Get Outta My Face!

Get Outta My Face! by Rick Horne, was published earlier this year, and the subtitle, accurately describes the message contained therein…”How to reach angry, unmotivated teens with Biblical counsel.”

Horne holds a D. Min from Westminster Theological Seminary and is a guidance counselor for a Christian school in the Philadelphia area.  As you might imagine, he has plenty of experience in counselling teenagers.  But more important than his direct experience, he brings Biblical wisdom, primarily from the book of Proverbs, which he notes was mostly written by Solomon for his young son, (Proverbs 1: 8) who may well have been a teenager at the time Solomon wrote it.

While Horne’s ultimate objective is to point angry and unmotivated teens to the cross of Christ, he dedicates the lion’s share of the book to Biblically grounded techniques for connecting and communicating with teens.  He does so by first informing the reader that he/she must first understand the teen and importantly understand him/herself in the light of scripture.  This approach offers great theological reminders about the nature of man, and sin’s corruption, irrespective of age.

Then Horne teaches four processes that he acknowledges are fundamental to most any formal couselling.  But he expands on these ideas with very helpful descriptions and dialogue, some of which are real life examples from his own “client base” of students at his school.  The four processes are:

Listen Big – To build a bridge to your teen

Clarify Narrow- to expose the realities of your teen’s experience

Look Wide- to discover your teen’s solutions

Plan Small – to support changes your teen wants

While the narrative of the book often appears to be written to parents who are in the midst of dealing with angry or unmotivated teens, the book is clearly applicable for anyone who deals with teens, whether youth leader, or coach, or simply an interested party.  And while the subject is most explicitly dealing with teenagers, I would submit that the teaching found in this book would apply just as well to the pre-adolescent and the young adult.  And, I would not hesitate to use the techniques on a middle-of-life adult, either.  The wisdom is that broadly applicable

At 171 pages, the book is a relatively quick and simple read.  But much of its good advice that can and should be referred to again and again as we have occassion to deal with teens (of all ages).

Think you can match this level of forgiveness?

Soul searchingly provocative isn’t it?  And I would submit that no one can, apart from the grace of God.

HT: Marc Heinrich

Stemming the second tide.

Like a rising tide, with waves washing further and further upon a beach, it appears that a true “post-Christian” set of relaxed ethics and morals has made it to OUR shores.  Let me correct that…while one can hardly suggest this is a new phenomena, the “tidal” metaphor had not fully dawned on me until I read the article today from Albert Mohler, president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville.

If we think about the growth of Christianity from its origins in what was, and still is Israel, to its expansion initially into Europe and then ultimately to the so-called New World, it can very much be likened to a tide rising and in ever increasing increments, claiming new soil and in the process, new souls. 

But what appears to follow that initial tide of conversion and practice of Christianity, is a tide that bears a distinctly secular mindset.  Granted it takes a long time for this new tide to make its effects known.  But it comes none the less and just as in a tide, everything in its course gets wet.  So, it seems, is the case for the tide of secularism.  Take a look at Europe.  It was the true seat of Christianity for about 1,800 some odd years.  While the Roman and Orthodox churches would argue it still is, it would be undeniable that the second tide of secularism has not just come, but has fully washed over that continent, taking with it many of the members of those ancient churches.  Today, in most western European countries, the practice of the Muslim faith is probably more common than Christianity, but at that, it is second to the practice of NO particular faith at all, apart from humanism.

Now, as Mohler points out, the evidence of what I call the second tide is not just on our shores, it is now far inland, and if we are not resolved to stemming it, it will wash over our country just as it has the countries of Europe.

The increasing disregard for moral practice, the diminished value of human life, especially the unborn, the increased notion that we are dependant on the state for our well being, are all indications to me that we are already AT LEAST ankle deep in the putrid waters of post-Christian secular humanism.  In a hundred year, or less, we’ll be just as lost as Europe if we do not build a wall against this second tide.

Hmmm, an interesting way of describing it.

A very perceptive article by Kevin DeYoung, a pastor who lives in East Lansing, Michigan, and who’s church is highly accessible to students at Michigan State University.  He has a handle on that generation, and the varying forms of worship that appeal to it.  He has also co-authored a book about the Emergent church movement.

The article though captures a concept that is trans-generational.  Just out of curiosity, of my handful of readers, how would you categorize yourself?  Take the poll below.

Box Scores From Tonight’s Presidential Press Conference

References to Health Care/Energy/Education (bundled together) - 7

Aaaaand – 35

Thaaaat – 16

Iiiiis – 7

Uhh-aaaaaand – 8

Aaaaand-uhh – 1

Uhh – I lost count after 180, but was amazed how many “uhhh’s” the President could string together with only a word or two in between.  this was especially pronounced toward the end of the press conference and during questions that he had no good answer for.

Weakest exchange – His attempt to take the high ground on the matters of stem cell research posed by the correspondent from the Washington Times.  Aside from not having an artful answer, he actually seemed stumped for a way to get out of the question and on to the next correspondent.  Perhaps on some non-political, moral level the president knows that his positions on stem cell research and abortion, which he also mentioned, are indefensible.

A facinating look at what is either thinly veiled deceit or stunning ignorance.

HT to JT for linking to a set of articles from US News and World Report.  When I first saw them, I had little intent of actually plowing through all of the material.  However, I got drawn in and could not stop, although I confess, I scanned some portions of this republished email exchange between Robert George, who if you have ever read his stuff, or seen him speak, you know he is brilliant, and Doug Kmiec.  Both are law professors, so that may void any interest you have in reading their correspondence.  But the underlying subject matter is haltingly important and I fear may be revealing about the character of our President.

This is an excerpt from one of George’s emails to Kmiec to whet your appetite.

President Obama did not prohibit human cloning (somatic cell nuclear transfer to create living human embryos) and does not oppose it.  What he opposes is the implantation and gestation of human embryos that were created by cloning—that is what he means in saying he is opposed to “reproductive cloning.”  The President supports the practice of cloning to create living human embryos for purposes of scientific research in which they will be destroyed to produce pluripotent stem cells.  His executive order has made research using cells and cell lines produced by creating human embryos by cloning eligible for federal funding.  This is the first time that federal money has been made available for research using materials derived from embryos created and destroyed specifically for research purposes.  (emphasis mine)

Words matter.  The President tries to differentiate between “reproductive” and “therapeutic” cloning, but the underlying creation and subsequent destruction of life is indisputable.

So, I am left with the question I cannot answer.  Is the President operating at this level of deceit based on semantics, or is he ignorant of what appears to be an effort to create a distinction, without a difference?

The US News & World Report articles:
Part 1

Part 2

part 3

Part 4

Part 5

Can’t wait ’till these babies roll off the assembly lines!

HT: my Bro-In-Law, Tim

For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks.

Subtitle:  The Reason Why He Uses a TelePrompTer

Last night on The Tonight Show with Jay Leno, Barack Obama made an off-handed remark, I assume, with the intention of being self-effacing and funny, that should make even the most ardent supporters of the President cringe in its insensitivity.

Ouch!  Making light of those who are mentally or physically disabled?  Wow, a serious gaffe for someone who is supposed to be soooo sensitive.  Now had it been some heartless Republican, what else would you expect but this sort of callousness for the sake of humor.  The President’s deputy press secretary Bill Burton dug the hole even deeper when he explained that the President was just trying to poke fun at himself.  I guess it was fun at the expense of those who have been dealt a difficult hand in this life.

Truthfully, this sort of error could be made by anyone.  And for my regular readers, you may be surprised to know that I actually empathise with Obama, in that it is only a matter of time before I make some similarly careless remark myself.  As long as even a whiff of wickedness remains in my heart, my mouth has the potential to pour forth something equally destructive. 

What is striking about this incident is the fact that so far this morning, Fox News, which the left would brand as the hyper-right media outlet, has only mentioned this on the crawl that runs beneath the talking heads on their programming.  Had this been a Republican politician, would the mainstream media have been equally subtle in their coverage?  I rather doubt it.

In fact, this video reveals the underlying sentiment of the M.S.M. when at approximately the :50 mark Keith Olbermann asks the question (in his own slip of the tongue) “what do we, what do we do…what does he do about that?” (emphasis mine)  While my hat is off to them for at least surfacing the incident, the unintended reveal here is that out of the abundance of Olbermann’s heart, is an apparent interest in “fixing” the problem for Obama rather than simply reporting it, or worse, had it been someone Olbermann opposes, absolutely destroying that person, which, if you have ever watched his political commentary, he is prone to do. 

Addition to the Blogroll

It’s an honor to refer my readers, all three or four of you, to a blog that I have just discovered.  It’s a brand new site, having just starting this month.   Its author is not particularly well known (yet), but he plays an incredibly important role in the day-to-day operations of the Obama White House, and travels with the President where ever he goes. 

It was indeed a pleaseant surprise to find this new blog in light of my post a week or so ago about the much ballyhoo’d oratory skills of the President.  Click HERE to read Barack Obama’s Teleprompter’s Blog.

What did I miss?

I was out of town earlier this week, and for two full days I did not listen to the radio or watch television, nor did I have access to the Internet.  It is amazing how quickly events around our country and the world can change over the course of just 48 hours, or so.

When I left on Sunday afternoon, I was rocking along, laboring under the cloud of doom that has been declared for the last 7 weeks.  I was absolutely clear from what I was being told by our President that the economy in the United States, and indeed in every other developed nation around the globe was in a crisis, aaaaaand, it was not only in crisis, it was veering toward a catastrophe.  President Obama told us about it over and over and over and over again.

Having seen my portfolios decline at percentages approximating 50, I admit to buying into the seriousness of the situation, even if I did NOT agree with the solutions that were being offered.  I am still struggling to see the connection between the essence of the economic problems facing the country and the targets of the planned spending.  And my doubt is confirmed when various non-partisan government watchdog groups and even the congressional budget office raise questions about the timing and the effectiveness of the programs and importantly, the true cost of the planned spending.

But wait!  Now the President is telling us that things are “not that bad.”  Huh?  Over the course of just a day or so, we have moved from a situation that is in-crisis and a hair’s breadth from catastrophe, to “not that bad.”

Not that bad?  With the stock market having strung together three or four positive days, and the fact that my portfolio is now down only 49 instead of 50%, is that the margin of improvement that changes the view from “brace-for-impact” to, “not that bad”?

Surely there must be some specific piece of good news that I missed while I was out of town.  Can someone help me?  Was there some economic indicator that really WOW’d everyone a day or so ago, but its shelf life in the news cycles was short and preempted by the shocking revelations that Anna Nicole Smith had a group of criminally negligent enablers who were supplying her with prescription narcotics?  Who would have ever thought such a thing could happen?  

Or perhaps yesterday’s nearly breathless coverage of what has been a foregone conclusion, that Bernard Madoff would go to jail, eclipsed that outstanding piece of good news that turned the economy around.  Come on, help a fella out.  What did I miss?

If there is no such nugget of information that I missed during my physical absence from the news, is it possible that the President’s handlers have decided to radically change the tone of his conversation?  If this is the case, it makes it really difficult to know which version of the “truth” we should be believing.  Or, is it possible that neither version is true?  In which case, is this man believable at all?