My first years following college were some of the most difficult of my life. I partied often, worked out of necessity, and spent countless hours staring into my bedroom ceilng and wondering, "What am I supposed to do with my life?" The problem for me, and I think the problem for many twentysomethings today, is that we aren't grounded in our faith. Even though I am still a "twentysomething," I see clearly where my journey would have been easier had it been planted in Christ. In the search for purpose, many twentysomethings have one necessary component--fervor for the hunt--but lack the other critical piece--a consistent connection to the Purpose-giver Himself.

I wish Renee Johnson had been around during my "quarterlife crisis." Known for her conversational style and relevancy, she has written a devotional for a twentysomething by a twentysomething. Faithbook of Jesus is a one-year journey for spiritual searchers. Each day includes a verse, commentary, prayer, and insight from a real twentysomething. I was so intrigued by the idea, I decided to connect with Renee and ask her a few questions.

Q: You've just emerged onto the scene. This is your first book. Tell us where you're from and how you got to be a published author.

A: I've come a long way from part time devotional writer to full time author. My biggest goal in life is spurring others forward in their daily walk with Jesus. The past 14 years of trials drove me to my knees and got me into the Word. After devouring devotional book after devotional book I kept coming up empty so I decided to write my own!

Q: Your devotional book, Faithbook of Jesus, has a noticeably strange title. Explain.

A: Well I call it "Facebook of Jesus" with a lisp. The online component (http://faithbookofjesus.ning.com) mixed with the survey results from over 300+ 20-somethings "tagged" makes it real, relevant, and fun for young people-yet deep enough to be called the "Faithbook of Jesus!" I like it. I hope you dig it too.

Q: This book has been billed as the first devotional written for 20-somethings by a 20-something. Yet you've said that this book is something that people outside of their 20's can pick up and learn from too. How were you able to straddle the demographical line here?

A: share my experiences from the Word and I'm so ecstatic that it helps reach my generation! However, the Word is powerful and I wouldn't want to limit its reach. I know that those who have a heart to reach a younger generation or teens who are tired of fluff will love it too!

Q: You've got a serious amount of material in this book. Where did it all come from? Did you just put it all together on the spot?

A: It came from the past 14 years of my own personal hell. I was stuck at home with severe health issues which I talk about in the book and my journey to faith in Christ through the Bible. I hope everyone will take the journey with me!

Q: I've heard you've got a second project in the works. Can you give us a sneak peek?

A: I am writing my second book on brokenness. I can't say much, but that you will be able to take the journey deeper alongside with me as I challenge my generation to not be stuck and learn how to be set free in Christ. (Note: I am tired of those dating books and this is my hope that others will write books for ages 18-35 that are about more than just relationships & dating).

You can download the first three weeks in a sample here.

Here is one I enjoyed:

W e e k 7 / / T u e s d a y • p a g e 4 3

M u c h A f r a i d
For God did not give us a spirit of timidity, but a spirit of power, of love and of selfdiscipline.
— 2 T i m o t h y 1 : 7

In her book Hinds’ Feet on High Places, Hannah Hurnard used an allegory to paint a
beautiful story for us. The heroine of the story is named Much Afraid, and you can
take a guess at what she’s like.

How often do I act Much Afraid? I’ve struggled with anxiety since I was twelve.
The verse above has been my favorite verse for more than fifteen years.
It’s not easy being a twentysomething. There are lots of unknowns. Purpose and
career keep me up at night sometimes. Wondering who I’m going to marry and where
we’re going to live wakes me up in the morning. Just thinking about the economy gives
me an anxiety attack. Here are four ways we can take fear and lay it at Jesus’ feet:

Rest in Jesus — “Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give
you rest” (Matthew 11:28).

Trust in Jesus — “Trust in the Lord with all your heart and lean not on your
own understanding; in all your ways acknowledge him, and he will make your paths
straight” (Proverbs 3:5-6).

Sonship in Jesus — “For you did not receive a spirit that makes you a slave again
to fear, but you received the Spirit of sonship. And by him we cry, ‘Abba, Father’”
(Romans 8:15).

Hope in Jesus — “Commit your way to the Lord; trust in him and he will do
this” (Psalm 37:5).

Leigh, 19, said in light of today’s economy she fears “surviving — just trying to
keep my head above water, settling for a full-time job here in America while
my heart longs to go to the unreached.”

Dear Abba Jesus,
Thank you for giving us a spirit of love, power, and self-discipline. Let this verse be
a reminder each time we begin to fear. Amen.

Check out Faithbook of Jesus: Connecting with Jesus Daily

See other JonathanMerritt.com exclusive interviews

I my heart palpitates for the work of Compassion International and World Vision. But in these economic times, some people don't have $40.00 per month in disposable income. Many people are living on low, fixed incomes but still want to give something to a worthy cause. These people have a widow's mite, but they need a treasury that works for them. If that's you, consider on of the following causes, which are designed to enable you to make a huge difference with very little money.

1. Mocha Club is "redefining the coffee break." For only $7.00 per month--the cost of two mochas--you can save lives. It may not sound like much money to you, but as Mocha Club is quick to remind, in Africa $7.00 can sustain life for one person living with AIDS, provide clean water to seven Africans for one year, or save one person's life from Malaria. I've made it easy to give to Mocha Club because I have already set up a team. My team is giving together to bring clean water to the Sudanese people. JOIN MY TEAM TODAY!

2. Plant with Purpose is a relief organization working to combat the vicious cycle of poverty and deforestation. Many people don't know that poverty and environmental degradation are intimately connected. Most of the world’s poor are rural poor. Many are subsistence farmers, completely dependent on their environment for survival. But as a result of widespread deforestation, the land isn’t providing like it used to. To combat this, Plant with Purpose has stepped with reforestation projects, economic renewal efforts, and spiritual discipleship for people in these communities. For as little as $1.00 you can help Plant with Purpose make a difference in a community. Take a moment and check out their animated project pages to find a destination and project in Asia, Africa, Latin America, or the Caribbean that you can afford.

3. Buy a Record, Save a Life is an initiative launched by The Goodfight, an Atlanta-based band who was moved to address the global water crisis. When you purchase their new album, Good & Evil, 100% of your money goes toward providing clean water for someone who doesn't have access to any. Believe it or not, the $10.00 cost of the album can provide water for one person FOR LIFE. There's a bonus: the music is great. So buy this record...and save someone's life.

4. Heifer International works with communities to end poverty and care for the earth. They do this by giving what they call a "hand-up" rather than a "hand out." With gifts of livestock and training, Heifer helps families improve their nutrition and generate income in sustainable ways. We refer to the animals as “living loans” because in exchange for their livestock and training, families agree to give one of its animal’s offspring to another family in need. Here's the cool part: you get to choose what you purchase. From water buffalo to goats to, yes, heifers, you can give an amazingly personal gift to someone in need. If money is tight, give a $20.00 flock of chicks, $10.00 seedlings, $30.00 honeybees, or a $1.00 general donation. Join Heifer's fight against poverty now. 

This week, my friends over at Renewal released their Green Awakenings Report, a run down of creation care initiatives at fifty Christian colleges. Some of the findings weren't expected. I assumed I'd find schools like Goshen College, Calvin College, Eastern Mennonite University doing good work. But I was shocked to find conservative Christian institutions like Moody Bible Institute, Oral Roberts University, and--my alma mater--Liberty University on there.

The stories in this report are inspiring. Projects undertaken span from recycling and restoration to transitioning to 100% wind energy or converting waste vegetable oil to bio-diesel fuel for campus vehicles.

"The student generation in particular is stepping up to care for God's creation, but previously little was known about what this movement practically looked like on Christian campuses," said Ben Lowe, Renewal's co-coordinator and author of Green Revolution. "The Green Awakenings Report demonstrates to the world what happens when Christian students and campuses come together to care for creation. Our two-fold goal is to demonstrate to colleges, churches, and communities how we are working together for the renewal of God's creation, and inspire others to join us."

If you are interested in creation care or you are college student looking to research what's happening on America's Christian college campuses, check out the Green Awakenings Report.

Any cool stories about creation care from your alma mater or college?

My interview on CNN regarding creation care, climate, and my new book

Check out my book, Green Like God: Unlocking the Divine Plan for Our Planet

Connect with Flourish, a creation care organization, magazine, and blog

I first learned of Matthew Paul Turner when I read The Christian Culture Survival Guide, a satirical look at the wonderful world of American Christianity. I laughed, I cried . . . Actually, I just laughed. A lot. I knew then that Matthew Paul Turner wasn't going away. Today, Matthew has written or contributed to over a dozen books on subjects as varied as politics, sex, pop culture, and finances. His most recent book is a memoir entitled, Hear No Evil: My Story of Innocence, Music, and the Holy Ghost. Weaving music and humor with uncommon wisdom, Matthew's book taught me about grace, God, and fear. I decided to take a moment and chat with Matthew about some of the finer and funnier points in Hear No Evil.

Q: In this book, you said you once dreamed of becoming the Michael Jackson of Christian music. What exactly do you mean?

A: Well, at the time, I believed it meant "Pop singer with mass appeal." The music Michael Jackson makes you feel something, makes you have an emotional response, and so, I wanted people to experience that through the music I created. 

Q: As a follow-up to the last question, have you ever undergone facial plastic surgery for cosmetic purposes? If not, what would be th first thing you'd fix or augment?

A: Not unless you count forced sanctification. I'd get pec implants. I've always had a bird chest.

Q: One of the best stories in this book retells when you attended your first "forbidden" concert. Can you recount that experience?

A: It was the "Make Your Praise Glorious" Tour starring Sandi Patty with a 10-piece band, background singers, and 12,000 adoring fans. For me, in 1988, it was a heavenly experience. 

Q: You admit to being an Amy Grant fan. (I admire your courage.) Are you a pre-Baby,Baby or post-Baby,Baby fan? What about Amy Grant revs you up?

A: Sort of. I loved Amy's music, or at least, the songs that I had heard. But since I wasn't allowed to listen to Amy until I turned 18, it was hard being her fan. Amy is a beautiful person. Her music inspires people, and for me, brought a lot of hope into my life. And you know, her music has never excluded anybody. And I think that's pretty amazing.

Q: You often write about being raised in a fundamentalist Baptist tradition and moving more toward a position of "grace and freedom." (It's something we have in common and draws me to your writing.) Where do you think fundamentalist Christianity "gets it wrong" and why  did you feel like you had to escape?

A: At my old church, Jesus was like a prison guard. In my opinion, fundamentalist Christianity gets it wrong in many areas:

1) Often being "right" trumps everything. It's not about being good or faithful or hopeful, it's about being right.
2) Often they don't know what to do with sinners. At my church, you made out fine until you screwed up or disagreed with those who believed they were right.
3) Often they skip from Jesus's birth to his death and resurrection without reading and applying his teachings.

To me, that seems like something anybody would not only want to escape, but should escape.

Check out Hear No Evil

Browse Matthew's blog, Jesus Needs New PR.

Check out more exclusive interviews

Oprah Winfrey is one of the wealthiest and most influential people in America. She is also one of the most controversial among people of faith. Winfrey's motto is "Live your best life," a maxim which bears eerie resemblance to the title of Joel Osteen's bestselling book and influences her talk show, magazine, book club, and unique brand of spirituality. Oprah is great at giving advice. In fact, she doles it out regularly and generously to the masses of Americans who want to improve their life, health, finances, and faith. Enter Robyn Okrant, author of Living Oprah.

Robyn is a 35-year-old average American woman who decided to spend 12 months following every piece of advice Oprah gave. From food purchase to a her sex schedule with her husband, Robyn tested the viability of the talk show host's guidance. Oprah became her guru, mentor, pastor, and personal shopper. Did it work? Did it maker healthier, wealthier, or wiser? I decided to sit down and chat with Robyn to find out.

Q: What did your husband "Jim" say when you told him you decided to spend a year "living Oprah?"

A: Jim is incredibly supportive of me. I am an artist and writer and frequently come to him with some wacky ideas that I bounce of him. When I mentioned Living Oprah to him, he asked if he'd have to do anything. Naively, I told him no - that he wouldn't even notice I was doing it - that I'd set time aside when he was at work to do the project. Little did I know, almost instantly, we were completely saturated in my "little" experiment.

Q: Have you had any contact with Oprah's people? How are they reacting?

A: Oprah's folks have asked me for my book. But whether they enjoy it or are using it as a dartboard...your guess is as good as mine!

Q: A couple of quick questions, popcorn-style. After a year of "living Oprah"...
    Q: Did you weigh more or less?
    A: Less, but definitely more toned and muscular
    Q: Happier or not?
    A: About the same...but more stressed out
    Q: Healthier or not?
    A: About the same
    Q: Better marriage or worse?
    A: During the year, worse, once the year was over, better than ever
    Q: Richer or poorer?
    A: Hmm...poorer during the year (almost 5K of my own money went into the project!) and than richer once the year was over because my book was published!
    Q: More spiritual or less?
    A: I would say I'm more confident in my spirituality. When I allowed Oprah to define or guide what she thought a healthy spiritual life should look like, even though I did learn some good lessons, I felt a bit off kilter. Now that the year is over, I feel more connected to my spirituality.

Q: You tried everything...literally, everything. In your opinion, what's the best piece of advice Oprah has given?

A: Oprah advocates that we all go out in the world and put time and energy into causes we believe in. So, it's not just about writing a check, it's about doing hands on philanthropy. I organized a big book drive, I donated time/food to a food pantry. Now that the Living Oprah project is over, I'm still giving my energy (in addition to donating money, when I'm able) to causes I believe in.

Q: Worst advice?

A: This might work for other people, but it didn't work for me...having to go out and buy clothing/makeup/accessories to fit in with Oprah (and her expert's and her staff's) idea of what makes women beautiful. I spent a lot of money on items, that in my real life, I'd never use. When doing the project, I looked just like the majority of folks who make up her audience, but I ended up feeling self conscious - as if I was walking around in costume. I felt could have spent my money in a more worthwhile manner...or better yet, SAVED it!

Q: I've heard you're working on another project. Can you give us a sneak peak?

A: I've got a few projects I'm juggling now, but I'm incredibly excited about the one that came as a result of Living Oprah. In response to all the focus I had to place on my appearance, on spending, on decorating, on listening to outside sources to validate me, I'm doing a little detox. We women are so bombarded with images of what we're supposed to look like, what a successful relationship is, what it appears like to "have it all." Many of us judge ourselves so harshly because we can't live up to the ideals presented to us in the media. I'm trying to strip away those influences in my life, in hopes that I'll end up even more confident and accepting of myself how I am, without being convinced that I need to have or be MORE. Who knows, maybe there are some women out there who might want to join me?

Check out Living Oprah: My One Year Experiment to Walk the Walk of the Queen of Talk

See other JonathanMerritt.com interviews

This article was originally published on RelevantMagazine.com.

I don't know when it began. The moment when Napster launched, maybe. Whenever it was, it set off a cultural ripple infecting the masses with an insatiable desire for more, faster and free. It's called the free culture movement, and it advocates increased access to creative goods with no strings attached. Free culturalists believe that restricting access to cultural goods and creating processes designed to turn profits actually hinders creativity. They say restrictive laws such as copyrights serve as negative feedbacks, diminishing the creativity they are designed to promote.

The Internet has only made things worse ... or better, depending on your perspective. International access to the Web is difficult to police and has revealed natural limits of protective laws. With the rise of peer-to-peer file sharing systems, it has never been easier to find and acquire whatever you desire without paying a shilling for it. Some claim this produces a society of pirates and thieves, while others say the real problem is the laws that restricted access to these things in the first place. Free culturalists crave the permission to freely use, enhance and develop creative goods in a world where remix is an art form.

Piracy doesn’t matter?

Lawrence Lessig is regarded as the "father of the free culture movement" and author of Free Culture: The Nature and Future of Creativity. He responds to charges of so-called piracy by saying, "Just at the time digital technology could unleash an extraordinary range of commercial and noncommercial creativity, the law burdens this creativity with insanely complex and vague rules and with the threat of obscenely severe penalties." Lessig isn't anti-capitalist or even anti-commercial. In his recent book, Remix: Making Art and Commerce Thrive in the Hybrid Economy, he argues that culture is best served by legal systems that balance commercialism and sharing. While the real crime in his mind is smothering creative collaboration, the answer is not killing commercialism.

Now more than ever, people are looking for more access to more stuff for less money and fewer stipulations. Everything must be recreated in a free culture. Those things you learned in freshman marketing class? Might want to reconsider some of it. Old business models are rendered useless. Best-selling authors are now expected to post regularly high-quality content on personal blogs, and many are now giving away free digital copies of their books for an initial period after the release. It seems new paradigms must be applied to music, art, literature and even religion.

The reality of the new paradigm

Media giant Apple has taken full advantage of free culture. On iTunes U, Apple offers free education. Through this open service, users can access thousands of free lectures from prestigious universities. And who can overlook the iPhone, Apple’s mobile-device-turned-obsession? One of its biggest selling points is the thousands of free apps available for download.

In the music world, Radiohead showed us that free culture could actually be a good thing. The famed British rock band released its seventh studio album In Rainbows in late 2007 as a free digital download. Patrons could offer to pay as much or as little as they wanted for the album. Forty percent of Americans opted to pay for the album, offering nearly $10 US on average. Had Radiohead opted for the traditional model, they would have earned around $1 US per album. In Rainbows debuted at No. 1 on the Billboard 200, going on to sell millions of copies and winning two Grammy Awards.

The typically-behind Christian world has made a few attempts to adapt to the culture shift, and leading the way is publishers. Zondervan, a division of HarperCollins and one of the nation’s largest Christian publishers, has begun giving books away. Yes, that’s right. Giving them away. In 2009, several Zondervan titles such as Andrew Farley’s The Naked Gospel and Gary Thomas’ Pure Pleasure were available for a limited time as a free digital download. Both titles maintain strong Amazon rankings and have done well in the marketplace.

And the church

Fewer strides have been made in the Church world. Most church services still end with a traditional call for “His tithe and your offering,” which can be off-putting to a generation that wants to give out of gratitude rather than guilt. In a free culture, the last thing you want to communicate is a pay-to-play model.

LifeChurch.tv in Oklahoma has certainly made strides to adapt. Their website offers free creative church resources, and they were among the first to offer an Internet campus where parishioners don’t even have to spend gas to join a worship service. Perhaps their most notable contribution is YouVersion, the wildly popular online bible available for mobile devices at no charge.

In New Jersey, Reformed Church of Highland Park opened up A Better World Café, a restaurant that supplanted the common pay system with an innovative pay-what-you-can model. Patrons of this ministerial venture can eat as much as they want and pay whatever they can afford. The nonprofit eatery attracts as many as 125 customers per day and utilizes mostly locally grown produce. The menu only offers “suggested prices,” and if patrons can’t afford to pay anything for their meal, they can volunteer at the café to cover it.

Some might think this movement is a negative cultural turn attempting to destabilize a social system that works fine. But these churches and organizations have simply recast their mission in the midst of this movement. Good or bad, free culture is our reality. It’s our world. Luckily, more than 2,000 years of history illustrate that the Christian way transcends cultural changes. Until my crystal ball arrives in the mail, I can’t predict what the future holds for the Christian world in light of free culture. But I’d pay to find out.

Check out this "remix" of Lawrence Lessig's Free Culture:

Browse my other articles at RelevantMagazine.com

Check out Free Culture by Lawrence Lessig

Some sins are really inconsequential and not worth talking about. But getting drunk, having sex before marriage, and breaking any of the Ten Commandments: these are definitely sins and we can't let them slide. At least, this is what many Christians (and pastors) believe whether or not they would admit it. We believe some sins are "serious" but others have become "respectable." That's why a gay person wouldn't feel comfortable in most churches today, but fat, lazy gossips abound. In an attempt to correct the imbalance, I decided to give some face time to one of the oft-overlooked skeletons in our closets: gossip. In this article originally published by LifeWay, I interview Jerry Bridges, author of Respectable Sins: Confronting the Sins We Tolerate. My goal is not to elevate so-called respectable sins or promote legalism, but to give some face time to a flaw outside of the usual suspects we should all be addressing.

The whirlwind of media frenzy was intoxicating. Anna Nicole Smith – Playmate, heiress, actress – had suddenly and mysteriously died.

In the days that followed, the media inundated the public with touching images, field reports, and expert interviews. Ironically, they created more questions than answers. What was the cause of death? Was there foul play? Where would she be buried? Who would gain custody of her infant daughter? Smith’s death received more media time than the newly-elected Democratic majority in Congress and just less than the war in Iraq.

At one point the feeding frenzy constituted more than 30 percent of all news coverage. It was even reported that American troop morale was impacted by the fact that America was so obsessed with the death of a single B-list star.

The sad reality is that we live in a culture of gossip. Whether it’s the latest celebrity baby bump rumor or the most recent Lindsay Lohan meltdown, Americans can’t get enough. And it’s not just celebrities we are going on and on about; we also talk about each other. In a recent Barna poll, 28 percent of respondents admitted to recently saying mean things about someone when that person wasn’t present. 

The study also stated that Christians are just as likely to gossip as non-Christians. “The respect, patience, self-control, and kindness of born-again Christians should astound people,” says Dave Kinnaman, the study’s director. “But the lifestyles and relationships of born-again believers are not much different than others.” 

The Tempted Tongue
The American Heritage dictionary defines gossip as “rumor or talk of a personal, sensational, or intimate nature.”  Jerry Bridges, author of Respectable Sins, says that gossip occurs when we pass on information – true or false – about someone. That means just because the information is cloaked as a prayer request or justified as a means to a favorable end, it’s still gossip.

Humans are inherently inclined to gossip. “We are hard-wired for negative speech because of our own need for self-esteem and recognition,” says Dr. Michael Sedler, author of “Stop the Runaway Conversation: Take Control Over Gossip and Criticism.” “We want to be in a position where we are built up and receive support and admiration from people. We tend to make ourselves look good with negative comments about others and positive comments about us perhaps at others expense unless we struggle against it.”

Unfortunately, most people don’t see gossip as something that’s all that bad. That’s why it’s so prevalent in churches today. “We tend to be eager to pass on bad news about someone else, and this is widespread among Christians. It is tolerated because we do it so much,” Bridges shares. “And we do it so much we stop being convicted about it.” For this reason, Carole Mayhall, author of “Words That Hurt, Words That Heal,” calls gossip an “insidious” sin. “People do not think of their gossiping words as true sin, but they are,” she says.

Regardless of how accepted or respectable the sin of gossip is, it is still sin. Our tongues should only be used for good and godly purposes and never to hurt others. As Scripture tells us, “Out of the same mouth come blessing and cursing. My brothers, these things should not be this way. Does a spring pour out sweet and bitter water from the same opening?” (James 3: 10-11).

Tongue Tied
Water isn’t the only metaphor James uses to teach about the untamed tongue. He also compares it to a destructive fire. “Consider how large a forest a small fire ignites. And the tongue is a fire. The tongue, a world of unrighteousness, is placed among the parts of our [bodies]; it pollutes the whole body, sets the course of life on fire, and is set on fire by hell” (James 3: 5-6).

“Gossip spreads and causes damage wherever it goes,” Bridges says. “It does two things. First, it tears down the reputation of the person we are talking about. Second, it brings unrelated people into the gossip chain. That is why it is just as bad to listen and enjoy the gossip as it is to spread gossip. It has a domino effect.” If you have been a victim of gossip, you don’t need anyone to tell you how destructive it can be. The emotional and relational scars it leaves clearly tell the story.

Christin, a single from San Francisco,  describes herself as a “victim of serial gossip.” She was the target of gossip throughout high school, but one occasion stands out in her mind. “My sophomore year, three sophomore cheerleaders and I were invited to the junior/senior prom, but my best friend, Jamie, was not,” she remembers. “Jamie became bitter, and the next year, Jamie called my date two weeks before prom and told him that I really didn’t want to take him. Without even telling me, he asked someone else.”

When the gossip finally got back to Christin, it was too late to find another date. “The night of prom, I stayed home and watched a movie. I kept staring at my dress and fighting back tears because I knew that I had become the laughingstock of my high school,” she recalls.

The effects of this dramatic event still reverberate in Christin’s life. To this day she is untrusting of her close girlfriends. “If my best friend would gossip about me, what will my acquaintances say?” Christin asks. “Gossip is a hurtful force. I think it is worse than getting punched in the face because gossip is harder to track down the source and untangle the reason why.”

Mayhall sympathizes with the fallout from Christin’s adolescent debacle. “Gossip hurts,” she attests. “Once spread, it is never able to be fully recovered.” As it spreads, both fire and gossip destroy, and often the destruction is irreparable.

Taming the Tongue
Ephesians 4:29 says, “No rotten talk should come from your mouth, but only what is good for the building up of someone in need.” What can we do to guard against an untamed tongue, and how do we clean up the mess when we allow unwholesome words to cause destruction in someone else’s life?

Sedler says it begins with a simple question: Is it necessary? “When I am repeating a story or sharing things, I ask myself what my motive is,” he says. “This will help me see if I am sharing to get attention, sharing for recognition, or sharing to hurt someone.” If we put every word to this test before we release it from our lips, we would undoubtedly regret less and reflect Christ more.

Scripture memory also comes in handy. “I think that as we let the Word of Christ dwell in us, more and more God is going to set a guard over our mouths,” Mayhall offers. “So many times when I go to say something I shouldn’t, God brings a Word of Scripture to my mind. The only thing you have at your disposal during the moment you need help is what you have memorized.”

But what if you slip up? What if you accidentally find yourself tongue-tied with no hope of retreat? Mayhall recommends simply apologizing.

“I often still say things that I wish I could reach into the air and push back into my mouth. But as believers, we need to be very quick to apologize,” she explains. “It is the hardest thing in the world to do, but we must follow the Lord on this. It not only helps you in your relationships but it helps you to think before you speak the next time.”

In fact, relationships are both the greatest risk and greatest tool when it comes to gossip. Because we are hard-wired to tear others down and build ourselves up, building accountability into our lives is invaluable.

“You are made or broken by the people you surround yourself with, so the people I surround myself with have positive speech patterns,” Sedler shares. “And I make an honest effort to let the people close to me know that if they see me doing or saying something that is out of line with the things of God, they should confront me. That kind of accountability keeps me in line.”

If we all made an honest effort to commit Scripture to heart, only speak when necessary, surround ourselves with uplifting accountability partners, and apologize when we mess up, perhaps we could all transcend and transform this culture of gossip. Now that would be something worth talking about.

Respectable Sins: Confronting the Sins We Tolerate by Jerry Bridges

Words that Hurt, Words that Heal by Carole Mayhall

In 2006, my frustration with the Church had reached fever pitch. I was having a hard time relating to it like many in my generation. Then I stumbled across Sarah Cunningham's book, Dear Church: Letters to a Disillutioned Generation. In 14 letters written to the Church, Sarah vented her frustrations and mine. She also gave me hope.

Today--nearly four years later--Sarah has released her second book, a memoir entitled Picking Dandelions: A Search for Eden Among Life's Weeds. It is well-written as expected and unlike some memoirs, the stories do more than entertain; they encourage and instruct. I recently caught up with Sarah to ask her about God, the book, and her search for Eden.

Q: I fell in love with your first book, "Dear Church: Letter from a Disillutioned Generation." It was raw, uncomfortable, hopeful. Dear church is starkly and noticeably different than this book. What changed for you as a writer between the two books that prompted the shift?

A: Ha. Its funny to hear someone say they fell in love with Dear Church, since you're right, that book was born out of such angst. I get that though. I read too and sometimes hearing someone else describe their own dark stages is what speaks to our real lives the most.

By the second half of Dear Church, though, my life and writing was already beginning to reflect a shift. The book talked about how I didn't want to dwell on disillusionment, but to move beyond it and to invite others to do the same.  Picking Dandelions picks up well beyond disillusionment, with some quirky and more humorous moments that were an equally important part of my journey to hold onto faith.

Q: Picking Dandelions is a memoir, yet there is still a theme woven through the collection of stories. Can you describe the thematic glue that holds it all together?

A: The stories in Picking Dandelions were pulled from my life story--my kind-of quirky childhood growing up across the street from a cemetery, my experience leading relief efforts at Ground Zero after 911, that sort of thing. But even though the stories could stand alone, there is a subtle theme that shows up in almost all of them and that is that humans can't afford the luxury of unchanged living.

I think that particularly applies to people of faith. If we're following Jesus--I mean really tracking along after him through the places he went and things he did--it would change us in an ongoing way.

A: Its that innate sense of hope in us that believes, in the tough times, that things are meant to be better and brighter; the part of us that sits back after a long day experiencing love and goodness with family or friends and recognizes 'this is how it is supposed to be'.

Theologically, of course, if you delved into that, you'd find some writers in the Bible seemed to believe man was born with a sense that there was a God and that this God was pulling them in a certain direction.

Q: "Change" is such a popular word these days, and it is one of the punchlines of Picking Dandelions. What is the change you speak about in this book and why do you think it is...ahem...change we can believe in?

A: In this case, I'm talking about faith that doesn't sit on a shelf back in the 1980s or 1990s like memorabilia from the year we acquired it. A lot of us can point to one conversion point, or one experience--a church service, a summer camp, a book, some sort of hardship, something--that shifted the way we thought about God. And after that event or series of events, we considered ourselves different. Changed.

But then we talk about faith just like that. ChangED. Past tense. Its done and over with. And I have come to think we should redeem the concept, take change off the shelf and bring it into the present day. That faith works best in the present and future tense, when we're changING.

I'm not talking about change just in a self-help sense, but change in a deep-rooted way. Change that emerges when we begin to search out and apply God's truths in our lives; change that begins to shape a new way of life and a new way of thinking that help us start to recapture part of Eden...part of God's intended life for humans.

Q: I love last lines, and I found your last line especially meaningful: "Picking weeds is a beautiful thing." Can you share with my readers what you mean?

A: Definitely. Throughout life, you experience dysfunction both in yourself and in the world around you. And as you grow, if you wise up, you start to weed out the skewed, flawed things that work their way into your life. When you do that, it takes you back to a place of freshness, back to a place of space. With the drama set aside, there is room in your life to experience the fullness Jesus said he came to bring. You make more good choices, you eliminate some of the habits or secrets that complicated your life, and suddenly you experience so much more of Eden in your life. You're amazed that life can be this good.

Purchase Dear Church: Letters from a Disilutioned Generation

Purchase Picking Dandelions: A Search for Eden Among Life's Weeds

More JonathanMerritt.com exclusive interviews

As one of the three brothers, I know a little something about sibling conflict. We often joke that we fight with each other and we'd fight for each other. I think this is true. Still, sibling conflict can be one of the most frustrating dynamics in any family. I wrote a little bit about this in a piece published by LifeWay Christian Resources. Take a look and feel free to leave feedback with your own take on this.

In the past, psychologists believed that the natural state of sibling relationships was conflict. That idea has since been debunked. Even still, according to Psychology Today, one in three adults describe their relationship with their sibling as “rivalrous or distant.”

Maybe you’re like Leslie, a woman who certainly knows what a long-term sibling conflict looks like. She and her sister, Meredith, haven’t spoken since June of 2006. That was the month their issues, which had been brewing since childhood, came to a nasty apex. Growing up, Leslie and Meredith constantly competed for their mother’s attention.

Their mother went to Meredith’s wedding, but not Leslie’s. Meredith didn’t go to college, so their mother didn’t come to Leslie’s college graduation. When Meredith had major surgery, Mom was there to care for her. When Leslie underwent the same surgery, she was nowhere to be found.

“Every time a mother would normally be there for her daughters, Mom would be there for my sister, but not for me,” Leslie remembers.

The hostility swelled throughout the years until it finally burst. Meredith began calling Leslie names and cursing at her over e-mail, but Leslie never responded. “After several hurtful e-mails, my phone rang,” Leslie recalls. “My sister called and basically said, ‘We’re done. We aren’t family anymore.’”

Maybe you aren’t much like Leslie. You don’t have knock-down-drag-outs with your sibling. You just feel a chasm of distance between you. Over time you’ve grown apart, and now it’s awkward trying to connect and find things in common. You’re a little more like Jessica.

Jessica is a single, 29-year-old from Georgia whose older sister, Casey, moved to Arizona five years ago. Though they had been very close growing up, the distance between the two highlighted how very different they had become.

“When we were younger, we played the same games, had the same friends – we stuck together,” Jessica shares. “Now I realize that as we’ve gotten older, things have changed drastically. It isn’t a stretch to say that as adults we have nothing in common.”

Being several time zones apart, Jessica says, causes you to rely on commonalities to stay connected. Unfortunately, Jessica and Casey just don’t share much as adults. “We don’t like the same shows, we don’t have the same friends, and we have different religious beliefs,” Jessica voices. Though the sisters haven’t given up on trying, both will admit it has become a struggle to find common ground.

As you get older, you may realize that you have unresolved issues with your siblings or simply find you don’t have much to talk about anymore. Yet you recognize both the benefit and intrinsic value of healthy family relationships. How can you begin easing tensions and reconnecting with your former childhood playmates?

Miles Apart
If you find yourself frustrated, look around for the green-eyed monster – jealousy. Cheryl Dellasega, a relationship counselor and author of Forced to be Family: A Guide for Living with Sinister Sisters, Drama Mamas, and Infuriating In-Laws says, “Without a doubt some of the most common causes of rivalry are jealousy and competition, which arise from a sense of being ‘less than.’”

This sentiment is evidenced by children fighting over the biggest piece of chocolate cake or proclaiming that a parent loves another child more, which is not always a baseless claim. Even though most parents attempt to treat their children fairly, it doesn’t always happen.

“In most families, there truly is favoritism,” says Leonard Felder, author of “Fitting in Is Overrated.” “And sibling rivalries are based on which child got more praise and warmth from one or both parents.”

But Kevin Lehman, psychologist and author of “The Birth Order Book: Why You Are the Way You Are” says it goes deeper than simply jealousy and favoritism. “At the root of sibling rivalry is the struggle for significance and attention,” he asserts. “The firstborn, for example, is the trailblazer. Then, the second-born comes along and says ‘Mommy look at me’ and the parents say to each other, ‘Remember when Robert did that?’”

In a perfect world, these issues would vaporize as we get older, but we don’t live in a perfect world. Sure, you’ve stopped crying your eyes out when your older brother snatches up the big piece of cake. But when he hovers over the grill to tell you how to barbecue the chicken (even thought you have a Master’s degree and own a home) it sure feels similar.

“The little girl or little boy that you once were – I’ve got news for you – you still are. If  you back someone into a corner, that child comes out,” Lehman says. “That is why so many people go to family reunions and 20 minutes later wonder why they didn’t stay home.”

Once we become adults, our eyes are opened to the fact that our siblings are humans with personalities. As in any relationship, there will be friction, differences, and preferences. Just because you’re different doesn’t mean you can’t become great friends again. And understanding why you’re having trouble connecting will go a long way to becoming closer.

Coming Together
The family is one of the most wonderful gifts that God has given us. He has designed it to be a source of comfort, community, and encouragement. That’s why the Bible uses phrases like “family of God” and “brothers and sisters” as metaphors to describe the Church. God wants us to get along with each other.

God knew how tough life could be, so it seems He created family to help us get through the sticky stuff. “There are some key moments in life when you will need to have a great working relationship with them,” Felder says. “To care for an aging or disabled relative, to make sure no one gets left out of family celebrations and life-cycle events, to pitch in and help members of the extended family who are going through tough times.”

If having healthy sibling relationships is important to God, then it should also be important to us. And if restoring that connection becomes a priority, we should be willing to work for it. So what practical things can begin mending a damaged or distant relationship with our brother or sister?

Lehman notes that it’s hard to tell someone to drop dead when things are put in writing. So he says one of the best ways to improve the situation is to write him or her a letter. “Tell them you have been thinking about them and what they mean to you,” he advises. “Be honest about the problems, express that you wish things were different, and tell them what you want to do about it.” It may seem like a safe play, but playing it safe might pay off.

Another idea is gathering the family around an act of goodwill. Consider volunteering together to help with a local cleanup effort. “Finding something positive and loving to unite you is a great way to build relationships,” Dellasega says.

As followers of Christ, however, beginning reconciliation is simpler than either suggestion. As Paul said in Philippians 4:6, “Don’t worry about anything, but in everything, through prayer and petition with thanksgiving, let your requests be made known to God.” If you are in the middle of a sibling skirmish, ask yourself when the last time was that you simply took the situation to God.

“The first step is to accept and appreciate that God made each of us different and unique. There is so much diversity in nature, in families, in human groups,” Felder says. “Instead of resenting the fact that you and your sibling have very different approaches to life, why not offer up a prayer of thanks that this family and this world are big enough to allow for the strengths of each of you to come to fruition?”

A Revitalized Relationship
The reality of any relationship struggle is that you can’t always fix it. “We don’t choose our siblings,” Judy Dunn, professor of human development at Penn State told Psychology Today. “There are personality differences that can be very striking, and if you’re stuck growing up with someone day-in and day-out who grates and irritates and provokes, then it seems very understandable that … some siblings don’t get on well.”

Once you realize that things may never change, it is best to turn it over to God and allow Him to use the negatives to achieve a positive.

Looking back, Leslie sees how God has used the rivalry with her sister to accomplish God-sized feats. “I have learned to be a better friend, … and I have had to learn to completely trust in God,” she says. “I think God wanted to use this to teach me to be dependent on Him.” Later this year, Leslie will be teaching a women’s Bible study on forgiveness at her church.

As for Jessica, she has used Casey’s move to Arizona as a prompting to work harder to connect with her sister. The sisters intentionally talk twice a week and hold each other accountable. When together, they focus on the things they have in common, like a love for shopping and good food.

“In the end, we worked harder and my sister’s move actually brought us closer together,” Jessica shares.

As Psalm 133:1 says, “How wonderful it is, how pleasant, when brothers live together in harmony!” Though you can’t always fix things, it doesn’t mean you should stop trying. Who knows? God might just take what seems like incredible differences and use them to transform you both into the close and loving siblings He desperately wants you to be.

Check out another LifeWay article by Jonathan: "9 Mission Trip Tips"

Alvin Reid is author or coauthor of more than 10 books and considered one of the leading evangelical thinkers on evangelism. He is also Associate Dean for Proclamation Studies and Bailey Smith Professor of Evangelism at my alma mater, Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary in Wake Forest, NC. I recently caught up with Dr. Reid to ask him questions about his most recent book, post-modernism, and the future of America's largest protestant denomination.

Q: Your book Introduction to Evangelism was a standard textbook on Evangelism for years. Now, you've released Evangelism Handbook. How has your thinking on evangelism changed since you wrote the first book?

A: In terms of the essential message of the gospel, nothing has changed. In terms of how to communicate that gospel well in our world, a lot has changed. My philosophy of change is to add when necessary without subtracting when unnecessary. So, in the Afterword Dr. Roy Fish states his approval of my timeless methods. At the same time, Dr. Thom Rainer in the Foreword notes the timeliness of the book. So, I am attempting to correct some problems in the conventional church without tossing the baby with the bathwater.

Fundamentally, what must change is our posture, and I write about that often. We must shift from a programmatic approach centering on methods to a missional approach centering on living lives that reflect the gospel in every way, including what we say with our lips. As Paul said in I Thess. 1:5, “Our gospel did not come to you in word only, but in power, and with the Holy Spirit, with conviction, as you saw how we lived among you.” That is how the gospel spread then, and how I believe it must now.  We must assume the posture of missionaries in our time. Pastors must help believers not merely come to services, serve, give, and learn information. Pastors must equip believers to be missionaries whether they are a butcher, a baker, a candlestick maker, or whatever their profession.

Q: You state in your book "the time has never been more urgent to reach the cities." How effective have Christians been in reaching urban communities with the Gospel? Where have we fallen short?

A: I added an entire chapter on reaching the cities to end the book because I believe we have not done well there.  As Rodney Stark notes in his book The Rise of Christianity, the gospel spread in the early centuries mostly in the cities. An unintended consequence of the institiutionalism of the church today is a love for a subculture that is safe and somewhat isolated from culture, which naturally does not lead us to the great cities.  My tradition, the Southern Baptist Convention, has in particular a lot of work to do in terms of living in and reaching cities. As I note in the book, 58% of the US population lives in the 50 largest metros, but only 25% of SBC churches are there. Thankfully, the mindset is changing on that.

Q: You are something of an expert on the Great Awakenings. You've written on them extensively. What would it take, in your opinion, to have another Great Awakening in America today?

A: It will take leaders in the church today understanding that if God moves in mighty power, a lot of what we consider precious may well be dismantled.  We have created a Christian experience for most that requires little sacrifice. But revival is costly.  We tend to focus on a spiritual awakening in terms of people repenting and being set free from gross sin, and that is a part of it. But revival historically changed the songs, the programs, and the posture of the people of God.  John Wesley wrote at one point that he was not sure a person could be converted outside a church building. Then God pushed him into the fields, a scandalous approach for an Oxford man. God used an itinerant like Whitefield and a young man given to melancholy like Brainerd. 

If we see a real spiritual awakening in our time it just may start outside the church building.  The question may not be whether or not God is at work, but whether or not our traditions hinder the work.  We need a revolution, a biblical one, and I am hopeful that we may yet see that in our time. We, in fact, may be seeing a bit of it just now.

Q: In your book, The Convergent Church, you talk about the ways post-modernism has affected the Church. What are the unique opportunities provided for the Church and the Gospel as a result of post-modernism?

A: People today are looking for something real. Post-modernism has helped to push the church from a “do this because you are supposed to” attitude to a more gospel-centered, missional focus. People today are not disinterested in spiritual things or in Jesus.  But they are not interested in what they perceived to be “organized religion.” So whether you are talking about a more “street-level” pomo or a more academic flavor (you have to read the book to see what I mean), a positive effect of post-modernism is to cause believers to get back to the reality of a life changed by the gospel.  That is not a bad thing.  In other words, I do not meet post-moderns who ask “can you prove it?” But I meet them who want to know if you can live it.

A: That, my friend, is a big question. About 25 years ago, I sat down with my wife as a young pastor in seminary. The Conservative Resurgence was underway, and we did not know how the future would go for the SBC.  Michelle and I decided we would stand on the inerrant Word of God no matter what it may have cost us.  In the providence of God I now teach at a seminary that I would never have dreamed it would want more or I would want it back then!

Last February, I talked to Michelle again. I realized that we in the SBC are at another tipping point, this time not over the authority of Scripture but over how we will live out our biblical convictions. Will we be very narrow, expecting a very tight outward conformity in our practice, or will we allow people serious about the gospel to apply it to their context even if not the way we might do it.

As I said at the Pastors Conference in Louisville, I believe we have reached a tipping point. We are going to embrace a missional, truth-centered approach over a methodologically-driven ethos. Most effective pastors I know under age 50 have already begun to do so (and some older than me!).  I am the eternal optimist on this. I still believe we have an amazing network if we can gather together around the gospel of Jesus Christ, not our preferences. I believe in the power of the gospel to change both the lost and the saved!

Order Evangelism Handbook: Biblical, Spiritual, Intentional, Missional

Order The Convergent Church: Missional Worshippers in an Emerging Culture

Download Dr. Reid's new e-book, Advance: Gospel-Centered Movements Change the World, for FREE

The other day I was talking to a pastor friend about where America is right now from the economy to political partisanship to the state of the Church. "I've never seen it this bad in my lifetime," my 57-year-old friend commented. "People are discouraged and hopeless. They need encouragement."

Can you think of a moment in your own life when people have been more discouraged than they are now? I run into people all the time who feel like God must be taking a break, like He floating around in heaven a million miles away while we're playing solo here on earth. Has there ever been a "Job moment" like we're experiencing today?

Job was like many people I know. He played by the rules, he was a loving husband and a good father. Most of all, He loved God and tried his best to live a righteous life. But through a series of supernatural events, Job fell on hard times. He lost everything--his house, his family, all his possessions. He went from infinitely hopeful to completely penniless. Before long, Job began feeling sorry for himself. After all, he didn't "do anything" to deserve what he was going through.

Through the book that bears his name, Job falls deeper and deeper into depression. He wallows in sorrow, and Job's friends' perspectives only exacerbate his wounds. When Job reaches the lowest low of his entire life, God breathes a surprising word of encouragement:

"Listen to this, O Job; stand still and consider the wondrous works of God." (Job 37:14)

It's a shocking response to Job's situation when you think about it. Job is suffering from a case of "poor me," and God tells him to stop and meditate on nature! It is a curious command that reveals a flaw in the human coping mechanism. In the midst of problems, we often mistakenly meditate on our misfortunes rather than celebrating God's goodness, faithfulness, and provision. It can be difficult to shift our focus without altering our surroundings.

We find in creation an encouraging testament about the Creator. When we shift our focus from our woes to God's world, we are reminded of the Creator's power and divinity (Romans 1:19-20). We are immersed in His glory and supernaturally encouraged (Psalm 19). We often think about revelation through creation in terms of revealing propositional knowledge, but we must ask ourselves if creation can also serve the purpose of ministering to us in difficulty. The book of Job says so.

Reflecting on Job 37:14, Zig Ziglar and Ike Reighard write,

Job had every reason, humanly speaking, to doubt God's goodness and power. His life had been turned upside down, and his friends blamed him for his problems. But into his pain God spoke. God said, in effect, "Hey, Job, pay attention. I know you're hurting, but your faith can be refreshed by looking at the wonders of all I've made." When our faith is shaken, we, too, can look at the awesome creation God has made, and our faith can be rekindled....

To notice God's power and delicate hand in creation, we have to "stand still" and look. If we're rushing around in a panic trying to fix everything, we'll be focused only on our problems. Even in the most difficult times in our lives, faith is built by stopping and looking at the wonder of God's power and grace in the expanse and intricacies of nature.

Like a priceless rock thrown into the pond of time, God's exhortation ripples through the story of Job and hits us all between the eyes. Perhaps our current difficulties provide us with a unique opportunity to reflect on the Creator's handiwork. Rather than look to the stock market, our financial protfolios, or the unemployment rate, we should learn to stand still, to retreat, to stop and ponder the works of God. Our Creator is brilliant, creative, powerful, faithful, and actively involved in the world around us. In creation meditation, we find a divine rememberance and unlikely encouragement unlike we've ever known.

Purchase the one-year Daily Insights With Zig Ziglar and Ike Reighard

Purchase Green Like God: Unlocking the Divine Plan for Oure Planet

This article orginally ran on RelevantMagazine.com

It’s been one year since Aretha Franklin belted out “My Country ‘tis of Thee” and America’s first Black President raised his hand to swear an oath to faithfully execute the duties of our highest public office. Barack Obama ran on the promises of change, hope, and progress. As the reviews of his first twelve months pour in, there seems to be a consensus of opinion:

Yes, he can ... in some ways, on some issues, some of the time.

Commentators all across the political spectrum are conflicted over the President’s first term so far, and the reviews are consistently mixed. While Obama’s charisma and family-man persona continue to warm America’s hearts, his policies and tactics have everyone questioning whether or not the (formerly) nearly-Messianic figure has the dexterity to really change anything. As political analyst Charles Krauthammer reflected, “A year ago, Obama was the most charismatic politician on earth. Today the thrill is gone, the doubts growing—even among erstwhile believers.”

Even some of Obama’s most devoted supporters are beginning to lose that loving feeling. Progressives think that during the last year the President became too detached and wasn’t tough enough. Liberal commentator Arianna Huffington (creator of The Huffington Post) recently asked, “How did the candidate who told a stadium of supporters in Denver that 'the greatest risk we can take is to try the same old politics with the same old players and expect a different result' become the president who has surrounded himself with the same old players trying the same old politics, expecting a different result?”

Huffington and much of the political left feel like Obama has reverted back to the Washington ways he swore off during the campaign, failing to fulfill many of his aggressive promises. According to an analysis by the non-partisan web site Politifact.com, Obama fulfilled only 91 of his 502 campaign promises. They rate 14 promises as “broken” and another 87 as “stalled.”

Conservatives, on the other hand, point their eager fingers at Obama’s policies rather than his approach. They say Obama’s downfall has been his substance, not his style.

To adequately assess Obama’s presidency, his agenda must be broken down into parts. Taking public opinion and political analysis into consideration, here’s how things have shaped up so far:

Economy: Obama’s economic policies include massive bailouts and government interventions. The President accomplished far less in saving jobs that he’d hoped and the unemployment rate is abysmal. 54 percent of Americans disapprove of his economic policy, an opinion probably influenced by the 62 percent disapproval rating on our skyrocketing budget deficit. On the flip side, many experts say the economy is stabilizing. Here’s to hoping. Grade: D

Foreign Policy: Obama’s highest public opinion marks come in his handling of foreign policy, partly due to the competence of Obama’s State Department. According to a CNN poll, 51 percents of Americans approve of his foreign policy and 53 percent approve of his handling of the Iraq War. His decision to order a troop surge in Afghanistan was unpopular among Democrats, but most Americans believe it was the right thing to do. Obama’s ability to pressure North Korea has surprised many, and only a few countries—such as Russia, China, and Israel—have been able to resist the charm of Obama and his foreign policy team. Here the President has only received significant criticism his trade strategy and his decision not to meet with the Dalai Lama in August. Grade: A -

Healthcare: Healthcare has been ground zero for Obama’s domestic team in 2009. Few people doubt that our healthcare system needs reforming, but most Americans agree that current proposals are not the way to go. In our current economic situation, Americans are looking for solid reform that will provide greater coverage for poor Americans but won’t bankrupt our grandchildren. Unfortunately, no amount of slick speeches (29 and counting) can convince them otherwise. 59 percent of Americans currently disapprove of so-called “Obamacare.” Grade: D -

Environment: With little notice, the President has spent his first year reversing often-criticized Bush environmental policies. He’s increased gas mileage standards, established 2.1 million new acres of protected wilderness, and announced new smog standards. His more public efforts have been less successful. The folks in Copenhagen weren’t persuaded by Obama’s appearance, and the only domestic effort to cut carbon emissions considered by Congress was cap-and-trade. This perceived intrusion into American businesses doesn’t poll well with Americans. The bill was approved by the U.S. House, but will likely never see the light of day in the Senate. Grade: C

Terrorism: The big question looming over post-9/11 Presidents is, “Are we safer under the current administration than the last?” A recent poll by the San Francisco Chronicle shows 62% of Americans say “no.” We’ve had two notable terror attempts on American soil in the last year: one successful attempt by an American soldier and one not-so-successful attempt by a Muslim with explosives stuffed down his pants. At the same time, Obama fulfilled his promise to take steps to close the prison at Guantanamo Bay and put an end to torture practices such as waterboarding. Some experts believe these steps will make us safer in the long run. Grade: C +

Social Issues: The President’s been reluctant to wage war over social issues thus far. Thus, he’s being judged based more on what he hasn’t done as much as what he has. On the one hand, he has failed to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act, which pleases social conservatives. On the other, Obama promised to pursue a common ground agenda to reduce abortions through supporting adoptions, increasing funding for unwed mothers and promoting comprehensive sexual education with an abstinence emphasis. He’s failed to do any of those things. He did, however, repeal the Mexico City Policy, a decision that will undoubtedly result in more abortions not less. The one blip on the social radar was the recent hate-crimes bill, but beyond that, there’s little to write home about. Grade: C -

There is both good and bad news for the Administration at this stage of the game. The bad news is that Obama has a long way to go to win the hearts of those he governs. A January 2010 CNN poll shows that nearly half of Americans say Obama’s presidency has been a failure so far. A recent Gallup poll indicates that Americans are less sure that Obama will be able to accomplish his goals in almost every area. According to the study, “Two-thirds of Americans now say the country is more deeply divided on major issues facing the country than it has been in the past several years.”

The good news is that he still has three years to go, and luckily, Presidents are judged on terms not months. As David Greenberg argues in this month’s The Atlantic, it is a myth that great presidents always leave their mark in the first year. John F. Kennedy’s first year was considered a failure, and Abraham Lincoln ended his first year with unbelievable debt having achieved little. Even though FDR has become a model president for first-year progress, not all of his goals were accomplished immediately. It took a couple of years to pass Social Security and the Wagner Act, and it was not until the war that FDR was able to help end the Depression.

Obama needs to rethink his policies and his strategy, there is little doubt about that. But our Founders knew what they were doing when they gave Presidents four-year terms. If Obama came to Washington to change America for the better, he’s got three more years to prove it. Right now, we’re unconvinced.

Read Charles Krauthammer's analysis in National Review.

Read Arianna Huffington's analysis on The Huffington Post.

Garden to the City is a film project with the mission of "revealing the story of God's renewal of all things." (The web site is rad, so check it out.) I can't wait to see the film series, which is divided up into four units: creation, fall, redemption, consummation. The web site for the project says the films will be available in 2009. That clearly didn't happen, but I hope that means they'll be releasing soon. The trailer is well done and makes me eager to see the finished project.

Garden to the City from Garden to the City on Vimeo.

I have often said that many people don't grasp our mission or the reason for being here because they never place life into the context of "salvation history." In other words, they never place themselves into the story of what God has accomplished, is accomplishing, and wants to accomplish on earth. Hopefully, this film series will get it right.

If you have any info on this series or when we should expect its release, let me know.

Order your copy of Green Like God.

On the 700 Club Wednesday, the one-time conservative Christian leader was claiming that Haitians brought this tragic earthquake on themselves because they made a “pact with the devil.”

Robertson said,

Something happened a long time ago in Haiti and people might not want to talk about. They were under the heel of the French, you know Napoleon the Third and whatever. And they got together and swore a pact to the Devil. They said 'We will serve you if you will get us free from the Prince.' True story. And so the Devil said, 'OK it's a deal.' And they kicked the French out. The Haitians revolted and got something themselves free. But ever since they have been cursed by one thing after another.

 In near disbelief, I tried to reason it out in my mind. Surely Pat Robertson couldn’t be so cruel. He must have heard the reports of the over 100,000 casualties. Surely he’s seen all seen the pictures of babies’ bodies being stacked like firewood, their limbs mangled and bodies crushed. Yet even in the face of all this, the 80-year-old broadcaster wrangled enough energy to pervert the situation by blaming this tragedy on the Haitians themselves.

Unfortunately, this isn't the first time remarks made on Robertson's television show has made us all want to hide under rocks in the wake of tragedy. Who can forget the strikingly similar comments made by Jerry Falwell after 9/11 on the 700 Club:

We have sinned against Almighty God, at the highest level of our government, we've stuck our finger in your eye. The Supreme Court has insulted you over and over again, Lord. They've taken your Bible away from the schools. They've forbidden little children to pray. They've taken the knowledge of God as best they can, and organizations have come into court to take the knowledge of God out of the public square of America.

It’s a strange theology that claims to trace the wrath of God to particular people and issues. It's even more strange applying that theology to tragedies like this. In Haiti, a husband searches for water to quench the thirst of what’s left of his family and a mother weeps over the limp body of her firstborn. In America, Robertson retelling folklore about “you know, Napoleon the Third and whatever” so as to cast blame for this event on the Haitians and their “pact with the Devil.”

There are more important things to do right now than attack Robertson. As a nation reels and hundreds of thousands suffer, we don’t have time to deal with Robertson’s comment. Now is the time for goodness and mercy and generosity. And then, after we’ve given these people everything we have in us and their tears have begun to dry, it will be time to address why we’re even allowing certain people to continue to have a voice in our culture.

Time Magazine's Top 10 Robertson Gaffe's

Is green becoming a new "religion?" Stephen T. Asma of Columbia College Chicago thinks so. He writes to prove it in his article, "Green Guilt," which was published by the The Chronicle of Higher Education. In it, Asma recounts a story of being scolded by his 6-year-old brushing for the running the water too long while brushing his teeth. His son apparently saw this wasteful use of resources as committing some "environmental sin." He goes on to say,

Instead of religious sins plaguing our conscience, we now have the transgressions of leaving the water running, leaving the lights on, failing to recycle, and using plastic grocery bags instead of paper. In addition, the righteous pleasures of being more orthodox than your neighbor (in this case being more green) can still be had—the new heresies include failure to compost, or refusal to go organic. Vitriol that used to be reserved for Satan can now be discharged against evil corporate chief executives and drivers of gas-guzzling vehicles. Apocalyptic fear-mongering previously took the shape of repent or burn in hell, but now it is recycle or burn in the ozone hole.

Psychologically, humans (at least in the contemporary Western world) have a need to feel guilty, he contends. In order to accomplish this we need a standard by which to regulate our consciousness and a religion to produce a standard. "Environmentalism, as a substitute for religion, has come to the rescue," he writes.

Albert Mohler, President of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, commented on this today at his blog. "[Asma's essay] is an excellent analysis of the religious character of environmentalism, complete with a set of comprehensive doctrines and religious practices," Mohler writes. "It is also an excellent consideration of the religious nature of human beings. Asma understands the pretensions of the secular mind, and he also sees the religious impulse working its way to the surface in the modern obsessions with heath, fitness, and an ever-expanding set of "secular" sins." Mohler conlcudes, "his essay offers a rare glimpse into the religious character of the rather new faith of environmentalism, complete with its 'potential for dogmatic zeal and obsession.'"

Many secular environmentalists do become obsessed--even consumed--with green living, green eating, green cars, and green industry. Environmentalism becomes their source of sin, guilt, redemption, mission and personal fulfillment. Green becomes a surrogate religion, usually presided over by the High Priest Al Gore. SoI agree with Mohler, but wish he'd gone further. Christians need more than a helpful critique. We need a hopeful alternative.

What about Christians who think trashing the creation isn't the brightest idea? What about those of us who think caring for God's creation is part of following Jesus? What about those of us who recognize that the millions of people dying every year from environmental problems is something Christians should be concerned about? What about us? Are we to be accused of abandoning the faith for a surrogate religion?

Rather than reacting to secular environmentalism, Christians should be redeeming it. We should be using less water and working for lower emissions--not because we need the guilt, but because we serve the Creator whose Son freed us from all guilt through His shed blood. We reduce our energy--not because we have some psychological compulsion toward standards, but because we respect THE standard (the Bible) where we're asked to care for God's glorious creation. Rooted in God's word and driven by a love for Jesus and people, we're prepared to turn back secular environmentalism and point people to the one who makes all things new.

Preorder your copy of Green Like God: Unlocking the Divine Plan for Our Planet today.

"Why Can't We All Just Get Along?"

That was the cry of Rodney King, the African-American man who was mercilessly beaten on March 3, 1991, by members of the Los Angeles police department. It became a rallying cry for the nation in the midst of hostile race wars. And it’s applicable today, as we find ourselves in very different—but no less contentious—culture wars.

The simple answer is, we are unique people with conflicting passions. But, shouldn’t it be different for followers of Jesus? Shouldn’t those of us who claim to follow the Prince of Peace be able to stand firmly upon our convictions without being offensive, cutting or downright mean?

Historically, there have always been pockets of Christians who give God a bad name—the Crusades, slavery, segregated America. While those are some of the most egregious examples, late-20th century Americans nurtured a new unChristian trend: incivility in public discourse.

Many Christians during this period noticed the widespread breakdown of morality in America and responded with organized political activism. A passion developed among America’s faithful, and with it came vicious public debates on hot-button issues like prayer in schools, the public display of the Ten Commandments, abortion and gay rights. As America polarized, public attacks became commonplace—even among Christians.

This struggle for control of our nation’s rudder—these “culture wars”—has hurt the public perception of Christianity. As recent Barna research shows, most non-believers feel “Christians are prideful and quick to find faults in others.” Today, 70 percent of non-Christians aged 16 to 29 say Christians are “insensitive to others.”

Such perceptions have triggered Christian thinkers from the right and left to wonder if this is the best practice for Christ-followers. Public engagement and personal passion over moral issues is laudable, but we should defend our deeply held convictions logically and lovingly instead of emotionally. We should temper our rhetoric with grace, humility and respect. We must learn to disagree without being disagreeable.

“Continuing the present course of the culture wars spells disaster for the United States and a historic failure to seize the moment and demonstrate to the world the significance of the American experiment,” writes Os Guinness in The Case for Civility.

On his God’s Politics blog, Jim Wallis posted “Rules for Christian Civility,” saying we should “not attack our fellow Christians as Democratic or Republican partisans, but rather expect and respect the practice of putting our faith first … even if we reach different conclusions.” Conservative columnist Peggy Noonan spoke out in her recent book, Patriotic Grace. “What we need most right now, at this moment, is a kind of patriotic grace,” she writes. “A grace that takes the long view, apprehends the moment we’re in, comes up with ways of dealing with it, and eschews the politically cheap and manipulative.”

Political incivility last year prompted Mark DeMoss to launch The Civility Project. DeMoss is the president of the largest Christian PR firm in America and has represented such conservative icons as Jerry Falwell, Franklin Graham and Charles Colson. “During the 2008 election, I began noticing some of the ugly things being said about people like Mitt Romney and Barack Obama, much of it by evangelicals,” DeMoss says.

DeMoss’ Civility Project asks people to pledge to be civil in public discourse and behavior, respect others whether or not they agree, and stand against incivility. “I think more people than we realize are clamoring for more respectful debate, especially on politics,” he says. “People are getting turned off to the entire system, Republicans and Democrats.”

DeMoss is careful to point out civility doesn’t mean unity. Americans will never agree on everything. Furthermore, civility doesn’t simply mean being nice. ”There are pragmatic and practical reasons for civility,” he says. “It is virtually impossible to have constructive dialogue or to inform and educate people in an uncivil environment."

Incivility is a cultural problem, and is not localized to the Christian community. From Kanye West’s infamous mic-snatching during Taylor Swift’s acceptance speech at the MTV Video Music Awards, to South Carolina Representative Joe Wilson shouting “you lie” at President Obama in the middle of his address to Congress, to Serena Williams’ expletive-laced rant after a line judge called a foot fault on her during the U.S. Open, it seems we’re no longer concerned about people’s feelings.

But Scripture says our attitudes should mirror Jesus’ as we put others above ourselves. Somehow, I just can’t imagine Jesus at a town hall meeting screaming His lungs out and comparing the president to Hitler.

Rather than getting dragged into the vicious spirit marking today’s public debates, Jesus would express the fruits of a greater Spirit: love, peace, patience, kindness, gentleness and self-control. Rather than letting opposing positions frustrate us, let’s see them as opportunities to live the virtues of our faith. Let’s infuse grace and humility into an uncivil world.

This article first appeared in Relevant Magazine.

This Spring, I will officially achieve a lifelong dream. My first book, Green Like God: Unlocking the Divine Plan for Our Planet, comes out in April with FaithWords, a division of Hachette Book Group USA. The book catalogues my two-year journey in search of God's plan for the creation. It has been a labor of love and one that I hope will push this conversation into laps of a broader audience. Some parts are gritty and uncomfortable, others are warm and inspiring. I wrote Green Like God to be at once theological and practical.

During the month of May, we are launching a nationwide blog tour in which friends and colleagues will be dissecting and reflecting on the book. Unlike other blog tours, which only include big name published authors and well-known leaders, I am including YOU! You are my friends and conversation partners, and I want you to be a part of this important event. If you have a blog and you post regularly, you're in!

Here is how to join:

1. Go to the Contact page of this website.

2. Very important: Type in your full name and email address. In the "question/comment" box, include the web address of your blog, the date in May 2010 you'd like to post about the book, and your physical mailing address. 

3. Submit the form.

It's that easy. So long as you post regularly at your blog, you'll be included. If you don't blog regularly, but you know someone who does, direct them to this post. Here is the cool thing:

IF YOU ARE PARTICIPATING IN THE TOUR, YOU'LL GET A FREE COPY OF THE BOOK BEFORE ANYONE ELSE DOES!

Space isn't infinite, so go ahead.
Send me your info and be a part of the Green Like God blog tour.

It was no joke. On April Fool's Day in 2009, U.S. President Barack Obama and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev agreed to pursue a significant reduction in nuclear arms with "effective verification measures." America and Russia possess the largest nuclear stockpiles in the world by far, which is why Obama told reporters in Moscow, "We must lead by example, and that's what we're doing here today." According to a recent study, 73% of Americans and 63% of Russians support the elimination of nuclear weapons.

With Obama and Medvedev playing nice and public opinion in favor of such action, one has to wonder why there has been little buzz since April. Perhaps there have simply been "more important" discussions in Washington. Healthcare has stolen most of the recent front page headlines. The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq are fighting over page two. And don't forget the economy.

What would you think if someone told you that the key to abolishing nuclear weapons might be Christians? What if all those religious people turned out to be the force that drove this conversation to its tipping point? The unlikely supporters could undoubtedly make an impact if they were to join the conversation. Christians would bring the numerical strength of their voting bloc as well strong moral arguments, which are always helpful on such issues.

The Two Futures Project (2FP) is a non-partisan Christian movement seeking to abolish nuclear weapons from the face of the earth. 2FP does not call for America to disarm unilaterally, but rightly advocates for multilateral, verifiable, and irreversible disarmament. This effort has been endorsed by many on the political left and right, including George Shultz, Cold War architect and former Secretary of State under Ronald Reagan.

Rather than unravel into an exmplanation of boring technicalities, which you would almost certainly not read, I encourage you to digest the information on the 2FP website. Tyler Wigg-Stevenson, Director of 2FP, beautifully articulates why its necessary that Christians oppose nukes. Additionally, he has done a wondrous job of outlining the path to a world free of nuclear weapons.

I recently joined the 2FP movement because I believe nuclear weapons are unchristian. When absolutely necessary, wars should be fought by soldiers not declared on innocent civilians. The Christian God abhors the shedding of innocent blood and nuclear weapons are only capable of widespread, indiscriminate killing and destruction of life. As nukes become more prevalent in our world, the chances of a terrorist gaining possession of one grows. And when a nation is attacked by a terrorist, there is often no country to bomb back.

If you are a follower of Jesus and agree that abolishing nuclear weapons is necessary, I encourage you to join this effort by signing on via the 2FP website. Also, watch and share the powerful 2FP! You just might be joining the movement that finally pushes this issue to the political forefront.

  ARTICLE ALSO PUBLISHED AT

Q: What do you think about the abolition of nuclear weapons? Do you think it is possible? Do you think it is smart? Do you think Christians should be involved in this conversation either way?

 Related Posts

"Remembering Hiroshima Rightly"

"No Nukes for a Safer Tomorrow"

"Is There Anyone Alive Who Would Oppose Nuclear Reduction"

Recently, I've been thinking about the free culture movement. Wikipedia aptly defines it as "a social movement that promotes the freedom to distribute and modify creative works in the form of free content by using the Internet and other forms of media." If you lay awake at night seething over copyright laws, you're probably a proponent of this movement. If you have a pulse, you've probably tasted its fruits.

Ever downloaded a lecture from iTunes U or taken advantage of a free weekly download? Do you show up at Sam's Club for free sample Saturday? Do you ever visit blogs or other sites where people provide free content? Is there a LimeWire icon sitting on your computer desktop (...shame on you)? Everywhere you look today it seems people are asking for and receiving free stuff.

The Church is typically late to any cultural conversation, so we might be a few years off from even realizing this cultural shift much less responding. But lately I've been wondering what this might mean for the Church in America? Will we raise money differently? Will we talk about tithing less? Will we creatively find ways to offer free products and programs to our parishoners? Will our products and programs look differently than they do now?

Reformed Church of Highland Park in New Jersey has responded to the free culture movement with a new creative ministry in their community. They've opened a community resaurant called A Better World Cafe where local patrons can eat as much as they want and pay whatever they can afford. The menu only lists suggested prices. Some visitors opt to pay more and cover those who opt to pay less. If someone is unable to pay anything, one can opt for the free daily selection or they are welcome to volunteer for one hour in the kitchen in exchange for another meal. 

I am inspired by this innovative pay-what-you-can model, especially in this economy, but I am also thrilled by their environmental ethic. The non-profit restaurant serves up to 125 customers per day using mostly locally grown produce from small gardens, farms, and markets. They compost leftovers and avoid using plastics and styrofoam.

Churches are always trying to think of good ways to think outside the ministerial box to meet the needs of a changing culture. This small church in New Jersey is an incredible example of what creative adaptation to cultural trends can accomplish when combined with a heart for ministering to people. They've implemented a courageous business model and responded to the needs of their community, and they've done it all in a way that highly values people and creation. Directors at A Better World Cafe say that groups all across the country have been inquiring about how to duplicate their model. Here's to hoping others do.

Where do you see signs of free culture in your own life? What do you think about the A Better Cafe model? How do you think your church would respond if you suggested starting something like this?

Interested in free culture? Check out  Free Culture: The Nature and Future of Creativity by Lawrence Lessig. Lessig is known as "the father of the free culture movement."

If you want to know more about this ministry and those who run it, see Who Is My Neighbor Inc, the Cafe's parent ministry at Reformed Church.

If you are interested in the A Better World Cafe model, check out One World, Everybody Eats. The founder of One World, Everybody Eats, Denisa Cerreta, pioneered the pay-what-you-can restaurant model.

EXTRA: This week, I reposted "Reuse or Recycle? Try Freecycling" at The Huffington Post.

I've heard so many people talking about "The War on Christmas" recently that I decided to gather my own thoughts on the subject. This is a two-part post. The first is "Who is the enemy?" and the second is "What is the answer?"

In my last post, I spoke about how consumerism grips Americans--both Christians and non-Christians--during the Christmas season. During this holiday unlike any other we unrestrain our insatiable hunger for more stuff, better stuff and newer stuff. Most of us end up rushing through the holiday tearing open gifts like the Tazmanian Devil only to spend a little time with family and say a brief word about that other guy...what's his name...oh yeah, Jesus.

So what is the answer? If the problem is that we spend too much money at Christmas ($450 Billion annually), then the solution is to spend less. If the problem is that we amass too much crap, then the solution is to buy less crap. If the problem is that the story of Jesus' birth has ceased to be the guiding narrative of this season, then the solution is to tell his story more often and more passionately. Seems pretty simple to me.

To this end, pastors Rick Mckinley and Chris Seay have launched Advent Conspiracy. They believe that we should be celebrating Jesus' life by living like Jesus did. (I know. Novel idea, right?) That means giving, but not materially. Instead, we give relationally. Jesus gave "presence," not "presents." Advent Conspiracy challenges followers of His way to give fewer gifts and give more time to others we love. Then we take some of that money we didn't spend and we give it to the poor, hurting, hungry, lonely, thirsty, and sick. Advent Conspiracy asks us to trade consumerism for selflessness, meaning and memories.

Check out their powerful new promo video:

Rick McKinley admits that some Christians are initially apprehensive about joining with Advent Conspiracy. "Some people were terrified," he recently told Ministry Today. "They said, 'My gosh, you're ruining Christmas. What do we tell our kids?'" After realizing this didn't mean abstaining from giving any gifts, people began to jump on board. Today, this organization has given millions of dollars to help alleviate the global water crisis.

It's probably too late to adopt this approach for your 2009 Christmas. That's okay. Maybe you should begin planning to celebrate next Christmas the Advent Conspiracy way. Tell your church leaders. Tell your pastor. Tell your small group. Celebrate like Jesus.

Of course, you couldrefuse to do anything differently. You could keep spending untold dollars on mountains of junk every year. And you could keep fooling yourself into thinking that the way to place Jesus at the center of this holiday is crusading against the "War on Christmas" and boycotting any retailer who doesn't celebrate how you'd like them to. "Christians get all bent out of shape over the fact that someone didn't say 'Merry Christmas' when I walked into the store," McKinley says. "But why are we expecting the store to tell our story? That's just ridiculous."

I say we begin telling the Jesus story on our terms in our own way. Not with a glib greeting at the front of Wal-Mart, but through sacrifice and relationship.

OTHER GREAT IDEAS:

Sometimes you have to give something. After all, some people you know will doubtlessly give you a gift and if you don't return the gesture, you'll feel awful until Valentine's Day. For these people on your list, consider Heifer International. Through Heifer, you can donate animals to people in poor countries. You choose what you want to give--a goat, chickens, lamb, llama, beifer (hence the name). These will help life people out of poverty and when donated in someone's name makes a great gift.

Christmas and trees go together like peanut butter and jelly. But how many Douglas Firs does one household need. Consider giving some plantable trees that are indigenous to your area through the Arbor Day Foundation. They are inexpensive and ship right to your door. I gave a set of these to several of my friends this year.

I've heard so many people talking about "The War on Christmas" recently that I decided to gather my own thoughts on the subject. This is a two-part post. The first is "Who is the enemy?" and the second is "What is the answer?"

A few weeks ago, I walked into the mailroom at our church office and found a stack of "I Say Merry Christmas" bumper stickers with a sign next to them that read, "please take one." For years, I have heard television and radio news personalities sound the alarm on the "The War on Christmas." According to their warnings, "Merry Christmas" as we know it is disappearing only to be replaced by its evil half-brother, "Happy Holidays."

This week, I stumbled across Focus on the Family's I Stand for Christmas campaign. The project allows customers to rate retailers on how "Christmas-friendly" they are. The implication is that we (consumers) would only patronize those who celebrate appropriately. The I Stand for Christmas web site says, "For millenia, CHRIST has been the reason for the season."

Is that still true? If we are honest with ourselves, is Jesus Christ really the reason we gather?

Most of us spend a paltry amount of time reflecting on Jesus compared to the massive amount of time we spend shopping at the mall, attending parties, wrapping and opening gifts, and eating huge meals. We spend an hour at church on Christmas Eve holding a candle and singing "Silent Night" but we spend four hours at the mall the day before. Sure, we may gather around grandpa for a stiff five minutes and listen to him read the Luke account of Christ's birth, but we hardly listen. We are licking our chops at the mountains of presents behind him. In reality, Christmas for Americans--and yes, even the Christian ones--is shaped more by Currier and Ives than Joseph and Mary.

I often wonder what the Lord would think if he returned to earth at Christmas and surveyed the way all of his followers were celebrating his birth. What would the Son of Man who "has no place to lay his head" think about our gaudy decorations and lavish presents totaling over $400 billion in America alone? Would Immanuel be pleased to find us remembering his lowly birth with materialism and gluttony?

I stumbled across a documentary recently that addresses these questions. "What Would Jesus Buy?" features the satirical countrywide tour of Reverend Billy and The Church of Life after Shopping. The film is directed by Morgan Spurlock (of "Supersize Me") and is littered with shocking statistics. It's a convincing presentation of what Christmas has become. It makes you wonder if we should actually be asking retailers to remove the word "Christmas" from their advertisements, to stop defiling our holy holiday.

Check out the trailer.

So many Christians want to fight against the "War on Christmas" with bumper stickers and boycotts, but I wonder if we've been fighting the wrong enemy. I wonder if we are the enemy. As Titus 1:16 reminds us, it is useless to profess God with our lips but deny him with our lives. Should we be more concerned with what the retailers are saying to us when we enter their stores or why we're spending so much time there in the first place?

Recently, I was offered an opportunity to become a blogger for The Huffington Post. I was a little reticent at first because I have heard others characterize the site, founded by liberal pundit Arianna Huffington, as "very liberal." I knew there would be some people who would attempt to cast me as a liberal in sheep's clothing if I published there, and nothing could be farther from the truth. I couldn't initially confirm that Huffington was indeed "very liberal" because I was personally unacquainted with it, but I firmly believe that people of faith should occupy spaces at both ends of the political spectrum, regardless of perceptions. So I decided to commit some thought and prayer to pursuing it.

The Huffington audience is massive and the nice people at Huffington graciously offered for me to blog with no real control over the content and no strings attached. I spoke with a good friend who is a leader in the conservative Christian movement and he said to "go for it." After thinking and praying about it, I felt like it was a good opportunity to introduce my ideas this forum where some people will agree and others won't. If people wrongly attempt to cast me as a some sort of liberal...well...what else is new?

The subject for my first article for Huffington was aggresive. Abortion has long been considered one of the hottest of the hot buttons in America. It divides America almost neatly down the center and people on both sides harbor fierce opinions. As a committed Christian who believes my faith's teachings on the sacredness of life call me to oppose abortion, I have long taken a "pro-life" or "anti-abortion" position on this issue. I support the overtuning of Roe v. Wade.

Subsequently, I have argued that the "pro-life" position should be expanded to include much more than just abortion. Because we believe life is sacred, we should also advocate on behalf of the thousands who are dying at the hands of genocidal maniacs in Sudan, the nearly 3 million (mostly children) who will die from preventable, water-related diseases this year, and the tens of thousands of civilians who have perished as a result of recent wars. Any "pro-life" position that is exclusively focused on abortion and does not address other anti-life atrocities is incomplete. The sacredness of life calls us to support a culture of life all over the globe.

This commitment to life-causes has also moved me to support an abortion reduction platform as an in-the-meantime approach to reducing the number of children who are aborted in America. This platform has garnered support from the left as well as the right and seeks to reduce abortions through comprehensive sexual education with an abstinence emphasis, greater funding and promotion of adoption, increased funding for unwed mothers, etc. One of the other pillars of this platform is increased availability of contraception for low-income, adult women. Recent studies indicate that contraception availability for low-income women is directly related to lower unintended pregnancy and abortion. I have been skeptical of this point for some time, but think that we may see a shift on this issue among some from the pro-life camp if the numbers are correct.

That was the subject of my recent article for the Huffington Post, "Is Availability to Contraception a Pro-Life Issue?" Please give the article a fair read and feel free to leave comments on both sites 9your voice needs to be heard there, too). As always, I cherish your respectful feedback.

The climate debate has been raging for some time, but recently it has reached fevor pitch. Normally, I don't post much on climate, but I felt this conversation needs to be explored in light of recent events. First, reports of hotter summers poured in. Then colder winters. There was the so-called "climategate" scandal. And now we're getting reports on the UN Climate Conference in Copenhagen.

I have said for some time that this discussion must be built upon honesty and integrity. We need to be honest about what the facts are and we must have the integrity to admit that we (most of us) are not experts. We can't pretend like we are scientists, economists, policy experts, ethicists and theologians. Instead, we should learn what we can and make prudent decisions based on the information available.

That's why I decided to take some time interviewing Dr. Katherine Hayhoe, a geoscientist and climate scientist at Texas Tech University. Katherine served as an expert reviewer with the IPCC panel, which was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2007. Most interesting, her husband is Andrew Farley, an evangelical pastor and author of The Naked Gospel. Katharine and Andrew recently co-wrote A Climate for Change: Global Warming Facts for Faith-Based Decisions. I asked her a few straightforward questions and gave her the opportunity to answer without censure. Take a look, and leave comments below.

JM: I’ve heard a lot of people say “we’ve reached a consensus on climate change” as if to say, “the debate is over.” Is the debate over? Is there really agreement about the causes of climate change among those seriously involved?

KH: Among climate scientists—people who spend their lives researching our world—there is no debate regarding the reality of climate change, and the fact that humans are the primary cause. It is primarily laypeople, such as talk show hosts, or those with vested interests in maintaining the status quo, who are perpetuating the idea that there is no scientific consensus.

The basic science that explains what is happening to our world has been well-established for more than two hundred years. Our earth has a natural blanket around it—a blanket perfectly suited for life. This blanket is made up of water vapor, carbon dioxide, and other heat-trapping gases in the atmosphere. Together, these gases keep our world about 70 degrees F warmer than it would be otherwise.

So what’s the problem? Well, since the Industrial Revolution, we have been burning increasing amounts of coal, gas, and oil. Every time we burn these fuels, we produce extra carbon dioxide. We can measure it at the tailpipe of any car, or the smokestack of any factor.

As a result, levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere have increased far beyond their natural levels. And carbon dioxide is one of those heat-trapping gases, whose properties can be measured in any lab. (I’ve even done it myself!) So pouring all these extra heat-trapping gases into the atmosphere is like putting an extra blanket around the Earth. And the Earth is starting to sweat.

There’s certainly lots of media hype about a great debate. But there’s really nothing left to debate about the science. When an organization like NASA posts their climate data for the world to see, we must conclude that either all of NASA’s scientists and engineers have been duped, or quite possibly, there’s some truth to this warming.

JM: In your book, A Climate for Change, you contend that global warming is something that Christians should be talking about. How so?

First, we have to be honest about the reality that the Bible makes no mention of climate change and says nothing specific about planet care, in and of itself.

As Christians, however, we are called to love God and love others.

Climate change is already affecting our world, particularly the poor and the disadvantaged who lack the resources to adapt. This is true both here in the United States, as well as in third world countries. Recognizing the reality of climate change and reaching out to help our global neighbors is a tangible expression of this love.

Already, we’ve seen the first American refugees from climate change. Just this year, the inhabitants of Newtok, Alaska were forced to abandon their homes forever as warming temperatures caused the ground beneath them to flood, and melt away. And what has happened in Newtok is just a small “snapshot” of what we might expect over the longer term if we continue to bury our heads in the sand and pretend that climate change is not happening.

Our book is not a guilt trip. As my co-author Andrew Farley, an evangelical pastor, points out in his book The Naked Gospel, as Christians we are motivated by freedom and love, not guilt or duty. Climate change represents an opportunity, perhaps the greatest of our generation, to “serve one another in love.”

JM: You note in your book that Christians are skeptical when it comes to this issue. I’ve certainly found that to be true (if not the understatement of the century). Why do you think this is the case?

KH: Many Christians feel like they’ve been burned by scientists in past, perhaps on issues related to the sanctity of life, or the creation-evolution debate. Complicating the issue is the fact that the science of climate change has become so politicized, albeit falsely so. The result is that conservatives, and many Christians, tend to view climate change as yet another environment issue driven by a liberal agenda with ulterior motives.

I can’t speak to past experiences. But in the case of climate change, I can say that there is truly something different happening here. We are talking about measurements from thermometers, which are neither Republican or Democrat; and records of melting glaciers, rising seas, and many other changes in our natural world, none of which are either conservative or liberal.

The science of climate change is not about blue politics, or red politics, or even green politics. Rather, it’s about thermometers and temperature readings, and measurements that we humans have been making for hundreds of years.

If this warming is occurring, and all the climate data we have indicates it is, then what we Christians should be doing is using our sound minds and God-given wisdom to seek solutions. It’s no different to what we should do if we find that our economy is tanking, or that crime is rampant in our streets. We need to seek a solution to the facts that confront us, because it is both sensible and right to do so.

JM: A lot of people like to point to an unusually cold winter or cooler year and poke fun at climate change proponents. Why is this bad logic?

KH: We’re all guilty of that. Every time it’s particularly cold out, it’s hard to resist complaining about how we’d like a little global warming now, please! But what we need to understand is that weather is not climate.

Weather is inherently unpredictable and chaotic. Weather is what happens from day to day, and even from year to year. Weather is that record snowfall, or that unusually hot year.

Climate, on the other hand, is predictable—if we know what is making it change. Climate is the long-term statistics of weather, over decades to centuries. Climate is the average conditions you would expect if you visited Florida in January, for example, or Alaska instead.

These are two very different things. And so when we talk about “climate change,” we have to take a step back and look at the big picture before we can figure out what’s going on. It’s about changes that have happened over twenty, fifty, and even a hundred years; not about what happens from day to day, or even from year to year.

JM: I heard on the news the other day that global warming has stopped, and we’ve even experienced global cooling recently. Is that true?

KH: Back in the 1970s, a handful of scientific articles and one Newsweek story speculated that we might be headed for a period of global cooling—over the next 10,000 years or so, that is! Today, more than ten thousand scientific articles, and perhaps even millions of news stories, have shown that instead, the world is warming; and warming very quickly.

Even still, mentions of “global cooling” have become popular lately. But there is no truth at all to the idea. In fact, the only way anyone can come up with such a notion is by carefully selecting the year 1998 (a particularly warm el Niño year) and the year 2008 (a particularly cool year) and drawing a straight line from one single year to the other. This is not a truthful picture to present to the public, but this is precisely what has been done by some, to purport that we’re experiencing a recent cooling.

In contrast, all we have to do is look at our long-term temperature records to recognize how we are currently experiencing a warming that is “off the charts” in comparison with anything we saw before the dawn of the Industrial Age. It’s warming, and it is an unnatural warming that coincides perfectly with our production of heat-trapping gases over the last 150 years.

In our book, “A Climate for Change,” we include a graph that shows how people arrive at the illusion of cooling, and clearly indicates the reality of warming. Our hope is that people will recognize that, no matter how convincing some voices seem to be, there are some simple facts that anyone and everyone can look at for themselves. And those facts show a consistent warming over time.

JM: Some sincere and respected scientists believe that the warming we’ve experienced over the last century or so is largely due to natural cycles, but you disagree. Why?

KH: No sincere scientist who has looked at the data can claim that what we’re experiencing today resembles any natural cycle we have seen in the past.

It’s interesting that some who believe in a young Earth (maybe 6,000-10,000 years old) are the same who argue that our current warming is part of a natural cycle. Both cannot possibly be true!

First, if the Earth is less than 10,000 years old, there are no natural cycles that are even noteworthy. Therefore, to say this is just a natural cycle like we’ve seen in the past, we are committing to an old Earth, not a young Earth.

But what if we are ok with the idea of an old Earth? Is this argument valid then?

It’s true that past records indicate the Earth has passed through long ice ages, and warm interglacial periods, on times scales of hundreds of thousands of years. But even if we take those time scales into account, we still don’t see any conditions like what we are seeing today. Today, levels of heat-trapping gases in the atmosphere are “off the charts” in comparison with anything documented in the past. Natural cycles cannot explain our current warming.

JM: You are a renowned climate scientist and a “Bible-believing Christian.” It is an interesting combination. Do your colleagues or friends at church ever tease you for having a foot in two different worlds?

KH: My colleagues have always been respectful of my beliefs. There are even some who share them. But I know some Christians do feel that I have a foot in both worlds; or, even worse, am trying to serve two masters!

I don’t see it that way at all. Exactly the opposite, in fact. Rather than having a foot in two very different worlds, I believe I’ve got both feet firmly planted on a God-given and God-driven reality.

I believe that nature is God’s other “book,” displaying his character and creativity. For me, scientific inquiry is an attempt to unravel what God was thinking when he designed the world.

I’m often asked whether I believe, or have faith in, global warming. My response to that is “no!” The Apostle Paul tells us that, “faith … is the evidence of things not seen.” I have faith in God, although I have not seen him. But science is exactly the opposite. Science is about accumulating the evidence of things that can be seen. Science then identifies the best explanation to account for what has been seen.

Global warming is simply the only explanation that fits the overwhelming number of facts that scientists accumulated about our world. And so that is why I can be a Christian, and I can believe that God has created this wonderful world for us, and at the same time accept that all the facts indicate that we have unwittingly made choices that have contributed to global warming. There is no contradiction there at all.

JM: Recently, a scandal arose when emails by well-known climate scientists, stolen from a British research lab, reportedly discussed manipulating data. Will this impact the conversation at all?

KH: A few emails written by a handful of the thousands of scientists who study climate change does not alter the fact that data collected from all over the world, for more than 150 years, shows a consistent warming.

This conclusion doesn’t just rest on one set of temperature data or tree rings. Sea level is rising; ice sheets are melting; spring is coming earlier in the year; insect, bird, and animal species are now seen further north than ever before. More than 25,000 of these types of changes have been seen around the world, all of them telling us that the world is warming.

We need to be careful how much we pay attention to media hype that is not based on solid fact. In “A Climate for Change,” we provide evidence for the scientific consensus that the world is warming: from the National Academies of 32 nations, from every major scientific organization in the United States, and even from authorities such as the Pentagon, which views climate change as a serious threat to our national security.

So in assessing the implications of the stolen emails for the overall science of climate change, we need to take a step back and look at the big picture. We have to weigh those few emails from certain scientists against an overwhelming, worldwide consensus from thousands of researchers.

I’m not defending these scientists’ actions or their words, because I don’t know them or work with them at all. What I am saying is that this is no call for us to throw the baby out with the bathwater. Climate change is a very real problem, and we need to move ahead by looking for solutions, no longer dragging our feet every time the media tells us to.

In writing “A Climate For Change” we hope that our readers will see that we ourselves have no political agenda. Neither of us have any stake in whether or not certain policies are adopted. The issue of climate change is not political for us at all. It is about sharing the truth displayed in God’s world with our brothers and sisters. With right information comes free choice.

Interested? Order A Climate for Change or The Naked Gospel NOW!

When American soldiers returned from World War II, the so-called mainline churches were pillars of Protestantism in the United States. (The six denominations typically considered to be "mainline" are the Episcopal Church, the Evangelical Lutheran Church, the Presbyterian Church (USA), the United Methodist Church, the United Church of Christ and the American Baptist Church.) In the 1950's, there were around 80,000 mainline churches in United States. Today, there are only around 72,000 American mainline churches. Subsequently, a quarter of mainline church members called it quits. This, despite massive population growth and substantial growth among evangelical denominations over the same period. 

Theologians, historians, sociologists, and cultural commentators have speculated about what may have caused this decline. Some say that mainline churches have abandoned their historical commitments to orthodox Christian tenets such as scriptural authority, gospel-centered preaching, and evangelism. Others claim that these denominations have failed to attract minorities and young people to replace their greying ranks. More than a third of all mainline members are 60+ years old. Research indicates there is some truth in both claims. Any church that abandons the gospel and scriptural authority will have a hard time differentiating itself from other socially-sensitive community groups; any organization that fails to capture the hearts of the next generation simply won't survive. (For a fair and interesting look at these trends, check out David Shiflett's "Exodus: Why Americans are Fleeing Liberal Churches for Conservative Christianity.") 

Over the last decade, the number of adults who attend a mainline church on a given weekend has been relatively stable. Leaders in mainline circles have harbored hope that the numerical hemorrhaging might be coagulating. Evangelical skeptics say that the credit belongs to America's population growth, and we shouldn't read into this. Much to the chagrin of mainliners, it appears the once-powerful Christian bodies may once again be fading.

According to a recent Barna study examining the state of mainline denominations, "demographics suggest that the mainline churches may be on the precipice of a period of decline unless remedial steps are taken." According to the report, population growth in America has provided just enough new members to maintain attendance levels similar to when the U.S. population was considerably smaller. Among the studies other findings are the rise in women pastors, an aging clergy in the mainline denominations, and swelling church budgets. Perhaps most telling, the study also found that only 49% of mainline adults say they are "absolutely committed to Christianity" and 72% say they are "more likely to develop their own religious beliefs than to adopt those taught by their church."

I have a unique perspective here even though I am a committed evangelical Christian and a Southern Baptist minister because I currently attend a mainline (UMC) seminary and I have many close friends who attend mainline churches. I've learned a lot from interacting with people in these circles, which now informs my perspective. On the on hand, I've found many of the portrayals of mainliners as crusading Bible-haters are mere caricatures. My experience is that many people in these traditions love Jesus and hold the Bible in high regard. Evangelical Christians must be careful not to over-generalize when speaking about our mainline brothers and sisters. On the other hand, I've found that many of the common stereotypes about mainliners are not baseless. Many of the mainline clergy I speak to unashamedly swim in a pool of heterodoxy. I have entered into friendships with people who accept universal salvation, deny the resurrection, and most commonly, fail to recognize the cross of Christ as central to Christian theology. I love these friends of mine, but I often encourage them to reconsider orthodox Christian teachings.

In my opinion and experience, mainline churches have become a mixed bag. Many hold fast to helpful traditions, ancient Christian practices, and meaningful liturgies. Yet more often than not these congregations lack strong leadership, strong convictions, a strong sense of identity, and vibrant populations of young people. All four of these things are essential to surviving the challenges of post-modern, post-Christian America.

Holidays at the Merritt household would make Henry Ford proud. Every occasion from Independence Day to Christmas manifests itself in the same structure: a winding assembly line of food. This Thanksgiving was no different. My mom worked the drink station and was filling red plastic Solo cups with sweet tea as fast as she could. When it was time for me to grab a drink, I opened our cupboard and reached for a reusable glass. "Don't worry, Mr. Green," a friend of the family cracked. "The Solo cups are recyclable."

I tried to explain to her and everyone else who was now agreeing with her that recycling is good, but it is even better not to use disposable goods if possible. After all, it still takes raw materials to make recyclable goods and much of the material is lost in the recycling process. No one seemed to care. I hear this argument a lot: If you don't feel like washing a dish, grab a disposable plate or cup and recycle it after you're done. Unfortunately, there is more to sustainable living than just recycling.

Deron Beal of Freecycle.org reminds us what the bigger picture looks like in a recent article in TIME Magazine, "The Power of One." Beal has created a "cybercurbside," which connects people through a website that allows people to connect with each other and share things that they no longer need.

"The lightbulb went off the day I realized that while recycling is great, if someone is able to reuse the stuff you no longer want, like your old sofa, you're keeping not just a 100-lb. sofa out of a landfill but also 20 to 40 times that in the raw materials needed to make a new sofa," says Beal.

Today, freecycle moves over 24,000 items per day through its nearly seven million members. Does that make a difference? They keep 700 tons of materials out of the landfill every day! As freecycle proves, recycling is good. Reusing is even better.

Read More.

Interested in creation care? Pre-order Jonathan's new book, Green Like God: Unlocking the Divine Plan for Our Planet.