Fear, Faith and the Proper Perspective: Christians and Catastrophe

Update: Hey, Dr. Mohler is making the same argument today that I made on the September 2nd. Read is article: FIRST-PERSON: Nineveh, New Orleans, & the City of Man. All in all I think that my article was not too bad.

For the last three days I have seen a rise in the concern and anxiety of many people in this country, people I know and people I see on the television and at the gas stations. While I do expect such fear on the part of those whose relationship to God is less than that of a believer’s, I am somewhat aghast at the seeming doom and gloom that has gripped many of my fellow believers.

Many people are worrying about gas prices and the state of the economy. Other people are mightily concerned about various hurricane aftermath issues. Yes, I have heard many people rightly distress about this situation. Many have said that New Orleans will be utterly abandoned and never rebuilt. People on the far left are blaming global warming and people on the far right are warning about the opening of apocalyptic seals.

While I do not want to belittle the current situation along the Gulf Coast and in the rest of the country, I do wish to put events into their proper perspective. I would also like to put these matters into their Biblical perspective. It behooves us to do so.

First, while the destruction of a city is a horrible event, it is not an event that rarely occurs. In fact, numerous small and large cities have been destroyed across history and continents by man (wars and bombings) and by nature (tornadoes, hurricanes, earthquakes, volcanoes, floods, mud slides, etc.)

Here is a brief list:

- South East Asia by a tsunami in late 2004. In fact, much of Southeast Asia and India are frequently devastated by storms and floods. The substandard housing and poverty stricken populace makes the disasters that more devastating.

- Financial District of Manhattan was devastated on 9/11 by Islamic terrorists.

- Sarajevo by war in 1995

- Mexico City was devastated by an earthquake in 1985 in which 25,000 people died.

- Beirut by Civil War in the 1980s.

- Berlin, Hiroshima and Nagasaki by the Allies in 1945

- Much of London was destroyed by the Germany during the Battle of Britain.

- San Francisco as destroyed by an earthquake in 1906.

- Atlanta, Richmond and most of the Southern United States in the 1860s by Civil War.

- Washington D.C. was destroyed by the British during the War of 1812.

- Rome has been destroyed numerous times by fire and war.

- Pompeii and Herculaneum were destroyed by Mount Vesuvius in 79 CE.

- Jerusalem has been destroyed numerous times over the course of history.

- Sodom and Gomorrah by the Lord God.

- Babylon and Nineveh have been destroyed numerous times.

And these are just the disasters I could think of off the top of my head. More thorough research would undoubtedly yield hundreds if not thousands such destructions.

Again, I do not want to diminish recent events, I simply want to put them in their proper historical perspective and, more importantly, ease concerns.

Second, there are many people who are concerned about the price of gas and the state of the economy.

There are several points to be made about the gas issue:

A) Relatively speaking, the price of gas has been much, MUCH worse than it is right now.
B) The same economists that predicted the current increase in gas prices have also rightly predicted that the gas bubble will burst and prices will drop dramatically.
C) In the short term, we can get oil from other countries. We have enough clout around the world that we will be able to get the needed oil.
D) Milk is MUCH more expensive than gas right now. For the last year the price of milk has sky-rocketed. Gas has only now reached the level of the price of milk. Now I drink far more milk than use gas to drive. I’ve been paying through the nose this past year on milk and I haven’t complained. Well, that’s not completely true: I complain about milk when someone complains about gas.
E) For the past five years we have been “suffering” from deflation. This means that the price of most goods and services has been dropping. Yes, we have been able to buy more for less these past five years. Therefore, we shouldn’t complain when milk and gas (and bottled water) goes up.


There are several points to be made about the economy:

A) Our economy is in good shape.
B) If our economy did not destroy itself because of 9/11 then I doubt this natural disaster will kill us.
C) The natural state of the economy is that it continues to grow. In all capitalist systems, the economy continues to grow and improve. Even in the worst recessions and depressions, a look at the overall trend of the market shows that capitalistic economies will always economically improve.
D) Every natural and man-made disaster that has befallen our country has been followed by a boom in the economy. Perhaps the worst disaster that ever befell our nation was the American Civil War. Half the country was destroyed. New Orleans, Atlanta, Richmond and many other major cities were all destroyed. However, this dismal period was quickly followed by the greatest expansion of economic growth and greatest rise in standard of living than any period in our history. From the outset our nation was one of phenomenal economic power; we were already had one of the greatest economies in history at our foundation. Following our Civil War, America became the greatest super power the world has ever known and had the greatest economy in history. I am not concerned.

Third, and this is the most important point to be made, Jesus explicitly told us not to worry or be anxious. There is a fundamental reason for this that strikes at the very heart of who we are and who God is.

In his two volume theological masterpiece, The Nature and Destiny of Man, Reinhold Niebuhr writes about anxiety and how it effects our faith and relationship with God. Niebuhr gained his understanding of “fear/anxiety” from Soren Kierkegaard’s work, The Concept of Anxiety. Kierkegaard's idea of anxiety is of the existential dread of man facing his own moral inadequacy - paradox of free will but the inevitability of sin - "man is most free in the discovery that he is not free" - man's achievements contained seeds of won destruction.

Niebuhr argues that man, as a creature whose existence paradoxically combines spirit and matter, can sense his own "finitude and fragility" in the universe. As spirit, man transcends nature and so is free. But as a creature, he is part of nature's order and so is bound. As both free and bound, a person inevitably experiences anxiety - annihilation and meaninglessness threaten all of his hopes, achievements, and affections. In this state of anxiety the Satan tempts man to deny his limitations through prideful assertions of his will that provide an illusion of control and meaning or to violate his freedom through sensuality. Man can only ease his anxiety and pretension through faith in God rather than self, that faith is always imperfect (imperfect faith being, for Niebuhr, the essence of "original sin").

Hear are some Scriptural passages that speak about fear and faith:

Matthew 6:25-34 – “Therefore I say unto you, Take no thought for your life, what ye shall eat, or what ye shall drink; nor yet for your body, what ye shall put on. Is not the life more than meat, and the body than raiment? Behold the fowls of the air: for they sow not, neither do they reap, nor gather into barns; yet your heavenly Father feedeth them. Are ye not much better than they? Which of you by taking thought can add one cubit unto his stature? And why take ye thought for raiment? Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow; they toil not, neither do they spin: And yet I say unto you, That even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these. Wherefore, if God so clothe the grass of the field, which to day is, and to morrow is cast into the oven, [shall he] not much more [clothe] you, O ye of little faith? Therefore take no thought, saying, What shall we eat? or, What shall we drink? or, Wherewithal shall we be clothed? (For after all these things do the Gentiles seek:) for your heavenly Father knoweth that ye have need of all these things. But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you. Take therefore no thought for the morrow: for the morrow shall take thought for the things of itself. Sufficient unto the day [is] the evil thereof.”

Matthew 10:28-31 – “And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell. Are not two sparrows sold for a farthing? and one of them shall not fall on the ground without your Father. But the very hairs of your head are all numbered. Fear ye not therefore, ye are of more value than many sparrows.”

Luke 12:4-7 – “And I say unto you my friends, Be not afraid of them that kill the body, and after that have no more that they can do. But I will forewarn you whom ye shall fear: Fear him, which after he hath killed hath power to cast into hell; yea, I say unto you, Fear him. Are not five sparrows sold for two farthings, and not one of them is forgotten before God? But even the very hairs of your head are all numbered. Fear not therefore: ye are of more value than many sparrows.”

Luke 12:22-32 – “And he said unto his disciples, Therefore I say unto you, Take no thought for your life, what ye shall eat; neither for the body, what ye shall put on. The life is more than meat, and the body [is more] than raiment. Consider the ravens: for they neither sow nor reap; which neither have storehouse nor barn; and God feedeth them: how much more are ye better than the fowls? And which of you with taking thought can add to his stature one cubit? If ye then be not able to do that thing which is least, why take ye thought for the rest? Consider the lilies how they grow: they toil not, they spin not; and yet I say unto you, that Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these. If then God so clothe the grass, which is to day in the field, and to morrow is cast into the oven; how much more [will he clothe] you, O ye of little faith? And seek not ye what ye shall eat, or what ye shall drink, neither be ye of doubtful mind. For all these things do the nations of the world seek after: and your Father knoweth that ye have need of these things. But rather seek ye the kingdom of God; and all these things shall be added unto you. Fear not, little flock; for it is your Father's good pleasure to give you the kingdom.”

Matthew 14:28-32 – “And he said, Come. And when Peter was come down out of the ship, he walked on the water, to go to Jesus. But when he saw the wind boisterous, he was afraid; and beginning to sink, he cried, saying, Lord, save me. And immediately Jesus stretched forth [his] hand, and caught him, and said unto him, O thou of little faith, wherefore didst thou doubt? And when they were come into the ship, the wind ceased.”

Mark 4:37-40 – “And there arose a great storm of wind, and the waves beat into the ship, so that it was now full. And he was in the hinder part of the ship, asleep on a pillow: and they awake him, and say unto him, Master, carest thou not that we perish? And he arose, and rebuked the wind, and said unto the sea, Peace, be still. And the wind ceased, and there was a great calm. And he said unto them, Why are ye so fearful? how is it that ye have no faith?”

Luke 8:23–25 – “But as they sailed he fell asleep: and there came down a storm of wind on the lake; and they were filled [with water], and were in jeopardy. And they came to him, and awoke him, saying, Master, master, we perish. Then he arose, and rebuked the wind and the raging of the water: and they ceased, and there was a calm. And he said unto them, Where is your faith? And they being afraid wondered, saying one to another, What manner of man is this! for he commandeth even the winds and water, and they obey him.”

1 Peter 3:14 – “But and if ye suffer for righteousness' sake, happy [are ye]: and be not afraid of their terror, neither be troubled;”

1 John 4:18 – “There is no fear in love; but perfect love casteth out fear: because fear hath torment. He that feareth is not made perfect in love.”

Rev. 2:10 – “Fear none of those things which thou shalt suffer: behold, the devil shall cast [some] of you into prison, that ye may be tried; and ye shall have tribulation ten days: be thou faithful unto death, and I will give thee a crown of life.”

Now, as I said, Jesus told us not to worry, fear, or be anxious. He plainly stated that fear is evidence of a lack of faith. However, while fear is evidence of a lack of faith, I do not believe that being fearful is a sin. Rather, being fearful is the occasion to sin: one could sin or not sin. Regardless, since fear is the opportunity to sin, we should not put ourselves in that opportunity. We are often told by our pastors and leaders to avoid situations in which we might find ourselves tempted to sin. Let’s follow their advice and not fear; “sin is crouching at the door …”

Thus, Jesus tells us not to fear but to have faith. Furthermore, if Jesus, as the God-Man and the Second Adam, is to be our prime example as to how to live and relate to our surroundings, we should take notice that He never feared or worried. The closest He ever came to fear was prior to His arrest while praying in the Garden of Gethsemane (Luke 22:44). The word Luke uses to describe Jesus’ state of mind is agonia, agony, anguish, i.e., mental distress. This word only appears here in the New Testament and, therefore, is not the Greek word commonly used to describe fear, phobia. While this is mental distress, it is doubtful whether fear, as explained above, is present and it is certainly true that no sin is committed. While this may have been torment and a mental struggle within the God-Man to face the apex of His mission, Jesus Himself neither feared nor worried. Therefore, neither should we.

In conclusion, while I understand how non-believers can worry and fear the future and the things that go bump in the night, I do not believe that believers should.

The destruction of a city is horrible but is to be expected every now and again in a fallen world. More cities will be destroyed in the future, rest assured.

Our economy is strong and we should not fear a capitalistic doomsday on the near horizon.

Lastly, as believers, we should never fear or worry or be anxious; God is in complete control of our situation and will not fail us. Jesus taught us not to fear and led by His example. Fear is the occasion to sin; we should avoid the occasion to sin.

So fear not, have faith, and put your selves in the proper perspective.

SBC Heresy Trials

As many of you may know, I have been chronicling the on-going Evangelical Crisis and the demise of the idea of the Conservative Resurgence as a historical opportunity of effective evangelism. My criticism of the Conservative Resurgence has been manifold, but primarily focused on the methods by which the Resurgent leaders purged the convention of those with whom they disagreed. But another criticism has been the assumption made by the Resurgent leaders and Southern Baptists in general that God would bless correct theology. The argument raised by the Resurgent leaders was that if the SBC continued its “liberal” drift then our body’s effectiveness at evangelism would slide and giving to the Cooperative Program would falter. As recent statements from the SBC suggest, despite the Conservative Resurgence and its “conservative” shift, we are now in an Evangelical Crisis and our Cooperative Program proceeds are at an old time low. These are two developments that did not occur during the SBC’s “moderate” years.

My focus on these two developments has not been to point fingers at the Resurgent Leaders and say that these outcomes are their fault. No, I honestly do not believe they are really responsible for these problems. Rather my focus has been on the Resurgent claim that their beliefs about the faith would prevent such negative outcomes.

However, while I have been criticizing the SBC for its pre/assumptions, I have not yet produced my answer to solve the problem of the Evangelical Crisis. For many months now I have been considering the problem and I think that I have an answer.

I originally came up with several practical solutions that the SBC could adopt without necessarily drifting to the “moderate” side of Christendom.

Let me be clear: I do not think that the SBC has to become more “liberal”, “moderate” or “conservative” in order to be more effective at evangelizing. While I consider myself “conservative” and well within the orthodox tradition of the faith, many individuals of a rather more “ignorant” nature when it comes to particular “technical” aspects of our faith, would see me as a “moderate” at best and a “liberal” at worst. Such terms are so influx from time to time, from place to place, and from person to person, they are largely losing their meaning to me. However, while I have significant differences with the SBC about what constitutes “proper” theology and an even greater difference of opinion on the methods that we as believers use to insure “proper” doctrine is maintained, I do not really care whether or not the SBC generally believes what I believe. Their theological beliefs are not necessarily the problem and the current situation would probably not change if they theologically drifted to another place on the Christian theological spectrum.

Since we have a “conservative” convention, let’s play with the cards dealt to us. Therefore, what are some practical solutions that the SBC can implement?

1) We have more women in the church than men but the dominant theological position within the SBC somewhat limits the variety of ministry roles a woman can pursue. Therefore, we are limiting the ministerial role of over half our body. Now I do not expect that the SBC will start recognizing women as senior pastor, but I would like to see the SBC publicly push to have more women in the ministry. Make a grand commitment to invite, educate, and promote women into Southern Baptist ministries.

2) This will probably be the most difficult task. Reconcile with other evangelical groups (such as the CBF and BWA) for joint ventures of Kingdom building. We do not have to agree 100% with every person in order to evangelize. Heck, we join with Roman Catholics to promote moral issues in this country but we refuse to join other Baptists to promote evangelism. Let’s rethink this.

3) Let’s start and promote evangelistic groups and missions (without Cooperative Program funds) that can be ministered by “moderates” in the SBC. Without using CP money, the SBC can allow “moderates” in the convention to seek funds and support outside the CP. This way we can have ministry positions for “moderates” but still not be accused of financially supporting their beliefs.

4) This is a good one. For many decades until the late eighties and mid-nineties, SBC missionaries would help build hospitals and medical centers for the poor. There is a Baptist hospital in Asunción, Paraguay. The thinking up until the Resurgence was that by building hospitals in heavily populated areas, the missionaries could witness to those individuals who came to the hospital for cheap treatment and these people could be introduced to the local Baptist churches. This was the thinking for much of the modern era. However, many moderate and liberal theologians and missionaries began to rediscover the local church as the New Testament focus of missions. They soon began to alter the way in which they did missions. In time, this paradigm shift in thinking came to the Resurgent SBC and its mission boards. They soon arrived at the same conclusion as the liberals and moderates and proceeded to focus solely on the local church. And now you know one of the main causes of the SBC church planting movement. A very successful movement, I might add, that needs to be encouraged and continued. However, with this renewed focus on the local church, the SBC, which was continually losing and continues to lose funds in the Cooperative Program, the decision was made by the International Mission Board to cut many of the medical ministries regardless of how effective they were in evangelism. Therefore, the Baptist Hospital in Asunción, Paraguay had to find support outside of the SBC .., which they did. And they continue to lead people to Christ today … without SBC help. Now in the United States, we are rapidly facing a healthcare crisis; a fact admitted by politicos on the right and left. God, through Christ, is the savior of both the spirit and the body. As His servants on earth in this age, we are both capable and duty-bound to minister to the spiritual and physical needs on man. Therefore, I suggest that the SBC begin to start cheap medical ministries for the poor in order to bring their spirits and bodies to Christ. We have had success in the past with these methods and there is a current need for healthcare in this world that Christian ministers should fill. I would never suggest either abandoning or even limiting our church planting plans, but I do think that there are untapped seekers in this country that can reached through ministering to the body.

These are a few of the broader solutions I am suggesting in order to solve the current the Evangelical Crisis (there are others but I am saving them for later). These solutions are largely aimed at the SBC and are offered as something the SBC can do as a body. However, I do believe that there is an overall larger solution to the Evangelical Crisis; a solution that cannot be reached by the SBC as a body but by the believer as a member of the body of Christ. My solution will have to wait for another time when I have finished my research and contemplation of the various aspects of this issue.

Part of my research has involved an analysis of how various parts of Christendom have understood the faith. This area of exploration has brought me in contact with George Shriver’s “Dictionary of American Heresy Trials”; a very extensive treatment on cases of heresy in America. A large proportion of which have to do with struggles for control of what will be taught in seminary; perhaps there is inevitably a conflict between the conclusions of learned individuals, and the demand that a seminary which is the primary training ground for a group’s future ministers should teach in accord with the beliefs of the group, however ignorant that group is.

I thought the Southern Baptist entries were quite interesting, though I myself might have explained the positions of the individuals on trial with greater clarity.

Anyway, this is the point of this post. What I found most interesting is that three of these professors (Stagg, Moody and Elliott) are intellectual heroes of mind. Small wonder, eh?

Southern Baptists

George B Foster (1858-1910). Ordained as a Baptist minister, taught systematic theology and later philosophy of religion at the Divinity School of the U of Chicago. By 1895 he had abandoned orthodox Christian theology; by the early 1900’s he believed that Christianity was no longer a live option; God became ‘the ideal-achieving aspects of the cosmic evolutionary process.” The Baptists Ministers’ Conference condemned his 1906 book The Finality of the Christian Religion, voting 48 to 22 that its views were ‘contrary to scripture and …subversive of the vital and essential truths of the Christian faith.’ The 1909 book ‘The function of religion in man’s struggle for existence’ aroused even more controversy; Foster declared publicly that he was still a true historic Baptist because “Baptists hold to the right of private interpretation of Scripture, freedom of thought and speech, and the privilege of every man to hold communion with God without the mediation of a priest.” The Minister’s Conference voted on 26 June to expel him; however, he never surrendered his papers of ordination and he continued to teach at U of C. The case served to clarify and widen the split between conservatives and liberals, particularly among the Baptists.

Mercer University (1939). 13 University students filed charges against 4 professors, again primarily around issues of modern biblical criticism (Mercer is Baptist) and around the issue of evolution. Resignations (under pressure) due to doctrinal irregularity had occurred in 1894, 1905, 1906 and 1924. A 10-hour trial was held on 20 March. The faculty were accused of denying the existence of demons, the blood Atonement of Christ, conversion from sin, the second coming of Christ, the resurrection of the body, hell, the Genesis account of creation, and the molding of Eve from the rib of Adam; and of saying that the Bible contained contradictions. The trustee investigative committee however refused to condemn them and simply issued a caution; the majority of students also supported the professors.

Frank Stagg (1911- ). Professor at New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary; investigated in 1956, apparently due to his writings on racial justice. Letters were solicited commenting on his views, which reveal six issues:

- undue emphasis on the New Testament, particularly on the human elements as opposed to the divine elements
- his view that the Trinity was unbiblical
- his view of the atonement as ‘transactional’
- his view that God’s wrath was the consequence of sin rather than a response to sin
- his ‘too psychological’ explanation of demons
- views on particular biblical passages

Stagg was called before the Trustees to respond, and then acquitted. He stayed at NOBTS until 1964, went to Southern Baptist and remained there until his retirement in 1982.

Robert Briggs (1915 - ). Briggs taught at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary. In 1960 an investigation was begun into the teaching of Briggs, William Strickland and Harold Oliver for “the application of radical Existentialism and so-called Bultmanianism.” Over the next three years an extended struggle took place to resolve the questions of the academic freedom of the faculty versus adherence to the Abstract of Principles which all faculty members had signed on appointment; no formal charge of heretical teaching was ever made. In 1964 Briggs resigned; shortly thereafter he took a post at Vanderbilt University, and then moved on to the Interdenominational Theological Center in Atlanta. Oliver resigned and went to Boston University; Strickland resigned in 1966 to go to Appalachian State University. Briggs’ opinion of the situation was that his colleagues accepted the claims of historical-critical research but were unwilling to deal with its implications for understanding religious authority and truth. He later wrote Interpreting the Gospels, Abingdon Press, Nashville, 1969.

Louisville 13 (1958): Forced resignation of 13 faculty members from Southern Seminary for unorthodoxy.

Theodore R Clark (1912 - ). Clark taught at the New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary; he was dismissed in 1960 primarily as a result of the publication of his book Saved by His Life (Macmillan, 1959). The trustees did not make clear the nature of their complaint but said that “His recently published book is one of several instances in which the board had been confronted with questions as to limitations in the area of communication with students and hearers as well as content of lecture materials.” Clark himself seemed genuinely surprised, puzzled and grieved over the controversy.

The book was a meditation on salvation, including a long prayer and several hymns written by Clark. The book aimed to put more emphasis on Christ’s life as a vehicle of salvation, rather than his death; and objected to the theology of some popular hymns about Christ’s death. Clark also emphasized the personal, existential self-giving of God over God’s transmission of propositional truth, and made other comments about the dangers of “Jesusolatry”.

The process appears to have been obscure; it is not clear that the Board ever met with Clark or that the faculty were aware that an investigation was underway. The Dean, J Hardee Kennedy, had written an approving review of Clark’s book and does not appear to have participated in the dismissal. Clark took an appointment at Pan American College in Edinburg, Texas.

Ralph Elliott (1925 -- ); dismissed from Midwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in 1962 over conflict about contemporary biblical criticism. In the 1950’s Southern Seminary had 13 simultaneous forced resignations over the issue (the ‘Louisville 13’); Elliott had been at Southern but moved to Midwestern shortly before the ‘massacre’. He was described at the time as ‘quite conservative in the larger world of biblical scholarship, a moderate in SBC religious ranks, and quite liberal in comparison to … most SBC pulpits'. He was tried twice: in 1960 after publishing The Message of Genesis: A theological interpretation, he was examined by the board of trustees who supported him, 14 to 7. The conservatives were unhappy with this result and passed a motion at the 1962 Southern Baptist Convention rejecting theological views which “undermine faith in the historical accuracy and doctrinal integrity of the Bible” and requesting trustees of all SBC institutions to address situations where such views were being taught; simultaneously, elections at the convention changed the balance of trustees at Midwestern. The new board met for a second trial; they agreed with Elliott on 9 out of 10 points, but they failed to agree on republication of the book – the trustees didn’t want to take responsibility for banning it, and Elliott refused to ‘volunteer’ not to seek its republication. The board then dismissed him by a vote of 22 to 7. Elliott moved to the American Baptist church and continued his career. Shriver notes that the second trial did not involve a disagreement over content, but a disagreement about whether the board could control publication of views in order to protect the position of the seminary; one explicitly said that “as long as it is a matter between a professor and his student what he says, that is one thing. But when he puts his beliefs in writing where everybody can read them – as in The Message of Genesis – that’s another thing.”

Dale Moody (1915-1992). Taught at Southern Baptist Seminary. Aroused controversy as to whether he supported the Baptist principle of ‘perseverance of the saints’ (drawn from Hebrews 6:4-6). He was accused in 1961 of teaching that it was possible for a person ‘once saved to be lost’ but was acquitted. In 1979, Moody proposed revision of the Abstract of Principles on this point; the University then said it did not wish to inhibit faculty freedom but would not extend his teaching contract past normal retirement age unless his teaching on this point was more traditional. Moody argued that his reading of the principle was in line with the original Biblical texts and the argument continued for roughly 3 years. On 17 November 1983, Moody gave a talk on the topic “Can a saved person ever be lost?”; whereupon the Arkansas Baptist State Convention asked the university to terminate him (he was already at retirement age). The University employed him until 1984 but refused to give him a further contract.

Paul Simmons (1936 -- ). Professor of Christian ethics at Southern Baptist Seminary, 1970 – 1992. He was attacked not for theological beliefs but for ethical positions, particularly in the areas of abortion, elective death and homosexuality, even though these were "solidly grounded in thorough research and careful biblical exegesis." This occurred in a general atmosphere of “fear, indoctrination and intimidation” led by the rising fundamentalist wing. In 1987 the Trustees reviewed Simmons’ positions, said there were no grounds for dismissing him but asked that he ‘moderate his public involvement’ in the debate on abortion. In 1989 he was accused of saying that Jesus was sexually active but this was proved false. Pressure to remove Simmons for his position on abortion continued and in 1992 the President attempted to offer him a financial package to leave, which Simmons refused. Following a further controversy about a film used by Simmons in a lecture, the Trustees proposed sanctions which Simmons was unwilling to accept, and he resigned.

Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary 1985-94. Investigated for allowing teaching contrary to Biblical inerrancy. In 1987 the Trustees announced a hiring policy that would include only orthodox inerrantists; whereupon the President resigned. The school has declined; the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools has declared it deficient, AAUP has censured it, multiple resignations were submitted in 1991 and the school has been placed on probation (i.e. just short of loss of accreditation). Between 1985 and 1994, 27 of the 34 faculty and 13 of the 16 administrators resigned.

Molly Marshall (1949 -- ). Resigned from Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in 1994; now at Central Baptist Theological Seminary (American Baptist, not Southern). A heresy trial was in the offing at the time of her resignation with the outcome largely predetermined; Shriver describes it as tied in with the ‘takeover’ of the SBC by the fundamentalists in the 1979-1990 period. The Seminary statement at the time of her resignation says that the president had determined that her views were ‘significantly outside the parameters of the Abstract of Principles’ although it did not specify; sources involved in the affair supposed it related to (a) the atonement (b) salvation only in Christ (c) ‘whether those once saved will persevere to the end’ (d) whether feminine language and concepts can be applied to God (e) the authority of Scripture. It is also possible that her status as a woman pastor and other gender issues played a role.

Holes

BY ROGER EBERT / April 18, 2003

You take a bad boy, make him dig holes all day long in the hot sun, it makes him a good boy. That's our philosophy here at Camp Green Lake. So says Mr. Sir, the overseer of a bizarre juvenile correction center that sits in the middle of the desert, surrounded by countless holes, each one 5 feet deep and 5 feet wide. It is the fate of the boys sentenced there to dig one hole a day, day after day; like Sisyphus, who was condemned to forever roll a rock to the top of a hill so that it could roll back down again, they are caught in a tragic loop.

"Holes," which tells their story, is a movie so strange that it escapes entirely from the family genre and moves into fantasy. Like "Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory," it has fearsome depths and secrets. Based on the much-honored young adult's novel by Louis Sachar, it has been given the top-shelf treatment: The director is Andrew Davis ("The Fugitive") and the cast includes not only talented young stars but also weirdness from adults such as Jon Voight, Sigourney Weaver, Tim Blake Nelson and Patricia Arquette.

In a time when mainstream action is rigidly contained within formulas, maybe there's more freedom to be found in a young people's adventure. "Holes" jumps the rails, leaves all expectations behind, and tells a story that's not funny ha-ha but funny peculiar. I found it original and intriguing. It'll be a change after dumbed-down, one-level family stories, but a lot of kids in the upper grades will have read the book, and no doubt their younger brothers and sisters have had it explained to them. (If you doubt the novel's Harry Potter-like penetration into the youth culture, ask a seventh-grader who Armpit is.) The story involves Stanley Yelnats IV (Shia LaBeouf) as a good kid who gets charged with a crime through no fault of his own, and is shipped off to Camp Green Lake, which is little more than a desert bunkhouse surrounded by holes. There he meets his fellow prisoners and the ominous supervisory staff: Mr. Sir (Jon Voight) and Mr. Pendanski (Tim Blake Nelson) report to The Warden (Sigourney Weaver), and both men are thoroughly intimidated by her. All three adult actors take their work seriously; they don't relax because this is a family movie, but create characters of dark comic menace. Voight's work is especially detailed; watch him spit in his hand to slick back his hair.

"Holes" involves no less than two flashback stories. We learn that young Stanley comes from a long line of Yelnatses (all named Stanley, because it is the last name spelled backward). From his father (Henry Winkler) and grandfather (Nathan Davis), he learns of an ancient family curse, traced back many generations to an angry fortune teller (Eartha Kitt; yes, Eartha Kitt). The other flashback explains the real reason that the Warden wants the boys to dig holes; it involves the buried treasure of a legendary bandit queen named Kissin' Kate Barlow (Arquette).

There is a link between these two back-stories, supplied by Zero (Khleo Thomas), who becomes Stanley's best friend and shares a harrowing adventure with him. Zero runs away, despite Mr. Sir's warning that there is no water for miles around, and when Stanley joins him, they stumble upon ancient clues and modern astonishments.

LaBeouf and Khleo Thomas are both new to me, although LaBoeuf is the star of a cable series, "Even Stevens." They carry the movie with an unforced conviction, and successfully avoid playing cute. As they wander in the desert and discover the keys to their past and present destinies, they develop a partnership, which, despite the fantastical material, seems like the real thing.

The whole movie generates a surprising conviction. No wonder young readers have embraced it so eagerly: It doesn't condescend, and it founds its story on recognizable human nature. There are all sorts of undercurrents, such as the edgy tension between the Warden and Mr. Sir, that add depth and intrigue; Voight and Weaver don't simply play caricatures.

Davis has always been a director with a strong visual sense, and the look of "Holes" has a noble, dusty loneliness. We feel we are actually in a limitless desert. The cinematographer, Stephen St. John, thinks big, and frames his shots for an epic feel that adds weight to the story. I walked in expecting a movie for thirteensomethings, and walked out feeling challenged and satisfied. Curious, how much more grown up and sophisticated "Holes" is than "Anger Management."

David Jacobus Bosch

I often refer to David Bosch and his magnum opus, Transforming Mission. Here is a short biography on his life and work.

Bosch, David Jacobus
1929 to 1992
Dutch Reformed Church
South Africa

David Jacobus Bosch was born into an Afrikaner home on December 13, 1929, near the town of Kuruman in the Cape Province of South Africa.[1] His parents were poor but proud farmers, "simple rural folk," and loyal members of the Dutch Reformed Church (DRC). From his earliest childhood, he received a "Christian Nationalist" education. Bosch stated how

at a very early stage already our minds were influenced by teachers and other cultural and political leaders to see the English as perpetrators of all kinds of evil and as oppressors of the Afrikaner. We read poems of Totius and Jan Celliers, we read Een eeuw van onrecht--a century of injustice--and we were convinced beyond a shadow of doubt that no people were a patch on the English when it comes to arrogance, self-righteousness and brutal oppression of others. After all, my own mother could tell stories about the concentration camp to which she was taken at the age of eight.[2]
If the English were the enemy to the young Bosch, blacks were essentially nonpersons. Blacks were hewers of wood and drawers of water, "a part of the scenery but hardly a part of the human community.... They belonged to the category of 'farm implements' rather than to the category 'fellow-human beings.'"[3]

In 1948, the same year that Bosch entered the University of Pretoria's Teacher's College, the pro-apartheid National Party was swept into power. For Afrikaners like Bosch, "it was to us like a dream come true when the Nationalist Party won that victory. We had no reservations whatsoever." At the university, Bosch became involved with the Student Christian Association (SCA]. While participating in an SCA-sponsored evangelistic outreach at a lakeside camp, he became convinced that God was calling him into the Christian ministry.

Upon returning to his parents' farm that summer, Bosch organized a Sunday service for the black laborers. A large crowd of black workers gathered. What happened there can only be described as a conversion of sorts.
As I arrived, trembling, at the place of meeting, everybody came forward to shake hands with me! It was one of the most difficult moments in my life. When they saw my hesitation, they assured me that it was quite alright, that, in fact, it was normal for Christians to shake hands with one another! Only then did I discover that many of them were Christians: Methodists, Anglicans, members of the African Independent Churches, and so on. Previously I only thought of them as pagans and, at best, semisavages.

Looking back now to that day, thirty years ago, I guess I can say that that was the beginning of a turning point in my life. Not that, from then on, I accepted Blacks fully as human beings. Far from it. But something began to stir in me that day, and all I can say is that, by the grace of God, it has been growing ever since. Gradually, year by year, my horizons widened and I began to see people who were different from me with new eyes, always more and more clearly. I began to discover the simple, self-evident fact, that the things we have in common are more than the things which divide us.[4]
Returning to the university, Bosch changed to the predivinity course and received two degrees: the M.A. in languages (Afrikaans, Dutch, German) and the B.D. in theological studies. During that time Bosch sensed a further calling to be a missionary and began to have doubts about the adequacy of the apartheid system. "In the early fifties, there were already signs that upset some of us, particularly, the removal of the Coloureds from the common voters roll. It was one of the first shocks; the honeymoon was over with the new National Party government." By his final year in the B.D. program, when Bosch was chair of the SCA branch at Pretoria, he was asked to go to the University of Witwatersrand to discuss the moral legitimacy of apartheid. When pressed, Bosch realized he could no longer defend apartheid.

At Pretoria, Bosch was particularly affected by E. P. Groenewald, the professor of New Testament.[5] Groenewald introduced Bosch to the writings of Oscar Cullmann, whose work would have profound influence on Bosch's theological perspective. Upon graduation, Bosch undertook doctoral studies at the University of Basel under Cullmann. His thesis, "Die Heidenmission in der Zukunftsschau Jesu," probed the link between mission and eschatology in the ministry of Jesus. Bosch also came under the influence of Karl Barth, whose impact would emerge only later, in Bosch's systematic attempts at a theological foundation for mission.

While at Basel, Bosch distanced himself further from apartheid, although as yet he had no alternative paradigm to substitute in its place. He began to feel isolated from the Afrikaner mainstream.
By the time I arrived [in Switzerland], I had little doubt about the fact that apartheid was immoral and unacceptable. If I say I had by that time broken with the paradigm, one must take that with a grain of salt, because I had not replaced it with another paradigm. It was still very haltingly true of myself. In my early days as a student, my viewpoint was inarticulate, but it was a shift out of the laager.
In 1957 Bosch returned to South Africa to begin work as a DRC missionary among the Xhosa people in the Transkei. For nine years Bosch labored as a missionary pastor in Madwaleni. His work consisted of village evangelism and church planting in a large, remote area. The country was rugged and accessible only by horse. Although those years had their disappointments, Bosch recalled that "these were our best years, absolutely wonderful."

Bosch's cross-cultural ministry experience was deeply significant in two ways. First, while acknowledging that he continued to hold deeply paternalistic attitudes toward black people, he believed that his missionary years taught him to trust people, particularly his African Christian coworkers. The appraisal by Frans Verstraelen is helpful here. He comments that
the missionary experience of David Bosch among and with the Xhosa in Transkei gave him precious insight into mission as service and partnership, as well as attitudes of empathy, humility, and modesty vis-a-vis people of cultural and religious backgrounds different from his own.... [W]hat is convincingly shown is his integrity as a human being and as a Christian, as a missionary, and as a missiologist.[6]
Second, Bosch's missionary service helped him integrate theory and practice. By day he would be out among the people, visiting with them. By night he studied, trying to integrate his experience in the Transkei with the scholarly insights of various anthropologists, theologians, and missiologists. Through that study, his early theological convictions began to change considerably. Bosch identified this period of missionary activity as the decisive decade in his theological development. "I started with a very conservative theological framework and only moved to a wider approach towards the end of the 1960s."[7]

Although Bosch did not feel his missionary work at Madwaleni was finished, a back injury rendered him incapable of continuing with the rugged lifestyle that the job required. In 1967 he was asked to serve as senior lecturer in church history and missiology at the DRC's Theological School in Decoligny, Transkei, training black pastors and evangelists. Bosch enjoyed teaching, but the limited scope of the work (four teachers, twenty students) impelled Bosch to seek other avenues of ministry beyond the little theological college.

First, he helped form the Transkei Council of Churches, serving as its first president. This council provided contact with a variety of church traditions, particularly Roman Catholics and Anglicans. Bosch's growing ecumenical openness stood in sharp contrast to the ethos of the DRC, which was marked by a strict separation from other Christian bodies. As Bosch himself noted: "In the sixties, the Transkei was the only place in the Dutch Reformed Church setup where there were practical, structural, working relationships with people from other denominations. There was no other place where you had any practical expression of ecumenical contact."

A second avenue for self-expression that Bosch developed during his Decoligny years was writing. During that period Bosch published his doctoral thesis and wrote three short books and numerous articles. He also edited five books for the fledgling South African Missiological Society. Bosch's written work from the period, nearly all in Afrikaans, reflects two dominant themes: the missionary practice of the DRC and the biblical theology of mission.

Of special note was his Jesus, Die lydende Messias, en ons sendingmotief (Jesus, the suffering Messiah, and our missionary motive), in which Bosch applied his doctoral studies to the South African situation, arguing that the mission of Jesus can be understood only in terms of the suffering servant of the Lord, who, like a grain of wheat, must die in order to bear fruit. Jesus' encounters with the Gentiles exemplified this ethos of servanthood, as did the experiences of the early church. It is with the same mind-set of costly servanthood that the modern church must understand its motive for mission as well.[8]

The significance of his argument becomes apparent only when we consider the historical context in which it was written. The booklet appeared at a crossroads in DRC missions policy. The 1955 Tomlinson Commission report had uncovered statistical evidence of a large number of unevangelized blacks within South Africa. That news prompted DRC mission enthusiasts to promote an expanded evangelistic outreach among them. Bosch, however, discerned non-theological factors at work among some of the proponents. Numerous DRC missiologists and politicians linked the evangelization of blacks to the unfolding government policies of separate development and Afrikaner solidarity. Missionary work was therefore coupled to the defense of the volk and the preservation of a white-dominated South Africa. Bosch warned against such mixed motives in strong terms.
What is the end goal of mission with such a motivation? Is it to maintain the white people in South Africa--or is it the foundation of the church of Christ...? Is it to serve South Africa--or to serve God? Is it to hear together the sentimental voice of our own blood--or to hear together the last command of Christ? Have we, by this missionary motive, created a sheep in wolf's clothes--or is it perhaps a wolf in sheep's clothes?[9]
Any missionary enthusiasm must be tempered with the realization that mission in Christ's way is the way of the cross, the way of costly servanthood toward others. Anything less was simply religious propaganda and prone to ideological manipulation.

With writings like these, Bosch gave evidence of a departure from traditional Afrikaner sociopolitical perspectives and the DRC's support of apartheid. Inevitably, these departures from Afrikaner "orthodoxy" began to isolate Bosch from the mainstream of the DRC.[10] No longer a ware Afrikaner (true Afrikaner), Bosch was denied a position on the DRC theological faculty in Pretoria. Instead, in 1972 Bosch accepted the invitation to become professor of missiology at the University of South Africa (UNISA) in Pretoria. Bosch and his wife, Annemie, did so, however, with some trepidation. As he described it, "We moved back to Pretoria, very afraid of Afrikaners. Very afraid of white people. We were returning home, in a sense, but returning very different from what we were when we had left in the early 1950s."

UNISA was unique among academic institutions in apartheid South Africa. It was an interracial university with staff and students from all ethnic groups within southern Africa. This was made possible because coursework at UNISA is done primarily by extension. UNISA was also unique because of its theology faculty, described as a "faculty-in-exile for anti-apartheid, anti-Broederbond DRC theologians."[11] Bosch's move to UNISA placed him, officially at least, on the periphery of the DRC. Bosch served there as professor of mission and chair of the Department of Missiology from 1972 until his untimely death in an automobile accident in 1992. He supervised students at all academic levels from South Africa and beyond.

Bosch the Scholar of Mission

One dimension of Bosch's legacy is his contribution to the academic study of Christian mission. Bosch was a theologian trained in the classic, European tradition. His facility in languages (he was conversant in Afrikaans, English, German, Dutch, French, and Xhosa) enabled him to act as a bridge builder between various theological and cultural constituencies.

As a "systematic missiologist," Bosch was a prodigious writer. Over the course of thirty-two years, Bosch wrote six books, four book-length UNISA study guides, seven major pamphlets, and over 160 journal articles and contributions to books covering almost every aspect of mission theory and practice. He also edited seven books in English and Afrikaans.[12]

His most significant contribution was his massive 1992 work Transforming Mission. Bosch adopted the use of "paradigm theory" (as developed in science by Thomas Kuhn and in theology by Hans Kung) in an attempt "to demonstrate the extent to which the understanding and practice of mission have changed during almost twenty centuries of Christian missionary history."[13] Transforming Mission is a storehouse of historical and theological knowledge, described by Lesslie Newbigin as "a kind of Summa Missiologica" that "will surely be the indispensable foundation for the teaching of missiology for many years to come."[14] Notwithstanding the valid criticisms that Bosch failed to give adequate attention to the emerging theologians and perspectives of the church in the Two-Thirds World,[15] Transforming Mission will surely remain his chief theological legacy.

Bosch was also active as an administrator and editor. He helped found the Southern African Missiological Society (SAMS), a multiracial and ecumenical fraternity of mission scholars, and he served as its general secretary from its formation in 1968 until his death. A major aspect of the work of the SAMS is the production of Missionalia, the society's journal. From its inception in 1973 until 1992, Bosch served as its editor and contributed scores of editorials and book reviews. During his service as dean of the Faculty of Theology at UNISA, Bosch served as editor of its journal Theologia Evangelica.

Three other theological contributions deserve special mention. First, Bosch labored extensively for a deeper biblical foundation for mission.[16] He lamented that the missionary movement had yet to develop a common understanding of how the Bible functions as the authority, basis, and frame of reference for the church's missionary thought and practice. Bosch was critical of traditional approaches that sought to justify certain preconceived understandings of mission by "mining" for textual "nuggets," proof texts, in the raw data of Scripture. Instead, Bosch advocated a rediscovery of the intrinsically missionary nature of the church, based on the witness of the Bible. The issue is not so much whether an adequate justification for mission can be found in the Bible but how the Bible can assist the church in living out its essentially missionary calling in the world.[17] The Bible functions as a foundational source and standard by which the church understands its identity in Christ, as well as a source of paradigms and models for current missionary engagement with the world.

Second, Bosch sought to bring greater theological clarity to the meaning and relationship of mission and evangelism. Throughout the 1980s, Bosch's involvement with conciliar and evangelical missionary conferences and consultations pushed him to deeper reflection.[18] Any genuinely Christian understanding of mission must reflect the wholeness of the Gospel of Christ and the breadth of the biblical witness. "Mission," Bosch wrote, is "more than and different from recruitment to our brand of religion; it is alerting people to the universal reign of God."[19]
Mission takes place where the church, in its total involvement with the world, bears its testimony in the form of a servant, with reference to unbelief, exploitation, discrimination and violence, but also with reference to salvation, healing, liberation, reconciliation and righteousness.[20]
Evangelism, Bosch held, is one essential dimension of that broad mission. Evangelism is the narrower concern to cross the frontier of unbelief with the announcement of the Good News of Jesus Christ.

How, then, do the two concepts relate? Although evangelism and mission are distinct entities, they are inseparably linked in creative tension; together they embody the church's life in relation to the world. What is needed, Bosch urged, are "pan-Christians" who can
embrace both the depth and breadth of the Church's mission and mandate, people who know that there is, by definition, no clash between our calling people to personal faith and commitment to Christ in the fellowship of the Church (evangelism) and our calling those thus committed to cross all kinds of frontiers in communicating salvation to the world (mission).[21]
Finally (and less well-known), Bosch sought to reflect on the meaning and communication of the Gospel in Africa.[22] As early as 1972 Bosch showed an awareness and critical appreciation of the black theology movement, interacting with such leaders as Steve Biko, Manas Buthelezi, and James Cone. Through such publications as Het Evangelie in Afrikaans gewaad (The Gospel in African robes),[23] "Missionary Theology in Africa,"[24] and "The Problem of Evil in Africa: A Survey of African Views of Witchcraft and the Response of the Christian Church,"[25] Bosch revealed a surprisingly comprehensive familiarity with African theologians and movements.

Yet his contextual orientation remained firmly Western, and northern European in particular. Frans Verstraelen has noted that Bosch had difficulty in giving "context" a central place in his theologizing because he remained in the category of "idealist" theologians who theologize from above rather than from below.[26]

Bosch the Ecumenical Personality

It would be inadequate, however, to understand Bosch only in terms of his academic accomplishments.[27] He was a person of the church. The church was central to his thought. A genuine concern for its unity and witness, as well as a frank acknowledgment of its vulnerability and failures, was never far from Bosch's mind.

At the international level, this churchly concern led Bosch to devote considerable energy to overcoming the so-called evangelical-ecumenical debate in mission. His 1980 book Witness to the World was, in large part, an attempt to describe this debilitating fracture in modern Protestantism and its missionary outreach and to propose a way forward.[28]

Bosch was an active participant in both the ecumenical and evangelical communities and attended most of their international gatherings--from evangelical conferences in Lausanne and Pattaya to WCC-related gatherings in Melbourne and San Antonio (where he served as a section leader). Bosch was a main speaker at the 1982 Grand Rapids Consultation on the Relationship Between Evangelism and Social Responsibility, cosponsored by the Lausanne Committee and the World Evangelical Fellowship.[29] He helped draft the influential "Transformation" statement at the WEF-sponsored Wheaton conference in 1983 on the nature and mission of the church.[30] He participated in the WCC's 1987 Consultation on Evangelism in Stuttgart, where he substantially wrote the consultation's statement on evangelism.[31]

Both in print and in practice, Bosch labored to clarify the fundamental issues of theological conflict between the evangelical and the ecumenical streams of the world missionary movement. He deeply believed that both sides had been impoverished by ignoring the concerns of the other. As a result, both had failed to develop a genuinely integral theology of mission for our era. Although the evangelical-ecumenical tension is not the only lens by which to analyze the dynamics of mission today, and although Bosch was increasingly conscious of the missiological contribution of non-Western theologians, it remains true that the evangelical-ecumenical tension insidiously hinders the life and health of the church--in both the First and the Two-Thirds Worlds!--and he sought to address this conflict.

Bosch the South African

Bosch's concern for the reign of God and the credibility of the church was lived out most fully, however, in his own homeland of South Africa. He agonized over the South African situation and the challenge the apartheid system represented to the integrity of the Gospel and the mission of the church. Telling evidence of Bosch's concern was his refusal to leave. Bosch was twice offered the prestigious chair of mission and ecumenics at Princeton Theological Seminary, and twice he made the difficult decision to refuse the offer, believing that he could not leave South Africa during such a dangerous and historic time in its history.[32] He also remained a faithful member of the DRC, despite his own marginalization within that community for many years.

Over the years Bosch's criticism of apartheid and his own church's justification of it became more strident. His critique tried to expose the ideological nature of apartheid and the Afrikaner civil religion in which it was embedded.[33] The heart of the matter, according to Bosch, was that the Afrikaner people were prisoners of their own history, afraid of the future. The ideological nature of apartheid seemingly blinded most Afrikaners to any future besides the one held out by the National Party. Yet in this desperate situation, Christians must remain hopeful, for it is not fate that controls the destiny of South Africa but the Lord of history.[34]

In his critique of apartheid, Bosch also emphasized the cruciality of ecclesiology. Drawing from Reformed and Anabaptist sources, he urged the church in South Africa to become an "alternative community."[35] The church is set apart from the world and called to be a church without privileges, a servant community that must embody the radical lifestyle of Christ's new community. Yet the Christian community's called-out existence is for the sake of the world. As Bosch put it: "The church has tremendous significance for society precisely because it [exists] as a uniquely separate community.... We have to work consistently for the renewal of the church--the alternative community--and precisely in that way at the renewal of society."[36] Only when they worked for the renewal and unity of the church, and lived out the implications of their faith in the world, Bosch maintained, could South African Christians effectively challenge the values and standards of the apartheid society around them. The church must furnish an alternative vision of reality, of life in the kingdom of God.

The concept of the church as alternative community (AC) is grounded in the reconciling work of Christ. On the cross, Jesus reconciled the world to God, breaking down all barriers that divide humankind. Thus all differences among persons (racial, economic, linguistic, cultural, religious), while still real, have been relativized in Christ. It is thus wrong, even heretical, to divide the one church of Jesus Christ by ascribing "an unduly high value to racial and cultural distinctiveness,"[37] for this would raise the value of one's national identity above one's identity in Christ. Yet this is exactly what the white Reformed churches of South Africa had done and, as such, were perpetrating "nothing but a heresy."[38] Instead of polarizing society by highlighting its racial, ethnic, social, or economic distinctions, the mission of the church is to be an agent of reconciliation and a witness to the unity won for the world in Christ.

Bosch helped create numerous forums to live out this vision. The 1979 South African Christian Leadership Assembly (SACLA), gathering together over 5,000 Christians from every ecclesiastical and political perspective, provided a concrete embodiment of the AC concept. Bosch was a major impetus behind the event, serving as chair of the executive committee and delivering four plenary addresses.[39] He was a leading proponent of the 1982 Ope brief (Open letter) to the Dutch Reformed Church, signed by 123 DRC pastors and theologians, which publicly condemned apartheid and urged the DRC to pursue visible unity across the racial divide with its black sister churches.[40] In 1985, following the declaration of the state of emergency by the South African government, Bosch became involved in the National Initiative for Reconciliation, a movement begun by Michael Cassidy of Africa Enterprise to continue the SACLA spirit in the midst of rising tension and bloodshed. For a time Bosch served as its national chairman.

For Bosch the AC concept served as a distinctly Christian socioethical response to the struggle for social justice in South Africa. The concrete political implications of the church as alternative community remained vague, however--a point on which Bosch has been criticized most notably by Anthony Balcomb and Christopher Sugden.[41] Likewise, Bosch was criticized for remaining a part of the DRC and for emphasizing reconciliation instead of liberation in the struggle for justice in South Africa. Although not aimed at Bosch in particular, the famous Kairos Document of 1985 criticized "Church Theology" because of its superficial talk about reconciliation and nonviolence. In the interests of social liberation, Kairos rejected the call for the church to be a reconciling "alternative community."[42]

With the privilege of hindsight, however, one could argue that the relatively nonviolent transformation we have witnessed in South Africa during the last decade has come precisely because of people like David Bosch. He remained within the DRC out of a prophetic desire to speak the truth of the Gospel to the Afrikaner people from a position of solidarity with them even in their sin!

Fellow South African theologian John de Gruchy has affirmed that in the service of social transformation, the symbols of "reconciliation" and "liberation" did not necessarily have to collide. They had the power to be complementary helpmates in the quest for justice in South Africa. After comparing and contrasting the Kairos Declaration and the National Initiative for Reconciliation Statement, de Gruchy summarized his conclusions as follows:
1. In the struggle for a just society, the church cannot be neutral, but there are different, complementary strategies.
2. The church must be the church, but this does not mean that it has its own political program alongside that of the struggle for liberation. It must participate in critical solidarity.
3. The gospel of reconciliation and liberation, as well as the political strategies of negotiation and confrontation, are not antithetical but two sides of the same coin.
4. The suffering witness of the cross, and therefore non-violent redemptive action, remains the paradigm for the Christian, even though there is an honored Christian tradition which supports the idea of a just revolution.[43]
From this perspective, Bosch's approach--focusing as he did on the church as the alternative community, costly reconciliation, and the role of suffering witness in Christian discipleship--can be affirmed as an essential contribution to South Africa as it struggles to be a society of justice and peace. In life and in death, David Bosch provided an authentic martyria--a witness to the world that was profoundly evangelistic.

J. Kevin Livingston

Rolling Stone to Publish Hunter S. Thompson Suicide Note

"No More Games. No More Bombs. No More Walking. No More Fun. No More Swimming. 67. That is 17 years past 50. 17 more than I needed or wanted. Boring. I am always b*****y. No Fun _ for anybody. 67. You are getting Greedy. Act your old age. Relax _ This won't hurt."