Another New Year!

Another new year—what shall I make of it?
God gave it to me as a loan
Shall I search for earth's cheer with
Its pretense and take it—
Not bread for my soul but a stone?

Another new year—what shall I gather,
Earth's tinsel, her glitter to show

Another new year—what would I rather,
A flash or a deep inner glow?
A year full of getting or a year full of giving
The best that I have to give?
A year full of fretting or a year full of living
The way that God wants me to live?

Another new year—what shall I make of it?
God gave me the right to choose.
Another new year—God helping, I'll take it
And give it to Him to use.

--“Another New Year” written by Phyllis C. Michael

The Christian Paradox

A real Christian is an odd number, anyway.
He feels supreme love for One whom he has never seen;
talks familiarly everyday to someone he cannot see;
expects to go to heaven on the virtue of another;
empties himself in order to be full;
admits he is wrong so he can be declared right;
goes down in order to get up;
is strongest when he is weakest;
richest when he is poorest;
happiest when he feels the worst.
He dies so he can live;
forsakes in order to have;
gives away so he can keep;
sees the invisible;
hears the inaudible;
and knows that which passeth knowledge.

—A. W. Tozer, The Root of the Righteous (Harrisburg, PA: Christian Publications, 1955), 156.

Augustine on the Incarnation

Man’s maker was made man,
that He, Ruler of the stars, might nurse at His mother’s breast;
that the Bread might hunger,
the Fountain thirst,
the Light sleep,
the Way be tired on its journey;
that the Truth might be accused of false witness,
the Teacher be beaten with whips,
the Foundation be suspended on wood;
that Strength might grow weak;
that the Healer might be wounded;
that Life might die.
- Augustine of Hippo (Sermons 191.1)

The Christmas Story

 

“What good is the Christmas story if it’s void of God and His glory?

What’s the worth of the words ‘peace on earth’ if it’s not rooted in the Truth of Christ’s birth?

What benefit is it for us to discuss the joy of the season unless we fix our hearts and minds on the principal reason that Christ has atoned for us?

See Christmas is more than just a story of a baby born in a manger,

More than a poor fiancé engaged to a humble virgin teenager,

More than a Magi, more than gold, frankincense and myrrh.

It’s more than a narrative of a Nativity scene, it was so much more that occurred.

It’s the coming of the Messiah, the fulfillment of all Old Testament promises,

The prophecy of the suffering Servant and all of His accomplishments,

The second Person of the Trinity commissioned to abandon His position,

And literally set aside the independent exercise of His attributes in full submission,

The Word manifested in the flesh, the fullness of God expressed,

The self-emptying Jesus poured out at the Father’s request,

The image of the invisible God, the radiance of the Father’s fame,

Holy, but retained His humanness to empathize with our pain.

He was unjustly crushed, chastised, cursed and shamed,

Mocked and adorned with a crown of thorns, disgraced but He still faced the grave,

To fulfill the Father’s will, to come and die in the place of sinful men,

And receive the fully fury of God’s judgment upon Himself instead,

The most monumental mark for mankind made in human history,

Wretched sinners being made righteous only by the wounds of the risen King,

The condescending of a holy God made in the likeness of men,

A child born to be the Savior that would save the world from their sins,

The offspring of the virgin’s womb,

The Christ, God’s own Son, fully God, yet fully man, the only theanthropic One.

This is what we celebrate, Christ the newborn King, veiled in flesh, the Godhead seen,

Hailed incarnate Deity.”

--Odd Thomas

 

 

 

Christmas

In the Christian story, God descends to re-ascend. He comes down;... down to the very roots and the sea-bed of the Nature He has created. But He goes down to come up again and bring the whole ruined world up with Him
--CS Lewis, Miracles

God - My all

God be in my head,
and in my understanding;

God be in my eyes,
and in my looking;

God be in my mouth,
and in my speaking;

God be in my heart,
and in my thinking;

God be at mine end,
and at my departing.

--St Patrick
--Simple Faith, Pg 75,76

Meaning

Those who want Heaven most have served Earth best. Those who love [mankind] less than God do most for [mankind].
--CS Lewis, "On Living in an Atomic Age" in Present Concerns, Page 80

On Talktativeness

Our miseries do not spring
    From houses wanting locks or bolts;
But from unbridled tongues,
    Ill used by prating fools and dolts.

~ Euripides 
~Plutarch's Lives, On Garrulity, or Talkativeness, Pg 223.

Bad and Good

"When a man is getting better he understands more and more clearly the evil that is still left in him. When a man is getting worse, he understands his own badness less and less. A moderately bad man knows he is not very good: a thoroughly bad man thinks he is all right. This is common sense, really. You understand sleep when you are awake, not while you are sleeping. You can see mistakes in arithmetic when your mind is working properly: while you are making them you cannot see them. You can understand the nature of drunkenness when you are sober, not when you are drunk. Good people know about both bad and evil: bad people do not know about either."

--C.S. Lewis: Mere Christianity Book 3 Chapter 4

The Gazelle and the Lion

“Every morning in Africa, a Gazelle wakes up. It knows it must run faster than the fastest lion or it will be killed. Every morning a Lion wakes up. It knows it must outrun the slowest Gazelle or it will starve to death. It doesn't matter whether you are a Lion or a Gazelle... when the sun comes up, you'd better be running.”

~ African proverb

Quote of the day

“There is nothing capricious in nature and the implanting of a desire indicates that its gratification is in the constitution of the creature that feel it.”
--Ralph Waldo Emerson quotes

Worthy Publishing

The Relentless Pursuit of Human Endeavor

The last time I was awestruck by a song was from Gulzar's song in Guru - "Jaage Hain." Gulzar's and Rahman's soulful rendition led me down a path of contemplation which I hadn't been for a long time. Many years later I serendipitously came across this song which has forced me to play it over and over again.. 

Hats of the lyricist(s) for brilliantly capturing and articulating in a few words the relentless and yet futile pursuit of human endeavor (reminiscent of King Solomon's musings in his masterpiece, Ecclesiastes)

"Paaya woh na chaaha, chaaha woh na paaya
Jiske peeche bhaage, woh saaya hai re saaya
Kya kya raste dhoondhe, kya kya dukh na paaya
Par saaya thehra saaya, ke haathon mein na aaya"

 

Mann jaage saari raat, mera dewaana
Mann maane na yeh baat, ke woh tha begaana
Hai khud se hi, khafa khafa
Kya chahiye, nahi pata, bawara

My mad mind wakes up whole night
My mind does not accept that my lover was a stranger
It is angry on itself
It does not know what it wants, oh my mad mind

Paaya woh na chaaha, chaaha woh na paaya
Jiske peeche bhaage, woh saaya hai re saaya
Kya kya raste dhoondhe, kya kya dukh na paaya
Par saaya thehra saaya, ke haathon mein na aaya

It got what it did not want and did not get what it wanted
What it followed was shadow
How many ways did it try to find, how much grief did it get
But shadow was shadow, and could not be caught

Koi subaah, jo main uthoon
Bujhe agan, mile sukoon, bawara

Any morning when I wake up,
May this fire extinguish and my mind get peace, oh my mad mind

Ginta rehta taare, lotoon main angaare
Khud se ladta phirta, yeh jag ko thokar maare
Kheenche kheenche baithe, baithe baithe bhaage
Na sunta khudke aage, yeh pagal ho gaya re

It keeps on counting stars, I rob blazes
It keeps on fighting itself only, and kicks the world,
It sits in tension, keeps running while sitting
It does not hear anyone before itself, it has become mad.

Paaya woh na chaaha..

Hai zindagi muhaal kyun
Bana liya yeh haal kyun bata
Uljha uljha rehta na sunta na kuch kehta
Sooni sooni aankhon se, reh-reh paani behta
Toote saare naate, haara main samjhate
Bichde din aur saathi, phir wapas nahi aate

Why is the life so difficult
Why did it make its condition like this, tell me
It is confused, neither it listen something nor say
Tears flow slowly from the lonely eyes
All the relationships are over, I lost in trying to explain this
Old days and seperated friends never come back

Wapas nahi aate, wapas nahi aate

They did not come back, they did not come back

Yeh dard kyun, yeh pyaas kyun
Phira kare, udaas kyun
Yeh dard kyun, talaash kyun bata, bawara

Why is this pain, why is this thirst
Why did it wander sadly
Why is this pain, why is this search, tell me, oh my mad mind


Thandi aahein bharke, jeeta hai mar-mar ke
Pyaasa reh gaya hai ye dariya se guzar ke
Dhoke se nazar ke, jhonke se umar ke
Raet ke mahal sa, dheh gaya hai bikhar ke

Taking cool sighs, it dies every moment
It has remained thirsty even after crossing the river
under the illusion of sight, from the fervor of age
It has shredded like a sand-palace


Mann jaage, jaage re
Mann jaage
Jaage jaage jaage, bawara

Wake up my mind, wake up
wake up
wake up oh my mad mind.  

--Source: http://www.bollymeaning.com/2012/06/mann-jaage-saari-raat-mera-dewaana.html

Resonate

An excellent resource by Nancy Duarte:

She provides great ideas on how to present visual stories that transform audiences.

http://resonate.duarte.com

Governance

Men must be governed by God or they will be ruled by tyrants.
~ William Penn

Come, Ye disconsolate

 By Thomas Moore

Come, ye disconsolate, where’er ye languish,
Come to the mercy seat, fervently kneel.
Here bring your wounded hearts, here tell your anguish;
Earth has no sorrow that heaven cannot heal.

Joy of the desolate, light of the straying,
Hope of the penitent, fadeless and pure!
Here speaks the Comforter, tenderly saying,
“Earth has no sorrow that Heaven cannot cure.”

Here see the Bread of Life, see waters flowing
Forth from the throne of God, pure from above.
Come to the feast of love; come, ever knowing
Earth has no sorrow but heaven can remove.

What is Success?

 What is Success?
--By Bessie Anderson Stanley
Her poem was written in 1904 for a contest held in Brown Book Magazine,by George Livingston Richards Co. of Boston, Massachusetts Mrs. Stanley, of Lincoln, Kansas, submitted the words in the form of an essay, rather than as a poem. The competition was to answer the question "What is success?" in 100 words or less. Mrs. Stanley won the first prize of $250.

Written in verse form, it reads:

He has achieved success
who has lived well,
laughed often,
and loved much;

who has enjoyed the trust of pure women,
the respect of intelligent men and
the love of little children;

who has filled his niche and accomplished his task;
who has left the world better than he found it
whether by an improved poppy,
a perfect poem or a rescued soul;

who has never lacked appreciation of Earth's beauty
or failed to express it;

who has always looked for the best in others and
given them the best he had;

whose life was an inspiration;
whose memory a benediction.

Archaeology and the Old Testament - Part 3

The Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser III

Assyria, in northern Mesopotamia played only a minor role in history until the beginning of the first millennium BC. The Assyrians began their rise toward becoming the greatest power the Near East had ever seen. In 876 BC, Assurnasirpal II (883-859 BC) led the Assyrian army west into Syria while Omri (885 - 874 BC) was king of Israel. The Assyrians did not advance beyond Syria but they must have learned of Omri because since that point they referred to the kings of Israel as being from the “house of Omri.” Shalmaneser III took the throne of Assyria in 858 BC when Ahab was in his last years as king of Israel and he was on the battlefield nearly every year of his reign. In 841 BC, Shalmaneser III marched west when Jehu had just begun his reign over Israel (841 – 814 BC). Then the Assyrian army moved southwest to Mount Carmel, where the annals say they received tribute from Tyre, Sidon, and Jehu, the “son of Omri.” Here is an event in the reign of an Israelite king which is only recorded extra-biblically.

Jehu’s tribute is commemorated on what we call today the Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser. On this obelisk Jehu is shown kneeling before Shalmaneser III, and the text lists the gifts he paid to placate the Assyrians. The Bible implies that though Jehu had a relatively long reign, he was never a particularly strong ruler and the Black Obelisk supports this impression. The Black Obelisk is made of fine-grained black limestone streaked with white and this was discovered at Nimrud (ancient Calah) by Austin Henry Layard in 1846. Layard was responsible for the first archaeological excavation at Nimrud, unearthing finds beneath the mound at the site, including a pair of colossal winged bulls from the time of Shalmaneser III and the great wall panels from the palaces of Tiglath-pileser III and Ashurnasirpal II.

The obelisk is shaped like a ziggurat with its top narrowing in steps and on each of its four sides are five panels that contain relief drawings depicting various individuals bringing their tribute to the king. The main text of the inscription is written above and below the groupings of panels while above each panel is a brief epigraph describing the scene in the panel. The inscription begins with an invocation of the various Mesopotamian gods and a list of the royal name and descriptive phrases for Shalmaneser III. It also boasts of the major military conquests and subjugations of the reign of Shalmaneser and lists them year by year from the first year through his thirty-first year. Since the last listing is for his thirty-first year, or 828 BC, the obelisk was likely written in 828 or 827 BC.

Of particular interest is the record of his conquest during the eighteenth year of his reign when he had crossed the Euphrates for the sixteenth time. When Hazael of Damascus attacked, Shalmaneser took away from him 1,121 of his chariots, 470 of his cavalry together with his camp. Hazael was the king of Aram (modern day Syria) from 842 to 810 BC. It was Hazael who was a thorn in the side of Israel during the reigns of Jehoram, Jehu, and Jehoahaz. It was during the reign of Jehoram, Hazael murdered Ben-Hadad and fulfilled Elisha’s prophetic word regarding torment of the Israelites: “You will set fire to their fortified places, kill their young men with the sword, dash their little children to the ground, and rip open their pregnant women” (2 Kings 8:12). During the days of Jehu, the Lord used Hazael to reduce the size and importance of Israel as “Hazael overpowered the Israelites throughout their territory east of the Jordan in all the land of Gilead (the region of Gad, Reuben, and Manasseh) from Aroer by the Arnon gorge through Gilead to Bashan (2 Kings 10:32-33). Also, during the reign of Jehoahaz, Hazael continued his assault on the Israelites and as 2 Kings mentions, it was only the mercy of God that prevented Hazael from decimating Israel a hundred years prior to the time when they would ultimately fall in 722 BC.

The payment of tribute to Shalmaneser by Jehu, King of Israel is depicted in the row of panels second from the top on each side of the obelisk. One side of the panel depicts Shalmaneser beneath a parasol along with four other Assyrians accepting the tribute from Jehu who is prostrating himself on the ground before the king. The panels on the other three sides depict two Assyrian officials receiving the tribute from a total of thirteen Israelite tribute bearers. The tribute bearers wear “long garments with fringed cloaks over them, shoes with upturned toes, soft, pointed caps” and the inscription on the panel reads “I received the tribute of Jehu (Ia-u-a) (the man) of Bit-Humri: silver, gold, a golden bowl, a golden goblet, golden cups, golden buckets, tin, a staff of the king’s hand, (and) javelins.” The identification of Jehu, as “man of Omri” is incorrect because Jehu was not a descendant of Omri but was responsible for bringing the Omri dynasty to an end. But the Assyrians frequently referred to the rulers of a country by the name of the dynasty that was in control at the time of their first encounter with that country. So, Jehu is referred by them as “house of Omri” because the Omride dynasty had previously been the ruling dynasty. As it turns out, King Sargon of Assyria who deported the residents of Israel is also mentioned in the archaeological records.

Archaeology and the Old Testament - Part 2

Tel Dan Stele

On July 21, 1993, an archaeological team from the Hebrew Union College – Jewish Institute of Religion in Jerusalem was doing excavations at the site of the ancient city of Dan, located at the foot of Mount Hermon in northern Israel. The team led by Avraham Biran had been toiling since early morning, sifting debris in a stone paved plaza outside what had been the city’s main gate. One of the surveyors discovered a flattened basalt stone protruding from the ground with what seemed to be Aramaic letters engraved into its surface. This stone fragment, known as fragment A, was determined to be part of a larger stele that had been smashed in antiquity. In June of the following year, the members of the team found two more inscribed stone fragments, designated B1 and B2. All the three stone fragments belonged to the same monument. Fragment B2 can be joined to the bottom of B1 and together they seem to be the left side of a portion of the stele, while fragment A is the right side. There is a gap between fragments B1 and B2. There are a few intervening letters or words missing for fragment A. B1 and B2 contain eight partial lines of text while fragment A contains thirteen partial lines. The inscription is written in Aramaic and is clearly legible with almost all words separated by a dot between the words.

The archaeological site where the city of Dan was located was inhabited at least since the fifth millennium BC and sometime during the fourth millennium the site seems to have been abandoned for nearly a thousand years after which it was settled once more during the third millennium BC. One of the most impressive remains from this period uncovered by archaeologists is a triple-arched, mud brick gate. There is also archaeological evidence that points to the destruction of the city during the twelfth century BC – destruction that was possibly related to the conquest of the area by the Israelite tribe of Dan which is mentioned in Joshua 19:40-48 and Judges 18. Around the middle of the eleventh century, the city was destroyed again but was soon rebuilt. During the ninth century, according to 1 Kings 15:16-20, Ben Hadad, King of Aram-Damascus invaded Israel and among the cities he conquered was Dan. The city recovered but it continued to face threats from Ben-Hadad and his successor Hazael until the beginning of the eighth century when the Arameans were defeated by the Assyrians. When Assyria conquered the northern kingdom of Israel in the latter half of the eighth century BC, the city of Dan fell to the Assyrians, as evidenced by a destruction layer caused by fire dated to the second half of the eighth century.

The discovery of fragment A in 1993 created a sensation because of its reference to the “House of David.” Never before had the familiar name of Judah’s ancient warrior king, an important figure of the Hebrew Bible and according to the Christian Scriptures, an ancestor of Jesus, been found in the records of antiquity outside the Bible. For long, skeptical scholars had asserted that David was merely a legend who was invented much like the rest of Israel’s biblical history by Hebrew scribes shortly after Israel’s Babylonian exile. David and other heroes of the Hebrew Bible, according to these skeptics, were about as historical as King Arthur and there was no literary criterion for believing David to be more historical than Joshua, or Joshua to be more historical than Abraham or Abraham to be more historical than Adam.

This was the first time, however, that any reference to the royal name “David” or “House of David” had been found in any inscription or extra-biblical fragments. But a minority of scholars contended that Biran and his colleague Joseph Naveh, a paleographer at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem who had helped decipher the inscription, had mistranslated the fragments. One skeptic asserted that the stele did not refer to David or his dynasty but to the house of Dod – probably a Canaanite god but no one has ever heard one by that name. Some even suggested that it was intended to signify a place rather than a person or a dynasty while others asserted without offering any evidence that the inscriptions were modern forgeries that had been planted at the Dan site. But in spite of these challenges, most scholars and archaeologists have concluded that “house of David” is the most plausible reading of the text. The discovery of two additional fragments (B1 and B2) of the stele added further credibility to Biran’s initial interpretation. Those pieces contained the names of two defeated monarchs: Jehoram, king of Israel, and Ahaziah, king of Judah, both of whom ruled in the middle of the ninth century BC. Some scholars now believe that the battle commemorated on the stele may have been described in 2 Chronicles 22:5 in which Ahaziah “went with Jehoram son of King Ahab of Israel to make war against King Hazael of Aram.”

Archaeology and the Old Testament - Part 1

Merneptah Stele

The Merneptah Stele (also known as Israel Stele) - a seven-and-one-half feet slab engraved with hieroglyphics - boasts of the Egyptian pharaoh’s conquest of Libyans and peoples in Palestine, including the Israelites. This is known to be the earliest reference to Israel in extra-biblical sources and demonstrates that as of 1230 BC, the Israelites were already living in the Promised Land. From the perspective of Egyptian history, the Merneptah Stele is rather insignificant but from the standpoint of biblical history, it is one of the most important objects ever discovered. It contains the first mention of Israel outside the Bible. It was found in 1896 by Sir Flinders Petrie in western Thebes, the stele remains an important document in uncovering the earliest origins of Israel. Today it can be found in the Egyptian Museum and is unlabeled as to its historic significance for the history of the Israelites. In the fifth year of his reign, Merneptah, the thirteenth son of Ramses II, began a major military campaign into Libya. Since he ruled for ten years, beginning in 1213 BC, Merneptah’s attack on Libya would have occurred in 1208 BC. His encounter with the people identified as “Israel” likely took place prior to that, perhaps between 1211 – 1208 BC.

The Merneptah Stele records not only the defeat of the Libyans but the close of this “Hymn of Victory” contains a cryptic passage that mentions a campaign even earlier in his reign: “Carried off is Ashkelon; seized upon in Gezer; Yanoam is made as that which does not exist; Israel is laid waste, his seed is not.” Alfred Hoerth explains that the south-to-north alignment of the three cities (Yanoam is located somewhere in Galilee) is sometimes thought to imply that the confrontation with Israel took place in the north of Palestine but others are doubtful if that would be a correct inference. A lot of attention has been paid to the determinatives (signs in the text that indicate the nature of the accompanying word) after each of the city names and Israel. The determinatives following Ashkelon, Gezer, and Yanoam indicate that they were city-states. However, the determinative for Israel is used for less settled people. Therefore, shortly before 1200 BC, an Egyptian scribe identified Israel as less politically established - a picture in keeping with the situation reflected in the first half of the period of the judges. Just as the Merneptah Stele reveals the earliest reference of Israel, the Tel Dan Stele affirms the historicity of Israel’s warrior king, David.

The Church

The church: "The only cooperative society in the world that exists for the benefit of its non-members."

~Archbishop William Temple

The Reasonable Man and the Unreasonable Man

The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man. --George Bernard Shaw

Paul Little's - How to give away your faith (Book Review)

Little, Paul E. How to Give Away Your Faith. Madison: InterVarsity Press.

“The Great Commission,” wrote Hudson Taylor, “is not an option to be considered; it is a command to be obeyed.” Evangelism is the art and science of communicating the good news of Jesus Christ in a clear, cogent, and Christ-like manner. It is a science because Christians must first be knowledgeable about what they believe, why they believe, and who they believe. It is an art because the more they actively engage with people in evangelism, the more conversant they will become.

Summary

In How to Give Away Your Faith, Paul Little offers practical principles and insights from Scripture and equips the reader to apply those principles in evangelism. In the first chapter, Little points out that Christians are not only responsible to share their faith with other people but they also need to be authentic in their commitment. In Chapter 2, he offers seven principles from Jesus’ interaction with the Samaritan woman. In the third chapter, the author argues that Christians should be in the world but not of the world. He further states that we must be conversant with the essential doctrines of the Christian faith. The fundamental doctrines that are clearly taught in Scripture should be the content of evangelism. It is not enough to know what (content) we believe but also why (intent) we believe it. The sixth chapter deals with the solution, namely Christ, who is the answer to the dilapidated human condition of emptiness, purposelessness, and alienation. Those who engage with others in evangelism should be mindful of not being judgmental, or self righteous, but God-centered. The essence and extent of saving faith is the message of the eighth chapter and the last chapter deals with developing our character through the spiritual discipline of prayer and Bible study.

Critical Evaluation

In Chapter 1, Little states that those who are intentional about evangelism should be realistic in their approach. Our society is marked by improved communication, technological innovation, and rapid transportation. Political, economic, and social revolutions are commonplace in every major continent but the essential human condition is the same. The trend today is geared more towards science and scientism (10). It would have been helpful if the author explained the difference between scientism and science. First, scientism is self refuting because it is a statement of philosophy about science and it is not a statement of science itself. As a philosophical statement, it claims that there are no true or rational philosophical statements because they are not scientifically tested. So if scientism is true, no non-scientific statements can be true or rational including the propositions of scientism. Second, science relies on the necessary assumptions that must be made if science itself is going to be practiced. Some of these philosophical assumptions include the rationality of the universe, the reliability of sense perception, and the laws of logic. Third, scientism fails to account for the numerous examples of rational debate and truth in disciplines outside of the hard sciences like ethics, political science, history, etc. Therefore, Christians who engage the culture should realize that scientism is not the same as science.

In Chapter 2, Little delves into the topic of witnessing. The question is not will we witness but rather how do we witness? How do we get Christians to share their faith when they are not particularly passionate about evangelism? How do we speak with unbelievers who are turned off by religion? When unbelievers see no evidence of the redemptive power of the gospel, it may seem like that it is less real. The challenge for those who witness is that we constantly hear the promises and claims of Christ but never observe any change in the life of those who profess to be saved (24). The high calling of the Christian life is that (1) a genuine personal relationship with Jesus Christ is a prerequisite to being a Christian witness; (2) the Christian witness involves the whole life and; (3) evangelism is an essential element for a growing experience with the Lord (25). The best example of evangelism is found in our Lord’s conversation with the Samaritan woman at a well near Sychar (John 4:1-26). We learn from Jesus that he was exquisitely tender in dealing with people who had failed on some level. The Samaritan woman had been divorced five times and was living with yet another man and Jesus was able to engage her in a conversation that had eternal ramifications. Jesus brilliantly connected her physical thirst – parched-throat thirst and also the thirst for intimacy – with a thirst for transcendence that only He could satisfy. “Everyone who drinks this water,” said Jesus, “will be thirsty again but whoever drinks the water I give them will never thirst. Indeed, the water I give them will become in them a spring of water welling up to eternal life” (John 4: 13-14).

In Chapter 3, the author deals with hurdling social barriers. Christians should be winsome and approachable in their interaction with the unregenerate world. Evangelism is irreducibly linked with orthopraxy – how we live out the Christian life. But we must never fail to realize that the human heart is ultimately changed by the Holy Spirit. As Little points out, we are privileged ambassadors of Jesus Christ who are called to communicate a verbal message and demonstrate through our personality and life what the grace of Jesus Christ can accomplish (53). This means that we should not go around chalking up scalps, taking credit for the Holy Spirit’s work and saying “I’ve got seven! You’ve only got three.” In all our evangelistic endeavors, God should always get the glory. No one can say “Jesus is Lord,” except by the Holy Spirit (1 Corinthians 12:3).

Christians should be conversant with the basic facts about their faith and where these facts are documented in the New Testament. Some of these facts are: (1) the deity and humanity of Christ (John 5:18; John 11:35); (2) Human beings are sinful and sin is the basic disease of rebellion against God, of going our way rather than His (Romans 3:10-18); (3) the fact and meaning of His Crucifixion (1 Peter 3:18); (4) the fact and meaning of His Resurrection (Luke 24: 36-48); (5) In becoming a Christian, there is something to be believed and Someone to be received (John 1:12). Saving faith is not mere intellectual assent to a set of facts but trusting Christ as Savior and Lord. As Little points out intellectual assent to a set of doctrines does not make a person Christian any more than mere intellectual assent to facts makes a person married (59). Knowing our message and communicating that message clearly is crucial to effective witnessing.

It is not only necessary to know what we believe but also why we believe what we believe. “But in your hearts revere Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect, keeping a clear conscience, so that those who speak maliciously against your good behavior in Christ may be ashamed of their slander” (1 Peter 3:15, 16). As John Stott put it, “We cannot pander to a man’s intellectual arrogance, but we must cater to his intellectual integrity” (65). Brian Auten states that there are four elements or principles of Christian witness found in 1 Peter 3: 15 and 16: the core, the content, the conduct, and the conscience. “Revering Jesus as Lord” can be understood as the core of our message. “Be prepared” and “give an answer” can be understood as the content of our message. “Gentleness and respect” has to do with our conduct. The conscience is the true character and integrity of the Christian. It is integrity that shames those who speak maliciously against our good behavior.

The author, then, carefully deals with questions and objections that are often posed by skeptics and unbelievers. What about the person who has never heard about Jesus Christ? He points out that these questions are more often than not intellectual smoke screens that skeptics hide behind to evade moral responsibility. Jesus asked the most important question: “But what about you? Who do you say that I am?” (Matthew 16:15). Another question often posed by the unbeliever is how can Christ be the only way to God? Why can’t the sincere Muslim, Buddhist, or Hindu be saved? The author correctly explains neither sincerity nor intensity can create or determine truth. Faith is only as good as the object in which it is placed (70). We must realize that all religions claim exclusivity and it is incumbent on us to determine which worldview is correct. Moreover, truth by nature is exclusive. In the moral realm, as in the physical there are laws that are not based on social convention (71). The problem of evil and suffering is one of the most daunting dilemmas that humans face. Little responds to this question by stating that humans were created by God with the freedom to obey God or disobey (71). Evil came as a result of man’s disobedience and because of the pattern of the universe his actions are not limited to himself but also involves other people. God addressed the problem of evil when He sent His Son into the world. His death on the cross was the penalty for our sins and evil.

How can miracles be possible in an age of science and technology? As Little explains, the real issue is whether or not God exists. If God exists, then miracles are not only possible they pose no intellectual contradictions (72). How do we know that God exists? One is the teleological argument: Every design points to designer. The universe is complex in its design. Therefore, the universe has a designer. Just as a wrist watch, which is relatively uncomplicated does not come into existence by chance, the universe which is infinitely far more complex than a wrist watch could not have come into existence by chance. Another argument is the cosmological argument: Everything that began to exist has a cause. The universe began to exist. Therefore, the universe has a cause. The author explains that these arguments should not serve as conclusive proofs but rather as hints that point to a Creator (72). How does one reconcile one’s faith with the fact that the Bible is full of contradictions? This question is often posed by people who have little or no knowledge of the content of the Bible. But this should not lead Christians to ridicule their opponents. The author explains that the Bible does contain some “apparent” contradictions but they have been vindicated by the discoveries of modern archeology. As archeologist Nelson Glueck states, “No archeological discovery has ever [contradicted] a biblical reference” (76).

Some skeptics have facetiously stated that the Christian faith is a psychological crutch for the weak. They suggest that some people have faith only because they have been conditioned since early childhood to this way of thinking (77). The author quickly explains that Christianity differs from wish fulfillment and psychological phenomena because the Christian’s subjective experience is securely bound to an objective reality, namely the resurrection of Jesus Christ (78). If the resurrection is true, then it makes all the difference in the world. Another objection that is often posed by the unbeliever is, “Isn’t living a good moral life sufficient for a person to go to heaven?” According to the Bible, God demands perfection (Matthew 5:48). God’s nature and character blazes with purity and holiness and if we are to abide in His presence, we would be consumed because of the corruption in our lives (Hebrews 12:29). Christ’s perfect righteousness is the only basis by which we can come into fellowship with God. “God made Him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in Him we might become the righteousness of God” (1 Corinthians 5:21).

Is the message of the Gospel still relevant today? Does it have any relevance to the purposelessness, hopelessness, emptiness, and loneliness that humans face today? In John 6:35, Jesus says, “I am the bread of life. Whoever comes to me will never go hungry, and whoever believes in me will never be thirsty.” When Jesus invades a person’s life, He fills the spiritual vacuum with eternal purpose and significance and through the indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit we can find ultimate fulfillment. In John 8:12, Jesus states, “I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness, but will have the light of life.” After a person becomes a child of God, the person no longer fumbles in the darkness of spiritual confusion and uncertainty because of the transforming power of Christ. In John 11:25, Jesus says, “I am the resurrection and the life. The one who believes in me will live, even though they die; and whoever lives by believing in me will never die. Do you believe this?” Jesus alone can address the fear of death because He conquered it be rising from the grave. He does not stand in a line of peers with Abraham, Buddha, or Confucius because He has the power to lay down his life, and to take it up again.

Jesus said, “I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep” (John 10:11). As a shepherd looks after and cares for the sheep, Jesus cared so much that He laid down life his for the sheep. This means that He will never leave nor forsake His sheep. But what makes the Christian message so special? Why could it not be one of the many ways to God? In John 14:6, Jesus says, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.” As Os Guinness explains, “Christianity is not true because it works (pragmatism); it is not true because it feels right (subjectivism); it is not true because it is my truth (relativism). It is true because it is anchored in the person of Christ.”

It is not true because it works; it works because it is true. It is not true because we experience it; we experience it – deeply and gloriously – because it is true. It is not simply ‘true for us’; it is true for any who seek in order to find, because truth is true even if nobody believes it, and falsehood is false even if everybody believes it. That is why truth does not yield to opinion, fashion, numbers, office, or sincerity – it is simply true and that is the end of it.

The truth claims of the Christian faith rest on the person and work of Jesus Christ. In Chapter 7, the author tackles the subject of worldliness. What does it mean to be “spiritual” and “worldly?” Is it merely a checklist of do’s and don’ts? The author draws principles from Romans 14 to better understand the issue of worldliness. First, we should not pass judgment merely based on externals (Romans 14: 3-4). Second, a personal conviction and not social pressure should mold our behavior (Romans 14:5). Third, the totality of our life belongs to God. “If we live, we live for the Lord; and if we die, we die for the Lord. So whether we live or die, we belong to the Lord” (Romans 14:8). As Abraham Kuyper once said, “…there is not square inch in the whole domain of our human existence over which Christ, who is Sovereign over all, does not cry: ‘Mine!’”

What is the essence of saving faith? How is it different from credulity? The author explains that faith is only as valid as the object (person or thing) in which it is placed (106). Believing is something or someone sincerely does not make it valid nor can faith’s validity be increased by intensity. Belief does not create truth any more than failure to believe destroys truth (107). Faith placed on something non-existent is mere superstition. The Christian faith is built on the person and finished work of Jesus Christ. So the Christian faith can be strengthened not by having faith in faith but resting and trusting on the Faithful One (112).

Does it matter how the Christian leads his or her life? Does character matter? The private and public life of the believer should be consistent. We see the outward appearance but the Lord looks at the heart (1 Samuel 16:7). It is through submitting every aspect of our lives to His Lordship and trusting in Him in our personal fellowship with God that we attain to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ (Ephesians 4:13). How does a person ultimately grow in Christ? It is through the discipline of prayer and Bible study. It is through the diligent study of Scripture (SPECS Bible Study Method) that we learn: (1) Summary of the text; (2) Promises to claim; (3) Examples to follow; (4) Commands to Obey; (5) Stumbling Blocks or sins to avoid.

Conclusion

“How, then, can they call on the one they have not believed in? And how can they believe in the one of whom they have not heard? And how can they hear without someone preaching to them? And how can anyone preach unless they are sent?” (Romans 10: 14-15). Preaching the gospel applies to all believers not just a select few. Paul Little’s How to Give Away Your Faith is an excellent resource for both new and seasoned believers on sharing Christ with others. He encourages, exhorts, instructs, and challenges the believer to be proactive and prudent in personal evangelism. Christians should seek to be authentic both in speech and conduct. As Little aptly states, “to witness effectively we must be realistic: genuine in our knowledge of people in today’s world and genuine in our total commitment to Jesus Christ” (20).