Recently, the leadership of my church announced that it is going to form a new church on the other side of town designed to appeal to the 21-40 age group. It is a noble goal, as this age cohort is far less likely to attend church than previous generations. I am 29 years old--planted squarely in the middle of this age group--and have had nearly a decade of dealing with my fellow Gen X and Y'rs. A church seeking to bring members of this generation to Jesus has to understand the attributes and desires of the group and deal intelligently with these traits.
Two attributes and two desires are greatly influenced by the pervasive influences of this age. The attributes are consumerism and confusion about truth. The deisres are a desire for commmunity and a desire for control. Some aspects of these attributes, concerns, and desires of the group are good, but often are sought improperly and in destructive ways. Others are problematic to the core from a Christian perspective. The negative aspects of these attributes and desires are a result of this generation's relentless pursuit of self-gratification.
Not every person in the generation will have all the same attributes, but I think that each attribute is applicable to a large number of people and it would be a very rare person indeed who is not effected by one of these for things. This article discusses each of these attributes and the challenges they pose to a church that seeks to have its members be imitators of Christ. This will be followed by an in-depth treatment of the cult of self-gratification. Subsequent articles will contain proposals and ideas regarding how we can counteract the negative aspects of these influences, both in our personal lives, in our communities, and the culture at large.
Consumerism
Personal autonomy is the demand of almost all Gen Y'rs. In this, it is unlikely that they are much different from many previous generations, but this demand has been directed more towards the satisfaction of personal desires by the fact that we life in a consumer society. Day after day, advertisements in all forms of media and the culture at large equate personal happiness with pleasure, which is obtained by purchasing certain items, engaging in certain actions, or experiencing certain things. And the advertisements do not try to convince the person to purchase them through reason and argument--the argument is usually not that the product is of the finest quality. Instead, the advertiser often appeals to the person's desires by using images and peer pressure.
These constant messages have multiple results. First, the listener becomes accustomed to a mode of thinking whereby he or she is the ultimate arbiter of truth. Who has the best cola? Well, I'll taste and decide for myself. Additionally, the criteria of whether something is valuable is not whether something is true or achieves excellence, but whether it brings pleasure or happiness. McDonalds doesn't say they have the best burgers, they just show people eating the food with a smile on their face and the caption "I'm lovin' it." It is also worth noting that modern advertising relies on images and evoking emotion rather than convincing a person via evidence that this product is the best. In making decisions, the listener is encouraged to make decisions on the basis of desire and emotion, often to the exclusion or limitation of reason. Finally, the listener is told that their status in society and among their peers will improve if they choose this product. In other words, an appeal to vanity is made. This can been seen in the facts that in advertisements it is almost always beautiful people and celebrities that are utilized, and that so many advertisers attempt to show that their wares are "cutting edge" and "trendy." The result is that people are trained to assume the utilitarian presumption that the maximization of happiness is the highest goal of life and society, but without the presumption that reason is the means by which to make the determination. The carnal desires are elevated, while reason is diminished and spirituality ignored.
Uncertainty About Truth
Many members of Generation Y are divided into two camps. In the first camp are those people who care whether things are true and may even consider it more important than personal pleasure. This does not mean that they necessarily believe that there is a God, or an objective moral law, or that there is a specific purpose to life. But they are willing to think about such matters and would concede that they are important. The second camp could care less about the truth, and is more than happy to use any means that will maximize happiness. Members of both camps are often cynical about the existence of truth and are quick to reject authority.
Among many who think truth is important, and especially among those who do not, there is a cynicism regarding whether truth exists. There are multiple reasons for this. As more people enter higher education, they come under the influence of a relativism in education that too often focuses more on debunking arguments through ad hominem attacks and claiming that all our intellectual predecessors were biased or simply trying to exercise power. Examining an argument on its merits is too often neglected. And while there are signs that the influence of relativism is lessening, its effects can still be seen in segments of society that teach that true tolerance is not giving in to the bigoted viewpoint that "if X is true, then not X is false." Evangelicalism deserves some blame for this state of affairs, having neglected the life of the mind, often despising reason, and failing to engage the world outside the church with a Christian worldview and ethic that encompasses all of life. As evangelical scholar Mark Noll puts it, it is a scandal, and one the church must work to remedy.
The result of all of this is that a cynical generation has emerged. Members of this generation who sense that the promises of the advertisers to bring happiness are bankrupt, are now wary of other promises to bring happiness. And those who continue to satisfy their needs chiefly through consumer culture generally do not believe or care that there may be a higher calling in life. The generation that has heard so many contrary voices of authority more concerned with publishing a novel paper than what is true or false (see academics) or winning an argument rather than discovering truth (see politicians) now distrusts authority. A world that says personal pleasure equals happiness and is the highest purpose in life, and that this is achieved through hedonism, cannot even deliver "the goods" (pleasure and temporary happiness) of this diminished goal through consumer culture. Thus it is no surprise that many do not believe that they have been designed with a purpose. As a result, it is very common for members of this generation to drift through life with an undefined life purpose. Too many drift through life, just trying to make the best of it and adopt a soft nihilism that creates low expectations and a life of limted joy.
Desire for Community
Generation Y'rs crave community. The lack of caring communities and meaningful interaction between friends has created a huge unmet need among today's young adults. There are multiple causes for this situation. First, families are far more likely to fragment. Everyone knows about the 50% divorce rate in our society. Another cause is the fact that young adults often leave home to go to school and try to "make it on their own" which takes them away from family and friends into new cities where they know few if any people. Even families that do not divorce increasingly separate to different parts of the country, and are only see each other on holidays. When Gen Y'rs get a job, it will often be for only a few years before they move to another job, in perhaps another city, thus even the work community is increasingly transitory. Our communities are filled with young adults who are lonely and searching for meaningful interation. A church potluck is not going to meet this need, nor are the handshakes and salutations that occur in the 5 to 10 minutes after a sunday worship service.
Another desire for community takes a different form. In addition to interaction, Gen Y'rs want to be part of communities where their talents are appreciated and valaued. As C.S. Lewis pointed out, a common interest is often the fertile ground in which friendship grows. To the extent that a young adult cannot find others in a community who share his or her interests, that person is not likely to have many friends. A person who cannot find friends within a community is going to feel isolated and not appreciated. Talent truly is on loan from God, but sadly our churches are too often places where the various talents of its members are squandered. If you can teach the Bible, or sing well, you're in luck. But God forbid if your talent is in painting, scientific inquiry, or a multitude of other areas of expertise or creativity.
Teaching our young how to use their talents for the glory of God is key if we hope to live in churches that bring the Gospel message of redemption to bear on all areas of our lives. As part of that message, however, we must also teach that the use of talent for God is done as an act of service. Too often, we are only willing to serve in ways that suit ourselves. After all, most of the "serious" members of a congregation can give a long outline of the deficiencies of our leaders in the clergy. We need to be willing to serve when asked, and perhaps even in ways that may not feed our egos or be totally within our control. We need to live that lesson out, and teach it to others.
Desire for Control
Generation Y--perhaps like most young adults in most generations--has an overwhelming desire to be in control of their own lives and tends to distrust authority. This does not mean that all members of this generation have purely selfish desires. Some may give their lives to causes outside themselves, but any such decision will be made by that person. We tend to be the captains of our own ships, with the possible exception of those who have unmet needs for community and may subbordinate their autonomy to meet that felt need.
As mentioned earlier, the consumer culture we live in creates habits of mind where we look to ourselves alone in making decisions. We consider satisfaction of our desire for pleasure as the key criteria in making decisions, and choose our options. We are told to seek out that which is trendy and stylish (two things that are in constant flux, unlike the objective moral truth of Jesus) as a means of setting ourselves apart. We are told to be one of the select few worthy of being considered better than those around us by buying a certain product--just like the other 10 million people who have seen the commercial.
And don't think about questioning this way of life for a second. If you do, that means that you are subjugating your freedom and not expressing your individuality. After all, what could be more freeing than spending all our time acquiring possessions, and more individualistic than joining the "hardy few" in our culture who are look to self-gratification as the ultimate purpose in life. As a church, we must show that it is in following Christ that we gain control of our lives. There is a reason Christ told us we cannot serve both God and money. Obviously, the main reason is because it is so easy for us to seek to gratify ourselves with false idols. But it is also because when we follow after the god "mammon" we end up in serving a God who tyrannizes us into a slavery where we seek pleasures and a purpose that false idol cannot provide; things that in the end dominate us. The question is whether we seek a life where our appetites dominate us, or instead choose to serve Jesus Christ, who transforms us into the people God designed us to be, and allows us the freedom that comes with contentment and being loved. For it is God who is the creator and ruler of the created order, and it is His command that we exercise dominion over all creation by loving and serving Him and one another. This is a vital lesson for our churches to teach, and one for many in my generation (including myself) to learn.
__________________________________________________
Thank you for reading this far. The next article in the Rich Young Rulers series will be an analysis of the "cult of self-gratification" that my generation and the culture at large has embraced. God Bless.
4/25/2005
4/24/2005
Killearn DTS Romans 9: 14-31
1) In verse 14, Paul asks a question in light of God choosing Issac and Jacob to receive the covenant blessings he began through Abraham. The question is whether God is unjust for having chosen one person over the other. It occurs to me that there are two objections that Paul may be addressing here. The first possible objection is "why doesn't God shower his grace upon all peoples?" In context of the passage however, it appears more likely that the issues are "has God's covenant with us failed, and aren't all Isrealites part of the kingdom of God since they are part of the community with which God has covenanted" (see verses 6 and 7). Paul cites the election of Issac and Jacob as examples to answer the objections regarding Isreal. God chose Issac and Jacob to receive the covenant blessing as a means of fulfilling his purposes. So we see God chosing to favor certain persons as a means of enacting the covenant, not causing it to be breached on God's side. As verse 15 tells us, God chooses to give his grace to those he wants to. We cannot dictate to God who will receive it. (v. 16) God's mercy does not depend on how much we want it or on our efforts to get it, but rather on God's forgiveness. As Wesley stated, the will of man is opposed to God's grace.
--Since God has decided to enact his purposes largely through man in the course of history, is it inevitable that he would purpose that certain men would receive blessing?
In verse 17, Paul cites the example of Pharoah in Egypt, who is told by God (through Moses) that he has been raised up to power in order that God might show his power, and that the peoples of the Earth would become aware of the His existence. Mission certainly accomplished by God, as the account of the Exodus is famous around the world. As Paul puts it (v 18) God has mercy on those He want to, and hardens those he want to. Wesley stated that in order to display His power, God rose to the throne in Egypt the most obstinant and proud man possible, but not a man whom God had made that way. In doing this, the punishment he received was more than just.
--If God created a person for the purpose of doing evil, and he does so, does that make God the author of evil? Explain your answer.
3) In verse 19, Paul anticipates an objection that the Isrealites might have to his argument. The objection is that if God has purposed for certain people to object Him and certain to accept, then how can we be held accountable, for who can resist God's will? In response, Paul quotes passages from Isaiah stating that the created should not question the will of the creator, just as the potter cannot be questioned by the pot for the way it was made, or the purposes it will serve. (v. 20-21). It is worth noting that in both examples from Isaiah, not only is the will of God being questioned, but also whether God sees the evil deeds of the people and will act.
Wesley states that God's dealings with us are invisible in some circumstances and clearly known in others. We cannot clearly see His purposes and working in things like when and where we live, our parents, our bodies and minds. These are ordered with perfect wisdom, but by rules we do not know. On the other hand, God has revealed to us clearly how he deals with us as our Judge--he rewards every man in accordance with his works. Those who believe are saved, those who do not believe aren't. Because of this fact, it is not tyrannical of God to furnish his mercy to some, because God offers his grace to those who accept His terms (Jer 18:7). From Calvin's point of view, God may harden an unbelieving man not only because He is sovreign, but also because that man would automatically be opposed to God because it is in man's nature to be so. As all men are opposed to God, it is not unjust for God to only choose some to receive His grace, because it would be just for God to punish every person who ever lived because that is what our sins have merited.
--Since God is sovreign and all powerful, is the fact that some come to God and others do not evidence that he has purposed for only some to come to Him? What is the role that free-will plays here?
4) Paul then presents a hypothetical in verses 22-29. What if, he asks, God bore with patience the objects of His wrath--prepared for destruction--as a means of showing his power? What if He did this in order to show the glory of His mercies to those he prepared in advance for glory? Paul cites examples from scripture that show God has chosen people both from within and outside the covenant community of Isreal to deal with. He points out that God has told the people in certain contexts that only a few of the community would be saved, and that if it were not for God's intervention, the community would have already merited destruction for its evil acts (and thus is not without blame or receiving an unjust "punishment").
--In verse 23, is Paul making the case that without seeing God's wrath, we would not be able to comprehend his grace? Does this mean that it is necessary for God to have allowed sin to exist?
In verses 30-33, Paul once again says that the Gentiles have received a righteousness that comes from faith, even though the outside world never sought to obey God's law. This has happened because Isreal as a community has not fully understood that what God desires is faith and trust in Him. A love of God, not mere obedience of rules. It is a stumbling block for them, and that is why they have failed to understand the life and purposes of Jesus Christ (v. 33).
--Since God has decided to enact his purposes largely through man in the course of history, is it inevitable that he would purpose that certain men would receive blessing?
In verse 17, Paul cites the example of Pharoah in Egypt, who is told by God (through Moses) that he has been raised up to power in order that God might show his power, and that the peoples of the Earth would become aware of the His existence. Mission certainly accomplished by God, as the account of the Exodus is famous around the world. As Paul puts it (v 18) God has mercy on those He want to, and hardens those he want to. Wesley stated that in order to display His power, God rose to the throne in Egypt the most obstinant and proud man possible, but not a man whom God had made that way. In doing this, the punishment he received was more than just.
--If God created a person for the purpose of doing evil, and he does so, does that make God the author of evil? Explain your answer.
3) In verse 19, Paul anticipates an objection that the Isrealites might have to his argument. The objection is that if God has purposed for certain people to object Him and certain to accept, then how can we be held accountable, for who can resist God's will? In response, Paul quotes passages from Isaiah stating that the created should not question the will of the creator, just as the potter cannot be questioned by the pot for the way it was made, or the purposes it will serve. (v. 20-21). It is worth noting that in both examples from Isaiah, not only is the will of God being questioned, but also whether God sees the evil deeds of the people and will act.
Wesley states that God's dealings with us are invisible in some circumstances and clearly known in others. We cannot clearly see His purposes and working in things like when and where we live, our parents, our bodies and minds. These are ordered with perfect wisdom, but by rules we do not know. On the other hand, God has revealed to us clearly how he deals with us as our Judge--he rewards every man in accordance with his works. Those who believe are saved, those who do not believe aren't. Because of this fact, it is not tyrannical of God to furnish his mercy to some, because God offers his grace to those who accept His terms (Jer 18:7). From Calvin's point of view, God may harden an unbelieving man not only because He is sovreign, but also because that man would automatically be opposed to God because it is in man's nature to be so. As all men are opposed to God, it is not unjust for God to only choose some to receive His grace, because it would be just for God to punish every person who ever lived because that is what our sins have merited.
--Since God is sovreign and all powerful, is the fact that some come to God and others do not evidence that he has purposed for only some to come to Him? What is the role that free-will plays here?
4) Paul then presents a hypothetical in verses 22-29. What if, he asks, God bore with patience the objects of His wrath--prepared for destruction--as a means of showing his power? What if He did this in order to show the glory of His mercies to those he prepared in advance for glory? Paul cites examples from scripture that show God has chosen people both from within and outside the covenant community of Isreal to deal with. He points out that God has told the people in certain contexts that only a few of the community would be saved, and that if it were not for God's intervention, the community would have already merited destruction for its evil acts (and thus is not without blame or receiving an unjust "punishment").
--In verse 23, is Paul making the case that without seeing God's wrath, we would not be able to comprehend his grace? Does this mean that it is necessary for God to have allowed sin to exist?
In verses 30-33, Paul once again says that the Gentiles have received a righteousness that comes from faith, even though the outside world never sought to obey God's law. This has happened because Isreal as a community has not fully understood that what God desires is faith and trust in Him. A love of God, not mere obedience of rules. It is a stumbling block for them, and that is why they have failed to understand the life and purposes of Jesus Christ (v. 33).
4/10/2005
Killearn DTS Romans 8: 26-34
1) In v. 26-27, Paul points out that just as we desire and struggle (groaning) to be redeemed by God, the Spirit of God groans (desires and struggles) in helping us in that process, particularly in prayer. Paul points out that we often do not know what we should pray for, but that the Spirit of God intercedes for us. Additionally, Paul points out that God knows the hearts of his believers and the mind of the Spirit.
Martin Luther stated that the Spirit assures us that we are children of God, regardless of our struggles with sin, so long as we follow the Spirit and struggle against sin. In fact, for Luther, the struggle is important, as he says it is that struggle (the cross) that is often most effective in deadening the flesh. All of creation joins us in this struggle, as does God's Spirit. Calvin notes that the fact that the Spirit interceedes for us in prayer, and that God looks at our hearts, should fill us with confidence when praying.
--What do you think the "groans" mentioned by Paul are indicative of? What does the placement of this passage show us about the importance of prayer in our redemption?
2) Verses 28-30 contain of of the more famous passages of scripture, where Paul says that in all things, God words for the good of those who love Him and have been called according to his purpose. John Wesley says that this passage refers to God's provision of Jesus to save our lost world. Calvin points out that the passage refers to the fact that God answers our prayers by using even the evils we face in life to our ultimate advantage.
In verse 29, Paul talks about the aspects of God's calling of us, which is, of course, done according with God's purposes. Paul says that those God forknew, he predestined to be conformed to the image of Christ, thus making Christ the firstborn of many brothers in the family of God. In verse 30, we read that those who are predestined are also called, those called are justified, and those justified are glorified.
Wesley states that those who are foreknown and predestined are those who are conformable to the image of God. In other words, those who God knows will submit to Him, given the opportunity, citing 2 Tim 2: 19 and Phillipians 3: 10, 21 as authority. Calvin states that Paul is detailing the order of election, and rejects that forknowledge is based on God knowing who would be willing to accept Him, for Calvin assumes that such a situation provides the creation with too much credit in the process.
--The interpretation of the term "foreknowledge" determines how a person will interpret this passage with regard to the process by which God calls a person and "predestines" him. What is your interpretation?
3) Paul says in v. 31 that in light of the great lengths God has gone to redeem us and make us holy, our response should be to realize that God is for us, and thus should not fear those who are against us. After all, if God is willing to sacrifice His Son on our behalf, then he is obviously willing to go to any lengths to provide us with what we need in our lives. Wesley and Calvin both note that verses 31-35 contain a series of exclamations where Paul details what our response should be to the difficulties of life in light of the fact of all God has done for us.
Paul goes on to say that we should not fear those who bring (false) charges against us, for it is God who justifies us and finds us acceptable (v. 33). As for those who condemn us, that should not lead us to fear because Christ was condemned on our behalf, and intercedes for us with God (v. 34).
--What sort of "charges" and "condemnation" does the world bring against Christians? Which are accurate, and which are unfair? What should be our response?
--
Martin Luther stated that the Spirit assures us that we are children of God, regardless of our struggles with sin, so long as we follow the Spirit and struggle against sin. In fact, for Luther, the struggle is important, as he says it is that struggle (the cross) that is often most effective in deadening the flesh. All of creation joins us in this struggle, as does God's Spirit. Calvin notes that the fact that the Spirit interceedes for us in prayer, and that God looks at our hearts, should fill us with confidence when praying.
--What do you think the "groans" mentioned by Paul are indicative of? What does the placement of this passage show us about the importance of prayer in our redemption?
2) Verses 28-30 contain of of the more famous passages of scripture, where Paul says that in all things, God words for the good of those who love Him and have been called according to his purpose. John Wesley says that this passage refers to God's provision of Jesus to save our lost world. Calvin points out that the passage refers to the fact that God answers our prayers by using even the evils we face in life to our ultimate advantage.
In verse 29, Paul talks about the aspects of God's calling of us, which is, of course, done according with God's purposes. Paul says that those God forknew, he predestined to be conformed to the image of Christ, thus making Christ the firstborn of many brothers in the family of God. In verse 30, we read that those who are predestined are also called, those called are justified, and those justified are glorified.
Wesley states that those who are foreknown and predestined are those who are conformable to the image of God. In other words, those who God knows will submit to Him, given the opportunity, citing 2 Tim 2: 19 and Phillipians 3: 10, 21 as authority. Calvin states that Paul is detailing the order of election, and rejects that forknowledge is based on God knowing who would be willing to accept Him, for Calvin assumes that such a situation provides the creation with too much credit in the process.
--The interpretation of the term "foreknowledge" determines how a person will interpret this passage with regard to the process by which God calls a person and "predestines" him. What is your interpretation?
3) Paul says in v. 31 that in light of the great lengths God has gone to redeem us and make us holy, our response should be to realize that God is for us, and thus should not fear those who are against us. After all, if God is willing to sacrifice His Son on our behalf, then he is obviously willing to go to any lengths to provide us with what we need in our lives. Wesley and Calvin both note that verses 31-35 contain a series of exclamations where Paul details what our response should be to the difficulties of life in light of the fact of all God has done for us.
Paul goes on to say that we should not fear those who bring (false) charges against us, for it is God who justifies us and finds us acceptable (v. 33). As for those who condemn us, that should not lead us to fear because Christ was condemned on our behalf, and intercedes for us with God (v. 34).
--What sort of "charges" and "condemnation" does the world bring against Christians? Which are accurate, and which are unfair? What should be our response?
--
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)