Part II – Spiritual Formation In Youth Ministry and Higher Education

Contributions from the Discipline of Spiritual Formation

I am convinced that if we are to produce the kind of students who have the capacity to implement a faith and vocational approach to their life, then we must begin with the foundational issue of their Spiritual Formation. It's the challenge of enabling them becoming whole and complete in Christ. Therefore, what is meant by Spiritual Formation is more than (what in principle is practiced in many evangelical contexts) as "verse-a-day" to keep the devil away". And/Or what Dallas Willard brilliantly describes in his seminal work: The Divine Conspiracy, as "Sin Management."

Can we validly interpret it's (the Bible) portrayal of faith in Christ as one concerned only with the management of sin, whether in the form of our personal debt or in the form of societal evil? …History has brought us to the point where the Christian message is thought to be essentially concerned only with how to deal with sin: with wrongdoing or wrong-being and its effects. Life, our actual existence, is not included in what is now presented as the heart of the Christian message, or it is included only marginally. That is where we find ourselves today… When we examine the broad spectrum of Christian proclamation and practice, we see that the only thing made essential on the right wing of theology is forgiveness of the individual's sins… The current gospel then becomes the gospel of "sin management." Transformation of life and character is not part of the redemptive message."

To put it another way, one's ability to manage their sin, to keep it from influencing negatively and overtly one's life, is often seen as the primary goal of Christian maturity and discipleship. Willard's critique, directed mostly towards evangelicalism, goes on to argue in his book that transformation of life and character necessarily means that one must engage the world… In short, according to Willard, our faith is to be all about the Kingdom of God, as it was for Christ. There can be no decompartmentalization, for the Christian, between faith and the rest of one's life. We cannot continue to practice, as many Christians do: Live in the world, despite the world; and not for Christ, to change the world.

Evangelists as Modern Day Gnostics:

In like manner, there needs to be an overhaul for many of us in how we present the Gospel to young adults. Numerous students hear the Gospel presented to them in what is nothing more than a form of modern day Gnosticism. The-would-be evangelist presents it in the following manner:

"I have some important information that you need to know about and if you listen to me and choose to respond, you can go to heaven and not to hell."

In other words, it's all about collecting vital life-saving information that in turn becomes an almost magical incantation. Once the words are spoken, then heaven is all but assured. The new believer then enters into a life of doing those things that will mostly "maintain" their faith; so that they are confident enough that if they died they would go to heaven and not to hell. This is the lowest common denominator of what can be offered still be considered the Gospel. Very little is said about counting the cost and the Lordship of Christ. Instead of enhancing their restored relationship with Christ, they craft into their life only those things that give them comfort of their eternal standing. There is a very felt need to grow into the image of Christ, because the emphasis is all about doing the right things… The unfortunate repercussions of this kind of Christian life style are disastrous and feed directly into a maintenance only mentality.

Right Being vs. Just Right Knowing or Right Doing

Nor should we, on the other hand, mistake Christian maturity as just having the ability to master intellectually and articulate correct theology… They are not the same. Soren Kierkegaard notes the following in his essay entitled: The Weight of Inwardness

… Certitude and inwardness determine whether or not the individual is in the truth. It is not a lack of content that gives rise to arbitrariness, unbelief, mockery or religion, but a lack of certitude. Whenever, inwardness and appropriation are lacking, the individual is unfree in relation to the truth, even though he otherwise "possesses" the whole truth[…]"

[…]our age is a master in developing truths while being wholly indifferent to certitude. It lacks confidence in the good."

"Truth exists for the particular individual only as he himself produces it in action. If the individual prevents the truth from being for him in that way, we have a phenomena of the demonic. Truth has always had many loud proclaimers, but the question is whether a person will in the deepest sense acknowledge the truth, allow it to permeate his whole being…
…Without inwardness, an adherent of the most rigid orthodoxy may be demonic…"
Kierkegaard passionately believed that right knowing did not always mean right being. He believed that while right doing didn't always mean right being… right being did always mean right doing… I am reminded of J.I. Packer's comment on the world "theologia" from which we get our world theology. Prior to the Reformation, according to Packer, the word "theologia" meant: "To study God in such a way, that what you learned became a part of you." After the Reformation, "theologia," in many Christian circles, came to mean simply the intellectual and scholastic study of God. Mystery and emotion in the Christian experience were disabused and deemed irrelevant.
Many Christian traditions eventually gave themselves permission to see one's Spiritual Formation as that of knowing only about God rather than the experience of knowing God personally. Again, I quote Kierkegaard: "Nobody knows more of the truth than what he is of the truth. To properly know the truth is to be in the truth; it is to have the truth for one's life. This always costs a struggle." Theology then must be internalized inwardly, in order that it be authentically manifested and represented outwardly.
What is Spiritual Formation? It is the commitment to the process of inwardly becoming like Jesus Christ, so that you can outwardly do the things that Jesus would do, if He were you, in the here and now.

Spiritual Formation in Christian Higher Education

The connection to Higher Education to me is obvious. Those of us in Christian Higher Education must challenge our students to advance further from the weak praxis of what it is popularly believed it means to be "Christian." They must move beyond practicing the Christian faith as a form of cheap fire insurance (i.e. "cheap grace" according to Bonhoeffer), the belief that Jesus came only to save them from their sins. They must understand that the decision they make for Christ necessarily means a life transforming encounter with the person of Christ… …that they have been saved "to" (Christ) and not just saved "from" (hell). That it's a decision having mostly to do far more with restoration (of relationships) rather than a region (heaven over hell).

Transformed, Transcend Transformational

O eternal truth and true love and beloved eternity! You are my God; to you I sigh by day and by night. And when I first know you, you raised me up so that I could see that there was something to see and that I still lacked the ability to see it. And you beat back the weakness of my sight, blazing upon me with your rays, and I trembled in love and in dread, and I found that I was far distant from you, in a region of total unlikeness, as I were hearing your voice from on high saying: "I am the food of grown men, Grow and you shall feed upon me. And you will not, as with the food of the body, change me into yourself, but you will be changed into me." Augustine Book VII pg. 149-50
It's crucial for them to understand that their Spiritual Transformation must lead them to the hard belief and practice that the more they are inwardly transformed, the more capable they are of transcending those compartmentalizing personal and cultural inhibitors that keep them from being transformational agents within the world of their private and professional lives.
Johann Arndt, German Lutheran pastor who heavily influenced German Pietism in the later 15^th and early 16^th centuries, noted in his essay on True Christianity the following:

Everyone wishes very much to be a servant of Christ, but no one wishes to be His follower… And although we cannot, in our present weakness, perfectly imitate the holy and noble life of Christ… nevertheless, we ought to live it, and yearn to imitate it, for thus we live in Christ, and Christ lives in us, as John in the first Epistle 2:6 says: 'He who says he abides in Him ought to walk in the same way in which He walked.' …No one can love Christ who does not follow the example of His holy life… True Christianity consists, not in words or external show, but in living faith, from which arise righteous fruits, and all manner of Christian virtues, as from Christ Himself."

And so we have this challenge before us… The challenge of helping our students transforming their inward nature into the nature of Christ Himself, so that no matter where they go and what they do, they would do it has if Christ Himself where doing it. I believe that it's only with this kind of heart and mind, that our students will have the motivating passion (because it's Christ's) and the moral and spiritual resolve (because it's the character of Christ, redeeming and energizing their own) that will enable them to be toxic to the very worldliness in which they find themselves. They will truly be able to believe: "Greater is He that is in you, than he that is in the world." (1 John 4:4) It will be then, and only then that we will be able to penetrate and transform those major institutions in our world e.g. the worlds of Business, Government, Education etc., that heretofore have been impenetrable and any substantive manner.

Christ in and Through Us, In the World

What the world desperately needs to see is not a Christianized us, but rather us, in Christ, in the world. In essence, it's the practice rejecting the corrosive values of the "world" and instead, choosing to connect lovingly and meaningfully with Christ's omnipresence within the world. It is not our job to take Christ into our professional work and world… He is already there! It's a matter of deliberate choice to have our life resonating with and accommodating His presence so that what He is reflected in and through us in a powerful, authentic, compelling and restorative manner to all of those people that He had determined to restore to Himself.

The love of God is hatred of the world and love of the world hatred of God. This is the colossal point of contention, either love or hate. This is the place where the most terrible fight must be fought. And where is this place? In a person's innermost being. Whether the struggle is over millions or over a penny, [in the world of business for example…] it is a matter of loving and preferring God – the most terrible fight is the struggle for the highest. What immeasurable happiness is promised to the one who rightly chooses. If anyone is unable to understand this, the reason is that he is unwilling to accept that God is present in the moment of choice, not in order to watch but in order to be chosen…"

What does the world need more than Christ? In Acts chapter one Christ ascended. In Acts chapter two the Holy Spirit descended... to live in us... that we might become the image of Christ once again in the world.

Spiritual Formation

And The Integration of Faith and Vocation

Part I
In the early 1990's, as a Student Minister, I would often take my Student's to a Young Life camp up in the state of New York. In order to save a day's traveling, we would all board a charter bus at 11:00 p.m. and drive the entire night (the thought being that everyone would be sleeping!) and arrive about 10:00 a.m. in the morning good-to-go for our next eight-day camping experience.
One particular event I recall vividly, during one of these adventures, was waking up in the deep dark hours of the morning and needing desperately to use the "facility." Sitting in the very front seat, I stood up and groggily noted through the semi-darkness a veritable wasteland of sleeping human bodies, grotesquely arranged across the aisle, seats and even the overhead luggage racks. Swaying precariously while I picked my way carefully to the restroom in the back, I noted four or five students who were still awake and playing cards right across the aisle from the bathroom. We all took a brief moment to stare at each other for a moment without saying any words, and then I opened the door and disappeared inside.
Upon completing my essential task, I made my way to the door only to discover that I could not open it! Immediately it came to mind that the students just outside the door must have barricaded themselves against it. Confident in my physical size and strength, I determined to push them away from the door by placing right foot against the toilet and my left foot against the opposite wall. Bracing my shoulders against the door and turning the knob at the same time, pushed against the door with all of my might. Sweat beaded itself on my forehead and my legs shook violently, but try as I might I could not budge the door. I stopped suddenly when it occurred to me that the loud punctuating grunts and groans emanating from the restroom, from all of my exertions would have made great laughing fodder for my adversaries outside the door. Nonplussed, I devised another plan of escape. Crossing to the other side of the room (I use this phrase very generously), ran at the door full-force like an enraged bull hoping to jar them loose and hopefully get a foothold and force my way out. Again, my efforts netted me only a loud fruitless thump; a nanosecond of brilliant stars and a sore shoulder that bounced me back to where I started. Becoming concerned, I craftily resorted to one final cannot-fail-plan: I placed my face near the door crack and begged to be let out – promising everything but my first-born son. Regrettably, like all my other preceding efforts no results!
Backing up from the door, I began to pace around attempting to devise some other plan that would render my escape from the gross confines in which I had been trapped for over twenty minutes. "Wait!" I said to myself. "Ohhhh…" Trembling with hope and anticipation, I turned the knob of the door hopefully. Pulling it INWARD the door opened up silently… The students that I thought had trapped me in the restroom were across the aisle were sleeping. Twenty minutes in that place when I only needed to be there for two – just because I lost perspective on which way the door moved!!! Flushed with humiliation, I made my way back to the front of the bus resolute that I would NEVER let anyone know what had happened!

The Moral of the Story:

Admittedly, I often get trapped spiritually speaking in the restroom of life. I get stuck because my lack of vision and perspective keeps me there and nothing else. I find this lost perspective leaves me with a bored, complacent and uninspired Christian life. I am convinced in the field of Youth Ministry, or even Spiritual Formation, much of it has to do with my lack of practicing a comprehensive sense of intentionally -- the integrating of a vibrant faith into my vocation. I know also that I am not alone in the struggle to integrate faith and vocation.

My Personal Responsibility

How easy it is to settle into the predictable machinations and responsibilities of my office without ever really insisting on energizing and perfecting my particular vocation as Christ would have it be. I know that I should never be free of the need to model to my students the very same things that I am calling and challenging them with as well. I should want my teaching and praxis of Student Ministry and Spiritual formation to be evident in my life still, even as I, at the same time, demand that it be evident in their life as well. In secret moments of hidden honestly, I ask myself: "What compelling evidence do I have in my own life that gives me the credibility to make the demands that I make on how they should be and act personally and professionally?" Can I say to them with integrity: "You can do this!" Because I have actually seen or done or am doing it myself?
My mind and heart are often needled with the disturbing thought that my constant challenge to students to include their faith in their vocation, (in ways that are substantive and meaningful) must first of all begin with the personal witness and observable evidence in my own life. Again and again, those sanctifying questions from the Holy Spirit: "Have I - am I - taking similar kind's risks, making similar kinds of sacrifices that I am asking them to make?" Have I instead contented myself to fall back on the practice that it's ok to, quote, instruct and present only theoretical material based on what some "expert" wrote, who happened to read what someone else wrote, who in turn read about still someone else – generations removed from real life experience?
I cringe inwardly when I recognize that I have not honored teachable spirits by making sure my anecdotes fresh? I become troubled when my selected personal stories related to the material that I am teaching, might not be authentic and compelling? I feel frustrated when I run short of illustrations, honed by real life experiences that have the ability to motivate and inspire. Is there any good reason why I should give up being committed as a scholar-practitioner (participator)?
At the root of it all, I believe that God calls me to use my gifts and to live life on the edge as a divine, sometimes wild, adventure; yet inwardly haunts the subtle but terrible fear, that I faithfully practice that all-too-true old and unpleasant adage: "Those who can't do teach."
In my more honest and reflective times, I find a literary figure like Gandalf - that enigmatic character from Tolkien's Lord of the Rings - fascinating. Like him I want to always be out THERE, - in the world… mixing it up…. I want to always truly be aware of the danger that is before us and ACTING in a manner that demands the full use of my calling (vocation) and gifts, combating whatever evil the Lord has prepared in advance for me to engage. I want vocationally, with godly love, if circumstances demand it, to be able to stand courageously before the demonic Balrogs of this age, and declare with resolute passion "you shall not pass!" because I belong to a higher order. But this will be impossible with my faith and vocation if I am constantly hanging out within the dim, narrow, polluted and unimaginative confines of a restroom. Balrogs don't seem to have established their domicile in restrooms and for obvious reasons – nobody lives there.
Living in the restrooms of life results in my having very little credibility because the nature and quality of my life will speak more loudly than any amount of countervailing words that I have to give them. With muffled voice, from a cramped contaminated room, through the crack of a closed door, I will attempt to give them material, that from every appearance, seems to have a dubious and uninspiring origin. The most powerful thing that I will really communicate is: "live as I live, but not as I say…." The greatest teacher of all time, in a conversation with a young, affluent aristocrat, was noted for saying: "Come, follow me…"

More Thoughts

Socrates Once Said:

The Greatest Way To Live With Honor In This World

Is To Be What We Pretend To Be


The Worst Education That Teaches Self-Denial

Is Better Than The Best

Which Teaches Everything Else And Not That

- Stephen Covey


Spiritual Renewal

Upon Emerging From A Spiritual Season

Of Cold Discontent & Mind Numbing Detachment

[It] DEMANDS That In Order To Truly "Feel" Again

Necessarily Means to Simultaneously Hope For Pleasure And To Risk Pain

For Pain and Pleasure Share The Same Source

Circumstantially, Their Purpose Capable of Both


r.s.g 01/14/09




Life Is Not Fair and Is Rarely Just -

Our Character Is Formed And Our Nature Shaped

In Accordance Of How We Choose To Respond

rsg 10/31/08

Hmmn... Interesting.... Perhaps Even Ironic...

Human Species Nearly Extinct 70,000 Years Ago

---

The human population at that time was reduced to small isolated groups in Africa, apparently because of drought, according to an analysis by researchers at Stanford University. The estimated the number of early humans may have shrunk as low as 2,000 before numbers began to expand again in the early Stone Age. Previous studies using mitochondrial DNA - which is passed down through mothers - have traced modern humans to a "mitochondrial single Eve," who lived in Africa about 200,000

---

Tiny bands of early humans, forced apart by harsh environmental conditions, coming back from the brink to reunite and populate the world. Truly an epic drama, written in our DNA."

---

clipped from: www.dailygalaxy.com

From Rich: Regardless of whether or not you are an advocate for Evolution, Theistic Evolution and/or Even 7 Day Creationalism This Is Fascinating... Isn't "Faith" A Truly Necessary Thing - NO MATTER What Your Worldview?! ....

A Book Review

Show Them NO MERCY – 4 Views on God and Canaanite Genocide

If you falter in times of trouble,

how small is your strength!

Rescue those being led away to death;

Hold back those staggering toward slaughter.

If you say, "But we knew nothing about this,"

Does not He who weighs the heart perceive it?

Does not He who guards your life know it?

Will He not repay each person according to what He has done?

Proverbs 24:10-12 (NIV)

Introduction

Studying the phenomena of genocide in the Bible is of crucial importance. Before any Christian can speak substantively on the issue of Genocide within a contemporary context, they must eventually be able to give meaning to its existence and the mandate of its practice by Yahweh from within the Old Testament. The issues related to this discussion can be enormous, particularly within an ideological climate that is highly suspicious and critical of all encompassing metanarratives, immersed in supercessionism, such as Christianity.

Stanley Gundry's edited work: Show Them No Mercy – 4 Views of God and Canaanite Genocide, attempts to address this very difficult issue through three essays presented by C.S. Cowles – Professor of Bible and Theology at Point Loma Nazarene University, Eugene H. Merrill – Professor of Old Testament studies at Dallas Theological Seminary, Daniel L. Gard – Dean of Graduate Studies and Associate Professor of Exegetical Theology at Concordia Theological Seminary and Tremper Longman III – Professor of Old Testament in Westmont College. Each contributor was commissioned to provide, from their theological tradition and perspective, a meaningful explanation of how to understand the Genocidal accounts described in the Exodus narrative, during the Conquest of the Promised Land. In short, how do we make Christian sense of the "herem," particularly as outlined in Deuteronomy 20:1-20, often referred to interestingly enough as the "Manual of War (Merrill 70)."

In general it would appear that there are three primary levels upon which the discussion of Genocide in the Bible must take place. The first level, more narrowly and most often discussed, would be the selection and annihilation (by divine fiat) the Canaanites during the period of the conquest of the Promised Land by Joshua and the Israelites. In general this will be the primary focus of this paper as related to the book: Show Them No Mercy
– 4 Views of God and Canaanite Genocide.

The second level (no less important) and in very much a related sense, would be the Genocide instigated and perpetuated by Yahweh Himself – depending on the context, often referred to as the Yahweh War, discussed at length by Merrill (pgs 63-101). There are three particular expressions of this:

a. Yahweh leading the battles and wars Himself and guaranteeing their success (with the Israelites) against the Canaanites,

b. Large scale Genocidal events such as the The Noahic Flood and Sodom and Gomorrah (independent of the Israelites) in the OT

c. The promise in the New Testament of Christ's final judgment and destruction of ALL those who are disobedient to Him. Notably three of the four authors (i.e. Merrill, Gard and Longman), as support for their Arguments, refer or allude to The Final Judgment as a kind of Genocide from the book of Revelation e.g. Revelation 19:11-21.

The third level of this discussion on Genocide in the Biblical text is comprised, in a related sense, of the following two elements:

The True Character and Nature of God

How does one reconcile what might appear to be radical differences in God's character and nature, particularly as compared between Jesus in the New Testament and Yahweh within the Old Testament. Ostensibly, is the God in the New Testament the same as the God in the Old Testament? By way of example, how does the Christian explain to a Post-Modern unbeliever what he believes to be apparent incongruities between the nature of Yahweh in the Old Testament and the nature of Jesus in the New Testament? To put it in the brutal terms of a nonChristian, post-modern critic: "Was Jesus complicit and present at Canaanite cities of Jericho and Ai as the Israelites in horrific bloody fashion, stabbed, hacked and chopped down the Canaanite non-military personnel such as mothers, girls and boys, young children and infants in arms?" And, less importantly, this is to say nothing of the often practiced complete (to many senseless) destruction of their entire culture and all of their resources i.e. animals, food and buildings etc.

Moral and Ethical Consistency Between the Old and New Testaments

One significant, final and inescapable issue has to do with our view of scripture, particularly, as it is related to infallibility and inerrancy – with and between both the Old and New Testaments; and the resulting hermeneutical and interpretive approach that one takes regarding the texts referring to Genocide. How does Jesus' Sermon on the Mount, with its uncompromising mandate on limitless forgiveness, unconditionally loving your enemies and helping the oppressed square with the command to implement Yahweh's devastating herem (i.e. "show them no mercy") in the Old Testament? If the Sermon on the Mount is true morally and ethically, how can, (in particular) the indiscriminate slaughter of helpless (innocent?) women and children be equally true as well? If both texts are equally authoritative, then for many, at least on the surface it would appear that there is an insurmountable conundrum in trying to make sense between these two testaments.

Again, as a conclusion to the Introduction, in a world that has become increasingly more knowledgeable and sensitive about the Church's historical broad connectedness to Genocide, we must understand that to a certain degree, we are increasingly, more and more: "on report;" and as a result we must be able to:

1. Provide thoughtful and substantive discussion on what is in essence a difficult apologetic issue for many Christian and non-Christians to accept, articulate and comprehend, in the light of the Biblical claims of a loving and gracious God.
   
2. Be able to speak with a kind of "prophetic voice" with a very clear and poignant "thus saith the Lord" when it comes to resisting, speaking out against, and stopping contemporary expressions of Genocide in our world today. Again, by way of example: If Israel in the Old Testament can claim that by divine fiat the justification for their genocidal activity, then why can't other religious groups and traditions in our world today claim the very same privilege for themselves? What is the difference? Indeed those declaring Jihad already have!
   
3. Finally, for many in the world, there is simply too much of a close connection between the Genocide in the Old Testament and the historical Church's involvement in Genocidal activity, regardless of it is role as 'Bystander' or out right "complicity." Even if the Genocide in the Old Testament was justified, we need to be better able to clearly distance from it, the Church's connectionto Genocide within the history of the Church itself; and until we are better able to accomplish this, then much of the moral high ground that we wish tooccupy in this issue may be untenable (Cowles 37).
   

Summary of Conclusions and Response:

To be honest I found the book Show Them No Mercy to be helpful and frustrating at the same time. The wide diversity of theological traditions represented allowed for a fair amount of in depth and creative hermeneutics related to the Israelite Genocide perpetuated against the Canaanites. There is a clear and significant break, on the view of scripture, between Cowles and the other three authors Merrill (who is Dispensational), Gard and Longman (both whom are "Reformed" in their theology - as I am, sorta more "Dutch Reformed").¹ They nestled their arguments a highly forensic matrix, with Longman leaving the unfortunate impression of being myopic and irritatingly arrogant; as well as moribund for the reader. The attribute of God's justice must be appeased – clearly; but Canaanites or not, these were human beings, with lives, hearts and meaningful relationships; who felt pain as well as joy; and just like the rest of us were made in Imago Dei. Longman definitely gave the impression, from a hyper-reformed point of view: (that I interpret and articulate in admittedly a non-scholarly fashion as) "Hey! It really sucks to be the non-elect!"

Cowles (Neo-Orthodox?), on the other hand, pleads convincingly for grace and love in regard to the Canaanites and the devastating herem that was unleashed upon them. He is unconvinced that the same God that we all know as Jesus Christ could have in any way been a part in facilitating the Genocide against the Canaanites. While Merrill, Gard and Longman stimulated the mind in their hermeneutic, Cowles ignited the heart in his radical use and interpretation of scripture related to the Canaanite Genocide. While Cowles proposition is inspiring in many respects, he too unfortunately sees in monocular fashion. Jesus Christ is not only Savior – He is likewise Lord as well. And as Lord, does those things that Lord's must do, such as when we read in Matthew 25:15-28 in the ominous Parable of the Talents. In short, the parallel here is the Christ is both Redeemer and Judge, not just Redeemer.

Metaphorically, I find that Merrill (less so), Gard and Longman, stand behind Calvin, Luther and Zwingli, coolly pontificating their positive intellectualized theology from the German lecture hall, while Cowles sits at a French Café table with William Wilberforce, William Booth and Brian McClaren – pounding on the table and beseeching all of us to be more circumspect and thoughtful in our interpretation of scripture and the resulting view of our fellow man.

So what might be a truncated overview of each of Cowles, Merrill, Gard and Longman's arguments?

Radical Discontinuity

C.S. Cowles

Radical Discontinuity for Cowles simply means that ALL of scripture must be interpreted in solely in the light of the revelation of Christ - who He is, what He did and what He taught. ANYPLACE where scripture speaks in such a way that is not consistent with Christ, then it must be discounted or explained in another manner – time and space prevent me from illustrating how forcefully he argues this. For Cowles the alleged mandate from Yahweh to annihilate the Canaanites must be explained as Judeo-cultural phenomena and not as a mandate from Yahweh. In other words, Cowles would argue that, Yahweh is invoked by the Israelites to justify their actions against the Canaanites – a people whose land they took over and who ethnically and culturally were different from them. Cowles is so adamant about this principle that he really does appear to embrace a kind of Marcionism (something that the other author's collectively accuse him of as well); but to be fair not without his appealing to the superiority of Christ over and throughout all Scripture. Importantly, he notes in his response to Longman's essay on Spiritual Continuity: "There is a scarlet threat that runs through the Old and New Testaments, that ties together the beginning and the end, and that discloses God's fundamental character. It is not the herem but the cross (Cowles 195)."

While I am highly sympathetic to Cowles use of Christ in his argument, I find that I am not ready to part with my traditional views of Scripture. Marcionism is a dangerous heresy. Cutting and pasting the Old Testament in Jeffersonian fashion can really disrupt the authoritative nature of all of Scripture. It is an irresistible and pernicious slippery slope. However, I am not yet ready to surrender this highly visceral subject matter to dispassionate forensic neophytes as well. Genocide under any circumstances is tragic and heart wrenching, and Cowles more than any of the other contributors captured this spirit in his discussion.

Moderate Discontinuity

Eugene H. Merrill

Merrill describes his Moderate Discontinuity largely through a Dispensational lens. What he means by this is, that the best way to give meaning to the Genocidal events in the Old Testament is to understand: "the moral and ethical dilemma of Yahweh war must also remain without satisfying rational explanation [This is the discontinuity part]… all that can be said is that if God is all the Bible says he is, all that he does must be good – and that includes his authorization of genocide (Merrill 94)." Merrill, in essence, leaves us with a kind of Kantian "leap of faith" over this particular matter.

My strongest concern regarding Merrill's position overall is that his explanation of the herem as a "Yahweh War" being comprehensively prosecuted personally by Yahweh as the Divine Warrior, leaves me with the uncomfortable and prickly image of the God of the Old and New Testaments, personally involved in the regular, easy and bloody slaughter of women, children and infants. For a person caught between Longman's Spiritual Continuity and Cowles Radical Discontinuity, it would seem to me that Merrill's position appears to be the most tenable. The idea of a good transcendent over arching purpose that remains mysterious, appeals to me more than a Neo-Marcionism on one hand and cold, detached annihilationalism by God on the other.

Eschatological Continuity

Daniel Gard

Very simply, Gard argues in his position on Eschatological Continuity that the Old Testament herem can only be properly understood in the light of the Yahweh War in which he extends to the end times. In essence, the Canaanite Genocide in the Old Testament have meaning because the function as "types" for inevitable future events. Therefore: "To Gard, the only factor that can, in the final analysis, lead to a proper understanding of the Old Testament genocide is its persistent future orientation (Merrill 151)." Working off of his discussion related to the final judgment, he notes: "The question is truly not one about God's love but about his justice, once acted out in history as it will be on the last day. He preserved then and will always preserve his people (Gard 140)." To which I can only respond with "Yikes!"

Gard and Longman theologically are not very different from each other. I find both of them to be narrowly and overtly forensic (almost clinical) in their discussion and understanding of the Canaanite Genocides. For them, there appears to be little or no compassion - nor even the need for mystery associated with God's ultimate purpose and reason for the Canaanites complete destruction. They were destroyed because of their sin, their non-elect status and simply because Yahweh willed it. I think Cowles is correct, in his almost shrill responses that call Merrill and especially Gard and Longman, to having the kind of compassion for the Canaanites that Christ had for His enemies; and that He commanded us to have as well.

Spiritual Continuity

Tremper Longman III

Longman also recognizes the eschatological continuity argument that Gard purports, but arrives at it through a different hermeneutic. In short, Longman sees the Canaanite genocide as Yahweh's judgment for their sin and their non-people-of-God status. In view of the totality of scripture and the purpose of God, their fate parallels and is consistent with the fate of those who live throughout all of history. God is Sovereign and will do as He purposes simply because He is Sovereign; and this cannot be questioned. The spiritual nature and providence of God determines a people's course and consequences. Again, even more than Gard, he embraces an almost off-the-charts forensic model in his view of how God interacts with mankind. He notes in his conclusion: "The period of God's extraordinary grace, often called common grace, is a special circumstance. In this light, we should not be amazed that God ordered the death of the Canaanites, but rather we should stand in amazement that he lets anyone live (Longman 185)."

Surely, Longman's comment above cannot be that narrow in terms of how God chooses to interact with us. God's relationship with us clearly means more than just His law and Holiness. His relationship with us also and necessarily involves His love and grace which are no less true of His nature than law and holiness. It's worth noting that this is basically Cowles argument as well. There must be more balance in the use of God's divine and moral attributes and the implications associated with them in relationship to mankind. I find that Gard and Longman unrelenting constricted and telescopic in their use of forensic Justification.

In conclusion, Show Them NO MERCY was stimulating, but not really satisfying – it left me hungrier, with more questions, than contented and full with helpful from helpful ones. In some respects, I learned (and was alarmed) with how freely some scholars are willing to trade away a balanced approach to difficult issues in order to be slavishly consistent to with one's own [narrow] ideological and theological paradigms. If I am forced to choose with whom I agreed with most in spirit, I would say that I love Cowles emphasis on Christ and the demand that we model His life of love and grace to all people. I found Merrill's ultimate position that of mystery in knowing God's ultimate purpose (despite his Dispensational approach) broader and more intellectually honest, even if it doesn't provide the kind of specifics that give the kind of illumination that we all so desperately want on this very difficult issue. Unfortunately, while I agree very much with the doctrine of Justification, I found Gard and Longman in their foundational use of justification to explain OT genocide, to be amazingly narrow, woodenly prescriptive and coldly exclusive.

1.These latter three were strongly presuppositionlist in their view of scripture, clearly emphasizing both Old and New Testaments as equally authoritative and canonical; and as the inherent and infallible Word of God - which automatically militated the ultimate (albeit general) conclusion, universally arrived at by all three: That Yahweh was directly responsible for the Canaanite genocide. In addition, and tellingly, all three of these contributors worked out their interpretive work through an almost exclusive "justification" atonement theory lens.
I find it troubling when Christians myopically operate only out of one particular atonement theory. Implicitly and explicitly the Bible appears to harbor a number of atonement theories that, in my mind, work in concert together. For example, it seems clear to me that Christ's work begins with justification, employs redemption as a means for reconciliation, in order that we and the Created Order might experience complete restoration into the image and place that God originally intended. In the end, it's all about "at-one-ment," and this is impossible to achieve through any one particular approach.

Bibliography

Gundry, Stanley N., ed. Show Them No Mercy – 4 Views on God and Canaanite Genocide. Grand Rapids: Zondervant Publishing House, 2003

Globalism and Capitalism – A Missiological and Christian Response

The Challenge of Sermon On The Mount Economics

In Our Current Economic System

My former Sociology Professor at Geneva College, Dr. Russell Heddendorf was tirelessly known for reminding his students that: "There is always a reality beyond the one that you perceive." To perceive is to interpret [what appears to be] reality. What we determine to be as reality is what in turn predicates our behavior. The general thought is, that the better we are in perceiving reality the more informed we become when it comes to choosing the proper behavior. This is no less true those of us who intend to go into professional ministry. In like manner, understanding our ministry context (perception) is crucial if we are to be faithful in our ministry endeavor (behavior). The enveloping reality of the globalism phenomena is upon us, and its tentacles extend deeply within the Christian ethos. It's affects on the world in which we live are becoming all pervasive and will affect everything from fundraising to our missiological strategies within socio-political contexts.

Thus, we must see the vital need for all who are Christian to understand the phenomena of "globalism" in our world today. Here are the four essential things that must be understood: 1. The formal, comprehensive and objective study of the nature and dynamic of globalism itself, as a phenomena, 2. The ability to articulate thoughtfully and in non- hysterical fashion it's pernicious affects upon individuals, culture and the Church, 3. The development of an intelligent and compelling prophetic voice within the Christian community, in the critique of Globalism, 4. The ability to work intentionally, effectively and redemptively within and through a globalistic milieu.

In short, in a related sense, much like the like the phenomena of Post-Modernism.(1) it would seem that Globalism is an emerging and all encompassing ideology. Friedman notes in his book The World is Flat:

"The driving idea behind globalization is free-market capitalism – the more you let marketforces rule and the more you open your economy to free trade and competition, the more efficient and flourishing your economy will be. Globalization means the spread of free-market capitalism to virtually every country of the world…(Friedman pg. 9)

If on a global scale the production of capital is the highest good and the most sought after virtue, then all other ideologies become subordinate including cultural distinctives, mores and customs. This will be justified and legitimized by arguing the initial and obvious advantages that capitalism brings, such as, employment, higher standards of living, technology and the intoxicating allure of the entertainment industry. These things are not bad in and of themselves, if they are a result of capitalism being used as a means, rather than as a natural result of capitalism being exercised as an end. This distinction is of vital consequence.

Unwittingly or not, it is clear that Christians, Pastors and Christian Non-profits (or non-prophets?) find themselves deeply and inextricably immersed within the dynamic of hyper and pan-capitalism itself. It is a condition from which there are no simple solutions. If this Recession has reminded us of anything it is that the less people spend on "stuff" – even nonessential stuff - the less people work; the less people work (here and abroad); the less they [can?] give to non-profits organizations like churches, missions and world health organizations. This very same dynamic affects government taxes as well. The less spending, the less work, the less tax and the less collected in taxes, the less government can do because fewer taxes have been collected from goods, services and salaries/wages.

And yet this conundrum gets worse because this very same hyper, pan-capitalism that causes significant reactions and even violent responses within other cultures – particularly Islamic ones – when they encounter this strand of capitalism as a worldview. So on the one hand, we have become utterly dependent upon hyper-pancapitalism for jobs, living and giving; and yet on the other it acts as a destructive foil in and against certain cultures that in turn illicit violent responses against us. Parabolically, speaking economically:

'A butterfly flaps its wings in Europe and it storms in Southeast Asia.'

It would appear that our immersion in hyper-pancapitalism is so complete, that the stark reality is: Were the 60+ million [alleged] Christians in our culture, to suddenly live faithfully according to the Sermon on The Mount it would destroy the economy and millions would suffer and probably starve. And yet we must find a way….

In light of the sheer pervasiveness of the globalistic phenomena, Christians must become adept in developing a tri-focal lens ⁽²⁾ through which they perceive and work effectively in the ministry contexts in which they find themselves. They must become good at addressing the four aforementioned goals listed in the beginning of this essay. Christians who want to do ministry and mission, must come to grips with the notion that the inter-relatedness of all things will no longer be determined through the filters of religious and political ideology, ⁽³⁾ but rather through the burgeoning ideological kaleidoscope of hyper-pancapitalism.

1. These two are in fact very much related. One of the distinctives of Post-Modernism is the leveling of the playing field of all ideologies, as well as, the blending of cultural uniquenesses throughout the world. The often times feverish drive, on the other hand, to establish capital, demands in pragmatic fashion, that if cultural particularities cannot be assimilated, then they must be de-emphasized – if not laid aside altogether. This dynamic is frequently the root of much of the anger aimed at the West, especially the USA.
   
   
2. The three pieces of the tri-focal lens are: A. The top lens (macro), which provides the big picture of the world around us – the horizon as well as the periphery a.k.a. the interrelatedness of globalism throughout all cultures B. The middle lens (meta), which provides an intermediate view of the world around us – it focuses on those things that are emerging and eventually connect us to the big picture a.k.a. how those cultures affected by globalism are impacting us C. The bottom lens (micro), which provides us with the everyday matters and issues that are constant a.k.a. relationships, work and family lifestyle.
   

   
   

3. Capitalism is inherently empirical in the cost benefit analysis in the individual's assessment of personal quality of life. Communism for example, failed not because communists woke up one morning, changed their mind and declared it defective; but because as an ideology it couldn't consistently provide them with the basic necessities of life such as food and shelter… let alone all of the unbelievable perks enjoyed by most capitalists from the West. In like manner, "religion" may end up being treated in the same way. People in the world will be sorely tempted to make the comparison between the eventuality of future promises associated with their faith, with the and immediate pleasures and advantages connected with hyper-capitalism. Some Christians will work to have both, but as we all know, you cannot serve two masters… eventually, in an effort to park our Lexus under the shady confines of the Olive Tree, we will inadvertently back over it and feel a need to move on.