Thursday, March 22, 2012

Israelis to Iran: We LOVE you!

PRESBYTERY STUDY MATERIALS For the Week 3/25/12

In the Book of Esther, Mordecai says to Queen Esther "Who knows? Perhaps you have come to royal dignity for just such a time as this." (4:14).  Take out the reference to royalty, and I think God is speaking to all of us.  This week's stories deliver hope to the world.  It never occurred to me to use Facebook as a way of sending messages to people we don't know, and in this case a message of peace from two Israelis to ordinary people in Iran.   The immediate positive response may not last or may be overshadowed by the politics of the region.  Who knows?

It reminds me of the church my daughter attends in Houston (to which I've made reference at a Presbytery meeting a while back).  The pastor of Ecclesia has cast a huge vision among the people:  this is a church that will change the world.  And in their case, they have latched onto two commitments.  Advent Conspiracy is a growing movement challenging Christians to spend less on themselves and their loved ones at Christmas and more on others.  The pastor is one of three clergy who decided to step out and speak plainly about the consumerism we indulge in at this holiday.  The church has made a sustaining commitment to providing clean water around the world.  They use one organization that works in Central America, Africa and Asia.  A sample well stands at the entryway of the church's courtyard.  Nearly every time I visit there, some effort is taking place to promote this mission.  It is long-term work...

Amazingly, this week's stories remind me that God has created a world in which, for all of the political and institutional structures we can create, each individual has the capacity to impact this life in amazing ways.  Who knows, maybe we can receive Mordecai's words - as spoken to us.

While all the Bible passages make good connects this week, I'm curious how you resopnd to this week's news.  Read the lesson below and post your comments.
Dave


Two Stories Tell of Personal Action to Address Major Problems
The Wired Word for March 25, 2012

In the News   Thanks to its belligerent leadership and alleged pursuit of nuclear weapons, Iran has grown increasingly isolated among the nations of the world. At the same time, Israel, whose very existence Iranian leaders have verbally threatened, has spoken clearly about its right to preemptively strike Iran. In the midst of this tension between nations, one Israeli couple, graphic designers Ronnie Edri and Michal Tamir, decided last week "to cut across the growing anxiety and fear over the possibility of an Israel-Iran war, and address Iranian citizens directly," said a report in the Israeli online magazine +972.
Edri and Tamir created a slogan -- "Iranians, We Will Never Bomb Your Country. We [HEART] You" -- that people can impose over their profile picture or any other picture. They posted the slogan along with smiling photos of themselves.
In an accompanying entry on their Facebook page, Edri wrote that while he was not an official representative of his country, the couple meant no harm to Iranians. "On the contrary, we want to meet, have some coffee and talk about sports," he wrote.
While some of the first responses were cynical, many more echoed the tone of Edri and Tamir's photos. And before long, ordinary Iranians began responding with similar posts, containing the slogan, "We [HEART] You, Israeli People. The Iranian People Do Not Like War With Any Country." Edri and Tamir also received hundreds of private messages from Iranians who said they were deeply moved by the campaign.
"I thought that when you're constantly surrounded by talk of threats and war, you are so stressed and afraid that you crawl into a sort of shell," Edri said. "So I thought, 'Why not try to reach the other side; to bypass the generals and see if [the Iranians] really hate me?'"
While it's unclear how such expressions of solidarity between people of the two countries might affect future relations -- or whether it might help prevent a war -- it seems to show that given a choice, many ordinary citizens would prefer friendly rather than belligerent relations with people of other countries -- even countries labeled as "enemies" by national leaders.
A second story in the news this week tells that 87-year-old Rev. Dr. Charles Wesley Shike is being honored at an art exhibit at the American Merchant Marine Museum on Long Island. Shike is one of a group of men from the United States who, following the end of World War II, herded cattle and horses onto ships to deliver them to Europe, which was ravaged by war and filled with starving people.
The group became known as "Seagoing Cowboys." It included war veterans, conscientious objectors, preachers, farmers, students and teachers.
The project began when Indiana farmer Dan West thought to help war victims by giving livestock. Picking up his idea, his denomination, the Church of the Brethren, adopted the Heifer Project and teamed with the now-defunct United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administration to turn the idea into reality.
Thus, between 1945 and 1947, about 7,000 men and boys loaded livestock on merchant vessels -- about 450 cattle and horses each trip -- and set sail for Poland, Italy, Greece and other war-torn countries. The Seagoing Cowboys made 360 trips, employing 73 different ships and delivering more than 300,000 animals.
"People over there were dying," Shike said. "By bringing them cattle, it felt like we were saving lives."
After one delivery, Shike made a side trip to Warsaw, Poland, to see a site where part of the Holocaust took place. While there, he experienced his call to the ministry.
Author Peggy Reiff Miller, who's been researching the Seagoing Cowboys stories, said of the participants, "They came back wanting to do as much as they could for peace. A lot went into ministry and social work or became missionaries and peace activists. Some went for the adventure, but many came back changed men."
More on this story can be found at these links:
Israel ‘Hearts’ Iran: Peace Campaign Takes Off on Facebook. Yahoo! News
Israeli-Iranian Solidarity Exchange Sweeps Facebook. +972
"Seagoing Cowboy" … to be  honored at art exhibit. New York Daily News
  The Big Questions
1. Are some problems really too big for an individual or small group of individuals to alleviate in any meaningful way? Explain your answer. If a problem is judged too big to be solved, is it worth trying? Concerning peace between nations, does achieving peace require that all sides be willing to allow the other sides to be left alone to go their own way?

2. To what degree are Christians individually responsible to address major world problems? Why? Do governments and individuals have different responsibilities? Explain your answer.

3. How does Jesus' statement "Blessed are the peacemakers" apply to individual Christians? Should we consider peacemaking the responsibility only of those who feel called to such work? Why or why not? Since conflict is inevitable in human relationships, how should we whose goal is peacemaking handle conflict when it cannot be avoided?

4. The motto of the Strategic Air Command (in charge of U.S. land-based nuclear weapons during the Cold War) was "Peace is our Profession." Can people in professions that employ force in their work (e.g., military, police, prison guards, etc.) be considered to be "peacemakers"? Explain your answer.

5. In what ways should the petition "Thy kingdom come" affect our attitude toward major world problems and troubles? How should it affect our efforts to work toward solutions? In the petition "Thy kingdom come," is "thy kingdom" referring to an earthly kingdom in which God is to be placed in charge, or to the Christian's membership in God's heavenly kingdom? If the former, how is God to be "placed in charge"? If the latter, how does that affect the Christian's attitude toward major world problems and troubles? In both cases, how should we respond in seeking solutions to major problems and troubles in the world?

6. If we are a follower of Jesus but find we have a distaste for doing good deeds, should we assume that doing them is not our calling? Why or why not?

Confronting the News with Scripture Here are some Bible verses to guide your discussion:
Exodus 4:13

"But he said, 'O my Lord, please send someone else.'" (For context, read 3:1--4:17.)
This statement is from Moses to God, after the Lord called him to lead the people of Israel out of slavery in Egypt. Moses offers God a string of excuses to say that he is not the right person for the job. God answers each excuse, but in the verse above, Moses essentially says that he doesn't want the job. God didn't take no for answer. And Moses, with a little help from his brother Aaron and a lot of help from God, led his people to the Promised Land.
Questions: To what degree should our preferences determine what attempts we make to help others? Does the pairing of Moses and Aaron suggest that we are better off seeking to work with others rather than assuming we are meant to be solo agents? Should we admire those who recognize their limitations but are willing to accept help?

Esther 4:14
"Who knows? Perhaps you have come to royal dignity for just such a time as this." (For context, read 4:1-17.)
We've indicated the whole of chapter 4 as the context for this verse, but actually, the entire book of Esther is the context. It tells the story of how Esther, a Jewish woman married to a Persian king, saved her people from slaughter by a great act of bravery. To do so, she persuaded the king to allow the Jews to fight back, and to kill and annihilate any enemy that might attack them.
When she first learned of the problem from her cousin Mordecai, and realized that she was the only one in a position to help, she also knew that confronting the king about his decree was a matter of great personal risk to her. Mordecai then made the statement quoted above to her, and she responded, "I will go to the king, though it is against the law; and if I perish, I perish" (4:16).
Questions: Are there times when attempting to do what one can to help others under threat is more important than one's own survival or obeying the law of the land? If so, give an example. How can the story of Esther serve as an example of the way civil disobedience or conscientious objection might play out for the person of faith in today's world?

Matthew 5:9

"Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called children of God." (For context, read Matthew 5:1-12.)
This beatitude needs to be heard in the context of attitude and commitment to live a holy life. The Roman emperors called themselves "peacemakers" (as well as "Sons of God"), but they often meant that they brought peace by eliminating those who disagreed with them and forcing everyone else to obey the imperial rulings.
As Jesus uses the term, peacemaking connotes positive actions for reconciliation, not obedience. Paul makes clear that reconciliation is a goal of Christian peacemaking when, writing to the Roman Christians, he says, "Let us then pursue what makes for peace and for mutual upbuilding" (Romans 14:19) -- not "obedience" but "mutual upbuilding" of each other as Christians.
Questions: How does mutual upbuilding promote peace? Do programs like Heifer International or Habitat for Humanity promote lasting peace? What effect do you think Facebook exchanges between ordinary citizens of nations experiencing tension will have?

Matthew 25:24-25
"Then the one who had received the one talent also came forward, saying, 'Master, I knew that you were a harsh man, reaping where you did not sow, and gathering where you did not scatter seed; so I was afraid, and I went and hid your talent in the ground. Here you have what is yours.'" (For context, read 25:14-30.)
Jesus told the parable of the talents to illustrate the need for those who follow him to be active in the Father's business while waiting for the kingdom of God to arrive. In the parable, a landowner gives varying sums of money to three of his servants for them to conduct his business while he is away. The servant who received five talents invested the money and made five more. The servant who received two talents made two more. But the servant who received one talent simply safeguarded it, gaining no additional earnings. The landowner becomes very angry with this last servant, who merely safeguarded the talent.
The "talent" was a sum of money, but in the deeper meaning of the parable, it can refer to a God-given skill or ability. (In fact, our modern English word "talent" is taken from this parable.) The parable suggests the one to whom such a skill is given should be using it for kingdom-of-God business. The anger at the third servant wasn't because he didn't make a lot of money from the amount he had been issued, but because he'd done nothing with it but protect it.
Questions: What peacemaking "talent" have you been given? Do you think your talent is buried or invested? How do we encourage each other to "invest" our talents?

1 Timothy 6:18
"They are to do good, to be rich in good works, generous, and ready to share …" (For context, read 6:17-19.)
In context, Paul is making this comment about Christians who are wealthy, but it fits most of us. We also should be rich in good works.
Question: Most of the time, the opportunities for good works are directed at an individual or particular group in need. But sometimes our good works might change the course of history. How do we spot those kinds of opportunities? Are these history-changing good works more important than good works toward an individual or group?

For Further Discussion
1. Comment on Hebrews 12:14: "Pursue peace with everyone, and the holiness without which no one will see the Lord." What things that you personally think of as innocent might you avoid doing because others see them as "itching for a fight"?  

2. "De-escalating" is often a necessary part of peacemaking. Regarding the current standoff with Iran, what might de-escalating look like?

3. Dan West first had the idea for the Heifer Project while serving as a relief worker in Spain during that country's civil war. He realized that only those babies who got powdered milk would live. He said to himself, "What these people need is not a cup, but a cow,"and wondered how he could get some of those cows from his native Indiana to where they were needed. West stood up in his congregation and explained how Heifer International would work. Although there eventually was a great deal of enthusiasm, at the time, one person got up and denounced him, saying that the idea was Communist. How often do we put a damper on good ideas because of our political presuppositions or our fears? How much is the culture invading the space previously inhabited by faith? Should work in the name of Jesus Christ be smushed into political boxes?

4. How has your commitment to Christ brought peace to your own life? To others in your community or the wider world?

5. Jeremiah 6:14 says, "They have treated the wound of my people carelessly, saying, 'Peace, peace,' when there is no peace." What situations might that apply to today?

6. Psalm 34:14 says, "Depart from evil, and do good; seek peace, and pursue it." When a contestant in a beauty contest is asked about her hopes and dreams, it has become almost a cliche that she says she wants "world peace." Is there a difference between a wish for peace and seeking and pursuing peace? What does peace-seeking have to do with turning from evil and doing good?

Responding to the News
This is a good time to examine our role as peacemakers in all of our interactions, including analyzing our attitudes and judgments toward others, issues, etc. We can also think about how to handle conflict as Christians when it cannot be avoided.
Some suggested peace resources: http://www.amazon.com/Blessed-Are-Peacemakers-Daniel-Buttry/dp/1934879231 http://www.amazon.com/Christian-Peacemaking-Heritage-Daniel-Buttry/dp/0817012133
http://www.cpt.org/
  Other News This Week
On the TWW forum, a subscriber offered some Big Questions related to the possible execution of an Iranian pastor for converting from Islam to Christianity. In one of the last news stories about this, an "anonymous source" within Iran says that the court is still investigating this case and that no decision has been reached. But the very fact that the court is even considering this case suggests that in some places, Christian conversion carries a good bit of risk. Read the story here:
Youcef Nadarkhani: Iran Denies Pastor's Execution Order. International Business Times

The questions suggested by the subscriber and others include:
1. Will the efforts in recent years to reconcile theological differences between Islam and Christianity be irreparably broken by this decision? Would a theological reconciling of  the differences between the two result in something that is neither Christianity nor Islam, but some mixture of the two?

2. Some interfaith scholars have maintained that since both Islam and Christianity developed from the same patriarch, Abraham, each of these monotheistic religions should be tolerant of the other. How can this decision be acceptable to Christians?

3. How far should Christians go in being tolerant of other religions? How should we respond to those of other religions? What is meant by "tolerant"? How does it differ from "celebrating differences"?

4. Pastor Youcef apparently was given a chance to change his position by converting back to Islam and declaring that Muhammad was a prophet, but he chose not to do so, even though he faced the realistic probability of martyrdom. What situations do Christians in America face in which demands or pressures are made to change or weaken our faith?
  Closing Prayer
O God, help us to not assume that because we are only one, we can do nothing to alleviate major problems. When there is something we can do, help us to see it. And when we see it, give us courage and wisdom to act. In Jesus' name. Amen. 
 

Copyright 2012 Communication Resources




No comments:

Post a Comment