Greg Sinclair

Thank you for the comment. We are actively working at partnerships and collaborative work with our brothers and sisters all over the world and trying to avoid the paternalistic approaches of the past. This is a work in progress that needs continued missiological humility and reflection. A true sign of a changing world and church is the reality that missionaries from S. America and Africa are being sent to North America.

My understanding of Christus Victor as a theory of atonement is that it takes the focus off of the penal substitutionary death of Christ (not to say that is wrong but a different focus) and puts it on Christ's victory over evil on the cross. While the penal sub theory is more of a legal construct (guilt-righteousness) Christus Victor is more focused on a wholistic healing and triumph over evil - which also incorporates better shame - honor and fear - power paradigms. I also think penal sub theory tends to focus more on the individual (although certainly Christ's death has cosmic implications) while Christus Victor emphasizes victory over systemic evil and communal types of sin that lead to shame. So it takes us in some different directions. But one could also say that in penal sub theory Christ is not only paying the price of our sin but also covering our shame - so there is overlap. I'd love to reflect more on this.

Thanks for the reference to Brene Brown. I should learn more from her. Practical theology is multi-disciplinary and we can learn much from these other areas.

Yes I believe in the sovereignty of God in this process and love Luke 10:9 "Heal the sick who are there and tell them, 'The Kingdom of God has come near to you.'"

The dilemma I face is that my evangelical friends (mostly Baptists) have more success motivating people towards personal sharing of their faith through an "it all depends on you" Arminian type of theology. Perhaps it is similar theologically to efforts to lead moral lives among LDS followers - who are motivated by a "works theology." My point I guess is that if we are going to have good theology we still need to be working, serving, sharing, even though God doesn't need us - we have the privilege of being on mission for Him. I hope that makes sense and would love to hear others ideas on motivating people towards verbal witness.

Thanks Bill for highlighting these misunderstandings and bringing some clarity to our discussion. The Mormon-Muslim comparison is interesting.

Hi Barbara. Thanks for sharing. Relationships and love are so important. Can you share with me the link also for the academic based site? I want to do a report on Scriptural Reasoning for our Christian Interfaith Reference Group.

Thanks for the practical example Michael. Doug Kindschi talks about thin dialogue and thick dialogue. If I understand the concept right, thin dialogue is thinking that we are basically the same.  Thick dialogue is representing our faith deeply and well as you said.

Thanks Paul for sharing your global experiences of interacting with the church in different contexts. Much of what you relate is on the minds of people in North America and I have heard it expressed quite often. In the US there is the travel ban and in Canada M-103 to study Islamophobia. There is a lot of fear of Islam in our churches, mainly due to ISIS and other terrorist groups. Students of history also warn us of what can happen when Islam is in the majority. For example, the book The Lost History of Christianity speaks of the decimation of the church in the east. On the other hand, many Muslims feel very threatened in our society today - and I believe our first reaction should be to welcome the stranger and extend a cup of water (or coffee) to our Muslim neighbors. So while not downplaying the threat to democracy of any authoritarian idealogy - I want to emphasize neighborly love and welcome - respecting the other as an image bearer and making sure their rights are protected. All this I also hope will be a powerful witness and open doors to sharing the Gospel.