Pop Culture Corner: What Does It All Mean? Sean McGinty and Jennifer Bell Talk Zombies

Jennifer:  I guess this discussion arose from your own mention of an interest in zombies. This got me thinking. In all honesty, up until February 2015, I really never gave them a serious thought. I’ll tell you a little about how my own preoccupation began, and then I’d like to hear from you.

First, I’m very much into the world of writing and the Arts, and what it means for Christians to be both writers/artists and patrons of the Arts. Second, I think TV is undergoing a kind of renaissance, in which the quality has blossomed. There’s something big writer snobs like me talk a lot about: “Literary TV.” This TV Renaissance, so to speak, has totally sucked me in—and I’m no longer dissing TV. Though a lot of it is sooooo very dumb. Third, trends in pop culture fascinate me. What leads to these trends? What do they say about culture? About Christianity? Fourth, I said I’m a snob. I am. I probably shouldn’t say that. Especially in a churchy forum. But, well, my husband and I—having neared the very end of the Great American Novel of Television, “Mad Men”—decided to turn on “The Walking Dead.” Sick fascination? Lurid interest? Zombies are—let’s face it—in. A total cultural phenomenon. So we tried it out.

Sean, let me tell you this: I freakin’ love that show!

Originally, I thought it was dumb (I don’t anymore) and, line-by-line, the writing was weak. Now, I’d suggest that—despite plot holes and unanswered questions—the story is pretty strong. But what’s the deal? Sean, what is your own interest? And should Christians pay attention to this cultural phenomenon?

Sean: Whenever I start thinking about the zombie genre, I end up thinking about a movie that doesn't have a single one: Carriers, the 2009 film starring Chris Pine (the new Capt. Kirk). Quick plot overview: Two brothers and their girlfriends travel across a plague-devastated America in hopes of reaching a childhood vacation spot. The group has adopted a set of rules which need to be strictly followed if they want to stave off infection (ex: Don't try to help the sick because they're already dead). The course of the trip tests how dedicated the foursome truly is to those rules and how they react when they're on the wrong side of them. 

“Rotten Tomatoes” clearly disagrees with me on this, but I think it's a great movie. And relevant to our discussion. It's one that reflects most of the elements that are so attractive in the zombie genre . First on that list, Independence: and not necessarily the good kind. Zombies are the quintessential American monster. I mean, it's a hoard of people that sweep clean the existing government and society, allowing the survivors to set up their own vision of order. That's American Soul 101. The first scene of Carriers has the kids in a stolen Benz, driving through a Western landscape, drinking beer and acting like it’s spring break. It's the picture of freedom from authority, and we love it. It's the same reason John Wayne was a star, striking out to places where he could make his own law and play the game however he liked. Looking at “The Walking Dead,” we see it when Glenn hops in that red sports car and peels out of Atlanta on the wrong side of the road. Nobody tells us what to do.

Jennifer: First, I just added Carriers to my Netflix queue. Second, be very careful what you say about “The Walking Dead.” No spoilers allowed!

Sean: No spoilers, promise. So theme # 1 is Independence. Theme #2 is the presence of Moral Dilemma. The zombie genre is able to engage viewers by pushing the moral stakes to the maximum. It let's us fiddle around with the question of what we would do in similar circumstances. It's a powerful hook although, more often than not, zombie movies bungle it. They tend to contrast merely flawed protagonists with über-wicked bad guys. Since we naturally identify with the hero, I think it causes us to belittle our own fallenness. We like to think of ourselves as Rick Grimes instead of the blatantly evil Governor. Yeah, we're a little messed up; we make mistakes, but deep down we're pretty okay. We do terrible stuff sometimes, but it's justified. Carriers never gives us that option. Without revealing too much, the characters’ attempt to set up their own independence via the rules for survival proves disastrous. These aren't people who help us affirm the basic goodness of humanity. In fact, the character we most identify with, the one who seems the most moral throughout the movie, is the one who commits what is arguably the worst crime of all. And the film doesn't go on to excuse it. It just leaves you with the question of how much are you willing to lose in order to do the right thing.

Jennifer: I can’t wait to see this freakin’ film. (Good point, though, on this basic goodness issue. Much of the artistic offerings we see do not deal with the fallen nature of humankind. We are all Rick Grimes, a pretty good guy.)

Sean:  I think you'll like Carriers. But, finally, the zombie genre is popular simply because it's violent. Theme #3 is Violence.  I had a professor in college who occasionally made shows for the History Channel. He bemoaned the fact that the network required images of sex or violence at least every two minutes in order to keep the viewers attention. “The Walking Dead” is particularly egregious on this count. The producers have routinely giggled like sixth graders about how they're allowed to make the show as bloody as they like. And, ultimately, this is one of the things that holds the show back. “The Walking Dead” is consistently able to ride the wave of shock value instead of working on its many weaknesses.

Jennifer: You know, I’m not totally sure I agree with you on the appeal of violence, but I would need to think more about it. I don’t think I’m into the violence and gore. I think I like the other two things you mentioned, though, and the idea of exploring how the future is constructed by secular society: that interests me a lot. But I need to think more about it.

Without spoilers, what would you say are its weaknesses? If you can’t say without revealing plot stuff, don’t say it.

Sean: I think the main problem is, as you pointed out, the weak writing. You're somewhere in Season 2, right? By the second half of Season 4, it's like they realized that dialogue isn't their forte and just decided to eliminate as much as possible.

Jennifer: I’m sorry to hear that.

Sean: Pacing is also a major issue. By their very nature, zombie stories usually turn into either road trips or sieges. That doesn't give you a ton to work with, and I suspect that's why we get whole episodes of characters going on supply runs . . . and not completing them before the credits roll. That wouldn't be a huge problem if the characters were fleshed out well, but the majority of them have always seemed two-dimensional. And, again, the extreme violence acts as camouflage for all this.

Jennifer: I just want to quickly interrupt you to mention that the road trip element, while not at all unique to Americans, definitely has a special appeal. So, with this zombie apocalypse, we’ve got this admixture of elements like the cowboy/anarchist/renegade, the road trip, and future anxiety. But back to you . . .

Sean: Carriers is a strong contrast here. It doesn't get bogged down with voyeuristic violence. The movie draws its tension from moral choices and relationships, which creates a more lasting impression than the numbing gore of “The Walking Dead.” 

As to whether or not it's important for Christians to be paying attention to the current monster zeitgeist, I'd say no. TV and movies can be fun to watch and discuss, but I don't think they offer much value to the Christian life other than that. I'm of the opinion that Christians are way too concerned with pop culture trends. It seems as though this stems either from the belief that the Gospel isn't interesting enough on its own and needs to be hidden in whatever is popular at the moment, or from the desire to not be seen as all that different from our non-Christian neighbors. These positions, if maintained, will inevitably lead to a watering down of God's Word, a hyper-spiritualization of trivial things, and the dangerous pride of wanting to be thought well of by the world. So sure, relax with a movie or a little TV, but I don't think we should consider it more important than that.

Jennifer:  Oh, no, Sean! I hope you’re up for this. I’m about to totally, unequivocally disagree with you!

Sean: No problem, I like a good back and forth.

Jennifer: Well, first, some kindly affirmation of your thought process! I like what you’re saying about zombies as the quintessential American monster, though—and this is probably important—they have Haitian roots, as well as other important non-American sources. Perhaps what is even more significant than the monster is the response. The response to zombies may be the quintessential American response: Zombies turn us all into cowboys, and cowboys are American.

Sean: I think the Haitian origin of zombies fits nicely into their categorization as American. They're immigrants! And they change pretty dramatically once they land here. The Haitian zombie was sort of like an undead robot controlled by a voodoo wizard. The modern "destroy-the-brain!" hoard didn't show up until Romero's Night of the Living Dead. And yes, I do hate myself a little bit for knowing this much about zombies.

Jennifer: Still, though, why zombies? Doesn’t some other kind of apocalypse evoke the same response? What is so especially important about the Zombie Apocalypse? Why the masses of brainless dead people?

Sean: I'm not sure the zombie apocalypse is really all that different from the wider dystopian genre. Many of the elements that are common in zombie movies are found in series like The Hunger Games or Divergent. I imagine part of the popularity is due to the violence, but I also think it's just a matter of fashion. A decade ago vampires were everywhere; now it's zombies. In another ten years, it'll be Bigfoots or something. Try to turn that one into a supernatural romance, Hollywood!

Jennifer: I’m a little all over the place here, so bear with me—but one of my first responses to “The Walking Dead,” when we began watching and I was all skeptical, was that the brainlessness took something away for me. What? A challenge? They’re dumb! Why is that the face of the apocalypse?

And this is why I’m ultimately disagreeing with you. I think pop culture and TV reflects the heart of the audience, and those interested in zombies are, through their interest, expressing spiritual preoccupations. I have definitely thought about this in terms of the preponderance of apocalyptic films (ranging from I am Legend to The Book of Eli, to barely skim the surface). There are reasons for this preoccupation. They reflect spiritual anxieties, desires, hopes. Where is meaning found in the apocalypse? Why is the apocalypse always so lousy, so fearful? The future is inevitably scary and hopeless. What makes one a hero in the apocalypse?

And, once one has accepted this preoccupation with the end times, we might turn to a secondary question. Why zombies, our favorite apocalyptic creation?

So, let me turn it over to you with this challenge: there’s no such thing as watching TV for the mere purpose of entertainment. We’re selling ourselves short. We need to take every thought captive. Even zombies. Especially zombies. TV as mere entertainment is—dare I say it—distasteful to me.

Sean:  I wouldn't necessarily disagree with the notion that popular TV and film reflect spiritual characteristics of the viewers and creators, but a lot of things do that. Your conversations with your coworkers, the way you spend your money, how you act in a traffic jam: they all reflect the heart to some degree. So my push-back question is what makes TV so special? 

Or, look at it this way, do Christians need TV and movies to grow spiritually? Did Christians prior to the 20th century have a more difficult time increasing in faithfulness? Clearly not, nor would many of those past Christians point to the pop culture elements of their own time as being particularly important.

The only thing that really lays open the heart is God's Word. Scripture describes itself as a sharp sword able to pierce the intentions of a person. The Spirit works through the Word to reveal our sinfulness and the redemption of that sinfulness on the Cross. These are the things that draw us closer to the Lord and subsequently allow us to love people better. Television and movies can't do that, and so I'm hard pressed to think of them as having much importance for the Christian life.

Now, I can appreciate the argument that TV could help us get a bead on cultural issues, which can potentially be useful in communicating the Gospel to non-Christians. Yet, even here, I wouldn't put too much emphasis on it. While every time and place has its own particulars, the humanity of The Aeneid is the same humanity of “The Walking Dead.” That is to say, pop culture isn't really telling us anything we didn't already know. The longing for redemption, for example, is always there. It expresses itself in different ways, but it's not as if Daryl's growth as a character suddenly opens our eyes to its reality.

Jennifer: Them’s fightin’ words, Sean! I won’t go crazy on you, though—and we can’t go on and on about this exhaustively, though it’s tempting. I’m stung by your suggestion that pop culture isn’t really telling us anything we didn't already know. For me, this raises many, many important questions: Is TV “art”? Is it a “low-brow” form of art? Is pop culture also “low-brow”? Is Art or TV or pop culture merely reflective, as opposed to being its own constructive or creative force? And, finally, is Daryl’s growth as a character opening my eyes in any way?

Very briefly, I do want to say this. I really think—and I’ve thought about this way too much—that TV is an art form, and it’s also undergoing a fairly spectacular renaissance, as I mentioned earlier, as it moves closer and closer to the novel. Recent years have revealed something along the lines of literary TV with serialization, which you find in such shows as “The Walking Dead” or “Mad Men.” Unlike the classic daytime soap opera, these new shows worry over big, complex themes—the stuff of Art with a capital A. There’s still a lot of garbage, of course, and “The Walking Dead” is no Sistine Chapel—but the potential for TV is there.

And, in saying this, I would strongly, adamantly, wildly, and ruthlessly argue that Art and pop culture are not merely reflective. In these things, one may see how reality is understood, indeed. But, in these things, one may also see reality better and more clearly than one ever has before. Art and pop culture can offer visions of reality that make sense to us, that help us to comprehend our world, that enlighten us in unheard of ways. I can look at Darryl and understand what it means to be a human made in the Image of God—in a way I’ve never, ever considered before.

I’m going to end here, just because I have to. Final thoughts?

Sean: First off, let me thank you for the discussion. I had a great time talking with you about this! Back to the topic at hand...

In regards to what qualifies as art, I feel completely unequipped to tackle the question. But I'd love to hear you talk about it with one of the RCC artists! So let me sidestep that topic and go on to some of the other issues you raise.

My main concern in this conversation is twofold: one, the static nature of humanity and, two, the sufficiency of Scripture for godliness. In regards to the nature of humanity, I'd reject any notion that modern humanity is inherently different from ancient humanity, and that art is therefore necessary to show us the ever-changing aspects of mankind (just to clarify, I'm not saying you hold to this idea, but it seems to me that this is the logical endpoint of the ideas being advocated). And so it's in this sense that I'm saying that pop culture isn't telling us anything new. Not that individuals can't learn something from pop culture, but that, in light of the broad swath of humanity's history, pop culture doesn't have a new, unique message. 

Second, and this is related to the first point, I believe Scripture provides all we need in order to grow in Christ. Now, that doesn't mean that God hasn't used His people throughout the ages to help us understand Scripture, just that there is no other source of revelation that tells us about increasing in faith. So, with that in mind, I have to absolutely disagree with you about Darryl showing what it means to be made in the Image of God in an unheard of way. We see what it means to be made in the Image of God by looking to the perfect embodiment of the Image of God: Jesus Himself. If Darryl shows us the Image of God in a new way, that means Christ is somehow lacking, and, besides being incorrect, leads to a host of other problems.

Jennifer:  Yeah, I think unheard of way isn’t right.

Sean: Let me use a pop culture example other than “The Walking Dead” to try to sum up my views. Last week, Christianity Today posted an article with the eye-rolling title of "The Prophetic Voice of Leslie Knope," highlighting the main character of the TV show “Parks and Recreation” and, in particular, her love for friends and community. Now, putting aside the question of whether or not a message which doesn't involve God or His Word could ever be described as prophetic, does the message that “Parks and Rec” sends mean that it's important for Christians to watch it? I'd say no. While Christians can, and must, affirm the love of friends and community, we do so because of Scripture's revelation, not because we see it on TV. Indeed, we see exactly what this love is only because of Scripture. The proper use of “Parks and Rec” is to treat it as an enjoyable and entertaining reminder of particular type of love. And that, I think, is the chief purpose of Art (without saying that “Parks and Rec” does or doesn't qualify for the category), to show us beauty and glorify the Lord as the source of all beauty. Art is a mirror that's enriching. Art is not a source of revelation. So, going back to my earlier statement, go ahead and enjoy TV and movies. Hopefully, the good ones will remind you of important things. Hopefully, the good ones will be beautiful. But a Christian isn't spiritually hindered by not watching movies, going to the museum, or visiting the Sistine Chapel. 

Jennifer:  Thanks, Sean. And I love “Parks and Rec.” Though maybe not as much as “The Walking Dead”! Oh, no! Did I just say that aloud? If you’re an Artist—or an Artiste—and you’d like to do one of these über-fascinating dialogues (because you know we don’t fully agree with Sean), let me know.

PANIC ATTACK-ack-ack-ack by Faith Christiansen Smeets (A Super-Duper Intriguing And Longish Piece Which May Kinda Be An Essay)

I had a panic attack, or at least a semblance of one, this past week. If you have never had or heard of a panic attack, here are a few insights into what it’s like: It feels like you are going to die.

You don’t know how or why, but you are pretty sure you are, in fact, dying. Your heart races, and you have tears coming out of your tear ducts when you are only trying to get words to come out of your mouth. You don’t know who to call or where to go exactly. You are incapable of making any decisions, even the physical ones you have come to rely on like eating until you are full or, more importantly, going to sleep when necessary. It feels like you drank fourteen “suicides” and a gallon of high-energy drinks. A “suicide,” for the record, is that magical concoction from when you were a kid and you mixed all the soda fountain options into one glorious drink. A little cola, orange, sparkly, cherry, diet, sugar death sip. It is also known as the “kamikaze.” It feels like you are high on suicide/kamikaze blends with a little speed, and you are just told you have a pop quiz in math. You haven’t done the math homework in weeks and you know, for sure, math is one of those subjects that really is made up of building blocks. You cannot “guess” the answer, no “true or false” to ease the pain. In this math quiz, you have to “show your work.” Panic attacks are, of course, more likely to be brought on by much more serious events than taking a surprise math quiz high on soda pop, but it’s that instant of panic drawn out over a period of time that seems to never end.

I know what you are thinking or at least what I might be thinking about someone who mentions having a panic attack: “Why would you be having a panic attack? Why all the anxiety? Did someone die? Are you going to die…like now? Like tomorrow? ISIS? Were you unjustly accused?” And of course, “Did you pray about it?”  

You have clothes and shelter and some family and your physical health. Your car insurance got paid on time along with your health insurance and a car that runs with or without said insurance. Or your bus is usually on time. You have your eyesight and/or hearing and a few pieces of jewelry your grandmother left you when she passed away. You make really good guacamole that everyone wants at their parties and your boss is an okay guy and you are planning a vacation, just a little drive up north, but a vacation nonetheless. You have medication for your diabetes and a gym membership. You have a big screen TV and a library card. You have High Speed Internet and a crush—or maybe you married that crush. You have some education, right? Or some talent? Or at least one to five of the aforementioned reasons to not have a panic attack? So what is the problem? What are you so worried about? Seems like everything is fine.

It’s funny because anxiety doesn’t always work that way. At least in my experience, it has never worked that way. The uncertainty or incessant worry that causes anxiety that leads to a panic attack or that leads to those darkest hours is a culmination of more than one event and/or untruth in which I have invested consciously or subconsciously. It is not always the obvious stressor like job loss, but rather it is the idea that the job is a reflection of your worth. Some kind of lie. What are you worth? Where does it come from? It is not always the lack of the basics like food and shelter, or one act of trauma like the loss of a loved one—but, rather, it might be the cost financially and emotionally that is involved which causes worry. Life’s events and the lies assigned to or the credence given to these events, subconsciously or consciously, becomes nearly all-consuming and that is a panic attack.

To be clear, I am in no way arguing that anxiety cannot be caused by a lack of life’s basic necessities or a traumatic event, but rather that those rules do not always apply. Anxiety has innumerable sources and unquantifiable power. For me, it’s a culmination of events and an unhealthy perspective based on lies I have chosen to believe. Specifically, what led to the panic attack this week was a flood of what one might consider “a series of unfortunate events” in the middle of what was already a very dark period of lie-harvesting.  

My mom had a stroke, my husband was in a car accident, the patriarch of my family died, a baby passed away on my birthday, my cousin was gravely ill and was malnourished laying in the hospital just waiting for something to change, members in my family are struggling, friends are crying themselves to sleep at night worrying about their adult children, money is disappearing to doctors, rats chewed up my car engine and washing machine wires, and I had not completed one of my new year’s resolutions made for 2014—and here it is 2015 and I was feeling like a real dope. These were just a few things that have taken place in the last few months that I am willing to share in a public forum.

I believe in a loving and gracious God who has made it clear that I am not to worry. And I didn’t call Him. Really, I should have just called God. Every day I should have called God. I should have referenced my Heavenly Father and quoted verses to quiet the fears and the lies and the worry. My lips and tongue should have been dry from continuous prayer. It should have been new every morning, because it is new every morning. My conversations should have been edifying and rejoicing and saturated with gratitude. My daily anxiety should have been cast on Him who cares for me to avoid the overwhelming fretting and lie-inhaling. On my knees, on the floor, on my face, and before Him because He has never forsaken me.  

Not everyone experiences anxiety in a similar manner or as a result of the same conditions. It can be experienced in a variety of ways from a variety of sources. For example, public speaking does not give me a lick of anxiety and some people would rather go to prison than use a microphone. Moreover, not everybody gets panic attacks. Yet sinners encounter an imperfect world here on earth with unforeseen tragedy at every turn and choose to believe in lies, which conjure up fear leading to anxiety. And we sinners have the choice to be lame or not. We have the choice to throw ourselves into His loving arms or not. Next time, I will try to not be lame. Next time, I will try to stop it before it starts by seeking the Truth instead of believing in lies. Next time, I’ll call on His Holy name. I pray next time you encounter someone in the middle of a kamikaze binge pop quiz, you will call on God on his or her behalf. Don’t be lame like me that time I didn’t call.

1 Peter 5:6-8 Humble yourselves, therefore, under God's mighty hand, that He may lift you up in due time. Cast all your anxiety on Him because He cares for you. Be self-controlled and alert. Your enemy the devil prowls around like a roaring lion looking for someone to devour.

30 Black Christians You Should Know: Complete Edition

30 Black Christians You Should Know: All 30!

This unique series - 30 Black Christians You Should Know - was sponsored and promoted by URBAN THEOLOGIAN RADIO. Vocab did the research and created the text for each digital card. Akande Davis of Advent Media provided the graphic design. Megan Rose released the images on social media. You can download and use them for teaching purposes. Do not sell, they are meant to be free. Give Urban Theologian Radio a shout out if you use them. 

 This is the list in the order in which we released them. It is roughly chronological. *the pictures above are in a different order: alphabetical order, by first name.

1. Lemuel Haynes (1753-1833)
2. Benjamin Banneker (1731-1806)

3. David George (1742-1810)4. Oladuah Equiano (1745-1797)

5. Absalom Jones (1746-1818)

6. George Liele (1750–1820)

7. Phillis Wheatley (1753-1784)

8. Daniel Payne (1811-1893)

9. Richard Allen (1760-1831)

10. Lott Cary (1780–1828)

11. John Stewart (1786-1823)

12. Betsey Stockton (1798-1965)

13. Frederick Douglass (1818-1895)

14. Alexander Crummell (1819-1898)

15. John Marrant (1755-1791)

16. Harriet Tubman (1822-1913)

17. Thomas Lewis Johnson (1836-1921)

18. Amanda Smith (1837-1915)

19. George Washington Carver (1864-1943)

20. William Henry Sheppard (1865–1927)

21. Samuel Morris (1873-1893)

22. Francis J. Grimké (1850-1937)

23. Mary McLeod Bethune (1875-1955)

24. Eliza (Davis) George (1879-1980)

25. Montrose Waite (1891-1978)

26. Efrain Alphonse (1896-1995)

27. Thomas A. Dorsey (1899-1993)

28. Andrew Jackson Foster (1925–1987)

29. Matthew Anderson (1845-1928)30. John Perkins (1930- ____ )

PS - Vocab has another 30 men and women already selected. So if you want to see a Part 2 in 2016, give us a holler.

Our Great Big Formal Announcement

We’re about to launch some great writing from Roosevelt Community Church, and this is our big FORMAL announcement.  Look for Tuesday and Thursday posts on facebook around nine in the morning. (We might begin with an exception today, however, just to get things rolling.) There are a variety of writers coming at you, and I’d encourage you to share widely. We have great stuff coming up on Leviticus and  Zombies, Anxiety and Discipleship.

I'm sticking in a little editorial caveat. These are written by individuals, and do not necessary represent all of RCC thinking. We value our peeps, though, so keep this in mind. I mean, you know, I'm the one they got to edit!

This is an ongoing project, so please submit work to me, RCC people. OUR NEXT DEADLINE IS MARCH 22 AT MIDNIGHT, but submit at any time. Though I can mess with stuff, it’s best if you use 12 point font, Cambria, one-inch margins, and single space. If you need specifics on the submits, e-mail or text me.

Witnessing to Family: Urban Theologian Radio Reflection

-->

I’m doing a little combo reflection here, since Randy Newman (the author of Bringing the Gospel Home) guests on both, and the focus is similar in each. Evangelism. Witnessing!

listen at this link: http://goo.gl/e5QCxZ

Yikes.

I wonder—I really do—how the general peeps feel about witnessing.

Do you do it?

Do you like to?

Are you all about the door-to-door thing, or do you keep a low-profile? Do you pull out your Christianity at parties, hound your degenerate family members, show up at deathbeds? How’s the old office witness thing going?

Really, I know that sometimes I’m the one who will to say the candid, albeit slightly skewed, stuff that a lot of people don’t feel comfortable talking about. Like I’ll admit to cussing or I’ll tell people how I couldn’t possibly home school because I suck as both a mom and a teacher, which is pretty funny since I actually am a teacher. BUT: I think I’m going out on a limb here when I say that evangelism is not my favorite thing.

The crazy thing is that, when confronted with this topic, I find myself suffering from writer’s block, which I think is just a great big myth anyway!

I often wonder about evangelism, and how the lives of the folks in Acts are relevant today. Right now, I really only want to pose questions. First, why is it not my thing? Second, do I have a right—biblically speaking—to take such a stance? May I bow out of evangelism?  So, these are, of course, begging a more basic question: Is there a biblical mandate to evangelize?

Matthew 28:19 probably says it best: “Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit . . .” (NIV).

I’m not so sure I can get around that one. I would, though, love to hear how people respond to this commission.

Newman assumes it, and moves on from there. In the first episode, he discusses the process of evangelizing by asking questions. Sounds like the Socratic method to me. This really mirrors Jesus who often answers a question with another question. This not only promotes active engagement rather than a passive kind of distance, but it also has the benefit of revealing insincerity. There’s a difference between sincere discussion and clever, insincere banter. There are plenty of people who enjoy sparring over philosophy, mostly because it can sound pretty smart. But the Socratic method may require sincere engagement.

So where are you?

Do you tell your friends that they’re going to hell, like Elaine’s boyfriend does on “Seinfeld”? Are you Elaine in this? Or Puddy? I’m kinda like George.

In the second radio episode, Newman talks about witnessing to family members. (What’s with all of the “Seinfeld” references?)

I did enjoy the fact that his background was Judaism, so he knew what witnessing to Jewish family members was like. That’s my background, too. I’ve always noted how it seems to me that when a Jewish person converts to Christianity, it‘s somehow one of the most offensive acts possible—right up there with terrorism and child abuse. Or, more accurately, joining a cult. Jesus is an all-out affront; one is turning his or her back on Moses, the Moses. It seems to be a very personal insult against Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.

This had always been my longstanding impression.

But now I realize, having married a Catholic who went all Protestant, that the Catholics aren’t so thrilled by conversion to Protestantism either.

In both situations, philosophical and religious beliefs are seen as affronts against two things that are, apparently, more important than just about anything else: culture and tradition.

Maybe more attention, then, needs to be focused on the importance of culture and tradition, but the ways in which they're intellectually secondary to belief systems.

In such a climate, I know how I’ve personally responded. I just shut up, to be honest. I like the Jewish people and the Catholic people in my life. Fun traditions, appealing culture! I don’t really want to mess with that!

I'm not in a cult!

At least, I'm not right now!

Still: there is the nagging existential stuff. How does the meaning of life fit in?

I get a little schizophrenic. Forget the meaning of life! Can’t we just celebrate Christmas with some uber-Catholic panache and eat some potato latkes? Spin the freakin’ dreidel!

Really, let me just admit to my own hesitancies (failures?), my own inadequacies (failures?), and my own distaste—it is distaste, folks—for an in-your-face witnessing style that presents Christianity in a disingenuous way. What is a disingenuous way? Have you thought about this? What is an effective witness? Is there a quiet witness? How do you feel about leaflets?

Are you with me?

This time, I’m asking for feedback. Where do you stand on evangelism and witnessing?

Written by RCC member Jennifer Bell

REVIEW: Dr. Sarfati Answers Science Questions LIVE!

http://backpack.podbean.com/e/dr-sarfati-answers-creation-science-questions-live-10262014/

BACKPACK RADIO: Episode #214 [October 26, 2014]

Sometimes my kids, all earnest and curious about the world, ask me random questions like, “How far away is the moon?” and “Where are snakes’ butts?”

Inevitably, I’ll answer, “Ask your dad.”

Yeah, I’m that kind of mom.

Early on, I made sure my kids knew what daddy did for a living. When the fridge would break, the eldest declared, “Daddy will fix it! He’s a scientist!” When a battery needed to be changed, the little one would—as instructed—dump it on his desk to wait for his return home. “Daddy’s a scientist! He can do it!”

You’ve got that one right, kid!

True. I married a scientist, and I did it so I never had to change a light bulb again.

Why they never want to know whether or not a verb agrees with its subject, I don’t know. Why they do not want to listen to a spontaneous, albeit fascinating, lecture on the modern novel, I’m not sure.

Really, they just want to hear about the mysterious, elusive, seemingly intangible snake butt.

And, well, you know what I’m thinking: I don’t give a rat’s a## about that. Let’s talk Hemingway, Mark Twain.

Ah, well, science!

I had the opportunity to be among the live audience for this show, and I’m so terribly thankful for guys like Jonathan Sarfati of Creation Ministries, who was on hand to celebrate Backpack Radio’s Fourth Anniversary. I’m thankful for the way Sarfati and others have worked so hard, so tirelessly—often in the face of academic ridicule that is painful and downright nasty—to show Truth.

I actually listened to this broadcast (on computer for the second time) immediately before I listened to Episode #5 on “The New AtheisticMorality” (from October 2010). I happen to also be reading this other book by Nancy Pearcey called Total Truth: Liberating Christianity from Its Cultural Captivity. My hope is to write another reflection on Episode#5 soon, and a semi-official/really-kind-of-informal book review of Pearcey later. Taken together, however, there’s an interesting and important message for Christians. We’re talking worldview. People like Sarfati and other scientists are on the front lines, so to speak, of a raging battle between presuppositions. I think it brave, frankly, to be so forthright.

I was pretty much raised as a creationist. I distinctly remember one instrumental book I read during my Christian high school education: The Genesis Flood by Whitcomb and Morris. I really don’t know how the book has weathered the years, but I do know that when I officially became an “adult” and owned my own bookshelves, I went ahead and made sure I had that book on them. The real science impressed me.

In college, I remember the early scoffing. There were two separate occasions when I admitted that I thought that God created the world and we did not evolve from apes. I remember these two instances, especially, because I was on the road during both of them. Traveling with friends. Talking. No doubt getting into it because people talk about big stuff on the road, and we were college kids. We had ideas, and a few of us said we believed in God—I was not the only one. But when I said that I did not believe in Darwinism, the mouths of friends dropped open. Seriously! You believe in Adam and Eve?!?

The not-so-subtle implication was that only idiots believe in creationism.

What I admire so much about Sarfati and other scientists like him is his willingness to work faithfully in a pretty hostile environment. Why would one do this? What compels such work? What kind of understanding does this involve?

I hope that listeners fully engage with this material. My guess is that many, many people—the religious and the irreligious alike—would be surprised (really surprised!) by the intellectual rigor and integrity and stamina involved in this kind of hardcore scientific work.

LINK to hear the show

Written by Jennifer Bell

Personal Reflection - Idolatry

The following is quoted from a blog post by Tony Reinke, which can be found at http://tonyreinke.com/2011/04/27/idolatry/

Timothy Keller writes the following in his book The Gospel in Life: Grace Changes Everything, Study Guide (Zondervan, 2010), page 40:

Why do we lie, or fail to love, or break our promises, or live selfishly? Of course, the general answer is “Because we are weak and sinful,” but the specific answer is that there is something besides Jesus Christ that we feel we must have to be happy, something that is more important to our heart than God, something that is enslaving our heart through inordinate desires. The key to change (and even to self-understanding) is therefore to identify the idols of the heart.”

After explaining the idolatry theme more closely from Romans 1:18–25, Galatians 4:8–9, and 1 John 5:21, Keller lists particular categories for personal reflection. The idol categories include the following:

“Life only has meaning/I only have worth if…

• I have power and influence over others.” (Power Idolatry)
• I am loved and respected by _____.” (Approval Idolatry)
• I have this kind of pleasure experience, a particular quality of life.” (Comfort idolatry)
• I am able to get mastery over my life in the area of _____.” (Control idolatry)
• people are dependent on me and need me.” (Helping Idolatry)
• someone is there to protect me and keep me safe.” (Dependence idolatry)
• I am completely free from obligations or responsibilities to take care of someone.” (Independence idolatry)
• I am highly productive and getting a lot done.” (Work idolatry)
• I am being recognized for my accomplishments, and I am excelling in my work.” (Achievement idolatry)
• I have a certain level of wealth, financial freedom, and very nice possessions.” (Materialism idolatry)
• I am adhering to my religion’s moral codes and accomplished in its activities.” (Religion idolatry)
• this one person is in my life and happy to be there, and/or happy with me.” (Individual person idolatry)
• I feel I am totally independent of organized religion and am living by a self-made morality.” (Irreligion idolatry)
• my race and culture is ascendant and recognized as superior.” (Racial/cultural idolatry)
• a particular social grouping or professional grouping or other group lets me in.” (Inner ring idolatry)
• my children and/or my parents are happy and happy with me.” (Family idolatry)
• Mr. or Ms. “Right” is in love with me.” (Relationship Idolatry)
• I am hurting, in a problem; only then do I feel worthy of love or able to deal with guilt.” (Suffering idolatry)
• my political or social cause is making progress and ascending in influence or power.” (Ideology idolatry)
• I have a particular kind of look or body image.” (Image idolatry)

Then he looks more closely at the first four categories:

If you seek POWER (success, winning, influence)…

• Your greatest nightmare: Humiliation
• People around you often feel: Used
• Your problem emotion: Anger

If you seek APPROVAL (affirmation, love, relationships)…

• Your greatest nightmare: Rejection
• People around you often feel: Smothered
• Your problem emotion: Cowardice

If you seek COMFORT (privacy, lack of stress, freedom)…

• Your greatest nightmare: Stress, demands
• People around you often feel: Neglected
• Your problem emotion: Boredom

If you seek CONTROL (self-discipline, certainty, standards)…

• Your greatest nightmare: Uncertainty
• People around you often feel: Condemned
• Your problem emotion: Worry

Gospel-Centered Children’s Curriculum: Episode #213 (October 19, 2014)

-->

Gospel-Centered Children’s Curriculum: Episode #213 (October 19, 2014)

click this caption to hear this full episode

I always get a little nervous when someone brings up kids and all of the noble attempts to raise Christian children, kids who stay in the church.

First, my inferiority complex, my personal infirmity—the Lousy Mom Rash—flares. My skin gets red and itchy, and I wonder how in the world I will ever be able to do the right thing. I suck as a mom. I’m a second-rate Christian. I’m not even good at getting my girls riled up for Christmas and Easter. I mean, I can barely muster up the energy and pizzazz for Santa and the Easter Bunny, let alone Jesus and the resurrection.

Second, the stats aren’t so hot. Kids tend to grow up in the Church and get out. I’ve seen it so many times myself—children of awesome, God-fearing parents who are then burning down the doors to get out and away, ready to take on the seductive world with its glories and heartbreaks. I grew up in the church, too, and there have been both good and bad effects of this—most too personal to address here.

This episode, about The Gospel Project’s children’s curriculum often used for Sunday schools, featured Trevin Wax, the content editor of The Gospel Project. I would urge all parents, especially, to listen.

I think a pivotal moment in my own thinking happened to me this one time when I was in a car, headed to Payson for a women’s church retreat—of all places—talking to some women. I was closest to the driver, a real supermom and an undeniably fab example of a Christian woman, but I was friends with the other women too, though—in all honesty—my own departure from this church was on the horizon and I probably knew it then (albeit subconsciously).

Somehow or other, the conversation turned to that Mel Gibson film, The Passion of the Christ (2004). Some Christians hate it; some love it. But this one woman in the car said something that struck me.

We were not really close at all, this woman and I. A newlywed at the time, she was someone I knew of quite well, but I pretty much didn’t know her at all. A highly impersonal relationship. I knew about her Christian upbringing, her Christian homeschooling, her upstanding Christian behavior, the nice Christian boy she had married. And, on top of it, she was really quite beautiful. She probably still is, but I wouldn’t know it now.

On this car trip, though, she said that The Passion of the Christ moved her in a way she hadn’t been moved before—despite growing up in a Christian household, despite being enmeshed in an intellectual discourse about the existence of God.  The film did something unique to her; it touched her. Her experience of Christ on the cross had been, well, sterile. The visual, the drama, the physicality of the suffering—rendered in color film—did something different to her. What? Reached her heart? Made her tear up?

Look, I don’t want to diss the intellectuals. I am not an advocate of blind faith or faith without reason or a heart-centric, sentimental religion that rejects mindfulness. Not at all! Not one little bit! I do think we are, though, soul and body unities.

And, really, this moment lodged in my adult brain and it’s still there right now. How had the heart of this über pretty girl—pretty in that elfin, preternatural Hobbit way—been missed? How had the film of a possibly not-very-nice man touched her in a way that the Gospel previously had not?

As a mom, I paused. As an adult, I wondered, Where am I? Where’s my heart?

And, so, this episode. We want for our kids to have ears to hear, eyes to see, open hearts. I don’t think we’re wise to plow ahead without addressing what is age-appropriate; I don’t think it’s wise to push our adult understanding on children, often bulldozing our kids down, not noticing that their hearts are untouched. 

You know which stories of renegade church kids—kids who fled when they got legal—have haunted me? Stories about angry dads breaking Pearl Jam cassettes (I know, cassettes! I know, Pearl Jam!) and throwing them at bewildered and sad kids, the tape flying everywhere, like party streamers, ribbons unwinding, and the dads, practically exploding, shouting about the devil’s music, missing the lyrics: Son, she said, have I got a little story for you/What you thought was your daddy was nothin' but a...

Other stories haunt me about girls having sex and suffering contemporary public stonings. Instances of child molestation and porn. Simpler cases in which decent kids just went off to college and disappeared into the secular sunset. Frankly, I’ve heard a lot of stories about kids only too eager to kiss the God-talk goodbye.

Back to this episode. At one point, Wax says that the curriculum aims to focus on what Christ has done for the kids—not just on what the kids should do for Christ. Yeah, that sounds good, right? But do you know how critical that is? How crucial it is to step away from legalism, from a sterile understanding of doctrine that is only salvation-by-works in disguise? Oh, it’s so very important! Seriously, do you fully understand what happens to the psyche of a child caught up in a thinly disguised salvation-by-works theology? Do you understand the long-term effects of shame apart from grace?

In recent years, especially, I’ve been convicted of the need for an age-appropriate Gospel message for kids. I’m pro-Sunday School. I’m pro—no joke—arts & crafts and Bible stories and Christmas plays.  It’s not that I don’t want for my kids to be equipped for hardcore studies in the Book of Romans or the Westminster Confession of Faith. My hope is that these things are part and parcel of mending broken hearts, hearts broken and ready to be put back together again.

                                                                             REVIEWED BY RCC MEMBER JENNIFER BELL