What reflections and connections can you make with this novel?
The ideology regarding the method of evangelism used by Don Richardson intrigues me greatly. I have been heavily influenced by the occupation of my parents(they are missionaries) and have lived a life immersed in the ministry. The concept of God placing eternity into the hearts of all men and redemptive analogies gave new insight to the reason why certain ministry approaches work better than others. Furthermore, it caused me to reflect upon the practices and teachings of my parents and other with whom I am well-acquainted. I would honestly say that I had seen the value in infiltrating the culture, so to speak and still holding to ones morals and values. As the popular Christian saying goes, one is to be "in the world but not of the world". The ideology of Don did, however, explain the "why" to the thinking of many missionaries as they attempted to adapt to the culture in which they resided.


Over this Christmas break I attended a week of evangelism sessions which used the program "The Way of the Master". Basically the process was derived from Jesus' manner of evangelism(hence the title of the program) and showed the practical application in our modern world. It was a very good course and addressed some very difficult questions and issues with extremely strong, Biblically-supported answers. Coupled with some of C.S. Lewis-type approach to issues, Don Richardson's ideologies and the course, my view of the importance of evangelism has been greatly boosted. Also my confidence regarding evangelism has also grown. Peace Child definitely caused extensive reflection and really provided me with a profound real-life example to supplement the material that I learned.
Citations:
http://img.mailchimp.com/2007/08/25/0v535s2geargqti8kl8d15roe2/way_of_the_master.jpg

Write Yae's last moments from the killers' perspectives.


Maum watched with growing anticipation as Yae talked of the grand invitation to his village. The joy embodied upon his face was nothing compared to the satisfaction which awaited Maum. Rather absentmindedly, Maum observed the formalities as he waited for the signal he knew was soon to come. Then, it came. A slight eyebrow raise was all that was needed, he passed along then deliberately rose to his feet. He secretly drew out his long barbed ironwood, all the while feigning a yawn. It was finally time! After seven months of gaining ostensible trust. Maum flashed a grin at Yamasi and Giriman as all three held their spears at the ready. More in the manhouse followed their suit, pulling weapons from under mats and edging ever closer to Yae, who was conversing with Kauwan and distracted, thus making him a cornered captive.
Yae looked up, to the great delight of all but himself, and his expression altered greatly as he glanced around at all those whom he had considered friends. Maum felt a victory as his eyes met Yae’s and the realization of what was shortly to take place dawned upon the victim. He made sure to carefully note the details of Yae’s reaction in order to depict for a later time in the manhouse. After all, this was an treachery of the most excellent sort and must be recognized. It was not a mere murder that was being committed, but the Sawi ideal of betrayal, revealed to Yae himself with Giriman’s words of “Tuwi asonai makaerin”-"We have been fattening you with friendship for the slaughter."
The marriage of his daughter to Kauwan was certainly worth this: the fulfillment of an art which their forefathers had perfected! Poor pathetic Yae, thought Maum, he believed he had overcome generations of tradition. His cry to Kauwan was still more pitiful, showing him not a true warrior. He cried “Kauwan! Where are you? Protect me, Kauwan!”, which only brought more satisfaction to who had formed a circle around him.
The reply from Kauwan showed his resolution regarding the matter, “I kept telling them this was bad, that you are my friend and they should not do this to you. But Maum here has promised me his daughter in marriage if I would keep silent. Too bad, my friend. I guess I’m not going to help you.” Maum was filled with pride regarding his large role in the whole matter, and he was ready to further secure his honor by, if possible, being on of the first to strike Yae.
“Don’t say that, Kauwan! Stand by your promise!” Yae screamed out these words in a voice filled with passion and anguish. Maum could hardly hold back any longer, he was ready to plunge the spear into Yae at any second. Yae attempted to rise, but was stopped short by a long barbed ironwood which stuck out of his side. Maum felt the joy of victory as it was his spear which pierced the side of Yae, who sank to one knee, and caused a mighty roar from the occupants of the manhouse.
Yae tried to pull out the spear and implored Kauwan for mercy. Kauwan turned away from Yae and simply stated “You should have given me a peace shild. Then I would have protected you.” With these words, was the fate of Yae sealed, and the permission seemingly granted to all in the manhouse to thrust their weapons into the injured party. One man struck Yae with an axe, at which he tumbled down; another man let an arrow fly into Yae’s thigh. Then, watching with amusement, Maum saw how the fallen warrior tried to redeem himself and lunged at some of the men, receiving another spear for the his troubles, which went through his calf. The men of Haenam merely moved aside shrieking at the reaction of Yae. Yae fell forward and slipped downward through a gap in the uncompleted manhouse only to get stuck by the spear sticking out of his calf. He made quite a spectacle for Maum to remember, hanging upside down with no hope of escape. Not only did he have to wait for the fate that was now totally unavoidable, but he was also subject to blows by the women and children. Arrows were shot as the dogs licked up the blood that was falling from Yae.
When Yae breathed his last, Maum joined the other warriors as they danced wildly around the body. They all boasted of their roles in the treachery, but none was more honored than Maum, who, by obtaining Kauwan’s silence, had the right to the head of the one formerly called Yae.

Citations:
Richardson, Don. Peace Child. 4th. Ventura,CA: Regal Books, 2005.

Choose a representative passage from this novel that holds particular significance to you. Type it in and comment on its significance.



"Reduced to utter dependence upon God, we set ourselves to hope for that key. We could not guess what form it would take. We only knew that it would be from God and would have His blessing."



I love the first part of the passage which states "utter dependence upon God". It is very profound and relates well to experiences I have had with God which has led to a further knowledge, on my part, of the nature on God.



"God is..." is a very popular phrase. We humans have the tendency to put God in a box. God is love("Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love." 1 John ) and at the same time, God hates sin(); those two qualities do not seem to work together, however, His Word, the Bible shows both to be true. God is merciful("But in your great mercy You did not put an end to them or abandon them, for You are a great and merciful God." Nehemiah 9:31), but at the same time He is justice("Yet the Lord longs to be gracious to you; He rises to show you compassion. For the Lord is a God of justice. Blessed are all who wait on Him. Isaiah 30:18), thus He will send people to Hell who do not believe in Him. These examples seem to be oxymorons, but they are in fact paradoxes. Many people do not acknowledge this fact and thus choose to focus on one aspect of God, and in grave danger of stereotyping God. If we don't like to be put into boxes, then how much more appalling should it be when the Lord God Almighty is being stereotyped? This whole paragraph may appear to be a tangent, one may think, "How does this relate to the passage whatsoever?" Well, it is often stereotypes which lead to disappointment which in turn bring about a state of brokenness. This state is frequently used by God to promote "utter dependency" on God. This now brings me to a very personal section of my post.

"I", that word which is used so much by a great many of us. In itself, it isn't bad or evil, but overuse often causes the one using it to focus more on themselves, and that was indeed the case with myself. My struggle with utter dependency on God is long and therefore, I shall limit it to the past year and a half.

I do not think that I "fit in"-so to speak-with the student body at TCIS. I do not think that now, and I didn't think that 18 months ago. There were some people who would tolerate my presence and a small pocket who would probably have considered themselves to be in good company when I was around. Out of that small pocket there were less than a dozen who I would have considered "good friends" and out of that, less than the number of fingers on my hand that would consider "close friends". I trusted the individuals immensely and would tell them nearly everything. At the same time I wanted them to be the type of friends, best termed in the words of Anne of Green Gables, that would be "bosom friend". Neither side was really ready for a friendship of that transparency and thus, not only did I get hurt, but it also made relations between those individuals very difficult during that year. Instead of really enjoying some of the moments which we had together, neither side understood each other and awkward silence was often the companion of such times together. This may seem to be just an issue between my friends and I, but the "wound" that appeared to spring from those encounters was really just the like a scab being torn away from a much deeper wound. I thought that I could rely fully on my friends, as the world often tells us, but that was just a box in which I placed my friends(the promised connection to the second paragraph). The issue went much further than the what I thought and had to do with my spiritual life. I was not utterly dependent upon God and was looking to fill myself up in other places: my friends. My friendships suffered because I was searching for a type of fulfillment that is only found in God. Heartaches later, after a year and a half of stumbling falling down I have finally learned the lesson of dependency that God was trying to teach me. I am still learning more about dependence and I do not rely on Him as much as I should, but the difference is that before I was only trying, but now I feel my whole being desiring intimacy with Him. This is, in a way, a testimony of what God has been doing in my life.

Citations: http://www.flickr.com/photos/cdiferente/2280874155/sizes/m/

What does Jesus want us to do for the Sawi?
Jesus gives specific commands to Christians-whom I shall refer to “us”. There are many commands and lessons which were taught to His disciples, however, among these, there is one command which stands out quite clearly found in Matthew 28:16-20 which states: But the eleven disciples proceeded to Galilee, to the mountain which Jesus had designated. When they saw Him, they worshiped Him; but some were doubtful. And Jesus came up and spoke to them, saying, "All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. "Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age." This famous passage is known as the “Great Commission” and transparently displays Jesus’ will for his disciples, or followers(as disciple literally means follower). Furthermore, when one looks at Matthew 22:37-40, the commands mentioned in Matthew 22:16-20 are found. It reads: But the eleven disciples proceeded to Galilee, to the mountain which Jesus had designated. When they saw Him, they worshiped Him; but some were doubtful. And Jesus came up and spoke to them, saying, "All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. "Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age." What does Jesus want us to do for the Sawi? He wants us to go and make followers of Jesus Christ, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. But it doesn’t stop there, He also wants His followers, Christians, to teach others the commands He taught His disciples. Jesus used many parables and illustrations to communicate His message of salvation, however, as stated in His own words, the commands in Matthew 22:37-40 truly do sum up all of His commands. The words from His mouth specify what should be taught to all people, and in this case, the Sawi.
A question now remains, what would the implication of Jesus’ commands look like? Well, I highly suspect it would resemble the work done among the Sawi by Don Richardson. He went to the Sawi and shared the gospel of Jesus Christ with them. Some received this message which created disciples. After these followers were born into God’s family, Don did not just leave them, but rather he taught them God’s Word and commands. According to Matthew 28:16-20, he followed the last commands that Jesus gave while still on Earth. Granted, he is only an example and one should always look to the source(God and His Word) when attempting to discern God, but I would not hesitate to say that he makes a fairly good exemplar when it does come to ministry and Jesus’ desires for not only the Sawi, but for all people.

The call that Don had to the Sawi is depicted in the song "To The Ends of The Earth" by Hillsong. It really captures the spirit of those that do go out and fulfill the Great Commission.

Citations: http://imbresources.org/photos/cs-earth.m.jpg

What should we do when confronted with other cultures?

This is a issue that everyone faces and that I connect to as a TCK. The answer to this question is fairly simple, one should respect the other culture and take advantage of the opportunity to learn about/from the culture and at the same time keep their own culture. Where does one draw the line between keeping and staying true to ones culture and respecting another's culture? In order to answer this question the word "respect" needs to be defined. Respect has several definitions, but when dealing with culture, a definition from Dictionary.com captures the spirit of respect that I believe should be used in relation to the question. It states that respect is "to show regard or consideration for". There is another definition that many referenced unto in their other posts which states "to refrain from intruding upon or interfering with". Through this post, I hope to explain my reasoning for the first definition.

In a world quickly globalizing, the second definition of respect is neither practical nor beneficial. It is inevitable that cultures will be meshed and intruded upon. The growth in "international culture" or the coalesce of cultures that have made a refuge for those who do not align themselves with a culture. The globalization movement has mostly been met with acceptance and enthusiasm in the past decades, but the irony lies within the fact that the same people who cry for globalization often protest against the infringement of cultures when in essence that is the primary goal of globalization. Although it may not claim that goal, it is the product. Some may disagree with my view, however, I would question the reason for its fallacy. This appears to be a very arrogant statement, but I am not accrediting it to myself, but rather to others whom have educated me regarding globalization and mere common sense. Take South Korea, for example, it is a very modern monocultural society, yet all the clothes are of Western style and originally Western technology has now manifested itself in a somewhat Korean version(cell phones, computers, cars, etc). This is due to several factors, one of which is, undeniably, globalization. South Korea needed to change in order to compete with the international community and the world, however, was their culture "respected"? According to the definition that many used in other blogposts, no, but according to the definition put forth in this post, yes. Yes, there may have been times where some were not respectful when dealing with the culture, but there are still many instances where there have been people who have respected the cultures. The reason why I strongly object to the definition of respect put forth by some others is that it does not allow for innovation and the changing times. In order for changes to occur, there must be some interference, some intrusion. The US primarily interfered with South Korea and through the "interference" South Korea gained much of the technology needed to progress to its current state. It is still South Korea, people still eat kim-chee and celebrate traditional holidays such as chu-sok. According to the definition of respect used within this post, the culture still stands and will be allowed to evolve with time.

How does Faith relate to the world in which we live?

There are some who would consider faith a paradox. It is engrained firmly into a society, yet it is embraced by individuals. It is often the base of culture, but it can be detached from the culture and stand, so to speak, by itself. But is this a true description of faith? “Faith” in the ancient Greek, found in the New Testament, means “belief + action” and with this ever important word defined I shall continue my post.

With faith defined it is not difficult to make some observations regarding faith’s relationship to the world in which we reside, such as faith makes people act in certain ways, but I would like to put forth another idea. I entertain the idea that faith is something so powerful that it absolutely requires action. If my theory is correct then it is faith that would drive people to commit actions they normally would not. It would be faith that would cause peoples to condemn that which is considered mainstream and never look back or visa versa. Faith is something associated with religion-and rightly so-but I believe it goes beyond religion and is actually the basis for relationship.

The relationship between faith and the world requires a very important component, and that is trust in both parties. If you watch the first video, you see that the girl had to trust the other individuals in order for her to take the “drop of faith” and allow herself to become vulnerable. In the second video, the guy did not have faith in the other man that was to catch him and was thus able to react when he was not caught. In order to exhibit faith, one must have trust in what they believe in to such an extent that it causes action. This idea of faith and trust can be applied to the Sawi. They had the idea that giving a part of their hair to each other to symbolize trust. This trust then caused the parties to believe and take action-thus have faith in the other party. This was quite unfortunate for some people who were betrayed, as the betrayal of trust was placed higher than actual trust. Trust is a component of faith that often supports the action behind faith and as seen in the Sawi example, it isn’t always for the benefit of the individuals involved.

Video One:

Video Two:

Faith is something that drives people in the world to do a great many things. What would Albert Einstein have done without some faith in physics and the laws of the universe? Would Martin Luther have written his 95 Theses? Would Adolf Hitler have pursued his supremacist ideals? People have changed the world for faith, for the better and worse. It is important to recognize its very prominent role within basic human relations and be able to analyze the actions/responses of others while at the same time not compromising personal ideas regarding faith within our every changing world.

Citations: 

My dad :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u99CnIOgcA0&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HsurGYKyGiY&feature=related

What do traders and NGOs do for these cultures? 

This question is one that is of particular interest to myself because I have been studying the UN in depth in International Relations and thus I shall be answering what the UN, and the NGOs aligned with it, do for cultures. 

Ideals often reflect a process of thinking or a mindset. Thus, in order to better understand some of the conclusions I draw regarding the UN, it seems best to look at what is possibly their most famous document, The UN Declaration of Human Rights (linked here: http://www.un.org/Overview/rights.html), which contains a variety of rights entitled to all human beings. Overall, this document seems to represent a very balanced protection of different aspects of life here on Earth. The Declaration does mention spirituality in that it garuantees the freedom to practice and change religion(Article 18), in reality this right is not promoted or well-held up in many of the UN's operations, in fact, more often than not the UN stays mum on the subject of religion and rather address other social issues such as racism or poverty. Now, both of the example which I just gave are important issues that need to be addressed, but spirituality is an aspect of life that must be faced, and in my opinion, the UN should make a point of addressing that fact more often. Am I saying that the UN is a terrible organization? By no means, although they are far from perfect, they do attempt to secure international relations as well as promote human rights accross the world, but nonetheless because of their lack of religious background(despite the fact that many of their human rights are similar to ideals found within the Bible and other religious texts), I believe they are a hinderance when dealing with people. This is equally applicable to both peoples from modern countries and those from less-developed nations. All people have a need for a spiritual presence in their life, some just don't look for it in, what many would consider, "traditional" locations(e.g. Isalm, Christianity, Hinduism, Buddhism, Judaism, etc). Even in our world where 16% claim to be non-religious, there is still an element of spirituality in their lives, such as luck, the form in which they express themselves spiritually is just different. Why is all this important? It briefly displays the fact that all peoples do have an element of spirituality in their life therefore it should be well-addressed by NGOs, such as the UN-who is considered a model for the world. 

Now onto the actual question. What do NGOs do for these cultures? Well, frankly, they promote their ideals. For example had the UN gone in before the missionaries, according to the UN Declaration of Human Rights, cannibilism would not be an acceptable cultural practice, which would result in the UN creating policies abolishing cannibilism in the Sawi tribes. Granted this is hypothetical and the UN doesn't technically have the power to stop anyone from doing anything, they would still promote their ideals and attempt to find diplomatic means to stop cannibilism in the country-thus changing the culture, or as some as so fond of saying "destroying" the culture. I really must protest the word "destroy" because destory implies that there is nothing left of the culture, and if one element is taken away a culture is still left with the other elements and therefore not destroyed. Bringing the focus back to the question, although the UN is concerned about human rights, they do have their own agenda and are always concerned about the balance of power-thus they(and any other NGO) are not objective or unbaised. They do educate people and promote equal rights, but at at cost, one that often takes its toll on improvished people groups and thier cultures. Many would consider them a more favorable person to send in first(at least when compared to a missionary), but it is important to recognize that there are hypocrites in all of us and that every organization has their own agenda.There is evidence of this hypocrisy in the fact that there are quite a few cases where UN workers have actually hurt the people they had come to help-intentionally (example one, example two, example three). This is heartbreaking-regardless of one's opinion of the UN-and should serve as a reminder of the fact that no one is perfect. 

Citations:

http://www.un.org/Overview/rights.html

http://www.adherents.com/Religions_By_Adherents.html

http://www.sikhsangat.org/news/uploads/1/un_logo.jpg