other forms about the cost for the cLAim project. Some suggest that the money might have been better spent if it were directed to the local churches that have a long-term presence in the community. How do you respond to this suggestion?

What is your response to those who say that cLAim is not directed toward the needs of the various communities within Greater LA? A “one-size fits all” approach has been shown to have significant weakness.

What are the cLAim evangelistic goals? When and how will you know they have been reached?

Book Review: For the Sake of the Gospel

Des Ford is passionate about the gospel. So much so, that he has been prepared to sacrifice much for the sake of it. He has been vilified, defrocked, and now worships outside of Adventism — the denomination he loves and has tried to move forward in its thinking about a cherished doctrine that he believes obscures the gospel. Hundreds of others have also sacrificed jobs and friends for the sake of the gospel. Now, Des Ford, collaborating with his wife, Gillian, in their book For the Sake of the Gospel: Throw Out the Bathwater, but Keep the Baby tells the story of the theological controversy that decimated the Adventist denomination through the 70s and 80s and whose effects are still felt even to this day.

For Ford, the bathwater is the doctrine of the Investigative Judgment. The baby is the gospel of justification by grace alone through faith alone. In a series of somewhat disjointed chapters, Ford pleads for the Adventist officials to come clean and confess the wrongs perpetrated on the members. As far as Ford is concerned, almost no scholar in the denomination believes in the Investigative Judgment anymore and it is time to jettison it completely.

In the first chapter, Des provides the transcript of a talk he gave in 1997 at the Sydney Chapter of the Association of Adventist Forums entitled My Vision for the Seventh-day Adventist Church. His vision is

that the true church will arise and proclaim the true gospel to the whole world. It's an objective historical gospel, revealing the love of God in such a way as to break the hearts of rebels so that they might hate sin, learn the purity of Paradise, that sin is insanity, and that life commends what Christ commands. It's a church teaching these things that will lighten the world with the glory of the gospel, not one fixated by dates that don't compute. Seventh-day Adventism has an opportunity and a privilege to preach the Pauline gospel. (p. 7 - emphasis in original)

Moving on from this vision, Ford reviews 22 illicit assumptions that support the Investigative Judgment, the outdated year-day principle, the question of when forgiven sins are blotted out, the New Testament's view of the Day of Atonement, the real meaning of Revelation 14:6-7, the way the Investigative Judgment has been "reworked" since its establishment, a critique of the view that the United States appears in prophecy, and the real meaning of Daniel 8:14.

Ford then surveys the politics around the denomination's understanding of the gospel including the way men who disagree with the church's official positions abandon conscience and follow orders to not saying anything about their views and who have to suffer cognitive dissonance.

Gillian Ford provides an interesting history on How a Seventh-day Adventist Scholar in Biblical Eschatology Found His Denomination's Prophetic Traditions Wanting and his rediscovery of the apotelesmatic principle.

There are articles on the Glacier View trial of Des Ford (rather than the examination of Ford's views — what Glacier View was supposed to be about). Appendices include "positive" presentations on the Sabbath and the Covenants for which the Fords hold traditional Adventist positions.

The above is a partial list of themes covered — hopefully giving a sense of what the book contains. By their own admission, the

'... book has been negative for obvious reasons. One cannot vote for dangerous errors which threaten the joy and well-being of the children of God. Neutrality in a religious crisis is the worst form of cowardice. (p. 195)

As I have indicated above, For the Sake of the Gospel is somewhat disjointed. Des Ford's aphoristic style is not always easy to read. But the flaws in the writing are more than made up for the following:

1. Des Ford has, obviously, been at the centre of the controversy surrounding the Investigative Judgment doctrine (although he is not the first). To hear from someone with firsthand knowledge and experience, including friendships with many of the key players in the history, provides an essential perspective.
2. Ford's passion for the gospel consistently shines through. In the end, Ford is not primarily concerned with controversy. He wants to see the gospel as the primary focus of our attention. In his view, dealing with the Investigative Judgment is essential because it obscures the gospel and robs Adventists of their true freedom in Christ and their assurance of salvation.
3. If it is by their fruits that we know the character of someone, then Ford is a genuine Christian man. The way he has consistently and graciously dealt with his adversaries and his refusal to engage in legal battles with his beloved denomination demonstrate the fruits of the Spirit in such a way that his credibility is enhanced.

For the Sake of the Gospel is an important book because it deals with important themes, written by an important "player", during an important part of Adventist history that we are still living. For the Sake of the Gospel, read this book.

Technorati Tags: Desmond Ford,Seventh-day Adventism,Investigative Judgment,Sabbath,Gospel

North American Adventism, by the numbers

by Tompaul Wheeler

I was momentarily tempted to post something about the latest Adventist News Network release about Adventist membership in North America topping a million, but then I realized that I was pretty sure we'd done that before, so maybe this was just a technical thing, and then I skimmed the actual article and the numbers just didn't seem to make sense. I moved on with my life, so I'm glad Alex Carpenter posted this:

Back in 2004 the Adventist Review News reported that:

'North American Division membership has passed the one million mark-1,001,872 as of October 21, 2004.'

Apparently the news is that we're continuing to top one million. Hmm? According to the most recent numbers helpfully available for us lay folk through the church's adventiststatistics.org, in 2006 the NAD recorded 1,041,715 members.

I applaud the focus on weeding out the excess on the books, but if, as the secretary states, the NAD grew at a 2% rate over the last five years (including losses) than we should be just hovering around 1,100,000. (The 2003 membership was 992,046.) Four years later, the news is that the NAD tops 1 million?

What's missing from the most recent Annual Council report in the Adventist Review is the actual 2007 number. Why?

Also not included in the report: the amount of money invested by the division, unions, conferences, local churches and individuals in public evangelism during 2007...

The slightly deflated numbers appear (based on what I've read elsewhere) to be related to a stronger emphasis on accurate, up-to-date bookkeeping, which is certainly laudable. Carpenter goes on to address church evangelism dollars which could appear to be invested more effectively.

The October 9, 2008 Adventist Review had a map of the U.S. and Canada, divided by regions, with Adventist to population ratios. One could assume that the Adventist church would do best in the South and Mid-America regions, but that's not at all the case. In those conservative regions, where religion is more closely tied to personal identity and people are set in their ways, the ratio is only 1:251 (hurray for all the old Adventists moving to Florida!) and 1:420, respectively. But up in the North Pacific region, by far the most secular part of America, the ratio is 1:143. (Even more secular Canada is 1:574, but that's for the entire country, where, as in Quebec, heritage and religion are tightly linked despite a general secularness (secularity?); Adventist statistics for the British Columbia conference are somewhat better than the nation as a whole.)

This reminds me of something I heard a church planting expert say several years ago (it was probably back at seminary): that church planting is most effective in the most secular areas. I think that rather than old-school evangelism, the North American church should focus on church planting and building fresh congregations, because, like it or not, the newer a church is, the easier it is for it to draw new members--and vice versa.

Can we Coexist?

by Travis Walker

Maybe you have seen the logo on a T-shirt or on a bumper sticker. The logo says Coexist with the religious symbols of Islam, Judaism, and Christianity. You especially see bands like U2 displaying the symbol at their concerts. So what is the message that is being promoted? Can Christians wear it without compromising the gospel commission?

My first reaction when I saw the logo on a T-shirt was, “man that’s a cool message. I wonder where I can get one of those?” I mean, doesn’t this message promote the religious liberty that this country was founded on: all races and religions having the freedom to live according to the dictates of their conscience?

Then I started thinking, “could I share Jesus with someone while wearing a shirt that essentially says that all thee religions are equal? Am I somehow promoting syncretism or ecumenism by wearing this? Am I somehow promoting that all religions lead to heaven? Or am I simply stating that we all have the right to live together in tolerance?”

But then something else came to mind, “if I am promoting tolerance, am I contradicting myself when I share my faith with someone from another religion or even just another Christian denomination?”

So now I am really starting to question the motivation I have for sharing my faith. Am I called to share what I believe in order to convert or in order to inform? You see, if we are called to be lights of the world, how intrusive should we be with our light? When does our light cease to be light? Can it be light when I am proselytizing? Or can it only be light when I am simply out to serve and love humanity without an agenda.

Maybe we need a little more humility when we share our faith. Maybe if we weren’t so dogmatic that we have the truth more people would be interested in what we actually have to say. Don’t get me wrong, I believe Adventist Christians have an important message that needs to be heard by the world, but I am concerned about how can we present it in a way in which they will actually listen.

Maybe if we had some respect and even cared enough to investigate what other people believed before we so arrogantly claim we know the truth, maybe if we expressed tolerance for those we disagreed with, then maybe, just maybe, people might actually listen to what we have to say. Do we care enough to listen before we speak? Can we love people we don’t agree with? It is my prayer that we can.

“I have become all things to all men, that I might by all means save some.” (1 Corinthians 9:22)

Review: God's Great Missionaries

by Nathan Brown

So much is written about evangelism and mission these days that it’s refreshing to take these many discussions back to the source. Beginning with the stories of Jesus, the early church and other assorted Bible characters, God’s Great Missionaries takes a fresh and credible look at what it means to be part of the mission of God in the world today.

Born to missionary parents, first-time author Gary Krause is now a director of mission for the Seventh-day Adventist Church worldwide. He brings this extensive experience of church mission activities around the world to his reading of familiar Bible stories.

God’s Great Missionaries is the companion book to a series of Bible-study guides and, in just a couple of places, the book slips and shows its Bible-study-lesson origins, taking angles that do not strictly fit with the Bible-story sources or the flow of the book. But on the whole, the book gains strength from its solid Bible-study foundations. The Bible stories are treated with respect and depth, at its best when focused on the practical ministries of Jesus and Paul. At the same time, this is not merely a head-in-the-book Bible study—indeed the subject matters demands it not be.

A book on engaging meaningfully with the world must itself engage with the realities of that world. God’s Great Missionaries is poignantly aware of the need for God and the hope He offers to our world—a world that simply can’t save itself—but also for the need for the message and presentation of the gospel to be adapted to language, culture and obvious needs of the people with whom it is being shared. Krause draws on stories of mission from around the world, Adventist mission history and personal experience, as well as citing contemporary events, voices and trends, to demonstrate that gaining a hearing for a message is as much about listening and responding as it is about preaching.

Easy reading but significant thinking, God’s Great Missionaries’ vision is active, global, inclusive, faithful, urgent and transformative. The book passionately challenges the church to think bigger in imagining how God can use us as His people to build His kingdom in our world: “We need to tear down those church doors and rip them off their hinges.” And it must also challenge us individually as to the role we play in our lives, churches and communities.

Different economics

by Nathan Brown

Most of the biggest news stories from this year so far have been focused on economics. From stock markets, exchange rates, interest rates, oil prices and food shortages in some parts of the world, many of the economic systems and implications we as a society have tended to take for granted are being brought into focus and questioned, particularly with regard to sustainability. As Christians, we are asked the same questions but these questions offer us the opportunity to urge some different answers.

One of the first realisations is a reminder that much of the current economic systems of our world—based as they are on greed, exploitation, injustice and absurd over-consumption—is wrong. That may not be the easiest thing to say. In times of stress, people tend to stick to what they know.

But the economic theory upon which so much of the way we live our lives is that which “inspires our pursuit of as much resource use and waste production (also known as economic growth) as possible, as fast as possible” (Brian McLaren, Everything Must Change). The comparative privilege enjoyed by most of us in the developed world is subsidised at the expense of the rest of the world. We need to be prepared to recognise it for the wrong it is, and use the stresses of economically difficult times to prompt us to consider how we, individually and as a society, might do things better.

As part of this process we need to ask ourselves if our lives and even our faith are so entangled in the economy as it is that we are unable to imagine other ways of ordering our lives and our world. Those who promote and profit from our economic systems have powerful voices, tuned to convince us of their importance and pre-eminence. Indeed, the prevailing economic forces can be described as

a religious movement of previously unheard-of proportions. Progress is its underlying myth, unlimited economic growth its foundational faith, the shopping mall (physical or online) its place of worship, consumerism its overriding image, ‘I’ll have a Big Mac and fries’ its ritual of initiation, and global domination its ultimate goal (Brian J Walsh and Sylvia C Keesmaat, Colossians Remixed).

In the face of rampant market-driven capitalism, it becomes increasingly clear why Jesus said, “You cannot serve God and money” (Matthew 6:24, NLT). He went on to urge that we should not worry about what we should eat, drink or wear—and the list would probably be longer if the Sermon on the Mount had been preached to 21st-century consumer in a shopping mall rather than to rural peasants on a hillside—and reminds us to look first to God who “already knows all your needs” and “will give you all you need from day to day if you live for him and make the Kingdom of God your primary concern” (Matthew 6:32, 33, NLT).

But even as we ask some of these questions of our own lives, we need to be quick to realise that the poor and already disadvantaged are always first to suffer in whatever stresses impact society. We must be asking how we as individuals and as churches can reach out to those who are hurting financially and emotionally in our communities and around the world.

Giving is the ultimate rebuttal to an economy built on getting and having. We must resist the temptations that uncertainties bring to try to build walls of protection around ourselves. Instead, as Jesus recommended, by our generosity and faithfulness we demonstrate that our treasure is to be found in the kingdom of heaven (see Matthew 6:20). Even in various end-time scenarios—in which economic turbulence often seems to figure—we must shift the focus away from mere self-preservation, whether spiritual or physical.

Adventist writer Chris Blake offers an inspiring alternative vision of the people of God responding to potential crises:

Let God’s people transition to new models of transforming grace of Christian community. Christianity has never been about isolationism, and never will be. . . . In the midst of imminent collapse, Adventist homes open to the dispossessed and fearful. Adventist churches and schools become cities of refuge and outposts of mercy. Sanctuaries house the homeless. Playing fields plough up into gardens. As a world self-destructs, chapter 2 of Acts emerges before our wondering eyes. . . . This is our finest hour (Swimming Against the Current).

End

by Nathan Brown

When I am most honest with myself, the idea of the Second Coming simply freaks me out. While Paul describes looking forward to “that wonderful event when the glory of our great God and Saviour, Jesus Christ, will be revealed” (Titus 2:13, NLT)—the “blessed hope” of the King James Version—there is at least a part of me that often struggles to join in his joyous expectation.

The concept of Jesus Himself—God of the universe—tearing a hole in the sky and stepping into our world, stamping out everything evil and bringing history as we know it to a crashing end demands some attention—and some courage. Even in the Bible stories, glory, angels, trumpets and earthquakes are not the most comforting things with which to be confronted. It seems the thought of coming face to face with God—whatever that means exactly—should scare us.

And, of course, it just seems all so foreign to the day-by-day, physical reality in which we live—the only reality we have ever really known. Throw in the strange and frightening things that many of our readings of Bible prophecy suggest will form the prelude to this shattering event and I can understand why many people might fail to appreciate the blessedness of our “hope.”

But what are the alternatives? As one of Douglas Coupland’s characters in his novel of last year, The Gum Thief, puts it:

“How could you possibly be alive and on earth and have a set of eyes and ears and a brain and not figure out that some kind of end is near?”

Left to ourselves, it seems apparent our world will eventually and inevitably succumb to any number or combination of doomsday scenarios, of which the world never seems to be in short supply. And even truly facing the inevitability of our own death and the death of those we love should be enough to bring us at least occasional shudders of panic. Factor in all the injustice, brutality and tragedy in the world as we see and experience it, and it’s a bleak picture.

In these times of dark honesty, the only thing more frightening than the Second Coming is the “risk”—that raises its spectre in moments of doubt—that it might not happen, there is no real hope and, as a result, we and our world are ultimately meaningless.

And so we turn back to the promise of the Second Coming, as frightening as it might seem at times—not because it’s the better of two fearful options but because it is the only source of true hope.

The recurring theme of the Bible is that one day, God will return to our planet. He will remake our broken world, He will set wrongs right and He will live with His people. This is offered repeatedly as God’s final answer to our temptations to despair in the face of our global and personal tragedies and crises.

And the most significant element in any discussion of the second coming of Jesus must always be Jesus. When He left the earth, the central promise given by the angels to the newly-alone disciples was that He who would return would be “this same Jesus” (Acts 1:11, KJV). Becoming confident in the hope of the Second Coming means allowing our fears to be swamped by the assurance of who Jesus is, His eternal love, His unquestionable goodness and what He has done for us.

Jesus isn’t the one who will be changed—it’s us, whatever that means. “Yes, dear friends, we are already God’s children, and we can’t even imagine what we will be like when Christ returns. But we do know that when he comes we will be like him, for we will see him as he really is” (1 John 3:2).

However daunting the prospect of Jesus’ return is in so many ways, we will recognise the same Jesus we have come to know in the gospel stories and through the life experiences we have already shared with Him. There will be something so essentially right in that moment—an overwhelmingly holy awe that may well feel a lot like terror, as well as an indescribable joy.

We can’t imagine, we can’t help but be unnerved but—knowing the God we do—we can hope and we can trust.

The Result of Childhood Trauma

Reader,
I don’t believe that the SDA church can be “reformed”. I think that in the best case scenario, for church survival in the US and other developed countries, is a metamorphosis, or what might be described as “time and cultural change”. No one any longer talks about “the shut door”, counsels regarding the dangers of education beyond missionary training, “the lake of fire”, or the “investigative judgment”. The 2300 Days Prophecy; petty rules regarding Sabbath keeping; Revelation beasts; forbidden foods, movies, and drinks; and end-of-the-world proclamations just aren’t selling nowadays. And eventually, if the organized church survives, and that’s a big if, members will relegate these teachings to evolutionary misunderstandings necessary for Adventism to survive as a Christian sect.

Emphasis will be increasing placed on the Gospel: i.e. community outreach and worldwide health and service organizations like ADRA. Adventist education will encourage freedom of thought and expression. And SDA educated young people won’t “leave the church” because their emancipation from narrow doctrinaire practices will be celebrated by their church family.

Comic modified from The Far Side, by Gary Larson
(click to enlarge)

The good news

by Nathan Brown

While on earth, Jesus sent out His disciples with the instruction that they were to “go and announce . . . that the Kingdom of Heaven is near” (Matthew 10:7*). This was the good news He wanted them to practice sharing. So when He left them with His final instructions to go and evangelize, to be His witnesses, to share good news (see Matthew 28:18-20 and Acts 1:8), it was not a new undertaking but rather an extension of something they had already been learning and doing.

About 2000 years later, we find ourselves as part of the same story and the same mission. Jesus also instructs us to share the good news. But the key to evangelism—and how we do evangelism—is considering what it is that we are to share.

Obviously, the good news is a message. We tell of how God created our world and that, after it went wrong, He has worked—and is still working—through history toward recreating it. We tell of how we were hopeless but that something changed in our lives when we somehow connected with the reality of God, and we now live by different motivations and priorities. We tell of how Jesus came to announce that “the Kingdom of Heaven is near” and how we live in anticipation of that kingdom being made complete when He returns.

But one risk we have is that we hear and say such things so many times that they are almost lost in their taken-for-grantedness. We are tempted to forget how good this good news is and how remarkable it can be for those encountering it with fresh eyes and ears. And we need to challenge ourselves to do the hard work of re-telling, re-imagining and re-explaining this good news in our time and place.

Theologian Walter Brueggemann urges that “a community of hope has texts that always ‘mean’ afresh” (Mandate to Difference). It’s another way of talking about “present truth”—a term dear to the hearts of early Adventists. Living in this tradition, we must not allow our expressions of good news to become tired and give the good news opportunity to always “mean afresh” in our lives, our church and our community.

One of the ways to do this is to realize the good news is also an action. Jesus’ further instructions to His disciples was to “heal the sick, raise the dead, cure those with leprosy, and cast out demons. Give as freely as you have received!” (Matthew 10:8). The instructions echoes Jesus’ self-proclaimed mission in Luke 4:18, 19. This good news was to make a real difference in the lives of the poor, the oppressed, the hurting and the hopeless. And, if it doesn’t, can it really be considered good news?

Not only is this a vital component of the good news taught and practiced by Jesus, it is also key to its effectiveness and attractiveness: “The world cannot argue with a church that lives in the pain of society’s poor. The integrity of this form of Christianity silences the harshest of critics, because they know genuine love and compassion when they see it” (Tony Campolo and Gordon Aeschliman, Everybody Wants to Change the World).

As the disciples went from town to town, announcing the kingdom of heaven and healing the sick, helping the poor and giving of themselves, one can imagine that the obvious question they would be asked in each community they visited is why they were doing these things and who had sent them. In answer, they would have enthusiastically told the people about their Teacher and Friend—a man called Jesus—and begun to explain to them the little they understood about Who He was and the difference He had made in their lives.

Ultimately, the good news is a Person. Jesus selected His disciples “to be his regular companions” (Mark 3:14) and that friendship became the foundation of any and all evangelism they were to do. They came to recognize in Jesus a life-changing Godness and a world-embracing love—and they couldn’t stop talking about it (see 1 John 1:1-3).

When we spend time getting to know Jesus, we begin to discover a Friend and a friendship we would be telling others about, even if Jesus had not specifically instructed us to do so. The good news is about Jesus. Indeed, the good news is Jesus. And that’s why it’s worth sharing.

A Morning of Miracles

The weather was cold, still a strong lingering of the winter past, and the wind nipped at her face still swollen and sore from the non-stop crying of the last few days. She was strangely unaware of each step she took and wondered at how she he made it to the garden so quickly. She was jolted into the present when she realized that the guards that had been there the day before and the huge stone blocking the entrance to the tomb were all gone. Her skin prickled with the energy in the air.

Something was wrong. What was happening? There had already been so many intense, unbelievable episodes over the last three days, one right after another, so that she reeled, thinking that it wasn’t over yet. Peering into the empty cave. The body of her Beloved was gone! In horror, she raced back to tell Peter and John the awful news of the empty tomb.

After they had witnessed for themselves, that indeed the body was gone, the men left Mary, alone and weeping. Fearful that they might be seen anywhere near the events of the last few days, they hurried back into hiding. Once again, she found herself suffering through this ordeal alone. Everyone was supportive when there were palm branches and miracles, but now, since Jesus’ arrest and execution, supporters were few.

Peering once again into the empty grave, Mary was startled to find two men inside the cave. They addressed her kindly, tenderly, asking why she wept. On explaining that the body of her Beloved had been in this very tomb, but was now missing, she turned sobbing to hide her grief. She had just stepped from inside the cave when she was confronted with another man inquiring about her grief. Thinking she had run into the gardener, she once again poured out her concern.

The simple reply, “Mary” awakened her from her grief. It was the voice of Jesus. It could be no other. The words were familiar, intimate, and tender. In that instant all the promises and conversations regarding the fact that he must give up his life but that he would take it up again flooded back into her mind.

She had forgotten! Yes! He had said three days, and this was the third day. It was true! The trauma of the crucifixion, the cruelty, the mobs, all of it had eclipsed the words of promise and hope that she had been clinging to. She couldn’t recall at what moment that they had been lost, but the ordeal had been horrendous, more devastating and awful than she had imagined it could be.

His tender words, now and in the past came full circle to give her a fuller, more complete understanding of his mission and life. Solemnly, carefully, he commissions her with her life work as an apostle in the kingdom he came to establish. “Go tell your brothers what you have seen and heard.” She becomes the first apostle, sent to establish and strengthen the other disciples.

She embodies Sophia or wisdom. These are the qualities of an experience and knowledge of God. She had allowed the mission and purpose of the Christ to fill her heart and life. She is the first one to exchange her fallen condition for the full infilling and transformation of the Christ within. Her life represents all that we might become if we allow the Christ power and the Spirit of God to transform us.

The resurrection story is one of the perfect Human One brought back to life after taking on the sins or bad karma of the whole world. It is also the story of the transformation of the fallen and restored of whom Mary Magdalene is the first fruit and representative of what Christ came to accomplish for us. Together they give us a complete picture of the love of God. The Redeemer and the redeemed. The Bridegroom and the Bride.

We are called, each one, through the tender words of Jesus to be in intimate relationship with the Divine. The resurrection story speaks to us of a new life and way of being in the world. The call to apostleship is also ours, if only we will accept it.

Women in Ministry

In conservative circles,

the ordination of women into ministry is still a hot topic.

Most of the world’s major religions still exclude women

from serving in this capacity.

If Jesus were here today

how do you suppose he would view the issue?

It seems that there were a lot of women involved in his ministry

here on earth.

Ironic isn’t it?

One of the things that Christ accomplished in his life

was to build a bridge back to God that had been lost

because of man’s fall.

This fall resulted in an imbalance between men and women.

Part of what Christ was doing in his earthly ministry

was to re-establish equality between men and women.

He did this by example.

Women played a major role in his ministry.

It is the subsequent record of scripture that fails to speak

more about the role of women.

The person entrusted with the resurrection story was a woman.

We discover through the Gnostic Gospels

that were written during a similar time period

to the canonical gospels

but were subsequently lost,

that the male disciples still had a difficult time overcoming

their cultural biases towards women

and that they found it difficult to believe that Jesus

had entrusted important truths to a woman.

So, here we are 2000 years later, arguing over the same things.

When are we going to truly listen to the Master’s words

and begin to follow the essence of his teachings?

At the heart of Christ’s teachings

is the theme that each person is a precious child of God.

One is not more important than another.

No gender is superior, no race is better than another,

and every soul is gifted to serve in a unique way.

The heart of Christ’s message is love.

Let’s put the heart back into the body of believers.

iGod, tieGod

I want God to tie my shoes.

And while he’s at, to buy me some shoes. Lots of them. And pants and shirts and suits and ties. All to keep in a nice house, to wear to a good job, to compliment a life well-appointed with success, purpose, fulfillment, happiness, and blessing.

Of course, the Cousin of Jesus said something a bit different. “I am not worthy to tie and untie the shoes of The One, Jesus Christ.”

John would be happy to fit Jesus with some shoes (make his paths straight?). To be the tailor of God. To be about Jesus’ success, purpose, fulfillment; to bring him happiness and to bless him.

I recognize a tendency in my own life, and in the lives of many Christians everywhere, to seek God as nothing more than an Opening Act. God as the one who plays before me (on the cross?) all in order to usher in the majesty of me. And bearing a cross certainly does not fit into my schedule of events.

He is my foundation, but I am the house.
His written word is the place I go to support my vision of worship, of religion, of life.
His Spirit’s purpose is to magnify my ministry.
God is the solution to my problems.
God is the safety net, I am the high-wire act.
He is the one who blesses my career, my romance, my dreams.
He is the champion of my conservatism, my traditionalism.
He is the champion of my liberalism, my progressivism.
He is, handily, the steroids that boost whatever it is I want to do and be.
He is Human Growth Hormone.

And so (changing metaphors) I shape my own, selected, God Playlist, with the tunes that fit within the song of my life. This is My God.

Or, more accurately yet, iGod.

I suspect a lot of disappointment/fulfillment with life is tied to who is tying the shoes and whose shoes are being tied?

Are you Lovable?

The American theologian and bible exegete, Ellen Gould White, writes: “No other influence that can surround the human soul has such power as the influence of an unselfish life. The strongest argument in favor of the gospel is a loving and lovable Christian.”

Lovable Christian?

Jesus says the mark of a growing disciple is lovability (John 13:35). The first fruit of the Spirit is lovability (Galatians 5:22). God is, above all, lovable (1 John 4:16).

In a recent Barna survey, just 16% of non-Christians said Christians “consistently show love.” More than 8 of 10 would not say that followers of Jesus are lovable.

Contemporary Franciscan Richard Rohr observes:“[R]eligion has always distinguished education from transformation. Being informed is different from being formed, and the first is a common substitute for the second.”

Could it be that more colorful brochures, slicker sermon presentations, more “relevant” worship services, and better (doctrinally) informed church members won’t amount to much GC (great commission) success? Perhaps we need to be formed, not informed. Perhaps we need to move the 16% figure to 96%. Perhaps we need to go ahead and believe the words of our New Testament, "You can give your body to be burned, but if you are not lovable, this amounts to nothing."Perhaps we need to stop arguing—for God’s sake, and the sake of people—and, instead, become the strongest argument in the gospel’s favor.

What do you think?