Boomerang Prayers

Back at you.

Books & Culture October 23, 2015
Image processed by CodeCarvings Piczard ### FREE Community Edition ### on 2015-10-16 05:50:42Z | http://piczard.com | http://codecarvings.com

Because I wrote a book with the title Prayer: Does It Make Any Difference? I receive letters and emails from readers who give wrenching accounts of unanswered prayers. A man quit his job at a printing plant when it began printing pornography and, despite his urgent prayers, never landed another job. A couple desperately wanted a child and found themselves infertile. Another woman got her wish for a child, only to have her daughter die of a rare disease before reaching the age of two.

I wrote two chapters on unanswered prayer, but frankly, all words seem impotent against the mystery of why such prayers go unanswered. When prayer seems more like struggle than relationship, when I find myself repeating the same requests over and over and wonder, "Is anyone really listening?" I take some comfort in remembering that Jesus, too, had unanswered prayers. Four come to mind.

1.

As Luke records, Jesus spent an entire night in prayer before choosing the inner core of twelve disciples. Yet if you read the Gospels, you marvel that this dodgy dozen could represent an answer to prayer. They included, Luke pointedly notes, "Judas Iscariot, who became a traitor," not to mention the pettily ambitious Sons of Thunder and the hothead Simon, whom Jesus would later rebuke as "Satan."

"O unbelieving generation," Jesus once sighed about these twelve, "how long shall I stay with you? How long shall I put up with you?" I wonder if, in that moment of exasperation, Jesus questioned the Father's response to his night of prayer.

The particular makeup of the twelve may not truly qualify as an unanswered prayer, for we have no reason to believe that any other choices might have served Jesus better. Even so, I find it comforting that while on earth Jesus faced the same limitations as does anyone in leadership. The Son of God himself could only draw from the talent pool available.

2.

A clearer instance of unanswered prayer occurred in the Garden of Gethsemane when, as Luther put it, "God struggled with God." While Jesus lay prostrate on the ground, sweat falling from him like drops of blood, his prayers took on an uncharacteristic tone of pleading. He "offered up prayers and petitions with loud cries and tears to the one who could save him from death," the Book of Hebrews says—but of course Jesus was not saved from death. As that awareness grew, Jesus felt distress. His community of support had all fallen asleep. "Could you not keep watch for one hour?" he chided.

We have few details about the content of Jesus' prayers, since any potential witnesses were dozing. Perhaps he reviewed his entire ministry on earth. The weight of all that went undone may have borne down upon him: his disciples were unstable, irresponsible; the movement seemed in peril; God's chosen people had rejected him; the world still harbored evil and much suffering.

In Gethsemane Jesus seemed at the very edge of human endurance. He no more relished the idea of pain and death than you or I do. "Everything is possible for you," Jesus pleaded to the Father; "Take this cup from me."

3.

The third unanswered prayer appears in an intimate scene recorded by John, the disciples' last supper with their master. Jesus expanded the scope of his prayer far beyond the walls of the Upper Room, to encompass even those of us who live today:

My prayer is not for them (the disciples) alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me. I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one: I in them and you in me. May they be brought to complete unity to let the world know that you sent me.

Disunity virtually defines the history of the church. Pick at random any year of history—pick now, with 45,000 Christian denominations—and you will see how far short we fall of Jesus' final request. The church, and the watching world, still await an answer.

4.

The fourth unanswered prayer appears in what has become known as the Lord's Prayer, which Jesus taught as a model. It includes the sweeping request that "your kingdom come, your will be done, on earth as it is in heaven." Surely that prayer remains unanswered today.

On television I watch the long lines of migrants fleeing war—some 42,000 displaced every day—and think of their prayers for peace and the simple yearning to return to their homes someday. I am haunted by the image of twenty-one Egyptian Christians kneeling in orange jumpsuits by the Libyan surf, their heads bowed in prayer as, one by one, each is beheaded by ISIS. God's will is not being done on earth as it is in heaven—not yet, at least.

I sense a partial clue into the mystery of unanswered prayer in what I call boomerang prayers. Often when we pray, we want God to intervene in spectacular fashion: to heal miraculously, to change evil hearts, to quash injustice. More commonly, God works through us. Like a boomerang, the prayers we toss at God come swishing back toward us, testing our response.

I think back to Jesus' unanswered prayers. The disciples? Eventually, except for Judas, the twelve submitted to a slow but steady transformation, providing a kind of long-term answer to Jesus' petition. John, a Son of Thunder, softened into "the apostle of Love." Peter, who earned Jesus' rebuke by recoiling from the idea of Messiah suffering, later urged his followers to "follow in his steps" by suffering as Christ did.

In Gethsemane, Jesus did not receive what he requested, removal of the cup of suffering. His plea for intervention looped back like a boomerang. Hebrews affirms that, though Jesus was not saved from death, nevertheless "he was heard because of his reverent submission. Although he was a son, he learned obedience from what he suffered." It was God's will that Jesus had come to do, after all, and his plea resolved into these words: "Yet not what I will, but what you will." Not many hours later he would cry out, in profound summation, "It is finished."

How many times have I prayed for one thing only to receive another? I long for the sense of detachment, of trust, that I see in Gethsemane. God and God alone is qualified to answer my prayers, even if it means transmuting them from my own self-protective will into God's perfect will. When Jesus prayed to the one who could save him from death, he did not get that salvation; he got instead the salvation of the world.

The final two prayers, for unity and for seeing God's will done on earth as it is in heaven, put Jesus' followers in the spotlight. "It is for your good that I am going away," Jesus assured the disciples. "As the Father has sent me, I am sending you." He turned over the mission to us, as ill-equipped and undependable as that original band of twelve.

In Vanishing Grace I wrote about hearing the musician Bono of the band U2 describe his short-term mission to an orphanage in Ethiopia. For a month he and his wife Ali held babies, helped nurse them back to health, and then donated money to equip the orphanage. Bono said that after his return to Ireland his prayers changed, taking on an angry, defiant tone. "God, don't you care about those children in Africa? They did nothing wrong and yet because of AIDS there may soon be fifteen million parentless babies on that continent. Don't you care?!"

Gradually Bono heard in reply that, yes, God cares. Where did he think his idea of a mission trip to Africa came from? The questions he had hurled at God came sailing back to him, boomerang-like, as a prod to action. Get moving. Do something. The role of leading a global campaign against AIDS held little appeal for Bono at first—"I'm a rock star, not a social worker!"—but eventually he could not ignore what felt unmistakably like a calling.

Over the next years politicians as varied as President Bill Clinton and Senator Strom Thurmond, and then Tony Blair and Kofi Annan and George W. Bush, found a musician dressed all in black and wearing his signature sunglasses camped outside their offices waiting to see them. In a time of economic cutbacks, somehow Bono managed to persuade those leaders to ante up fifteen billion dollars to combat AIDS.

With government support assured, Bono went on a bus tour of the United States, speaking to large churches and Christian colleges because he believed that Christians were key to addressing the global problem of AIDS. He invited others to participate in what God wanted accomplished in the world, and many did.

My understanding of prayer has changed. I now see it less as trying to convince God to do what I want done and more as a way of discerning what God wants done in the world, and how I can be a part of it. Mystery endures, but a different kind of mystery: What tiny role can I play in answering Jesus' prayer for unity, and in doing God's will on earth as it is in heaven? The boomerang circles back.

Philip Yancey is the author of many books, including Soul Survivor: How Thirteen Unlikely Mentors Helped My Faith Survive the Church. This essay was posted on his blog site on October 18, 2015.

Pastors

Why I Confessed My Sins to a Jesuit Priest

Even though I’m a Protestant pastor.

Leadership Journal October 22, 2015

“Forgive me, Father, for I have sinned. It has been 31 years and I have never practiced confession.”

If I had followed the traditional formula, perhaps that is what I would have said to the priest who took my confession in November of 2014. But I’m a Protestant and we didn’t bother with formalities. I think he and I were both a little surprised to be sitting across from one another.

Last year, I took a five-week sabbatical. Part of that time I spent in silent retreat at Montserrat House, a Jesuit Retreat Center. I needed rest—I knew that. What I did not know was, while there, God would introduce me to the transformative power of private confession.

Feeling forgiveness

On the last night of my retreat, the Jesuits made themselves available to anyone who wanted to practice confession. Father John had led the retreat so I caught up with him, breaking the silence to ask, “Can I come to confession tonight. I’m Protestant.” Father John smiled and answered, “Of course.”

Father John had led the retreat so I caught up with him, breaking the silence to ask, 'Can I come to confession tonight. I’m Protestant.'

I stood in line with 60 other retreatants waiting to make our confession. When it was my turn, I entered a small study and sat in a hardback wooden chair across from Father John. He recognized me as his Protestant retreatant and immediately launched into an explanation of how confession works.

I interrupted.

“Umm, Father, I understand how it works in theory. I wanted to practice confession. I’m Protestant, but can you take my confession?”

“Well, it’s not customary,” he responded, “but it’s not prohibited.”

So there I was, a Protestant pastor sitting across from a Jesuit priest. And I laid my soul bare before him. I confessed that my relationship with the Lord had devolved into a work relationship. I confessed to showing favoritism among members of my congregation. I confessed to struggles with pride and selfishness, to sinning in anger and causing others grief. All this and more I said in halting sentences.

The emotions I felt in those moments surprised me. The depth of sorrow was unexpected. You see, I had already confessed all these sins. Earlier in the day, as I walked through an examination of conscience, I offered each of these sins to the Lord, asking for his forgiveness. In my understanding of confession, the real work was done.

That night, sitting in what I later learned to call the reconciliation room, tears streaming down my face, I realized that perhaps there was more to confession than I thought. I reached the end of my list and Father John handed me a tissue and pronounced these words over me, “You are forgiven. The Father forgives you your sins.”

In that moment, I knew what he said was true: I was forgiven. The truth of God’s forgiveness washed over me in a way it had not earlier in the day when I confessed my sins to God in the privacy of my own room. The experience of confession was different when it required me to humble myself before God in the presence of another person. It was transformative.

Confession as spiritual discipline

What made that experience so transformative for me? For the first time in my life I had practiced confession as a discipline. From a theological perspective, I had already confessed my sins to God and received forgiveness. Private confession (naming our sins in the presence of another person) is done not as a means of achieving forgiveness; Scripture encourages us to confess our sins to one another because it is healing (James 5:16).

Scripture is clear: once we confess our sins, God cleanses us from all unrighteousness. How often, in spite of that truth, do people continue to walk around with a deep sense of shame over past sin? In my experience, people bear that burden far too often.

Jesus told his disciples, “If you forgive anyone’s sins, they are forgiven; if you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven” (John 20:23). This verse used to make me uncomfortable: Could Jesus possibly mean what he said? Would he really entrust that power to us? I now believe he masterfully articulated the truth of the human condition: for an individual to be free of the shame of sin, often another person must serve as a witness to the power of God to forgive sins.

After my first experience with confession, my thought was, “Why in my faith tradition did I never learn about private confession? Why was this never taught as a spiritual discipline alongside prayer and Bible study and fasting?”

Becoming a Confessor

After practicing confession I began to ask how I could help members of my congregation experience what I experienced in my time with Father John. Father John and I may have differed somewhat theologically on what exactly happens in the process of confession. What we agreed on is the reality that private confession should be a discipline in the life of believers. That meant I had to wrestle through the question of how to help others experience the transformative power of private confession as a sacred and spiritual practice.

That process began with writing an examination of conscience, a liturgy my congregants could work through to prepare for confession. The liturgy was intended to serve as a tool for self-examination and to shape an appropriate theology of forgiveness. After writing it, I wasn’t sure what the next step would be. Then a young woman in our congregation asked to meet with me.

This woman had come to faith for the first time just three months before and was struggling to accept that God could really forgive her for all she had done in her past. So I asked her, “Would you be interested in practicing confession?”

She was confused. “Would I like to do what?” she asked.

I explained how confession worked and gave her the examination of conscience to look through. I encouraged her to pray and see if God’s Spirit led her to practice confession as a discipline.

Two weeks later, my office became a reconciliation room and I became a confessor as this young lady laid her soul bare. As I pronounced the words over her, “If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness. You are forgiven. The Father forgives you your sins,” her eyes filled with tears and I saw her come to terms with the truth of God’s radical forgiveness. Our time together concluded with her announcing she felt ready to be baptized. Several weeks later, we had the opportunity to practice that sacrament publicly with other members of our congregation.

I was interested to see how our staff members would feel about embracing the discipline of confession, so in our annual performance reviews, I included the question, “Would you be interested in practicing private confession?” The staff was split. About half of our staff members were interested in beginning to practice confession (or felt like they were already doing this on some level) and about half were less certain. One noted interest but really wanted the anonymity of confessing to someone outside our pastoral staff. Our staff’s attitude served as a good gauge for how private confession would be received by our congregation.

The idea of confession is uncomfortable for some. Others meet it with a great deal of enthusiasm. We want to help people meet this practice with courage so we’re committed to a gradual introduction to the idea of private confession as a necessary spiritual discipline. Here are a few guidelines I’ve found helpful:

Make it an option.

Since private confession is a gift, I want to make it an option for every member of our congregation. There’s no campaign and we haven’t yet made any big push on a Sunday morning. Instead, as we meet with people and feel they might benefit from the practice, we make it an option and trust God’s Spirit to lead people toward this discipline if it will be helpful.

We are also incorporating times of corporate confession into our services. For this, we looked to the Lutheran tradition and are incorporating the confeitor when appropriate. The confeitor is based on a Mass written in the 12th Century and revised by Martin Luther in 1523. This liturgy requires the congregants and minister to kneel together and confess:

“I confess to God Almighty, before the whole company of heaven, and to you, my brothers and sisters, that I have sinned in thought, word, and deed; in what I have done and in what I have failed to do, by my fault, by my fault, by my most grievous fault; wherefore I pray God Almighty to have mercy on me, forgive me all my sins, and bring me to life everlasting. Amen.”

What a sacred moment! There are other elements to the confeitor but if it were just this it would still be beautiful.

Make it a choice.

Spiritual disciplines are sacred practices people grow into. We will never make confession a compulsory practice but we will invite people into it in the same way we invite people into prayer, Bible study, and fasting.

I first practiced confession in the context of a retreat. In planning to introduce this practice to our congregation, it made sense to plan for ways we can incorporate opportunities for private confession into the structure of spiritual retreats. A guiding principle for every activity we offer goes by the “challenge by choice” rule: no one is required to participate but everyone is welcome to join in.

Make it anonymous.

A friend who grew up Catholic told me, “I always confessed to a priest I didn’t know. Always.” Some people want anonymity as a part of confession. That is okay.

When we begin to provide regular opportunities for people to practice private confession, I will invite friends who pastor other congregations to serve as confessors. Confession as a spiritual discipline simply requires the ear of a mature believer, someone willing to listen and able to give counsel if requested. So we will make sure people who would like to confess with some degree of anonymity have the opportunity to do so. The power is not in people confessing to their pastor but in confessing aloud to another.

Make it normal.

I envision a time when confession becomes a normal part of our congregational life. The image of members of our community lined up together, waiting to make confession is something I look forward to seeing. I want our congregation to experience the transformative power of confession. I want them to experience what it’s like for another human being to bear witness to the truth of God’s power to forgive their sins. I want them to experience the healing power of confession. It’s going to take some time for us to get there but we’re working toward making confession a regular part of our congregational life.

Rachel Triska is coleader of Life in Deep Ellum in Dallas.

News

66 Missionaries Must Leave UK after Operation Mobilization Loses License

Same visa problem almost led YWAM to lose hundreds of workers last year.

Christianity Today October 22, 2015
Alison Ralph / Operation Mobilization

One of the world’s largest missions agencies will lose 66 staff members from its British office after United Kingdom Visas and Immigration (UKVI) officials stripped away its license to sponsor visas.

Following an inspection by the UKVI office earlier this year, Operation Mobilization (OM) can no longer bring in missionaries from outside the European Union to staff its UK office. Non-European employees and volunteers currently sponsored by OM must leave the UK within the next two months.

“We have seen the expectations and requirements on visa sponsors increase dramatically in recent years, and unfortunately, along with many similar organizations, we have been unable to keep up with those requirements quickly enough in a way that immediately satisfies the UKVI,” Gary Sloan, OM’s UK director, told CT in a statement.

“OM UK respects this as a final decision,” he said, “and our focus will continue to realign our protocols and internal procedures to ensure they are in full compliance with current legislation when we look to reapply for our licence in 12 months time.”

OM’s current immigration difficulties parallel those of Youth With A Mission (YWAM), which faced having more than 300 missionaries and their families booted from Britain last year.

In an audit related to the UK's attempt to reduce immigration numbers, UKVI officials found that YWAM's England and Wales office had erred in two out of seven areas. While the missions organization says it “immediately” submitted a corrective action plan to the government, the UKVI warned that YWAM could be downgraded, limited in its visa sponsorship capacity, or lose its license over the errors.

In January, the UKVI reinstated YWAM’s sponsorship status. YWAM said it learned "hard lessons" about record-keeping.

In 2009, CT reported that the UK’s adoption of a point-based immigration system, designed to bolster homeland security and regulate the labor force, had confused Christian ministries about how to properly designate their employees. It even led to US singer Don Francisco's deportation.

"Some of the problems we have seen are due to churches not being fully aware of their new responsibilities, while on other occasions, immigration officials have wrongly banned people from the country because they haven't understood their own rules," the Evangelical Alliance UK's Daniel Webster told CT at the time.

Prior to YWAM's predicament, British immigration officials also revoked Wycliffe Bible Translators’ sponsorship license in 2014. (The organization later told Third Sector that the decision had had little effect on its work.)

After an immigration inspection in May 2014, UK evangelism group Nations Trust had its license downgraded, preventing the organization from issuing new visas but allowing it to continue to sponsor existing employees. Nations paid for a three-month, $2,200 “Action Plan” through the UKVI over the summer, passed another inspection that October, and had its license reinstated that December.

Globally, OM has more than 6,800 volunteers and staff which serve in 118 countries. In The Future of the Global Church, Patrick Johnstone—compiler of the first six editions of the Operation World missions handbook—ranked OM as the third-largest missions agency in the world, behind Cru (formerly Campus Crusade for Christ International) and Gospel for Asia and ahead of the Southern Baptist Convention’s International Missions Board, Wycliffe Bible Translators, and YWAM.

OM was founded in 1960 by George Verwer. His group sought to “mobilize local churches for global missions which would be led by indigenous rather than foreign missionaries,” wrote Justin Taylor for The Gospel Coalition. More than 100 nationalities have participated in OM’s ministries.

CT has previously covered OM’s contribution to India’s grassroots revival and how persecution led the group to transform itself into a local witness.

Pastors

Leaders as Coaches

5 fundamentals for bringing out the best in your people

Leadership Journal October 22, 2015

I came for a tennis match, but by the end I had learned how to lead people better.

The game didn’t appear on television or on any center court. It took place on court 11 of a college tournament. My daughter Erin played this match that, to anyone else, would appear unspectacular at best. But not from my angle.

Compared to last season, Erin’s game has changed—dramatically, and for the better. Her strokes. Her aggressiveness. Her confidence. How? The answer walked onto the court between games to talk with Erin: Coach Tammy Cecchini.

*****

“I spent the entire past season watching Erin, how she performed and acted at each practice,” Tammy said.

Curiosity drove me to probe into what they worked on together and, most importantly, how and why. That’s when a few key principles came into focus that will help any leader take people development seriously.

It doesn’t take much adeptness, after all, to manage high performers and appear successful based on luck and an organization’s previous ability to recruit well. Eventually, though, such good fortune evaporates. Whether the setting is business, ministry, music, or sports, a truly successful leader will coach any and all players to their full potential.

So how did Tammy do this? She practiced these five fundamentals for coaching players to become their best (listed using tennis scoring, of course):

Love. A heart for people.

“I love and care for every one of these girls,” she said, “and my goal is to make sure their four years here at Valparaiso University are the best possible for them as tennis players, students, and friends.”

The basic starting point emerges from role clarity. If a coach does her job well, every player entrusted to her will improve in skill, confidence, and character. How easily, though, focus can narrow and elevate a team or organization’s results as the ultimate indicator of success. So a leader must ask himself, Am I a coach or not? If the honest answer is “no,” then ensure that there is someone building into those people. A team or organization locked on results with little or no regard for individuals’ development will, eventually, lose big.

Look, instead, at the healthiest teams, and you’ll find a leader/coach who loves every player.

15. Make it personal.

“When I coach, I look at each girl individually. When I kneel in front of a player during a match, I need to know what motivates her. Everyone is different.”

Good coaching requires the relationship to get personal, one-on-one, so the person feels valued and understood. This requires intentionality in how time together is spent. “In individual workouts, I spend about 45 minutes working on their game and 15 minutes just talking, so we get to know each other.”

Take inventory of the people on your team. Do you spend one-on-one time with each person? If so, do you allot time to work on performance issues and to build relational equity? Often, leaders start to believe a person, or an entire team, doesn’t need such personal interaction, that their people can motivate themselves and improve on their own. This works for only a tiny fraction of folks. In reality, the concept of self-development is a scam designed to let leaders off the hook; people need someone to show up and invest in them.

30. Keep it positive.

“You need to have equal amounts of both confidence and skill,” says Tammy.

To coach is to work firmly in reality, and that means pointing out mistakes that need correction. But to stop there will leave a player focused on her faults—a belief that they have the ability to do better must exist for someone to actually improve. The radical difference a leader/coach makes is clear to see: Affirmation builds confidence; constant criticism tears it down. This truth applies equally to players on courts and in cubicles.

So what can it look like when done well?

“I will let a player know when she's not doing something right, but I also let her know when she is doing it right,” says Tammy. “It may seem like I'm being hard on her, but she will know when I say ‘You did it!’ that I mean it.”

Another coach, Duke’s Mike Krzyzewski, also believes in the power of positivity: “I believe in you. These four words can mean the difference between the fear of failure and the courage to try,” he says in his book The Gold Standard: Building a World-Class Team.

No one achieves success by simply trying to avoid failure. Do people on your team feel your full confidence—are they motivated to by your belief?

40. Coach for the long haul.

Results take time and perseverance, from the player and from the coach. Give up on a player? Never. Stubborn and insistent optimism toward potential is a coach’s role. “I constantly remind her about what we’ve worked on and how she can't go back to her old ways,” says Tammy. “It takes time, but the more she does it, the more confident she becomes.”

Share high expectations for the potential every person possesses, and don’t let the player settle for mediocrity or slip back into bad habits. Then look for that player to absorb and reciprocate such insistence. “I look for someone who is willing to work hard, even though she might not get recognition; someone who listens well, displays appreciation, and shows she wants to get better.”

Do the members of your team display commitment to improve, fueled by your steadfast belief in them?

Game point. Focus on what a person could become.

When a leader/coach looks at someone on her team, whether it’s a corporate business unit, church ministry, or a college tennis team, much more than today’s performance comes into view. Coach Tammy’s eyes focus on something greater that will, ultimately, lead a player toward success: “I see potential in Erin. I told her last year that she hasn't reached her full potential, and I believe it. And now I'm positive that she believes it, too. ”

Is reaching personal potential more important than out-scoring an important? According to UCLA Coach John Wooden, “Success is the peace of mind attained only through self-satisfaction in knowing you made the effort to do the best of which you are capable.”

Isn’t a coach’s true primary role to help every player achieve success—whatever that means for every individual?

*****

After Erin’s match finished, Coach Tammy told me, “All the hard work is paying off. Her strokes have improved a little bit. But I want and expect more from her.”

My daughter’s eyes beam bright when she hears Tammy talk that way. Those moments give me a glimpse into the wonderful difference this coach makes in my daughter’s heart. Ten years from now, the memory of wins and losses will fade, but the handprint from a caring coach will remain.

By the way, Erin didn’t win the match that day.

Or did she?

David Staal, senior editor for Building Church Leaders and a mentor to a third grader, serves as the president of Kids Hope USA, a national non-profit organization that partners local churches with elementary schools to provide mentors for at-risk students. He also chairs the advisory board for a nearby college, teaches marketing at another university, and served ten years in leadership for a local church following a corporate career. David is the author of Lessons Kids Need to Learn (Zondervan, 2012) and Words Kids Need to Hear (Zondervan, 2008). He lives in Grand Haven, MI, with his wife Becky. His son Scott and daughter Erin attend Valparaiso University.

News

Pew: Churchgoers Least Likely to See Science and Religion in Conflict

Survey finds ‘surprising number of topics’ where faith does not influence views on science.

Christianity Today October 22, 2015
Steve Rainwater / Flickr

The more you go to church, the less likely you are to see science and religion as incompatible, according to the latest Pew Research Center survey.

Half of Americans who attend religious services weekly said science and religion are often in conflict, less than the 54 percent who attend monthly or yearly, and far less than the 73 percent who seldom or never attend.

“It is the least religiously observant Americans who are most likely to perceive conflict between science and religion,” stated lead author Cary Funk in today's report.

White evangelicals are especially likely to say that science is compatible with faith: almost half (49%) agree, compared with 38 percent of all US adults. About three in ten (31%) black Protestants (two-thirds of whom identify as evangelical according to past Pew research), also said science and religion are mostly compatible.

But while almost 60 percent of Americans think science and religion often conflict, only 30 percent think science conflicts with their own religious beliefs, down from 36 percent in 2009. The drop was driven by the religiously affiliated, which fell from 41 percent to 34 percent; the religiously unaffiliated, or so-called “nones,” stayed constant at 16 percent.

“People’s sense that there generally is a conflict between religion and science seems to have less to do with their own religious beliefs than it does with their perceptions of other people’s beliefs,” Pew stated.

Evangelicals experience more personal conflict than the general public: 4 in 10 said their own beliefs sometimes conflicted with science. But even that number has decreased from 52 percent in 2009.

The biggest area of contention that respondents mentioned: creation and evolution. More than a third (36%) said religion collided with science over issues of creation, evolution, and Darwin. About a quarter (24%) said there were broad differences over the belief in God, existence of miracles, and view of whether man is actually “in charge.”

Only about 1 in 10 (11%) said abortion is an area of conflict, while another 7 percent thought science conflicted with religion in specific medical practices.

Indeed, religious persuasion affected just a few areas of science that Pew asked about. While those with a religious affiliation don’t think the world’s growing population is a problem, and while 6 in 10 of those who regularly attend worship services say genetic modification of babies is “taking medical advances too far,” religion didn’t affect opinions on other scientific topics including:

  • Whether to allow access to experimental drug and medical treatments before they have been fully tested.
  • The safety of genetically modified foods.
  • Climate change.
  • Space exploration.
  • The long-term payoffs from government investment in science.

“Our analysis points to only a handful of areas where people’s religious beliefs and practices have a strong connection to their views about science topics and a surprising number of topics where religious differences do not play a central role in explaining their beliefs,” Funk said. “What is most striking is the multiple influences on people’s views.”

People’s opinions are shaped by generational divides, gender, educational attainment, and differences in knowledge about science, she said.

Evangelicals were more likely than the general public to say that humans have not evolved due to natural processes, and that the growing world population will not be a major problem. They were also somewhat likely to favor allowing more offshore drilling and oppose stricter power plant emission limits. They somewhat favor allowing parents to decide what to do about childhood vaccines.

Should religion play a larger role in public opinion on scientific issues? Most evangelicals (69%) and black Protestants (66%) said churches should be guiding views about scientific issues, while the general public is evenly split (50% in favor, 46% opposed) on whether churches should address science from the pulpit.

The latest GSS survey also examined evangelical views on science. The results were mixed.

  • One-third (34%) of evangelicals had taken any college-level science course (slightly below the national average of 41%).
  • More than half (55%) agreed that science makes our way of life change “too fast.” Most (80%) also said science and technology make our lives better.
  • More than two-thirds (69%) said the universe did not begin with a huge explosion (such as the Big Bang), and three-quarters (76%) said human beings did not “develop from earlier species of animals.”
  • Overall, about half of Americans (53%) said science is changing our way of life too fast; 82 percent said science is making our lives better. Half said the universe began with an explosion and that humans evolved from animals (53%).

CT’s past reporting on the relationship between science and faith includes extensive coverage of human origins, noting how most Americans—Christian and otherwise—do not fall neatly into creationist or evolutionist camps, how theologians view the debate, and how debates help (or hurt) the discussion.

[Image courtesy of Steve Rainwater – Flickr]

Ideas

David Was a Rapist, Abraham Was a Sex Trafficker

What we miss when we downgrade Old Testament abuse stories to sexual peccadilloes.

Christianity Today October 22, 2015

My family and I were driving to the movie theater recently and Game of Thrones came up in our conversation. Having never read the book or seen the HBO show, but figuring reviews and trailers gave me all I needed to know, I pontificated, “Game of Thrones is popular only because it’s about sex and violence.” To which my son Noah responded, “Sex and violence—sounds like your books, Dad.”

The reason I write about sex and violence is that the Bible—especially the Old Testament, where I spend most of my time—talks about sex and violence. A lot. It includes stories of fornicators, adulterers, prostitutes, polygamists, ethnic cleansing, fratricide, infanticide, and other forms of cruel activity.

But the Old Testament is also full of sexual violence. We read of rapists, pimps, and other perpetrators of sexual exploitation. The Bible, then, is not that different from Game of Thrones—or better yet, the news. Every day we seem to hear about sexual assaults on college campuses, in the military, and even in churches. Sadly, many of us are no longer shocked when we hear such horrific news.

This reality makes studying sexual violence in Scripture all the more pressing. Paul said all of Scripture—including what we might consider the R-rated stories of the Old Testament—is God-breathed and can train us in righteousness (2 Tim. 3:16–17). It’s not that we skip over such stories, but that we tend to use euphemisms when telling them. We don’t pay close attention to the details, and as a result miss what the biblical authors intended to communicate. Stories not just of prostitutes, adulterers, and fornicators, but also of sexual predators and human traffickers, teach us profound lessons about God and his grace. He came to redeem all people, even those who are sexually violent, as the genealogy of Jesus shows.

Abraham: The Pimping Patriarch

The first story we tend to euphemize is that of Father Abraham. Abraham—the second man mentioned in Matthew’s account of Jesus’ family history—gets off to a great start by obeying God’s call to leave his homeland. But not all was well with the patriarch. We give him due honor for his astounding faith. And sure, we recognize he slept with his wife’s female servant. But when describing how he trafficked his wife, we soften the details.

Shortly after arriving in Canaan, he leaves for Egypt to avoid a famine. Because of Sarah’s beauty—at age 65—he orders her to tell the Egyptians that she is his sister and not his wife. That way no one will kill him in order to marry her (Gen. 12:12–13). Since Abraham and Sarah were half-siblings, the message was half true. But since their prime relationship was that of husband and wife, it was half false.

Upon arrival, the Egyptians praise Sarah for her good looks, just as Abraham had predicted, and Pharaoh takes her into his harem. To thank Abraham for sharing his “sister,” the ruler rewarded him richly with animals and male and female servants. While the text is somewhat vague, the language that Pharaoh “took her” suggests sexual engagement.

God called Abraham to be a blessing to all families of the earth, including his own. But he does the opposite here. He was more concerned about his own safety than his wife’s wellbeing and dignity. (And Abraham repeats this cowardly, selfish act in Genesis 20.) Sarah must have felt betrayed, and Pharaoh suffered because of Abraham’s deception: God sent plagues to punish Pharaoh for taking Sarah as his wife (Gen. 12:17). The only one “blessed” in this scenario is Abraham. He essentially trafficked his wife and profited richly, and it didn’t take long for sexual exploitation to creep up again in his family.

Tamar: The Pious Prostitute

Abraham’s great-grandson Judah had three sons. The oldest son, Er, married a Canaanite woman named Tamar, but he was wicked in God’s eyes, so God killed him (Gen. 38:7). Judah then told his second son, Onan, to “go into” Tamar in order to perpetuate Er’s line. Levirate marriage—in which the oldest brother of a deceased man is obliged to marry his brother’s widow—troubles many of us today, but it was common for the ancients and was later codified for God’s people (see Deut. 25:5–6).

Onan did go into her, but whenever he slept with her, he “spilled his semen on the ground” so she wouldn’t get pregnant (Gen. 38:9). The reason? Onan knew the offspring would not be his, but his older brother’s. That meant Onan would not get the firstborn’s inheritance. Onan’s behavior—sexually exploiting Tamar while depriving her of the dignity of motherhood—was wicked in God’s eyes, so God killed him, too.

Noticing a pattern with his sons, Judah decides not to give Tamar to his third son, Shelah. Judah tells her to live as a widow in her father’s household. So when Tamar realizes Judah is doing nothing to continue Er’s line, she schemes a creative plan. Shortly after Judah becomes a widower, Tamar dresses up like a prostitute and sits along a road on which she knows Judah will soon travel. Judah sees her and assumes she’s a prostitute, not his sneaky daughter-in-law, so he approaches her and promises to pay the standard fare (a goat), which he would send later. She agrees, but only if he gives her some collateral now. He hands over the ancient equivalent of his wallet—a signet, cord, and staff—and he “goes into” her. She finally conceives, and Er’s line survives.

However, when Judah discovers that Tamar is pregnant—not knowing that he is the father—he orders for her to be killed. Since Tamar is pregnant with twins, his command will involve the execution of not only his daughter-in-law, but also his own children. It looks bad for Tamar, until she sends a message with Judah’s possessions, saying, “I am pregnant by the man who owns these” (Gen. 38:25). Judah then exclaims that his prostituting daughter-in-law is more righteous than he.

Judah was a deceptive, sexually immoral, and hypocritically judgmental father-in-law. But after this episode, he is a changed man. Later, he offers himself as a slave in place of his youngest brother, Benjamin, to the man in charge of the grain in Egypt—his brother Joseph—whom he had sold to slave traders 22 years earlier (Gen. 44:33). Unlike Judah, Tamar was simply attempting to do what was right—albeit, she did so imperfectly. God killed Er and Onan for their wickedness, but protected and blessed Tamar.

David: The Raping Monarch

The Old Testament includes several rape stories, including the gang rape of the Levite’s concubine (Judges 19) and the rape of Tamar—who was probably named in honor of Judah’s daughter-in-law—by her half-brother Amnon, the oldest son of King David (2 Sam. 13). But perhaps the most notable is one that most people don’t associate with rape: David and Bathsheba.

The story is familiar. David is at home in Jerusalem when he should have been off at war with his men and the army of Israel. Walking around on his roof one evening, David notices an attractive woman, Bathsheba, bathing. He summons her, they have sex, and she conceives. When David’s plans to cover up the scandal fail, he has her husband, Uriah, killed in battle.

David messed up—big time. But we soften the story by reducing the affair to consensual adultery. Some say Bathsheba must have known David was watching her, so she could have resisted him. In the 1951 film David and Bathsheba, Bathsheba wants David to be enticed.

But why blame her? She could have been fully clothed and using just a bowl. The text doesn’t say she was naked. And the text doesn’t say she knew she was being watched. Finally, women generally didn’t say no to men—not in ancient societies like theirs. And subjects certainly didn’t say no to kings. While the first half of the story is ambiguous about the extent of her guilt, the second half is pretty clear about who is to blame.

The text and the characters point the finger at David. God blames David. “The thing David had done displeased the Lord” (2 Sam. 11:27). The text doesn’t say the thing “they” or “David and Bathsheba” did. Just David.

The prophet Nathan blames David. Nathan tells a story about a rich man who stole and slaughtered his poor neighbor’s ewe lamb in order to feed a hungry guest (2 Sam. 12:1–4). Blaming Bathsheba, even in part, would be like blaming the ewe for getting eaten.

David blames David. At the end of Nathan’s story, David says the man—who represents him in the parable—deserves to die (2 Sam. 12:5). Based on the huge power differential between the king and his subject, it’s more accurate to call this power rape rather than adultery. Bathsheba couldn’t say no. She didn’t even have a choice.

Coming Clean

Sexual violence was rampant in the ancient world, as it is today. And the biblical authors didn’t ignore stories of sexual violence or euphemize the details. Rather, they narrated the stories of sexual violence and exploitation in depth—so much so that in Tamar’s case, readers wonder, What’s this long interruption about Tamar doing in the middle of the Joseph story? And while the New Testament praises the good deeds of men like Abraham and David, it doesn’t sweep their sin under the rug.

Ancient genealogies often boasted impressive fathers, ignored forgotten mothers, and omitted anything embarrassing. But Jesus’ genealogy in Matthew deviates from the typical formula. It includes four women, which would have been considered weird. But the weirdness gets taken to astronomical levels as we examine who these women were. The first woman mentioned isn’t Eve, Sarah, or Mary, but the pious prostitute Tamar. The second woman, Rahab, is another prostitute. The third is a widow, Ruth—whose act of uncovering Boaz’s feet was gutsy and unconventional, to say the least. And the fourth woman is referred to simply as “the wife of Uriah”—the power rape victim Bathsheba.

Many pastors and authors like to single out the women in Jesus’ genealogy, all of whom appear to be Gentiles. But we don’t talk about Abraham and David—who were perpetrators, not victims, of sexual sin. When it comes to discussing sex scandals, we apparently feel more comfortable talking about women than men. And we’re skeptical—sometimes even condemnatory—of the victim.

The Old Testament, however, gave the victim the benefit of the doubt. Deuteronomy 22:25–27, for instance, outlines what should happen if an engaged women is raped in a rural setting. It’s straightforward: If a woman is raped in the countryside, the man deserves to be killed. And the woman’s testimony is good enough to convict the perpetrator. Unlike our legal system, the Mosaic Law assumes the woman’s innocence. The situation isn’t exacerbated by an unjust legal system that exonerates perpetrators.

God instituted laws like this so that his covenant people would protect women. Unfortunately, not every woman is protected, as is evident in our world day to day. Men in power—including some who have faith in God—use their position to sexually exploit or abuse powerless women. Abraham chose to profit by pimping his wife. Judah and his son Onan exploited Tamar; Judah even planned to kill her. And David leveraged his political authority to have what seems like a one-night stand with Bathsheba—even though he already had plenty of wives to satisfy him.

God used his power to intervene on behalf of these powerless women. He sent plagues to seize Pharaoh’s attention, which led to Sarah’s deliverance. He killed Onan and used Tamar to oppose Judah. And he sent Nathan to confront David for taking his neighbor’s “ewe lamb.”

God protected these women from further exploitation, but why didn’t he get involved earlier? Why doesn’t he protect women today who are raped on college campuses, at churches, or at home by their male relatives? I don’t know. As we see in Scripture, divine intervention doesn’t always come. God protected Lot’s daughters from the rapists of Sodom (Gen. 19:1–29), but he didn’t protect Lot from his daughters (Gen. 19:30–38) or the Levite’s concubine from the rapists of Gibeah (Judges 19).

It will always be a mystery to us why God chooses to protect a victim in one situation but not in another. But we do know that God expects his people to act on his behalf whenever we can. One way we can do that is by supporting organizations like International Justice Mission that rescue and protect trafficking victims. Churches can partner with local organizations to fight against sexual abuse. And we need to give victims the benefit of the doubt. They need our love and support.

Discipline or Forgive?

Given the severe consequences of egregious sexual sins like rape, how is it that David got off the hook? He not only survived—remember the Mosaic Law required rapists to be killed—but also remained on the throne. Politicians and pastors today would surely lose their positions for such misconduct.

The short answer is that David repented. After Nathan’s parable, David confessed, “I have sinned” (2 Sam. 12:13). He later wrote a psalm of repentance in which he appealed to God’s grace:

Have mercy on me, O God, according to your unfailing love;
according to your great compassion blot out my transgressions. (Ps. 51:1)

David deserved death, but God granted him grace and forgiveness.

But how do we reconcile this with other instances in the Old Testament where a repentant sinner is still put to death? Think of Achan, who was killed even after acknowledging that he had taken booty from the city of Ai, something God specifically forbade (Josh. 7). Perhaps one reason Achan was not spared was that his crime resulted in the loss of more lives (36 Israelite soldiers) than David’s cover-up scheme, which cost the life of Uriah and only a few of his fellow soldiers. Perhaps it was also because David was a man after God’s own heart, who repeatedly risked his life to defend God, God’s glory, and God’s people (1 Sam. 17; 23; 24; 26). However, the text doesn’t clearly explain why God chooses to mete out capital punishment in some instances (Achan; Uzzah in 2 Samuel 6; the stick-gatherer on the Sabbath in Numbers 15:32–36; Ananias and Sapphira in Acts 5:1–11) and to show mercy in others (David; Cain in Genesis 4; the woman caught in adultery in John 8).

Ultimately, we can’t say definitively why God chose not to kill David. The fact that David was spared does not mean, however, that David’s sin had no ramifications. It certainly did. Bloodshed, fratricide, and rebellion marked the later years of his reign (2 Sam. 13–1 Kings 2). Two of his sons, Amnon and Absalom, were also rapists—and both of them were killed, though the text doesn’t explicitly state that God did the killing. But God had told David through the prophet Nathan that judgment would fall upon his house (2 Sam. 12:10). This announcement got David’s attention and likely prevented him from repeating these sins of rape and murder.

The consequences for sexual violence are severe indeed, but God’s mercy toward repentant sinners is even greater. When we talk about sexual violence and help victims, we need to remember that God’s grace is far more powerful that human sin—as egregious and damaging as it can be. Scripture teaches that when humans behave badly, God behaves graciously. He not only forgives repentant sinners, but also gives aid, strength, and healing to victims of abuse. Jesus, the offspring of both victims and perpetrators of sexual abuse, came to redeem not only their lives but ours as well.

The gospel tells us that no one is beyond the reach of God’s redemption. To be sure, the sin of perpetrators of sexual violence needs to be taken seriously. We cannot ignore sexual violence when it arises in our communities. We should acknowledge these tragedies for what they are, and address them appropriately. If a member of a church confesses a crime like rape, for instance, it will need to be reported to the police immediately. But we also need to proclaim to them the message of God’s forgiveness, knowing that God calls us to extend his grace to people taking big risks in confessing their sin. And we are wise to realize that even severe consequences of sin are opportunities to experience God’s grace and redemption (Heb. 12:7–11). God disciplines his children and uses human judgment as a part of his care for them.

Scripture teaches us that God works in and through messed up people—even ones with some of the worst sexual baggage we can imagine. Scripture doesn’t avoid talking about sexual violence. Nor does it use euphemisms to soften the severity of sexual abuse. It presents reality as it is. Sin has tragic consequences. But God works in and through consequences to work out redemption.

David T. Lamb is associate professor of Old Testament at Biblical Theological Seminary in Philadelphia and author most recently of Prostitutes and Polygamists: A Look at Love, Old Testament Style (Zondervan).

Church Life

Are Smartphones Making Christianity Too Convenient?

When there’s an app for everything, practicing my faith doesn’t feel like a sacrifice.

Her.meneutics October 22, 2015
Esther Vargas / Flickr

Jesus is taking up too much space on my phone.

I already had a Bible app, an Instagram feed full of artsy shots of my morning devotions, and a few worship music playlists when the Proverbs 31 women’s ministry launched an app with a daily morning devotional. I downloaded it, and encouraged my Bible study and freshman mentees to do the same. A few days later, my university introduced an app for our Wednesday night services. My storage is plummeting enough that I considered deleting my email and weather apps to keep up with the onslaught of holier options.

There’s a reason “there’s an app for that” took off among the church as well as the culture at large. Through these icons on our phones, we can access helpful resources easily, quickly, and mostly for free. I downloaded Proverbs 31’s “First Five” because I knew and loved the ministry that created it, and I struggled to find ways to support the women in my Bible study that had difficulty maintaining a daily quiet time.

But with each new app to download, I began to wonder about the downside of the convenience demanded in almost every area of our lives. Innovation has come through again and again on its promise to make our lives more efficient. But with our high-tech expectations, has convenience become an idol?

On our smart phones, our devotional activity evolves just like the way we order food or stream videos. It’s quick—carefully timed and curated for us. Audio features may even read a Scripture passage to you. You don’t have to leave your bed, open a Bible, or spend more than five minutes to check your daily devotions off your to-do list (which is probably also on your phone).

We see the church pushing for convenience in other areas: online giving, church-based social networks, sermon podcasts, streaming services, and more. There are clear perks to these methods, including the ability to reach people across the globe. And perhaps the efficiency of these methods frees up Christians to go deeper into Bible study and evangelism. But I worry that our motivation at times is not ministry or mission, but convenience itself. Are we actually trying to make Christianity as painless as possible?

Jesus told large crowds of people: This is going to be hard. In Luke 14, he warned his followers to “count the cost” of being a disciple. They had to decide for themselves if it was worth it, because it cost something. We can’t expect his truth to impact our lives if we try and minimize our time and investment in discipleship. When people asked Jesus what they needed to do to follow him, he pointed them to the cross. He told them to give away everything they have, embrace homelessness, hate their family, and give up their very life. (For comparison: We now need an alarm to remind us to read a ready-made Bible commentary for what might be the only five minutes we devote to God all day.)

Our lives will obviously look different than the 12 men who followed Christ, but we can at least strive for the right motivations. Stewarding our time well, and using it to God’s glory, requires us to make choices based on convenience or efficiency. It’s not wrong to choose the easier or quicker option. But just like dry shampoo and mini toothbrushes, there are “convenient” options that pale in comparison to the real thing. These aren’t meant to be full-time replacements. In the same way, we can use technology and convenience in addition to the day-to-day work we do to follow God and his commands.

For me, scrolling through an online devotion pales in comparison to pulling out a Bible, feeling the weight of it in my hands, turning the pages, scribbling thoughts in the margins, and watching it fill up with my own notes, church bulletins stuffed between pages. Watching an online church service can’t compare with reaching out and shaking hands, hearing voices both melodious and discordant saturate the room, and sacrificing time for the fellowship of others.

And yet there are obvious benefits to utilizing technological gains for advancing the Kingdom. It’s the story of all creation: God creates good things, sin distorts them, but there is always hope for redemption. Instead of letting technology shape the way we think about the world, we should let the way we think about the world shape the way we use technology.

Using apps aimed at streamlining our lives could cause us to view our time with God as yet another intrusion. Or we can deliberately resist that mindset, and realize our time with the Lord and Savior is different, even when on our screens. We can linger and savor our devotions, rejecting the allure of efficiency for the sake of communion with God… and with each other. For the women in my Bible study, my hope is that these apps can equip us to better serve each other and build our real-world relationships, rather than lead us to believe we can grow in Christ on our own, just us and our iPhone screens.

Kaitlyn Schiess is a senior at Liberty University. She is planning on attending seminary after graduation. Kaitlyn serves as spiritual life director for the Liberty Debate Team, works for the social media team in Liberty’s Marketing Department, and regularly blogs at thatkindoflegacy.wordpress.com.

[Image source]

Pastors

The Spirituality of Slowing Down and Shutting Up

How do you connect with God in a society of perpetual noise and busyness?

Leadership Journal October 21, 2015

In this series: Making Time for Sabbath

The word “addict” may conjure images of a disheveled drug-user. But relatively few people are addicted to drugs. However, judging by the way we drive, the way we zone out on mobile devices (even when surrounded by friends), and the way we distract ourselves with multiple forms of media, it seems many of us are in the addictive grip of noise and hurry.

An addiction’s power resides in the lies it tells us.

On the surface certain stimuli look pleasurable. And they do in fact provide a moment of pleasure or numbness or distraction. But addictive powers are dehumanizing and soul-destroying. Addicts lose the ability to self-regulate and eventually the stimulus gains mastery over their lives. Everything in an addict’s life is negatively altered. Relationships with family, friends, God—they all suffer.

Everyone would agree that alcoholism and compulsive gambling are destructive. But what about noise and hurry? Most of assume noise and hurry to be just a part of life. But are they really benign, unavoidable realities? Or do they have the same life-destroying, idolatrous power as drugs and alcohol? I believe they do. And just like other addictions, they damage our relationships, especially our relationship with God.

The spiritual practices of being silent and slowing down are the way out of this trap. They have the potential to restore a rich and intimate relationship with God.

The right kind of rest

The deepest contentment is not derived from external excitement, but through inward rest. Yet we’re constantly told to “rest” by cultivating a heightened state of excitement. But constant audio and visual input pushes God to the margins. Over-stimulation shakes our lives like an Etch-A-Sketch, making God disappear.

Silence allows us to deal with our inner chaos. It provides the conditions for repentance, conversion, and growth.

On the other hand, silence and slowing down create space for God. Silence removes the fear-based distractions we compulsively turn to. Silence allows us to deal with our inner chaos. It provides the conditions for repentance, conversion, and growth.

Removing ourselves from addicted lives of connection, production, and consumption is unnerving—and that is the surest sign we need it! You might say, “I would die if I eliminated noise and hurry from my life!” True—you would die. You would die to a life marked by the deception of distraction. But in turn, as diversions disappear, you would find God again and human life as God intended it to be.

In silence and slowing down we learn that we will survive, indeed thrive, as we cease activity. We gain the trust to take a break from our work and stop distracting ourselves through entertainment. Silence is perhaps the best nourishment for a deep and dynamic relationship with God.

Silencing the church

Our church is located in Orange County, a place hardly known for silence and solitude. Yet together we are employing the spiritual practices of quietness, contemplation, and silence. And it’s working. We’re seeing deliverance from addictive powers and witnessing people transformed into the likeness of Christ. The momentum is building and more people are seeing the power and beauty of shutting up and experiencing God.

But, yes, we get some resistance. We’ve learned the hard way that silence is not intuitive. People have said, “You are asking us to slow down too fast.” We have discovered that what we think of as the gift of silence can feel to others like an unanticipated disturbance of the soul. An inner world that has not been examined for a long while can be a scary place to go. We’ve found we need to ease people into silence. We need to walk with them as they cultivate these practices so they do not feel alone. We’ve learned to gently urge worshippers to take stock of their inner lives and train them to sense God’s presence and love.

This is not some newfangled ministry technique. Ultimately cultivating silence and slowing down is simply about nurturing our souls and connecting with God. Now that’s something to talk about.

Todd Hunter is the founding pastor of Holy Trinity Anglican in Costa Mesa, California.

News

Treasures on Earth: How Religion Is Redistributing the World’s Wealth

What economic and demographic data suggest about 2050.

The US and India are projected to be among the world's 5 top economies in 2050.

The US and India are projected to be among the world's 5 top economies in 2050.

Christianity Today October 21, 2015
Wikipedia Commons

A deep dive into economic and demographic data suggests that not only is the world becoming dramatically more religious, but the resulting religious diversity is redistributing wealth like never before.

Today, the bulk of the world’s wealth resides in majority-Christian countries. But by 2050, the five leading economies are projected to be “one of the most religiously diverse groupings in recent memory,” say researchers Brian Grim and Phillip Connor at the Religious Freedom and Business Foundation (RFBF).

The foundation’s latest report, which compares the “best available demographic and economic data,” predicts that, come 2050, only one of the top five economies—the United States—will be a majority-Christian nation. “The other mega economies in 2050 are projected to include a country with a Hindu majority (India), a Muslim majority (Indonesia), and two with exceptionally high levels of religious diversity (China and Japan).”

Additionally, while religious “nones” continue to grow in raw numbers, their share of the global population actually peaked in the 1970s. “Religious populations are projected to outgrow religiously unaffiliated populations worldwide by a factor of 23 between 2010 and 2050,” states the report. “This will increase religious diversity and alter the distribution of wealth.”

While global GDP is expected to increase by 216 percent from 2010 to 2050, growth among Christian populations is only expected to increase by 117 percent. Christians make up 31 percent of the world’s population, according to the most recent data available, and are expected to maintain this percentage by 2050. (Currently, there are 2.2 billion Christians in the world, a number which is expected to hit 2.9 million by 2050.)

One reason the growth of majority-Christian nations isn’t expected to shoot up: most already have well-developed economies, said Grim.

They could grow more quickly if “they began at a lower starting point,” Grim told CT. “Additionally, much of the Christian growth in the next decades will be in Africa, from primarily demographic growth, though also some conversion. [By 2050], about half of Christians will live in sub-Saharan Africa. While those economies are beginning at a lower point, they aren’t expected by economic forecasters to grow as fast as the economies in Asia.”

The study coupled religious demographic data from the Pew Research Center with GDP data from the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), and weighted them by income differentials to find the projected GDP of each religious group.

The religious population with the highest anticipated GDP growth by 2050 (615%) will be Hindu, the report said. Mostly concentrated in India, the population is expected to increase by 400 million. The Hindu share of the world’s population is expected to stay nearly constant (13% to 15%) over the next 35 years.

The GDP of the Muslim population is predicted to increase by 445 percent by 2050. At the same time, the number of Muslims is expected to grow from about 23 percent of the world’s population to nearly 30 percent.

Religiously unaffiliated economic growth is predicted at 245 percent, much of it occurring in the Asia-Pacific region, specifically China. Today, this population makes up 16 percent of the world’s population, but is expected to fall to 13 percent by 2050.

Other than Christians, Jews are the only religious group highlighted by the report with growth lower (93%) than the expected global GDP increase. Jews make up 0.2 percent of the world’s population and are expected to compose the same percentage of the world’s population in 2050.

A growing economy does not necessarily mean the religion that is most prevalent in that country will grow, says Grim.

“There is no clear relationship between the two,” he said. ”Where you have advanced economies, there has been a trend towards less religious affiliation, especially in Western Europe…. People have more freedom to opt in or opt out [of religion]."

At the same time, the economic growth in China has been accompanied by a surge in religious practice, ranging from folk religion to Christianity to Confucianism, he said.

As economies develop, people transition from labor intensive agricultural and production jobs into more service positions, says Grim. Male and female education rates increase, which tends to delay marriages and ultimately lower birth rates.

With the exception of Buddhism, which has already largely plateaued because of the birth rates in China, the growth rates of all faith groups are slowing, said Grim. “Even the expected rapid growth of the Muslim population is still a slowing trend.”

Previous CT economic coverage examines a new model of Christian stewardship that’s scalable, global, and can compete with China; how countries which had a significant missionary presence in the past are on average more economically developed today; and why the government is the best institution to change the poor’s standard of living—though Christians reduce poverty too. CT also covered the 10 most popular strategies for helping the poor.

Ideas

Not Just Jobs, Not Just Bibles: The Future of Fighting Extreme Poverty

Contributor

After a generation of massive global progress, aid and mission efforts are pointing the same direction.

Aid distribution in Somalia refugee camp.

Aid distribution in Somalia refugee camp.

Christianity Today October 21, 2015
IHH Humanitarian Relief Foundation

For the last hundred years, evangelicals have debated the false dichotomy of proclaiming the good news versus performing good deeds.

But in today’s world it just might be that the most effective way to bring the good news to the most difficult-to-reach nations is to weld the two together—in the very same way Jesus did. In fact, the physical and spiritual needs in our world not only make this approach effective but also essential.

I believe this was the essence and example of Jesus’ life. “Go back and report,” he said, “that the blind receive sight, the lame walk, those who have leprosy are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the good news is proclaimed to the poor.” (Matt. 11:5)

In the year before he died, missiologist Ralph Winter said this integration of gospel proclamation and social action was the most important trend in global mission. “We need both to save people from sin and from malaria,” he said. “Evangelism. . . . becomes weak and lacks credibility if it does not generate committed believers who will tackle the world’s problems.”

The Great Commission and the Great Commandment are calling us out of our comfort zones and into the world’s brokenness. Jesus waits for us there.

We need this holistic approach to missions, perhaps now more than ever. The major trends in both global poverty and mission are pointing us to the same places—regions where the church is least established and where poverty and human suffering is most acute. The Great Commission compels us to go to those countries in our world where people have not heard the gospel. And the Great Commandment tells us to love our neighbors. Today, those twin commands send us to the same contexts.

Jesus is calling us into the broken places, the bleeding edges of our world. He has always called us to follow him into the world’s brokenness and pain, acting as his ambassadors and as healers, reconcilers and redeemers.

Poverty’s Retreat

To understand why the world’s poverty and the spread of the gospel now compel us to go to these most challenging places, we need to look at the progress the world has made. Since 1990:

  • Two billion people have gained access to clean water;
  • 156 million people are no longer hungry;
  • Malaria infection rates are down by a third in Africa, helping to prevent a million deaths;
  • Tuberculosis deaths have fallen by 45 percent;
  • Maternal mortality rates have fallen by half.

These are incredible gains. The proportion of people living in extreme poverty is now half of what it was 25 years ago. And the new Sustainable Development Goals have set a target of eliminating extreme poverty by 2030.

But this progress is leaving many people behind. In about 50 countries—characterized by conflict, natural disasters, poor governance, and other chronic issues—there has been no progress defeating poverty. These marginal places—Somalia, Bangladesh, South Sudan, or Syria—will soon represent more than 50 percent of the world’s poor, even though they have only 20 percent of the world’s population. Already poverty in these fragile countries is deeper and more entrenched than elsewhere. They are the home countries to many of the world’s 50 million refugees. These countries are also home to:

  • 77 percent of the world’s school-age children who are not in school;
  • 70 percent of the world’s infant deaths;
  • 65 percent of the world’s people without access to safe water;
  • 60 percent of the world’s undernourished people.

These are also countries that have been resistant to the gospel. Of the top ten fragile states, seven have non-Christian majorities. Across the 1.4 billion people living in fragile states, 69 percent of them are non-Christian. Of the world’s 1.6 billion Muslims, half live in fragile states.

Winter says that we need to make priorities as we seek to transform our world, and we should go first where the darkness is deepest—where the gospel is absent and the human need the greatest.

The World’s Immune System

Pope Francis has likened the church to a field hospital for the world’s sick and wounded. I like Pope Francis, but I prefer to think of churches as white blood cells. We don’t sit back behind the front lines. Instead, like white blood cells, we scour the earth looking for the wounds and infections that threaten. Then we rush to the hurting places to heal and mend.

As I spoke to one pastor about the poverty retreating to fragile states, he told me it sounded like a job for US Secretary of State John Kerry, not for a pastor. But when I told him that’s where the gospel is least established and also where the “least of these” lived, he said, “Count me and my church in!”

Unfortunately, too many of us have the same initial response as my pastor friend. It’s someone else’s job. The issues in fragile states are complex. They often involve fractious politics and religious tensions. They involve civil war and human rights abuses in places where it’s hard to tell the “good guys” from the “bad guys.” They are in places like Pakistan or Somalia where Americans may not be welcomed. They involve work in hard places like the Central African Republic and South Sudan, where civil wars have led to atrocities and horror.

The current conflicts in the Middle East are a case in point. Warring factions have beheaded Christians, broken international laws, violated human rights, and ruined cities. The violence has affected 12 million people, causing 4 million to flee Syria and Iraq as refugees. A quarter of a million people have died. The conflict is man-made, mind-numbing and largely Muslim, and our understanding of it is skewed by a media that focuses on the politics, not on the people.

As a result, for four years, most Americans turned away from the carnage, showing little compassion. And then a little boy washed up on a beach.

Everything changed when the photo of Aylan Kurdi, the three-year-old boy who drowned trying to escape to Europe, hit the international newswires. Suddenly everyone cared about Syria. And while it hasn’t ended the war, all that attention is making a difference. Children will be able to sleep in shelters and under blankets. Mothers will have enough food to cook for their families. Fathers will be able to find jobs because the organizations trying to make a difference have the resources to do so. In other words, good Samaritans responded.

What if while Christians are beheaded in the Middle East, American churches rushed to the assistance of Muslims fleeing Syria and Iraq? What if our churches partnered with churches in Lebanon struggling to care for Syrian refugees? What if we showed America and the world the power of the gospel to transform lives—physically and spiritually?

The church has always faced defining moments as the world changed around it. I believe we are at such a defining moment. It is my dream that the church would step up and respond with the love of Christ to the world’s greatest needs. God so loved the world that he died for children like Aylan Kurdi, and I believe his heart is broken when any child suffers and dies needlessly.

If we are to love this same world as God does, we will have to see it through his eyes. We will have to put aside our many biases and look far beyond our churches and local communities. The Great Commission and the Great Commandment are calling us out of our comfort zones and into the world’s brokenness. Jesus waits for us there.

Richard Stearns is president of World Vision US and author of The Hole in Our Gospel and Unfinished.

[Image credit]

Apple PodcastsDown ArrowDown ArrowDown Arrowarrow_left_altLeft ArrowLeft ArrowRight ArrowRight ArrowRight Arrowarrow_up_altUp ArrowUp ArrowAvailable at Amazoncaret-downCloseCloseEmailEmailExpandExpandExternalExternalFacebookfacebook-squareGiftGiftGooglegoogleGoogle KeephamburgerInstagraminstagram-squareLinkLinklinkedin-squareListenListenListenChristianity TodayCT Creative Studio Logologo_orgMegaphoneMenuMenupausePinterestPlayPlayPocketPodcastRSSRSSSaveSaveSaveSearchSearchsearchSpotifyStitcherTelegramTable of ContentsTable of Contentstwitter-squareWhatsAppXYouTubeYouTube