Breakpoint

In February of 1943, German university student Sophie Scholl was convicted of high treason against the Nazi regime and executed by guillotine. Last week, Germany announced it will honor this Christian martyr with a €20.00 sterling silver commemorative coin. Scheduled for circulation in time for her 100th birthday, which is in 2021, the coin will bear Sophie’s likeness with her words, “A feeling for what is just and unjust” along the edge.       

Sophie Scholl was raised, along with her older brother Hans, in a nominal Lutheran household. Like most German children at the time, she was a member of the League of German Girls and her brother, a member of the Hitler Youth. However, as they grew up, they became more and more disillusioned by the Nazification of virtually every area of German life and Hitler’s tyrannical opposition to much they believed to be good, such as works of art and music considered to be non-Aryan.

As students at the University in Munich in the early 1940s, they began to seriously consider, partly due to the influence of Christian professors, what their faith was demanding of them. Finally, the slaughter of Polish Jews and Russian POWs pushed them to act against Nazi atrocities. Hans founded an underground resistance group called The White Rose and began, with a few friends, to write, publish, and distribute leaflets advocating passive resistance to Hitler’s policies and for the eventual overthrow of National Socialism.

When Sophie, having arrived at University after her brother, was introduced to his friends, she insisted on joining the group. They acquired a typewriter and a mimeograph machine to produce their leaflets and bought paper and stamps in small amounts from different sources so as not to arouse suspicion. They would mail them anonymously to nearby homes and distribute them secretly around their university campus.

While distributing their sixth group of leaflets at the university, Hans and Sophie, along with friend Christoph Probst, were discovered, arrested and charged with treason. Within four days, they had been accused, tried, condemned, and executed. Sophie was 21.

According to several witnesses, Sophie died as she had lived, with grace and courage, and without regret. As she was led to the guillotine, Sophie reportedly said, “Such a fine sunny day and I have to go …. What does my death matter, if through us, thousands of people are awakened and stirred to action?”

As Brett Kunkle and I wrote in our book A Practical Guide to Culture, Christians often talk about what we are saved from, things like sin and death and judgment. And that is good news indeed! But as Sophie and Hans Scholl grew in their faith, they we forced to wrestle with what they were saved for.  God had called them to a particular moment in German history. The intersection of their dual citizenships, in heaven and in Germany, clarified for them their responsibility to love and act.

As Hans once wrote to a friend: “Should one go off and build a little house with flowers outside the windows and a garden outside the door and extol and thank God and turn one’s back on the world and its filth? Isn’t seclusion a form of treachery—of desertion? …. I’m weak and puny, but I want to do what is right.”

The Scholl siblings refused to flee from their culture, as we are tempted to do today, to seek safe shelter for ourselves and our children from the depravities around us. Safety, however, is never the goal of the Christ-follower. Faithfulness is. As the prophet Jeremiah described, faithfulness to God requires we seek the welfare of the city, of the nation to which we are called. If we are to be, what Paul called, ministers of reconciliation (2 Corinthians 5:18), we have to figure out what it means to be in the world, but not “of” it.

Few, if any of us, will face a guillotine for our faith. We will, it seems, face lesser challenges and persecution. Like Sophie Scholl, we will need a courage and a commitment that only comes from understanding that we are called by God to this time and this place. We’ll have to know now only what we are saved from and what we are saved to, but what we are saved for. We’ll have to learn to speak the truth in love, not because it will necessarily “work” but because it is our Lord’s command. We’ll need to strive faithfully to educate and catechize our children, even as we seek to protect the most vulnerable among us, and proclaim God’s vision for human flourishing.

We may have to risk our friendships, our reputations, and even our careers but, to quote Sophie Scholl one more time, what does that matter, “if through us, thousands of people are awakened and stirred to action?”

In July, the U.S. State Department’s “Commission on Unalienable Rights” released a draft report that attempted to provide a grounding for our country’s commitment to human rights. Fundamental among those rights, the report declared, are freedom of religion and the right to private property.

The Commission sought comments from the public, and they’ve gotten them. While the part about property rights garnered little response, the insistence on religious liberty has sparked a firestorm of protest, including from a “group of academic and religious leaders.”

Most Americans take the existence of human rights for granted. We see them, to borrow a phrase, as “self-evident.” We can’t really imagine a world without them, or we look at places like China or North Korea with incredulity, as if it’s obvious that their way is clearly wrong. Instead, what these countries demonstrate is that there’s nothing “natural” about the idea of human rights. Rather they are the products of Judeo-Christian beliefs about the intrinsic dignity of the human person.

After all, as the State Department report points out, “more than half the world’s population suffers under regimes where the most basic freedoms are systematically denied, or under regimes too weak or unwilling to protect individual rights, especially in the context of ethnic conflict.”

Most countries don’t deny the idea of human rights outright. However, because they lack adequate moral grounding for them, human rights become a kind of buffet. Those in power pick the ones they like, for the ones they like, and ignore the rest. Again, to quote the Report, “human rights are now misunderstood by many, manipulated by some, rejected by the world’s worst violators, and subject to ominous new threats.”

Given these threats, it’s vital that we who take the idea of universal human rights for granted, ground them on something more permanent and transcendent than international consensus or “we’ve always done it this way.”

The only secure basis for human rights, of course, is the Christian belief that humans are created in the image of God. Think about that line from our founding documents: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.” But it’s not self-evident that we are equal, if we only consider the external attributes humans have. We don’t all share those attributes. We don’t all share the same height, or weight, or IQ, or hair color, or skin tone. Thus equality must be based on some universal human quality that is intrinsic to our humanity. Christianity offers this in the idea of the image of God.

The report acknowledges this: “Protestant Christianity, widely practiced by the citizenry at the time [of the founders], was infused with the beautiful Biblical teachings that every human being is imbued with dignity and bears responsibilities toward fellow human beings, because each is made in the image of God.”

Even non-believers such as Tom Holland, the author of Dominion, have recognized that the West’s ideas about freedom and the dignity of the human person are the product of Christianity. Atheist philosopher John Gray has written that modern politics, with its idea of human rights, “is a chapter in the history of religion,” specifically Christianity. Another atheist philosopher, Luc Ferry, in his book A Brief History of Thought, observes that it is to the idea of the image of God that the “west owes its entire democratic inheritance.”

Without the Christian idea of the imago Dei, “universal, indivisible and interdependent and interrelated” human rights simply wouldn’t exist. In fact, even the guy who said “God is dead,” Frederich Nietzsche, said universal human rights, an idea he considered weak, came from a Christian view of the world.

Unfortunately, there are many, like that “group of academics and religious leaders” I mentioned earlier, who deny that connection. In a statement protesting the draft report’s emphasis on religious liberty, they said that the attempt “to elevate religious freedom above other human rights . . . will weaken religious freedom itself and undermine respect for and damage the protections of the universal values of human dignity.”

As you may have guessed, those most likely to be violated by the elevation of religious freedom are those “denied these [human] rights because of who they are or whom they love.”  In their minds, religious freedom is really code language for a “license to discriminate.” In a world where religious minorities increasingly face persecution and death, to trivialize religious freedom in this way is myopic. However, it is inevitable once rich concepts like “freedom" and “human dignity” are defined down to mere personal autonomy and self-actualization.

Our first freedom, like the rights that depend on it, are grounded in a Christian view of what it means to be human. They cannot be sustained otherwise. This new U.S. State Department Report is a welcome reminder.

If we put adjectives such as "economic" or "racial" in front of the word "Justice," are we in essence buying into critical theory? Isn't justice simply justice?

That's the first question John Stonestreet and Shane Morris tackle on this edition of the BreakPoint podcast.  John and Shane also tackle how we engage gracefully on social media (hint: Check out the book of Proverbs). And what about fathers when it comes to abortion--their needs and especially their responsibilities?

Finally, how should a truly Christian perspective on eternity affect and shape our worldview?

A Practical Guide to Culture: Helping the Next Generation Navigate Today’s World, by John Stonestreet and Brett Kunkle, available at the Colson Center online bookstore

“The Economics of Sex,” video, Austin Institute

Recently, political scientist Michael J. New described the results of what’s being called “the largest known in-depth interview study of American attitudes on abortion” as “nuanced.” A better term would be “complicated,” or maybe even “not-at-all coherent.”

This new study out of Notre Dame, entitled “How Americans Understand Abortion,” not only sought to determine what American believe about abortion, but why they believe it and which factors influenced those beliefs. Anyone who opposes abortion and is committed to protecting the preborn can learn much from the results.

For example, I found it fascinating that, according to the study, most Americans are simply not “particularly knowledgeable about the details of abortion.” Those of us neck deep in the issue may find it unbelievable that anyone could be “unfamiliar with basic facts about fetal development or public policy,” or what Roe v. Wade actually did to America, or where state abortion laws currently stand. But many are, which makes the task of education, especially about the science and politics of abortion, a priority for pro-lifers. In fact, data suggests that many Americans would be shocked to learn how permissive our nation’s abortion laws are.

Another lesson to learn from this Notre Dame study is that we must do a better job publicizing the “life-affirming work done by the thousands of pregnancy help centers in the United States.” Much of the support for legal abortion is based on the fear “that children born after unintended pregnancies would be neglected,” and that “women would be adversely impacted by carrying an unintended pregnancy to term.” In other words, people are simply unaware that these old arguments, which date back to even before Roe itself (i.e., “who will care for these women and children”), have been substantially answered in incredible ways by pro-lifers everywhere. Easing concerns about whether help is available for women in unexpected or crisis pregnancies will be essential to any effective pro-life apologetic.

The most important lesson from this study, however, is just how deeply moral relativism is shaping the abortion debate. Though a large percentage of Americans dislike abortion, they are uncomfortable with making abortion illegal. The data is incredible. Even those who think that abortion should be legal know that something wrong with it. And yet, they simply can’t imagine an alternative to the status quo.

“Successful pro-life outreach to this group,” New suggests, “is the key to creating a durable pro-life majority that will restore legal protection to the unborn.”

In other words, in addition to the beautiful and brilliant work of caring for children and women in crisis, work the pro-life movement has excelled in for decades, we have to learn to make the case for life. By “we,” I mean “you” and “me.” We need to know the science surrounding abortion, so that “they” will know the science is on the side of life. We need to know how embryology and ultrasounds have only strengthened the case for the humanity of the fetus. The case is incredibly strong, in fact, but, as this study reveals, we can’t assume that Americans know. And if they know, we can’t assume they’ve connected the dots to the immorality of taking innocent preborn lives.

The case that abortion is wrong must be made alongside the case that abortion should be illegal, and not just by the “pro-life professionals.” If the Supreme Court manages to overturn Roe v Wade, and we should pray it does, the status and safety of preborn children will be decided on a state by state basis. Local law matters when it comes to abortion as much or even more than national law. After all, the law is a moral teacher. Many Americans think abortion should be legal simply because it is. That’s why pro-abortion forces oppose any restriction on abortion whatsoever as outrageous infringements on women. They must not allow a pro-life foot in the door.

Those of us who care about the unborn must help people know what they should know about abortion so they can make the connections they currently aren’t making.

The next Colson Center online short course, to be offered in September, will help you do just that. Pro-life apologist Scott Klusendorff will, over four successive Tuesdays, equip you to defend life and oppose abortion. Learn how to make the case for life with others in less than a minute. Learn the five bad ways people argue about abortion, how to answer objectives to the pro-life position clearly and persuasively, and how to take the next (or maybe even first) step to putting your convictions to action.

Come to BreakPoint.org to register for our next short course: “Champion Life: How You Can Oppose Abortion and Defend the Unborn.” All sessions are recorded for your review, or in case you need to miss a live class session. Again breakpoint.org.

To paraphrase King Solomon, to the writing of statements there is no end. However last week, I was honored to be included among the original signatories of The Philadelphia Statement, an essential appeal at this important moment in our cultural history. Acknowledging the current crisis overwhelming speech rights, the Philadelphia Statement calls for it to be protected, as an essential condition for the survival and flourishing of self-governing people. 

The Philadelphia Statement is, in a sense, comparable to the Harper’s Letter, published just a few weeks ago and signed by dozens of influential, left-of center artists, scientists and others. As more than a few of us noted, a few of the original signatories of that letter had a hand in building the sort of cancel culture they were rebuking. The Philadelphia Statement is, in this sense, more intellectually honest. 

“Freedom of expression is in crisis,” the Statement begins. “Truly open discourse—the debates, exchange of ideas, and arguments on which the health and flourishing of a democratic republic crucially depend—is increasingly rare. Ideologues demonize opponents to block debates on important issues and to silence people with whom they disagree.”

This paragraph is an answer to the well-meaning Christians who, at times, ask whether it is appropriate to be involved in “political debates” over things like free speech or religious freedom. Part of the Christian’s calling is to steward and protect good things. Freedom of expression is one of those good things, and not just for us. 

After all, a free marketplace of ideas provides the best opportunity for people to discover the Truth. Only when bad ideas aren’t silenced but rather met with better ideas can we truly learn. The Philadelphia Statement says it this way: “Dissenting and unpopular voices… have often guided our society toward more just positions.”

For the Christian, supporting free speech is evidence of our confidence in the Gospel. We believe Truth always will win out, no matter which ideas oppose it. And, it’s only in the Gospel that we find any logical grounding for free expression in the first place. Again, here’s how the Statement puts it:

“If we seek a brighter future, we must relearn a fundamental truth. That our liberty and happiness depend upon the maintenance of a public culture in which freedom and civility co-exist. Where people can disagree robustly, even fiercely, yet treat each other as human beings, and indeed fellow citizens, not mortal enemies.”

Only the Gospel has been able to historically ground any real sort of universal human dignity and respect, including for those with whom we disagree. Only if we acknowledge that each person is independently related to God, created in His image, and uniquely valuable regardless of anything else about them, can we establish cause to respect and protect their freedom of expression, no matter how wacky.

Whenever the Church is silent or marginalized, other cultural forces step in as a de facto Church, playing its societal role, only without any crucial grounding for objective truth or human value. In such a world, those in power, whether state forces or Twitter mobs, claim the authority to decide which ideas, and which people, are acceptable. Those deemed unacceptable are dismissed from publishing, from academic research and other university settings, from media platforms, or, in extreme cases throughout history, from existing.

Not only does this kind of cancel culture devastate those individuals, it impoverishes the larger public. Even more, cancel culture is a wasteful deception, promising what it can never deliver. A twisted arm can never make a true believer.

To be clear, I signed the Philadelphia Statement, not because I think the Gospel can ever truly be cancelled. Let the Twitter mobs rage. God’s Word will continue to spread as He sees fit. I signed the Philadelphia Statement because I believe every person is created in the image of God, and to deny anyone’s freedom of expression is to deny their worth. Stewarding this very good freedom is, in my view, a way to love my neighbor.

Please a look at the Philadelphia Statement, which we’ll link to at breakpoint.org. You can even choose to sign it yourself at thephillystatement.org. 

In late July, the body of Pastor Balvinder Bagicha Bhatti was found on the side of the road in the Indian state of Punjab. Returning from a nearby village after a visit to a church member’s home, Bhatti was found beaten and bloodied, with tattered clothes and scraped shoes. The additional set of bloody footprints led his family to believe that he had been assaulted. Local police, despite the evidence of foul play, registered the case as an accidental death.

Bhatti isn’t the first Christian pastor in India to die under suspicious circumstances. In 2017, Pastor Sultan Masih was gunned down by two motorcycle-riding assailants outside his church in Ludhiana. In fact, Batthi is not even the first member of his family to die under suspicious circumstance. His brother was murdered just a few years ago.

Just a week after Batthi’s death, only on the other side of the country, Hindu radicals prevented a family in Jharkhand from holding a Christian burial for a loved one, told instead that they must conduct the funeral in accordance with the village’s majority Hindu faith as a way of preserving communal peace.

More and more in India, it seems that preserving “communal peace” means “keeping Hindu fanatics from attacking and/or killing their non-Hindu neighbors.” According to a new report by the group Persecution Relief, “Hate crimes against Christians in India [rose] by an alarming 40.87 percent” in the first half of 2020, “even despite the nationwide [coronavirus] lockdown in place since March 25.” 

According to the report, the “293 cases of persecution against Christians reported in the first six months of 2020 included five religious-motivated rapes and six religiously-motivated murders.” The vast majority of these hate crimes are committed by Hindu nationalists who wish to turn India into a Hindu state, and therefore oppose Christianity and Christian missionary work.

In places like Jharkhand, Hindu violence is often directed at Christian households. Around the same time the Christian family was forced to conduct a Hindu funeral, a mob of Hindu fanatics beat up the heads of three Christian families in another Hindu village, leaving the families homeless. When the police came to investigate, the village “head man” intervened on behalf of the attackers, forcing the families to sign a document promising they would not conduct any more Christian activities in the village.

In other parts of India, Christian persecution is taking the forms of anti-conversion laws and impediments to the building of churches. The cumulative result is that India now ranks tenth on Open Doors World Watch List, which tracks the persecution of Christians worldwide. Since Prime Minister Narendra Modi came to power in 2014, advancing Hindu nationalism, India has consistently moved up on the World Watch List which, for the record, is the wrong direction.

Given the current political climate, it seems likely that the situation for Indian Christians will continue to deteriorate. Thus, it’s vitally important for us to pray for them, and to speak up for them wherever and however we can.

I invite you to join us as we pray together each and every Wednesday morning, from now until the day after the November election. One of the reasons we will be praying for the preservation of religious freedom in America is so we can continue to advance religious freedom, and work for the end of religious persecution, all around the world. Including in India. Come to BreakPoint.org to sign up and join us. We will be led this week by Os Guinness.

Modi and company must know that, eventually, they will have to pay for accommodating violent fanatics. While India casts itself as the “world’s largest democracy,” the blood of our brothers and sisters literally cries out from the ground.

With Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden selecting  Sen. Kamala Harris as his running mate, the election season is in full swing. And as John Stonestreet and Shane Morris discuss, the Democratic Party is in full swing as well–to the left, especially issues such as abortion and transgender rights.

John and Shane also discuss the recently crafted “Philadelphia Statement” on civil discourse and strengthening liberal democracy; how Americans dislike abortion, yet are uncomfortable about making it illegal; a new study revealing that more than 90 percent of doctors in Belgium favor infanticide in certain cases; another study revealing those who follow social media for their news are less informed than those who don’t, except for their knowledge of conspiracy theories.

Upstream Podcast with Shane Morris

Strong Women Podcast with Sarah Stonestreet and Erin Kunkle

A Practical Guide to Culture, by John Stonestreet and Brett Kunkle, available in Colson Center Bookstore

The Philadelphia Statement on Civil Discourse and Strengthening Liberal Democracy

“From Abortion to Assisted Suicide to Infanticide,” by John Stonestreet and David Carlson, The Point

“The Knowledge Lost in Information,” by John Stonestreet and Shane Morris, BreakPoint

The Things of Earth: Treasuring God by Enjoying His Gifts, by Joe Rigney and John Piper, available at the Colson Center Bookstore

They wrap up this episodes with their recommendations for the week.

Each Wednesday morning until the day after the November election, the Colson Center is hosting a virtual prayer gathering for the Church and for our nation. Not only are we praying together weekly, but I’ve asked a select group of leaders to help direct our prayers for the coming week. This past Wednesday morning, Pastor Rick Warren of Saddleback Church and author of The Purpose Driven Life, offered a few critical reminders for Christians in this time of, as he called it, “virus and violence.”

First in times of tension and transition, like ours, the Church has always found unique opportunities to point people to Jesus. In the second and third centuries, even as plagues swept the Roman Empire, Christians ran toward the sick and suffering as pagans ran away. Through Christian love and hospitality, the faith grew. Not only did many people ultimately embrace Christ, but the world was ultimately blessed with hospitals, the name ultimately given to those places that showed this kind of Christian hospitality.

Though in our day, entire health care systems exist to deal with pandemics, illnesses, injuries, and diseases, only the Church is uniquely called and empowered to address what Pastor Rick called the dis-ease that people have, including the fears, tensions, emotional, spiritual, and certain physical needs.

In a terrific, practical example of this, Pastor Rick described that when many food banks and pantries shut down across Southern California during the pandemic, Saddleback Church stepped up and established pop up food distribution centers. Since the beginning of the pandemic, they’ve reached a quarter of a million families with 2.5 million pounds of food. Even better, through this effort, over 9,000 people have professed faith in Christ for the first time, and over 1,000 new members of the Body of Christ have been baptized… in, he assured us, a COVID-safe manner.

The next opportunity for the church to, as Chuck Colson often said, “be the church,” is to parents and children as the school year starts. “The Church that figures out how to care for kids and parents,” Pastor Rick argued, “will have the ear of America.” I think he’s right, and even more, I needed to be reminded that despite all the chaos of this culture moment, the work of the Church cannot be stopped. The Church has out-survived movements and philosophies and nations and leaders and empires. It’s going to survive November also.

After all, as Pastor Rick prayed, our Hope is not found in who we put in the White House, but in Who we put on the cross. As far as election results, the safest and most sure prayer is the one Jesus taught us to pray: “Thy Will Be Done.” Because we know it will, even if we don’t necessarily like it.

As much as I hope for certain results in November and will work toward them on a national level and a local level, this week especially I will pray that God would strengthen, protect, and use His Church during this time, and that we, as His people, would place trust, not in horses or chariots or polls or strategies, but in Christ.

Next Wednesday, we will gather again, virtually. Os Guinness will guide our time and shape our prayers, reminding us of other things we must not forget as we appeal to the God of heaven and earth for forgiveness, for healing, and for mercy.

Due to limitation on our audience capacity, we are asking folks to register each week to join us live via Zoom. We will, however, send a link to the recording of each prayer time and a prayer guide for the week, to anyone who registers. You can also join us on the Colson Center Facebook page or the BreakPoint Facebook page. In fact, come to BreakPoint.org and click on this commentary to get the recording of last week’s session with Pastor Rick Warren, as well as the prayer guide.

I will close with the prayer I prayed at the end of session Wednesday:

“ALMIGHTY God, who hast promised to hear the petitions of those who ask in thy Son’s Name; We beseech thee mercifully to incline thine ears to us who have now made our prayers and supplications unto thee; and grant that those things which we have faithfully asked according to thy will, may effectually be obtained, to the relief of our necessity, and to the setting forth of thy glory; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

Every single day, approximately 500 million tweets are tweeted, 4 million hours of video is added to YouTube, and 4.3 billion Facebook messages are posted. If a single person were to view all the information uploaded to the Internet just in the last 24 hours, it would take longer than the span of recorded human history.

The mistake is assuming that a deluge of information means that we are better informed. Not at all. In fact, a new report by Pew Research found that what they called “extremely online people,” meaning those who rely primarily on social media for their political news, are among the least-informed and most easily-deceived groups in America.

Reason.com described these findings this way: “Analyzing polls conducted from October of last year through June 2020…Pew found that just 8% of U.S. adults who get most of their political news from social media say they are following news about the 2020 election ‘very closely,’ compared with roughly four times as many among those who turn mostly to cable news (37%) and print (33%).” The Pew study also confirmed these self-reports. When evaluated on their current political knowledge, those who turned to social media for news scored lower than any other group, except those who relied mainly on local TV. Those who relied on a variety of sources, including news websites, cable and print news scored highest.

Interestingly, exclusive Facebook and Twitter users did score higher in their knowledge of conspiracy theories, such as 5G causes coronavirus or Bill Gates planning to inject people with tracking microchips. In other words, what someone finds illuminating vs. Illuminati largely depends on the amount of time they spend on social media.

All of which underscores the fundamental myth of the Information Age: that access to information is the same as knowing, and that knowing about something is the same thing as wisdom. In one of the choruses from the play “The Rock,” T. S. Eliot asked: “Where is the Life we have lost in living? Where is the wisdom we have lost in knowledge? Where is the knowledge we have lost in information?” He wrote that in 1934. What would he say about the information deluge of today?

How is it possible that, in an age when the answer to almost any question is only a few taps or keystrokes away, the least informed are those who do the most tapping and typing?  As Eliot suggests, we’ve confused information with knowledge, and knowledge with wisdom.

Unfortunately, shouting the truth more loudly or posting in all caps on social media is rarely an effective response. In fact, Christians who see their job as primarily telling the truth, rather than engaging people with the truth, are often just lost voices among all the noise. I’m painfully aware that, even with my own children, I am but one stop on the information bus of their day… and there are a lot of stops.

For example, it’s far too common for parents to find the faith or moral convictions of their students derailed by anti-Christian claims and pseudo-arguments that are just, well, silly. I mean by claims any apologist or theologian or coherent thinker could debunk in minutes. The answers are there, but they are convinced by a particular set of voices and they’re not hearing the others. Even more often, however, students are just preoccupied with digital diversions that replaced any hunger for finding truth with what Aldous Huxley called an “appetite for distraction.” 

These students, like all those identified by Pew as being “very online,” need more information like a drowning man needs more water. The only real antidote, as Brett Kunkle and I describe in the book A Practical Guide to Culture, is discernment, an ability to sort through the excess of information,  to identify what is true and good, and then to choose according to wisdom.

Of course, Developing discernment is a lifelong process but can begin with a few very simple but careful questions: “What is meant by this?” “Is this true?” “How does the Bible speak to this?” “Will God be honored?” “Will the image of God be respected?” “Is this source trustworthy?” “Is this intended for my good?” and “Is this helping love and care about the right things?”

We identify a series of useful questions for parents and offer other strategies for developing discernment in A Practical Guide to Culture and the new Student’s Guide to Culture. And to be clear, though I thank Pew for the revealing survey, discernment is about more than being better-informed voters. It’s about keeping our heads above water in an age drowning us with information so we can be people of truth, wisdom, and love.

If there's a great cultural and spiritual war going on, what's it about, and against whom are we fighting? Is the war over truth? Over restoring America? John Stonestreet and Shane Morris remind us that we need to understand where we are in the arc of God's cosmic Story, and that the forces arrayed against Him and us are the principalities, the powers, world rulers of this present darkness, and the spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places (Eph 6:12).

John and Shane also answer questions about the nature of Biblical truth (is it true for everyone, or just for Christians?) and the use of written prayers (do they run afoul of Jesus' admonition against "vain repetitions."

Join Us in Prayer for Our Nation . . . every Wednesday