"The fact that I was not able to communicate with anyone via technology was almost unbearable."

That's what she said.

Literally.

The University of Maryland just completed a study in partnership with International Center for Media & the Public Agenda (ICMPA) where 200 college and high school students were asked to give up all media for just 24 hours. From computers to television to cell phones, they could not use any technological devices. The quote from this blog title was a good summation of the overall feelings conveyed by the subjects. Each student who participated was asked to write blog entries after the fast with no length requirement. Among the 200 students, over 110,000 words were written. Just so you know, that's about a 400-page novel.

The study concluded that "without digital ties, students feel unconnected even to those close by."

"The student responses to the assignment showed not just that 18-21 year old college students are constantly texting and on Facebook -- with calling and email distant seconds as ways of staying in touch, especially with friends -- but that students' lives are wired together in such ways that opting out of that communication pattern would be tantamount to renouncing a social life."

One of the stranger, more disturbing parts of the study involved the language of the addicted online socialites. They used words that the researchers often hear from alcoholics and drug addicts, saying they got "jittery" and "extremely antsy" and "frantically craving" and even "miserable."

I've got to say, that when I purposefully fast from technology in order to keep myself in check with some of my beliefs, I find that I'm not so different from my peers. I'd like to think, as perhaps many of you would, that I'm not addicted to my phone or computer, but alas I seem to know my heart well enough to say that I'm equally linked electronically. I reach for my phone or go to turn on the TV without even thinking about it. When my technological fasts are most successfully done, I'm usually in the woods or at the monasteries.

However, the idea that we're now all being connected electronically is not all bad. The study also found that this generation has responded so positively to things like Facebook and Twitter because many of this up and coming generation really care about what is going on in their world: both locally with friends and internationally as a citizen of the world. A student who failed the assignment and wasn't able to shut off the computer said he was glad he failed because he was able to find out about the earthquake in Chile and a friend who needed someone to talk to. The researchers were surprised at how many blog entries included sentimental language about missing their friends and the news about the world around them; the students seem to really care.

The electronic age is not something to be resisted because, frankly, we're already in it. The best thing for those who are older, perhaps having trouble understanding "all this techno-stuff" that the "kids are in to these days," is not to lambaste and demonize it, but to get involved with it. This is how humans will connect for a good amount of the foreseeable future, and if you desire to talk to anyone from any culture or generation, it's often best to meet them where they're at, even if they're online.

Numbers

I realize that this has been somewhat all over the blogosphere, but I also realize that some of you have a very limited...um...sphere.

USA Today and LifeWay Research center just completed a very extensive study of young adults and religion/spirituality. The headline ran on the front page of the paper two days ago saying, "Young Adults Less Devoted to Faith," which was backed up by what USA Today does SO well: tons of colorful unnecessary graphs!

Basically, today's young adults (called "Millennials") would describe themselves as "spiritual" and not "religious." This quote, which includes the president of LifeWay Research group, is telling:

"Among the 65% who call themselves Christian, 'many are either mushy Christians or Christians in name only,' Rainer says. 'Most are just indifferent. The more precisely you try to measure their Christianity, the fewer you find committed to the faith.'"

They found that most Millennials (65%) don't pray with other people, don't read their Bible/Sacred text (67%) and don't go to any type of worship service (65%). BUT 65% of all of them claim to be a Christian. I think what Rainer says near the middle of the article is very well stated (his interpretation of the data):

"We have dumbed down what it means to be part of the church so much that it means almost nothing, even to people who already say they are part of the church," Rainer says.

It may surprise some of you, but I'm really not the type to freak out about this type of thing. I know there are tousands of moms who are saying something like, "OH GOODNESS WE'RE LOSING ALL OUR KIIIIIIDSSSS!!!!"

But here's the truth: the door is narrow (Luke 13:22-30). I think it is a healthy mindset to desire for churches to be big, for the movement of Christianity to be massive. But the truth is, since the beginning of the Christian movement, and even before that through the history of Judaism, we have seen a large group of people who desire the benefits of Christianity and the God of the Bible without the cost that it so clearly entails.

The cost, though, is more than just going to church and reading a sacred text.

EEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!

Proof that humans beings are MESSED UP. SO MESSED UP. This is Bieber Fever in New Zealand. Pay attention to the 1:35 mark.

HT: Blogtown

Are You TIRED?

I've always loved these segments of infomercials. Mainly because most of the things they say that "always happen" either never happen or do so often that you should just deal with it. KIDS SPILL CEREAL SOMETIMES OK??? We don't need a device that prevents that from happening, we just need to be less lazy and expectant of convenience. Get off your rear, get some Bounty paper towels and wipe that milk off your floor! He's just a kid... Oh, oh wait, I'm sorry, that would just be so inconvenient. This is America! Make something do it for me! Now!

Cinderella

For all of the talk about how the publishing world is in a tailspin, there are still victories.

Book publishing could be the most complex and difficult businesses to break into. The process from getting a book off your computer, desk, journal and in Borders is about as difficult as getting in to the NBA. But luckily, the world of books still operates in a very unique way when it comes to the awards it gives out. The film and music industry have both gone to the dogs, politicizing every award in order to lift a young performer's career or give it a nice cap (Jeff Bridges, I love you), or even cap a young performer's career (Cuba, you have a place in my heart).

But, no, not in the world of books. We still award great art and see the written word as virtuous and novel and creative. We still recognize the word as art, dangit!

I say all of this because of how pleased I was that I had not heard of the Pulitzer Prize winner until I checked the Pulitzer Prize winners. Tinkers by Paul Harding has an amazing story of publication, and of course it is told best by NPR. Take four minutes and thirty seconds to listen to or read the story of its publication and road to literature's highest honor. No one has heard of this book, it was published by a tiny publishing house, and simply by word of mouth the manuscript traveled to the highest desk, and received great affirmation.

Now all I have to do is find a copy of it...

This is What People Think When They Hear "Evangelical"

This picture is a one of those that makes me want to devote my life even more to Christian ministry. The challenge of moving to an informed, educated Christian movement seems daunting when I look at this, but alas, if we do not do anything to support reason, logic, and science education as a fit into our Christian worldview, then I believe we will lose. Because it's easy to be ignorant, but c'mon friends, let's be smart. You can be Christian and be educated in reason and science; do not be afraid of these disciplines and make radical suggestions without any foundation. For, as Bruce Waltke would say, to do so would be to ignore truth, and if we ignore truth, we have forgotten God entirely.

HT: WOW and BlogtownPDX

The Economist Takes on Portland

Well, Portland, you know we've hit the big time when The Economist decides to write us up. This week's paper (yes, they call it a "paper") has a profile on our fair city entitled, "The New Model: Is Oregon's metropolis a leader among American cities or just strange?" And while the title rivals the word count of the article, it's pretty interesting to see all of this national and international buzz that Portland has received for being green, bike-friendly, and sustainable (whatever that means).

I thought I would share some of my favorite quotes:

"But on the whole, Portlanders not only love their city but believe that it is, and ought to be, a model for the rest of America."

"Mr Adams has a vision of progressive urbanism: a city where most people cycle or ride the streetcar, recycle what they consume, exist in harmony with nature and live in communities rather than the suburban sprawl of cities like Los Angeles, Houston, Phoenix or Atlanta."

"In Portland, 'business casual' means wearing a fleece. The area’s main industrial cluster is 'activewear', led by Nike and Columbia Sportswear and including thousands of smaller companies."

"Mr Adams says Portland’s success is 'totally replicable'."

"Joel Kotkin, a Los Angeles-based demographer and author, thinks that places like Portland, San Francisco and Boston have become 'elite cities', attractive to the young and single, especially those with trust funds, but beyond the reach of middle-class families who want a house with a lawn. Indeed Portland, for all its history of Western grit, is remarkably white, young and childless. Most Americans will therefore continue to migrate to the more affordable 'cities of aspiration' such as Houston, Atlanta or Phoenix, thinks Mr Kotkin. As they do so, they may turn decentralised sprawl into quilts of energetic suburbs with a community feeling."

"Adam Davis of Davis, Hibbitts & Midghall, a Portland polling firm, says that Oregonians like to consider themselves leaders but also exceptions. They are likely to remain both."

I hope The Economist realizes that, according to their reading of Portland, we hate this article. The most pointed Portland-y distinction brought up is our generational legacy. The big question for Portland's culture and economy is, will all the young people stay and plant families in the city? The article somewhat argues that we won't be able to keep our young people because it's just not a city for families. The reporter obviously didn't go to Eastmoreland, Alberta, or any of our suburbs. I know we have more dogs than children in the urban core, but I think that after you live in Portland for a year, you realize it really ain't a bad place to raise your tots.

Conquered Words: March

This is my monthly post where I tell you what I have read and (ever so briefly) what I thought about each work. If you haven't read these books, then read this blog and pretend that you did!

March is a month that I always look forward too. It is also a month where I tend to believe that I will read 900 books (Ok, no, not literally, don't be that guy). But I normally finish my finals pretty early and end up getting close to two weeks off. I plan on reading a lot. But something always comes up, and also, I always forget how much I LOVE COLLEGE BASKETBALL. I cannot give that game half of my attention, it must take it all. Beyond that, Ali always comes home and we spend a lot of time together. This year, wedding planning decided to be the Godzilla of my peaceful Japanese city that is Spring Break.

But you know what? Contrary to much of my belief as a human, books are not everything. That took a lot of effort to write, so tell me you're proud. Also, over break I started two great books that I'll certainly write about in April. For now, here's what March looked like:

1) Finally Alive by John Piper (Christian Focus, 160 pages). This took no time at all to read and I'm happy for it. This is certainly not Piper's best work. Ok, duh, it absolutely is theologically sound and is able to articulate Biblical exegesis well, but it just wasn't my favorite thing to read ever. It wasn't literature. I'm sorry. The book is Piper's explanation of what Christians call "the new birth," which is a trasformational process done by God and for God's glory to the benefit of his creation. It's a radical process and no other faith system or worldview has anything like it. The new birth, or "regeneration" to theologians, is a doctrine that must be defended and marked because of its uniqueness to the Christian worldview.

2) Reflections on the Psalms by C.S. Lewis (Harvest Books, 168 pages). OH WOW CHRIS READ ANOTHER C.S. LEWIS BOOK BLAH BLAH BLAH. You know what, I did. Hadn't read this one yet and I needed to because it's been a great resource as I look into the biblical idea of worship, which is what I'm teaching to high school students over the next number of weeks. C'mon now. Lewis + the Psalms = BOMB.

3) Unceasing Worship by Howard Best (IVP, 226 pages). This was a resource for me as I launched the worship teaching series at Willamette Students High School Group. Best is a scholar on biblical worship and has been a long time Wheaton dude. He's an incredible mind and finally sitting and reading through the first half of this book served me well theologically and philosophically. The second half is more focused on the arts. I didn't have time to delve into it.

4) Portland Noir edited by Kevin Sampsell (Akashic Books, 300 pages) Ahhhhh what a treat Akashic has been to the great cities of the world and they finally put Portland on their little map. Akashic books has been running a series of short story fiction set in the great cities of the world. Portland Noir is another notch in their belt of great, localized fiction work. It's taken me a while to knock out each story, but I conquered. Each book is filled with short noir stories set in the particular city written by authors of that city and edited by a writer from the same city. They've done Seattle, Boston, Dehli, and numerous others and they've been a treat to each city. I heard about these books because one of my academic mentors Dan DeWeese was published in this book. He has an awesome story in there. He also looks like Kevin Spacey. Kevin Sampsell of Powell's Books and author of the memoir A Common Pornography got the editing job and he wrote a very solid introduction to a wonderful compilation of writing that certainly gives great insight into our city.

March turned out OK.

Keep reading, friends.

Sharing

Ah yes, gospel tracts: "share the good news" by handing someone a piece of paper that says everything you're too scared to tell them yourself in a far less personal and more theologically incorrect way! It's just so...oh, what's the word...easy!

- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone

Douthat on the News

Ross Douthat gave an interesting take on cable news in yesterday's New York Times. Like him, I became interested in the poor practice of cable news corporations when John Stewart gave the "Crossfire" guys some friendly fire. Not sure if I'm pitching my tent in Douthat's camp, but he certainly solidified the fact that CNN needs help, and Stewart isn't just making potty jokes, he's giving America the news:

What cable news needs, instead, is something more like what Stewart himself has been doing on “The Daily Show.” Instead of bringing in the strategists, consultants and professional outrage artists who predominate on other networks, he ushers conservative commentators into his studio for conversations that are lengthy, respectful and often riveting. Stewart’s series of debates on torture and interrogation policy, in particular — featuring John Yoo and Marc Thiessen, among others — have been more substantive than anything on Fox or MSNBC.

Good Friday

"We begin at the real beginning, with love as a Divine energy. This primal love is Gift-love. In God, there is no hunger that needs to be filled, only plenteousness that desires to give...God, who needs nothing, loves into existence wholly superfluous creatures in order that He may love and perfect them. He creates the universe, already foreseeing – or should we say 'seeing'? there are no tenses in God – the buzzing cloud of flies about the cross, the flayed back pressed against the uneven stake, the nails driven through the mesial nerves, the repeated incipient suffocation as the body droops, the repeated torture of back and arms as it is time after time, for breath’s sake, hitched up. If I may dare the biological image, God is a 'host' who deliberately creates His own parasites; causes us to be that we may exploit and 'take advantage of' Him. Herein is love. This is the diagram of Love Himself, the inventor of all loves."

- C.S. Lewis, The Four Loves, pg. 126-127


I hear it so often said by my atheistic friends that the cross was God's "Plan B," the backup to his original idea of a loving relationship with creation. This is so incredibly far from Orthodox Christianity. At the dawn of time - no, before time - God, in his Triune nature, was and is still in a perfect love relationship with the Three. Creation was an act of pouring out that love, the giving love he simply is. And as Lewis writes here, this Creator's one and only plan was to make a universe that would mirror that Triune Love: an unending giving love. Yet it could only be done so dramatically: a Son's life was the way to display this absolutely radical and unfair love. He needs nothing in return.

The purest of love is the being who doesn't just ask for nothing in return, but doesn't even think of a reciprical love. "By this we know love, that he laid down his life for us, and we ought to lay down our lives for our brothers and sisters." This type of love is impossible when you are apart form God. We are not Divine. We need to feel loved, but, "this is love, not that we have loved God but that he loved us."

The last year or so of my prayers and meditations have been centered around a couple of things. One of which has been this question: "Does my love look like the cross?" Or, put another way, "Does my love really hurt?" So often, my relationships are easy. People laugh at my jokes, make me feel better about myself, and make me look credible and cool. This costs me nothing, I'm simply receiving love and good feeling. I have very few relationships where giving love hurts. But what are those relationships that make me hurt? That cost me something? My prayer is that God would make me a sacrificer, a giver to people. And for the forgiveness and grace for my selfishness. In these prayers, I have found God to be gracious: showing me where to give, how to give, and to always keep the gospel at the center of my prayers for those I know.