Changing the World?

Law school hasn’t been easy and I don’t think it will get any easier. Coming from someone who grew up in a comfortable well-off Chinese Christian family in West Vancouver, who has never worked for a day in his life and spends most of his time in the church, coming to face the reality of this world is extremely difficult. Everyday on the news, in our classes, in our newspapers, we are faced with genocides, starvation, slavery, aftermaths of natural disasters, economic disasters, and debates over humanitarian causes. Being a student of law means the studying of law and it’s interplay with politics and policies, whether on a national or international level, is inevitable. One, cannot help, but to ask the question: As ppl called by God to bring the realization of the “kingdom of God” that is ever so present, to the people of this world, what can we do to reflect our love for mercy, our strive for justice, and the gift of a relationship with God that He has so graciously and lovingly bestowed upon us on the cross.

What makes us good servants of God -- someone whose presence, along side God’s, can maximize their influence and impact on the very world that God invites us to change? Does it come with a thorough understanding of God – whether it be a substantial knowledge of the Bible attained by years and years of studying, or a divine understanding of God and His ways derived from a mind attuned to the very nature of God? Or is it a heart and mind full of faith – believing that God will lead and guide every single one of your steps (if not the small ones, the big ones) whether it be through divine inspiration or circumstances, and through that, ultimately changing the world simply because you’re walking with a God who longs to and works to change the world in the process? Or is it someone who has a acquired and attained the depth, the caliber, and the understanding of the world, and having built and developed skills to maneuver and manipulate the system, affect the very policies that run our nations and international relations? Or is it simply with love? One random act of love, one step at a time? Do we live life with the general guidelines of righteousness, wisdom, and love, given to us through the writings of our fathers in faith? Does it help the child bondage by the very fact that they are sex slaves? How does it bring hope to those that are watching their sisters and mothers getting raped, and their fathers and brothers mutilated and tortured by the very same ppl? What good is it, to those starving to death?

Answers? Anyone?

The Kingdom Of God: How does that fit in?

In the gospel of John, we see the evangelist uses of dualailty quite often with light and dark, good and evil, etc etc etc. You get the idea.

But have we taken this dualism too far?

Is the kingdom of God a left or a right?
is the kingdom of God liberal or conservative?
is the kingdom of God modern or postmodern?
Is the kingdom of God emerging or not emerging?
Is the kingdom of God catholic or protestant? MB or Baptist?

I was talking with this sunday school lady the other day at Dan's church, and Wing and I started to debate the whole issue of the Kingdom of God and her answer was," The Kingdom of God is the love of God in the hearts of men."

I have many more thoughts, but I'll just leave it here and let the discussion begin.

Too Generous of an Orthodoxy?

I just read this from "Generous Orthodoxy" and I was wondering what your thoughts are on it and what your thoughts are on my thoughts

"In this light, although I don't hope all Buddhists will become (cultural) Christians, I do hope all who feel called will become Buddhist followers of Jesus; I believe they should be given that opportunity and invitation. I don't hope all Jews or Hindus will become members of the Christian religion. But I do hope all who feel so called will become Jewish or Hindu followers of Jesus." p.297

I've only quoted one paragraph from a chapter on "Incarnational" so please feel free to read it because it is most likely out of context if you just read this.

Anyways, before you guys turn me into the church heretic, here are my thoughts:

This passage brought up a few older thoughts of mine which I shall mention as we go along but I find myself agreeing with this paragraph to some and most degrees. The first thought of mine it brought up was from a sermon. In the middle, the pastor mentioned that there are a number of Jews in Israel that acknowledge Jesus as the Messiah. When the person who met them asked if they consider themselves as 'Christians', they said no and said that they were Messianic Jews or Jews who had found their Messiah. With this in mind, I don't think all people should have to convert to Christianity AND abandon everything they use to know.

My thought on this came from me thinking about why I like studying religious studies in the bathroom yesterday before class. I find studying religions interesting because you can see how people live when they consider something to be true. Some questions for myself that arose from this included: What if Christianity was false, would I still have all these changes in my life? What if say, Islam was true, would I convert? What if I saw changes in a Buddhist's life that I did not see in my own life, would I see what they have that I do not have?

These made me think of if I converted, would I toss everything that was good about Christianity out the window. Say if I became a Muslim, would I use similar techniques in prayer as I did in Christianity. I think it has to do with human nature. When we get older, it's harder to change habits and it's like uprooting a tree and planting it somewhere else, it becomes increasingly difficult as the tree gets older.

My final thought comes from C.S. Lewis who said religions are like doing math. There is only one correct answer but some are closer to the right answer than others. Maybe it is not wise to throw out everything Buddhists know about meditation and abstaining from worldly things. Maybe we should take a page from the Muslim playbook about praying often (as they often pray more in a day than we do).

So if you feel like it, read the chapter, it's pretty good (I haven't finished it though, I just wanted to write this down before I forgot). Builds on what Bell says in Velvet Elvis about how all people are saved but how they have not all yet accpeted salvation.

One final thing I forgot to write down is a quote from Bono.

"And I learned that religion is often the enemy of God, actually. And religion is this sort of -- religion is the artifice, you know, the building, after God has left it sometimes, like Elvis has left the building. You hold onto religion, you know, rules, regulations, traditions. I think what God is interested in is people's hearts, and that's hard enough."

Perhaps religions as we know them are more man made than we want to acknowledge and maybe we don't need everyone to be Christian in the sense of doctrines and church buildings but maybe just to believe in Christ and to be saved. And perhaps just holding onto the two greatest commandments, they won't need all the unneccessary junk we have (i'll let you decide what you think junk is as we all have a different opinion). But let us not wipe out complete cultures without sensitivity and replace it with the North American version of Christianity that may not work in their communities. (not everyone has bread and wine to spare ;-) )

But my thoughts end here and they are incomplete. Please continue with them.

Discussion Topic: Restoration

I Was sitting with Andrew and Wing today at the SUB during my break and somehow the word "restoration" came out. I'm sure each of you have your own definitions and feelings towards the importance and where it stands in your journey.

Boxing Day Gift: Continuing on with TULIP 2

I want to pick up with Unconditional election since I didn't elaborate enough from last time.
Unconditional election for me also means that there is technically no human obligation for us to fulfill in order to receive salvation from God. Hence the term "saved by grace, not through works". Hence this is extremely important or else we cheapen grace. What is mercy without grace, what is salvation without grace? What is Jesus without Grace? It is through Jesus that we are 'elected'.

L = Limited Atonement

Why is atonement limited? As stated Jesus came to save all people, he died for all people. So how come there are still people that are forgiven in Hell and in Heaven? I still have more questions to ponder about this point:

Did Christ die for all the sins of some men?
Did Christ die for all the sins of all men?

Limited Atonement also concerns into the issue of Free-will, like the whole issue we had during the discussion of 1 Peter back in October.


I = Irresistible Grace
I think I associate myself closely to the general given definition of irresistible grace. The basic definition of this doctrine is that God is sovereign and can overcome all resistance when he wills. Specifically saying, this irresistible grace is already given, we can't really reject it. God has given it to us. So God supreme takes away our what resistance we have to denying his grace. It might sound like God is forcing people to believe, but in some way, I believe free will still exists in people selecting God or not.

P = Perseverance of the saints
Once saved, always saved. I should make a correction to that. Once correctly saved (meaning they placed their faith in Jesus correctly) they would not fall away. I'm actually quite hesitant about this point, although 2 months ago I would affirm it so convincingly. Questions like: Who justify as being correct and believing in the right things?

I seriously have a disliking of doctrine. For one, it takes the best news ever of the gospel and add so much baggage to it. TULIP in this example just highlighted somethings I am questioning, yet some parts I do continue to affirm because they seem appropriate.

I was talking to my dad the other day about some of these points, and to the core he said ," You're just questioning the love of God and how come there seems to say that it is impossible to have a loving God and a just God." I agreed. He pointed out, "look at our relationship, as father and son, we are just like that to God, children. He loves us as our parent, he disciplines like our parent, yet his love doesn't change. However, God himself as a father would also give people who refuse him their choice as well.

Is really hard to describe that kind of relationship with our languages. I think that's why is hard to put into words and hence we get these wordy doctrines. God's relationship with us is described as a Groom to his bride, as a father to his children. I mean, go to your parents, and ask them why they love you. I don't think they could explain it themselves above the point that "you are my child". Or how about one day turning to your spouse asking, "why do you love me?", hopefully they won't just say because "you're beautiful", or "smart", or "you're nice"but because true love is really indescribable. (this is pretty awkward coming from a family studies guy).

To be honest, I have no desire to understand all this doctrine. I believe I've been called to love God and love my neighbour, to simply demonstrate and then to testify.

Sweet, I'm done with the TULIP thing...

Oh and please welcome Sarah to our blog!

Boxing Day Gift: Continuing on with TULIP

Time to answer the long begotten question that Kevin left me in regard s to what I believe about TULIP back in October. Since now I have the time (and Kev reminded me, is time to continue on this conversation, shall we begin?)I'm not a big fan of doctrine nor Calvinism, but here we are: (The following are not in any order)

T = Total Depravity
We need God, we have all have the tendency to sin. I'm a bit hesitant on the whole idea of being "born into sin" as Augustine would argue. Yet my mind is torn on babies and kids who die without knowing better, before they know right from wrong. So they die and go spend eternity in the depths? God is too loving. I know some would argue that God will judge which I will have no doubt about. Yet it is a mystery is it not? But if we deny this point, the whole importance of the virgin birth of Jesus will come into jeopardy. (Man passing down sin to their children, so if sin does not begin at birth, then Jesus didn't need the virgin birth, and vice versa, Jesus was not a sinner if born not from a virgin, some hard things to think about).

I hold on Total Depravity in my definition as that we all need God, and we all have the tendency to sin and rebel against God. Yet, the questions still linger...

U = Unconditional Election
God has chosen to save everyone. I believe that salvation is for everyone. God came to save everyone. Heaven is full of forgiven people. Hell is full of forgiven people. Jesus came to save all.

Ok...I think that's enough for one day...my brain doesn't work too well during the holidays...haha

But let's discuss these 2 points first.
Brothers & Sisters, fire away....

Restoration

It's been a long while since anyone has posted anything on our conversational blog, since I'm still awake, I decide maybe I should write something for the Christmas holidays...

I titled this part of my thought as restoration after Gary's insight to Velvet Elvis, because within me, I believe we could do so much, to elaborate on how we are to try to restore this world to a place God intended it to be.

Just recently, the stats for one of the most elusive shopping days in the United States coded name 'black friday', in which is the day after thanksgiving kicking off the Christmas shopping season. The figures that came in on how much people did spend on that day was a close estimate of around 27.8 BILLION dollars USD.

Think about that...27.8 BILLION Dollars USD in one day of shopping

I hate throwing out stats...but here are some I think we need to truly consider:

It will cost us 1.74 Billion to give safe drinking water, sanitation and hygene education to the whole world (WaterAid)
It will cost about 13 Billion dollars more to what the UN is currently giving each year to provide basic health, nutrition needs of the world's poorest people. (Bread for the World)

Think about that.

14.74 Billion dollars a year can give the world its basic needs of surival of safe food, water and sanitation...just basic needs

Do you feel pain when you read these stats?
Cause I think Jesus does

How do we help in trying to restore the world?
I guess here's a start...doing the basic things Jesus commands us to do:
Feed the hungry
Taking care of the sick, widowed, and orphaned

I'll be the first one to admit, when ever those TV commericals come on about helping the poor, the needy, in places like Afica or Burma, I would change the channel. Cause I want to be ignorant of what is real around me. If I don't see it, it is not happening, is not affecting me.

How are we to 'T'Shuva' to the way God made us to be?

Something for all of us to think about during this holiday.

A new community without agendas

I have just finished reading the last chapter of Rob Bell's book. And the last chapter carries yet another powerful message and idea. It talks about the idea of restoration and reconciliation from God - and not just for mankind alone, but for all of creation. This was something that I've never thought about before. Reconciliation and restoration for all of creation. Many times, I've heard about the message of reconcilation from God to man, but I've never heard much of a message that puts the restoration and reconciliation in such a global context. And it makes sense. In the beginning, God created the earth, and he created man to care for it. How good of a job do we that nowadays? Not a very good job, and I can speak that for myself. Paul states that God reconciles himself to all things on heaven or earth in Christ - when it comes to "things", we often put all the emphasis on the human soul, and very little on the latter.

The word community - I'm starting to have a greater appreciation of this word. I wonder now why we don't use this word more often. It's such a beautiful word to describe a group of people that can genuinely care for each other's needs without expecting anything in return. This is what a church should replicate - to be a true community. Rob Bell talks in the last chapter that we need to consider setting aside our personal agendas - churches should consider setting aside their personal agendas of converting somebody's soul every week. Instead, we should act more like a community - we ought to demonstrate in acts and deeds of what a reconciled or restored community ought to be like - demonstrate how heaven can come down to earth - this may be the best way to demonstrate what God's reconciliation and restoration is all about at a time when there is so much doubt surrounding the church. When people see this and understand how God's reconciliation and restoration can work in a community (restoring a community to what a community is intended to be, a group of people caring for each other), then they can begin to see how God's reconciliation and restoration can work for their lives and souls (restoring a person to be what God intended the person to be). As Rob suggests, this may be the reason why the book of Acts contain many stories of people helping each other in deeds. It's not all about people trying to convince or argue against other people about coming to God - it's about showing people of what it is like when there is a group of people who is committed to God and willing to do what it takes.

This kind of thinking has sparked a new idea in me. As a church, why don't we spend more time serving the communities around us? Serving without agendas. Serving without having to worry about how we can sneak in to talk about the gospel along the way. There can be so much time spent in serving the needs of the internal church - but what about the needs of the outside community around us? If we don't actively go out and submerse ourselves in the outside community, why in the world would they become interested in us? How else would they experience what the reconciliation and restoration of God is like? Perhaps the church ought to have designated days where they just go out and serve the outside community for some sort of volunteer work. Or maybe even designate a part of the regular offerings to donate to special needs of the surrounding community. This is a great challenge, including myself. It reminds me again of how hard it is to be a Christian. It's not about believing and then waiting to go to heaven. It's about giving up yourself and serving others - everywhere, everyday, every time. That's tough. It's against normal nature. I'm lazy. And it's even tougher nowadays because you're always wondering in the back of your mind if your kindness will be abused or taken advantage of. We automatically put up a shield and often never fully open the door, but just peer outside through the hole to see who's standing outside. Then we either ignore them, or just open up a wedge of the door and tell them that we're not interested and that they should go away. There's only so much love you can give, and you often only choose to give it to the people that you want to. You typically don't mind being nice and helpful to someone that you like. But what about to a total stranger? That's hard - and that's partly because you know there's no motivation or incentive in doing so. But that's what a community should be like - a bunch of people helping and caring each other without incentives, without any agendas. Perhaps that's what a church should be striving for.

Have I become a Pharisee?

Have I so much concentrated on the study of the word, the theology, the way our culture is affected that I have neglected the people around me? Have I become what Jesus taught not us to be, someone who cares so much about the style or reading, the search for the true meanings, the traditions, but neglected what Jesus, my Rabbi has taught, to love and care for the people around me?

It certainly feels and seems that way....

Why I think I'm an emerging Christian (notes from the last post)

To answer some of the questions left by Kevin in my last post, I've decided to answer quickly as November shall become a crazy month for me and I will (if I can withhold from posting) stop posting until November is over. I think we've began an awesome conversation within the last few weeks since the start of T'shuva, although it has been mainly subjected to me posting, but the conversation continues.

So here I am in respond: (I realize each of these could result on a blog entry of its own)
Yes indeed I've slowly started my library of progressive, post-modern theological books like Brian Mclaren and Rob Bell etc. But I don't think I quite fit within the more liberal Emergent window due to a few truths that I cling on to as part of my belief.

1. Divinity of Christ, resurrection of the body etc
- At this point of my journey, I continue to believe strongly that Jesus is indeed the son of God who came to show me a new way of life, also dying for my sins and then coming back to life 3 days later. I belief this to be one of the essential truths I hang on to. Contrary to dudes like Marcus Borg who thinks other wise in the resurrection of Christ, and I know N.T. Wright had a tough time dealing with his good buddy Borg not accepting that and yet still wanted to classify Borg as a Christian because Borg loved Christ as any other believer. (Maybe Kev you could relate to Borg?)

2. The Bible
- I believe in reading the Bible as an unfolding narrative and the power that is within it (kind of liberal in some ways). I also believe the Bible is written as we call "inspired by God". Although I am not opposed to the interpretive approach in reading the Bible, I think at this part of my journey, I have come to a keen liking for the narrative appraoch.

I believe the Bible to be true, just as I believe that I am in reality in existence and that is truth. We might argue that the Bible is full of biases, opinions, contextual, and personal agendas of the authors who wrote them (it carries the full blunt of the humanity of its authors), and hence making it decrease its reliability and truth. I think Mclaren gives the best example and I will try to reuse it here: God created me, Eugene a human being, but I am also a pro-creation of my parents. I am shaped by my culture, society, schooling, friends, etc...to make Eugene the Eugene I am today. All these other influences don't take away the truth that God created me. In the same way, I believe the Bible came out is like that, it's "pro-created" by human hands, influenced by culture, history etc. But it doesn't take away from the truth that God created the Bible, just as I am created by God.

3. I believe in TULIP (I actually like to call this Post-Calvinisim)
- I'm still working on this one. I can say I used to oppose the acrostic of TULIP. But as I keep on coming across, I do see why this doctrine in so many churches today. (More on this on another day)

How I hold on to reform theology in a post-modern world:

I believe Jesus was on a mission here on earth and has left this mission for us to continue after he returned to Heaven. This mission is unchanging. So in this sense, I think (as Wing does) that there is an underlying truth that we must cling to (stuff from the above). However, I also believe we need to be constantly reforming (not in theology) but rather how to be an example of these truths in this world. Not because our past history as Christians or churches have gotten it wrong, nor are we moving closer to getting this whole journey right. Our mission field is dynamic and changing, and hence our actions of being and doing good like Jesus must also try to fit in this dynamic scenario. (I think Jesus highlighted 2 very important truths for us to follow which is to Love God with all our heart and soul and mind, and loving our neighbors as ourselves)

As mentioned by Dan tonight during dinner, I'm sure I will come back to this some time soon and revisit and continue to reform these beliefs. But as of this point of my journey, I've reach that as I am a mere Christian, trying to love God and people in this post modern world.

Post-Emergence?

I recently had a conversation with Wing about the terms "emerging" vs "emergent" which I believed in classification of post-modern church means something different. Then Dan threw in the "Post-Emergent" where we take the best of the crop and start our own kind of thing.

After a little research (something I find myself doing a bit too often in the last month) I've found some answers to justify for what I mean.

The concept of the emerging church came out of a conversation within a group of pastors and theologians in regards to their response to "generation X" and how they could reach generation X in the middle late 90's. But this conversation then shifted towards of how the church should handle post-modernism: This is what we call Emerging

Within it came out 4 different streams:

1. A stream within that came out that tended to be more liberal regarding issues like original sin, authority of scripture, atonement of sin, exclusivity of Christ etc. This is what we call Emergent. (I think Kevin could relate to this)

2. Then we have another group that are more based with house churches and try to do smaller groups, moderate and evangelical, just trying new church forms.

3. The third group we have the traditional church with all the jazz, but they are trying to upgrade the music, upgrade the preaching style to make it more hip and cool for the kids. Trendy Church beta/ RC 2 that kind of thing.

4. The last group we have churches that hold on to traditional reform theology and try to change the focus of the church towards what looks it would look like from a mission in the post-modern culture. So, what does mission look like within our own culture. Like imagining us becoming missionaries and dropped in this society, what do we do? What does the mission church in this society look like? What does the missionary look like? That's the emerging part. The Missional church.

In some ways, I wish I could be like Dan to pick and select the best from all these 4 to make a "post-emergent" view, but I don't think is possible. I don't think I belong to the first 3, for one I'm not liberal, nor am I small house church, or am I into this hip and cool church thing.

Kev, I think I've got you started for this coming Saturday's conversation.

My view of the Bible

We go through the Bible day in day out being taught such terms that the scriptures are: authority, inerrant, infallible, revelation, objective, absolute, and literal. These are so important that some churches make it their core belief in that. But were in the Bible does it say they are any of those things?

For one, how can the layman of today understand those terms we often say the Bible is without some background knowledge of the sciences, the Enlightenment, philosophy etc (I am part of the group that knows very little about them) which provides the context in which we have doctrine that say the Bible is all those things I've listed above.

Hence, I propose a new way of seeing the holy scriptures for the people of today. Not that I'm saying those things about authority, and inerrancy etc are not true, or that I no longer believe in it. I merely suggest that we should look at it this way: The Bible is good for preparing God's people for good works.

I would like to one day understand how our church forefathers came up with these terms in description of the Bible and the struggling they would have to over come to get to these doctrines. But for me today, I would much prefer to accept the latter.

That is something my simple mind can comprehend. That is something I can accept.

Nothing like civil war

nothing like civil war. i was waiting for this to happen. there is always someone somewhere who disagrees especially when it comes to something as sensitive as faith. they'll always think they are right and the others will always think they are right and then they will precede to fight to the death over some truth that they probably both haven't grasped.

what am i talking about?
i present to you an article that is titled "Rob Bell denies the Gospel"
the same beloved Rob Bell who wrote Velvet Elvis

just thought it was interesting and i would share it with you
i'm not here to hate on Rob Bell or the other guy but it's interesting to see their different views and takes on the bible.
and of course, the most interesting is how they call each other (or at least this guy calls Bell) a heretic like he has all the answers and the "true" christianity.
but we all know God is bigger than one man and one idea.

http://www.sliceoflaodicea.com/archives/2006/10/rob_bell_denies.php

I heard this imagery the other day..

So I was listening to this talk given by Brian McLaren the other day and what he thought Christianity was like when he grew up. He said life is like a box of jigsaw puzzles and our point of life was to put this puzzle together. Now jigsaw puzzle boxes have the picture of what the completed puzzle should look like. So in this sense, people will try to follow the picture to figure out the puzzle. So what if the top of the box, with the picture was switched onto a different box of puzzles that was trying to build a different picture? Mclaren continues on with this illustration and says the Bible is the jigsaw pieces, and he loves every single piece. But he says when we try to put everything together, we are left frustrated because we were given the wrong picture lid. Some would take a marker and fudge the pieces to fit with the pictures. Others would leave out some pieces that doesn't seem to fit the picture.

Interesting....

Did somebody switch our lids?

Are we more loyal to the picture on the lid or the puzzle pieces?

Welcome

T'Shuva is the Hebrew word meaning "to repent" or "to return". I personally like the definition of "Return". To return to what you might ask? To return to the truths of what following Jesus means. The reason why I use the word return is because truth isn't new, truth was, is and always will be there, is just a matter of us "rediscovering" it. We are on that journey to rediscover, to dust off, to open up, to return....

Our journeys will be very different, each one of us will have different perspectives, but we intend to share it with each other, share it with you. Hopefully, we'll help each other see glimpses of the vastness of our creator. We intend to have more of you join us, share with us to and add to the discussion on our journey.
Welcome to the T'Shuva road trip , it's going to be a heck of a ride.