KNOWLEDGE is stored information. It is whatever you ‘know.’ Knowledge does not require that information which you hold be true, it simply requires that you know something. Knowledge comes exclusively from learning. This means you can gain knowledge in school or from books. You can learn from experiences you have or from observing the experiences of others. The single defining factor of knowledge is that it is data which is stored in your brain—on your hard drive.

WISDOM is far different from knowledge. Wisdom is the ability to process knowledge. To play on the hard drive analogy, wisdom is the software that is able to organize the data on the hard drive and put it into practice. In a practical sense, wisdom still does not require that the data you are processing be truth, it simply is the ability to put knowledge into practice.

From a philosophical stance, wisdom requires that data be true. To process information which is false and apply it would be foolish. Think about statistics. Say I interview three people and ask what their favorite color is. The first person says that his favorite color is green. Not wanting to be left out, the second and third person also says green even though their favorite colors are yellow and red respectively. As the statistician, I conclusively state that all mankind has the favorite color of green. This is obviously wrong so philosophically this is not a wise conclusion

From a Christian perspective as well, wisdom is the ability to process truth. But, there are additional factors which apply over and above the philosophical stance. From the Christian perspective, truth must be God’s truth. We get God’s truth from God’s word. This makes the Bible our primary source of knowledge and the database from which we are able to pull from in order to be wise. So, from this perspective, wisdom is the ability to process the truth of God’s word and apply it to our lives.

Polish pop star Doda faces trial for claiming drunks wrote the Bible.

The world has truly become a crazy place. I’m used to the US where people are offended by the Bible and the government sets out to ‘protect’ people from the Bible and they call that ‘religious freedom’ (soapbox). I live in a world where the idea of the Bible offends; rather than a world where others offend me—usually.

Check this out though. In Poland, pop start Doda is facing trial for claiming that “it is hard to believe in something [the Bible] written by people who liked herbal cigarettes and were drunks” (Sify.com). Not surprising, the Catholic church was offended by this statement, as am I to a certain extent.

The church is pushing for Doda’s concerts to be canceled on the grounds that she may speak more blasphemes statements. More so, they have pressed charges against Doda which are being taken very seriously by the state. If she is convicted, she will serve two years in prison for the statement.

I say the world is a crazy place because in the US, it’s the Christians that are being persecuted by the state as the church has little political influence on the state. In Poland the Catholic church has a lot of influence on the state, so those who persecute the church are able to be punished. I’m bothered by this contrast to a great extent. The Bible teaches that we are blessed when we are persecuted because of righteousness (Matthew 5.10).

In light of this passage, it seems it is easier to be faithful to the Word in the US where freedom of speech means we can’t talk about the Bible in public, since that sort of persecution results in blessing rather than in a place where you can sue for “offending religious sensibilities” and be in non-compliance to God’s standards.

Much of the world lives as if the mind is synonymous with the body; thoughts are chemical reactions which make up another part of he physical body. I believe very differently. A person is far more than just the physical attributes. I find the Bible to teach that the body is made up of three separate parts, the body, the mind and the spirit.

The body is the flesh and nothing more. The body has different parts which work as the mind controls it. There is also some interaction between the mind and the body as our flesh comes with different strengths and weaknesses. Because of these strengths and weaknesses the mind does not have free reign over the body; rather it must work within the limitations of the physical body.

The mind itself is made up of three parts: thoughts, will and emotions. I find the thoughts to comprise the consciousness and sub-consciousness. The thoughts are literally what you think and what you or other forces, such as society, have trained your mind to think intuitively. The will is the ‘want’ and the drive behind actions. You can think about drinking a soda, but if you don’t want to, there is no logical reason to do it. The will is the part of the mind that ‘wants’ to drink the soda. The emotions are the part of the mind that you are not in control of. Every person reacts to things in different ways. Those reactions are the emotions: happy, sad, excited, etc. Emotions are able to influence your thoughts and even your will, but ultimately the thoughts are what determine the actions.

The spirit is the final element of the soul. Your spirit is your USB drive. It is through your spirit that you are able to connect to God, through His Spirit and communicate with Him. When you accept Christ and become connected to Him in spirit, your mind is then influenced by the Spirit in order to encourage you to act in accordance with God’s will, God’s desires.

Is a person more than a physical body? Yes, very much so. The majority of who you are is contained within the mind. The most important part of the body, however, is the spirit as the spirit is what connects you to God. The most exciting part of the soul is that the entire soul—mind, body and spirit—will be resurrected and made new when Christ returns for His church. All of who we are will go with us into heaven or hell, just with the limitations of the flesh removed.

So much time is spent on the subject of repentance in the Bible. There is a reason for that. I think this passage in Hosea–Hosea 5.11-15–brings to light that importance as it contrasts the believer, who is being called to repentance by discipline, with the unbeliever.

This issue is like this. Let’s say there is a mom at the playground with her kids Billy and Samantha. She looks at her watch and it is time to go. The mom yells out, “Billy, Samantha, time to go home.” Samantha is closest to the mom, but doesn’t even here her, so she goes on playing. Billy does hear his mom, but when he looks at Samantha, he sees that she isn’t going, so he chooses to stay and play, ignoring his moms call.

Billy is the believer who is ignoring the call to righteousness and allows himself to be in sin. Samantha is the unbeliever. She hasn’t even heard the call to righteousness. Going to the passage in Hosea; Ephraim is Samantha and Judah is Billy. Ephraim, at this point, has given themselves over to the world for quite some time. There is little trace of Yahweh God left in their culture. They are completely pagan for all intents and purposes. Judah is still attempting to follow, but they have a problem. Because the nation of Israel has been split, they are unable to go and worship at the temple in Jerusalem. They are, at this point in history, being enticed to worship as the pagans do because they are unable to worship as God directed. Even though their motive is to worship Yahweh God, they are turning away from God’s standards in turning to pagan worship. The world is enticing them to sin without even realizing it. Just like Samantha, who did not even hear the call of her mother, enticed Billy to be disobedient, Judah was enticed by the world to worship as they do—as the pagans do.

Stepping away from the story for a minute, let’s spend some time creating a list of characteristics of the believer who is in sin vs. the unbeliever.

SIMILARITIES:

1. They are both experiencing the pains of the world which come from not being in a right relationship with God.

2.

3.

DIFFERENCES:

1. Even though there is sin, Judah desires to follow God even though Ephraim does not.

2.

3.

EPHRAIM

According to verse 11, Ephraim is absolutely determined to follow the the world. Ephraim was not interested in following God at all. This is the character of the unbeliever. Even if they have heard about God, they are so determined to follow their own ways that they cannot even think of following God. That is why they went to the Assyrians (the Ninevites) when they needed to be rescued from the pains they were experiencing as a result of their disobedience. They went to King Jareb of Assyria and he was unable to help them.

When the unbeliever experiences pain in this world, they have to make a decision where to go. If they don’t know about Christ, their only option in most cases is to go to the world; to drugs, alcohol, crime, unholy relationships, etc.

JUDAH

Judah is in a little different situation. Judah knows the truth, but is not following. They are involved in sin even as they attempt to worship God. The pain that they are experiencing comes in the form of discipline. This is like the believer in Jesus Christ who is involved in sin. The world brings enough struggles on it’s own, but sin results in discipline on top of the struggles of the world.

SO WHAT?

Regardless of which person you are—and hopefully you are neither—God is going to rain down a greater destruction if there is no obedience. In verse 12, God says He is a moth, but by verse 14, God has become a great lion, causing far more distress due to continued disobedience. Even at this, if we are damaged beyond recognition because of discipline, God finds a greater discipline. He says, “I will go away and return to My place” (v. 15). God will cease to protect us if we refuse to submit to Him.

There is hope. He will only refuse those who are disobedient “Until they acknowledge their guilt and seek [His] face;” (v. 15). There is hope in repentance. For the believer, they can come back to Christ and be restored to fellowship and to the peace that God provides. For the non-believer, he can come to Christ to be forgiven.

The application is that if you are Judah, the believer who is in sin, you have to come to repentance. But, there is a far greater challenge in this passage. The passage requires that we address Ephraim, the unbeliever. Israel’s purpose was to be a light to the world, that they would also be saved. Our purpose as believers is to be a light to the world, that others might come to Christ because of us. We are to get out into the world and show them God’s love, so that they too can come and experience the salvation that we have experienced through Jesus Christ.



Cultural intelligence, or CQ, is a way of measuring our ability to adapt to a foreign  culture. There are four parts to cultural intelligence: knowledge CQ, interpretive CQ, perseverance CQ, and behavioral CQ. To varying degrees, I have experienced all four parts of cultural intelligence, even in my limited experience with missions. My hope is that the time that I have spent preparing to go to Chile and the time I have spent in Chile will make the four parts of cultural intelligence clear.

Knowledge CQ is the part of cultural intelligence that has to do with your understanding of a culture. It can be done, in part, by reading books and through other forms of research, however, knowledge CQ is often obtained from hands on experience within a culture (Livermore, 2006).

When I was preparing for a short term trip to Chile, we spent quite a bit of time, as a group, discussing what it is like in the Chilean culture. We had an added element in that the church we were going to minister to had originally been planted by a very conservative church. This meant not only learning about the culture of the community, but also that of the church. The time spent in discussion with members of our church who had already been down to Chile was invaluable but, the knowledge obtained from actually visiting the country far exceeded it in value.

An example of something which we did not learn about was the way the church in Chile viewed the Catholic faith, the Jehovah’s Witnesses, the Mormons and even other denominations, such as Pentecostals. They understood their roots in the same doctrines which they hold to, but found them to be false witnesses, which actually lead people away from Christ. We would never say that of most denominations in the US, so it had to be experienced first hand to see the truth in it.

Interpretive CQ has to do with our awareness when amidst another culture. It is one thing to have knowledge, but it is a far greater thing to be aware enough to interpret a situation to use the knowledge of that culture properly. Without interpretive CQ, it is not possible to use the hard earned knowledge properly (Livermore, 2006).

One of the things we were told before we went to Chile is that the men will often greet close brothers with a holy kiss. This could be a kiss on the cheek or a kiss on the lips. About the third day in Chile, I was greeted by one of the church elders whom I had just met the night before. He extended his arm and then leaned in to kiss me on the cheek. Knowing myself, I probably would not have freaked out. I would have allowed it, but because I had the knowledge, I was able to properly interpret the situation so, I was able to take the proper cultural response—to return the kiss on the other cheek.

Perseverance CQ does not, as it suggests, simply have to do with the ability to withstand the challenges that come with cross-cultural missions. It has more to do with a desire to persevere by adapting to the culture. It is an inner motivation to learn about the culture so that, as much as possible, life can be lived as the locals live it. Often Westerners, persevere by finding ways to live as Americans from within the foreign culture, which is not perseverance CQ at all (Livermore, 2006).

I was zealous in going to Chile. I was ready to eat the weird stuff. I was ready to live in slums and anything else they threw at us. What I didn’t realize is that those things were not going to take place. The major differences I encountered on the trip had to do with relationships and the way that one person interacts with others. In my practical mind, I was not prepared for this. But, I got lucky. I immediately made friends with a young man named Jorge. He knew as much English as I did Spanish—none. In spite of the obvious stumbling blocks, he took me around town to meet all the people he ministers to. We were able to communicate non-verbally enough to discover many ways in which we were the same. This situation made it comfortable for me to interact with others whom I had a language barrier with as well. It opened the door for me to persevere in an area in which I would not previously have been able to do so.

To this point a missionary can have all sorts of knowledge, the ability to discern what knowledge applies to what situation and actually have a drive and desire to adapt to a foreign culture, but there is one major piece missing. It is the ability to actually put the knowledge into practice. This is called behavioral CQ. The extent to which one is able to put knowledge CQ, interpretive CQ and perseverance CQ to work is the level of behavioral CQ they have (Livermore, 2006).

Before going to Chile much of the discussion was about how to deal with the challenges and differences. There was not a focus on cultural intelligence. I really feel that God instilled a great deal of intelligence in me and others on the team in order to make the trip successful. Now, with a greater understanding of cultural intelligence and the ways that knowledge CQ, interpretive CQ, perseverance CQ and behavioral CQ all work together, I believe I am well equipped for the challenges that missions may bring me in the future.

References

Livermore, D. (2006). Serving with eyes wide shut. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books.

Recently I attended an African American, Baptist congregation for their Sunday worship service. I regularly attend a predominantly Caucasian church in the same town which is non-denominational. There were many things which I witnessed which differed from what I was used to and some which were the same. These varied from the practices of scripture reading, to music and worship and even into theology and Jesus.

Congressional scripture reading is done in many churches and is even done in my own church from time to time. This church opened service with scripture, by memory. Scripture reading continued both congressionally and independently, throughout the service and even throughout the sermon. I think it is their way of allowing the congregation to partake in the proclamation of scripture, so as not to lose focus on the message.

There were many ‘cosmetic’ differences that I recognized. All of the media had a very plain appearance. This differs from my congregation. We have a lot of artists and so our congregation has come to expect an artistic approach in many things including media. One of the greatest differences was in the music. The music was far more colorful, blending nuances of jazz and blues in and about the exaltation and opening prayer. Powerful drums backed by the church organ dominated the upbeat tunes and brought flavor to the docile ones. The music was a crucial part of the entire service up until the pastor began to preach. The music begun again as the pastor began to conclude his message. This differs from my home church where music is reserved for worship time and special presentations.

Worship was far more than just music and singing. It was the calling of the Spirit upon the congregation. It began with a challenge to ready yourself before Lord. I appreciated this practice as oft worship is dry, consisting of empty words while we ponder over shopping lists, rather than call on our Lord and Savior to praise Him. Those who led worship were captivated and filled with the Spirit as they presented their praise to God. Their vulnerability before the congregation allowed the congregation, and even myself, to become vulnerable in worship where we may otherwise not have been.

One of the striking elements of prayer, worship, and the sermon was the focus on Jesus. Never would I challenge my congregations focus on Christ, but this church made Jesus the center of all things in a way I have never seen. It was a reminder that we don’t need to focus our lives around the deep theological things in the word, but simply to recognize the simple message of the One whom we have placed our faith in and to lead others to do the same. Even the pastor, after an intriguing sermon packed with edifying challenges, tied in the most primitive of choices, to follow our Lord or to follow Satan.

I think that theology is actually a similarity. Not that we have the same theology in every sense, but that the approach is similar. Our congregation, even among leadership, varies in view on non-salvific issues. Some are staunch Calvinists, where others are staunch Armenianists. What I really appreciated about the Pastor is that he did not find it necessary to create a doctrine in order to proclaim the meaning of the text. He quoted, “…if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved” (Romans 10.9 KJV). He then said that you can only confess by the power of the Spirit in calling you. So, it is both by the sovereignty of God and by man’s own will to act that man is saved. He led from this into a challenge to proclaim Christ as Lord and did not bother in the laborious and often misleading task of explaining the theological correlation between election and man’s will.

I think this was a great experience as it allowed me to see our Lord working in a different setting, with different people. It really brings light to God’s plan. It is easy for a church, especially a growing one, to begin to act as if they are the only church that exists. Truly, that is not the case. Christ is working in many ways here in my own town same as He is as all over the world.

Modern Christianity has a very formalized method of evangelism. It varies from denomination to denomination and person to person, but the methods are very formal. What I witness is a call to invite Christ into your heart. Is this wrong? No, but I think that it creates a sort of Christian, which may be missing the point of Christianity and may not even be Christian at all.

Consider the words of James, “…be doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving yourselves” (v. 1.22). See, many Christians will invite Christ in, but never experience any life change as a result of it. My pastor always says that he doesn’t rejoice so much when someone accepts Christ, but when a year later, they are walking faithfully with Him.

At risk of seeming terribly pragmatic, lets look at the way that Jesus called men into His service. Consider Matthew’s calling, “As Jesus went on from there, he saw a man named Matthew sitting at the tax collector’s booth. “Follow me,” he told him, and Matthew got up and followed him” (Matthew 9.9). When I challenge someone to come to Christ, I do not challenge them to ask Christ into their heart. Rather, I challenge them to commit their lives to the service of Christ.

The initial benefit to this method is that they immediately have in view that there is going to be change necessary. They have to DO things different. There is an additional benefit to this in that this sort of challenge comes with all sorts of questions. “Well, I have committed to following Christ, but what does that mean?” You can challenge them to become involved in church and in Bible studies as well as discipleship. As well, they should be challenged to pray to God and to read their Bibles in order to find out, not just what to do, but how to truly serve.

In this, I am not condemning other methods for evangelism. As I said, I don’t wish to be pragmatic about Jesus’ methodology. What I do desire to see is follow up. Are there people in your congregation, living stagnant lives? Do they think they are saved because they said a prayer and attend church on Sunday? Are they spiritually dead and ignorant of it? Find these people and challenge them to a greater service in Christ Jesus. Just the same, as you fulfill the great commission and draw others to Christ—however you choose to do that—make sure that they are challenged to actually follow Christ, to seek out and to do His will.

I logged into Yahoo this morning, not because I always do, but because I wanted to see what was happening in the world. I want to make note what Yahoo considers to be pressing news as of 8AM pacific time on 7-3-10.

“Serena Williams cruises at Wimbledon”
“Tricks to make your legs look longer”
“Apple ‘stunned’ at iPhone flaw”
and last but not least…
“‘Bachelor’ couple addresses nasty breakup”

Now, there is nothing wrong with Tennis or following Tennis, but I’m not entirely certain why this get’s the top spot, especially when Argentina is losing to Germany in the world cup as we speak. When it comes to sports, I think American’s still have an unhealthy relationship.

These other three titles point out a glaring flaw in the way that man looks at the world. Among many things, John 17 teaches us to be in the world, but not to be of the world. This means that we are residents here, but we do not conform to it.

It’s like when you visit China town in LA. The Chinese there are IN LA, but they are not OF LA. The are still OF China. For us, we are to be IN the world, that is the earth, but we are to be OF the heavenly kingdom. I look at it like this. Why be worried about how long your legs look when your goal is to glorify your King in Heaven, not to glorify yourself on Earth? Why even have an iPhone–unless for some reason it is helpful for your job or something reasonable–when the ridiculous amount of money could be spent on the Lords work? And when it comes to ‘The Bachelor,’ I really do not believe that such immoral programming can be  glorifying to God. To watch it incessantly as so many do is to desire that lifestyle above your own. Isn’t God worth such desire?

I have been doing some thinking about legalism this morning. I was thinking about verses like the following that say we have to follow the commandments. Paul taught that we are free from the law, so why so much emphasis on keeping the commandments? Truly, these are only two of many verses in the Bible commanding us to keep the law.

“Blessed are they who keep his statutes and seek him with all their heart” (Psalm 119.2).

“If you love Me, you will keep My commandments” (John 14.15).

Don’t get me wrong. I’m not looking for an escape; some sort of loophole in God’s word which will allow me to escape the responsibility of this charge. Instead, the goal is to bring some clarity, so that obedience to this command does not result in self-righteousness.

Romans 2.15 says, “…they [Gentiles] show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts now accusing, now even defending them.” I think this verse really unlocks the mystery of the law. The law is written on man’s heart. This is called general revelation. We do not need a written law to be able to tell right from wrong and certainly the Spirit of Christ is able to discern for us what is right. We already know what is right! Then the principle—if you love Christ, you will do what He desires. It’s not legalism in the sense that you are adhering to a list of do’s and don’ts in hope that you might at some point earn righteousness and salvation.

The defining factor between legalism and love, then, is that the one who loves, obeys because he wants to please his savior who has judged and pardoned him; the legalist obeys in hopes that he can pay his own penalty. But, sin is too great. We have no ability to save ourselves. “…Salvation comes from the LORD” (Jonah 2.9). It is only by submitting to the will and authority of Christ and obeying the greatest of all commands, “…Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind” (Matthew 22.37) that we are able to accept the free gift of salvation. It is at this point that our obedience ceases to be legalism and becomes love.

Biblical creation is one of the most difficult things to take by faith for many people. I don’t know if it is that God is not ‘big enough’ or if it is so contradictory to science that we are unable to believe it. Let’s take a look at what the Bible has to say.

First of all, proper hermeneutics is critical to an understanding of the creation accounts. Many people want to take certain stories, such as Job and Jonah, and say that they did not actually take place; rather they are stories which God designed in order to teach us something. Often times a large part of Genesis is put into this category.

The truth is that these are all Old Testament narratives, though. It does not matter if you are reading 1 Kings or Genesis 1, they are narrative and ought to be used the same. The Hebrew people, where they did make use of allegory, metaphor and other forms of imagery, reserved this practice for shorter proverbial or parabolic situations where something could be taught on the spot. The creation accounts of Genesis 1 and 2 were written into a time line of the history of God’s chosen people. It should be understood as being historical.

So, it is not so much the fantastic elements that people reject. We understand that God is hear and working in this world to bring about the completion of His plan. But, we are used to seeing God work through this creation, so a seven day creation becomes very abstract and difficult to believe.

Here is something to ponder—not doctrine, but my own musings:

2 Peter 3.8 says, “with the Lord one day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years like one day” (NASB). It seems to say that a day to the Lord, who is the one who created all things according to John 1, time is relative. So could it be that 7 days took place over some extended period of time according to Jesus’ divine control over time?

I have heard it argued repeatedly—and I tend to agree—that the Hebrew word used for day, literally means one day, a 24 hour period, sun down to sun down. Therefore, it had to take place in 7 earthly days. I myself am more interested to see how the Greek speaking Hebrews from before Christ viewed a day. In the LXX (the Greek translation of the Hebrew texts) they translate the word day in the Genesis account as ἡμέρα (aymera). This is the same word Jesus used in Matthew 26.61 to denote the number of days it would take for the temple to be rebuilt. Therefore a day is a day.

Where this seems to support the argument for a true 7/24, there is one other element to consider in the semantic argument. In 2 Peter 3.8, the word used is also ἡμέρα. So, in the end, what I see is a 7/24 (really 6/24) creation, where Jesus has taken divine control over time in order to complete what science says would take millions of years into 7 temporal days.

I’d encourage you to consider this and make your own judgment, according to the Spirit. Seek out the truth from scripture for yourself. I think this might just be one of those things we are to take on faith and may not be able to conclusively be settled until the Lord returns and we are given understanding.