Reddit mentions: The best christian missionary books

There's a difficult part in Hosea 2:16-17. Here is the ESV:

> 16 “And in that day, declares the Lord, you will call me ‘My Husband,’ and no longer will you call me ‘My Baal.’ 17 For I will remove the names of the Baals from her mouth, and they shall be remembered by name no more.

The idea here is the Hebrew word Baal means husband/master, but was also the name of a pagan god. Thus people who prayed to that name, could claim to be praying to the Lord, because the Lord is their master. It must have made relations smoother with all the Baal worshipers they interacted with, and it would have allowed them to get more wisdom and teachings, because oftentimes the Bible seems so short, and there are so many things it doesn't mention. Yet God rejected this practice and admonished them to not use that name for him anymore.

On the other hand, in Acts 17, Paul comes across one of the altars to "an unknown god" that was common in the Graeco-Roman empire. They used these altars because oftentimes disaster would be associated with worshiping the wrong god and so it was better to hedge if you weren't sure. Paul does not admonish them, but compliments their religiosity:
> Acts 17:22 Paul then stood up in the meeting of the Areopagus and said: “People of Athens! I see that in every way you are very religious.

Then Paul proclaims to them the real object of their worship, the Lord:

> 23 For as I walked around and looked carefully at your objects of worship, I even found an altar with this inscription: to an unknown god. So you are ignorant of the very thing you worship—and this is what I am going to proclaim to you.

> 24 “The God who made the world and everything in it is the Lord of heaven and earth and does not live in temples built by human hands. 25 And he is not served by human hands, as if he needed anything. Rather, he himself gives everyone life and breath and everything else. 26 From one man he made all the nations, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he marked out their appointed times in history and the boundaries of their lands. 27 God did this so that they would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him, though he is not far from any one of us. 28 ‘For in him we live and move and have our being.’[a] As some of your own poets have said, ‘We are his offspring.’[b]

>29 “Therefore since we are God’s offspring, we should not think that the divine being is like gold or silver or stone—an image made by human design and skill. 30 In the past God overlooked such ignorance, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent. 31 For he has set a day when he will judge the world with justice by the man he has appointed. He has given proof of this to everyone by raising him from the dead.”

Amos Yong is one of the most interesting writers on pluralism in Christianity today. His writing might interest you:

https://www.amazon.com/Gospel-Pluralism-Today-Reassessing-Missiological-ebook/dp/B017J89YVQ
https://www.amazon.com/Religious-Pluralism-Commission-Theological-Christian/dp/0981958281
https://www.amazon.com/Beyond-Impasse-Pneumatological-Theology-Religion/dp/1498204651
https://www.amazon.com/Spirit-Poured-Out-Flesh-Pentecostalism-ebook/dp/B005OYUIIG

I find that Christianity is difficult for people to accept who reject the doctrine of original sin / total depravity / brokenness. This is part of why Christianity has made so little progress in Japan. I will be interested in whatever answers you find in your journey.

For me, I see glimpses of my brokenness restored in my new creation (2 Corinthians 5:17), yet even as sanctification continues, I don't see how it will ever be complete until Christ comes again and fully restores the New Kingdom. Furthermore I don't see how this new creation would be possible without God's grace.

Yet all of these concepts and words are packed with theological baggage and centuries of western philosophy and culture. Could satori (悟) be another way of saying born again? Could our earthly passions (煩悩) be another way of recognizing original sin? To me the gospel of LOVE and MERCY and GRACE makes this difficult to accept, but might there be a path there for someone else? I sure hope so. Because I want all to come to share in the wondrous gift of salvation. And antagonizing -- instead of attempting to understand and converse with -- other belief structures has caused a lot of historical problems and may not be the most righteous path.

However, my personal conviction is it is still only a path to God. Christ is the destination. After finding him, accepting his grace, and having a personal relationship with him--I believe that is more than enough. At that point the other things seem like distractions and tests, and their merits few.

First, you need to pray. Keep growing in your relationship with God and in the knowledge of the Scriptures. If you are going to serve as a missionary you have to be qualified. This requires not only godly character, but a deep love for God, other people, and sound knowledge of the Scriptures.

If you are maturing as a disciple, you can pass on what you've learned. Here is a resource that may help you to grow: Biblical Training. There are a lot of online resources, so if you need anything specific feel free to pm me and I will try to direct you to the right resource.

Are you a member of a local church? Is there a small group Bible study or fellowship you can join? Church membership is vital, as a missionary is going to be sent from a local church. You need to be actively serving using the spiritual gifts God has given you in this context, and if God wills, the church will prayerfully send you.

Which people in your life currently can you be praying for, and how can you be intentional to share the gospel? A heart for others is important. Look at those whom you interact with regularly, whether it is family, friends, co-workers, other students, etc. Be actively praying for them, and for opportunities to share. Know how to share the gospel clearly. It may help to study through The School of Biblical Evangelism.

Here are three books that may help you:

• The Missionary Call
  
• Life on Mission
  
• Here to There

> Fantastic, thank you. Are you saying you do believe in a systemized natural theology, and if so, whose (or does it most resemble)?

I am attracted to both Thomistic and Leibnizian cosmological-style arguments.

> what exactly did Kierkegaard mean by “Leap of Faith” and how does it relate to the common colloquial use of the term?

Kierkegaard doesn’t actually use that phrase. I believe it was Alastair McKinnon who first noted—in “Kierkegaard,” 19th Century Religious Thought in the West, vol. 1, ed. Smart et al. (1985)—that the term “leap of faith” does not occur in Kierkegaard but was an invention of his commentators. Kierkegaard does speak of “the leap,” but it is given different specifications depending on the context. Primarily it is used to refer to a qualitative existential transition (e.g., from the aesthetic to the ethical life, or the ethical to the religious life).

That said, there is still much to recommend the term “leap of faith” as naming the specifically religious transition. Some say it is more of a leap “to” faith, but both phrases highlight elements that are present in that concept—i.e., faith pertains to both the leap’s formal character and its teleological trajectory. However, faith is not the ultimate terminus for Kierkegaard; faith itself is directed to God. Thus Kierkegaard identifies “the good” with “the God-relationship” (Works of Love, p. 339); “to love God is the highest good” (Christian Discourses, p. 200).

> it seems to me he’s wanting to persuade “Christians” to be Christians, not just pay lip service.

This seems to me an accurate reading, and Tietjen’s recent book is good on that aspect of Kierkegaard.

> Yet I come across it all the time used by atheist materialists assuming it means suspending one’s reason and believing “just because”.

To be sure, it’s a versatile phrase, but for Kierkegaard at least it does not mean (and Kreeft in the above book points this out at one point, too) a leap “in the dark.”

In addition to what /u/tphelan88 said, I would say that evangelism is not primarily about conversion, but about worship. We evangelize not primarily to save people, but primarily to increase true worship of God. Conversion is necessary for someone to truly worship, and so it is a fruit we desire to see from evangelism, but if everyone truly worshipped God, there would be no evangelism. After Christ returns, there will be worship, but no evangelism.

Because we are seeking to increase worship of God, the act of evangelism itself is a form of worship. Thus our evangelism has a fruit, whether or not it leads to conversion. When we preach the gospel to everyone, we know that our work is always bearing fruit, even when it doesnt always bring conversion.

If you are interested in a reformed/calvinistic perspective on evangelism, check out Let the Nations be Glad! by John Piper.

Edit: Also, check out the classic Evangelism and the Sovereignty of God by J.I. Packer

> more than half of all Christians walked and have stayed clear of Rome

For what it's worth, the RCs are the biggest Christian communion in the world; the Orthodox are next (not Roman but we emphatically love the saints); Evangelicals come somewhere after that; it's a mistake to think of Evangelicalism as a majority or norm.

Meanwhile the Assyrians, Copts, Ethiopians, and all the other old-school Christianities still celebrate the saints and rejoice in their intercessions. It's only the newfangled religious movements that have quit following Martin Luther's advice to "call upon the holy angels, particularly his own angel, the Mother of God, and all the apostles and saints" (Luther’s Works, 42:113), as he exemplified when he prayed, "O blessed mother! O most worthy virgin! Remember us, and grant that the Lord do such great things to us too" (Sermon of August 15, 1516, in What Luther Says.)

When Breath Becomes Air - Paul Kalanthi

and
This is a Soul - Rick Hodes

They're both some of my favourite non fiction novels of all time, both of which I found myself being unable to put down even after reading it over and over again. Despite it's heavy themes that places many readers on the verge of bursting into tears, I think it seriously forces you to question so many different themes and aspects of your life that you may not have considered before from their perspective, since it's written from largely an autobiographical POV.

Kalanthi is an Indian-American Yale trained neurosurgeon who has a BSc and MA from Stanford and Cambridge (Or Oxford? I forgot) who despite his overwhelming occupational success, initially overcame cancer but then went into remission. It's a thoughtful analysis of his life, his marriage on the verge of breaking down, and his decision to have children despite knowing that he only had a few years to live. I suppose on some levels, it's a novel about finding life while staring into the hollow face of death. Or at least that's how I'd like to believe it

Hodes is a Jewish-American internal medicine MD who after graduating from URochester Med School and completing his residency, decided to volunteer in Ethiopia in the 1980's during the famine. Although he had planned on staying for only 3 months, he found himself returning to the refugee camp time and time again. Up to this day, he has resided in Ethiopia for over 30 years whilst accepting a very modest salary from a United Jewish Fund something something non profit. To save the lives of 5 different children, he decided to legally adopt them so that they would have coverage under his medical insurance.

I think the most interesting aspect of the novel was that it wasn't whitewashed or overglorified in any specific aspect; rather it was just a raw documentation of his three decade long career and the choices he had made that lead to that day. On some level, I think the idealist in myself sees him as a lunatic, but as a lunatic that has made the ultimate sacrifice and became the kind of ideal that students fantasize about becoming when they were once happy and full of life. Then reality hits, we have student loans and bills to pay, some have young families to support and eventually over time we lose sight of the people that we thought we ought to become when we had hopes and dreams. I always thought being in a mission on the other side of the world was a goal that everyone spoke of at one point in time, but few keep that promise. But holy shit, he actually did it

He wasn't exempt from that, even his grandmother said "My grandson is an idiot, he could be making a ton of money like you guys but instead he's working for a medical mission in Africa." I think many people see a bit of themselves or of their former hopeful self in him, and up to this day he still continues to work for the mission in Ethiopia where whilst facing overwhelming odds, he continues to find life

Well first, read a Gospel straight through.

I thought this dialogue was pretty cool. I can at least vouch for Ulrich Luz, who has written extensively on Matthew's gospel: http://www.amazon.com/Encountering-Jesus-Buddha-Their-Teachings/dp/0800635647/ref=la_B001ITXLVW_1_4?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1408078436&sr=1-4

This is kind of tangential, but this book where Buddhists write on the Rule of Benedict is really cool: http://www.amazon.com/Benedicts-Dharma-Buddhists-Reflect-Benedict/dp/1573221902/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1408078637&sr=1-1&keywords=benedict%27s+dharma

In a certain sense, Benedict's Rule and the entire monastic enterprise is
an attempt to deeply understand and live out Christ's teachings. In a similar spirit I would recommend The Cloud of Unknowing, which is a shining example of Christian mysticism and apophatic theology. Apophatic theology tends to create a platform for Christian-Buddhist dialogue for some reason.

Speaking of monks, Merton's Zen and the Birds of Appetite probably represents his most mature and developed thinking on Buddhism (or at least one dimension of it.) It pairs very nicely with his book on the Desert Fathers, The Wisdom of the Desert. (I don't recommend Mystics and Zen Masters, which is more of a historical overview of various figures.)

Here's a memoir of Paul Williams' conversion from Buddhism to Catholicism. Williams is a leading scholar of Mahayana Buddhist philosophy. http://www.amazon.com/Unexpected-Way-Converting-Buddhism-Catholicism/dp/0567088308/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1408078793&sr=1-2&keywords=paul+williams+buddhism

Thich Nhat Hanh's Living Buddha, Living Christ is a very popular example of a Buddhist reflecting on Christianity as he sees it.

But seriously, read a gospel. Any of them, or all of them. That's the most important part. All the rest is commentary.

They aren't Orthodox theologians, but:

• Christianity: The First 3000 Years - can't beat this for an academic, accessible, comprehensive, and fair point of view of every corner of the Christian world in history. Literally every corner. You can skip chapters/parts that don't apply to Orthodoxy if you wish.
  
  
• A Short History of Byzantium -
  focuses more on the Byzantine Empire and so leaves out a lot of stuff, but it does cover the Ecumenical Councils and a lot of Orthodox history. There is also a harder-to-find 3 part trilogy of this abridged book.
  
  Orthodox Writings:
  
  
• Bishop Ware's The Orthodox Church has an overview, but it's pretty light.
  
  
• Orthodox Alaska provides a historical look at the history of Orthodoxy in Alaska, which is pretty great (and super interesting).
  
  There are probably not many good histories of the Church by Orthodox theologians, to be honest.
  
  

While not being about Zionism, this book deals with our identity and mission as the people of God, and I believe it is helpful for any Christian to read, but is very helpful in understanding our role as Israel.

I think as far as engaging with zionists, it's important to remember that people believe things for different reasons. It's likely that they believe this because it's what their church taught, and therefore their parents and the folks around them teach it as well. That's normal and natural. You want to approach this with grace and care for the individual. I'd recommend showing how scripture teaches your viewpoint, recognizing that you'll probably have to explain your hermeneutic. Only if they're interested in learning more about the topic would I suggest they look into reading a book, no matter how good it is.

This is really helpful. It's very easy to assume too much.

This is not necessarily the case for secularized, post-Christian cultures, but for most other cultures there are "keys" that you can engage to help share the Gospel. Kim says that often European and American worldviews are competing, but some worldviews have elements that are not competing but complimentary.

I learned this from a missionary named Don Richardson who wrote Peace Child and Eternity in Their Hearts, in which he deals with this issue.

My point is that there are many ways to engage with the Gospel, some more instructive (giving categories) and some more deductive (receiving/figuring out cateogires). It's helpful to be a student of the culture to know this stuff.

edit: if you're familiar with the story of Peace Child or just now read up on it, here is a video of him and his family returning to that tribe. It's beautiful.

Not Indigenous, but some of my favourite theologians are. I'm just here to throw some good recommendations that you might find worth looking into:


Shalom and the Community of Creation by Randy Woodley

A Native American Theology by Clara Sue Kidwell, Homer Noley, and George E. "Tink" Tinker

Rescuing the Gospel from the Cowboys by Richard Twiss

These are all pretty approachable texts. A Native American Theology is one of my favourite theological texts out there. It's a short read, it's extremely approachable, and it just knows how to use what little space it has to great effect.

And because I know the editor, I need to shill this great text:

Unsettling the Word is a collection of texts where authors take a Biblical text and recontextualize in some way to discuss decolonialism. THese can range from essays on a text, poetry in the spirit of the original text, or reimagining the text to be about a North American context (for example, the last piece in the book reimagines the end of Revelation to be about Turtle Island instead of Jerusalem).

Here is a secular historian and anthropologist from the university of Dartmouth that you might find intersting.

This first one is focused on a lot of this history in the Tlinglit culture, not Aleut, which is intersting as they are the Alaskans that were more resistant to Christanity under the Russian colonial period and didn't convert enmass until the American colonial period. And interestingly enough, they embraced Orthodox Christanity as a way to perserve, in their minds, their native Tlingit culture that the Anglo Americans were trying to forcefully remove from society. The potlatch will tie into this book

https://www.amazon.com/Memory-Eternal-Orthodox-Christianity-Centuries/dp/0295993863

I haven't read this one yet, but it's the book he did before the first on,e as the preliminary resource, I mentioned and it's primarily focused on the potlatch in Tlingit culture in the 19th century. I don't know, but if it's focused on all of the 19th century, I think Christanity would enter the story at some point.

https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0295994894/ref=dbs_a_w_dp_0295994894

You might also like this text that argues that Orthodox Christanity, particularly the Greek Fathers of Antiquity, shared similar metaphysical views with the Alaskan animist shamanistic tradition, which very well could apply to other Pacific northwest peoples, but I would just be making an educated guess when saying so.

https://www.amazon.com/Mask-Icon-Transformation-Arctic/dp/1885652631/ref=mp_s_a_1_3?keywords=from+mask+to+icon+holy+cross&qid=1570408788&sr=8-3

You also might like this book by a secular historian and ethnologist on the transition between shamanism to Orthodoxy in Alaska and eastern Siberia, again it might apply to the Yakama story but it might not. This one runs pretty expensive though.

https://www.amazon.com/Shamanism-Christianity-Encounters-Orthodox-1820-1917/dp/0313309604/ref=mp_s_a_1_6?keywords=Andrei+Znamenski&qid=1570409521&s=books&sr=1-6

I'm guessing it's from this:

Heart of Joy: The Transforming Power of Self Giving

If the context is, we gain joy from what we give, I might be more on board. Then joy becomes the result of love. Still, I'd have to read the book to know for sure.

It depends. I suggest you check out the Urbana Missions Conference. It's one of the biggest missions conferences in the United States and can help you get a better feel for what you can do and where you can go. I also highly recommend On Being a Missionary by Dr. Thomas Hale, who was a friend of my family's and was a doctor in rural Nepal for 30 years. It has a lot of practical wisdom and helps you get personally ready.

1. Here is a great article on the Old Testament view of life after death by TD Alexander. The question of what the OT teaches concerning the eternal state is very difficult. To answer your question on the hope of the OT people: For the righteous who are down in Sheol, suffering the consequences of God’s punishment, there is hope for them because God has the authority to raise men from the intermediate state at the resurrection. Resurrection is the hope, which is what the Pharisees taught.
   
   
2. The Scripture, taken on its own terms, teaches there is one divine author. So this unity must always be thought of when understanding the plurality of the many authors of Scripture (and vice versa). You can more on Hebrew cosmology with this excellent resource.
   
   
3. I can't really speak to this one. It is interesting, though.
   
   
4. No, He did not. Judaism was always a monotheistic religion. It taught that God is one (in number) and one (in essence). Deut 6:4 teaches this. Furthermore, I think taking the first Chapter of Genesis clearly shows that God is the Creator, he's not vying for his title against other Gods, he's the creator, and anyother gods which exist are idols made by man's hands or imagination.
   
   
5. Do you mean the royal "us" in Genesis 1:26?
   
   
6. Yes. I think a sound Biblical Theological argument can be made for this. Adam was original prophet/priest/king who fails in this garden-temple. GK Beale has done lots of work on this. See "The Temple and the Church's Mission.
   
   
7. I personally believe Jonah died and was resurrected. A full-orbed way to understand Jonah is to look at the life and ministry of Christ, who actually identifies with Jonah in Matt 12:40. I think it is a stretch, and inconsistent with what Christ teaches about Jonah to identify the Peter incident with Jonah's decent into Sheol.
   
   
8. Water can often be used as judgement in the OT (Noah, Egyptians), however we see that Jesus goes under the baptismal waters of Judgement, so to speak so that the church would safely be carried through them. (Noahs family = church, Israelites passing through red sea = church). Futhermore, after these OT water episodes, a New Creation emerges. Noah's family (and a new earth), and Israel (a people and a promised land) are born as new creations after the waters of Judgment flood their enemies. This adds significance to Jesus' acts of rebuking the waters, being baptised in water, and the Holy Spirit's continued ministry of creating new life as the (lord, so to speak) of the waters of judgement (Gen 1:2). And what are we told in Revelation? There will be no more ocean. Reading Revelation on it's own terms, we should think of what this would mean to a Jewish reader -- God has completely done away with judgement and wrath and chaos. The New Creation has arrived.
   
   If these topics interest you, I highly recommend this work: New Testament Biblical Theology, A. The Unfolding of the Old Testament in the New.
   

I think that's one reason why we have seen a growing willingness by pastors and theologians to consider something as radical as a total return to first principles; consider the perspective advocated by:

• Philosopher Jacques Ellul's Anarchy and Christianity
  
• Theologian and former missionary Darrel L. Guder's ecclesiological extension of Barth's critique on religion / aggrandizing of revelation in The Continuing Conversion of the Church
  
• Theologian and former youth pastor Kenda Creasy Dean against "Moralistic Therapeutic Deism"
  
• Pastor and theologian David E. Fitch in The Great Giveaway: Reclaiming the Mission of the Church from Big Business, Parachurch Organizations, Psychotherapy, Consumer Capitalism, and Other Modern Maladies.
  
• Theologian and former pastor Soong Chan Rah against ethnocentrism and classism in The Next Evangelicalism: Freeing the Church from Western Cultural Captivity
  
• Pastoral and authorial team, John M. Perkins and Shane Claiborne's Follow Me to Freedom: Leading and Following As an Ordinary Radical

The Mystery of the Incarnation and the Paschal Mystery are both acts of the New Creation by God. There is a reason 2 Corinthians 5:17 calls us "New Creations"; there's a reason that Colossians 1:6 says that the Gospel is bearing fruit, harkening back to Garden imagery; there's a reson why the early Church Fathers called Sunday the 8th day.

Christ's resurrection has irreparably changed the nature of creation as we know it and it is now always growing forwards to a greater and greater manifestation of the kingdom of heaven onto the earth. I highly recommend that you read The Temple and the Church's Mission by G. K. Beale.

Tribes around the world that are essentially in the "Stone Age". Aka, the most advanced tools they have are made with stone. They hunt with bows and arrows or blowdarts or the like. Generally they live in the jungle, as the jungle keeps them isolated from the outside world.

If you're interested in stuff like that, for starters read Peace Child. It's the true story of a missionary who went to live with a stone age tribe of headhunters/cannibals in the 60s. Very well written, gripping, and fascinating. The whole "Someone will come to explain this to you" scenario doesn't happen per se, but there's tons of other great stuff in there.

I see it as based more on ANE theological motifs and cultic practices.

Haven't had time to sift through the comments (so likely noted elsewhere) but the Garden represented a Temple. The creation of the man/woman in Gen 1.27 was akin to the installation of the image of the deity in a temple. This is discussed more fully here.

Functional usage and installation of the temple image is discussed in these monographs:

• Born in Heaven, Made on Earth: The Making of the Cult Image in the Ancient Near East by Michael Dick
  
• Cult image and divine representation in the ancient Near East ed. by Neal Walls
  
• Induction of the Cult Image in Ancient The Mesopotamian Mis Pi Ritual, by Michael Dick

Here’s a couple of good books you may consider reading beforehand or take along, God bless

Let the Nations Be Glad!: The Supremacy of God in Missions https://www.amazon.com/dp/0801036410/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_i_3l50CbFZ3KR8C

Cross: Unrivaled Christ, Unstoppable Gospel, Unreached Peoples, Unending Joy https://www.amazon.com/dp/1433686015/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_i_Ni50CbY6XG857

Do you know there are christians who trust in God's goodness beyond human-reasoning, and they see miracles.
http://www.amazon.com/Gods-Smuggler-Brother-Andrew/dp/0800793013
http://www.amazon.com/John-Lake-Complete-Collection-Teaching/dp/088368568X

And here a man who's adamant about Jesus being real, because he has witnessed Him, His mercy & His grace:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lBnC7Ef9Lec

Missionaries commonly find that God has prepared the way for them by planting hints of himself in the beliefs of many cultures, from Paul in Athens (who quoted "in whom we live, and move, and have our being" from a poem about Zeus) to the Algonquin Great Manitou to Peace Child.

>condoms to prevent AIDS.
FTFY

Christianity is supposed to be based off 2 main rules, Love the Lord with all your heart, soul, mind and strength (because he created you and loves you and wants to have a relationship with you), and love your neighbor as yourself (Because they are a creation of God and He loves them too). Anything done to Break these rules is sin, which puts a separation between man and God, because God must be perfect and man is imperfect. The only way to fix this is too repent because God wants to forgive our sin so he can be in relationship with us. But an imperfect person cannot repent perfectly be cause he has been corrupted. However a perfect person can repent perfectly, but has no need to do so. So God took the form of a man, lived a perfect sinless life, was killed (paying the price for sin), and rose from the dead (defeating death). Now because a perfect man payed the price of our sin, we can simply accept his sacrifice and be back in the right standing with God and we can have the relationship for which he created us.

And you have obviously never heard the story of the peace child. There was a tribe in the South Asian Islands who were visited by missionaries. They were told the story of the gospel. When they got to the part about Judas talking to the pharisees and accepting silver they listened closer. When they told about the betrayal in the garden, they cheered for judas. When they heard about Judas throwing the silver at the feet of the pharisees, they were confused. And when Judas hung himself they screamed out in protest. You see their culture revered betrayal. Long ago their king had two sons. one betrayed the other and took everything the king had left him, then he had two sons and one betrayed another yet again. and this continued until they believed betrayal to be the only way to succeed. So you would have people sleeping with a knife to ward off those who would kill them in the night for their property. So the missionaries taught them the story of Jesus himself in the context of biblical history. When they heard it they said that it reminded them of their peace child, the son of the chief who was traded for the son of the chief of a related tribe to ensure that they tribes would not attack each other. If one tribe did attack the other they would kill the peace child. The missionaries taught a better way to live, with christian morality. They taught them to trust and not betray each other. Don't you believe that this is better than how the tribe was going about things before? Oh and this is a real story. You can read about it in the book Peace Child.

My husband is currently reading Orthodox Alaska by Oleksa and enjoying it.

https://www.amazon.com/Orthodox-Alaska-Theology-Michael-Oleksa/dp/0881410926

The most famous example of this that I know is Bruchko by Bruce Olson. He strikes off into the jungle as a teenager, totally on his own, and almost dies several times while attempting to make contact with an isolated tribe. Eventually he discovers that all along, the tribe had a prophecy about how someone like him would come to bring them a message of truth (or something along those lines).

There's also the really influential missionary book Peace Child, which introduces the "'redemptive analogy' thesis: the idea that each culture has some story, ritual, or tradition that can be used to illustrate and apply the Christian gospel message." Not quite the same, though, since I don't think he believes these indigenous narratives can be salvific on their own.

The only book I read as a Christian that tells exactly the story you're describing was a kid's fiction book: The Secret of the Desert Stone.

This is the correct short answer.

The long answer is linked below, and it is well worth your time and money to read

https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0830826181/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1473054914&sr=8-1&pi=SY200_QL40&keywords=the+temple+and+the+church%27s+mission&dpPl=1&dpID=41Wj1WGYN5L&ref=plSrch

"The Holiness Of God" by R.C. Sproul influenced my thinking somewhat.
"God's Smuggler" by 'Brother Andrew' inspired some activity.

Hello, English-speaking white boy here. I was baptized in a very well-educated OCA parish years ago and moved to my current city for work. Here there is only a Greek parish, a very ethnically Greek parish, so I understand what you are feeling.

The reason so many "ethnic" parishes exist in the Western world versus the missiological route taken by Sts Cyril and Methodius which offers services in a native language is because of the way the bulk of Orthodoxy arrived in the West.
Though there were missionary trips (check out "Orthodox Alaska" for a taste of the missions work among the native people), most of Orthodoxy came with the immigrants as their religion and their culture. Many people groups upon arriving in America settled into ethnic ghettos and though they had become part of the world's 'melting pot,' they were still very isolated. Their culture was still their identity and was passed down to following generations.

Much of my parish is still first-generation Americans and where I live, we don't get too many inquisitors about Orthodoxy because it's in the 'Bible Belt,' so this parish has remained mostly Greek in language. The current priest is an American-born Carpatho-Russian priest who has added some English, but on a 'good' day we're still at 80% Greek.

For all of the 'ethnic' parishes around there are plenty that offer services in English, whether OCA, Antiochian, Greek, ROCOR, etc. But, as my priest has to remind me when I jump on my "I want English!" soap box, the Greeks in our parish are just as much the sheep he has been entrusted with as we English-speaking people are. And (I am not speaking on a wide scale, I am simply stating from my particular parish), so much of their cultural identity is wrapped in Orthodoxy that if we abandoned the Greek, many in our parish would stop coming, even though they speak English.

It can be frustrating, but I have learned much of the liturgical Greek since arriving and since I know the Liturgy in English, the transition hasn't been too bad. Because I am not Greek, I do stand out a bit. The Greeks refer to me as "the Russian," though I'm not sure why. There are many who haven't spoken the first word to me in three years, but then again, there are many others who have welcomed me and tried to Greek me up a bit (though I still haven't gotten the taste for ouzo).

A unified American Orthodox Church is still a long way in the future, but it is something being worked toward. There is much to decide upon, much to sort out. I'm all for a uniquely American Orthodoxy (I would even propose our Liturgical chant be based on Sacred Harp, but that's just my opinion), but it will take time, lots of time, just like Orthodoxy around the world has required hundreds and thousands of years to take its place among the people.

Start with Malcolm Muggeridge's biography of her, then read the whole series of paperbacks written by her nuns and brothers collected from the things she said and did. Many of them can be had for one cent. This is not a complete list:

http://www.amazon.com/Something-Beautiful-God-Malcolm-Muggeridge/dp/0060660430/

http://www.amazon.com/Loving-Jesus-Jose-Luis-Gonzalez-Balado/dp/0892836768/

http://www.amazon.com/One-Heart-Full-Love-Mother/dp/0892833939/

http://www.amazon.com/Heart-Joy-Mother-Teresa-Calcutta/dp/0892833424/

http://www.amazon.com/Total-Surrender-Br-Angelo-Devananda/dp/0892836512/

Orthodox Alaska: A Theology of Mission
By Fr. Michael Oleksa
link

Here is the mobile version of your link