Much has been written in recent years about Margaret Sanger’s “Negro Project.” The most recent article is a must-read for every pro-lifer. An excerpt of Michelle Malkin’s column:

“If you aren’t creeped out by the No Birth Control Left Behind rhetoric of the White House and Planned Parenthood, you aren’t listening closely enough. The anesthetic of progressive benevolence always dulls the senses. Wake up.

“When a bunch of wealthy white women and elite Washington bureaucrats defend the trampling of religious liberties in the name of ‘increased access’ to ‘reproductive services’ for ‘poor’ women, the ghost of Margaret Sanger is cackling.

“As she wrote in her autobiography, Sanger founded Planned Parenthood in 1916 ‘to stop the multiplication of the unfit.’ This, she boasted, would be ‘the most important and greatest step towards race betterment.’ While she oversaw the mass murder of black babies, Sanger cynically recruited minority activists to front her death racket. She conspired with eugenics financier and businessman Clarence Gamble to ‘hire three or four colored ministers, preferably with social-service backgrounds, and with engaging personalities‘ to sell their genocidal policies as community health and welfare services.

“Outright murder wouldn’t sell. But wrapping it under the egalitarian cloak of ‘women’s health’ — and adorning it with the moral authority of black churches — would. Sanger and Gamble called their deadly campaign ‘The Negro Project.’”

Ditto…what she said.

Whether you’re an adult or a teenager who likes to read young adult novels, you might want to check out book reviews at Chuck Colson’s BreakPoint. Editor Gina Dalfonzo created the Youth Reads section to give Christians some guidance on the latest (and popular) young adult novels.

I’ve written a few reviews for the site, and I have an upcoming short feature on sex-selective abortions.

For more information on the topic, see Unnatural Selection: Choosing Boys Over Girls, and the Consequences of a World Full of Men. The author is “pro-choice,” but the book is objective enough, informative, and well researched.

And it came to pass in those days that a decree went out from Caesar Augustus that all the world should be registered. This census first took place while Quirinius was governing Syria. So all went to be registered, everyone to his own city.

Joseph also went up from Galilee, out of the city of Nazareth, into Judea, to the city of David, which is called Bethlehem, because he was of the house and lineage of David, to be registered with Mary, his betrothed wife, who was with child. So it was, that while they were there, the days were completed for her to be delivered. And she brought forth her firstborn Son, and wrapped Him in swaddling cloths, and laid Him in a manger, because there was no room for them in the inn.

Now there were in the same country shepherds living out in the fields, keeping watch over their flock by night. And behold, an angel of the Lord stood before them, and the glory of the Lord shone around them, and they were greatly afraid. Then the angel said to them, “Do not be afraid, for behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy which will be to all people. For there is born to you this day in the city of David a Savior, who is Christ the Lord. And this will be the sign to you: You will find a Babe wrapped in swaddling cloths, lying in a manger.”

And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God and saying:

“Glory to God in the highest,
And on earth peace, goodwill toward men!”

So it was, when the angels had gone away from them into heaven, that the shepherds said to one another, “Let us now go to Bethlehem and see this thing that has come to pass, which the Lord has made known to us.” And they came with haste and found Mary and Joseph, and the Babe lying in a manger. Now when they had seen Him, they made widely known the saying which was told them concerning this Child. And all those who heard it marveled at those things which were told them by the shepherds. But Mary kept all these things and pondered them in her heart. Then the shepherds returned, glorifying and praising God for all the things that they had heard and seen, as it was told them. – Luke 2: 1-20

Every day you faced the questions
Torn by the lot you had received
Every tear was a reminder
Of how I was conceived.

But in the middle of the confusion
You found strength to make it through
And now I can love and be loved
All because of you

The Man

Ryan Bomberger tears up when he recites the lyrics to “Meant to Be,” a song he wrote as a tribute to his birth mother—a woman he’s never met. The man behind the controversial pro-life billboard campaign, Too Many Aborted, was conceived in rape. His birth mother was white, and the rapist was black. Despite the circumstances of his conception, his mother allowed him to live.

Bomberger was born in Pennsylvania in 1971, two years before the U.S. Supreme Court declared a “right to privacy” to abort in Roe v. Wade. In the late 1960s, however, states began allowing abortions in cases of rape, incest, and health of the mother or fetus. Prior to Roe, some states even allowed abortion on demand, including neighboring state New York. If Bomberger’s birth mother had wanted an abortion, the option was available. But she chose life.

“There isn’t a day that goes by that I don’t think about how much life is a gift,” Bomberger said in a telephone interview. “I can’t help but think about my biological mother’s decision, the reverberation…that’s like a powerful, resurging thought in my mind every day, and that’s no exaggeration.”

The first child adopted by a white Christian family, Bomberger said he tried to find his birth mother in 2004 just to thank her, but was unable to locate her. “I still believe that some day, some way, she’ll be able to hear those words of gratitude. Her decision put me in a family. It’s a very different kind of family. An amazing, loving family.”

Bomberger called his parents “two of the most remarkable people in the world.” They had a heart for adoption even before they married. His adoptive mother’s parents were divorced, and her father was an alcoholic. “She was placed in an orphanage as a young child, and she made a promise to God at the age of five that she’d be a mommy to kids who didn’t have one.”

Ten adopted and three natural children later, the Bombergers were a multiracial assortment that made the Jolie-Pitt family look like amateurs, with American Indian, Vietnamese, black/white, white, and black children. “People look at us like we’re some kind of freak show,” he said, laughing. “‘What is this?’ This is family. This is what it looks like.”

While the media hype celebrities who adopt transracially, Bomberger said, there’s a different level of sacrifice when you don’t know where the next check or meal is going to come from. But his parents felt they were called to adopt.

“They could have had a life of convenience,” he said. “Our family owns a department store, and they could have had a cushy sort of life, but instead they have thirteen children. There were lots of hand-me-downs, handed down hand-me-downs…they really understood what sacrifice was…they knew that adoption was a way of unleashing purpose, and our family was transformed by that. It was transformed culturally and in so many other ways, because of the beautiful act of adoption.”

Bomberger and his wife share this calling. He adopted his wife’s daughter, and the couple gave birth to two children, adopted another, and are considering adding a fifth child to the family through adoption.

The Life-Affirming Work

Bomberger and his wife started a non-profit organization called the Radiance Foundation, which he said grew out of their desire to help people embrace their own God-given purpose. It also reflects their desire to help people understand they have an intrinsic value and worth that no one can define or take away.

“The reason why we felt so strongly about that is because both my wife, Bethany, and I had gone through some really radical, personal destructive episodes in our lives. We were basically pulled out of our own self-destruction by God’s love and the hope that can come only by truth.”

Bomberger said he went through periods of self-loathing that nearly took his life. “My radical transformations came by relying on the very, very frayed thread of hope because of the faith my parents instilled in me. If they hadn’t, I wouldn’t be here today.”

A long-time adoption and pro-life advocate, Bomberger wanted to expand his part-time efforts into full time. He said there was something missing in other pro-life campaigns: abortion’s disparate impact on the black community. The former creative director for motion graphics broadcast media parlayed his skills and resources into starting a comprehensive organization that creates campaigns like the billboards. One of his billboards depicts a black child and the words Black Children Are An Endangered Species.

“We had no idea that our first billboard campaign would take hold the way it would and get the kind of media reaction it did,” he said. Some people asked why he focuses on abortion among blacks. “I always compare it to breast cancer awareness.”

Although men and women get breast cancer, the disease impacts women the most. Abortion kills unborn babies, regardless of race or sex, but it’s impossible to ignore or to gloss over the fact that black women have abortions at higher rates (between three and five times higher) than women of other races and ethnicities.

Bomberger’s work has attracted support from such pro-life advocates as Dr. Alveda King, niece of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.; Rev. Walter Hoye, president of the Issues4Life Foundation; Arnold M. Culbreath, urban outreach director of Protecting Black Life; and Day Gardner, president of the National Black Pro-Life Union.

“I didn’t know anybody in the pro-life establishment,” he said. “That was pretty powerful to get that kind of positive feedback and reaction from people who believe not just the messaging but were willing, in what others were calling provocative and controversial…to put their faces and their words behind it to endorse it.”

Bomberger has received thousands of positive e-mail from everyday people of different races thanking him for his work in the pro-life and adoption movements. “We speak to several hundred thousand people a year at various events and conferences…and to get the incredible feedback is very encouraging, knowing that we’re connecting to people, that we’re moving people, that we’re inspiring people. It makes all of our efforts—and all the denunciations from liberal groups like the NAACP and ACLU—worthwhile.”

Bomberger v. NPR

Bomberger’s billboard campaign led to an NPR “debate” between him and Rev. Carlton Veazey, president and CEO of the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice, formerly known as the Religious Coalition for Abortion Rights. He said he’d approached several key pro-abortion leaders to debate, and they continually turned him down. He didn’t reach out to Veazey, however; NPR approached Bomberger.

After previously interviewing with NPR for thirty minutes to talk about one of his billboards, only to be completely cut out of the three-minute segment that aired, Bomberger was skeptical.

“It wasn’t about me being spotlighted, but how do you cut out the person who created the campaign and explained the reason behind the campaign?” Despite this experience, he agreed to another interview. “I should have known better.”

NPR called Bomberger fifteen times in three minutes about the validity of his conception story. “How do I know that my story is really true? Because according to the enlightened senior producers at NPR, when you’re adopted, the agencies don’t tell the adoptive parents any of those details. They’re all private.” Not true, Bomberger said. “Adoptive parents are given every detail they possibly can be given.”

Bomberger wanted the opportunity to debate Veazey, a man who “apparently loves to use religion to justify killing,” so he agreed to appear. His skepticism was warranted. He said NPR censored his portion of the debate on the broadcast. “Their heavy editing of only The Radiance Foundation’s perspective, while preserving every word spoken by Reverend Carlton Veazey, revealed NPR’s typical liberal bias and uninformed defense of Planned Parenthood,” he wrote on his blog. NPR officially denied favoring the pro-abortion side and so far has refused to release the unedited version of the debate.

Fatherhood and the Future

Bomberger has found his calling, and he’s committed to spreading the message. He and Rev. Walter Hoye of the Issues4Life Foundation launched a bicoastal billboard campaign on fatherhood.

In previous campaigns, they talked to pastors across the country and other leaders about the need to “step up to responsibility… and deal with the myriad of issues that are plaguing the inner city.”

Bomberger intends to highlight the hypocrisy among leftists on racial disparities. For example, health care disparities typically are characterized as a negative. “But abortion is the only one that apparently has a positive connotation,” he said. For organizations like the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League and Planned Parenthood, racial disparities in abortion, illegitimacy, and fatherlessness don’t seem to be a pressing concern.

“This is the first time we’re making [fatherhood] the focal point…and it’s crucial for us to awaken men to return to their role as providers and defenders…to be the kind of man that steps up to responsibility,” whether married or not.

The new campaign also will touch on child abuse, which occurs more frequently in female-headed homes with live-in boyfriends. “Where are the protectors?” Bomberger said. “It’s hard to address the issue of abortion and not talk about the other half of the equation.”

With many irons in the proverbial fire, Bomberger will contend with accusations that pro-lifers don’t care about children once they’re born. He’s living proof to the contrary. A strong advocate for transracial adoption, Bomberger is frustrated by blacks who oppose it, even as black children languish in the system. He could have languished as well, but Christians rescued him. His adoptive mother’s father threatened to disown her, but she’d made her decision.

“Losing a father to gain a son. I’m glad she went with the right one.”

(Photos courtesy of Ryan Bomberger)

I hear the zombie show on AMC, “The Walking Dead,” is getting hot. The second season premiere broke records. Good for them. Zombies are underrated, don’t you think?

In 2008, I interviewed the actor Jon Bernthal, who plays Shane Walsh. I’d reviewed an independent film called Day Zero for Blog Critics and wanted to talk to one of the actors. From the available actors I chose Bernthal.

Day Zero is set in the near future, and America is going to war. Three friends receive draft notices and have 30 days to report for duty. Bernthal played a cab driver, and his character’s love interest was played by Elisabeth Moss, who portrays Peggy Olson on AMC’s “Mad Men.” Small world.

Since I’m getting a number of hits for “jon bernthal,” I thought I’d reprint the telephone interview originally published at Blog Critics in 2008:

Raised in Washington, D.C., country music-loving actor Jon Bernthal went to Russia to study acting and ended up playing professional baseball. He’s no longer playing ball, but his acting career is on the upswing. In the independent film Day Zero (read the review), Bernthal plays a street-wise cab driver named James Dixon who, along with two friends (played by Elijah Wood and Chris Klein), receives a draft notice and has 30 days to report for duty. The story follows the trio as they struggle with political and personal convictions, fear, and leaving behind loved ones.

I asked Bernthal about his character, his patriotism, and his upcoming projects.

What was your first reaction after reading the script?

My first reaction was I had to do this movie. I just read a character description on Dixon, and I called my agents and asked for a script. As soon as I put it down…I was a man on a mission. I wrote to the producers, I wrote to the writer, and I said…you’ve got to let me audition for this, you’ve got to see me. I know I’m meant to play this role. You know that the business of Hollywood is difficult. These guys, they really took a risk on me. They need big stars to get these movies made, and there’s a lot of interest in this. I wasn’t able to get in the room because nobody knew who I was and it was a challenge. I knew I had to play this role, and I wasn’t going to take no for an answer.

Your character, ready-to-fight tough guy James Dixon, seems to have nothing to lose. Then he falls in love. How did that affect the character’s strong convictions?

He’s a guy who lives by a code and being there for his friends, the few people he’s been able to make connections with in his life. I think this code he lives by and these convictions he’s lived his life by wound up getting him in a lot of trouble. That being said, he would never change who he is. It makes him the guy that he is. Finally, somebody shows him what he’s shown to other people. I think that it’s totally revolutionary for him, and I think that he has to stay, he has to be with her. It made everything kind of haywire, and he’s got to prioritize for the first time.

Which character in Day Zero do you most identify with?

Dixon.

Meaning you’re that patriotic?

You know, patriotic is a weird word. There’s many kinds of patriotism. It doesn’t mean that you have to be a hawk, you know? That you have to be pro-war. I think that Dixon isn’t necessarily pro-war. I think he’s pro-responsibility, pro-duty. He thinks, as I do, that this country affords many people a lifestyle that other places and other people in the world could only dream of. Unfortunately, there’s not much that this country asks of us, and I think we…sometimes get caught up with being as comfortable as possible and don’t think about any sort of the responsibilities we have to the environment or to our neighbors around the world. I think [Dixon's] conviction is something that I aspire toward.

What was it like working with Elijah Wood [Frodo Baggins from Lord of the Rings]?

Oh man, it was terrific. Elijah’s the most professional person I’ve ever come around. He works incredibly hard. He’s incredibly positive. I’m kind of a slob. I just could not believe the way he took care of his costume. He was just such a consummate professional. He was such a joy to have on set. In the beginning of that process, he was really the heart and soul of everything. He just kind of inspired everyone to work the longer hours.

We had no money, so we were up all night, you know, out in the cold and the rain a lot of the time. I know it’s “boo-hoo,” these actors, right? I know it’s all ridiculous, but at the end of the day it was so great to see a bona fide movie star so incredibly down to earth…always has time for a guy on the street, you know? And just never a bit of negativity from him. He was an inspiration.

What projects are you working on now?

I’ve been working on The Pacific, which is an HBO mini-series. It’s the next installment sort of like Band of Brothers. It’s Steve Spielberg and Tom Hanks, just like Band of Brothers. It’s another WWII mini-series. We were trained by the Marine Corps, by real Marines, and it was just an honor for these guys to take the time and let us sort of feel and taste what it’s like to be a real Marine. Obviously without real bullets being shot at you.

I’m not going to sit here and go, “Oh, it was so hard,” but the fact of the matter is that these guys take a lot of pride in what they do and they really want the Marine Corps represented in the right way. What these Marines did for us in WWII was just astonishing. It’s time for this story to be told, and I can’t imagine a better group of people to tell this story. They’re doing it right, and I think it’s really going to be a terrific project.

Besides that I have a project called Bar Starz coming out, and a movie called The Air I Breathe [starring Kevin Bacon and Forest Whitaker] coming out, which also was at Tribeca. They’re both [directed by] first-time directors.

When you blow up and become a big star, will you let me interview you again?

[Laughing] You’re crazy! I will always let you interview me. I promise you that, no matter what. And you’ve got to promise the same for me.

Definitely.

From Brett McCracken:

“As a ‘movement,’ Occupy Wall Street doesn’t reveal an organized grassroots agenda as much as it represents a general climate of anger, frustration, and antagonism against the ‘haves’–a suspiciously narrow (1%), heartless, no good very bad group whose entrepreneurial success and capitalistic success apparently oppress the 99% of us have-nots who are being unfairly kept from sharing in the 1 percent’s riches.

“Mostly, though, Occupy Wall Street represents the natural discontent of an entitled generation raised on the notion that we deserve things, that the government owes us something, that everything we want should be accessible, and that somehow we are not responsible if we don’t end up quite as successful in life as we’d hoped. It’s a blame-shifting problem. It’s an inability to delay gratification or go without that which we believe is our right or destiny. And it’s a problem both on the micro/individual and macro/government level.”

(I reviewed Brett’s book, Hipster Christianity, for the Christian Research Journal.)

(AP Photo/Andrew Burton)

Update: Wall Street Journal (emphasis added): “But to the extent that the mainly young demonstrators have a valid complaint, it’s that they are trying to bust their way into an economy where there is one job for every five job-seekers, and where youth unemployment runs north of 18%. That is a cause for frustration, if not outrage.

“The question is, outrage at whom? On Wednesday, Occupy Wall Street marched on J.P. Morgan Chase’s headquarters, after having protested outside CEO Jamie Dimon’s home the previous day. That’s odd, seeing that J.P. Morgan didn’t take on excessive mortgage risk and didn’t need (although it was forced to take) TARP money. The demonstrators also picketed the home of hedge fund mogul John Paulson, who made much of his recent fortune betting against the housing bubble, not helping to inflate it.
…
“Still, if anyone in the Occupy Wall Street movement wants an intellectually honest explanation for why they can’t find a job, they might start by considering what happens to an economy when the White House decides to make pinatas out of the financial-services industry (roughly 6%, or $828 billion, of U.S. GDP), the energy industry (about 7.5% of GDP, or $1 trillion), and millionaires and billionaires (who paid 20.4% of all federal income taxes in 2009). And don’t forget the Administration’s rhetorical volleys against individual companies like Anthem Blue Cross, AIG and Bank of America, or against Chrysler’s bondholders, or various other alleged malefactors of wealth.”

Michelle Malkin (emphasis added): “Unlike Tea Party activists who focused like a laser beam on politicians in both parties responsible for redistributing wealth to Big Business cronies by force, the Occupy Wall Street movement is everywhere and nowhere. The entitled Kamp Alinsky Kids are poaching WiFi and trespassing on private property under the guise of ‘social justice,’ but in plain service of themselves.”

From the Right Sphere: “Since ‘Occupy Boston’ has forced the cancellation of the Greenway Mobile Food Fest, The Right Sphere is trying to raise $1,000 for the Greater Boston Food Bank, which was supposed to benefit from that event. Please consider donating as little as $1, $5 or $10 to the Greater Boston Food Bank to help defray the Occupy movement’s damage to Boston’s nonprofits and to to show that we can put our money where our mouth is and support the needy in Boston.”

Only Democrats can get away with implying that blacks are too lazy, ignorant, or stupid to go down to the local DMV and obtain a driver’s license or non-driver photo ID card.

Voter ID laws, designed to protect the integrity of the voting process, have been a hot topic in recent years. Politico reports that so-called civil rights groups have accused Texas Governor Rick Perry of signing a “strict” voter ID law that discriminates against blacks and Hispanics. Under the previous law, voters were allowed to show documents like utilities bills, bank statements, and paycheck stubs if they didn’t have photo ID. The new law takes effect on January 1.

Is the Texas law discriminatory because it applies only to blacks and Hispanics? Or does the local DMV bar these groups from applying for driver’s licenses or non-driver photo ID cards? Is their application fee higher than everyone else’s? Perhaps blacks and Hispanics are disproportionately averse to posing for bad photos that add 20 pounds.

Find out!

It’s a simple question.

Addendum: Live Action interviews Ray Comfort, the man who made the video. Comfort also works with actor Kirk Cameron at The Way of the Master ministry.

Marriage, a universal institution of divine origin, is the foundation on which to order society, build families, and raise children. The majority of juvenile delinquents and men in prison were raised in female-headed households. Children living in single-parent households are more likely to be poor, abuse alcohol and drugs, and have babies outside marriage.

Generally, married men and women are safer, healthier, happier, and financially better off than their single, separated, or divorced counterparts. Fathers married to the mother of their children are more emotionally and financially invested in their offspring.

Children living with their married, biological parents have greater academic achievement and fewer behavioral problems, and report higher levels of psychological well-being. Notwithstanding efforts to undermine, redefine, and mock marriage, children greatly benefit when their parents are committed to each other and to them.

Some believe marriage is only a “piece of paper,” and that living together without the piece of paper is less harmful to children than divorce. According to “Why Marriage Matters: Thirty Conclusions from the Social Sciences,” a new study cosponsored by the Center for Marriage and Families at the Institute for American Values and the National Marriage Project (NMP) at the University of Virginia, they’re wrong. Divorce no longer is the greatest threat to family stability and child well-being. Cohabitation (also known as shacking up) is “the largest unrecognized threat to the quality and stability of children’s family lives.”

The good news is the divorce rate is down since peaking in the early 1980s, but family instability is increasing. Children are much more likely to live in cohabiting households than divorced households. In these less stable and more dangerous unions, children are at least three times more likely to be physically, sexually, and emotionally abused than children in intact, married families. The researchers concluded that “cohabitation has emerged as a powerful alternative to and competitor with marriage.”

It seems counterintuitive. If children fare better living with two married parents than one, they’d fare the same or only slightly worse living with two unmarried parents. That’s not the case with abuse. According to the report, children in cohabitating homes are “markedly” more likely to suffer abuse than those in both intact, married families and single-parent families. However, children in cohabitating households fare better economically than children in single-parent households.

Sociologist and NMP director W. Bradford Wilcox said that unmarried couples living together are more likely to be unfaithful and to break up.

“But is cohabitation really the problem, or some deeper factor — like poverty or relationship troubles that predated the cohabitation?” Wilcox wrote on a New York Times blog. “The truth is that these other factors account for some of cohabitation’s negative impact but the best studies suggest that cohabitation also has an independent negative effect, precisely because it does not institutionalize commitment in a way that is easily understood and honored by romantic partners and their friends and family.”

The study also focused on “complex households,” where children and adults live with half-siblings, stepsiblings, stepparents, and stepchildren, and referred to “multiple-partner fertility,” in which parents have children with more than one partner. These children tend to have behavioral and health problems, perform poorly in school, and report poor relationships with their parents.

Family instability has always hit poor and working-class communities hardest. While family instability is prevalent in poor communities, research shows that it’s rising in lower middle-class communities. In contrast, marriage is becoming stronger among more educated and affluent communities.

Children live in a separate-and-unequal society not caused by racism or so-called bias. There is a marriage gap between more educated parents who married before having children and remain together raising the children, and less educated parents who don’t. Senior Manhattan Institute fellow Kay Hymowitz discussed the marriage gap between better educated mothers and less educated single mothers in Marriage and Caste in America: Separate and Unequal Families in a Post-Marital Age. Despite the so-called sexual revolution, which arguably benefited men more than women, better educated women continued to marry before having children.

More educated mothers tend to be dedicated to what Hymowitz calls The Mission, “the careful nurturing of their children’s cognitive, emotional, social development.” The goal is to produce children who do well in school, go to college, marry, and have children. She calls it common sense (backed up by research) that mothers with husbands have a greater chance of fulfilling The Mission.

The NMP report’s researchers acknowledge that marriage isn’t the cure-all for society’s problems, but they contend that marriage is “an issue of paramount importance” if we want to protect our most vulnerable citizens, “the working class, the poor, minorities, and children.”

Although attitudes about marriage have changed over the years, the importance of marriage to children and to society has not changed. The research is solid and mounting. Children are safer and more likely to thrive living with a mother and father married to each other. Regardless of how society tries to minimize or radically redefine marriage, it’s the best environment in which to raise healthy, happy, and law-abiding citizens.

Originally published last year in the Christian Research Journal

That which has been is what will be,
That which is done is what will be done,
And there is nothing new under the sun.
Is there anything of which it may be said,

“See, this is new”?
It has already been in ancient times before us.
There is no remembrance of former things,
Nor will there be any remembrance of things that are to come
By those who will come after.

King Solomon’s words in Ecclesiastes 1:9–11 echo through the generations. There is no new thing; we only forget what has come before. For instance, we are born rebels, yet each youthful generation that rebels believes its insurrection is novel. Seeking to set ourselves apart from the majority, to impress the world with our unique style and way of living, is part of our nature. We want to stand apart from the larger group but seek acceptance from a more insular group.

Brett McCracken, a twenty-something journalist, examines these and other tensions in Hipster Christianity: When Church and Cool Collide. The self-described Christian hipster surveys his own “cool Christianity” subculture, questions whether these Christians are obsessed with being different for its own sake, and discusses the impact the quest for cool has on our faith.

The History of “Hip.” McCracken defines the hipster as a young, fashionable, and “independent-minded contrarian.” He embarks on a well-researched exploration that tracks the evolution of hip, from as far back as the Enlightenment to America’s founding to the post-World War II hipster era to 1960s hippiedom to the present-day incarnation of “a commitment to total freedom from labels, norms, and imposed constraints of any kind.”

The seeds of Christian hipsterdom were sown in the 1960s, when teenage Baby Boomers became a cultural force. As the culture goes, so goes the Christian church. Youth ministries sprang up, but churches still faced an important question. Given the church’s square and oppressive image, and youth’s countercultural rebellion, how was the church to reach them? McCracken is critical of the church, which at times has bowed to the culture to reach young Christians. Cool, as defined by mainstream culture, collided with the church’s values.

From this flowed the unexpected rise of hipster Christianity in the form of the Jesus People and Christian rock music. Next came the cultural co-option of Christianity as a sort of retail brand. The current form of Christian hipsterism mocks and rebels against this branding. Christian hipsters typically don’t like megachurches, altar calls, the 700 Club, contemporary Christian music, or Christian movies. They like breaking taboos and getting tattoos. They tend to drink and may smoke, and they prefer the term Christ follower to Christian. Generally, they like alternative and independent secular music, movies, and books “well respected by their respective artistic communities—Christian or not.” McCracken offers examples of Christian hipster “figureheads,” such as musician Sufjan Stevens and writer Lauren Winner, author of Real Sex: The Naked Truth about Chastity, and he lists top Christian hipster cities and churches.

The “Cool” Conundrum. What distinguishes the Christian hipster from his secular counterpart? The Christian hipster strives to live a more Christlike life, as befitting a believer, and he’s marked by “significantly less” hedonism, less cynicism, less drug use, and less premarital sex. Nevertheless, McCracken concludes that the pursuits of Christianity and cool are irreconcilable.

“Cool” trails, which include individualism, alienation, and rebellion, are problematic for the Christian, because these things tend to cause self-centeredness, loneliness, and elitism. Rebelliousness, for instance, isn’t always a bad thing. Jesus Himself was a rebel. But an attitude of rebelliousness can easily move from breaking oppressive rules to breaking rules that help us grow in grace.

When is Christian coolness authentic? When it sincerely celebrates what’s good about art and culture apart from trendiness, when it’s centered on Christ and not consumption and image, when it’s different from the world, and when it’s willing to say no to sin.

“We easily forget that our Christian beliefs are actually pretty radical, unheard of, life-changing, world-shaking, and elegant,” McCracken writes. Why should we fear unpopularity or being out of touch? The Christian shouldn’t concern himself with outward coolness and being different for its own sake. Our faith sets us apart. We should dare to be different as new creations in Christ.

Though Hipster Christianity adopts a tongue-in-cheek tone at times, it’s appropriate to the material. McCracken attempts to generate a serious discussion about a subculture of believers trying to set themselves apart, like generations before and generations to come. The impulse to stand out, however, is satisfied only in Christ.

Originally published April 3, 2007, on Townhall.com

Chastity is a misunderstood virtue.

It is more than simply refraining from premarital sex. It’s an attitude, a way of life, and open rebellion against a debauched culture. Contrary to popular opinion, Christians don’t think sex is dirty or evil. Christians believe sex outside marriage is wrong.

The Thrill of the Chaste: Finding Fulfillment While Keeping Your Clothes On is part memoir and part how-to guide on giving up casual sex, embracing chastity, and experiencing “a life more hope-filled, more vibrant, and more real” by putting sex in its proper place. That kind of life, says author Dawn Eden, is the thrill of the chaste.

The thirty-something [now former] New York Daily News editor, blogger, and Christian convert has written a nakedly honest book for a specific audience: single women ready to admit that premarital sex is not making them happy or helping them find the husband they desperately seek.

In The Thrill of the Chaste, Eden contends that our casual sex culture encourages singles to view one another as commodities. Like many young single women, she was caught up in the hype that sex is the way to a man’s heart. Eden began to understand that premarital sex and its attendant baggage actually made it less likely that she’d get married. For example, to protect oneself from the eventual let-down of casual encounters, one must develop a toughness. In Eden’s case, she sabotaged relationships before she got dumped so she could remain in control.

“[T]he same armor that enabled me to tolerate casual sex made me less attractive to the kind of man I most desired.”

Eden says dissolving the hard shell and allowing herself to be open and vulnerable have helped her be more capable of sustaining a long lasting relationship like marriage. Yes, Eden readily admits she wants to get married and believes God has called her to marriage. She also recognizes that some women reading the book want to get married and provides practical advice on how to meet marriage-minded men who share their faith.

Whether religious or not, women reading The Thrill of the Chaste will be able to relate to Eden’s descriptions of awkward morning-after scenarios. No matter what feminists claim, it is futile to deny that women become attached. “Women are built for bonding,” writes Eden. Sex detached from love leads to a feeling of emptiness.

Being chaste has a strong spiritual component, and to practice it requires a purpose beyond mere abstention from sex until marriage. God created us as relational beings to experience his love and show that love to others. The sexual part of the martial relationship bears more than physical fruit (children). Spiritual fruit borne by two uniting together as one is the “gift of self that they give to each other,” writes Eden, which “becomes a gift to the Lord.”

Bucking the culture and remaining obedient to God present the same problems they always have. As Eden writes, “The most challenging part of chastity isn’t overcoming temptation. It’s gaining the spiritual resources to joyfully face day-to-day life as a cultural outsider.” And Christians know that kind of joy is found only in Christ.

The Thrill of the Chaste encourages single women to focus on sharing God’s love with others and growing in grace rather than putting “the goal of meeting a husband at the center of “thoughts, actions, and dreams.” Eden has found fulfillment in chastity, and she’s using her God-given gifts to help others find fulfillment, too.

Originally published in 2003 on Townhall

When the Ayatollah Khomeini first referred to the United States as “The Great Satan” at the time of the Iranian Revolution in 1979, he wanted to invoke the image of the Seducer, the Liar of all liars. According to the Koran, Satan is “an insidious tempter who whispers in the hearts of men.” To Muslims, America is not a superpower to be feared, but a deceiver to be obliterated.

In his concise, best-selling book, The Crisis of Islam: Holy War and Unholy Terror, Bernard Lewis examines the religious origins of terrorism and takes the reader through thirteen centuries of the history of Islam. He explores key events leading up to terrorism in the twenty-first century. A follow-up to his best-selling What Went Wrong, this readable, 184-page book includes four maps showing the expansion of Islam in the Middle East from 622 A.D. to the present.

Lewis’s thesis is that Islam’s current obsession with the United States isn’t a recent phenomenon, and its hatred isn’t just about Israel. To Muslims like Osama bin Laden, the war against the “Land of the Unbelievers” is a religious one. Despite President Bush’s pronouncement that Islam is a religion of peace, Lewis makes clear that it is not. The Middle East’s escalating hatred for the West challenges many assumptions Americans–who are baffled by this hatred–may have about Islam.

A Middle East expert, Lewis proffers that Americans are puzzled by this venomous sentiment because their general level of historical knowledge is “abysmally low.” Muslims, however, are defined by their history: who they are, where they came from, and what they perceive as God’s purpose for their lives. “For [Osama] bin Laden, his declaration of war against the United States marks the resumption of the struggle for religious dominance of the world that began in the seventh century,” Lewis writes.

For example, to the Middle East, President Bush is just a successor in a long line of rulers–from the Byzantine emperors of Constantinople, the Holy Roman Emperors in Vienna, Queen Victoria, and other European imperialists–who were serious impediments to the divinely ordained expansion of Islam, merely delaying its inevitable conquest. Without understanding how important history is to followers of Islam and how important it should be to Americans, the confusion will continue.

With an engaging style, Lewis traces the development of Islam from the prophet Muhammad in seventh century Arabia, to the rule of the caliphates, under which Islam grew to become a world religion in barely a century. He dedicates a chapter to the influence of oil wealth in the spreading of Wahhabism, a strict and violent sect established in Saudi Arabia. The Wahhabis have been able to broaden their version of Islam worldwide because of Saudi Arabia’s oil money and power in the Middle East. Lewis contends this violent sect would have remained an isolated fringe without oil wealth. His point raises interesting questions about America’s present alliance with Saudi Arabia.

One of the most interesting aspects of The Crisis of Islam is the connection Lewis makes between failed social movements–Nazism, Soviet Marxism and Socialism–and the anti-American sentiment in the Middle East. These social theories played a key role in building the foundation of their anti-Americanism, a fact many are either unaware of or have forgotten (Ironically, the Middle East’s contempt for the West also had origins in the nihilistic philosophy so familiar to the brooding American college student). Muslim intellectuals in the 1930s and 1940s embraced the philosophy of these movements not because they thought them great, but because anti-Americanism was a distinct part of the message. The book is packed with such fascinating facts.

Lewis challenges twenty-first century Americans’ assumption that Muslims hate America because of its alliance with Israel. At the establishment of the Jewish state in 1948, the U.S. was cautious and maintained limited contact with Israel. Not until the spread of Soviet influence in the Middle East during the Cold War did the U.S. begin to see Israel as a well-positioned ally. Countries such as Russia and France have had much deeper involvement with Israel, but the Middle East’s wrath seems to be focused on America.

In the post-Cold War era, the U.S. is unmistakably the dominant force in the world. For the first time in centuries, Lewis argues, the Osamas have no useful enemies of the West to turn to for support in an attack against the U.S. To paraphrase Lewis, radical Muslims realized that if they wanted to fight the U.S., they had to do it themselves. The war has only just begun.

In the last chapter of the book, “The Rise of Terrorism”, Lewis discusses what he calls “new-style terrorists”, where innocent civilians–not just one person–are the prime target. The goal is to inspire fear and gain international publicity. Lewis instructs the reader in the Koran, declaring that suicide is a major sin and punished by eternal damnation in Islam. The terrorists who attacked the U.S. on September 11 have no justification in Islamic doctrine or law and no precedent in Islamic history. Islamic terrorists are in direct contradiction to their holy book.

The Crisis of Islam has no happy ending. Closing on a somber note, Lewis writes, “If the fundamentalists are correct in their calculations and succeed in their war, then a dark future awaits the world, especially the part of it that embraces Islam.” If The Crisis of Islam leaves us with only one lesson, it should be this: Islam is a religion, a culture, and a way of life. The more we understand this world and our place in it, the better equipped we’ll be to defend ourselves against those who are willing to die to annihilate us.

Originally published March 24, 2006, on Townhall.com

From fatherlessness flows many things.

Fatherless children are more likely to be poor, perform poorly in school, engage in premarital sex, become teen parents, abuse drugs, and commit crimes than children from intact families. Black children are significantly less likely than other children to be raised in intact families. In 2004, a mere 35 percent of black children were living with two parents, compared to 83 percent of Asian children, 77 percent of white children, and 65 percent of Hispanic children.

Despite decades worth of research on the damage wrought by illegitimacy, a research psychologist named Peggy Drexler attempts to argue that lesbian couples and “single by choice” mothers do a better job of raising boys than married couples in Raising Boys without Men: How Maverick Moms are Creating the Next Generation of Exceptional Men.

Drexler, a mother of two and married for 36 years, interviewed a small and limited number of lesbian couples, heterosexual women who volunteered to deprive their sons of fathers, divorced mothers, and their sons. Her “maverick moms” reject “social judgments” and stress “communication, community, and love” in their roles as mothers.

In one form or another throughout the book, Drexler sets up the strawman, “Mother love doesn’t hurt our boys.” I have never heard reasonable people make such a claim. Unlike Drexler, most people believe that “mother love” and “father love” need to balance each other, which is why intact families are best for children. Drexler often exaggerates and uses the most extreme examples throughout the book to support her biases.

Raising Boys Without Men will give aid and comfort to single mothers, but a house full of them, no matter how well off, won’t ever change the fact that boys want and need fathers. Considering the utter devastation fatherlessness has caused in black communities, it would be easy to go off on Drexler, but she makes clear that she focused on mostly white, affluent lesbians and single mothers.

Why didn’t she interview black single mothers and fatherless boys in inner cities, mothers whose fatherless sons are in and out of the criminal justice system, and boys who are fathers themselves by the time they’re teenagers? Drexler writes:

Like mine, most research in this area has concerned a primarily White and privileged population. Lesbian identity among socioeconomically subordinate groups is generally less visible or less affirmed than it is among more prosperous, White, educated, urban populations. Ethnographic evidence suggests that closeted lesbian and gay people of color often value racial solidarity over sexual adhesiveness. Racial/ethnic allegiances may deter disproportionate numbers of people of color from coming out.

In other words, interviewing poor or economically disadvantaged, black heterosexual or closeted lesbian mothers would not have yielded the results that Drexler, an advocate for white, affluent, lesbian-headed households, was seeking.

Incidentally, the feminist movement traditionally has been a white and affluent phenomenon, although its effects have reverberated through all levels of society. The late Betty Friedan was a suburban homemaker who likened her home life to a concentration camp. For whatever reason, she was unhappy being married and trying to raise decent human beings. It sounded like a personal problem to me, but her book, The Feminine Mystique, marked the unofficial beginning of the feminist movement and sparked a revolution.

Although women had legitimate claims, especially when it came to equal wages for equal work, feminism went much further by waging war against the last standing pillar of society: the traditional family.

Feminists argued that women should be free to work outside the home and to be sexually promiscuous (and irresponsible). Chasteness until marriage was Victorian and repressive, and marriage was stifling and demeaning. A new crop of young women became sexually available to men without the shackles of commitment. The archaic idea of marrying the woman you impregnate was thrown out with the rest of the garbage.

Women from affluent, intact families were able to bounce back from sexual irresponsibility (oh, the irony!) in ways that women from lower-classes, especially those who grew up without fathers, were not. In 1964, a year after Friedan’s book hit the streets and a year before Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan issued a report that warned of the increase of female-headed households in low-income urban areas and associated social pathologies, close to 25 percent of black babies were born to unmarried women. In 2006, the rate is 70 percent.

The irony of ironies is that despite the “independent woman” meme pushed by feminists, too many of their inner city and low-income “sisters” are not independent nor are they dependent on husbands-oppressors, either. They are dependent on the government. The state is the provider. The children grow up mired in a cycle of poverty that is passed from one generation of fatherless children to the next.

A recurring theme in Raising Boys Without Men, despite Drexler’s best efforts to downplay it, is the boys’ desire for fathers. They wanted men — masculine men — in their lives. The clear message of the book is that the boys’ hunger for fathers was trumped by the desires of their progressive “maverick moms.”

The feminist movement spawned generations of selfish women, absentee fathers, and shattered families. Some women may want to be free of husbands, but children certainly don’t want to be free of fathers. And no study will ever prove otherwise.

Originally published in the The Jerusalem Connection, January – February 2008

Blacks and Jews in the United States share a painful history.

As the descendants of slaves—Africans in the U.S. and Hebrews in Egypt — both groups faced persecution and prejudice. They fought alongside one another during the Civil Rights Movement, a struggle against oppression and for racial justice and dignity. Jews were members of and financially supported organizations like the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People and the Urban League, and some were beaten and killed with black Americans during that turbulent time.

Some of the most well-known black leaders of the movement were Christians. The Civil Rights Movement had its beginnings in an appeal to Christian love and the universal brotherhood of men. The black church, as a source of strength and education, played an important role during that era. Churches in the black community were and in some cases still are centers of political activity.

During the “black power” movement of the late 1960s, however, relations between blacks and Jews deteriorated as tension crept in. Even today, this tension is evident. But what about black Christians? Do they believe Israel maintains the promises and blessings of the Abrahamic covenant?

Eric Redmond, a black Reformed pastor in Maryland, says he’s not as pro-Israel as some evangelical Christians seem to be, but he believes “there is a future for ethnic Israel.” He added: “Presently, political state-Israel is simply another political state that needs to work with other nations to live with some sense of peace in the Mid East and the broader world community. Present political-state Israel needs to see Palestinians as people with (God-given) human dignity.”

Glenn Plummet, pastor, co-chair and CEO of the Fellowship of Israel and Black America (FTBA), and founder of the Christian Television Network, seeks to reestablish and strengthen the connection between black Christians and Jews. He urges the two groups to “join hands in fellowship and friendship.”

The shared history of slavery between blacks and Jews is clearly revealed in song. According to FTBAs web site, many Negro spirituals came from Hebrew scriptures. Black Americans used phrases like “Crossing over Jordan,” “Heading toward the Promised Land,” and “Go Down, Moses” to parallel their exodus from slavery and legalized racial discrimination with the Jewish exodus.

There are two schools of thought on Israel’s role in God’s redemption plan. According to “replacement theology,” the Christian church has replaced Israel in God’s plan because of Israel’s rejection of Christ. They believe God’s promises to Israel will be fulfilled in the church. The other school holds that the church is separate and distinct from Israel. That is, the Jews are still considered God’s chosen people, and that Gentiles are spiritual heirs.

Romans 11 teaches that Gentiles are like ingrafted branches of an olive tree. The tree represents God’s covenants with Israel, and Gentiles share in the “nourishing sap” of the tree’s roots. But the Apostle Paul warns us not to boast.

“You do not support the root, but the root supports you… Do not be arrogant, but be afraid For if God did not spare the natural branches, he will not spare you either.” (Romans18, 20 & 21)

Black Christian blogger Darnell McGavock doesn’t believe the Bible teaches replacement theology. He adds, bluntly: “While every Jew [who] refuses to accept Christ today will go straight to hell with all others who refuse Christ, God has promised men that one day he will again call them to Himself, and they will embrace Christ. There are Messianic Jews [in Israel] fighting the good fight of faith, and they need more of our support.”

God promised he would restore the Jews as a nation and that a remnant would be saved. Part of the restoration has taken place. Israel was declared an independent Jewish state in 1948. But the spiritual restoration is yet to come.

“I will bless those who bless you, and whoever curses you I will curse,” God said to Abraham, “and all peoples on earth will be blessed through you.” (Genesis 12:3) Black Christians, who once marched for freedom alongside Jews, ought to be at the forefront in blessing God’s chosen nation.

Whether physical slaves to human masters or spiritual slaves to sin, everyone needs to hear the Gospel to receive true freedom, found only in Christ. Black Christians, descendants of slaves and ingrafted branches on the olive tree, have a unique opportunity to bring this message to the Jews.

Originally published in Biblical Worldview Magazine, December 2005

In the Beginning…

Let there be light. – Genesis 1:3

On January 17, 1998, a 31-year-old CBS Studios gift shop manager in Hollywood, California, broke the biggest story of the decade. The president of the United States had been having an affair with a 23-year-old White House intern, and Newsweek, ready to run the story, spiked it at the last minute.

The gift shop manager was Matt Drudge. An ordinary citizen with a 486 computer had scooped a major news magazine, and journalism hasn’t been the same since. His web site, the Drudge Report, gets over 11 million hits a day and is read by journalists and politicians alike.

“We have entered an era vibrating with the din of small voices,” he told an audience at the National Press Club a few months later. “Every citizen can be a reporter…The Net gives as much voice to a…computer geek like me as to a CEO or speaker of the House. We all become equal.”

Drudge uttered those prescient words before the advent of web sites called weblogs, or “blogs.” Blogs have ushered in a new era, and that sentiment can’t be overstated. Traditional media’s monopoly on what is newsworthy is eroding. Citizen journalists – ordinary people collecting, analyzing, reporting, and disseminating information – are bypassing the gatekeepers.

The blogging explosion is often compared to the Protestant Reformation. With the invention of the printing press, an individual suddenly had the power to communicate with the masses without interference from institutional elites. With the emergence of blogging, we’ve all become potential Martin Luthers in the midst of our own modern day reformation.

What is a blog?

A blog is a frequently updated web site with “posts” arranged in chronological order. Although blogs have certain common features, such as comments, trackbacks, and categories, what makes a web site a blog is the presence of a “permalink,” which is a link to an individual post.

The first blogs appeared around 1999, and the growth of the blog universe, called the “blogosphere,” has exploded since then. According to the Pew Internet & American Life Project, 11 percent of Internet users read blogs in 2003. In February 2004, the figure was 17 percent. It jumped to 27 percent by November 2004. That is a growth of 58 percent. Less than five years old, the blogosphere has grown exponentially. Technorati, a real-time blog search engine, presently tracks over 21 million blogs.

For every imaginable political persuasion, religion, hobby, profession – and perversion – there are blogs. At least one child molester, currently behind bars, kept a blog. But what man uses to accomplish evil, God can and does use for good.

The Believing Blogger

Go into all the world and preach the good news to all creation. – Mark 16:15

God has given us many ways to evangelize the lost, and blogs are the latest tools. As more people go online and discover the blogosphere, there is no shortage of opportunities to fulfill the Great Commission.

Christian blogs come in a wide variety, including devotionals, online journals of mission trips, draft sermons and Sunday School lessons. Others are devoted to raising awareness of persecution around the world, while many focus on politics or doctrinal issues. I blog mostly on politics from a Christian perspective, but I never realized how much I actually knew about the Bible until recently. Thanks to a certain Democratic politician’s penchant for attending black churches during the election season, I’ve had ample opportunities to blog about the Bible.

Last year, Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry implied that if George Bush were a good Christian, he’d spend more money on social programs as a show of  “good works.”

“The scriptures say, what does it profit, my brother, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? When we look at what is happening in America today, where are the works of compassion,” Kerry preached.

Any Christian worth his salt knows Kerry was misinterpreting, misapplying, and politicizing James 2:14-17. The apostle was giving guidance to individual believers, not governments, on how to evaluate their faith to determine whether it is living or dead. A believing political leader does not demonstrate his personal faith by taking more money from taxpayers to give to the “poor.” Giving his own money to feed and clothe the less fortunate may be a work of faith.

Correcting misinterpretation of Scripture is a given, but should Christians entangle themselves in political debates?

Christians and Politics

I am sending you out like sheep among wolves. Therefore be as shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves. – Matthew 10:16

America is bitterly divided politically, and partisan bickering has reached a new level. The most popular Christian bloggers tend to focus on politics and often weave their faith into the discussion. Although I sometimes struggle with mixing faith and politics, I know my faith impacts every area of my life, including which party and policies I favor.

Some insist that Christians should not be involved in politics at all, but there is no biblical basis for this assertion. If our system is truly a government of the people, for the people, and by the people, Christians have an obligation to participate in the governing, whether they do so indirectly by voting or directly by campaigning or running for office.

Public policy shapes society, and Christians ought to be engaged in shaping public policy. For example, if Christians believe abortion is murder, they should try to protect the unborn by influencing the people who write the laws. Religious freedom is another public policy issue important to believers. We know religious oppression exists around the world, and if Christians in the United States don’t want to suffer the same fate, we should always be aware of what elected representatives are advocating. Christians must be informed voters.

Though we are not forbidden to be involved in politics, our involvement must be informed by our faith. Just as voting citizens hold political leaders accountable for their actions, Christians must hold each other biblically accountable and remember that we are one in Christ.

God Blog Convention

Make every effort to keep the unity of the Spirit through the bond of peace. – Ephesians 4:3

In mid-October, about 135 Christian bloggers gathered at the first God Blog Convention (“GodBlogCon”), a three-day conference held at Biola University in La Mirada, California. Topics included pastor blogging, business blogging, Christian philosophy, Intelligent Design, Christian bloggers with non-Christian readers, etc.

Christian bloggers from around the country who knew each only through blogs and e-mail had a chance to meet face-to-face and talk about issues in the Christian blogosphere. I led a session at GodBlogCon called Christian Blogging 101, and we talked about what it mean to be a Christian blogger. Simply being around other bloggers who go through similar trials was edifying.

Dealing with unbelievers can be daunting. One session at GodBlogCon that I didn’t have the chance to attend was called, “When Non-Christians Read Your Blog,” led by Biola University professor Timothy Muehlhoff. He discussed how to blog about faith without alienating nonbelievers.

“We need to write in such a way that people can see themselves presented as…complex people who aren’t monsters,” Muehlhoff said. “As Christians today, we are embroiled in the argument culture and we have forgotten this one thing: ‘Blessed are the peacemakers,’” he said. “Wouldn’t it be nice if we could say we brought a level of civility back to the conversation?”

Yes, it would be nice. Otherwise, we’re only clanging cymbals.

In, But Not Of…

Do not love the world or anything in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. – 1 John 2:15

There is nothing new under the sun. Although blogs are a new medium, their purpose is as old as time: to communicate. The ultimate purpose of the Christian blogger is to communicate the message of the cross, and we must do so in truth and love. It is difficult at times, but we can find comfort in each other. The Bible tells us to confess our sins and pray for one another and be salt and light in a corrupt world as Christ’s witnesses.

The death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ has set us free from the penalty of sin, and we must stay focused on sharing this message. We have a Savior who knows our struggles. Just before he was arrested, Jesus prayed for himself and all believers. His words still bring comfort:

I have given them your word and the world has hated them, for they are not of the world any more than I am of the world. My prayer is not that you take them out of the world but that you protect them from the evil one. They are not of the world, even as I am not of it. Sanctify them by the truth; your word is truth. As you sent me into the world, I have sent them into the world. For them I sanctify myself, that they too may be truly sanctified. (John 17:14-19)