Living cross-culturally part 1.

Emily and I arrived in France 767 days ago. Be sure to check out my photo-a-day blog. Living in France has been an incredible experience, one that has eternally changed me. It has been one of the most transformative choices we have made. It has been one of the most challenging choices we have made. I have learned so much from our time here, working with truly incredible people, and living in this wonderful place. And the bread here has ruined me for bread outside of France.

Our experience has been exactly what many other missionaries living in Europe had told us: living cross-culturally is extremely hard and you never get over culture-stress. Culture shock is the sense of confusion and frustration that engulfs someone when the "honeymoon” period of living in a new place fades. It is the utter disbelief at how another culture could function so differently from your home culture. Why can't people form a line to wait for the bus or the cashier? How is it possible in Grenoble, a metropolitan area of 500,000 people, for only one branch of our bank to accept cash deposits? The branch on campus opened our bank accounts, sold us renter's insurance, gave us our debit cards, PINs, and chequebooks, but the teller (not the atm) could not accept the 20€ I wanted to deposit for activating my new account. Instead, I had to go to the main branch in downtown to deposit cash. Thankfully, culture shock does pass; it takes time and perseverance, but it does not last forever. 

Culture stress is the fact that I am a Californian living in Grenoble, the fact that I am the stranger in a foreign land. Anytime there is a misunderstanding or conflict, it is the French culture which wins. I understand that it would be ridiculous of me to expect the French people around me to conform to my American ways. But it is hard that every day, with every misstep, I am the one who is wrong. It can be upsetting when, on top of the normal stresses of life, a cultural mishap thwarts your plans and leaves you feeling ridiculed for your cultural ineptitude. Someone is rude toward you and it's your fault for creating the awkward opportunity for them to be rude. It is not about logic or reason, it comes down to the fact that I am not at home here and everyone knows it the moment I open my mouth. Culture stress is described as a low-grade fever you never get over, and I must confess that after 767 days that is how it feels. I know that in time, perhaps on the order of years or decades, this fades away. 

One of the fruits of living here in France is the humbling process of culture stress. Being the person who does not know the culture, the language, or the customs puts you in a very dependent position. I need others to help me if only to verify that what I said in French actually makes sense. Being the outsider wears on you over time. The choices become either never leave your house, leave France, or humble yourself to your host culture. Humility is a hard concept to learn, I am very much still in progress, but living as a stranger in France has helped me along in this process. It has also made me extremely appreciative of the rare person who is kind and understanding toward me; who is patient with my less than perfect French skills, and who puts in extra effort to help me navigate life here. When we return to California, I want to find every opportunity to be like these gracious people and help others who are strangers and outsiders.

Thoughts on Heaven: Is Ministry a Temp Job?

This post is a continuation of the ideas laid out in my previous post "Thoughts on Heaven" and is a question I have been praying and wrestling about for a while: is ministry a temp job?

An aspect of Heaven which Scripture describes is that we will have jobs and roles in eternity (Gen 1.28, 1 Cor 6.2-3, Mt 19.28, Rev 3.21, 22.5). Immediately we think this sounds terrible; retirement is a dream of our modern era. This stems not from an eternal perspective on the nature of work, but is a consequence of living in a fallen world. Originally we were given the job of cultivating God’s good creation (Gen 1:26-30), and having work was a part of God’s design for humans. In Genesis 3:17-19 we see part of the curse is our work becomes difficult. Much of the enjoyment intended for our occupations has been replaced with weariness and struggle. But we still have a God-given desire to do, make, create, and work.

In light of eternity, what job security do I have as someone in full-time ministry? For those in vocational ministry, whether as a pastor of a local church, a campus minister, a cross-cultural missionary, or any number of other full-time positions, will we outgrow our need for ministry? Other jobs like engineers, baristas, and interior designers conceivably have a place in Heaven. Should pastors be concerned that one day we are doing to be replaced by the Good Shepherd (Jn 10:11-18) himself? When Jesus came he made the high priest’s job redundant (Heb 4:14). Does the same fate await ministers in Heaven? What use will we have for sermons or Bible studies when standing in God’s presence? Paul describes in 1 Corinthians 13:8-10 that prophecies and speaking in tongues will cease in Heaven, and such means of experiencing God will be eclipsed by God Himself. What happens if a pastor’s only marketable skill or job experience is preaching? Does an infinity of unemployment await him or her?

Perhaps we will all have time to devote toward developing other jobs, tasks, and creative endeavors. My father-in-law (who is also in full-time ministry) says he is waiting until Heaven to learn to play the violin, so perhaps he will have a future in one of Heaven’s orchestras?

The good news is, despite the fact that we do not know what Heaven holds for the full-time minister, our God is far too creative to abandon us to idleness for eternity.

What are your thoughts? Have you found any scripture which sheds more light on this subject?

Jesus is not afraid to get his hands dirty

Jesus is awesome. I have to start there. In the story of the healing of Jairus' daughter (Mt 9:18-26, Mk 5:21-43, Lk 8:40-56) there are two healing: first the woman who has been bleeding for twelve years and then the daughter of a leader of the local synagogue named Jairus. 

It's interesting to read this story with the purity codes of the Old Testament in mind, because the woman who has been bleeding is ceremonially unclean (Lev 15:25) and the dead daughter of Jairus is also unclean, and yet Jesus touches both of them. According to my understanding of Old Testament purity codes and first-century practices, wouldn't touching them also make Jesus unclean? The woman with blood only touches Jesus's cloak so I am not sure if this would be enough to make him unclean, but when Jesus "took [Jairus' daughter] by the hand" (Mt 9:25, Mk: 5:41, Lk 8:54) that would seem to make him unclean. According to Numbers 19: 11 touching a dead body made someone unclean. This fear of corpse contamination may be some of the reasoning why in the story of the Good Samaritan the priest and the Levite both avoid the wounded man. Jesus also talks of this defilement when he calls the Pharisees "whitewashed tombs" (Mt 23: 27) in reference to the unmarked graves in the Kidron valley which could within sight of the Temple accidentally render a pilgrim, coming to celebrate Passover, unclean for seven days.

Jesus is not concerned with purity codes, not because he is disregarding the Law, but because just as honoring the Sabbath should not keep him from helping others in need, corpse contamination would not keep him from doing the Father's will of healing. We see in this story that Jesus is willing to touch and be touched by those who society shuns. Jesus does not hesitate to reach out and get his hands dirty for our sake, and his interactions with these two women demonstrate the larger truth of how Jesus, who is perfect, came into the dark and dirty world so that he could restore and save us.

This raises a question about the Law which is not addressed in the Law: if a dead body ceases to be a dead body does anything rendered unclean by that body become clean again? For both the woman with the bleeding and the daughter of Jairus, Jesus took away their uncleanliness. Jesus overcame the source of their defilement and made them clean. 

So the answer my earlier question of did these women make Jesus unclean is no. The uncleanness of both women did not make Jesus unclean because he makes unclean things clean. His power to purify trumps any ability to defile. And this is an illustration of the Gospel, Jesus came into this unclean world and not only purifies us according the rules of cleanliness, but he also fulfilled our debt to sin and imputes us with his righteousness. Like I said, Jesus is awesome.

Thoughts on Heaven: It will be more awesome than we can imagine

This blog post is a preface to a preface to some thoughts I have been praying and wrestling with God about. What will life in the New Heaven and Earth be like? As a child I remember being a little scared with the concept of Heaven because, to be honest, the idea of us floating around clouds with harps for an endless eternity sounded...boring. But God is not boring, and the more I learn about Him the more I am convinced of this. I remember finding comfort in the thought (perhaps this was God speaking) there will be baseball in Heaven (which is funny because I now think baseball is boring).

Our cultural image of Heaven, this place somewhere in the sky, all of us with halos and harps, is a gross underestimation of how awesome the New Heaven and New Earth will be. Heaven will be so much better than this feeble image. As best we can describe it, Heaven is the place where God (who is omnipresent) is; it  is the where He dwells. By place, I do mean Heaven will have the same three spatial dimensions we know here; Jesus in his resurrection body (a foreshadow of our own bodies to come 1 Cor 15:20) inhabited these spatial dimensions. This of course does not mean Heaven is restricted to those three dimensions.

An issue we finite creatures encounter when discussing Heaven is our ideas and descriptions are limited by our words; how can we define the infinite glory of Heaven with finite human words? This is why so much of theology is metaphorical. Now before you dismiss me as a heretic, hear me out. 

The metaphorical nature of theological concepts does not make them not true, what I mean is that such concepts as the truth of who God is, the Son's relationship to the Father, etc. are more true than what our limited words can express or our finite minds can comprehend. The Son and the Father are not only in a deep familial relationship with each other like a father and son, but they are one, and the metaphor of father and son is actually an understatement of their deep relationship, love, and unity. Jesus used the words "father" and "son" not because it perfectly describes Him and the Father, but because we can wrap our finite minds around these ideas; I understand what it is to have a father and to be a son. God and His awesome nature is too big for us to fully understand, this is just an aspect of our creature nature; God is God and we are not. 

This is why I think a reoccurring image used to depict Heaven is music (Rev 4:8-11). Have you ever listened to a piece of music which stirred up emotions or captivated you with its beauty and for a time, perhaps only a moment, you were transfixed by the experience? This, I think, is a better descriptions of what Heaven will be like than human words can say, which is why Scripture often uses music when describing Heaven. These passages do not mean Heaven will be one endless church service. Heaven will be more awesome than we can say or imagine because God is more awesome than we can understand.

"Copy and Paste" and Intra-Biblical quotations

Have you ever read a passage in the New Testament, perhaps in the writings of Paul or Matthew, where the author quotes a passage from the Old Testament, but when you compared the New Testament quotation with the original source you found slight variations in the wording? For example, the Luke 4 quotation from Isaiah 61: (red added to show differences)

Lk 4: 18-19 (NIV)

“The Spirit of the Lord is on me,
    because he has anointed me
    to proclaim good news to the poor.
He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners
    and recovery of sight for the blind,
to set the oppressed free,
   to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor.”

Isa 61:1-2a (NIV)

The Spirit of the Sovereign Lord is on me,
    because the Lord has anointed me
    to proclaim good news to the poor.
He has sent me to bind up the brokenhearted,
    to proclaim freedom for the captives
    and release from darkness for the prisoners,
 to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor.”

Should the New Testament authors have not been more careful when quoting the Old Testament? Because the Bible is God’s word, shouldn’t we be extra vigilant to get our wording right? What’s the deal?

The good news is there is a logical explanation for these “loose” standards of quotation, and ultimately the word variations between Old Testament sources and New Testament quotations, while it may give nuance to the passages, do not change the meanings especially when the passages are viewed as a whole and not by word count.

The reason why the New Testament authors were not as “precise” in their citing of the Old Testament reflects a difference between their first century Near Eastern culture and our own twenty-first century Western culture. It was sometime around the third century when the quotation mark was invented and the idea of exact, word for word quotation, began. By the societal standards of the day, the New Testament authors were being accurate in their quotation of Old Testament texts. The challenge for us now is understanding their standards of accuracy and our modern standards of accuracy are different. Today with modern technology I can copy and paste a paragraph, quote, or even an entire manuscript with complete confidence I am not forgetting a word or letter. Computers are really good at assisting with these kinds of tasks. Such luxury was not available to Paul. Neither was a personal copy of scripture; before the advent of the printing press copies of the Bible were too laborious and expensive for an individual to own.

It is fine for us to adhere to the standards of precision afforded to us by modern technology, but we should not be upset when we cannot impose our cultural value upon biblical texts written in the context of a different culture.