 |
Can a relationship be too intentional? In "Navigating The Early Stages of a Relationship," Scott Croft seems to say so. This occurs when the deliberate nature of the relationship breeds too much intimacy too soon. Obviously, there needs to be some intentionality from the start. Croft writes: Guys, tell her why you have initiated or are initiating with her, tell her that you intend to pursue the relationship to determine if marriage to her is the right choice before God.
But once that is established, the tendency can be to rush.
Most of the relationships I've experienced have been intentional. I'm thankful for this, because it means that the men who have pursued me have had no interest in messing with my heart. At the same time, a relationship can become unbalanced when every time together is viewed as an opportunity to move the relationship forward.
Croft points out the benefits of both group interaction and activity-based togetherness: If you do spend time alone, spend it in activities, read a book together, be in public places, etc. In these early stages, people should not be spending long hours looking into each others eyes over candle-lit tables or being alone together at one another's apartments. To do so courts temptation (so to speak) and implies a level of commitment that's simply not there yet.
At various times, I have recognized the importance of "play time" in a relationship. Just playing a game of tennis together or hijacking a couple of swings at the park can be a precious time. Play promotes natural conversation, allows you to see the other person's personality and builds camaraderie. Plus, it allows affection to grow while intimacy is held at bay. Every conversation need not be a DTR (defining the relationship). Enjoy the early phase of a relationship, and don't be afraid to play.
We've been talking about weddings on The Line. Some have brought up wedding costs, modesty in bridal gowns, and other things. I'd like to divulge some stuff about my wedding a bit over four years ago that I pray serves as an encouragement for those of you pondering how you can pull it off in a timely manner and at a reasonable budget.
I've gotten my wife's permission, as well as the photographer's permission, to post some photos; scroll down to see some of those.
Ashleigh and I had a wonderful ceremony. We had spent a couple of months planning it (we married just four months after becoming engaged), and we had delegated the responsibility of running the show to one of Ashleigh's friends, someone who was involved in a number of stage productions in grad school. Having a competent wedding coordinator enabled us to just enjoy the ride.
Our church was wrapping up the construction of its sanctuary, and so we weren't able to use that. Instead, we chose a historic church in Portsmouth, Virginia, Monumental United Methodist Church. The church was founded in the late 1700s, and included the Rev. Francis Asbury as one of its pastors. We paid $1,200 to rent the sanctuary, reception hall (including the dishes), and receive the services of the church's pastor and custodian.
We ordered our cake from a little bakery across the street from the church. Price: $300.
The flowers were given to us by a friend from church. If we had to purchase flowers, I would have bought them from the local flower wholesaler, not mentioning that they were for a wedding.
I had designed the invitations myself and had a few dozen of them printed (thermal ink) at a local Hallmark. We only sent invitations to out-of-town guests and maybe a couple of other people, so printing and postage costs were kept very low. We put a general invitation in our church bulletin so that all our friends would feel welcome to attend both the ceremony and reception.
Decorations were minimal, as the wedding took place a couple of days before Christmas and the sanctuary was already decorated with poinsettias and Christmas trees. We spent $250 for additional decorations for the reception hall. The church provided candles for the sanctuary (it was a night wedding).
Ashleigh's dress cost $800, after alterations. She found it "off the rack" at David's Bridal.
Professional musician friends Mike and Lorri Hafer played at the reception. We paid for their expenses, which may have been a couple hundred dollars.
Four of our friends played and sang during the service. They offered to do so for free.
We paid our photographer $700 for both the engagement photos and wedding photos; though she is a professional photographer, because she is a friend and is married to one of the guys in my band, she cut us a great deal. Our videographer did it as a gift to us. I made our three-camera wedding video on my Mac.
A number of our friends baked cookies and such for our dessert reception. We also bought some munchies and ingredients for punch at Sam's Club. Total cost: $100.
We had our rehearsal dinner at a local restaurant, just reserving a room and ordering off the menu. We didn't offer alcohol. The bill may have been $400 or so. We gave presents to the wedding party during the rehearsal dinner at a total cost of about $100. This included CDs of the music we played prior to our wedding, Rachmaninoff's Vespers by the Robert Shaw Festival Singers; we ordered a bunch through a CD club for maybe $40.
My tux was free with the groomsmen rentals; look -- no ties! The bridesmaids were able to get their outfits off the clearance rack at Lord and Taylors for about $40 each.
A story before I show the photos. During our engagement, in an effort to ease Ashleigh's concerns about what might possibly go wrong with our wedding, I asked, "What's the worst that could happen? If the wedding cake doesn't make it -- that's irrelevant in the big scheme of things." Well, as it turns out, the bakery did forget to make our cake. When the cake didn't arrive on time, I walked over and knocked on their door, since they had just closed for the day; when they came to the door and realized their mistake, they put their whole team into getting it done. It was delivered, very fresh, during the ceremony and just before the reception.
We had a wonderful wedding. I wouldn't change a thing. It was fun and pure and inexpensive and we could invite all our friends. We shared our first kiss at the altar in this beautiful historic church, and honeymooned in Paris, France. The scent of incense wafting from the priest's censer during the Christmas Eve ceremony at Notre-Dame is etched in my memory.
What did it cost us? About $4,000 for the wedding and just over $1,000 for the Paris honeymoon (we joined a travel club to get great deals on a flight, and reserved our hotel room online).
Enough chatter. Here's what you came here for....
I read an article the other day about saving money on weddings. After a couple of quick tips, the writer shares this thought: Thirty-nine years ago, my parents were married in a small chapel north of New Orleans. They each had two attendants; 40 guests attended. A friend took photographs. Since then, my father has had a theory: "The success of the marriage is in inverse proportion to the lavishness of the wedding." His thinking (which holds some water) is that the more time and effort a couple devotes to picking out the perfect invitation, favor, or limousine service, the less they work on their compatibility during the critical period of engagement.
I heard once (and I think we've mentioned on Boundless somewhere) that weddings among early Christians were as simple as having couples who wanted to get married stand during the course of a church service and repeat their vows. That's radically bare bones compared to the elaborate details couples are working on right now for weddings that will be taking place in the next couple of months.
What level of planning and investment makes a wedding special without taking away from the larger project of planning and investment for a good marriage?
Any thoughts from our married readers? Any readers in the midst of planning a wedding?
Despite parents' and pastors' best efforts, Christian teens are having sex in record numbers. In "Even Evangelical Teens Do It," columnist Hannah Rosin talks about a new book that blows the covers off premarital sex trends among the abstinence-minded.
Her review of Forbidden Fruit: Sex & Religion in the Lives of American Teenagers by Mark Regnerus is sobering. She writes, [Among] teenagers who identify as "evangelical" or "born again" ... 80 percent think sex should be saved for marriage. But thinking is not the same as doing. Evangelical teens are actually more likely to have lost their virginity than either mainline Protestants or Catholics. They tend to lose their virginity at a slightly younger age — 16.3, compared with 16.7 for the other two faiths. And they are much more likely to have had three or more sexual partners by age 17: Regnerus reports that 13.7 percent of evangelicals have, compared with 8.9 percent for mainline Protestants.
This is bad news on lots of fronts, but especially for their future marriages. What these sexually active teens likely don't know is that for every sexual partner, their chance of divorce goes up. Why so much pre-marital sex among kids who've been encouraged to wait till marriage? ... partly the problem lies in the temptation-rich life of an average American teenager. The fate of the True Love Waits movement, which began with the Southern Baptist Convention in the '90s, is a perfect example. Teenagers who signed the abstinence pledge belong to a subgroup of highly motivated virgins. But even they succumb. Follow-up surveys show that at best, pledges delayed premarital sex by 18 months — a success by statistical standards but a disaster for Southern Baptist pastors.
Evangelical teens today are much less sheltered than their parents were; they watch the same TV and listen to the same music as everyone else, which causes a "cultural collision," according to Regnerus. "Be in the world, but not of it," is the standard Christian formula for how to engage with mainstream culture. But in a world hypersaturated with information, this is difficult for tech-savvy teenagers to pull off.
So who, among the many who singed abstinence pledges, is following through on their commitment to save sex for marriage? Rosin says Regnerus found, What really matters is not which religion teenagers identify with but how strongly they identify. After controlling for all factors (family satisfaction, popularity, income), religion matters much less than religiosity. Among the mass of typically promiscuous teenagers in the book, one group stands out: the 16 percent of American teens who describe religion as "extremely important" in their lives. When these guys pledge, they mean it.
It seems that no matter what, this group of believers is set on waiting. Rosin writes, But among this elite corps of evangelicals, the women are breezing around in what one girl I know called "shockingly slutty conservative outfits" while the men hold their tongues.
This is the part of the review I found most dismaying. Why add to the challenge of waiting? It's like Eve offering Adam the apple. Young women in this group of devout believers should know, and do, better. They have only good to gain from obeying God's standard of modesty. It will make the waiting that much more bearable for themselves, and even more so, for the young men they hope will one day take them as wives.
A 27-year-old man described as "one of the world's most prolific spammers" was arrested yesterday.
The Associated Press quotes Tim Cranton, a Microsoft Corp. lawyer and senior director of the company's Worldwide Internet Safety Programs thusly: "He's one of the top 10 spammers in the world.... He's a huge problem for our customers. This is a very good day."
A good day for some, but also a day to recognize that a means of God's grace has been taken off the scene.
In a blog post I wrote back in October entitled "Spam: Good for the Soul," I wrote of how spam helped highlight discontentment in my heart, how it brought out a distasteful response that revealed a distasteful heart.
In that blog post I referenced an article by Carolyn McCulley, "You Made Me Sin," who quoted from Dr. David Powlison: "The circumstances of our lives simply reveal what's taken root in our hearts. When pressed, we either ooze the fruit of the Spirit or the fruit of sin."
My conclusion then is the same as it is now: May what the spammers mean for evil be turned around and used by God for good. May their spams provide a helpful view into my heart, and may I be reminded that though I deserve much worse than mere spam, I'm the recipient of the amazing grace of God.
I have to confess that my response to the issue of spam is different this time. Instead of dealing with feelings of hatred, I'm finding myself dealing with feelings of vengeance, upbeat that someone like this is being brought down....
Last week, we brought you the documentary The Great Global Warming Swindle. Now, I want to call your attention to a film that the New York Times calls "the antidote to 'Inconvenient Truth,'" Steve Hayward's An Inconvenient Truth or Convenient Fiction?
Here's a portion of the introduction: "The problem with Vice President Gore and other global warming extremists is that they distort the science, grossly exaggerate the risks, argue that anyone who disagrees with them are corrupt, and suggest that solutions are easy and cheap. And that's an all too convenient fiction."
And another quote worth highlighting: "Most Americans think that the environment in the United States is getting worse. That's what they tell pollsters by a huge margin. And, in fact, what our data show is that in most areas, not all areas, but in most areas environmental quality in the U.S. is improving rapidly and dramatically."
This documentary falls somewhere in the middle on global warming and its causes. Hayward states up front that he believes much of what Al Gore says, mainly that the planet is warming and that humans are playing a substantial role. But he also says that the problem is "greatly exaggerated by the activists and more susceptible to improvement than we think."
Several commenters to Candice's post took issue with calling global warming politics fear driven. But it seems Hayward's claiming that fear is exactly what's driving it.
Something I particularly enjoyed about attending Na was hanging out at the Boundless booth. We handed out chocolate and "Grappledecks" (packets of helpful Boundless advice on everything from modesty to conversing with the opposite sex to changing your oil). At first, booth visitors seemed reluctant to take the free Grappledecks, but by the end of the conference people were visiting the booth just to get one. "I hear these are funny!" they'd say or "Can I take a few for my friends?" The space in front of the Boundless booth became the "Grapple Cafe" as guys and girls pulled out the cards and discussed (and chuckled over) them. (I later saw people reading them on my plane ride home).
We had some faithful Boundless readers stop by (Dan H. had all three Boundless T-shirts!). It was fun to pick their brains on what they like about Boundless and what they'd like to see more of. "I like the practical advice," one girl said. "It offers a slightly different perspective on the truths I'm getting at church." (If you weren't at Na, consider this post a visit to the Boundless booth and tell us what you'd like to see more of!)
Our mannequins provided a unique challenge. They didn't always stay upright and fell at the slightest touch. At one point, when the female mannequin fell backward and knocked down the male mannequin, one visitor quipped: "She needs to learn to let the guy initiate." My favorite mannequin moment came while Josh and I were breaking down the booth Monday night. I noted that the mannequin looked like a chalk outline.
Me: It's a crime scene.
Josh: He was caught being someone's buddy.
Thank you to all the Boundless readers who stopped by the booth at Na. And to any of you who are visiting our blog for the first time because you stopped by, it was great meeting you! We still have plenty of "Grappledecks." Maybe you'll be able to get one at a future event!
I've read with ongoing interest, and dismay, the volume of reader comments in favor of radical efforts to address so-called global warming. The consensus among readers seems, strangely enough, to be that the Boundless staff is daft for not jumping on the climate-change-crisis bandwagon. Such hysterics is a prime example of why it's so important to know history. Regardless of what the science really says, and what does or doesn't eventually happen to the polar ice caps and oceans, we relinquish our liberties for the purported "greater good" at our own peril.
I'm happy to have a copy of a new book on the subject and eager to jump into it. It's called Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1,500 Years, by S. Fred Singer and Dennis T. Avery. I'm planning to write a review of it for Boundless.org, just as as soon as I meet my own book deadline (another subject for another day).
In the meantime, I was reading Edith Schaeffer's, A Way of Seeing, and found her chapter about fear a welcome reminder of how we Christians should respond to all potential catastrophes. She said, Our Father in heaven ... knows that our energies, time, emotions, conscious thought, and creative possibilities can be nibbled at, wasted, or even destroyed by being "afraid of sudden fear." Don't we see how fantastic is God's understanding, as He shows us how we are so often afraid of fear unknown, unnamed -- a nebulous, floating thing we are apt not to recognize, and which therefore eats away at us, spoiling what we could be right now, because of what we fear in the future? The word comes sharply to us -- "Don't!" We are not to waste our time being afraid of something, although it may come suddenly and will be real at the moment it does come.
Whatever your thoughts on the evidence, or lack thereof, of global warming, if you claim to be a follower of Christ, what you must not be is afraid. And certainly you must not make decisions or take actions based on fear. God's Word is clear, Be not afraid of sudden fear, neither of the desolation of the wicked, when it cometh. For the Lord shall be thy confidence, and shall keep they foot from being taken" (Proverbs 3:25,26).
Of course I'm eager to see the believers in global warming stop letting their fears drive their politics. But equally important is overcoming my own fear that such fear-driven politics will prevail.
Tim Challies blogs a lot of conferences and says he's never seen any speaker generate more excitement than John Piper. He said, "Piper's a rock star everywhere I go, no matter what audience demographic he's speaking to." And based on what I saw, I don't doubt it. People were holding up Piper signs and the crowd gave him a standing ovation before he began.
In keeping with the conference discernment theme, Piper began, "It takes more discernment than it first seems to know what pleases God." And the short answer is, God pleases God. He then gave a series of questions and answers that helped clarify this thought:
- Who is the most God centered person in the universe? God
- Who is uppermost in God's affection? God, not you
- Is God an idolator? No
- What is God's chief jealousy? To be known, trusted and obeyed
- What is the chief end of God? To glorify God and enjoy Himself forever
Do you bristle at this? If so, Piper said it may be because you need to adjust your lenses on what it means to be God-centered. He asked, "Are you God-centered because God is supremely valuable to you or because you believe you are supremely valuable to him?" Deep down, he said, people believe that they are at the center of God's affections.
Piper acknowledges that God's self-exultation may sound unloving to some. But, he said, that's only because we have defined love the wrong way. We define love by being made much of, but Piper said that throughout redemptive history, the Bible has defined it this way (and I'm paraphrasing here quite a bit):
Love labors, plans, and suffers to enthrall the beloved with that which will totally and eternally satisfy their souls. And God is the one being in the universe who, in order to do that, must be self-exulting. If He didn't do this, He would be hateful. The essence of God's love is to do whatever He has to do to make us enthralled with Him.
Piper said a lot of other things which are worth exploring in this Monday afternoon session. You can find them here at Desiring God.
Eric is speaking this morning on the issue of "gray matters," something he wrote about for Boundless a few weeks ago (here and here).
Judging from those articles, it's going to be a challenging, provocative hour. This is where the practice of "discernment" becomes really practical, where it affects most of us us most intimately.
When C.J. spoke on "the Idol Factory," which is our hearts, he reminded us that, unchecked, our hearts will regularly create idols. I was a little shocked when he said, "Draw near to idolatry." But his point was that idolatry is something the modern Christian does not identify with. This is dangerous, since idolatry is the most talked about, and heavily condemned, sin in Scripture.
How can identify idolatry and root it out of his life? C.J. suggested inviting the careful critique of those in the Christian community, whom we trust. We may be oblivious to something that is obvious to them. "Initiate, invite, detect," he challenged. This exhortation reminded me of an article I wrote called "My Ugly Blind Spot." Idolatry has the potential to be the ugliest of blind spots.
Proverbs 27:5-6 is a good example: "Better is open rebuke than hidden love. Wounds from a friend can be trusted, but an enemy multiplies kisses."
Those who love you are the best to offer critique. To avoid living with glaring blind spots, regularly ask those you trust to give insight into your life and point out areas that need improvement.
Discerning what has taken the place of Jesus in our hearts requires the Holy Spirit and the imput of godly friends. Drawing near to idolatry — in order to root it out — requires community and an openness to change. And there is hope for those of us who detect idols in our hearts.
It hurts to be confronted with my ugliness. But as I've discovered, these painful moments can also be a catalyst for change. I'll never be a truly nice person. I suspect I'll still give "the look" in moments of weakness. But as I deal with blind spots, and as I continue inviting loved ones to help me better see those blind spots, I can be confident that I'll come out looking more like Christ.
While watching the Boundless booth last night I met Christa Taylor, a young woman who's heading up a small business that offers "trendy and feminine modest dresses for modern women."
Through her online store, aptly named Christa Taylor, you can pick up dresses, skirts, tops, swimming suits and accessories. All designs are her own, which is pretty cool, and all the clothing is made in the U.S.
They "always give at least 30% of [their] profits towards the needs of the poor and towards social justice throughout the world."
I've appreciated modesty for quite a while now; it's great to have the Christian community step up and meet a need that is obvious to anyone walking through the mall, and doing so in a socially conscious way.
I've spent the past hour taking line after line of notes on C.J.'s exposition of idolatry.
I'm pretty confident, frankly, that Tim Challies, who is sitting next to me, will be able to convey the depth and power of the message better than I could.
So instead of providing a write-up based on my notes, I'll defer to my friend Tim to do so. I'll link to it as soon as he uploads it, and we can either begin the conversation here or there.
In the meantime, here are two photos of C.J. in action.
Motte, Suzanne and I are in the midst of "live-blogging" our first event, the three-day New Attitude conference. What do you think? Keeping up with us?
When Dr. Al Mohler was a boy scout, he learned a poem that helped him distinguish between the harmless scarlet king snake and the deadly coral snake. The poem went: "Red and black, friend of Jack. Red and yellow, kill a fellow." Although Mohler dutifully memorized the poem, when he actually came across a snake in the woods, he decided not to depend on it.
This afternoon, Dr. Mohler compared his childhood experience to the grown-up task of discerning the culture. How we engage with culture is a life and death matter, he said. We don't want to leave it to chance. Many Christians resort to these five unhelpful ways of engaging our culture:
- "Let's get completely wet." This approach assumes everything associated with our culture is neutral.
- "We're going to stay completely dry." This person disengages with culture and becomes unaware of what is going on.
- "Let's take a dip." This person picks and chooses aspects of culture to adopt as it's convenient and neglects to acknowledge that culture is a system.
- "Let's take a sip." This approach attempts to "taste" culture through an immersion experience and is inadequate to truly experience culture, which is deep and complex.
- "We're going to watch the aquarium." This approach watches culture from a spectator's perspective; unengaged.
Each of these views of culture falls short of cultural discernment. Some accept culture too readily. Others avoid it to the point of being useless to God's redeeming purposes. Dr. Mohler pointed to Matthew 22:23-46 as offering the example for cultural discernment. After brilliantly responding to the questions of both the Sadducees and the Pharisees, Jesus states the greatest commandment:
"Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind." This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: "Love your neighbor as yourself."
Discernment of culture, Mohler said, comes down to these commands. Loving God requires a concerted effort to remain pure in a sinful world; loving our neighbors requires that we understand our culture enough to be ambassadors.
"Our home is nowhere and everywhere," Mohler said. We must remember that culture is broken. It is a seductive force that is not shaped by God's values. But when we submit our minds to God's truth, and our hearts to His love, engaging culture in a way that impacts our neighbor is possible.
Ricky Alcantar, one of the tireless New Attitude folks that's been helping coordinate us bloggers, took the group of us out for dinner tonight. How cool to hang out with Alex, Brett and Tim -- men for whom I have the utmost respect -- over a relaxed meal.
For those of you who don't get a lot out of photos of people eating, I'm also including a picture of one of the original paintings in the Na lounge.
The artwork above is copyright 2007 David Altrogge
Mark Dever began his talk this morning with, "Oh how the devil must hate this conference. He must be displeased with this message of discernment, which teaches us how to repudiate him."
I first heard Mark preach exactly 10 days after praying with Senate Chaplin Dr. Lloyd Ogilvie that the Lord would reveal himself to me. And though I don't know exactly when salvation occurred, I know that hearing Pastor Dever for the first time was like eating the most delicious meal I had ever had; like eating the food that C.S. Lewis describes in the land of Narnia. It was satisfying in a way I had never experienced.
It's been 11 years since then. It was great to hear him again.
Mark warned that this talk would be "dense" and "long." It was, thankfully. He gave a very practical, hour and a half message on what Christians should agree upon, what we may disagree about, and how to do it well. Here's a brief summary.
First, in order to determine what Christian should agree upon, you need to evaluate the circumstance. In other words, all Christians do not have to agree on all matters, all the time. For example, a husband and wife need to be on a higher level of agreement than friends or acquaintances; and Christians who go the same church need to be in agreement on a higher level than say, writers and readers of the Boundless Line blog.
With that established, Mark said there are three things on which every Christian must agree: God, The Bible, and The Gospel. He said simply that 1) we must believe in the one true God; the triune God; that He was not made; that He functions as our sovereign Creator and our Judge; and that He is the one we are called to believe in; 2) we must believe that the Bible is inerrant; that God has revealed himself in the Bible, that that's how we know what God is like; and 3) we must believe that Jesus Christ became incarnate and that we are justified before God only through him.
As for doctrine on which sincere believers may disagree, Mark gives four test cases: the millennium, prayers for the dead, complimentarian vs. egalitarian, and evangelism. Not that these things don't matter, they're just non-essential. He rhetorically asks, "Can you have an Evangelical who believes in women serving as a pastor of a church? Of course you can. Is it a good idea biblically? No."
Finally, Mark says that when we must disagree, let's make sure it's evident that we care more about each other than winning the argument. He says that it should always be done with love, respect and sometimes by heeding Romans 14:22, "So whatever you believe about these things keep between yourself and God. Blessed is the man who does not condemn himself by what he approves."
I spoke with Mark afterward and thanked him for message. He said, "I hope it was helpful." It was.
"It is a joy to be with thousands of believers proclaiming, 'Great is the Lord!'"
Those are the words of Na worship leader Bob Kauflin opening Sunday morning's session. And the joy is manifest: three thousand 20somethings standing, hands raised, singing loudly, praising the Lord. It is what we were made for.
It reminds me of a dear brother who prays whenever we're together, "Dear Lord. Thank you for this fellowship. Thank you for the common bond we have in Christ." You can tell there's nothing he enjoys more than being with other believers. It's one of the blessings God gives us that mirrors, heaven, though imperfectly.
After spending most of my life in the fellowship of unbelief, the common bond I have in Christ is one of the most precious to me
BoundlessLine.org is not the only place to get updates on New Attitude. Tim Challies (of Challies.com) and Alex and Brett Harris (of TheRebelution.com) are also blogging, as is the New Attitude team.
Tim is, as expected, great painting pictures with words. If you'd like to be here, but aren't, you'll feel like you're here if you spend a few minutes reading his recent posts:
Alex and Brett are publishing some great photos, and a bit of commentary. If you want to read the perspectives of the brothers of New Attitude's founder, take a look at a few of their recent posts:
You can keep up with all the blogs by all the New Attitude bloggers by just going to the New Attitude site.
We've got a cool booth set up here at New Attitude, nestled in between Ugg Records (Steve and ViKki Cook) and Desiring God ministry.
If you're here, stop by to sign up for our free e-newsletter, and while you're at it pick up a GrappleDeck and "sweet gift"!
I'll be posting photos of New Attitude over the next couple of days. Below is the first batch, taken just minutes ago. Click on any image to see it full-size.
Motte, Suzanne and I arrived in Louisville last night, eager to immerse ourselves in all that is New Attitude.
Over the next couple of days the three of us will be givng regular updates on our experiences: the speakers (Joshua Harris, Eric Simmons, CJ Mahaney, Mark Dever, Al Mohler and John Piper), the revisited relationships with friends we've not seen in a year, our time at the Boundless booth, and anything else that strikes us.
If you're here, please feel free to drop by the stack-o-boxes, say hi and pick up a chocolate bar and GrappleDeck.
And whether you're here or not, be sure to check back regularly!
You can also keep up with the other livebloggers on the New Attitude website.
Here's one documentary you didn't see at this year's Cannes Film Festival.
Why is it that those most concerned with what we put in the air seem least concerned about what we put in our hearts?
Some commenters have come to Planned Parenthood's (PP) defense, saying that abortions only account for 3% of their services. A look at PP's 2004-2005 Annual Report shows that that is just false.
Here's the relevant information for the period from July 2004 to the end of June 2005:
- $882 million in total income
- $347 million of that from their clinics
- $273 million of that from federal grants and contracts
- $216 million of that from private contributions and bequests
During that period, they killed 255,015 babies, earning $108 million for doing so. That means that 31% of the income they earned came from performing abortions, not a mere 3% that some have suggested. They kill 14 babies for every 1 they help with prenatal care. They perform 180 abortions for every 1 adoption referral. These figures show that PP is in fact anti-choice and pro-abortion.
Though PP is a nonprofit organization, they pocketed $63 million that year, bringing total assets to nearly a billion dollars. And while money is a significant motivator for PP, ideology is the most significant one -- an ideology based on the satanic belief that kids are in fact not a blessing, but something to be disposed of.
The facts show that Planned Parenthood is eager to kill babies, eager to make money. This world would be better off if PP were defunded, and the money currently being given to them were instead given to pro-life crisis pregnancy centers and family planning agencies not so bent on facilitating abortion.
Related to Ted's post on stay-at-home moms is a poll out this week, that reveals financial worries and a search for Mr. Right are the top reasons women are reluctant to have children. The study of 1,800 child-free women, for Grazia magazine, debunks the idea that a woman's career is a primary factor in her choice to remain childless. In fact, only 16 percent say they don't have children because of their careers. More than half (51 percent) of those aged 24 to 27 and a third of 28- to 32-year-olds say they cannot afford to get on the "family ladder" because they are not financially stable or do not own their own home.
Other deterrents include "having too much fun to think about children" and "feeling too much like a child themselves to have one yet." Despite these reasons for holding off, 62 percent of women age 24 to 27 admit to stressing about fertility. Grazia editor Jane Bruton says: Getting on the family ladder is simply becoming too expensive. If you don't own your own home or feel financially stable because of excessive debt then you aren't going to feel equipped to have a child.
On top of this, women are waiting longer to meet the right man to father their children and are simply not prepared to compromise.
While a desire not to compromise — particularly on Christian character — is a good thing, I detect symptoms of the quarter life crisis in these women's responses. (I discussed this topic in "Set, Go...Ready.") I suspect most women are more ready than they think to marry and have children. Women who feel unprepared should be seeking out intentional ways to grow into godly adults.
I talked about the New Attitude conference for singles and young adults back in November. I brought it up again a month ago. A few days later Suzanne blogged about her experience at last year's New Attitude conference. It was last written about earlier this month by Motte.
Now it's arrived.
Motte, Suzanne and I will be packing up our clothes and hair wax and heading out on Saturday to spend a few days with friends and mentors. We're looking forward to catching up with old friends and being challenged by great speakers like Joshua Harris, Eric Simmons, CJ Mahaney, Mark Dever, Al Mohler and John Piper. Between sessions we'll be manning our very cool Boundless booth; during sessions you may catch us live-blogging.
If you're there, please feel free to stop by our booth to say hi! If you're not going this year, check back over the weekend for the latest from the home of the Kentucky Derby and the Louisville Slugger.
Here's a revealing Q&A found on Planned Parenthood's site for teenagers.
Dear Experts,
I had an abortion a little over a month ago and now I'm pregnant again. What are the risks of having a second abortion?
The Answer:
Abortion is a very safe procedure. It's about twice as safe as having tonsils removed, and is much safer than giving birth.
The risks for the second abortion are generally the same as for the first, if they are both performed at the same stage of pregnancy. There is no evidence that having more than one abortion causes any health problems.
However, the risks increase the longer a pregnancy goes on. That's why the most important thing is not to delay the abortion procedure. Generally, the earlier the abortion, the safer it is.
The need for abortion can be prevented by proper use of birth control. Call ... for information about birth control and abortion services at your nearest Planned Parenthood.
Hope this information helps!
Take care,
teenwire.com® Editors
Well, there's experts and then there's "experts" who make a lot of money in the anything goes sex and abortion industry.
Others would have advised that abortion isn't just a simple medical procedure. They would have told this young girl that having one or more abortions significantly increases risks of delivering prematurely in the future. They would have told her that after an abortion, many women develop eating disorders, relationship problems, suicidal thoughts, alcohol and drug abuse, as well as other psychological problems. Some may even have told her about the link between abortion and breast cancer.
And they would have told her about the life-affirming alternatives to abortion and about the help that is available.
But not Planned Parenthood. As Ted put it, this would have put up too many roadblocks on this young girl's way to "abortion bliss."
HT: The Corner
I'm happy that my wife is able to stay home with our two baby daughters. She's able to take them to the library for story time, to the mall for lunch and window shopping, to the park so they can go down the slides, to friends' homes so they can play with their peers. I'm glad our girls are being raised by their mommy (and papa), rather than by someone who might be in it only for the money. I'm grateful that, though I work at a ministry, Focus on the Family does make it possible for us to afford such an arrangement.
You can have this arrangement too, some day, if you'd like.
In an article published this morning on Boundless, author Heather Koerner identifies 10 things singles can do now to increase the likelihood that they can stay home with the kids.
Of course, not all of our female readers will be stay-at-home mothers. You may have chosen a career that'll have you spending most of our daylight hours at the office, for example. But many of you will be caring for your future kids at home. And many more of you want to do that, but don't see yourself being able to do so for whatever reason.
Regardless which scenario you anticipate, you should consider that some day you may want to forgo corporate responsibilities and instead, for either a few months or many years, care full-time for the children you may some day have.
Read the article. It's not a difficult read. And then come back here and let us know what you think.
Is it realistic? Is it something you want to do? Are you concerned that your college education will go to waste? Do you fear that you'll be unfulfilled as a mere mommy? What are some ways you could carry out point #9? Are you offended that I'd imply that kids are better off raised primarily by their mommies than by employees of a child care business? Are there alternatives to full-time child care or full-time care by a mommy? Is this even something you think much about as a single adult? Do I ask too many questions?
I thought some of you might benefit from an e-mail exchange between a Boundless Line reader and me. It's self-explanatory so I won't spend any more time introducing it.
* * *Hey Motte
I really enjoy the blog and appreciate the things you have to say. I have an issue I'm hoping you can help me with. Your article "Dealing with Sexual Confusion" struck a nerve with me. I'm a 22 year old male who's seeking to follow Christ in every way. A few weeks ago, I was reading an article on homosexuality written from a Christian perspective, when all of a sudden a gripping fear came over me that I might be homosexual.
I recognized immediately that this was a full-out attack of hell itself. I have never dabbled in anything remotely related to homosexuality, nor ever experienced any same-sex attraction -- and still don't. I am currently pursuing a beautiful, Godly young woman to whom I am very attracted. So the issue for me is not an actual same-sex attraction, but rather the fear that "that will happen to me."
I have prayed, fasted, rebuked the devil, sought God in his word, and sought Godly counsel from my pastor and father. Though I have experienced temporary freedom from this fear, Satan still keeps shooting his fiery darts my way. When the fear comes, it often seems overwhelming. I'm wondering how you found freedom from confusion and fear, and how might I go about doing so?
Thanks so much.
Reply
Thanks for writing. I'm not a counselor but I believe I understand what you're going through since it's sounds so much like the fears I had when I was your age (and at various other times to be honest).
Like you, I don't believe I've ever experienced sexual same-sex attraction. But I've been fearful of becoming a homosexual none-the-less. My fear was more that my male friendships could become something more. So I began to distrust my feelings and that led several minor crises about my own sexuality. I never really understood this irrational fear until I read something Dr. Albert Mohler wrote about two years ago in response to the movie Brokeback Mountain.
In "Sexual Confusion and the End of Friendship," Dr. Mohler clarifies what happens to young men in a society that wants you to not only question your sexuality, but experiment with it as well. He references an article from Touchstone magazine titled, "A Requiem for Friendship: Why Boys Will Not Be Boys and Other Consequences of the Sexual Revolution" from Anthony Esolen, Professor of English at Providence College in Providence, Rhode Island. In a truly haunting section of his essay, Esolen asked us to imagine a society in which the taboo against incest has been removed. Under such circumstances, no uncle would be free to hug his young niece without an accusation of sexual interest. Relationships between parents and children, brothers and sisters, and relatives of all varieties would be corrupted and undermined by the imposition of sexual suspicion.
As Esolen understands, this is exactly what is happening as homosexuality is normalized in the culture. Normal, non-sexual, fraternal friendships among men now come under suspicion. This is especially true for teenage boys and young men, who are less secure about their manhood and more concerned about their own -- and their peers' -- sexual identity.
The normalization of homosexuality destroys the natural order of friendships among men. "Think about that friendship, the next time you see the perpetual adolescents and feather boas as they march down Main Street, making their sexual proclivities known to everybody whether everybody cares or not," Esolen instructs. "With every chanted slogan and every blaring sign, they crowd out the words of friendship, they appropriate the healthy gestures of love between man and man. Confess -- has it not left you uneasy even to read the words of that last sentence?"
Earlier in his commentary, Dr. Mohler wrote that men need an "uncomplicated heterosexual expectation." I think that's what I needed. And I think it's what you need as well, an uncomplicated heterosexual expectation; an understanding that the feelings of love or admiration or closeness you feel with another male are perfectly normal, and even manly.
As for the overcoming the fear, you are right, it is directly from the devil. But you may also be predisposed to worrying about such things. I know I am. I worry a lot about what I'm capable of so I've dealt with more than just a fear of homosexuality. But God has sustained me throughout all my struggles.
My advice to you is to stand fast; abide in God's Word and in prayer; and if you are overwhelmed like you say you are, seek the counsel from godly men you trust.
I hope this letter proves helpful. Know that I've already prayed for you and will continue to as the Lord leads.
In Christ,
Motte
In today's Washington Post, Michael Gerson (the president's former speechwriter) explores Republican front-runner Rudy Giuliani's muddled view on abortion. Giuliani is now attempting a political vault with the highest degree of difficulty: winning the GOP presidential nomination as a pro-choice candidate. . . .
There is, however, a question that comes before politics: Does Giuliani's position on abortion actually make sense?
In early debates and statements, he has set out his views on this topic with all the order and symmetry of a freeway pileup. His argument comes down to this: "I hate abortion," which is "morally wrong." But "people ultimately have to make that choice. If a woman chooses that, that's her choice, not mine. That's her morality, not mine."This is a variant of the position developed by New York Gov. Mario Cuomo in 1985. In this view, the Catholic Church's belief in the immorality of abortion is correct, in the same sense that its belief in the Immaculate Conception is correct. Both beliefs are religious, private and should not be enforced by government.
But the question naturally arises: Why does Giuliani "hate" abortion? No one feels moral outrage about an appendectomy. Clearly he is implying his support for the Catholic belief that an innocent life is being taken. And here the problems begin.
How can the violation of a fundamental human right be viewed as a private matter? Not everything that is viewed as immoral should be illegal; there are no compelling public reasons to restrict adultery, for example, or to outlaw sodomy. But when morality demands respect for the rights of a human being, those protections become a matter of social justice, not just personal or religious preference.
If you believe an evil is being perpetrated against an innocent, it follows that you would feel compelled to do something about it (by standards of common decency). That is why Giuliani's position is so perplexing (and troubling, if you really think about it). Recognizing evil and then stepping out of its way does not make you a good person. The Post article concludes: But Giuliani has chosen an option that is not an option -- a belief that unborn life deserves our sympathy but does not deserve rights or justice. This view is likely to dog him in the primary process, not only because it is pro-choice but because it is incoherent.
I'm glad somebody's paying attention.
HT: Justin Taylor
Yesterday, we sent out an appeal to Boundless e-newsletter subscribers asking if they had "a few dollars to spare." It's about how we're a small part of a larger story here at Focus on the Family. And how we need your help to continue to do all the things we do.
Check it out here.
It's quite a challenge. A silly one, some might argue, but it remains a challenge nevertheless. And together, shoulder to shoulder, we can -- and should -- take it on.
Let me explain.... No, there is too much. Let me sum up.
In March Steve Watters wrote a blog post that was so intriguing that nearly 250 of you commented on it.
Word is around the office that Steve's post will hold the record as "Most Commented Upon Blog Post" until the ice caps melt. And such a sentiment is tempting the usually very humble Steve to pridefulness.
So out of loving concern for our co-blogger, here's the challenge: Submit a comment or five. On anything. From global warming to Planned Parenthood to relationships to the color of your cat's eyes to your favorite food to a word that strikes you as funny-looking to a word that I may have mispelled to whether or not Boundless should start a group on Facebook. If it makes its way past our moderators, you'll find yourself in perhaps the most notable, and noble, blog thread that Boundless has ever published.
Do it for Steve's sake.
Let me illustrate an appropriate comment tenor below....
When a guy and girl hit a point in their relationship where things just aren't going to work, what's the best way to end it?
Does there need to be some kind of formal conversation stating that it's not going to work along with a potential explanation in order for there to be closure? I'm gonna guess a lot of girls will say, "yes." I had another hallway conversation here at work in which a co-worker asked, "Why does it seem guys so often just stop calling and try to fade away when a relationship isn't working?"
I can't remember where I read it, but I recall someone explaining that a guy often thinks it's more honorable to quietly fade away instead of trying to formalize the end of a relationship with a conversation that might be painful. Anyone who has gone through a breakup knows how awkward it can be for people who once saw potential together to try to talk through why it isn't going to work. It almost seems like a no-win proposition. If you're totally candid about why you're not a good fit, there's a good chance you're going to make the breakup even more painful. If on the other hand, you try to be vague and euphemistic, you end up saying one of those lines that drives everyone crazy -- like, "It's not you, it's me," or "God wants me to spend more time working on my relationship with Him for awhile."
The alternative, I guess, for some guys is to let the relationship die of neglect -- to hold back on any formal ending and any attempt at explanation in order to avoid the hurt that may go with it.
As someone who once took that approach -- thinking it would cause the least hurt -- I know now it's not honorable. While avoiding saying something that might have caused immediate and concentrated hurt, my "fade away" ended up stretching that hurt over an extended painful time.
My encouragement to guys who see the need to end a relationship is to do the honorable thing of bringing closure. It doesn't need to be a long, awkward unpacking of every doubt and reservation you have, but it should clearly state that you have reached the end of your "relationship" so that there is no confusion about what your status is. In a day of pseudo-relationships, this isn't easy. It's much more tempting to keep all your options open and simply let a dating relationship fall back into something nebulous -- a person you could still hang out with and talk about life if you want.
But that's not healthy for anyone. If there's anything today's relationships need are more formal dead-ends. To get out of the maze of today's mating system, people need to know when a path is a dead-end so they can keep their energy focused on better paths.
Well, I'm back and the dress fit, so you can all stop worrying about it now. ;-)
I just read through the comments in Ted's post about Planned Parenthood -- quite the heated discussion going on! And very interesting. I would like to make a couple of comments, not about the topic itself, but about the arguing that has surfaced because of it.
My website, TrueU.org, has a forum for us to discuss the articles we post, things going on in the news, and pretty much anything else we want to chat about. I love the forum -- we have a lot of regulars who I kind of feel like I've gotten to know over time.
But, let me tell you something, we do not always get along. People argue on the forum all of the time -- we have a wide variety of opinions and they are not always expressed in the kindest way. I can't even tell you the number of times I've had to enter a conversation to tell people to please show a bit respectful for their fellow forum members.
Now, I know it's tough to be nice when people say things you think are ridiculous. There have been numerous times when I've typed a response to someone, only to erase it before I've posted it. Sometimes you just want to reply with venom. But, in the end, it's not helpful. People are not going to really hear what I have to say when I'm rude. However, if I present my opinion in a winsome manner, people are more likely to give my thoughts a chance.
After moderating my forum for awhile, I got a bit discouraged with the attitudes I saw around the site. It didn't seem like things were getting any better. So, I wrote an article called "The Awesomeness of Humility." In it, I talk about the humility we repeatedly see in God the Father and in His son, Jesus. God continued to show a humble love to Israel in spite of the fact that she consistently turned away from Him. And Christ humbled Himself enough to become a man and serve us as it talks about in Philippians 2:5-8.
But the main point of my article was the following: We are all going to disagree with one another at some point. I don't think that's a problem. I'm a big advocate of knowing what we believe and being able to confidently and effectively defend those beliefs. However, the danger I can see is that it is very easy for us to forget two things:
- We are asked to live a life worthy of the calling we have received by being completely humble and gentle (Ephesians 4:1-2).
- We are interacting with children of God. Our words are powerful. The way we speak to one another (whether face to face or typing out responses on a message board) can be very effective, in either a positive or negative way.
I am reminded of C.S. Lewis' quote in his essay, The Weight of Glory: You have never talked to a mere mortal. Nations, cultures, arts, civilizations — these are mortal, and their life is to ours as the life of a gnat. But it is immortals whom we joke with, work with, marry, snub, and exploit — immortal horrors or everlasting splendours. (emphases mine)
So, my desire for all of us is that we consider others as we type. All of us need to use a bit of humility when conveying our opinions -- not only because it's the best way to get people to actually hear us, but also because it helps us fulfill the command to love our neighbor. Hopefully we can all use some wisdom as we speak with one another about issues that are important to us.
Call me old fashioned but I'm a big fan of the compliment. From what I can tell, they are always well received, from both men and women. Of course, I'm careful that they're never flirtatious if they're directed toward a woman. But I wonder if I'd be different if I had grown up in today's hyper-sensitive culture.
According to an online newspaper in Scotland, The Scotmans, men won't offer women simple compliments anymore because they're afraid of saying the wrong thing. And it appears that there's just cause for such temperance. Research reveals that 70 percent of women think that the motives behind flattering remarks given by co-workers or new acquaintances are suspect.
Here's an excerpt: "It is a sad state of affairs, but it is true," Professor Cary Cooper, of Lancaster University Management School, said. "A lot of people -- and it is not just men -- are frightened of saying something for fear it will be misinterpreted. It has become so much more difficult."
I wonder how our readers feel about this. Men, are you afraid of giving compliments for fear of offending? Women, are you suspicious of men who'll hold the door for you? If you are, then maybe The Scotmans Guide to Modern Manners on the Dos and Don't of compliments will help:
Dos:
- Do be sincere when making your compliments. "If you are genuine, the recipient will sense that and there won't be any sense of an ulterior motive," says Clare Coulson, author of the manners and etiquette bible House Rules. "Sometimes you turn up tired and looking bedraggled and someone says, 'Oh, you look nice', and it just sounds so fake."
- Do hold open doors - a man with good manners will do this instinctively, and a woman with good manners will accept the gesture with grace.
- Do compliment colleagues on their work. "Even if you might think twice about complimenting their hair or their appearance, everyone likes to be told they got something right at work," says Professor Cary Cooper, of the Lancaster University Management School. "Saying that someone handled a meeting particularly well or did a good job on something is not only a nice gesture, it improves motivation and lifts the whole workplace environment for everyone."
- Do pick your time for a compliment. "The most graceful way to pass a more personal compliment is to do it and then move on," says Coulson. "That way, there is no room for awkwardness."
Don'ts:
- Don't compliment someone in front of other people. "It is absolutely excruciating when someone makes a point of complimenting you in front of a large group," says Clare Coulson, author of manners and etiquette bible House Rules. "You want the ground to swallow you up."
- Don't say someone has lost weight -- unless they have obviously lost a lot. It might make someone think they were fat to start with.
- Don't comment on her perfume. "Making a personal compliment is a really grey area," says Coulson. There is something a little too personal about pointing out someone's scent -- no matter how much you enjoy it.
- Don't call someone "love", even out of habit. "I have been living in the north-west of England long enough to call everyone 'love'," says Professor Cary Cooper, of Lancaster University. "But when I said it on the phone to a woman in London she was outraged. It is not a term of endearment everywhere so it could turn a well-intentioned compliment into something which could be interpreted as patronising."
- Don't overdo it -- complimenting the same person all of the time but never anyone else is a recipe for disaster.
What do you do when you don't like your friend's spouse? In "Friendly Friction," Christianity Today presents the perspectives of six singles. The primary thing to consider when you dislike your friend's chosen (or intended) is what action (if any) is God asking you to take? Must you love unconditionally? Forgive? Humble yourself? If your friend seems to be dating a bad seed, maybe you need to ask some hard questions. Or perhaps you need to release personal preferences and trust God to work out your friend's situation.
I was particularly impacted by Jeanette's testimony. She writes: My sister's always been my best friend. Despite my best efforts (although I have to admit my "best efforts" weren't that impressive), I couldn't find any redeeming qualities in the man she chose to marry. I thought he was an arrogant little hobbit, and I didn't exactly roll out the red carpet to welcome him to the family. Unfortunately, by failing to love him flaws and all (which is how Christ loves us), I ended up building a wall between my sister and me.
Now that the seven-year itch has hit their marriage, my sister is reluctant to come to me for support. My earlier complaints about her husband prevent her from leaning on me during her time of need. The Bible is clear that Christians should support marriages. I fear my words, even those spoken in secret, have in some ways separated what God joined together in my sister's marriage.
I think we would agree that the worst thing we could do would be to render ourselves spiritually useless in our friends' lives. But where's the line? Obviously we are called to offer biblical advice as our friends navigate relationships and marriage. At the same time, our love, support and prayers can be crucial to our friends as they seek to discern the Lord's will.
I remember confronting a good friend of mine after she became engaged months after she had broken off a relationship with another man. I didn't have qualms about her chosen, but I was concerned that she was entering a rebound relationship. I asked her some specific questions. Her answers left me satisfied that she was indeed following the Lord, not her emotions, in her decision to wed.
Don't be afraid to ask hard questions, but don't forget to exercise humility, grace and love as you tread relationship territory with friends. Refrain from hasty judgments or words you may later regret.
A couple of months ago 18-year-old Lila Rose, a sophomore at UCLA, decided that she had had enough of Planned Parenthood's deception. Thought by many as merely a friendly resource for those wanting information about birth control, family planning and unplanned pregnancies, Lila knew better. And she wanted to show the world what she knew -- that Planned Parenthood was primarily in the business of facilitating abortion.
She went undercover, taking on the role of a pregnant 15-year-old, and walked into a Los Angeles Planned Parenthood office.
In the course of the conversation with a staff member, she was told to lie about her age so that there would be fewer roadblocks on her way to abortion bliss. She got everything on tape, and uploaded it to YouTube (which has since removed the video). You can hear excerpts of the audio here (clip) and here (extended).
Of course, Planned Parenthood was grateful that the illegal activities of one of its staff members was exposed, so that they could remain an organization characterized by integrity.
Not.
Instead, the organization is threatening legal action against the young whistleblower.
This situation brings up some interesting issues. First, is it acceptable for someone to use deception in order to expose a greater evil. I think Jesus shows us that in some cases it is acceptable. Second, now that it's irrefutable that Planned Parenthood is all about seeing more mothers kill their babies, what are you going to do about it?
HT: The Rebelution
A team of singles pastors from Joshua Harris's church have written a paper on the topic of online dating. It provides current users and those considering the use of online dating services with thinking "shaped by biblical principles."
The team weighs in on the discoveries they've made from their counseling experience and interviews with those who have participated in online dating. For those considering it, they address issues such as expense, false hope, safety, and compromise. For current participants, they give instruction on involving your community, communicating your values and asking about theirs.
Joshua says the paper isn't comprehensive and is meant only for wise counsel. That's OK because there are concerns addressed elsewhere that may help fill in the gaps. Boundless's own Candice Watters covered the issue two years ago in her article "Browsing for a Mate." In it, she speaks frankly about some of the "minuses" of online dating.
Here's one of them: A steady stream of matches. This can be a distraction, especially for males. Jerry Seinfeld said, "Guys don't want to see what's on television — they want to see what else is on television." With millions of potential matches, how can you possibly know when you've found the one? Maybe the village matchmaker wasn't such a bad idea after all.
And with a steady stream of potential matches, how can you resist the temptation to see if he or she isn't better than the one you're currently pursuing? But with more and more respected Christians giving counsel, Christian singles are better prepared than ever to face issues like these.
HT: Justin Taylor
Friends,
So sorry I haven't posted in about 16 years. I know my great wisdom and insight have been missed ... or not at all. ;-)
Seriously, though, life has been somewhat crazy. In a half hour I'm leaving for Minnesota for my friend's "emergency wedding."
Now, people, it's not what you think. My friend was supposed to get married at the end of July, but her fiancé just got a letter saying he's being re-activated to the Army and has to report to a base by June 3. So, within the last couple weeks, the wedding has been moved up to this Saturday and I am on my way out. I've never even tried on my bridesmaid dress, so pray that it fits!
In other news, we published a couple of TrueU articles today that might be of interest to you. Lauren F. Winner has been out of college for 10 years now, and she tells us about some of her fondest memories and her biggest regrets. Also, author Jennifer Nelson, gives recent college graduates some advice about getting that first job and learning to humble yourself when you realize your college degree gave you the skills to make coffee for your superiors.
Anyway, check out the articles if you have a chance. Have a great weekend and I'll see you when I get back!
There's nothing like working in the yard to help clear your mind, and then let it wander.
I was mowing the grass this past weekend, and found myself thinking about how, though I don't think about it much, I'm surprisingly environmentally friendly.
Yeah, my wife and I like to support organic farms and buy clothes and toys at the thrift store, but we go beyond even that.
First, I was using an electric lawnmower. Yeah, they make them. It's a bit inconvenient -- the motor is not quite as powerful as a gas mower, and I have to be careful not to run over the cord. But it's quieter than a gas mower, is easier to start up, and doesn't emit any pollution. My motivation wasn't to reduce so-called global warming, though, but to save money and mess -- no cans of expensive gasoline, no having to get the oil-gas mix right, no having to tug on that cord to get it to start.
So kudos to me, I guess, regardless of my selfish motives.
As I pushed the mower around, I glanced over at the three porch lights we've got at the front of our house, noting that they were all earth-friendly fluorescent bulbs. Again, my motivation wasn't to reduce global warming, but to save money -- they last longer than regular bulbs and use less electricity.
Surprise -- I'm finding myself modeling good stewardship of the planet's resources!
Then I thought of how hot the summer's going to be, and remembered that I've got a swamp cooler in the basement that I really should bring up soon. Also known as evaporative coolers, these keep your room cool using the same amount of electricity as a 100 watt light bulb. So instead of using freon and gobs of electricity, we've gone all-natural and conservationist. Once again, though, my motivation was to save money -- it's cheaper to use water to cool the home than a traditional air conditioner.
My point? I guess I've got a couple. First, the free market is facilitating environmentally friendly decision-making. I don't need the government to tell me what kind of lawn mower, light bulbs or air conditioner to use. Second, just like President Bush (who has a more environmentally friendly lifestyle than Al Gore), I haven't made a big deal out of it (until now). I don't consider myself a more righteous person just because I've got a smaller carbon footprint. I'm not calling for others to pat me on the back or for owners of gas mowers and incandescent bulbs to feel guilty for "destroying the planet."
I guess I'd consider myself a quiet conservationist, humbly stewarding the resources the Lord has provided. Though I don't believe humans are the primary cause of global warming, I'd like to think that, though primarily economic in motivation, my decisions reveal a degree of respect for God's creation. And I think such subtle stewardship reflects a fine lifestyle. The bonus is that it's also saving me a few bucks.
And I'm not talking about alcohol. Elena asked me what I meant when I wrote: "I've observed that some of the most intentional men have allowed themselves to be intoxicated by the joy of those already in the next stage of marriage and family." She writes: "Those already in the next stage of marriage and family" — meaning the marrieds and marrieds-with-kids who are helping lead the singles group? Or people from other areas of the church? What situation were you thinking of?
Also... Are you implying that this intoxication is paralyzing to these "intentional" men? Or that the intoxication helps provide an impetus to their pursuits of women in the singles group?
Definitely the latter. I realize the word "intoxication" can be understood to be negative, but I meant it positively. Being exposed to the joy of family life can serve as a catalyst for singles to desire it for themselves, particularly those who have come from broken homes where the benefits of a functional family were not modeled. I have observed that single guys who hang out with married guys and happy families with children are more likely to desire this situation for themselves. While those who only hang out with other singles, may not realize what they're missing.
There is also the issue of modeling, which comes back to the "know-how" piece. When men and women are observing quality courtships, marriages and family relationships on a regular basis, they will pick up on specific ways to be intentional in both pursuit and response. Not only do men need these models of the "next step," women need to recognize how they can respond in a godly and wise way to those who pursue them. When we're constantly surrounded by those in our same age and stage, we miss out on the helpful examples of those in the next life stage.
You'll notice if you look at the footer of this blog post that I've put this in the "Dating & Courtship" category. Why? Because wearing such a shirt communicates that you have good taste not only in your choice of websites, but also in your choice of T-shirt.
And such a fact will undoubtedly affect your dating and courtship life. For the better, we think.
These were designed by overpriced graphic artists, using multiple colors (some of them tastefully subtle), and printed on high-quality T-shirts. These are not the kind of T-shirts you get off the rack at Wal-Mart. Honest. They cost us more than you might think to put these together so that you'd be proud to wear them. We consider them "Boundless quality."
Which comes to my main point: The folks warehousing these shirts are telling us that they need to move. So I'm asking you a favor: Please order at least one for yourself, and at least one for each of your friends.
And wear them. Wear them when you blog. Wear them when you attend the New Attitude conference. Wear them at school. Wear them to bed. Wear them as you fertilize your garden. Wear them when you go out this weekend.
Please click around the images below to get a close-up of the design or to go ahead and order one. By doing so, you'll be helping our ministry in many ways -- you'll show management that Boundless readers value our ministry by helping us pay our bills, you'll share Boundless with those around you when you wear it, and you'll help our warehouse people get out from under boxes of these beautiful things.
Really -- do it now. It'll take just minutes.
Motte's post reminds me of a recent conversation. This past weekend, I spoke with a friend who was visiting from Seattle. In true girly fashion, I inquired about her romantic possibilities. She had recently gone on a few dates through an online dating site, but nothing too promising had arisen from that. I asked her what the Christian dating scene was like in her city.
"Well," she said, "I'm in a great Bible Study Fellowship group! There are many quality single guys there who are devoted to Christ."
"So what's the problem?" I asked.
"They don't seem to want to date anyone," she said. "I mean, on any given week they have easy access to a dozen awesome Christian women, so why make a choice?"
Why indeed? This led me to wonder if community groups of singles are anesthetizing the sexes to one another. Think about this: If I see you every week, even if I think you're a nice person — godly, kind, funny — I might not go to the effort of seeking you out in an intentional way. In fact, I wouldn't need to — unless I inexplicably "fell in love" with you. In the article "Quarantining a Generation," I wrote about the marriage confusion caused by homogeneous singles groups: A lack of mentorship may also contribute to the growing confusion in single circles concerning marriage. Bombarded by media that portray marriage as boredom and bondage, single guys have little motivation to pursue a woman and start a family. Instead of being encouraged to develop gentle and quiet spirits, single women are pushed by society to be independent and self- sufficient.
I'm not overly surprised that my friend is seeing little marriage fruit in a seemingly ripe environment. To stick with the metaphor, perhaps these individuals lack the motivation, or know-how, to pick the fruit that's theirs for the taking. I've observed that some of the most intentional men have allowed themselves to be intoxicated by the joy of those already in the next stage of marriage and family. An environment that has the right ingredients isn't necessarily the best place to make marriages. Singles might want to expand their possibilities by seeking out intergenerational contexts.
There's always the risk of getting hurt whenever you begin a relationship. But there are decisions you can make on the front end that can help minimize the pain if things don't work out.
One female colleague's vow to limit access to her emotional and intellectual capitol, as well as her time and energy, is one way. She writes about it here after a particularly hurtful "pseudo-relationship."
Here's how it began:
It's over. Another four-month pseudo-relationship that began online … finished.
It began well. His contact and my reply. So far, so good. A few emails were exchanged, and then we got on the phone. Three months of phone calls and emails led to his three-day visit to Colorado. We had a good time. But the past month has been spent in me asking where we're going from here, if anywhere, and getting no satisfactory answer. A week ago I called him and put it on the line. I said if this didn't have a future, I needed to walk. And I did.
And here's what she learned:
And where does this leave the women? Glad you asked. We're not blameless. We're wasting precious time being pen pals and buddies with these guys, keeping them company in their lackluster, accountability-and-friendship-free lives and entertaining them with witty chit-chat, companionship and connection in hopes of it becoming something "more." When will it become so? When we're neighbors in the nursing home? When we're established in the New Jerusalem? Face it: we're enabling them. We're living in a perpetual church youth group, and no one is going off to college.
As Suzanne Hadley concluded in her article "Not Your Buddy," when it comes to male-female relationships, lack of intent is a bad idea. And on the intent issue, it's all about the guys.
To be fair, though, my colleague acknowledges that "women have their share of dysfunction." So in the spirit of airing it out, feel free to write about it here.
We've just received word that the Rev. Jerry Falwell has died.
Dr. Falwell has been a champion for righteousness as founder of the Moral Majority, President of Liberty University, and Senior Pastor of Thomas Road Baptist Church in Lynchburg, Virginia.
I had a lot of respect for this man, and am challenged by his humility, boldness, conviction, and action. Some wrongly associated him with religious charlatans because he lived much of his life in the limelight; I hope that as the obituaries come we instead are shown a true picture of this godly, honorable man.
It's probably a good time to pray that the Lord comfort those who dearly loved Rev. Falwell.
People are crazy for miracle cures and they're not waiting for a doctor's prescription to get them. So writes Claire Coleman in "Pretty Pills: The dark side of the latest underground beauty trend." The boom in online pharmacies and web-based drug sales has meant that in a few clicks of a mouse you can have access to a number of pills that, if their claims are to be believed, could do pretty much anything, from whittling your waist size to ridding you of body hair.
The problem with drugs obtained this way is that they rarely include instructions. No dosage information and worse, nothing about potential side-effects. But these risks don't seem to deter a growing number of people who think that illicitly acquired drugs could offer a nopain, all-gain route to the body beautiful. Xenical is only one of a number of drugs being used and abused in this way.
That there should be serious dangers associated with taking these wonder drugs should come as no surprise. History shows that no quick fix comes without a downside. But despite ... cautionary tales, we seem as devoted as ever to the prospect of a one-stop beauty solution.
Contrast that with this confessional by Nicole Nordeman. In "Coming Clean," she reveals just what it took to get her looking perfect in her first solo appearance on the cover of CCM. She also reveals what 13 fellow CCM artists think about all the pressure to look a certain way when you're in the spotlight. It's a refreshingly honest perspective, though a bit disheartening to realize that even those in positions of leadership are as plagued by feelings of self-consciousness and disdain as you and me.
She writes, I felt ... still feel ... uneasy about that photo shoot princess moment. Not because there's anything wrong with feeling momentarily flawless ... but because that photo and many like it, in no way represent my real life. I feel rather nauseous when I consider the young girl who sees that photo and has no idea that it took 5 hours and an entire team of makeup artists and stylists to make me look like a princess. She also has no idea that even after all that, somebody sat at a computer (with my enthusiastic blessing) and point and clicked away my acne scars, my 35 year old wrinkles and the roll of flesh around my middle that makes me look like I am perpetually stuck in my 2nd trimester.
This is an especially difficult scenario to stomach, since this same young girl will probably send me a heartfelt email about how she appreciates how "real" I am...
Unlike their secular counterparts, though, these believers don't just say, "yeah, I feel pressure to look good and no, that's not my natural complexion or hair color" (photo shop anyone?). They go on to acknowledge that in Christ, we not only have an obligation to see ourselves not as mannequins, but as temples of the Holy Spirit, but also in Christ, He gives us the strength and ability to do just that.
Whether at church surrounded by friends or sitting alone in my cubicle here at work, I love to engage the Lord in worship.
When I think of what the Lord has done, I sometimes find myself moved to tears. The thing that really "gets" me is when I'm reminded of the great chasm differentiating my sinfulness and the Lord's holiness ... and how God in His inexplicable kindness has nevertheless shown His love toward me by making me His child.
Consider these lyrics from a song by Stuart Townend: How deep the Father's love for us,
How vast beyond all measure
That He should give His only Son
To make a wretch His treasure....
His dying breath has brought me life....
Why should I gain from His reward?
I cannot give an answer....
Though His love is unfathomably great, and my deserving of that love is minimal, yet he has given me life and made me his beloved son. Or consider the lyrics from another song by the same songwriter: All my days I will sing this song of gladness,
Give my praise to the Fountain of delights;
For in my helplessness You heard my cry,
And waves of mercy poured down on my life.
I will trust in the cross of my Redeemer,
I will sing of the blood that never fails;
Of sins forgiven, of conscience cleansed,
Of death defeated and life without end.
Beautiful Saviour, Wonderful Counsellor,
Clothed in majesty, Lord of history,
You're the Way, the Truth, the Life.
Star of the Morning, glorious in holiness,
You're the Risen One, heaven's Champion,
And You reign, You reign over all!
I long to be where the praise is never-ending,
Yearn to dwell where the glory never fades;
Where countless worshippers will share one song,
And cries of 'worthy' will honour the Lamb!
Though I was dead, dead in my sins, I was made alive with Christ. And the One who made me alive is trustworthy. What a beautiful Savior, indeed, and it's right to long to spend eternity with Him. Even as I copy-paste the lyrics and read through them now I find myself moved in a type of worship. I love songs that reference not just my response to God, or my intent to worship Him, but that draw attention to who God is and what His character is. Consider this song: In Christ alone my hope is found,
He is my light, my strength, my song;
This Cornerstone, this solid Ground,
Firm through the fiercest drought and storm.
What heights of love, what depths of peace,
When fears are stilled, when strivings cease!
My Comforter, my All in All,
Here in the love of Christ I stand.
In Christ alone! - who took on flesh,
Fullness of God in helpless babe!
This gift of love and righteousness,
Scorned by the ones He came to save:
Till on that cross as Jesus died,
The wrath of God was satisfied –
For every sin on Him was laid;
Here in the death of Christ I live.
No guilt in life, no fear in death,
This is the power of Christ in me;
From life's first cry to final breath,
Jesus commands my destiny.
No power of hell, no scheme of man,
Can ever pluck me from His hand;
Till He returns or calls me home,
Here in the power of Christ I'll stand!
The hope that such truths imbue! The encouragement that such lyrics give! The love that songs such as these stir up!
How wonderful that the Lord has given us songs such as these, and such a place as church in which we can sing these songs alongside other sinners, and find ourselves reminded of how great and awesome and fearful and kind the Lord is, characteristics all the more wonderful in light of our unworthiness.
Joe Carter of The Evangelical Outpost has a top ten list of "fixtures of evangelism" that he feels are harmful to the Gospel. His main contention is that these tips and techniques are meant to create check-box converts instead of true disciples. Included in the list are "The Altar Call," "Protestant Prayers," "Chick Tracts," and my personal favorite, "The Sinners Prayer." Here's a excerpt: The gates of hell have a special entrance reserved for people who thought that they had a ticket into heaven because someone told them all they needed to do was recite the "sinner's prayer." I've searched through the entire New Testament and can't find an example of anyone who was "saved" after reciting such a prayer. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that such prayer is worthless or that it can't be used by the Holy Spirit. But salvation is not obtained by reciting a magical incantation as many, many, "Christians" will discover after it's far, far, too late.
Joe concedes that these fixtures may be more counterproductive than pernicious. Though he does say this type of "close the deal" mentality turned him into "a cross between Billy Graham and Willy Loman" by the time he was eight. Not pernicious, but very funny.
What I found interesting is that usually when one goes about criticizing a certain style of evangelism, they often give the qualification, "However, the Lord can use anything. So God bless them." Not so with Joe. I believe he wants to convince us that convincing is the job of the Holy Spirit, not the evangelist.
It's naturally easy to stay uncommitted to any church during the single years.
During college, for example, you can get your dose of spirituality through a campus ministry like InterVarsity or Campus Crusade and use your Saturday nights or Sunday mornings to rest or study. After you've graduated, you can stay aloof from church involvement because, frankly, many churches backburner ministry for singles, and seem irrelevant to their experience.
But being connected with a church as a single is as important as being connected at any other stage of your life.
In the recent blog entry "The Importance of a Local Church," Ricky Alcantar of the New Attitude Blog raises the issue of church membership and involvement, and how God calls us to give our lives to it.
In an audio message by Mark Dever, referenced in the blog post, we're presented with four questions:
- What is a church?
- Why is church involvement so important?
- Why should I join a church?
- What does church membership involve?
When I was single, both as a college student and college grad, I found a lot of meaning in church membership and involvement. It was good to have pastoral oversight, to have access to mentors that just weren't that available elsewhere, to be given a variety of opportunities to serve, to experience the breadth of multigenerational fellowship, to be challenged by expositional preaching, to have a "family" and a "home," and so on. I even met Ashleigh, my wife, in church.
We've talked about church involvement before, in the blog posts "Do You Date the Church?" and "Church Membership," and in the Mentor Series article "Stop Dating the Church." We keep bringing it up because we think it's of vital importance.
Are you a member of a church? How has that enriched your life? If you're not actively involved in a church, please ponder the ensuing comments and humbly consider joining Christ in making church a priority.
Copyright 2009 Focus on the Family. All rights reserved. International copyright secured. The Line and Boundless Line are trademarks of Focus on the Family.
|
Recent Comments