Sen. Barack Obama has ended his membership at Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago, attempting to disassociate himself from comments pastors have made in the church's pulpit.

Trinity was where Obama had his conversion experience, his marriage, and his children's baptisms.

The resignation comes one month after he broke ties with Rev. Jeremiah Wright. Rev. Michael Pfleger recently made racially charged comments where Pfleger pretended he was Clinton crying over "a black man stealing my show" in a guest sermon at Obama's church.

"It's clear that now that I am a candidate for president, every time something is said in the church by anyone associated with Trinity, including guest pastors, the remarks will be imputed to me, even if they totally conflict with my long-held views, statements, and principles," he said today.

Religious leaders have made campaigning difficult for Obama and Sen. John McCain. Last week, McCain rejected endorsements from Texas pastor John Hagee and Ohio pastor Rod Parsley.

Share this:

Posted by Sarah Pulliam Bailey at May 31, 2008 7:45PM | Comments (13)

Cathy Lynn Grossman's recent USA Today article on William Young's surprise bestseller The Shack is her second in a month, this one shifting attention to the long-developing and growing backlash against the book coming from a number of influential voices concerned about the book's implicit theological claims.

Several conservative Protestant heavyweights--Al Mohler, Chuck Colson, Mark Driscoll, and influential blogger Tim Challies--have sounded off on the dangers of The Shack's vision of God, salvation, and the Church, creating a quartet of caution for the casual Christian reader. These strong cautions are all the more notable in light of the over-the-top endorsement from one of evangelicalism's most respected spiritual sages, Eugene Peterson, which is featured on the book's back cover.

Among other things, this growing backlash broaches important questions about the proper relationship between art, theology, and the Church for evangelicals and their close kin. What does it mean for artists to be faithful to the confessional Christian traditions and communities of which they are a part, especially that largest of communions--the communion of the saints across time, space, and tradition? If we regard the Nicene Creed as a shared expression of that broad communion, what does it mean for an artist, perhaps a writer such as William Young, to be faithful to that confession?

Switching directions, we must also ask what it means for Christian traditions and communities to be faithful to artists and their craft. This, too, is a theological question: How does the Church show good faith toward those sub-creators in God's human economy whose very creative inclinations are evidence that they bear the image of a God who delights in creating? Making a place for art and the artist is a way of affirming the human and creational pattern that the Christian God calls "very good."

My hunch is that we probably see a failure to keep faith on both sides here, and that it would be a good thing for all of God's Church to discuss the when's, where's, why's, and how's of our mutual infidelities.

Along the way we might also want to pause to think about what the phenomenal grassroots popularity of an iconoclastic novel such as The Shack--1.1 million copies in print, 500,000 more to be printed in June, UK rights just purchased--tells us about the attitudes and pastoral realities churches must reckon with on the ground.

Posted by Derek Keefe at May 30, 2008 12:01PM | Comments (66)

The folks at Wikisource have a new project bound to stir up controversy. It's called the Wiki Bible Project, and it aims to "create an original, open content translation" of the Bible, by the people for the people. Call it the Pauper John Goldfarb Ali Version.

Great idea. I mean, people have never disagreed over what the Bible says. Christians and Jews and Muslims all worship the God of Abraham, so they must read his word from the same pages. Buddhists and Taoists and Pagans? Individualistic variations, nothing more. A holy book is a holy book, regardless of what name it goes by.

Right ... Just try telling that to Jerusalem. Muslims and Christians and Jews all understand the Bible quite differently on this subject.

The Bible doesn't talk directly about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, but I wonder if CAMERA has any plans for influencing the editing.

Libby Purves at Faith Central explains a little more about the project and shares a satirical story from Britain's version of The Onion:

They ask people who know Greek or Hebrew to "claim" a chapter (Exodus went first) and offer a translation. It fiercely says "Stay faithful to the original source text and do not borrow from copyrighted modern versions....Avoid sectarian disputes, possibly by footnoting variant translations."

However, the mischievous beasts on Newsbiscuit report straightfacedly that it is an attempt to make "one on-line holy book for all world faiths, written and edited by the world-wide community....‘If someone feels strongly that the central tenet of another religion is fundamentally wrong, then they can go on-line and change it. This morning the Wiki-Bible stated quite categorically that there was but one god and his name was Allah. This afternoon, another editor had corrected that to explain that there were in fact a number of different gods including Ganesh, Krishna, Vishnu and Cristiano Ronaldo.’

And so forth. It also suggests adapting commandments -- 'This morning the seventh commandment read ‘Though shalt not commit adultery. Unless it is with thy neighbours wife Janice".

This article was cross-posted at The God Blog.

Posted by Brad Greenberg at May 28, 2008 8:09PM | Comments (12)

In a short, short news story, The Grand Rapids Press reported that

Christian publishing giant Zondervan on Tuesday announced it was cutting 18 jobs as part of a restructuring effort.

Among those who lost their job was Executive Vice President and Publisher Scott Bolinder, who had been with the company for 19 years.

The company, owned by media conglomerate News Corp., has about 325 employees in Cascade Township and 35 at offices in Miami and San Diego.

The jobs that were cut represent about 5 percent of the positions at Zondervan, and included 5 executive positions. The publishing house hired Moe Girkins as its new president and CEO last winter.

Publishers Weekly reported that, "Parent company HarperCollins has said that Zondervan has been a soft spot in the overall performance of HC."

In recent years Zondervan had annual title output in the high-500 to low-600 range. Powers confirmed the reorganization would lead to a reduction in titles, but said the company would not release specifics now.

Since 1988, Zondervan has been part of HarperCollins, which is a subsidiary of News Corporation, which is run by Rupert Murdoch. The publisher’s first huge break was the NIV Bible, which in 1986 overtook the King James Version. A more recent one was The Purpose Driven Life.

Posted by Susan Wunderink at May 28, 2008 11:33AM | Comments (4)

You probably heard last week that John McCain wants nothing to do with the Rev. John Hagee, the indomitable supporter of Israel who really wants the Jews to get home so Christ will return. The impetus was recent revelations of this sermon, in which Hagee explains that Hitler and his band of evil murderers were God's chosen "hunters," divine agents whose atrocities were sanctioned for the greater good of driving European Jews to Palestine.

Well, I haven't heard much from Hagee, but Shmuel Rosner of Haaretz traded e-mails with his No. 2, David Brog, which was published as a five-question interview. The most interesting bit ledes it:

1. The first question is an obvious one. Can you explain this quote in a way that will resonate with the readers:

"Then God sent a hunter. A hunter is someone with a gun and he forces you. Hitler was a hunter. And the Bible says - Jeremiah writing ? 'They shall hunt them from every mountain and from every hill and from the holes of the rocks,' meaning there's no place to hide. And that might be offensive to some people but don't let your heart be offended. I didn't write it, Jeremiah wrote it. It was the truth and it is the truth. How did it happen? Because God allowed it to happen. Why did it happen? Because God said my top priority for the Jewish people is to get them to come back to the land of Israel."

The theological exercise in which Pastor Hagee was engaged is so common that they have a fancy name for it: theodicy. This is the struggle to explain how a loving God could permit evil in the world. Religious thinkers have been debating this most difficult of questions for centuries and, of course, no one has come up with an answer that "resonates" with everyone. We just need to agree to disagree.

Pastor Hagee's view that an omnipotent God must sanction the evil in our world actually has deep roots in Jewish thought. To cite just one example, the Talmud teaches us that the Temple in Jerusalem was destroyed because of "sinat hinam," or baseless hatred. In other words, our own Talmud teaches that God used the Romans to perpetrate the greatest tragedy in the history of the Jewish people (until the Holocaust) because of Jewish sins.

We are certainly free to disagree with both the Talmud and Pastor Hagee on why God permits such atrocities. But I don't think it's fair to single out Pastor Hagee and act as if his approach is so unusual, unique, or foreign. Those who are shocked by Pastor Hagee's theodicy demonstrate only that they are unfamiliar with centuries of Judeo-Christian theodicy.

Brog makes a nice reference to the Talmud, which no doubt scored some points with the folks keeping track at home. But how 'bout his explanation? I wish I could argue for, or against, it. Here's my problem: Theodicy is a black hole of theological clarity. Scholars and religious leaders have been trying to understand it for millennia, no doubt sparking thousands of hours-long conversations that ended without resolution (not the least of which were broached during my college Bible studies). Again, let's return to that story I mentioned after the earthquake in China:

"If there was a God, how come he let all that happen?" Tom Cotton, 51, of Pinion Hills asked while finishing a burger at a Carl's Jr. in San Bernardino.

"If it's his plan," Cotton said, scanning the restaurant as if he was going to curse, "he's sure got a messed-up plan."

God only knows what that plan might be.

"If God is wiser than we, His judgment must differ from ours on many things, and not least on good and evil,' C.S. Lewis, the Christian philosopher and children's author, wrote in "The Problem of Pain.' "What seems to us good may therefore not be good in His Eyes, and what seems to us to be evil may not be evil."

So ... Does God sanction evil, as Brog argues? This appears to be the model from the Book of Job. Or is evil simply the result of man's sin, its consequences out of God's hands? If this is the case, which I heard many friends argue after the 9/11 terror attacks, than it would seem we have reduced God to a smelter, a far-from omnipotent being left to extract the best from the whole.

Anyone want to proffer a theory?

This article was cross-posted at The (new and improved) God Blog.

Posted by Brad Greenberg at May 25, 2008 8:15PM | Comments (36)

Youth Ministry Exchange
By youth workers and for youth workers, YMX is the place to discuss all things youth ministry, with thousands of threads on every imaginable subject. Some sections are free, but a $5 annual pass gets you access to the whole thing - and it's totally worth it.

The Source for Youth Ministry
Jonathan McKee started this site (formerly Jonathan's Resources) as a labor of love for youth workers. Chock full of free resources and ideas (the game section alone is amazing).

The Center for Parent/Youth Understanding
This website, from CPYU founder Walt Mueller, is really for parents, but youth workers find it extremely helpful. It's loaded with blogs, articles, links to relevant stories, and more resources than you can imagine to help you learn about youth culture. And the free, weekly e-mail updates are a must.

YouthMinistry.Com
When Group Publishing partnered with Doug Fields's Simply Youth Ministry, they resurrected this long-dormant domain to create a new site, distinct from their two other sites. They're just beginning to move from a commerce-only site to a content-and-commerce site.

Especialidades Juveniles
Youth Specialties' Spanish division has its own website, completely separate in location, content, and maintenance from the English-language YS site. Based on traffic stats, it's the most popular youth-ministry site in the world. Of course, it's all in Spanish.

Youth Specialties
Okay, it's a bit self-promotional, but it truly is my favorite for all things concerning youth ministry, with thousands of pages of articles, ideas, and free stuff - plus the most comprehensive youth-ministry job bank anywhere (with over 700 listings at any time).

Posted by Susan Wunderink at May 23, 2008 10:59AM | Comments (2)

A recent proposal to start a gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender support club at Gordon College, a top evangelical liberal arts school in Wenham, Massachusetts, was rejected by the college's student association 7-6 three weeks ago. Since then, discussions have continued on campus regarding how best to address students wanting the club while upholding the college's biblical teachings on homosexual behavior.

The student association stated that such a group was needed, but that it did not fit best as a student government?affiliated entity. Soon after their decision, a subcommittee met to discuss the question of what office the group should formally affiliate with, if at all. Dean of Students Barry Loy said the group would likely fall under the auspices of his office, but that no official decision has been made.

The proposal was spearheaded by senior Tania Green, a heterosexual who says she got the idea for such a group after Soulforce, a nationwide gay-rights bus tour, came to Gordon's campus in 2007. (See CT's prior coverage on Soulforce's visits to several U.S. Christian colleges.) Alongside the Soulforce visit, the circulation of an independent magazine telling the stories of 12 gay and lesbian Gordon students has pushed conversation about GLBT issues on Gordon's campus to greater immediacy.

Green met with several staff members for feedback on her proposal, including Loy, provost Mark Sargent, the director of Gordon's counseling center, and faculty adviser Paul Borgman. Green said that overall, faculty responded positively to the proposal, but encouraged her to change the name of the group from Gay Straight Alliance to Spectrum, citing the former's association with gay advocacy. Spectrum is being proposed as a forum in which GLBT Gordon students can meet and discuss their experiences, not as a pro-homosexuality group.

"Now there is a big concern to address that there are kids on campus (who are gay)," Green said. "Conversations are happening that have a personal quality to it."

"I think there is a need for our GLBT students to grow and not feel ostracized," said Loy. "I have been very impressed with the thorough discussion and thoughtfulness (the students have put in) at a very busy time of year." Gordon's commencement was last Saturday, May 17.

Further media coverage:

A Place Where Voices Can Be Heard: Gordon College students advocate for same-sex acceptance on campus. (The Hamilton-Wenham Chronicle)

Letter to the Editor: College's effort do deal with gay lifestyle more complicated than portrayed. (Abigail Geer, Salem News)

Campus Club Rejected: Vote against gay support group leaves some Gordon students feeling isolated. (Salem News)

Posted by Katelyn Beaty at May 23, 2008 8:27AM | Comments (12)

Presumptive Republican nominee John McCain just rejected Pastor John Hagee's earlier endorsement.

The controversial Texas pastor has made several anti-Catholic remarks in his sermons. Hagee also withdrew his endorsement. The Huffington Post is reporting that in a late 1990s sermon, Hagee said that "the Nazis had operated on God's behalf to chase the Jews from Europe and shepherd them to Palestine."

"Obviously, I find these remarks and others deeply offensive and indefensible, and I repudiate them. I did not know of them before Reverend Hagee's endorsement, and I feel I must reject his endorsement as well," McCain said in a statement Thursday.

In his statement today, McCain added that his relationship with Hagee did not compare with Obama's relationship with Rev. Jeremiah Wright. "I have said I do not believe Senator Obama shares Reverend Wright's extreme views. But let me also be clear, Reverend Hagee was not and is not my pastor or spiritual advisor, and I did not attend his church for twenty years. I have denounced statements he made immediately upon learning of them, as I do again today," McCain said.

McCain also rejected and repudiated Columbus pastor Rod Parsley, who has also made controversial statements and endorsed McCain. McCain had called Parsley a spiritual adviser earlier this year.

Hagee and Parsley withdrew their endorsements.

Share this:

Posted by Sarah Pulliam Bailey at May 22, 2008 3:09PM | Comments (15)

Whatever you think about the morality of the death penalty in general, you've got to admire the leaders of the Chaldean Christians in Iraq. In a land that is torn by ethnic and religious power struggles - a place where memories of past travesties are nurtured for the sake of political advantage - these Christians have responded in a very Christian manner to the Iraqi Central Criminal Court's death sentence for the Al Qaeda leader who abducted and perhaps killed their archbishop.

Paulos Faraj Rahho was kidnapped February 29. His body was discovered March 13. (The cause of death is still uncertain, since Rahho suffered from a heart condition and his body appeared not to have been shot.)

Compass Direct offers this report of church leaders' response to the death sentence:

Speaking from Baghdad, Auxiliary Bishop Shlemon Warduni said that Ahmed should be punished for his crime but that executing him would be pointless.
"If somebody is killed I think there is no use in it for the Iraqi people," the Chaldean church leader said. "Our principles are love and pardon and reconciliation."
Chaldean Archbishop of Kirkuk Louis Sako openly condemned the sentence.
"We are not satisfied with this decision, because the church is against the death penalty," he told Agence France-Presse yesterday.

An AKI (AdnKronosInternational) news item added these quotes from Warduni:

"We pursue peace, security and reconciliation in Iraq, all the things that Monsignor Rahho fought for during his life," said Shlemon Warduni, current auxiliary bishop in Baghdad, quoted by the Italian bishop's conference news agency SIR on Monday.
...
"Monsignor Rahho, would not have accepted the sentence. Christian principles say it is not allowed to sentence someone to death, and instead it invites us to forgiveness, reconciliation and justice."

In that cultural and historical context, with a seeming endless pattern of violence and vengeance, that is a costly and credible witness to Jesus and his teaching: "You have heard that it was said, 'Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be sons of your Father in heaven."

Posted by David Neff at May 21, 2008 2:40PM | Comments (4)

My friend Dean's list of interests on his facebook profile reads as follows: "Interests: You Name It. The World Is An Interesting Place." I tend to share Dean's expansive interests, which partially explains why on a day when I could have blogged about yesterday's ruling allowing gay marriages in California, the global food crisis, continued gnashing of teeth regarding the Evangelical Manifesto, or the critical response to the latest Narnia film that opens this weekend, I'm instead drawn to this Houston Chronicle story about Lone Star Cowboy Church in Montgomery, Texas.

I'm admittedly a latecomer to the cowboy church phenomena, which was reported on in the pages of our magazine some five years ago. And upon reading that Lone Star has its own rodeo arena, which was built almost as soon as the tent church that served the congregation for the first two years, it's tempting to dismissively file the whole movement under news of the weird, as an odd bit of cultural ephemera spun out of American evangelical subculture machine. Yet the Chronicle article also indicates that Lone Star has over 1300 members, and that there are more than 100 churches linked with the Baptist General Convention's Texas Fellowship of Cowboy churches alone. (I highly recommend you take a look at this map, which plots cowboy churches in the Fellowship.)

Clearly, something is going on here, but what? How should we understand what's happening at Lone Star and in the larger movement? Does it represent the expansion of the gospel through the faithful translation of Christianity into the everyday cultural forms of a distinct subcultural people group--an exercise in removing unnecessary barriers and becoming "all things to all people"? Or, does it represent the collapse of the Christian gospel and message into the world of meaning provided by the mythos, language, and forms of the American West's cowboy culture?

While I'm confident the truth lies somewhere between these two poles, it's hard to say where, though I'm definitely nervous about what appear to be the "tribal" markers that bind the movement and its churches together. These tribal dynamics are also clearly on display in other subcultures that have produced churches or movements, such as biker culture, surf culture, or the hippie culture of the 60s and 70s. When churches begin to look like affinity- or interest- groups, and less like God's extraordinary project to transcend cultural divisions by uniting a diverse and motley lot under the the Lordship of God's Christ, the gospel has been diminished. In Christ, there is neither cowboy nor yuppie, biker nor gamer, farmer nor techie. All are one in Christ Jesus.

In an American free-market, voluntary church environment, we'd all do well to scan the pews (or hay bales) of our own churches and see who we've joined ourselves to. My hunch is that we'd find we're probably not much different than our cowboy brothers and sisters in seeking out our cultural kin.

Posted by Derek Keefe at May 16, 2008 5:15PM | Comments (18)

California will become only the second U.S. state to allow gay and lesbian couples to tie the knot after the state's Supreme Court on Thursday (May 15) overturned a voter referendum that had banned same-sex marriages.

Twenty-three gay and lesbian couples had filed suit to challenge a 1977 law and the 2000 referendum that defined marriage as between a man and a woman. In a 4-3 decision, the court ruled that barring gay couples from marriage violates the "fundamental constitutional right to form a family relationship."

Writing for the majority, Chief Justice Ronald George said opening marriage to same-sex couples "will not deprive opposite-sex couples of any rights and will not alter the legal framework of the institution of marriage."

Under the ruling, same-sex couples will be eligible for marriage licenses in 30 days, and the state will recognize gay marriages performed in other jurisdictions. Currently only Massachusetts allows gay marriage, as do five other countries, including Canada.

While gay rights group hailed the ruling as a watershed victory, opponents promised a no-holds-barred battle to amend the state constitution to explicitly ban same-sex marriages. If approved by voters in November, the amendment would trump the court's decision.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has twice vetoed a legislative attempt to allow gay marriages, but said he would oppose the November referendum and respect the state court's decision.
Justice Marvin Baxter, in a dissenting opinion, said the court's majority was imposing "by judicial fiat its own social policy views for those expressed by the people."

Several religious groups -- including Mormons, the state's Catholic bishops, Orthodox Jews and the National Association of Evangelicals -- had filed briefs asking the court to not allow gay couples to wed.

Conservatives, while bitterly disappointed, indicated they would use the decision to build momentum to pass the constitutional amendment. "This ruling will unite the people of California and will propel their efforts to amend the state constitution," said the Texas-based group Liberty Legal.

And, recognizing that they have been unable to ban gay marriage in the five years since Massachusetts' highest court approved it, conservatives know how big the stakes may be in Thursday's decision.

"The court has overturned not only the historic definition of marriage, but the clear will of the people of California," said the Washington-based Family Research Council. "The California Supreme Court has taken a jackhammer to the democratic process. ... This decision put marriage at risk all across the nation."

Gay groups, too, recognized that their struggle to attain marriage equality in the nation's most populous state is not yet over.

"I would love to tell you to take a day and sit back and enjoy this momentous victory," said Joe Solmonese, president of the Washington-based Human Rights Campaign, in a fundraising appeal issued two hours after the court's ruling.

"In fact, sitting back is the reaction the right wing is hoping for. We can't afford to let them turn our success into their win."

One of the case's two lead plaintiffs was the Rev. Troy Perry, who founded the predominantly gay Metropolitan Community Church in 1968 and performed his first same-sex union ceremony a year later. Perry and his partner of 23 years, Phillip De Blieck, were legally married in Canada in 2003.

"I can't quit crying," Perry said in a phone interview just after the ruling was made public. "After 39 years of fighting for this, today thank God that the Supreme Court of the state of California ruled in favor of us."

Perry tempered his joy with the knowledge that "this is not the end of this struggle. There are still 45 states [that don't recognize same-sex unions in some way] that we have to work on."

Posted by Ted Olsen at May 15, 2008 4:28PM | Comments (19)

At my high school graduation party, a friend who was not a Christian walked up and commented on the music playing over the outdoor speakers at my parents' house.

"Why is it," he asked, "that Christian bands always have the best musicians?"

I was a bit perplexed: The tunes he was hearing belonged to Midtown, a pop-punk quartet whose members, as far as I knew, were not Christian.

I also disagreed with my friend's assessment. I mean, I was a big fan of MxPx and Slick Shoes ... but the best musicians? Hardly. (For evidence, listen to"Rappin for Jesus" by Stephen Wiley.)

Until a few years ago, Christian bands occasionally would have a radio hit or two -- dc Talk and Jars of Clay had their moment, as did Sixpence None the Richer -- and then disappear back into oblivion.

Switchfoot, whose CD a friend of mine picked up in a South Dakota pawn shop during our 2001 road trip around the country (that's a different, longer story), seems to have bucked that trend. Being heard on TV promos and Star 98.7, or whatever the pop rock station is in your town, for years to follow, Switchfoot has been one of the lucky few who have broken through without significantly changing their message, though I would argue they too have watered it down and published one really bad album.

This music is part of the bigger, "parallel universe of Christian pop culture," as Daniel Radosh dubs the industry in his new book "Rapture Ready!" (Radosh's list of the top 10 Christian songs begins with Larry Norman's "Why Don't You Look Into Jesus?")

"Rapture Ready!" details the exploits of a secular New York Jew on a quest to the center of evangelical culture. Radosh visits the International Christian Retail Show, the Holy Land Experience and Stephen Baldwin World; serves as part of the mob calling for Christ's crucifixion in Arkansas' Great Passion Play; and goes backstage with Bibleman, AKA "Batman for Jesus." I'll forgive Radosh for avoiding VeggieTales night at a minor league baseball stadium and the giants who break burning stacks of bricks in Jesus' name.

Radosh intersperses Christian camp with more sober accounts of economics and theology. Chapter 4 focuses on the Bible-publishing business and originally appeared in The New Yorker, and Chapter 5, which, believe it or not, appeared in Playboy, is about pre-millenialism and the "Left Behind" phenomenon.

"In the end," Brian McLaren, author of "A New Kind of Christian," proclaims on the book jacket, "he offers evaluations and insights that might be considered downright prophetic, and compassionate too. No evangelical insider could have done as good a job as Daniel Radosh."

He's definitely more sensitive to things he finds strange than Matt Taibbi. The book has been well-reviewed by Relevant magazine and The Forward, among others. I read through a chunk of it last night and, for some reason, found the style quite similar to A.J. Jacobs' in "The Year of Living Biblically." (Jacobs, possibly not by coincidence, also wrote a review for the book jacket.)

In the intro, Radosh explains that Christian culture is no laughing matter, at least not from a business perspective: It is a $7 billion a year industry.

"At some point," Hanna Rosin wrote for Slate.com, "Radosh asks the obvious question":

Didn't Jesus chase the money changers out of the temple? In other words, isn't there something wrong with so thoroughly commercializing all aspects of faith? For this, the Christian pop-culture industry has a ready answer. Evangelizing and commercializing have much in common. In the "spiritual marketplace" (as it's called), Christianity is a brand that seeks to dominate. Like Coke, it wants to hold onto its followers and also win over new converts. As with advertisers, the most important audience is young people and teenagers, who are generally brand loyalists. Hence, Bibleman and Christian rock are the spiritual equivalent of New Coke. Christian trinkets - a WWJD bracelet, a "God is my DJ" T-shirt - function more like Coca-Cola T-shirts or those cute stuffed polar bears. They telegraph to the community that the wearer is a proud Christian and that this is a cool thing to be - which should, in theory, invite eager curiosity.

This is significant because, according to research by The Barna Group, 61 percent of twentysomethings were "spiritually active" teens but have since lost their religion. Christians leaders see culture as the new channel through which to reach the lost and distracted. Radosh writes:

A less reliable statistic -- but one that has galvanized pastors who believe it reflects what they see in the pews -- is that if current trends continue, only 4 percent of today's Christian teens will be "Bible-believing Christians" as adults.

"Less reliable" is far too generous. That factoid is pure fiction. But, nonetheless, Christian culture can increase the fervency of the faithful, something I saw countless times as a teen at P.O.D. and Dogwood concerts (the latter for which I actually skipped my senior prom). They may not be the best musicians, but their message often carries more weight than typical Christian influencers.

As Radosh relays in the first few words of the book when describing a concert on a rural Kansas airfield:

A lanky teenager made his way out of the crow and ran to where his friends were waiting on the periphery, sweat smearing his thick black eyeliner. "Awesome performance." He grinned broadly. "They prayed like three times in a twenty-minute set."

This article was cross-posted at The God Blog.

Posted by Brad Greenberg at May 14, 2008 11:09AM | Comments (7)

As a teen, I was told several times by fellow Christians that Charles Darwin recanted his theory of evolution on his deathbed. This 125-year-old legendwas believable because it played into the idea that no matter how wicked a life someone had led -- and we believed Darwin to be a vile man -- God would welcome them back, even in their final moments.

For Albert Einstein, who I will admit is one of my heroes, nearing the end did not make him a more religious man. His vague language on God had long been interpreted by the faithful that Einstein was a fellow believer. But, in a letter being auctioned in England, Einstein was quite critical of religion and the Jewish people, of which he was a proud member. From The Guardian:

Einstein penned the letter on January 3 1954 to the philosopher Eric Gutkind who had sent him a copy of his book Choose Life: The Biblical Call to Revolt. The letter went on public sale a year later and has remained in private hands ever since.

In the letter, he states: "The word god is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me) change this."

Einstein, who was Jewish and who declined an offer to be the state of Israel's second president, also rejected the idea that the Jews are God's favoured people.

"For me the Jewish religion like all others is an incarnation of the most childish superstitions. And the Jewish people to whom I gladly belong and with whose mentality I have a deep affinity have no different quality for me than all other people. As far as my experience goes, they are no better than other human groups, although they are protected from the worst cancers by a lack of power. Otherwise I cannot see anything 'chosen' about them."

Avoiding Einstein's frank review of his people, I disagree with his interpretation of the Bible. Yes, Jesus spoke highly of a childlike faith, but does that mean the Bible's stories are "primitive" and "childish?"

Hardly. Even if you don't believe its accounts of Jewish history, the Gospels and the epistles, the complete book, covering 4,000 years from the Beginning to the End, is the greatest literary work ever.

It's more enjoyable, though, if you believe it.

This article was cross-posted at The God Blog.

Posted by Brad Greenberg at May 13, 2008 12:34PM | Comments (42)

Never underestimate the power of an Oprah endorsement. Ever since she branded German-born spirituality guru Eckhart Tolle's A New Earth: Awakening to Your Life's Purpose the 61st Oprah Book Club selection in January 2008, the book has sold 3.5 million copies. Over the past several weeks Oprah and Tolle have hosted unprecedented free "webinars," on which Oprah-Tolle discuss a chapter from the book each week and field live questions from the online audience. That audience grew to 2 million people.

Tolle's message is based largely in Eastern spirituality, though he draws from Christian language and imagery (such as the book's title). Tolle defines the human problem as a false self - what he calls "egoic mind patterns," which can be overcome by acknowledging oneness with ultimate reality, or "God." Here's how Greg Boyd, senior pastor at Woodland Hills Church in St. Paul, Minnesota, summarizes it:

Tolle espouses a rather typical Eastern metaphysics in which the true "you" is not the "you" that is distinct from other people, but the (alleged) "you" that is one with the universe. To grasp this, imagine waves on an ocean. Your individual ego is one such wave, but the true "you" in the Eastern religious worldview is the ocean itself - as it is for me and every other "wave." The wave-"you" is limited and temporary, but the ocean-"you" is unlimited and eternal.

Oprah's website reports that she and Tolle will be offering another webinar session beginning June 16.

Boyd aside, seemingly few evangelicals have taken the time to engage A New Earth and offer a thoughtful, biblical response - perhaps because, as Peter Jones, writing for Christian Science Monitor puts it, A New Earth's missteps are rather old:

For Tolle, "knowing self and knowing God become one and the same." The millions who've turned to Tolle might naturally conclude: I am the "I Am." Sound familiar? It should. According to the Bible, such "knowledge" springs from the oldest error of all: man's desire to be "as gods."

Stay tuned to CT for our upcoming analysis of the Oprah-Tolle craze in the next two weeks.

Related coverage:

Greg Boyd's review of A New Earth at his blog, "Random Reflections"

The Real Secret of the Universe | Why we disdain feel-good spirituality but shouldn't. (May 2007)

The Church of O | With a congregation of 22 million viewers, Oprah Winfrey has become one of the most influential spiritual leaders in America. (April 2002)

Share this:

Posted by Katelyn Beaty at May 9, 2008 9:01AM | Comments (6)

It seems Steve Kreuscher has let his status as a denizen of Zion (Illinois, that is) go to his head. He's asked a judge to legally change his name to the motto that backs our money: In God We Trust.

Believe it. First name, In God. Last name, We Trust. The reason, he explains in detailed story from Daily Herald, is that God has been good to him, and he wants the world to know. The also reveals a few other interesting name changes from recent memory:

Santa Claus: Robert Rion of Mundelein, 1997

GoVeg.com: Karin Robertson of Virginia, 2003

Megatron: Michael Burrows of Washington, 2007

Optimus Prime: Scott Nall of Ohio, 2001

Pro-Life: Marvin Richardson of Idaho, 2008

Low Tax: Byron Looper of Tennessee, 1998

Jesus Christ: Jose Espinal of New York, 2005

Some people need to just be happy with their Christian name.

This post originally appeared, in slightly different form, at The God Blog.

Posted by Brad Greenberg at May 7, 2008 3:27AM | Comments (5)

The end may be in sight for the debate over "harvesting" human embryos for their stem-cells in the pursuit of possible medical cures. Apparently adult stem cells--those cells gotten from human body tissues and not embryos--have the potential to be just as versatile for medical research as ESCs--but without the need to kill nascent human life. An article in Newsweek:

In June 2006, a Japanese group led by Shinya Yamanaka reported the first successful result with mouse skin cells, and between November 2007 and January 2008, Yamanaka's group and two American groups led by James Thomson and George Daley at Harvard University all reported the successful reprogramming of human skin cells into a state that is indistinguishable from human embryonic cells. Over the last several months, progress made along this new scientific path has been breathtaking. The laboratory of Rudolf Jaenisch at MIT has taken in the lead in developing therapies with this new technique in mice, demonstrating a cure for a mouse version of sickle cell anemia and alleviating the symptoms of Parkinson's disease in mice.

What these scientists can now do is essentially to take any type of cell and turn it into the equivalent of an embryonic stem cell - without needing embryos or egg cells. So what exactly are these new cells? Cells are fundamentally defined not by where they come from, but by their program of gene activity. In this sense, the new cells should be called embryonic stem cells. And since they are genetically identical to the person who provided the original sample, they are technically embryonic cell clones of that person. But scientists have discovered the power of words to elicit positive or negative emotional responses. "Clone" and "embryo" are words to be avoided. And so by consensus, the new cells are being called induced pluripotent stem cells.

Researchers say more work must be done on the promising technique.

Posted by Stan Guthrie at May 6, 2008 9:42AM | Comments (2)

The economic numbers for the first quarter of 2008 showed that while the U.S. is not yet in a recession, we're sure darn close. The quarter's scant 0.6 percent growth rate suggests that ridiculously high commodity prices (oil, corn, pork bellies) should fall back to earth as Americans cut their spending, reducing demand. But as recent earnings reports show prices have skyrocketed. Since last August, the price of a barrel of crude has gone from $70 to over $110, despite six months of stagnant economic growth. The same is true for other commodities like copper, where trading volume has remained stable, suggesting that the price hike is not entirely due to speculative investors.

While economists make fine arguments in support of the belief that the rise in commodity prices is a symptom of bad monetary policy, it's also hard to dismiss the fact that high prices could simply be a matter of supply and demand - or at least expected supply and demand. One Wall Street Journal writer suggests that there are many similarities between today's economic conditions and those in the '70s, including low interest rates, a weak and falling dollar, market interventions, and high oil prices. But, he says:

there is an important difference between our troubles today and those of the 1970s. In that decade, aggregate supply sagged as oil producers scaled back production and anchovies disappeared off the coast of Peru. The 2000s have been about demand expansion. Millions of workers in China, India and Vietnam, among others, have joined the world trading system.

So, while there may be other factors influencing the rise in the price of oil, metals, and food. A fundamental reason for this price increase is a matter of basic economics: supply and demand. Indeed, despite oil prices that would encourage massive production, oil giant Chevron said it pumped less oil in the first quarter of this year than in the first quarter of 2007. And when ExxonMobil announced its production expectations, investors were shocked to hear that the company said it would pump no more oil over the next few years than it does today despite increasing its exploration and production budget by 25% to between $25 billion and $30 billion a year over the next five years. Business Week explains how astounding the announcement is:

Ponder that for a minute. Texas-based Exxon is the largest publicly traded company in the energy business. In fact, it's the most profitable company in the history of capitalism, earning a record $40.6 billion on sales of $404 billion last year. Yet even with prices at the pump near all-time highs, Exxon isn't planning on producing any more oil four years from now than it did last year.

It would be as if Steve Jobs said that though people were willing to spend nearly four times more for a Mac than they had been eight years ago, Apple would not build any more. Why is one of the best run oil companies, and most profitable company ever, declining to increase in production? Business Week explains, "Since 2000, Exxon's oil output from two of its largest regions, the U.S. and Europe, declined a startling 37%. That's 500,000 fewer barrels a day in just seven years." In other words, its getting harder and harder to find oil. The most money being made in oil exploration is by those who can drill miles beneath the ocean floor.

While it may not be accurate to say that the world is running out of oil (a cartel dedicated to keeping prices high has too much to say about the world's oil supply to suggest the world is running out), it is accurate to say that for the moment supply is having trouble keeping pace with demand.

While supply remains stagnant, demand has spiked. "World consumption is projected to rise 35 percent, to around 115 million barrels a day, in the next two decades," according to The New York Times. Most of the growth will come from China, India and oil-producing countries in the Middle East."

As developing countries prosper, their citizens seek to emulate developed countries. They eat wheat instead of rice; meat instead of beans. They commute in cars from their homes miles away from the office. They buy cell phones and other electronics, increasing demand for copper and microchips. Some commentators suggest that those of us in the developed world must either quickly abandon our energy guzzling, wasteful ways or get used to a lower standard of living. Most likely, we'll have to do a little of both.

But how should American Christians react to a world in which those resources we've become used to having mostly for ourselves are suddenly in demand across the globe? Can we learn to share our global resources? Must we see a lower standard of living in our future?

Many Christian traditions have taught the lessons of simple living. Living simply, and thereby consuming less, does not necessarily correspond to a decrease in living standards. Those skills in simple living, it seems, are more needed these days as billions more people are now competing for a shrinking supply of resources. While some researchers foresee nationalistic competition in a scramble for limited resources, possibly resulting in war, Christians can be leaders not only in wisely exploiting creation but also in justly sharing it.

Of course, actually accomplishing that task takes more than words. But in a world where energy and other resource dependencies have allowed terrorists to breed and genocides to freely proceed, where people go hungry because they can't afford food, the ability to do more with less is another resource in which demand outweighs supply.

Share this:

Posted by Rob Moll at May 4, 2008 8:12PM | Comments (21)

The Associated Press just reported the upcoming "Evangelical Manifesto," a document signed by 80 evangelicals that will be released Wednesday. It was CNN's lead story Friday night.

The statement, called "An Evangelical Manifesto," condemns Christians on the right and left for "using faith to express political views without regard to the truth of the Bible."

"That way faith loses its independence, Christians become `useful idiots' for one political party or another, and the Christian faith becomes an ideology," the draft states.

Evangelicals such as author and speaker Os Guinness and president of Fuller Seminary Richard Mouw signed the statement.

According to the AP, drafters say evangelicals have often expressed "truth without love," helping create a backlash against religion during a "generation of culture warring."

"All too often we have attacked the evils and injustices of others," they wrote, "while we have condoned our own sins." They write, "we must reform our own behavior."

Share this:

Posted by Sarah Pulliam Bailey at May 2, 2008 10:29PM | Comments (18)

The ECFA issued a rather terse press release on Wednesday announcing that president Ken Behr was leaving the organization. No reason was given, nor were Behr's future plans explained.

According to the release, senior vice president Dan Busby will serve as acting president until a new president is chosen.

"We are thankful for the contributions Ken has made to ECFA during his tenure," ECFA chairman of the board Michael Batts said in the release. "He has stretched us to more fully utilize technology in providing membership and educational services, and he has generated a number of ideas about the growth of our membership base."

Share this:

Posted by Madison Trammel at May 2, 2008 10:34AM | Comments (0)

April 25th marked the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network's annual Day of Silence, described by the Network's website as a "student-led day of action when concerned students, from middle school to college, take some form of a vow of silence to bring attention to the name-calling, bullying and harassment--in effect, the silencing--experienced by LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender) students and their allies." Not surprisingly, the nationwide event elicited a range of responses from evangelical Christian groups at both the national and local level, and therefore offers promise as an occasion for further reflection about what form Christian witness should take in a pluralistic democratic society.

Boycott, in the form of students staying home from school that day, was advised by both Concerned Women for America and the American Family Association. This strategy was often joined to protest, as seen at Mount Si High School in Snoqualmie, Washington (an eastside suburb of Seattle). According to a Seattle Times article, not only were 495 out of 1,410 students not at school for the day--"including 85 athletes whose parents had asked that they be excused for their personal beliefs"--but "about 100 people joined the Rev. Ken Hutcherson, a prominent anti-gay-rights activist, in prayer and song that questioned the dedication of a school day to what they said was a controversial political cause." The week before, Hutcherson, pastor of the local Antioch Bible Church, had called for 1,000 "prayer warriors" to join him in an ad in a local paper.

A form of protest was also displayed by Alexander Nuxholl, a sophomore at Neuqua Valley High School in Naperville, Illinois. Nuxholl was granted the right to wear a shirt that read, "Be Happy, Not Gay" on the Day of Silence by the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The court also ordered the school district not to discipline him for wearing the shirt. Nuxholl's case was litigated by the Alliance Defense Fund (ADF), a Christian nonprofit legal alliance based in Scottsdale, Arizona.

The ADF also sponsored a countermeasure or alternative to the Day of Silence, a second common strategy for Christian witness. The annual Day of Truth, which came three days after the the Day of Silence, was, according to its website, "established to counter the promotion of the homosexual agenda and express an opposing viewpoint from a Christian perspective." Christian students are encouraged to wear T-shirts and pass out cards (outside of class time) that read:

I'm speaking the Truth to break the silence.
True tolerance means that people with differing--even opposing--viewpoints can freely exchange ideas and respectfully listen to each other.
It's time for an honest conversation about homosexuality.
There's freedom to change if you want to.
Let's talk.

This year marked the fourth for the Day of Truth (roughly 7,000 participants), and the thirteenth Day of Silence (roughly 500,000 participants).

In addition to boycott, protest, and the creation of an alternative, the Day of Silence saw another response from evangelical Christians--participation. The Golden Rule Pledge is promoted by Grove City College Psychology Professor Warren Throckmorton as an option for "straight Christian and conservative students [who] are conflicted about this day. They do not affirm homosexual behavior but they also loathe disrespect, harrassment or violence toward any one, including their GLBT peers." This response urges Christian students to act in accordance with the message on the cards they are urged to give out:

This is what I'm doing:

I pledge to treat others the way I want to be treated.

Will you join me in this pledge?

"Do to others as you would have them do to you." (Luke 6:31).

The Golden Rule Pledge website features first-hand accounts from Christian students who participated in this year's Day of Silence, including Jordyne Krumroy of Appalachian State University in Boone, North Carolina, who convinced ASU's Campus Crusade and InterVarsity Fellowship ministries to support Christian students such as her who chose to duct tape their mouths shut for a day.

Evangelicals are by definition a gospel-proclaiming people. Part of our becoming a wise people is learning to match our proclamation both to the manner of the Christ we proclaim, as well as to the occasion before us. Gospel wisdom, then, means not just learning when to speak, but what part of God's good news to speak first, and how that news should be delivered. On occasion, we may even find the best way to begin to "speak" this marvelous news is to remain silent.

Share this:

Posted by Derek Keefe at May 2, 2008 12:00AM | Comments (19)

ABC's report of Wheaton College professor Kent Gramm's resignation was an example of sloppy journalism and weak analysis.

The original headline was simply false: "Professor Fired for Getting a Divorce." Gramm was not fired. He resigned because he declined to talk with the college about his divorce. (The image to the right is a screen shot of an earlier version)

Later today, ABC changed the headline to "Professor Loses Job Over Divorce." The headline is still not quite accurate. To lose your job generally indicates that someone took it away from you. However, Gramm voluntarily resigned. And according to the Chicago Tribune, the college offered him another year of employment while he searched for another job.

Also, student Emma Vanhoozer's name was misspelled. Most journalists are extremely careful about getting basic facts like these correct. But reporter Russell Goldman bypassed whatever fact-checking system ABC has set up, if they have one.

Not only are there factual errors, but Goldman imposes his own strange analysis on the situation.

"If the school is free to impose its beliefs on divorced family members where does the law draw the line? Could the school just as easily impose arranged marriages?" Goldman writes.

Yes, that's the big looming threat here: forcibly arranged marriages. Someone has been reading too much coverage of the raid on the polygamist sect's ranch in Texas.

Share this:

Posted by Sarah Pulliam Bailey at May 1, 2008 4:03PM | Comments (10)

Apocalypse Now: Images of war, death, and ecological disaster portray the Book of Revelation in a 2007 Swedish edition of the New Testament. Called Bible Illuminated: The Book, the version's magazine format features arresting news and fashion photography, some sexually charged. Project leader Dan S?derberg, who has a background in advertising, said the intent of the photography is simply to draw readers into the text. "The Bible in its current state tends to alienate so many people," he said. "You can't dismiss the Bible unless you know it, and the more you know, the more you can take part in things. After all, the Bible is used in many aspects of life - even as an excuse for starting wars. You have to inform yourself."

Share this:

Posted by Susan Wunderink at May 1, 2008 10:58AM | Comments (6)