Weekly Web Roundup (5/13/17)

Photo Credit: aka Quique

Here is a collection of items from around the web that caught my attention the past couple of weeks:

How to Raise an American Adult by Ben Sasse (The Wall Street Journal)

"We all know the noun adult. But I was perplexed last year to hear the new verb to adult. In social media, especially on Twitter and Instagram, it birthed a new hashtag: #adulting. As in: “Just paid this month’s bills on time #adulting,” or “Decided I couldn’t watch Netflix 8 hours straight and went to the grocery store instead #adulting.” It even got a nomination from the American Dialect Society for the most creative word of 2015. “Adulting” is an ironic way to describe engaging in adult behaviors, like paying taxes or doing chores—the sort of mundane tasks that responsibility demands. To a growing number of Americans, acting like a grown-up seems like a kind of role-playing, a mode of behavior requiring humorous detachment. Let me be clear: This isn’t an old man’s harrumph about “kids these days.” I still remember Doc Anderson standing in the street in 1988, yelling at me to slow down as I drove through his neighborhood in our small Nebraska town. I was 16 and couldn’t stand that guy. Years later, when I had children of my own, I returned to thank him. Maturation."

Teams in Mission: Are They Worth It? by David Sedlacek (The Exchange: Christianity Today)

"Teamwork has been a popular concept in missions theory and practice for decades, but there is a persistent sense among missionaries that teams may be more work than they are worth. Working alongside others, especially those of different cultures, is no easy task. It takes time, effort, and energy to work in a team, and it doesn’t always produce the fruit we look for. We’ve all heard this comment: our younger generation values teamwork, but the older generation doesn’t get it. Twenty-five years ago, as a member of the new generation of missionaries, I nodded my head in agreement. I thought, Yes, we value teamwork and the older generation doesn’t get it. Today, I am a member of the “older” generation. When I hear the familiar refrain, I’m tempted to respond, “Yes, the younger generation values teamwork, and we don’t get it.”"

Don’t Let Facebook Make You Miserable by Seth Stephens-Davidowitz (The New York Times)

"Friends have always showed off to friends. People have always struggled to remind themselves that other people don’t have it as easy as they claim. Think of the aphorism quoted by members of Alcoholics Anonymous: “Don’t compare your insides to other people’s outsides.” Of course, this advice is difficult to follow. We never see other people’s insides. I have actually spent the past five years peeking into people’s insides. I have been studying aggregate Google search data. Alone with a screen and anonymous, people tend to tell Google things they don’t reveal to social media; they even tell Google things they don’t tell to anybody else. Google offers digital truth serum. The words we type there are more honest than the pictures we present on Facebook or Instagram."

Reflections on the Meaning of Home by Scott Sauls

"Recently, our oldest daughter graduated from high school. To commemorate her accomplishment, Patti and I wrote her long Letters from Mom and Dad. In those letters, we walked down memory lane reflecting upon and getting nostalgic about her eighteen years of life. As we reminisced, it dawned on both of us that, while we gave the girl opportunities, we never gave the girl roots…at least not with respect to place. To date, she has lived in seven different homes and attended eight different schools in five different cities. Contemplating the quasi-nomadic upbringing that we imposed on our daughter, Patti wrote in her Letter from Mom, “I am so so so sorry…and you’re welcome.” 

The “I’m sorry” part makes good sense. Moving of any kind is disorienting, especially in childhood. It uproots a child from friends, teachers, neighborhoods and familiar spaces. It digs a hole in the heart, uprooting and re-rooting like that. For better or for worse, our daughter’s story has become the same as mine. It’s a story with no lifelong friends or neighbors or houses from childhood. Instead, it’s the story of a traveler. What good could come from seven homes and eight schools and five cities in eighteen years? Why on earth would my wife feel compelled to say “You’re welcome” right after saying “I’m so so so sorry” to our daughter? I believe it’s because regret and hope don’t have to be mutually exclusive."

A Theology of Race

Here's a helpful video from Jemar Tisby on what the Bible means when it refers to race or, more appropriately, ethnicity.

The Differences Between Convictions, Persuasions & Opinions

Photo Credit: ThoroughlyReviewed

One of the things that I have most appreciated about my involvement with the ministry of Cru is that we are an interdenominational, worldwide organization. This means that we have people involved from a variety of church and cultural backgrounds.

This provides for our staff and students the opportunity to learn from those who are different than them and to gain a greater appreciation for the diversity that exists within the Body of Christ.

This, of course, also provides the opportunity for a variety of challenges as people from varying streams of faiths and ethnicities seek to understand each other and serve together around a common vision of proclaiming the good news of Jesus.

As a Christian ministry, we do have a Statement of Faith in order to clarify what we believe about those things that are essential to the Christian faith. This not only helps to provide direction when partnering with local churches and other organizations, but it helps to bring focus to who we are and what we're about.

As a new staff member with Cru I was introduced to a helpful framework to help in discerning which beliefs were absolutely essential to my faith and which could be viewed in a bit of a different light.

Dr. Alan Scholes frames this in the language of Convictions, Persuasions and Opinions. Here is what Dr. Scholes has to say:

1.  Convictions: These are central beliefs of the Christian faith that are crucial to salvation. Notice how Paul identifies the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ as “of first importance” in 1 Cor. 15:3–5 “For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve.”  Paul is saying that the truth of Christ’s death for sins and resurrection from the dead is fundamental to Christian belief.  To deny this is to deny the gospel (see vv. 1-2).  Other examples of “conviction-level” doctrines would include the authority of the Scripture, the doctrine of the Trinity, the full deity of Christ, the full humanity of Christ, humans under divine judgment for sin, the forgiveness of sins, salvation by grace through faith, etc. These are issues over which we would eventually divide fellowship with others (if there is no repentance). The church has historically used the term "heresy" to speak about deviations from these beliefs.  Listen to what Paul says about those who abandon these fundamental truths of the gospel in Gal 1:8-9.  “But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so now I say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be accursed." 

2.  Persuasions: These are beliefs about which we are personally certain but can still fellowship with other Christians who disagree since they are not matters central to the gospel and/or the historic Christian faith. A person may be ignorant of these doctrines and yet still be saved.  For example, it is not necessary to know how God’s providence relates to human freedom in order to experience salvation.  Examples of "persuasion" level issues would be forms of church government, appropriate mode of baptism (sprinkling vs. immersion), the scope of Christ’s death (everyone vs. only the elect), the age of the earth, nature of God’s providence, and the nature of the millennial kingdom. Many denominational distinctives fit into this second category.

3.  Opinions: These are beliefs, desires, or even wishes which may not be clearly taught in Scripture over which believers may legitimately differ. Implicit in this third category is the assumption that there may be more than one correct "Christian" view on an issue. Notice what Paul says in Rom. 14:5-6 about Sabbath observance for Christians: “One person esteems one day as better than another, while another esteems all days alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. The one who observes the day, observes it in honor of the Lord. The one who eats, eats in honor of the Lord, since he gives thanks to God, while the one who abstains, abstains in honor of the Lord and gives thanks to God.”  As an apostle, Paul could simply have handed down a ruling that would have settled the controversy but he didn’t.  Examples of “opinion-level” doctrines could be aspects of church government (e.g., how many elders should a church have), the order of Christian worship, etc.

Having this type of framework has been extremely helpful for me as I've gotten older in my faith and been exposed to many different beliefs that fall under the Christian umbrella. It helps me to determine which doctrinal beliefs are non-negotiable and which are not.

It is common for many Christians to think that everyone has to agree with them about everything. It doesn't seem to matter whether it's about salvation, baptism, when to hold Sunday morning services or what kind of chicken to serve at the potluck, these believers make no distinction between matters.

But what I've found as I've matured in my faith is that the number of issues that I would include in the "Conviction" category has grown smaller but my passion for these matters has not.

It has also freed me up in interacting with others about those areas that might be considered more "Persuasion" level beliefs to allow for a greater degree of flexibility. I can still firmly believe in a certain doctrine but I can also maintain fellowship with other believers that have come to different conclusions.

This type of approach to understanding Christian doctrine recognizes that how we understand the Scriptures is often influenced by factors like where we grew up in the world, what our church experiences have been, the ethnic group to which we identify and even our political party affiliations.

It is natural for us to want others to be passionate about the things we're passionate about. But there are simply some doctrinal beliefs where the Bible is not clear and in which sincere Christians might disagree yet remain in fellowship with one another.

Even though we may use guidelines as those I've suggested here, we may still find ourselves in disagreement with others about which beliefs fall into which category. In these circumstances, it's important for us to maintain a charitable & humble spirit.

In addition, it's wise for us to continue to search the Scriptures, to pray for God's Spirit to guide us and to seek the wise counsel of those we respect like our pastors and other spiritual leaders. I do believe it's possible for us to hold firm beliefs but interact with others in a winsome and kind way.

Weekly Web Roundup (11/5/16)

Photo Credit: barbasboth

Here are some interesting stories that I have noticed from around the web this past week:

3 Growing Needs in Missionary Education by Ed Stetzer (Christianity Today)

"Thinking about educational needs for missionaries inevitably leads to questions about the role of traditional institutions in their training. As we begin to develop new pathways for “limitless” sending, we open the doors of missions not only to seminarians, but also business people and students and artists and . . . We will no longer be sending only people who have completed years of formal theological preparation. We will be sending people who have asked for international transfers within the workplace. They will have new jobs in brand new cultures, which will most likely make much formal training within an institution prohibitive. Obviously, creativity is needed. Some institutions have already begun to develop programs to meet the minimum requirements of mission organizations, and that’s good. Yet, more needs to be done to get to the kind of limitless sending we desire."

The New Evangelical Moral Minority by Kelefa Sanneh (The New Yorker)

Here's a lengthy profile from The New Yorker on Russell Moore, the president of the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission. Dr. Moore is a leading evangelical voice and, like me, a member of Generation X. I find his approach on how to engage our culture a welcome departure from some of the more combative postures that many Christian leaders of recent generations have demonstrated.

TV's making progress on diversity, but it's motivated by money by Gary Levin (USA Today)

"“People have begun to recognize how much money they can make by targeting underserved audiences,” says Courtney A. Kemp, the creator and executive producer of Power, a popular Starz series about a black nightclub owner. “The color that’s relevant here is green.  It’s not about any kind of altruism, or a sea change in how people are feeling about diversity.” Instead, it reflects demographic shifts, and TV executives' need to chase viewers as Hollywood faces radical shifts in how and where they find their entertainment.  U.S. Census data projects the percentage of blacks, Hispanics and Asians will continue to grow in coming decades, while the percentage of whites declines.  And amid steadily declining ratings, blacks are among the most loyal viewers, watching nearly 50% more TV each week than the general population, Nielsen says."

Lux in Tenebris: How God Is Moving on Secular Campuses by Owen Strachan (Patheos)

"It can feel to the church today like the darkness is closing in. If you close your eyes, all can seem lost. But if you open your eyes, you see points of light. You see gospel advancement. You see strategic initiative. You see local churches leading ministries to students while also calling them to meaningful membership in the local church. This is the model I believe we need moving ahead. Parachurch ministries can do great good, but I believe they will do most good when partnering closely with local churches. This is especially true as campus access grows dicey in places."

No, Most Black People Don’t Live in Poverty - or Inner Cities by Alana Semuels (The Atlantic)

"There might have been a time when conflating inner cities and African Americans was appropriate shorthand, but it’s just not accurate anymore. The majority of African Americans are living both above the poverty line and outside of the inner cities, rendering Trump’s comments misleading and factually inaccurate."

Fan Reactions to the 2016 Cubs World Series Win

As you're probably aware, the Chicago Cubs ended over a century of futility by winning their first World Series championship in 108 years. As a Detroit Tigers fan, I am not personally invested in the Cubs winning. But as a baseball fan, I am happy to see lifelong fans of the Cub finally enjoy a title.

This video compilation shows reactions from a number of Cubs fans after their win in Game 7 over the Cleveland Indians. For sports fans, it doesn't get much better than experiencing the pure exuberance of a long-awaited title.

Understanding Marginalization Of Sub-Dominant Cultures

Photo Credit:
United Nations Photo

"Dominant cultures" and "sub-dominate cultures" might be terms that are foreign concepts to many of us. I often find it helpful to define terms, which I'll attempt to do here, so that we're on the same page with one another as we grow in cultural understanding together.

In its simplest sense, a dominant culture is a culture within a nation or geographic area that determines what is "normal." To put it another way, members of a dominant culture are those who most often get to experience their values, beliefs, customs, and way of life as that which is considered the norm.

Within the United States, it is those of us that have a European American heritage that would be considered the dominant culture. Additionally, because those of us of European descent are more than half of the U.S. population, we can also be considered the majority culture.

On the flip side, a sub-dominant culture are those where the values, beliefs, customs and way of life of its members are not considered the norm. Examples within the U.S. could be Muslims of Middle Eastern heritage, Americans of Chinese descent or Mexican Americans. Within the U.S., we might also refer to those that identify within these groups (as well as many other sub-dominant groups) as ethnic minorities.

However, dominant/majority and sub-dominant/minority are not necessarily interchangeable terms. For example, Afrikaners within apartheid-era South Africa (and in many ways, still today) were most certainly of the dominant culture since they held positions of governmental authority, owned the bulk of land and established cultural norms. However, they would not be considered the ethnic majority since less than one out of every ten South Africans identify as an Afrikaner.

It is probably helpful to consider dominance/sub-dominance as related to power and ethnic majority/ethnic minority as related to numbers of a population. Although sub-dominant and ethnic minority groups often are the same groups within a society, it is possible for an ethnic minority group (e.g. Afrikaners in South Africa) to be the dominant group.

Understanding these nuances can be helpful for us in recognizing the ways that sub-dominate and ethnic minority cultures can be marginalized within a society. In Suffering & the Sovereignty of God, Dr. Carl Ellis offers the following insights as to how marginalization can take place and the role that Christians can play in addressing it:

"Marginalization happens when that which is valid is regarded as invalid merely because it differs from the prevailing standards of creature-ism [i.e. judging the Creator by the standard of the creature]. Thus, people who fit this description are relegated to a position of insignificance, devalued importance, minor influence, or diminished power. How does marginalization affect human interaction? 

Every society has a dominant culture and at least one sub-dominant culture. Each of these has a corresponding cultural agenda and intra-cultural consciousness. Those in the dominant culture tend not to realize they have a culture, and those in the sub-dominant culture know very well that everybody has a culture. 

All in the sub-dominant culture are exposed to the dominant cultural agenda. But few in the dominant culture are even aware that there is a sub-dominant cultural agenda. Therefore, to those in the dominant culture, the concerns of the sub-dominant culture tend to be marginalized. We can define these dominant and sub-dominant cultures in terms of race, generation, gender, geography, language, etc.  

This begs the question: who is going to show the world how to deal with these kind of power differential dynamics? It must be the body of Christ. There are four dimensions of marginalization:   

1) Relational (face-to-face) marginalization, 

2) Systemic marginalization - which is marginalization by way of time-honored conventions and protocols, 

3) Marginalization by design - which is intentional marginalization resulting from subjugation [e.g. the African slave trade], 

4) Marginalization by default - which is marginalization resulting from a lack of either real or perceived power... 

One thing that exacerbates ethnic-based suffering in the world today is the lack of a full understanding of marginalization. For example, we tend to think of only one manifestation - relational by design. We don't think much about the other three dimensions. If we in the church are going to have something prophetic to say to the issue of ethnic-based suffering, we must deal with [all four dimensions of suffering].  

Every sub-dominant group has a distinct paradigm for marginalization. For example, the African American experience has largely been a struggle against racism and its effects - an application of creature-ism. Therefore, racism is regarded as the paradigm for all marginalization. We may know that marginalization does not ultimately require a racist motive. However, from an African American perspective, marginalization is assumed to have a racist motive. 

Anglo-Americans without this paradigm tend to view African American protest against marginalization as "playing the race card." African Americans, on the other hand, may view Anglo Americans' protest as being in denial. When this happens we will speak past each other, because we do not understand that marginalization is the foundation of ethnic-based suffering. The theology of the Christian community has been weak in that area. If we are going to be a prophetic voice against marginalization, we will need to address it with some serious theology."

My hope in gainer a better understanding of these concepts is that we will grow together in our ability to address injustice in the world so that a greater number of people will come to know our Creator, the God of justice, truth and grace.

(HT: To my friend Chris Pratt for the heads up on Dr. Ellis's thoughts on this matter)

Slavery & Christian Heroes of the Faith

Photo Credit: WELS.net

In a recent blog post, Trevin Wax tackles a difficult question for the modern Christian -- How do we respond to the great heroes of our faith that openly subscribed to racial prejudices and may have even owned slaves themselves?

Due to the uncomfortable nature of this topic, most of us choose to ignore the question. We would rather act like we don't know that Jonathan Edwards, the great Puritan preacher, owned slaves or that Martin Luther, the courageous instigator of the Christian Reformation, is widely known to have been anti-Semitic?

So how do we wrestle through the reality that some of those that are generally regarded for their deep understanding of the gospel failed so miserably to live out this understanding as it pertained to their fellow man?

Wax offers this:

"The one thing we cannot do is to explain away our theological forebears’ attitudes and actions by appealing to the historical context of their time. It’s true we must take into consideration their context in order to understand them and refrain from unnecessary vilification. But we must make sure that as we point out the general social ethics of the day we do not diminish the sinfulness of their practice. Otherwise, we run the risk of elevating right doctrine over right practice in a way that departs from the teaching of the apostles. 

Attitudes and actions matter. When Paul confronted Peter for separating himself from the Gentiles, he wasn’t worried that Peter had abandoned justification as a doctrine. Paul called him out because Peter was denying the truth by his practice. In other words, we cannot paper over the sinful actions of our forefathers by appealing to the soundness of their doctrinal beliefs. And let’s be clear. Racial and ethnic superiority is antithetical to the doctrine upon which the church of Jesus Christ stands or falls. 

...Slavery is a great evil, but even slavery cannot stand in the way of the grace and glory of the gospel. And just as we learn from the blind spots of the generations who have gone before us, we trust that the blood of Christ will cover our own blind spots. That’s why the more we walk with God, the more we cry like David: "Cleanse me from my hidden faults.""

The men and women that went before us were fallible human beings, just as we are today. Because they "missed it" in such an important area does not negate the truth of the message they preached, even if they failed to always live it out in their own lives. These men were influenced by the culture they lived in...and we are influenced by ours. It's a reminder that just because a popular preacher advocates something, it doesn't always mean it lines up with what Scripture teaches. We should always compare what we're being taught to what the Bible actually says.

Just as we are horrified to learn that Bible-believing Christians participated in the slave trade, future generations will be shocked to learn of issues that we tolerated (e.g. abortion). If history has taught us anything, it is not that people are inherently good and that the gospel is not needed but it has shown us that we are wicked and in desperate need of a Savior. Fortunately for us, that Savior is not found among sinful Christian leaders but He stands at the right hand of the Father pleading on our behalf.

To read the rest of Trevin's well-written post please click here.

Donald Miller on Theology

I have only read one of his books, Blue Like Jazz, but Donald Miller is someone whose perspective I respect. I have heard Miller speak in person and am a regular reader of his blog and I think his voice is one that has the power to resonant with a younger generation that is disillusioned with traditional forms of church and Christianity.

I especially appreciate Miller's emphasis on story and relationships in that we are all part of God's bigger story and that life is really about relationships. In his book, Searching For God Knows What, Miller takes on a false idol that is possessed by many unsuspecting Christians -- theology. As Christians committed to having a sound belief system, we can take offense to someone suggesting that our study of God could be an idol. But, in many ways, I agree with Miller. Look at what he has to say:

"You might think I am saying truth should be thrown out, that theology doesn’t matter. But this is not what I’m saying at all. What I’m intending to illustrate is our drive to define God with a mathematical theology has become a false God rather than an arrow that points to the real God. Theology can become an idol, but it is more useful as guardrails on a road to the true God. Theology is very important, but it is not God, and knowing facts about God is not the same as knowing God. Let me give you an extreme example of how very bad we have gotten about this in the west.

About the time (and I share this in the book, so forgive the repetition) I was thinking through these things, I was teaching a class in Canada, and my students were freshman college students, all of whom had grown up in the church. The class was called “The Gospel and Culture.” I started the class with an experiment, I told the class I was going to share the gospel of Jesus, but I was going to leave something out. I wanted them to figure out what I’d left out. I talked first about sin, about how we are fallen creatures. I told some stories and used some illustrations. I talked about repentance, and again told some stories, then I talked about God’s forgiveness, and I talked about heaven. I went on for some time. And when I finally stopped and asked the class to tell me what I’d left out, after twenty or more minutes of discussion, not one student realized I’d left out Jesus. Not one. And I believe I could repeat that same experiment in Christian classrooms across North America.

What I came to understand, then, is Christian conversion is relational. It is not theological or intellectual any more than marriage is theological or intellectual. In other words, a child could become a Christian if they had a mysterious encounter with Jesus, and a simple thinker could become a Christian if they had a mysterious encounter with Christ, and even a person who was a Muslim or a Buddhist could become a Christian if they had a mysterious relational encounter with Christ. This is the only answer at which I could arrive that matched the reality in which we live, the complexity of scripture, and the mysterious invitation offered to us by Jesus."

Miller is not saying that theology doesn't matter. In fact, it matters greatly. But having correct beliefs about God doesn't mean that we know God. We can all probably point to people we know that are seminary trained...and total jerks. It is part of human nature to take pride in what we know and this plays out all too frequently when it comes to religion. Jesus himself said to the religious leaders of his time,

"You diligently study the Scriptures because you think that by them you possess eternal life. These are the Scriptures that testify about me, yet you refuse to come to me to have life." (NIV, John 5:39,40)

Knowing theology does nothing for us if it doesn't draw us closer to God and affect our lives in a positive way. Just like the Pharisees of old, we can fall into the trap of thinking that reading tomes of books about God automatically leads us into a deeper relationship with Him. It doesn't. Not if what we learn about God doesn't change us as people. A sincere study of the Scriptures and the character of God will only cause us to have a greater understanding of our own sinfulness and His righteousness. Those that believe they somehow have a better standing with God because of the books they have read or because they have letters after their name are simply mistaken. The person that has rightly applied the study of God to their lives will only have greater compassion and humility towards others.

I can study the Bible and teach others about God and still miss Jesus in the process. My theology is important for it forms the foundation of what I believe about myself, others and, most importantly, God. More specifically, what I think about Jesus and how I respond to that knowledge sets the course of my eternity. Therefore, it is critical that those seeking to follow God continually examine their doctrine to see if it matches up with God's Word and His revelation of Himself. But if conviction in my beliefs causes me to treat others with greater coldness, arrogance and pride, then I probably need to do a heart check because something didn't sink in along the way.

Thanks for the reminder, Don.