How The Christian Church Got To Where It Is

2y ago
18 Views
2 Downloads
2.66 MB
114 Pages
Last View : 18d ago
Last Download : 2m ago
Upload by : Melina Bettis
Transcription

How The Christian ChurchGot To Where It IsA Sketch of Historical Theology to 1900H. Carl Shank

How The Christian Church Got To Where It Is: A Sketch of HistoricalTheology to 1900Copyright 2018 by H. Carl Shank. All rights reserved.ISBN 978-0-359-22145-5Permission to photocopy any portion of this book for ministry purposesmust be obtained from the author. Any photocopy must includecopyright credits as stated above.Most Scripture references are taken from the the ESV Bible, 2001 byCrossway, a ministry of Good News Publishers. All references used bypermission from the publishers. All rights reserved.Cover design: H. Carl Shank. Background photo montage fromhistorical sites in England and Scotland from a personal history tourin 2017. Historical figures via public domain from bottom right: SaintAugustine of Hippo, William Tyndale, Martin Luther, John Calvin, andJohn Wesley.First Edition 2018. Second Edition 2019.Printed in the United States of America2

About the AuthorIn addition to his M.Div. and Th.M. (systematics) work, H. Carl Shankhas been a youth, associate, solo, staff and lead pastor in over forty yearsof church ministry, pastoring beginning and established congregationsin Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia and New York state. Hispassion for leadership development has resulted in mentoring numerouspastors, teaching in a number of local Bible institutes as well as servingas an adjunct faculty member of The King’s College, and trainingInterVarsity leaders on the East Coast. Carl has been regularly soughtout for his acknowledged gifts of discernment and wisdom in dealingwith church issues. He had been serving as the Executive Pastor of achurch in Lancaster, PA, as well as a church health consultant throughNCDAmerica. He is recently retired.Besides numerous seminars and church related articles, his recentlypublished Bible study contributions include Living Life God’s Way:Reflections from the Psalms, Study Guide and Leader’s Guide, Romans:The Glory of God As Seen in the Righteousness of God, Jonah: A ReluctantMessenger, A Needy People, and God’s Amazing Grace, Esther: For SuchA Time As This, A Study of God’s Providence, Church Warnings! The SevenChurches of Revelation for Today, Building For God: Leadership and LifeLessons from Nehemiah, and The Pastoral Letters Revisited: Behavior andBelief available from Lulu Press, Amazon and other booksellers. Carlis married to his wonderful wife, Nancy, and has three grown, marriedchildren. He lives in the Marietta, PA area and can be reached forconsulting, seminars or leadership and mentoring development atcshanktype@gmail.comwww.carlshankconsulting.com3

4

Table of ContentsSelected Bibliography.7Foreword .9Who Cares? Why Study Historical Theology. 13Historical Theology: An Introduction. 25The Sweep of History:A Broad Overview of Historical Theology. 31The Triune God:The Trinity in Historical Theology. 43Christology:Jesus Christ in Historical Theology. 49AnthropologyCreation, State and Nature of Man. 57Appendix:Finney’s New Measures: The Controversy and Its Effects. 77Other Titles by the Author5

6

Selected BibliographyBerkhof, Louis. History of Christian Doctrines. Banner of Truth, 1996.Bracher, Dennis ed. The Confession of Dositheus. Eastern Orthodox,1672hjbvbhi. , John. Institutes of the Christian Religion: Four Volumes in One DigitalLibrary Volume. Albany, OR: SAGE Software, 1996.Early Church Fathers. Including texts from The Anti-Nicene Fathers, theNicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, 37 Files. Electronic Bible Society.Ericksen, Millard. Christian Theology. Baker Academic, 2013.Ferguson, Sinclair B., Beeke, Joel R., and Haykin, Michael A. B. ChurchHistory 101: The Highlights of Twenty Centuries. Kindle Edition.Reformation Heritage Books, 2016.Finney, Charles G. Finney’s Lectures on Theology. SAGE Software, 1995.Finney, Charles G. Revivals of Religion or Lectures on Revivals. Albany, OR:SAGE Software, 1996.Grudem, Wayne. Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine.Zondervan, 1994.Hoeksema, Herman. The Triple Knowledge: An Exposition of the HeidelbergCatechism (3 Volume Set). Reformed Free Publishing, 1990.Hodge A.A. Outlines of Theology. Hardpress reprint, 2018.Leith, John H. Creeds of the Churches, Third Edition: A Reader in ChristianDoctrine from the Bible to the Present. Westminster: John Knox Press,1982Lloyd Jones, Martyn. “Can We Learn From History?,” By Schisms RentAsunder, Puritan-Reformed Studies Conference, 1969.Louth, Andrew and Thomas Clark Oden, eds. Genesis 1-11. AncientChristian Commentary on Scripture, Old Testament, Vol. 1. DownersGrove IL: InterVarsity Press, 2011.7

Michael J. McClymond, Michael J. and McDermott, Gerald R. TheTheology of Jonathan Edwards. Oxford University Press, 2011.New Hampshire Confession of Faith. Owen, John. Christologia. SAGE Digital Library Theology. Albany, OR:SAGE Software, 1996.Owen, John. The Doctrine of the Trinity and the Person and Satisfaction ofChrist. SAGE Digital Library. Albany, OR:SAGE Software, 1996.Ramm, Bernard and Vanhoozer, Kevin. The Evangelical Heritage: A Studyin Historical Theology. Baker Book House, 2000 reprint.Renwick, A. M. The Story of the Church. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing,1958.Schaff, Philip. Creeds of Christendom, Vol 1. Baker, 1998.Singer, C. Gregg. “A Philosophy of History,” Jerusalem & Athens: CriticalDiscussions on the Philosophy and Apologetics of Cornelius Van Til.Presbyterian & Reformed Publishing, 1993.Smail, Tom. Like Father, Like Son: The Trinity Imaged in Our Humanity.Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2006.The Dordrecht Confession of Faith. https://gameo.org/index.php?title Dordrecht Confession of Faith (Mennonite, 1632).Walker, Williston. A History of the Christian Church, Classic Reprint.Forgotten Books, 2012.The Westminster Confession of Faith and Larger and Shorter Catechisms.Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland, 1967.8

ForewordIn 1984, as part of the extension courses of The King’s College atAlbany Bible Institute, in Schenectady, New York, I had the privilegeto teach a course on the History of Doctrine, 1650–1900. I was thesenior pastor at an Orthodox Presbyterian Church in the city at the time,and on the extension faculty of The King’s College in New York State.My interest in the history of theology and doctrine came from apractical pastoral question as to why there had historically been so muchresistance to evangelical thought and churches in that area. I learned thatthe particular region in which I was ministering was part of what wascalled the “burned over” district. It was a vast area in New England andNew York that had experienced the Charles Finney revivals of the 1800s.1While many so-called converts were added to the churches of the periodthrough “hot seat” evangelistic methods,2 their children and children’schildren resented and resisted such in-your-face evangelism and theevangelical movement in general. They ended up forsaking the churchand allowing it to grow old and cold. (See the Appendix on Finney.)While historians may debate the summary statements above, I waspersonally told this history by an embittered family in the Amsterdam,NY area, as our church sought to plant a daughter church there. It was,without a doubt, tough going in seeking to establish a local base for anevangelical Presbyterian church in that town.When I had an opportunity to teach a historical theology course at alocal Bible institute, I took on the task of seeking to understand the broaderhistory of the evangelical church through the ages from the sixteenthcentury Protestant Reformation onward. I learned there is much reasonfor an aversion to evangelical thought and evangelical churches in New9

England. That aversion, I was to learn later, resulted in very few majorevangelical churches in New England. Those that were evangelicallyoriented were usually smaller and fighting for their existence in a regionknown for Unitarian universalism.Church growth experts from Fuller Seminary and other institutionsin the 1980s would regularly avoid New England, preferring to focus theirefforts and expertise on the southern and western parts of the country. Irecall one church growth seminar in which I was explaining my woes ofseeking to grow a gospel church in northern New York state. The seminarleader’s advice was brief and to the point — “Move!” It was just too hardto establish a significant foothold for the gospel in New England.The Puritan experiment of a “city on a hill” generally failed in NewEngland, notwithstanding the revivals under Jonathan Edwards inNorthampton, MA in the 1700s. Puritan scholars will greatly disagree asto the causes of this failure, but the fact that New England shows strongresistance to biblical, evangelical thought demonstrates and illustratessuch widespread failure.Why all of this happened to the center of historic, old Princeton ledevangelical thought and life demands a study of historical theology andits roots from the Protestant Reformation onwards. The following studywill be more of a “slice,” or a summary look at what I consider the mainstreams of historical theology. It will not be a comprehensive study, but Ibelieve it is a generally accurate look into why the church is where she istoday, not only in New England but in the rest of our country and world.Carl Shank2018Notes1. Charles Grandison Finney (1792–1895) has been considered by many as theFather of American Revivalism. Beginning his career as a lawyer, Finney had anencounter with God that transformed his life and called him into Christian tml). See Appendix for more on Finney.2. “He adopted the Methodists’ ‘anxious bench:’ he put a pew at the front of the10

church, where those who felt a special urgency about their salvation could sit. Heprayed in colloquial, common, and ‘vulgar’ language. Most of these New Measureswere actually many decades old, but Finney popularized them and was attacked fordoing so.” (Ibid)11

12

Who Cares?Why Study Historical TheologyI“The checks and road signs of the past were not taken into consideration,and ancient heresies, long since condemned by the church, are constantlyrepeated and represented as new discoveries.”“He must hold firm to the trustworthy word as taught, so thathe may be able to give instruction in sound doctrine and also to rebukethose who contradict it. For there are many who are insubordinate, emptytalkers and deceivers . . .”(Berkhof in History of Christian Doctrines; Titus 1:9, 10 ESV)just believe the Bible. In over forty years of pastoral experience andteaching, I cannot recall how often I have heard this sentence. Manyuse it as a sincere declaration of their faith in God and reliance on theBible as the Word of God. Some use it as a defense against a modernisticdismissal of the Bible as authoritative. Others use it as a comebackagainst “theology,” as if theological and historical commentary somehowdegrades or runs counter to the literal or printed words of Scripture. Afew may use it as an excuse not to give themselves to serious study of theBible altogether.What many people often fail to recognize is that we are always doingtheology. We are always making theological observations, applicationsand conclusions from the Bible. “Theology,” very simply is the study ofGod as He has revealed himself in His Word, the Bible.1 Theology properhas come to mean a systematic study of the truths of the Bible, or anexploration of those truths in a systematic way. However, everytime wemake a comment on a biblical statement or term, we are doing theology.Saying we “just believe the Bible” means we believe certain truthsrevealed in the words of Scripture in a way that makes sense to us and in amanner in which we were taught. Thus, Baptists and Presbyterians believe13

“baptism” is a biblical truth, but their thoughts and explanations widelydiffer, even though both would maintain they just believe what the Biblesays about baptism.So, when we say “I just believe the Bible,” we are making a theologicalstatement. Now, it is most likely a partial or only personally informedstatement, but a statement about biblical truth nonetheless. But that’sthe problem, isn’t it? And that is the issue with which historical theologywrestles. What does the whole Bible say about this or that? Different ages,different writers, different needs, and different stresses within the Churchof Jesus Christ all contribute to the study of historical theology.Numerous writers through the history of the Church have attemptedto answer this question. Thus, the collection of theological systems grows.I presently work within the framework of what is called a WesleyanArminian2 theological system, though I have been trained in and ammore comfortable with another system, a Reformed-Calvinistic3 systemwith a Presbyterian-covenantal bent. Many of my friends come froma Dispensational4 system of thought and others from a Pentecostal/Charismatic5 viewpoint.Some Christians become bewildered at theological systems, and thevarious points of view offered by historical theology, and thus the retreatto “I just believe what the Bible says.” We are back at our circular startingpoint. So, let me make some clarifying and hopefully helpful statementsabout theological systems and their strengths as well as their limitationsas we study historical theology.No one ultimate systemThe first thing we can say about historical theological systems is thatno one system has answered the question, “What does the wholeBible say about a subject?” Sorry to my devoted and somewhat fanaticsystematic theologian friends. Because we are finite human beings withfinite capacities, we do not grasp the whole compass of Scripture aboutanything!This does not necessarily mean what we do grasp is untrue. It israther unfinished. The Psalmist reminds us of the expansiveness of God’s14

revealed Word in Psalm 119:96 – “To all perfection I see a limit; but yourcommands are boundless.”6 That is why, for instance, the WestminsterStandards, as they are called,7 are “secondary” standards, secondary to theScriptures. People make mistakes, ignore parts of the Word of God, or justdon’t follow through with the whole Bible. While technology has madethe whole Bible more accessible, it is still fallible human beings accessingthat technology.On the other hand, it could very well be that our system is defectiveand does not accurately represent what the Bible has to say. Clearly,theological errors have invaded the church since the Apostle Paul’s day(cf. Acts 20:28–31; 1 Corinthians 15:12ff; Galatians). Even in the pagesof Scripture we are presented with historical theology of the period.That is why the Church early on made such statements as the Apostles’Creed (3rd – 4th centuries AD), the Nicene Creed (AD 325 & 381), andthe Chalcedonian Creed (AD 451). These statements of fairly universallyagreed upon faith and theology grounded the Church in the truths ofScripture over against heresy, misinformation and miscommunication.Of course, later statements of faith and practice would follow.It would seem that the two major powerhouses of theology, Calvinismand Arminianism, are at times given ultimate status. In his book, Why IAm Not A Calvinist, Jerry Walls and Joseph Dongell argue thatThe reality is that Calvinists no less than Arminians rely oncontroversial philosophical judgments and assumptions. Whenthis is not understood, contested philosophical judgments aresometimes passed off as simple biblical truth. But the less awarewe are of our philosophical assumptions, the more they controlour thinking. We need to be aware of the philosophical issues aswell as the biblical issues, and sorting them out from each otherrequires our careful effort.8I have personally learned much from the different theologicalsystems and the journey of historical theology from my friends. I havebeen humbled to learn that my views of a particular passage or word wereinaccurate or incomplete. I have experienced an openness to God and his15

Word in a way that my chosen system was unable to lead me. And, afterforty three years of active, professional ministry, I am much less ready tosay my system has all the truth. Hopefully, I am growing and learning morefrom God the Holy Spirit daily as I search the Scriptures and continuallyrevise my theological musings. No one system has all the truth. There isno one ultimate system.Systems tend to divide not uniteThe classic comeback from the Roman Catholic Church againstProtestantism is that this one great division within the Church of JesusChrist has led to a whole succession of divisions. There must, therefore,be something wrong, something inherently dangerous and evil withProtestantism. Several hundred Protestant denominations and thousandsof churches of varying theological stripes dot the global landscape today.9Dr. Martyn Lloyd Jones, a converted physician who became atheologian, wrote in 1969 that many of the divisions within Protestantismwere sinful.10 The idea of a national church along with certain nationalcharacteristics of those centuries helped create theological divisions.Scottish Presbyterians wanted more precision in their theologicaldefinitions than their English counterparts. The European politicalsituation of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries pitted Luther againstthe Anabaptists.There was trouble defining what was “essential” from what was“nonessential” in a theological review of the Bible. At the Colloquy ofMarlburg in 1509 Luther destroyed any hope for theological unity bytaking a piece of chalk and writing, “This is my body, not represents it” onthe table of discussion. The system called transubstantiation ruined anyhope for church unity.Lloyd Jones said that for real unity we need to avoid both ends ofa spectrum—the extreme of “unrestricted laxity” versus the extremeof “egotistical rigor.” Historical theology shows how systems becomelegalistically binding documents. What is the “irreducible minimum” ofthe Christian faith? That is the question and issue of historical theology.16

Systems are not endsTheological systems are not ends in and of themselves. This should beclear from the study of historical theology. This follows from what hasbeen said above, but needs to be emphasized here. I retreated from onedenominational affiliation in my career because the important discussionscentered around the theological systems of belief, not the Scriptures.It is very easy to become so enamored with a theological system that itbecomes the standard around which all statements about a Bible truth areanalyzed or tried.This is not unnatural or evil, however. Men and women have laboredlong and hard over making their theological system right and proper.They have invested years, sometimes centuries in their denominations,seeking to reach what the whole Bible has to say about this or that. Theyhave given honest effort, hours and hours of prayer, and countless days ofdiscussions with colleagues over theological assertions. These are nottempests in a teacup, but rather very serious debates about eternal truths.The problem is when the system becomes all encompassing and allimportant.Systems help provide theological coherenceOur theological musings and inspections are at best partial andincomplete. Theological systems seek to give a systemic view of Scripturaltruth and a systematized, coherent view of truth. They attempt to piecetogether biblical truths in a carefully organized way. As Wayne Grudempoints out about his systematic theology:This organization also provides one sort of check againstinaccurate analysis of individual topics, for it means that all otherdoctrines that are treated can be compared with each topic forconsistency in methodology and absence of contradictions inthe relationships between the doctrines.11Thus, balanced consideration of complementary teachings are given bygood theological systems, such as Christ’s deity with his humanity orman’s responsibility with God’s sovereignty.17

Coherence also provides more detailed analysis, a more completepicture of a biblical subject and hopefully gives a more accurate pictureof truth. Coherence should give more clarity to a subject. While manyBible believers feel the Bible is clear to them on this or that subject, thisis internal, subjective clarity. The problem is that internal clarity is notnecessarily external clarity. What is obvious to one believer may not beso obvious or clear to another believer. Thus, for example, the “days” ofGenesis 1 are “clearly” 24-hour periods of time for one believer, whileanother Christian sees them as geological ages or spans of time. A goodtheological system addresses these “clarity” issues in a more completeway than most individual believers can.Systems help fulfill the Great Commission (Matthew 28:19, 20)I am indebted to Wayne Grudem again for this salient point on which Iwill elaborate a bit.12 One of the emphases of the early Anabaptists wastheir adherence to “following Jesus.”13 They felt that their Reformationbrethren were confusing the words and actions of Jesus and those whowished to follow him with theological trappings which had little to dowith New Testament revelation. They wanted a New Testament churchmade up of mature, tested and tried, born again believers. Many of themgave their lives to the flames because of this belief system.Jesus commanded us to “make disciples” of all nations “teachingthem to observe all I have commanded you” (Matthew 28:20). “All I havecommanded you” includes, as Grudem points out, the interpretation andapplication of Jesus’ life and teaching as well as the Letters or Epistles ofthe Apostles, since they were given by the “command of the Lord” (1 Cor.14:37; John 14:26; 16:13; 1 Thess. 4:15; 2 Peter 3:2; Rev. 1:1-3).14But the Anabaptists failed to recognize that “all I have commandedyou” must include the Old Testament writings since Jesus and theApostles freely used and referred to them as God’s Word (cf. 2 Tim. 3:16).The Great Commission, rather than just a call to evangelize people so theymake a decision for Christ, is a call to disciple and teach people the wholeBible. A good theological system helps accomplish this task.18

Systems deliver us from Christian “babyitis”Theological systems help Christians committed to the Bible as God’ssufficient and clear Word eradicate wrong ideas about a myriad of subjectsas well as grow in decision making and maturity. Theological systemschallenge both our preconceived ideas about God and his truth as well aslearned errors from others.With all the available Bible-tainted media in today’s information richage, we need good theological systems to help us distinguish truth fromerror. Old heresies continually pop up in new forms. An understanding ofbiblical and historical theology, helps us see these teachings for what theyare—heretical formulations.In a very practical way, this question about “what does the wholeBible say about a subject,” guides us in finding out about husband-wiferelationships, raising children, living for Christ at work and school, andeven spending money. Grudem well says, “In every area of inquiry certaintheological principles will come to bear, and those who have learned wellthe theological teachings of the Bible will be much better able to makedecisions that are pleasing to God.”15Why study historical theology?Why study the history of doctrine? J. G. Vos in his article, “The Use andAbuse of Church History,”16 gives three important reasons to do so. We canunduly romanticize the past. We can give it an ideal quality or characterthat it does not have nor deserve. Some overzealous Baptist historians,noting the historical gaps in their denominational development, defendedtheir heritage this way: “If you see a white horse entering a dark forest, andthen see a white horse emerge from that forest, you can be sure it is thesame horse.”The Waldenses17 were sometimes championed for their fiercely held“priesthood of all believers,” over against the prevailing Roman Catholicsystem of the period. However, their view of justication by faith alone wasnot fully realized or held until the Protestant Reformation. They may havebeen faithful witnesses of Christ in a dark period of church history, butthey were less than ideal markers of correct theology.19

The Anabaptists, or the “radical Reformers,” as they have been called,professed faithful New Testament Christianity, but discarded Paul and hiswritings in favor of the sayings of Jesus. Noted as harbingers of a “peacetheology,” some Anabaptists were, however, quite warlike and raisedarmies for their defense.The second reason why we should accurately study the history ofdoctrine is the problem of absolutizing of the past, seizing upon oneperiod of time as normative and ideal for all future times. Luther and theProtestant Reformers were brave souls in their time, yet their admixtureof church and state led to mass persecutions of those who did not agreewith town fathers. Vos puts it this way — ecclesia reformata reformanda est— “The church having been reformed is to be further reformed.”Then there is the disdaining of the past, a prideful and noted trashingof past church councils and creeds and discussions. The theologianBernard Ramm prefers being “a-historical.”18 The philosopher, Hegel,unfortunately once said that “we learn from history that we learn nothingfrom history.”19 A very common objection is “no creed but Christ.” Theproblem is, however, what Christ? How do we understand the unionof divine and human in the Jesus of the Bible? Is this Jesus merely thesupreme ethical teacher whose incarnation divested himself of divinity?Or is Jesus fully God but not quite fully man? The early Church Councilswere brought together to discuss and give a biblical route through thevarious teachings about Jesus that cropped up in the first centuries of theorganized Church. I met a pastor who told me that the Bible is not writtenfor systematic theological discussions, but is only an expanded story. Suchreasoning, I believe, dishonors God and his providential workings in thehistory of his Church.Certain major theological problems have cropped up in churchhistory, such as the nature of the Trinity, the understanding of the Personof Christ, how a person is justified before God and so forth. Some ChurchFathers, some of whom have long been condemned, are cited by modernwriters today as verification of long held truth. And so, the modern writerand speaker, Rob Bell in his book, Love Wins, makes rash and selectivehistorical theological comments to somehow prove that the God of20

love will “win” in the end, and that all people will finally be saved. Bellselectively uses, and many say misuses, historical theology to buttressa point of view denied by the majority of orthodox writers through thecenturies. He claims the likes of Origen, Basil, Augustine and even MartinLuther, yet miserably fails to place their comments within their ownhistorical and theological milieu. This is careless theology.20There is a very practical need for historical theology. The ReformerMelancthon penned the Augsburg Confession of Faith (1530) becausePhilip V needed to bring Lutherans and Catholics together to battlethe invading Turks. Later, the Formula of Concord (1580) was draftedto formalize and systematize theological insights. The WestminsterConfession of Faith was the document our Puritan forefathers broughtover on the Mayflower to delineate what the “city of God” should look likein the new world. The Bible was read through the eyes of historical needsand stresses. Our study of historical theology thus helps us understandwhy we are where we are in church life and thought.We read in the Psalms a recapitulation of ancient history to enforcecurrent spiritual truths. The history of Israel in their wilderness wanderingsis recited by God to them in Psalm 78 for them to remember and repentof current day defections from him. Stephen in his defense recites acondensed history of Israel and then makes this application — “You stiffnecked people, uncircumcised in heart and ears, you always resist the HolySpirit. As your fathers did, so do you. Which of the prophets did yourfathers not persecute? And they killed those who announced beforehandthe coming of the Righteous One, whom you have now betrayed andmurdered, you who received the law as delivered by angels and did notkeep it.” (Acts 7:51–53)As stewards of God, we are under a mandate to investigate themeaning of history, under the searchlight of Scripture alone. The truth ofthe sovereignty of God makes historical study and research meaningfuland important. C. Gregg Singer writes:The historian who believes in the biblical view of historyproceeds on the assumption that God so rules in the minds21

and hearts of man that in their political, economic, and socialdecisions and acts they create a meaningful pattern of events andthat this pattern derives its meaning and purpose from the factthat ultimately the sovereign God establishes the cause and effectrelationship between them.21This book supports a presuppositional point of view of history andhistorical theology. To say that history and historical theology simplyrecord what has happened without a person’s subjective views enteringinto the discussion is a myth of neutrality that cannot be sustai

Finney, Charles G. Finney’s Lectures on Theology. SAGE Software, 1995. Finney, Charles G. Revivals of Religion or Lectures on Revivals. Albany, OR: SAGE Software, 1996. . has come to mean a systematic study of the truths of the Bible, or an exploration of those truths in

Related Documents:

May 02, 2018 · D. Program Evaluation ͟The organization has provided a description of the framework for how each program will be evaluated. The framework should include all the elements below: ͟The evaluation methods are cost-effective for the organization ͟Quantitative and qualitative data is being collected (at Basics tier, data collection must have begun)

Silat is a combative art of self-defense and survival rooted from Matay archipelago. It was traced at thé early of Langkasuka Kingdom (2nd century CE) till thé reign of Melaka (Malaysia) Sultanate era (13th century). Silat has now evolved to become part of social culture and tradition with thé appearance of a fine physical and spiritual .

On an exceptional basis, Member States may request UNESCO to provide thé candidates with access to thé platform so they can complète thé form by themselves. Thèse requests must be addressed to esd rize unesco. or by 15 A ril 2021 UNESCO will provide thé nomineewith accessto thé platform via their émail address.

̶The leading indicator of employee engagement is based on the quality of the relationship between employee and supervisor Empower your managers! ̶Help them understand the impact on the organization ̶Share important changes, plan options, tasks, and deadlines ̶Provide key messages and talking points ̶Prepare them to answer employee questions

Dr. Sunita Bharatwal** Dr. Pawan Garga*** Abstract Customer satisfaction is derived from thè functionalities and values, a product or Service can provide. The current study aims to segregate thè dimensions of ordine Service quality and gather insights on its impact on web shopping. The trends of purchases have

Chính Văn.- Còn đức Thế tôn thì tuệ giác cực kỳ trong sạch 8: hiện hành bất nhị 9, đạt đến vô tướng 10, đứng vào chỗ đứng của các đức Thế tôn 11, thể hiện tính bình đẳng của các Ngài, đến chỗ không còn chướng ngại 12, giáo pháp không thể khuynh đảo, tâm thức không bị cản trở, cái được

More than words-extreme You send me flying -amy winehouse Weather with you -crowded house Moving on and getting over- john mayer Something got me started . Uptown funk-bruno mars Here comes thé sun-the beatles The long And winding road .

3 Christian - Anglican 25.06 Christian - Anglican 15.48 4 Christian - Uniting 5.44 Christian - Other Protestant 6.79 5 Christian - Other Protestant 2.55 Christian - Uniting 2.88 6 Christian - Presbyterian/Reformed 2.53 Christian - Presbyterian/Reformed 1.35 7 Christian - Other 1.83 Christian - Lutheran 0.87