Missionary nannies

Pete, I found a new job for you. Sorry, couldn't pass this one up.

Will Ya Do It for the Kids?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Shane Bennett

When you've been a mobilizer as long as I have, you pick up a few tricks. (C'mere, youngster. Pull up a chair next to Uncle Shane and let me tell you a thing 'r two. And bring me a glass a tea, will you? No ice.)

Now you've surely never done this one, but you've seen it, right? If you spin an issue so people see that it might affect children, you get more attention and much more response. People are just more apt to jump out of the pew to do something for cute (or even not-so-cute) kids than they are for fat, old guys with bad breath! Kids move people. Manipulative mobilizers know how to use (abuse?) this dynamic.

For this month's Practical Mobilization article, you might think I'm slipping to such depths, but I hope there's no manipulation here. Just an idea that has crossed my desk and mind lately, one I think deserves more-widespread attention.

I feel a little bad about this idea because I'm excited to advocate for it, but I'm never going to do it myself. Curious?

Missionary nanny.

This seems like such a great way for two whole classes of people, in particular, to get exposed to the world while making an honest and worthwhile contribution to God's Kingdom.

The first class consists of young, single women. Here's an opportunity for a female missionary to live in some of the furthest reaches of the planet without totally making her dad panic. She would live with and be under the protection of an experienced missionary family. She would serve them and release them to be more effective in their work. This service would likely take the form of child care, education, and household duties.

Older women might also find great fulfillment in this role. When I'm speaking to a church crowd on Sunday morning, I love to mention a skill that many people have, but few recognize as applicable to missions. I'll ask "How many people have raised children?" Many will raise their hands. I'll ask "How many have raised children that other people enjoy being around?" Most hands stay up, and if I'm lucky a few people chuckle. Then I use my serious voice and say, "You have developed skill and expertise through managing your home and raising your children that can make a significant impact in the lives of missionary families."

Understanding The Need

We've all seen the pattern: A young couple finds each other and has a growing vision for the world. Their local church is so happy because you can just see these guys will make great missionaries. They marry, wait the required amount of time to solidify their marriage, then head off to the wild blue yonder. Let's say they go to Shanghai. As the circle of life goes, in several months you hear the exciting news that a baby is on the way. A year or so later, baby number two, then three. Before their first furlough they might have built their own people group!

Now imagine what their house is like: Their life is filled with ministry, they're living in a strange culture, and Grandma is half a globe away. Though they live in arguably one of the most modern cities in the world, their apartment is a jungle as wild as any you might see on a three-day paddle from civilization in Central Brazil.

They need someone to say, "Hey, I know what it's like. Here's what I tried and it worked okay." If the connection can be made and such wisdom applied, that young family might experience a season of peace that they didn't know could ever be. And that might lead to a season of success in ministry that they hadn't even imagined.

Many of the people who think they have the least to offer actually have the most. Missionary nanny is a role that can release the hard-earned wisdom and expertise of our experienced moms.

Seizing The Opportunity

The first logical stop to learn more is missionnannys.org. Yes, astute spellers, the plural form of "nanny" is "nannies," but trust me, that's the correct url. It also seems wise to inquire with the missionaries sent out by your own church. Would a family your church is already connected with benefit from a nanny - or home-school teacher? Finally, check with a respected agency. My new tribe, Frontiers, has opportunities to play just such a role in some really cool cities around the globe.

Perhaps it goes without saying, but a missionary-nanny opportunity could end up in a big mess. If you're considering doing this or you're encouraging someone you care about to consider it, please ask yourself and the family you'll serve some honest questions:

* How would a role like this fit in with what God's doing with my life?
* What exactly will I be expected to do? Can you list my responsibilities?
* What time will I have off?
* Will there be time for me to hang out with local people? Learn the local language?
* What will the living arrangements be?
* What will the financial arrangements be?
* Is this a last-ditch effort to convince your wife to stay on the field? (You might want to find a more subtle way to ask that one!)
* Have you had previous experience with a missionary nanny? How did it go?

A Call to Mobilizers

Will you join me in throwing out the net for this particular role? Missionary nannies and home-school teachers can be a great asset to families living and working in frontier situations. And they can be a wonderful shaping experience in the lives of both older and younger women (or men!). Finally, they can minister love and care to some sharp, young kids, braving challenging lives in strange cultures.

Can we do it for these children? If it makes a difference for only one of them, it will be worth it. (Oh, sorry. I got a little manipulative there at the end!)

If you have thoughts to add to make this a conversation rather than a monologue, please send me an email. If you have a real-world missionary-nanny story to tell (either as a nanny or one nannied), either good or bad, I'd love to hear it.

And as always, feel free to pass this issue along to anyone else you think might be interested!

Preaching Ruth

I went down to the Sunshine Mission this past Sunday with my church small group to feed the homeless and share a message. I have a great admiration and respect for the people who founded the mission. It is very well organized and well-maintained. We started the chapel with Josiah leading the men in worship. Instead of singing to them, we invited the men to sing the songs that they wanted to sing. One thing the team talked about afterwards was how the men preferred to sing songs that we see as songs you sing in children's church. Songs like "He's got the whole world in His hands" and "This little light of mine. I'm gonna let it shine."

I'm not sure if I've ever preached on Ruth before, but I thought it was particularly relevant for this particular group. The text I spoke on was 1 Corinthians 1:26 which says, "For you see your calling brethren, that not many wise according to the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called. but God has chosen the foolish things of this world to put to shame the wise, and God has chosen the weak things of the world to put to shame the mighty, and the based things of the world, and the things which are despised, God has chosen."

I titled the message "The person God chooses." I made the point that Ruth was an illegal immigrant living off the generosity of others (aka...welfare) , but God chose her to be in the royal lineage because she kept her integrity. I also made the point that Boaz is a type of Christ who chooses us despite our social standing.

Ruth reminds us there is a human face to the least and the despised among us. In an age of political discontentment and polarization, let's not forget about the Ruths among us.

Hooked on Soma worked for me!

I vaguely remember reading Aldous Huxley's Brave New World when I was a junior in high school. The year is way off in the future and man has managed to create a utopia through genetic engineering, promiscuous sex, and mind-altering drugs. Religion is replaced with Soma, a drug that effectively eliminates pain.

You want to guess what is the most prescribed type of medication here in America? The answer is not high blood pressure medication nor is it medication for diabetes. The answer is anti-depressants. I learned this by watching a special report on CNN this morning. The reporter voiced her official concern that depression is overdiagnosed by family physicians not wanting to take the time to tell the 25 year old woman who just broke up with her boyfriend that eating right, excercising, getting more rest, and dealing with the emotional pain by watching Pink Panther and getting a new boyfriend is the likely solution to her temporary grief. It seems that most physicians nowadays instead of saying "Just deal with it!" are saying, "Here's a pill. Take two of these and you'll feel better in the morning."

Are anti-depressants the new Soma? I find it interesting that the word sorceries in Revelation 9:21 is the word "pharmakeia" in the Greek, from which we get the word pharmacy. In my opinion, I think this verse is referring to the practice of mixing drugs with magic charms and spells, a common practice in nearly every developing country (especially Africa). I highly doubt that God would send someone to hell for taking Paxil, but the broader question is this, are modern physicians the new medicine men? Are anti-depressants the 21st century version of Soma? Regardless of how one answers these questions, I have a feeling that America and the Western World are fastly turning into societies that would make Aldous Huxley proud. I can almost see the T.V. commercial in the near future, Hooked on Soma worked for me!

Two types of Jihad

I'm in the process of studying the two different types of jihad in Islam. Here is a brief article that discusses the difference between offensive jihad and defensive jihad. I thought my readers would find the content interesting. Have a great weekend!

Big Aaron is watching you!

It is official. I have finally joined the 21st century. This week, after hundreds of e-mails sent directly from my gmail and yahoo address books, I have sent out my first e-mail yesterday using Constant Contact, an e-mail marketing service. No longer do I have to update my contact list one by one deleting out of date e-mail addresses. I can now do it all with the click of a button.

Not only can I know how many of my e-mails have been opened, I can also know who has opened them ... who has not. Feeling a bit like Big Brother (or George Bush depending on your political persuasion), I decided to take a peak at the list of those who actually opened the e-mail I sent out yesterday. Thank you Craig.

I don't know about you, but I think all this is a little creepy. Think about it. I, Aaron Taylor, know what you did in your living room, basement, or bedroom (depending on where your computer is) or didn't do. I'm not sure what to respond now when people say to me, "Hey Aaron, I read your latest update." Should I respond with, "Yes. I know?" Or maybe I can use this as leverage with friends and family. Um...excuse me aunt so and so, I'd really like to know why you don't bother reading my updates? Are you too busy? I guess I'll consider that next time you ask me to come to the next family event.

On second thought, spying on my readers might not be such a good idea. I think it's best that I don't know who actually opens my e-mails. I'd rather leave it to my imagination. Besides, I have an excellent extended family really like going to reunions even if the sum of the conversations are usually "So, what have you been doing for the past year?"

Does anybody else think the concept of privacy is being lost in our culture? I can be goofing around with friends at Six Flags and some 14-year old kid can take a video on their cell-phone and, before you know it, I could be a star on U-Tube without even knowing it. Perhaps I say something totally stupid and insensitive (a rare occurence I hope) and, before I have the chance to grab the words and put them back in my mouth, millions of people can know about my faux pas.

Here is another question to think about. Is the concept of privacy a Biblical one? Most Americans assume that privacy is a basic human right. Is this assumption correct? To what extent? Besides the obvious moral injunction to not be a Peeping Tom, what does the Bible have to say about the concept of privacy? This is something I haven't given much thought. I'd love to hear my readers' thoughts on this matter. And as you type, remember.....Big Aaron is watching you!!!

Correction

In my last post, I wrote that 3 billion subsistence farmers are being put out of business by current U.S. agricultural subsidies. After a heated debate with my friend Pete, I realize the comment was poorly worded since the term subsistence technically means somebody who grows only for themselves and their families, although I have heard this term used in other ways. A better way to word the sentence is this, "Millions of farmers in the developing world are struggling to compete in the global economy due to being priced out of the market as a result of U.S. Agricultural Subsidies." The reference is regarding current U.S. farm policy which many rural farmers in America are seeking to reform as well. For the record, Bread for the World is not advocating the total elimination of subsidies, but a more fair and equitable distribution that benefits both rural farmers in America and the millions of farmers in the Global South.

Here is a website dealing with this issue from both sides of the argument.

Liberals for Jesus-Cornerstone Festival

Last week I went to the Cornerstone Music Festival, an annual event held in Bushnell Illinois, for the first time. There are many things that I saw that I expected. Hundreds of tents playing everything from Celtic ballads to heavy metal, 15 year olds and 40 year olds with mohawks and tatoos, and just about every type of individual in between.

What I was not expecting was the intellectual sophistication of the workshops in the mornings and early afternoons. I sat in on Jonathan Case, a religion and philosophy professor at Houghton University discussing the implications of the shift of Christianity from the Global North to the Global South. I also sat in on several workshops listening to a Wheaton professor discuss the theology of N.T. Wright, one of the most widely acclaimed (and controversial) New Testament scholar alive today. By far the most interesting for me was Stephen Sizer's workshop on the dangers and fallacies of Christian Zionism. His workshop called "I Left Rapture Theology Behind" was surprisingly popular. Stephen Sizer made a compelling case for partial preterism, a view held by both R.C. Sproul and Hank Hannegraph which sees the bulk of Matthew 24, Mark 13, Luke 21, and the book of Revelation as describing the events surrounding the destruction of the Jewish Temple in 70 A.D.

According to partial preterists, believers should be preaching the gospel and occupying until He comes while at the same time looking for the imminent return of Jesus to usher in a New Heaven and a New Earth. Date setting based on current events leads to error, and possibly a man-made apocalypse. Having grown up listening to Christian Zionists and their repeated calls for the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians (though they dare not use the term) and their repeated efforts to thwart peace-making efforts between Jews and Palestinians (peace-making is the antichrist's work in their view), I couldn't agree more.

I was happy that there were very few people I had to convince that poverty was a moral issue. Hundreds of people signed the One Declaration and many indicated that they would call their congressmen to advocate for the world's poor once they get on the mailing list. Given the fact that the renewal of the Farm Bill, which desperately needs to be reformed, is being discussed in Congress right now, I was thrilled to be able to attend a workshop that actually encouraged me to write a letter to my representative on the spot. I honestly hope that Senator Bond will read my letter and consider the implictions of 3 billion subsistence farmers around the world being put out of business due to extravagant U.S. Farm Subsidies.

I also talked with several individuals from Christian Peace Maker teams, an organization advocating non-violence. I was humbled to actually talk to people who have stood in front of Israeli tanks to stop them from plowing over Palestinian markets while at the same time building friendship with Jewish settlers. Talk about the Sermon on the Mount 101. There were more than one Anti-War groups there that, although I still have many questions about pacifism verses the just-war theory, I admired the cogency of their arguments-and their passion for peace.

Cornerstone is like a Christian Woodstock. In fact, the people that run the festival, the Jesus People are linked to the original Jesus Movement that came out of the Hippie Movement. This doesn't mean that everyone at the festival was a committed Christian liberal. I would venture to say that most were not. I do think it fascinating however that this is the only gathering that I can think of where someone like Michael Moore could conceivably sit down and have a meaningful conversation with an American pastor without the two reaching out to grab each other's throats. Now that is peace making!

Off to Cornerstone!

For years I've heard about the Cornerstone music festival, although I've never really been interested in attending, largely because I am way too boring to get into Christian punk/grunge/heavy-metal. I liked this kind of music when I was an adolescent. When I was 12 I used to tease my parents for liking Twila Paris over Stryper and now I am downloading Twila Paris songs on Itunes and listening to Josh Groban and Celtic Women. It is official. I am completely and utterly unhip. In fact, I think I am so unhip that I'm not even sure if hip is a hip word anymore. Wasn't that the 80's?

Be that as it may, although I haven't head-banged in years and I have no idea how to "get jiggy wit it", I will be going to Cornerstone to convince those that do that global poverty is a moral issue of Biblical proportions. The issue of economic justice is one of the primary concerns of nearly all the Old Testament prophets. I'm just glad that God hasn't called me to do what they did. Somehow I think that laying down on one side naked for a year eating dung might not be very good PR for an aspiring world evangelist (think Isaiah and Ezekiel). I'm glad that all I have to do is get a few punk rockers to sign a petition. I would appreciate the prayers of my readers. I'll probably need a lot of it.

I leave today with the words of Kip, the cousin of Napolean Dynamite whose faithfulness to his inner gangster has inspired millions of white guys with no rhythm like myself.

Peace out!

Random thoughts

1. Rhiannon and I drove to Chicago today. When we were forced to detour, there were no signs to direct us where to go. After a few turns, we thought we were lost but discovered that we were right where we should be. I wonder if there is a spiritual lesson in that?

2.Psalm 94:19 says, "In the multitude of my anxieties within me, your comforts delight my soul." I've never heard this verse quoted before. I think it interesting that a person can be anxious and comforted at the same time. That's good news.

3. Psalm 103:6 says, "The Lord executes justice for all who are oppressed." Watch City of Joy with Patrick Swayze and you will have a decent understanding of this verse.

4. I wish Jo Frost from Supernanny wasn't British. She'd make a great U.S. president.

Religious freedom article

Here is an article about religious freedom. I couldn't have said it better myself.

By Robert Seiple, Thu Jun 21, 4:00 AM ET
Richmond, Va. - The conversation was both memorable and sad. It was 1999 and I was in Moscow representing the United States and attempting to promote international religious freedom. In 1997, Russia had adopted a new law on religion, mostly in response to an opportunistic West that had flooded the former Soviet Union with missionaries following the fall of communism. The Russian Orthodox Church and Islam – the two established majority religions – felt threatened and conspired with the Russian government to produce the law. Most religious law from authoritarian countries turns out to be bad legislation, and this was no exception. It essentially provided government protection for established religions, while tearing up the welcome mat for anything new.

My meeting took place with high-ranking officials of the Orthodox and Islamic faiths. The discussions were candid and clear. The Russian Orthodox Church wanted to maintain a government-sanctioned monopoly on things spiritual. It was obvious that the Western missionary onslaught had generated great angst. The Russian Church felt dismissed at best, overrun at worst. Missionaries' cultural insensitivities contributed much to this hurt, ensuring this legislation as a result.

Similarly, Islam felt a need to push back. The imam of Moscow told me unabashedly that he was losing some of his flock to Western evangelizing efforts and needed the 1997 law to maintain "market share" (his phrase). This was the sad part of the conversation. I asked rhetorically, "What does this say about your faith, your theology, when you need legislation from the government to elevate your beliefs over other beliefs, or to guarantee your market share in the marketplace of spiritual matters?" This was legislation that could just as easily be applied to import quotas and price controls! This was certainly not the finest moment for two majority faiths.

In a culture of religious pluralism, majority faiths bear special responsibilities. Unfortunately, all too often it is the dark side that emerges. India's Hindus, for example, have recently petitioned the government for a series of anticonversion laws. For the world's "largest democracy," this violation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is appallingly ironic.

Pakistan's antiblasphemy laws have likewise sullied the moral standing and reputation of Islam. Clumsily written and easily abused, this legislation has most often been used to settle scores with individuals from minority faiths.

In the US, Christianity is the majority faith. As a nation that trumpets the rule of law, our "dark side" tends to reveal itself in the political process. For instance, in next year's presidential sweepstakes, there may be a Mormon on the ticket. Polling data suggest that a significant number of Christians will not vote for a Mormon. If this is true, we can also assume that a Jew, a Muslim, or an atheist candidate would lose votes from the Christian majority. This raises an ironic question: Is religious identity the last hurdle for a country that prides itself on having "no religious test" for political office and in which religious freedom has been woven into the fabric of the rule of law? What does it say when a country is more likely to elect a member of a racial or gender minority than a religious one? At the least, religious majorities need to implement their faith without creating fearful minorities.

Martin Luther King Jr. summed up why the majority should stand up for all faiths. "When one is not free, no one is free." Silence in the face of religious oppression hastens the day when all religions will be diminished. Mutual support among religions does not necessitate religious compromise. No faith needs to seek a lower common denominator in order to protect all people of faith, but followers of every religion should respect others' beliefs.

Any steps toward respect preclude establishing one faith over another. A hierarchy only exacerbates differences. Distinctions are important, but points of commonality should be identified as well. The golden rule, sanctity of life, respect for sacred texts, reconciliation commitments, and other values are represented to some degree in all major religions. Focusing on commonalities creates collective power, instead of a destructive wedge.

Finally, majority faiths have an obligation to show their best qualities, to demonstrate why the "news" of their faith is "good news." Theological protectionism suggests an insecure theology. On the other hand, having all the answers precludes the humble embrace of the great mysteries of existence. The awesomeness of God is diminished by human absolutes and judgments proffered in easily digestible sound bites. It just may be that our own faith is more attractive to others when respect is evident, humility is the norm, and actions incarnate are our spiritual language.

One way we grade another country's commitment to human rights is by how that country treats minority populations. Similarly, there is a religious test for majority faiths and how they interact with minority beliefs. And this test is one that all religious majorities ought to prepare for – because lots of folks are watching.

• Robert Seiple was the first US ambassador at large for International Religious Freedom. He is currently president and CEO of the Council for America's First Freedom.

Give me that old fashioned faith teaching

I used to hear the song, "Give me that old timed religion" and think of a 90 year old woman with spectacles hanging off her nose and a yardstick in her hand ready to give some unfortunate 5-year old a Holy Ghost whoopping. I think it interesting that our generation often thinks of old-fashioned in negative terms whereas, for nearly all of human history (and as it still is in the vast majority of the world living outside the West), the concept of old is identified with wisdom, not archaism.

It could be that I am just a sentimental person, but I rather miss the concept of the old-fashioned revival. More specifically, I miss a lot of the old-fashioned faith teaching that is simply out of vogue in today's contemporary seeker sensitive style of doing church (even charismatic churches). For the past year, I have been on a mental overhaul thinking about how the Christian faith relates to the geo-social-political issues of our time, (more specifically, how the Christian faith (especially American fundamentalist Christian faith) impacts Western civilization and what this means for the current clash of civilizations between the West and Islam. In the process of this contemplation, I have rejected a lot of the militarism (in particular as it relates to expanding American hegemony in world affairs) associated with the particular brand of Christianity that I grew up in (and am currently a part of now). In my upcoming book, "Reformation" I will explain this in more detail.

None of these considerations mattered yesterday as I was sitting in an old-fashioned revival meeting listening to a message about how Jesus defeated the Devil through the power of speaking God's Word. "You can't out think the devil, but you can out talk him," said the preacher. Amen to that! Although I flat reject some of the preacher's other ideas that he preached the previous nights (like bombing other countries for the purpose of opening them up to the gospel), I found it unusually refreshing to be reminded that when the devil is on my back, I can give him a good old-fashioned whooping by using the sword of God's Word against him.

When the preacher was finished, I practically ran down the altar to get my overdose of the Holy Ghost....and to get the devil off my back. Look out devil, I'm armed and dangerous now! You'll be hearing a lot of "No weapon formed against me shall prosper" from me from now on. Better get used to it.

Letter to an Iranian televangelist

Below is an article written by an Iranian televangelist and the subsequent letter I wrote to him. Since I doubt I'll get a response, I figured I could post it for my readers. Have at it guys. This should promote a lively discussion.

Reza

I have just returned from a very blessed trip to the Holy Land, Israel. I conducted four Islam Awareness Seminars in four different churches in the cities of Tiberias, Haifa, Tel Aviv, and Jerusalem. I also spoke at the CFI (Christian Friends of Israel) conference in Jerusalem. I taped many Farsi programs, in Jerusalem, for TBN Nejat TV, interviewing Messianic Jews concerning the covenant of God with Israel, the peace of Jerusalem, Zionism, etc. I was also interviewed by various magazines such as Jerusalem Post, Israel Today, Christian Embassy, and also CBN News. Special thanks to Eric and Terri Morey for organizing this trip. I believe that this trip was ordained by God. Even though I have been to Israel many times, on this trip I received much insight into the physical and spiritual condition of the Land. Here are some of my observations:



The church in Israel is young and needs our prayers.
There is a rift between the Arab and Jewish churches mainly as a result of Christian Zionism coming out of America.
Israel is not in the best financial situation at this time with so many immigrants coming to Israel in such a short amount of time. As a result the churches (both Arabs and Jews) need financial support.
Christian Zionism in America, due to its lack of knowledge of Arab Israeli relations, is increasing the rift between the Jewish and Arab believers and churches.
Arab churches are, for the most part, ignored by the church in America. This matter does not help their sense of being “second rate” citizens in Israel.
A major reconciliation process between the Arab churches and Messianic churches needs to be put into effect, if we are to see a major change in Israel.


I feel like a double agent. On one side I plead the cause of Israel with millions of Farsi speaking Muslims throughout Iran and around the world. And then, on the other hand, I bring the cause of Muslims before the people of God. How could peace come to Israel when the church is not at peace with itself in the land? How can we have peace in Israel?



As far back as Israel was formed as a nation, Israel has faced oppositions. That is partly because of her calling by God and the weight of that call. And today is no different. After becoming a nation again in 1948, Israel has already faced several major wars. Now facing the looming threat of a nuclear Iran and predictions of a coming war with Syria, Hezbollah, and Hamas, Israel is being challenged again for her very survival.



In a time of crisis, there are always various voices being raised, some for edification and restoration, and others unto confusion and ignorance. The question is what voice do we follow in such a time? When Israel was in the process of being taken captive by Babylonians, there were many “prophets” and “prophecies” concerning Israel proclaiming peace and comfort to the people of God. Yet there was one man by the name of Jeremiah who proclaimed the true word of God. There are many popular and comforting words in support of Israel today, but are they from God? Just because they say that they are pro Israel, do they have a legitimate voice to create a new path for the people of Israel? The Bible commands us to judge all prophecies or spiritual declarations (1 Cor. 14:29). James gives us a scale by which we can judge these voices and revelations that are being spoken these days:

James 3:17 (NKJV) But the wisdom that is from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, willing to yield, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality and without hypocrisy.

Note the words “peaceable” and “full of mercy.” When Jesus was refused by Samaritans in Luke chapter 9, James and John were ready to call fire from heaven to consume these “dirty gentiles!” There are many Christian political voices, mainly from the U.S., which today in the name of “Zionism” advocate war and contentions with such countries as Iran, Syria, Iraq, etc. What did Jesus do when they rejected him in Samaria?



Luke 9:54-55 “And when His disciples James and John saw this, they said, “Lord, do You want us to command fire to come down from heaven and consume them, just as Elijah did?” But He turned and rebuked them, and said, “You do not know what manner of spirit you are of. 56 For the Son of Man did not come to destroy men’s lives but to save them.”





In our efforts in supporting Israel as a nation and also as a people, we must be careful that we do not discriminate against others for whom Christ gave His life. I was told by several leaders in Israel that some of the preachers in America who are considered “Zionists” are causing dissensions among the body of Christ in Israel. Zeal without knowledge is a harmful force. The wall that separates the Jews from the gentiles was broken down through the sacrifice of Jesus on the cross. To raise that wall again is nullifying the redemptive work of Christ. That is a dangerous thing to do. Please read Ephesians 2:11-18.



How can we then support Israel and at the same time love Arabs and Muslims? Here are some suggestions:



A) Proclaim the truth in love. I have been doing that in our broadcasts. Muslims will understand God’s covenant with Israel, if we teach it in the spirit of the New Covenant.

B) Pray for the spiritual and physical leaderships of both Israel and the Arab nations and Iran.

C) Support both the Messianic and Arab congregations in Israel. You can obtain a list of these congregations through our office.

D) Build a bridge of hope and love among the people in Israel.

E) Pray for the evil nature of Islam to be exposed in the eyes of the Muslim people.

F) Help to spread the Gospel both among the Jews and the Arabs. There are those who believe that the Jews do not need to come to God through the sacrifice of Jesus and therefore they refuse to pay the price and preach the Gospel to them. Remember what Paul said in Romans 1:16.

G) When you visit the land of Israel, please make an effort to visit both a Messianic and an Arab congregation.



God has called us to reconcile, not to be politically motivated and tear apart and divide. Israel became a nation before most of these so called “pro Israel” Christians were on the scene. That is not to say that we shouldn’t stand for Israel and support her. That we do, but not in a spirit of the world and the political system of the world. God never contradicts Himself. He will not have us stand for Israel while we are turning away millions of Muslims for whom Christ gave His life. That is not the nature of the Gospel. Jesus died for the Jews as well as the Muslims. And they both will be judged if they reject Him. So there is no difference. Jesus took that division on His body on the cross. Christian Zionism in America is recreating that division and that is dangerous. Yes, God has rebirthed the nation of Israel, and He will fulfill His calling upon them. Yes, we will bless Israel and pray for the peace of Jerusalem. But let us not run ahead of Him. Let God do His business and let us do ours. Remember these words of the great Jewish Apostle:



2 Corinthians 5:18-21 (NKJV)

18 Now all things are of God, who has reconciled us to Himself through Jesus Christ, and has given us the ministry of reconciliation, 19 that is, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not imputing their trespasses to them, and has committed to us the word of reconciliation. 20 Now then, we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God were pleading through us: we implore you on Christ’s behalf, be reconciled to God. 21 For He made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him. (bold letters are added for emphasis

Aaron's Response

Aaron Taylor
to reza
More options Jun 18 (2 days ago)
Dear Pastor Reza,

I appreciate the spirit of the letter you have written regarding the
situation in Israel today. It seems to me that you are struggling
between your faith and your conscience-a struggle I can very well
identify with because I was raised in a Christian Zionist environment
and also attended Christ for the Nations, a Bible school heavily
influenced by Christian Zionism. I have been a missionary for years
(including working among Muslims) and I have a burning desire to reach
people with the gospel. I never really thought about the moral
implications of Christian Zionism until I read Brother Andrew's book
"Light Force." Reading Brother Andrew's book forced me to ask the
question of whether it was God's will for Arabs to be driven out of
their homes by the tens of thousands in 1948 or whether it continues
to be God's will for Palestinians to be facing near starvation because
many living in rural villages can not leave their villages because the
roads are blocked by huge concrete blocks put there by the IDF. Or
furthermore, is it God's will that people's lands be seized by Jewish
settlers who don't seem to care that the Palestinians living outside
their settlements are starving?

What I think I hear you saying, Pastor Reza, is that we need to have a
change of heart towards Arab (and I presume Palestinian) Christians. I
agree. The question I am asking though is: Is it possible to have a
change of heart without a change in theology? As you and I both know,
the only hope for Jews and Arabs is Jesus. Once Arabs (including Arabs
living in the Gaza strip and the West Bank) turn to the prince of
peace for salvation, things will all be fine....or will it?

If we ask the hypothetical question: What would happen if through a
moral revival or a mass conversion to Jesus, Palestinians living in
the West Bank and the Gaza strip all of the sudden decided they wanted
to live at peace with Jews? What would be the Christian Zionist's
response? Would it be to annex the territories to Israel (if indeed
Scripture commands believers to suport the reclaiming of the Biblical
promised land)? This is something the Israeli government doesn't want
simply because the Jewish state would no longer be Jewish. Would a
two-state solution be possible? This is something the Christian
Zionists do not want because it would invalidate God's covenant with
the Jews to restore the former Promised Land.

I find it interesting that in Ezekiel's vision of the restored
promised land, foreigners are treated as equal citizens (Ezekiel
47:1-22). Is this what is happening today? Furthermore, I find it
interesting that when the Apostles asked Jesus when he was going to
restore the kingdom to Israel, He replied "It is not for you to know
the times and the seasons of which God has put in His own authority,
but you shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you,
and you shall be my witnesses in Jerusalem, Judea, Samarian, and the
uttermost parts of the earth."

Jesus put the priority on preaching the gospel, not on building an
earthly kingdom in the Middle East. It seems to me that fulfilling
the land covenant with Jews is God's perogative, not the Church's. It
also seems reasonable to me that Jesus is perfectly capable of
settling land disputes when He comes back to earth. I also have to
wonder why so many Zionists are so adamant about Jewish possession of
Jerusalem when Jerusalem is going to be the seat of the Antichrist
during the second half of the 7-year tribulation (if indeed the
dispensational interpretation is correct)? Furthermore, those who
finance Jewish immigration to Israel are sending Jews to their deaths
since 2/3rds of the Jewish population is going to be slaughtered at
the end of the tribulation according to the prophet Zechariah.

I wonder if dispensationalism can be reformed in such a way to uphold
the land covenant and at the same time not give way to Christian
Zionism, which puts a greater priority on land conquest than the
preaching of the gospel. Since you seem to be struggling with this
issue (as have I), I think this is a question worth devoting some
thoughtful study.

I would love to hear your thoughts on this matter.

Blessings in Christ,

Aaron

Golfing in the Night

The strangest thing happened last night. I was driving golf balls in my back yard (why I wasn't at a golf course, I don't know) going merrily along my way when all of a sudden a police car showed up. Out of the door stepped some neighbors I have never met who wanted to give me a piece of their mind. Apparently, as I was driving golfballs, I was unknowingly hitting their property every time, crashing into their windows, and damaging their property. Next to them was a lawyer, a woman who looked to be about in her 40's. Between the three of them, (the husband, the wife, and the lawyer) they were discussing how much to sue me for. The bid started out at $30,000, but then the lawyer suggested they could get a hundred times more than that. As I raised my voice with the objection that having to fork out all that money would ruin my life, the three acted like I wasn't there and continued to raise the amount.

And then I woke up. I'm not sure why I've been having these types of dreams lately, but it seems that nearly every night I face a crisis and then wake up relieved. Perhaps that is a good start to the day-the sense of relief knowing that you are not being sued for tens of thousands of dollars. Maybe mundane isn't so bad after all.

In defense of ordinary

Growing up in church, I have heard nearly hundreds of times a phrase that goes something like this: God uses ordinary people to do extraordinary things. As an idea well grounded in Biblical truth, I have no problem with this statement. I do have to wonder, however, why I have never heard a sermon on how God uses ordinary people to do ordinary things. We all know that Moses and David were ordinary men who did extraordinary things....that is...if you consider growing up in Pharoah's court or rescuing lambs from lions' jaws ordinary (I'm not planning on attempting the second one any time soon).

I have a theory that ordinary gets a bad rap. I know this because I need look no further than myself. Like most aspiring preachers, I have a nearly obsessive tendency to compare myself with others, and because of that, I am often subjected to lengthy internal lectures (from the Holy Spirit I presume) on why comparing myself to others is not a good idea. One of the things I have been hearing on the inside over and over is this simple statement: For every Peter and Paul, there are a hundred widows with two mites. In other words, God uses ordinary people to do ordinary things -but ordinary things really matter.

One of the most striking characteristics of Jesus' teachings is his uncanny ability to make heroes out of ordinary chaps like you and me-a housewife searching for a lost coin, a good Samaritan helping an unfortunate traveler, a stoned-out prodigal making his journey home, a laid off estate-planner ensuring his financial future, a generous boss compensating his last-minute hired hands, an individual giving a cup of cold water in the name of a disciple.

I have a hunch that God is far more interested in ordinary things than we are. If this is true, and I think it is, I wonder how this realization can change the way we view our lives? This may be another hunch, but I think that a life of contentment and service to others may not be as ordinary as we might think.

A promise kept

Over 50 years ago, Harold Taylor made a promise to Betty Lou. Not only did Harold promise to love Betty Lou and help raise her two children, but he promised to be a church going man for the sake of his family. Harold was non-religious at the time, but not necessarily antagonistic towards God. Betty Lou was a devout Catholic and was not about to marry a non-church going man, no matter how handsome he was.

When Harold and Betty said "I do", little did Harold know that they would have 10 additional children together, my dad being one of them. Harold was a navy man, so he would be gone for months at a time. Although Harold was not able to spend much time with his children while they were growing up, Harold kept his promise to faithfully love his wife and to take care of his family.
He also attended a Baptist church for the rest of his life.

The rest of Harold's life ended today.

Thank you Grandpa for teaching me the value of integrity.

I'll miss you.

Why do they hate us?

I wish I could say this isn't true, but most Americans (and Europeans too) are oblivious as to why much of the rest of the world hates the West. In liberal academia, the culprits are usually Western imperialism and Western economic domination through international lending institutions (such as the World Bank and IMF) and international corporations. Even fewer Americans know that much of the Muslim world view 9/11 as retaliation for Western abuse of power, not as anarchic terror. The stated abuses are as follows:

1. The unbalanced support of the U.S. for Israel in oppressing the Palestinians
2. The U.S. sanctions and bombing campaing in Iraq in the decade of the 90's that killed hundreds and thousands of Muslims.
3. The U.S. support of corrupt and oppressive regimes throughout the Muslim world
4. The presence of U.S.troops in Muslim lands (which is viewed as a desecration of sacred soil)

These four points are exactly what Bin Laden used to justify 9/11, and they are still being used to recruit moderate Muslism to radical Islam today. Every American should at least know this, but very few do.

According to author Meic Pearse, the last four points mentioned are merely symtoms of what is really driving anti-Western sentiment around the world. In his book, Why the Rest Hates the West. Pearse argues that the real reasons why the rest of the world (especially the Islamic world) hate us are largely cultural. Values that we take for granted, such as freedom, human rights,individualism are viewed by others as a prescription for moral anarchy. Freedom means disrespect for authority, human rights means entitlement, individualism means breakdown of the family. Now that Western society is largely secular, most Westerners scorn traditional morality (especially in regard to sexual values and the integrity of the family) and are ever too willing to impose their "freedom" on others...whether they want it or not. For Pearse, the rest of the world views Westerners as morally contemptible barbarians with little respect for family, religion, and tradition. In other words, the real root of global rage lies in cultural imperialism. We believe our values are universal and can't understand why the rest of the world doesn't want our values.

There is much to this thesis, but it does underscore a point I made in my speech for the film "Holy Wars" and that is that there needs to be a serious attempt at dialogue between the twin civilizations of the West and Islam....our very survival depends on it.

Call your representative today!

Below is a letter I received from the religious arm of the One Campaign. I urge my readers to act on this. I've studied this issue and I can tell you that the current U.S. agricultural subsidies are pricing third-world farmers out of the market and worsening the hunger problem (especially in Africa). Not to mention the policy is very hypocritical considering that the U.S. government is the single greatest promoter of trade liberalization in the world today. This is an issue of economic justice of Biblical proportions (think the Prophet Amos).

This week, hundreds of Bread members from around the country have gathered in Washington for The Gathering 2007. On Tuesday, they'll walk the halls of Congress to let their representatives know that it's time for a new farm bill!

Even if you won't be able to make it to Washington, you can still be a part of Lobby Day. We are asking all Bread members to call their senators and representative on Lobby Day, June 12. At the end of the day on Tuesday, we want all of Capitol Hill to be talking about Bread for the World and the need for broad reform of the farm bill!

Please call your senators and representative on Tuesday, June 12 at 1-800-826-3688. Find out who your members are. [Note: This toll-free number will connect you to the Capitol switchboard, where you will ask to be connected to your senator or representative's office in order to relay your message.]

Ask your member of Congress to reform the farm bill to better meet the needs of hungry and poor people. With changes in commodity payment programs, the farm bill can:

provide more targeted and equitable support for U.S. farmers;
strengthen communities in rural America;
provide an adequate, nutritious diet for hungry people in this country;
make U.S. food aid more effective and efficient and,
remove obstacles to poor farmers in developing countries working to earn their way out of poverty.
We've reached a critical point for the consideration of this farm bill. This is it – it's crunch time. Subcommittees in the House of Representatives will be writing both the nutrition and commodity titles of the farm bill this week.

Both the Senate and House Agriculture Committees will be marking up the complete farm bill later this month. In July, we expect the bill to go to the floor. This means you'll be hearing from us frequently over the next six weeks – especially if you live in the district of a member of the Agriculture Committee. We'll be emailing updates and asking you to act quickly. Please check our website, www.bread.org , frequently for the latest information and actions.

Taking on the farm bill is one of Bread for the World's most ambitious – and challenging – campaigns to date. We have already had huge success this year with broad calls for reform in the media and promising conversations with members of Congress. Now is the time your call can make a difference.

None of us can do it alone, but together, and across many faith traditions, we can raise our voices to see that hungry people are fed. We can urge those who act in our name to tackle hunger on a grand scale, and do so with our blessings. If we want fields ripe for harvest, we must first sow the seeds. Let's get busy sowing. Let's help farmers and end hunger.

Living in two worlds

I must admit that living here in America often makes me feel like I am living in two separate worlds. The one world is the world I live in and interact with people every day. That is the American world, and it consists largely of going to church, eating Taco Bell, and watching Spider-Man. The other world that I live in is the near-daily communication I have with Christian leaders living in places like Pakistan, India, Nepal, and Senegal. With the exception of Nepal, I have been to these places more than once, inluding actually living in one of the places. With my memories of my travels and my near daily communications, I am reminded how the concerns of my brothers and sisters living around the world are drastically different than my rather petty concerns here in America.

I receive a report from a ministry we support in Pakistan and I am reminded how my Pastor friend (who is around my same age) is concerned with building a Bible School, an orphanage, and helping the poor. I receive a report from Nepal and, although I am delighted they are using the mega-voice players that I sent them (a tool from the God Story Project that plays the gospel story in multiple local languages), I am reminded that some of their pastors have just been beaten for the sake of the gospel. I am delighted that a pastor in India is in the process of translating my book "The Road Back Home" and plans to distribute it among the pastors under his organization, but then I am reminded that in my world back home, how many pastors do I oversee that would be interested in reading one of my books? Rather than relishing in my new celebrity status in one tiny part of the world, I know full well that my Indian pastor friend would be delighted to receive any Christian literature from an American Christian, since gospel literature is so scarce in his corner of the world. Living in two worlds can be quite humbling at times.

Demonizing Islam

In today's post-9/11 world, one of the most popular ways for an American Christian leader to get attention is to demonize the Islamic religion. The standard way of doing this is usually to cite a few war-like passages in the Koran and then to say how 9/11 proves that Islam is a violent and evil religion. Part of the inspiration in writing my Good Muslim post, taken from the story of the Good Samaritan, came from a conversation I had with a friend who couldn't understand why I disagreed with his view that all Muslims have a propensity towards violence. For my friend, since the "spirit of Islam" itself is demonic, then it follows that Muslims themselves can not be trusted. Most of my moderate Christian friends would agree that we must judge individuals by the content of their character and not by their religious affiliation (which is one of the points that Jesus was making in the parable of the Good Samaritan), but I have to ask a further question, is it right to "demonize" Islam?

The first part of the question is theological. I've dealt with this issue in other posts, so I will not revise my arguments here, except to say that from a Biblical standpoint, there is a mixture of truth in error in other religious traditions outside of Biblical revelation. That is to say, both the grace of God and the deception of the devil are present in varying degrees depending on the tradition in question.

The second part of the question is a more practical one. Does it do any good for Christian leaders to demonize Islam by citing passages from the Koran? I say no and here is why. Pretend for a moment that I am an anti-Semitic fascist dictator (for some this might not be such a stretch, but humor me for a moment)and I want to make a case not simply against Jews, but against Judaism. All I would have to do is to point to the Old Testament and to show how God ordered the Jews to slaughter entire tribes (in some cases, they were ordered to leave nothing breathing alive, this would include women, children, and animals). I could then point to hundreds of verses to show how Jews are ordered to spread their religion around the world. For example, there are hundreds of verses that tell Jews to "proclaim his goodness among the nations" and there are numerous verses that speak of Israel's priestly role as light to the nations. I could talk about who Judaism teaches that Jews will one day rule the world (think about the Messianic passages in Isaiah) and make the conclusion that Judaism is a violent and evil religion seeking to take over the world.

And the conslusion would be wrong. Even though Orthodox Jews today continue to read the Old Testament, I have not met one Jew interested in establishing a world-wide theocracy. Much less, I've never met a Jew even remotely interested in converting non-Jews even through peaceful means. And yet, this is exactly what Jews are commanded to do in the Old Testament.

What does this mean? It means that somewhere, somehow, in the course of history the religion of Judaism liberalized. Jews found a way to interpret their Scriptures in a way that is compatible with societal norms. If Jews can do this with the Old Testament, which is every bit if not more violent than the Koran, then certainly Muslims should be allowed (and indeed encouraged) to interpret their holy book in a way that is compatible with today's world. Even if one believes that Islam is indeed violent and incompatible with the modern world, it still does no good to demonize the religion because this only drives moderate Muslims into the arms of the radicals. Do we really want to make Bin Laden's case for him?

Does Christianity promote individualism?

If there is one thing that separates Western thought from non-Western thought, it is the concept of individualism. As Americans, we are products of Western culture. Our cultural icons are John Wayne and Frank Sinatra, men who did it "their way." We admire those who do what they think is right regardless of the opinions of their family and their communities. This is why young people in our nation are constantly searching to "find themselves" and to "be different" even though they end up looking like nearly everyone else in the same struggle. In short, the Western mantra is-to thine own self be true. The concept of individualism also leads to concepts of equality and human rights. We believe that all people should be treated fairly and equally.

As Westerners, we tend to think these ideas are obvious to everyone, but they are not. In terms of world history, individualism is a very recent development and to this day is not the assumption of the vast majority of people living in non-Western societies. When we say that all people should be treated equally, they see this as a sign of disrespect to established authority. Non-westerners see individualism as leading to materialism, feminism, sexual immorality, the breakdown of the family-and just plain disrespectful to established institutions.

When my wife and I led a young man named Jean Pierre to Christ while we were missionaries in Senegal, Jean Pierre payed a price. His family rejected him and tried to place a curse on him to kill him. Jean Pierre's faith did not waver and now, although his family is not converted, they all respect him. What is remarkable about this is that Jean Pierre lives in a society that values conformity. The Senegalese like to eat from the same bowl and drink from the same cups during meal time to emphasize their unity as Senegalese. Their is no such thing as an individual hairstyle because everyone actually wants to look like everyone else. To embrace evangelical Christianity for Jean Pierre was to go against the grain and assert his ability to make a free choice over his culture's expectation of conformity.

Individualism can be great, but it also has its drawbacks. Communities break down when people care only about themselves and not about the group as a whole. My question is: to what extent does Christianity promote individualism? Jesus did not seem all too concerned about the fact that His message would divide families. In fact, He even said that was exactly what He came to do!(See Matthew 10:34-39) Is individualism merely a product of Western culture or is it explicity a Christian virtue? Furthermore, is it possible to separate individualism from Christianity? If so, how do we cultivate a godly individualism without equating Western culture with Christianity? Or better yet, is that even necessary?

Once again, discuss!

Coals of conscience?

I found another verse in the Psalms that has an interesting parallel in the New Testament. Psalms 11:6 says,

"Upon the wicked He will rain coals; Fire and brimstone and a burning wind shall be the portion of their cup."

Notice the similarity between this verse and Romans 12:20 which says,

"If your enemy is hungry, feed him; If he is thirsty, give him a drink;For in doing so ;you will heap coals of fire on his head."

The New Testament context is obvious. Paul quotes from Proverbs 25:21-22 to make the point that Christians are not to repay evil for evil, but to leave vengeance up to God. In agreement with the teaching of Jesus to love your enemies, both Paul and Solomon believed that kindness to an enemy afflicts the conscience of the enemy (and in some cases, will cause the enemy to repent). The coals of fire, therefore are coals of conscience.

What is striking about these three passages is the use of fire and coals. In the verse in Psalms, the words fire and brimstone are used. Could it be possible that these three verses are talking about the same thing? Namely that the coals and the fire and the brimstone, terms often used to describe the punishment of the wicked, primarily refer to the torment of a guilty conscience? If so, then how does this relate to a literal interpretation of the Bible?

Questions! Questions! Questions!

When and who?

I came across an interesting verse today in Psalm 9:18.

"For the needy shall not always be forgotten; The expectation of the poor shall not perish forever."

The implication seems to be clear. The needy and the poor are often forgotten and mistreated in this life, but there is coming a day when this will not be so. Notice that this verse says nothing about the spirituality of the poor person or to their relationship with God, it simply teaches that there is coming a day where the poor will receive justice. A parallel is the story of the rich man and Lazarus. The rich guy goes to hell and the poor man goes to Abraham's bosom. In this story as well, nothing is mentioned about the poor man's relationship with God nor to the virtue of the poor man. Here are my questions.

When will the poor receive justice? At the end of days? If so, who will be the beneficiaries?

Discuss!

The Good Muslim?

Perhaps one of the most famous parables of Jesus, besides the parable of the prodigal son, is the parable of the Good Samaritan. Even non-believers who have never picked up a Bible are familiar with the term Good Samaritan as someone who helps another in a time of need. We have organizations honoring the famous Samaritan (such as Samaritan's Purse) and laws as well (such as the Good Samaritan law). The most obvious meaning is that all of us should be willing to lend a hand when we see someone in a desperate situation.

This was not, however, the primary meaning to the original hearers of the parable. What would have shocked the first century Jewish audience the most was the fact that the hero of the story was, in fact, a Samaritan. What seems to us like a simple help your neighbor story was acutally a very clever literary device by Jesus to condemn one of the most prevalent sins of his era (and our own I might add). The sin Jesus was referring to was, of course, racism. Jews simply didn't like Samaritans because they were half-breeds, racially impure.

Given that the majority of my readers are Christians with a similar background as myself, I am reasonably sure that what I have written so far should come as no surprise. All of us have heard sermons on racism at one time or another and, thank God, most of us realize that racism is a sin. What may come as a surprise is that the parable of the Good Samaritan was not only a slight against racism but also against another sin that I feel is far less talked about, and that is the sin of religious bigotry.

The Samaritans were not just racial half-breeds between ethnic Jews and Assyrians. They were also apostates from Judiasm. They believed in the God of Abraham and yet, they mixed their belief in God with pagan idolatry. The Samaritans were the descendants of the 10 tribes of Israel who broke away from Judah and Benjamin and set up their own version of temple worship complete with their own priesthood-something they had no authority to do under the Law of Moses. Not only that, when they were finally taken captive by the Assyrians, they interbred with them and adopted some of their religious beliefs as well.

And the hero of the story is a Samaritan? Impossible! In the story of the Good Samaritan, Jesus cut to the heart of religious pride to teach us that individuals should be judged on the content of their character, not on their race or, yes, even their religion.

If Jesus were giving this story today on a pulpit in one of the thousands of mega-churches that dot the American landscape, I wonder if He would tell the story of the Good Muslim? Furthermore, I wonder what kind of reaction He would get if He did.

Would Jesus support gun control?

I'm back and ready to blog. First things first. No, Pete, I wasn't ignoring your question on the gun control issue. I just don't have a clear opinion one way or the other. I do think it is rather strange however, that so many Christian groups lobby for the NRA, as if the view of protecting people's rights to purchase semi-automatic weapons is distinctively a Christian issue. I also think it odd that so many conservatives support Rudy Guliani, even though he is pro-abortion and doesn't take a strong stand against gay marriage, based solely on his performance for cleaning up crime as the mayor of New York City and his subsequent post 9/11 leadership. One of the things that Guliani says is that he was able to reduce crime in New York largely through tougher gun control measures.

As far as the issue itself from a biblical standpoint, I think it has to do with living with what is permissable and what is ideal. Defending oneself with a gun, or any other type of self-defense where the potential victim harms or takes the life of the aggressor may be permissable (clearly in the Old Testament this is the case), but is it ideal? Given the pacifist nature of the New Testament, that is the real question in my book.


Here is an article that covers this issue from just about every possible angle. The author is a pacifist, but a lot of the comments on his article take the opposite position. The dialogue is amazing. Hope you enjoy reading it.

Jessica Lynch- a hero in disguise

We all remember the story. A 19-year old girl, a supply clerk for the U.S. Army was captured by the Iraqi forces and later rescued by a team of U.S. special forces. Jessica Lynch, however, was no ordinary POW, so the media told us. She was a female Rambo who didn't go down without a fight. Shortly before Jessica returned home, she was a national icon.

There was one little problem with the female Rambo part-it was purely fiction. Jessica Lynch did not fire at the people who attacked her Humvee. Her gun was jammed, she was knocked unconscious, and the next thing you know she woke up in an Iraqi hospital.

While the media hyped her as a female warrior, the real hero was Jessica's conscience. Jessica could have very easily went along with the hype while the country was hailing her as G.I. Jane, but she did not. Jessica chose reality over fantasy.


Yesterday Jessica appeared before Congress to set the record straight.

It's time for a reality check.

A strange similarity

Flashback: I'm watching a video in church. In the video there is a man who is in prison for the sole crime of being a Christian. The man tells his son how in the recent past his dad could even pray in school, but then "they" took that away from him. Then it became politically incorrect to talk about Jesus. The next thing you know the man is about to be executed. In an emotionally gripping moment, the man tells his son to pray like he taught him to, to take care of his mother, and to remember that God is the Father to the fatherless. In the end the man joins the cloud of witnesses in heaven as one in a long line of martyrs for the Christian faith. For an impressionable young Christian raised in red-state America, the message was loud and clear. This is what will happen if liberals (aka..democrats and secular humanists) are allowed to take over.

Flash forward: I'm on an airplane flying to a country where Christians actually have been persecuted in the recent past and I watch a movie called V for Vendetta. In the film, Britian has been taken over by a dictator who came to power on the promise to restore Britain to its former glory by bringing God back into the government. The man proceeds to wage war against gays and Muslims and creates a Big Brother society along similar lines of Hitler's Nazi Germany. The message of the film was loud and clear. This is what will happen if fundamentalist Christians are allowed to take over.

Does anyone else but me find these similarities strange? What are the lessons we can learn from the two opposing viewpoints?

Wedding dresses needed

I thought this was interesting.

TURKEY - WEDDING DRESSES NEEDED
from: Turkish World Outreach (http://www.two-fot.org) email
- April 12, 2007

Ladies, do you have a wedding dress you would be willing to part
with for the cause of Christ? If so, please consider sending
it to Turkish World Outreach!

Turkish World Outreach
508 Fruitvale Court
Grand Junction, CO 81504 USA

This Christian organization is collecting wedding dresses to
provide destitute believers in Turkey with a means of employment.
Many have been fired from their jobs because they have chosen
to leave Islam to follow Jesus. Wedding dresses from western
nations are greatly admired in Turkey, and Turkish believers
will be able earn a living by renting such dresses.

Maybe I'm not so crazy

For the past year I've been blogging about some very challenging concepts. Some of my ideas (especially the idea that separation of church and state is a Christian idea)have made me feel like a spiritual maverick within the American Christian church. For a while, I was wondering if there was anyone out there who really understood the way I see things.

Now that I am almost finished with Philip Yancey's book What's So Amazing About Grace?, I am delighted, and perhaps a little disappointed, to know that I may not be as crazy as I thought after all. Now that I have found a book that basically explains what I have been trying to say all along, I am wondering, what can I blog about now?

St. Louis Rams anyone?

Living with Islamists

Check out this article from Christianity Today called Living with Islamists. Joshua White is an excellent example of incarnational witness for today's Christian leaders seeking to build bridges of friendship with the Muslim world. Having been to Pakistan, I found his description of the Pakistani people and, especially, the plight of the Christians, fascinating. Pay special attention to how Joshua, a Christian missionary, learned to respect the people and the culture of the people he went to reach. Knowing that Peshawar is the most violent and lawless region of Pakistan, even I was a little surprised by his rather generous portrayal of the people.

Slavery, baby killing, and forgiveness

Question:

From what i understand, the bible instructs us to obey the government unless the law of the land contradicts God's law. i really can't say whether or not it was a good idea or God's will for the States to fight back against Britain. i'm glad they did, though.

it may not be what you had in mind, but i don't really have an answer for that question. i agree with what you said regarding what scripture says about government. which brings me to a question that i have been kicking around lately.

was God against the institution of slavery?

the reason I ask this is because there are several examples in the OT where God gives laws on how to treat slaves. and as you mentioned, in the NT, paul actual told the slaves to obey their masters. yes, perhaps the idea of every believer being equal in Christ led to the abolition of slavery, but the interesting thing was it seems that God never condemned the institution.

now we may get hung up here if we have different definitions of slavery. it seems doubtful to me that God would ever approve of the many cruel atrocities that happened because of slavery. but if we're talking about indentured servants (wiki it) and/or slavery in which the slaves were treated decently (in a humane way), i don't remember reading any biblical disapproval of it (OT or NT).

please know that i'm not saying slavery is a good thing or that we should bring it back. like i said, many horrible things happened because of it. but most people probably think of this type of slavery when they hear the word without considering how things were done in Biblical times and what the Bible actually says or doesn't say about it.


Answer: First of all, thank you very much for your question. To answer your question, I am going to try something new. I am going to answer your question with a question and I'll leave it to you, and my readers, to draw your own conclusions to the point I am making.

Let me give you two passages both found in the Bible. The first passage is Psalms 137: 8-9 which says,

"O daughter of Babylon, who are to be destroyed. Happy the one who repays you as you have served us! Happy the one who takes and dashes your little ones against the rock!"

The second passage, found in Acts 7:60 is from the lips of Stephen the martyr who prayed these words as stones were crashing against his skull,

"Lord, do not charge them with this sin."

My question is this: Both passages are found in the Bible. Which passage is morally superior?

The day I got "Left Behind."

The year was 1988. I was 11 years old and my younger brother, Paul was 7 years old. Our family was visiting my aunt who lived in what we called at the time the "boondocks" of Missouri. I'm not sure if the word is still around today, but back then it meant "in the middle of nowhere" and, with the nearest neighbor being a mile away, that is exactly what it felt like the day my brother and I were walking and talking in a nearby field. As my brother and I were talking and minding our business, something out of the ordinary happened that we still haven't been able to explain to this day. From seemingly out of nowhere, we heard a piercing trumpet blast .

For most young children, this would be an insignificant incident, but not for us. It just so happened that the day we heard the trumpet blast was the exact day the Rapture of the Church was predicted to happen by the author of the book "88 Reasons Why the Rapture will Happen in 88."
For those unfamiliar with the Left Behind series, the Rapture is the event that millions of evangelical Christians who follow the dispensational interpretation of Scripture believe can happen at any time without a moment's notice. In the Rapture, Jesus snatches Christians away from the earth to take them to heaven while leaving the rest of the world to suffer the horrors of the Seven Year tribulation.

As children of the charismatic movement, we knew full well the verse in the Bible that says, "In the twinkling of an eye, the trumpet will sound and the dead will be raised incorruptible," (I Cornithians 15: 52). The day we heard the trumpet blast, my brother and I fully expected that after we blinked our eyes, we would be in heaven. After blinking hard a few times, we both looked at each other with the same horriffied expression on our faces. "Oh no! We've been left behind!" we thought. Immediately we ran inside my aunt's house and discovered that our parents and our cousins and aunts and uncles were still standing. For the rest of the day we were thinking to ourselves that not only had we been left behind, but our entire family had been left behind as well. As I went to bed that night, I remember racking my brain trying to figure out what my entire family could have done so wrong to suffer such an aweful fate. Neither my brother nor I were fully convinced that the rapture had not taken place until the next day when the family decided to visit a nearby church. To our relief, we were happy to see a church filled with Bible Believing Christians worshipping the Lord together. We figured that all these Christians could not have been left behind, especially not the pastor. As our family worshipped the Lord together that day, I was inwardly thanking God that I wasn't going to have to take the mark of the beast or swim in a river of blood any time soon. The relief quickly turned to disappointment when I realized that I still had to go to school the next day.


As innocent as this story is, I've told it for a reason. An evangelical Christian may read this story and reminesce about the wonders of child-like faith, but a secular American reading this story is likely to have a different reaction. For millions of secular Americans, the Left Behind theology promoted by TBN, the 700 Club, and bestselling prophecy pundits is not only delusional, but dangerous. The thinking goes something like this. If millions of Americans believe this doctrine, and these same Americans are the most powerful voting block in the country, why would people who believe the world is heading for an apocalyptic meltdown care about global warming or protecting the rainforest? To further complicate matters in the minds of secular Americans, the leading advocates of the Rapture theory are also the most vocal advocates for neo-conservative politics, which, in their minds, is the belief that America should back Israel unconditionally, wage pre-emptive wars to establish pro-Western democracies, and give little to no regard to what the U.N. has to say about it.

At least, that's how the "left" sees things. No longer are we evangelicals the persecuted minority. We are the ones holding the cards with our Aposlte -in -chief holding the highest office in the country. As unfounded as many of the theocracy accusations from the far-left are, American evangelicals, especially those raised on Left Behind theology, are facing some tough questions right now, and will face many more in the future. American evangelicals are still the most vocal supporters of the Iraq war, a war that is a quagmire in the eyes of many, and it seems that hardly a day goes by without a TV preacher calling for war with Iran. To make matters worse, these same T.V. preachers also raise millions of dollars to finance Jewish settlements in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, giving little to no consideration to fact that the people they are displacing might actually be human beings with families to feed. Never mind the fact that both sides of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict have committed atrocities against each other beyond anything we in our fast food, mall shopping, church hopping, American culture can conceive of. Never mind the fact that Jesus said, "Blessed are the peacemakers" and yet, when Israel was blasting the Lebanese to smitherings last year, preachers were calling it a "miracle of God" despite the fact that the war actually strengthened Hizbollah's presence in the region. To top it off, according to the Left Behind theology, if someone comes along with a solution to stop the two sides from slaughtering each other, according to the same interpretatin of Scripture, that person has to be the devil (the antichrist to be exact)!

All of the sudden, a cute little story about a boy thinking he has missed the rapture isn't so cute anymore. If millions of others hold to the same beliefs, it could lead to a a self-fulfilling pre-mature apocalypse....at least that's how the other side sees it. The question I am asking is this: If a Biblically-based belief system has potentially dangerous consequences for humanity, should it be abandoned (in preference to other interpretational approaches to Scripture) or reformed? How about when high profile evangelicals make statements to the media that we wish would have never been said. Do we get angry at the minister for making us look like bufoons, or do we start questioning the theological underpinnings that produced the statement? There are many in my generation choosing the latter. As a non-official representative of evangelicals approaching 30, I would like to ask those older and more mature in the faith to pray for us younger evangelicals. Pray that God will guide us as we look to the Scriptures and formulate new wineskins for the 21st century. Trust me. We're going to need all the prayer we can get.

Random thoughts

Here are a few thoughts I've been working on this week.

1. Those who separate the world into us verse them and see everyone else as void of light and reason are destined to embrace a value system where might becomes right; however, those who underestimate the sinfulness of man are destined to surrender too much power to the hands of too few people.

2. In order to love your enemies, you must first believe in their humanity.

3. The Apostle Paul says to "Speak evil of no one." I wonder how that applies to me in the ministry?

4. Paul did not attack the institution of slavery in his day, but he did teach that all people, whether male or female, Jew or barbarian, slave or free, were potential bearers of the Christ image through faith. It was this idea, which is supposed to be lived out in the life of the church , that eventually led to the abolition of slavery.

5. Isn't corn good?

The absent revolutionary

No more Mr. nice blogger. It's time to start asking some tough questions. For most of my life, I have believed that America is a nation founded by Christian men on Christian principles. If you look at our constitution, I would agree that the principles of separation of powers as well as the emphasis on personal freedoms are thoroughly consistent with a Christian worldview (even though many of our founders were, in fact deists at best or secular humanists at worst...but I digress)

I love the 4th of July. For purely sacrilegous reasons, it is probably my favorite holiday because it is simply the most fun. I love the fireworks, the bratwursts, and, most importantly, the pool party at my aunt Ruth's house every year that allows me to catch up with my dad's side of the family. For one day out of the year, I remember the sacrifice of those who fought for the freedom that I now enjoy and I feel very proud to be an American.

Here is my problem. I look for examples in the New Testament of Christians plotting revolutions to overthrow the Roman government, which was far more oppressive than the British government that our forefathers overthrew, and I find absolutely nothing. Zilch. Nada. Not even a hint.

Think about it for a moment. Nero was one of the worst dictators in human history. At the Ripley's wax museum in Dallas, he is (or at least was when I was there)put right alongside Hitler as one of the most evil men that ever lived and yet, all we get from Peter is "Honor all people. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honor the king."

If you look to find a revolutionary in Paul, much less Jesus, your search will come up dreadfully short. If you look to Paul for answers to how a Christian should relate to governing authorities, about all you are going to get is instruction to pay taxes, obey the laws of the land, and to pray for your leaders (Romans 13:1-7, I Timothy 2:1-3). In fact, it was Paul that told the Christian slaves of his day to obey their masters, and encouraged other Christians to aspire to lead a quiet life and to mind their own business (Colossians 3:22 and I Thessalonians 4:11). Not exactly Boston Tea Party material! I imagine if I were a patriot in the 18th century looking to overthrow the British government because of illegal search and seizures and taxation without representation, I think Peter and Paul would be the last people I would look to for inspiration.

And yet, in all of this, how many American Christians do you know that question the idea that our forefathers were acting out the will of God when they fought against the British? How many American Christians question the idea that God initiated the Revolutionary War?

Interesting question indeed. The flip side of the issue is that since the New Testament teaches that government is a God-ordained institution, it logically follows that it is not wrong for a Christian to serve as a policeman, congressman, military officer, or as a president of a country.

Hindsight can be a strange creature. I don't know too many people, including me, that would argue that the U.S.A should rejoin the British Commonwealth. Somehow I don't think the British want that either. Having said that, I think the question is still relevant...could it have happened another way or perhaps at another time?

Is masturbation a sin?

Question: Is masturbation a sin?

Answer: This is a question that has puzzled Christians for centuries. The short answer is that nowhere in the Bible is masturbation referred to as a sin. In fact, the word is not even in the Bible. Having said that, I feel that excessive masturbation coupled with pornographic fantasies is an addiction that needs to be broken. Here is an excellent article that deals with every Scripture related to this issue.

The article is a bit long, but very thorough. I don't agree with everything the author says on his website, however, I feel that the author does a good job answering tough questions from a Biblical perspective. Since the author has researched this more thoroughly than I have, I'll defer to him on this matter.

Shivering for Jesus

When Rhiannon and I used to live in Senegal, distributing gospel literature was one of the primary aspects of our ministry. Every week, we would go to the University and distribute gospel tracts, cassettes, and New Testaments. Today I felt like I was back on the mission field again. A friend of ours from church called us the other day and invited us to distribute the Jesus Video at a local mosque.

In honor of Good Friday, and because I thought it would be a productive way to spend an afternoon (after all, I am still a missionary/evangelist), I decided to join the fun by going to the local mosque and handing out the Jesus Video to the people as they left the parking lot.

First of all, let me say that it was cold. I can not remember a time in April where it has been this cold. The thought kept reocurring to me that this is the least I can do considering the amount of suffering that Jesus went through on my behalf.

After a few minutes, the mosque leaders came up and talked to us and asked why we didn't just go in and talk to them and have a dialogue. Since I wasn't the leader, I pretty much played dumb. Our leader was a fiesty Egyptian woman who converted to Christianity in Egypt, but then basicallyl had to flee for her life before escaping to the U.S. I was awestruck at the woman's resilience. First of all, we had the right to be there. We were not trespassing on their property. We were on the sidewalk and we had permission from the police. For a while, the mosque leaders stood out in the parking lot telling the people not to take our literature and videos. All the while we stayed...shivering.

The funny thing is that the mosque leaders eventually left and we were able to distribute the rest of our videos. The people were more eager to take what we had than they were to listen to those who urged them not to take it. My Egyptian Christian friend said that we gained their respect when we stood our ground, especially out there in the cold. Placing myself in her shoes, I could tell that for her, the gospel was a form of liberation for her. And by liberation, I mean it in the same sense that many feminists use it, liberation from male oppression. I could sense the same thing from a few of the women who took the videos from her.

One of the things I thought to myself was: "I wonder if it would be more effective if we just had a dialogue with these leaders?" I actually thought for a moment about what we looked like out there and wondered if we were making things worse by evangelizing in such a bold way. And then I remembered the simple fact that because of what we were doing, hundreds of Muslims would see and hear an authentic presentation of the gospel for the first time. I remembered that, although we may have looked crazy and irrational out there in the cold trying to proselytize a people of another faith, it is a genuine fruit of the gospel that we live in a society that allows the freedom that we have to propogate our faith. And, yes, it works both ways. Muslims are evangelizing here in the U.S. with much vigor and tenacity and, as long as I am alive, I will defend their right to do so. I remembered that those living in Muslim countries around the world do not have the freedom to make an authentic choice about their religion without fear of death or imprisonment.

I realize that there is a time for dialogue. I strongly believe that in the age that we are living in, Christian leaders and Muslims leaders need to build bridges of understanding and mutual respect. Much of my speech in the upcoming film "Hoy Wars" is about how we in America and the Western world need to remove the speck from our own eyes so that we can understand how millions of Muslims around the world view us. I believe this is especially true when it comes to political realities that are not quite as black and white as we would like to believe. Having said that, I believe there is a time to dialogue and a time to preach. I'm glad that I can boldy say with the Apostle Paul, "I am not ashamed of the gospel of Jesus Christ, for it is the power of God to salvation to all who believe."

For our Egyptian friend today, the gospel meant freedom and liberation. Let us pray that we as a nation will never lose our liberty to shiver for Jesus.

The role of the Church in society

I've been thinking a lot lately about the responsiblity of the Church to be salt and light in the earth. I immediately think of great leaders such as William Wilberforce and Martin Luther King whose faith made a positive impact on society. Within Christianity, there are numerous views on how the Church relates to the State. Some believe that the Church is not doing its job unless it excercises worldwide political influence. The idea is that Christ is Lord over all of creation, therefore, the Church must redeem the culture and take dominion over the earth as part of the original mandate given to Adam. Others say that given the fact that Jesus refused political power when the people tried to make Him king and given His words, "My Kingdom is not of this world", Jesus wasn't interested in building an earthly kingdom.

Here is an interesting verse of Scripture I have been pondering for a while. I think it is very relevant to the question of the role of the Church in society.

The Apostle Paul says to the Corinthian Church,

"For what have I to do with judging those also who are outside? Do you not judge those who are inside? For those who are outside God judges."

What do you think this verse tells us about the role of the Church in society? Note to self: this is a huge topic!

I'd love to hear your thoughts.

Is forgiveness of sins required?

Below is an interesting article by Pastor Tim O Brien.

I've posted it because it raises an interesting question: Does God require that a person's sins be forgiven before they can experience His presence? According to Pastor Tim, the answer is no. According to Pastor Tim, much of evangelism is centered around getting a person to recognize their sinfulness. If you have ever heard of Ray Comfort or Kirk Cameron or seen the television show "Way of the Master", you will know what I am talking about. Cameron and Comfort believe that the use of the law (specificallly as revealed in the 10 Commandments and the Sermon on the Mount) for the purpose of showing a sinner their sinfulness is indispensable to salvation. Cameron and Comfort would also question someone's conversion experience if they have not been "awakened by the law." While I agree that Comfort and Cameron have discovered a valid Biblical principle, I have to ask: Is it true that the use of the law is the only valid form of evangelism? Pastor O Brien says no. I would like to know what my readers think.


It is often said something like, “You have to get forgiveness of sins before you can experience God.” The idea is that someone has to recognize their sinfulness and ask God’s forgiveness before they can expect anything from Him. This, however, was not the attitude of Jesus.

Jesus went about graciously healing the blind, freeing the vexed, granting the crippled to walk, and lifting up with gracious words those of ill reputation. He did not demand them to recognize their sins or to cry out for forgiveness in order to receive His favor. He would often say something like, “What do you want me to do for you?”

Jesus rebelled against the religious system of His day. That system not only categorized actions as clean or unclean, but it categorized people as clean or unclean. The “unclean” could not expect any favors from God.

Ironically, the evangelical church often does the same thing today. We categorize people as saved or unsaved. Now, I understand that there is a theological correctness to whether someone has received a saving knowledge of Jesus or not, but this was never supposed to exclude someone from experiencing God’s favor.

When God’s presence is clearly abiding with us, then everyone in the room can experience God, saved and unsaved. God will heal. God will touch. God will speak. God will grant favor to anyone.

If we demand that people say a sinner’s prayer before they get God’s attention, we are not following the pattern of Jesus. Once they are touched, then they can make their decision, just like the lepers that Jesus healed.

So much of the time Christian religion is focused on getting people to recognize their sinfulness. Although sinfulness is certainly an issue, it is often not something that stirs the heart of the non-believer. They either do not think they are sinful or, even if they do, they don’t believe it will do any good to feel bad about it.

The fact is that God can open up a heart that doesn’t even recognize it’s own sinfulness. God can reveal His presence to them or grant their request. God loves to do great things for people, to display His goodness.

All God needs is a people who are inviting Him into their midst. Jesus said, “My house must be a house of prayer for all,” not a house of robbers. When we make God’s house a house of prayer, then the robbery stops. People stop being robbed of their chance to experience God.

When we steward the presence of God, we give everyone a chance. Everyone gets to touch Him. But to steward the presence of God, it takes our very lives. Who is willing to give their life to host the presence of God so everyone can get a chance?



[People are gathering in the dozens at Rock of Ages Mondays at 7pm to deliberately call on God for a visitation. We are experiencing Him in greater and greater measure. If your heart is for revival and a move of God, come help us call on Him. Reference: Luke 17:12]



NOTE: We have Jesus Camp T-shirts for $8 XL and $9 2XL.



by Pastor Tim O’Brien

Rock of Ages Ministries

Author may be reached at tnt5@jobe.net

For Daily Guide 6 Apr 07 edition

Scattered thoughts

For those of you who would like a snap-shot into the mind of Aaron Taylor, here are a few thoughts I have been working on lately. Feel free to comment on any or all of them.

1. Anthony is vindicated! Last week Rocky, the bully who taunted Anthony for being a girl and not standing up for himself, was blind sighted when the tribe voted him off. The main reason was that he was overly critical and difficult to get along with.

2. When I was a kid, I used to want to act in movies. I've discovered that making films is actually very boring. Last week, during the filming for Holy Wars, a feature length documentary in which I am one of two main characters, the director was filming me doing my daily routine (like walking the neighborhood) and we had to do several takes. It was very tedious. I told him I thought that making movies was actually pretty boring. He said that most of the time, the actors sit around for hours in their trailers waiting for the directors to call on them. I saw Kevin Spacey on the Today Show today and he said the same thing, that making movies is boring. I think that fantasy often becomes a bore when it meets with reality.

3. Flushed Away is one of the funniest cartoons of the year. Loved the singing slugs.

4. Blood Diamond was excellent, though not free from controversy. Perhaps the most significant theme of the movie was not the blood diamond issue (which is still an issue, but not to the degree that it was 8 years ago), but the use of child soldiers in guerilla conflict. I think everyone should be aware of this issue.

5. The Apostle Paul says to the Corinthian Church,

"For what have I to do with judging those also who are outside? Do you not judge those who are inside? For those who are outside God judges."

What do you think this verse tells us about the role of the Church in society? Note to self: this is a huge topic!

I'd love to hear your thoughts.