CONFESSIONS OF A FIRST TIME PROFESSOR

          "So what are you going to do when you get back to the Philippines?" My friends bombarded me with this question after I prayerfully decided to take a leave off from my school in Seoul, Korea. I did not decide to stop out in a flash. It took me weeks to finally arrive on it despite of the fears I had. I knew it was the best decision I made at a time when I needed to choose between my studies and my health.  

      

      "Well," I said, "I'd be needing to take a much deserved rest for a couple of months, ease my mind and body and think of nothing but happy thoughts and relieve myself from stress that has already taken its toll on my physical and mental health." And if and when I'm a lot better already, I wish to teach in a (secular) university to challenge and inspire young people, the way I know best."                                                                                                   

      A week ago, I was reminded by a friend that God had answered my prayer. A few months have passed and now, I am in the final stretch of the first semester, encoding my students' grades and signing their clearances. Time flies so fast. And now here I am confiding to you all about how it all went.         

      

      Well. Let me first say that I got to experience what we call as "reverse culture shock." "The students' culture these days is a lot different from when I was still on their shoes. I could not understand how in the world some of them could have the nerves of plugging their earphones while their professors are having their lectures or while they are taking their exams. I think I've politely scolded a couple of students in my class for doing such. I DEEM IT DISRESPECTFUL (I think nobody would argue with me on this one).

       I taught in two colleges in this local university last semester and it was enjoyable, frustrating, and challenging at the same time. As a first time professor, I was somehow hopeful that my students would be eager to listen to their lessons, as I explained them exhaustively. Yet, the opposite happened. I needed to somehow know where they are coming from so I could speak their language and help them understand what I was articulating in front of them. It was crazy at first. 

     There was a time when I was teaching English Grammar and we happened to discuss consonants and vowels in passing. The student I asked was looking confused and immediately looked at the notes I gave them. I asked him again to give me examples of vowel letters but he could not. I got frustrated. Should I blame him? Should I blame his high school teachers? or should I blame the Philippine education system for producing high school graduates who could not even answer a very elementary question? Still and all, blaming, I know, would not do anything anymore. I needed to work double time to re-educate them of what they have "forgotten."

     Then, I remember why I was there for- to teach, challenge, and inspire the youngsters of today and help them to dream big, dream bigger and to help them tap their potentials and fulfill their dreams. I reminded myself daily of this truth about my calling to teach. 

    Noise.Noise.And.More.Noise. I bought a lapel microphone to make sure that I was able to get my message across since the noise outside the classroom was actually eclipsing my voice that I could not even hear myself anymore a lot of times. The classrooms were not conducive for learning.  I salute my fellow professors who actually teach and sometimes shout to get their voice heard. Everytime I would teach my classes in that college, I was literally exhausted. And let me say, feeling exhausted is actually an understatement.

      I also taught 3rd year students who are going to be (hopefully) educators in the future.  A lot of them were okay. However, most of them could not express themselves in English well. I challenged them not to answer in our lingua franca  but articulate their thoughts in English. And usually, they will give me silence,silence and more......silence. It was tough at the outset. One of my students said that they were not used to conveying their thoughts as fast as they could since some (if not most) of their teachers allow them to speak in Tagalog even when it should be in English. Really???

          Before I forget, I taught Humanities to my 3rd year students. It was an arduous task since the subject matter does not only talk about "arts" per se but man being cultured and refined in the meditation of the arts, him, being the center and the manking in the study of Humanities. THE COURSE WAS NOT MY FORTE, but somehow my background helped me in  passing on the truths of the subject matter, since arts and religion are intertwined in the history of humanities. I learned while I was teaching. And hopefully, I did well on it.

       As I said, I was shocked at the culture of students (or at least, our students) these days. I am not entirely sure if they know what they want or how to get what they want; or if they really like what they are doing or if they still got the passion to do what they thought they want to do. I WAS CLUELESS. 

      But then again, I was there to inspire them. I need to rekindle the passion that had them study in the first place. I had to talk with my students and see where they are coming from. I would never forget the time when in our discussion, a couple of my students cried while discussing something in class which happened to touch on their personal lives. Somehow, being a Youth Pastor before helped me analyze and see what is going on with their lives and in my own little ways, uplift their weary and tired spirits.

      The moment I first stepped in my students' classrooms, I indubitably told them that I was there not only to teach but also to inspire them. I told them that there is something bigger waiting for them in the outside world; that they should not stop dreaming, studying and knowing more, since, that will be their ticket to success. I know it is not going to be easy. I've felt a lot of times that many of my students have already given up even before they give a shot at fulfilling their dreams. I want to help them get past their fears and do well. I want them to find a better life for themselves under the sun. There are lot more things that I want to help them see and do, yet, I am only me.

        Whenever I travel going to the university, I talk to God and tell him to use me as a channel of his blessing, his grace, and his love daily. I know how it feels to struggle as a student. I've lived decades of my life burning my midnight oil for the sake of my future and even left my family to live on foreign soil to fulfill my God-given dreams. 

I know how it felt to be abased and not have anything in my pocket when I go to school, take my exam with an empty stomach, and memorize theorems and subjects when my head is filled with countless troubles enough to frustrate and appall my debilitated self. 

   Modesty aside, I can say that I finished well (at least in my journey as a student). I did persevere and I just pray that, everyday will be a day for me to inspire them. Just when nobody wants to smile at them, I will do it to lift them up. When nobody wants to listen, I'll be a friend to them, lending my time and ears, hear their cries and pray for them. And as I do, I'll look up to the One who taught me how to teach, and in the heavens find my joy in serving the youngsters whom I hope will act as catalysts of change in the present and in the future.

IS EVERYTHING WORTH MY JOURNEY? 

          

           I guess when I find my students see the light, behold true happiness in what they do, discover their place under the sun, and live their life in faith, will I be able to ascertain in myself that it's worth every second of it. But for now, I will endeavor to be a good mentor, an inspiring educator, letting the light of my Master Teacher shine for all my students to see. 

          Until then.....until then....

CALLED TO LIVE AS YOU

Many times, we try to compare our lives with those around us and so end up in frustration in jealousy. We are so caught up with all the why's and how's of everything that we feel defeated and think of how unfair life could get. God would want us to live the life he gave to us, wherever we are, being at the moment and living as he has  called us to be. Paul in his first letter to the Corinthians explains, "Only let each person lead the life that the Lord has assigned to him, and to which God has called him..."-1 Cor. 7:17a.

We need not fret over what we have at this time. God is in charge and he is in complete control of the questions that we might have. All we need to realize is that God will never make a mistake. He has his sovereign reasons as to why we are where we are at the moment.

You are called to be you and not to be somebody else. God wants you to live the life he intentionally weaved not for others to journey but only for you live, to taste his goodness and savor in his eternal glory. Live the life he leads and he will show the light in your way.

HANDLE IT WITH CARE

"Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit who is in you, whom you have from God, and that you are not your own? For you have been bought with a price: therefore glorify God in our body." -1 Cor. 6:19-20

I remember a friend/classmate back in Korea who takes really good care of his books. Everytime he buys one, he makes sure that he would cover it nicely. He would only lend it to someone whom he believes will show much love for his books and take care of them the way he does.

The words of Paul in 1 Cor. 6:19-20 ring true as well. Our earthly dwelling which is our body has been bought with an expensive price. Here, he reminds the Corinthian believers of four things: first, that their body is the temple of the Holy Spirit; second, that they don't own themselves anymore; third, that they have been bought with a price; and lastly, that they should glorify God in their body.

These reminders perfectly echo the way we ought to live as God's people. Since we are living on borrowed time, and borrowed life, we must remember to glorify the "Lender" of this life through our words and deeds. The world we live in maybe as godless as the ancient Corinth, yet what we must consider is the exhortation of Paul to the believers to remember who we are and what we ought to do. May it be our prayer that God would grant us the grace to live for him daily, dying from the sins of this world and dying to live for the One who bought us with the price of his life on the cross.

VISION 20/20

King Solomon believes that a leader must have a vision so as not to make his future bleak. The motivation behind a vision will drive people to get what they want, where and when they want it. A godly leader does not allow himself to be caught up with the ABC’s of accomplishing it, but patiently waits upon the voice of God and let Him lead him on how to approach things and make the vision a reality. We need to give up our worldly passions in order to hear God’s voice and let Him do through us his works, in His ways. Thus, our vision should not be based on our own, but is a by-product of God's revelation to us. We need to communicate it to people properly and allow them to be soaked in the precious vision of God.

It is pertinent therefore to realize that in accomplishing the leader’s vision, one must understand that the vision itself is not derived from the leader, but is communicated to him by God. It is his revelation and his workings. Spiritual leadership should bear testimony of this agenda from God and should work towards its fulfillment. We need not convince people to buy-in to it, but as God sees the leader’s desire to bring the people towards his agenda, He will work in them and then through them.

NEWS FLASH: PAT ROBERTSON BELIEVES MARIJUANA SHOULD BE LEGALIZED

Christianity Today's blog dated March 08, 2012, reports on Evangelist Pat Robertson's stance on decrimilalizing pot in the US. He succumbed to the truth that the fight against illegal drugs for that matter has not been successful and that marijuana should be treated like any other beverage alcohol. (link=> http://blog. christianitytoday.com/ ctpolitics/2012/03/ pat_robertson_t.html) While the former US presidential candidate firmly believes that is now high time for America to legalize "pot", his position has been met with criticism and still majority of conservative evangelicals would not follow in his "pot ideology".

Although marijuana has been thought of as useful in the medical field, marijuana should be made available only when medically necessary. With much respect to Pat Robertson, there is no way that "pot" should be legalized and should be made ready for purchase to just anyone right at the counter.We need to realize that succumbing to the fight against drugs should not bring us to endorse it in the end. If the evangelist has already given up on the fight against marijuana (which i fervently hope he has not), then there are still those who are fighting against the dangers and the troubles that marijuana can cause.

GOD'S HEART + HAND

The heart and hand of God are woven closely in the life of Christ. Thus, we say, that evangelism cannot be separated from social action as evidenced in the earthly ministry of Jesus. He did not only preach about the kingdom of God but showed the way of the kingdom to the people. He extended the heart and hand of God by healing the sick and doing many other great things to better the life of those who were around him. 

Matthew 4:23 vividly depicts Jesus doing a socio-evangelistic action, "And he went throughout all Galilee, teaching in their synagogues and proclaiming the gospel of the kingdom and healing every disease and every affliction among the people." It is in this aspect that social action should always be associated in our attempt to bring the Good News to people. It is the action by which the Good News is anchored, the way of love of the Christian faith by which we are and should be known.

Evangelism and social action work hand in hand. It is not easy for people to see the love of God if we are not able to reflect it in our actions. On the other hand, if social action is emphasized over evangelism, we lose the whole idea of the Great Commission. They are intertwined as words and works create a moving revolution forward to a life changed by the heart and hand of the Master.

ARMINIUS AND HIS DEFINITIVE THEOLOGY OF SALVATION

Jacob Arminius at the outset of establishing his theology on salvation made it clear first by zeroing in on the decrees of God which he distinguished in four logical pronouncements. The first three of these decrees set forth the general divine intention to appoint Christ as the mediator of salvation to fallen mankind and the fourth decree refers to particular persons and rests on the prescience and foresight/foreknowledge of God by which he foreknew, from all eternity, who would believe by the aid of prevenient grace and would persevere by the aid of subsequent grace; and who would not believe and persevere.[1]

Arminius underscored that man being under the wrath of God is able to instigate salvation but only after God had granted him the primary grace to enable his will to oblige with God.[2]

He believed that the grace sufficient for salvation is conferred both on the elect, and on the non-elect, and that their response on that grace will determine if they may be saved or not.[3] Arminius believes that God elects to salvation, on the basis of the foreknowledge of God on the response of the person, all those who have come to belief. The human choice to believe precedes the divine choice to save individuals.[4] Arminius’ understanding is that there is a prior general divine determination for the salvation of mankind and to provide sufficient means to this end and he assumes that based on God’s foreknowledge of human response to grace, he elects or rejects people to salvation.

Arminius nullifies the idea of predestination as the decree of God choosing certain people to eternal life, and others to everlasting destruction purely out of his good pleasure instead, he believed that predestination is an eternal and gracious decree of God in Christ, by which he determines to justify and adopt believers, and to endow them with eternal life, but to condemn unbelievers and impenitent persons.[5] Salvation and the giving of faith to particular persons do not exclude anybody. For him, predestination is primarily of Jesus Christ to be the Savior of sinners.[6] He insists that predestination must be understood "in Christ". In his Declaration of Sentiments of 1608, he sets forth his predestination theory in terms of four decrees. These contain the familiar "Arminian" ingredient of foreseen faith, but it is significant that the first of the decrees has to do neither with faith nor foreknowledge and is not "conditional." Rather, Jesus Christ is the object of this absolute decree.[7] Thus, Christ was appointed as the Mediator and there is no predetermination that only some will be saved for the number of the elect in Christ is open and indefinite. Thus, there is no place for the idea of an explicit number of elect for election is based on the foreknowledge of God of how humans treat his offer of saving grace.

By election, Arminius meant that it is a decree by which God resolves to justify believers and to condemn unbelievers, which is the purpose of God according to election. He believed in the election of classes: election unto salvation and election unto damnation. If God was going to predestinate, it would be in the way of class or group predestination rather than individual election. God would choose the class and man would decide his own free participation in that class of believers.[8] The foreknowledge then of God is on the response of the person to whom the gospel is presented thus man’s free will is accounted for in the process.

Arminius did not deny the doctrine of election but he insisted that it is conditional since that it should be understood as divine foreknowledge of what individuals would freely do with the liberty given to them.[9] God knows in advance who will and who will not believe (Rom. 8:29).

Arminius asserts that the saving effects of Christ’s death and resurrection are limited to the elect in the following sense: salvation extends only to those who freely choose to believe. The limited effect does not imply that he died for some and not for others; Christ died to atone for all the sins of humanity. But salvation is limited for those who believe and does not include those who reject Christ. To be damned is to reject God’s salvation. Thus, salvation becomes sufficient for all yet only efficient to those who are elected to salvation.[10]

Arminius believed that grace is resistible and that many even in Scripture resisted the grace of God. But how can salvation be “all of grace” if humans are free to either accept or reject it? Arminius answered this question with prevenient grace”, grace that goes before salvation. God is always courting his creation, extending grace and love to everyone. So long as one does not resist this prevenient grace but allows it to work, it becomes justifying grace. That change is “conversion” and is not good work but simple acceptance.

The human will liberated by prevenient grace must cooperate by accepting the need of salvation and allowing God to give the gift of faith. God will not impose it. Neither can the sinner earn it. It can only be freely accepted, but even the ability to accept is made possible by grace.[11] Since God knows everything, God knows who will accept grace and who will turn it down. In that sense salvation and damnation are predestined. Along this line, Arminius denied what Calvin had affirmed: That God determines who will accept grace and who will refuse it.[12] Arminius believed that true believers necessarily do persevere unto the end. Christians are kept by the power of God through faith- an uncompromised and persevering faith that kept him eternally.[13]

---

[1] Richard A. Muller, God, Creation, and Providence in the Thought of Jacob Arminius: Sources and Directions of Scholastic Protestantism in the Era of Early Orthodoxy, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1991), 162-163.

[2] Earle E. Cairns, Christianity Through the Centuries, A History of the Christian Church, Third Edition, (Grand Rapids, Michigan, Zondervan Publishing House,1996), 317.

[3] James Nichols, translator, The Works of James Arminius, Volume 2, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1986), 53.

[4] David Bagchi and David C. Steinmetz editors, The Cambridge Companion to Reformation Theology, (Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press, 2004), 139. 

[5] Roger E. Olsen, Arminian Theology Myths and Realities (Downers Grove, Illinois: IVP Academic, 2006), 181.

[6] Roger E. Olsen, 184.

[7] Bangs, Carl, Arminius and the Reformation, ATLA Religion Database 184. Church History 30 no 2 Je 1961, p 155-170

[8] Charles A. Mcllhenny, “Case of Professor James Arminius and the Synod of Dort”, Reformed Theological Journal v.18 (year): 79.

[9] Earle E. Cairns, 317.

[10] Earle E. Cairns, 317.

[11] Roger E. Olsen and Adam C. English, Pocket History of Theology, (Downer’s Grove, Illinois: InterVarsity Press , 2005), 83-84.

[12] William C. Placher, A History of Christian Theology: An Introduction, (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: The Westminster Press, 1993), 226.

[13] Reformed Theological Journal v.18, McIlhenny, Charles A. Case of professor James Arminius and the synod of dort 85.