Search Results

When my wife and I purchased our first home, I determined our lawn would be at least comparable to that lovely lush landscape of the guy two doors down. Our street took a lot of pride in curbside appeal. I joined them in the weekly ritual of weeding, seeding, planting, mowing, watering, raking, trimming and brimming with pride. I spent a lot of time rooting shrubs and flowers, and sometimes digging up the roots of things that needed to go. I learned something valuable while bent over my spade, turning mulch, and worming my fingers into loam to find the extent of root balls: Only well-rooted plants survive, and sometimes that means roots must run deep. That came home in a powerful way when someone gave me a cactus to plant. Actually, it wasn’t even a complete cactus, just a leaf. They told me it would grow anywhere and wouldn’t need much attention. So I stuck it in the dirt at the mailbox, the pretty white mailbox perched atop a white post with colorful tulips painted on its side. The cactus was meant to be the backdrop to the dancing colors of real tulips surrounding the post. Soon the cactus grew. The one leaf became two, then doubled again. Before I knew it the cactus had taken over the mailbox area, drinking up all the moisture and nutrients. My tulips drooped, faded and died. Finally I decided to remove the cactus and replant the small bed around the mailbox. That’s when I discovered how deep and wide cactus roots run! That sprawling system of tentacles forced me to dig up a sizable section of the front yard curb area! After a couple weekends of toilsome digging and searching—and a couple of weekends of hard looks from neighbors—I dug up the cactus, roots and all, and started anew. In the last couple of weeks we’ve gotten a good glimpse into the root system of racism. We thought we could stick the racists into the country’s past, next to a post marked “obsolete,” and gladly forget about it. But the roots of racism run deep. That’s why an entire police department and many others appear shot through with indications of that insidious root system. That’s why we’re now inundated with reports of municipal governments and court systems complying with police to raise revenue on the backs of African Americans. And that’s why we’re watching youtube videos of students on college campuses—both secular and Christian—engaging in acts that are at least stupid and insensitive and in some cases plainly racist. The roots run deep, deeper than the natural eye can see, beneath the soil of our hearts, our cultures and our institutions. We need to do some digging—especially Christians and Christian leaders. It’s necessary we take the shovels from our garages, put on our gardening gloves, and get to weeding. Seems to me a few things need to be recognized perhaps more fully and even gladly than they have been. 1. Racism Is Alive and Well. Greatly exaggerated were any reports of racism’s demise. That should be obvious now. But just a few short months ago a lot of people pressed back against claims of racism. They told us we could not know for certain if any racist motivation were a part of incidents like Ferguson or Staten Island or Cleveland. These were sad events, some said. But perhaps these were isolated incidents, not connected, almost random. Why cry “racism”? Well, now we have a look at the roots, sprawling beneath the soil of assumed respectability and authority. Ferguson, Staten Island, Cleveland and an untold number of other places all share the same root system. They all manifest human depravity, and that depravity sometimes takes the form of racial animus. For my part, the DOJ report on the Ferguson Police Department tells us quite plainly that the vital signs of racism are quite strong. The old man lives. And more than that, the DOJ report decisively proves the prevailing reality of institutional racism and systemic injustice. Those numbers do not lie and they cannot be explained away as chance. And when the statistics say African Americans were less likely to be guilty of the crimes for which they were stopped than white drivers, then appeals to black criminality won’t do either. Still further, Ferguson isn’t alone among Missouri towns in these practices. And Missouri isn’t alone among the states. There’s a piling mound of research evidence that shows the same thing in other places as well. Sad to say, but racism is alive and well. 2. Racism Cavorts with Power. Rarely does racism walk alone. She dances with power. Not just the raw, unlettered, erratic power of stereotypical toothless hillbillies who sometimes “have a few too many” and cause trouble for brown-skinned people while embarrassing the good white-skinned town folks. No. Racism acts far more seductively than that. She prefers men in robes or suits or uniform. She rathers young people wearing the letters of fraternities, with power over who can and cannot join their organizations. Racism makes her deals in country clubs, once segregated by club rules, now segregated by club fees and culture. Racism likes smoky rooms with dark cherry paneling, where the makers of futures and cities like to laugh, back slap, and cut deals. She would marry power, but that’s too public and people would talk. So she continues as power’s mistress, the unseen influence that poisons his heart toward his wife, Justice. We cannot have any discussion of power without suspecting that fallen human alienation along racial lines is at least a possibility. 3. Racist Contexts Cast Clouds Over Us. The root system of racism spreads beneath all our feet. There are a lot of people in Ferguson who had no clue about what was going on in its police department. They were sympathetic toward police and trusting of authority. They couldn’t see the cactus draining water and nutrient from their community. But the DOJ describes a pervasive corruption along racial lines. That corrupt context informed the attitudes and actions of some officers and it created racially misinformed impressions about African Americans (i.e., more likely transporting or selling drugs, less respectful of law, more criminal). The shooting of Mike Brown, the police reactions to protests, the kangaroo grand jury and the aftermath all occur in this context, under this burgeoning cloud of racist stereotype, mistreatment, frustration and anger. That cloud bust and everyone got wet. If we don’t let the winds of justice blow then we cannot be surprised if cumulus clouds of racial hostility form overhead. And we shouldn’t be surprised when the rain comes and it’s toxic. We can’t let racism go unchallenged or it’ll come back to hurt everyone. 4. Frat Boys and Judges Have A Lot in Common. Here’s another kindness from the Lord: On the heels of reading the DOJ report and perhaps beginning to think to ourselves, Those racists in Ferguson are terrible, the Lord shows us that our children and our brightest students can be just as terrible. Judges go to college. They make good grades. They lead student organizations. Then they graduate and begin legal careers. Some of them run for office and make public policy. The students in Oklahoma University’s SAE grow up to be prosecutors and judges and city officials. And guess what: Sometimes such students attend Christian colleges and universities. Perhaps the Lord is telling us that this racist root system gives rise to that Ivy and Kudzu crawling up academic towers. If any of us think we’re immune by virtue of education and class, we ought to be careful lest we fall. Education doesn’t eradicate racism any more than it eradicates any other sin. We need something more profound, that reaches farther down in the human soul. 5. Racism Destroys Lives. This point isn’t to be forgotten. When we talk about Ferguson’s criminal justice system or systemic injustice generally, we’re talking about the weight of the State crushing citizens. We’re talking about everyday people being harassed, imprisoned, and further impoverished by a government that’s supposed to be “of the People by the People for the People.” To put it plainly: These things kill Black people. Sometimes slowly. Sometimes suddenly. But it’s always deadly. It could be the death of long sentences or the death of bullets. It could be the lingering death of poverty and resource restriction or the infectious death of disease and few health options. But it’s death. Things are better compared to, say, 1960—which is to say the overreaching hand of deadly oppression has been beaten back through long years of protest. But the owners of the hand are not happy about being pushed back. So the snarled hand of racism continues to overreach. And it kills what it touches. That’s why none of this is a game and none of this should be left to our favorite talking heads, whoever they are. 6. This Is a Christian Discipleship Issue as Much as a Social Justice Issue. Tell me what you think, but I’ve come to the conclusion that the Christian Church desperately needs to be discipled regarding “race,” racism and justice. I once thought the most significant deficiency in Christian theology (at least in the West) was a deficiency in the theology of suffering. But I think there’s more ink used to help people with suffering than there is to help people think of themselves primarily as Christians and radically apply their new identity in Christ to fallen categories like “race” and insidious sins like racism. It’s tragic that the country’s biggest sin is racism and the Church’s biggest omission is racial justice. The tragedy gets compounded when one remembers that some quarters of the Church were once the strongest supporters of this sin. That means we’re working our way out of a deficit. The roots of racism are tangled with our faith. And this means we can’t assume some neutral stance, being formally against this sin but practically uninvolved. The root keeps creeping. We had better be weeding the garden of our faith and growing one another up into the fullness of Christ with attention to this anti-Christ called “racism.” Over and over the question I get from genuine and well-meaning Christians is, “How can I think about…?” Or, “What should I do about…?” Those are discipleship questions that desperately need answering in every local church—assuming we don’t want the roots of racism to find any soil in the body of Christ. Conclusion The roots of racism run deep and wide. They’re deeper than the outward actions of a self-professed racist. That’s surface mulch. They’re deeper than the actions of an officer in a corrupt police force. That’s only the potted soil. They’re deeper than police policy and institutional practices. They’re deeper than education. That’s the surrounding soil. The roots of racism are as deep as the fallen soul. That’s bedrock. We’re going to have to dig that deep to eradicate this poisonous root. Taken from www.gospelcoalition.org. Used by permission.

Materialists believe that the mind emerges from the brain and that the mind (soul) is an artifact of the brain. Like the Sadducees of Jesus’ time, they only believe what they can see, feel and touch (Matthew 22:23-31, Acts 23:8). This has been the prevailing paradigm in the western scientific world since Charles Darwin’s Theory of Evolution became the dominant scientific dogma. Recently, however, there has been growing dissent in the area of neuroscience, psychology and psychiatry because the result of adherence to the materialists’ philosophy in the lives of patients, where the rubber meets the road, has been devastating [1]. Interestingly the discovery of the baffling area of quantum physics at the beginning of the last century [2] marked the beginning the crumbling of materialist philosophy. Denial of the power of the mind, and by extension the spirit, in the treatment of patients with mental and even physical disorders, has led to poor treatment outcomes in many cases. The materialist position, therefore, is becoming increasing untenable. Alternatively the Bible presents the view of the spirit, soul and the body as separate, but intimately integrated entities (Genesis 2:7, Matthew 26:41, 1 Thessalonians 5:23, Hebrews 4:12). Each of us is a spirit, having a soul (mind) and living in a body. Life is actually a spiritual force. The mind has the power of intellect, emotions and free will [3], and, if enabled by the spirit and, empowered by the Holy Spirit, can make good choices that can positively change the body, which includes the brain. The materialist view, however, in denying the existence of the spirit and soul, has held to the pre-eminence of the body. This mindset contributed to the view that the brain could not really be changed once we reached adolescence and that all we could hope for in many psychiatric and neurological conditions was compensation and reliance on medication rather than a total cure. This was the prevailing view in the 1980s when I started in research and clinical practice as a communication pathologist treating patients with various mental and neurological conditions in clinical and educational settings and research settings. Because of my belief in the biblical view, I set out to help patients, who the medical community had given up on, with remarkable results [4]. I also was able help transform destitute students in deprived schools even to international notice [5]. At the time clinicians and educationalists like me who believed in the power of the mind to change the brain, were scoffed at. However, as the Sanhedrin discovered, when faced with the walking man who was once crippled (Act 4:14), it was difficult to deny her results. Fortunately certain discoveries have led credence to the biblical view research included. It was discovered that the brain continually changes in response to mental and sensory signals throughout the human life span [6]. This process has now been termed ‘neuroplasticity’. It was once thought that, as adults, we had the full complement of nerve cells (neurons) and that we basically lost neurons until we died. Now we know scientifically that we continue to produce neurons in certain areas of the brain constantly, a process known as neurogenesis [7]. The growing medical specialties of psychoneuroimmunology and psychoneuroendocrinology [8] are bringing to light the intimate relationship between the mind, the brain and the immune and endocrine systems. Remarkably the eye-opening science of epigenetics is showing how our choices can profoundly influence, not just our own genes and those that we are in relationship with, but the genes of multiple generations of our descendants [9]. There is thankfully now a growing opposition to the materialist view even among mainstream scientists. In response to the growing evidence of the mind being able to change the brain, materialist have held the view that it is the brain that changes the brain [10] This is akin to a computer reprogramming and redesigning itself. Thankfully, in the face of growing recent evidence, the materialist view is losing some of its pre-eminence. There is growing dissent among a populace that is seeking answers to gnawing questions and cures to intractable mental and physical disorders [11]. Surveys show that the majority of lay people globally do not see themselves as biological automata, but as thinking human beings with the ability to think and choose making biological change [12]. Furthermore, the crisis in the education, over-labeling and over-medication of our children is crying out for a change of direction. It is time to return to what the Creator says about the nature of man in the Bible- He knows what we are made of and how we are made (Psalm 103:14). The Mind definitely changes the Brain. References 1. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2005 Jun 29;360(1458):1309-27. Quantum physics in neuroscience and psychology: a neurophysical model of mind-brain interaction. Schwartz JM, Stapp HP, Beauregard M. Nour Foundation: Mind-Body Connections: How Does Consciousness Shape the Brain? United Nations 9/11/2008- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FwXhcyTe7qQ Creation Ministires:’ Charles Darwin’s real message: have you missed it’ by Carl Wieland-http:// creation.com/charles-darwins-real-message-have-you-missed-it 2. Nobelprize.org – The Nobel Prize in Physics 1918. http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1918/ 3. The Spiritual Man – June 1, 1968 Watchman Nee 4. Mind-Mapping: A Therapeutic Technique for Closed-Head Injury, a dissertation submitted for her Masters at the University of Pretoria, May 1990. Mind-mapping as a Therapeutic technique, in Communiphon, South African Speech-Language-hearing Association No. 296, pg. 11-15,November 1990. 5. The Mind-Mapping Approach: A Model and Framework for Geodesic Learning, a dissertation submitted for her Ph.D. at the University of Pretoria, March 1997. The Development of a Model for Geodesic Learning: The Geodesic Information Processing Model, in the South African Journal of Communication Disorders, Vol. 44, 1997. 6. Neural Plasticity Volume 2014 (2014), Article ID 541870, 10 pages. Adult Neuroplasticity: More Than 40 Years of Research. Eberhard Fuchs and Gabriele Flügge. 7. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2000 Oct;1(1):67-73. Neurogenesis in the adult brain: death of a dogma. Gross CG. 8. International Society of Psychoneuroendocrinology- www.ispne.org/. Psychoneuroimmunology Research Society- www.pnirs.org/. 9. Ethan Watters, “DNA Is Not Destiny: The New Science of Epigenetics Rewrites the Rules of Disease, Heredity, and Identity,” Discover, November 2006,http://discovermagazine.com/2006 nov/cover. Nova- Ghost In Your Genes, 2006 Nat Rev Genet. 2012 Jan 31;13(3):153-62. Understanding transgenerational epigenetic inheritance via the gametes in mammals. Daxinger L, Whitelaw E. 10. The Brain That Changes Itself: Stories of Personal Triumph from the Frontiers of Brain Science– December 18, 2007 by Norman Doidge 11. Med J Aust. 2004 Jun 7;180(11):587-9. The rise and rise of complementary and alternative medicine: a sociological perspective. Coulter ID, Willis EM. 12. Scientific American- Site Survey Shows 60 Percent Think Free Will Exists. Read Why. By Gary Stix | January 15, 2015 | http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/talking-back/site-survey-shows-60-percent-think-free-will-exists-read-why/

People usually think of “Heaven” as the place Christians go when they die. A better definition explains that Heaven is God’s central dwelling place, the location of his throne from which he rules the universe. Many don’t realize that the present pre-resurrection Heaven and future post-resurrection Heaven are located in different places. The exact location of the present Heaven is unknown, but we’re told the future Heaven will be located on the New Earth. The present Heaven is a place of transition between believers’ past lives on Earth and future resurrection lives on the New Earth. Life in the present Heaven (which theologians call the “intermediate” Heaven) is “better by far” than living here on Earth under the curse (Phil. 1:23). But it’s not our final destination. Will We Live in Heaven Forever? The answer depends on our definition of Heaven. Will we be with the Lord forever? Absolutely. Will we always be with God in the same place Heaven is now? No. In the present Heaven, God’s people are in Christ’s presence, free of sin and suffering and enjoying great happiness: “in your presence there is fullness of joy” (Ps. 16:11). But they’re still looking forward to their bodily resurrection and permanent relocation to the New Earth. So, yes, after death we’ll always be in Heaven, but not in the same place or the same condition. To illustrate, imagine you lived in a homeless shelter in Miami. One day you inherit a beautiful house overlooking Santa Barbara, California, and are given a wonderful job doing something you’ve always wanted to do. Many friends and family will live nearby. As you fly toward Santa Barbara, you stop at the Dallas airport for a layover. Other family members you haven’t seen in years meet you. They will board the plane with you to Santa Barbara. Naturally you look forward to seeing them in Dallas, your first stop. But if someone asks where you’re going, would you say “Dallas”? No. You would say Santa Barbara, because that’s your final destination. Dallas is just a temporary stop. At most you might say “I’m going to Santa Barbara, with a brief stop in Dallas.” Similarly, the present Heaven is a temporary dwelling place, a stop along the way to our final destination: the New Earth. (Granted, the Dallas analogy isn’t perfect—being with Jesus and reunited with loved ones will be immeasurably better than a layover in Dallas!) In the Present Heaven Do People Have Physical Forms? Unlike angels, who are in essence spirits (John 4:24; Heb. 1:14), human beings are by nature both spiritual and physical. We don’t occupy our bodies as a hermit crab occupies a shell. We can’t be fully human without both a spirit and a body. Given the consistent physical descriptions of the intermediate heaven and its inhabitants, it seems possible—though debatable—that between our earthly lives and bodily resurrection, God may grant us temporary physical forms. If so, that would account for the repeated depictions of people now in Heaven occupying physical space, wearing clothes and crowns, talking, holding palm branches in their hands, and having body parts (e.g. Luke 16:24, Rev. 7:9). Certainly we do not receive resurrection bodies immediately after death. If we have intermediate forms in the intermediate heaven (and we may not), they will be temps, not our true bodies, which remain dead until the final resurrection. Will We Recognize Each Other in the Present Heaven? When asked if we would recognize friends in Heaven, George MacDonald responded, “Shall we be greater fools in Paradise than we are here?” Scripture gives no indication of a memory wipe causing us to forget family and friends. On the contrary, if we wouldn’t know our loved ones in Heaven, the “comfort” of an afterlife reunion, taught in 1 Thessalonians 4:14-18, would be no comfort at all. In Christ’s transfiguration, his disciples recognized Moses and Elijah, even though they couldn’t have known what they looked like (Luke 9:29-33). This suggests that personality will emanate through whatever forms we take. If we can recognize those we’ve never seen, how much more will we recognize our family and friends? After we die, we will give a detailed account of our lives on Earth (2 Cor. 5:10; Matt. 12:36). This will require better memories, not worse. Those memories will surely include our families and friends! Are You Looking Forward to Your Forever Home? Though life in the intermediate Heaven will be wonderful, it’s not the place we’re made for, our true eternal home. The Bible promises that we’ll live with Christ and each other forever on the New Earth, where God—Father, Son (eternally incarnate), and Holy Spirit—will be at home with his people: Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth. . . . I saw the Holy City, the new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God. . . . And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, “Now the dwelling of God is with men, and he will live with them. They will be his people, and God himself will be with them and be their God.” (Rev. 21:1-3) This passage clearly indicates that ultimately God’s central dwelling place—Heaven—is on Earth. Some, including N. T. Wright, argue that the New Earth shouldn’t be called Heaven. But if Heaven, by definition, is God’s special dwelling place, and “the dwelling of God” will be with humankind on Earth, then Heaven and the New Earth will essentially be the same place. Heaven is also where we see God’s throne, and we’re told that “the throne of God and of the Lamb” will be in the New Jerusalem, on the New Earth (Rev. 22:1). Instead of us going up to God’s place to live forever, God will come down to live with us in our place, literally bringing Heaven to Earth! God’s children are destined for life as resurrected beings on a resurrected Earth. We should daily keep in mind our true destination, our ultimate home. Let’s be like Peter and the early Christians: “according to his promise we are waiting for new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells” (2 Pet. 3:13). Taken from Eternal Perspective Ministries. Used by permission.

People usually think of “Heaven” as the place Christians go when they die. A better definition explains that Heaven is God’s central dwelling place, the location of his throne from which he rules the universe. Many don’t realize that the present pre-resurrection Heaven and future post-resurrection Heaven are located in different places. The exact location of the present Heaven is unknown, but we’re told the future Heaven will be located on the New Earth. The present Heaven is a place of transition between believers’ past lives on Earth and future resurrection lives on the New Earth. Life in the present Heaven (which theologians call the “intermediate” Heaven) is “better by far” than living here on Earth under the curse (Phil. 1:23). But it’s not our final destination. Will We Live in Heaven Forever? The answer depends on our definition of Heaven. Will we be with the Lord forever? Absolutely. Will we always be with God in the same place Heaven is now? No. In the present Heaven, God’s people are in Christ’s presence, free of sin and suffering and enjoying great happiness: “in your presence there is fullness of joy” (Ps. 16:11). But they’re still looking forward to their bodily resurrection and permanent relocation to the New Earth. So, yes, after death we’ll always be in Heaven, but not in the same place or the same condition. To illustrate, imagine you lived in a homeless shelter in Miami. One day you inherit a beautiful house overlooking Santa Barbara, California, and are given a wonderful job doing something you’ve always wanted to do. Many friends and family will live nearby. As you fly toward Santa Barbara, you stop at the Dallas airport for a layover. Other family members you haven’t seen in years meet you. They will board the plane with you to Santa Barbara. Naturally you look forward to seeing them in Dallas, your first stop. But if someone asks where you’re going, would you say “Dallas”? No. You would say Santa Barbara, because that’s your final destination. Dallas is just a temporary stop. At most you might say “I’m going to Santa Barbara, with a brief stop in Dallas.” Similarly, the present Heaven is a temporary dwelling place, a stop along the way to our final destination: the New Earth. (Granted, the Dallas analogy isn’t perfect—being with Jesus and reunited with loved ones will be immeasurably better than a layover in Dallas!) In the Present Heaven Do People Have Physical Forms? Unlike angels, who are in essence spirits (John 4:24; Heb. 1:14), human beings are by nature both spiritual and physical. We don’t occupy our bodies as a hermit crab occupies a shell. We can’t be fully human without both a spirit and a body. Given the consistent physical descriptions of the intermediate heaven and its inhabitants, it seems possible—though debatable—that between our earthly lives and bodily resurrection, God may grant us temporary physical forms. If so, that would account for the repeated depictions of people now in Heaven occupying physical space, wearing clothes and crowns, talking, holding palm branches in their hands, and having body parts (e.g. Luke 16:24, Rev. 7:9). Certainly we do not receive resurrection bodies immediately after death. If we have intermediate forms in the intermediate heaven (and we may not), they will be temps, not our true bodies, which remain dead until the final resurrection. Will We Recognize Each Other in the Present Heaven? When asked if we would recognize friends in Heaven, George MacDonald responded, “Shall we be greater fools in Paradise than we are here?” Scripture gives no indication of a memory wipe causing us to forget family and friends. On the contrary, if we wouldn’t know our loved ones in Heaven, the “comfort” of an afterlife reunion, taught in 1 Thessalonians 4:14-18, would be no comfort at all. In Christ’s transfiguration, his disciples recognized Moses and Elijah, even though they couldn’t have known what they looked like (Luke 9:29-33). This suggests that personality will emanate through whatever forms we take. If we can recognize those we’ve never seen, how much more will we recognize our family and friends? After we die, we will give a detailed account of our lives on Earth (2 Cor. 5:10; Matt. 12:36). This will require better memories, not worse. Those memories will surely include our families and friends! Are You Looking Forward to Your Forever Home? Though life in the intermediate Heaven will be wonderful, it’s not the place we’re made for, our true eternal home. The Bible promises that we’ll live with Christ and each other forever on the New Earth, where God—Father, Son (eternally incarnate), and Holy Spirit—will be at home with his people: Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth. . . . I saw the Holy City, the new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God. . . . And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, “Now the dwelling of God is with men, and he will live with them. They will be his people, and God himself will be with them and be their God.” ( Rev. 21:1-3 ) This passage clearly indicates that ultimately God’s central dwelling place—Heaven—is on Earth. Some, including N. T. Wright, argue that the New Earth shouldn’t be called Heaven. But if Heaven, by definition, is God’s special dwelling place, and “the dwelling of God” will be with humankind on Earth, then Heaven and the New Earth will essentially be the same place. Heaven is also where we see God’s throne, and we’re told that “the throne of God and of the Lamb” will be in the New Jerusalem, on the New Earth (Rev. 22:1). Instead of us going up to God’s place to live forever, God will come down to live with us in our place, literally bringing Heaven to Earth! God’s children are destined for life as resurrected beings on a resurrected Earth. We should daily keep in mind our true destination, our ultimate home. Let’s be like Peter and the early Christians: “according to his promise we are waiting for new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells” (2 Pet. 3:13). For original article click HERE. Go to epm.org.

“It is as well to admit when your enemies are onto something.” So wrote Douglas Murray in his essay in the May issue of the British magazine Standpoint. While Murray’s point was on the broad theme of the West’s move to secularization, I was most arrested by Murray’s point about the growth of Islam—and I think there are some things there we Christians ought to pay attention to. By the growth of Islam, I am not here talking about demography, although there is much to consider there. Reports indicate that the global future is religious, not secular, but that religious element includes a massive Islamic population. The world’s tomorrow is heavily Islamic, even if, as I believe, the world’s day after tomorrow is the kingdom of God. By the growth of Islam, I am also not referring to the paramilitary conquests of radical Islamic groups—such as those driving ancient Christian communities out of Iraq. No, today I’d like to consider the stories of those Westerners who convert to Islam. Murray notes that he is struck by accounts of those who convert to Islam because of how similar they are to each other. He writes they go something along the lines of this: “I had reached X age (often the twenties or early thirties) and I was in a nightclub and I just thought, ‘Life must be about more than this.’” Murray continues: “Almost nothing in our culture says, ‘But of course this is not all.’ Instead the voice of our culture just says, ‘repeat, repeat.’ In the absence of such a voice, they search, and they discover Islam.” But why do these seekers choose Islam, and not something else? Why not, for instance, Christianity? “Partly it is because most branches of mainstream Christianity have lost the confidence to proselytize,” Murray concludes. “Partly it is the trickle-down effect of the fact that Islamic traditions have not yet been so affected by historical criticism and scholarship.” These points are, I believe, critical to the future of the church. The issue is precisely what Murray identifies—a question of confidence. The old mainstream of liberal Protestant churches, such as those in Western Europe—as well as many sectors of European Catholicism—lack creedal confidence. In their rush to appeal to the cultured despisers of religion, these forms of previously Christian conviction have negotiated away the authority of Scripture and the supernatural core of the Christian faith. They have no transcendent Word from God to address those perennial questions of meaning and purpose—and guilt and shame. The cultured despisers recognize in these churches a commitment to the same authority they already know—science, progress, and human rationality. There is no need to pay attention, then, because there is not a claim to authority from the outside. There is no longer remaining a “Thus saith the Lord.” Now, it is easy for those of us who are conservative evangelicals to recognize this sort of loss of confidence and to cluck our tongues. We, after all, still hold to the authority of Scripture. We have something to say. But Murray’s other point hits us too. Many sectors of Christianity, he says, have lost the confidence “to proselytize,” that is, to call persuasively for unbelievers to repent of sin and to believe the gospel. This is not simply a problem for those who have lost the scriptural authority to evangelize—those, for instance, who embrace universalism or inclusivism or some other false teaching about the gospel. This is a problem for those who hold to the old-time religion, but who do not verbally share that faith. Confidence is precisely the issue. We don’t evangelize for the precisely same reasons the liberals apostatize—because we fear what unbelievers will think of us. The unconfident Christian assumes that he or she must be an expert in philosophy and apologetics and history, to knock back every possible objection an unbeliever might have. The unconfident Christian cringes, afraid the unbeliever will think us to be backward or unsophisticated if we say things like, “Have you come to know Christ for the forgiveness of your sins?” It’s not just that this lack of confidence prevents us from sharing the gospel; it’s also that this lack of confidence is readily apparent to the unbelieving around us. Why consider the claims of a resurrected Christ, if his followers are no more confident of his power from on high to carry out the last command he gave us before his ascension to the Father (Acts 1:7-8)? Our unbelieving neighbor can tell if we are afraid of him, or afraid of what the culture thinks of us. That is almost as much of an apologetic for a still-dead Christ as the liberal bishop who makes his case with German scholarship. And the sad result is that this sort of unconfident Christianity leaves our neighbor, when the crisis hits in that nightclub, left in fear and despair and in the tyranny of a guilty conscience. Only a few will go to Islam, of course, but many more will just go on with the “repeat, repeat” nihilism of Western culture. The answer is a church that is not afraid. The church should be unafraid to hold up a Bible and to say, “Thus saith the Lord.” And the church should be unafraid to look into the eye of a neighbor and say, “You must be born-again.” The church is unafraid because we know that Jesus of Nazareth isn’t dead anymore, and he wields from heaven the power of a gospel that raises the dead and tears down strongholds. A faithful, evangelistic church will find that the culture often will laugh at us, or rail against us. Of course it does. Jesus told us that the Light of the world is painful; it exposes hidden sin and reminds of coming judgment. But the Light has come into the world and the darkness has not, will not, cannot overcome it. A fallen world groans around us. The stakes are too high to let the only ones with confidence to confront a secular culture be those carrying Korans. www.russellmoore.com . Used by permission.

Is it okay to talk to our loved ones who’ve gone on to be with Jesus? First, would it even be possible for someone in Heaven to know what’s happening on earth, and be able to hear us say anything? Many assume the answer is no. But in Matthew 17, Moses and Elijah clearly already knew the events going on when they appeared with Jesus on the mount of transfiguration. In Luke 15 Jesus speaks of rejoicing in the presence of the angels, not BY the angels but in their presence, whenever a sinner repents, suggesting God’s people in heaven rejoice at God’s work in lives on earth. To rejoice at it, they obviously must be aware of it. And Revelation 6:9-11 shows martyrs in Heaven who are clearly aware that God hasn’t yet brought judgment on those who persecuted them, and are wondering why. So they know some of what’s happening on earth. Okay, so if it’s possible someone in Heaven could hear us, is it right to talk to them? First, there’s a huge difference between talking to someone and praying to them, and it’s critical we keep that clear. When people pray to Mary and the saints, they are calling on them as intermediaries, asking them to intervene and exercise power in this world. There is no biblical basis for this. Since 1 Tim. 2:5 says Christ is the only mediator between God and men, it would violate this to pray to those in heaven. We’re not to pray to people or to angels, but only to God. But would it be okay to say, “I’m not sure you can hear this, Mom, but if you can I just want to say thanks for how you always watched out for me. I love you and I’m looking forward to seeing you again and talking and having you show me some special places there.” That’s talking to someone, but it’s NOT praying to them, calling upon them to do something, or to exercise power or talk back. Seeking to call up from the dead or to hear from the spirits of the departed is a forbidden occult practice (Deut. 18:9-14). But that’s very different than doing what I just described. Personally, rather than talking to a loved one, I am more comfortable simply praying to Jesus or the Father (there are biblical examples of praying to each) and saying, “Lord, would you please give my mom a hug, and tell her it’s from me?” Now I think my mom sometimes sees what’s going on here and might hear this when I say it, but I KNOW God hears it. And I trust God to do what He knows is best. Does that make sense? I have some old friends in Heaven, Greg and Jerry among them, that I sometimes think of and ask the Lord to greet for me. Whether He does that is His call, but my relationships with those brothers was a gift from God, and one day I’ll see them again in His presence. I suspect God is pleased with my sense of connection to them, and certainly He understands the bonds of friendship. Jesus called us his friends. He is the best friend I’ve ever had. I could see how a person speaking to their departed loved one, even if they’re not violating Scripture (since they’re not praying to them or calling on them), could become unhealthy or obsessive. But that’s not likely to happen when we’re talking to God about them. He invites us to come to Him with what’s on our minds and hearts. Obviously your loved one is on your mind and heart. If your child or wife or husband or parents or best friend are with Jesus, God understands your desire to feel connected to them, and to want them to know of your love for them, and that you miss them and look forward to seeing them again. I have every reason to believe God would honor the request to pass on our warm greetings to loved ones. But again, that’s up to Him. It’s one thing to ask God for something like this, but entirely another to insist on it. We’re the creatures, He’s the Creator. He’s the Potter, we’re the clay. (And what a privilege to be His clay, as well as his sons and daughters.) So, bottom line to the person who asked the question, as long as you’re not praying TO your loved one or FOR your loved one (who needs no prayer now), but to God ABOUT your loved one, and your feelings, and your desire for them to know something, I think there’s nothing in that which violates a Scripture. Just be careful it doesn’t shift into anything that treats them as intermediaries or leads to obsession or seeking contact with them, which is expressly forbidden. I said at both our daughters’ weddings, in the summer of 2001, that I believed their two grandmothers were watching from heaven. And since Nanci’s mom had been blind her last few years here, she was seeing the wedding in a way she couldn’t have even a few months earlier before she died. I firmly believe this is true, but even if I was wrong on that point (since of course I can’t know exactly when God allows people to see events on earth and when He doesn’t), I would not be wrong in praying “Lord, please tell Mom her precious granddaughters love You with all their hearts and married young men that do too. That will mean so much to her.” My guess is that Mom knows all that anyway, and that she is enjoying seeing God at work in the lives of our grandchildren, her great-grandchildren she hasn’t yet been able to hug. (It’s odd to me that so many assume people in Heaven are ignorant of what’s going on here on earth where the great drama of redemption is unfolding—wouldn’t we think they’d be more enlightened, not less?). Still, it doesn’t hurt to ask God, the Giver of special relationships. He is gracious and understanding of our thoughts and feelings and love for the precious people He has put in our lives. From epm.org. Used by permission.

The tragic death of any celebrity offers every parent the opportunity to talk to your kids about drugs. Her death is on every television, magazine, and Web site in the country. When something is this widespread, it creates a nice big opportunity for you to address the issue of drugs. You might hear from your kid, as many parents do these days, this idea that smoking weed is no big deal. More and more cities and states are “decriminalizing” marijuana and so-called “medical marijuana” joints (pun intended) are popping up in communities around the country. So much so that the government has started to send letters to those that are too close to high schools. When you talk to your kids about drugs, I would suggest a terse comment that includes the words “Whitney Houston.” Houston’s life ended at age 48. That’s deeply tragic, but also avoidable. The lesson here is that other people–not just the user–are affected by drug abuse. In Whitney’s case, her friends, her daughter, her family, and her fans are now hurting from her decisions. Whether you are a superstar or a regular one, you’re self-destructive decisions in life take a toll on those you love, and those that love you! What researchers have known for years is that if you expose a developing brain to drugs or alcohol, you run the risk of making that person more susceptible to addiction. It’s as though you are training the brain as it is growing–conditioning it for addictive behavior down the road. Researchers also tell us that kids are smoking pot and drinking alcohol earlier than ever. Putting those two together, we could have a generation of addicts in the making (not just drugs, but addiction of all flavors). Another well known fact is that the part of the brain that is slowest to mature is the part that deals with judgment. Don’t believe me? Call your insurance agency today and insure your 16-year-old to drive your car. You’ll quickly find that their extremely high insurance rates that are tied to facts that young people don’t always use the best judgment. Of course, you may have already experienced your own son or daughter’s lack of common sense. Some of these guys think they are economists. They are talking about all the money that could be gained by taxing the now illegal drug market. Well, we tax alcohol and cigarettes very heavily in our country today. And quite frankly, the revenues received through taxation don’t come near the damage that cigarettes and alcohol take on the lives of our citizens. So here are a few tips for those of us that want our kids to make good decisions in life. Remember, you are your child’s best teacher: 1. Make sure your kids have plenty of practice making decisions in your home. This is their safe place to learn good judgment, vs. bad. 2. Ask your what your kids’ opinion is on everyday family issues! 3. Make sure you have POSITIVE expectations for your kids (Raise a child UP in the way they should go) 4. Find ways, like discussing Whitney Houston’s death this week, to negatively imprint drug usage in your kids minds at a young age. 5. Get to know your child’s friends and their families! 6. Your house should be the centerpiece of your kids social life! Yes, it might mean you have to spring for pizza. But I would rather have my kids hanging out at my home then someone else’s. Your kids might be surprised that their friends like you! 7. Beware of your child’s money supply. Kids should get allowances, but if your kid starts having money and you are unaware of its source, that is a red flag. 8. When a child’s grades fall right off the table, that is a pretty good indication that your son or daughter has discovered the world of drugs. Smoking weed diminishes motivation. 9. Don’t tell yourself “My kid would never do such a thing!” Because obviously kids that get hooked on drugs come from a variety of home situations. If your child is already using drugs, you have to directly confront the issue. Get him or her to a group that deals with drug usage effectively. Personally, I think Teen Challenge does a great job. Do not become the enabler! Do not make excuses for your kids! And pray. Pray every day. Now go talk with your kids. Not at your kids. Use public events, cautionary tales, as a springboard to talk about the difficult issues surrounding drug use.

Is the Word of God that should drive our discussions about modesty. What has God revealed about it? First and foremost, a biblical definition of modesty must focus on the heart . Modesty is primarily about our motivations. In addition, modest dress is also about discernment, having an awareness of others and our environment. Modern Modesty Controversies In a recent conversation, a woman I spoke with seemed deeply offended when I suggested a woman’s manner of dress could tempt a man to lust. She wasn’t denying the claim that men lust after women, but she was emphatic that women are not to blame for a man’s lustful thoughts and actions. She’s right, of course. A person is never guilty of another person’s sin. This woman’s protest is, in part, motivated by a desire to fight various rape myths in our culture. When a girl dresses scantily, goes to a college party, gets drunk, makes out with a dozen guys, and then is raped, for some there is a tendency to say, “Well, she was just asking for it.” This kind of victim-blaming, sadly, leads some to temper any compassion for such women when they are abused. Let’s be clear: victims of rape are not guilty of their rape. The girl who walks across campus at 2 a.m. and gets assaulted is not to blame for the crime committed against her. Similarly, victims of another’s lust do not thereby mean a woman is guilty of lust. She should never be made to account for another person’s sin. Where then does modesty fit into the Christian ethic? Paul on Modesty: 1 Timothy 2:8-10 “I desire…that women should adorn themselves in respectable apparel, with modesty and self-control, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or costly attire, but with what is proper for women who profess godliness—with good works.“ Christian women should concern themselves with modesty because the Bible does. This text is a primary example. (For the purposes of this article, I am writing about women because Paul is writing about women in these verses. I recognize that men should also embrace modesty.) 1. Modesty is not anti-pretty At the outset, we should take note that Paul is not anti-adornment. The force of his statement is positive: “women should adorn themselves.” These are not the words of an anti-fashion prude. The same word “adorn” is used to speak of a bride beautifying herself for her husband (Revelation 21:2). It is a term that expresses being ornamented, well-kempt, and put in order. The question for Paul isn’t about whether a woman should ornament her body, but how. 2. Modesty is about who you worship In the context, Paul is talking about how women should prepare themselves for gathering at church. Women are commanded to adorn themselves in a way that is fitting for worship. If they “profess godliness”—that is, they desire to show God honor and reverence—how should they dress? Paul puts his finger on the trigger of the problem. In Ephesus, the original destination of this letter, the cultural elite were known for their gaudy and extravagant wardrobes, their elaborate hair styles, and their expensive clothing that communicated extraordinary wealth. Paul paints a picture of this for the Ephesians Christians and says, “Don’t mimic that. When you come to church, come dressed in a way that shows you desire to the attention to be on God, not yourself.” A person’s manner of dress, or even their preoccupation with clothing itself (Matthew 6:28-30), is often indicative of a heart that loves self more than God. 3. Modesty is about behavior and attitude, not just clothing When Paul says that women should wear “respectable apparel,” the term “apparel” is probably translated too narrowly: it is a term that encompasses not just clothing, but one’s whole demeanor, attitude, and actions. Ultimately, what should adorn a woman is not just clothing but “good works.” As Christians, we are being remade by God for good works (Ephesians 2:10). Christ died so that we might be zealous for good works (Titus 2:14). Women should seek to dress their lives in works that do good to others, marked with godly love. This means modesty is not simply about what we wear, but how we act, how we communicate, and how relate to others. 4. Modesty shows sensitivity to sin In this text Paul says a woman’s apparel should be worn with “modesty.” Other translation opt for the word “decency.” The King James Version translates this “shamefacedness,” which gets more to the heart of the word. It is talking about a demeanor of reverence, showing respect to oneself and a regard for others. It even carries the connotation of “bashful.” Connected to the term “shame,” the word implies the idea of grief over sin that is in the world—that a woman would be so sensitive to sin, knowing that sin is offensive to God, that she would never come close to trying to provoke it in others. No, a woman is not guilty of a man’s lust if she dresses with the intention to allure him. Let him account for his sins. But she is guilty of a lack of shamefacedness, for treating sin lightly. A heart of modesty is motivated by a love for one’s fellow man. 5. Modesty involves cultural discretion Paul didn’t just paint broad strokes when talking about modesty; he gave specifics. He said braided hair and gold or pearls or costly attire were out of place for a truly modest woman. Some knowledge of Roman culture is helpful for understanding what Paul is saying. In Paul’s day, Greek hairstyles for women were fairly simple: hair was parted in the middle and pinned in the back. But a culture change was sweeping the region. Women in the imperial household were wearing their hair with elaborate curls and braids, covered in expensive ornaments. The elite throughout the empire copied this style. For Paul, the appearance of braids and ornaments was more about what the fashion communicated. They carried connotations of imperial luxury and conjured up images of notoriously immoral Empresses like Valeria Messalina and Poppeaea Sabina, ancient equivalents of Cosmopolitan cover girls. The poet Juvenal, a contemporary of Paul, gives a vivid description of this cultural trend: “There is nothing that a woman will not permit herself to do. Nothing that she deems shameful. And when she encircles her neck with green emeralds and fastens huge pearls to her elongated ears, so important is the business of beautification. So numerous are the tiers and stories piled one another on her head that she pays no attention to her own husband.” Similarly, the philosopher Philo gives a description of a prostitute in his writing called “The Sacrifices of Cain and Abel”: “A prostitute is often described as having hair dressed in elaborate braids, her eyes with pencil lines, her eyebrows smothered in paint and her expensive clothes embroidered lavishly with flowers and bracelets and necklaces of gold and jewels hanging all over her.” Paul’s description of immodest dress conjured a picture of someone preoccupied with appearance, fashion, luxury, and sexual prowess. Similarly, modern modesty standards are not about arbitrary rules of how much skin is shown or how low-cut something is, but about the messages and values our clothing communicates. 6. Modesty is about true freedom, not repression More often than not, modesty standards are seen as repressive, arbitrary rules that restrict a woman’s creativity and freedom. But when modesty is motivated from the heart, the exact opposite is true. Paul says women should adorn themselves in respectable apparel with “self-control.” This might be better understood as “self-mastery,” being of sound mind or sober, being in control of one’s impulses and appetites. In extra-biblical literature, this word has sexual nuances: being able to totally control your romantic and erotic desires. Habitual immodesty is often, though not always, a kind of slavery. A woman may be enslaved by her desire to attract a man. She might define her worth by her fashion sense, her sex appeal, her image, her bust size, her weight, or the brand names she wears. This kind of slavery is widespread because sin impacts us all, and in today’s sexually charged, media-saturated culture, many women fall prey to this kind of slavery. But as Christians we are free from the slavery of sin because we are united to Christ. Paul exhorts us to live out this freedom: “Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, to make you obey its passions” (Romans 6:12). When it comes to modest dress, we can follow Paul’s next statement quite literally: Do not present the members of your body to sin as instruments for unrighteousness, but present your members to God as instruments for righteousness (v.13). Paul wants Christian woman to have self-mastery in their wardrobe choices, to be totally free from worldly ways of defining worth, beauty, and sexiness. Ironically, it is not just those who are scantily dressed that are enslaved, but even those who pride themselves on their modesty. “Modest is hottest,” they say, unaware that in their own hearts, they are still enslaved to a preoccupation with their physical image, still defining their worth by their outward adornment. Defining Modesty Taken together, these aspects of modesty help to give us a working definition. Modesty is a respectable manner of adorning one’s body and carrying oneself, born out of a freedom from a worldly definition of beauty and worth, and motivated by a hatred of sin and a desire to draw attention to God. When it comes to the subject of modest clothing, the first question we should ask ourselves is: What am I trying to accomplish by what I wear? Taken from covenanteyes.com. Used by permission.

Battles come every day. In whatever form they come, they come. They come with relentless pressure, incessantly assailing the battlements of our lives and our culture. Battles come in our marriages, in our families, in our jobs, in our communities and in our friendships. Enemies violently storm our lives, startlingly surging out of places and people and situations that we never dreamt they would surge from. Dark storm clouds gather over the horizon of politics, and enemies marshal their forces and assail our economy. Deteriorating ethics and collapsing morals perpetually weaken walls that have long protected the integrity of our culture, permitting enemies of all sorts frightening entrance in places we once assumed as invincible. When one battle appears to be ebbing in one place, another always seems to be brewing in another. Then there are the battles around our own thoughts. We’re constantly pressing against the desire to feed that voraciously hungry dark side of ourselves and perpetrate a great wrong in order to feed it. It seems that we are incessantly faced with vexing questions and draining decisions that seem to be intentionally designed to batter the bulwark of our morals at every turn. We are constantly faced with choices that stretch our ethics to the breaking point, effortlessly snapping the very back of those ethics as we succumb to our baser self and then grapple with the guilt that suffocates us once we’ve caved. There are battles within battles that become horribly tangled and impossibly enmeshed, radically elevating the complexity of situations to near insanity and beyond. We are confronted with battles that are less battles and more points of irritation, all too frequently being the result of sloppy living on our part or on the part of someone else. There are battles fought for the sole purpose of staging the next battle, or provoking one. Battles rage for the purpose of strategically positioning a person, a philosophy or a cause, thereby rendering victory little more than a secondary objective. Often battles are fought for the singular purpose of forcing cherished societal issues to the forefront, repositioning political opponents, solidifying allies, courting world favor, or simply to make a statement. Indeed, battles abound. Giving Battles Permission Far too often these enemies seize perpetually higher ground right in middle of innumerable masses of people who ignore both the savagery of the battle, as well as the horrific consequences of the very battle that rages all around them. Too often it’s not that we lose battles, or fight them ineptly, or run in panicked fashion away from them. Rather, as impossible and improbable as it sounds, it’s often the case that we ignore their very existence despite the screaming ferocity of them. In reality, the greatest tragedy may not be the battle itself and the carnage that it wreaks. Rather, the far greater tragedy may be our ignorance of the battle. It would seem that a weak defense is hardly the worst case scenario. Not recognizing the battle in the first place is clearly the most dangerous scenario of all. The Enemy as Providential Progression The increasingly frightening nature of the battles rests not simply in the abject ignorance of many as to the battle itself, but it rests with those who write off the battle as the natural progression of the culture to some higher consciousness and more refined state of democracy. There are those who view the onset of destructive forces as possessing the essential elements and irresistible energy that has both the method and muscle to perpetuate the evolutionary process that is certain to birth a more robust and advanced society. And in viewing these battles in this manner the battle is dismissed and the need to step up and fight it need not be considered. It is the opinion of some that it is in the tearing down that the building up most effectively occurs. Indeed, such a belief certainly has great validity if the tearing down rests in the hands of a morality that realizes that immorality can most certainly tear down, but it does not have within itself the character to rebuild. Therefore, what is destructive is errantly seen as good in that whatever might be destructive about it is offset by the good that our agenda purports it will bring. Such skewed nonsense embraces the enemy as importing a hidden good that offsets the bad nature of the enemy. Morals as Restraining There appears to be some deliriously cock-eyed sense that true advances are only restrained by the values that birthed them, so to battle on behalf of them is to battle against progress itself. Too often, ‘out with the old and in with the new’ embraces a supposed vision that is far too often void of the wisdom that is critically necessary to determine if indeed it is a vision at all or if in reality it is little more than a hollow idea borne of selfishness, tainted by all things vogue and erected of bias. We may gorge ourselves on philosophies that bend truth to serve bent agendas and that give us permission to side-step core values, making our enemy a friend that we accidently mistook as an enemy. When this happens foe becomes friend, and the soft underbelly of all that we stand for becomes dangerously exposed. Letting Battles Be Battles The most egregious thing that we can do is to reinterpret a battle that we should fight as some glorious advancement that we need to get behind, instead of seeing it as something that we need to get behind us. I would conjecture that the greatest cowardice is to cow-down in the face of the battles that are facing us and change the face of them so that the battle becomes invisible and we can therefore live without the guilt of having run away. If we choose to succumb through surrender borne of reconstructed thinking, or should we rationalize unadulterated defection by shifting our values and pitching compromise, we will live diminished lives scarred by defeat and undercut by failure. And in the end, the victories that we were bred to win will become defeats that we will be doomed to bear. Letting Battles be Battles We need to let battles be battles and refuse to let them be anything else. We need to view battles through the keen eyes of morals and the honed intuition of ethics, rather than viewing battles with an eye toward changing those very morals and values. We must not allow ourselves to be deluded into believing that core morals and sound values are irreparably bound to another time that would bind all forward thinking and decisively banish forward progression. We cannot be duped by the evasive arguments that rationalize the abandonment of cherished morals and ethics because they will serve to turn the clock backward rather than creating a potent framework to thrust us forward. In order to do that, we must boldly recognize that morals and values do not impede progress or stall advancement. Standing on solid principles as we stand on the precipice of the future is not a clarion call wherein we are compelled to retreat to the comfort of more secure or simpler times. Instead, morals and values create the potently sustaining bulwark within which our future can be securely and successfully navigated. Any future stripped of morals and purged of values is a future that will become an abhorrent past that will lend shame to our stories and paint regret across the face of history. And it will be so because the greater our advances, the more necessary the cultivation of morals and value to shape them and guide those advances. The further we advance the more vulnerable we become due to the simple fact that we possess progressively greater power that brings progressively greater implications in both the use and abuse of that power. Therefore, the further we progress the greater the need for the sure and faithful guidance of morals and ethics. We cannot permit any argument despite how astutely conceived and tediously constructed to cause us to see enemy as friend. We must understand that it is the power of ethics embraced and morals unleashed that transform individual lives and unleash entire cultures toward rich transformation. Let the enemy be the enemy and let us stand in opposition as we are called to do so. Let us never live in denial of the battles that rage around us and within us. Indeed, let’s allow the battle to be the battle. © 2015 Craig Lounsbrough, M.Div., Licensed Professional Counselor

Due to the many differences in the physical makeup of male and female brains, men and women experience anger differently. Men, on average, fire up quickly but cool down in a shorter period of time. Women take longer to get upset, but once fired up its much more difficult for them to calm down. So, men are like firecrackers on the 4th of July: they light up quickly, but their anger does not last very long. Women, on the other hand, are like kettles: they take some time to boil, and once hot, the “water” stays hot for some time. So, ladies and gents, your reaction to an argument or a fight is different! Don’t try to see your partner’s feelings in light of your own. The same emotional response in the brain motivates men to take action and women to walk away. He needs to fix it. She is sick to her stomach and can’t eat or sleep. Here are some more fascinating points on anger from my new book “Who Switched off YOUR brain? Solving the mystery of he’s/she said: When males and females get into an argument cortisol, which is a really important chemical but should only be released into the body by the adrenal glands in small, intermittent amounts, is released in abundance. Cortisol takes about twelve hours to subside in a female and about one hour in a male. The female brain, however becomes more stressed in an argument than the male brain, which often causes a female to overreact–this releases more chemicals at a higher rate than in the male brain, which in turn makes a female feel terrible. Fights for women are on par with them having a seizure! Men, however, can go from zero to a fight and back again quickly, while ladies cannot–just the thought of a misunderstanding or a fight stresses a woman out. We will try anything to defuse a conflict, won’t we? And despite the fact that a woman’s bigger prefrontal cortex gives her the advantage in sparring with words, his bigger amygdala means the impact of these words are going to really hit him hard and fuel the fire! The important point here is that when we can recognize our differences and shape our expectations, we are free to receive the benefits that properly processed anger can provide – greater understanding, greater honesty, greater connections, greater health and, most of all, greater love. Ephesians 4:6 says ” In your anger do not sin…” Postscript: Men and women rest differently, men by withdrawing and women by talking. The question was asked whether this is the same if the woman is an introvert and the man an extrovert. The answer is that the brain wiring of females functions by resting through communication–if someone is more introverted and intrapersonal then she will still talk but more to herself and quietly. A man who is an extrovert will still rest by going into his “man cave”, thus when he talks he is operating under his personality, which may be more interpersonal and linguistic. I handle this in depth in my book and DVD set called “The Gift in You”. For more information about Dr. Leaf’s research, go to www.drleaf.com.

Is it possible to have a thriving relationship with God even in the middle of a culture gone crazy? Absolutely! And my confidence is bolstered by the testimony of an ancient biblical prophet named Daniel. He lived most of his life in Babylon as a servant of tyrants and still managed to hear from God, speak for God, and live his life in a way that was pleasing to God. And I think he has much to teach believers today. Daniel was probably about fourteen years old when he was taken captive along with many other survivors of Nebuchadnezzar’s sack of the city of Jerusalem. He was transported, along with some dear friends, to the capital city of the world’s greatest empire at the time – Babylon. Babylon’s biblical history dates back to the earliest chapters of the first book of the Bible, where we find a hunter named Nimrod who started a cult and founded Babel (the more ancient name for Babylon). He led his followers to worship the stars and Babylon became the birthplace of astrology, the occult, and every kind of debauchery and evil. Babylon is also used in Scripture in the Revelation of St. John to refer to the secular system that opposes God’s agenda throughout all time with commercial, political, and religious ramifications. In other words Babylon, while a beautiful and magnificent ancient city to behold, was also a very pagan and violent place. It was quite a change for Daniel who had grown up in the royal family in the shadow of the holy temple and the palace compound of Israel. We might conclude that Babylon would have been a tough place for a Christian to live. If you, like me, live in the context of western Christianity, this is probably because we have a pretty cushy view of religious life. We’ve had it good. Christendom’s influence has been far reaching and we’re still reaping some of the nice benefits of the remains of the Holy Roman Empire. But Christendom is falling, and we were never commissioned to erect or maintain it to begin with. The United States and Ireland both recently legalized same-sex marriage a decade after Canada did so, and many other western nations will be following suit. This is a tough issue to navigate for Christians who have historically believed that marriage is a sacred institution reserved for a lifelong bond of one man and one woman. Abortion happens, and that would likely be most shocking to ancient Christians. To think that we will come up with a dozen half-baked excuses to use forceps and suction to kill and remove the life of a unique, pre-born individual human being, created in the image of God, from the womb of its mother and first defender is a little mind-boggling. There are plenty of other hot button issues I could mention that have created tremendous conflict between people of the Christian faith and the laws and customs of our land. Suffice it to say that our modern Babylon is changing rapidly around us, and it’s creating a clash between timeless truth and modern thinking. When other Christians want me to be madder about the way things are or get angry that our Judeo-Christian values are being replaced, I hesitate, reminding myself that we live in Babylon. And we are prophets, we are servants, and we are missionaries to a culture that has never actually been “Christian” to begin with. As I’ve taught through the Book of Daniel at Grace Hills, I’ve been a little blown away by some of the parallels between his world and ours. For example… If you’re young, take your spiritual formation seriously now. Daniel was 14 when he had to make really tough choices about some boundaries that honored God. If you’re a parent, it’s important to prepare your kids for heaven, yes. But it’s even more important to prepare them for life in Babylon. We don’t have to have a “Christian” nation, government, or culture to thrive spiritually. In fact, there really is no such thing on earth. We belong to a kingdom that is not of this world. We hold dual citizenship. So stop reacting to changes in your earthly kingdom with panic. King Jesus still reigns. People are never the enemy, be they political leaders, philosophers, or professors. We don’t wrestle against flesh and blood but against spiritual, invisible forces at work. There is a time to refuse to bow, when God’s truth directs us in conflict with what the culture around us says. And when we refuse to bow, we have to be prepared to get burned. All of us are builders, and that’s not bad, unless we’re more interested in building our personal empires than in extending God’s rule and reign. Seek his kingdom first. When the handwriting is on the wall and we know where our culture is headed, it’s time to be prophetic in people’s lives, sharing grace and truth with the loving accent of Jesus. Lions’ dens are uncomfortable, but our fate there rests in God’s hands, and we’re always better off in his hands than in anyone else’s. No matter how long we’ve been following Jesus, our proper posture before God is humility and repentance. We’re never better than the Babylonians. We’re just better off by grace. There is a spiritual conflict happening all the time, all around us in the unseen, heavenly realm. Angels fight for us against demons who wish to destroy us, and prayer makes a difference. The grand finale of history and the final judgment of God is set in stone. It’s coming. All will face eternity in a state of life or a state of death. Jesus makes the difference. And there is more. I don’t know about you, but in the middle of my current cultural surroundings, I need this kind of wisdom. I need some basic, common sense, practical answers about what to do and what not to do as I relate to the world around me. From Daniel, I learn my role in this world… DO live for Jesus regardless of the environment. DON’T compromise your faith-fed values. DO serve people, Christian and non-Christian. DON’T bow to the false gods and systems of the world around you. DO raise kids to know and love Jesus and recognize him as their King. DON’T force, coerce, or pressure others to believe or live the same way. DO have friends and find a community of faith. DON’T ignore the needs of people and become isolated from others. DO pray, in all circumstances, about everything. DON’T stay angry or react in ways that uphold truth but fail to show grace. I’m halfway through my preaching series in this awesome book. This Sunday, we’re “in the lions’ den.” Join me in praying for more people lost and blinded in our modern Babylon to find Jesus, to see God’s truth, and to experience the grace of God. We’ll never make Babylon be Christian, but we can help people become Christians, even in Babylon.

So it’s Saturday morning and your 7th grade daughter comes running in your room and says, “Mom/Dad, Brian just called and asked me to go to the show this afternoon. P-L-E-A-S-E! Can I go?” You’re caught off guard and you pause momentarily to consider the question – to which your daughter interjects, “All my friends get to go to the show with their boyfriends. . . Oh P-L-E-A-S-E. I really want to go!” Lead Researcher, Pamela Orpinas, shared three interesting observations: 1. A likely explanation for the “worse educational performance” of early daters is that these adolescents start dating early as part of an overall pattern of high-risk behaviors.? 2. Dating a classmate may have the same emotional complications of dating a co-worker. When the couple splits, they have to continue to see each other in class and perhaps witness the ex-partner dating someone else. It is reasonable to think this scenario could be linked to depression and divert attention from studying. Dating should not be considered a rite of passage in middle school. Perhaps the findings from a recent study from the Journal of Research on Adolescence might help you find your answer. Researchers followed 624 students in 6th to 12th grade for seven years. Each year researchers noted the students’ dating habits, as well as changes in behavior and study skills. Following categories: had the worst study skills. 3. So in trying to figure out the answer to your middle schooler dating, here’s a helpful suggestion I provide in my book, ABCs of the Birds and Bees – For Parents of Toddlers to Teens regarding dating. First, I encourage parents to determine their family values regarding dating. In other words, at what age will you be comfortable with your children dating? Then I encourage parents to plant those seeds early so their children grow-up knowing their family values. Here’s an illustration I give in the book: Regarding dating, researchers found students tended to fall into one of the following categories: Never or hardly ever dated in middle school to high school. Rarely dated in middle school, but increased dating in high school. Dated throughout 6th to 12th grade. According to the research, students who dated in middle school had significantly worse educational performance, were four times more likely to drop out of school and reported twice as much alcohol, tobacco and marijuana use. Students with the lowest incidence of dating had the best study skills. When guidelines for dating are established early, they help eliminate future problems. A mother shared with me that when her daughter was about six-years-old she brought up the subject of dating. She asked her little girl, “Do you know what your Daddy and I are going to let you do when you are about 16?” With great excitement and curiosity and little girl replied, “No, Mommy! What?” “Well,” her mother responded, “when you are about sixteen, and if you prove to us you can make very wise choices, your father and I are going to let you start dating.” The little girl’s eyes glistened with excitement as she thought of her Prince Charming coming to take her on this wonderful date. Throughout the next few years, the mother and daughter talked about what a fun date might be. When they saw teenagers together, they would discuss which couples looked like they were having fun and had a healthy relationship and which ones didn’t look so healthy. When the daughter was in the 8th grade, she came bouncing down the stairs all excited and announced that a young man had just invited her to go to a movie. The mother lovingly turned to her daughter and said, “I’ve been telling you for a long time that you would be able to date someday, but not before you were 16.” She said her daughter was disappointed. She was even a little mad, but she was not surprised. Obviously, the path this wise mother began to pave when her daughter was six alleviated some of the frustration and pain for both mother and daughter. Note: Middle School is not too late to plant those seeds. And as you set guidelines for dating, keep in mind it’s far easier to loosen the rules as you go along than tighten the reins once your child starts dating. Resources: onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jora.12029/abstract Morris, Marilyn, ABC’s of the Birds and Bees for Parents of Toddlers to Teens; 2010, pg. 44.