Emergent Christianity, Anabaptism, and Evangelicalism as Ethos and Movements

Introduction

Upon reading Dr. Olson's recent article on Evangelicalism below I was left asking what are the distinctives of Emergent Christianity that make it what it is today as an ethos and as a movement? This has been repeatedly addressed within Relevancy22 (see sidebars - A Letter of Welcome, and, Emergent Christianity Defined, for samplings) but it has left me wondering if Emergent Christianity can be so simply summarized by so simply stating that it is (i) an expanded version of an old evangelical ethos that is both more open, and less rigorously dependent upon, favored evangelical dogmas and, (ii) composed of past evangelicals who may be more politically-moderate, including those with leftist leanings, wrapped around democratic (party) mantras (with or without formal political affiliations and PAC group endorsements).

Both seem true, but in another sense, Emergent Christianity is more than these mere observations as it addresses society's evolving post-modernistic cultures and socio-cultural multi-ethnic pluralisms. By adding these last two social qualifiers we then "gin up" both the Emergent ethos and the Emergent political overtones into areas of social activism, social involvement, and social identity, that would give to past Evangelical Christians now involved in Emergent Christian churches, more societal relevancy and pervasiveness than they lately had publically received - or been granted - by the social media under their previous Evangelical banners and stigma.


Overtones to Anabaptism

At least that is my short answer when observing recent religious trends found within Emergent Christianity during this past decade or two of its birth (roughly beginning in the 1990s) and its rapid outgrowth away from right-wing,  tea-party conservatism, as found within standard Evangelicalism as media-defined. However, even as Emergent Christians negotiate their own post-modernistic entry into the 21st century world of politics and societal involvement, let us not forget Anabaptism's initial entry through its newly-embraced, more recent fellowships, entering into its politically-neutral folds to serve Jesus through community involvement and church-based social agency. Anabaptists were once politically engaged in later European history, but because of its experience of deadly martyrdom and persecution became quickly disengaged towards a political position of neutrality. This was because Anabaptism as an ethos and movement was perceived by European Christians at the time as infringing upon their own ethos and movements. An experience that Emergent Christians can sympathize with given the harsh rhetoric it has received these past many years from Evangelical presses, pulpits, and academic institutions. As a primer to Anabaptism let us quote Wikipedia:


Anabaptist Persecutions and Migrations to America
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anabaptism
 

The burning of a 16th-century Dutch Anabaptist Anneken Hendriks,
who was charged by the Spanish Inquisition with heresy.

"Roman Catholics and Protestants alike persecuted the Anabaptists, resorting to torture and execution in attempts to curb the growth of the movement. The Protestants under Zwingli were the first to persecute the Anabaptists, with Felix Manz becoming the first martyr in 1527. On May 20, 1527, Roman Catholic authorities executed Michael Sattler. King Ferdinand declared drowning (called the third baptism) "the best antidote to Anabaptism". The Tudor regime, even the Protestant monarchs (Edward VI of England and Elizabeth I of England), persecuted Anabaptists as they were deemed too radical and therefore a danger to religious stability. The persecution of Anabaptists was condoned by ancient laws of Theodosius I and Justinian I that were passed against the Donatists, which decreed the death penalty for any who practiced rebaptism. Martyrs Mirror, by Thieleman J. van Braght, describes the persecution and execution of thousands of Anabaptists in various parts of Europe between 1525 and 1660. Continuing persecution in Europe was largely responsible for the mass emigrations to North America by Amish, Hutterites, and Mennonites." - Wikipedia


A Likely Half-Brother

In a sense, Anabaptism's updated half-brother is that of postmodern Emergent Christianity which shares the same passionate drive to tell of Jesus to all the world's cultures. Similar to Anabaptism, we can find some Emergent Christians willing to politically detach themselves from American politics for the sake of the gospel's ministry. But unlike Anabaptism's historic political neutrality, we find even more Emergent Christians willing to engage American politics from a moderate, or leftist, position. Hence Emergent Christianity's stance of neutrality, or moderate/leftist sympathies, has no less marked itself from rightist Evangelical banning than has its theologies showing the same. As such, one could perceive Emergent Christians as those unwilling to be defined within Evangelicalism's narrowly perceived brand of political agendas; nor by Evangelicalism's sub-culture of bible-beltways; nor by its politically-and-theologically regressive communities; nor by its politically-conservative, hot-button issues; nor even by Evangelicalism's conservative missional rhetorics and bombastic evangelistic pulpiteering to the masses.

Thus, one could make the argument that Emergent Christianity is both like-and-unlike Anabaptism on the one hand, even as it is a more recent outgrowth from conservative Evangelicalism on the other hand. It differs from Anabaptism in its perception of involvement within the political spheres of American life. And differs from Evangelicalism in its movement away from conservative American politics. Because Anabaptism is neutral in its stance to political engagement, Emergent Christianity has not been deemed a threat to its faith and way-of-life. In fact, Anabaptists may even secretly admire their Emergent brethren for standing up for the rights of the unempowered, disenfranchised, impoverished classes of America. Whereas right-wing, conservative Evangelicalism would not be so sympathetic, blasting Emergent Christianity for its differences from itself both politically and theologically.


Conclusion

Hence, even though Emergent Christianity is a resultant outgrowth (in part) from Evangelicalism, it is also a half-brother to Anabaptism. And like both, is willing to make claims as to its right of identity and progeny, its political involvements and objectives, even as it elicits a newer comprehension of the Christian gospel of Jesus entering into a postmodern global environment of social networking, open dialogue and communication, and multi-ethnic pluralism. Each social perception is an important theological qualifier as Emergent Christianity comprehends itself of the missional work of Jesus having judged their social involvement and purposeful admission within the family tree of God as one-and-the-same with earlier historical Christian ethos and movements however politically regarded or perceived by opposing political religious groups. Depending on one's political point-of-view, it can be considered a political friend or a political rival. For myself, I think there is plenty of room in the family of God for both, and especially so in an America dedicated to political equality and balance-of-power, demarcated by its mottos of "Liberty and Freedom for All."

R. E. Slater

July 14, 2012

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

New and forthcoming books about evangelicalism

(and my thoughts about this concept)
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/rogereolson/2012/07/1403/

by Roger Olson
July 13, 2012

Recently there have been some new books on the popular subject of “evangelical” and “evangelicalism.” It seems that in the past, perhaps as recently as the 1960s and 1970s, most people including most scholars knew what these terms meant. It was kind of like pornography according to the Supreme Court justice who said “I can’t define it, but I know it when I see it.” We just kind of “knew” other evangelicals when we met them. Then there were the odd cases nobody quite knew what to do with. Are Seventh-Day Adventists evangelicals (if they want to be)? Donald Grey Barnhouse and Walter Martin stirred up a hornets nest in the 1970s by suggesting they (or at least some of them) might be.

Then there has always been the discussion about Southern Baptists. We in the north considered it obvious (that Southern Baptists are evangelicals) even if the SBC wouldn’t join the National Association of Evangelicals. Of course the SBC was evangelical, whether they liked the term or not.

All this points to a very important distinction that I still don’t think most writers about evangelical and evangelicalism have grasped or made sufficient use of. The distinction is between evangelical as an ethos and evangelical as a movement. Somehow, over the years, some people and organizations have become attached to the “evangelical movement” who don’t really have an evangelical ethos. And many have an evangelical ethos who don’t quite fit comfortably in the evangelical movement—especially as it has both broadened and narrowed.

There’s the interesting paradox about the movement. On the one hand, to some people’s way of thinking, it has become so broad and amorphous as to be meaningless. There’s really no even relatively cohesive movement anymore. How can one movement include both Joel Osteen and Michael Horton? And yet, many observers of the evangelical movement in America would put them both in it. (That’s kind of like putting Shirley MacLaine and David Spangler in the New Age Movement. But it happens and seems to work—if you’re comfortable with one movement including spiritual flakes and serious thinkers. Both are devotees of the esoteric, so they go in the catch-all category “New Age.”)

What do Joel Osteen and Michael Horton have in common that causes both to be considered members of the evangelical movement by many people? Well, both at least claim they believe in the authority of Scripture, the deity of Jesus Christ, conversion to Christ by faith, a supernatural world view and salvation through the cross of Jesus Christ. Compared to secularism, that’s a lot of common ground!

I think it’s helpful to distinguish, though, between an “evangelical ethos” and the “evangelical movement.” Surely they overlap a lot, but one is a certain attitude toward reality (supernatural reality), the Bible (supreme authority for faith and practice because supernaturally inspired by God), personal decision for Christ by faith as beginning (or at least crucial step) of authentic Christian living (conversionism), the cross of Jesus as the basis of salvation, activism through witness and/or social transformation. The evangelical ethos is heavily influenced by Pietism and Revivalism although it does not necessarily include outward emotional displays. It believes in transformed affections and amendment of life by God’s grace through the work of the Holy Spirit. That ethos can be found in many denominations in America including some Catholic churches.

Now, some will insist on adding to that ethos conservative doctrinal belief and I think there’s truth in that, but you can find conservative doctrinal belief where there is no evangelical ethos. Not every conservative Protestant, for example, is truly evangelical in this sense.

Some years ago I received a call from a well-known Lutheran theologian who hosted ecumenical dialogue events. He asked me to recommend a “real evangelical” to speak at one. I mentioned a well-known conservative Methodist theologian. The Lutheran theologian snorted and said “He’s just a conservative Methodist.” I had to agree. I had no reason to think he lived out of an evangelical ethos. So I mentioned the Reformed president of a leading evangelical seminary. The Lutheran theologian said “Yes!” and that’s who they invited. Many would consider both the conservative Methodist and the Reformed seminary president “evangelical” just because they are both noted for being relatively conservative doctrinally. But only the Reformed seminary president is ALSO noted for piety.

Now, the evangelical movement is a strange beast. On the one hand, it’s so large and amorphous as to be a figment of people’s imaginations. On the other hand it’s so narrow and focused on conservative social and political issues as to be an exclusive club populated virtually only by Religious Right and neo-fundamentalists. The first sense of it is still associated with Billy Graham. As one Lutheran observer and commentator on evangelicalism said “An evangelical is anyone who likes Billy Graham.” The second sense is associated in many people’s minds especially with James Dobson and Al Mohler.

My experience is that the secular media use both senses. Sometimes they talk about “evangelicals” as a huge segment of the population who claim to be “born again.” Other times they talk about “evangelicals” as ultra-conservative Protestants who vote in a block based on two main issues—homosexuality (opposition to “gay marriage”) and abortion (opposition to all abortions except perhaps to save the mother’s life).

It’s no wonder we’re all confused about evangelical and evangelicalism.

I try to remember to make clear whether I am talking about the ethos or the movement (in one of its senses) when I talk about “evangelical.” I am most certainly evangelical in the ethos sense and so are the vast majority of Baptists, Free Church Protestants, Pentecostals, Anabaptists, conservative Presbyterians and Methodists, Holiness (Nazarene, etc.), and charismatic Lutherans and Catholics.

I have more trouble including myself in today’s evangelical movement; I identify with the evangelical movement BEFORE it became so amorphous as to be almost meaningless and at the same time so narrow as to be exclusive and largely determined by “group think” about conservative social, political and doctrinal issues (such as inerrancy of the Bible).

One forthcoming book on evangelicalism I highly recommend is Power, Politics and the Fragmentation of Evangelicalism from the Scopes Trial to the Obama Administration by Wesleyan scholar Kenneth J. Collins (Asbury). I’m not sure when it will be published by InterVarsity Press but probably in October. The focus of the book is evangelical engagements with power in the political sense. I think (in the early version I read) Collins is wrong about the “evangelical left.” I don’t think there has been (at least in the 20^th century and today) an evangelical “left” in the same sense as the “Religious Right.” There have been and are evangelical “lefties” (socially, politically) but they have never been as organized or as powerful or as identified with a political party as the evangelical right has been and is. I think the comparison breaks down in that the main representatives of the evangelical left (e.g., Jim Wallis) have never used the power tactics Religious Right evangelicals have commonly used (e.g., “voter guides” that are really disguised political campaign literature).

However, Collins’ book is an excellent critical survey of evangelical engagements with politics throughout the 20^th century. As with all the other books on evangelicalism, however, I think it could do more with my distinction between evangelical “ethos” and “movement.”

A recently published e-book I can highly recommend is Frank Viola’s Beyond Evangelical. (http://frankviola.org/evangelical.htm.) I may want to blog about this one more specifically and at greater length later. Viola is a prolific writer about evangelical Christianity and this is one of his boldest books yet. It contains many quotations from people (including yours truly) who are disillusioned with the current state of evangelicalism as a movement but who love an evangelical ethos. I think this book could also benefit from making explicit use of that distinction.

Another one is The Activist Impulse: Essays on the Intersection of Evangelicalism and Anabaptism edited by Jared Burkholder and David C. Cramer and published by Pickwick. It contains fifteen chapters (including the Introduction) about anabaptism and evangelicalism. I think the whole debate about the relationship between anabaptism and evangelicalism can be solved by my distinction between ethos and movement: most anabaptists are evangelicals by ethos; some are also movement evangelicals (but some most definitely do not want to be part of the evangelical movement especially in the narrow sense of social, political and doctrinal conservatism).

There’s been a long debate going on among Southern Baptists (and SBC exiles in the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship) about whether Southern Baptists/southern baptists are evangelicals. Of course they are ethos-wise. Many are not movement-wise. But most are even movement-wise in the broad, relatively amorphous sense of the evangelical movement.

Somehow over the years many southern evangelicals have come to identify “evangelical” with a “Yankee” phenomenon, form of religious life. When I moved to the south to teach theology an old-time Southern Baptist (but in exile from the SBC) seminary dean (my then boss) told me to visit Baptist churches in small towns to see what they are like. He assumed there were big differences between them and the Baptist and evangelical churches I came from in the Upper Midwest. Not so. The very first one I visited in a small town was exactly like any small town Baptist church in the Upper Midwest (except the accent): same songs sung, same order of worship (informal but somewhat planned), same preaching style, same invitation/altar call, same everything (except the accent). Just different names (all initials) for youth group, women’s group, etc.

The main thing I want to emphasize again here is the distinction between evangelicalism as an ethos and evangelicalism as a movement (really two movements—one larger that includes the other).

When I say I’m an evangelical I definitely mean in the ethos sense. When I identify with the evangelical movement I mean the one that I grew up in and still exists somewhere and somehow although it’s hard to find. The National Association of Evangelicals is one remnant of it. I most decidedly do NOT mean the narrow, exclusive, mostly Reformed, neo-fundamentalist one associated in most people’s minds with Dobson and Mohler and their ilk. They and I share an evangelical ethos, but that’s about all.

[It's a curiousity that we have to define ourselves by what we are not... but alas, it has come to this.... - res]

Jesus, The True Remedy for any Addiction We Fight

http://www.relevantmagazine.com/life/whole-life/reversing-grip-addiction#overlay-context=life/whole-life/reversing-grip-addiction

Reversing the Grip of Addiction

By April Byrd
July 13, 2012

April D. Byrd is a writer located near Atlanta, GA. She is the founder and editor of the blog Breath Of Life Daily, a site dedicated to be a resource of inspiration and celebrate life as it's lived. For more insights and inspiration follow her follow her on Twitter @aprilinspired.

Ask any child of an alcoholic or drug abuser and they will tell you—addictions are ugly. As a firsthand witness of my mother’s struggle as a child, I will tell you the same. It was painful to see how addiction consumed her life and it was hard to be around her when she was in the thick of it. She fought hard, and sometimes her strength came through, but I never knew what type of mood or mindset she would be in. Her instability negatively affected not only her life, but the lives of those around her.

Immediately from birth, life is a shocker. We develop and grow, but there remains a natural human inclination to reach out to anything substantial, to stabilize us and lend us support. For some people, this innate need can turn into a full-blown addiction. In fact, 16 percent of the U.S. population is dependent on alcohol, nicotine, or other drugs.

Addiction has both a personal and national effect. It is a disease that runs its course in the brain, and a new report shows that substance abuse beat out obesity as the number one health problem in America. It is also America's number one healthcare cost, claiming approximately 30 percent of our federal and state healthcare spending.

Many of us do not even realize we suffer from addiction, or we live in denial, but an addiction can still consume and drain us even if we do not acknowledge it. Sadly, the very attempt to gain stability can actually tip our lives into a dangerous imbalance. The overly consuming nature of addiction can take over the minds of addicts, and destroy their lives.

A Surface Cure for a Deeper Problem

But not all addiction is chemically based. We also hold dependencies on things that might not necessarily be negative such as sex, food or social media. But for all the social media junkies out there, America has a bigger problem than our Facebook obsession. With new media and technology advancement, it’s now easier to become addicted to the approval of others. Addictions stem from the need to be satiated and to feel whole or complete, which can be superficially fulfilled with a simple Facebook “like” or admiring blog comment. No matter the substance, the root of addiction is the same: to fill or to meet personal inadequacies. Often an addiction is used as a substitute to avoid having to face a deeper issue.

Given all the studies, there is only one “addiction” that has never produced any negative results.

The obsessive tendency in America abounds, but what if there is such a thing as a good addiction? Is it possible that an addiction could be more productive than consumptive?

A Different Kind of Substance

Given all the studies, there is only one “addiction” that has never produced any negative results. The side effects are more beneficial than terminal, and it actually increases focus rather than inhibiting it.

Perhaps the most controversial dependency of all, the Bible calls faith “the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things unseen” (Hebrews 11:1). There may a stigma attached to it at times, but faith is the most captivating power on earth.

Faith is a stimulant, producing with the Holy Spirit the side effects of “love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control” (Galatians 5:22-23). Faith is grown by passing the word; it is more powerful when it is lit with passion. It is life-changing for those who receive it. It empowers us to overcome, instead of going under. And many of us can speak of the medicinal quality of joy and laughter.

Choosing Better Habits

Addictive tendencies can result from suppressed passion, so activate your faith and allow it to stimulate your life. Stay busy, and feed those activities that drive your passion. We are all given something that we’re good at and love. Choose something that creates a positive and productive effect in your life, and go for it. Keep your hands and your mind busy. Actively pursue your passion, instead of waiting for it to come to you.

Also, keep in mind that faith is based in trust. Just like the good force behind every AA meeting, support is essential, and you are never alone. There is someone in your corner you can always turn to. Even if our parents are not physically or even mentally there, we have a Father who loves us. He knows all, sees all and cares immensely.

When I was eighteen, my mother lost her life battling a drug addiction, and I will miss having her as an active part of my life because of it. I know all too well the toxic toll an addiction can take on a life, but I also know what it means to be whole because of faith. The greatest substance I know of is faith in Christ—the true remedy for any void we try to fill through an addiction.

The Future Might be Risky, But So Is the Past

http://peterrollins.net/?p=3807

by Peter Rollins
posted 12/7/12

Our futures stretch out in front of us much like a path engulfed by fog. While decisions we make here and now can help us to guess what may lie down the road, we can never know for sure what we’ll find there. There will be births and deaths, the finding of meaning and the loss of it, illnesses will come and go and economic changes will impact our lives in ways that we may not even realise.

In the face of such uncertainty we might say to ourselves that at least the past isn’t risky. It is over. Done. Finished. And yet, for good or for bad, the reality is a little different.

We tend to think that cause is used up in effect. In other words, cause and effect work in a linear way with the cause coming first and the effect coming after. And yet in the world of subjective experience things are a little different. This can be seen most clearly in language itself. At its most simple, the last words in a sentence can radically change the meaning that we had ascribed to the previous words. Here, what comes after, can effect how we interpret what came before. In this way what comes later retroactively impacts what came previously.

One of the ways that we see this play out is when talking about a breakup. Sometimes we can talk in such a way that it would appear that there was nothing good about the person we had lived with. Of course the relationship might have been fraught with difficulties from the outset, however we often find that it is the subsequent actions that have transformed the way that we understand what took place previously, thus fundamentally changing our interpretation of the past.

Is this not what we see in the French film 5×2 directed by François Ozon? By employing an inverted chronological structure the film begins at the troubled end of a relationship and then moves backwards. Ending with the couples chance meeting at a beach resort. In this way the viewer is invited to interpret what went before in light of what happened at the end, thus exposing how later events impact how we read previous ones.

While the idea of the future being able to rob the past can be scary it can also be a liberating reality. For many of us have had lives full of pain. There might be years, even decades, that we feel were wasted. It can feel as if the past is past and that regret is all we will ever feel. Yet the past can be changed. Something can happen today that causes us to radically reinterpret it. Perhaps, in light of the new reality, we start to view it like a prophecy pointing to toward the present, or a period of waiting or preparing. The point is that there is no way of nailing a single meaning to historical situations. To live is to risk. To risk the past as much as the future.

Fog, by R.E. Slater - http://reslater.blogspot.com/2011/10/re-slater-fog.html

9 Quick Ways to Get "Depressed"

Photo via Shutterstock

 

9 Quick Ways to Get "Depressed"

http://www.relevantmagazine.com/life/whole-life/9-quick-ways-get-depressed      

By Nicole Unice
July 11, 2012

Nicole Unice is a counselor, ministry leader and author of She’s Got Issues (Tyndale, 2012). Her 20-something volunteers call her their “life coach.” She calls them friends. Connect with her on Twitter or at her website.

There are those who are truly depressed, and then those who are "depressed." To achieve the latter, simply follow these 9 steps and you'll be a self-pitying sad sack in no time.

“I don’t know … I just wonder if I might be depressed.” As a counselor and ministry leader, I’m often the one who hears about how people are “really” doing. And for every 10 times I’ve been consulted about a bleak mood, only two or three of my 20-something friends actually has diagnosable and clinical depression.

The rest of them are experiencing a tough spell, a general malaise, a “meh” mood, and most were even contributing to that mood with their own life choices. How about you? Here’s 10 quick ways to find yourself down and deflated:

1) Nurse Resentments

Assume the worst in people. When you feel ignored, misunderstood or mistreated, assume it’s because the person really hates you and is disgusted by your presence. Enter a cycle of hating yourself and hating other people. Repeat this script to yourself all day and night, and subject yourself to the mental equivalent of grabbing a shovel and digging your own grave.

2) Live in the Past

While you are busy nursing resentments, go ahead and let yourself think of all the other times the same thing has happened. Make sure you color a rosy glow over everything from the past you wish you still had, and a black cloud of doom over everything from the past that was painful. Create a story of extremes, and look for ways to repeat the cycle in your current life.

3) Ignore Your Body

Don’t listen to your body. If you feel tired, don’t rest. If you have an erratic sleep schedule, keep at it. Also, eat a lot of processed junk food that will shoot your blood sugar to the stratosphere and then send you crashing down without a parachute. Eat when you are stressed, stock up on caffeine when you are tired, and keep at it for more than three days in a row. When you feel run down, don’t listen. When you need to relieve stress by exercise, have a Red Bull instead.

If you want to be depressed, just go about this world as if you can be healthy without working at it at all.

4) Ignore Your Soul

Pretend you are a machine. Don’t think too hard about the junk you are feeding your soul, just assume that it all filters out and you aren’t affected by wasted time, sad love songs, boredom, stupid YouTube videos or sarcastic, misogynistic movies. Don’t take your soul seriously. Make sure you don’t read or listen to anything edifying throughout your day. Just go about this world as if you can be healthy without working at it at all.

5) Believe the Lie That Everyone Has It All Together ... Except You

Believe TV. Believe romantic comedies. Look around at your acquaintances and believe that their life is so much better than yours.

6) Become a Cynic

Start to believe the following things: people don’t change, life generally sucks and avoiding pain is more important than risking love.

7) Never Cry

Don’t ever show weakness. Don’t be sad. Don’t cry. If you ever think the dam is about to break, hold back the tears with all the strength you can muster. Completely ignore any reason why you might be crying, and if you do think about it for a few minutes, make sure you tell yourself that whatever loss or pain is causing you to be upset is definitely stupid and unimportant.

8) Never Apologize

Don’t ever admit to being wrong. Even when you know you are wrong, justify your reasons. Let your self-defense keep you puffed up and protected. Choose to guard yourself over loving the people around you who need to know that you are, in fact, human and make mistakes. Tell yourself that they’ll get over it, and carry on.

9) Maintain an Impossible Standard for Yourself and Everyone Else

Set yourself up for failure. Make sure you believe that everything you ever attempt must be a stellar success, that failure is not an option. Listen to the part of you that’s terrified at failing and will prevent you from ever trying anything, or listen to the part of you that believes you’ll always do it right, and try, fail and hate yourself. Expect the same from everyone around you. Expect those you love to always know what to say and to do to make you feel better. When they don’t, use the same self-loathing voices that you beat yourself with to push back.

I believe we all have our 10th way to get depressed, but it’s unique to you. Perhaps its about being with an unhealthy friendship that brings you down. Maybe it’s stalking someone on Facebook that you need to unfriend. Maybe it’s a phone number you need to delete from your phone.

Maybe you read through these steps and none of them sound good to you. In that case, take all 10 steps, reverse, and be healthy.

Free depression inventories can be a helpful tool to evaluate the severity of your mood. You can take this one developed by the Mayo Clinic for more information.

Part 2 - How Are We to Understand "Noah and the Flood?"

Noah's Ark (1846), a painting by the American folk painter Edward Hicks.

How should we interpret the Genesis flood account?

http://biologos.org/questions/genesis-flood

by Biologos.org

In a Nutshell

Genesis 6-9 tells the fascinating story of Noah, the Ark, and the Flood. Some Christians interpret the text to mean that the biblical flood must have covered the entire globe. They also work to explain the evidence in rocks and fossils in terms of this world-wide flood. Other Christians do not feel the text requires that the flood be global, but could have covered the small region of earth known to Noah. The scientific and historical evidence does not support a global flood, but is consistent with a catastrophic regional flood. Beyond its place in history, the Genesis flood teaches us about human depravity, faith, obedience, divine judgment, grace and mercy.

In Detail

"I will send rain on the earth forty days and forty nights; and I will blot out from the face of the land every living thing that I have made." — Genesis 7:4

Introduction

The Genesis Flood of Genesis 6-9 tells a fascinating story. Sometimes referred to as Noah and the Ark, it is a common fundamentalist claim that the biblical flood must have been a worldwide one, or else Scripture as a whole is undermined. From this point of view, the flood is often used in an attempt to account for the geologic column, which is otherwise seen as evidence of a very old Earth. However, a balanced interpretation of Scripture does not force the reader to believe that the Flood was a worldwide phenomenon. The scientific and historical evidence summarized below supports the idea that the flood was indeed catastrophic, but that it was local, recent and limited in scope. Beyond its place in history, the Genesis Flood is also a part of the greater narrative of the Bible. It highlights theological points concerning human depravity, faith, obedience, divine judgment, grace and mercy.¹

The History of “Flood Geology”

In the 19th century, a growing body of extrabiblical evidence began to undermine the traditional belief in a global flood. As early as the first half of the 19th century, geologists and theologians Edward Hitchcock, Hugh Miller and the Rev. John Pye Smith viewed this evidence not as a threat to faith, but as an occasion to reach a better understanding of Genesis.²

But in the 20th century, George McCready Price, a Seventh-day Adventist from Canada and self-taught amateur geologist, took a less compliant stance and began the modern flood geology movement, which ascribes many features of Earth’s present state to a recent, global flood. In his book The New Geology, published in 1923, Price explained the Christian fundamentalist perspective of geology, and he did so with such style and sophistication “that readers untrained in geology are generally unable to detect the flaws.”³ Others followed Price in the modern flood geology movement, including Byron Nelson, Harold Clark, Alfred M. Rehwinkel, John C. Whitcomb, and Henry M. Morris.

In the 1950s, Bernard Ramm, a baptist theologian and author of The Christian View of Science and Scripture, along with J. Laurence Kulp, a geologist and Plymouth Brethren member, critiqued Price’s book by pointing out critical errors and omissions.⁴ Ramm, Kulp and others encouraged the American Scientific Affiliation and other organizations not to support flood geology.⁵ In 1961, Young Earth Creationists Henry M. Morris and John C. Whitcomb, Jr. updated Price’s work by writing The Genesis Flood. This book argued that the creation of the Earth was relatively recent, and that the Fall of Man started the second law of thermodynamics. The book also claims that Noah’s Flood was global and produced most of the geological strata we see today. Many regard the work of Morris and Whitcomb to be a major foundational step in the development of modern day creation science, which has since gained a worldwide foothold.

Let us now consider the actual evidence for this position from both the Bible and from science.

A Local Flood

The language used in Genesis 6-9 does not insist that the flood was global.

First of all, the Hebrew kol erets, meaning whole Earth, can also be translated whole land in reference to local, not global, geography. The Old Testament scholar Gleason L. Archer explains that the Hebrew word erets is often translated as Earth in English translations of the Bible, when in reality it is also the word for land, as in the land of Israel.⁶ Archer explains that erets is used many times throughout the Old Testament to mean land and country. Furthermore, the term tebel, which translates to the whole expanse of the Earth, or the Earth as a whole, is not used in Genesis 6:17, nor in subsequent verses in Genesis 7 (7:4, 7:10, 7:17, 7:18, 7:19).⁷ If the intent of this passage was to indicate the entire expanse of the Earth, tebel would have been the more appropriate word choice. Consequently, the Hebrew text is more consistent with a local geography for the flood.

Moreover, in this period of history, people understood the whole Earth as a smaller geographical area. There is no evidence to suggest that people of this time had explored the far reaches of the globe or had any understanding of its scope. For example, the Babylonian Map of the World,⁸ the oldest known world map, depicts the world as two concentric circles containing sites of Assyria, Babylon, Bit Yakin, Urartu, a few other cities and geographic features all surrounded by ocean. There are also small, simple triangles that shoot out from the ocean labeled as nagu or uncharted regions.⁹ Contextual evidence also suggests that Greek geographers developed comparable maps during the middle of the first millennium, where Greece was positioned in the middle of a circle surrounded by oceans.¹⁰ These maps remind us that people were most familiar with the regions surrounding their homelands. Therefore, to say that something happened in the kol erets –– or referring to "all people" (Genesis 6:13), –– would have been an appropriate way of referring to the entirety of Earth and its population in a manner in which ancient Israelites would have been familiar. Davis A. Young, author of The Biblical Flood: A Case Study of the Church's Response to Extrabiblical Evidence, sums this up when he states:

"Given the frequency with which the Bible uses universal language to describe local events of great significance, such as the famine or the plagues in Egypt, is it unreasonable to suppose that the flood account uses hyperbolic language to describe an event that devastated or disrupted Mesopotamian civilization — that is to say, the whole world of the Semites?" ¹¹

Scientific Problems with a Universal Flood

There are a number of practical problems that conflict with the idea of a global flood.

First, a universal flood would have changed the topography of the land. For example, in the event of a worldwide flood, the Hidekkel, or Tigris, and Euphrates rivers of Genesis 2:14 would have disappeared under layers of flood-laid sedimentary rock.¹² Instead, the Euphrates is mentioned again in Genesis 15:18, and the Hidekkel is alluded to in Daniel 10:4. This suggests that the rivers’ integrity was maintained.¹³

Second, it would require an inordinate amount of water to flood the entire Earth. One popular explanation for this problem is that prior to the flood, the world was watered by mist from a global canopy of water vapor which then condensed, causing the first rains to flood the Earth (Genesis 2:5-6). However, this explanation is incongruent with archaeological evidence that concludes ancient Mesopotamia — the land of the Tigris and Euphrates — was “an extremely arid environment that necessitated the use of irrigation for successful agriculture.”¹⁴ Furthermore, the pressure necessary for the condensation of such a large quantity of water would have been fatal for all living creatures. In fact, a closer look at the Septuagint version of the Old Testament shows that the word for fountain was used in place of the word for mist. Some modern translations have used similar words like stream and spring.¹⁵ In either case, the water is said to have risen from the Earth, which makes it more likely that these terms were referring to irrigation canals.¹⁶ A similar terminology is used in reference to the flood (Genesis 7:11), where “fountains of the great deep burst open, and the floodgates of the sky were opened.” But when we look closely at the original Hebrew text and consider the use of the words fountains and deep in other passages, it is more likely that the fountains of the deep were also irrigation canals.¹⁷

Another supposition is that all animals and humans are derived from the survivors on Noah’s Ark. There are several problems with this idea. First of all, there is no way that the 2 million known species of animals could have fit onto the ark — not to mention the estimated 10 to 100 million species yet to be discovered. The dimensions of the Ark were 300 cubits by 50 cubits by 30 cubits (Genesis 6:15). At 18 inches per cubit, the Ark would have been 450 feet long, 75 feet wide and 45 feet tall. This was indeed a large ship by the standards of the time, but not nearly large enough to carry such a vast and varied cargo. Getting all of the animals to fit on the ark, along with the necessary food would not have been feasible. Some have argued that not all species were included, but only representatives of each type. Not only would this still represent an improbably great number of creatures, it would also require that the evolution of related species be drastically accelerated after the flood, in order to account for current diversity of species.

Finally, the migration of animals across mountains and oceans is quite difficult to explain. To make matters worse, there are no traces of animal ancestors along the proposed courses of migration. These are just a few of the many scientific problems with interpreting Genesis 6-9 as a truly universal flood. Efforts to find physical evidence of a global flood have failed. Even some of the most capable Christian researchers, including John Woodward, George Frederick Wright, William Buckland and Joseph Prestwich, all failed in their searches. Young states, “It is clear now that the evidence they were searching for simply does not exist.”¹⁸

The Location of the Flood

Assuming that the Flood was local, its location has not yet been precisely determined. Though excavation of flood deposits in Mesopotamia provides evidence of ancient flooding, there is no evidence that it is unambiguously the biblical flood. ¹⁹ Young writes:

"Nevertheless, the stratigraphy of some of the Mesopotamian flood deposits, literature pertaining to Gilgamesh and ancient Sumerian cities, the New Eastern setting of the biblical account, and the obvious affinities of the biblical and Mesopotamian flood traditions all converge to suggest that there may very well have been a catastrophic deluge in the Tigris and Euphrates River valleys that severely disrupted the civilization of that area — a civilization that represented the world to the biblical writer — and it may be that this is what the biblical story is all about."²⁰

Scholars still speculate about where a great flood may have occurred in the Near East. For example, in the 1990s Columbia University geologists William Ryan and Walter Pitman concluded that a massive local flood took place in the area we now know as the Black Sea. They theorized that when the Ice Age ended and glaciers melted, a wall of seawater surged from the Mediterranean into the Black Sea.²¹ This flood, which may have occurred around 5500 B.C., would fit into the Old Testament timeline of Noah’s Flood. Robert Ballard, famous for finding the Titanic, led a 1999 expedition with the hope of finding more evidence for this theory. The expedition revealed an ancient shoreline for the Black Sea, and after radiocarbon dating, the findings supported their hypothesis that a freshwater lake and surrounding manmade structures were in place before the flood. Conflicts with the Black Sea explanation do exist, however. For example, 5500 B.C. is too early for Noah to have used metal tools to create the ark, and the location of the Black Sea does not fit the Sumerian and Babylonian accounts of the flood, which strongly suggest that it took place in Mesopotamia.

The location of the flood remains mysterious and of continued interest to modern geologists.

Other Flood Stories

Many flood stories permeate mythology around the world. At one time these flood stories were thought to be evidence of a global flood; proof that its survivors carried the story with them from the Near East as they spread out around the globe.²² It is now clear, however, that the evidence for this claim is lacking.

Some of the most notable compilations of these stories were collected by James Strickling and Byron C. Nelson.²³ Strickling did a statistical analysis comparing 61 flood stories from around the world. After comparing their similarities and differences, he concluded that one family of eight people could not have populated the Earth after a worldwide flood catastrophe. In order to account for the many stories throughout the world, Strickling concludes, “Either catastrophic flooding of global or near-global dimensions occurred more than once, or there were more survivors of the Great Deluge than one crew, or both.”²⁴ In 1931 Nelson compiled more than 41 flood stories and found that despite their remarkable similarities, there were also striking differences. For example, only nine of the 41 stories mention the preservation of animals and only five mention that there was divine favor on those saved from the flood. ²⁵ With regard to these differences, geologist Dick Fischer writes, “However tempting it might be to attribute all those ancient stories to a one-time global catastrophe to conform with the traditional interpretation of the Genesis Flood, a literal reading of Genesis does not require it, and the unyielding revelations of nature and history disavow it.”²⁶

According to the Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible, the “Flood stories are almost entirely lacking in Africa, occur only occasionally in Europe, and are absent in many parts of Asia. They are widespread in America, Australia, and the islands of the Pacific.”²⁷ This evidence again raises concerns for the theory that flood stories have all spread from one original source.

Lessons of the Flood

Regardless of the details surrounding the event, there are significant theological lessons to be learned from the Flood narrative.²⁸ In the early church, Tertullian, Jerome, Ambrose, Cyril of Jerusalem, and Augustine understood the story of the flood to encourage moral conduct.²⁹ For example, Noah can also be used as an example of Christian perseverance, since he had great faith to build the Ark that God commanded (see James 5:11). Origen, Jerome, Augustine and others also employed other allegorical methods to illustrate Christian principles. ³⁰ Being conversant with other flood stories from ancient Mesopotamia as well as the general theology of Genesis will also help us understand the point of this story. The biblical flood is a response by God to the corruption of humanity, save Noah. The flood waters are not a random punishment, however, but an undoing of creation –– a return to the state of chaos that existed before God gave order (this is described in Genesis 1). The waters of chaos had been kept at bay by the firmament, the raqia, which is a solid dome above, and by the earth below. That is how Earth became habitable. When we read in Genesis 7:11 that the "fountains of the great deep burst open, and the floodgates of the sky were opened", it means that God is letting the barriers give way so that the waters of chaos can crash back down upon the Earth, thus making it uninhabitable again. In other words, God's intention in this story is to bring Earth back to its state of chaos and start over again, with a new "Adam" (Noah). We will read throughout scripture that God's plan of "starting over" will culminate in Jesus, the "last Adam." (1 Corinthians 15:45).

Conclusion

An informed reading of the Genesis story neither permits nor requires it to be a universal, global flood, and geology does not support a universal reading. A non-global interpretation does not undermine the lessons learned from the Genesis Flood account that are pertinent to the life of faith.

Part 1

How Are We to Understand "Noah and the Flood?"

http://relevancy22.blogspot.com/2012/07/noah-flood-creation-genesis.html

The Tongue

 

http://www.biblesolution.org/bible-verses-tongue.html

My heart overfloweth with a goodly matter; I speak the things which I have made touching the king: My tongue is the pen of a ready writer.~ Psalms 45:1

The Lord Jehovah hath given me the tongue of them that are taught, that I may know how to sustain with words him that is weary: he wakeneth morning by morning, he wakeneth mine ear to hear as they that are taught. ~Isaiah 50:4

Bible Verses Tongue - is Fire

My heart was hot within me; While I was musing the fire burned: [Then] spake I with my tongue:~ Psalms 39:3

And the tongue is a fire: the world of iniquity among our members is the tongue, which defileth the whole body, and setteth on fire the wheel of nature, and is set on fire by hell.~ James 3:6

Who have said, with our tongue will we prevail; Our lips are our own: who is lord over us? ~ Psalms 12:4

How to deal with your tongue

Keep thy tongue from evil, And thy lips from speaking guile. ~ Psalms 34:13

I said, I will take heed to my ways, That I sin not with my tongue: I will keep my mouth with a bridle, While the wicked is before me.~ Psalms 39:1

Let my tongue sing of thy word; For all thy commandments are righteousness. ~ Psalms 119:172

Whoso keepeth his mouth and his tongue Keepeth his soul from troubles.~ Proverbs 21:23

In the covert of thy presence wilt thou hide them from the plottings of man: Thou wilt keep them secretly in a pavilion from the strife of tongue. ~ Psalms 31:20

Bible Verses Tongue - Instrument of Praise

Then was our mouth filled with laughter, And our tongue with singing: Then said they among the nations, Jehovah hath done great things for them. ~ Psalms 126:2

Deliver me from bloodguiltiness, O God, thou God of my salvation; [And] my tongue shall sing aloud of thy righteousness.~ Psalms 51:14

I cried unto him with my mouth, And he was extolled with my tongue.~ Psalms 66:17

And my tongue shall talk of thy righteousness [And] of thy praise all the day long. ~ Psalms 35:28

Bible Verses Tongue - Instrument of truth

The lip of truth shall be established for ever; But a lying tongue is but for a moment. ~ Proverbs 12:19

The tongue of the righteous is [as] choice silver: The heart of the wicked is little worth. ~ Proverbs 10:20

Bible Verses Tongue - Wise Instrument

The tongue of the wise uttereth knowledge aright; But the mouth of fools poureth out folly. ~Proverbs 15:2

There is that speaketh rashly like the piercings of a sword; But the tongue of the wise is health.
~Proverbs 12:18

She openeth her mouth with wisdom; And the law of kindness is on her tongue. ~ Proverbs 31:26

Thy lips, O [my] bride, drop [as] the honeycomb: Honey and milk are under thy tongue; And the smell of thy garments is...

Bible Verses Tongue - Instrument of Life

A gentle tongue is a tree of life; But perverseness therein is a breaking of the spirit. ~ Proverbs 15:4

Death and life are in the power of the tongue; And they that love it shall eat the fruit thereof. ~ Proverbs 18:21

By long forbearing is a ruler persuaded, And a soft tongue breaketh the bone. ~ Proverbs 25:15

Bible Verses Tongue - Instrument of Justice

The mouth of the righteous talketh of wisdom, And his tongue speaketh justice. ~ Psalms 37:30

My tongue also shall talk of thy righteousness all the day long; For they are put to shame, for they are confounded, that seek my hurt. ~ Psalms 71:24

Bible Verses Tongue - Instrument of Violence

Destroy, O Lord, [and] divide their tongue; For I have seen violence and strife in the city. ~ Psalms 55:9

So they shall be made to stumble, their own tongue being against them: All that see them shall wag the head. ~ Psalms 64:8

Bible Verses Tongue - Instrument of Lying

For the mouth of the wicked and the mouth of deceit have they opened against me: They have spoken unto me with a lying tongue. ~ Psalms 109:2

The getting of treasures by a lying tongue Is a vapor driven to and fro by them that seek death.
~ Proverbs 21:6

Bible Verses Tongue - Instrument of mischief and Perversion

His mouth is full of cursing and deceit and oppression: Under his tongue is mischief and iniquity.~ Psalms 10:7

An evil-doer giveth heed to wicked lips; [And] a liar giveth ear to a mischievous tongue. ~ Proverbs 17:4

He that hath a wayward heart findeth no good; And he that hath a perverse tongue falleth into mischief. ~ Proverbs 17:20

The north wind bringeth forth rain: So doth a backbiting tongue an angry countenance. ~ Proverbs 25:23

They have set their mouth in the heavens, And their tongue walketh through the earth. ~ Psalms 73:9

Bible Verses Tongue - Instrument of provocation

For Jerusalem is ruined, and Judah is fallen; because their tongue and their doings are against Jehovah, to provoke the eyes of his glory . ~ Isaiah 3:8

For your hands are defiled with blood, and your fingers with iniquity; your lips have spoken lies, your tongue muttereth wickedness. ~ Isaiah 59:3

Bible Verses Tongue - Instrument of War

They have sharpened their tongue like a serpent; Adders` poison is under their lips. Selah ~ Psalms 140:3

In the covert of thy presence wilt thou hide them from the plottings of man: Thou wilt keep them secretly in a pavilion from the strife of tongue. ~ Psalms 31:20

Who have whet their tongue like a sword, And have aimed their arrows, even bitter words, ~ Psalms 64:3

My soul is among lions; I lie among them that are set on fire, Even the sons of men, whose teeth are spears and arrows, And their tongue a sharp sword. ~ Psalms 57:4

And they bend their tongue, [as it were] their bow, for falsehood; and they are grown strong in the land, but not for truth: for they proceed from evil to evil, and they know not me, saith Jehovah. ~ Jeremiah 9:3

Then said they, Come, and let us devise devices against Jeremiah; for the law shall not perish from the priest, nor counsel from the wise, nor the word from the prophet. Come, and let us smite him with the tongue, and let us not give heed to any of his words. ~ Jeremiah 18:18

No weapon that is formed against thee shall prosper; and every tongue that shall rise against thee in judgment thou shalt condemn. This is the heritage of the servants of Jehovah, and their righteousness which is of me, saith Jehovah. ~ Isaiah 54:17

Bible Verses Tongue - As Instrument of deception

Deliver my soul, O Jehovah, from lying lips, [And] from a deceitful tongue. ~ Psalms 120:2

Their tongue is a deadly arrow; it speaketh deceit: one speaketh peaceably to his neighbor with his mouth, but in his heart he layeth wait for him. ~ Jeremiah 9:8

For the rich men thereof are full of violence, and the inhabitants thereof have spoken lies, and their tongue is deceitful in their mouth. ~ Micah 6:12

The remnant of Israel shall not do iniquity, nor speak lies; neither shall a deceitful tongue be found in their mouth; for they shall feed and lie down, and none shall make them afraid. ~ Zephaniah 3:13