I can’t be bothered with anything these days, but shrug. I just don’t have anything to say recently.

G’night

Mission trips to Africa
I’ve been to Africa on a capacity-building trip rather than mission. I felt it was necessary, but wouldn’t want to go every year, even though I’m on the board of a charity that supports development in Africa.

We have to find the right balance of stewardship and action. I want to make sure that I steward the resources that God has given me and that includes my skills as well as my time and money.

Going to Africa again will need to satisfy some strong criteria:

1. Do I have to go?
2. Can the people there get the same help locally?
3. What will God build in me by going or staying?

I know that in the short term I don’t need to go back and yes people there can get the same help. I wouldn’t get much more out of going back now as I did the first time, but perhaps in another year that may change.

In terms of CO2 from plane travel, I would like to see us putting resources in place (money, advocacy within the church and the community) to off-set our travel. Contributing to the solution while also being part of the problem can balance things out. It’s not ideal, but it is worth doing.

State of Fear and anti-global warming science
I found the book an interesting challenge for us not just to accept everything that we’re told, but to investigate it for ourselves. I did start questioning the widely held truths about climate change, but in re-examining much of the evidence, I drew my own conclusion (and I may be wrong) that it is happening and I need to do something about it.

Part of that is being responsible in what I do here in Edinburgh and what I do when I travel. Alison and I are going to Paris in April, but choosing to go by train and Eurostar. So , does this make us feel better? Yes it does - it also happens that it was cheaper and allows us to avoid the rush at airports. I’m not advocating this for everyone, but it’s a personal choice.

Role of the Church
I’d like to see the church more active in encouraging stewardship - in choosing environmentally sound suppliers and building methods (which I’m sure we’ll be doing for the new church building work at CCE).

I’d also like to see more creative thinking among Christians about what it means to be responsible citizens. I’m sure that we’re more likely to win more people in our communities to God if we are showing that we care for our community and the environment.

I’ll leave it there, but I do think that we need to take up the command that we should love one another as we love ourselves. Being gung-ho about the consequences of any of our actions is not an option.

Erik - thanks - i have emailed you offline.

Rupert, can’t find an email address so will answer your question here.
Actually my wife and I came here to city of 47,000 that had NOT ONE church to “plant a church” in January 1989. We came under another man’s vision and worked with that as we felt the Lord lead…

I made lots of mistakes, did a few things right,..and learned a lot in the process…another language for one.

I have always said “the church is not the building”, yada,yada, yada, but somewhere in it all I got away from the original vision…we just finished a year of lay back and do very little because we were seriously burned out…we baptized 3 people…

We also do pro-life/adoption work.
Keep foster babies etc. Have a 14 year old foster child right now.

The second most common form of birth control in Japan for ALL women is abortion. Guess that is why I get kind of passionate about “missions”. In lots of places there just ain’t no one around to show them a different way. Half the US population but about the same ACTUAL number of abortions per year !!That needs to be changed…

Our blog is: http://kami-no-ai.blogspot.com/
Don’t laugh…

Who is your sister in law if I might be so bold to ask? her husband? It is a pretty small world over here…

We are about 2 1/2 hours from Nagoya. In Nara Ken, near Osaka (the 2nd biggest city).

Here is my personal mail address if you would like to continue this discussion on a less “public” venue. ericknac@yahoo.co.jp…

If not that is A-OK with me…
Pray the Lord’s grace on you and yours…
Eric

The more interesting question is the one Rupert is trying to get to, and one I’ve had to consider myself. When the question about air travel and mission came up the Sunday before last, I knew I was going to end up passionately disagreeing with someone! Part of my problem is that too many people will immediately equate “mission” in this context with going to some foreign land to win souls for Christ.

That is far far too limiting. Ultimately, that is the aim, but Christians going overseas on “mission” can also be looking to support and encourage the local church in those far flung places. This can be via theological training/teaching, but also via education/support for sustainable development.

It’s not as simple as saying we should be looking after the lost souls on our own doorsteps first. That should be part of our everyday life (though I can’t claim to be very good at it), so taking two weeks in every year to go on “mission” abroad can and should be something additional anyway.

At the end of the day, some of us are called by God to serve Him overseas and to use our resources for this purpose. This is what I have felt was right for me for nearly 10 years now, and I am happy to reconcile this with my concerns regarding climate change. As I said, I can’t claim to be particularly good at evangelising my friends, family, neighbours, colleagues, people I see on the bus etc, but I don’t sit on my hands the 50-odd weeks I’m in Edinburgh.

Here’s another (off topic) example. Evolution. The majority of scientists (95%?) believe that evolution and some unknown method of abiogenesis created the human race, “from goo to you” as they say. Most Christians would disagree with this, whilst varying in their particular creation beliefs. So we can’t always trust the scientists (unless you believe everything Dawkins claims!).

I totally agree with the end of your post. And that is exactly what i am arguing for: that we see the gospel much wider than people getting saved. I think the evangelical church in the last 80 years or so has narrowed it down to that, and in reaction to the liberals, we moved away from some of the things you mention. Lets do more of those things, and if some people that we do good to, come back to Jesus to find eternal life, then that is to be hugely celebrated.

In my opinion, if you look at 2000 years of christian history, you could argue that many that you call traditional, are in fact new in thier view of faith, and those you call neo-dox may actually be more traditional and consistent with the whole realm of ancient faith. Once i got out of my evangelical bubble, i found there were a lot more believing people alive now, and throughout history than i first thought (while still appreciating some things that i have learnt from evangelicalism).

The point of this post is that i feel passionate about the way we have narrow the gospel to salvation of souls that i think is unbiblical. So i get bothered by “heresy”.

Back to topic, you are right we could lose by aligning ourselves with the environmental movement, if it is wrong. However the opposite is also true … and you only have to look at the church opposing much science throughout history on the basis of the “biblical” understanding to realise that we have walk humbly with our convictions as we see them.

Secondly, thank you Rupert for your kind comments…I appreciate them too.

JFYI, I have gone back and forth on the warming issue. I could never find one book or report that could push me totally over to one side or the other. ( Although I never heard David Attenborough’s program I have seen his animal programs…I love the voice…)

Then I happened upon the book, mentioned before,”State of Fear” by Michael Crichton (once again, fairly badly written…but one of the few English books in my local library). But the real graphs and real information he included, plus the author’s message, 2 appendices and bibliography, got me really thinking. Reading those bits is very worth while.

Then I found more information as I dug…one person here and another there who said the same thing, “This is mainly politically motivated, without much hard evidence.”

When the 2 climatologists were “fired” for daring to voice an opposite opinion, we really saw that come into play…

The articles that I mentioned before at the Canada National Post Site make this point from several different angles. The article about hurricane expert was pretty sad… the French scientist changing his opinion due to the new data he found says a lot…

I still believe we as followers of Christ need to make wise use of creation.The large SUVs that are so popular in the US are just wrong. Even if there is no green house effect, it wastes a non-renewable resource. Recycling should be “encouraged” for more materials…

And yet, preaching the Good News was Jesus’ last command…But Alastair’s comment on 3/02 already nailed that one down in my opinion.

Andrew mentioned “colonising”…
not everything done by missionaries has been good. I confess that. But neither has it all been bad.

It must be acknowledged, there is a lot of work that cannot be done where there are very few or no followers of Christ. Like in many areas of Japan.

Cases where missionaries and the Good News of Christ made burning widows at their husbands funerals unacceptable (William Carey) or selling unwanted daughters as temple prostitutes unacceptable(Amy Carmichael) or abandoning unwanted children or old people to die in the weather (many places in the world including Japan). Or establishing hospitals, bringing modern medical or hygiene practices and on and on.

In my opinion, a lot of the freedom and good in the world today is directly traceable to the Good News of Christ. It is very important to start at your Jerusalem (has anyone seen the new movie about William Wilberforce…) but it is also important to take the Good News into all the earth.

Blessings on the journey…where ever it may lead…

In Christ,
Eric Kurfman

Is it not strange that we seem more relaxed about christian heresy than about scientific “heresy”. What does that say about what we really believe is real deep down. I resonate with Eric’s disappointment that Neo-dox christians feel the need to put down more “traditional” christians (though I admit the characters Rupert has dredged up recently for us are quite breathtaking ).

There are serious scientists who doubt climate-change is primarily man-made, and there are still more who doubt that it is one of our more significant challenges, esp many economists.
Anyone who had spent time in the company of scientists or been involved in scientific research or has read the history of science will be wise enough to hold all scientific knowledge lightly.
If you are wrong you do lose; you lose credibility in the eyes of the world. In Galileo’s day, the church held on to a wrong idea because it was popular with academia at the time, not because of biblical doctrine. Beware.

The juxtaposition of mission work and carbon-emissions makes me think about globalisation. Think about this: on balance does Satan want us to have a global christian network, or separated insular cultures.

And to be honest, I see much more “caring for the land” in the West than I saw in Africa, esp the Sahel. We are heirs and stewards of creation and we need to bless our global neighbours with that knowledge too. Modern science, which grew out of the reformation’s systematic, careful search for truth will help us do that, but we must avoid the temptation to naturalism - nowadays we are all but blind to the high-tech that is organic life - because it doesnt fit into the “scientific” worldview.

And we should ask the Lord to heal our lands. I have no doubt that he will do much of it through changed hearts, but I believe God loves working miracles for those he loves. There is always hope.

Sorry if this is too strong.

Andrew

I was trying to contrast Falwell and what we were looking at church that sunday. I was trying to capture something of the debate about mission being seen as saving souls vs. mission being something far more holistic. And i was trying to do that without slagging off Falwell, but was trying to clear i disagreed with him. Having just re-read my post, i don’t think i did too bad a job at that … but if that wasn’t what i conveyed to you, i do apologise.

And i think you are right, i was asking a question about CO2 levels and mission.

My points (which only Alastair has picked up) on God renewing the earth rather than destroying this one, and creating a new one would still stand (global warming or not) and would still for me mean we have a mission from God to be involved in that restoration work for all creation (world, structures, organisations, people, etc).

The science of global warming is not my forte, and i will look at your articles when i get a chance. What has convinced me so far is a very prominent naturist called David Attenborough in the UK who did a film on global warming. He is an older chap, not known for his hype and has been ruthlessly rigorous in his scientific research on wildlife … and if he was now saying it was happening, i trusted him. I am of course always open to being shown otherwise (like a good emergent!!!) but at present this is the ground i stand on.

Please do come back and comment; your contribution has fueled this discussion and has been appreciated. Thanks.

I have not read the article and cannot comment either way.

I find it very compelling that one of the original proponents has come out and said “I was wrong”…

All I can say is…an ounce of propaganda is worth a pound of scientific research…
sigh…x4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BY7875_rv1s