Of the Kingdom

Jesus Example

Was Jesus’ work on earth spiritual or physical? It was certainly spiritual, but nothing in God’s kingdom is ever purely spirit. Even God, who is Spirit, takes on flesh. The demons of pride and domination were cast out, so to speak, of the first century religious institutions, but so too were literal demons cast out of individual people. Christ preaches against greed, particularly amongst the religious, but he also makes a whip to drive out the money changers from the Temple. Jesus conquered spiritual sin on the cross, but did that in parallel with His conquest of physical death in the Resurrection. We are spirits indeed, but we are spirits clothed in flesh. The church is the spiritual body of Christ, but it is ones whose purpose is to effect physical change in this world. After all, the arguments the body parts have is over which is more effective in the physical world.

Why did Christ come? As it turns out, He had a lot to do. He came to “bear witness unto the truth,” (Jhn 18:37) so that “they might have life, and that they might have [it] more abundantly,” (Jhn 10:10) so they “might have my joy fulfilled in themselves,” (Jhn 17:13) to “seek and save that which was lost,” (Luk 19:10) to call “sinners to repentance,” (Luke 5:32, 1Ti 1:15) to the “lost sheep of Israel,” (Mat 15:24) to “save that which was lost” (Mat 18:11) to be the “Saviour of the world” (1Jo 4:14), that “we might live through him” (1Jo 4:9).

But His mission was not just preaching. Though salvation was certainly a theme and major part of his commission, it was not all of it. The longest passage discussing His purpose for coming to earth was read by Him in Nazareth at the beginning of His ministry. He reads, “The Spirit of the Lord [is] upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised, To preach the acceptable year of the Lord” (Luke 4:18-19). Certainly there is a lot of preaching involved. But there is also liberation, deliverance, and healing. His commission was not simply to preach and convert by means of healings; they were independent parts of his commission. Of course, this could be spiritualized if isolated from Christ’s work. But interpreted by the life Christ then set out to live, and considering the sorts of things He spent most of His time doing, it would strain the text beyond its breaking point to think of this as being exclusively spiritual.

Jesus taught about the living bread, but he also fed 5000 people because they were hungry. He cleansed lepers for compassion sake. When he healed ten lepers, and He knew that only one of them would return. I do not think Christ would have withheld healing on the ten even if he knew that none would return. Truly, none did return. On the night of his arrest, His ministry collapsed as, “all forsook him, and fled” (Mark 14:50). The 5000 he fed. The 10 lepers he cleansed. Every single person for whom He did a miracle and to whom He preached left Him. At the time of his crucifixion, Jesus ministry was an utter failure in terms of evangelism. He had zero remaining converts. But had Jesus’ work up to that point been completely destroyed? Would the only value of His ministry come from His Resurrection?

The Prophets’ Mission

Such is the story of many of the prophets. Most ended their ministries killed in Jerusalem by those to whom they preached and demonstrated the Kingdom. The most pious tended to be the most rejected (compare the success of Jonah to Jeremiah). Does their only value, and that of Christ, lie in their ability to win souls?

I would answer emphatically, “No.” Christ showed the Kingdom of God while on earth. Every demon that was cast out was a picture of the coming Kingdom. Every cleansed leper, every full belly, every kind word and beautiful act Jesus did was a picture of that which was about to dawn. The feeding of the 5000 was a physical prophecy of the coming Kingdom; it taught about how hunger was a fleeting thing, something which would have no place in the Kingdom of Heaven. During His ministry, Christ sends out His disciples and tells them, “Heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, raise the dead, cast out devils: freely ye have received, freely give” (Mat 10:8). Their commission was not

Eternal Value

But how could any of these physical works have any real value? Would not any earthly deed be far out-shadowed by even the smallest eternal deed? Certainly helping the poor is good; but the poor, along with their slums and villages, hunger and disease; will rot and decay, or else be consumed along with all other things in the end times. Wouldn’t even a single salvation, a single person going from mortal to eternal, outweigh any amount of conversion-less charity?

The answer depends entirely on your view of eternity. If you see heaven as a place containing only souls, then evangelism is really the only important thing. All charity must become a means to that end. But did Christ heal, cast out and feed purely for the purpose of conversion?

All Things New

But what if Christ was serious when He promised to, “Make all things new” (Rev 21:5)? What if “all things” meant more than human “souls”? What if there were more to God’s redemptive work than the human element?

Will David’s Psalms be forever consumed when the elements melt away? Or will they too have a Resurrection? Perhaps the echoes of God’s glory which we hear of in the Psalms will be given new life, unclothed of the cloak of human language, and we can hear in their full beauty the melodies which David’s soul so imperfectly expressed. Will the judgments of Moses pass away? Maybe these earthly shadows will become the pillars upon which the new Temple will stand. Will Nehemiah’s Jerusalem be destroyed by the New Jerusalem? Or will the New be built upon the eternal part of the old?

When we see the glorious appearing of the New Heavens and the New Earth, will see what God has prepared for us, using our hands to achieve his purpose? Will the Holy Place contain living paintings of the ending of the Slave Trade, of the great Christian compassion on those with the Black Death, of the steadfastness of Martin Luther, of the sacrifice of missionaries? Will the courtyard of the Temple contain sculptures of the apostles and prophets and teachers? After all, are we not the clay and He the potter?

Art and Justice and Industry and Order are all real things, or at least they are as real as we are. And though canvases and courthouses and stones will pass away, the work of Man, or at least that part of Man’s work which was on God’s behalf, will be Resurrected like Man will be (or at least that part of Man which has gained eternity). For our God is not a destroyer of the Good; will He abolish just laws, burn beautiful paintings, smash efficient machines and tear down cathedrals? No, for this is the job of another. When He comes again, it will be to make all things new, not to obliterate all things. Humanity is His tool, His paintbrush, his violin. For whatever glorious reason, He has chosen to bring about His Kingdom in us and by us.

God never rebuked the tax collector for being a tax collector (3:13) nor the soldier for being a soldier (Luke 3:14). Paul never gave a universal command for believers to leave their jobs and become missionaries. Indeed, he talked of the variety of the gifts, about the beautiful diversity of the body. Moses judged. David sang. Nehemiah built. All by God’s power and at His command. Paul didn’t judge, or sing, or build; he evangelized. But whose work will survive into eternity? Certainly the souls that were saved by Paul’s word. But are we to believe that only some of the work commanded by God will endure? Will Paul’s work endure and that of Moses and David and Nehemiah pass away? Or will all of God’s work endure, even if we cannot conceive of how?

But isn’t this a much more consistent picture of the world? Doesn’t it help make the picture of Christianity more reasonable? If salvation is the only eternal thing, then anyone not actively engaged in evangelism is wasting his time. Everything becomes wholly consumed with that. Poetry, art, business and medicine all become means to an end. God would only delight in them insofar as they were able to bring about salvation, not as things in themselves. But this is not the God who inspired the Psalms, who gave light to the stars, who designed the Temple. God cares a great deal about many other things.

It seems to me that we have simply lacked the creativity to conceive of how this might be. But we must overcome the temptation of thinking that our vague conception of the Resurrection of humans is all that really matters. We need to look forward to the glorious dawn and take Peter’s advice: “Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness. Wherefore, beloved, seeing that ye look for such things, be diligent that ye may be found of him in peace, without spot, and blameless” (2Pt 3:13-14).

We certainly need to seek moral perfection of ourselves and others in Christ, but we must also do a different thing. We must “look for such things.” What things? We must “…look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.” God is commanding us to see the bits of His Kingdom which are now visible. We should bits of this righteousness dwelling in Beethoven’s 9^th Symphony, Notre Dame, Milton’s “Paradise Lost,” Newton’s Theory of Gravitation or Algebra. The righteousness, the dikaiosynē, the part of a thing which conforms to and glorifies the Father, ought to be sought after by us.

Then comes the really exciting part. In whatever capacity God grants us, we should be his agents in bring His Kingdom to earth. This includes evangelism, but also art and poetry and social work and government. We need to first pray to God, “Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth, as [it is] in heaven” (Mat 6:10). Then we must do the harder thing; we must take the advice God gave to Joshua when Joshua knew what he should do, “Get thee up; wherefore liest thou thus upon thy face?” (Jos 7:10). We must get up off our knees and bring God’s Kingdom to earth, by word and deed, by pen and hammer, by paintbrush and guitar, by law and contract.

On Evangelism and Coercion

I spoke with a Christian classmate and they said that their stomach turns when they hear the word “Evangelical”. I asked them why, and they explained that feelings of coercion and pride were at the root of the feeling. I suppose that the person felt like “evangelism” was tantamount (at least connotatively) to the Inquisition: Believe or die!

This is a common perception on my sociological category. And perhaps my ancestors were indeed inquisitors and I have to deal with that true legacy. Or it’s propaganda. In either case, I’ve got a strike (or three) against me in starting any conversation because I’m an “Evangelical”. So every once in a while, I am compelled to give a defense for the word with which I am stereotyped.

Evangelism is for me simply the attempt to convince another to believe in a theory about God and the universe. This theory has brought me great joy and peace, and because I love my neighbor, I wish to share the joy and peace.

My motivation hinges on changing belief. But the interesting thing about belief is that it’s not voluntarily changeable. No matter how much money I offered to pay you, you could not believe that the tooth fairy is sitting on top of your monitor right now. Even if you stood to make $1 million, you could not actually believe in something that you believed to be false. And no matter what I threatened you with, you couldn’t change your beliefs. You could say you believe something, but clearly you can’t change your own mind this way. Coercive “belief”, isn’t belief.

The next point is one of Christian doctrine. Christians believe that salvation comes through belief (at least…). So if no one can ‘coerce’ anyone else into believing a thing and if my religion teaches that belief is required for salvation, what then is evangelism? Whatever it is, it logically cannot be coercive. What is it then?

If you want to change someone else’s mind (say, on the team that will win on Sunday), you need to use evidence. Everything from a qualitative statement like “The Cardinals have such a great offense,” to a quantitative one: “Kurt Warner threw 4583 yards in the 2008 season.” This is the way you can change a mind: present compelling evidence. The mind’s evaluates evidence: “For the ear trieth words, as the mouth tasteth meat” (Job 34:3). So give it evidence!

Do I have the truth? I think I do, as I hope everyone thinks they do. Or at least a part of it.

Isn’t it arrogant to claim that your way is the only way? It would be if I claimed that the human institution of Christianity was the only way, it would indeed be arrogant; we are humans who built it, after all. This is the incredible thing about Christianity: we don’t have a monopoly on the truth. You don’t have to go to a Christian church to be saved. You don’t have to call Jesus “Jesus.” You just have to believe in the truth. Those Christians who do this will be saved; those who don’t, won’t. Jesus actually says that many will profess to be his followers but in the end “…I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.” The same goes for every human on the planet: if you have right belief, you will be saved.

It’s not about Christianity; it’s about the truth. Just like nature, gravity doesn’t care if you’re calculating where a cannonball lands from Newton’s laws or from lots of practice. Gravity is gravity, and its rewards are not exclusive to Newtonians. We can say that Newton has perhaps the most effective and elegant way to analyze gravity on a macro scale, but a man need not know the name of Newton to use gravity effectively. The same is true for Christianity. It’s the most effective and elegant way to analyze the spiritual world, but a man need not know the name of Jesus to attain salvation.

So I am an Evangelist for Christianity as Newton was an Evangelist for physics. Did Newton coerce people into believing his theories? No. He convinced them. One piece of evidence at a time. Because his view was true, people who believed in it were better off because of their belief. And belief in Newtonian physics spread.

We consider it an obligation and an honor for a scientist to make his findings known. We look at respect on the evangelical scientist, he who tries to better the world by his revelation of truth. And this is what I aim to do: to share what I believe I understand. If my reasons and evidence are compelling, believe. If not, don’t. I am an Evangelical Christian as Newton was an Evangelical Scientist.

Church for Atheists

Along the lines of the entry earlier this week, I have been thinking about the spiritual health of non-Christians. They have the same needs as any Christian has. They need community. They need opportunities for service. They need places to express joy and thanksgiving (even if it’s directed to the universe in general). I think it’s clearly biblical to try to bring them to church. Unfortunately, all the talk about Jesus and miracles is terrifying for a staunch materialist.

When we see a man who has been beaten by robbers and left for dead, what ought we to do? Put him on our own donkey. Sure. But what if he refuses our help on the grounds that he is terrified of donkeys? He will not accept the best thing for him: to be carried to a place of rest. So do we throw up our hands and give up? After all, he had his chance and he blew it. Or do we try to pull he and the donkey together, much to the protestation of both man and beast? We know for a fact that his riding the donkey will be for his own good; coercion may be the most merciful thing.

Moreover, when we offer him wine, and he refuses, saying he doesn’t believe in the power of alcohol to dull pain. Do we force the wine upon him?

In my little rip-off of Jesus great parable, the robbers are Humanism and Materialism, the man is the atheist, and we’re in the role of the good Samaritan. Our donkey is church and the wine is prayer. For many of us, we can think of nothing else but the donkey and the wine. And in part it’s right; the church is indeed the best community on Earth and prayer is the best way man can commune with God. But the man has a deathly fear of the donkey and will not ride it; he does not believe in the wine, and will not drink it.

I propose that we consider another approach: give him all he is willing to take. He’s hurting, so let’s let him lean on us and walk towards the inn, albeit it at an excruciatingly slow pace. He won’t take wine; let’s offer him water. There is no question that he’s thirsty, almost to death for any liquid.

What is the leaning and what is the water? I’m not quite sure, because Christians haven’t quite figured out what spiritual practices are tolerable for Atheists. An Atheist would not come to a prayer meeting; would he come to a lesser communion of God by quiet meditation? Or perhaps stargazing? An atheist would not sing about Jesus; would he sing about the beauty of nature?

I am not thinking about this in typical Evangelical terms (though I think those approaches also are valid). What first motivated this was the question: how do I heal the spirits of my atheist patients? Even assuming that total spiritual healing would never come through Christ, did I not still have an obligation to heal as much as I could? So how can an atheist who is starving to death for community and parched for spiritual practice be healed in part?

I am also not talking about watering down the Gospel. The Gospel must be preached with power and authority at Church; the effort to seek and save the lost must continue unabated. But just like international work, long-term solutions are ideal, but people are starving to death today. Evangelicals have done a superb job at the long-term (eternal even) solution for the soul, but what keeps the soul of an Atheist from starving today?

I pose this question particularly to church people. I don’t know the answer. I see terrible spiritual affliction, and though the church is fighting it systemically, there are too many suffering without relief today who feel too uncomfortable to come to church. Should we have 'church' for atheists?

How can we be a Good Samaritan and give relief to the soul of the bruised and beaten Atheist today?

Henry

Two months ago on a plane to New York, I met a man named Henry. We talked pleasantries for a few minutes, but got into intense conversation rather quickly. He asked me about my research, so I showed him the pictures I had taken and described my research. It turned out that he was a scientifically-minded actor who was very impressed that I was (in his mind) actually a scientist.

God guided the conversation to spiritual things through me, and that's when things got good. I found out that he had a religious background (Episcopal), but has fallen away from the faith and had embraced atheism for the sake of reason. Most of the conversation was spent discussing his security in Atheism; I presented the rationality and defensibility of the Christian Faith.

Before parting ways, we exchanged contact information. I sent him an email when I returned, and he asked me for my mailing address. I provided this, and before I knew it, I had received a letter, handwritten and on nice stationary. He said he appreciated the conversation and it opened his eyes to the possibility of there being a God. But, in the end, he talked about how he couldn't imagine God hiding from us behind the universe.

I sent him a letter explaining that God wasn't hiding; He was everywhere. His beauty could be seen in the sunrise, the shadow of His love could be experienced in human relationships and so on. Through all this I had been praying rather hard for him, harder than I had for any other stranger I had shared my faith with.

The letter I got back blew me away. He said that he longed for my faith, that my letter was refreshing in the cynical darkness of New York. He asked honest questions about my motivation; why I did what I did in religion and life. It seemed that the Holy Spirit spoke to him in such a powerful way that he would completely change his tone. I wrote a letter back that encouraged him to stop longing for faith and just to believe.

By this time I had gotten an interview at Cornell in New York city (the medical school is in the city; the main campus is in upstate New York). I realized I would be able to see him when I went for my interview. I called him and arranged for it. I realized that with such a broken spirit, salvation was close. I prayed and even fasted for him before I left. I had all of my friends and my church praying for him.

I had arranged to meet him on Monday afternoon at 4PM. My plane got in late. His plane got in later. I had no time on Tuesday to meet because of my interview and early flight. For most of the day, I was rather upset with God for seeming to set up such a perfect opportunity to share with him and then to cancel it. I was very disgruntled as I rode the subway and then the bus to catch my flight.

Then, right before I reached the terminal, I got the burning in my belly to change my flight. I had tried to make it a later flight, but there were none on that day. I had nowhere to stay and didn't even know if he was going to be able to meet. If he was free, I didn't know where he'd be. But I did it. I changed my flight to 9AM of the following morning.

I took the bus and then the train back into the city. I decided I'd walk around Times Square until 6pm when he got off of work. With my rolling suitcase, I went through the crowded streets, in awe and disgust at the bustle and materialism of that place. I decided to stop and go to McDonalds to sit for a while. I left a message with Henry and then nursed a Mr. Pibb for half an hour. At 6:05PM, he called me. When I told him where I was, he was surprised; I just happened to be a few blocks from where he was. He walked over and met me in the McDonalds.

He recommended a diner, so we walked and talked on our way there. Upon arrival at Astro Diner, we got to the meat. Then, over the next three hours, we would discuss many things. After discussing it, he admitted that he would probably be happier as a Christian. He also said that Christianity was more rational than Atheism. Eternally, it would probably work out better for Christians than for him. He even had experienced a miracle on Good Friday when he was a believer. We discussed freewill, and he admitted that he had only the illusion of control over his life. But this was all he wanted. This was everything to him: to have the feeling that he was in control of his own life. He was willing to give up everything else for that. He compared himself to the character Cypher in "The Matrix," who knew the Matrix was a lie, but knowingly preferred the lie to the truth.

I have never had a more candid conversation with a non-believer. Never have I heard somebody who was so completely honest about their motivations and intentions. Unfortunately, his intentions were purely selfish.

We agreed to continue corresponding, and he left for home. I later made my way back to the airport and spent as much of the night as I could unconscious, hunched over a food court table.

I hope that God moves in his heart; nothing more can be done with his mind. He has no other hope for salvation.

The "E" word

I have been a Christian a very long time. I have always been told that I was supposed to share my faith, but nobody told me how easy it was to start, how adventurous an endeavor it is, nor how fulfilling it can be!

I have been awakened. I have opened my eyes to a new world!

What it isn't (preface for nonchristians)
I know that some who read this may not be Christians and probably have an entirely perverted view of evangelism. You've seen 'Evangelicals' yelling about how homo-sexuals are going to hell. This is not evangelism. My experience has been that it rarely involves the four laws, though sometimes gets there. They need to be translated over the course of at least an hour for most college students. Let's take a simple "gospel" presentation as an example:

"You were made good by God, but are now a sinner in need of redemption which you can obtain by faith in Jesus Christ."

Most of you, my peers, don't believe in God (or mean something entirely different than a Christian), you don't believe in objective morality (so the word 'sin' has no meaning), you have a violent gut-reaction to needing someone else's help for anything. You probably define 'faith' as "believing something contrary to the evidence" so think that it's a silly to have it in anything. And you almost certainly believe that Jesus was a great teacher who never performed a miracle (because miracles are impossible); in your minds, he is in no way capable of anything beyond a good sermon. Each of those objections must be addressed by anyone attempting to 'evangelize'

Evangelism is in the simplest terms, sharing good news. Literally it is derived from the word from 'angel' meaning 'messenger.' I believe I am living a more effective, fulfilling and happy life because of my relationship with Jesus. It is the same kind of thing as when I tell you, "I did really well in Molecular Biology when I studied with a group; I'd recommend it." I care about you and want you to do as well as I did in the course. I don't want to 'convert' you to Study Groupism and so feel superior because I won you as a convert. I just want you to do well. The more I cared about you and the worse you were doing in the course, the more I'd try to convince you to study in a group so that you do well. It is about my concern for you, not anything selfish. The same is true of Christianity. Christ has brought me fulfillment, love and hope. I just want to share it.

I hope this explanation makes sense, but I know it probably doesn't. Evangelism is, in all likelihood, still considered by you a great evil. I assume it has to do with relativism, but I have never been able to fully understand why this doesn't make sense. I would be very happy if you could articulate your objections to me.

The rest of my account will be addressed to Christians; nonchristians read on at your own risk.

Realization #1 - It's fun and easy
There are a million ways to "share my faith." It just takes intentionality. Almost any conversation can be comfortably shifted to a spiritually fruitful one with a question or two.

For example, I was talking about FISH. "It was miraculous that FISH did what it did. And I mean that literally. Are you a big believer in miracles?" My friend responded, "For sure!" and then described a family member's miraculous recover from cancer. Then I simply asked, "So then are you a believer in God?" And it just flowed from there.

I have also realized that there are benefits of relativism. Namely, most college people believe it is a sin (or the closest atheistic equivalent) to offend you. There was a time when a person I was talking to described how unreasonable it was to condemn others. I said that I was one of those who condemned others. You wouldn't believe how fast he backpedaled.

Realization #2 - It's adventurous
It is one of the most exciting things we could ever do. It is true spiritual battle!

The times I am most alert, most humble, most passionate about prayer and most hungry for the Word are those times when I am ministering. Because it is a desperate battle for the souls of men and women. The realities of these things we have been taught are never more real: the value of the Word, the power and desperate need for prayer, and the impossibility of our fight through flesh.

It is the greatest privilege of this world. The prophets of old did not have this privilege. Jesus himself didn't. He reserved it from before time began for us, His Church!

Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever believes in me will also do the works that I do; and greater works than these will he do, because I am going to the Father.
- John 14:12

It is true in general for Christianity and it is especially true for evangelism: Christ is the only way to jump the track and live a life that is truly free. If we do not follow the spirit, our life is determined. We know where we're headed and, like Autopia, we'll make sure that we follow the road. Our greatest rebellion is hitting the bumper and continuing on the track. The Holy Spirit gives us the chance to break free and go where He leads. We have the terrifying opportunity to trust God that our destination is good. It is no longer like a track or a trail, but cross-country, like the wind.

The wind blows where it wishes, and you hear its sound, but you do not know where it comes from or where it goes. So it is with everyone who is born of the Spirit.
- John 3:8

It doesn't stay easy. And I'd be disappointed if it did. God will eventually ask hard things and glorify Himself and us through them. But in asking hard things God is giving us a chance to really capture the adventure we desire so deeply. We pay billions of dollars to watch adventure in movies and to experience it in theme parks. Like a drug, we pay to satiate the hunger. But now we can have true adventure! We don't know how it ends, except that the good guy wins. We each can be a hero greater than Superman and an adventurer seeking a treasure greater than the Holy Grail. But being a hero and an adventurer takes courage. So man up and take the first step.

Realization #3 - It's fulfilling
There is nothing better than sharing your faith. There really isn't. As a Christian, it's the thing
we're supposed to do. It's our job. Our goal is to pursue Christ, but I really believe that direct evangelism is the physical manifestation of that. Certainly you may not have the gift now to be an evangelist, but ask for it! We're supposed to seek the greater gifts!

The great commandment is to love God and the second is to love our neighbor. The greatest thing we can ever give someone is eternal life. I have never cared for those people around me than when I am praying for their salvation. I have been so fulfilled this last month that I've seen God work in this way.

Prayer
Here is a list of people I'm praying for. If you are a Christian, please join me. If you think you see your name on this list, believe in Jesus. Once you tell me, I'll take your name off.

Matt, Anna, Melissa, Errol, Geia, Henry, Bonnie, Nathaniel, Sona, Sunny, Shirley, Sarah, Andrew, Afton

Interview and a bonus!

Yale Interview
So I had an interview at Yale last Friday. It went well besides the fact that it got to 6 degrees. I think that is the coldest air I've ever felt. Besides that, the Yale experience was great and I had my most interesting interview yet. Usually interviewers ask you about why you want to go to medical school, questions about your application, etc. They want to see if you're the same in person as on paper.
My interviewer seemed convinced of all that before I even walked in. He was somewhat portly and sat comfortably back in his office chair. He had a South African accent and had a jovial demeanor. We talked comfortably and he laughed with great belly-laughter at quips and jokes I'd make. The first part of the conversation was rather high-level discussion on international work and the philosophy thereof. I discovered he was a classmate of Paul Farmer at Harvard, so was well familiar with his work.

He had done his research on me. In addition to reading through my application (which seemed rare for interviewers), he actually searched for the articles I wrote to the Daily Bruin and then read them. I had gathered by this point that he had atheistic leanings, and when he told me that he had read my articles, I had a pang of fear. Then he asked me how I reconciled science and faith.

I was off-guard for this question at first, but talked through it until I was speaking coherently. As I described my views, he was tracking and had even read a book that I had. I then started asking him questions. I asked if he was a particularly religious man. He said no, but had an interest nevertheless for his children's sake. He commented weakly that he personally wished he could be like I was, that is, with the two reconciled. I asked where specifically he thought there was conflict. He stopped and thought for a long time. He finally said that it was religious people who caused him not to believe. I told him that you ought not judge a faith by its parishioners any more than you judge a scientific theory by the behavior of scientists; he ought to look at the teachings of Jesus to know what Christianity truly was.

The conversation moved on to other things, but at the end of the interview, he thanked me with genuine sincerity for my opinions.

I walked out of the interview and said a prayer of thanks. God sent me all the way to New Haven, put me before an important doctor, and then had me defend the faith and share the beautiful consistency of Christianity to a man otherwise isolated from Christians. I never expected I'd be "...being brought before kings and rulers for my name's sake" while interviewing (Luke 21:12). What an opportunity! Praise God!


P.S. - G.K. Chesterton
I'm very disappointed I hadn't heard of him earlier. It would have so greatly reduced the severity with which I have in the past banged my head against the wall. He is a magician, with his prose releasing us from the chains of super-rationalism, and sprinkles us with fairy dust, allowing us to ascend into the heavens (I think I sub-consciously ripped that off one of his reviewers).

But for the moment it is possible in the same solely practical manner to give a general answer touching what in actual human history keeps men sane. Mysticism keeps men sane. As long as you have mystery you have health; when you destroy mystery you create morbidity. The ordinary man has always been sane because the ordinary man has always been a mystic. He has permitted the twilight. He has always had one foot in earth and the other in fairyland. He has always left himself free to doubt his gods; but (unlike the agnostic of to-day) free also to believe in them. He has always cared more for truth than for consistency. If he saw two truths that seemed to contradict each other, he would take the two truths and the contradiction along with them. His spiritual sight is stereoscopic, like his physical sight: he sees two different pictures at once and yet sees all the better for that.

Incredible! That was from Orthodoxy, which I'm halfway through.


P.P.S. - Love
I was over at Andy's in Orange and I saw this cartoon. It reminded me of a previous blog I wrote about women. It came from a webcomic called xkcd.com .

Christmas Sweater and the Gospel

I was invited to a party last Saturday night. In deciding what to wear, I settled on a kitten Christmas sweater. That is, I decided to wear (over a tan collared shirt), a child's medium sweater that had a large white kitten in the middle surrounded by candy canes and gumdrops. Needless to say, I looked ridiculous.

Why I made such a decision is an entirely different conversation, but the fact remains, I wore a kitten sweater to a party that I expected to be very out of place at.

Normally I go to parties, find someone to talk to, and then get into as deep and philosophical a conversation as I can with that person. I'm normally near the edge of the room and it's normally awkward.

With the kitten sweater, I was popular.

For a nerd like me, being popular was a new and exciting experience. I've been respected (or feared) while in FISH, but by no means was I ever popular. That is, I could tell people to do things, but few people would ever want to spend time with me.

Normally, I could never break into a tight circle of conversing people. During the party, things were different. I simply had to approach the edge of a closed circle, someone would point out the lurking kitten at the periphery, and I'd be in. My attire (which everyone complimented) would be the center of conversation for the group for a few minutes.

The things that I said mattered greatly to the group. One person was discussing Messianic Jews. I said something like "Messianic Jews are lots of fun," and the mostly group (most of whom I'm sure had absolutely no idea what either of those words meant), decided I was right. After a few more minutes, the group of agnostics and Catholics literally wanted to go to a Messianic synagogue. If I'd been on my toes, I think I could have actually gotten a few of them to go. I've never had that kind of influence with people. I normally have a hard enough time getting people who are my friends to go to church with me, let alone semi-intoxicated secular strangers at a party.

Application
I've recently started going to parties and doing evangelism. I would talk with someone, shift the conversation to spiritual matters, and share the Gospel as best I could over the music. This time, I was preaching Christ from a position of (what seemed to be) social authority. I was no longer a social beggar, barely holding on to the few minutes of attention I could steal. I didn't beg for a glace at a flyer or signboard (or worse yet, a 8' sign with "REPENT" on it). People wanted to give me their attention.

Learning the language and dynamics of a culture is essential in effective evangelism. Paul in Athens spoke the language of the Greeks, and made a masterful argument for Christ that was relevant to what Greeks valued: Reason. Today in college, we make our decisions based on what our social leaders are doing. For example, tonight there will be more than 5000 people running through UCLA in their underwear. Why? Because a few people with immense social authority did the same thing a few years ago and told their friends. Why are they running in their underwear and not to Christ? Because Christians do not have any social authority.

Perhaps Christians ought to re-learn the language of those around them to win them for Christ. We continue evangelizing with the outdated language of reason to a culture that no longer understands or cares.

Social authority, like money, is not inherently evil. If the analogy between social capital and capital capital holds, then the parable of the unjust steward applies:

Luke 16:8The master commended the dishonest manager for his shrewdness. For the sons of this world are more shrewd in dealing with their own generation than the sons of light.9And I tell you, make friends for yourselves by means of unrighteous wealth, so that when it fails they may receive you into the eternal dwellings.

For perhaps the first time, I believe I learned a few words of cool. I intend to continue learning the language and maybe one day, I'll be able to translate the Gospel to so many lost people.