A Heart-Wrenching Decision, Indeed

Obama is right on target in what he recently told students observing his speech at the Catholic flagship school Notre Dame:

Pro-life or pro-choice, or somewhere in between, we certainly can all agree "that this heart-wrenching decision for any woman is not made casually."

So, don't unplug your brain just yet. Because this statement which sounds so all-embracing on its surface, also begs the question, Why? WHY is abortion a "heart-wrenching decision for any woman" and one that "is not made casually?"

Is it because it is a difficult and painful medical procedure?

Not really. Lots of people make the decision to undergo far more painful and difficult medical procedures, and that decision is not "heart-wrenching."

No, to the contrary, I think everyone intuitively knows that the reason this decision is heart-wrenching is that any woman making that decision is going against the most basic instinct God has implanted within her heart: the instinct to protect her child. Admitting that abortion is a universally heart-wrenching decision is admitting that it is killing a human being, for whatever reason that morally problematic act is being undertaken. Let's call a spade a spade.

Only the truly, unreachably, evil person does not find their heart wrenched when faced with the prospect of willfully having to make a choice that causes the death of another human being.

If there is any other reason that abortion could possibly be a "heart-wrenching decision for any woman," would someone please point it out to me?

Christians Abandoned and Killed in Iraq

I have a close friend in Baghdad who has alerted me to a situation which really is both a tragedy, and a travesty of justice.

And no, it's not the situation you're thinking of!

This is related to a people group who are indigenous to Iraq, even before it was Iraq ... the Assyrian Christians. As you can imagine, a Christian minority in Iraq has been persecuted in recent years, under Saddam, and is now being persecuted further under the Muslim majority in Iraq.

Many have fled. My friend has been advocating for the creation of a province in Iraq, where the Assyrian Christians could be allowed to return, and live in relative peace and security.

Doesn't sound like too much to ask for, does it?

But here's the problem. For several years that he has been advocating this, with U.S. politicians and those who are in power in Iraq, they have at least paid lip service to the need to help the Assyrian Christians. But suddenly now, under Barack Obama's administration, he is finding doors slammed in his face.

And, simultaneously, Muslim extremists in the very heart of Iraq are being emboldened to mercilessly attack the impoverished Assyrian Christians who remain.

My friend tells me that during the last week alone, five innocent Assyrian Christians have been murdered in cold blood. He sent me the attached photo of two elderly Assyrian Christian women who were gunned down, in cold blood, in their home in the Dora area of Baghdad.

This photo is one member of a set taken by Baghdad security forces investigating the crimes. (He says it was the least grisly of the entire set, which he saw.)

My friend tells me he has submitted approximately 30 proposals for assistance for Assyrian Christians in Baghdad, to organizations which routinely make grants to assist groups in Iraq. But because the people who would be assisted are Christians, and it is not "politically correct" in our government to be seen as helping Christians right now, these proposals are being routinely dismissed.

Last week U.S. President Barack Obama, who himself is supposedly a Christian, touted the "contributions" to the world made by the Muslim faith -- without giving any specifics about what these supposed contributions are.

The contributions to the world brought by Christianity, on the other hand, are very specific and historic. One I can attest to personally is the contribution made by the world's largest faith-based relief and development organization, World Vision, which helps save millions of lives annually through its programs ... funded primarily by mom-and-pop Christians throughout the world who are donating their hard-earned dollars (in the face of a global recession) to help the poor.

And that is just one of many very specific contributions being made to our world by Christians and their organizations. So, why isn't our president out there touting the benefits added by the Christian faith? And why is it so politically incorrect to try and help Christians in the context of a country like Iraq who are suffering in poverty and being killed for their beliefs?

Someone please explain this to me. Thanks.

A Pervasive Sadness

Okay, I think I need to be a little bit transparent and confess. I've been struggling the past few weeks.

It's been a whirlwind. I think that most of the people reading this are aware of my dad's 9-year struggle with Alzheimers, and the fact that he died on December 30. His death capped a two-year marathon of caring for him. Then two weeks ago I took his ashes to Alabama, and along with my two brothers and my aunt (my mom's sister, who was a missionary to northern Africa for 45 years), and with some of my dad's friends back in his hometown where he had laid my mom to rest, we buried his ashes next to her plot in Birmingham's Elmwood Cemetery.

We had an enjoyable time of fellowship that week. I put 1600 miles on a rental car and drove Aunt Dorothy back to her home in Sebring, Florida, then up to Atlanta for a four-day business conference. Then home again, and immediately back to work.

It felt nonstop and I had this weird pervasive sense of numbness and tiredness when I got home. It didn't help that I'd had the flu for an entire two weeks before I left for Alabama. But as I began to try and get readjusted I couldn't shake this pervading sense of what seemed like sadness. I wondered if it was just the physical effects of the workload, the flu, the stress of a busy few weeks.

Last Monday night I had a speaking engagement in Bothell, about 90 minutes north of where I live. I had received an e-mail 8 or 9 months earlier from a woman representing the Northwest Christian Writer's Association asking me to speak about "writing opportunities for nonprofits" at one of their meetings. My sense was that it was a smallish group, a fairly informal meeting, perhaps speaking for 20 or 30 minutes in general terms then sitting and just chatting. We e-mailed back and forth a few times during the summer then I didn't hear any more.

Of course, in the intervening 8 months the economic landscape has changed dramatically. Now I could answer the question, "What are opportunities for Christian writers at nonprofits right now?" in about one minute. (Or however long it takes to say, "Sorry, there really are no opportunities right now.") So I was having a hard time thinking about what to speak on for 20 or 30 minutes. I began to feel a little nervous about the event. The week after I returned from Alabama I e-mailed my contact and asked for more information. What kind of people (and how many) were attending the meeting? What were their expectations and how best could I help? How long did she want me to speak, and what was the format like? How should I dress? Etc.

The Monday of the event rolled in and I hadn't heard back from her, and hadn't done any real preparation yet. I half suspected perhaps the event had been cancelled and they had just forgotten to tell me. I spent most of Monday fiddling with my thoughts, trying to put together an outline for various types of formats and lengths of time. But I had a really hard time coming up with anything substantive. I threw together a very small and informal PowerPoint presentation. Put pictures of my family on it, and stuff like that. I felt like I had the equivalent of "writer's block" (speakers block?), mostly because I wasn't sure what to expect.

Thus, the time arrived for me to make the 90 minute drive north. I tried to eat a small dinner but I just wasn't hungry. I started out two hours before my scheduled arrival time just because I wasn't sure about traffic. And as I began to drive north, my stress level began to climb. My stomach ached and my throat felt weird. I felt suddenly feverish and thought I must be getting sick again. At one point I pulled off the freeway and stopped at a gas station, not because I really needed fuel, but mainly because I thought I might throw up and wanted to be near a bathroom. I felt a growing sense of dread as I approached Bothell.

I arrived at an enormous church 20 minutes before the meeting was scheduled to start. I saw some lights on in some classrooms, but they were vacant and I couldn't find anyone there. Finally I found a janitor who told me I was on the wrong side of the very large church complex.

As I approached the right side of the church, I realized how wrong I had been. I walked into an enormous meeting room, filled with what looked like 150-200 people sitting at tables. At the entrance to the room, people were lined up, checkbooks out, paying to get in. As I walked up, people turned and looked at me. They recognized me. I recalled that I had e-mailed them my picture for their newsletter. I glanced up at the enormous stage, and the screen behind it that gave my name as the keynote speaker.

I tried not to swoon as they greeted me and pinned a namebadge on me. "How long am I speaking for?" I croaked. They told me I was on at 8:05 and would be speaking until 8:45, then I should leave 15 minutes for questions. I excused myself to go "wash up."

By the time I got back to the car tears were streaming down my face and I was gasping for breath. I felt like I was having a panic attack. The urge to start the engine and just drive off into the night was powerful. I was thankful I had left my laptop back in the room, so I couldn't really leave. So instead I dialed Darlene. When she answered she said, "What's wrong?"

"I just walked into a room full of at least a hundred writers. They are paying to get in. I found out I'm the keynote speaker and I have 40 minutes to give a formal presentation. And I really have no idea what I'm going to say."

Darlene was her usual, calm self. "Forty minutes should be no problem for you," she chuckled. "You're a good storyteller. Just tell stories and tie them to your main point. Smile. Laugh at yourself. You'll do fine." She assured me she would call some of our friends and ask them to pray. After we were done, I prayed a desperate man's prayer for help, crying out to Jesus in that car in a dark parking lot with its steamed up windows for 10 or 15 minutes, then mopped my face, plucked up my courage as best I could, and returned to the meeting room.

I had 15 minutes before I was on. I noticed the PowerPoint presentations that everyone was using were about 10 times more elegant than mine. So I wasted 14 of those 15 minutes polishing mine up a bit, then handed it on a jump drive to the technician. "I'm sorry," he told me honestly, "I don't think I have time to put this in now. You're on in one minute."

"That's okay," I assured him. "The Lord is in control. Do what you can." He put the jump drive in his pocket. He was dealing with another problem.

I was being introduced. A minute later, I walked up and wired myself into the wireless mike. I still had no idea what I was going to say for 40 minutes. "Lord," I prayed silently. "I don't care as much about looking like a fool as I care about wasting these good people's time. Please help me. Speak through me."

I remembered my wife's advice. I started by sharing stories of how the Lord developed me as a writer, some of my writing experiences, coming to World Vision, and what a great organization World Vision is, and why. I spoke about how we used freelance and contract writers. I had chatted with Jim, a very nice fellow who is a communications vice president for Crista Ministries, earlier in the day, and shared some of his thoughts with the group. I talked a bit about my recent experience with the radio team and working on World Vision's social networking technologies, and how much promise those held for the way we as writers communicate. I just talked.

It felt discombobulated, but people seemed interested enough. When I started question and answers, I was relieved that there were a few questions I could sink my teeth into.

Afterward, there was a line of people waiting to talk with me. I chatted with folks for an hour. I was so blessed by the people I talked with, they were so kind and gracious and genuine. But best of all, there was this beautiful, sweet, small elderly woman who had been sitting next to me. She now held my hand unashamedly. She was disabled to some extent, and shared how she had struggled for years with bouts of brain cancer and treatment for it. She showed me a notebook full of beautiful illustrations which she had done. They took my breath away.

Yes, my struggles were real, and painful, and challenging. But sitting next to this woman, this saint, this hand of Jesus who reached and and took mine and wouldn't let it go, somehow put it all into perspective. Her challenges were enormous, way too large for her small frame, but not too large for God. Her attitude, her sense of joy, spilled over from her onto me.

She reminded me of that hero of heaven in C.S. Lewis' Great Divorce -- Sarah, a woman who nobody knew on earth but who was celebrated by a procession of bright spirits due to the way she allowed God's love to spill over from her onto all she came in contact with. I found myself not wanting to leave that room when a scant two hours before it had been all I could do not to bolt for the door.

I don't know whether she or anyone else was really blessed by what I had to say that night. They probably thought, "Oh brother, he didn't prepare, did he?" But no matter. I am trusting that the God who wanted me to be there spoke through me, somehow, despite my weakness, my pervasive sadness and tiredness and numbness.

I know that he could do so, because he used others who had refused to succumb to the battle, to speak to me.

Why Downward Spirals are Vicious

Today's headline from the New York Times reads: "U.S. Is Pressed To Add Billions To Bailouts."

Doubletake. Wait just a minute. I thought the U.S. government has already handed out billions in bailout money ... to banks and finance institutions, to auto manufacturers, even to hard-pressed homeowners. So who is it that is asking for billions more?

The article says: "The government faced mounting pressure on Monday to put billions more in some of the nation’s biggest banks, two of the biggest automakers and the biggest insurance company, despite the billions it has already committed to rescuing them."

Tripletake. "Billions more?"

I'm trying to imagine running a business, like the insurance giant AIG, and running it so badly that I have to come to the government asking for a $150 billion (with a B) bailout in order to keep it afloat. Then, a few short months later, I come back and ask for billions more?

There is only one thing that could possibly be going on here. The entitlement mentality that has been slowly creeping into mom and pop America these past few years, the sense that life owes me something and if I fail it can't possibly be my own fault,  has apparently infected even America's largest institutions now.

What has made the entitlement mentality possible in the past is a codependent government which is there to bail us out. Hence welfare has become not merely a safety net for the truly poor who cannot work; it has become a substitute for having to work which is abused daily by millions of people who would apparently rather sit and home in their trashed up trailers and drink booze and take drugs and abuse their kids.

As parents we see the same thing in raising our families. One of the toughest parts to being a parent is overcoming the conviction that you need to be your kids' best friend. You need to step in and protect them from the consequences of their bad decisions (rather than letting them suffer the consequences themselves and hence learn from them).

So at some point the government is going to have to learn to do what all parents who are being the kind of parents God wants them to be have to learn to do: To just say "no." Sorry, AIG, if your business model and business decisions have been that bad, you are going to have to suffer the consequences for it.

The rub of course is that it isn't just AIG execs who will suffer, it is the thousands of employees and all the others who have paid in money into the bad system and now are looking to AIG for help. The consequences of our failures always affect others, and at this level the net is cast exceedingly wide.

But the cycle of codependence has to stop somewhere. Government may have the deep pockets, but ultimately they are going to turn back to the governed and victimize them with higher taxes in order to pay for their bailouts of AIG, and the banks (selling junk mortgages to those who can't afford them), and the car manufacturers (who, by the way, should have learned a lesson about making more fuel efficient and trustworthy vehicles long ago from the experts like Toyota).

Downward spirals are vicious because they gather momentum as they spiral downward. They become harder and harder to stop. Better to stop it now and deal with the pain.

What is God's love language?

One of the things that has, surprisingly (at least to me, anyway), made an impact on me recently is this whole idea of people having different "love languages." There are (supposedly) five of them, according to the book by Gary Chapman:

• verbal expression/gratitude
• undivided attention/time
• gifts/tangible expressions
• help/service/assistance
• physical contact

You can take a brief "30 second assessment" on Chapman's Web site, or I found a more extensive love language assessment tool I liked on Facebook.

The valuable thing is not only understanding (and helping those who love you to understand) what says "love" to you, but more importantly, understanding how you can effectively express yourself to those you love. If your wife is highest on service and lowest on gifts, and you are vice versa, and you give her an iPod for Christmas, then sit and watch TV while she does the dishes ... she's not hearing that you love her, when you think you've expressed it well. Right?

This also got me to thinking, recently, about what happens in our culture around Christmastime. I watched this really cool YouTube video to promote an organization called "The Advent Conspiracy." Basically the video says Americans spend $450 billion each year on gift-giving at Christmas time. It noted that it would take an estimated $10 billion to solve one of the world's worst and deadliest problems -- lack of access to safe drinking water. If we could redirect just 2 percent of what we spend on Christmas gifts, we could solve one of the world's most pressing problems!

The video makes some stark points. Despite all our gift-giving and receiving, we are not really as happy as we should be, are we? And how much time at Christmastime do we devote to serving? To encouraging and spending time with others? If we put a fraction of our energy into other expressions of love, it would go a long ways to create happiness in the world.

I assume Christmas gift-giving is how we at least attempt to express love in this very fallible society. But the interesting thing is that gift-giving is only one of the five love languages. Are we as focused at Christmastime on expressing love through the other four languages as well?

Verbally expressing gratitude and love? I guess Christmas cards sort of do that. But what about sitting down in a quiet corner, sharing a latte, and just sharing your heart to someone you love?

Undivided attention/time? That's probably the hardest one for us, especially at Christmastime, such a busy time of the year. This season has been unusual for us here in the Northwest. Right now we are in a deep freeze and no one can move anywhere. I haven't been to the office for three days. One of my colleagues made it in last night, but he didn't make it home again. He sat on the freeway near the office for three hours, then finally gave up, parked his car, and slogged through the snow to a nearby hotel to spend the night. He planned to turn the car back around and head back to work this morning when he got up.

So, for those of us who stayed home, it's been a great time to simply spend time with those we love. I've really enjoyed three days at home with my wife, even if I've had to spend a lot of time on the computer getting my shows done. It's just so nice to be near her, and to eat lunch sitting by the fire.

Serving others. I really like how our church has, in recent years, created a seasonal emphasis around service. We have been seeking out single moms and families of lesser means who we can help and serve. This expression of God's love has been life-changing for many, both the recipients and the givers. There's a reason Christ expressed his love by washing his disciples' feet.

Physical contact. Suffice it to say that for many, a touch goes a long way. We are a society too sparse on hugs, handshakes, and a warm, encouraging arm around the shoulders. It's no coincidence that this is our very first language of love ... that without being cuddled, babies languish.

What is God's language of love? We often assume it's giving. But we are in part a reflection of what God is in full. So, if there are five love languages for us, there are probably more for him ... and he is perfect in his expression of each one of them.

God is indeed the ultimate bestower of gifts ... Jesus said that in many ways and places, the Father loves to lavish gifts upon his children. And he himself is the ultimate example of that, according to John 3:16: "For God so loved the world, he gave his only begotten son ..."

But, what about words of encouragement and praise? John says that Christ is "the Word," the expression of God's character. And his word to us is not condemnation, but encouragement. To him we are worthy of saving, of the ultimate sacrifice, ultimately objects of his affection. Christ takes us, his church, as his bride, and says, "You are beautiful."

Moreover, for him it is impossible for him to divide his attention, and he has given us all the time in eternity. His focus is upon his children. Zechariah tells us that "whoever touches us, touches the apple of God's eye" -- the apple of someone's eye is that little reflection you see when you are looking into their eye and they are gazing fixedly at you. Moreover, God's greatest gift to us, His son, means that if we are willing we can spend all eternity in his presence. Talk about the gift of time!

And God is also the ultimate servant. Jesus washed his disciple's feet, as an expression of his love. He said, "The son of man came not to be served, but to serve." The idea of God serving them made his disciples very uncomfortable, and Peter protested. But it's in God's nature to serve, and he also wants to serve others through us. We are his hands and feet.

And finally, physical contact ... what more ultimate expression of that than the Incarnation? Christmastime is all about physical contact, God made flesh. Jesus laid aside the benefits of deity and became one of us, born a baby into a cradle in a manger, to make direct contact with a human race that was going to hell in a handbasket and to turn us aside from this destiny of despair.

So, which is God's love language? Giving? Encouragement? Time? Service? Contact?

I can't decide. I think it's all five.

Global Warming: Man-made or natural? Can it be stopped, or is it the end of the world as we know it?

Thanks to everyone who attended the second installment of our Sunday morning class on Creation Stewardship, focusing on climate change issues.

I really enjoyed the interaction. I think everyone was in agreement that it is our responsibility as Christians to be good stewards of God's creation, and we are all committed to doing that. And that is exciting!

I think we also realize that while climate change appears to be a reality, there is a lot of skepticism as to the cause. Is global warming primarily caused by greenhouse gas emissions? If it is, can we make a noticeable impact in reducing global warming by curbing greenhouse gas emissions? And what cost is too high to pay for making the necessary changes? Those are some of the questions I know we all are asking.

I would really encourage everyone to be prayerful and open as we seek to understand the answers to those questions. We have a serious responsibility to answer these questions correctly and to take whatever decisive actions may be required to ensure a better future both for our progeny, as well as billions of impoverished fellow citizens of Planet Earth.

I wanted to offer some links and resources which we explored Sunday, which you may wish to review prayerfully as you are seeking to answer these questions for yourself.

A primer on climate change issues -- I found the following URLs on Wikipedia to be very helpful and educational. You have to take Wikipedia with a grain of salt, of course, but it is a very comprehensive source of information.

• Global Warming (the Greenhouse Effect) and Climate Change (also see this extensive list of climate change-related terms and topics)
• The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) -- UN organization monitoring scientific thought on climate change issues
• The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) -- an environmental treaty produced at the UN's Earth Summit in 1997
• The Kyoto Protocol (intergovernmental agreement to cut greenhouse gas emissions)
• G8+5 and the Washington Declaration (post-Kyoto Protocol)

Organizations Supporting and Opposing the IPCC Claims

One of the first organizations to seek to mobilize Christians (beginning in the late 1990s) in support of the IPCC claims and what it termed as "creation care" was the Evangelical Environmental Network (EEN).

The Evangelical Climate Initiative of 2006 was a declaration of hundreds of evangelical Christian leaders who supported these findings and called for urgent action.

The Cornwall Alliance disagreed with the ECI's stance in support of the IPCC findings. In its 2007 response document titled “A Call To Truth, Prudence, and the Protection of the Poor: An Evangelical Response to Global Warming” (PDF) the organization doesn’t question the reality of climate change/global warming, but it does question the IPCC’s assertion that the undisputed cause of global warming is anthropogenic. It also questions whether global warming could be significantly mitigated through a costly global effort to curb carbon emissions. They argue instead that those resources should be devoted instead to helping the poor to industrialize and gain the wealth that will give them the resources to deal with the effects of global warming.

Calculate Your Carbon Footprint

Here are three fun and interesting "carbon footprint calculators" on the Web. I can't vouch for their accuracy, but it doesn't hurt to think about the impact your lifestyle is making on our environment, and how you might be able to adjust it to be kinder to the Earth ...

• Carbon Footprint Calculator
  
• Nature Conservancy Carbon Footprint Calculator
  
• An Inconvenient Truth's Carbon Footprint Calculator
  

Let's Keep the Conversation Going!

If you have any additional comments or questions related to this "hot topic," please submit them here (by clicking the "comments" link below) and I'll do my best to address them in future posts.

Creation Stewardship

Much thanks is extended to all who participated in this morning's "Creation Stewardship" class at Elim.

This morning's class focused on three things:

1) My assumptions
2) A Biblical Framework for Creation Stewardship
3) A Recent History of Both Sociopolitical and Evangelical Response to Climate Change Issues

Week after next (Nov. 16) we will meet for a second session during the adult education hour at Elim, to examine specific climate change claims being made by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), and echoed by the Evangelical Climate Initiative's 2006 document, Climate Change: An Evangelical Call to Action.

In this blog post, as promised, I am providing the following four appendices:

A) A list of questions I intend to discuss during this session, related to those claims.
B) Scripture passages referenced in today's "Biblical Framework" session.
C) Links and other resources associated with today's "Recent History" session.
D) Details on "My Assumptions" which I omitted for sake of time today.

I would encourage you to click the "Comments" link at the bottom of this post, if you have any additional issues or questions we should address on Nov. 16.

- Larry


APPENDIX A: Questions for Discussion Nov. 16

Is global climate change truly a reality? What do we know about climate change? Is there a consensus? How many detractors are there, and what is the basis for their disagreement?

What do we know or postulate about the history of global climate change?

What do we know or postulate about the real or potential impacts of global climate change?

What is being hypothesized about the causes of global climate change? Is it anthropogenic (human-caused)? We will attempt to examine each hypothesis in terms of its support, as well as looking at the arguments of detractors.

Politically and socially, how are these hypotheses about the causes of climate change being embraced? (This is where we'll look specifically at the global drive to eliminate or reduce carbon emissions as a possible causative factor in global warming/climate change.) What are the real or possible costs associated with changes that are being made or recommended as a result of this?

What about social justice and access to or distribution of natural resources among the neighbors who inhabit planet earth with us? What changes if any are we called to make to ensure that our biblical responsibility for upholding social justice is achieved?

If we as citizens and Christians do indeed have a responsibility to make personal or corporate lifestyle changes as a result of environmental concerns, how urgent and critical are the changes that we are being called to make?

Additional questions suggested this morning:

• How are evangelicals in developing countries responding to the climate change issue, as compared to how we are responding here in the United States?
  
• Some have criticized the validity of the claims made in Vice President Al Gore's documentary, An Inconvenient Truth. What are we to think of this?
  

If you have suggestions for additional questions you would like me to address, please click the "Comments" link at the bottom of this blog posting.

Also, check back on this blog next weekend, when I intend to post some of the specific links and resources that I will be using on Nov. 16. Thank you!


APPENDIX B: Biblical Framework Scripture Passages

Special thanks to the Evangelical Environmental Network, from whose site this framework was adapted.

1: God created the universe, including the earth (our environment), as well as the heavens beyond, for His pleasure and glory, and as a place for us to dwell as we seek to bring Him pleasure and glory. As its creator He both brings life to the earth, and sustains it through the word of His power. As humans we are intimately tied to this creation. We were created out of the dust of the earth, and to this dust we will return when we die.

Witness of the Old Testament:

Genesis 1:1-25, 26-31, 2:1-4

Psalm 104

Isaiah 40:12,26

Isaiah 42:5-7

Creation declares His glory:

Psalm 19:1-4

Psalm 96:1,11-12

Rom. 1:20-23

Rev. 4:11

Jesus’ relationship to all of creation:

Col. 1:15-20

John 1:1-3

Heb. 1:2-3

1 Cor. 8:6

Eph. 1:10

2: When God created the earth, He saw that "it was good." He then committed it into the hands of human beings to steward, or to manage and be responsible for.

The earth is the Lord’s:

Col. 1:16

Heb. 1:2

1 Cor. 10:26

Psalm 24:1

Lev. 25:23

Deut. 10:14

Neh. 9:6

Isa. 66:1-2

3: Our responsibility as stewards means that we will be held accountable for our efforts in leveraging that which has been committed to us, into greater blessings for God and others. In other words, we are not merely to be self-centered consumers; we are to be multipliers of blessing and goodness.

What does it mean to “be a steward?”

Luke 12:42-48 (Parable of the Wise and Foolish Stewards)

Matt. 25:14-30 (Parable of the Talents)

4: We human beings have already, fundamentally, failed as stewards. We sinned, and both we and the entire earth came under a curse as a result. Entropy and death is the rule of the day in our bodies as well as our environment, thanks to our failure and the resulting curse.

Creation cursed by humanity’s sin

Gen. 3:17

Isa. 24:5-6

Hosea 4:1-3

Jer. 4:18-28

Rev. 11:18

5: Our failure, nonetheless, does not absolve us of our responsibility to either take care of our (dying) bodies or steward the (decaying) environment. These responsibilities are personal and they are corporate.

1 Cor. 6:19-20

6: God has created resources for us to consume in order for us to be healthy and blessed. However, social justice and the law of love demand that we think about others above ourselves when it comes to the distribution of (and access to) these resources. In other words, love demands we ensure that we leave our children and our children's children a world that they can live in.

He provides the resources we need

Psalm 104:10-30

Gen. 6:19-21

Exod. 23:12

Lev. 25:1-7

Job 38:39-41

Job 39:5-8

Matt. 6:25-27

2 Chron. 7:13-14

He uses us to provide the resources others need

Col. 1:20

2 Cor. 5:14-21

Phil. 2:4-8

Luke 4:18-19

John 13:34

1 John 4:7-8

Matt. 25:34-45

Luke 6:31

Micah 6:1-4, 7-8

Psalm 72:1,12-14

Matt. 22:37-40

7: The earth as we know it is temporary and will someday be redeemed and changed (by God) into a new earth where our current environmental woes will be only a distant memory, if that.

God’s future kingdom

Rom. 8:19-23

Isa. 11:1-9

Isa. 35:1-2,6
Isa. 55:12-13
Isa. 65:17-23
Rev. 21:1,5

APPENDIX C: Links & Resources for Recent History

Initial Concerns Expressed About Climate Change

1988: Formation of the UN’s “Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change” (IPCC)

http://www.IPCC.ch/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intergovernmental_Panel_on_Climate_Change

1990, 1992, 1995, 2001, 2007: IPCC assessment reports (& sharing the Nobel prize w/ Al Gore in 2007)

Evangelical Response To These Concerns

2006: Evangelical Climate Initiative’s Climate Change: An Evangelical Call to Action

http://christiansandclimate.org/

http://www.ChristianityToday.com/ct/2006/februaryweb-only/106-34.0.html

>2006: Other supporting organizations …

National Religious Partnership for the Environment -- http://www.nrpe.org/

Evangelical Environmental Network -- http://www.CreationCare.org/

http://www.RestoringEden.org/

2006+: Responses to the Evangelical Climate Initiative …

Interfaith Stewardship Alliance

Cornwall Alliance for the Stewardship of Creation (Dobson/Colson)

http://www.ChristianityToday.com/ct/2006/october/8.26.html

http://www.CornwallAlliance.org/

2008: Southern Baptist Convention

Leaders do an about-face on climate change …

http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/03/10/baptist.climate/index.html

What about the rest of us?

2007 Barna poll says evangelicals “going green” with caution …

Only 33% of evangelicals describe global warming as a “major issue,” in contrast to 62% of those associated with other faiths.

http://www.barna.org/FlexPage.aspx?Page=BarnaUpdateNarrow&BarnaUpdateID=317

APPENDIX D: My Assumptions

1) The supremacy of the Bible as the source of truth. I think probably the key assumption that I carry, through which I am going to filter my approach to this topic, is that God's revealed Word to us, the Bible, deals in some manner with every controversial issue, including this one, that confronts us. By "deals with it," I mean that God in His wisdom has given us through His Word an intellectual, spiritual, and philosophical framework to equip us for how we respond to this hot topic. It may not be overt. It usually isn't. We won't find any verses or proof texts to say either, "The current debate about the environment is of the Devil" or "Global warming is a huge danger confronting the planet and we should all focus our time and energy being green." But I do believe we can draw from it principles that will help us frame the debate.

2) My sociopolitical framework. Socially, I am a conservative evangelical and politically I am a Republican, though like many others, I am always enamored with the attitudes and actions of the Republican Party. I consider it a lesser of two evils, as it were. However, I also work with many evangelicals who are not conservative Republicans and I respect and dialogue with them. And I don't think being either a conservative evangelical and a Republican or not necessarily has a bearing on this debate, but you do have a tendency to see different responses from people about questions of environmentalism and climate change depending on which political party they align themselves with. Hence you don't really see Joe Biden out there crusading for opening up the Alaskan wilderness for oil drilling, like you do Sarah Palin.

That said, I do think it is interesting to acknowledge that both sides of the political spectrum, Republican and Democrat, pretty much now embrace the conclusions of the IPCC on climate change, which has created all the fuss about global warming, as we will soon discuss. So, whether we agree or not, this is going to be something that is going to be a part of each our our lives in the coming years.

3) My ad hominem assumptions. "Ad hominem" means "to the man," and here I wanted to reveal my assumptions regarding parties on both sides of this debate.

In truth, I have struggled with some of the more political, radical manifestations of the environmentalist movement, partly because of the perceived assumptions of those who have led it ... their tendency to embrace anti-Christian practices of placing all of their faith in science and big government, and none of their faith in God. It has been my belief since college, partly because of reading books like Thomas Kuhn's "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions," and other works more recently, that we know less than we think we know about some of the bigger questions in the universe. There are a lot of different questions in this debate, and I think they fall along a spectrum. Some questions have, in my mind, very obvious answers. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that if humankind is consuming a nonrenewable resource like fossil fuel at an accelerated rate, there is going to come a point in time, though I'm not sure any of us really know how soon, when the availability of that resource is going to diminish, when its price and value is therefore going to increase, and when it will eventually run out. It would therefore behoove us to be planning for that eventuality and developing more renewable sources of energy.

Another no-brainer is that if you continue to dump untold millions of tons of pollutants into the air we breathe, which is a nonrenewable resource, or if you continue to allow the destruction of the rainforests and habitats that are responsible for converting the carbon dioxide that we breathe out into the oxygen that we breathe in, that this can't be good for the planet and eventually is going to put is into some sort of crisis.

I think we can put those kind of assumptions and questions into a category of "no duh." There are others that are not so easy. For instance, are burning fossil fuels and carbon emissions speeding exponentially the climate change we are seeing? Is it the primary cause? Does "global warming" on a macro level truly exist and is it within our control to stop it by changing our carbon footprint? Are we fast approaching, or are we past, some point of "no return" where we are dooming all of humanity by our global inability or refusal to cut back our consumption of nonrenewable resources? These assertions are all being made, but I don't think the answers here are as easy to come by.

Also, in the interest of full disclosure, I need to tell you that I have a personal relationship with two of the key signatories of the Evangelical Climate Initiative's landmark 2006 document, Climate Change: An Evangelical Call to Action. We will talk more about this important document a little later on during this hour. Those two individuals are Richard Stearns, president of World Vision, and my employer; and also Dr. Robert Acker, the senior pastor of my home church in Southern California, whom I consider a close friend and colleague. I have an enormous amount of respect for both the intellect and integrity of both of these men, as well as many of the other of dozens of evangelical leaders who signed this document.

4) The nature of scientific dogma. My fourth assumption is best introduced by saying that I am not a rocket scientist, and even if I were I'm not sure how much that would help us. There are difficult questions out there which are a challenge to answer. Our tendency in the face of difficult questions is sometimes to become dogmatic in our assertion of our beliefs which are founded on our assumptions. I think we need to recognize this as a problem which is founded in our human nature to be egotistical and selfish. We often feel we have to know all the answers. It takes some humility to recognize that we are only human, that we are limited, and that we often don't know the answers. It takes humility to listen to others' perspectives and acknowledge that there may be some truth in what they say.

I think it's okay for us to be dogmatic when it comes to dogma. The definition of dogma is: "settled or established opinion, belief, or principle; specific tenets or doctrines authoritatively laid down." In the case of we Bible-believing Christians our most authoritative doctrine, our dogma, is the body of truths found plainly expressed in the Scriptures. We can be dogmatic about who God is, about who He created us to be, and about how He wants us to live our lives, because we find these truths plainly expressed in the Bible.

I think our problem comes when we get dogmatic about other things. Our political beliefs are a case in point. If we argue dogmatically about the rightness of our own political framework, and reject out of hand the political philosophies of others, we risk dogmatic arrogance, in my opinion.

Hence, I am going to be very dogmatic about the Cross. I will be less dogmatic about global warming, or the role of government, or taxes.

I think the same thing is true of science. Too many people have it backwards. They reject belief in Scripture as arrogant religious dogma, yet enshrine their scientific hypotheses as ultimate truth. So, to many scientists, we Christians are arrogantly dogmatic and they themselves carry the light of truth within their beings. Opposite worldviews.

I do believe that thinking global Christians will give science its proper respect, it's proper place. The scientific method has yielded many benefits to mankind, including the creation of medicines and medical techniques which save lives and extend lifespans. However, it's also created many monsters. Witness Hiroshima and Nagasaki. And particularly, when science begins to stray beyond its own borders, for instance into realms of history and philosophy; when for instance it starts trying to tell us that scientific hypotheses about our origins are enshrined truth and proven fact; I think we are right in accusing it of arrogance. In truth, science still hasn't been able to establish some of the most fundamental truths about the created order. What is light? Is it a particle? A wave? What is dark matter? Etc. If science is yet unclear about such basic operating principles of this physical world in which we live, how can it so arrogantly assert that its version of history (be it the big bang, or evolution, or any other matters related to origins) is unreproachable truth? And are issues like the causes of environmental phenomena such as global warming really so cut-and-dried? How are we to know that tomorrow's paradigm shift won't change everything we think we know about such matters, once again, just as prior scientific paradigm shifts during the last century or two have done?

A century or two is, after all, a very short timeframe in the big scheme of things.

So, I guess all that is a longwinded way of presenting my fourth assumption, and that is that in most cases it is arrogant for us to assert that the science we think we know is in all cases unreproachable truth. I am obviously not a scientist, but I believe this is an assumption also embraced by many honest scientists.

However, one mitigating factor against this healthy skepticism, in the case of the discussion at hand today, the issue of climate change (global warming) and whether or not it is human-induced, is the issue of urgency. I mentioned the 2006 document, Climate Change: An Evangelical Call To Action. I have several copies of this document here, hopefully one for each table, which you can be reading this morning. Also you can access this at the web site address given on the overhead and on your notes. This document contains four very noteworthy claims:

• Claim 1: Human-Induced Climate Change is Real

• Claim 2: The Consequences of Climate Change Will Be Significant, and Will Hit the Poor the Hardest

• Claim 3: Christian Moral Convictions Demand Our Response to the Climate Change Problem

• Claim 4: The need to act now is urgent. Governments, businesses, churches, and individuals all have a role to play in addressing climate change—starting now.

I would postulate that these claims warrant our close attention to this issue. For, IF THEY ARE TRUE, healthy skepticism such as mine shouldn't be allowed to stand in our way of us acting. If human-induced climate change is indeed real, and if its consequences will be significant and hit the poor the hardest; and if our moral convictions do indeed demand our response to this situation, and IF the need to act now is urgent, then truly we would be amiss to delay.

I am hoping people aren't attending this class looking for me to give easy answers to very complex questions. In many ways I truly am sitting on the fence on this issue right now, whether or not I should be. But if I can provide some of the key questions, and encourage you to think them through honestly; as well as some key resources on both sides, and in doing so you can come to conclusions on your own and be motivated to act based on those conclusions, then I think this session will have been time well spent, regardless of what that conclusion may be.