"We've got only a few decades to save the world: Somewhere between 2030 and 2050, if current trends persist, atmospheric CO2 levels will hit 500 parts per million, temperatures will rise 2 degrees, and the Greenland ice cap will begin turning to slush, causing sea levels to rise 20 feet."
http://www.wired.com/science/planetearth/magazine/15-10/ff_plant_renew
I'm not a doomsday environmentalist. I don't think that the entire world as we know it will be utterly destroyed because of some environmental response to pollution. I've watched The Day After Tomorrow, and I think it is good fiction...but fiction nonetheless. However, this recent Wired article got me thinking.
A couple of years ago, I decided to research hydrogen technology for my senior thesis in high school. Hydrogen intrigues me because it is a clean energy source. You don't have to be the premiere environmental PH.D. in the world to realize that releasing billions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere probably isn't a good thing. As I researched what was happening to the environment, I heard more and more about the coming disaster. One of the things that I discovered was that the Arctic Icecap was melting at an unprecedented rate. Satellite images of the last 30 years show a dramatic decrease of ice. Now Wired seems to be saying that this theory is justified. At the time, I wasn't completely sold, but was far more sympathetic to the argument than my surrounding Christian community. They were still in the state of disbelief.
I think that today, some Christians still don't think anything of Al Gore's cries to save the environment. But it seems that a growing number are responding. If it is true that the ocean would rise even a meter (as another article I recently read said would happen...and there's nothing we could do to stop it), then that is going to affect dramatic portions of the world. A rise of 20 feet of the sea level would effectively eliminate Manhattan. What should be the Christians's response?
First, whether or not we believe such a catastrophic event will take place, we should think about what The Creation Mandate says. As humans, we are to take dominion over the earth; to care for it and subdue it. The world is certainly being subdued. But Christians must ask themselves, what ought we do to care for God's earth? If this issue came to the forefront of second century Christians, I'm sure there would be an apathetic attitude by many, for the Gnostic heresy had quite a foothold and so people believed that matter was evil. Why ought they care about the earth?
American Christian evangelicals, with their lack of focus on the four-part gospel, means that many Christians forget (or do not know) that the world will be renewed at the end of time. They see that there is a sinful world, and that Jesus came to save people and take them to Heaven...end of story. I admit, that's a bit of a straw man, but you get my jist. Instead, Christians ought to focus on a four-part gospel: God created a good world, it was corrupted by man's Fall because of sin, Jesus came to redeem mankind, and Jesus is coming again to make all things right and make all things new! Because the earth will not pass away but be renewed, it is important. So instead of abandoning it, we ought to cultivate it as we were made to do.
Second, Christians should not entirely dismiss the idea of rising oceans. Suppose it was going to take place, albeit over the course of many years. As Christians ought to have a heart for people, and the rising water will put people into a worse situation, Christians should be concerned at plan appropriately to lead relief efforts. Imagine Katrina on a global scale. If we are the hands and feet of Jesus, we should bring healing and life like He did.
Third, Christians should do what they can to not pollute the atmosphere. Personally, I would love to get a hybrid vehicle. Not only does it help the environment, but it saves money that is normally spent on gas! It is worth investing thought into what can be done.
I hope I haven't seemed obsessively concerned about environment. As with all things in life, there needs to be balance. From my attempts in the past, I have discovered that finding and articulating where exactly a Christian's mindset should be regarding the environment is not easy. But maybe, if nothing else, my post will cause you to put some thought into the topic.
Taking Every Thought Captive,
Zachary
Thursday, September 27, 2007
Tuesday, September 18, 2007
Evangelism
A few days ago, I went out to talk with high school students from NYC high schools at the Manhattan Mall on 32nd and 6th. I went as a part of Student Venture, a ministry to NYC high school students. Last year, some TKC students partnered with Student Venture to reach students at Norman Thomas. Further, the House of Thatcher focused this involvement as their City Engagement project. This year, they have contacted the House of Lewis about joining them in that endeavor. After discussing it as an Exec Team and sending some of our guys to an informational lunch, we decided as a House to commit to this project with the House of Thatcher. This is breaking new ground on the TKC front because, to my knowledge, no Houses have ever joined up for City Engagement. This year, we have already begun, and it is not even November. We are truly “raising the bar,” which is a mantra that has been taken up by Student Development for this year. They have raised the bar in the level of training they are giving their leaders, in the facilities for that training, in the gym membership and surely in other ways that I do not even know about yet or that do not come immediately to mind.
So I listened in the Student Lounge to Chris, the point-person for involvement with Student Venture. She talked a bit about the vision and how engagement takes place. It seems like they have thought this through quite well. It also seems like Student Venture’s influence is not limited to one high school. I would be interested in researching more about Student Venture on the internet. Pennie Gelwicks was heavily involved last year and is the point-person in the House of Thatcher. She invited and encouraged our House to participate.
That is a lengthy introduction to what I found myself doing. I was walking in the food court of the Manhattan Mall, approaching students with a couple of other Kings students, asking them in a survey questions about themselves. Particularly, I asked one person, due to the length of time we had and our assignment from Chris. I went through the questions. First, I asked about music preferences and other banal topics. It lead into the last three questions which were of a more personal nature. Did the person feel loved by friends and family? Did he feel loved by God? Did he want me to tell him more about that love that God had for him?
While I felt fine talking asking the first questions, I didn’t feel as comfortable when I hit those last questions. Why? What right do I have to pry into a complete stranger’s beliefs and personal feelings? We are told in Scripture to always be ready to give an answer to anyone who asks about the faith that we have in Christ Jesus. Perhaps my discomfort comes from the role-reversal. I am asking questions instead of giving answers. I believe that being proactive in things is good. But I don’t feel like I have earned a right to be heard by that stranger about why I think they should change their beliefs. It seems to be disingenuous. I’m selling them something.
Even if I have pure motives in witnessing to them, which obviously I do, I’m not at a good place to talk with them about spiritual things because I haven’t showed them the love of Jesus. Whenever Jesus or the early church shared the good news, it came with all the benefits of a changed life and the presentation was accompanied by acts of love. I think I would feel far more comfortable with sharing my faith if I did an act of service or kindness and was asked about why I did it. That, to me, is the perfect “in” to sharing my faith. But engaging strangers about their personal beliefs with the intention of changing their mind just feels wrong to me.
I may feel uncomfortable from my lack of experience and practice. It is normal to feel shy or intimidated by a new situation. It’s true, street evangelism is still a new thing for me. Maybe I’ll grow to love it. But I feel that the damage that can be done to the hearer by a purely rational presentation of the Gospel must often outweigh the good. The risk is high, maybe too high. When leaving someone with a tract or explanation of what Jesus did without any proof that Jesus is real in my life, am I stripping the news of goodness? When attempting to change a culture, one must first understand the culture, then speak to the culture in a way that appeals to it. If I am presenting to postmoderns, I ought to prove to them by my actions that what I am saying works. Maybe decades ago, the ground was fertile and all that was necessary was for the seed of the Good News to be sown. The culture was one that already had a knowledge of who Jesus was, maybe people just needed questions answered about how it applied to their lives. There was enough common ground and receptiveness that walking up to a stranger and telling them about what Jesus did for them was enough to bring them to their knees in tears. But I do not believe that is the situation we see today. In many ways, belief in Jesus could thoroughly explained in the most solid, rational way possible, but because the hearer has little concern for rational explanations, the news falls on deaf ears.
God’s message will go out and bear fruit. Of that there is no doubt. But it would be foolish for His disciples to approach unbelievers in an outdated and ineffective manner. As in any situation, a rhetorician who wants his argument to be heard must speak to the needs and desires of his listener. The speaker must determine which way of introducing his message would cause his listener to be the most receptive. I’d like to be able to say that the gospel is so obviously a blessing that anyone should be immediately receptive to it. But I do not think that such a view reflects reality.
I hope I haven’t sounded too harsh. I’m sure that The Spirit has used this kind of evangelism to great purposes in the past. It’s just that I question if such a method is really the preferred method of spreading the love of Jesus where I live today.
I’m excited about Student Venture and what will happen with that this year. I know that there will be plenty of opportunity to serve and relate with those high school kids on Fridays when they come to the Student Lounge. I hope to be a blessing to them there. I hope to be able to present to them the love of Jesus in a way that they can see and understand. And I pray that God moves in great ways as we, students of The King’s College seek to spread Jesus’ love and His Kingdom.
Taking Every Thought Captive,
Zachary
So I listened in the Student Lounge to Chris, the point-person for involvement with Student Venture. She talked a bit about the vision and how engagement takes place. It seems like they have thought this through quite well. It also seems like Student Venture’s influence is not limited to one high school. I would be interested in researching more about Student Venture on the internet. Pennie Gelwicks was heavily involved last year and is the point-person in the House of Thatcher. She invited and encouraged our House to participate.
That is a lengthy introduction to what I found myself doing. I was walking in the food court of the Manhattan Mall, approaching students with a couple of other Kings students, asking them in a survey questions about themselves. Particularly, I asked one person, due to the length of time we had and our assignment from Chris. I went through the questions. First, I asked about music preferences and other banal topics. It lead into the last three questions which were of a more personal nature. Did the person feel loved by friends and family? Did he feel loved by God? Did he want me to tell him more about that love that God had for him?
While I felt fine talking asking the first questions, I didn’t feel as comfortable when I hit those last questions. Why? What right do I have to pry into a complete stranger’s beliefs and personal feelings? We are told in Scripture to always be ready to give an answer to anyone who asks about the faith that we have in Christ Jesus. Perhaps my discomfort comes from the role-reversal. I am asking questions instead of giving answers. I believe that being proactive in things is good. But I don’t feel like I have earned a right to be heard by that stranger about why I think they should change their beliefs. It seems to be disingenuous. I’m selling them something.
Even if I have pure motives in witnessing to them, which obviously I do, I’m not at a good place to talk with them about spiritual things because I haven’t showed them the love of Jesus. Whenever Jesus or the early church shared the good news, it came with all the benefits of a changed life and the presentation was accompanied by acts of love. I think I would feel far more comfortable with sharing my faith if I did an act of service or kindness and was asked about why I did it. That, to me, is the perfect “in” to sharing my faith. But engaging strangers about their personal beliefs with the intention of changing their mind just feels wrong to me.
I may feel uncomfortable from my lack of experience and practice. It is normal to feel shy or intimidated by a new situation. It’s true, street evangelism is still a new thing for me. Maybe I’ll grow to love it. But I feel that the damage that can be done to the hearer by a purely rational presentation of the Gospel must often outweigh the good. The risk is high, maybe too high. When leaving someone with a tract or explanation of what Jesus did without any proof that Jesus is real in my life, am I stripping the news of goodness? When attempting to change a culture, one must first understand the culture, then speak to the culture in a way that appeals to it. If I am presenting to postmoderns, I ought to prove to them by my actions that what I am saying works. Maybe decades ago, the ground was fertile and all that was necessary was for the seed of the Good News to be sown. The culture was one that already had a knowledge of who Jesus was, maybe people just needed questions answered about how it applied to their lives. There was enough common ground and receptiveness that walking up to a stranger and telling them about what Jesus did for them was enough to bring them to their knees in tears. But I do not believe that is the situation we see today. In many ways, belief in Jesus could thoroughly explained in the most solid, rational way possible, but because the hearer has little concern for rational explanations, the news falls on deaf ears.
God’s message will go out and bear fruit. Of that there is no doubt. But it would be foolish for His disciples to approach unbelievers in an outdated and ineffective manner. As in any situation, a rhetorician who wants his argument to be heard must speak to the needs and desires of his listener. The speaker must determine which way of introducing his message would cause his listener to be the most receptive. I’d like to be able to say that the gospel is so obviously a blessing that anyone should be immediately receptive to it. But I do not think that such a view reflects reality.
I hope I haven’t sounded too harsh. I’m sure that The Spirit has used this kind of evangelism to great purposes in the past. It’s just that I question if such a method is really the preferred method of spreading the love of Jesus where I live today.
I’m excited about Student Venture and what will happen with that this year. I know that there will be plenty of opportunity to serve and relate with those high school kids on Fridays when they come to the Student Lounge. I hope to be a blessing to them there. I hope to be able to present to them the love of Jesus in a way that they can see and understand. And I pray that God moves in great ways as we, students of The King’s College seek to spread Jesus’ love and His Kingdom.
Taking Every Thought Captive,
Zachary
Tuesday, September 4, 2007
A Troublesome Situation
Some people make me angry. It doesn't happen often, but when it does, I can get irate. For example, when someone leaves $12 million to a spoiled dog. And I'm not pulling an ad hominem. This particular recipient is actually a canine.
Let me explain. A couple of weeks ago, a famous New York real estate owner, billionaire Leona Helmsley, died. She was one of the richest people in the world (369th to be exact, according to Forbes). From what I understand, this lady was a ruthless businessperson. In fact, the US media called her "The Queen of Mean." I'm not sure whether to agree or not, but given that she left more money for her dog than for any of her family, I think I'd agree. Albeit most of her fortune went toward charity. But maybe that's because she had no friends in life. Her dog, Trouble, was likely Helmsley's best friend.
Helmsley liked to call her dog "Princess." Trouble would eat gourmet human food, but only if it were hand-fed. The little pooch had a tenatious side--and would bite anyone it pleased, except for its master. Helmsley often found her dog's biting to be entertaining. An article in the New York Post, by Dareh Gregorian says that "many of those who had encounters with the dog over the years said she took after her infamous owner--demanding and mean." And the $12 million trust proves that the 8 year old Maltese was obsessed over.
Further, in the will, Helmsley's brother was only given $10 million. Two of her four grandchildren were given $5 million each; the other two received nothing for reasons that weren't explained in the will. But who in their right mind would spend $12 million on a D-O-G??
I don't know much more about Helmsley's life. Yet where she put her money tells me that she does not value family. And it tells me that she must not have had many friends. In fact, she probably had no REAL friends. And instead of making me mad, that saddens me.
It saddens me that someone would live their life, not growing in friendship and love with other human beings. It saddens me that someone would be so self-centered as to spend their life and resources like Helmsley did. It saddens me that Helmsley left this earth thinking more about her dog and what would happen to it than about her own soul and the souls of others.
True, I cannot discern her heart. But this kind of selfishness is saddening just because it is so prevalent. It points to a world that is broken and shattered. It reminds me of a world that is pursuing its own pleasures, seeking for fulfillment and running from the very Person who could make their lives complete. It reminds me of the Fall. And that reminds me that I too am a sinner.
I may not have $12 million dollars to put in my will when I die. I may not have $330 million that I won from the Mega Millions Lottery like just happened. I don't have ANY money when I am weighed on scales of that size. But I do have a couple of things that are worth far more than what Helmsley has.
I have TIME. She doesn't. Her clock expired at 89 years. I still have (if it is the Lord's will) many healthy years to go. As Professor Fotopulos said in my business class last week, time is our most valuable resource. And when it is spent, we can NEVER get it back.
And I have JESUS. Again, I don't know her heart, but given how she lived, I think I judge correctly in my statement. I am reminded of the old song: "I'd rather have Jesus than silver or gold, I'd rather be His than have riches untold. I'd rather have Jesus than houses or land, I'd rather be lead by His nail-pierced hand...Than to be the king of a vast domain, or be held in sin's dread sway. I'd rather have Jesus than anything this world offers today."
When I consider what I do have, I am not so angry that a dog inherits $12 million and I have never inherited a cent. Instead, I count my blessings and praise God because of the life that I have, the time he has given me, and the relationship I have with Him and with others. Solomon said it best. Meaningless, meaningless are riches for a life that is not fearing God and obeying His commandments. Part of me pities Helmsley and the soulless creature Trouble. I have the meaning than they could never experience. To fear, love, and serve Jesus is the ultimate pleasure in life.
Taking every thought captive,
Zachary
Let me explain. A couple of weeks ago, a famous New York real estate owner, billionaire Leona Helmsley, died. She was one of the richest people in the world (369th to be exact, according to Forbes). From what I understand, this lady was a ruthless businessperson. In fact, the US media called her "The Queen of Mean." I'm not sure whether to agree or not, but given that she left more money for her dog than for any of her family, I think I'd agree. Albeit most of her fortune went toward charity. But maybe that's because she had no friends in life. Her dog, Trouble, was likely Helmsley's best friend.
Helmsley liked to call her dog "Princess." Trouble would eat gourmet human food, but only if it were hand-fed. The little pooch had a tenatious side--and would bite anyone it pleased, except for its master. Helmsley often found her dog's biting to be entertaining. An article in the New York Post, by Dareh Gregorian says that "many of those who had encounters with the dog over the years said she took after her infamous owner--demanding and mean." And the $12 million trust proves that the 8 year old Maltese was obsessed over.
Further, in the will, Helmsley's brother was only given $10 million. Two of her four grandchildren were given $5 million each; the other two received nothing for reasons that weren't explained in the will. But who in their right mind would spend $12 million on a D-O-G??
I don't know much more about Helmsley's life. Yet where she put her money tells me that she does not value family. And it tells me that she must not have had many friends. In fact, she probably had no REAL friends. And instead of making me mad, that saddens me.
It saddens me that someone would live their life, not growing in friendship and love with other human beings. It saddens me that someone would be so self-centered as to spend their life and resources like Helmsley did. It saddens me that Helmsley left this earth thinking more about her dog and what would happen to it than about her own soul and the souls of others.
True, I cannot discern her heart. But this kind of selfishness is saddening just because it is so prevalent. It points to a world that is broken and shattered. It reminds me of a world that is pursuing its own pleasures, seeking for fulfillment and running from the very Person who could make their lives complete. It reminds me of the Fall. And that reminds me that I too am a sinner.
I may not have $12 million dollars to put in my will when I die. I may not have $330 million that I won from the Mega Millions Lottery like just happened. I don't have ANY money when I am weighed on scales of that size. But I do have a couple of things that are worth far more than what Helmsley has.
I have TIME. She doesn't. Her clock expired at 89 years. I still have (if it is the Lord's will) many healthy years to go. As Professor Fotopulos said in my business class last week, time is our most valuable resource. And when it is spent, we can NEVER get it back.
And I have JESUS. Again, I don't know her heart, but given how she lived, I think I judge correctly in my statement. I am reminded of the old song: "I'd rather have Jesus than silver or gold, I'd rather be His than have riches untold. I'd rather have Jesus than houses or land, I'd rather be lead by His nail-pierced hand...Than to be the king of a vast domain, or be held in sin's dread sway. I'd rather have Jesus than anything this world offers today."
When I consider what I do have, I am not so angry that a dog inherits $12 million and I have never inherited a cent. Instead, I count my blessings and praise God because of the life that I have, the time he has given me, and the relationship I have with Him and with others. Solomon said it best. Meaningless, meaningless are riches for a life that is not fearing God and obeying His commandments. Part of me pities Helmsley and the soulless creature Trouble. I have the meaning than they could never experience. To fear, love, and serve Jesus is the ultimate pleasure in life.
Taking every thought captive,
Zachary
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
