This past week I’ve been listening to an excellent sermon series by Andy Stanley of North Point Community Church in Atlanta. The series is entitled “It’s Personal,” and in it he makes the case for why people should become Christians. In typical Andy Stanley fashion, he approaches the topic from a completely fresh perspective, and I want to share one particularly challenging illustration with you here.

Stanley began by explaining that if you ask an adult why they’re not a Christian, they’ll give you a lot of reasons, some being philosophical and others being more experiential. Generally the reasons are good ones that we should take seriously, but here’s the catch–If you can explain away all your friend’s obstacles to Christianity, they still won’t become a Christian. Or at the very least, it’s unlikely.

In his experience, Stanley found that most adults don’t become Christians by working through their objections. As long as Christianity remains an intellectual category, it will never be compelling enough to surrender their lives to.

To explain what he meant, Stanley used the illustration of marriage. Consider a single man who has a bunch of reasons for not getting married: It’s too expensive, it’s not a good time, what about all the other women he’ll miss out on dating, and look at how bad other marriages are today–why would he want that?

Then one day, this single man who is set in his single ways meets the woman of his dreams, and wouldn’t you know it? He wants to marry her! What happened to all of those obstacles? Does he suddenly have more money than before? No. Is he afraid of missing out on other women? Maybe a little, but not enough to let this one go. What about the other bad marriages he’s seen? He’s determined to make this work–it’s WORTH IT.

You see, it’s not that he worked through the obstacles. They simply became less important in the face of this new relationship. That doesn’t mean that the objections were not important ones and that they no longer matter. The single man who decides to get married must still be financially responsible, and he should still guard against the pitfalls that have ruined marriages around him. But those roadblocks have only become important considerations, not large enough to prevent him from moving forward.

And that’s how it is with God. Adults who become Christians don’t necessarily work through all of their objections–they simply meet Jesus, and suddenly their objections become less important. And like the single man who decides to marry, adult Christians don’t ignore the objections that plagued them for so long. They carry their doubts and concerns into their Christian faith, but the objections are no longer spiritual roadblocks. They are simply important considerations to be worked out in relationship with God.

What does all this mean for Christians? For me, this was very convicting. When someone objects to the Christian faith it is easy to go into debate mode and cast gentleness to the wind. I don’t bother being spiritually consistent as long as I’m right. While it’s not wrong to discuss a person’s objections to Christianity (Paul did this all the time in Scripture) Stanley’s words remind us that what is MOST important is that your discussion partner is encountering Christ along the way. You may be offering an air-tight argument, but if you’re a jerk about it then you’re missing the point. Non-Christians need to encounter Christ in us. Ultimately, that is what changes people.

If Christianity is about a personal God, then we shouldn’t get angry or confused when non-Christians stand unconvinced by our arguments. They simply haven’t met Jesus yet. By the way we love them, let’s make sure that they do.

Today I read an interesting articled published in First Things magazine by David B. Hart entitled “Believe It Or Not.” Hart is a Christian apologist who specifically grapples with the beliefs of New Atheism, and he does so in his book Atheist Delusions. This most recent article is written as a response to a recently published book titled 50 Voices of Disbelief: Why We Are Atheists.

In case you aren’t familiar with the “New Atheism” that has risen in popularity in our culture, the term refers to a brand of Atheism that is extremely critical of and sometimes hostile towards religion, and in turn touts science as the antidote. The reason I’m bringing it up on my blog is that it’s an issue about which we as women should not only be concerned, but also well-informed.

What is particularly troubling about the New Atheism is that it has risen to popularity on the coattails of out-dated ideas, a point that Hart makes in his article. And while the lack of originality would seem to be a plus, it actually reveals a startling complacency amidst the church. New Atheism is raising concerns and objections that Christians addressed centuries ago, but so few of us are familiar with these arguments that we are ill-equipped to respond. As a result, we have witnessed the birth of a new generation of Atheists who believe they are genuinely challenging the Christian faith in new and original ways, especially because many Christians can only offer a babbling response.

This predicament aims a particularly searing critique at Christian women. It is not uncommon for Christian women to chuckle about how much their husbands enjoy discussing theology, all the while shrugging off their own lack of interest. “I just don’t understand that stuff” is the common excuse. Ladies, if you are someone who brushes off these important questions because it does not interest you, let me gently challenge you to repent of this mindset. While we are not all called to achieve advanced degrees in this area, the rise of the New Atheism has been made possible by our theological apathy.

Not all Atheists are men. Nor do they all live in ivory towers. They are your neighbor, your co-worker, maybe someone in your family. There are women who squarely reject God on philosophical grounds who will never enter your church to hear your pastor’s defense. That’s why they need to hear it from you.

Of course not all of us are philosophically minded, but that’s no excuse for not having thought through some of the questions that Atheists are asking. Consider the following:

• Some Atheists object to the existence of God because He failed to answer their prayers when they needed Him most. How would you respond to that seeming betrayal?
• Others object to the existence of God because they don’t understand how a good God could allow evil to exist in the world. How would you respond to this problem in a manner that avoids being cliché or pat?
• Some Atheists are so repulsed by corruption within the church that they write off God altogether. How might you respond to this objection, taking seriously the very real mistakes of the church?

What is striking to me about some (though not all) of the Atheist objections to God is that they are sometimes founded upon an emotional reflex. Something bad happened to them in relation to the church or Christians, so they reject God altogether. And while that is by no means a sound philosophical argument against the existence of God, many Christians have a faith born out of the same basic reasoning; an equal but opposite reaction. It is a Christianity based upon sentimentalism, but not an understanding of WHY God is real and worth trusting your life with.

So while I do not mean to imply that reason trumps faith, nor is it a more powerful evangelistic tool than unconditional love, reason should certainly be a factor. As 1 Corinthians 1:18-25 reminds us, there will never come a time when the wisdom of God is anything but foolishness to a blind world, but we are still called to love God with both our hearts and our minds. So spend some time reading about these difficult issues. Few of them have tidy answers but the important thing is that you engage the questions, because as we are learning, your skeptical neighbors and friends certainly are.

Yesterday Cas spoke at WBS about the second half of Philippians 3 and knocked it out of the park! (I’m still working on posting the audio but we’re having technical difficulties. I’m probably the difficulty, but I’m working on it.) Since I can’t post the audio, I wanted to highlight something she said that has not only captivated my imagination but given me new direction in my prayer life.

As Cas recounted the conversion of Paul, she pointed out something rather remarkable. In chapter 3 of Philippians we get to witness firsthand the dramatic change between Paul “pre-Christ” and Paul “post-Christ.” In verses 4-6 he describes his previous status as the ultimate Jew and persecutor of the church, but in the rest of the chapter we encounter evidence of a dramatic transformation. Rather than persecute the church, he now builds it up.

What Cas pointed out that I had never heard before is that the Greek word for “persecute” (v. 6) is the same word used in verses 12 and 14 to mean “press on:”

Not that I have already obtained all this, or have already been made perfect, but I press on to take hold of that for which Christ Jesus took hold of me. Brothers, I do not consider myself yet to have taken hold of it. But one thing I do: Forgetting what is behind and straining toward what is ahead, I press on toward the goal to win the prize for which God has called me heavenward in Christ Jesus.

The Greek word there is dioko, and like many Greek words its meaning changes somewhat depending on the context. Clearly, there are two different contexts between verse 6 and verses 12-14, given that they are translated so differently. The irony is that both uses occur within the context of Paul’s life. Paul’s life changed so dramatically that dioko took on a completely different meaning when applied to his converted life.

In practical terms, this means that the same zeal with which Paul persecuted the church was now redirected toward growing the church. And when I think about it, that makes sense. God had created Paul with that passionate drive, but because of his fallen nature he was using it for evil. The zeal was good and God-given, but the aim was wrong. So God changed Paul’s life, and changed Paul’s aim. He saw the potential in Paul to use his gifts for the good of the Kingdom, and He used them.

This story should challenge us in the way we see non-Christians in our lives. It’s so easy to take an adversarial stance, getting defensive or pointing out the things about them that are wrong. But what a terribly hopeless perspective!

Instead, the story of Paul should spark our imaginations. Rather than condemn people or judge them, dream on their behalf! Look for their strengths, the things about them that were clearly given to them by God but have simply been misdirected, and then pray for their Christ-like potential.

Maybe you have a friend who excels in the business world but is consumed by the drive for success. What would their life look like, how could they use their gifts, if God got a hold of them? Maybe you know someone who, like Paul, is extremely critical of the Christian faith and enjoys debating all the reasons that God can’t exist. Just imagine if that same passion to engage issues of truth with fervor and zeal were harnessed on behalf of the Gospel?

God has the ability to redeem ANYONE, so it’s important that we pray with that perspective in mind. Rather than simply dislike unbelievers or see them as lost causes, dream God-sized dreams on their behalf! Imagine what God could do with their gifts, and then pray for those things to happen! Such a perspective will help to stave off the us versus them mentality that we so easily sink to, but it is also far more faithful to the redemptive character of God, with whom we ALWAYS have a reason to hope.

This week at Women’s Bible Study I taught on the first half of Philippians 3 in which Paul confronts some spiritually toxic religious leaders. They are trying to add stipulations to the Gospel–namely the Jewish law–and Paul is irate. His subsequent response to them is both clever and challenging, and I learned a lot in my research this week. In case you missed my talk, the audio is below:

One of the things I mention in my talk that I wanted to highlight on my blog as well is Paul’s testimony. It’s totally different than how we think of testimonies today. Generally when someone is asked to share their testimony at church, it’s because they have a really dramatic story. Before Christ their life was in the gutter, but then they got saved and now they’re completely different. That kind of thing.

Paul’s testimony, on the other hand, doesn’t go that route. If you read Philippians 3:4-6 Paul essentially shares his testimony, but he does so in a surprising way. He describes his life before Christ, but what is striking about his story is that he emphasizes how good he was, not how bad. In fact, his life pre-Jesus was pretty much all that he hoped it would be and more. He was perfectly happy and content. He was on the road to success, and he thought he had a good standing before God.

But then God intervened, opened Paul’s eyes, and the rest is history.

Now I don’t know about you, but I take a lot of comfort in Paul’s testimony because I always thought my testimony was lame. I never had a rebellious phase. I was a good kid who always did what I thought was right. Along the way I heard about Jesus and it sounded right to me, so I began to follow Him.

Not exactly the kind of story that your church will make a video about.

Yet Paul’s testimony reminds us of something very important: EVERY testimony is powerful. You see, we talk about non-Christians as if they’re all miserable and they hate their lives so we need to show them a better way. But that’s simply not true. A lot of non-Christians are perfectly content and happy with their lives. They don’t think they need anything else. To these people, Christianity is merely a lifesaver to those who are drowning–it’s just one more self-help option among many, but not something they really need.

It is for this demographic that “lame” testimonies like mine are important. For those people who believe religion is just an “opiate for the masses,” our lives prove otherwise. Not all of us came to Christ because we’d hit rock bottom. For some of us, we heard the Gospel and knew it was true. That was all it took. And for others, we had everything the world had to offer but we knew that there had to be something more. And then we found Christ.

These are less dramatic stories and they don’t get very much attention, but your testimony is powerful to someone. So own it! Tell you story to people. Why do you follow Jesus? What brought you to him? Your story doesn’t have to be dramatic, but you DO have to have a reason. So don’t be ashamed of the way you became a Christian. If you’re like Paul, then you’re in good company!

I want to begin today’s post with a story of unrequited love. It’s the tale of Ellie the chihuahua and Bo the boxer/English bulldog. Bo is pictured to the left. He’s my mother-in-law’s dog and he weighs roughly 60 to 70 pounds. He’s also one giant muscle. Ellie, my dog, weighs about 10 pounds. You can probably see where this is going.

Every time I bring Ellie to see Bo, he is beside himself with excitement. He loves Ellie. He starts out with the usual dog handshake–the butt sniff–which she seems relatively ok with. But then he starts falling all over himself with enthusiasm. He gets in her face, he wants to play, he wants to be as close to her as possible. And to this, Ellie’s response has always been the same: rejection. She bares her death and growls. I like to say she’s guarding her virginity, but in all honesty she’s probably just terrified of being eaten.

You see Bo doesn’t understand how to love Ellie the right way. He comes on so strong that she perceives his love as an attack. My husband has tried to coach him on how to be smooth with the ladies, but Bo just won’t listen. He’s too aggressive, which is why their love will never be. Bo doesn’t know how to be gentle.

Now the reason I share this story is two-fold. First, we tend to think of gentleness as a primarily female attribute, but it’s not. Not only is it listed in Galatians 5:23 as a fruit of the Spirit for all believers, but the story of Bo and Ellie also demonstrates how crucial it is for men to be gentle. How many of you know a guy who came on so strong that he was either way too aggressive, or just creepy? And more importantly, husbands must learn to be gentle if they’re going to love their wives well. For al my guy readers out there, your wife isn’t like your buddies. You can’t yell at her or fight with her and then go shoot hoops with her. You have to be gentle. Otherwise, you’ll always struggle to love your wife, and your children, effectively.

So gentleness is not just for women. But here’s the main reason I shared the story of Bo and Ellie: Gentleness is the way we translate love into a language the world can understand.

In the same way that Ellie perceived Bo’s love as an attack, the world often feels the same way about Christians. We show love so aggressively, namely by sharing the Gospel in harsh ways, that the world feels assaulted, not loved.

That’s why gentleness is such a crucial fruit of the spirit. Without it, we could make love look like whatever we want. We could be absolute jerks and call it “tough love.” Christians do that all the time. But God heads us off at the pass and says, “Now wait, I want you to be loving, but I also want you to be gentle.” Gentleness serves as a qualifier that prevents us from abusing love. It ensures that we’re conveying love in a way that the world can receive it.

So while gentleness is the oft-forgotten fruit of the Spirit that we tend to value little, I encourage you to consider how effectively you show it. Also ask you friends. When you’ve tried to convey a tough truth to them, did you do it gently? When you disagreed with your roommate or husband, did you relate your anger or your convictions gently? If you’ve ever had trouble effectively communicating your feelings to people, this could be the reason why. But more importantly your witness is at stake. If we feel the need to force the Gospel on people, they’ll probably respond the way Ellie does to Bo. We need gentleness to translate our love into a language the world can understand.

Every week I get on this blog and write in a way that attempts to sound somewhat authoritative and thoughtful. I like to give the impression that I know what the heck I’m doing, but I really don’t. I’m constantly growing and learning about life and God and myself, and this blog is no exception.

As a writer, I’m always working on two key things, and I still have a loooong way to go on them both:

1) Finding my voice. It’s easy to mimic the countless other Christian voices out there that I think sound really great and I want to be like. Every time I read something thought-provoking or hear a great preacher I think, “Hey I should be more like them.” This is always a disaster. I’m not them and I end up sounding fake. That said, I’m still working on figuring out how Sharon says things best, and to stick with that.

2) Figuring out my target audience.

This second one has been really hard for me. Anyone who’s read my blog knows that it’s targeted towards Christians (in case “She Worships” didn’t give it away) but over the last couple weeks as I’ve written a number of posts, I kept having the thought, “How would this sound to someone who doesn’t believe in this?” Will they be totally turned off by all the Christian jargon and insider language I’m using? While I may be encouraging Christians, am I simultaneously turning off many who aren’t? And not because I’m being judgmental, but simply because of the basic assumptions I’m making? This is the internet, after all–it’s not like I’m holding a secret meeting of Christians that’s safe from the prying ears of those who disagree with me.

Yet sometimes I write like I am.

This is something that a lot of Christians struggle with. Some of us have so immersed ourselves in the Christian world that we don’t know to relate, or even talk to people outside of it. We know how we’re supposed to talk to non-believers, ie. be kind and loving, ask them questions about what they believe, listen to them, and then gently direct the conversation towards Jesus. That’s like every Christian’s covert op for being friends with non-Christians. And while that’s not necessarily a bad thing (it definitely beats standing on a sidewalk screaming at people through a bullhorn) it’s generally not very convincing to people, and it overlooks our greatest evangelistic bridge–our humanity.

As humans, we share a lot of things with each other. We face the same fears, struggle with the same temptations, and we want happiness, health and security. God deals with all of these issues through his Son, and that’s one of the reasons why we follow Him. We don’t have to be afraid anymore. We don’t have to be bound by our anxieties and mistakes. Our humanity finds refuge and wholeness in Christ.

But for some reason, a lot of us act like we left our humanity behind when we became Christians. Because we feel so much pressure to make the Christian life appear totally awesome, we don’t talk about our doubts, our struggles, our regrets, or our fears with much openness. Even when we do talk about those things, it’s with a Christian spin or the tag line, “But God is faithful!” Yes, He is, but sometimes things are scary and awful. Period.

Many of us hide the things that make us human. We turn into Christian robots that smile all the time, always have the right answer, and are thoroughly unable to sustain real relationships with people who think God isn’t real.

This is why the Incarnation is such an important part of the story of Christ. God didn’t become man simply so that he could die in our place. He became man so that he could relate to us. He spoke to the world in a way it could hear and understand. He spoke into our humanity, and continues to do so.

That should be our model for ministry: Be human. Don’t act scandalized when a non-Christian (or a Christian) doubts Scripture–that’s human. Don’t judge when a non-Christian sins–that’s human. And don’t be condescending when a non-Christian struggles to have faith–that’s human.

Conversely, don’t act like holiness and purity come easy to you–that’s not human. And don’t act like you figured out God because you’re so smart or good–that’s not human either.

When I write in a way that only speaks to Christians and excludes the average human being, I have failed. Not only as a writer, but as a called disciple of Christ. Given that Christians are humans too, we need to hear the exact same truths as our non-believing counterparts. The language we use should essentially be the same. That said, if I’m no longer writing for the human heart, then I’m not really ministering well to Christians or non-Christians.

With all of that in mind, I’ve decided that that my target audience is human women. Regardless of what topic I’m discussing, I’m going to try harder to frame my language in a way that any person could understand. Obviously that’s a somewhat impossible goal given that the wisdom of God will many times be foolishness to humanity, but that’s no excuse for me to get lazy either.

The Christian in-crowd language is one of Satan’s greatest tools for short-circuiting our accessibility and authenticity. And he is so adept at it that most of us think it’s not a problem for us. I have non-Christians friends, and I know a lot of Christians who are a TON more socially awkward than I am, so until recently I always talked about Christian-ese in the context of “them.” “That’s something that cheesy Christians do. Not me.” But honestly, I think that’s what the majority of Christians do. Christians who act like broken humans are the exception.

Ultimately, our in-crowd language not only shapes our speech, but our minds and hearts as well. In-crowd language is merely a reflection of an in-crowd community. And as Christians, that’s something we’ve got to avoid. It’s hard to break out of the rut that our language falls into, but it’s something I want to work on in my writing, as well as myself.

Cliques.

This is a word that instantly generates feelings of annoyance and disdain. We all knew those girls in high school, that group in college, maybe even some people at your church right now. Few things feel worse than being excluded from those tightly-knit groups who so ably highlight our inadequacies. And that is why we hate them.

I still remember sitting in my Middle School cafeteria the day my best friend moved on to a better group. Even though we’d been inseparable for years, I’d seen the move coming for weeks. She’d been spending more and more time with those “other girls,” and then came the day when she sat down at their table for lunch. I asked her to come sit with me, and she gave me the “please don’t talk to me anymore” look. Brutal.

(Of course I can’t really blame her. She was blossoming into the most gorgeous girl in our school, while I simultaneously spiraled into the depths of what I call me “awkward phase.”)

Because of stories just like mine, we all detest cliques. We’ve all been excluded at one time or another, and many of us still bear the scars from those emotional blows.

But is there more to it than that? Aside from the way cliques make us feel, is there something inherent about their very nature that we should avoid? What does Scripture have to say about this rampant social practice? After all, we may have been hurt by a clique, but we’ve probably been in a clique as well. What might God think about this?

Well to find the answer, we can look at the very first clique in the Bible, and it’s found in Genesis 11. In this chapter, we see the people of Babel growing in number, as well as pride. They have deceived themselves into thinking they can attain equality with God, so they set out to build a tower that will reach to the heavens. God told them to be fruitful and multiply, but they instead hunker down and stick together. They have bigger fish to fry than simply multiplying. They have the rep of the group to protect.

And what is God’s response to this? It goes as follows: “If as one people speaking the same language they have begun to do this, then nothing they plan to do will be impossible for them.” (v. 6) So He confuses their language and scatters them all over the earth.

What exactly did God mean by that statement? Nothing will be impossible for them? Did He really mean that nothing at all would be impossible? That they could really become like God Himself if they merely stuck together? I don’t think so.

What God meant by those words was that no evil would be impossible for them. Already they were seeking to replace God, and they were only just beginning. Clearly, no act of disobedience was out of bounds, so what would be next??

This is the danger of the in-group mentality. It is a mentality in which the self-preservation of the group is put first and foremost ahead of every other concern. And when this happens, all other people, interests, or causes are subordinated to the well-being of the group. We have seen the in-group at its worst during the Holocaust and the practice of slavery. We even see it in Christian cliques when pastors and prophetic voices are driven out of their churches for reasons having nothing to do with Christ.

In-groups mentalities are therefore extremely destructive because they use peer pressure to get the whole group to act, at which point their collective actions become all the more powerful. If you don’t go along with the group, you risk being shunned, thereby making it very difficult to change them.

So the larger these in-groups get, the more dangerous they become, which is why God scattered them. As the group gets larger it gains momentum, growing faster and faster. And as this growth transpires, it gains increasing man-power to promote its cause.

God knew all of those things, and foresaw the potential destructiveness of this in-group mentality, which is why He responded so definitively. If left unchecked, there was no end to the evil they could accomplish.

That said, beware of cliques–and by that I don’t mean avoid people who are in them. Rather, don’t be in one yourself. When we are in a clique, we fall prey to the in-group peer pressure, and subsequently hurt others. What’s worse is that these cliques often prevent us from even caring if we trample those around us. We find ways to rationalize why we are so exclusive–”I do hang out with other people…sometimes;” “We tried hanging out with her but she’s just so hard to talk to;” “She’s just at a different stage in life than the rest of us, so she should find someone her own age to hang out with.” All of these are justifications for exclusion, exclusion that wounds and destroys.

How do you know if you’re in a clique? Some of the tell-tale signs include the way you spend your time–do you make an effort to hang out with anyone else, or do you only hang out with one specific group of friends who also happen to be exactly like you? Also, what do other people think about the group? Odds are if you’re in a clique, then people have mentioned it to you before. Listen to them. And finally, has anyone been hurt because of the group dynamic? And by that I mean has anyone felt intentionally excluded. Although friendships are never perfect, which means people will inevitably get hurt from time to time, the group’s willingness or unwillingness to make amends and include them in the future reveals a lot.

If you find yourself in a group that fits any of those qualifications, then you need to do one of two things–talk to the group and make an effort to change, or start making new friends. Cliques can be spiritually toxic, so if your friends are resistant to change then you need to switch social circles.

Instead, resolve to be outwardly focused. God called us to be fruitful and multiply, and this command applies to more than mere procreation. We need to multiply spiritually, we need to be adding to our number daily those who are being saved, as well as making our Christian friendships more fruitful. Reach out to the people in your church, dorm or workplace who need a friend, and reach out to those in the community that the socio-economic in-group has marginalized. This practice will generally take us out of our comfort zones, but if the people of Babel teach us nothing else, it is that we can either take ourselves out of the clique, or God will do it for us.

I posted this blog about a year ago when I was overseas, and it has been one of my most popular pieces so I thought I would re-post it today.

Have you ever dated someone who was perfect for you on paper, but you just couldn’t make the relationship work? Logically, they had everything that you were looking for in a spouse, but something was missing? You loved everything about them, but you weren’t in love with them? While it made sense in your head, there just wasn’t any chemistry.

Sometimes in the face of these situations, I would find myself telling others about how perfect the person was for me, but I would do so in the hopes of convincing myself. Deep down I knew that something was terribly wrong, but I thought that if I focused on all the things about him that were right and good, that the lack of attraction would simply go away.

This method never lasted very long, and soon the charade became apparent to everyone around me, including myself. In reality, a relationship that only works on paper is really no relationship at all.

Well I think that has happened to my relationship with God. On paper, it’s all there. I know all the right words to say, I pray, I do ministry, I disciple young women, and if you ask me why I believe the Gospel I can tell you without hesitation.

On paper, everything is perfect.

But all those things are starting to fall flat. This week I’ve been confronted with people who could be ostrasized by their families, or even killed, were they to profess faith in Christ. So when given the opportunity to share the Gospel with them, I’ve found myself hesitating. I have all the right answers to their questions and objections. I know the Scripture and apologetics like the back of my hand. So what is stopping me? One haunting question…

Is it worth it?

Is it worth it for these people to lose their families and friends all for the sake of changing to a better religion? Is it worth risking their lives, just to accept a more holistic worldview? On paper, it all makes sense to me. On paper, Christianity is the most logical understanding of humanity, the world, sin and God. But is having a correct worldview really worth the risk I’m asking them to take?

All week, my instincts have been telling me “no.” No it’s not worth risking all that, just to get someone to pray a prayer and believe the logic behind Christianity. It’s not worth taking their lives into their hands simply because someone presented them with a more compelling argument than that presented by Islam, Buddhism, or Hinduism. If all we’re about is proposing the best argument, the best way of life, the most convincing worldview, then I can’t sell that to people who could lose everything because of it.

And that is the mindset that results when we reduce our faith to mere words. Logic and apologetics are all good things, but they are not enough to move mountains, let alone hearts. They may be true, but they lack power.

In 1 Corinthians 2:4 Paul writes, “My message and my preaching were not with wise and persuasive words, but with a demonstration of the Spirit’s power.” Without the power of God infusing our hearts and our minds, without authentic and transformational experience of His presence in your life, your relationship with God will be just as exciting as a dating relationship that only works on paper. In your head, it all makes sense, but your heart just isn’t in it.

That is why my heart has been so hesitant to share the Gospel with those for whom it could mean culture alienation. It’s been a long time since I’ve felt the power of God in my life in a real, transformational way, so my words fall flat in the face of real risk. And when I did share the Gospel, I felt just like a girl trying to convince herself that her boyfriend is perfect for her, when deep down her heart wasn’t sure that was true.

As soon as I identified this issue in my heart, I started praying for an experience of God’s mighty power. And being the faithful God that He is, I have felt it in an undeniable way. Nothing huge and earth-shattering, at least not yet, but just enough to remember the power behind the words that I speak. Just enough to remind me that it IS worth the risk. That we don’t merely share the Gospel because it makes the most sense, but because it really is GOOD news. It is life and peace and freedom for all who believe. It is unity with God and everlasting life, a life that begins here and now amidst so much death and darkness.

The Gospel is all of those things, but even saying it now will mean nothing to my heart or yours if my words are not infused with the power of God’s Spirit. And that is only something that God can give. That said, we can never spread the Gospel apart from a total dependence upon Him. We may know how to turn a phrase or stage an argument, but if we are not experiencing God’s power then we will never convince others, let alone ourselves.

Are you experiencing God’s power right now? Does it light up your heart and mind, and compel you to go tell the world? If not, I urge you to pray that it does, because we should never be people of mere words. We should also be people of power.

I’ve recently found myself in a number of situations in which preachers and Christian speakers were conveying what, I would call, “half of the Gospel.” By this I mean that they teach parts of the Gospel perfectly, even brilliantly, but simultaneously fail to mention key parts of the Gospel. It’s not that these teachers were saying anything wrong, but they were not conveying the whole truth either.

Now this has always bothered me, but I was willing to look past it. After all, God IS love, so it’s great to hear a sermon on loving the poor and caring for the needy. And God IS a God of holiness and judgment, so it’s important to learn about the severe implications that His character has for our lives. Because God is infinite, it would be impossible to encapsulate all that He is into one sermon. And so I rationalized that these messages about “half the Gospel” were ultimately ok. Hearing half the Gospel is better than hearing none of it at all, right?

But recently I’ve started to reconsider this position. In fact, I began to wonder if “half” the Gospel is really even the Gospel at all. For instance, is the Gospel kind of like Math?–I may not know all there is about Math and its abstracts concepts of calculus and algebra, but I know how to add and subtract, so I can definitively say that I know Math.

In the same way, if I only learn one part of the Gospel, can I then claim that I know THE Gospel? Or if I preach just one part of the Gospel, can I then say that I have actually preached “the Gospel?”

The answer to this question is a resounding “no.” The Gospel is not at all like Math in that sense. The Gospel is instead more like a cake. As a friend of mine so cleverly put it, if you only have half the ingredients of a cake, you don’t have a cake at all. You have a couple eggs and some salt, but that’s not a cake–that’s scrambled eggs.

And that is what we get when we only preach half the Gospel–we get a scrambled eggs theology that ultimately looks nothing like the Gospel we find in Scripture.

Some of you may be thinking this is a bit harsh. After all, if God is love, and we preach love, are we not still teaching the heart of God? I would argue no, because preaching God’s love without God’s judgment is to fundamentally misunderstand God’s love in the first place. God’s love is so radical because of the judgment that we deserve. He is a righteous, holy God who has every right to condemn us, yet He does not.

Thus to preach a Gospel of love without judgment is to domesticate God into some sort of warm and fuzzy deity in the sky who is devoid of wonder and fear-inspiring awe. It is also to make the cross utterly incoherent. Why would God let His Son endure such a gruesome death if not for his sense of justice?

What’s more, you have to look at the implications of “half the Gospel.” Yes, Jesus cared about the poor, but if our ultimate goal is to feed the poor and clothe the hungry without ever addressing people’s spiritual needs, then what are we left with? Say that we were able to clothe everyone, feed everyone, and heal everyone, would that change eternity one bit? No. Scripture tells us that life on earth is but an instant compared to eternity, so we would be laboring to make one instant better, while ignoring the glaring blind spot of peoples’ eternal needs. As Derek Webb puts it, we would ultimately be clothing corpses.

In this way, half the Gospel is not really the Gospel at all–it is either secular social activism, or Pharisaic religiosity, but it is not the Gospel. For that reason, keep your eyes and ears open for these speakers of half-truth. And more importantly, make sure your life preaches the whole truth, because half the truth is actually little more than a dressed up lie.

Last night I was reminded why I quit watching Grey’s Anatomy. I decided to tune in this week because I heard one of the main characters might get killed off and that sounded entertaining. But I was disappointed. Not only did no one die, but I am now certain that the writers are intentionally producing a morally subversive show.

Now I know a lot of you who are reading this right now are obsessed with Grey’s. I am not writing this post today as a diatribe against your favorite show, so hang with me as I explain my thought process. I promise there’s a point.

To begin, I spent almost the entire length of the show in a state of total fury. My roommate and I had to restrain one another from throwing furniture at the t.v. as the characters delivered some of the most ridiculous, morally backwards lines that I have heard in a long time.

Two of the characters “got married” by signing a post-it note of their vows. It was meant to be a kind of romantic gesture since they “didn’t have time” to get married in a legally binding way. Later in the show, a different character left her husband because he asked her to be around the family more instead of advancing her career. The female doctor nobly shed tears as she declared her husband to be a “weak man” for giving her such an unreasonable ultimatum.

In both of these scenes the music swelled in the background, signaling to the viewer the deep and meaningful significance of the characters’ actions. I rolled my eyes.

What really bothers me about these plot lines is the way they ennoble destructive decision-making and morally bankrupt behavior. A selfish mother and wife is hailed as a brave pioneer for women’s rights in the workplace. Two people who are too busy to even make public vows are somehow expected to do the hard work of making an entire life together, just because they signed a post-it note, on a whim, and decided to call that a wedding.

The title of the episode was “Here’s to Future Days.” It should have been called “Here’s Why Our Nation’s Divorce Rate is So High.”

Watching this show makes me feel like I’m taking crazy pills. The moral compass isn’t even on the dial. But like I said, the purpose of this post is not to cast judgment on those of you who are faithful watchers. While I think Grey’s Anatomy symbolizes a lot of what is wrong with our culture today, that also means we should pay attention.

Grey’s Anatomy is popular today, not simply because it has compelling story lines, but but because it dignifies, if not exalts those lifestyles that characterize a large portion of Americans. In today’s culture, it is not uncommon for couples to co-habitate before marriage, or for marriages to crumble for the sake of career advancement. It happens all the time. And in Grey’s Anatomy, viewers find an affirmation of their lifestyle.

That said, the Christian response to shows like Grey’s is not to boycott them. In contrast with my gut reaction, we are not to throw bricks at our television sets and write letters of complaint to the stations that air them. Nor should we passively watch these shows, explaining it away as our one “guilty pleasure.” Instead, we need to study them.

When we watch popular television shows, we are given a glimpse into the morality of the secular mind. It is a kind of lesson about the worldview of our day. And rather than simply reject this alternative perspective, we must seek to understand it. If we can figure out how and why Americans buy into the moral principles these shows portray, we can establish some common ground for conversation. Rather than isolate ourselves from the culture, we build bridges for communication.

Now I am not letting you off the hook for watching total trash just because you like it. If you aren’t careful, the shows you watch will shape you more than you will ever realize. BUT, there is an extent to which we must engage the culture and have a sense for its spiritual pulse. It’s almost like studying a foreign culture before you embark on the mission field. If you go overseas but subsequently stay in your home, refuse to learn the language, and never adapt to the country’s customs, you will reach no one.

It is the same with American culture. You can live in the U.S. your entire life, but if you hide away in a Christian bubble you will have just as much in common with your neighbors as you might with villagers in the mountains of Tibet.

So if you watch Grey’s I’m not gonna tell you to stop, but do be aware of the morality they are selling, and pay attention. Chances are your classmates and co-workers are eating it up with a spoon, so engage the perspective and figure out how to respond to it. Like any diligent missionary, we need to learn the language of our culture so that we can use it to share the message of Christ.