Breakpoint

One quote in Steve Garber's excellent book on education, The Fabric of Faithfulness, has always stood out to me. It comes from a Duke University graduate and offers an important observation, an indictment really, about higher education. "We've got no idea of what it is that we want by the time somebody graduates. This so-called curriculum is a set of hoops that someone says students ought to jump through before graduation. No one seems to have asked, 'how do people become good people?'" In other words, simply amassing a large collection of classes, buildings, resources, books, and other so-called "hoops" does not an education make. What's missing in the whole enterprise is an idea of what an educated person would look like if the process worked. This "thinking with the end in mind" is just as necessary for any church, Christian school, or other Christian organization committed to discipleship. On most of our websites, we use language to communicate our commitment to discipleship, but how clear are we on what a disciple is? Do we have a clear enough vision of what a disciple looks like in order to contextualize and guide all of our programs, books, sermons, teaching series, small groups, and other discipleship tools that we so often employ? Imagine launching a new computer company but not having an answer to questions such as, "What kind of computers will you make? What will they look like? What will be unique about your computers compared to others? What kind of functionality will they have?" To respond to these questions with, "Well, I have no idea, but I bought a bunch of computer parts, and I'm going to put them together" would be absurd. (And, there's a Johnny Cash song that comes to mind…) This is why a Christian worldview is so important. The Biblical vision for discipleship only makes sense within the larger Biblical vision of reality. In other words, discipleship is far more than having a sense of spirituality, or a sense of meaning and purpose, or a set of Christian habits, or even "feeling close to God." Discipleship is living life under the rule and reign of the Lord Jesus Christ, Who is sovereign not only over how we ought to behave but over the entire cosmos. In The Faith, Chuck Colson wrote, "Orthodox Christianity, alone among worldviews, provides a stop to the inertia of time through the renewal of the soul and the regeneration of people that transforms cultures." Chuck understood that disciples are those who have been transformed by the renewing of their minds so that they actively engage the world around them with the heart and mind of Christ. They see others as Christ does. They seek to obey Christ in every area in which He has authority, which is every square inch of His creation. Twenty years ago, Chuck Colson created a program to replicate this vision of discipleship within Christian communities everywhere. Through the Colson Fellows program, Christians would think deeply about life and the world through a Christian worldview, and seek to follow the Lord in every aspect of life and culture. Rather than a Christian faith turned exclusively inward, the Colson Fellows program turns faith outward. Underlying the Colson Fellows program is a framework that begins with understanding reality in light of the full scope of the Biblical account of reality. This account can be understood in four chapters—creation, fall, redemption, and restoration—and it stands in stark contrast to other worldviews. So, Colson Fellows dig deeply at the Christian worldview, and they study the alternatives. This is an essential step if we are to, like the men of Issachar, "understand the times and know what to do." Another critical part of the Colson Fellows framework is understanding the Biblical doctrine of the imago Dei as the fundamental identity of human beings. This is particularly critical to understand in light of the crucial issues that confront followers of Christ in this cultural moment. A deep dive into this idea enables the kind of response we need to have as Christians, one that goes beyond mere reactionism and outrage. Finally, every Colson Fellow, after spending a year in a committed learning community, articulates a plan for living out what they've learned. Each of these plans is built along the lines of intentional Gospel-shaped questions that connect the reality of the Kingdom with the calling we have to our cultural moment. This year, nearly 750 people have been studying with us in 60 different learning communities across the United States and beyond. Lord willing, they'll be commissioned as Colson Fellows at the Wilberforce Weekend in May. And when they are, by God's grace, they will be committed to their Lord, to His truth, to loving their neighbors, and to His church. Applications for next year's Colson Fellows class, which begins this summer, are currently being accepted. For more information, visit www.colsonfellows.org.

John unpacks a number of recent commentaries from BreakPoint, specifically highlighting the march for life and a hero we profiled, Dr. Mildred Jefferson. John also discusses a new report from the New York Times which suggests that many prenatal tests give false positives more often than they produce an accurate diagnosis. John then discusses death and dying and how we as a society struggle to think carefully about such matters. He highlights two recent commentaries the outline how the Christian worldview offers great hope and framework to deal with mortality. To close, John shares the latest report from The World Watchlist on the state of Christianity and religious freedom worldwide. He highlights the stress on faith around the world and challenges Christians in America to pay attention to the plight of brothers and sisters in the faith worldwide. He also explains the importance of practicing and defending faith in our culture where we may not feel the stress of traditional persecution.

Many churches have shut their doors in the face of Covid, but one large church in Denver hasn't just shut their doors; they've sold them. According to Christianity Today, "The Potter's House Denver will sell its property in Arapahoe County and continue to worship exclusively online." We often hear that because the Church isn't a building, it doesn't matter whether it meets in one. But trading in-person worship for an online experience misses what the Church actually is. It isn't just a place for individual contemplation on "spiritual things." That's not the Christianity of the Bible but the pietism of Gnosticism. Embodied worship is an essential part of a Christian worldview. If our faith is the sort of thing we can live it out alone, never needing the presence of others, then are we truly still the Church? The Church is the ecclesia, the called ones, the gathered ones, the community of the saints of God. If we aren't a "we," we are not the Church.

Today, as tens of thousands March for Life in Washington D.C., we remember one of the movement's most important pioneers. Dr. Mildred Jefferson emerged from the segregated South during an era of intense racism. She was the first black female doctor from Harvard University, the first woman to intern at Boston City Hospital, the first female surgeon at the Boston University Medical Center, the first woman admitted to the Boston Surgical Society and a renowned professor of surgery at Boston University Medical School. Over her career, she was awarded 28 honorary degrees. Her accomplishments to advance female and racial diversity in the medical field are cause enough to celebrate her incredible life, but she should also be remembered for her tireless work opposing abortion, both as a physician in the Hippocratic tradition and as a Christian. Her work for the pro-life cause began in earnest in 1970, in response to a decision by the American Medical Association to declare abortion ethical for doctors as long wherever it was legal. Jefferson, incensed by the decision, co-founded the Massachusetts Citizens for Life and was appointed to the board of the National Right to Life in 1971. In 1972, a public television station in Boston featured Dr. Jefferson in an episode of a series called "The Advocates." The program aired nationwide and showcased Dr. Jefferson's credentials as a physician, as well as her skills as a powerful and winsome speaker who used impeccable logic to argue against abortion. After the broadcast, Dr. Jefferson received a number of letters, including one written by a rising west coast politician. It read: "Yours was the most clear-cut exposition on this problem (abortion) that I have ever heard. . . . Several years ago I was faced with the issue of whether to sign a California abortion bill. . . . I must confess to never having given the matter of abortion any serious thought until that time. No other issue since I have been in office has caused me to do so much study and soul-searching. . . . I wish I could have heard your views before our legislation was passed. You made it irrefutably clear that an abortion is the taking of a human life. I'm grateful to you. The author of the letter was Ronald Reagan. On January 22, 1973, the Supreme Court struck down all restrictions on abortion nationwide. The infamous Roe v. Wade decision only led Dr. Jefferson to redouble her efforts in the defense of life. A few months later, she became vice-chair of the board of National Right to Life. The following year, she became the board's chair and, the year after that, president of the organization. Dr. Jefferson held that post from 1975 to 1978 and soon became the most prominent pro-life spokesperson in the country. Even after leaving her position at National Right to Life, Dr. Jefferson continued to be a powerful advocate for the movement. Representative Henry Hyde, himself an eloquent pro-life champion, once said that the best thing the pro-life community could do would be to raise enough money to pay Dr. Jefferson to travel the country advocating for the unborn full-time. Dr. Jefferson understood that the fight against abortion was a moral imperative: I'm opposed to abortion as a doctor and also because I know it is morally wrong. An individual never has the private right to choose to kill for whatever reasons, be they whim, convenience or compulsion. Because I know abortion is wrong, I will use every means available for free people in a free country to see that it is not perpetuated. The doctor who willingly accepts destroying life will have no grounds on which to object if the state should compel that doctor to destroy life. Abortion on demand, Jefferson realized, would turn into a demand for doctors to perform abortions. As a result, conscience rights for medical professionals would disappear. They would be forced to obey the state rather than their faith or their conscience. And, if the state could demand this of doctors, it could demand it of anyone. Abortion, Jefferson realized, was a step toward totalitarianism. In other words, Dr. Jefferson foresaw the coming attacks against conscience rights for medical professionals such as nurses and pharmacists, and if allowed to stand, similar demands would be extended to other, non-medical professions. Dr. Jefferson died in 2010, but the movement she helped lead continues, stronger than ever. Today, as tens of thousands are in Washington D.C. for the March for Life, consider honoring Dr. Jefferson's legacy by donating to your local pregnancy resource center. Those who provide care, assistance, and support for families facing unexpected or crisis pregnancies, are on the front lines of fighting our nation's greatest evil. Their work, birthed in the wake of Roe v. Wade, is more important than ever. Though we may soon see the end of this legal travesty, the pro-life movement, built by people like Dr. Mildred Jefferson, is nowhere near its end. The best way to honor those who've gone before us in this cause is to join them.

We're used to hearing that free speech is being squashed in places like Iran or China. But Finland? According to Christianity Today, several Lutherans in that country are now on trial for "criminal incitement against a minority group—hate speech." All for affirming the same beliefs about human sexuality Christians have held for thousands of years. On the one hand, this is surprising. Finland is a Western country that prizes human rights and diversity of thought. On the other hand, this kind of thing is inevitable once it is assumed that any opposition to LGBT ideology "must" be born of hate and fear, and that hate speech isn't protected speech. Then it becomes inevitable that society will seek to squash tenets of Christianity. Those who challenge the current sexual status quo do so out of love for neighbors, and it's precisely ideas that the wider society finds distasteful that free speech is supposed to protect. What's happening in Finland is a reminder that political decisions flow downstream from deeper cultural assumptions.

Grappling with death is as old as the Fall, but a new generation of smartphone apps provides a modern twist. By combining predictive factors such as age, smoking habits, and body mass index, these apps predict when a user will give up the ghost. To be fair, some of the "death" apps do more reminding than predicting. WeCroak, for example, is inspired by a Bhutanese saying that "to be a happy person, one must contemplate death five times daily." Users receive "five daily invitations" with quotes that remind them that their death is inevitable. On one hand, these apps attempt to fix a cultural wrong. The idea for WeCroak, for example, came to co-founder Hansa Bergwall through an addiction to the popular mobile game Candy Crush. Sick of wasting time, he hoped that being confronted with his own mortality would help him use his time more wisely. Apps like WeCroak are sometimes called "anti-apps" or attempt to undo what technology does best to us… distract us. Distraction, of course, is the primary way that Westerners cope with the prospect of death and takes many forms. A five-hundred-billion dollar beauty industry glamorizes youth and promises immortality. A thriving commercial economy allows us to pursue our dreams to the extent that was impossible for most people throughout human history. We may have a God-shaped hole in our hearts, but the sheer variety of stuff available keeps us occupied in trying to fill it. And, when death finally comes, we can outsource it to the professionals: care homes, hospice workers, and morticians. By contrast, some Eastern traditions go the opposite way and try to embrace death completely. Some Buddhist monks, for example, practice "maranasati," or death contemplation. In some traditions, this takes extreme forms, such as spending weeks in cemeteries observing corpses in various states of decay. Awareness is a central pillar in Buddhist teaching, which promises an escape from the suffering of our unmet desires. Given how evasive real answers about death are outside of Christ, it's no surprise that the continued search would eventually lead to an app like WeCroak. But is simply contemplating death enough to produce the life-giving answers we're looking for? Recently, WIRED magazine's spiritual advice columnist, Meghan O'Gieblyn, received this question: "Lately I've been feeling like life is passing me by, so I downloaded an app that reminds me [that] I'm going to die. I thought it would help me accept my mortality and focus on what really matters, but it just makes me anxious. Is there something wrong with me? Is being anxious the point? Do you think these apps can be helpful?" O'Gieblyn's responded, "Death apps are less a wake-up call than another false comfort, one that reflexively defers to the favored religion of our age—information… [I] suspect your anxiety stems in part from your awareness that the app, on its own, is not really addressing the heart of your fear." That's well said but far from an answer. In fact, O'Gieblyn goes on to recommend a coping strategy almost as powerless as WeCroak: more "life experiences," political activism or a fuzzy sense of "religion," The Bible, on the other hand, describes the reality of death seriously, because of its accurate view of life. Death is not a healthy or normal part of life. As one author put it, it's not the way it's supposed to be. In death's shadow, says the Teacher of Ecclesiastes, "everything is meaningless." Fools and wise people alike end up in the grave. Even our best endeavors come to nothing. But the Bible doesn't leave us there. Jesus' mission to Earth wasn't merely to spread wisdom or help us face death with a stiff upper lip. He came to destroy death. "I am the Living One:" he says in the book of Revelation. "I was dead, and now look, I am alive for ever and ever! And I hold the keys of death and Hades." That means that knowing Him is the beginning of life, the starting point for real joy, the only way to overcome death, and the only foundation for real hope. Like the founders of WeCroak, early Christians in Rome were fond of the phrase memento mori: remember that you will die. In light of the Gospel, this reminder is also an invitation. Know Christ… and live.

John and Shane answer a listener's question about training men to embrace manhood. They also field a question from a listener who has seen a conversation open up with a daughter who has closed the listener off. The question is, how should the listener should proceed? John then revisits a commentary on sperm donation and provides greater context to a challenging topic before answering a listener's inquiry in whether Adam and Eve were primates. ** Resources ** How to have a Conversation: Difficult Circumstances Greg Koukl | What Would You Say? |

Recently Cambridge University established Europe's first center devoted to studying and promoting animal rights law. The academics in charge say they'll focus on questions such as whether animals should be farmed for food, used for testing, caught and killed, or kept in zoos. According to the Los Angeles Times, it's part of a growing push to designate some animals as "non-human persons," with legal rights to life, liberty, and even property. This would be bad for both humans and animals. The very concept of "human rights" comes from Christianity's doctrine that people are made in the image of God. Likewise, animal welfare—which is different from "animal rights"—was pioneered by Christians like William Wilberforce, who saw humans as stewards of the rest of creation. If we're just animals, as the concept "non-human persons" implies, there's no reason we should be kind to or respect other animals. Human rights and animal welfare become nonsense, and things get a lot hairier for all of us.

Imagine a pregnant mother, recently informed that her baby may have a rare genetic condition. She now faces a future caring for someone with an intellectual or physical disability, perhaps financial stress, and even a shortened life. Certain dreams and hopes she has harbored for her preborn child have been dramatically altered. To make matters worse, many women in this challenging situation face intense pressure from medical professionals and family members to have an abortion. Some have even described having to defend the decision to not have an abortion to medical professionals who assume that a disabled child should not be allowed to live. But what if the prenatal test that sparked this whole series of events was a false positive? What if this test returns false positives 85 percent of the time? According to a shocking new expose in the New York Times, a new investigation of companies manufacturing and promoting prenatal tests for rare and serious conditions concluded that certain prenatal tests, tests which lead countless women to get abortions, are "usually wrong." Up to a third of expectant mothers in the United States will face this scenario, claims the article, telling stories of mothers who received positive test results for debilitating chromosomal conditions. Many of these mothers considered abortion until they discovered through more invasive follow-up tests that the screening results were false, and their babies were fine. Of course, even if accurate, test results do not in any way alter the inherent value of every human being. Still, many women do not bother with follow-up testing, trusting the results of these prenatal screenings, which manufacturers advertise as "reliable" and "highly accurate." These tests are neither "reliable" nor "highly accurate." According to an analysis conducted by The Times, screenings for several rare conditions yielded false positives 85 percent of the time. A few screenings, such as the test for Prader-Willi syndrome, were wrong 90 percent of the time. Millions of women, conclude the authors, have "been misled by a wondrous promise that Silicon Valley technology has made…that a few vials of their blood, drawn in the first trimester, can allow companies to detect serious developmental problems…" The false promises are made via incredibly dishonest advertising. Medical giants like Quest Diagnostics and Myriad Genetics use phrases like "total confidence," "clear answers," and "information you can trust." However, they fail to publish data on how well their tests perform, and even cherry-pick numbers to make them appear more accurate than they are. However, in one case, The New York Times appears to join in on the deception. The authors repeatedly assure readers that prenatal tests for Down syndrome are reliable. Yet, a 2014 study published in the New England Journal of Medicine shows that around half of the positive Down syndrome screenings for low-risk pregnancies turned out to be false. For trisomy 18, a similar condition, up to 60 percent of screenings yielded false positives. The tragedy of this many false positives comes into focus in light of another number: Nearly 70 percent of babies in the US who test positive for Down syndrome in the womb are aborted. It's terrible that many of these children didn't even have the condition their parents so greatly feared. It's even more terrible that this culture has decided that people with disabilities are better off dead. The real name for this way of thinking is eugenics, something that didn't end with Nazi death camps in Europe and forced sterilization in the United States. The deadly logic that follows the idea that some humans are "defective" and "not worthy of life" is still with us, only gussied up, sanitized, and medically justified for the 21st century. Ours is the real-life version of the movie, GATTACA, in which a "perfect" society free is built, not by eliminating defects, but by eliminating people. While The New York Times deserves credit for exposing the eugenics underbelly of the prenatal testing industry, the authors of this article ultimately buy the same basic premise. The problem, they suggest, is bad testing, not deciding some are "defective" and eliminating them. But both history and good science fiction warn where this kind of thinking leads. The issue is not the bad science behind modern eugenics but the bad idea behind all eugenics. It's an idea that's claimed victims throughout history and must be rejected no matter how accurate our tests are. Christians have faced down dehumanizing cultures like ours before, since its earliest days when the persecuted church rescued abandoned Roman babies. They were inspired and animated by a better idea: that every human being is intrinsically valuable because they bear the image of God.

Recently, Medium's Tom Whitwell reported, "a study of 14,000 Australians over 14 years found that neither being promoted nor being fired has any impact on either emotional well-being or life satisfaction." The fascinating study compares the emotional impact of a variety of life events, from retiring to going to jail, being robbed, getting married, or having a baby. Some of the results are what you'd expect. For example, major health issues hurt both emotional wellbeing and life satisfaction; and though getting married can be stressful leading up to the event, it brings distinct positives afterward. But surprisingly, neither getting fired nor getting promoted have long-term effects. That certainly challenges the idea that climbing the corporate ladder is the secret to happiness. Of course, other studies show the high value of work in general: as the Harvard Business Review summarizes, "being unemployed is miserable." All of which points a generation struggling with the meaning of work to the truth of how God made us. Work is a worthy endeavor … but not our ultimate identity.