An interim note on saying the unwelcome truth

The last major post has led to an interesting exchange, so you may wish to look at [and perhaps join] the comment stream.

DV, Monday, I will go on to the issue of becoming a good man in a storm, in light of Paul's example in Ac 27.

GEM

On the importance of saying the unwelcome truth

Now, let us turn our attention to why Paul spoke up in Fair Havens, even though it was probably predictable that he would not have been likely to have been heard, and may even have been made to sound as if he were an idiot speaking out of turn.

Perhaps, a contemporary parallel will help us see why it is sometimes important -- and even commanded by God -- to speak the unwelcome truth, even if you "lose the argument" in the short term. [Remember, mere facts and logical reasoning are usually the LEAST persuasive form of argument.]

For instance, if you have been listening to the BBC or the like over the past day or so, you will have heard how Pope Benedict XVI has offended many Muslims and others, in a recent lecture at Regensburg, in which he quoted the C14 Byzantine Emperor Manuel II Paleologos, from a debate with a learned Persian.

As The Australian reports in a well-researched article:

"The emperor comes to speak about the issue of jihad, holy war," the Pope said. "He said, I quote: 'Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached."' [NB: Cf Q 9:29 & 5 below.]

Clearly aware of the sensitivity of the issue, Benedict added "I quote" twice before pronouncing the phrases on Islam and described them as "brusque", while neither explicitly agreeing with nor repudiating them.

"The emperor goes on to explain in detail the reasons why spreading the faith through violence is something unreasonable," Benedict said in the 32-minute lecture on the relationship between faith and reason. [You may wish to see my own notes on that here.]

"Violence is incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul," he said, issuing an open invitation to dialogue among cultures.

Reiterating his concerns about a modern world "deaf" to God, he warned that other religious cultures saw the West's exclusion of God "as an attack on their most profound convictions".

"A reason which is deaf to the divine and which relegates religion into the realm of subcultures is incapable of entering into the dialogue of cultures, " . . . .

Papal spokesman Father Federico Lombardi said Benedict used Emperor Manuel's views on Islam only to help explain the issue and not to condemn all of the Muslim religion as violent.

"We know that inside Islam there are many different positions, violent and non-violent," he said. "The Pope does not want to give an interpretation of Islam that is violent."

Many Islamic leaders have denounced Muslim radicals for using violence, saying this perverts their faith, but a minority of extremists say the Koran commands them to use it.

Last week, the Pope said no one had the right to use religion to justify terrorism.

At an open-air mass on Monday, Benedict told about 260,000 faithful that Christians believed in a loving God whose name could not be used to justify hatred and fanaticism.

Notice how the wider context of the West's need to open up its conception of reasoning, by no longer conflating reason and naturalistic rationalism, has been lost in much of the reporting.

Also largely lost -- cf. the response from a Muslim cleric below -- is the subtle point that the Pope is underscoring the Catholic Church's turning away from the grave errors and indefensible evils that stemmed from its unbiblical advocacy of the crusades in an earlier era -- a point that has in recent years been publicly underscored by Pope John Paul II's apologies and prayers of penitence during his visits to sites of the crusades. [In short, the Roman Catholic Church has first sought to publicly take the beam out of its own eye, before addressing others correctively, as Jesus required in Matt 7:1 - 5.]

Then, too, it is unsurprising that in a time when Islamist terrorism and jihad are major issues that are yet to be frankly and fully discussed in light of the unfortunate facts of the Quran -- cf 9:5, 29 - 31 -- and of the militancy of Islam's founding era, the international media picked up the outcry. A telling case in point is from the leading Muslim Cleric in Turkey, Ali Bardakoglu, which the Pope is due to visit later this year -- his first planned visit as pope to an Islamic country. As AP reports:

Bardakoglu said Thursday that he expected an apology from the pope and said it was Christianity, not Islam, that popularized conversion by the sword.

"The church and the Western public, because they saw Islam as the enemy, went on crusades. They occupied Istanbul, they killed thousands of people. Orthodox Christians and Jews were killed and tortured," he said . . .

AP astutely amplifies: Istanbul, Turkey's largest city, was the capital of the Eastern Roman and Byzantine Christian empires before being conquered by Ottoman Muslims in 1453. Of course, before it was so-renamed by the conquering Ottoman Turks, it had been known as Constantinople, who among other things turned the leading church in Constantinople, the wonderful Hagia Sophia, into a Mosque. [The Attaturk regime turned it into a Museum.] Not to mention, in fact, the first several centuries of the Christian era were marked by Christians who bore peaceful witness to an unwelcome gospel, even at the expense of their lives.

(Also, in a subtle distractor from the Pope's point, the Islamic cleric adverts to the occasion where Venetian-led crusaders, deflected from their more normal focus on recapturing the Holy Land from its Muslim conquerers, attacked Constantinople. Unaddressed: the prior hundreds of years of jihad wars that for instance from 62os to the 730's took the domain of Islam forward by the sword, from Medina to India in the East and France in the West. It is impossible to make the case that that vast arc of conquest that created today's Muslim heartland largely at the expense of precisely the Byzantine/Eastern Roman Empire, was as a result of "defensive" actions.)

In short, part of the balancing context we should address - but which is of course missing from much of the news coverage, which instead has too often seemed to make the pope sound like an idiotic hypocrite -- is the unfortunate fact that Islam has in material part been spread by the sword, right from its founding era, and the further sad fact that that was justified by not only the example set by Mohammed and the four "rightly guided" Caliphs, as is encoded in the sharia law, but by Quranic passages such as:

9:29 Fight those who believe not in God nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by God and His Apostle, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued . . . .

9:5 But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war); but if they repent, and establish regular prayers and practise regular charity, then open the way for them: for God is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful. [This is the infamous Sword Verse.]

That these passages are often, and indeed historically have usually been, taken to mean just what they seem to say is an unfortunate fact of the current radical islamist movement. But also we can see it in the thought of a great many other more "moderate" muslims, e.g. the attitude of for instance Pakistan's Brigadier S. K. Malik, in the preface to his The Quranic Concept of War, as cited by Silas of answering-islam.org:

"But in Islam war is waged to establish supremacy of the Lord only when every other argument has failed to convince those who reject His Will and work against the every purpose of the creation of mankind."

"Many Western Scholars have pointed their accusing fingers at some of the above verses in the Quran to be able to contend that world of Islam is in a state of perpetual struggle against the non-Muslims. As to them it is a sufficient answer to make... that the defiance of God's authority by one who is His slaves exposes that slave to the risk of being held guilty of treason and as such a one, in the perspective of Islamic law, is indeed to be treated as a sort of that cancerous growth on that organism of humanity.... It thus becomes necessary to remove the cancerous malformation even if it be by surgical means, in order to save the rest of humanity."

There are of course simply no parallels to such a sentiment in the New Testament, the distinctively Christian Scriptures. Indeed, the specific "sword passage" in the NT, Rom 13:1 - 7, is in a context that immediately implies that the pagan Roman Emperor, Nero -- admittedly before he went quite insane -- was not only legitimate but God's Servant to do us good, in part by bearing the sword in defense of justice from evildoers!

But all of these nuances are liable to be lost in today's shouting, just as Paul's cautions were lost in the dismissive rhetoric of that fateful day in October 59: a prisoner arguing against the Ship's Owner and Pilot -- ridiculous!

So, then, why bother speak up when it is likely to be unwelcome? Should we not rather instead remember that while speech may be silver, silence is golden?

First and foremost, because if God tells us to speak up, and how, we should:

AM 3:7 Surely the Sovereign LORD does nothing
without revealing his plan
to his servants the prophets.

AM 3:8 The lion has roared--
who will not fear?
The Sovereign LORD has spoken--
who can but prophesy?

Second, such a prophetic caution is often a vital stage in the reformation to follow as the folly of rejecting godly wisdom soon enough manifests itself.

Then, there will be a dire need for a good man in the storm -- and having the courage to speak unwelcome truth and wisdom is often a qualification for such an important but thankless job. (Next time, we will see how that happened with Paul, and draw out lessons for our own situation.) END

Making better Community Decisions in the face of risks

Now, let's get anachronistic, transporting ourselves in our imaginations to the ship in Fair Havens that October of 59 AD.

Could a different apptroach to the decision have made a difference?

For instance, what if the Centurion had asked the Kubernete ["Pilot" in the NIV] to tell him what the odds were on what kind of weather during October?

Then, the decision makers would have had a better picture of the situation. Going back to my Nov 15, 2002 post:

In many decision-making situations, what the facts are is an open question, often hotly contested by highly articulate advocates and spin-doctors. Thus, we are forced to act in the face of uncertainties, risk and probabilities.

Operations Research offers a framework for making such decisions, based on Game Theory: playing a “game” with Nature as the opponent.

For instance, let us again consider the situation of Acts 27, from a decision-making perspective:

NATURE: The relevant environmental factor was the weather. We can identify at least three plausible states of Nature, given that it was late in the year, so the first winter-storms could have come at any time.

(1) Continued adverse winds until the first winter storm closed down sailing for the winter. (This would have locked the ship up in Fair Havens, regardless of intent.)

(2) A day or two of good sailing wind, as that would suffice to get the ship within striking-distance of the more commodious harbour, Phoenix.

(3) Initially favourable winds, but as a precursor to the first winter storm – what happened in the event.

DECISION-MAKER: This would have mainly been the Centurion, as influenced by the Experts (Ship Owner and Kubernete/steersman), the majority and Paul. Here, there were two options:

(A) Sail for Phoenix, if the winds became favourable. (The majority opinion.)

(B) Stay put in Fair Havens. (Paul’s alternative.)

We know that in the event, we had the match A-3, leading to disaster. However, this is after the fact. How can one decide wisely before the event?

Basically, we can set up a so-called “payoff table” showing what outcomes would be likely from A or B if Nature went to states 1, 2, or 3:

A: In state 1, there would be no opportunity to sail before the winter weather set in. If 2 ocurred, then the ship would have been in a better, and probably safer, harbour. Of course, as happened, we ended with A-3, a disaster.

B: Safe, but not comfortable, and the ship could possibly have been subject to damage.

The next step in deciding is to assess the likelihood or prudence of the outcomes, and to decide on the best alternative. Here, if one knows the probabilities attaching to states 1, 2 or 3 it would be helpful in quantifying the options. (One way to do this, is to ask the experts to indicate how often out of say six seasons the weather would play out as 1, 2 or 3.) But, the usual case is that such “subjective probabilities” are at best educated guesses, and the down-side vulnerabilities may exceed the upside benefits.

In that case, we should assess the range of opportunities and threats, and if possible, estimate what is more or less likely to happen. Then, we could weight the potential benefits and potential costs, to give an expectation, by summing up benefit/cost x probability. (For instance, if we bet $100 on a six on a die, for $1,000, we can expect, on average, to gain $1,000 if we get a 6, with a 1/6 chance, but stand to lose five chances out of six, so we expect to gain: 1/6 x $1000 + 5/6 x (-$100) = $ 83 per throw. One may lose most of the time, but on average, one would gain. That is how businessmen and investors make a living. Profit is often based on returns to the risk of enterprise.)

However, in some cases, like Russian roulette, even though the chance of a negative downside is 1/6: one bullet and five empty chambers when one pulls the trigger; the loss is so high that we would probably decide to minimize our exposure to a catastrophic outcome. (In yet other cases, the outcome is a mixed bag, so it may be wise to see how to minimize regret: the “if I had only known . . .” on either the upside or the downside.)

In the case in Acts 27, Paul’s initial advice was probably prudent, even if the gentle South Wind had lasted long enough, as the potential loss was so serious – as the Apostle pointed out.

But, the point is that if a proper exploration of the possible scenarios and the decision alternatives had been looked at, together, the whole pattern of how the decision was made would likely have shifted. [One challenge: the shipowner probably knew the risks being run, but to him the odds of losing the ship across a whole winter in Fair Havens loomed larger than the possibility of passengers losing their lives in a short run down the coast with a favourable wind -- i.e. his interests and that of the passengers diverged. So, he may well have been tempted to try the usual side arguments and personal attacks that so often distract attention from inconvenient points. ]

Thus, also, the principles of participation, mutual respect and freedom of information are very important if democratic decision-making is to work. It is no surprise to see that these are exactly the principles that are so often wanting in our own public debates -- nor, to see how often disaster results.

So, as we look at many risky decisions in our region today, and as we look at how we make decisions in which the public has a stake, the presence of distractors and disrespectful personal attacks should serve as a warning that somethig is probably wrong here. (Resemblance to developments here in Montserrat, or across the Caribbean and event he world as a whole over the past several decades are NOT coincidental.)

Right -- not might, nor money, nor technical expertise, nor even the views of the majority -- makes right. END

Democracy and the prophetic voice in a world of fallen, fallible people

We have begun to discuss the implications of the Acts 27 account of events in Fair Havens, Crete in October of [probably] 59 AD.

For, we have seen how Paul's well-judged minority report that an undue environmental risk was about to be run if they set sail from Fair Havens plainly failed to carry the day with the majority, in the face of the advice of the pilot and of the owner of the ship. [Doubtless, these were in turn influenced by the fact that the ship and cargo were at higher risk in Fair Havens than in Phoenix, so they appealed to the discomfort of the passengers, to induce them to go along with the plan to make the ship safer by sailing on to Phoenix.]

So, when a gentle south wind came up, the ship sailed out towards the more attractive wintering port, Phoenix, only to be caught in an early-arriving winter storm.

That is, we here see several key lessons:

1. First, let us note how the majority, as influenced by the powerful -- but evidently agenda-driven -- voices of the technical and moneyed elite, made a dangerous decision and nearly lost their lives as well as the boat and cargo.

2. Thus, we should immediately note a point that should be obvious, but is often lost in the noise over the value and importance of "Democracy": the majority, the powerful, experts and the otherwise influential, can be wrong or even foolish. (It is right -- not might -- that makes right.)

3. That is one reason why it is very important to encourage, hear out, and protect the minority down to one person, even though it is often "inconvenient" for backers of whatever agenda is being pushed by the powerful.

4. Lurking beneath, too, is the issue of community decision making in light of an uncertain future and a potentially dangerous environment.

5. So, in a world of uncertainties, it is important for decision-makers to consider the full "fan" of credible scenarios -- optimistic, typical, pessimistic -- that could play out if a proposal is acted on in the relevant environment.

6. That way, the community can learn to think in terms of alternatives and consequences, and can see why more robust alternatives -- even if less comfortable and attractive than other alternatives [if things go well] -- may be more prudent.

7. We can also see Paul, a Christian, acting the part of the good citizen and rendering wise, informed and prophetic counsel to the micro-community represented by the ship's company, even though it was probably predictable that his words would be unpopular.

8. As we will go on to see, in the crisis that followed, the earlier wise counsel gave him a credibility that allowed him to become the "good man in the storm," as decisions had to be made in the unfolding crisis.

In short, given a world full of uncertainties, and of fallen, fallible, interested people, we must recognise that we can go wrong, dangerously wrong. So we need to govern ourselves in ways that encourage that "still, small voice" of wisdom that we should then follow -- uncomfortable and inconvenient though it so often is. END

Learning from 9/11 the Montserrat Volcano crisis and Acts 27

Today is of course the fifth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, a case where in the interests of freedom of society, risks were run with potential terrorists [we all know the profile now . . .], and the world paid a stiff price as evil men exploited the vulnerabilities of freedom to murder thousands and plunged the world into a dark night of war that still continues.

Overnight, too, we had some serious developments here in Montserrat. Summarising:

Over the past day or so the volcano here in Montserrat has reached a new, further elevated state of activity as a vent on the Gages Wall has reached the stage of repeated albeit small explosions. A crumbling notch is now in that wall, overlooking Plymouth. Alarms sounded, we heard from the chief scientist at the MVO, and from the Governor yesterday. People living on the flanks of the Belham valley [to the NW] have been put on notice to prepare for evacuation, if in a worst case scenario, there are pyroclastic [hot ash, gas and rock] flows and surges in that valley. That news was certain to be deeply unwelcome, for very understandable reasons, among many living in Isles Bay, Salem and environs.

There was some relatively speaking good news this morning though. In a further development, the MVO head informed the public that the peak of the dome is tilting over towards the North East, and that growth appears focussed there suggesting that the Tar River valley to the NE -- and away from inhabited areas -- is the most likely direction of expected collapses.

Oddly, this issue of society involving itself in potentially high-risk situations and the need to address credible scenarios and balance freedom or convenience with security, is an apt illustration of the situation that developed in Ac 27. For there, Paul, an appellate prisoner on a ship in the Imperial wheat service from Egypt to Rome, had counselled the ship not to sail out of Fair Havens, Crete, precisely because of the risk of winter storms setting in and putting the ship at grave risk:

AC 27:9 Much time had been lost, and sailing had already become dangerous because by now it was after the Fast. So Paul warned them, 10 "Men, I can see that our voyage is going to be disastrous and bring great loss to ship and cargo, and to our own lives also." 11 But the centurion, instead of listening to what Paul said, followed the advice of the pilot and of the owner of the ship. 12 Since the harbor was unsuitable to winter in, the majority decided that we should sail on, hoping to reach Phoenix and winter there. This was a harbor in Crete, facing both southwest and northwest.

Duly, a gentle south wind blew up and they thought the were going to be able to sail on to Phoenix. So, they set sail. But, disaster was the result:

Ac 27:14 Before very long, a wind of hurricane force, called the "northeaster," swept down from the island. 15 The ship was caught by the storm and could not head into the wind; so we gave way to it and were driven along. 16 As we passed to the lee of a small island called Cauda, we were hardly able to make the lifeboat secure. 17 When the men had hoisted it aboard, they passed ropes under the ship itself to hold it together. Fearing that they would run aground on the sandbars of Syrtis, they lowered the sea anchor and let the ship be driven along. 18 We took such a violent battering from the storm that the next day they began to throw the cargo overboard. 19 On the third day, they threw the ship's tackle overboard with their own hands. 20 When neither sun nor stars appeared for many days and the storm continued raging, we finally gave up all hope of being saved.

Why was Paul not heeded? Why is it that when I and other hosts of the Let's Talk Radio Talk show raised concerns in the context of warnings by Dr Glen Matteoli of the USA and presentations by Prof Okada of Japan, during the 10th anniversary conference of the Volcano eruption, we were publicly lashed during the weekly volcano update and interviews, as misconstruing the situation, when we called for managing the situation in light of a full fan of credible scenarios? Why is it that even today, many are in denial about the realities of the evolving world in which Islamism is making its third religiously-motivated bid for global power in 1,400 years: the first being from 632 on under Mohammed's early followers, and the second from about 1453 on when Constantinople fell to the Ottoman Turks?

The answers are a bit of a surprise – or, maybe not: we all like to imagine we know more about and are more in control of our circumstances than we really are. Worse, a probability is actually an index of ignorance -- if we knew the outcome for sure, it would be 1 or 0, not somewhere in between. [And acknowledging ignorance is a very humbling exercise for many of us . . .]

So, we tend to dismiss or deny the possibility or even the actuality of unwelcome, uncomfortable or disruptive – but in fact otherwise, quite credible -- scenarios. Sometimes, we call it optimism, sometimes it is just plain wishful thinking, but as a result we too often run risks that we should not, with potential downsides that if we were to look at them in the cold light of day, we would think again before running the risks. (Think about the risks of speeding in a car on a dangerous road.)

So, sometimes, we get caught out: even if the technical experts tell us good news, and the big business classes back them up, and it is the popular feeling. That "democratic" “consensus” in the teeth of unwelcome reality is exactly what happened in Acts 27; to disastrous results. For next time, let's explore these thoughts on the limits of democratic government in a world of sinful, fallible men, a bit further. END

___________

PS: I am experimenting with a new font, Georgia. Let's see if it gives a pleasing result. This is also the third attempt to post, we had two brief power cuts. UPDATE: I did a slight cleanup, and I like the result on screen. The link to the discussion of Islam and that to the lessons on probability should be helpful.

Please hold till Monday

Sorry, I had to take on a bit more overnight at EO. Monday, I will follow up.

The Caribbean people in global missions

We the people of the Caribbean are the result of the world's first experiment in globalisation, as the Spanish tried to pioneer new trade routes to the far east by sailing west: Columbus refused to believe Eratosthenes' calculation of [rather roughly!] about 200 BC, that is in fact within several percent of the true value of how far it is around the Earth.

[The Librarian of Alexandria had looked at the shadow cast by the sun on a certain day at Alexandria and at Syene, far tot he south along the Nile. From the difference in angle he worked out the number of degrees of arc between the two cities, thence the circumference of the Earth. Earlier, Aristotle had argued that since the Earth cast a round shadow always on the Moon during a lunar eclipse, and since it is obviously a solid, then it would logically be a sphere as only such a shape always casts a circular shadow.]

Columbus bumped into the Caribbean, and a largely unhappy train of events was set in motion as European settlement of the New World began.

However, despite the horrors of slavery and all that went with it, we received the blessing of the gospel, which materially contributed to our liberation and empowerment. So, over the past 200 years, we have become a Caribbean people even as we became more and more a cultural melting pot of people from all over the world. By God's grace, we have largely learned to live with one another across many a racial and cultural divide.

That immediately means that we are in a position to reach out by bridging North and South, East and West, through the power of the gospel.

In turn, that immediately raises the challenge that we are strategic for the ministry of the gospel all across theworld. For never have we been so educated, so relatively well-off, so able to travel, and so out of the current geostrategic clashes. So we need to ask if we have come to the kingdom for such a time as this. Thus, we need to consider carefully what God may be telling us and calling us to.

In turn, that leads us to reflect on the way we should interact with government. So, have a look at Acts 27, to see a case study I first looked at when this blog began. END

Fullness, reformation, blessing and our Mission to the Nations

Today, I had to pause to help put out a brushfire over at the EO blog. Pardon the delay.

_____________________

Now, to the main topic of the day:

As Acts 17 notes, when the Apostle Paul went to Athens, 500 years after Socrates' day, he spoke to them in terms that God had made the nations from one man, and so controls our places and times that he uses our times and challenges to prompt us to grope for him, however blindly [that is the underlying impression in the particular words Paul used].

So that brings to a focus the issue of nationhood at a moment of crisis, of kairos. Into such places and times, the risen Jesus sends his Gospel and his church, opening the doors of blessing:

Eph 4:11 It was he who gave some to be apostles, some to be prophets, some to be evangelists, and some to be pastors and teachers, 12 to prepare God's people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up 13 until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God and become mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ.

So the choice that confronts the nations in such times is the call to repentance, discipleship and reformation, leading to the overflow of the blessing of Abraham to the nations -- the exact blessing long since promised to the chosen people. [BTW, that means that envy at the blessings an utterly unwarranted response to it as enjoyed by Israel or as enjoyed by any other nation that wholeheartedly turns to the gospel.]

It also means - and I here make a note to those who sub-biblically see the church as a tiny remnant with essentially no influence on an increasingly corrupt surrounding world -- that reformation of the nations under Christ is just as much a part of the church's commission as is the call to penitence. Indeed, that should always have been obvious from the Great Commission:

MT 28:16 Then the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain where Jesus had told them to go. 17 When they saw him, they worshiped him; but some doubted. [nb: I believe this is the incident wiht 500 bretheren together seeing Jesus at once mentioned in 1 Cor 15] 18 Then Jesus came to them and said, "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age."

That highlighted phrase is telling, as it speaks to a transformation of the way of life of the community and of individuals in it as is envisioned in Eph:

2:8 For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith--and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God-- 9 not by works, so that no one can boast. 10 For we are God's workmanship, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do . . . .

EPH 4:17 So I tell you this, and insist on it in the Lord, that you must no longer live as the Gentiles do, in the futility of their thinking. 18 They are darkened in their understanding and separated from the life of God because of the ignorance that is in them due to the hardening of their hearts. 19 Having lost all sensitivity, they have given themselves over to sensuality so as to indulge in every kind of impurity, with a continual lust for more.

EPH 4:20 You, however, did not come to know Christ that way. 21 Surely you heard of him and were taught in him in accordance with the truth that is in Jesus. 22 You were taught, with regard to your former way of life, to put off your old self, which is being corrupted by its deceitful desires; 23 to be made new in the attitude of your minds; 24 and to put on the new self, created to be like God in true righteousness and holiness.

In short, discipleship leads naturally to reformation as more and more people amounting to a critical mass seek to live by Jesus' principles of neighbour-love and all-out love to God, which he cited from the Torah as the summation of the Law.

And so, in our time that call to repentance and reformation again goes out across the world, in the Caribbean, in the lands of the North and across the lands of the South. In that context, our strategic location as a bridge people raises the question of the Caribbean's strategic value int he church's mission to the nations in our time. To that we will next turn. END

Kairos: the nexus of opportunity and risk

It is a commonplace to observe that the Caribbean and the wider world are in crisis. Here in Montserrat, with a fast-growing lava dome [again!] that is underscored. But, what is less common is to understand that there are both risks and opportunities that now face us.

My concern is that we the people of the Caribbean rise to the opportunity without unduly exposing ourselves to the risks.

For instance, we face a major challenge because -- apart from Trinidad, Barbados and Cuba -- the island nations of our region have but little or no commercially exploitable oil; which exposes us to the volatile energy market.

So, when oil's price spiked last year, we rushed into the Petrocaribe deal with Venezuela, putting ourselves into heavy debt to what may well be an emerging Latin American strongman of an all-too-familiar type. Is this wise? Was there an alternative, given -- say -- Trinidad's oil reserves? Have we in light of Prov 22:7 -- The rich rule over the poor, and the borrower is servant to the lender -- implicitly sold our right to take an independent stance to a regime that historically has claims on the territory of several Caribbean states? Should we for instance -- in addition to the usual renewable and efficiency approaches -- be exploring the emerging, promising PBMR modular nuclear reactor technology being developed in South Africa? [Let us note that some 80% of France's electricity is nuclear powered.]

Clearly, we need to think again.

More broadly, we the people of the Caribbean are the world's first cosmopolitan people, and we have learned to live and work with each other across racial, religious and other divides,with a high degree of harmony. In a world in the midst of a massive geostrategic conflict, is that not an asset, the ministry of reconciliation? Could that be an implicit challenge from God to awaken to our awesome potential under the church's global mission?

Why not now? Why not here? Why not us? GEM

PS: I have added several apologetics and issues links for those who may wish to explore such themes; cf. the links sidebar. If the anonymous commenter of yesterday needs to think through some issues on the evidences at the core of the Christian faith, I highly recommend to him that he reads Kreeft and Tacelli's Handbook of Christian Apologetics. C S Lewis' Mere Christianity is a classic that will well repay a look, too. Online, on the issue of the trustworthiness of the Bible, a look at F F Bruce's classic will be a worthwhile investment of time. When we look at such issues, finally, let us remember that the point is not so much that God is on trial before our bar of judgement, but that we are on trial before his bar of judgement:

Rom 2: 6 God "will give to each person according to what he has done." 7 To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life. 8 But for those who are self-seeking and who reject the truth and follow evil, there will be wrath and anger. 9 There will be trouble and distress for every human being who does evil . . . 10 but glory, honor and peace for everyone who does good . . . 11 For God does not show favoritism.

Hezbollah in Venezuela?

All:

Overnight, I ran across a disturbing account at NewsMax.com, by Gustavo Coronel, on that dangerous Islamist group's evidently successful missions to the marginalised Wayuu people group, who straddle the Venezuela-Columbia border.

While I think the tone of the article is in considerable need of improvement, the basic claim seems well-warranted, i.e there is good reason to conclude that such an outreach is in fact taking place, similar to many dawah initiatives around the world that target marginalised and disaffected groups. Certainly, Gateway Pundit has presented some disturbing images indeed, drawn from the Hezbollah Venezuela e-group web site.

Disturbing reading, and reason for us to reflect on the issues summarised here about Islamism and the Caribbean, and here, on how some islamic advocates in our region are manipulating our history the better to pull us into their system of thought and global agenda. Readers may also find the Barbados Declaration, July 2003 relevant to a proper response. END

All:

Those who have been watching my web adventures will know that I have spent the past while since April 7, 2005 on an extended recon in force over at Joe Carter's Evangelical Outpost.

Now, Joe has just taken up the job as Director of Web Communications with the Family Research Council, as he discusses here, and at the same time, as the threads here, here, and most recently here can show, the major topics I have addressed have now come to a point where I am satisfied that I understand practically as well as theoretically and can assess and address the issues likely to be raised by the dechistianisers of the North here and elsewhere.

So, let me excerpt from the 2002 JTS-CGST Ethics lecture, on the onward strategy for this blog:

____________________

. . . intellectual leadership is a decisive factor (for good or ill) . . . and must therefore be a key to the sound and sustainable reformation of the Caribbean. This is not new; the need for prophetic intellectual leadership was also a central issue faced by Paul, most notably on his visit to Athens. Therefore, his example provides quite relevant insights that we may use to guide our own initiatives.

The Apostle had come to Athens five hundred years after its glory days — the days of Socrates, Plato, Aristotle and Pericles, to take a brief respite from his stressful Macedonian adventures. For, in Macedonia, he had been harassed and harried from one town to the next, and was finally driven out, taking refuge in Athens.

However, he found the all-pervasive idolatry too disturbing to keep silent. [Acts 17:16.] So as a lion, with terrible resolve, turns and vexes those who have unwisely persisted in harrying him, Paul — in the city of Socrates — went to the Agora (the marketplace), and started to dialogue with passersby; as that stone-dresser turned philosopher was wont to do. Soon, a group of pagan Philosophers paused, argued with him, conferred among themselves, and, parodying the fate of Socrates, took the Apostle to a meeting of the Areopagus [Mars Hill] Council.

There, the Athenian leaders got more than they bargained for. For, Paul made straight for the rotten intellectual foundation of Pagan thought and culture. Pointing to its beautiful temples and monuments, he picked the altar that exposed the critical instability: TO AN UNKNOWN GOD. That is, on the most important possible point of knowledge, the Athenians — the fountainhead and proud guardians of the Western intellectual, artistic and democratic traditions — were forced to admit their ignorance, in a public monument!

Paul then pointedly stated the decisive prophetic issue: “Now what you worship as something unknown I am going to proclaim to you.” That is, the true key to the field of Knowledge is Revelation (rather than merely human speculation, argument or experiment[35]), starting from our God-given intuition that an orderly universe without and a rational mind and ever-probing conscience within jointly testify to a Rational, Orderly, Moral Creator. [Cf. Romans 1:18 – 32.]

Of course, and as Dingwall, Spong, Freud, Marx, Skinner, Ayer, Crick and many others illustrate today, we may suppress or becloud such intuitions; but plainly to our intellectual, moral, and social peril; with damaging environmental and sustainability implications. However, since God knows perfectly, he can communicate additional significant — though obviously not exhaustive — truth to guide us in the face of such intellectual dilemmas, moral conundrums, and sustainability challenges. Hence, the prophetic force of Paul’s key word: “proclaim.”

1) The Creator-Redeemer God does not live in temples we can make with our hands. Nor does he depend on our religious leaders and institutions, rituals, gifts or offerings. Instead, it is he who made us and gave us everything we have. We are therefore his stewards in — and of — his world[36], for “in Him we live and move and have our being.”

2) From one man, God created the nations, setting their times & seasons [kairous], and their places[37], “so that men would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him.” That is, the diverse fraternity of nations [ethnoi, people groups] was created to foster opportunities to demonstrate godly, harmonious social order-- not least, by restraining the possibilities for the rise of a corrupt, globally dominant regime.[38] (Further to this, when nations choose instead to forget God and His ways, making false loyalties, power, prestige, pleasure and prosperity their chief values, they walk down a road to ruin; cf. Deut. 8:17 – 20.)

3) “In the past, God overlooked [our] ignorance, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent. For he has set a day in which he will judge the world with justice by the man he has appointed. He has given proof of this to all men by raising him from the dead”:

4) The time for ignorant pursuit of false loyalties and foolish agendas is over; God has intervened globally, decisively and publicly[39] by Christ’s incarnation, death, and resurrection: “he has made this same Jesus . . . both Lord and Christ.” [Acts 2:36.]

5) God therefore commands that we repent, undergoing a comprehensive change of heart and mind driven by recognition of the truth and godly sorrow over sin, leading to a transformed way of life [1 Cor. 6:9 – 11]. In particular, we are to receive as Lord and Saviour him who is “the Way, the Truth, and the Life.” [John 14:6, cf. Acts 4:12.]

6) This command to repent is universal, but does not demand blind obedience: God offers public proof to us by raising Jesus from the dead. In evidence of this, we have over five hundred eyewitnesses, most of whom were still alive when the record was made, and the continued manifestation of resurrection power — in manifold ways — in the church to this day. [1 Cor. 15:1- 8, Eph. 1:17 – 23.]

7) Flowing from this, human culture is not autonomous or absolute: there is a set day for judgement of the world, a comprehensive audit carried out with perfect justice. Thus, communities and their citizens are servants of God, accountable before their Creator for truth, right, justice and the proper stewardship of resources in their care, starting with their land. This opens the door for prophetic commentary on public morality, policy and issues linked to development and sustainability. [Cf. Rom. 1:18 – 32 & 13:1 – 10.]

8) Moreover, since we are created from one ancestor, there can be no justification for nationally-, or racially-, or class-, or otherwise- motivated oppression, aggression, exploitation or prejudice. Community extends to the fraternity of all peoples, and so God refuses to answer the foolish question: “Am I my brother’s keeper?”

Paul’s audience, however, mostly reacted with an ill-advised, illogical sneer: in effect, never mind the evidence and our acknowledged ignorance on the subject — God can’t be like that!

However, some were willing to listen further, and a few openly turned to Christ. Scanty immediate results. But the truth had been proclaimed and backed up with adequate evidence. And, Paul, too, had made a decisive turn, seizing the intellectual and cultural initiative.

From Athens, the Apostle would go on to Corinth and Ephesus, building bases from which the Christian Faith would ultimately triumph in Greek culture. Intellectually, he would go on to expand his Mars Hill thesis, through penning the Epistle to the Romans[40], which articulated in greater detail the case that would at length prevail over classical paganism.

So, two thousand years later, we know who had the better case that fateful day. For, Paganism’s hollow intellectual and moral core now stood exposed for those with eyes to observe, and ears to listen. The future therefore belonged to the Apostle, not to the Philosophers and Politicians. Thus, from small beginnings, the churches planted in Athens and other Greek cities grew strong and prevailed.

___________________

And that, ladies and gentlemen, defines our own challenge as thepeople of God in the Caribbean in our time, as we take up the MVAT challenge.

Grace be with us all.

Gordon