Sunday, December 27, 2009

Security Questions, Strange Answers

As I read this article on responses to the recent attempted terror attack on the flight to Detroit, I find myself bothered by a few matters.

One, this attacker had been turned away from Britain, reported to our embassy in Nigeria, and highlighted as a threat for nearly 2 years before this. So, we had warning about the person that was credible, but no action was taken.

Two, he had the same explosive on his body that the "shoe bomber," Richard Reid, used. That means either we have not found a way of finding such explosives when on the body short of a vigorous body search, or our system failed in Nigeria and Amsterdam, where he went through security.

Three, while it was alert passengers who subdued the would-be bomber (same as what happened with the shoe bomber), our proposed solution is to make all passengers remain seated with nothing on their laps for the last hour of flying. How would this have made the bomber's flight safer? The bomb was strapped on his body--his carry-on was cleared. I have a flight coming up in a few weeks. If security is tighter while getting on the plane, fine. But unless we are supposed to sit for an hour before landing staring at our flying companions to see if there is anything suspicious they do, I cannot imagine that taking away our pillows or laptops will make us safer. It will only prompt discomfort and the occasional subduing of a passenger with an itchy chest who is mistaken by someone in his row for a threat.

Interestingly enough, since 9/11, passengers have been alert enough to stop the only two attackers who have made it on the plane. Screening may need to be improved, and the questions of more stringent "no fly" lists and the use of profiling to increase security (let's not go through the whole "we have to treat grannies in wheelchairs just like young men from Yemen" argument again)must be addressed. But creating a flying environment that is even more uncomfortable seems like we're trying to tell people that "everything is under control" when it's not, and we all know it.

Finally, I'm bothered by the articles that quote FBI and other law enforcement saying that they are operating on the assumption he was "acting alone." The man was trained in Yemen, on a watch list, and said he was operating in conjunction with Al Qaeda. How in the world can this be "acting alone?" The same was said about the shoe bomber and the Ft. Hood shooter. Then we find out that each has been in touch with Al Qaeda types, have been encouraged or assisted by them, etc. This is not a criminal activity. It is terrorists waging war with individual agents. If we treat this phenomena as if it is crazed individuals alone, and not a larger attempt to attack the nation, we will face another 9/11 and then wonder how it could have happened. Get the military involved; increase the presence of armed sky marshals. And call it "war," not "crime fighting."

Tuesday, December 22, 2009

Ten Stupid Things That Keep Churches from Growing.

This article is from a site I've discovered and like a lot--it's called Stuff Christians Like and offers an insightful look at our subculture. When I say "insightful" I sometimes mean "painful," because much that we have developed looks pretty lame when looked at more closely.

Anyway, you can take a look and see what you think. The article is an introduction to a book by church planter Geoff Surratt, and had some good insights that aren't even from the book. And once there, you can scan some of the other articles that are there, too.

Posted using ShareThis

"Tiger Woods, meet A.C. Green" (from LATimes.com)

I really appreciated this article, by LA Times columnist Chris Erskine, for a number of reasons. First, I was, and am, a Lakers' fan, and remember the "Showtime" years with A.C. Green so clearly. Second, I'm a big A.C. Green fan--his talent was overshadowed by that of his teammates, but he made them better and was really good himself. Finally, he was and continues to be a consistent testimony, to the point that he continues to get a hearing from those who might not be prone to listen to his message from others.

Posted using ShareThis

Thursday, December 10, 2009

A Brief Review: "Just Courage" Just Misses

I decided to listen to the audiobook of Gary Haugen's Just Courage after hearing his message at The Master's College on a podcast--it was very good. I've followed the work of International Justice Mission, and have read many positive reports on their work. [Full disclosure: I actually met Gary when he was still a student at Harvard--his brother was living with me at the time--but we've had no contact since.]

As I listened, I recognized that Haugen is a good storyteller; his illustrations were engaging and certainly helped make his points. He is a thoughtful Christian who has seen an evil in this world that has become his passion, and he has lived out his concern through directing IJM in its work around the world. His thrust in this book was straightforward--just as the calling of Christians down through the ages has been to act with courage in overcoming the cultural evils of the day (African slavery, poverty, etc.), the call today is to seek justice, and specifically in the freeing of those sold into slavery (most often as laborers in factories or into the sex trade)and protection of the oppressed. This calling requires facing fear and danger, but this is why faith-inspired courage is necessary.

His passion and commitment to his cause his clear, and he believes that it's neglect cannot go on. He acknowledges that not everyone is called to this ministry, but presses a strong case that it must be embraced by all.

I applaud this concern and am thankful for the ministry of IJM. I praise God that our church is actively involved in a similar ministry that rescues and helps those enslaved in sex trafficking. A number of our members have traveled to Thailand to participate firsthand, and we will continue to increase our involvement in fighting this evil and bringing hope with the Gospel. It is the right thing for us to do in the name of Jesus.

That is the point at which the book left me with a question. I didn't hear much about the tie between the activity of setting captives free and an equal concern for seeing them set free from spiritual bondage. It may happen, and IJM may in fact be passionate about this, but it didn't come through clearly as I was listening to the book. There were appeals to the gospels concerning how believers were to live, and appropriate applications of that to seeking justice. But I didn't catch a direct link between seeking justice and freedom for slaves and bringing the gospel to recently freed but spiritually enslaved people. This has been the hallmark of Christian endeavors around the world throughout history. While Christians have often had their failures come back to haunt them, the successes of bringing the gospel and cultural change are most significant.

A related concern was a passage where Haugen argued that some are called to medical mission, some to alleviating poverty, some to evangelism and discipleship, and some to seeking justice (there may have been others in that list, but it was that kind of list, with those kind of elements). What bothered me a bit was the separation of evangelism and discipleship from the other activities. I don't think that evangelism is special activity that servants of Jesus can choose to do in the world, or choose instead to do justice ministry or poverty relief. And the servant of Jesus who chooses the others and leaves evangelism out of the picture because it isn't his calling is not acting faithfully in such a context, either. I'm not referring to preaching services, and there is plenty of need for culturally sensitive witnesses who may "go slow" to gain a hearing. But my resistance goes up when I see a dichotomy created where there should not be one.

Finally, I had the thought as I went through the book that if it were a person with a passion to feed the hungry, or end poverty, or provide medical care to those without, it would sound the same. Change the illustrations slightly and any "cause" could use this script. Again, that is not to say it isn't well written or a good cause; these causes, though, are ancillary to the great cause, however, of bringing God glory by leading the nations to worship Him. We bring good because we also bring the gospel. A story about a reunited family that gives no indication that they have even been exposed to the good news about Jesus doesn't inspire me. I'm guessing that they have been, but it's only a guess at this point.

Just Courage presents the argument for Christians to engage in the fight against the evils sin has brought into our world--in this case the injustices of slavery and oppression. It is a valid argument, but one that would resonate more strongly if it were more clearly anchored in a holistic approach that brings the opportunity for spiritual as well as physical freedom.

Friday, December 04, 2009

Reflections on Facing Life-Altering Surgery

Matt Chandler, pastor of The Village in Highland Village, TX, is in surgery right now to remove a mass from his brain's right frontal lobe. The mass was discovered when Matt collapsed and was taken to the hospital on Thanksgiving.

I have a great appreciation for Matt's ministry--not just to the masses like me through his preaching and podcasts, but because he is my brother's family's pastor. My appreciation continues as I read his blog from this morning, "My Heart is full…I am Thankful" on the church's website. Read it and be encouraged. Then pray for Matt, his family, his church, and his ministry.

Posted using ShareThis

Wednesday, December 02, 2009

Tiger's Transgressions

We've been inundated with the fast developing story of Tiger Woods' car accident and the follow up revelations of accusations that have, apparently, been substantiated concerning his unfaithfulness to his wife and family.

In a statement today, Tiger expressed sorrow over his "transgressions"--not a word you hear in popular culture. He says he has discussed them with his family, and that he hopes to do better in the future. He doesn't actually say what the transgressions are, and continues to assert his right to have a measure of privacy, even as someone who has earned his living as a very public figure.

I don't like the way he has been treated--especially that the National Enquirer and US Weekly have been leading the charge in printing accusations of immorality. I'm torn between two competing thoughts: the idea that those who use celebrity to enrich themselves must be ready to have the spotlight also reveal what is embarrassing, and the thought that I want his family to survive and the best place for healing for this family is outside the spotlight. The question of the the people's "right to know" is not easy to resolve.

What intrigues me is the word Tiger chose to describe what he did--transgression. It is more than a mistake. It is more than an error in judgment. It is violation of a moral law; one of the synonyms for "sin." And while I don't know if Tiger has any faith to speak of, I pray that he would not lose this sense of sin, of conviction, of failure--not just getting caught, but doing wrong. And I pray that such a sense will be the first step in his discovery of God's solution to both the guilt he feels and the evil he has done to himself and others--the mercy and grace and forgiveness to be found only in Jesus Christ.

Tuesday, December 01, 2009

A Not-so-normal Dinner Conversation on Contextualization in Mission

Recently we had dinner at our home with long-term workers in a limited access country of central Asia. As we talked about the ministry in their setting, the conversation turned to the growing emphasis on "contextualization" in missions--the belief that success in penetrating Muslim and other strongly resistant cultures with the Gospel will involve allowing the creation of culturally appropriate forms of faith. Hence, "Jesus followers" may choose to create "Jesus mosques" in Islamic settings, choose to pray 5 times a day toward Jerusalem, choose not to call themselves "Christian," and in all other ways adhere as closely to the outward practices of Islam (this is a VERY abbreviated description of what is a complex approach).

While I have always felt that the church will look different in many ways in different cultures, I have been more uncomfortable with a contextualization that opts not only to be an "insider movement," but to be something other than a manifestation of the church that is linked to historic Christianity.

The husband/dinner guest became very animated in discussing this. He argued that in the areas of his world where the gospel is spreading most rapidly, there is not only an identifiable church in distinction to the majority culture, but the church is ready and willing to suffer for its open identity with and loyalty to Jesus. He says that the lack of an identifiable, visible church throughout his host nation's history has been a detriment to gospel witness, and that a heavily contextualized approach would continue that deficit.

Over two millennia, reception of the gospel and the establishment of the church has brought drastic change to cultures wherever it has gone. Western culture itself went from tribal violence to something very different. Look, for example, at the impact of the gospel on the Vikings: they gave up their violent ways and became a farming people. Yes, some elements have remained and been "redeemed," but core practices of other religions have not found a welcome in church life generally among evangelicals, and we have rightly labeled past Roman Catholic attempts to do so among tribal groups as "syncretistic."

Any thoughts?

Review of Donald Miller's "A Million Miles in a Thousand Years"

I read and reviewed Donald Miller's latest book. You can find the review on my other blog--follow this link.