Weekly Web Roundup (8/13/16)

Photo Credit: danzden

Here are some interesting stories from around the web that I've seen during this past week:

Don't Let Anyone Tell You Adoptive Parents Aren't Parents by Carrie Goldman

American gold medal gymnast Simon Biles is one of the breakout stars of the 2016 Rio Olympics. But NBC commentator Al Trautwig's initial refusal to refer to Biles' adoptive parents as her parents caused quite a stir. This article addresses the importance of language choice when referring to adoptive families.

Racial History of American Swimming Pools from The Bryant Park Project

Americans everywhere rejoiced when Simon Manuel became the first African American swimmer to earn an individual swimming gold medal in the Olympics. For African Americans, the feat was of particularly significance due to the complicated history that the black community has had with America's swimming pools. This feature explains why.

A Letter From Young Asian-Americans To Their Families About Black Lives Matter by Shereen Marisol Meraji and Kat Chow

NPR offers some quality commentary on how many younger Asian Americans find themselves at odds with their parents over their views and engagement with social justices issues, particularly the Black Lives Matter Movement.

The “Dreaded Glenn”: A Response to Ms. Gaye Clark by Bryan Loritts

A post on The Gospel Coalition website earlier this week ignited a controversy when writer Gaye Clark wrote a piece entitled, "When God Sends Your White Daughter a Black Husband." The post has since been removed but the response from Pastor Loritts is worth the read as he explains why he, along with so many others, were troubled by the article.

When Love Fills Your Heart by Dayle Rogers

A friend and co-worker, Michelle Beckman, went home to be with the Lord this week after a courageous several year battle with cancer. Michelle committed the best years of her life to serving middle school and high school students so that they could know the Savior that she loved so dearly. Dayle Rogers writes of her friendship with Michelle and offers a touching tribute highlighting the influence that Michelle's life had on so many.

On Black Women & Marriage

Photo Credit: godserv

From The Economist:

"The collapse of marriage among blacks is well documented, but not the sexual, psychological, emotional and social toll this has taken on black women. Seven out of ten are single. Of the others, many are forced into "man-sharing." 

This crisis in the black “relationship market,” as Mr Banks calls it, starts with a “man shortage.” About one in ten black men in their early thirties are in prison. As a group, black men have also fallen behind in education and income, just as black women have surged ahead. Two black women graduate from college for every black man. As these women rise into the middle class, the men stay in the lower class, becoming less compatible. 

Many black women respond by “marrying down, but not out,” as Mr Banks puts it. But that makes bad marriages. Two out of every three black marriages fail, about twice the rate of white marriages. 

The real problem is the behaviour of those few black men who are considered good catches. They often stay unmarried for the opposite reason: they have too many options. As one man told Mr Banks: “If you have four quality women you’re dating and they’re in a rotation, who’s going to rush into a marriage?” Even black men who nominally commit to one woman are five times as likely as their white counterparts to have others on the side."

To read the rest of the article please click here.

In my ministry within the black community, I've seen some of these realities and, unfortunately, with some individuals very close to me. But I've also personally witnessed numerous successful marriages between African Americans.

If you are an African American man or woman, what is your response to this article? What solutions can be offered to reverse these current trends?

Does Character Matter For Presidential Candidates?

Photo Credit: U.S. Embassy New Delhi

"Of all the properties which belong to honorable men, not one is so highly prized as that of character." ~ Henry Clay

In the midst of a highly contested U.S. presidential primary season, a new book uncovers aspects of the personal life of President John F. Kennedy. The book, written by a former White House aide who claims she had an affair with President Kennedy, once again raises the question of personal character as it pertains to qualifications for the nation's highest office.

The suggestion of indiscretions on behalf of President Kennedy is not news to presidential historians. This has been commonly known for some time. What is intriguing to consider is whether Kennedy would have ever gotten elected in the first place had he lived in our TMZ-driven culture. Several current individuals aspiring to the presidency have had to face allegations of their own marital infidelities and this has been fatal for some (see Herman Cain) and could be for others (see Newt Gingrich).

What this tells us that character, who we are at our moral core, still appears to matter to the American public. Robert Dallek writes in The Daily Beast why character does matter for presidents:

"Presidents are not only the country’s principal policy chief, shaping the nation’s domestic and foreign agendas, but also the most visible example of our values. As a country that prides itself on being the world’s exemplar of human rights, the rule of law, and moral standards, it is embarrassing to have men seeking and/or serving in the presidency who fall short of our highest ideals. True, most Americans give lip service to the proposition that even the most exalted among us have their flaws, but we are eager to believe that presidents manage to rise above the limitations that beset the rest of us. 

We have been constantly disappointed in the many ways presidents and lesser public officials have fallen short of what we expected of them—Harding’s Teapot Dome scandal; Harry Truman’s influence-peddling associates; John Kennedy’s hidden medical history and compulsive womanizing; Ted Kennedy’s Chappaquiddick; Lyndon Johnson’s vulgarity that many complained undermined the dignity of the presidency; Richard Nixon’s resignation for abuse of power; Ronald Reagan’s Iran-contra scandal; Bill Clinton’s Monica; and George W. Bush’s Valerie Plame expose are among the most memorable of our recent public embarrassments. 

...Whether we like it or not, president’s private lives are no longer hidden from public view. And it is not without benefit to have this information. Presidential character matters and not just for the symbolic reasons I mentioned. Wouldn’t the country have been better served taking account of Harding’s moral failings? Certainly, voters acted recklessly in ignoring complaints that Nixon, despite assertions that we were dealing with the “new” Nixon, deserved the epithet, “tricky Dick.” We were certainly forewarned about Clinton’s womanizing, which undermined his presidency. James Monroe’s assertion that “national honor is the national property of the highest value” remains an enduring ideal. 

Should politicians’ character flaws, then, bar them from office, especially the oval office? Or does this set an impossibly high standard? Probably. Presidential aspirants reach for the highest office to satisfy some yearning for greatness or even immortality. The historian Richard Hofstadter said that politics for a majority of office holders, and particularly those obsessed with getting to the White House, is a form of vocational therapy. Grandiosity or convictions about standing apart from ordinary men seems to be a central component of the country’s most ambitious politicians. Ambition, of course, is not without its virtues. But when politicians, and especially presidents, let their need to win eclipse the larger good, as has so often been the case, it makes presidential striving a national problem."

Whether a man (or woman) has been faithful to their spouse should not be the only factor in deciding who we vote for. For it is true that just because a woman or man has remained true to their marital vows does not mean they will necessarily make a good president. But I also know this: If a person hasn't been true to the one person they've vowed before God to remain faithful, it would be naive to believe that they'd be true to the common American citizen.

Yes, character still matters.

To read the complete Dallek article please click here.

Why Single Women Need To Wait For The Right Man

Photo Credit: de.laina

Here are some challenging thoughts from Ruthie Dean urging single women to wait on the right mate by being the right mate:

"As women, I believe we in part perpetuate the man-boy problem by failing to hold the highest standards for ourselves, standards God desires for us. I recently heard a friend complaining that she couldn’t get Phillip* to call her. Two minutes later, she responded to his text, “Wanna watch a movie at my house?” in the affirmative. I’ve seen it too many times—brilliant, accomplished, God-fearing women making excuses for the players and the deadbeats and the guy who aren’t interested in anything more than sex. A lot of us have been there. We’re strong. We aren’t settling. And then we lose sight of what’s important and start “hanging out with” that guy. If a man can’t call to ask you on a date, he’s certainly not going to man-up and put a ring on your finger. 

The arguably most dangerous way women are contributing to the man-boy problem is in regards to sex. Oftentimes, women, including Christians, go further physically than they want to, hoping that their prowess will help them ‘catch a man’ when in fact, the opposite happens. Sex gives men the benefits without the promise of commitment and fidelity. Sure, there won’t be as many guys lining up to date you, but marriage will be a different story. Keeping the highest sexual purity standards will ensure he isn’t dating you just because he likes seeing you naked—and keep his intentions honorable. 

Another way women perpetuate the problem comes with the well-at-least-he’s-better-than _____ game. My hairdresser told me yesterday she had a hard time ending a relationship with a non-Christian, because the last Christian she dated had sent her pornographic text messages. Infuriating! However, standards should not be created based on the worst examples but instead on what God deems right. 

Many women also fall prey to the lie that dating or hanging out with “that guy” does not hold future implications. I found this especially true in college when friends (and myself, ahem) would date Mr. Text or Mr. I Don’t Believe in Organized Religion believing we could end the relationships as soon as someone better came along. However many of my friends are still entangled with or damaged by these men—especially in cases where sex was involved. By dating or playing around with the wrong men, we are essentially displaying mistrust in God’s plan and harming ourselves when the right man comes along. Andy Stanley, pastor of North Point Community Church, challenges singles: “Become the right person the right person is looking for.” A woman who dates placeholder men is most likely not who “Mr. Right” is looking for."

To read the rest of the article "Real Women Don't Text Back" please click here.

Tim Keller on Marriage

Photo Credit: 19melissa68

Our society is currently grappling with the meaning of the institution of marriage. We're told that one out of every two marriages fail. We celebrate reality television unions based more on celebrity than that of commitment. And here in 2011, we find that even the very definition of marriage is being re-examined.

 So what is the purpose of marriage? Dr. Tim Keller, an author and pastor in New York City, sheds some light on this subject in his new book, The Meaning of Marriage: Facing the Complexities of Commitment with the Wisdom of God. In a recent television interview, Keller expounds on his belief on the institution of marriage. You can watch the video here.
Dr. Keller offers a counter cultural definition of why marriage exists. It is much more than emotional love, although it certainly includes that. At its heart, marriage is complete commitment to another person and with that commitment comes a freedom to be completely oneself with another. It is a beautiful illustration of God's commitment to those that He is in covenant relationship with and we humans get the opportunity to get a small taste of God's view of us through our experience of the marriage covenant. It is love in its purest form.

Money Can't Buy You Love

Photo Credit: brandon king

"I'll give you all I got to give if you say you love me too/
I may not have a lot to give but what I got I'll give to you/
I don't care too much for money, money can't buy me love" ~ The Beatles

Can money buy you love? Apparently not. Money may enable you to get more stuff but it won't necessarily help your relationship. From USA Today:

"Researchers have found that focusing on money and possessions can take a toll on couples' happiness and stability.

In conducting the study, investigators from Brigham Young University analyzed relationship evaluations completed by more than 1,700 married couples across the United States. The participants were asked how much value they placed on "having money and lots of things."

The study, published in the Oct. 13 issue of the Journal of Couple & Relationship Therapy, found that couples who believe that money is not important scored up to 15 percent higher on marriage stability and other measures of relationship quality than materialistic couples.

"Couples where both spouses are materialistic were worse off on nearly every measure we looked at," lead author, Jason Carroll, a BYU professor of family life, said in a university news release. "There is a pervasive pattern in the data of eroding communication, poor conflict resolution and low responsiveness to each other."

To read the complete article please click here.

Are Big Families More Fun?

My brood of six

It used to be that larger families were the norm. My father's family had six boys. My mom's had three boys and two girls. My wife's mother's family had ten children. But the average family today has 2.1 children.

Families like mine that have more than the national average can seem like a bit of an oddity. On numerous occasions when out in public, we've gotten comments like, "Are those all yours?" or "I don't know how you do it." Which I find kinda funny, 'cause it's not like we're the Duggars or something. Yes, we're outnumbered but that's why God created zone defenses.

The Orlando Sentinel recently examined the pros and cons of big families:

"At a time when our fascination with big families is at a peak and, perhaps not coincidentally, family size is at one of its lowest points — women are having, on average, 2.1 kids — we asked an expert and two large-family moms to help us separate myth from reality: What are the pluses of big families? The minuses? What's the bottom line?

Large families are very diverse, but some frequently mentioned pluses include built-in playmates for your kids, more chances for kids to interact with children of different ages and, well, call it the Pitt factor: fun, joy, general merriment.

On the minus side are fewer resources — whether time or money — per child, less alone time for parents and more noise.

Mary Ostyn, the mother of 10 kids, six adopted, and the author of "A Sane Woman's Guide to Raising a Large Family" (Gibbs Smith), says she sometimes wishes she had the time and money to enroll her kids in more extracurricular activities.

"None of our kids are going to be world-class gymnasts, but they're going to know how to work hard, to help out, to share and to take care of people younger than themselves," she says. "It comes down to this awesome community that a large family is: For their whole lives, they're going to have this group of people that really understands them."

Psychologists have always assumed that siblings are good for you, because they provide so much support, says Joe Rodgers, a professor of psychology at the University of Oklahoma. But are two, three or four siblings better — or worse — than one?

"The answer is fairly controversial — and fascinating as well," Rodgers says.

On one side are researchers who believe parental resources such as time and money are split among offspring, with children in bigger families getting smaller pieces of the pie.

On the other side are researchers such as Rodgers, who say that's an overly simplistic way of looking at family dynamics; often parents are very good at engaging more than one kid at a time.

"There are all sorts of things, from mealtimes, to vacations, to carpooling, where parents are not dividing up the resources among children, but rather multiplying those resources across children," says Rodgers."

When my wife and I first talked about the number of children we'd like to have, we decided that two, or possibly three would be good. God has blessed us with four. And we wouldn't want it any or way. But that is not to say that smaller families cannot also be great experiences for children. For example, my wife was an only child and I think she turned out alright.

God leads families in different ways. For some, it's not in God's plans for them to have any children. For others, He may want them to have ten children. However big or small each family ends up being, it's important to be grateful for what God has given us and to demonstrate that gratefulness through lives of obedience to Him.

It is true that our children may not get a whole lot when it comes in the way of material things.  As missionaries on a meager salary, our children understand that they are simply not going to be able to have all the things that their friends have.  But we hope that we love them well enough that when they look back on their childhood that they will remember a loving family and not dwell on the temporal stuff they didn't get.

For me, I've come to realize the blessing that children are and I'm thankful that the Lord has entrusted us with four of them. Having a bigger family means less time for self and more sacrifice. In order to make our family work, we have to often put the needs of others above our own and learn how to love unconditionally and forgive quickly.  There are many challenges we face but as I often tell our kids, life before them was quieter, cleaner...and not nearly as fun.

To read the complete Sentinel article please click here.

Pat Robertson, Marriage, Divorce & The Gospel

Photo Credit: mags20_eb

While on a short-term mission project to Virginia Beach a number of years ago, my wife and I got to know a woman that had what is probably one of the most stressful jobs in America. She was the spokesperson for Pat Robertson. Upon learning what she did for living, I commented that there was probably never a dull moment for her. Her response? "You don't know the half of it."

I'm not sure if our friend is still in that job but Robertson is still making comments that keep his aides on their toes. On a recent episode of his show "The 700 Club," Robertson surprised many when answering a viewer's question about whether it was morally justifiable for a person to divorce a spouse that is stricken with Alzheimer's disease. He said this:

"That is a terribly hard thing," Robertson said. "I hate Alzheimer's. It is one of the most awful things because here is a loved one—this is the woman or man that you have loved for 20, 30, 40 years. And suddenly that person is gone. They're gone. They are gone. So, what he says basically is correct. But I know it sounds cruel, but if he's going to do something he should divorce her and start all over again. But to make sure she has custodial care and somebody looking after her."

Co-host Terry Meeuwsen asked Pat, "But isn't that the vow that we take when we marry someone? That it’s For better or for worse. For richer or poorer?"

Robertson said that the viewer's friend could obey this vow of "death till you part" because the disease was a "kind of death." Robertson said he would understand if someone started another relationship out of a need for companionship.

Robertson gave the example of a friend who faithfully visited his wife every day even though she could not remember his visits to illustrate the difficulty of caring for someone with the disease."

Needless to say, Robertson's response is disappointing. Unfortunately, I've come to expect him to make public proclamations about sensitive topics from time-to-time that are hurtful and not grounded in Scripture. Russell Moore offers a response in a manner much better than I ever could. Moore comments:

"Marriage, the Scripture tells us, is an icon of something deeper, more ancient, more mysterious. The marriage union is a sign, the Apostle Paul announces, of the mystery of Christ and his church (Eph. 5). The husband, then, is to love his wife “as Christ loved the church” (Eph. 5:25). This love is defined not as the hormonal surge of romance but as a self-sacrificial crucifixion of self. The husband pictures Christ when he loves his wife by giving himself up for her.

At the arrest of Christ, his Bride, the church, forgot who she was, and denied who he was. He didn’t divorce her. He didn’t leave.

The Bride of Christ fled his side, and went back to their old ways of life. When Jesus came to them after the resurrection, the church was about the very thing they were doing when Jesus found them in the first place: out on the boats with their nets. Jesus didn’t leave. He stood by his words, stood by his Bride, even to the Place of the Skull, and beyond.

A woman or a man with Alzheimer’s can’t do anything for you. There’s no romance, no sex, no partnership, not even companionship. That’s just the point. Because marriage is a Christ/church icon, a man loves his wife as his own flesh. He cannot sever her off from him simply because she isn’t “useful” anymore.

...It’s easy to teach couples to put the “spark” back in their marriages, to put the “sizzle” back in their sex lives. You can still worship the self and want all that. But that’s not what love is. Love is fidelity with a cross on your back. Love is drowning in your own blood. Love is screaming, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me.”

Sadly, many of our neighbors assume that when they hear the parade of cartoon characters we allow to speak for us, that they are hearing the gospel. They assume that when they see the giggling evangelist on the television screen, that they see Jesus. They assume that when they see the stadium political rallies to “take back America for Christ,” that they see Jesus. But Jesus isn’t there.

Jesus tells us he is present in the weak, the vulnerable, the useless. He is there in the least of these (Matt. 25:31-46). Somewhere out there right now, a man is wiping the drool from an 85 year-old woman who flinches because she think he’s a stranger. No television cameras are around. No politicians are seeking a meeting with them.

But the gospel is there. Jesus is there."

For a more appropriate Christian response on how to respond to a spouse with Alzheimer's, look to the example of Robertson McQuilkin. Randy Alcorn tells the story of how this Bible college president resigned his post in order to care for his Alzheimer's ridden wife, Muriel. McQuilkin's posture to his sick wife was not one of abandonment, but to stay and care for her. His attitude demonstrates what marriage is truly about:

"I never think about “what if.” I don’t think “what if” is in God’s vocabulary. So I don’t even think about what I might be doing instead of changing her diaper or what I might be doing instead of spending two hours feeding her. It’s the grace of God, I’m sure."

Marriage paints the picture of how God feels about us. He is committed to us for good or for bad, in richer or poorer, in sickness and in health. He will always remain faithful to us no matter what condition we find ourselves in. I'm grateful to have a God that doesn't divorce me in the times I don't have much to offer.

To read Russell Moore's complete post please click here and to read Randy Alcorn's full post please click here.

Do Christian Men Have an Obligation to Marry Young?

Photo Credit: hanzabean

Kay S. Hymowitz has written a fascinating article for the Wall Street Journal Online about the trend we are seeing of men that seem to be intentionally delaying adulthood by avoiding marriage and parenthood until much later in life.

Hymowitz quotes comedienne and author, Julie Klausner:

"We are sick of hooking up with guys," writes the comedian Julie Klausner, author of a touchingly funny 2010 book, "I Don't Care About Your Band: What I Learned from Indie Rockers, Trust Funders, Pornographers, Felons, Faux-Sensitive Hipsters and Other Guys I've Dated." What Ms. Klausner means by "guys" is males who are not boys or men but something in between. "Guys talk about 'Star Wars' like it's not a movie made for people half their age; a guy's idea of a perfect night is a hang around the PlayStation with his bandmates, or a trip to Vegas with his college friends.... They are more like the kids we babysat than the dads who drove us home." One female reviewer of Ms. Kausner's book wrote, "I had to stop several times while reading and think: Wait, did I date this same guy?"

Hymowitz goes onto identify that ambiguous stage of life that more and more men are occupying for longer periods of time -- pre-adulthood.  Those classified in the pre-adulthood stage are males that may be post-college age-wise (mid 20's and up), but are living life fundamentally no differently than they did while in their teens or early 20's.  (If you're having a difficult time envisioning this, picture Adam Sandler in nearly any movie that he has ever been in.) 

How could this be a problem?  Well, if you're a single women that is looking for a man who you can settle down and start a family with, it may seem like slim pickings when examining the field.  For most women, the ideal potential husband probably has showered within the last 24 hours, does not regularly go out with "bed head", and doesn't occupy a job that could easily be filled by a fifteen year old high school student.  A pre-adult doesn't fully understand that adulthood not only brings with it independence from one's parents but also responsibility to be a productive member of society.

For the pre-adult male that is perpetually stuck in a state of "21-ness", marriage and family could be the last thing on his mind. Hymowitz comments further:

"Unlike adolescents, however, pre-adults don't know what is supposed to come next. For them, marriage and parenthood come in many forms, or can be skipped altogether. In 1970, just 16% of Americans ages 25 to 29 had never been married; today that's true of an astonishing 55% of the age group. In the U.S., the mean age at first marriage has been climbing toward 30 (a point past which it has already gone in much of Europe). It is no wonder that so many young Americans suffer through a "quarter-life crisis," a period of depression and worry over their future."

In many ways, I have a hard time relating to men that live life well into their 30's and 40's without any plans to marry and have children.  Fairly early on during my time in college, I began praying about whether I thought God would want me to get married and prayed specifically about the type of woman that I would want to marry.  When I believed I had met her, I didn't waste any time.  I met my now-wife when I was 24 and married her shortly after I turned 25 (we were wed less than a year after meeting).  We had our first three children by the time I was 30.  Needless to say, if there was any boy left in me, I was forced to grow up due to the responsibilities inherent in being a husband and father.

Mark Driscoll, a pastor in Seattle, wrote a controversial article on this very topic several months ago.  In the article, Driscoll pulls no punches as he describes these pre-adult men as "boys who can shave."  Look at some of what he had to say:

"What happens if you walk into the church and try to find out what a man looks like? First of all, you're not going to find a lot of guys in most evangelical churches. The least likely person to see in church is a single, twenty-something male. He is as rare at church as a vegan at a steak house.

In the world, boys who can shave are children who are consumers. In the church, boys who can shave are cowards who are complainers.

A buddy of mine calls them evangellyfish because they have no backbone. They don't declare a major, church, theology, or fiancé. They don't want to fail and they think if they don't try, then they can't fail. And by definition, that's a failure.

They are, however, endowed with the spiritual gift of complaining. They say, "I hate the church. The church just wants my money." As if the church wants his futon, Xbox, light beer, and computer filled with free Internet porn.

Here's the cold hard truth: it's a lot harder to do something than it is to complain about those who are doing something. The notorious sin of Christian guys is complaining about guys who are doing something rather than doing something."

While Driscoll's words certainly are pointed, I have to admit that I agree with much of what he has to say. Boys are tentative, irresponsible and wait for others to do things for them. Men take initiative, willingly accept responsibility and gladly call others to follow them.  But does this mean that Christian men that wait until later in life to marry are in sin?

First, there is no age that the Bible states when a man should marry. Throughout history men have generally married at a variety of ages, depending upon the era and culture in which they lived. So I don't think there is a "right" age for all men to seek out marriage.

Second, marriage is not for everyone. There have been some great men throughout history (both Jesus Christ and the Apostle Paul come to mind) that did not marry because they felt they could serve God more faithfully without the responsibilities of marriage. So a man that feels called by God to a single and celibate lifestyle for the sake of the gospel should be applauded.

Third, there are men that desperately want to get married and God has just not brought the right woman across their path. They are committed to living a God-honoring lifestyle and are not willing to compromise their convictions just because they have a desire to get married. These men, too, should be admired and esteemed.

However, I think that the trends show that there is an increasing number of Christian men that are prolonging marriage because they simply don't want to accept the responsibilities that come with having a wife and, possibly, children. It is not that they feel called to singleness or aren't interested in women, they simply don't want to grow up and move on to the next stage of life.

Being a husband and father forces us to grow up and truly live as men and that scares a lot of guys.  These "boys who can shave" realize that having a wife will mean that they will be responsible to and for someone else and that is intimidating.  It means they will not just be living for themselves anymore but will need to take someone else into account.

But their passivity affects others whether they realize it or not.  There are literally millions of godly, available women that are searching for a husband in a world seemingly made up of boys. I know of too many women that are waiting for a man of initiative to pursue them yet the single men that they interact with are too busy playing video games and hanging out with their buddies.

It can grow wearisome for Christian women to wait for years for a godly man to pursue them and settle for any nice guy that shows an interest in them. My advice to women is to not settle when it comes to your dating relationships and the choice of a husband. If you want to be married to a man, don't date a boy.

For the men out there, Driscoll has this advice:

"Men, you are to be creators and cultivators. God is a creator and a cultivator and you were made to image him. Create a family and cultivate your wife and children. Create a ministry and cultivate other people. Create a business and cultivate it. Be a giver, not a taker, a producer and not just a consumer. Stop looking for the path of least resistance and start running down the path of greatest glory to God and good to others because that's what Jesus, the real man, did."

Alice Cooper on Faith, Sex and Marriage

Photo Credit:
Dena Flows

Alice Cooper is probably best known for his brand of "shock rock", theatrical concerts and hits "School's Out" and "No More Mr. Nice Guy."  But few know that Cooper publicly identifies himself as a Christian and claims to be a committed follower of Jesus Christ.  Having grown up in a family of faith, Cooper left behind his Christian upbringing during his teens and venture into rock and roll.  In a past interview with JesusJournal.com, he comments on the rediscovery of his faith later in life and his views on God and the Devil:

"I was pretty much convinced all my life that there was just one God and there was Jesus Christ and there was the Devil," he told KNAC.com. "You couldn't believe in God without believing in the Devil. I always tell bands that the most dangerous thing you can do is to believe in the concept of the Devil or the concept of God, because you're not giving them full credit. When you believe in God, you've got to believe in the all-powerful God. He's not just God, He's the all-powerful God and He has total control over everyone's life. The Devil, on the other hand, is a real character that's trying his hardest to tear your life apart. If you believe that this is just mythology, you're a prime target because you know that's exactly what Satan wants: To be a myth. But he's not a myth, of this I'm totally convinced. More than anything in the world, I'm convinced of that."

As a popular entertainer in a profession known for its decadence and rebellion, Cooper possesses a remarkably refreshing perspective on relationships. Check out this video as Cooper shares his thoughts on sex and marriage. Please click here if the video player does not show up. (h/t to Tim Challies for the video link)

powered by Splicd.com

In Honor of My Parents on Their 40th Anniversary

My parents’ journey in life together started innocently enough well over 50 years ago. Having grown up mere blocks from each other in the same small Michigan town located on the banks of Lake Huron, they first met as young children. My father often found himself playing at my mom’s house since he was good friends with one of her brothers and later on he found himself coached my mom’s dad on various youth baseball teams.

Initially, my mom and dad didn’t care much for each other but that began to change during adolescence and their interest in one another increased as they entered into adulthood. Coming of age during the turbulent decade of the 1960’s, my father enlisted in the United States Marine Corps while my mom, who is two years my dad’s junior, entered community college upon finishing high school.

They wrote to each other regularly while my dad was in Vietnam and saw each other the few times he was able to make it home. Over time they realized that they had fallen in love. Months after my dad finished his time of active service in the military, my parents were married in May of 1970 and officially began their life together. Less than a year later, my brother, Chip was born. I came along in 1973 and my sister joined our family in 1975.

Life seemed good as they began preparing for the years ahead as a family. But for reasons known only to God, the road ahead would not be an easy one. An unspeakable tragedy struck our family in February of 1976 when my brother, who had contracted some type of viral infection, unexpectedly stopped breathing on that fateful Valentine’s Day evening. They rushed him to the hospital and my father, who was working the midnight shift at a brass factory at the time, hurried to the hospital. By the time my dad got there my brother was gone.

Having been married for less than six years, my parents’ worst fears had been realized. They had lost a child. Having to cope with that reality while also raising two other young children was not easy. As would be expected, they struggled and managed the best they knew how. What is important is that they stuck together. As is often the case when a couple loses a child, the grief becomes so overwhelming that the marriage crumbles to the point of becoming irreparable. But God had his gracious hand on the Crocker family and my parents’ marriage survived.

They raised my sister and me in a loving and supportive environment and modeled a God-honoring marriage. They cared for us, provided for us and perhaps, knowing that we could be taken from them at any moment, had a greater appreciation of the blessed gift that children are. They provided a spiritual foundation that no doubt has contributed to what I am doing with my life today. I can say with a fair degree of certainty that had my parents given up on their marriage that I would likely not be where I am today.

They demonstrated the grace of God to me in a way that helps me to relate to my heavenly Father as a caring, nurturing father. I have seen that even as my parents have walked through death and loss (and they have lost a lot of loved ones), that their faith in God has remained strong and that He is at the center of their marriage.

In my ministry to college students, I have met scores of students who have to deal with the after-effects of broken homes, poor parenting and messed up childhoods. Even though I was introduced to death at a young age, I grew up in a stable, safe and loving home environment. In my thirty-seven years I have had the privilege of being close to a number of tremendous people who are great influencers in the world. But none have my admiration, respect and love like my parents.

Thank you, Mom and Dad, for your faithfulness to God, to one another and to our family. Thank you for being such great grandparents to our kids. And thank you for being a living demonstration that God can take the suffering of our lives and turn it into His good. Congratulations on 40 years of marriage and I pray that you will have many more together. I love you dearly.

Standing Up For Marriage

In many circles a major story has been lost in all of the news coverage of the election Barack Obama. In several states (including the one in which I reside, Florida) measures were passed that would legally define marriage as the union between a man and a woman. Surprising to many, this type of measure passed in the state of California. Generally regarded as a left-leaning and progressive state, a number in the gay community did not respond positively to this development.

In fact, protesters have even picketed Mormon temples and Christian churches for their perceived role in the passage of Proposition 8. Conservatives view legally accepted marriages between homosexuals as an assault on a sacred institution, whereas liberals view it as a natural progression in the granting of equal rights to a group of people that have been historically oppressed.

In a pluralistic democratic society, how should we respond when there are proposed changes in the law when it comes to those institutions that we consider sacred, such as marriage? One of the major challenges in the discussion of a sensitive topic such as this is to realize that there are actually at least two different senses in which we view marriage. First, it is a union in the eyes of God "til death do us part." Second, it is a legal contract in the government's eyes that can be broken when seen fit by one or both parties. This is wherein the rub lies. In one sense it is holy, sacred and eternal; in the other it is secular, temporal and limited to this age. Maybe the perspective that C.S. Lewis shared on marriage in his classic Mere Christianity needs to be considered:

"Before leaving the question of divorce, I should like to distinguish two things which are very often confused. The Christian conception of marriage is one: the other is the quite different question — how far Christians, if they are voters or Members of Parliament, ought to try to force their views of marriage on the rest of the community by embodying them in the divorce laws. A great many people seem to think that if you are a Christian yourself you should try to make divorce difficult for every one.

I do not think that. At least I know I should be very angry if the [Muslims] tried to prevent the rest of us from drinking wine. My own view is that the Churches should frankly recognise that the majority of the British people are not Christians and, therefore, cannot be expected to live Christian lives. There ought to be two distinct kinds of marriage: one governed by the State with rules enforced on all citizens, the other governed by the Church with rules enforced by her on her own members. The distinction ought to be quite sharp, so that a man knows which couples are married in a Christian sense and which are not."

Perhaps those that are advocates for gay marriage are so infuriated at those that are against it is because many that claim marriage is sacred and holy treat it as if it is secular and temporal. According to a number of studies, those that identify themselves as born-again Christians divorce at essentially the same rate as the general population. How can we say that marriage is a holy institution that would be threatened by the legalization of gay marriage when an arguably greater threat is the frequency that Christians cheat on their spouses and the alarming rate at which Christians divorce?

In mentioning these realities, I am not attempting to bring greater pain to those that have already suffered the devastating heartbreak of a broken marriage. What I am seeking to do is to cause those of us that call ourselves followers of Jesus to first take a good look at ourselves. There are some in the public eye that are the most vocal critics of gay marriage that have had three or four marriages themselves. And they call it sacred?! When it comes to the marriage debate, the words of Jesus from the Sermon on the Mount resound:

"Do not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you." "Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, 'Let me take the speck out of your eye,' when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye."

For those of us that have not gone through a divorce or physically committed adultery, we don't escape Jesus' warnings either:

"You have heard that it was said, 'Do not commit adultery.' But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart."

Jesus' teachings went beyond what we find comfortable. He spoke against divorce. He spoke against adultery. And, yes, he even spoke against lust. I do think that marriage should not be entered into lightly and I do believe that it should be reserved for a man and woman for life. But I also think it would do us well to consider that our words ring hollow to the mainstream when we claim to be advocates for that which is God-ordained yet continue to not demonstrate that in our own lives.

None of us are perfect and we will all fail from time-to-time so let us remember that our love will always go farther than our anger and that grace has more power to pierce the human heart than judgment.