My good friend Kerry Clark (who I’m still bummed about missing when I was recently up in his part of the country) left a comment just a few minutes ago that really stated the obvious in a clever and succinct way. He said that our worldview must begin with a set of biblical presuppositions — particularly about the character and nature of God.

So, let’s talk about God for a while, shall we?

To begin with, as I read the Bible I find God to be more than the God of our religion. I find him to be the God of nature and art and beauty as well. He is the God of both the “sacred” and the “secular”. In fact, I’m a little uncomfortable using those words anymore. I’ve come to view everything as “sacred” in the sense that it all belongs to God. I’ve come to believe that nothing is truly “secular” in the sense that God is excluded from it.

God — who you would think has fairly high standards of craftsmanship and aesthetics — made the world, stepped back and said, “That’s good.” He didn’t say, “That’ll do.” He didn’t say, “Close enough.” He said, “That’s good.”

Moreover, “everything God created is good, and nothing should be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving” (1 Timothy 4:4). If I were to make such a statement, you might be justified in pushing back a little. But that wasn’t me saying that last sentence. That was the Apostle Paul under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Everything and nothing are pretty inclusive words and are difficult to get around in that verse.

We should be more thankful than we are for the gifts we receive from our Creator. Sex. Friendship. Family. Beauty. Art. Music. Work. Play. The interracial, intercultural world in which we live. Painting. Singing. Dancing. Laughing. Cooking. Eating. Our God is the God who created all these things, and we should be more grateful for them than we are.

I fear that one of the worst things Christians have ever done is that we’ve made God too religious. We act as if he’s only interested in religious things: religious buildings, religious books, religious activities.

Of course, he’s interested in those things, but he’s only interested in them if they’re related to everyday life. If the Old Testament prophets are reliable — heck, if Jesus is reliable — God gets pretty critical of religion that’s divorced from everyday life. If what’s happening on Sundays isn’t connected in some ways to what’s happening on Monday through Saturday, our religious services are worse than worthless; they’re hypocrisy of the highest order — the kind that makes God nauseous.

Our worldview must begin with a biblically accurate picture of God — particularly the understanding that God is concerned with the whole of human life.

Now, here’s a question for us to wrestle with: Do we really believe God is vitally interested in both the “sacred” and the “secular”? How might our lives be different if we really believed and acted on this?

I hope to have made my case for the necessity of Christian involvement in the world. As those who claim to follow Jesus, we simply cannot allow ourselves to withdraw permanently from the world he commanded us to go out into.

A rare piece of trivia I just recently learned: The Roman Catholic word “mass” is supposed to come from the final sentence of an old Latin rite: Ite, missa est. Translated nicely, it means, “Now you are dismissed”. More literally (and bluntly) it means, “Get out!”

Perhaps that’s something we could borrow from our Catholic friends. The idea that when we’re dismissed we’re being sent out into the world which in John Stott’s words, “God made and godlike beings inhabit, the world into which Christ came and into which he now sends us. For that is where we belong. The world is the arena in which we are to live and love, witness and serve, suffer and die for Christ.”

As we go, we will find ourselves confronted by a variety of issues ranging from war to abortion to poverty. In order to face these issues actively and engage our world redemptively, we must make sure we have a Christian worldview in place.

But that begs a question: What is a Christian worldview?

I’ve talked about that before, but I want to revisit it in our current context. So, two questions today:

First, what is a Christian worldview? What are the basic building blocks of a Christian worldview? If you wanted to teach a class on a Christian worldview, how would you start? What would your syllabus include?

Second, is there just one? What I mean is: when we discuss thorny issues, we sometimes talk about “The Christian View of War” or “The Christian View of Abortion”. But is there just one? Or is there a spectrum?

Life is complicated, and in the face of such intricacies Christians often veer towards one extreme or the other. Some Christians look at the world and grow cynical. Citing disagreements among Christians, corruption among politicians, complacency among the general population and confusion on a wide assortment of issues, some say things are hopeless. In my opinion, these people show a lack of trust in God and his ability to speak to us and lead us into truth.

On the other hand, some bury their heads in the sand and pretend that life is really black and white. They believe there are quick solutions, and, thus, they are in my opinion naive and simplistic. They may even deny the problems altogether, quoting their favorite Bible verse (often ripped completely out of context) and dismissing any who disagree with them.

What is desperately needed in our world is a group of people who will work diligently at developing a Christian mind — one that will analyze the issues, reading the Bible, listen to others, employ discernment mixed with humility and take hope-filled action.

The world has enough Chicken Little pundits, loudly exclaiming that the sky is falling and the end is near. The world has enough Pollyanna simpletons with their heads in the clouds pretending that everything is fine when it’s clear to anyone with sawdust for brains that something’s gone wrong in our world.

Neither cynical nor naive — that would be a good characterization of Christians who behave themselves well. It seems to sound a little like that old saw Jesus used to use — you know the one about being innocent as doves and shrewd as serpents.

I asked this question last week, but I think it may have gotten lost in the shuffle somehow. No one responded, which is a little unusual around here of late.

So, I’m going to ask it again, and I really am interested in discussion on this. Of course, as always, we should keep things civil.

Is the government beyond redemption?

And the other thing I asked was this: What if everyone in Washington, D.C. was overwhelmed by the grace of God? Would both parties necessarily move closer together on issues? Would the two-party system be abandoned for something better? Would they all stop working in the government?

What would happen to our nation if some sort of serious spiritual awakening occurred on Capital Hill?

Lately, I’ve developed quite a stack of books I’m planning to work through. I had a birthday at the end of February, and I used that as an excuse to buy a bunch. Then I had some sent to me (sometimes people do that). Finally, this week — while I was out in California — I went by my publisher and my new best friend (Alex Field) not only bought me lunch but told me I could pick up any books that looked interesting to me (these two things combine to make it easy to become my new best friend).

So, here’s a list of books I’ve got waiting. Let me know if you’ve read any of these or if any of them sound interesting to you:

A Comedian’s Guide to Theology by Thor Ramsey

The Delusion of Disbelief: Why the New Atheism Is a Threat to Your Life, Liberty, and Pursuit of Happiness by David Aikman

Empire Falls: A Novel by Richard Russo

God on Mute: Engaging the Silence of Unanswered Prayer by Peter Greig

I Want to Believe: Finding Your Way in an Age of Many Faiths by Mel Lawrenz

LifeSpace: The practice of life with God by Joni Grace Powers & Robert Pyne

Red Letter Christians: A Citizen’s Guide to Faith & Politics by Tony Campolo

The Road: A Novel by Cormac McCarthy

Through a Screen Darkly: Looking Closer at Beauty, Truth and Evil in the Movies by Jeffrey Overstreet

Who’s Your Caddy? Looping for the Great, Near Great and Reprobates of Golf by Rick Reilly

Wicked: The Life and Times of the Wicked Witch of the West: A Novel by Gregory Maguire

As Christians we must be extremely careful to avoid aligning ourselves en mass with one political party or another. No party (and no political ideology) has cornered the market on truth and goodness. At the very best, a political program can only be an approximation of the purpose and desire of God in a particular place at a particular time.

That goes for the Christian Right, and it’s true of the newer “Red Letter Christian” movement as well.

The fact is, there are Christians scattered all along the political spectrum, and many of those Christians vote the way they do because of their faith — rather than in spite of it. For example, a Christian may vote along conservative lines because of the way the Republican party tends to stress individual initiative and an entrepreneurial spirit. However, some Christians are put off by the way the Republican party seems indifferent towards the weaker person who gets marginalized or buried by the fiercely competitive beast that is capitalism.

On the other hand, a Christian may vote along more progressive lines because of the compassion the Democratic party has traditionally shown to the poor and the less fortunate. However, some Christians are put off by the way the Democratic party seems to smother creative enterprise with big government.

Republicans seem to care more about a human life before it is born into poverty. Democrats seem to care more about human life after it is born into poverty.

Each side attracts Christians because it emphasizes a truth about humanity — whether it is the need to give people freedom or the need to protect people from exploitation.

Each side repulses Christians because it fails to take the other side’s truth seriously. Both can be liberating; both can be stifling. As J.K. Galbraith said, “Under capitalism, man exploits man. Under communism, it’s just the opposite.”

Understandably, many Christians long for a third way which included the best of both sides. But the only way we’ll ever hope to achieve such a compromise is by listening to the other side with a hefty dose of humility — realizing that our side doesn’t have a monopoly on truth, diligently working to pursue God’s purposes for our society.

Because this world has fallen and become broken, there is bound to be a gap between the ideal and the actual. But nothing is beyond redemption, is it?

Here’s a question for you: What if everyone in Washington, D.C. was overwhelmed by the grace of God? What if all the elected officials at every level (national and local) became as serious as you are about pursuing the will of God for their lives and the lives of the people around them? Would both parties move closer together on issues? Would the two-party system be abandoned for something better? Would they all stop working in the government?

What would happen to our nation if some sort of serious spiritual awakening occurred on Capital Hill?

That’s me. I’m a blog slacker — at least this week I am!

Since last we spoke I’ve been to Maryland, Pennsylvania and California. It’s been quite a whirlwind tour, and I’m just now recuperating after having flown home last night. I will get back to my regular posting, but I’ve got lots of thoughts swirling around my brain right now.

I did a parenting seminar last weekend. I hadn’t done one in several months, so I was a little nervous about presenting the material. I even changed one of the sessions around completely. But it all came back to me. I was exhausted afterwards and realized just how out of shape I’ve let myself become. I’ll be hitting the gym more regularly from now on.

I spent a lot of time out in Gettysburg, PA. I walked around the battlefield, the cemetery on the hill, some museums and a church. Remind me to tell you about the church; it sparked a lot of emotion and thought.

I flew out to California to meet the launch team for River Park Community Church. I also got to see some old friends, tour some potential schools for the girls and see the house we’ll be renting for the foreseeable future. I’m so excited about this new chapter of our lives. But there are times when I am scared out of my wits! I wonder, “What in the world am I doing? What gave me the impression that this would be a good idea?”

I’m sure this will be a near-constant back-and-forth in my head for a while. But I am convinced that God is in the middle of all this. Here’s some of what I told the launch team Sunday night:

I used to have this idea that following God would get easier as I got older. I thought that one day I would finally surrender to such an extent that it would be like Jesus was driving my car. I would sit in the passenger seat and wave at all my friends as we drove past. I could enjoy the scenery while Jesus made all the decisions for me and my car.

But I’ve learned as I get older that Jesus — who, as I have said before, is the most frustrating person I’ve ever met — asks me to do something much more difficult. He doesn’t say, “Let me drive.” He comes and says, “Follow me.”

He doesn’t even really give me good directions. He’s less interested in giving me guidance than he is in being my Guide.

So, we’re trying to follow Jesus. We don’t have much of a map. We have a general idea of where we’re going, but we’re mostly just trying to stay as close to his back bumper as we can right now. And when we finally get where we’re going, we’ll know we couldn’t have done this on our own. The only way we’ll get where we need to go is by paying attention to the guy in front of us.

That’s where we are right now. We’re on high alert. He could make a hard right at any moment. He doesn’t always feel the need to use his turn signals. We may have to run a few yellow lights to keep up. We may have to make a U-Turn and find him again. But that’s what we’re doing.

Pray for us. Support us financially if you can. And let us know how we can help you follow Jesus more closely in the next chapter of your life.

According to Vision 360’s California office, Ventura and Santa Barbara Counties (which are just to the northwest of Los Angeles) are home to approximately 1.2 million people. Roughly 14% of those people attend a Christian church of any kind on any given weekend (7% Catholic, 6% Evangelical, 1% Mainline Protestant). In the past decade, that number has decreased by 2.5%.

Think of it: More than a million unchurched people in those two counties alone.

Nearly 500,000 of those people live in the Ventura/Oxnard Metropolitan area. This area currently has 130 Evangelical churches.

By way of comparison, Davidson County (Nashville, TN) has a population of just over 600,000. There are more than 750 churches there. Forsyth County (where I currently live) has a population of right around 150,000. There are 37 Baptist churches here.

Statistically speaking, the best way to reach unchurched people is through new church plants. On average, a church that is older than 10 years can expect one new convert per year for every 89 members. A church that is between 3 and 7 years old averages one new convert for every 7 members. A church that is under 3 years old averages one new convert for every 3 members.

It is for these reasons (and several others) that I will be flying to California this weekend where I will announce the plan for my family to move to Ventura County this summer and join the launch team of River Park Community Church.

We are excited. We are nervous. We are terrified. We have no idea how we will survive financially. This makes very little sense…unless there really is a God who is bigger than all of our obstacles and fears.

Now, more than ever, my family needs your prayers, your friendship and your financial support. Please, prayerfully consider giving money to support this new work in such a vitally important region of our world.

I will keep you informed.

“It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government — except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time” (Winston Churchill).

There are three basic forms of government that can be considered. Each of them reveals something about our view of human nature. For example, if we are utterly pessimistic about human nature, we’ll lean towards authoritarian governance, looking for ways to have the smart people impose their will on the rest of the world. Under an authoritarian regime, there are no checks and balances, no bill of rights, no free and fair elections. There is no trust. There is only suspicion of the consequences of human freedom and choice. There is no social discourse because the smart people do not believe they have anything to learn from the general population. An authoritarian government imposes its vision of society on people and coerces them into accepting that vision — usually through violence and the denial of basic human rights.

If we are on the other end of the spectrum and are utterly optimistic about human nature, we may lean towards anarchy. The belief among some is that people are so good at heart that there is no need for laws. Just leave people alone, and they’ll do the right thing. Structured government is seen as a hindrance to true personal freedom.

Personally, I cannot square either of these with what I know about human nature. Humans have immense dignity and are capable of great thought, sentiment and action. However, humans are also fallen and capable of tremendous acts of depravity. A Christian perspective of civil society must reckon with both of these facets of humanity. That is why Christians are so often associated with the spread of democracy.

There is a pretty broad spectrum of views within democracy — from an emphasis on individual rights to an emphasis on communal good. At the heart of modern democracy, though, is the idea that we all listen to one another, using reason to persuade, discuss, critique and compromise.

The beauty of democracy (from a Christian perspective) is that it takes humans seriously — refusing to govern people without their consent, giving them a share in the decision-making process. At the same time, because it understands the potential depravity of humans, it never concentrates power in one person or group. Reinhold Niebuhr said, “Man’s capacity for justice makes democracy possible; but man’s inclination to injustice makes democracy necessary.”

Granted, democracy has often been hijacked and corrupted. But that only tends to happen when people refuse to be involved in the process. Democracy lends itself to conversation; it thrives on the involvement of everyone. Christians, therefore, help democracy flourish when they make a constructive contribution to the ongoing dialog in a pluralistic society, joining the conversations on war, divorce, abortion and education.

Christian involvement in democracy, thus, should not be seen as an attempt to gain power or control or to impose our vision of society on everyone else. This is part of being a good citizen and a good neighbor. This is part of what God calls us to do and be in this world. We are not merely concerned with getting as many people on the life boats as possible, preparing them for the life to come. We are also concerned with life in the here and now, making life on this earth reflect God’s original intent.

To further clarify my position on what we’ve been discussing lately around here, I want to draw a distinction between general principles and specific policy. I believe a local church has no business advocating specific policy, but it should state its support for general principles.

For example, a local church should state the biblical principles regarding the sanctity of human life. I do not believe they should propose legislation regarding the outworking of that principle. This is simply a matter of integrity. While some members of a local church may have expertise in the area of establishing public policy, the church as a whole does not. That is not the church’s purpose, nor is it the church’s place.

Furthermore, a person’s stance on the best way for the government to protect the sanctity of human life is not a salvation issue. The church must always be a place where we allow for disagreement and discussion on a wide variety of things. As long as we all agree that Jesus is in charge, we need not all vote along the same lines.

The church should declare principles. The church should not design policy.

Having said that, each church should applaud and encourage those who feel called by God to give their lives to public service. There will be individual Christians and even Christian organizations who do have the level of expertise necessary to engage in debates over specific public policy. It may be that a large number of people within a local church feel similarly about a particular issue and band together, sharing knowledge and influence, to enact change at a legislative level.

This is very different from a local church being committed to one political platform.

What do you think? Is it helpful to draw a distinction between principles and policy? How can the church do a better job of articulating one without advocating the other?