The German pastor/theologian Helmut Thielicke once observed about American Christians: “They have an inadequate theology of suffering.”

Who could disagree? How could we expect a theology of suffering to emerge from a society that has survived two centuries without a foreign invasion, solves all meteorological discomfort with “climate control,” and prescribes a pill for every twinge of pain?

At least part of our difficulty may come from how we read the Bible. I have found at least five biblical approaches to suffering, and if we focus on one of these approaches exclusively, we risk not only an inadequate, but a heretical, theology of suffering. Because they appear progressively through Scripture, I call these five approaches the Hardship Stages.

Stage 1: A person living right should never suffer. We experience this stage, often dubbed the “prosperity gospel,” almost as a reflex. A 30-foot golf putt rims the cup but does not fall: “You must not be living right!” A Christian leader comes down with cancer: “How could this happen to such a saint?”

We should at least acknowledge that similar sentiments do appear in the Bible, especially in the Book of Proverbs, which implies that right living will earn its reward in this life. And consider the sweeping promise of Psalm 1:3 to the righteous man: “Whatever he does prospers.”

You would have to go back to Exodus and Deuteronomy to understand the source of this theology. In his covenant with the Israelites, God guaranteed prosperity if the people would follow him faithfully. But the Israelites broke the terms of that covenant, and a book like the Psalms reveals the Jews’ anguished adjustment to new realities. Almost a third of the psalms show a “righteous” author struggling with the failure of prosperity theology.

Stage 2: Good people do endure hardships, but they will always find relief. Many of the “hardship psalms” take on an insistent tone of self-defense. The author seems to believe, “If I can just convince God of my righteousness, then God will surely deliver me.”

I have come to see such “self-righteous” psalms (which may grate on the ears of those raised on “Amazing Grace”) as psalms of preparation. They help an entire nation understand that sometimes righteous people do suffer, and sometimes they do not get delivered. In that sense, these psalms are truly messianic: they prepare the way for Jesus, a perfect man who, as Hebrews says, “offered up prayers and petitions with loud cries and tears to the one who could save him from death.” But Jesus was not saved from death.

Hebrews also records a list of faithful persons through the centuries. Some received miraculous deliverance: Isaac, Joseph, Moses, Rahab, Gideon, David. But others were tortured and chained, stoned and sawed in two. This latter group went about in sheepskins and goatskins, destitute, persecuted, and mistreated, wandering in deserts and mountains, and in caves and holes in the ground. The author makes this blunt assessment: “These were all commended for their faith, yet none of them received what had been promised.”

Stage 3: All things work together for good. That famous phrase appears in Romans 8, and is often distorted. Some people think it means “Only good things will happen to those who love God.” Ironically, Paul meant just the opposite. In the remainder of the chapter, he defines what kind of “things” he is talking about: trouble, hardship, persecution, famine, nakedness, danger, the sword. Paul endured all those things, and in the end succumbed to them. He was not “delivered.” Yet, he insists, “in all these things we are more than conquerors”; no amount of hardship can separate us from the love of God.

Paul found a neat way to resolve the contradictions raised by the first two hardship stages. Hardship is part of the human condition, and no one can claim an exemption. But for those who love God, the condition is temporary. One day the “groaning” creation will be liberated, and all hardship will be abolished. We have a timing problem, Paul says. Just wait: God’s miracle of transforming Bad Friday into Easter Sunday will be enlarged to cosmic scale.

Stage 4: Faithful people may be called to suffer. The Book of 1 Peter introduces this new twist on hardship. Far from stage 1, where the righteous expect an immunity to suffering, this theology assumes that those following “in His steps” will, like Christ, suffer unjustly. History bears out Peter’s words. According to tradition, 11 of 12 apostles died martyrs’ deaths, and the spilled blood of such martyrs became the seed for the church’s growth.

Stage 5: Holy indifference. The apostle Paul reached this exalted state, as expressed in such a passage as Philippians 1. Paul can hardly decide whether it is better to die and be with Christ or to stay awhile and continue his ministry. Clearly, prison is desirable: he lists many good results from that hardship. Wealth, poverty, comfort, suffering, acceptance, rejection, even death or life—none of these circumstances mattered much to Paul. Only one thing mattered ultimately: the surpassing goal of exalting Christ. And that goal could be accomplished in any set of circumstances.

It bothers some people, I know, to list a series of biblical “stages” without a tidy formula resolving them into a grand scheme. For those people, I simply recommend contemplating stage 1 in the light of stage 5. Curiously, Paul’s advanced state of holy indifference to pain puts him right back in stage 1. For Paul, a person living right did not suffer—not in any ultimate sense, at least. Rather, suffering offered a way to participate in “the fellowship of Christ’s sufferings.” And God prospered all the events of Paul’s life by using pain, like pleasure, as one of the tools to advance his kingdom.

I have met few people who have attained the lofty state of stage 5, which may confirm Helmut Thielicke’s comment about America. How can a nation so singularly blessed be expected to master such advanced faith? We must turn instead to the Christians in El Salvador, or South Africa, or North Korea, or Iran, for a lesson in the advanced school of suffering. Alas, it seems we devote more time and energy debating the possibilities of stage 1—or at least yearning for those “good old days” when America won all its wars and the stock market soared.

What do charismatics and evangelical social activists have in common? Forty Christian leaders representing both camps met last month in Sierra Madre, California, to find out.

Historically, these groups have represented divergent perspectives on the priorities mandated by the Christian faith. But the paper “Words, Works, and Wonders: The Power and Justice of the Kingdom of God,” which came out of the meeting, affirms that the constituencies share “a commitment to the Bible as our authority and inspiration and to the Holy Spirit as our guide, convictor, and empowerer.” Moreover, the paper notes that some attending the conference came because they are seeking “a deeper experience of the Holy Spirit in their social action ministries,” while others attended because of a “growing conviction that the Holy Spirit … has a heart for the whole world and especially the poor.”

Michael Harper, director of an Anglican charismatic renewal organization in the United Kingdom, and Ronald Sider, executive director of Evangelicals for Social Action, coordinated the conference, at which all six continents were represented.

Sider characterized the meeting as the beginning of a dialogue. He said charismatics and social activists have a lot to learn from each other. “We evangelical social activists can learn to be open to the presence, the guidance, and the power of the Holy Spirit,” he said.

The paper acknowledges that questions remain, including “How do we relate the call to suffer redemptively and the call to attain victory over evil?” The only specific proposal to emerge from the meeting was to continue the dialogue. The planning committee was asked to arrange a second meeting with additional participants for sometime within the next two years.

The Boston Church of Christ, home base for more than 3,000 worshipers, and New England’s fastest-growing congregation, is the focus of a controversy that reaches across the country.

Last year, the Christian Chronicle, a Churches of Christ newspaper published in Oklahoma, labeled the Boston congregation divisive, authoritarian, and “dangerous.” Detractors cite excessive demands on members’ time; isolation of church members from family and most outside friends; heavy pressure to succeed in evangelism; and a one-on-one discipleship program that one Churches of Christ periodical called “a glorified snitch system.”

Supporters point to the Boston congregation’s ethnic integration (77 nationalities are represented); to marriages saved and psychological crises ended; and above all, to the congregation’s commitment to evangelism. Commented church-growth specialist Donald McGavran of Fuller Theological Seminary: “All the branches of the universal church in America could look at this [congregation] and see what they can use.”

The rapid growth of the Boston Church of Christ began in 1979 when evangelist Kip McKean was hired by a suburban congregation with fewer than 100 members. By December 1980, Sunday attendance exceeded 250. Today, more than 3,300 people worship weekly at the Boston Garden, home to the Boston Bruins and Celtics. In addition, more than 1,300 were baptized in 1986 at churches planted by the Boston congregation on five continents since 1982.

The heart of the church’s outreach program is evangelistic Bible studies, more than 300 of which are hosted weekly within a 40-mile radius of Boston. McGavran cites those, as well as the use of house churches and rented worship space instead of a mortgaged building, as keys to the church’s growth.

Points Of Disagreement

The Boston Church of Christ is part of the nondenominational Churches of Christ, one of the groups produced by a nineteenth-century attempt to restore New Testament Christianity to the American church. The Boston church differs from most Churches of Christ congregations, however, in that it is part of a movement known as Multiplying Ministries, developed by Chuck Lucas at the Crossroads Church of Christ in Gainesville, Florida. Many of the more than 13,000 Churches of Christ outside that movement say the Boston church’s methods diverge from Churches of Christ traditions of freedom of conscience and congregational autonomy.

Other controversies focus on theology and methodology. Key among the theological objections is the Boston church’s claim to be virtually the only channel of salvation. While leaders acknowledge that some outside their congregation are saved, they believe baptism is necessary for salvation and teach a narrow definition of what constitutes valid baptism. As a result, the church rebaptizes even people who were baptized in other Churches of Christ.

The primary objection to methodology centers on the authority the congregation holds over its members and the guilt resulting from its heavy demands. Each member is assigned to a discipling partner with whom he or she is expected to have daily contact. Discipling partners provide advice on every aspect of a member’s life, from daily schedules to the duration of kisses on a date. College students are discouraged from going home for the summer unless there is a strong Churches of Christ congregation in that community. And former members report they were urged not to take even four-day trips away from Boston.

Living in “total commitment [to Christ means] you’re always babysitting for the [children of church] leaders, serving the brothers and sisters … pushing for people to go to church or to Bible talks or church functions,” said former member Karen Gray, a senior at Wellesley College. “And then you’re sinning because you didn’t get enough sleep. You’re always guilty.”

World Evangelization

The Boston church’s ambitious world evangelization plan involves planting churches in key foreign cities, with daughter churches expected to plant other congregations. The influence of the Boston Church of Christ already extends to six continents.

Some have questioned whether the Boston church can maintain its momentum. The congregation’s dropout rate has risen dramatically as the number of baptisms has grown. The church claimed a 90 percent retention rate in 1980. But a review of its records from May 1980 to December 1986 shows that 32.5 percent of the members who have not moved away from the area have quit.

“When you get white hot, I don’t know where you go after that,” commented Robert Randolph, a member of the tiny Church of Christ in nearby Brookline, Massachusetts. “After a while, even the faithful begin to notice it’s hype.”

Responds evangelist McKean, of the Boston church: “If places are not growing, I’m 100 percent sure God is not with them.… This is the condemnation some churches feel. This church is growing; they’re not.”

In interviews, former members of the Boston Church of Christ gave a variety of reasons for leaving. “Most of the people who leave do so because they can’t take the pressure any more … and they’re so burned out they don’t want to have anything to do with any other group either,” said Philip Owen, an Indianapolis engineer who was recruited while a student at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

To join the Boston Church of Christ is to find “instant family, instant friends,” said Kecia Henderson, a member of the church for four years. But because church members are strongly encouraged to socialize only with other members and with evangelistic prospects, she said, leaving the church means facing the prospect of leaving your friends behind.

Moreover, because the church teaches that few, if any, outside its number are saved, people who leave the church often believe they have turned their backs on God, said former member Gary Idleburg. “A lot of people end up wallowing in debauchery because they never made the separation in their mind between the church and God.”

By Carlene B. Hill, in Boston.

Christian College Coalition President John Dellenback will step down this year after a decade at the helm of that evangelical higher education association. In addition to his work with the coalition, Dellenback has served in a number of capacities, including four terms as congressman from Oregon, director of the U.S. Peace Corps, and member of the U.S. Secretary of State’s Advisory Committee on South Africa. He was recently elected chairman of the board of World Vision U.S. CHRISTIANITY TODAY asked Dellenback to reflect on his time at the coalition.

What have been some of the most meaningful aspects of your time at the coalition?

The thing that immediately jumps to my mind is the membership. Out of the 77 colleges and universities that are part of this team effort, we have 28 different denominations represented, and we have another 10 or 11 schools that are interdenominational or nondenominational. To me, that says that within the evangelical world we do not have to split off and build walls that separate us from each other. We can get a broad group of widespread representation working together; and when we come together, we deal with what ties us together—Christ—and not the things that could be used to separate us.

What coalition accomplishments are you most pleased with?

Most of the people who teach in Christian colleges got their master’s degrees and doctorates at secular schools. They enter the classroom—where they are using basically secular textbooks—and are told: “Now be sure, when you teach the subject, you include the relevance of Christ.” But no one has trained them for this, and they have very little in the way of literature that helps them do it. So a major thrust for the coalition has been to work with the colleges as they strive to make their faculties, their administrations, and everything else show Christ throughout all areas.

We have done that with meetings where we’ve gathered chaplains, or athletic coaches, or professors, or administrators to share with each other. We’ve had workshops and national conferences where faculty come from their own institutions and meet women and men who are doing similar things on other campuses.

In addition to that, we are publishing a series of supplemental textbooks. The first book out is Psychology Through the Eyes of Faith. We also are working on Biology Through the Eyes of Faith, Literature Through the Eyes of Faith, and Business Through the Eyes of Faith.

What advantages does the Christian college offer students?

These are all liberal arts institutions, and their task is to help young people learn how humanity has come to its present stage. But that’s only part of it. The special calling of the Christian college is to say that Christ is relevant to everything that we do.

The Christian college can show students that faith is like the vertebrae of the skeleton; it doesn’t separate us from the world, but it gives us the strength and the foundation to go out and function wherever we are. I hope our schools can more and more bring forth young people with that kind of faith. Also, I hope they can help students know there are certain values that should characterize their lives.

What kind of values?

If I had to pick three, I would say it should be impossible for a young person to come out of one of our schools without having had the concepts of service, stewardship, and love inculcated. The students are key because the structure of the coalition doesn’t mean anything unless it’s serving the colleges, and the colleges don’t mean anything unless they’re equipping young people.

An estimated 50,000 prolife activists marched on Washington, D.C., last month to mark the fifteenth anniversary of the Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion. It was the fifteenth annual March for Life since the high court’s landmark 1973 decision.

The march began with a rally in front of the White House. There, for the fourth consecutive year, President Reagan addressed the group by way of a telephone hookup. “America was founded on a moral proposition that human life—all human life—is sacred,” the President said. “Are we to forget the entire moral mission of our country through history? Well, my answer is no.”

Reagan urged passage of prolife legislation he has sent to Congress, and he pledged to fight all federal funding of abortion. To that end, he encouraged support of new regulations that would cut off funding of family planning groups that promote and perform abortions.

After the rally, the activists marched to the Supreme Court building, many carrying banners and singing hymns. The march was peaceful, although a Court spokesperson said 35 people were arrested for praying at an illegal place on the Court grounds.

Organizers said marchers came from nearly every state, and March for Life president Nellie Gray said she was “extremely pleased” by this year’s turnout. “It shows that America’s prolife movement is here to stay,” she said. “It has lasted 15 years … and is going to persist until all the preborn children are protected.”

Meanwhile, the prochoice movement is claiming continued public support for abortion. At a press conference two days before the march, the National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL) released a survey that said 88 percent of Americans favor retaining abortion rights in some form, while 10 percent said they opposed abortion under all circumstances.

NARAL executive director Kate Michelman said that while her group is pleased the survey found continued support for abortion, she is concerned about the depth of that support, especially among young women. Only 39 percent of the public favored abortions for “any woman who wants one.” Michelman said she fears the “collective memory” of the pre-Roe v. Wade years “is lost.”

The National Right to Life Committee protested the wording of the survey, which spokesperson Kay James said was “loaded” against the unborn. James pointed out that many prolife activists would be included in the 88 percent figure because they would accept abortion if it would save the life of the mother.

James said the poll underscored many misunderstandings the public holds about abortion. Thirty-six percent did not realize that abortion is currently legal for all nine months of pregnancy, and 62 percent mistakenly believed that abortion is illegal for all minors, James said. “It is patently clear that there is a glaring need for public education on abortion,” she said.

In an age when teenagers are confronting “adult” problems such as broken families, drug and alcohol abuse, suicide, and sexuality, Christian youth workers say traditional ministry tools and training are losing their effectiveness.

“Kids are not the same today as they were 20 years ago,” says Dave Lambert, editor of youth books for Zondervan Publishing House. “The world is changing very rapidly, so much so that—as Alvin Toffler says—change has changed. Although the biblical principles for youth work haven’t changed, the techniques of youth work from even 10 or 15 years ago are not very useful today.”

The recent National Youth Workers Convention in Los Angeles offered its 1,150 participants seminars on standard topics such as retreats, group discussion, drama, and music. But it also offered sessions on homosexuality, broken homes, and suicide—subjects that, even a few years ago, were considered unusual.

Guy Doud, the 1986 National Teacher of the Year and a keynote speaker, says many young people are engaging in activities previously reserved for adults. “Kids are having ‘adult’ experiences in the areas of sex, drugs, and alcohol much earlier than in the past,” he says. “This gives the impression that they are more self-assured and independent. But in my experience, young people today are more immature than young people of 30 to 40 years ago.”

The trend toward “early adulthood” has not been lost on Young Life, a youth ministry that recently expanded to include junior high school students. “The ‘age of accountability’ is going down,” says its president Doug Burleigh. “The kinds of decisions that were being made by college kids 20 years ago are being made by junior high kids today.”

Challenges And Resources

“Temptation felt the same in the 1950s as it feels today,” says Marlene Lefever, manager of curriculum services for the David C. Cook publishing company. “But the questions are more serious [today]. In the fifties, kids asked each other if they were virgins. Today, they wonder if their friends are gay.”

Lambert says Zondervan’s youth book advisory committee has identified three trouble areas for kids. “First is sex, along with the whole question of AIDS,” he says. Society accepts and promotes an increased sexuality, he notes, with movies frequently assuming that if young people “fall in love or even like each other that the next step is going to bed together.”

A second problem area involves “family relationships and the disintegration of the family,” Lambert says. “A survey … done a few years ago … showed that losing their parents was a major fear for half of all teenagers.… You have more divorces, more single-parent and blended families, and in some cases you have parents living with people they’re not married to. This confuses kids.

“Third,” he says, “kids have no—or little—hope for the future. They live in the present because the future is frightening to them. They’re frightened by the economy, international tensions, and everything else, and they feel inadequate, as if they’re unable to deal with the world. For many kids, life is very existential, with no meaning except what they create for themselves.”

Christian thinkers and publishers are rushing to fill the void in materials designed to help youth workers deal with kids’ problems. But often the marketplace will not tolerate books on controversial topics. “Kids need to know about AIDS,” says Lefever, “but we don’t yet see a market among Christian workers for materials on AIDS, AIDS is perceived as someone else’s problem right now.”

Still, publishers are working to produce books to meet current needs, with Zondervan publishing titles on sexuality, family relationships, and teenagers in crisis. David C. Cook offers a curriculum to help parents understand adolescence, and other materials that help kids through problems with self-image.

Wanted: Role Models

New challenges bring additional pressures, and many youth workers are responding by trying to build a deeper sense of community in their groups. According to Doud, it is not materials and books that help young people, but adults who are committed to Christ and to youth. “More than anything, young people need real people to look up to and emulate,” he says. “… Kids need solid role models, and it’s important not to try to be something we’re not.”

In addition, he says, youth workers need to help kids overcome their selfishness. “We have to lose ourselves in the service of others, and kids desperately need to be shown this by Christian leaders.

“Our student council hosted a prom for the senior citizens in our community,” Doud said. “At first the kids thought it was a crazy idea. But then one of our officers, a popular athletic-type guy, told me, ‘This is the most fun I’ve had in school. It feels so good to do something for someone else.’ Kids need to see that in their Christian leaders, because they won’t learn about serving others from our society.”

By Steve Rabey, in Los Angeles

EDUCATION

Christians in Chicago have won the first round in their fight against a school official’s decision to force home-schooled children back into the public school classroom. Following a demonstration in front of the Cook County School District offices, Superintendent Richard J. Martwick announced he was postponing efforts to file suit against parents who taught their children at home.

At issue was a letter from Martwick’s office to parents in Cook County who were teaching their children at home. According to Chuck Busch, who with his wife has been home schooling for six months, the letter told them their children would be considered truant, “and unless we put them back in school within three days, we would be subject to court proceedings.”

Martwick’s threatened legal action puzzled home schoolers and education officials alike, since both the Illinois Supreme Court and the Illinois Board of Education had ruled that home schools legally qualify as private schools. On January 6, Martwick received a letter from the state board of education informing him his position on home schooling was inconsistent with state law.

Jan Arduini, a spokesperson for the Christian Home Educators Coalition, says parents met with district officials but were told that if their children did not begin attending school, they would be considered truant. At that point, parents sought help from the Christian Connection, an activist group that had successfully campaigned against the city’s proposed gay-rights legislation. “They came to us because they had talked to Martwick and couldn’t get anywhere,” says spokesperson Susan Levin.

On January 15, parents staged a demonstration that attracted local media coverage. Later that day, Martwick issued a statement saying he was “putting on hold” his attempts to charge home schoolers with truancy until legislators review the state’s compulsory education law later this year.

A small Israeli minority of Messianic Jews—Jewish persons who have accepted Christ—continues to grow despite harassment and persecution in their native homeland.

A third of the 30 Messianic congregations are in the Tel Aviv area, where two-fifths of Israel’s 4.4 million people live. Several other congregations meet in Jerusalem. Most are small—only a few encompass 100 or more believers—and most are led by a small team of elders selected from the church’s membership. They usually meet in apartments or homes each Saturday, the Jewish Sabbath. (In Israel, Sunday is one of six work days.)

Interest In Yeshua

Messianics are striving to avoid sectarianism. Elders from about a dozen congregations have been meeting regularly for several years, and their evangelistic committee held its first-ever campaign in August 1986 in Tel Aviv. Volunteers used a questionnaire to spark conversations about Jesus, or Yeshua (ye-shu’-uh), in the streets. About 250 people gave their addresses for follow-up literature.

However, this “first” only highlights the growing number of attempts to reach Israelis for Christ. Ilan Zamir, an elder in a Tel Aviv congregation, is part of a team working on a Hebrew-language New Testament with explanatory notes. Joseph Shulam, leader of a congregation in Jerusalem, has organized a team to write a multi-volume New Testament commentary in Hebrew. Also, a theological education by extension program is in place, while Messianic musicians have produced four songbooks of Jewish melodies and words of praise.

Facing Israel’s Wrath

Such an increase in Messianic Jewish activity is not without cost, however. At least a dozen organizations are devoted to assailing Messianics. Believers say that members of the best-known group, Yad L’Achim, periodically harass congregational leaders by disseminating distorted information about them. A poster with a photo of one Messianic couple and their toddler son, for example, warned: “Watch out for these people.” They are always smiling and helpful, it said, noting, “They love you because they want you to love Jesus.” Yad L’Achim’s tactics also include demonstrations and, some believers claim, bugging telephones, opening mail, and breaking into homes.

Another antagonist is Shmuel Golding, known for the weekly debates at his Jerusalem Institute of Biblical Polemics, where he attacks some 180 New Testament fulfillments of Old Testament prophecy. Golding also offers training for those who wish to dissuade young Messianics, and has “counselors” in place in several countries. In his own counseling, Golding claims a 75-percent rate of Messianics “coming back to their Jewish roots.”

Messianics face an even more intense challenge from ultra-Orthodox or Hasidic Jews. They comprise but 5 to 7 percent of the population, yet wield a disproportionate amount of clout from being wooed by Israel’s two major political parties. Hasidic Jews hurled stones into a Tiberias congregation’s worship services during a six-month period in 1985. Newspapers, fearing Hasidic protests, will not accept Messianic advertisements, one congregational leader says. And the ultra-Orthodox often are at the forefront of pressure on local officials to use zoning regulations against Messianic congregations. A congregation near Tel Aviv struggled more than two years to reverse a municipal injunction prohibiting meetings in a building they were renting.

Still Bleeding

While Israel boasts of wide-ranging religious freedom, open-mindedness is another matter. Evangelism of Jews is “chutzpah … something which is not acceptable in any way,” says Rabbi Pinhas Peli, a Jerusalem Post columnist and professor of Jewish thought and literature at Ben Gurion University. To anyone wanting to carry the gospel to the Jews, Peli admonishes, “Hands off. Not now. You want to talk to us, give us another hundred years, another 50 years. Let’s heal the wounds that are still bleeding from the Holocaust.” Peli acknowledges a religious void in Israel, but urges, “If you want to be a true friend of Israel … if you want to help people who are looking for spirituality, help them find it within their own religion.”

“In the minds of most Jews,” says Menahem Benhayim, a leader in a Jerusalem congregation, “Nazism was another phase of Christianity.” Benhayim notes that some Jews “recognize that Nazism was anti-Christian and pagan. But they believe that Nazism was able to use traditional church hostility toward the Jews to effect its diabolical aims.”

Still, sensitivity stemming from the Holocaust abounds, even among believers. “I will never be [called] a Christian,” says a Jewish woman whose parents vere killed by Nazis during World War II. “I believe the same thing as a real Christian believes,” she lectures. “But to call myself a Christian, no. The word has been too contaminated for us as a people.”

Yet Christianity is not inherently anti-Semitic, believers contend. “You can take any religion and annex it to hate,” says David Yaniv, who lives on a kibbutzlike community in northern Israel. “Christians can hate, Jews can hate, Moslems can hate.”

Ya’akov Damkani, one of three evangelists spearheading the use of tracts to reach his countrymen, regrets that the church had “no love … no approach for taking the gospel to the Jews” for 19 centuries. “But there is a new development taking place. It’s the first time in history that Israel is beginning to really receive love from Yeshua’s followers.”

By Art Toalston in Jerusalem

In a move intended to end so-called phone-sex services over its lines, AT&T has decided to stop paying companies for calls placed to their “900” numbers. If AT&T’s decision is approved by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), all companies who offer a 900 number service will be affected. AT&T charges callers 50 cents per call to the 900 numbers and pays from 2 cents to 5 cents per call back to the suppliers of the recorded messages.

The 900-number service is used for several purposes, including public opinion polls, sports results, and consumer tips. It became popular, however, with pornographers, and AT&T has been receiving complaints from parents and antipornography groups about its use for phone sex.

The company’s decision to stop paying suppliers of the recordings will cut off the source of income for those suppliers, thus making the service unprofitable for pornographers, as well as for other companies who provide the 900-number service.

“We’re especially troubled by reports that children can reach these messages,” said AT&T vice-chairman Charles Marshall. “Eliminating the economic incentive for adult-message sponsors should help solve the problem.”

Although AT&T is clear about who the action is aimed at, Director of Public Relations Frank Ovaitt stated that his company has a “sacred responsibility to the nation for the freedom and privacy of communications. We don’t monitor those calls. We’re not censors.”

The reason AT&T cannot simply refuse to offer the 900 service to pornographers is because it is subject to FCC regulations prohibiting public utilities from selectively refusing service to customers.

AT&T’s decision will almost certainly cost the company lost revenues, but Ovaitt was unwilling to speculate on how much. But, he said, “we don’t want other [nonpornographic] customers to have to pay for this decision. We’re working individually with these customers to offer alternative services.”

One option is a service AT&T calls Premium Billing. Unlike the 900 number, Premium Billing is not subject to FCC regulation.

By David Disch.