This is the second “misreading” book that E. Randolph Richards has written. The first one was Misreading Scripture with Western Eyes which he wrote with Brandon J. O’Brien. For this second volume he has teamed up with a different writer, Richard James (this is a pseudonym, it is used for safety reasons because of the part of the world where he works). As the subtitle of the book indicates the authors write about some concepts that were very well-known in the biblical world, but are not as well-known in Western culture. I am referring to: patronage, honor, and shame. They also write about kinship, benefactors and clients, and boundaries. The people of the biblical world understood these concepts and practices. As the authors point out on more than one occasion, these matters of culture did not need to be spelled out, the people of the biblical world understood them and could see them at work in Scripture (page x-xi, 8). However, Western readers do not see them or assume them (page xi). Because of this we may miss them when they are at work in biblical passages. As the authors articulate these concepts they point out the differences that exist between collectivists’ cultures and individualists’ cultures. America and modern Europe are individualist cultures, most African, Eastern, Middle Eastern, and South American cultures are collectivist (page ix). The cultures we find in the Bible were collectivist (page x, 8).

As the book unfolds the authors draw from Scripture and their own experiences. Since they have lived in different cultures they have first-hand examples of the thoughts and practices of people who live in a collectivist cultures. It makes for some interesting reading.

E. Randolph Richards

They offer some other interesting insights as well. For example, they point out the different ideas that people have about the story of Joseph in the Old Testament. People from individualist cultures focus on Joseph’s rise to power. In the face of all kinds of setbacks and obstacles he becomes a prominent person. That grabs our attention. People from collectivist cultures tend to focus more on Joseph’s restoration to his family than his rise to power (page 11).

The differences between individualist and collectivist cultures is further brought out with a contemporary example. A pastor in Beirut was concerned because someone from his church had stolen a book from the church library. He knew who had done it. In the West we would be concerned about getting the book back. This pastor’s concern was not so much about getting the book back as maintaining the good name of the church in the community. He did not want his church members to be known as thieves. He found a way to speak to the thief in a nonthreatening way that helped the man save face, be reconciled to his church community, and maintain the good reputation of the church in the community (pages 174-175, 186).

This book is filled with insights into the biblical texts, both in the Old Testament and in the New Testament. Many of these insights could be easily overlooked by Western readers because we are not familiar with the cultural constructs of Eastern, collectivist cultures that the people in the biblical world had. I like books like this. They open a window of understanding into the biblical text that we might not otherwise see. If you are interested in deeper Bible study or the cultural background of the Bible this is a book you will enjoy. One thing we as believers do not want to do is misread Scripture. Instead, we want to correctly interpret it (2 Tim. 2:15). This book will help us do that.

Reviewed by John Lathrop

Publisher’s page: https://www.ivpress.com/misreading-scripture-with-individualist-eyes

In our urban-dominated landscape, hunting, particularly sport hunting, has increasingly been viewed as a remnant of a barbaric era that is no longer needed and should be abolished. Clearly there is a cultural divide between hunters and anti-hunters. Hill and White sought to deepen their understanding of this intellectual and ideological divide and investigated how Christians have understood and understand their faith in regards to sport hunting. As Hill clearly says, “… this collection of essays was to provide a window into the different perspectives held historically by Christians in relation to sport hunting and to hear new voices on the debate. … The secondary goal was to encourage its readers to thoughtfully consider the various perspectives, many times not set in clear apposition, and the merits (and weaknesses) of each” (p.411). In brief, the book clearly accomplishes its goals.

Before delving into the text, readers should know that I was a contributor to this volume. My article, “Dominion Over Animals: Taking the Scriptural Witness and Worldview Seriously” (pp.33-348) summarizes my dissertation published in Dominion over Wildlife? An Environmental Theology of Human-Wildlife Relations, Wipf and Stock, 2009. My engagement with the specific contributions made by my fellow contributors to this volume occurred only after the book was published.

The editors did a superb job providing readers with an overall perspective on the topic. Their writing not only helped prepare readers to grasp the major themes and controversies, but their summaries of the articles enhanced reader pre-understanding and thus apprehension of the material. Heuristically, the book (both sections 1 and 2) stand as a model for educational best practice. I would note, however, that Hill’s contention that Christianity was a syncretistic religion (p.23) reflects a modernistic comparative religions bias and not the testimony handed down by Christ’s apostles.

The articles are organized into two major sections. Section One takes a descriptive approach to the debate over recreational hunting. Articles focus on historical attitudes and perspectives held by Christians over the centuries, starting with the biblical text and culminating with interviews of contemporary Christian hunters. The articles show how Christians argued both for and against sport hunting. Articles often described prevalent views by the way “Nimrod” of Genesis was portrayed in the literature. Interestingly, when hunting was in vogue, Nimrod was portrayed as a neutral or valuable character. When hunting was not in vogue, Nimrod became a term of derision and symbol of moral turpitude.

The second article entitled, “A Dying Legacy?: A Century of Hunting in the Stories of Texas Families”, Hill provides a sort of meta-analysis of the interviews contained in the following chapter. He keenly identifies key themes, concepts and sociological factors that impact one’s adoption (or lack) of hunting. If one wishes to have a quick, but not simplistic, look at the cultural-historical issues embedded in the hunting experience, this article is must reading. Though it focuses on the American, albeit Texas, experience, I suspect that the categories and insights will be useful elsewhere in the United States if not the world. The third article is actually a collection of interviews. These interviews are valuable for providing a more granular look at the motivations behind the desire to hunt as told by various hunters who claim a Christian heritage.

Section Two contains articles addressing the ethical or prescriptive views on hunting. Authors from both sides of the debate use a variety of rationales to support their position for or against the morality of hunting. Unsurprisingly, the majority of the emphasis focused on the justification (or lack thereof) for the killing of animals for “fun”.

Two articles that attempted to use Christian theology to condemn hunting (Killing and the Kingdom: A Case against Sport Hunting” by Shawn Graves and “Muscular Christianity and Sport Hunting: Missing the Target?” by John B. White were quite disappointing. Both ostensibly tried to use Christian teaching to condemn hunting but neither dealt with the concrete realities and teaching of the Biblical text. Their arguments reminded me of Supreme Court justices that attempt to argue that capital punishment violates the U.S. Constitution’s cruel and unusual punishments clause even though the authors of the Constitution clearly supported the death penalty. Any rational reading of the constitution clearly reveals that the authors were only referring to cruel execution methods such as Drawing and Quartering, etc., not to a condemnation of execution in general. Grave’s approach tended to avoid Scripture entirely choosing instead to rely on the vague notion of not causing harm. White’s article, on the other hand, argued that God’s intention was for humans to not kill animals. It never occurred to these scholars to even consider the ontological status of animals. If they did, the anti-hunting authors would perhaps understand that harm to an animal is categorically different (morally speaking) than harm to a person. (I suspect they would both grant that fact but apparently, they did not consider the full impact of that view). If God grants humans permission to kill His property, who are we to say that somehow violates God’s will? Neither of them considered how Christ was quite comfortable killing animals, sometimes for no apparent reason other than to demonstrate he could (e.g., miracle of the fishes). Dismissing this by saying that Jesus was God (though true) does not resolve the problem because Jesus was also the perfect human who provided an example of a sinless life before God.

Regrettably, Christian anti-hunters continue to commit two key mistakes that I have repeatedly pointed out over the years. First, they have either an inability or unwillingness to read literature that disagrees with their perspective. Not every scholarly article is found in top tier (often liberal) journals. Second, they are unwilling to consider the whole testimony of Scripture. Instead, Christian anti-hunters find a generic passage, such as “reconciling all things” and then use that generic principle to truck in every idea that fits their narrative even when specific passages counter those ideas. By rejecting or perhaps ignoring the principle of the general rule is constrained by the specific, they allow themselves to fly off into fanciful arguments without sufficient grounding in the Word of God.

Overall, this book provides an important contribution to the topic of sport hunting that is scholarly, yet accessible to college-level readers.

Reviewed by Stephen M. Vantassel

Publisher’s page: https://www.mupress.org/God-Nimrod-and-the-World-Exploring-Christian-Perspectives-on-Sport-Hunting-P952.aspx

Growing authoritarianism and surveillance

The pandemic has seen a dangerous expansion of power by autocratic governments and excessive use of force by law enforcement authorities to administer preventive measures. As stated by Michelle Bachelet, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, countries disregarding the rule of law to combat the crisis in the guise of exceptional or emergency measures could spark a human rights disaster. Governments are also increasingly using surveillance technology to gather information, trace movement and track individuals. This is a cause for concern as there are serious questions whether such measures could meet international human rights standards of necessity and proportionality. In some countries such as Sri Lanka and Israel, military intelligence is used for contact tracing. In the hands of restrictive governments, intrusive surveillance could lead to increased restrictions on minorities and pose serious challenges to human rights.

Rising Islamophobia and hate speech

In Sri Lanka, compulsory cremations in violation of WHO guidelines during the COVID-19 pandemic have hurt the religious feelings of Muslims, who are a minority in the country.  In one example, the death of a Muslim woman was wrongfully identified as caused by COVID-19 by the authorities. The family was then compelled to cremate the body against their religious sentiments. Moreover, hate speech against Muslims in the country has also been on the rise, after there was severe religious profiling of victims in mainstream media. Similarly, in the UK, far-right groups have used the Coronavirus crisis to fuel anti-Muslim sentiment. According to monitoring groups, fake news has circulated on social media that Muslims were breaching the lockdown by continuing to attend mosques.

Discrimination of religious minorities in the provision of relief

In Myanmar, the Burmese military has been accused of denying Rohingya Muslims access to medical care during the COVID-19 crisis. In Pakistan, a Muslim cleric faced criticism from Christian leaders and human rights activists after he claimed that his organization, Dawat-e-Islami was converting non-Muslims to Islam using COVID-19 aid. According to reports, Christian minorities in the country have also been discriminated in the provision of emergency relief. In Bangladesh, too, there have been reports that the government has provided relief to only Muslims from the Prime Minister’s relief fund. In the Philippines, since pastors are not categorised as self-employed, they have been left out of government welfare schemes.

Inconsistent measures concerning the reopening of religious places of worship

In New Zealand, the government has faced criticism that it had failed to consider the rights to freedom of religion when it drafted the COVID-19 Public Health Response Bill, after concerns were raised that places of religious worship were ordered to remain closed while malls, bars, and other public places were deemed safe to reopen.

A cover for Islamist extremism

Arrests of leaders of minority faiths

In India, a pastor and 7 others including 3 Christians were arrested while they were preparing relief packs. The authorities accused them of illegally gathering to worship during the COVID-19 lockdown. While in detention they were questioned on whether they were receiving money to convert people. Also, in Nepal, a pastor was arrested on charges of misinformation for stating that prayer could heal COVID-19. He was released and then rearrested on trumped-up charges of outraging religious feelings and proselytism.

A positive development

Conclusion

Religious minorities are facing new challenges and increased vulnerability owing to COVID-19. This requires urgent attention and action on the part of governments and the health authorities battling this crisis. Preventive measures followed by governments must be adequate, proportionate, and guarantee equal treatment. While exercising patience and goodwill during this global pandemic and continuing to follow health regulations as deemed necessary by the authorities, it is also important that human rights agencies, civil society actors and faith groups, where necessary, proactively question the legality of preventive measures and advocate for the rights of religious minorities to ensure their protection and halt governmental overreach. The rights and well-being of religious minorities should not be neglected or undermined in the pursuit of a safer world.

WEA-RLC Research and Analysis Report
June 18, 2020

World Evangelical Alliance (WEA) Religious Liberty Commission (RLC) sponsors the WEA-RLC Research & Analysis Report to help individuals and groups pray for and act on religious liberty issues around the world. WEA has a consultative status with the UN Economic and Social Council. This report was researched and written by Jose Henriques, and moderated by the WEA-RLC Executive Director, Godfrey Yogarajah.

First Virtual Global Pentecostal Studies Conference: “Mapping Global Pentecostal Issues”

When: Saturday, 31st October 2020, from 12:00-20:00.

What: The European Research Network on Global Pentecostalism (GloPent) will be having its first Virtual Conference, hosted by The Centre for Pentecostal and Charismatic Studies at the University of Birmingham. The theme is “Mapping Global Pentecostal Issues.”  

Keynote Speakers

J. Kwabena Asamoah-Gyadu (Trinity Theological Seminary Ghana). “The Lord is the Spirit (II Corinthians 3:17): An African Critique of Global Pentecostal Theologies.”

Corneliu Constantineanu (Aurel Vlaicu University of Arad). “The Spirit Engaging and Transforming Life: Tenets of Romanian Pentecostalism.”

Daniel Chiquete (Instituto Tecnológico y de Estudios Superiores de Monterrey). “¿Lugares del espíritu? El pentecostalismo y sus representaciones espaciales en América Latina” (in Spanish).

Veli-Matti Kärkkäinen (Fuller Theological Seminary). “Identities of Global Pentecostalism(s) in the Pluralistic and Secular World: Theological Tasks and Challenges.”

More Information: https://www.birmingham.ac.uk/schools/ptr/departments/theologyandreligion/events/2020/glopent-world.aspx

Mel Robeck has shared with Pneuma Review the press release from the International Dialogue between the World Communion of Reformed Churches and Classical Pentecostals, which concluded on December 4, 2018.

Representatives of various classical Pentecostal churches and a delegation from the World Communion of Reformed Churches met in Legon, Accra, Ghana, November 29 – December 4, 2018. This meeting was the fifth session of the third round, which is focused on “Ministering to the Needs of the World.”

The participants were photographed on the campus of Trinity Theological Seminary, where the Methodist scholar on Pentecostal and Charismatics, Dr. Kwabena has recently become President. Pictured left to right, row one: Bas Plaisiar, Teresa (Tess) Chai, Jacqui Grey, and Van Johnson. Row two: Karla Koll, Jean-Daniel Plüess, Gabrielle Rácsok, and Setri Nyomi. Row three: David Daniels, Mel Robeck, Hanns Lessing.

At the beginning and end of each day, participants gather to pray, sing, read and reflect upon the Bible together. This time of sharing in spirituality and worship helps to contextualize the discussions that take place, and builds greater community between participants.

This year, the dialogue focused on the significance of eschatology (those things having to do with the end of time and the return of Jesus, which is our blessed hope) to Mission. To open the discussion, the Rev. Dr. Karla Ann Koll (Reformed) and Rev. Dr. Van Johnson (Pentecostal) prepared and presented papers reflective of the teachings of their faith communities on this topic. Participants then raised questions and responded in a free-ranging discussion intended to tease out common interests and common concerns, while noting differences in understanding.

In her presentation, Dr. Koll demonstrated that Reformed Christians, like Pentecostals, anticipate the return of Jesus Christ to bring the Reign of God in its fullness. Their primary focus has been on sharing the Gospel and caring for the lives and well-being of others in ways they believe are in keeping with that Reign. Following the teachings of John Calvin regarding the sovereignty of God, and their belief that God’s redemptive intention encompasses all of creation, they have been less focused upon events surrounding the Second Coming, and more on the call for the Church to minister until Christ’s return. They maintain that the Holy Spirit empowers them both to promote the Gospel, and work to transform culture and society in keeping with Christ’s will.

Dr. Johnson made the case that both time and space have challenged the way Pentecostals think about and act upon their understanding of eschatology. Pentecostals believe that God has been restoring the purity, passion, and power of the church through the Holy Spirit, in anticipation of the imminent return of Christ and the inauguration of His kingdom. Like the early church, their expectation that time was short before Christ’s return, has motivated much of their mission activity, in which they have emphasized the proclamation of the Gospel to the “lost.” Yet, after a century of existence, Pentecostal views of time are changing, leading to shifts in how they view mission. If they have more time to live and act, their view of the world around them, their space, must be taken more seriously than in the past. While continuing to affirm the soon return of the Lord, their notion of mission has broadened beyond proclamation or evangelization alone, to include other missional activities. Now, mission includes a range of activities extending from evangelism to creation care as signs of the future kingdom.

The Resurgence of the Gospel and the Flowering of the Global Christian Message

Part Two: Recharting the Christian World Mission

Church councils, a changing geo-political landscape, invasion and upheavals had a radical impact on how followers of Jesus participated in the Christian mission.

This article is part of The Gospel in History series by Woodrow Walton.
Image: The Books of Kells by way of Wikimedia Commons.

It may seem strange but it is from Ephesus that the re-charting of the Christian world mission takes place. It is, however, not as strange when one considers the fact that Ephesus, situated in Asia province of the Graeco-Roman world and facing the Aegean Sea and looking westward is the western entrepot of a vast East-to-West commerce where goods from oriental sources were readied for trans-shipment either into Europe or into Africa. There had a been long history of commercial intercourse between East and West.

The other factor is that Ephesus, like Antioch-on-the Orontes, is an important Christian Center where Paul the Apostle once preached. Ephesus lies south of Nicaea and of Troas, also crossroads, between East and West. From Troas, Paul and Silas took voyage toward Philippi and Thessalonica. On the other side of the Aegean from Ephesus stood Athens and Corinth.

As a result, Ephesus became an eminent Christian Center and by the late 300’s and early 400’s, and became the host for conciliar meetings of Christian leaders from places in Europe, North Africa, and the Near East. In A.D. 431, a council was held in Ephesus to clarify, for the sake of evangelism and Christian instruction, the meaning of the Trinity particularly with attention on the Person of Christ Jesus. There were three eminent Christians who differed over what to stress. One was Cyril of Alexandria who was strong on the redeeming work of Jesus and on the divinity of Jesus. The second was Theodore of Mopsuestia who was as strong on the humanity of Jesus as Cyril on the divinity of Jesus as Son of God. The third part was Nestorius from Antioch who was made Patriarch in Constantinople. Nestorius differed on referring to Mary, the mother of Jesus, as a theotokos, mother of God.

The amphitheater of Ephesus.
Image: Jordan Klein / Wikimedia Commons

The Council of Ephesus in A.D. 431 came out in Cyril’s favor putting both Theodore and Nestorius in an unfavorable light. A second Council was held in A.D. 449 which amended the verdict but did not exonerate either Theodore or Nestorius. The controversy simmered for twelve long years. Then in A.D. 461, a greater number of Christian leaders gathered from all over the then Christian world, from York in Roman Britain, to John, a Bishop in western Persia. The Council at Chalcedon came down hard on the Second Council of Ephesus and called it a “Robber” Council. It was a partial victory for both Nestorius and Cyril and for the Apostle Paul’s statement found in his second letter to the Corinthians: “God was in Christ” reconciling the world to himself (II Corinthians 5:18-19ff). Though neither Cyril nor Nestorius was fully satisfied, it did free both of them to go back to Egypt and to Antioch to do that which was most important, to preach the gospel as each understood the gospel. In the years between A.D. 431 and A.D. 461, Nestorius wrote a defense, first done in Greek, then translated into Syriac between A.D. 525 and 533. The Bazaar of Heracleides must have been written between A.D. 451 or 452, as he mentions the death of Emperor Theodosius in A.D. 450.

The Resurgence of the Gospel and the Flowering of the Global Christian Message

Part One: The Medieval Prologue & the Remapping of the World  

This article is part of The Gospel in History series by Woodrow Walton.
Image: The Books of Kells by way of Wikimedia Commons.

In Retrospect

By looking backwards to the beginning of the spread of the Gospel that Jesus is both Lord and Christ and considering the results of both the life, death and resurrection of Jesus and the message that Peter spoke at the Feast of the Pentecost, we are struck by the Power of the Holy Spirit to change lives and change the course of history and why, no matter the opposition and oppression, that gospel continued to spread. Other things factor in. The first factor is that of those who heard.

Those who heard Jesus were the Jews of the circle of the Gentiles (Galilee), the Jews of Judaea, and a mixture of peoples, Jew, Greek, Syro-Phoenician, and Samaritans to begin with, and a centurion or two within the Roman military system and stationed within Galilee and Judaea. There was a mixture of peoples and a mixture of social classes ranging from shepherds, to high status people, including a rich young ruler. The Gospel reached from those at the bottom to those at the top and officials as tax-gatherers. The news spread horizontally and vertically from among those who heard.

The visitors who were present when the Church began returned home and told of what they heard. When Peter, John, Philip the Deacon, and later Paul, started their missionary journeys, they were simply following up where these visitors came from: The Mediterranean world and its northern, southern, southeastern shorelines, up the Nile and the Gulf of Suez as well as northeast to the valley of the Tigris and Euphrates rivers and following their courses toward the Arabian Sea. The significance of this spread west and east is in the mode of travel. The early Christians traveled the waterways more so than by way of roads which were few and dangerous to travel. Even the Roman-built roads were not all that good across Anatolia [Asia Minor/modern Turkey], going from Antioch to Ephesus facing the Aegean Sea.

Rodney Stark, Cities of God: The Real Story of How Christianity Became an Urban Movement and Conquered Rome.

Most travelers went by ship, boat, or along the shores of rivers. As a result, most Christian communities were found in port cities such as Antioch, Caesarea, Troas, Ephesus, Corinth, Alexandria going west in the Mediterranean. The Roman military road from Capernaum and the upper shore line of the Sea of Galilee took one up to Damascus, Dura-Europos, and the towns along the Euphrates-Tigris waterways. Seldom were Christian churches found in the hinterlands. Most were found in shoreline cities. It was Wayne Meeks who first noticed that the earliest Christian churches were in urban areas; then it was Rodney Stark who wrote of how Christianity became an urban movement in his Cities of God (Harper San Francisco, 2006).

This was the situation of the resurgence of the gospel throughout the following centuries when persecution or invasions occurred. The Christians took to the sea or the waterways to spread the gospel to more distant lands. When persecution broke out in Jerusalem, Acts 8: 25-49 tells of Philip the Deacon’s ministry with a Treasurer of the Candace of Ethiopia (Roman name for modern Sudan). The roadway he traveled goes along the southeastern coast of the Mediterranean to the Nile river and then up the Nile to the city of Meroe, the capital of Ethiopia. The Angel of the Lord then turned Philip around and had him introduce the gospel along the Eastern Coast of the Mediterranean from Azotus to Caesarea, a major port for ships from Rome and the Aegean Sea. Acts 11:19 to 30 informs the reader that Christians from the Island of Cyprus and from Cyrene, the main port city of what is now Modern Libya in Northern Africa, were among the forerunners of the church in Antioch (modern Antakya), another major port city. This is but the start of the story.

Chris DeWelt, “What is God doing in the world?” Good News Productions, International.

In this video you will get a glimpse of some of the things that God is doing in our world.  The Christian faith is experiencing significant growth in a number of places around the globe. Dr. Chris DeWelt highlights what is happening in the church in China, India, and the Muslim world. He also speaks about the opportunity that we, in the Unites States, have with international students. In addition, he speaks about the advance that is taking place with translating the Bible into the languages of people groups that do not yet have a Bible. Here are just a few things that you will lean in this video. In China about 12,000 people are baptized each day. In one two-year period in India 20,000 churches were planted. In 1979 it was estimated that there were 500 Christians in Iran, now it is believed that there are about one million. For more encouraging news, watch the video.

Reviewed by John Lathrop

http://gnpi.org/chris [Note: GNPI requires contact information to download the video]

PneumaReview.com speaks with Eugene Bach, a spokesman and leader of the Chinese mission movement, Back to Jerusalem, about their vision and the amazing things they have seen God do as they carry the good news to the world’s most restrictive places.

Please tell our readers where and when the Back to Jerusalem Movement began.

The Back to Jerusalem vision is a call to the church in China to take the Good News to the unreached nations between China and Jerusalem. It was independently birthed over 90 years ago in two separate locations in China – Shandong Province with the Jesus Family and then later on with the Northwest Spiritual Movement and the Back to Jerusalem Evangelistic Band from central Henan Province.

What is the vision of the Back to Jerusalem Movement?

Quite simply, The Back to Jerusalem vision is nothing more than the Great Commission given by Jesus in Acts 1:8 and Matthew 28:18-19. The Back to Jerusalem vision is the commission given to the church in China to join the efforts of the global Body of Christ to evangelize the lands between the walls – the restricted nations between the Great Wall of China and the Western Wall of Jerusalem.

The vision is bigger than a ministry. There is a ministry called Back to Jerusalem, but it does not own the vision.

The vision is bigger than any denomination. There are many denominations involved in the Back to Jerusalem vision – from conservative Amish to charismatic Apostolics – but the vision does not belong to any denomination.

The vision is bigger than any personality. There are several well-known believers involved in the Back to Jerusalem vision, but not one of them owns it. It is not a personality driven vision.

Eugene Bach with Pastor Zhang Rongliang

The majority of the Chinese involved in the Back to Jerusalem vision today come from very simple uneducated agrarian backgrounds. They reject titles and only refer to themselves as brothers and sisters. Even the most senior pastors in the traditional underground house churches with millions of believers, who have embraced the BTJ vision, only wear the simple title of brother or sister.

What types of ministries does Back to Jerusalem support? In addition to Bibles, what other resources do you supply?

With more than 2,000 active Chinese Back to Jerusalem missionaries working in the land between the walls, it can only be said that we actively support a smorgasbord of activities that cause trouble in nations that are currently closed to the Gospel. Those activities range from missionary training, mission exposure, missionary support, ministry equipping, and platform creation through business, disaster relief, humanitarian aid, or education.

Other resources include emergency aid during disaster relief efforts, business training and investment, alternative energy units, and a variety of electronic communication tools.