Christianity Today - The Search For the Historical Adam

Christianity Today and BioLogos are coming out this month with findings based upon current human genome studies (popularized by National Geographic in 2008 - see below for more links). CT has given its June 2011 article a video preview (shown below). Please follow along with future links on this site to RJS's Search for the Historical Adam as he reviews a Christian perspective all these newest theories and suppositions: http://relevancy22.blogspot.com/2011/06/search-for-historical-adam.html.

skinhead
June 3, 2011

* * * * * * * * * *

BioLogos and the June 2011 “Christianity Today” Cover Story

http://www.biologos.org/blog/biologos-and-the-june-2011-christianity-today-cover-story/

by Darrel Falk
May 31, 2011

"Science and the Sacred" frequently features essays from The BioLogos Foundation's leaders and Senior Fellows. Today's entry was written by Darrel Falk. Darrel Falk serves as president of The BioLogos Foundation. He transitioned into Christian higher education 25 years ago and has given numerous talks about the relationship between science and faith at many universities and seminaries. He is the author of Coming to Peace with Science.

The cover story of the June issue of Christianity Today, entitled "The Search for the Historical Adam" (the full article can be viewed here), notes that our website The BioLogos Forum has played a prominent role in moving the discussion surrounding the historical Adam forward and cites various blogs and articles that appear on these pages. We are pleased that a matter deemed so important by us is beginning to play a prominent role in the discussion for the Church as a whole.

As detailed extensively on these pages over the past two years, there is now little doubt that God has created all life forms, including human beings, through an evolutionary process. God could have created in an instant. After all, in the supreme divine act of all time Jesus was raised from the dead—in an instant. However, it now seems certain that this is not the way He chose to create the human body. God’s process was gradual, not instantaneous.

We are fully aware that interpretation of scientific data changes and this fact causes some to be skeptical about the scientific consensus regarding human creation. True, scientific revolutions do occur. However, the data with regard to human creation has been accumulating for 150 years, and the conclusions have been substantiated through a wide variety of scientific disciplines. Astronomy shows that the universe is billions of years old. Geology independently shows that the earth, though a little younger, is also billions of years old. Paleontology poignantly lays out the parade of created life forms and graphically documents the species-changes over hundreds of millions of years. Comparative anatomy and developmental biology show feature after feature in living bodies, each with its distinctive trademark pointing to gradual alteration from that which came before. And, with the sequencing of the human genome, genetics provides the final confirmatory lynch pin. Creation through a gradual process is not a hypothesis that emerges from a peripheral scientific sub-discipline. To show it wrong would involve overturning principles that independently lie at the very core of the findings of most of the natural science disciplines. True, they all together cry out in unison with a loud voice—“Created!” However, they also, in a subtle, but persuasive whisper, add the all-important qualifying phrase—“…slowly and not in an instant!”

The Christianity Today cover story is important because it engages the Church in one of the most important questions of all: was there a historical Adam and Eve? There has been much discussion of this point on these pages and although we strongly encourage ongoing discussion, BioLogos does not take a position on the issue. Denis Alexander, Director of the Faraday Institute and a frequent contributor to the BioLogos conversation says ‘yes’ in this BioLogos article, and Tim Keller, pastor of Redeemer Presbyterian Church in New York City affirms it in this one. Denis Lamoureux and Peter Enns believe otherwise and have expressed their views here and here, for example. The scientific data are silent on the possibility of a federal headship—two unique individuals singled out by God from all others to enter into relationship with him and to bear his image. Similarly, science is silent on the veracity of the alternative possibility— that the story of Adam and Eve is not a story of two unique individuals. According to this latter view, the story of Adam and Eve is in a very real sense the story of all humankind—we have all sinned and we are all in need of redemption. [(this is also the position of this website here, Relevancy22, given the burden of proof from human genomic studies (several of those articles can be found on this site's sidebars) - sh)]

These are theological questions, not scientific ones. Science makes it abundantly clear, we believe, that God has created through an evolutionary process and that there was never a time when there were just two individuals on earth. It goes no further though. Beyond that, we are in a different realm, one deeply steeped in the traditions and creeds of the church, and in theology, biblical scholarship, and philosophy.

Although The BioLogos Forum has raised the issue and encouraged discussion, we also urge caution. The “Federal Headship” model that accepts the scientific findings while at the same time holding to the historicity of a real first couple has not yet been carefully worked out by theologians. The reason that we haven’t had many articles of that sort is because we haven’t been able to identify theologians who are looking at the question from that perspective. In general, our experience has been that theologians are in one of two camps. Either they work within the framework of a non-historical Adam and Eve or they believe the scientific conclusions will eventually prove to be deeply flawed and humans were not created through an evolutionary process after all.

The purpose of BioLogos is to show that there can be harmony between mainstream science and evangelical Christianity. We are in complete agreement with Richard Ostling (the author of the aforementioned article) and the Editors of Christianity Today that working through the historicity question is of the utmost importance to the Evangelical Church. Within the framework outlined above, it boils down to theology not science, and we urge the Church to reserve judgment for a while. Let’s keep both possibilities before us. Here’s hoping that (1) some of our greatest theological minds will work on the question of what a model based on “Federal Headship” would look like. Here’s also hoping that (2) some of our finest theologians will continue to work on how the view of a non-historical Adam would address some of the issues that puzzle and concern most evangelicals. Communication is key. This must move beyond theologians speaking to each other in language that is not readily accessible to the rest of us. Let’s figure out pastorally-responsible ways of putting the issues before the Church in a manner which is respectful of all views, while not shying away from the challenges that lay before us.

This is an exciting time for the Church because there is much interesting work to be done. Personally, I reserve judgment and I urge that all of us proceed with caution. Let’s see what emerges. Let’s see what our theologians and philosophers come up with, especially those who hold to a historical Adam and Eve. The Church is 2,000 years old. It has been guided by some of the sharpest minds that have ever lived and it has done so under the guiding wisdom of Emmanuel—God with us. This is God’s Church and we must proceed prayerfully, lovingly, and solemnly. We must listen intently to the wise voices of our deep past while following the Spirit’s guidance into a future where we have not yet been. We are not alone though. We are surrounded by a great cloud of witnesses whose lives and work remind us of the faithfulness of God through the millennia. This is still God’s Church and we are still God’s people. We are not alone. Emmanuel—God is with us!

More Pieces on the Historical Adam from BioLogos

• The joint statement from our second "Theology of Celebration Workshop"
• Evolution and the Fall
• Daniel Harrell: A Pastor Deals with Adam and Eve (Video)
• Denis Alexander on Understanding Genesis and the Fall (Video)
• N.T. Wright on Adam and Eve (Video)

NatGeo - The Human Genome Project after 10 Years

Christianity Today and BioLogos are coming out this month with findings based upon current human genome studies (popularized by National Geographic in 2008 - see below for more links). CT has given its June 2011 article a video preview (shown below). Please follow along with future links on this site to RJS's Search for the Historical Adam as he reviews a Christian perspective all these newest theories and suppositions: http://relevancy22.blogspot.com/2011/06/search-for-historical-adam.html.

skinhead

**********

Five Break Throughs & Five Predictions

Ten years after the Human Genome Project's grand achievement, experts hail the advances and share hopes for the next decade.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/human-genome-project-tenth-anniversary/

A museum visitor views a digital representation of the human genome in New York City in 2001.

Photograph by Mario Tama, Getty Images

Ker Than

for National Geographic News

Published March 31, 2010

In June 2000 scientists joined U.S. President Bill Clinton at the White House to unveil the Human Genome Project's "working draft" of the human genome—the full set of DNA that makes us human (quick human genetics overview).

As the tenth anniversary of that achievement approaches, scientists weigh in on the scientific discoveries the Human Genome Project enabled, as well as some hopes and predictions for future advances that could be made using the project's data.

BREAKTHROUGHS POWERED BY THE HUMAN GENOME PROJECT

1. Democratized Data

Coordinated by the U.S. Department of Energy and the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the Human Genome Project formally lasted from 1990 to 2003. The project helped pioneer the now common practice of making scientific data freely available online.

(Related: "'Eco Hubble' to Bring Nature Data to the Public.")

This open model of research has enabled researchers to make discoveries much more quickly than in the past, said Francis Collins, NIH director and former leader of the U.S.-government effort to sequence the human genome.

"For example, the search for the cystic fibrosis gene finally succeeded in 1989 after years of effort by my lab and several others, at an estimated cost of U.S. $50 million," Collins writes in an opinion piece published in this week's issue of the journal Nature.

"Such a project could now be accomplished in a few days by a good graduate student. ... ," he writes. All the budding geneticist needs, Collins says, is the Internet, some inexpensive chemicals, a thermal cycling machine to amplify specific DNA segments, and access to a DNA sequencer, which "reads" DNA via light signals.

2. Added DNA to Human-Origins Tool Kit

The Human Genome Project has proven to be a valuable new tool for studying human origins and the history of our species' migrations, said Mark McCarthy of the University of Oxford in the U.K., who studies the genetic causes of diabetes and obesity.

"We've learned how young a species we are and how similar so many of us are, particularly those populations that came out of Africa 70,000 years ago"—such as the ancestors of modern Europeans or East Asians or South Asians—McCarthy said.

The genetic data largely back up theories derived from archeological and linguistic studies, such as the idea that ancestors of many modern human populations originated in Africa, he added. (See "Massive Genetic Study Supports 'Out of Africa' Theory.")

Furthermore—by working under the assumption that the more closely related different human populations are to one another, the more similar their genomes will be—scientists have been able to roughly chart out the path that humanity took as it spread around the world.

(Explore an interactive atlas of the human journey based on genetics.)

3. Snipped Away at Diseases' Prehistoric Origins

The Human Genome Project set a foundation for later efforts such as the International HapMap Project, which aims to uncover single nucleotide polymorphisms, or SNPs ("snips").

SNPs are differences in the lettering of genes among members of the same species. The written language of DNA uses four "letters," or nucleotides: A, T, C, and G.

HapMap is a catalog of common SNPs that occur in human beings. SNPs that lie next to each other on a chromosome and are inherited together are called haplotypes; clusters of related haplotypes are called haplogroups.

SNPs can greatly influence our susceptibility to certain diseases, such as cancer, heart disease, and diabetes, scientists say. (Find out how an SNP-laden hairball helped reveal the face of a 4,000-year-old human.)

Geneticist Spencer Wells, who leads the National Geographic Society's Genographic Project, called HapMap "the biggest payoff of the Human Genome Project so far." (The National Geographic Society owns National Geographic News.)

HapMap "revealed the relatively high frequency of genetic diversity that exists across the entire genome. Using that data, scientists were able to start looking at disease associations at a genome-wide level," said Wells, who is also a National Geographic explorer-in-residence.

This is important because scientists are finding that many diseases have multiple gene influences.

"For the really interesting diseases, you've got a lot of genes that have relatively low effect" by themselves, Wells said.

(More on HapMap: "New DNA Mapping to Trace Genetic Ills.")

4. Found Lack of Junk in Our Genetic Trunk

Before the Human Genome Project, some scientists had estimated the known three billion or so DNA letters combined to form a hundred thousand or more genes.

"That seemed sensible, because we're such big, complicated organisms," said Christopher Wills, a biologist at the University of California, San Diego.

"But the amazing thing is that there are much fewer genes in the human genome than expected"—only about 20,000 to 25,000—"which means that each gene has to be very sophisticated in what it does," Wills said.

Because the number of DNA letters per gene is limited, the new, lower gene count made clear that about 98.5 percent of our DNA has nothing to do with genes—junk DNA, some called it.

(See "First Decoded Marsupial Genome Reveals 'Junk DNA' Surprise.")

But even junk DNA strands—long seen as useless or as relics of vestigial genes—are proving they hold a few gems.

"The part of [DNA] that doesn't code for proteins, which is about 98.5 percent of it, turns out to be much more rich in functional characteristics than I think a lot of people had imagined," NIH's Collins told National Geographic News.

"There doesn't seem to be much reason to use the word 'junk DNA' anymore," Collins added.

5. Supercharged Genetic Research

The Human Genome Project has helped foster the creation of newer, faster, and cheaper methods of gene sequencing, said George Church, who heads the Personal Genome Project at Harvard University.

That's because the rough draft of the human genome that resulted from the Human Genome Project serves as a reference against which the data from new sequencing methods can be compared.

"It's like doing a jigsaw puzzle," Church explained. "If you've got the final picture on the cover of the box, ... you can say, This little piece goes here."

PREDICTIONS FOR THE NEXT TEN YERS

1. Science Will Pinpoint What Makes Us Homo Sapiens

In the near future, scientists will be able to compare our genome against those of our evolutionary cousins, such as chimpanzees and Neanderthals, to get a clearer sense of which genes are involved in making us Homo sapiens, the University of California's Wills said.

"The thing I'm really looking forward to is finding out how we differ from our close relatives, what has driven us toward becoming human beings, and in particular, which genes are responsible for our astonishing talents," Wills said.

NIH's Collins called the recent success at partially sequencing Neanderthal DNA "fascinating."

"I think most people ten years ago would not think it would be possible to reconstruct an accurate rendition of a sequence of Neanderthals," Collins added, "and yet we're pretty close to that."

2. Gene Therapy Will Cure Diseases

Gene therapy—curing ailments by replacing faulty copies of genes with normal ones—will finally become a reality, likely within the next decade, the University of California's Wills said.

(Related: "Color-blindness Cured by Gene Injection in Monkeys.")

"The big problem has been, How do you get the genes to the cell?" he said.

Scientists have been using viruses to "infect" animals' DNA with new genes, Wills noted, "and that's dangerous.

"But I think a breakthrough is going to be happening fairly soon. When it does, it's going to be very exciting."

(Also see: "How 'Gene Doping' Could Create Enhanced Olympians.")

3. The Very Meaning of "Gene" Will Change

The traditional definition says a gene is a region of DNA that encodes for a protein.

But in recent years, scientists have discovered stretches of so-called junk DNA that don't make proteins but are nonetheless important.

For example, some regions of DNA appear to hold instructions for producing a DNA-like, but non-proteinaceous, molecule type called double-stranded RNA.

"These double-stranded RNAs"—part of the body's RNA interface or RNAi—"turn out to be very strong regulators of the way that genes function," Wills said. (Find out why the discovery of RNAi led to a Nobel Prize.)

Some double-stranded RNA, for example, can "silence" genes by preventing their protein products from being produced. They do this by binding to and blocking a messenger molecule in the protein-creation pathway, called messenger RNA.

Wills estimates that if bits of double-stranded RNA were counted as genes, they would double the estimated number of genes in the human genome.

"As far as I'm concerned, I'm happy to call them genes without worrying about semantics," he said.

NIH's Collins agreed. "I think we're at a bit of a semantic difficulty here, in terms of deciding what to consider a gene," he said. "Genes are units of inheritance that need not be thought of in such simplistic ways anymore."

4. Personal Genomes Will Spawn Made-to-Measure Drugs

Thanks to improving technology, within the next five years a person should be able to have his or her entire genome sequenced for about a thousand U.S. dollars, many experts say.

Soon after, that figure could drop as low as a hundred dollars, the Genographic Project's Wells said. "I could imagine a time, ten years from now, where it could get down that cheap."

(See "Coming Soon: Your Personal DNA Map?")

NIH's Collins said the pace of technological innovation has been dizzying to watch.

"I thought we would get to this point, but I didn't think we would get here so quickly," he said.

The cost of sequencing a human genome "has come down by a factor of more than 10,000. That means DNA sequencing is moving forward more quickly than that classical example of exponential growth, which is Moore's law from computers." Moore's law speculates that the processing power of computer chips doubles every two years.

Collins envisions a day soon when everyone's genome will be sequenced and included as a routine part of their medical records.

By "knowing what you're at risk for and individualizing your preventative medicine plan," doctors will be better able to treat their patients, Collins said.

The era of personal genomes will also be a boon to pharmacogenomics, the science of tailoring drugs to an individual's genetic makeup.

5. Personality Will Move From Art to Science

As scientists learn to better understand the information contained in our genomes, they will get better at predicting how genes influence the development of physical and mental traits and even behaviors.

In the distant future it may be possible to look at the genome of a human—or a close human relative—and roughly deduce not only what she looked like, but, for example, how she acted.

"Will we ever be able to do it with complete confidence? I suspect not, and I rather hope not," the University of Oxford's McCarthy said.

"But I do suspect that by the time we've finished this journey that we've started on ... we'll be able to do better than we're doing at the moment."

The Search for the Historical Adam 2

Christianity Today and BioLogos are coming out this month with findings based upon current human genome studies (popularized by National Geographic in 2008 - see below for more links). CT has given its June 2011 article a video preview (shown below). Please follow along with future links on this site to RJS's Search for the Historical Adam as he reviews a Christian perspective all these newest theories nd suppositions - http://relevancy22.blogspot.com/2011/06/search-for-historical-adam.html.

skinhead

June 3, 2012

The Search for the Historical Adam 2

http://musingsonscience.wordpress.com/2011/06/07/the-search-for-the-historical-adam-2/#more-657

by rjs5

posted June 7, 2011

The June 2011 cover story in Christianity Today, The Search for the Historical Adam, is a summary of the state of the discussion about the understanding of Adam and Eve in our church. The subtitle lays it out – “Some scholars believe genome science casts doubt on the existence of the first man and woman. Others say the integrity of the faith requires it.” This is a topic we’ve discussed a great deal on this blog, and a topic that will continue to come up for the foreseeable future. It will not be resolved in short order. In fact, the significance of the question requires that we revisit it from a number of angles, posing questions and considering the ramifications of the answers.

In addition to the cover story itself, Christianity Today has also posted an introductory piece by Ted Olson, Adam, Where Are You? and an editorial outlining the stance of Christianity Today on these issues: No Adam, No Eve, No Gospel. In his introduction Ted Olson calls for a difficult grace filled family meeting.

Few debates in our world have been as impassioned and emotional as those over creation. But now we’re not just talking about dating rocks and interpreting fossils. We’re talking about family. Nor is the discussion between those who think the Bible’s account of creation, fall, and redemption is important and those who find it irrelevant. This is a family meeting. (p. 9)

This is an important point – this is a family discussion. Quite frankly non-Christians, those not committed to the gospel, don’t care. There is a bemused incredulity that we waste any intellectual effort on the discussion. A corollary here is also important – this is not a quest for external credibility or the approval of secular colleagues. It is an attempt within the family to reconcile what we know from scripture with what we know from science.

What do you think? What motivates this discussion?

Do you think it is important?

The cover story in Christianity Today does a fairly good job of giving a balanced picture of the current state of the debate. There are scientific, biblical, and theological questions to be considered.

The scientific data cannot be brushed under the rug and ignored. I continue the discussion here because I am convinced that the scientific evidence for an old earth, evolution, and common descent is so strong that Christians must adjust – this is a reprise of Copernicus and Galileo.... Some questions raised by proponents of Intelligent Design remain open, questions regarding the sufficiency of natural mechanism alone in bringing about the current state of life. But these open questions do not challenge the observation of an old earth, evolution, and common descent. New earth creationism is increasingly harder to justify and defend. The theological and scientific questions raised by keeping to a theory of young earth creationism has become overwhelming. While one can take a position of mature creation on the strength of the testimony of scripture, this leaves us with a illusion of evolution, including death and decay, preceding the Fall. Many find that this leaves us with an image of God as intentionally deceptive in creation. I don’t expect everyone (or anyone) to simply take my word for it on the evidence. Thus some of my posts here have dealt specifically with the evidence and the nature of the scientific debate. This will continue.

The biblical questions are more significant than the scientific questions. How do we understand scripture as the inspired Word of God? How are we to read Genesis? What is the form and intent of the text? It is more than merely plausible to suggest that Genesis 1-3 is not a prose recitation of history. The word plays and names, the form and structure, the story elements and the imagery, the presence of different variations on the story, make it clear that the form and intent transcends a mere recitation of fact. John Walton has put forth a proposal for the first chapter of Genesis in The Lost World of Genesis One, but does not delve into the harder questions raised by Genesis 2-3 and the story of Adam and Eve. There are many questions regarding the nature of scripture that remain to be wrestled with.

The most significant questions, however, are the theological questions. This is where the Christianity Today editorial comes into the picture.

Christians have already drawn the line: there must be an original pair of humans endowed with souls—that is, the spiritual capacity to relate to God in the special way Genesis describes. (p. 61)

At stake, it is suggested, is (1) the entire story of what is wrong with the world. This “hinges on the disobedient exercise of the will by the first humans. The problem with the human race is not its dearth of insight but its misshapen will.” and (2) The entire story of salvation, which hinges on the obedience of Christ undoing the disobedience of Adam.

The editorial allows for the possibility that Adam and Eve could be leaders of an original population, rather than the unique biological progenitors of the entire human race. The importance of community in Ancient Near East thought and life and a corporate understanding of the nature of humanity provides an important perspective on the interpretation of the text. They point to the recent book by C. John Collins, Did Adam and Eve Really Exist?: Who They Were and Why You Should Care, as providing a possible approach. We began this book last week and will continue to work through his argument. Joel B. Green’s book Body, Soul, and Human Life: The Nature of Humanity in the Bible also delves into some relevant issues, including the nature of sin and the corporate view of humanity in scripture.

I am not convinced, though, that the editors at Christianity Today have accurately defined the stakes in the discussion. In particular it seems to me that the description of the gospel as problem (Adam’s sin) and solution (Christ’s life, death, and resurrection) is not a sufficiently complete understanding of the story we have in Scripture. I don’t think the incarnation is a response to a problem, rather it is a part of the plan of God from the very beginning. Whether we have Adam, Eve, a garden and an apple, or some other history represented by this story, rebellion and redemption was, for some reason known to God, part of the plan. Christ was present from the beginning and in Him we live and move and have our being.

Do you think that the editors of CT have accurately described the stakes in this discussion?

Does the entire story of salvation hinge on the disobedience of Adam? If so how?

The editorial ends in the same place that Ted Olson’s introduction started – with a plea for a grace-filled family discussion.

At this juncture, we counsel patience. We don’t need another fundamentalist reaction against science. We need instead a positive interdisciplinary engagement that recognizes the good will of all involved and that creative thinking takes time. In the long run, it may be the humility of our scholars as much as their technical expertise that will bring us to deeper knowledge of the truth. (p. 61)

This is my prayer. May this discussion be characterized by the humility of our scholars, by their technical expertise and their willingness to listen to each other, to understand, and to wrestle with the hard questions. Only in this fashion will we move forward in Christian response and unity.

David Opderbeck has also posted some reflections on the CT editorial on his blog Through a Glass Darkly. As always, his thoughts are well worth consideration.

Darrel Falk at BioLogos has also commented on the editorial: BioLogos and the June 2011 “Christianity Today” Editorial. This is an excellent piece.

If you wish to contact me directly you may do so at rjs4mail[at]att.net

If you have comments please visit The Search for the Historical Adam 2 at Jesus Creed

The Search for the Historical Adam 1

The Search for the Historical Adam 1

https://musingsonscience.wordpress.com/2011/06/02/the-search-for-the-historical-adam/

by RJS

June 2, 2011

The June 2011 cover story in Christianity Today is a summary of the state of the discussion about the understanding of Adam and Eve in our church. The subtitle lays it out – “Some scholars believe genome science casts doubt on the existence of the first man and woman. Others say the integrity of the faith requires it.” This is a topic we’ve discussed a great deal on this blog, and a topic that will continue to come up for the foreseeable future. It will not be resolved in short order. In fact, the significance of the question requires that we revisit it from a number of angles, posing questions and considering the ramifications of the answers. Darrel Falk has posted some comments on this issue of Christianity Today and the question of Adam and Eve on the BioLogos blog - BioLogos and the June 2011 “Christianity Today” Cover Story. I don’t have this issue in hand, and the cover article is not yet available on line. When it is available I will comment on it directly and pose some questions.

In a timely fashion, though, I received from the publisher (through Scot) a book by C. John Collins, Did Adam and Eve Really Exist?: Who They Were and Why You Should Care. This book expands on the discussion in his article in the ASA Journal Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith (v. 62 no. 3 2010) (I posted on it here). Dr. Collins’s goal in writing his book is stated in the introduction (p. 13)

My goal in this study is to show why I believe we should retain a version of the traditional view, in spite of any pressures to abandon it. I intend to argue that the traditional position on Adam and Eve, or some variation of it, does the best job of accounting not only for the Biblical materials but also for our everyday experience as human beings – an experience that includes sin as something that must be forgiven (by God and our fellow human beings) and that must be struggled against as defiling and disrupting a good human life.

He is not, he notes a little later, trying to provide the right answers. Rather his goal is to help Christians think through the issues critically and carefully. While he is critical of some positions held by Francis Collins as described in his book The Language of God and by many of those who are affiliated with BioLogos (and no doubt would be critical of some of my positions) he is not criticizing the BioLogos perspective or evolutionary creation in itself. It will be interesting to engage with Dr. C. John (Jack) Collins, working through his book and considering the arguments and reasons. His approach provides a useful entry into some of the key issues and ideas.

One of the first questions Dr. Collins raises in the introduction to his book is that of authorial intent in scripture and most importantly in Genesis 1-3. In the rest of this post I would like to explore this topic a bit.

Does authorial intent determine how we should read the accounts of Gen 1-3?

Does it matter if the author thought these accounts were historically true? If so why?

For some people establishing that the inspired Biblical authors thought that an idea was true, a historical statement was true is enough to establish its veracity. If the author of Genesis 2-3 thought that Adam and Eve were created exactly as described this is enough to establish it as a fact essential for the Christian faith. Dr. Collins places a high value on both authorial intent and the nature of Biblical authority, but finds the situation a bit more complicated than often thought and does not structure his argument on this approach to the text.

Dr. Collins suggests that there are at least four possible ways to look at authorial intent in Genesis 2-3 (p. 16).

1. The author intended to relay straight history, with a minimum of figurative language.
2. The author was talking about what he thought were actual events, using rhetorical and literary techniques to shape the reader’s attitudes toward those events.
3. The author intended to recount an imaginary history, using recognizable literary conventions to convey “timeless truths” about God and man.
4. The author told a story without even caring whether the events were real or imagined; his main goal was to convey various theological and moral truths.

The view argued by Dr. Collins is option 2. There is figurative language in the telling of the story of Adam and Eve, the story uses devices and techniques common to the literature of the day. But the authorial intent was to describe historical events. The use of rhetorical and literary technique is as appropriate to the inspired biblical text as it is to any kind literature. There is no need for wooden literalism. Here he quotes CS Lewis (Mere Christianity, Book 3, CH. 10): “People who take the symbols literally might as well think that when Christ told us to be like doves, He meant we were to lay eggs.”

It is not true though that if the text uses symbolic language it is merely symbolic. Symbolic language can be used to convey historical reality. Now we have to have a method for making a judgment about the nature of the elements of the story. Dr. Collins uses the following three criteria for this study (p. 19):

1. How does the person or event impact the basic story line? My study of the Bible has convinced me that the authors were self-consciously interpreting their world in terms of an overarching worldview story. Does making the persons or events “merely symbolic” distort the shape of the story?
2. How have other writers, especially Biblical ones, taken this person or event? Any notion of Biblical authority requires me to respect what Biblical writers see; common sense requires me to check what I see against what others see, especially those who are closer to the original time and culture than I am. This is one reason I will not confine my conversation partners to people who already agree with me.
3. How does this person or event relate to ordinary human experience?

This is an intriguing set of criteria. As we consider the arguments in Dr. Collins book it will be interesting to apply them and to explore where they may help to determine the truth and where they may lead us astray. One place where I think that Dr. Collins and I may disagree is in the significance of authorial intent in the context of an overarching ancient near east worldview. The author intended to convey an ancient near east cosmology, with a world on pillars, the vault of the sky holding back the waters. This was an integral part of the worldview or author and original audience. There is no reason for us to assume that this cosmology was inspired by God and therefore correct. Perhaps Adam and Eve are not “merely symbolic” but part of an assumed worldview, not corrected by God, and used to convey his theological message in the same way that ancient cosmology is used rather than corrected. I am not giving this as the answer, but putting the idea up for consideration.

What do you think?

Is authorial intent significant? If so how and when?

What criteria would you use to evaluate the text?

If you wish to contact me directly you may do so at rjs4mail[at]att.net

You can subscribe to a full text feed of my posts at Musings on Science and Theology.

Public Enemy: Iran's Persecution Backfires

Regime's antagonism is increasing Christianity's appeal.
http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2011/june/publicenemy.html

Trevor Persaud

posted 6/01/2011

A major spike in the harassment and arrest of Iranian Christians in recent months is re-vealing just how nervous the Islamic republic is about the prodigious success of house churches, say Iranian Christian leaders.

At least 202 Christians in 24 cities faced "arbitrary" arrest between June 2010 and January 2011, according to Elam Ministries. Elam, run by Iranian expatriates, counted 80 arrests over 2008 and 2009 combined.

"[Iran] has been substantially more public in its oppression of Christianity," said Todd Nettleton, a spokesman for Voice of the Martyrs. "Announcing it on the news, having the mullahs talk about it in their Friday sermons—it's just become a lot more out in the open."

"Persecution has escalated to an unprecedented level," said Abe Ghaffari, executive director of Iranian Christians International. While Iran's historic Armenian and Assyrian congregations usually enjoy freedom of worship, Farsi-speaking house churches hosting converts from Islam work under significant threat.

"In effect, recognition of Christians in the laws of Iran has now become basically recognition of an ethnicity rather than faith," said Hussein Jadidi, a human rights lawyer who recently fled Iran after he became a target in a Christmas sweep that caught 70 other Christians.

The government is concerned, observers say, because more and more Iranian Muslims are converting to Christianity. The house church movement is booming, with converts estimated in the hundreds of thousands. Evangelists are distributing large numbers of New Testaments, and satellite television continually beams Christian programs into the country.

"The government always used to deny that Iranians become Christians," said Elam's David Yeghnazar, but now the church has become too strong to ignore. Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei declared the house church network "enemies of Iran" in an October speech, which analysts labeled a rare public acknowledgement of the movement.

"Religion is regarded as part of your national identity," said Issa Dibaj, an Iranian Christian who works as an Elam translator. "If you turn away from your religion … it's as if you have betrayed your country."

"In the past, [the government] would emphasize apostasy as the crime," Jadidi said. "They've changed their tactics; now evangelism, witnessing, and changing religion have become a security crime."

But now analysts say Islam is losing credibility after 30 years of theocracy. Resentment against the reigning regime is spreading and deepening—especially since the disputed 2009 national elections.

"Before the [1979] revolution, the clerics were promising that once Iran becomes an Islamic state, it would be utopia, it would be brotherhood, and everything would be fine," Dibaj said. But since then, Iranians "have seen nothing but war and fighting and international isolation and hatred, [and] they are thirsting for change."

"The Iranian public basically doesn't trust the government anymore," Ghaffari said, "and they don't trust the Muslim clergy anymore, because they have seen a lot of double standards and hypocrisy."

Converts in smaller communities still risk persecution from their own families, but tolerance is growing in urban areas and among the younger generation. "In fact," said Dibaj, "in places like Tehran and more educated communities, if you say, 'I have become a Christian,' they will respect you because of your courage and your independent thinking."

If anything, government persecution has made Christianity much more attractive, said Yegh-nazar. "When government officials are on television telling people not to read the Scriptures, that generates more interest in the Scriptures."

**********

 

Jasmine Revolution in Tunisia - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Chinese_protests


Crowd in front of a McDonald's in Wangfujing on 20 February 2011

**********

 

Colo(u)r Revolutions - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_revolutions

 Colour revolutions is a term that was widely used by the media to describe related movements that developed in several societies in the CIS (former USSR) and Balkan states during the early 2000s. The term has also been applied to a number of revolutions elsewhere, including in the Middle East. Some observers^[who?] have called the events a revolutionary wave, the origins of which can be traced back to the Indian independence movement in the 1920s, the Portuguese Carnation Revolution in the 1970s, and the 1986 People Power Revolution (sometimes called the "Yellow Revolution") in the Philippines.

Participants in the colour revolutions have mostly used nonviolent resistance, also called civil resistance. Such methods as demonstrations, strikes and interventions have been intended protest against governments seen as corrupt and/or authoritarian, and to advocate democracy; and they have also created strong pressure for change. These movements generally adopted a specific colour or flower as their symbol. The colour revolutions are notable for the important role of non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and particularly student activists in organising creative non-violent resistance.

Such movements have had a measure of success, as for example in Serbia's Bulldozer Revolution (2000); in Georgia's Rose Revolution (2003); and in Ukraine's Orange Revolution (2004). In most but not all cases, massive street protests followed disputed elections, or requests for fair elections, and led to the resignation or overthrow of leaders considered by their opponents to be authoritarian. Some events have been called "colour revolutions" but are different from the above cases in certain basic characteristics. Examples include Lebanon's Cedar Revolution (2005); and Kuwait's Blue Revolution (2005).

 

 

Why Beijing's Largest House Church Refuses to Stop Meeting Outdoors

http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2011/aprilweb-only/beijinghousechurch.html

Shouwang vows to continue showdown until Christmas in hopes of ending Achilles' heel of unregistered churches: government pressure on landlords.

Promise Hsu in Beijing, China
posted 4/26/2011

Editor's note: As worldwide headlines noted the Easter season showdown between Beijing authorities and one of China's largest house churches, one Shouwang member offered Christianity Today this analysis.

The global media spotlight has recently centered on the meeting place of Shouwang Church in Beijing. Since April 10, the unregistered congregation of 1,000 mostly young professionals has been forced to worship outdoors after the landlord of its rented conference hall gave in to mounting government pressure and terminated the church's lease.

During the past three Sundays, numerous uniformed and plainclothes police officers were sent to a public square at Zhongguancun, known as "China's Silicon Valley," where Shouwang worshipers were supposed to gather. Hundreds of Shouwang members were detained, from a few hours to 48 hours. They worshiped—reading the Bible, singing hymns, and praying—after being loaded onto buses or held in police stations. Many others have been under house arrest. The church's leaders, including four pastors and three elders, have been under house arrest for most of the past two weeks. Some church members have lost their jobs or rented homes—or both.

On Easter Sunday, more than 30 people were rounded up at Zhongguancun, while many Shouwang members were confined to their homes. A young couple asked the police to drive them to the Zhongguancun square. The police agreed. They sang hymns, read the Bible, and prayed in the police car. They also gave the police officers a copy of the Bible and an autobiography about how a Chinese biologist became a Christian. The police car moved around the square. After the young couple finished worshiping, the police officers drove them home. The young couple shared their experience with fellow Shouwang members through the church's online forum, which was shut down in mid-April but resumed later.

It was not the first time that Shouwang Church made global headlines. In November 2009, when President Barack Obama had just wrapped up his first visit to China, The Wall Street Journal ran an opinion piece entitled "The China President Obama Didn't See." It was about 500 Shouwang members worshiping outside in a suburban park during a snowstorm after being evicted from the office space that the church had rented for three and a half years.

Shouwang began in 1993 as a home Bible study led by Pastor Jin Tianming, a son of an ethnic-Korean peasant family in northeast China who became a Christian while attending Beijing's prestigious Tsinghua University. In 2005, Shouwang began renting office space in order to integrate its 10 fellowships and open itself to the general public. The church also applied to register with the government, but was rejected and told to join the Three-Self Patriotic Movement, China's state-approved Christian body.

By 2007, Shouwang was arguably one of the largest house churches in Beijing, but remained almost unknown until it began publicizing its location troubles in Xing Hua, the church's quarterly magazine. One of its first issues had a special report on Shouwang's registration process, which gained attention from other house churches and those who were following Chinese Christianity.

Like almost all house churches, the Shouwang congregation has faced the issue of survival from the moment it was established. The most serious direct crackdown came during the run-up to the 2008 Beijing Olympics, when on May 11 armed forces broke into Shouwang's Sunday worship in a rented office space and ordered the church to put an end to the worship. However, all three services from morning to afternoon were held as usual. Many worshipers were asked to give their names and contact information.

Amazingly, Shouwang survived the clampdown. Yet the church realized that pressure on the landlords of the facilities it rented was a weak point in both the survival and further growth of the congregation. It had been forced out of the previous rented venues, and in 2008 faced another eviction. So by the end of 2009, Shouwang raised and paid about $4 million for the second floor of the Daheng Science and Technology Tower in northwest Beijing's Zhongguancun area. Yet authorities once again interfered, and the property developer has refused to hand the key over to the church.

For now, it is not known when the outdoor worship will end. In a pastoral letter sent the night before Easter, Pastor Jin Tianming, who has been under house arrest, reaffirmed the stand on outdoor worship: "The 'outdoor' in the outdoor worship is not a means to an end but a stand we are making before our Lord of glory and the authorities. It is a kind of worship before the only true God who is the only head of the church. And in this particular period of time, it is a worship that is even more precious than any hymn or sermon and would much more please God."

For the past three Sundays of outdoor worship, Pastor Li Xiaobai has sent Shouwang members sermons based on the Book of Esther, a symbolic choice to illustrate God's unfailing salvation of his people. In the case of Shouwang, the issue of worship venue is a reflection of a deeper struggle over the legality of the non-state-owned church in China. More than 30 years after reforms were started, it looks impossible for the government to control everything. It has considerably shifted its ground on the economy, having allowed non-state-owned companies to exist and expand. Now it is increasingly faced with the continued rise of non-state-owned churches: something it has long considered the product of "Western culture."

Even a decade into the reform era, the Chinese government was still chained to its ideology that market economy was restricted to "the Western capitalist countries." It was Deng Xiaoping, China's de facto leader in the 1980s and 1990s, who admonished his colleagues to stop splitting hairs over "whether it is surnamed socialist or capitalist." "The policy," he said, "is okay if it works." This insistence on economic reform paved the way for the further expansion of private enterprises and the official recognition of private property. In fact, this has gone on to help the growth of house churches, making it possible for them to rent or even own places of worship.

If the current government leaders should carry on with this part of Deng Xiaoping's theory, they would probably help usher in the continued rise of China. They would see a newer China, where some truly respected schools, universities, research institutes, hospitals, and philanthropic foundations could grow out of house churches or those church-goers, similar to what has occurred in church history worldwide.

For now, it seems crucial for the Chinese government to better understand what the church is. On the bright side, the numerous detentions and arrests of Shouwang congregants might provide golden opportunities for police officers and their leaders to learn more about Christians and their faith firsthand. The police might find it strange when they read the following on a Shouwang Q&A fact sheet: "'What if the police arrest me because of my participation in outdoor worship?' Do not resist; let them take us away, just like a lamb to the slaughter. In our hearts, we know that we gather here to worship; and for the sake of worship, we will pay the price. We believe in what the Lord has said: 'Blessed are those who are persecuted because of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.'" Once they detain or arrest those Christians, the police would see and hear how these people behave and speak.

There have been different opinions within Shouwang about the governing committee's decision to worship outdoors. Some have argued that the church could worship as separate groups indoors (since Shouwang currently has dozens of family Bible study groups and fellowships), and others warned that it was too sensitive to hold outdoor services while what has been called the "Jasmine Revolution" is spreading from North Africa to Asia. But the Shouwang governing committee has issued multiple open messages explaining the outdoor worship decision. In a letter, they said, "We ask the Lord to preserve the unity of our church, that despite of our different viewpoints, we may still be able to submit to and bear with one another."

As for how long the outdoor worship will last, Shouwang said that if the problem of a worship venue could not be solved, they would continue to worship outdoors until Christmas 2011. They would then reassess the situation and devise new plans for the coming year. This means Shouwang seems to be prepared for a long road ahead. In the history of the Christian church, a year or even a decade would not be a long time. But the next few weeks or months might witness another turning point for the church in a country whose ancient name is, surprisingly, "God's Land."

**********

Jasmine Revolution in Tunisia - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Chinese_protests

Crowd in front of a McDonald's in Wangfujing on 20 February 2011

 

**********

 

Colo(u)r Revolutions - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_revolutions

 

 

 

Colour revolutions is a term that was widely used by the media to describe related movements that developed in several societies in the CIS (former USSR) and Balkan states during the early 2000s. The term has also been applied to a number of revolutions elsewhere, including in the Middle East. Some observers^[who?] have called the events a revolutionary wave, the origins of which can be traced back to the Indian independence movement in the 1920s, the Portuguese Carnation Revolution in the 1970s, and the 1986 People Power Revolution (sometimes called the "Yellow Revolution") in the Philippines.

Participants in the colour revolutions have mostly used nonviolent resistance, also called civil resistance. Such methods as demonstrations, strikes and interventions have been intended protest against governments seen as corrupt and/or authoritarian, and to advocate democracy; and they have also created strong pressure for change. These movements generally adopted a specific colour or flower as their symbol. The colour revolutions are notable for the important role of non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and particularly student activists in organising creative non-violent resistance.

Such movements have had a measure of success, as for example in Serbia's Bulldozer Revolution (2000); in Georgia's Rose Revolution (2003); and in Ukraine's Orange Revolution (2004). In most but not all cases, massive street protests followed disputed elections, or requests for fair elections, and led to the resignation or overthrow of leaders considered by their opponents to be authoritarian. Some events have been called "colour revolutions" but are different from the above cases in certain basic characteristics. Examples include Lebanon's Cedar Revolution (2005); and Kuwait's Blue Revolution (2005).

Should the China Ambassador Worship at a House Church?

http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2011/june/underdiscussion-jun11.html

Observers discuss whether the U.S. ambassador to China should worship at an unregistered church to 'publicly identify with the persecuted.'

Compiled by Ruth Moon

posted 5/31/2011

During a March budget hearing, Congressman Frank Wolf (R-Va.) challenged Gary Locke, current U.S. Secretary of Commerce and President Obama's nominee for the next ambassador to China, to worship at an unregistered house church instead of a Three-Self Patriotic Movement state church in order to "publicly identify with the persecuted." Locke said he would consider it.

"It isn't worship—it's showing up and being there. I'm not asking the ambassador to change his faith. I'm asking him to identify and visit the persecuted, just like you visit people in prison. You visit people where they are. They thirst to have someone identified with the American government show up and be with them. And by doing that, you provide help and protection."

Frank Wolf, U.S. Congressman

"The U.S. ambassador should worship in a house church, especially if he is a Protestant Christian. If he is Catholic, he should seek out a so-called 'underground church.' Such actions would likely result in more media attention to religious persecution in China, and perhaps give hope to the persecuted. However, media attention would be fleeting. Moreover, such an act—even if done regularly—would be primarily symbolic, and U.S. international religious freedom policy has for too long been characterized by symbols rather than substance. What we should be asking the U.S. ambassador to China is what concrete programs he will initiate to convince the Chinese that religious freedom is in their interests. How will he ensure that U.S. religious freedom policy in China becomes more than words and symbols, as it has been under this administration?"

Thomas Farr, professor, Georgetown University

"If the Chinese government allows it, there should be no problem with the U.S. ambassador to China visiting a house church. Indeed, such visits demonstrate a mature bilateral relationship while signaling a stable and responsible China that is comfortable with its religious minorities."

Chris Seiple, president, Institute for Global Engagement

"It has been estimated that as many as 80 percent of China's Christians worship in unregistered churches. So if an ambassador wants to show support to China's Christians, it would be good if he or she recognized not only registered-church Christians, but those in unregistered churches as well. However, the Chinese government would no doubt take great offense at such a show of support, and it is hard to imagine the current administration spending goodwill capital with the Chinese government to show support for house-church Christians, in light of their other stated priorities and in light of the large amount of debt owed to China by the U.S."

Todd Nettleton, spokesperson, Voice of the Martyrs

"Before deciding where to worship, the ambassador should consult with leaders of both registered and house churches, and then pray for discernment as to what decision will best advance the gospel and strengthen the witness of the church in China."

Galen Carey, director of government affairs, National Association of Evangelicals

"I think the most important consideration of the next U.S. ambassador to China should be: 'What actions of mine will most benefit the Chinese house church?' At present, I don't think an attempt by a senior U.S. diplomat to visit a house church in Beijing or elsewhere would be a good thing, because it would likely endanger the house church itself … I think a far more powerful form of protest would be for the ambassador to refuse to meet with anyone from the Three Self Patriotic Movement until freedom of worship is granted to Shouwang. I think all U.S. Christian organizations should be lobbying hard to stop any further hospitality to the Three Self Patriotic Movement or Catholic Patriotic Association officials in the U.S. until there is full worship freedom in China."

David Aikman, author, Jesus in Beijing

"The effect on the perceptions of Christianity within domestic society is likely to be unfavorable. The Chinese Christian population is a tiny minority in China, no more than 8 percent of the total, and official and unregistered churches still labor under the stigma of being a 'foreign' religion. The history of the modern era in China is framed by the humiliating defeat by the British in the 1840s Opium Wars. It was in the wake of military defeat that most foreign missionaries entered the country with the protection of foreign gunships. As a small percentage of the population, tying their fates directly to foreign international pressure plays into the hands of the regime's propaganda, which frequently warns of threats posed by 'foreign enemy religious forces' to China's sovereignty."

Carsten Vala, professor, Loyola University (Md.)

"Politics and religion do not, and should not, mix, in China or here. I know this is not a popular view among some, but it is the prudent view. In China, when Christianity and politics got mixed up in the 19th and 20th century, there was trouble for U.S. policy. The popular view toward Christianity also turned negative. Such will be the same today if the U.S., for whatever reason, seeks to interject religion into the relationship. Having the U.S. ambassador visit an 'underground' church would be counterproductive."

Gordon H. Chang, professor of history, Stanford University

"Identification by an American government official would be the kiss of death for unregistered churches in China. For many reasons, some of them quite understandable, the leaders of China are afraid of any organized movement with connections to the outside, especially America. Though they have no political ambitions, Chinese Christians outside the officially sanctioned church have enough difficulty already; any perceived link to the American government will only further arouse the government's suspicion and ire. We should not add to the church's troubles by a well-meaning but counter-productive show of support."

G. Wright Doyle, Global China Center

Katrina Volunteers Continue, Even When it Costs Them

http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2011/juneweb-only/katrinavolunteers.html

Volunteers remain willing to donate time and labor, even if it means that they have to pay.

Bruce Nolan, Religion News Service

posted 6/01/2011

A Methodist hurricane-recovery ministry that funneled nearly 68,000 hammer wielding volunteers into metro New Orleans until it essentially ran out of money has reinvented itself—by asking volunteers to pitch in $225 to spend a week repairing houses.

And the volunteers are still coming.

Some were in Covington, La., recently, putting up drywall for Adelita Solarzano, an artist whose 100-year-old cottage is still barely livable nearly six years after it was hit by nine trees felled by Hurricane Katrina.

In years past, volunteers' donations to Solarzano or thousands like her would have meant giving up a week of vacation and paying their own transportation to the New Orleans area.

Once here, they would set to work with tools and construction materials provided by some relief organization.

Some major relief organizations, like Habitat for Humanity, Operation Helping Hands and the St. Bernard Project, still mostly follow that model, or ask workers to contribute only nominally toward their upkeep.

But at the turn of the year, the Rev. Darryl Tate said the Louisiana Methodists' enormous disaster-recovery effort found itself near the bottom of its treasury, having spent $34 million in grants and donations from the national denomination.

The state Methodist Conference was reluctant to tap into federal housing dollars, he said, wary of the red tape, spending restrictions and back-office accounting it would entail.

So the conference essentially shut down its rebuilding ministry.

But on April 1, it replaced it with a new nonprofit organization called the Epworth Project that would seek its own financing, including some from the very volunteers already donating free time and labor.

The new model takes advantage of a truism many rebuilding organizations say they still see, nearly six years after Hurricane Katrina: Volunteers remain willing to come, in substantial numbers. It's the money that has become difficult to find.

Indeed, 70 percent of the volunteers working with Epworth are repeat visitors who come back year after year, said Dale Kimball, Epworth's executive director.

"I don't need to preach; I do need to do this," said the Rev. Robert Wood, a semi-retired Methodist minister from Paupack, Pa., who worked on Solarzano's house and does two mission trips a year.

"Our work isn't done until the homeowner is back in," said Greg Corner, a volunteer from Media, Pa. "If that's going to take spending a little extra money, why not?"

Although volunteers remain willing, Kimball nonetheless said he spends several weeks a year on the road, marketing the region's continuing rebuilding needs to churches and other sources of new volunteers.

A white board in his office is filled with the results: youth groups that will fill 250 slots a week throughout the summer. And pay for the opportunity to do so.

Although it's formally independent of the Methodists' Louisiana Conference, the new Epworth Project is still culturally Methodist. The chairman of its board of directors is the Rev. Gary Willis, senior pastor of Aldersgate United Methodist Church in Slidell, La., and the very name honors the English village and birthplace of the father of Methodism, John Wesley.

In designing Epworth, Kimball said officials estimated that if they attracted 600 volunteers a year and charged each $225, they could finance 50 rebuilding projects a year.

But Kimball said slightly more than 2,000 are signed up. The extra money will finance more rebuilding; the region still carries a substantial backlog of storm damage.

"I've got pages of names and addresses of people waiting for us, and we get three or four new ones a day," Kimball said. "On these two sheets alone I've got a year's worth of work we haven't started."

Bruce Nolan writes for The Times-Picayune in New Orleans.

********** 

 http://www.epworthproject.com/

Find us on Facebook - http://www.facebook.com/pages/Epworth-Project/128269467222899
for real time ministry updates

Check out our Adopt-A-Project page to help with the rebuilding process financially!

Now you can get your very own Epworth Project t-shirt for just $10! Check out

the Epworth Store to get this brand new t-shirt while supplies last!

Hurricane Katrina was over 5 years ago but work still needs to be done. Families are still displaced from their homes, living in trailers or with family. Resources exclusively for hurricane damage have run out but people are still in need of help. When all the focus was on hurricane recovery, many families with other needs were ignored or neglected. Epworth Project exists to respond to those who were affected by Hurricane Katrina and were uninsured or under-insured - whose unmet needs will not be covered by relief systems such as FEMA, the Small Business Administration or the Re Cross. Likewise, we seek to provide basic needs for those who are living in unfit conditions, whether caused by Hurricane Katrina or not.

Epworth Project provides a mission experience for youth, college students, young adults, and church groups of all ages who are interested in being part of rebuilding the greater New Orleans area. Our organized and energetic staff will make sure that all of the details are arranged for your visit including lodging, supplies, and entertainment ideas.

As a volunteer, you will transform the lives of the least, last, lost, and forgotten people of the greater New Orleans area. While you are working, your life will be transformed as well. We do what we do because we are still haunted by the pictures of devastation from Hurricane Katrina. With your help, we will continue to bring hope to the people of Louisiana.

Over the past 5 years we have been able to host 88,426 volunteers that have clocked 3,465,723 work hours in the greater New Orleans area. The economic impact from this work and help is $90.1 million. Thanks to you, we have been able to help 21,365 people repair 12,641 homes. Work is still being done. Please consider being part of the next 5 years.

If you are interested in an all-inclusive mission experience for your youth group, Epworth Project Summer Program can meet your needs! We are currently booking youth groups for the summer of 2012. Your trip will include lodging, food, building supplies, worship, devotionals, and fun! We will help students connect the physical work that they are doing with the unconditional love and grace from God.

Epworth Project in conjunction with Northshore Disaster Recovery, Inc. will provide spiritual, emotional, and physical resources to those affected by Hurricane Katrina, regardless of race, creed, color, sex, handicap, or religious preference.

How to Donate

Epworth Project is able to help more people because of the generous donations from churches, organizations, and individuals. If you would like to make a donation to help fund future ministry and service, please make check donations to:

Epworth Project and mail them to:

Epworth Project
360 Robert Blvd.
Slidell, LA 70458