 |
You'll hear more about this later, but this fall will be the tenth anniversary of Boundless. We've been planning to come up with a feature to get your thoughts and stories for the anniversary, but in the meantime I have a favor to ask. I am giving our leadership team a presentation next week and I'd like to share at least one good story for them of how Boundless has intersected with the lives of our readers -- ideally from someone who has been around for a few years.
Anybody game?
Last year I wrote about a controversial decision by the California state Legislature that would allow men to use women's restrooms as long as they dress like or identify themselves as women.
But California state government liberals have nothing on Colorado state government liberals. Yesterday, the Democratic Governor of Colorado Bill Ritter signed a bill that prevents "discrimination" based on "sexual orientation" in "places of public accommodation."
Here's the release from Dr. James Dobson on S.B. 200: Who would have believed that the Colorado state Legislature and its governor would have made it fully legal for men to enter and use women's restrooms and locker-room facilities without notice or explanation?
Henceforth, every woman and little girl will have to fear that a predator, bisexual, cross-dresser or even a homosexual or heterosexual male might walk in and relieve himself in their presence. The legislation lists every conceivable type of organization to which this law applies, including restaurants, bathhouses, massage parlors, mortuaries, theaters and 'public facilities of any kind.' Those who would attempt to protect females from this intrusion are subject to a fine of up to $5,000 and up to one year behind bars.
This is your government in action. It represents a payback to Tim Gill and two other billionaires who have essentially 'bought' state legislators with enormous campaign contributions. Coloradans deserve better!
And by the way, because of the way this bill is written, it is not subject to the initiative process. There is no recourse.
So whenever my eight year-old daughter needs to use a public restroom, my wife will have to go with her to ensure there aren't any questionable characters in the next stall. Nice.
Motte let me write the post for this week's episode of The Boundless Show. For those of you who don't know me yet, I'm Lisa. Hey.
Ok, here's the deal. My day job is in PR and Media Relations, so I'm basically going to sell you this show. And I'll do it without shame. Because it's that good. This may be because this time I actually interview people with something to say, rather than droning on about my own lackluster ideas and experiences. If you agree, please don't say so.
This was my first year at the New Attitude conference, and after recovering from the initial shock of seeing young Calvinists jump around with their hands in the air (hello, worship meets tricep workout), I had time to be impressed by the conference's theme ("The Word of God"), resources, exhibitors, attendees and speakers.
New Attitude is the focus of this week's show, and the whole thing was recorded on location in Louisville, KY. (Does that sound impressive? It should.) Motte and I open by chatting with some listeners who visited our booth. To all of you who stopped by and said "hello," thank you! It was great to match names with faces, people I recognized from the blog and beyond. Of course you wanted to meet us to see if we're really as cool as we sound on the show. We are.
The real weight of this episode, though, is in our speaker interviews. I chatted with Josh Harris, Mark Dever and Al Mohler. These guys don't just sit around waiting to be interviewed, people. We had to stalk them mercilessly. But it paid off. I asked each of them questions related to their conference messages and/or other areas of expertise. I then asked them all the same five questions. You'll have to listen to understand what I'm talking about; let's just say it's not a stuffy parade of evangelical talking heads. Lisa "Keepin' It Real" Anderson would never allow that.
Joshua Harris (New Attitude organizer; author of I Kissed Dating Goodbye) -- 3:58
Josh talks about why this conference was started, and shares an awesome story of an attendee's heart being radically changed by the Gospel. He also compliments me on my hair. Bless him.
Dr. Mark Dever (pastor of Capitol Hill Baptist Church; founder of 9Marks) -- 21:52
Mark gives some no-nonsense advice on getting into the Word of God, shares what it means to "love" the Scriptures, and rebukes me for not joining his church when I attended it.
Dr. Al Mohler (president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, author of Culture Shift) -- 40:54
Al (can I call him that?!) explains the importance of apologetics for postmoderns and gives a kickin' rundown of what he'd do if he were single and looking for a wife today.
Inbox -- 56:28
Mark Dever returns to answer a listener question on how to find a solid, Bible-believing-and-preaching church. Whoa.
 And finally, the music this week is provided by Zelos, an independent band from Washington, DC. I got to introduce them to the crowd at New Attitude before they performed on the Boundless Stage. This is a great group of guys with amazing hearts and fantastic talent, so check 'em out.
I'm not making this stuff up, folks. The content of this week's show is so hard-core, you'll be blown away. I am still processing some of the things that were said. Take a listen and let me know if you agree!
I've purchased two different Bible software packages over the years, and have gotten a great deal of use out of them over the years.
My current favorite, like the previous two, includes a variety of translations and texts. But unlike the previous two, it cost me nothing.
I didn't mind paying for Bible software. Those who worked on them deserve to earn money from their work. At the same time, if I can get it for free, I will!
If you want to try it out, you can download it here:
I use the ESV mostly, but also refer to the KJV from time to time. You can browse all the translations, commentaries, lexicons, dictionaries, glossaries, devotionals, books, maps and images on this page.
BTW, if you're looking for free Bible software for your iPod, click over here, or for something online with lots of versions of the Bible, click over here.
 When the economy is down, Spam sales go up.
"Sales of Spam rise as consumers trim food costs." That's one of the news headlines from the San Francisco Chronicle this week: What was once cheeky, silly and the subject of a musical (as Monty Python mocked the meat in a can), is now back on the table as people turn to the once-snubbed meat as costs rise, analysts say.
Unfortunately, an increase in food costs has spilled over to Spam: The price of Spam is up too, with the average 12 oz. can costing about $2.62. That's an increase of 17 cents, or nearly 7 percent, from the same time last year.
I wonder if $2.62 still seems a little rich for some of our readers. I know that was beyond my price range at certain points of my "hungry years" -- especially when I got down to the "Meals Ready to Eat" that my dad sent from the church foodbank.
What kind of effects do financial challenges have on your diet?
On Saturday, I had the privilege of celebrating the life of a saint. My friend and fellow choir member, Susie, is now in the presence of our Lord. It was a beautiful ceremony. One that rejoiced in her life, her 40-plus years as a wife, mother and grandmother and, most of all, her Lord Jesus Christ. The whole attitude was that of 1 Thessalonians 4.
One thing I noticed, though, was that I was one of the only under-50 non-family attenders. On the car ride home, as I was mulling this over, I realized that this was only the second funeral I have ever attended that wasn't for a member of my own family (the first was the death of a teacher my sophomore year of high school).
It got me wondering: Is this the way the church body should be? Why aren't the young attending, and being inspired and blessed by, these funerals? Why aren't the seniors giving their wisdom at baby showers? Why is it that last Sunday I headed down to the youth wing on an errand and had one of the youth workers smirk at me and ask, "What are you doin' down here, Koerner? We don't see you in these parts often."
He was absolutely right. And it made me a little sad. Are we so compartmentalized at church that we don't know anyone other than our peers?
In today's Boundless article, Ted and Motte interview Voddie Baucham, the pastor of Grace Family Baptist Church, whose congregation practices a "family-integrated" approach to the church body. It was a really interesting article. Pastor Baucham talks about the problems that occur when we age compartmentalize our churches. After all, how can the we model and teach the young when we don't see them? And how can we learn the wisdom of our elders if we don't even know them?
His ideas have really got me thinking. In the meantime, though, I realize that it's my responsibility to be intentional about cross-generational relationships. Two places I have found to nurture these are in service (that's how I met Susie, in the music ministry) and ladies' Bible study. Yes, it's fun to serve alongside my peers and to do Bible study with my friends. But the Lord has been showing me how lacking that kind of life can be.
And while there are definite benefits to cultivating non-peer relationships (especially for singles), I've realized that I just want to live life with the church body -- all the church body. I want to see and celebrate God's faithfulness to all of His children. And I'm pretty sure I can't do that from the comfort of my Sunday School class.
Last week I wrote a blog post questioning why so many confessing Christians support same-sex marriage. It sparked a long tail of comments both speaking against and defending such actions. For the most part, the conversation was civil ... until I started receiving crit mail about my original post. Which surprised me.
To be honest, I sort of dismissed it. And then I got a personal e-mail from the director of gender issues for Focus on the Family, Melissa Fryrear. In a very gracious and humble way, Melissa said I really didn't represent well the "tremendous message of redeeming grace" to complement my strong message of biblical truth on homosexuality.
And after re-reading my post, I agreed with her. So I took it down. Then I asked her to write a post on balancing truth and grace when speaking about homosexuality.
Here's what she wrote:
* * *What comes to mind when you consider the concept of Truth? Perhaps synonyms like fact, reality, certainty, precision, or exactness. What about Grace? What comes to mind when you consider this concept? Perhaps synonyms like kindness, mercy, benevolence, leniency, or compassion. Without a doubt, what does come to mind is intricately connected to your worldview.
Because Focus on the Family is a Christian ministry, for us Truth refers to God's reliable message and Grace refers to the undeserved goodwill God extends to humankind. It other words, Truth and Grace always need to go together. This is especially important for Christians to keep in mind when they participate in dialogues related to homosexuality.
OK, now that I've mentioned one of the most ardently debated and emotionally charged issues of our day, let me first share why issues related to homosexuality are so personally significant to me.
Twenty years ago I was a liberal, anti-Christian, card-carrying feminist who celebrated a lesbian identity (and subsequently lived homosexually for a decade). Today I am a conservative, evangelical Christian woman and heterosexual. (Yes, you read all that correctly!) I'm also privileged to serve as the director of Focus on the Family's Gender Issues Department which, among other responsibilities, hosts Focus' Love Won Out conference. It probably comes as no surprise then why I have such a keen interest in issues surrounding homosexuality, especially as those issues relate to Christianity and to Christians in particular.
Through the years I’ve seen Christians respond to issues surrounding homosexuality either by forfeiting truth or forfeiting grace. In other words, some Christians lean so heavily toward God’s truth that they lack any compassion for those who struggle with unwanted same-sex attraction or those who identify as gay or lesbian. Or other Christians lean so heavily toward God's grace that they abandon the biblical mandate regarding sexual behavior. Both of these extreme responses are less than ideal.
There is a better response and Jesus Christ, of course, provides the perfect example.
You may recall in John's gospel that he describes Jesus as being full of both truth and grace: "The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth" (John 1:14). That's the best response -- balancing both truth and grace.
Given that I have a personal history related to homosexuality, I am especially passionate about sharing unashamedly what Jesus Christ has done in my life -- first for eternally saving me and second for so radically transforming my life.
I'm also passionate about helping Christian families that are directly affected by homosexuality -- moms and dads who have a son or daughter living homosexually; men and women desiring to overcome unwanted same-sex attraction; and other family members and friends who have a loved one identifying as gay or lesbian.
It's also my heart's cry that those who do not yet know Christ personally will hear and learn about Him and as a result one day make the most important decision of their life by accepting Him as their personal Savior and Lord.
And I am committed to helping equip Christians to balance biblical truth regarding sexuality with Christ’s compassion toward those who are living outside of it.
And here we come full circle.
Christians have a right, even a responsibility, to proclaim (and sometimes defend) the biblical sexual ethic meaning God's created intent for gender, sexuality and marriage. And how Christians do this is just as important meaning our attitude and tone must be one of gentleness, compassion and love.
Lest Christians forget ... we all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to his own way (Isaiah 53:6) and it's God's kindness that leads us to repentance (Romans 2:4). As God has been gracious to minister the truth of His Word with compassionate love in each of our lives, may we emulate Him and minister to others in similar fashion.
We can never forfeit one for the other; the answer is always both truth and grace.
One of the joys of living and traveling overseas is finding new and unique uses of the English language.
For reasons I'm not sure of, many such instances of mangled English come from Asia, a "language" known variously as "Engrish" or "Chinglish." I think the mangled language results because most Asian writing does not use the Roman or Cyrillic alphabets, which use letters and combinations of letters to represent sounds and phonemes. Rather, Chinese, Japanese and Korean use ideographs, symbols that represent ideas, not sounds. In Engrish or Chinglish English sounds (even mispronounced sounds) get written down phonetically, and concepts that are communicated by ideographs are put down in literal form, resulting in mangled English. Perhaps some linguistics majors out there can explain it better.
I've encountered many examples of fractured language in my travels around the world. For example, when I lived in Africa a nearby beach had this puzzling, hand-painted sign:
It is dangerous toba
the here.
 (A thousand extra-special Brownie points to the reader who can decipher what the sign was trying to say.)
Recently while traveling in Jordan I was at a highway rest area where we were encouraged to enjoy the "falvour" of a certain brand of cigarettes.
 Not far from there I found this brand of toothpaste in a small drugstore in Wadi Musa. I also bought a pack of souvenir postcards welcoming me to the "Holly Land," but they apparently didn't make it from the hotel in Aqaba into my luggage.
 And then there is this poor fellow working on a road crew in Africa; English, apparently, is not his first language.
Yes, I realize most of us would mangle an unfamiliar foreign language if we were forced to use it. When my wife and I were in Paris many years ago, a waiter switched to English rather than have to listen to my atrocious accent and probably less-than-precise French. I was more amused than insulted.
Anyway, enjoy these fractured phrases and linguistic lapses:
So That's What They Mean by Technicolor Yawn
Goes Well With the Flied Lice ...
On Second Thought, I’m Not Hungry Anymore
No Thanks, I’ll Stick With the Genetically Intact Coconut
Didn’t Walt Disney Try This, Too?
Don’t You Have to Die First?
Comes With Instructions for the Heimlich Maneuver
Arsonists, Take Note
By No Means Use an Amateur
The Coffee’s Pretty Bitter, Too
Sit Down Before Your Read This
Watch Out for Price Cuts
Umm ... What?
What Would Dr. Freud Have to Say About This?
Yeah, It’s Always the Quest’s Fault
He’s My Favorite Peanuts Character
Speaking of young adults exceeding expectations ...
It came to my attention this morning that two of our authors, teens Alex and Brett Harris, were interviewed by NPR about their passion "to encourage teens to act responsibly, become leaders and change the world."
These young men challenge me, someone who's no longer a "young adult," to resist the low expectations I might have adopted for myself and pursue the Lord's will in all its vibrancy and adventure.
It's a lie, one promoted for millennia, that we shouldn't expect much from teens and 20-somethings.
The lie goes something like this: "They're still maturing, still learning how to be grown-ups, and are really unable to take on much responsibility or make much of an impact on those around them, let alone the world."
The truth is, though, that youth does not disqualify one from making a difference, from being an example to others.
I think of the teen recently elected as mayor of Hillsdale, Mich. and the teen elected to the Bedford, Texas city council. I'm inspired by these young men's leadership and pursuit of responsibility.
And then there's David Brainerd, a 20-something who back in the 1700s significantly impacted the early evangelical movement in America and around the world. David Barshinger, in his Boundless article "Young Passion," introduces us to this remarkable young man, a man who, though he never reached his 30s, inspired Francis Asbury and William Carey and others to take the gospel to those who'd never heard it.
Barshinger concludes:
Much more could be said about David Brainerd, including his dedicated practice of prayer, his mastery and application of Scripture, and his emphasis on growing in grace. He devoted his life, his breath, his body to God. He teaches us, through struggles, how we too can glorify God and devote ourselves passionately and sacrificially to God's kingdom.
May I be inspired by young adults who, in their humble pursuit of God's will, exceed cultural expectations. And may their examples prompt me to exceed the low expectations set for me.
 Today is Memorial Day, the day we honor those Americans who have given their lives in war. You might not know this from the newspaper or TV, though. The holiday seems to have become another excuse to sleep in and for retailers to sell everything from dryers to bed sheets. In fact, Memorial Day should be May 31, but since that's a Saturday this year, the government moved it up so we could all enjoy a long weekend.
If you're ever near Washington, D.C., be sure to stop by the Vietnam Veterans Memorial. Maya Lin's elegiac memorial is perfect, despite the controversy that erupted when her design was announced in the early 1980s. In fact, the two sculptures added to it "balance" it out -- overly literal figures of male and female soldiers -- actually detract from the deep symbolism of Lin's elegant design. Visitors leave mementos at the base of the wall that are deeply meaningful only to the person whose name is on the wall and the person who left it. In addition to the usual flowers, teddy bears and uniform items,  one time I saw a 45-rpm record of "Devil in a Blue Dress" by Mitch Ryder and the Detroit Wheels. What did that song mean to whoever left it? Which name on the wall was it intended for? It was a haunting sight, that simple black disc propped forlornly against the base of the wall.
The Korean War Memorial suffers in comparison, a hodgepodge of quasi-impressionistic sculptures and a polished granite wall containing images instead of names. It's as if the design committee couldn't decide what it wanted to be -- symbolic or literal. It settled for both. Personally, I think the Korean veterans deserve better.
The World War II Memorial, nearby on the Washington Mall, is huge and sprawling, as was the conflict it memorializes. Its classical design is split into two halves, one for the Atlantic Theater and one for the Pacific. For a while after it opened, people would leave mementos around the memorial as they do at the Vietnam Wall. Faded photos of young men in uniform, their hats tipped at a jaunty angle, provoked deep melancholy. Even if those brave young men are still alive, they would be in their 70s and 80s. Thousands of their generation die every day.
That memorial is especially meaningful to me, even though Vietnam was my generation's war. You see, I have two dads memorialized in the World War II plaza. My biological father, Eugene, died six weeks before I was born. He served in an Army Air Corps unit that flew The Hump, supplying British, Australian, and American units in China and Burma. I have a few old photos of him with his brother Paul, in uniform on leave in Tehran, Iran, broad smiles belying the world-changing conflagration they were part of. I know my father only from these photos and the stories told me by my Uncle Paul, Aunt Mary and my mom.
My other dad, Francis -- it feels strange to call him my step-dad, since he's the father who raised me –- fought in Europe. I don't know much about what he did, because he never talked about it, even when questioned. I do know he refused to see Saving Private Ryan. He is now in his 80s, suffering from Parkinson's disease and Alzheimer's in a veteran's home in Iowa. He is long past remembering anything he did in the war.
I will mark Memorial Day in remembrance of them and their generation, especially, but I will also remember all the young men and women who have died in all of America's wars for the past 232 years. Yes, I plan to barbecue some burgers and brats, too; there's nothing wrong with celebrating. But please, as you celebrate, remember the true meaning of the day and thank a veteran.
Thanks, Dad. Both of you.
It's the day before Lisa and I fly to Louisville for the New Attitude conference. We're excited. And we open this week's show talking about why we're going, what it'll be like, and how it'll affect The Boundless Show next week. Oh, and if any of our listeners will be in attendance, be sure to catch this show ... there just may be something in it for you.
Roundtable -- 5:30
Who among us hasn't experienced a painful breakup? I know I have. And for most of my life, I thought the risk of "terrible loss" was just part of dating. But it doesn't have to be this way. In this week's Roundtable, we discuss the primary causes of breakups that feel like divorce and talk about how practicing some restraint might protect against feelings of regret and bereavement if things don't work out.
Culture -- 21:48
There are very few movies that come out in a year that I'll go to the theater for. But this year, I'd like to see about three on the big screen: Prince Caspian, Indiana Jones and ... (title too long) and the new Batman. Plugged In's Bob Waliszewski talks about two of them in this week's Culture segment. I was extremely interested in what he had to say about the new Indiana Jones movie premiering tonight, particularly given the mixed reviews. Bob also talks about the movie version of Sex in the City that apparently many of Lisa's friends are excited about. What!
Hungry Years -- 33:10
We skipped this segment last week because of our long interview with Joel Rosenberg (which you'll want to be sure and catch if you missed). But we're back this week with a good one from Steve Watters called "Clothes Don't Make the Man." In it, Steve recounts a time in his life when Uncle Gary, a custodian, taught him why the tags on your clothes aren't half as important as who you are.
Inbox -- 37:55
Girl meets guy. Become close friends. He's godly, kind, everything that would make a great husband. But is there hope if there's no romantic attraction on her part. Candice answers ... (drum roll please) yes. But how? Listen in.
Finally, we'd love to hear back from you about our longer music segments. I have to say, I really enjoyed this week's bumpers from classical guitarist Keith Cooper. Lisa met him at NRB this year and says he can really shred a guitar. He can.
Hooray for David Cook!
The end.
... or so many people think.
When I was a kid, I remember playing in a hay barn, making tunnels through the stacks of hay bales. Once, a few of us thought it would be cool to crawl into our little hideaway and read books. We didn't have flashlights to light the way, so we used candles. Yeah, in retrospect, that was pretty dumb.
If any adults were around, they would be kind to warn us against such behavior. After all, lighting candles in a hay barn could lead to our getting burned.
Yes, we at Boundless (a ministry of Focus on the Family) have said that homosexual behavior is dangerous. More dangerous than lighting candles in a hay barn. The lifestyle can lead to further confusion about the beauty of marital sex, can give one deadly diseases, can lead to heartbreak, confuses the metaphor we've been given for the relationship between Christ and His Church: a husband and wife. And more importantly, it disappoints God, who has clearly condemned such behavior.
"Abomination" is a difficult, antiquated word, but it is one that Scripture uses to describe homosexual behavior. It is an abomination.
But again, here's the twist that too many folks misunderstand: While we rightly denounce homosexual behavior, and denounce the promotion of such behavior and lifestyles, we do not condemn homosexuals themselves. Note in the previous paragraph that I wrote, "It is an abomination." I did not write, "Homosexuals are an abomination." There's a significant difference.
My heart personally breaks for those who suffer the torment of same-sex attraction (SSA). My heart even breaks for those who don't "suffer," but who act without remorse on their SSA. In the same way I have compassion for the person with a cleft palate, for the person who loses a leg to cancer, for the person wrestling with emotional or mental illness ... I have compassion for the person whose sexual identity has become skewed.
I've personally sought out articles that express the compassionate heart we at Boundless and Focus on the Family have for those who experience same sex attraction. I want to see our readers develop more of a heart for those with SSA. If you're wanting to see your heart grow toward those with SSA, or if you're skeptical that we really do care at all, let me challenge you to read the following articles I've published over the past year and a half:
If we speak poorly of an activity, and the promotion of that activity, an activity that is destructive and confusing and which God condemns, we are not doing so out of hatred. Please try to understand that it is out of compassion that we reach out to the sexual sinner, compassion for their bodies and minds as well as for their spirits.
I'd hope that you'd reach out to me should I once again begin lighting candles in a hay barn....
There have been a lot of comments on Motte's post about Christians supporting gay marriage. Not surprising. People have strong feelings about this issue on both sides -- just like people have strong opinions about abortion or political parties. Whenever we publish posts like this, people react passionately.
What I would like to do in this post is remind everyone that when we talk about homosexuals, we are dealing with real people, real feelings and real struggles.
This is not to say that we can avoid pointing out that some things are right and some things are wrong. The Bible says that lying, adultery, slander, unforgiveness and homosexual acts are sinful. But here's the catch: Many of us know (or fit the description of) a liar, a gossip, a person who harbors bitterness, or someone who is a practicing homosexual. We know people who sin, we are people who sin, and we know people who refuse to reject their sinful behavior. I refuse to reject mine almost every day in one way or another. And in spite of the fact that we know sinners or are sinners, people continue to love us, pray for us and support us.
We published a TrueU article awhile back from a woman who's sister is gay. She's struggled with the idea of, "love the sinner, hate the sin." What does that look like when dealing with your sister and her girlfriend? How does she show love to her sister but "hate" her lifestyle? What does that even mean? Is it possible -- is it right? There were days when I'd take out my frustrations on the dishes in the kitchen sink, slamming pots and pans and offering only curt, one-word answers to Genevieve's genuine questions about my day. Sometimes, I'd try to overcompensate by greeting the happy couple with a syrupy hello, cooing over their new sweaters and grilling up something fabulous for dinner. Whenever I tried to hate Claire's sin, it felt like I was hating her, too. Finally, I just gave up — avoiding home by staying out as late as possible before crawling beneath the covers in a puddle of tears, clueless about what God wanted me to do. It was just easier that way.
Sure, we had tons of heart-to-heart talks. But Claire didn't seem care about my concerns. She saw judgment in my tears. She didn't understand why I couldn't just accept her for who she was, or at least understand that it was her house, too. She had her own bedroom. She paid half rent. The world and the living room were fair game for the both of us — even though we stood on completely different moral carpet. Just what would Jesus do, anyway?
The author's sister felt that her homosexuality was part of who she was. She felt judged by her sister's distress. The author had to come to terms with loving her sister simply because we've been commanded to love, and also because it opened more doors. Opinions and lectures pale in comparison to genuinely loving the people around us, especially when the people we're dealing with are struggling with attractions they didn't choose: My father once pointed out to me that Jesus was nailed to the cross for our sin — everything from the little white lies to the most vicious crimes. From the casual fibber to the murderer behind bars, we've each taken our turn banging in the same nails. It might be said that the only difference between the two sinners is that one is outward and honest with his shortcomings … while the other gets up every morning and lies about it. While I'm busy pretending, Jesus doesn't trouble the Father with petty questions about whether or not it's permissible to be in the same room with me. In fact, even when I shut Him out, He keeps knocking on my door.
Paul tells us in Galatians 5:6 that in this lifetime, "The only thing that counts is faith expressing itself through love" (NIV). My sister was well aware of what I thought, where I stood, and all the whys that fell between the cracks. She'd heard my speeches; we'd been over the rules. But at the end of the day, the one thing that fills in the gaps is sharing my faith — time, after time, after time — through love. Not lectures. Not disgusted looks. Not childlike tantrums.
"Faith expressing itself through love." That's what we've been asked to do. This doesn't mean we don't vote or that we always avoid voicing our opinions. But remember that it's Christ's expression of love that draws us to Himself and causes us to realize that our own efforts are hopelessly tainted without Him.
I've purposely avoided talking about courts or laws or civil unions or agendas in this post. I want to remind all of us -- including myself -- that we all struggle in one way or another. We are all hopeless without Christ. We've been asked to love God and our neighbor -- even our gay neighbor. Let's make an effort to focus on doing that through our actions and the tone of our conversations. Let's not set out with a plan of accusation, instead let's move forward with the great commandments.
I was shocked and saddened to hear the news this morning that Steven Curtis Chapman's youngest daughter, Maria, was killed yesterday when she was struck by a car in her driveway. Steven has been a friend of Focus on the Family and an advocate for International adoption. The Chapmans have adopted three daughters from China: Shaoey, Stevey Joy and Maria. "After our first trip to China, my wife and I knew our lives were changing — our eyes and hearts were opening to how big God really is, and we have wanted to experience more of that," Chapman says on the [Shaohannah's Hope] Web site. "We've really wondered whether or not we should just go to China and stay there. But I don't think so. I believe God is saying, 'I want you to go, get your heart broken, your eyes opened, and then take this story back to the church in America and around the world."'
Please pray for the Chapmans during this difficult time. This is not at all how
We thought it was supposed to be
We had so many plans for you
We had so many dreams
And now you've gone away
And left us with the memories of your smile
And nothing we can say
And nothing we can do
Can take away the pain
The pain of losing you, but...
We can cry with hope
We can say goodbye with hope
'Cause we know our goodbye is not the end.
And we can grieve with hope
'Cause we believe with hope
There's a place where we'll see your face again.
(lyrics from "With Hope" by Steven Curtis Chapman)
Oh I will dance with Cinderella
I don't wanna miss even one song,
Cuz all too soon the clock will strike midnight
And she'll be gone
And sometimes, for reasons beyond our understanding, she's gone before the clock strikes midnight.
Last night, as many of you already know, CCM artist Steven Curtis Chapman's youngest daughter, Maria Sue, left us. Unexpectedly, the Prince tapped her papa on the shoulder and gently whispered, "May I have this dance?"
I can imagine the joy in Maria's eyes when she at last met her new Partner, when Jesus took her in His arms and spun her around the Ballroom, and as He shows her around the Castle, her new home.
May Maria's new dancing partner, the Prince of Peace, bring peace to the broken hearts of those who miss dear little Maria. And may we cherish our dances with the ones we love, while they're still with us.
Two 16-year-olds. One who spends time with "Sex and the City." And one who spends time with Scripture.
In the article of hers that we published today on Boundless, "World Friendly," Suzanne Hadley explains that the media we consume affects us, whether we acknowledge it or not, whether we like it or not.
Is it coincidence that the teen who watches "Sex and the City" is posing semi-nude on magazine covers? Is it coincidence that the teen who studies Scripture is making a difference by involving himself with the global anti-slavery movement?
As Suzanne points out, she's not judging anyone, not dismissing them as "a sinner." I'm not either. We're all sinners. But perhaps we can learn from these two teens, perhaps making a connection between behavior and media habits.
"You are what you eat," some say. "Garbage in, garbage out," they say. I, for one, want to do better; I want to ingest good things.
* * *
The 16-year-old girl mentioned above is Miley Cyrus, as you likely know. She went along with the semi-nude photo shoot because she was under the impression that it "was supposed to be 'artistic.'"
I've wondered for a long time how unclothed bodies became "artistic," and therefore acceptable for public viewing, even promoted as virtuous pieces of culture for the enlightened among us. I'm reminded that Adam and Eve covered their naked bodies, and God also provided coverings for their bodies. The beauty and holiness of their bodies was no longer to be displayed for all the world to see, but was to be hidden, perhaps like the precious Ark of the Covenant was hidden within the Holy of Holies for only the High Priest to view.
Modestly Yours elaborates: For some reason nudity, when presented as art, seems to get a free pass, even for wholesome young girls like Miley Cyrus. The argument, I believe, goes "art is 'cultured' and how could anything 'cultured' be bad?" Be even the most artistic, tastefully done nude photograph, while surely a step up from overtly trashy pornography, is still publicized nudity and therefore problematic in my mind.
Like the artists of the world, I believe that the human body is a beautiful thing. However, just because something is beautiful doesn't mean it needs to be shared with everyone. Under the guise of art, we've been led to believe that you can separate a body from a person. That you can appreciate the form itself while ignoring the essence contained within it. But body and soul are inseparable. And when a body is revealed in such a complete way, not everyone will cherish the soul that comes with it.
One insightful commenter replied, "Every artistic nude is tasteful -- until a slobbering, leering, horny person finds it exactly to his -- or her -- 'taste'. Then it's degrading and embarrassing."
* * *
I really should have split this one blog post into two, since it's really about two separate issues: media discernment and the effects of media on our character and behavior, and the appropriateness of public "artistic" nudity. I look forward to seeing which receives more comments.
HT: The Point
 It's no secret that I have little patience for much of what passes for the "emergent" church. Part of my problem is that the movement is so hard to define and pin down -- often deliberately so. Also, the fact that you can't decide whether you are "emergent" or "emerging" tells me that the entire thing needs to be thought through a bit more clearly. And then the whole matter begs a simpler question: emerging from what?
Having said that, I must add that this movement, however you chose to define it and in some of its more lucid moments, makes some good points. It's in many ways a legitimate reaction to the superficiality and individuality that infect so much of today's evangelicalism. Many of these evangelical weaknesses are cultural manifestations of deeper theological problems. Unfortunately, most of the emergent reaction is strictly cultural, not theological, so, in a way, the emergent movement is just as shallow as the thing it critiques -- just shallow in a different way.
Another problem is that while some of the emergent critique is valid, a lot is based on bad thinking and unfair arguments. It's full of straw-man reasoning, mischaracterizing mainstream evangelicalism and then knocking down that false image, as if that somehow knocks down the real thing. Or it paints with too broad a brush. And a lot of it is just plain squishy, hard to define, hard to grasp, hard to pin down. As I said in The Boundless Show podcast, it's like trying to nail Jell-O to the wall. (And for our Commonwealth friends, American Jell-O is what you call "jelly.") For a movement that critiques the shallowness of American evangelicals, a lot of the emergent movement is incredibly superficial itself.
A good example of this is a recent interview with Brian McLaren by the Associated Press's Rachel Zoll. If it were possible to grant emergents a Supreme Pontiff, it would be McLaren. (Yes, I know: screaming oxymoron alert.)
First comes the standard broad-brush, straw-man criticism that today's evangelicalism is too heavenly minded to be of any earthly good. In the interview, McLaren acknowledges that while evangelicals engage in some humanitarian work, it's done for the wrong reason and therefore does not work. [This humanitarian work] is not working within the paradigm that a lot of Christians work, which is all that God is ultimately interested in is extracting souls for heaven. And we might do some good works here on earth, but we don't really expect any of it to work, because the world is sort of, the toilet has been flushed and it's going down.
This statement is breathtaking in both its error and its arrogance. I don't know a single evangelical humanitarian agency that says that its work is solely for the purpose of "extracting souls for heaven" (whatever that means). From the Salvation Army to Samaritan's Purse to World Relief to World Vision to Compassion International to Blood/Water Mission and many others, these agencies work to relieve human suffering and to present the Gospel. McLaren not only doesn't know what he's talking about, but he sets up a false dichotomy between humanitarian work and evangelism.
But that's typical of McLaren. His attacks on evangelicalism -- indeed, his attacks on any claim to normative, orthodox theology -- are usually based on oversimplification. Here, for example, is his excuse for rejecting any claim to orthodoxy: [L]ook at the Catholic Church: For all of its orthodoxy, it could have bishops covering up for molesting priests. And evangelicals, for all their claims of orthodoxy, can be barbaric to gay people and can blindly support a rush to war in Iraq and can be, as we speak, fomenting for war with Iran.
Does he really mean to say that the Roman Catholic Church's repository of orthodoxy, its catechism, advocates covering up child molestation? And since when does the abuses of some mean that the entire structure must be rejected? Such thinking is so immature that it would be rejected on your average middle-school playground. But it's typical of McLaren. He never really answers questions; he simply brings up something entirely different in a sly, Cheshire-cat kind of way. It's deflection to avoid having to say what you truly believe.
But McLaren has never much cared for precision. Try reading his books some time. You can go thousands of words and dozens of pages and still not know exactly what he thinks about something. And why be precise when you can resort to clichés and paint with a really broad brush? What need is there to think carefully and exactly about a topic when inept AP reporters and book publishers looking for big sales will let you get away with sloppy thinking?
And who, by the way, are all these evangelicals who are "barbaric to gay people and ... blindly support a rush to war in Iraq"? (And what, precisely, is a "rush" to war? Would he have preferred a mosey to war?) I know I am neither barbaric toward gays, nor do I support the war in Iraq. I know many, many evangelicals just like me. Yes, some people (evangelical or not) are "barbaric" toward gays, and some people (evangelical or not) support a rush to war. And some support the war for well-thought-out reasons. I happen to respectfully disagree with them.
But the key word is respectful. Because, in the end, McLaren does not respect anyone who does not think as he does. For all his talk of doing church and being the church, in his public writing and statements, he fails on one key aspect that Christ said would define us: our love for one another. It's one thing to lovingly correct; it's another to mock. McLaren is contemptuous of traditional, conservative evangelicalism, apparent in this AP interview and his other writing. He just smiles nicely when he mocks -- in his squishy, straw-man kind of way.
*Postscript: For you aspiring journalists out there, this AP article is a classic case of how not to conduct an interview. Nothing aggravates me more than when a subject’s answer cries out for a follow-up that is never asked.
Last week, I invited our readers to sign up for our interest list to receive the Boundless Magazine we're proposing. We received over a hundred responses from that little blurb. Thanks.
This week, I'm including a pdf of the first nine pages of the prototype we'll be debuting at New Attitude next week. It includes the cover, title page, introduction from Steve Watters, and an article from Boundless contributor Rachel Starr Thomson titled, "For Such a Girl as I."
Enjoy.
Oh, and be sure to sign up for our interest list if you haven't already. Your support is needed.
I enjoy lively discussions about global warming and evolution and chicken wings as much as the next guy. Perhaps more. Ultimately, though, these things are trivialities.
And so I found myself over the weekend mulling over what the main thing truly is, the thing that should daily fuel my imagination.
And what is this main thing? Paul declared that the thing of "first importance" was this: "that Christ died for our sins." Elsewhere he identified the main thing about which he would boast: the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ. In the end, there was but one thing that Paul wanted to know and make known: "Jesus Christ and him crucified." The death of Christ will continue being a focus of our worship even in heaven, where the heavenly beings are even now proclaiming, "Worthy is the Lamb who was slain."
How easily I forget. How easily I find myself entangled in mere novelties. And so I find myself reflecting on the crucial words of a sermon given by C.J. Mahaney: Ought not the patient to be familiar with the physician? Ought not the bride to be familiar with the bridegroom? Ought not the sinner to be familiar with the Savior? Beyond doubt it ought to be so. Surely we can not know this Christ too well. Surely there is not a word, nor a deed, nor a day, nor a step, nor a thought in the record of His life which ought not to be precious to us.
Father, saying that we are doing better than we deserve is one serious understatement. In light of your Holiness and our sinfulness, what we deserve is your judgment, your wrath, hell, and yet, because You are rich in mercy, we have become objects of Your mercy and no longer objects of Your wrath as we trust in Your Son and His finished work on our behalf for our sins. We come to you tonight clothed in the righteousness of another, clothed in the righteousness of Your Son in whom is all Your delight.
The cross is the blazing fire at which the flame of our love is kindled. We have to get near enough to it for its sparks to fall on us.
My sins have been great, but what was accomplished through the cross of Christ is greater. I'm a great sinner, but He is a greater Savior. Today may I draw near enough to Christ's cross that its sparks fall on me, setting my love aflame. Today may I boast in Christ and him crucified. Today may I keep the main thing the main thing: Christ died for my sins.
In light of earlier news that Japan is facing a population implosion, I was interested to read in the New York Times that Pittsburgh (along with other pockets in the United States) now has more residents die each year than they have new people born.
 Basic math implies that population will decline in these conditions unless it's offset by people moving into the city -- but there aren't enough new people moving in to Pittsburgh. According to the article, population plunged from 423,000 in 1980 to about 312,000 today -- with a decline of 60,000 in the metropolitan area just since 2000. Demographers call this a "natural decrease" and according to the New York Times, it:
...has been occurring for years in tiny rural towns and in some retirement meccas in the South. But the phenomenon is relatively new in metropolitan areas in the Northeast, the Rust Belt of the Middle West and Appalachia.
So what does that mean practically? The article illustrates: Hospitals are closing obstetrics wards and converting them to acute care. Local governments and other social service providers are adjusting to the emergence of entire neighborhoods where the average age is soaring, and private foundations are awarding scholarships to retain students and attract new ones.
In Pittsburgh, public school enrollment plummeted from about 70,000 two decades ago to about 30,000 and continues shrinking by about 1,000 a year.
"What we look like, you're going to start to see elsewhere," one professor told the Times: Chris Briem [a regional economist at the Center for Social and Urban Research at the University of Pittsburgh] traced the shift to the shuttering of steel plants in Pittsburgh, which prompted residents to seek work elsewhere.
"It was a very age-selective migration: young, working-age people took away their families and future families, leaving behind a population that aged in place," he said.
While the general population of the United States continues to grow, a map on the New York Times Website beside the article shows that numerous areas are experiencing the trend of deaths outpacing births.
I'm curious to know (among any would-be demographers out there) what the realistic options are for reversing the population trend in these communities beyond either 1) finding great ways to compel new residents to move there (think Radiator Springs in the movie Cars) or 2) some kind of renewed emphasis on family formation among the people who already love calling places like Pittsburgh "home."
Harrison Scott Key posted earlier this week over at World Magazine's blog about the difference between values and virtues: The minister made a distinction between values and virtues. Values, he said, were subjective things, the kinds of things even Christians have been duped into embracing. We talk about values, your values, my values. It means nothing, except "that which I deem important."
Virtues, he said, were objective and timeless -- and terribly out of fashion. ...The seven virtues, written about by Prudentius in the 5th century A.D., are these: Chastity, Temperance, Charity, Diligence, Kindness, Patience, Humility. Those aren't values, and they aren't subjective. They are timeless qualities that are appreciated and needed in every age and every culture.
His inclusion of chastity reminded me of a comment I heard last week that Christians who have heard much about abstinence don't always know as much about the larger concept of chastity that it's derived from. That comment came from Christopher West, a friend of Focus on the Family who briefed us recently on some of the rich insights on human sexuality from the Catholic tradition.
Christopher told us that he often hears people say, "You should be chaste until marriage." But that demonstrates a misunderstanding about chastity he explained. Chastity is bigger than abstinence. "When you understand what chastity actually is you know that you can't stop being chaste once you're married," he emphasized.
"In the western world, the term has become closely associated (and is often used interchangeably) with sexual abstinence, especially before marriage, due to the restriction of sexual relations to marriage deriving from the Ten Commandments," reads the Wikipedia entry on chastity. "However," it continues, "the term remains applicable to persons in all states, single or married, clerical or lay, and has implications beyond sexual temperance."
"Chastity," Christopher West explains, "is first and foremost a great yes to the true meaning of sex, to the goodness of being created as male and female in the image of God. Chastity isn't repressive. It's totally liberating. It frees us from the tendency to use others for selfish gratification and enables us to love others as Christ loves us."
Am I the only Evangelical who heard more growing up about abstinence than about the overarching (and amplifying) virtue of chastity?
I got an e-mail Monday saying, "Mr. Rosenberg has some time tomorrow morning." I was all over that.
I've been a big fan of Joel Rosenberg ever since he spoke at a Focus on the Family chapel three years ago. I'm not usually one for platitudes but he's brilliant. Yes, I know, he puts his pants on one leg at a time like the rest of us. It's just that when he does, he writes best selling novels that predict the future.
So yeah, we were excited to have him on The Boundless Show to talk about his new book, Dead Heat. The segment was so good, we alerted the media. Here's a portion of the release: On this special episode, which releases Friday, May 16, and is available free on both iTunes and Boundless, Rosenberg discusses personal failure, his commitment to family, and his own reflections on the Last Days as described in the Bible. He gives a special charge to young adults to live intentionally in light of Christ's return, something he feels is imminent.
"What if Jesus is coming back a lot sooner than we all thought?" Rosenberg asks listeners. "Are you ready to see Jesus face to face? Are you living a life of holiness? Are you living a life of spiritual impact? This is the moment we need to get in the game."
An evangelical Christian from an Orthodox Jewish heritage, Rosenberg was a Washington insider before leaving that fast-paced environment to write books, primarily novels. His success has come in part due to a knack for writing storylines that tend to "come true." The plot for The Last Jihad, written before 9/11, mirrors that day's tragic events.
I think you'll enjoy the interview.
I also think you'll enjoy the rest of the show. In our roundtable segment we answer the question, why quiet times? And in the Inbox we tackle one of man's greatest passions: sports. Is it possible to be a sports fanatic and a Christian? Listen in.
Also this week we've expanded the music bumpers. The music from The Museum is just too good not to.
Yesterday, four judges from the California Supreme Court decided to go against the will of the people and redefine the institution of marriage to include same-sex couples. It was a blatant act of judicial activism with no constitutional basis whatsoever.
Here is Dr. James Dobson's public statement addressing the ruling: "In 1863, Abraham Lincoln said in the Gettysburg Address that ours is a government 'of the people, by the people and for the people.' Well, not in the state of California, where four imperious and unelected justices have just overridden the will of the voters. In 2000, Proposition 22 defined marriage as being exclusively between one man and one woman; the initiative passed by an overwhelming margin of 61 to 39 percent. That emphatic expression of the will of the people has now arrogantly been declared null and void.
"In so doing, the justices have undermined and endangered the basic building block of society, which has been honored and preserved in every nation on earth through most of human history. What an outrage. It will be up to the people of California to preserve traditional marriage by passing a constitutional amendment in the November elections. Only then can they protect themselves from this latest example of judicial tyranny."
Thirty-five years ago, judicial activists on the U.S. Supreme Court "found" a right to abortion. And 50 million dead pre-born babies has been the result. God only knows the ramifications of this outrageous ruling.
Some people have too much time on their hands, like these guys.
It's been almost five years since the release of the final movie in the Lord of the Rings trilogy. If you're pining for Middle Earth, with its walking trees, Fangorn forest, vengeful waters, dwarfs, epic battles, catapults, sword fights and such, then Prince Caspian is for you.
I saw it a couple of nights ago, along with a theater full of others who'd been invited to catch it before its official release tonight at midnight.
I had no idea what to expect, having not read the books. I thought it was a lot of fun, to be honest. Slick CGI, good acting, interesting plot, gripping battle scenes, and so on. It's better, in my opinion, than The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe, but not as good as The Best Movie Ever Made, of course.
This is not a kid's movie. Though there's not much blood, it is quite violent.
I was disappointed that the scriptwriters had Susan give a pretty impassioned kiss to Prince Caspian moments before leaving Middle Earth Narnia. I don't think C.S. Lewis would have approved of his character's intentional defrauding of a man who was destined to marry someone else.
Regardless, I thought it was a fun movie. Before you decide whether or not to see it, as with any movie, I'd strongly encourage you to read reviews about it. Plugged In Online is a great place to start.
While commuting to work this morning, I put my car in neutral and coasted whenever I approached a downhill. It's a fuel efficiency technique called the Pulse and Glide. And it's part of my daily battle to see if I can get more than my current 22 miles per gallon average for city driving.
Other things I'm trying include:
- Driving slower
- Coasting to stoplights, stop signs and parking spots
- Accelerating slowly from stops
- Keeping windows and sunroof closed
- Parking in pull-through spots
- Clearing out my trunk
I found these tips on Ecomodder.com. They have tons more for all you polar bear savers out there (and I say that with great affection). My goal is simply to improve my gas mileage from 22 to 30+ miles per gallon. I estimate it'll save me about $25 a month.
Oh, and I'm also taking advantage of a local grocery store's promotion that saves me 20 cents a gallon for every food purchase over $50.
So what are you doing to cut down of fuel costs?
The thing is, if polar bears need to be saved from anything, they need to be saved from overpopulation.
"The Interior Department ruled Wednesday that the polar bear will be protected as a threatened species. Why special treatment for an animal whose population has more than doubled over the last 50 years?"
So begins an article explaining that, though the number of polar bears has dramatically increased over the past few decades, they are now considered -- despite facts to the contrary -- as an endangered species.
Why? Because of unfounded fears that the ice caps are melting, thus threatening the bears' habitat.
Let me challenge you to examine the raw facts. Let me challenge you to take a look at the actual data, rather than rely on a reporter's or bureaucrat's or pseudo-scientific huckster's misinformed spin. Check out the charts and satellite images for the north and south poles here. You may be surprised to see that, while ice does melt during summer (run for the hills!), for the past three decades the average global sea ice area has remained constant, at just over 22 million square km during the winter. Southern hemisphere sea ice area has actually increased over the past 30 years.
So why, despite the fact that polar bear populations have skyrocketed and global ice has remained pretty constant (taking into account seasonal fluctuations, of course), are these animals considered endangered? Simple: The politics of global warming alarmists have trumped scientific fact.
Thank God that we have access to the facts. Otherwise, these politicians and entrepreneurial alarmists might persuade us too to succumb to fear, rather than to trust in God and find our rest in Him.
Have I ever mentioned that I won't buy Girl Scout cookies? That's right. When those adorable little girls come to the door in their cute little brown outfits, I just smile and say no thanks.
It's my personal conviction. I simply cannot stomach giving money to an organization that has been taken over by radical feminists and supports Planned Parenthood.
Related to this is to today's Boundless article called "Basketball Jesus" by George Halitzka. It's about how Christians often have varying degrees of conviction about issues like politics, alcohol, R-rated movies, and when, and when not to, boycott something. Have you ever met folks who think R-rated movies are a tool of the devil? Or setting foot inside a bar is sinful, and voting Democrat means supporting baby-killers? If you ever question the views of those "Super-Saints," they'll cheerfully tell you how unspiritual you are.
Maybe on the flip side, you've encountered Believers who vote straight Democrat (because Big Oil has Republicans in their back pocket). They enjoy slasher movies and have nothing against a good chugging contest. When you wonder about their shady lifestyle, they scoff at your "legalism."
For 2000 years, Christians have argued over stuff that isn't covered in the Bible — only the topics have changed. In ancient Corinth, the disagreement was over meat.
Though I'd argue the sanctity of life is covered in the Bible, I do get his meaning. So go ahead and buy your box of Thin Mints, I won't judge. Really, I won't. As a matter of fact, my father-in-law often has them in his pantry. And I'll even enjoy one once in awhile when I'm visiting.
On May 14, 1948 Israel became a nation for the first time since Jerusalem was destroyed by Rome in A.D. 70. After Rome took over, the Jews were dispersed -- spreading out to many different countries -- no longer connected by a common land. But after the Holocaust the United Nations voted to make Israel a nation once again -- the Jews would again have a place to belong.
In the 60 years since Israel has been a country, there have been many wars and almost no peace. As we all know, the fight over this tiny piece of land continues. When asked by Time Magazine where Israel would be at in 60 years, Holocaust survivor Elie Wiesel wisely responded: When it comes to Jewish history, it is dangerous to indulge in prophecy. Who would have predicted Abraham leaving the grandiose home of his father and his idols to discover that God alone ruled the world? And Moses, the man with a speech defect, an inspired spokesman for his people? And David the young shepherd, a warrior and king?
Had anyone predicted Hitler's crimes? Only three years after the saddest and cruelest chapter in Jewish history, a sovereign Jewish State was proclaimed: Was it predictable? Was its military victory over five well armed Arab armies predictable? And the Six-Day war? And the Yom Kippur war? And the influx of a million Jews from the Soviet Union? And the assassination, by a Jewish fanatic, of the legendary Prime Minister Itzhak Rabin?
To try to predict is ill-advised and dangerous.
When it's summed up that way, it does seem silly to try to predict what might happen with God's chosen people, although we do know that it all ends with a newly created Jerusalem. But in the meantime, the Bible calls us to pray for the peace of Jerusalem.
Whatever your politics when it comes to Israel, the 60th anniversary of this small nation is a good time to remember to pray for peace within its walls.
I think the emphasis for May in my daughter's Sunday school class is "helping others." At least, that's the gist I got from the calendar she brought home from church which listed different ways to help others on different dates. Things like "pick strawberries for a neighbor" and "clean your room on National Clean Your Room Day."
But, among the different dates was one that made me stop. May 15th. National Chocolate Chip Day.
Can that be right, I wondered? So, I did a little checking and yep, the National Confectioners Association has dubbed May 15th, this Thursday, to be National Chocolate Chip Day.
Normally, I'm not all that into, you know, pagan holidays. But this is one I could really sink my teeth into (he, he). I also liked the encouragement of "helping others," so ... what to do with chocolate chip cookies? Turns out, my church needs some for their cookie ministry (the deacons take cookies after church each Sunday to each new visiting family because, I don't know, nothing woos the lost like delectable brown sugar, butter and pieces of cocoa delight).
Then, the words started echoing in my mind. Cookie. Ministry. Cookie. Ministry. So, here's my invitation (to girls and guys alike--both my husband and my brother-in-law make some mean chocolate chip cookies): Will you join my family in celebrating National Chocolate Chip Day? But, remember, we want to do ministry. So, maybe you could take some cookies to your church staff. Or to the homeless. Or to your neighbors that you haven't met yet. Or to those people at work that kind of annoy you (just make sure they don't read this blog).
I know that there are some big problems in this world. And cookies won't solve them. But, who knows? Maybe we could shine just a little of God's love in our own little corners of the world--one cookie at a time.
By the way, here's a recipe celebrating National Chocolate Chip Day that I'm going to try. Maybe Ted can perfect it after he wraps up that chicken wing thing.
I couldn't help but blog about Bella after seeing it in the theater.
Now that it's been released on DVD, I can't help but buy a copy of this remarkable film.
I wrote that "Bella will make you a better person." Candice wrote that it's "the message of the gospel wrapped beautifully, subtly in a story that will change you." This movie inspired my wife to write that "if we'll take our eyes off ourselves and our problems, focusing our attention on the needs of others, we may just start changing the world one heart at a time."
Dr. Dobson enjoyed it. Focus on the Family President Jim Daly loved it.
Bob Hoose and Steven Isaac of Plugged In Online concluded that "Bella is an unusually intelligent, humane film that reminds us how easy it is to impact one person's life—and perhaps save another's—simply by being sensitive to hurting people and carving out time to care. It is a tender tale of grace, faith, redemption and the sanctity of life...."
Rare is the movie that will make you a better person. Bella is among them.
It's that time of year again. You know, when we make our annual trek to Louisville, KY for the New Attitude conference. I always look forward to the worship, teaching, and fellowship. So edifying.
This year The Boundless Show host Lisa Anderson will be with me. She'll help out with the booth and take the lead on the interviews we've scheduled with Josh Harris, Mark Dever and Albert Mohler. I'm sorry to report, though, that John Piper gave us the big dis (not really) when we requested an interview -- something about going on hiatus from interviews because of a book he's writing.
Oh, and we'll be debuting the Boundless Magazine. It's a prototype of what we hope will become a regular quarterly print publication with all exclusive content. Be one of the first to receive it by signing-up on our interest list. Much more on this later.
As for the prototype, it's got all exclusive content too and we're hoping to have our PDF version available soon. But if you want a hard copy, you'll just have to come to Louisville and drop by our booth at New Attitude.
So who's going?
There are many crises in the world to worry about, and at times it's easy to become overwhelmed. I'm sure many Boundless readers have causes that they're deeply devoted to and support, so I'm not going to suggest you change where the Lord might lead you.
But let me suggest something to think about. The word genocide is thrown around too lightly these days, but a case can be made for a real genocide going on today in the Darfur region of Sudan. It's a slow-motion genocide, receiving limited attention in the press because of the logistical difficulties of reporting from one of the most desolate places on earth and because of the very real danger of death at the hands of the genocidal perpetrators -- the government of Sudan in Khartoum.
The roots of the Darfur tragedy are long and deep, but here is a good, succinct summary. For a more disturbing, firsthand look, though, I highly recommend you view the movie The Devil Came on Horseback and read the accompanying book by Brian Steidle. (The film and book take their title from the name of the government-sponsored Arab militias that terrorize the people of Darfur: the janjaweed. The word means "devil on horseback" in Arabic.) Warning: the film contains some very disturbing images and content, but I think we owe it to ourselves to look this evil square in the eye in order to understand it -- and confront it.
Nearly 10 years ago, when I reported on the war and slave-trading in southern Sudan, I became despondent that so few people in the world seemed to care. But I realized my vision was too narrow. Through the patient efforts of many people, a peace treaty was signed in 2004, and while the people of southern Sudan still live in tenuous circumstances, they at least are not having to dodge bombs and bullets.
I was mere days away from flying into Darfur back in 2006, but the situation deteriorated rapidly with the removal of African Union troops, and the janjaweed started targeting aid workers, so my trip was cancelled. But I'm able to keep up with developments and support the people of Darfur through the Save Darfur coalition.
Please check out the situation for yourself. And if the Lord so leads, please pray for and support the people of Darfur.
This Sunday is Mother's Day. So our host Lisa Anderson kicks off The Boundless Show with an encouraging word about her mom and how she prays for the show each week, even though she's never heard it; because she doesn't own a computer and refuses to get one because of "all that porn." But she understands it's an audio show so at least it's in the ballpark.
Steve Watters ends the segment with a poignant reminder of why we all need to take the time to make this Mother's Day a special one.
Roundtable -- 6:50
Is it OK for Christians to go camping alone with their girlfriends or boyfriends? Hmm. That's one of the dating dilemmas we discuss in our roundtable this week. Other dilemmas revolve around jobless men and spendthrift women. It's a fun segment, but we hope you'll find it helpful as well.
Culture -- 22:35
Many of you have probably already seen Facing the Giants from Sherwood Pictures, the movie production arm of Sherwood Baptist Church in Albany, Georgia. Well, they have a new movie coming out this September called Fireproof and Lisa had a chance to sit down with Jim McBride and Steven Kendrick after a special screening here at Focus on the Family. I couldn't make it but based on what everybody had to say, it's a must-see!
Hungry Years -- 33:29
When John Thomas was offered his first job out of college, he was a reluctant candidate. One of the marks against it was the location ... his hometown. And who wants to move back home right after college. Nobody, right? But despite low pay and no benefits, would it turn out to be an offer he couldn't refuse? Check it out. I guarantee you'll laugh out loud.
Inbox -- 38:50
Does Boundless have an unbalanced view of marriage? One of our listeners thinks so after Candice brought up a woman's "help meet" role in last week's podcast. The questioner asks in short, shouldn't women who've done all the right things to "get married" stop chasing men and seek God? Steve and Candice tackle this one with resounding, We agree! But....
I'm including your listening options here because we're working on our artwork this week. If you're inclined to listen on iTunes, please take a moment to leave us a review. Also, if you like to stream or download the MP3 or want to subscribe through RSS, all those options can be found on our Feedburner page.
And last but not least, I'd like to end by thanking West Coast Revival for letting us use their music this week. It really adds to the show. And if you want to hear more go to their Web site.
You're a single Christian woman, and you have in your head that you're not supposed to initiate relationships; that's the guy's role. And yet it's your heart's desire to be married, to enjoy your husband, to raise children.
So how might you get from where you are now to where you want to be?
Among other things, you can pray. While prayer seems more mystical and less practical than other things you could try, it is truly effective. After all, it consists of presenting your requests before the Creator of the universe. He not only cares for you, but is able to do something about your situation.
And you could invite friends to join you in prayer. Nothing at all wrong with that.
Speaking of practical, let me be practical: Click right now over to the Women Praying Boldly Web site and join their community. It's free, the fellowship is encouraging, and you'll have friends who'll pray for you, and for whom you too can pray.
This may seem like a shameless plug for a friend of mine, but it's really not. It's about helping you do what you can to help marriage happen.
It's a puzzling biblical truth that sometimes we "do not have, because we do not ask." I implore you to join the community of women at Women Praying Boldly, and then, with them by your side, to go ahead and ask.
 I'm a big fan of intergenerational friendships among Christians. I've often heard someone my age say, "I want to get to know an older believer to glean from his wisdom and experience." But sometimes wisdom comes from the young. An excerpt from my personal blog.
Soft-spoken with gentle eyes, 16-year-old Zach Hunter doesn't look the part of an abolitionist. But beneath a quiet exterior beats a fiery heart akin to William Wilberforce or Martin Luther King Jr. In the past four years, Zach has written two books, founded an anti-slavery campaign and spoken all over the world.
This morning I sat at a table with Zach and his mom. When asked if he ever gets to be a "normal" 16-year-old, Zach shrugs and says, "Sometimes." His next words challenge me. "A lot of times kids my age are going out and doing things I don't want to do—because they're not right." He's talking about seeing certain movies or going to prom, things most teens—even Christian ones—probably wouldn't think twice about.
Zach has a keen sense of right and wrong—a quality that led him to start "Loose Change to Loosen Chains" when he was 12. The student-led campaign continues to raise thousands of dollars each year to end slavery. Gentle and humble (remind you of anyone?), Zach isn't your average powerhouse influencer. And yet his fierce dedication to God's calling on his life and willingness to sacrifice are inspiring a generation to take action. In a CT article, he says of his generation:
"I want us to make history—and I don't mean to get our names in some history book, but to be known as a generation that did something for God, cared for the poor, and totally stopped slavery."
And God is blessing Zach's willingness to commit his youth to this cause. Zach's book Be the Change surprised publishers with the number of copies sold. And his upcoming book Generation Change will be accompanied by parent-youth events to help parents empower their children to follow God's calling on their lives.
I'm glad for examples like Zach. God challenged me to a higher standard through him. You can catch Zach's wisdom on his blogs at breakawaymag.com.
Earlier today I talked about how housing is one of the "big five" expenses for families. That also means it's one place where mistakes can be very costly -- for families or singles.
And over at Boundless, I wrote an article titled "Home Buying Mistakes" where I list 15 common home-buying mistakes and how to avoid them. I also tackle whether there is anything distinctive Christians should be considering in the home buying process.
I'd be interested in what you think. Take a quick look at the article (it's an easy read -- nice bolded topic headings) and see if you agree. Have you made any of these mistakes? I have. Anything you hadn't thought about before? What about coming at home buying from a Christian worldview -- any ideas for that?
And in the spirit of being "shining stars" in the blogging world and showcasing the intelligence and originality of our readers, will you promise not to start any comment with "I haven't read the article ... but"? I'm really interested in what you can think of that I haven't. I promise, you will make my day! (Of course, "Amens" are perfectly allowable. You know..."Amen to #7! I learned this by..." That kind of thing.)
Also, if I had to add mistake #16, I think it would be buying a home where the master bathroom has no separating wall between it and the master bedroom. Whether you are married or want to be someday, I will swear by this one. We do have a separating door, so this morning when my husband hopped into the shower at 5:45am, I was able to simply roll over in the darkness, put the pillow over my ear and get 45 more minutes of sleep. Ah, bliss.
In a Yahoo Finance article titled "Can You Live on One Income? It's Worth a Try," financial writer Laura Rowley has some advice for those considering single-income family life: Beware the Big Five.
Rowley quotes Elizabeth Warren, author of The Two-Income Trap, who has determined that today's two-earner families spend 75 percent of their budgets on five things (where the single-earner family of the 1970s only spent one-half of their budgets on the same things).
What are the big five? Food? Clothing? Electronics? Automobile? Nope. According to the article, those costs have actually gone down on an inflation-adjusted basis. But five costs have skyrocketed:
- Housing -- Up 100 percent in inflation-adjusted dollars since the 1970s
- Health Insurance -- Up 74 percent
- The Second Car -- Though the inflation-adjusted price of cars has dropped since the 1970s (this surprised me), families now have two cars instead of one.
- Taxes -- The income of the second-earner is going to be taxed at a higher rate than the income of the first earner. So, taxes on the family unit have risen 25 percent.
- Child Care -- In 2007, the average cost for infant care in a licensed center was $14,647.
The takeaway according to Rowley is to be intentional: "You see lots of articles discussing ways to eliminate the second income -- things like clipping coupons, buying second-hand clothes, and cutting out vacations and cable television. But ultimately, paring those expenses isn't going to cover the gap for most middle-class families, because those aren't the costs that drive them to the economic edge. The real problems are ...'the big five.'
So, if you're serious about raising your future children at home, take a hard look at that list. Good financial choices now (in housing, autos and health insurance) can give you many more choices in the future.
And realize that there will be sacrifices. Rowley quotes financial coach Judy Lawrence: "You have to be willing to do some soul-searching about the things you're going to change and let go of," Lawrence says. "It's going back to your true priorities, values and goals and saying 'it's the best choice for me, my family, and our future' -- not 'we'll be locked into a life of drudgery and we can't do what we want to do.'"
From my experience, the sacrifices are absolutely worth it.
Once coed dormitories became the norm on college campuses, you had to know it was only a matter of time before male and female students were allowed to room together. I guess college administrators felt that sharing floors and bathrooms just wasn't enough to completely destroy gender distinctions.
Here's an excerpt from an MSNBC article one of our readers sent us: In the prim 1950s, college dorms were off-limits to members of the opposite sex. Then came the 1970s, when male and female students started crossing paths in coed dormitories. Now, to the astonishment of some Baby Boomer parents, a growing number of colleges are going even further: coed rooms.
At least two dozen schools, including Brown University, the University of Pennsylvania, Oberlin College, Clark University and the California Institute of Technology, allow some or all students to share a room with anyone they choose — including someone of the opposite sex. This spring, as students sign up for next year's room, more schools are following suit, including Stanford University.
What's next? Clothes-optional dorms and classes?
On the next The Boundless Show, guest contributor Suzanne Hadley makes the point that staying overnight with a member of the opposite isn't just about sexual temptation, it's about sharing an intimacy that's reserved for marriage. And the more you do things outside of God's design, the more likely it is that you'll never know its real meaning.
But Ivory Tower elitists don't know or care about stuff like that. And college isn't just about learning anymore. It's about gender blending.
A few years ago the Swiss government asked an ethics panel to consider "plant dignity." So the Swiss Federal Ethics Committee on Non-Human Biotechnology got together and produced the "Dignity of Living Beings with Regard to Plants" report.
Here's the gist of the report from The Weekly Standard's "The Silent Scream of the Asparagus": A "clear majority" of the panel adopted what it called a "biocentric" moral view, meaning that "living organisms should be considered morally for their own sake because they are alive." Thus, the panel determined that we cannot claim "absolute ownership" over plants and, moreover, that "individual plants have an inherent worth." This means that "we may not use them just as we please, even if the plant community is not in danger, or if our actions do not endanger the species, or if we are not acting arbitrarily."
There's a lot to unpack here. But my mind immediately went to the issue of abortion. Consider the implication of language like, "living organisms should be considered morally for their own sake" and "individual plants have an inherent worth" and "we may not use them as we please." It appears the Swiss want to assign more value to plants than Americans currently give pre-born babies.
It shows you just how distorted human reason can become with an ever declining Judeo-Christian influence.
"So, Mommy," my daughter sheepishly began. "Did you know that Riley gets paid to do jobs for her mom?"
"Hmm, no, didn't know that," I smiled.
A few minutes later I have agreed that yes, I will think of some jobs my 7-year-old can do for me to earn money. No time like the present to learn a good work ethic and what we do with our money once we earn it (oh yeah, you know me, reinforcement on tithing cannot be far away).
Evidently, though, I'm a little slow off the draw because my daughter hits me up within a few hours. She has thought of some jobs. "Oh, really, honey? Let me hear them."
Idea #1: She will do a play and her dad and I will pay for tickets. Here we have a talk about the things we do for our family simply because they are family. She's disappointed, but not defeated.
Idea #2: She will get up a little early and set the breakfast table for me. Another talk. This one is about how if we are going to get paid to do a job it needs to be one, something that we work hard for, and two, something that mommy really needs help with.
I come up with an idea: she can clean blinds. You can see the wheels spinning in her head. Obviously not what she had in mind. But after a few days of contemplating and also seeing the Barbie at Target that I remind her she can buy when she has her own money, she's ready.
So, this weekend for three hours (no, I'm not kidding), my daughter sat on the living room floor taking the vacuum across the blind slats, one by one. One dollar per window and she didn't stop until she had enough money for her tithe plus the Barbie.
It was a great day for both of us. She learned about the rewards (and not just financial) of hard work and I felt an incredible satisfaction in her dedication and also in the fact that she really did help me. I hate cleaning blinds.
It made me wonder how often I am like my 7-year-old when I'm talking with God. Yes, Father, I want to do some work for you, but I've got my own great ideas. How about I do this? I really enjoy it and that can be my work. Or how about this? It gives me a lot of satisfaction and it's not too hard.
Justin Taylor touched on this in yesterday's article, Working Out a Theology of Work: Whatever your vocation, God calls you to honor Him, to reflect His image, and to labor with all of your might. You may not be in your dream job right now. But the secret is to honor God in the little things and to sanctify the ordinary.
Am I laboring with all of my might? Am I working heartily, as for the Lord and not for men? This weekend, I felt I had a small glimpse of God's perspective. The play would have been fun. Setting the table wouldn't have been too hard. But my daughter worked hard and she did what I really needed her to do. God, make me that kind of daughter to you. Even if it means cleaning blinds.
Someday my prince will come ... and that day is May 16.
That is the release date of Prince Caspian, the second Chronicles of Narnia film produced by Walt Disney Pictures and Walden Media.
Mark Moring of Christianity Today interviewed Andrew Adamson, the film's director. Adamson directed 2005's The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe and the first two Shrek films. A few other interesting facts about Adamson: He was the son of Christian missionaries to Papua New Guinea; he duked it out with Lewis' stepson Doug Gresham over the role of women in the first Narnia film; and he's intent on being faithful to one of the best-loved children's books of all time.
Doug Gresham, who has been intimately involved with the production of both films, believes Prince Caspian is a better film than The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe, even though it's a more difficult story to tell. Adamson explains:
The story of Lion/Witch was already very cinematic with sort of a five-act structure. In Prince Caspian a lot of the story is told in retrospect, with Trumpkin telling the kids what happened when they were gone. So I restructured it to make it more linear. It's a challenge, but sometimes the limitations you face actually create more interesting solutions. And that's what I think makes this movie feel like a bigger movie, a more complex and interesting movie.
Despite his evangelical upbringing, Adamson feels a greater duty to his art than Lewis' Christian fan base:
I feel my responsibility to C. S. Lewis's fans is just being true to
the books, and letting people take from it what they will. What you
take from it depends on your belief, and how much interpretation you
place upon it. I think by staying true to the book, I'm staying true to
what any fan gets from the book.
For those of you who, like me, are excited to see Prince Caspian come to the big screen, you may want to check out this excerpt of the excellent Radio Theatre audio drama of the work produced by Focus on the Family.
Last week, I blogged about the influence the Hispanic birth rate will have on America over the next 50 years. In that same time frame, the Japanese government now projects they will lose a third of their population. In an article titled, "Japan Steadily Becoming a Land of Few Children," the Washington Post writes: Japan, now the world's second-largest economy, will lose 70 percent of its workforce by 2050 and economic growth will slow to zero, according to a report this year by the nonprofit Japan Center for Economic Research.
 Demographers discuss Japan's dramatic population reversal in a new documentary called Demographic Winter. Because Japan never had the baby boom America had, they are showing more quickly a pattern demographers are seeing around the world -- not enough children to support aging populations.
The growth of world population at this present moment, the commentary explains is not from new births -- rates are dropping almost everywhere -- it's from a health explosion that is allowing people to live longer and longer.
All the efforts around the world to control population (documented in books such as Fatal Misconception) have been rather effective, but have now made it likely that many of the readers of this blog will be asked to pay a larger share of the taxes required to care for an expanding aging population dependent on a shrinking workforce.
My concern is that this expectation might lead to resentment among young workers toward the people they are supporting and could lead to a coarsening attitude toward the elderly and even greater acceptance for euthanasia. That would be a tragic scenario, especially knowing it could have been averted if the population debates of the past three decades could have been less hysterical and more honest about what objective demographers actually knew about population trends.
He stood at the stoplight at the bottom of the freeway exit ramp. Dirty, disheveled, most if not all of his worldly possessions in a few bags at his feet. He held a scrawled cardboard sign: "Homeless: Just tryin' to survive."
I watched him from about four cars back. Interesting touch, I thought, making note of the dropped "g." With an apostrophe, no less! That's when my son spoke up: "Why isn't anyone giving him money?"
Why, indeed? Had I become so jaded that I took it for granted that no one gives money to beggars on street corners?
It's a common dilemma. I lived and worked in Manhattan in the mid-'80s, during the height of the crack epidemic. One encountered three or more dirty, disheveled beggars on every block, each holding the ubiquitous blue-and-white Greek coffee shop paper cup. When I first moved to the city, I was genuinely torn as I walked down the street; even if I was so inclined, I did not have enough money to give to everyone who asked. In those first days, I put a few quarters in a few cups. But a few days later I saw one of my beneficiaries staggering down the street, drunk out of his mind. I had no doubt where my quarter had gone.
That's when I stopped giving money. A few offers to buy a meal were turned down. That solidified my resolve. And when a woman in a full-length fur coat gave me a sob story about how she'd just inherited the coat and wouldn't part with it because it was her aunt's favorite coat ... blah blah blah, so could you please give me some money, I just walked by, giving her barely a glance. Living in the city had hardened me.
Twenty-plus years later, I had taken a purely clinical approach to the man at the bottom of the freeway ramp. My son, alas, had not yet been hardened.
I'm still not sure how to think about this. There are Jesus' words in Matthew 25:45: "I tell you the truth, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me." Those words are a dagger to the heart every time I think of how callous I'd become in New York -- and on the freeway ramp.
But then I read the apostle Paul's words in 2 Thessalonians 3:10: "If a man will not work, he shall not eat." The homeless man was young and able-bodied, and surely he could find work somewhere. Giving money to beggars merely encourages irresponsible behavior.
But then ...
I can go back and forth on this forever. One thing I can do is to give generously to organizations such as the Salvation Army, Samaritan's Purse or Compassion International that are able to pool resources and do genuine good for the least of these -- no equivocating or questions asked.
Our self interest makes the world go 'round. That's the understanding of how most markets work. In The Wealth of Nations, Adam Smith made his argument about "the invisible hand" of self interest that drives our economic system. He wrote: It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker, that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest. We address ourselves, not to their humanity but to their self-love, and never talk to them of our necessities but of their advantages.
If we were to look pragmatically at our lives, we'd recognize that many of our decisions about our work, our education, our free time, and so forth is guided by an invisible hand of self-interest. Though we'd rarely admit it, even the things we feel called to do as Christians often get filtered through the question, "What's in it for me?"
Or maybe I'm the only person who's thought that. Maybe I'm the only person who has stopped to calculate what recognition and even what compensation I could get from various promptings I feel toward ministry opportunities.
Which is why I've appreciated Gary Thomas's book The Beautiful Fight. On my second pass through the book this morning, I spent some time praying about Gary's point on page 122 that "The point of Christian ministry is not personal fulfillment." He goes on to say: It is not to gain a sense of importance, relevance or significance. The primary purpose of having hands and feet that reach out to others is to display God's glory. This reality necessitates a focus on God's empowerment as opposed to human giftedness.
I know this kind of Christianity 101, but this can be a quite a struggle to put into practice. While Adam Smith is saying on one hand that it is self interest that guides most of our actions, Gary Thomas is saying that our calling as Christians should not be about what's in it for us, but how God can be glorified.
Gary goes on to explain that what we do out of a desire for importance, relevance or significance will only go so far, but that when we seek to glorify God, he can do more through us than we could have ever done in our own strength and wisdom. "Your limitations can bring glory to God as they provide platforms for him to do something that has no other explanation but God," Thomas writes.
So, question for discussion: How can we as Christians do all to the glory of God while living in a world where everything seems to function on the motivations of our self interest?
We received an e-mail this morning from a young woman who's been married for just under a year. Here's an excerpt (edited slightly for brevity): Not too long ago I walked into our bedroom and found my husband reading my journal. Now, I'd never told him not to read it. I'd never told him it was off limits to all eyes but mine. I'd never told him how I felt about my journal -- because in the home that I grew up in, journals were sacred. It was a spoken rule in my parents home that a journal is totally, completely, entirely private.
And I've enjoyed that privacy between the pages of my journal for the last decade. During the ugliness of the aftermath of my parents divorce (i.e., court battles, custody arguments), my journal was my best friend. During the awkward time of my adolescence, my journal was a place of refuge. My journal has been a place I go to write when I am angry or frustrated or disappointed; when I am grateful or feeling distant from God.
For me, writing is therapeutic. And in my married relationship, it has been a "friend" for me to turn to when I am frustrated in order to sort out my feelings of anger before I react, so I can calmly approach my husband with kind words in times of conflict (and avoid situations where gossip or bias might arise if I were to verbally voice my frustrations to another person). In short, my journal has been my good friend for all these years.
After I found him reading my "sacred" musings, I was hurt. I felt violated. We talked about the situation -- or at least tried to. But because of his background and because he feels that it would be fine for me to read his journal (if he had one), he doesn't understand why I am so upset about the whole ordeal.
I've told my wife that nothing is private with me any more. She's free to rummage through my computer and read old e-mails, free to dig through boxes of stuff I've collected during my single years, free to open my mail, free to tell her friends whatever she wants about me, and so on. If she discovers anything that she has questions about, I see it as an opportunity to be more transparent with each other, for her to get insights into who I am and who I've been.
That said, I do understand this woman's desire to keep some of her thoughts private. She admits that she uses her journal to work through things before "going public" with them. And I think that's a legitimate use of a private journal.
So, though ideally (in my opinion) there'd be nothing entirely private between a husband and a wife, I think it's fair for this woman to ask her husband to not look at her private journal. And her husband should respect such a request. Perhaps in time she'll be open to opening its pages to him; in the meantime, he should trust that her request is being made out of good motives, and not out of a disrespectful desire to keep something from him.
That said, I'd love to hear what you think. Is it OK for some things to remain secret even within marriage? Should you allow your spouse to keep some things private, and not take offense that they're "keeping" certain things from you?
I was in a Christian bookstore the other day and saw a key chain that read: "It is Yoo Hoo He died for." I giggled at the use of a chocolate milk brand to tout Christianity. In her review of Rapture Ready!, Slate writer Hanna Rosin considers the strange world of Christian subculture. She notes: At this point in history, American evangelicals resemble the Israelites at various dangerous moments in the Old Testament: They are blending into the surrounding heathen culture, and having ever more trouble figuring out where it ends and they begin. In politics, and in business, they've mostly gone ahead and joined the existing networks. With pop culture, they've instead created their own enormous "parallel universe," as Daniel Radosh calls it in his rich exploration of the realm, Rapture Ready! A Christian can now buy books, movies, music—and anything else lowbrow to middlebrow—tailor-made for his or her sensibilities. Worried that American popular culture leads people—and especially teenagers—astray, the Christian version is designed to satisfy all the same needs in a cleaner form.
Growing up in a Christian home and attending a Christian college, I've experienced my share of Christian subculture. I listened to Christian music, owned a "witness wear" t-shirt and even wore a WWJD bracelet. While I believe these things strengthened my identity with Christ at the time, I can see how they could have appeared silly to outsiders. Rosin writes on the advent of Christian subculture: In the '80s, Christians were known as the boycotters, refusing to see movies or buy products that offended them. They felt about commercial culture much the way a Marxist might: that it was a decadent glorification of money and meaningless human relationships. Then, sometime during the '90s, when conservative evangelicals started coming out of their shells, they took a different tack. The boycotters became coopters and embarked on the curious quest to enlist America's crassest material culture in the service of spiritual growth.
I'm wary of this blending of Christianity and culture to produce a brand. At the same time I wonder what would be a more effective approach. Aren't wholesome, biblically-based alternatives for teens a good thing? Honestly, I believe that Brio magazine (an alternative to mags like Seventeen and Sassy) sustained me through my teen years.
However, there is a fine line. We certainly don't want to be the money changers in the temple—leveraging Christian products for financial gain. Neither do we want to give teens and children a warped view of faith in Christ—as a sub-par way of doing life. Rosin writes: For faith, the results can be dangerous. A young Christian can get the idea that her religion is a tinny, desperate thing that can't compete with the secular culture.
Reducing Christianity to a sickly brand is not only detrimental to the cause of Christ but just plain wrong. Still, quality Christian products can and have changed lives. Maybe the key is to consistently renounce the silly and champion the inspired, and ask God to grant us the wisdom to see the difference.
Tim Challies offers a good review of Rapture Ready! on his blog.
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