I Believe In Public Schools (Part 2)

So here is the summary of Part 1: Jesus purposefully and strategically did not and does not extract his followers from a sinful world, but leaves us here to influence the world for good, for God and to invite sinners to accept and follow Jesus.  I proposed that this applies to our children, and that their "world" in which they can influence for good is their public school.

The popular objection to this argument often sounds something like this:  Our kids are too young and impressionable to be subjected to such huge responsibilities.  They need to be protected and nurtured in a safer environment.  Later, when they are strong and mature, they will be able to influece the world.

That objection sounds reasonable until we re-read the Bible chapters I referenced earlier (John 14-17).  Jesus speaks to his followers in a peculiar tone: he speaks constant re-assurance, acknowledging their fear of living without him by their side.  In chapter 17 he prays three times for their protection!  He does not treat his followers like strong, capable men.  On the contraary, he acknowledges that in their faith they are young, weak, immature and in need of protection!  By way of analogy, Jesus does not ask his children to hide away in safety, waiting to interact and influence the world until they are mature. Plus, he simply trusts that his Father will protect them as they mature.  I wonder if our fear of public schools is really an indicator of our lack of trust in God's protective power?

There is also a practical response to this objection.  At what point in my child's life will he/she really be ready to face to realities of the mean, cruel world?  Let's face it; we can't shelter our kids forever.  Eventually they will grow up, move away from the safety of the commune we call home and be faced with the darkness of our world.  And last I checked, neither a high school diploma nor the arrival of an 18th birthday include a magic potion labeled, maturity, wisdom and perseverance. It seems to me that the structured environment of a six-hour school day followed by eighteen hours at home is a great combination of environments in which our kids can graually learn how to resist evil and influence the world for good.

Psychiatrist John Bowlby proposed a great theory to help parents.  In his theory, healthy parents create a secure base at home, in which their kids are loved, nurtured, fed, disciplined, etc.  When those children know they have a secure base waiting for them at home, they can have the confidence to face difficulties, try new activities, take risks, etc.  Applied to school, children can endure temptation and even thrive in a difficult place because the safety of home is coming soon. 

So here is my proposal:  Send your kids to public schools.  Create a warm, safe, loving home for them to return to.  Stay in constant communication regarding their experiences at school, both good and bad.  Talk through their difficulties.  Help them process their conflict and coach them on how to respond. Encourage them to take risks and try new things!  Be there to cheer them on and be the first to pick them up when they fall!  

Or, I suppose you could also just sit on the couch every night and complain about how the schools aren't doing a good job raising your children for you.

Next, in Part 3:  ACT's, IQ, and why C students rule the world.

I Believe in Public Schools (Part 1)

I remember the question very clearly.  Olivia was only a year old, and we were enjoying dinner with some friends whose daughter was the same age.  "So are you going to send Olivia to public schools?" Thankfully, Erica and I had talked often about this issue before having children, and we were in firm agreement: "Yes."  And the reason is not just because we are cheap for a private school or too lazy to homeschool.

It turns out that this strong, affirmative answer surprises some folks.  Many just assume that a conservative pastor would automatically send his kids to a Christian school, or maybe even homeschool his kids.  No.  And in this short series of posts, written on this first week of Olivia's first-grade experience, I will attempt to explain why I believe in public schools.  (Disclaimer: this is not an attempt to condemn those who choose private schools or homeschooling- it is just the reasoning behind our decision.)

My first reason comes from my core belief that as followers of Jesus, we are called to influence our world for good, for God, for Jesus and his Kingdom.  And, believe it or not, so are our children.  In the Bible, in the book of John, throughout chapters 14-17, we find a lot of red ink.  Those are the words directly from the mouth of Jesus.  In those chapters, Jesus works hard to encourage his followers that they really will be okay as he leaves them, both through his death, and especially after his acension to heaven.  In John 17:11 he makes this very clear as he prays to his Father: "I will remain in the world no longer, but they are still in the world, and I am coming to you. Holy Father, protect them by the power of your name..."  Jesus is going. His followers are staying...for at least a little while.  We also find out the reason:  Jesus expects his followers to take his message to the ends of the earth. They can't do that if he takes them with him.  And the same is for us. 

When we pray the sinners prayer and put our trust in Christ, we are not immediately tele-transported to the safety and holiness of heaven.  We stay, grow, and tell others!  It is also clear that we are not to shut ourselves out from the world in order to remain holy or not be influenced at all from the world.  In fact, in the Bible, and especially in the book of John, "the world" that we are "in" is usually a reference to the dark, sinful, broken, realm of human society.  In short, the world is our mission field!  And missionaries don't sit safely at home behind locked doors!  They go out into the world and make a difference!

I believe this applies to our children.  I want Olivia and Easton to make a difference in their world.  I want them to set the example for their classmates in how they treat their teachers, other students, the bullies and the picked-on.  I want them to tell their friends about Jesus, and his great love for them.  I want them to invite their friends to church.  On the negative side, it seems just a tad hypocritical for Christians to yank their kids (and their kids' good influence) from public schools and then turn around and criticize public schools as cesspools of evil.  Duh!  That is like making a withdrawal from your bank account and then complaining to the bank manager because your balance didn't go up!

"But Jason," you might argue, "that is fine and dandy for us strong, mature adults, but should our young and impressionable children be forced to endure such a sinful world?  They are so impressionable at their age!  Shouldn't we provide them a safe, secure, environment in which they can grow to maturity, and then go out into the mean cruel world?"  Good question!  I will address it in part 2.

Viral: How Social Networking is Poised to ignite Revival- a Review

Leonard Sweet is a theologian and historian by training, and a futurist by calling and passion.  A prolific writer and lover of poetry, he was  a way of describing the future he sees.  I just finished his latest book, in which he attempts to show that social networking is a tool by which twenty-first century Christians might bring spiritual revival similar to the Reformation and the Great Awakening.  While Sweet offers some interesting insights, I believe the book fails to prove its point. 

Viral is yet another book describing the culture/generational clash using the Pre-modern/Modern/Post-modern dialectic of human history.  The author focuses on the technology used to communicate knowledge.  In the pre-Modern era (the one in which Jesus lived) communication was mostly verbal, since the production of printed material was costly and time consuming.  The Modern era is best illustrated by the Gutenberg press, which made printed material accessible and affordable to all, and allowed almost anyone to publish.  The Post-Modern era is best illustrated by the search engine Google, the most widely used source to find and share digital information, and also the digitizer of everything printed in paper books during the Gutenberg era.  The culture of the Googlers is labeled as TGIF (assembling the four great means of social networking: Twitter, Google, iPhone, and Facebook.


Sweet's critical comparison of Modernity and Post-modernity is unoriginal.  He criticizes modernity (the Gutenbergers) for its extreme individualism, its tendency to dissect/analyze, its view of truth as rational propositions, its preference for homogeneity, and its resulting compartmentalization of life.  He predictably adores Post-modernity (the Googlers) for its emphasis on community, its tendency to create/synthesize, its view of truth as living narrative, is preference for diversity, and its resulting holistic view of life.  Unfortunately, there is nothing new in all of this- it is the common fodder in books of this subject matter.  What is valuable, though, are the examples, statistics and stories from the realm of technology.  For example, he shared research that showed a decline of violent crime among those who played violent video games, something no one expected to see.

To his credit, Sweet does not blindly and naively embrace the Googler generation.  He shares the pitfalls he sees that might keep the generation from sparking revival., especially  the narcissism that social media allows, and the tendency to waste time, words and influence on meaningless details of our lives.

In the end, I have to wonder to whom exactly Sweet was writing.  Throughout the book he acknowledges his own preference for and comfort within the Gutenberger culture, while at the same time describing his deep appreciation and his attempts to use the technology of the Googler culture.  The appendix is entitled, "How Gutenbergers can learn from Googlers."  If I were to guess, the book was intended for Gutenbergers who are trying to understand, appreciate, minister to, and also live in the Googler culture.  If this indeed was the intent, I believe Sweet failed on one major point.  And that is the question of, can real relationships exist, grow and/or thrive outside of face-to-face contact?  Googlers are criticized for their constant texting, Instant Messaging, Facebooking, etc., which takes away from face-to-face interactions.  Sweet suggests that these "virtual" meetings and virtual relationships are just as deep, meaningful and real as are relationships that interact exclusively live and in person.  Sweet goes so far as to claim that because of their desire for community, aided by technology, Googlers have better relationships than their book-reading parents.  Sweet suggests this time and again, but he never really proves it.  The research he cites is scant! 

If, as is suggested in the book, Gutenbergers rely on argument, reason, and logic to convince them of the truth, and if, as it seems, the book was written to help Gutenberbers, then he ought to have devoted a large section of the book to a linear, logical, well-cited argument for his position on this point.  After all- that is how Gutenbergers think!  If he wants Gutenbergers to connect to Googlers by telling more stories, then he ought to have connected with the Gutenbergers at least on this one point with reason and argument!

While I have indeed learned more about the Googler culture, and I can use his suggestions, and have received his correction that I need be more of a story-teller than an argument creator, I am left unconvinced that Googlers have better relationships through social networking, and I am left unconvinced that they will bring revival.

Required Disclaimer:  I received this book for free from WaterBrook Multnomah Publishing Group for this review.

Vacation: What Exactly Are We Vacating?

Vacations are difficult for me.  They just never live up to their expectations.  And if they do, the time flies too quickly.  To be honest, in recent post-children years, vacations have often seemed more difficult than regular life.  A hotel room is the worst- you can't even stay up late and watch television because the kids are sleeping!

The word "vacation" is related to the word "vacate."  Essentially that is what we do when we go on vacation.  We vacate.  We at least vacate our home, our lawn, our to-do list, and the pile of laundry.  We try to vacate our jobs at the same time.  And therein lies the difficulty.  What, exactly, do we vacate?  I have sometimes tried to vacate everything- thereby leaving my wife to do the planning, shopping, packing, etc., leaving her exhausted before even leaving the house!  I have especially tried to vacate parenting- an activity that is very stressful for me.  But this doesn't work.  Not, at least, for a family vacation. 

So this last week as we spent a family vacation in St. Louis, I tried to be specific, limiting, and realistic regarding what exactly I wanted to vacate.  Work, emails, to-do lists, and big decisions, and pretty much anything resembling a project.  I did not, however, try to vacate my family or children.  I cooked a lot of food, swam a lot in the pool, and tried to enjoy every kid-friendly activity we encountered.  I still didn't get to ride up and into the Arch.  I didn't get to eat at my favorite St. Louis restaurant.  Erica and I played a few board games.  I read my book a little but didn't finish it.

In the end, I really just lowered my expectations for what exactly I wanted to vacate.  Was it the ultimate vacation?  No, but it was good, restful and vacating.

Wesleyan Arminianism Versus Calvinism

I recently preached a two part series entitled, Why Can't We All Just Get Along?  The purpose of the series was to show the differences between major groups/traditions/denominations/teams (or however you prefer to label it) within Christianity, but also to look at what varying groups hold in common, including how we can work/worship together based on our commonalities.  

This, of course, returned me to a previous study of the theology known as Calvinism (usually associated with Baptists, Presbyterians, Independent Bible churches, Reformed churches, etc.)  When looking at contrasting systems of belief, I usually look to find that core of the differences, and not just any difference.  Calvinism is usually best known for the doctrines of eternal security ("once saved, always saved") and/or predestination.  But I don't believe either of these are the core.  Eternal Security, in fact, is the necessary conclusion of the system (which is really untenable without the entire system)  But the real foundation of the system, or the "root of the TULIP" if you will, is the doctrine of divine sovereignty.  That is, that God is fully and absolutely in charge of everything in the universe.  In my own words, God micromanages every movement in the universe.  This, of course, does not allow for any free-will.  Not only the philosophical and often atheistic version of free-will, but also the Wesleyan, God-given and limited freedom kind.

Then I found this quote- the best I have seen- that really sums up our differences:

“If an iota of chance is allowed into the universe, then God’s sovereignty is denied, and God is not God.”                                                   -R. J. Rushdoony, The Necessity For Sytematic Theology

This truly is the core of the core of the debate between Calvinism and Arminianism.  And we must note and acknowledge that this sentence, and its converse, are philosophical constructs, and are a priori in nature.  That is, one makes a decision regarding this issue, and then selectively reads and conveniently interprets all of Scripture through this construct, or filer.  Note that the source for this is a book on the necessity of systematic theology, which, as a formal discipline, co-mingles biblical AND philosophical theology.  The word systematic implies it.  If not, then it is merely biblical theology, which results in mixed bag of both human freedom and absolute divine sovereignty, without a clear explanation between the two.

The Calvinist reasons as he reads Scripture, and lands at the above conclusion.  The Arminian reasons as he reads, and concludes that God, in his undeniable sovereignty, creates and allows for “chance” which is really managed freedom, and that this managed freedom in no way denies God’s sovereignty but only upholds and indeed magnifies it!

This, then is the separating point between the two systems of theology.  The real core, I believe, for both.  Every other difference, I would argue, stems from here.

One Small Book- One Big Lump In My Throat

Having heard so many good things about this book, and needing some great material for a teaching series in our church, I checked out Randy Alcorn's The Treasure Principle.  With only 90 pages of text, I figured it would be an easy read.  But those ninety pages were full of difficult truth.

Although the principles suggested by Alcorn are difficult to hear, he writes with sensitivity and from a position of integrity.  He readily shares his own journey and the lessons he learned about his own attachment to money as he endured some difficult times.   It is difficult to argue with someone who has fought a tough battle and emerged with scars and lessons learned.

The book centers around six "Treasure Principle Keys."  The first key is "God owns everything.  I'm his money manager."  Each key is illustrated with Biblical teaching, quotes, and stories from real life.  Randy readily shares his own stories and those of others.  You will not want to miss the story of William Borden.  And when you read it, you won't easily forget it.

As a pastor, I am often anxious and yet intrigued to see how authors interpret various Scripture passages.  Alcorn never pushes a passage to say more than it was intended to say.  He does, however, offer fresh but challenging insights into various Scriptures.

I know I will never read Jesus' one-sentence parable of the buried treasure the same again.  And I will never be the same because I read this book.  And if you tend to worry about your bills, think often about money, or usually send the offering plate on by, you will want to read this book also.

I received this book for free from WaterBrook Multnomah Publishing Group for this review.

If you enjoyed this review and are intrigued by this book, rank my review here:  

Timing Is Everything

The Byrds sang that, "There is a season - turn, turn, turn. And a time for every purpose under heaven." The Bible affirms it in Ecclesiastes 3:1, "There is a time for everything, and a season for every activity under the heavens."(although this passage is often misquoted to proclaim a time for even ungodly things.) Leadership experts affirm that even bad timing can ruin the best idea. This week I experienced one of those "timing" events.

But in order to understand the "timing," let me take you back to approximately 1994. I was 17 with an entrepreneurial spirit. I had attended a seminar where some millionaire was selling his instructional books and, yes, cassette tape series teaching greedy suckers like me how to buy stuff at public auctions and re-sell it all for huge profits. So after seeing an advertisement in the newspaper for a US Postal Service surplus auction, I attended. There were tables full of old computers, to which the geeky part of me was instantly drawn. By the end of the auction I had purchased 4 old laptops, each weighing about fifteen pounds, for about $17.50 each. I took them home and was able to get a few of them to boot up. But then I had to sell them. A classified ad in the newspaper would cost as much as the laptops. Plus, they were already very old. Why would anyone buy my laptops when they could buy a smoking-fast 386 processor running Windows 3.1? I found a store that allowed me to sell a couple of them on a consignment basis. But they never sold, the store went out of business, and I never got my laptops back.

I lost interest, moved away to college, and plowed into the future with the remaining laptops sitting in my old bedroom closet.

I went home for Thanksgiving and my mom gently asked me to do something with "those old laptops." I checked ebay for "Grid computer" and found a few over-priced listings, but no completed auctions. I took them home, cleaned them up, booted them up again, and decided to test the waters with a 10 day listing starting at $25. And just for kicks, I set a $100 Buy-It-Now price for some gullible or just plain old impulsive buyer. The next morning I discovered that someone had indeed purchased it during the night! Just today I sold the other 2 for even more!

Seventeen years ago these laptops weren't worth anything. Or maybe it was because ebay was not around yet, bringing a global marketplace of buyers to the stuff in my basement.

Timing. What a huge factor. In business, in life, and even faith.