Culture Shock
a world Chrisitan's manifesto

Why is western culture always used for setting the parameters of what’s considered Christian?

Why do certain cultures seem to have such a learning curve?

Why are racial hate groups suddenly surfacing after we all thought that politically correctness and new age understanding had obliterated racism and predjudice from our society?

What keeps the Christian message from being understood by other cultures? Some of the barriers that exist and some of the more radical strategies currently being applied towards total cultural adaptation of the Christian message

What is the church? A non cultural definition: a network linking communities from all cultures through their realisation of Jesus being Christ, Son of the living God

SYNOPSIS ‘Love your neighbour as yourself’ isn't just a command for missionaries. It describes the spirit in which the ordinary Christian must resist the spirits of intolerance manifest by white supremacists, ethnic cleansing, the troubles in N. Ireland, schoolhouse shootings, and other forms of social unrest - and win. This entails learning about other cultures, and willingness to learn the valuable lessons that they have to impart to the rest of the world - in the same way they've received from the West in the past. In fact, this is a book designed to give you culture shock. The first fundamental question we'll ask is, why is western culture always used for setting the parameters of what’s considered Christian? What factors brought the west to prominence? What makes ‘ugly Americans’ ugly? Is it the lack of coffee? As if that weren’t shocking enough, we'll follow that up with a scriptural study showing how each culture is in itself a gift and a calling from God, and how each has something to teach the rest of the Christian world. In fact, we’ll absolutely get our hands sticky with issues like Replacement Theology and the equality of women. Among the various cultural traits and values that we can all learn from, is the concept of honouring one another. We'll look at what Thai and other Asian cultures can teach us about this. Then, there's the issue of individualism vs. collectivism. Where does the balance lie, and what does that imply regarding our complicity with the sins of our forefathers? The answer might not be to everyone’s liking. Then, we'll note how standards of ethics also differ from culture to culture. We’ll examine two general types of ethical standards found in every culture, bipolar and multipolar. The one may seem more enlightened, and the other, primitive, and yet ... what does the Bible say? Then, we’ll look at a seemingly commonplace feature of our own culture, the word ‘thank you’. Some cultures don’t have it, and others are in danger of losing it. However, a direct corollary exists between a thankful attitude and walking in light, and that can profoundly affect a whole people group. All of the above, we'll see, define the spirit in which we must do warfare against the spiritual forces of cultural intolerance manifested by Neo-Nazism, ethnic cleansing, white supremacy, schoolhouse shootings, terrorism and social unrest. There is no easy way out. In fact... - well, I’d better not scare you off just yet. Then, there's one last culture we'll look at (the culture shock isn't over yet). That's Christian culture. There are many good things to be said about Christian culture, but not all that can be said about it is good. What did God mean when He gave warnings in His word about the ways of the ‘world’? Is ‘Christian culture’ really the alternative God had in mind? We’ll look at possible scriptural precedents and how they help us know where to draw the line in regards to our involvement with the world and whether or not they truly infer an alternative culture for Christians. The experience of the early Church will also throw light on the subject in a way that is very relevant to today’s situation. Whatever the verdict is, it is a culture. Just as with any culture, it isn't necessarily our job to tear it down. We’ll then review the history of how ‘Christian culture’ has slowly become more open and more flexible over the last five centuries. There are barriers that yet exist, but we’ll look at some of the more radical strategies currently being applied towards total cultural adaptation of the Christian message. Then, we’ll look at three barriers that keep Christian message from being understood by other cultures. Here’s where we’ll get our hands really dirty. We’ve always thought those who refuse the gospel do so out of rebellion towards God. That may be true, but in many cases, it’s also because they're seeing us in light of their cultural values -- and they're not always impressed by what they see. We’ll look at how cultural values actually protect the members of each culture in their unique areas of moral weakness, and how to have wisdom in getting around them. All that also has to do with a culture's common perception of who the ‘bad guys’ are -- often determined by their history interaction with other people groups. Sometimes that's further complicated by our overemphasis on our own political agenda. All of this will help us to understand what the church isn't. Finally, we'll look at what Jesus said that the church is. From that, we will gain a non cultural definition: a world-wide network linking communities from all cultures through their realisation of Jesus being Christ, Son of the living God. It's the revelation of Christ that links us -- not cultural conformity.

The Didache is an edifying piece of writing from the late first or early second century. It describes how the early church conducted baptisms, the Lord's supper, how they delt with those who refused to forgive, and how they recognised a true prophet.

The Shepherd of Hermas is a very interesting (if not odd) work that has some hard things to say. Never the less, it is probably more relevant than many of us today would care to admit. They were the visions of a slave named Hermas, in which he is visited by "the shepherd", the angel of repentance Some very striking parables of the building (in which we are the stones), on faith, repentance, double mindednes and the fear of the Lord.

INTRODUCTION The Shepherd of Hermas was originally written somewhere between the last part of the first century and probably the first part of the second century. The Didache was written about that time, as well, although probably earlier. In that time period, most of the original Apostles had died --the last one, John, died AD 100--, and the cannon of scripture hadn't been fully agreed on yet. In other words, many people were still not sure exactly which epistles and gospels were really inspired New Testament scripture, and which weren't. It was only later on that the Leadership of the church decided more or less unanimously which books would make up the cannon of scripture. (It was definatly the wisdom of God that they did, as I, for one, would hate to see what would happen if such a decision were left to the church in the state we've been in ever since!) The Didache is sort of a hand-book for early Christians -- especially those who didn't have copies of any of the gospels or epistles. It contains probably what someone like Apostle Peter, or James would have taught had they started a church in some town far from Jerusalem. The Shepherd of Hermas is a series of visions, or revelations received by a slave, named Hermas, who lived in Rome. The "shepherd" is actually the angel of repentance who gives him most of the revelations in the second and third parts of the book. The Shepherd of Hermas made a great impression on the early church. In fact, many of the church fathers, such as Irenaeus, Origen, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian --thought he later changed his mind--, treated it as though it were divinely inspired scripture. Again, it had not yet been agreed at that point, exactly which books were, in fact scripture. My own experience in reading The Shepherd of Hermas, is probably like many other's. I was confused by some of the strange, powerful statements that were made, and put it down, and didn't read it again until many years later. Then, I began to get something out of it. In fact, the more I read it, the more I am convinced that there is a vital message for the twentieth century church. Part of the problem in reading the full text of what now exists, is that it was written by hand, and subsequently copied by hand. Rome, at that time, not being a major centre of Christianity as it became later, they were probably not as careful in preserving the writings as they were in places such as Ephesus, Antioch and Alexandria, where what now are known as New Testament scriptures were kept. Therefore, as the book was copied, it's possible that some people's pet doctrines crept in. If they sincerely believed something to be so, some people felt perfectly justified in "correcting" someone else's literary work, or at least making marginal notes. Later copiests mistook the marginal notes for corrections, and added them in. Therefore, if you read the full text --available at the Christian History library web site -- you will find certain other ideas that don't seem to make sense, but were floating around during the second century. Since I don't know the original languages, nor do I have access to the original texts, I am not a qualified textual critic. However, I have edited the English translation as much as I dare to. I've left out some of the parts that would confuse rather than edify, with the opinion that they might not have been in the original visions of Hermas to begin with. Therefore this isn't a "version" based on a textual edition, but rather, an "abridged reader's edition", meant solely for the purpose of edifying the Body of Christ in the twentieth century. What I did find, however, is that when the questionable texts are removed, the whole thing reads even more smoothly than before, as though they didn't belong in the first place! In reading, you will find that Hermas and his shepherding angel were neither Calvinists nor dispensationalists. I really can't help it -- they really weren't! However, if you are one who believes that it's just possible that a document can fail to support those two relatively recent doctrines, and yet be true to Scripture, you should be edified by the reading of The Shepherd of Hermas. One of the overpowering themes is cleansing oneself of double-mindedness. One truth that is emphasized is that, by following the desires that come as a natural part of the born-again experience, one is able to overcome sin. In this desire is the fear of God. For the double-minded Christian, the Christian life is extremely difficult, especially when confronted with some of the hard sayings in The Shepherd...etc. However, once repentance is made, and the soul is cleansed of a double mind, following these things comes very naturally. There are also some striking statements about faith and unbelief that would seem to have been spoken by some of the more radical Bible teachers of our time. In all, the Shepherd will remind the reader of the book of James, only very much expanded. The Didache has been presented in its entirety, with only the language of the translation updated --thees and thous changed to yous and yours. Finally, I am in no way insinuating that these works be treated on a level with Holy Scripture. Though they were rejected from the cannon of scripture, they were never the less acknowdeged as profitible for personal edification; just as many books today, such as C.S.Lewis, A.W.Tozer, Martin Luther etc. are good reading, but definatly not part of the Bible. Moreover, many prophecies and visions by Elijah, the "sons of the prophets", Agabus, the believers in Corinth and many others were never included in Scripture (nor even suitable as such), though they were no doubt edifying to those who heard them. The Scritpure is already complete without them, and we must test what we read by comparing it to revealed truth in scripture. I trust that you will do just that, and what you find to apply in the light of Truth, you will receive for edification.

Marta! Marta!

Two sisters. How much difference do you suppose there could be between them? One was determined to get everything done the way it should; the other saw that only one thing is important -- intimacy with God. Lots of rich stories in this one, plus a bonus article on just why is it we, the church, can't manage to come together in unity.

Marta! Marta! -- The Sequel: The Inner Sanctuary and the End Time Church

If you haven't read the original Marta! Marta! yet, then don't read this until you do - unless you particularly enjoy hearing your pet doctrine refuted (or defended - depending on where you stand). Covers areas such as Israel's part in the end times, the timing of the rapture and the great tribulation, and the spotless bride of Christ (though definitely not spotless now, she will be), and how intimacy with God in the inner sanctuary is vital to it all. You should be blessed, even if you don't agree with everything Baruch says.

Down load page ...where these and the following can be downloaded for free personal use

Matthew 6:22,23
The lamp of the body is the eye. If therefore your eye is good your whole body will be full of light but if your eye is bad your whole body will be full of darkness. If therefore the light that is in you is darkness, how great is that darkness

What did Jesus mean by, "good eye"?

What's fundamentally wrong with the popular saying, "People are our greatest assets"...?

Find out why it is that...

• ...some people are always so dependent on others
• ...how and when you use the word, thank you, shows if you have a "good eye" or not
• ...the desire to control and manipulate is a symptom of a "bad eye"
• ...the world is so much more a fun place to be when you're not in control over it

Also find out...

• ...how to start relating to others
• ...how to increase the value of everything you own and everyone you know (a way to get rich...!)
• ...how to light the lamp of your "eye"