Dr. Peter Boghossian is a professor at Portland State University.  He is gaining popularity with the freethinker and atheist movement across the United States.  Dr. Boghossian has been delivering revivalist style lectures that call for people to "jettison their faith".  Peter's main thesis is that "faith based belief processes are unreliable."  He will even go as far to say that faith is a delusion.  His quest for truth is only found in reason.  Peter would not call himself an atheist but rather a skeptic.

Peter Claims he is willing to change his views if sufficient evidence is presented.  He also calls for all of his listeners to be willing to change their position of belief if sufficient evidence is presented.  This is a great point that Peter makes.  Critical thinking is something that Peter encourages and teaches as part of his role at the university. 

One subject that seems to come up in his talks and his interview is the idea of, "you wouldn't fly on a faith based airplane, so why would you construct social structures and morals that stem from a faith based process".  Which, I would not fly on a faith based airplane myself, but everytime I get on a plane I really hope it flys.   However this is where Dr. Boghossian and I begin to differ in perspectives.  We do not get to choose whether or not we are born.  In essence we are on the airplane whether we like it or not.  We are left to conclude with limited perspective of where, how, when and why the airplane will go.    I do not wish to throw unconstructive criticism around, so when I disagree with Peter I want to make sure that it is understood that Peter is an incredibly smart person, who engages issues with sincerity. 

I believe it is important to define the term faith in terms of this discussion and the since in which Dr. Boghossian uses it.  When Dr. Boghossian is referring to faith he is criticizing blind belief in something.  We must all acknowledge that if we believe in something there must be the question of “why” do we believe our claim.  This is the essence of what Dr. Boghossian getting at.  If you make a claim about something (faith) then you better be able to back it up.  I agree.  If we claim to know something we should be able to at least be willing to engage in conversation about why we make such statements.

Hope might be a better term for us to understand this premise by for this particular discussion.  When we have “hope” in something it means we want it to be true based on the evidence that is provided.  Take the very essence of God for example.  No one can prove or disprove God.  However there is a lot of evidence, I think, that points to God of the Bible who interacts with his creation.  Therefore I hope that He is who he says he is.  Most evangelicals would use the word “faith” as that definition, but Peter would rather call that hope, because we cannot definitely prove the existence of God and his definition of faith is to claim something as empirically true.

The thesis that faith is an unreliable process is one that has to be embraced by all.  However it must also be understood that though faith as defined in this post is a faulty process that  “hope” is a logical conclusion.  Let's take hope out of the religious context for a moment.  If you claim reason as the sole process to arrive to truth you must realize that reason will break down at some point.  Things that are true will contradict themselves in science and math.  Therefore one has to have hope to believe in whatever it is they choose to believe, and to take it one step further if you are a skeptic, by the process of reason you should be skeptical of yourself.

This discussion is an important one to have.  I am working with young people and adults all the time that make claims about Jesus and God that are simply not true, as in they are not in scripture or found anywhere else.  For Christians it is important for us to know why we believe what we believe. 

Christianity is not something that I blindly entered into, nor just accepted because somebody told me I should.   One of the statements that Peter made in an online discussion I had with him is that one of his biggest reasons for not believing is the lack of evidence that “professing Christians” had for what they believed. 

1 Peter 3:15, tells us to be ready to give testimony for the hope that we have, and we are to respond in love.  I actually really appreciated Dr. Boghossian critique of faith.  I think it has reaffirmed the truth that is found in scripture and it has made it even more clear to me how accurate and trustworthy God’s word is.   Therefore my conclusion is based on the Hope that Jesus offers at the Cross.  I can believe the miraculous events because the accuracy of the evidence that is found in scripture, not because I can prove that they happened.   I challenge you think about why you believe.   Here are some questions for you to begin with:

1.     Where did we come from?

2.     How did everything around me come to be?

3.     What is the purpose of life?

4.     What happens to me when I die?

5.     Who or what set the standards  IE..  morals, right and wrong, what is love, knowledge/reason, etc.....

One last exercise for you to engage in that involves reason.  Take any object and try to reason your way back to its existence, working through every step that would be involved for it to exist and see where it leaves you. 

 

Example.  A wood chair- somebody had to cut piece of wood and form it together, the wood had to come from a tree, the tree had to come from the earth, the earth had to produce the right amount of nutrients for the tree to grow, where did all the soil (land come from)?  At that point I have to make a “hope” claim.  Try it with anything.

 

I would love to hear your thoughts about hope, faith, and anything else that was involved in this post.  Getting the process right is important but I believe the conclusion is eternal.

In our society there is a lot of interest in the end times.  The end times are something that have been discussed throughout history and just about every generation believes that they are the last.  This week our class discussed a book by Jared Diamond, called "Collapse: How Societies Choose To Fail or Succeed."  The premise of the book is founded upon several different civilizations that have risen to power and then declined or in some cases completely collapsed. 

Diamond uses a five point model to run these civilizations through to show different factors of collapse.  The five categories are:

1.  Environmental Damage
2. Climate Change
3. Hostile Neighbors
4. Friendly Trade partners
5. Societies response to the problems

Diamond does state that these areas of interest in collapse are not the only factors that can attribute to collapse, but these are 5 possible factors that seem to be a starting point for a framework to begin conversations about collapse (10).

One of the sections that really stood out to me was the section on the Mayan civilization.  I have been to see several of the ruins in Mexico and Latin America where this once great civilization thrived yet today there is nothing more than several archeology sites that the countries use for tourist destinations.  How could this be?  Using the framework that Diamond provides he is able to shed some light on the rise and fall of the Mayans.  Though they were sophisticated in their buildings and temples they were plagued by some simple realities. All of the factors that Diamond uses for his framework seem to be a factor in the decline of the Mayan civilization.  The biggest one that all societies face is the fifth category that Diamond lays out.

In 2012 the world is uncertain, some believe the world is coming to end and there are TV shows about preparing to live after the collapse.  There seems to be many factors that our current world is facing and the realization that no matter how secure we may feel the end could come. 

The application that I found myself realizing is that my security is not in this world.  I do believe that creation account in the Bible is one that needs to be realized and embraced because God gave it to us in Genesis 1:28.  It means we are stewards of the earth not savages who dominate the earth and abuse what God has given to us.  Being a steward is one part of the equation though.  We are to steward, to care for what we have been given, until Christ returns, which for Christians is the hope and good news that we live out in today's world. 

The earth will, one day, be no more, at least in the current form that we currently understand it.  Our hope then is not ultimately in prepping physically for the end, but preparing ourselves as the Bride of Christ.  See Matthew 24:14 about the end times.

The conclusion that I drew from Diamond is, the world is going to change, there are problems that we have inherited from previous generations and we are creating our own set of issues, but the response in which we address the issues can be the factor in which decides our position in standings of this world and ultimately if our society will rise or fall.  Our source of truth will also determine how we engage the issues that we are currently facing. 

1. What is the craziest end times belief or action you know of?

2. What does it look like to address current issues of outlined by Diamond with a Christian worldview?

This week I found myself engaging in a topic that is very interesting to me.  As I read my devotions on my Ipad and made comments and notes, and highlights all electronically, I read a book called, "The 12 Books that changed the world", by Mylven Braggs.  One of the books he highlights is the Authorized King James Bible of 1611. Braggs writes that the Gideon society is distributing "63 million scriptures world wide", "more than one million copies of the Word of God are placed every seven days" 265.   The King James Bible has become the standard Bible used across the earth and is in the homes of millions of people.  This seems like a pretty boring read so far.  We all know about the King James Bible right? 

The King James bible was authorized in 1611.  Braggs writes, "It was a gift of the monarch. It is the property of the King. It has royal authority going before it. It declares that God and King James are as one and that the authority of the king and queens of this country is sanctified by God Almighty Himself through this Word" 266.  These are some strong conclusions that are made about the King and the level in which he viewed his earthly power.  This idea of whose kingdom we are building is something I believe that we need to look at in our present day. 

So what difference does this version of the Bible really make.  I am not going to bash the King James Bible, but I am also not going to submit to the idea that it is THE only Bible that represents God's Holy word.  The King James bible was a translation that was done to honor the king, not the King of Kings. Tyndale who's writing were heavily drawn upon for the completion of the 1611 authorized version of the King James, was executed because of his work translating the original manuscripts of Hebrew and Greek into English for the common person to read.  ANY time we use the Bible for our own personal gain to establish our Kingdom on earth, it is a mi-representation of the God we serve, and leads to conclusions that invites cancerous actions from within the structures we sometimes call church.

This leads me to main emphasis for the church today.  We to often seek the praise of men, to give honor to the things of this world, and not to bring Glory to our God.  When you read the Bible, whether KJV, NIV, NASB, ESV, etc..... they should all lead us to some basic conclusions that most people are not going to walk, Matthew 7:13.    Those conclusion are, God is God, three-in-one, Father, Son, Holy Spirit, working in perfect unity, Jesus was sent from the Father as a perfect substitute, died on the cross to satisfy the wrath of God, ushered in a new covenant through his blood, and we are saved by Grace through faith.  Thus all authority has been given to Christ and we are to go and make disciples of all people groups, baptizing, and teaching to obey everything he has commanded.

I know there are people in our churches that still claim and fight for the use of King James Bible as the one and only true representation of God's word.  There's actually a church very close to us, that make those claims.  I suggest we all try to focus our efforts and attention to what God's word tells us rather than which translation is most accurate.  I have my preferences and opinions on that subject but they are not worth anything, my struggle should be for the glory of God to be known, and time spent walking in his ways, not debating with other brothers and sisters. So I leave you with this.

^{Ephesians 4:1-6 NIV}

¹ As a prisoner for the Lord, then, I urge you to live a life worthy of the calling you have received. ² Be completely humble and gentle; be patient, bearing with one another in love. ³ Make every effort to keep the unity of the Spirit through the bond of peace. ⁴ There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called to one hope when you were called; ⁵ one Lord, one faith, one baptism; ⁶ one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all.

 

I would love to hear what version of the Bible you prefer most?

 

As I am writing this post we just experienced the warmest March on record in Illinois.  We saw multiple eighty-degree days.  The issue of global warming is one that most of us are familiar with.  The media seems to have multiple views of what global warming is and how severe the conditions are.  This week for my studies we engaged this issue in a book called, "Global warming: A very short introduction" by Mark Maslin.  The book walks the reader through some basics of the issues that surround Global warming. 

One of the interesting twists to this book is the fact that Maslin brings up an issue that I have not considered to be tied together.  Maslin suggests that Global warming and poverty are connected.  "Global warming provides us with a unique opportunity to restructure global economics and at the same time provide a mechanism to alleviate poverty around the world.  Current economic development is always accompanied by a massive expansion in a country's energy requirement (location 382)".  Whether you agree or disagree with the idea of Global warming, there is no doubt that the rising world or the 2nd and 3rd worlds are making strives to create better living conditions for themselves.  When this process happens the energy needs are elevated as Maslin points out. 

Maslin suggests that taking wise steps in energy production in these developmental countries is important for future.  The critique that I would have is that though Maslin suggests these connections between poverty and global warming there is not much more than a mention of the two in his book.  The reader is left to try and figure out the connections from the predominately content driven writing that is found in the book. 

One of the most important parts of the book that I found was in chapter eight.  This is where some suggestions for solutions are presented.  Maslin presents some ideas of renewable, alternative and clean energy that are currently present but need refinement.  Some of his suggestions are bio-fuels, solar and wind energy and nuclear.

As a Christ follower reading about Global warming I try to have an open mind while reading the information.  However, some of the views that the Global warming theory is based on come into conflict with my view of the Creation account found in scripture.  This being said, I do think that as a Christian we are to be good stewards of what God has entrusted us in.  Therefore the suggestions of alternative fuels, and solutions that are presented are something that I believe should be developed.  The other fact is, many of these alternative fuels source can be very beneficial for poverty alleviation and being the good news to people and communities. 

One example of this that I have applied is actually through my dissertation project with Feed the Crave.  About a year ago, Feed the Crave started looking at what it would take to address two of the worlds biggest issues in third world countries, clean food and water.  We also wanted to address these issues where there were people who had not yet heard the Gospel.  This meant that we would be working in predominately remote conditions.  Using small windmills made from treadmill motors and small solar panels we have found ways to purify water without any power from the grid, using salt and ionizing the water.  The food issue, we found that most of the places we were working in they were able to grow their own rice.  However, Hulling the rice was long and exhaustive and very unproductive.  Using common tools found in these places with alternative wind and solar sources we were able to power these mills and increase rice production for use by 10x. We are still experimenting and testing different ways to make these solutions better.

Though I may not agree with all of the details that encompass the debate over global warming, many of the solutions that have come about because of the issues that the debate has brought up can be used as tools to alleviate poverty while opening doors to places where the message of Christ has not yet been preached. 

 

 

Isolation can be a funny thing.  There are times when involuntary isolation can be humbling, frustrating and down right awful. Things like losing a job expectantly, natural disasters, or moral failures can lead to this type of involuntary type of isolation. The other side of isolation are the times when we voluntarily step out of a role or create a space for reflection, study, or a time of refocusing.  Going back to school, or deciding to be your own boss through self employment, or merely taking time to be away from your natural surrounding for a period of time can all be examples of this voluntary isolation. 

Most of us will experience one of these two types of isolation times in our lives.  I was able to read a book by Shelley Trebesch entitled, "Isolation; A place of Transformation in the life of a Leader".  The main idea of the book is, there are times we will all go through some sort of isolation.  The emphasis is not on just the idea of going through the isolation, but coming out the other side of the isolation, being transformed and emerging with new perspectives, and clearer vision.  This book is centered around people in ministry but I believe could be adapted to anyone going through isolation that are outside of ministry.

The book revolves around a main concept that is described through a visual chart that lays out four processes in isolation.  These processes of Isolation are as follows;

1. Stripping - Usually a breaking process that prepares a person to want to go deep with God

2. Wrestling with God - Turns the experience from a why to a what and creates a hunger for God.

3. Increased Intimacy with God - Forms a hunger for a deepen relationship with god which will affect the future ministry since ministry flows out of being

4. Looking forward to the future- Frees up the person to know more of God.  Experience more more of God, and the expectantly look to God's continued presence in life and ministry. (pg 44)

After reflecting back through the book and discussing the book with others in my cohort, it was interesting that most of us were at similar stages within the process of isolation.  Speaking for myself, I stepped voluntarily into isolation when God called me into ministry, and my Dmin.  I am in the second step of the process as I reflect on my own life.  As I "wrestle with God" it is not over the things that I used to be concerned about, but rather is consumed with what God wants for me and the community in which he has placed me.  I see that he is trying form me and mold me into a tool to be used for his Kingdom.  While this is sometimes rather frustrating, it is also amazing to see how God has shown himself and affirmed that this is exactly where I need to be. 

There are two things that I walked away with from this book in my own life.  One is it doesn't really matter how old you are there are going to be times of isolation.  The second is it is important to be able to interpret the times of isolation so that we can be transformed by that time.  Isolation is not necessarily a bad thing, even if it is involuntary because as we are transformed through these periods we can emerge looking forward to the future with a passion and clarity.

 

I would love to hear a time when you have gone through a period of isolation and what the results were.  How did you handle it?  How were you shaped through it. 

New Media 1740-1915

 

This week in my doctoral work at George Fox University we read a book entitled New Media 1740-1915 by by Lisa Gitelman & Geoffrey B. Pingree.  The book brought to light different aspects of media that have a part of the development of culture through 10 essays.  Most of us would consider this type of media old and out dated but understanding this media in its context and cultural climate when it was invented can shed light on all forms of media and technology that exist.  Gitelman and Pingree point out in the introduction that all media will face a period where it is evaluated and put through scrutiny to see if it will actually be adaptable to the culture that it is being introduced to.  The big issue is how or will new media be negotiated and implemented into the society.  Just because the media is insightful and often times very helpful, it can be interpreted or cast off because of the interpretation the culture puts on it.

One essay that I really enjoyed was one on the telephone being introduced into the Amish and Mennonite communities. The technology that was present was not evil or ever intended to be a disruption to life, however the interpretation from these communities was exactly that.  They felt that it infringed on the heart of there communities.  The possibilities that the phone could make in these communities were enormous; it opened up possibilities outside of their community and put communication to the outside world at their fingertips.

As I was reflecting on these essay’s there were some forms of media that I thought about that also have been interpreted into our culture that were not always viewed the way they are now.  One of those is Facebook.  Only a few years ago everyone had a ‘My Space’ account and only a few people had Facebook.  Now that is very different.  As the new media of Facebook continued to expand and become user friendly, the days of ‘My Space’ quickly drew dim.  In our culture today you can link just about every online account to your Facebook page and communicate in different forms of media to thousands of people all at once.  You can also receive that amount of media and data from one social platform.

Another form of media that is popular in our world is Wikipedia.  Wikipedia has grown into one of the most viewed sites on the web.  The content is user driven and in many cases able to give credible information on a subject.  However you don’t know if it is a 13 year old girl that has an interest in the subject or a scholar with a PH.D unless you go beyond the information on the site.  So in one sense it opens up the possibility of much more information, however it can also lead to deceptive or untrue pretenses if the information is not entirely true.

It is pretty amazing to think about, as new media is unveiled the world becomes more interconnected and in a sense, just like the Amish feared, the world becomes a lot bigger to the possibilities that exist.    

In my context in a church setting, I believe it is important to negotiate the waters of new media.  The amount of new forms of media is ever increasing and more complex to navigate in relation to productivity and effectiveness.  I believe that it is important in a culture where “everything is good and ok” to still be willing to investigate and research how these new forms of media are going to effect us before we fully embrace them.  We may not be able to fully understand how Facebook is going to change culture, but it is important to understand how Facebook might be a tool to be used in ministry rather than a distraction.  As we move forward in our fast pace world lets remember that God has entrusted us as leaders and to be aware of what forms of media we are using to partner with the Kingdom of God and use them well.

 

What are your thoughts on forms of media and technology?  I would love to hear of any that you know of that have been accepted prematurely and what the results of that was?  Who wants to be the first to admit they had a commodore 64?

 

 

This week I had the chance to engage in a very refreshing book by Daniel Forrester, titled "Consider: harnessing the Power of Reflective Thinking in your Organizations".  Forrester's book is a result of study and observation that took place in his own life.  He builds upon his own work with stories and studies from recent high profile situations and people that have either used reflective thinking or have completely ignored thinking all together.  His book is one that made  me step back and reconsider some of my own habits and thought process that I carry out in my daily life.  After reading his work I not only felt refreshed but I was able to take away some practical steps in which to slow down a bit and think intentionally about situations and problems.

One of Forrester's main points is that many crisis or unfavorable situations could be avoided if people would have just literately slowed down and thought through the big picture.  One of the situations that he uses to illustrate this is the BP oil spill of 2010.  As we all probably know, BP had a pipeline rupture that spilled oil into the gulf of Mexico for 85 days.  The beginning to the whole situation was when a rubber o-ring was drilled into by an operator on one of BP Oil Rigs.  When the operator reported that there were chunks of rubber coming up on deck from the drill, the supervisor dismissed it as not a big deal.  Here is a perfect example of pausing for a moment to think.  Such a simple concept of thinking could have prevented a catastrophe.  Merely realizing rubber from a drilling rig is not normal could have prevented a long and costly mess.

Forrester continues his thoughts by illustrating how people throughout history such as Abraham Lincoln, Colin Powell and General Petreaus have used Reflective thinking in efforts to make wise decisions that made the right impact.  No matter our personal feelings on any of those individuals, we must acknowledge that they have, or were entrusted to make high ranking decisions for a reason.  At some level they had proved themselves to be able to process, formulate, and communicate information in a way that was well thought out and clear.

The application I see from this book in a ministry context is that in churches there are typically two types of decision making styles.  The first is a reactionary decision style.  These types of decisions are the ones that no thought or very little thought is given and a response is give prematurely.  Sometimes the answer or solution works but many times it does not.  These types of decisions are usually a response to "putting out fires" in the ministry so that peace and order can be kept. The only thing is these types of decisions can have toxic implications for a long time after a decision is made.

The other type of decision-making style that I have observed in ministry context are those that are deemed, "large and complicated".  Most of the time that would be true.  Examples are vision or mission statements, buildings, and corporate worship issues.  The result that often happens is that these decisions are drug out and considered for so long many times the people making the decision change, the ministry changes, or simply life takes place.  Then all the time put into thinking about issues is wasted when the set of data or circumstance no longer match the issue to be considered.

Neither one of these types of decision-making styles are beneficial for the Kingdom of God.  I think what Forrester points out to us in his book.  We need time to stop and think.  "The best decisions, insights, ideas and outcomes result when we take SUFFICEINT time to think and reflect."(4)  The result of our think time and reflection should be action that addresses the issue or bring light to an area that is being worked on. 

I have been encouraged by Daniel's writing and have made a conscious effort to build in think and reflection time into my daily schedule already.  It has been amazing the benefits and efficiency that I have already seen.  I encourage you to follow the old saying of "stop and smell the roses" and build some intentional think time into your day so that your actions will carry more thought and efficiency. 

Last week for my studies I read a great book called, "A Brief Guide to Ideas", by William Raeper and Linda Edwards.  This book is everything except brief in the scope of the content that it covers but does break down some incredibly large subjects to a size that is able to be comprehended.  The authors take on subjects from Knowledge and reason to Christology.  It addresses several philosophical hot topics such at modernity, post-modernity and moral relativism.  Overall this was one of the best primers for a christian believer to begin to engage in a broad view of the christian faith and the world in which Christianity has played out.

One of the sections that caught my attention and I found myself engaging in was that of the early philosophers who took on the topic of "why do we exist".  Existentialism is something that everyone has to deal with at some point, and is something that is asked by many people I talk to.  The writings by Soren Kierkegaard were some of the most influential for me in this reading.  Soren was a man of faith and believed that God was the purpose of our lives.  That we were called to worship him and to live out our faith here on this earth in practical ways.  The Danish church structure of his day was very contrary to this idea.  Much of Soren's life was spent writing, thinking, and acting out a faith that challenged the status quot.  The theme for Kierkegaard's message was Faith (105).  He believed that faith in Christ was something that should radically change a person way of living.

The practical side of this is, in today's church there is are many status quot Christians that are taking up room in our church buildings.  Their lives look no different from unbelievers and there is no desire to change.  Most philosophers are trying to think about what it might look like.  For Kierkegaard, it was not that we need more head knowledge but we need to engage our head knowledge with our hands and feet. 

I see this as something very important for the church as we move forward.  We need to continue to grow in our understanding of God (head knowledge) and not sacrifice the truths that can only come from careful study and examination, however we must escape the trap of believing we are really living out the Kingdom by only knowing God.  Jesus tells us in John 14:15 that if we love him we will obey his commands.  I am pretty sure that did not just involve learning everything we can about him and meeting different nights of the week to just huddle together and talk more about him.  One of Kierkegaard's famous quotes is,

"The Bible is very easy to understand. But we Christians are a bunch of scheming swindlers. We pretend to be unable to understand it because we know very well that the minute we understand, we are obliged to act accordingly."-Soren Kiergaard, Provocations1850

 

As I close out this post, I encourage you to think about what it looks like to be a child of the King of Kings, to be a citizen of the Kingdom of heaven.  What does it look like to follow Jesus?  Then try to be as honest with yourself as possible, does your life resemble those characteristics, does your church community, or even the people you spend time with? 

Mark Noll has expanded upon his first work, "the Scandal of the Evangelical Mind" by writing a book called, "Jesus Christ and the Life of the Mind".  This is the subject of which I will be discussing this week in my post.  Noll does not hold any punches in his examination of the evangelical mindset.  Noll states that, "my contention in this book is that coming to know Christ proves the most basic possible motive for pursuing the tasks of human learning" (20 of 2092)."  Noll goes on to contend that  recent evangelicals are lacking in this pursuit.  One of the most critical examinations that Noll gives to the evangelical society is the disregard for Christian History and tradition.

When talking about Christian tradition and history to most evangelicals they will question the real need for study of church history.    I often hear things like this, "we are more educated than obedient", "no creeds but Christ" (yet that in its self is a creed), "if we would just live the word then we will learn the word".  I would not necessarily say I disagree with all of these however, I question why we have embraced such a shallow position and limit ourselves in our thinking.  I would contend that because of the lack of depth to our evangelical background we lack the richness that could come if we were open to learning from the Christian community of the last 2000 years and not limit it to the reformation period 100 -200years ago.

The one area that I personally appreciated and was challenged on was the area of the Christian Creeds.  Going through bible college and seminary in reformation movement, creeds were something that were viewed as dangerous and corrosive to a persons Christianity.  After reading more and studying the purpose of creeds, it is rather enlightening and encouraging the depth of those statements.  I think many in my tribe would argue that people made creeds more important that the Bible itself.  This statement can be true in many cases but this is how Noll begins the conversation, "Their challenge, in what might be called the church's first intellectual breathing space, was to summarize the faith in authoritative short statements that could specify what Christianity was, define a curriculum for new converts, provide formulas for use in worship, and build barriers against false teaching (62 of 2092)".  When we begin to realize that the Old and New Testaments were not nicely printed in available forms, we quickly realize the importance that these creeds played in the development of the early church.  There is so much truth and theology that is packed into those short statements. Those statements are something that should be seen as important, however because of the availability to the entire bible,they are not the final declaration of who God is.  Scripture is the final authority.

This book has been one of the best best books I have read concerning the importance of practices and traditions of the early church.  It is not a comprehensive study of tradition and practice but helps those of us who are week in our ecclesiology to begin to understand the vastness of the entire Christian community.  There are some really important things that I believe that we all miss when we only study within the lines of our denomination or christian movement.  I love the fact that in the restoration movement it was a call to go back to living out scripture, to be called "Christians", and to be united by Christ.  It didn't take long for that movement to  divide and branch into several different denominations.  So there are areas that we, as believers, can really benefit from one another if we are willing to position ourselves to learn with one another.

What are some quirky things about your tribe or denomination?

 

What are some things that your denomination or church does well?

 

Good Example: Methodist church uses the quadrilateral to categorize their theological thinking.

This week in my doctorate work at George Fox University we engaged in a very interesting conversation revolving the book by Mark Noll, "The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind".  His thesis of his work is found right after opening the book on page 3.  Noll says, "The scandal of the evangelical mind is that there is not much of an evangelical mind".  He then goes on to share that evangelicals have been very heavy of the practical theology, that is, virtues,  generosity, spread of the message of salvation, and reaching out to the hurting and needy. 

When I begin the journey that Noll set out, I first admit there was a sense of me that had some push backs to his comments.  I mean, are we not called to be the hands and feet of Jesus and the things he says evangelicals are strong at seem to line up pretty well with what Jesus called his followers to do.  As I read on, I realized that because we have been so reactionary to culture that many evangelicals have literally lost their minds.  They do not really know why they do what they do.  "On the one hand there is the enormous growth of the Church, and on the other its almost complete lack of influence" (10).

What Noll is arguing is not to return to merely philosophies and calculated bible knowledge, but to be people who actually know what we believe and why we believe what we do. He is asking the evangelical to engage at a deeper level that mere compulsion.  As we look back through History we see that Christ followers have played a huge role in development of the arts, universities, and innovations that have impacted societies.  To merely wright off the notion of developing the mind and thought of believers is writing off a long standing practice of Christ followers. 

My take away from Noll's writing is that we do need to concern ourselves more with the intellectual side of our belief.  I meet with believers all the time that have no clue what they actually believe.  They have a spiritual encounter and they have been told its Christianity so they claim that as their belief, without really knowing what it means to be a Christ follower.

Noll presents very strong arguments for why we should be involved in the intellectual realm of our faith, and I would agree with him.  However, I do not think you cannot discount the activism and spiritual nature of our belief in God.  It seems to me that in the Christian culture we tend to swing like a pendulum in what we center as identity.  For periods of time we are heavy on intellectual and then we are consumed by that and people push back and we swing to activism or social action (where we are now) and we loose our intellectual integrity. 

One of the biggest parts of my Doctorate work is continually emphasized as being a "Reflective Practitioner".  This means that we engage in the intellectual realm and are striving to Understand on a deeper level that leads us to engage the needs at a deeper level than just running out and doing a lot of things in Jesus Name without really pointing people to Jesus.  I want to encourage all of us to pray, think and then act.  Engage both areas of intellect and activism with a deeper response.

I would love to hear your stories of how truth and critical thinking has led you to a deeper response to issues.