UTM

You can help Pam Mooty raise money for UTM.

Pam Mooty, one of our friends from UTM partner New City Church, is an ultra-distance runner.  She runs ultra-marathons, which are long distance races that go way beyond the standard 26.2 miles and test the limit of endurance at a whole new level.  Since Pam will be raising money for UTM through her next big ultra-marathon, we decided to ask her a few questions…..

How did you get into running ultra-marathons?

 I have been running for the last 5-6 years and decided that I wanted more than the marathon.  I realized I enjoyed running longer and not having to be super fast.  So last year, I decided to try my first ultra-distance and complete a double marathon (52.4 miles).  As last year was coming to an end, I decided I liked what the ultra-distance was all about.  You go through hard spots where you think you cannot move and then you are moving along again.  It is a soul searching experience. 

What kind of training do you go through in order to build up strength to run an ultra-marathon?

 It is a huge time commitment.  It was years of running 5K’s, 10K’s and then marathons.  Then it is year round training even when the weather isless than perfect.  You cannot just blow the training miles off.  It is running on hills, running on flat areas at a little faster pace, running on trails both easier and difficult terrain, running for hours to cover time on task.  So yes, a lot of Saturdays where I am running twelve hours.  Then the training of figuring out what best fuels you.  So you try eating and drinking different things to find what best works for you.  And for this race I have had to train carrying a pack with my own water and food.  Prayer, praise, and worship is the icing on the training.  I cannot train and get this strong on my own…….God is by my side along this crazy journey of ultra-running.

Describe the ultra-marathon in which you will be competing. 

The middle of June, I will be participating in a race called the Desert R.A.T.S. (Race Against the Sand).  This is a 148 mile 5 stage race on the Kokopelli Trail from Grand Junction CO, to Moab, UT.  The days mileage goes in the following order:  20,39,9,52, and 26.2 miles.. We will have a crew that sets up and tears down our tents which are our sleeping accommodations for the duration of the race.  They will also be providing a hot meal for supper and a breakfast each day.  The terrain varies from mountainous to desert and the temps range from 95 to 110 in the mountains and the desert getting as high as 120 degrees.  Each racer is required to carry 1000 calories of nutrition, 100 oz.  Of water, a hunting knife, light jacket, emergency blanket and strobe, flashlight, and etc...            http://geminiadventures.com/new/?page_id=130

You decided to raise money for UTM through sponsors for Desert R.A.T.S. Why did you choose UTM as your chosen organization?

I prayed for God to show me whom I would be running for.  I did not want this race to be about me.  And the organization that kept coming to mind was UTM.  I have been honored to meet some awesome young people who through the work of UTM have definitely transformed their lives in ways only God can do.. God is working and using UTM to show people how they can turn their lives around.  And not only are they changing, but they are in turn helping others to transform their lives.  God is serious about his people.  I feel honored to be able to go out and run this race and raise money to help advance the work of UTM…..

If someone wanted to sponsor you, let’s say, 1 dollar per mile, how would they go about it?

I would like to have some people each day sponsor me for the day at $1 a mile.  Day 1 sponsors would sign up for $20 since I will be running 20 miles.  Day 2 would be $39, etc...When you sign up, you can write a check directly to UTM.  Or donate online at https://www.wepay.com/donations/ultra-distance-for-utm  How awesome if some wanted to cover the entire run of 148 miles!

 

Quotable from Dr. Carl F.H. Henry on Social Justice

“I should hope we move into an equally strong appeal for personal commitment to Jesus Christ and for dedication to social justice, one that will so distinguish the Christian community that the world will stop to catch its breath.”

 

Carl F. H. Henry, “The Tensions Between Evangelism and the Christian Demand for Social Justice,” Fides et historia 2 (Spring 1972): 10.

Social Justice by Raymond Aitchison (Part III)

God's way of promoting social justice in this present age is to increase the number of people who pursue justice and righteousness in their social relationships because they have received Christ by faith, and through the indwelling Holy Spirit have been "created anew in Christ Jesus for good works" (Ephesians 2:10).

If we are aware that there are existing public evils or injustices in our own society which should be rectified, then it is right, and will commend our Christian testimony, for us to pursue this through the constitutional channels that are available. But let us also at all costs keep our priorities right. Man's prime need is to be reconciled to God through faith in Christ; and only in this way will the root cause of social injustices be effectively dealt with. Biblical principles of social justice do not require us to "Christianise" society. A comment by Dr Martyn Lloyd-Jones is to the point here (from "The Christian and the State in Revolutionary Times"). He says, "The world can never be reformed. Never! That is absolutely certain. A Christian State is impossible. All the experiments have failed. They had to fail. They must fail. The Apocalypse alone can cure the world's ills. Man even at his best, even as a Christian, can never do so. You can never make people Christian by acts of Parliament. You can never Christianize society. It is folly to attempt to do so. I would even suggest that it is heresy to do so. Men must be 'born again'. How can they live the Christian life if they have not become Christians? Good fruit can only come from a good tree, a good root; and the idea that you can impose a Christian life or culture upon non-Christian people is a contradiction of Christian teaching. Nevertheless, government and law and order are essential because man is in sin; and the Christian should be the best citizen in the country."

There are those who talk about the "whole Gospel", by which they mean that social justice is part of its message. This is a misconception. Justification by faith is not half the gospel; it is the whole Gospel. Social justice is an essential part of Christian teaching for those who have first received Christ through faith, it is a necessary by-product of the Gospel, as all Christian character and behaviour is a by-product. It is a result which should of necessity follow in the life and behaviour of the man or woman who has been justified by faith, and who is motivated by the love of Christ wrought by the indwelling Holy Spirit, and guided by the Word of God.

Update on Erik Osmolinski, the First Graduate of UTM's Man-Up Program

Erik posted this update on his facebook page after the birth of his baby girl this past Friday:  

 5 yrs ago I thought my life was done. The student athlete had slowly turned into an alcoholic drug addict/dealer. I tried to end my life and almost did. Since then I've watched God insert so much life into my world. A revived relationship with my son, married my wife, adopted a new daughter and watched another come into the world Friday. He breaths life even when we chase death.

Man-Up Graduation Pics of Davien Fizer, August 9th, 2012

Social Justice by Raymond Aitchison (Part II)

The Biblical directives in respect of the Christian's individual responsibility are therefore perfectly clear. But how should we react to those (including a number of evangelicals) who are declaring and even demanding that Christians and churches should be actively and publicly working together with others to achieve a "just society" and to address the problem of "structural injustice" (as the popular phrase goes)?

In considering this let us take note of one or two basic issues. First of all, what is a "just society'? Whose concept of such a society are we to adopt that of Marxist ideology or that of the humanistic philosophy of Western liberalism? Both of these differ in certain basic respects from the Old Testament principles of social justice in Israel as these are set forth in the Law and the Prophets. But further: in describing a 'just society', are we to confine ourselves merely to socio-political and socio-economic matters and "structural injustices", or do morals in matters of sex, honesty in business, truthfulness in public statements and in the media, and similar matters, have any place? To what extent are the Ten Commandments, for instance, to be taken into account? Their terms and requirements do not seem to loom very large in the schemes for a 'just society' that are being set forth by a number of protagonists of "social justice". Where does this elusive entity known as a 'just society' begin and end?

But there is a still more fundamental question. What is the root cause of an unjust society? Is it essentially the structure of society, or is it the nature of man himself? Marxist ideology and Western humanistic liberalism both have their answers, and these differ fundamentally from that of the Scriptures. This answer states plainly that man is a fallen and sinful being, who is in rebellion against God, and who is by nature incapable of pleasing God (Rom. 8:7,8). His sinfulness will therefore make itself evident, whatever his circumstances may be, and an unjust society is ultimately unjust because man is sinful arid unjust. It is right and necessary that public injustices, which may exist in a given society, should be rectified by those who hold the reins of government and by the members of that society. But merely changing the structure of a society will not finally remove every kind of injustice because it will not change the sinful nature of man. The state of the world in general, and of Africa in particular, bears this out.

From the Archives: The Uneasy Conscience of a (Post) Modern Fundamentalist

Thought I'd share this article that I wrote 4 years ago on another blog site.  It provides some history and context of my journey as I began embracing both the gospel of Jesus and social justice. 

For the past eighteen years, I’ve felt several overriding tensions as I live out the gospel in the ‘hood. In some ways it is an “uneasy conscience” as Dr. Carl F.H. Henry described a half a century ago. For me, this uneasiness surfaces from the tension between the false antithesis of orthodoxy and orthopraxy, specifically as it relates to the faith community’s responsibility to help the poor. The more that I ponder my fundamentalist-Baptist upbringing, the more I realize how this heritage played a part in creating the tension. 

Due to my father’s ministry job as a worship pastor, I grew-up attending several different Fundamentalist-Baptist churches for the first twenty-two years of my life. During those two decades, I don’t ever recall hearing a message from any of the pastors or a Bible study from any of the Sunday School teachers that called attention to the plight of the poor and the Christian’s God-given responsibility to help them. Even though I frequented these churches every time the building was open, including every Sunday morning, every Sunday evening, and every Wednesday night, I never heard anyone refer to any of the 2000 or so Bible verses throughout both testaments that implore God’s people to help the poor. So when I began serving the poor at a little store-front church in the inner-city as a college student, I suddenly became acutely aware of how God’s concern for the poor permeated the entire narrative of Scripture. With some mentoring from Servants Center's director Don Tack, I also realized the futileness of pious activities such as street evangelism among the homeless population compared to building relationships and doing holistic ministry among them. Unfortunately, when I switched ministries to become a manager of a homeless shelter (under the direction of Don Tack) that emphasized holistic ministry, my home church responded by dropping my missionary support. Later, word got back to me that they believed I had embraced the “social-gospel,” which is sort of like the Scarlet letter of Fundamentalism. My name and ministry suddenly became synonymous with words such as neo-evangelical, compromise, liberal, and social-gospel. 

There is pain in rejection, especially from such a grave misunderstanding by my ecclesiastical heritage. I was just as committed to the gospel as I’d ever been. In fact, out of the 21 men that benefited from the homeless shelter during my two years as its supervisor, eleven graduated into self-sufficiency with full-time employment and secure housing. Several men trusted Christ for their salvation and to this day, continue to serve Christ in their church. In comparison, when I was doing street evangelism, several made dramatic professions to Christ, but every single one of them fell away because their “conversion” wasn’t the real thing.

What’s more, I was just as committed to sound doctrine as I’d ever been. I embraced historical fundamentals such as an infallible, inerrant Scripture, Christ’s deity, Christ’s substitutionary atonement for our sins, Christ’s bodily resurrection, and Christ’s imminent return. Yet to the leadership from my former home church, my actions proved otherwise. How twisted the logic of their thinking! That somehow because I added social and economic activities such as job assistance, mentoring, and budget counseling to evangelism among the homeless poor meant that I no longer held to a high view of the Bible and Christ. Shouldn’t it be the other way around? Shouldn’t those who hold to an inerrant and infallible view of Scripture be passionately and actively living out what the Scripture actually says? Since they believe the Bible to be true, shouldn’t the fundamental and conservative evangelical churches be most concerned about living out the 2000 or so verses about the poor and oppressed that demand a response from God’s people? Regrettably, this has not been the case. If our treasure is where our heart is, many of the yearly budgets from these churches reflect more of a concern for bricks and mortar, professional pastoral staffing, and quirky Christmas and Easter programs than responding to the needs of the poor. 

From that moment fifteen years ago, I realized that an essential part of urban ministry must also include educating the church about ministry among the poor. Therefore, for the past fifteen years of our ministry to at-risk youth and their families in the ‘hood, we have served the church by offering workshops and seminars on redemptively helping the poor without creating dependency.   This has been my little way of influencing fundamental and conservative evangelical churches, countering the lack of theological reflection that I’ve observed when addressing current social and economic issues that affect the poor. It has also done wonders when confronting the tension that I feel as a "post-modern" who believes and lives out the fundamentals of my faith in Jesus.

 

Social Justice by Raymond Aitchison (Part I)

I thought I'd post one of the best articles on Social Justice that I've read by an author named Raymond Aitchison.  

It is a pity that the response of some evangelical Christians towards issues of social justice and social concern has been so often negative. To some extent this has been a reaction against the emphasis placed in "liberal" circles upon the so-called "social gospel" at the expense of the Biblical Gospel of justification by faith. This does not, however, justify a negative response, which avoids issues instead of facing them. Happily there is today a growing positive attitude among evangelicals towards social concern and social justice, an attitude for which we have outstanding examples in such eminent evangelicals as Wilberforce, Barnardo, George Muller and William Quarrier.

There is no doubt whatever about the clear Biblical injunctions that impose a social responsibility upon the Christian, and especially a concern for the poor and underprivileged (as e.g. in James 2:14-16 and 1John 3:17, and numerous passages in the Old Testament). These do not, however, require us to follow headlong in the train of every person or organisation or body of opinion that claims to be promoting social justice. Not only has God clearly imposed social concern upon us in the Scriptures, but in them He has also given us guidelines to direct us.

What, then, is social justice in Biblical terms? "Justice" and "righteousness" are part of a way of life which God expects of us as His people (see e.g. Micah 6:8; Ps. 11:7; 1John 3:7). This stems from the kind of character which we possess, and is in turn the reflection of what God Himself is and how He acts (1John 3:7). Social justice is essentially the outworking of this way of life in our relationships with others. It is thus not an option that we may accept or avoid at our choice; it is a necessary part of our practical Christian living.

What are the Biblical guidelines to direct us? A basic one is Leviticus 19:18: "Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself". This was quoted with emphasis by our Lord on one occasion (Matt. 22:39), and on another occasion gave rise to the parable of the Good Samaritan. It was also reinforced by both Paul (Romans 13:9 and Galatians 5:14) and James (ch. 2:8). Both our Lord and Paul declared that this commandment summed up the Law. It can therefore be taken to sum up the social duty of the Christian. And its Biblical implications are both wide and demanding. The injunctions in both Testaments to be concerned for the poor and needy, and to be upright. just and merciful in all our dealings with others, are written plain for all to see. Our Lord also summed up social responsibility on another occasion by saying (Matt. 7:12): "All things therefore whatsoever ye would that men should do unto you, even so do ye also unto them: for this is the law and the prophets." And the Christian's social responsibility does not end with his fellow-Christian, though this is his first priority. The example of our Lord Himself, and Paul's remark in Galatians 6:10. make it clear that this responsibility extends to everybody.

Quotable From David Platt's, Radical

“Caring for the poor is one natural overflow and a necessary evidence of Christ in our hearts.  If there is no sign of caring for the poor in our lives, then there is reason to at least question whether Christ is in our hearts.”    

David Platt, Radical: Taking Back From the American Dream, (Colorado Springs, CO: Multnomah Books, 2010), 108-109.

Social Justice without the Social Gospel Model #1: William Carey

Today is the 252^nd birthday of William Carey.  If you know anything about the history of missions, you know William Carey as the father of Protestant missions.    But very few people know the extent of Carey’s influence in India. Not only did he preach the saving gospel of Jesus Christ and disciple many Indian nationals while translating the Bible into 40 different Indian languages, Carey also spent a significant amount of time righting the wrongs that had permeated the Indian culture during this time period.  In other words, the conservative Calvinist Baptist missionary William Carey also championed social justice!  

Over a decade ago, Vishal and Ruth Mangalwadi wrote an amazing book called “The Legacy of William Carey: A Model for the Transformation of a Culture.”  Its first chapter imagines a professor quizzing his Indian students at a leading Indian university from all different disciplines with the question, “Who was William Carey?” which led to several illuminating responses:

An economics major testifies that William Carey “introduced the concept of savings banks to India to fight the all-pervasive social evil of usury.  Carey believed that God, being righteous, hated usury, and thought that lending at the interest of 36-72% made investment, industry, commerce and the economic development of India impossible”

A medical student declares that William Carey “was the first man…who led the campaign for a human treatment for leprosy patients.  Until his time they were sometimes buried or burned alive in India because of the belief that a violent end purified the body and ensured transmigration into a healthy new existence.”

An education student states that William Carey “began dozens of schools for Indian children of all castes and launched the first college in Asia…..For nearly three thousand years, India’s religious culture had denied to most Indians free access to knowledge, and the Hindu, Mughal, and the British rulers had gone along with this high caste strategy of keeping the masses in the bondage of ignorance.” 

A feminist social science scholar asserts that William Carey “was the first man to stand against both the ruthless murders and the widespread oppression of women, virtually synonymous with Hinduism in the 18^th and 19^th centuries.   The male in India was crushing the female through polygamy, female infanticide, child marriage, widow-burnings, euthanasia and forced female illiteracy, all sanctioned by religion…..Carey opened schools for girls.  When widows converted to Christianity, he arranged marriages for them.  It was Carey’s persistent battle against sati for 25 years which finally led to Lord Bentinck’s famous Edict in 1829, banning one of the most abominable of all religious practices in the world: widow-burning.”

I really believe that William Carey and his missionary colleagues would be puzzled by the back and forth debates among evangelicals of what constitutes the gospel and how it relates to social justice.  They’d be appalled by the arguments that certain fundamental and conservative evangelicals make contending that social justice is a distraction from preaching the gospel or that it unavoidably leads to an apostate social gospel.  To them it would be a no-brainer that “justification by faith inevitably leads to justice,” as Tim Keller so masterfully articulates.  Now Carey was far from perfect.  In fact he was a lousy husband to his mentally ill wife and never disciplined his children which caused much strain among his missionary team.   So with Carey’s life and example, I will eat the chicken and spit out the bones.  However, when it comes to doing missions, Carey does provide a Biblical and transforming model that links proclaiming the saving gospel of Jesus Christ with a passion to do social justice within a broken world.  

 

Defining Social Justice (Part 1)

In order to understand the relationship between social justice and the gospel, we need to figure out what social justice really means.  Social justice, with all of its ambiguity, has morphed into a term that expresses something different to everyone, rendering it extremely tricky to define.  So over the next few posts, I will give several descriptions that resonate with a cross-section of people. 

Some equate social justice with government redistribution of wealth and property.   Wiki’s definition alludes to this, stating that “social justice is based on the concepts of human rights and equality and involves a greater degree of economic egalitarianism through progressive taxation, income redistribution, and even property redistribution. “  No wonder right-wing talk show host Glenn Beck negatively defined social justice as “forced distribution of wealth with a hostility towards individual property rights under the guise of charity/justice,” and then warned churches to run away!   He merely echoed a movement of voices that reduced social justice to political activism based on socialistic economic theory.   With such a knee-jerk reaction to the term, Beck threw out the baby with the bath water and came across looking like a simpleton. 

Another strand of thought links social justice with love.  The progressive intellectual Cornel West declares that “social justice is love, made public.”  Tony Campolo amplifies West, maintaining that “social justice is nothing more than love transformed into social policy.”    One can hardly dispute these definitions, since love is the catch-all virtue that envelops all human affection, compassion and kindness for the good of others.

 It also seems quite vague.   How do we really know what love is?  By what measurment and standard does society decide what characterizes love?  By majority rule?  From a distance or nearby?  Does “love made public” and “love transformed into social policy” over-rely on government intervention?  Is the quest for social justice in our world achieved primarily through a vote for the right candidate that will enact the right legislation?    For instance, I know of certain white people that voted for Obama in 2008 because they believed it would help solve the horrific scourge of racism that has plagued our nation for generations.    For them, voting for a black man like Obama was an issue of social justice and a fast-track method to eliminating racial prejudice.  But if you asked African-Americans whether race-relations and racial prejudice improved over the past four years, most would say that it really hasn’t changed much.   Don’t get me wrong.  I am in no way discrediting political involvement in relationship to social justice.  It does play an important part. The racist policies of Jim Crow in America would not have been overthrown without changing laws.  Justice for the unborn in our nation will need increased political participation in order to overturn Roe vs. Wade.    Yet reducing social justice to government policy (motivated by love) diminishes social justice as only partisan politics and as a political buzzword that is here today and gone tomorrow.