The fight for the souls of our Youth.

[Ooberman]

I was listening to a Xian podcast (Apologetics.com):

Youth & Culture: Introducing Them To Abundant Living

Author: Harry Edwards, Jeremy Livermore, Sara Roberts Author: &Author: Sam Welbaum
Mon, Jul 26, 2010


A recent Barna survey reported that the younger generation today was more than twice as likely as all other adults to engage in behaviors considered morally inappropriate by traditional standards. For example, two-thirds of the under 25 year old segment (65%) of the population had used profanity in public, compared to just one out of five Boomers (19%). The younger group, known as Mosaics, was nine times more likely than were Boomers to have engaged in sex outside of marriage (38% vs. 4%), six times more likely to have lied (37% vs. 6%), almost three times more likely to have gotten drunk (25% vs. 9%) and to have gossiped (26% vs. 10%), and twice as likely as Boomers to have observed pornography (33% vs. 16%) and to have engaged in acts of retaliation (12% vs. 5%).

Without question, our young people today face enormous challenges as it redefines what it means to do the right thing in their own lives. Unfortunately it appears these challenges are met with little resistance. Listen as we explore some of the causes of moral decline among the youth and discuss practical ways to overcome them. Hosting the show is Harry Edwards with special guests Sara Roberts, Sam Welbaum and Jeremy Livermore.

http://www.learnoutloud.com/podcaststre ... itle=20072

I can't type fast enough to tell you how amazed I was at how out-of-touch Xianity and evangelic Xians are with respect to the modern age and youth in general.

There is such a rift that I can see why the Youth are running from Xianity.


For one, they were technophobes and talked about the amazing technology kids use today with disdain - wow, way to endear yourself to the Renaissance Fair group! I'm sure they make up a huge segment of the population!


But the worst part was how they talked about the youth being immoral (all the time ignoring they are basing their idea of morality on 2000 year old social mores that included some really ugly ideas: homophobia, etc.

Then they railed on the youth for being egotistical and narssistic. to the point that one youth leader took a poll of her kids and they scored a 19 on a narsisitc scale, when the average is 15.

She said this showed how vain kids were and how they need to be brought down a peg! The whole tenor was "these kids don't know whats good for them - feeling good about themselves is bad - they need to humble themselves before the archaic and incomprehensible rules of Jesus...."

At first I thought, oh, these people want to help lessen drug use and teen-pregnancy, but it simply switched into "They don't follow Jesus properly, they don't want to, they are vain, they have all that high-falootin technology".

Xianity does this: it tells you over and over again that you are wretched, but then when they are about to lose you, they say - oh, but in God's eye you are special.

They don't think that telling someone the Creator of the Universe is interested in them would increase their good feelings about themselves! In fact, isn't that what they claim: that when they found Jesus they felt good about themselves?

But then they have a person responsble for bringing up kids this is bad?!?!?!? That is horrible.


I'm still listening to it and it is starting to make me sick.. There are so many stupid Xians that feel they are capable of talking to kids and forming their minds and then they rail on kids?

One guy said, "Oh, yeah, and there's that AD, uh, Attention, uh disorder.."

DUDE! if you don't even know what it is called STFU and don't talk about it!

I'm sick of these morons who don't know a damn thing other than the standard company line of Xian manipulation and think they are qualified to lead children.

It's very disturbing.

I am going to finish listening to this and hope that I understand their sick methods better so I can help destroy this horrible manipulation - of children no less!

To listen to them talk about their method of attracting kids to the church is grotesque.


Anyhow, has anyone else heard this kid of slop from the Xian youth group leaders?

[GrumpyMrGruff]

Anyhow, has anyone else heard this kid of slop [degenerate-youth, reactionary policies, Luddism, etc.] from the Xian youth group leaders?

Not specifically from youth group leaders. In my experience, youth group leaders are often among the more dynamic (if not actually progressive) evangelists I've met. At least the successful ones that attract large followings. More conservative youth leaders will still attract some teenagers (often those who are already religious from family influence or those looking for stability and routine).

Your post reminded me of the book The Outsider Interviews. This book is by Christians and aimed at Christians and it discusses interactions with the twenty-something crowd rather than teens. It suggests "genuinely" befriending outsiders rather than viewing them as potential converts. (Sadly, the implication is that this behavior will help convert them later.) I picked it up after Hemant Mehta at the Friendly Atheist wrote a synopsis.

That book discusses the disconnect between many evangelicals' sanctimonious attitude toward church "outsiders" ('those unsaved heathens!') and scriptural attitudes toward nonChristians. Though the book doesn't focus solely on inter-generational stereotyping, many of the negative attitudes mentioned in the book are present in this podcast.

The book is accompanied by a DVD of non-confrontational, non-proselytizing interviews between the Christian authors and some representative outsiders. You might try to find those video clips online (I only see trailers on YouTube). The outsiders make some insightful comments by answering the opposite of the question asked in the podcast: Not "What is wrong with youth culture today," but "What is wrong with Christian attitudes toward modern culture?"

This blog compiles a list of outsider responses to this question. The perceptions of Christians don't look to great. I'd like to see Barna expand on the perception of Christianity in a controlled survey. In the meantime, this blog post has some interesting statistics (if they're accurate).

[Ooberman]

Thanks for the post - i felt mine was a little undirected, but you narrowed in on the points I was really interested in. Also, great info.

I never knew there was such a discrepency in perception and the actual.

The last link is really interesting:

How Christianity is Perceived

Non-Christians aged 16-29 years old were asked, “What is your current perception of Christianity?�

* 91% said antihomosexual
* 87% said judgmental
* 85% said hypocritical
* 78% said old-fashioned
* 75% said too involved in politics
* 72% said out of touch with reality
* 70% said insensitive to others

Present-day Christianity is no longer like Jesus intended.

84% of non-Christians are friends with Christians, but 15% say the lifestyle of the Christians they know is not different.

The Truth About Christians

The top priority of Christians is not to sin, etc.

* 40% (roughly) of Christians want to see homosexual teachers fired from schools
* 40% (roughly) of Christians would rather support cancer research than AIDS research

We are much clearer with the sin of homosexuality than we are with the sin of divorce, but only 1% of Christians have prayed to address what they believe is the problem with homosexuality.

It is not us versus them but us versus us.

Matthew 23:13 (The Message)

I’ve had it with you! You’re hopeless, you religion scholars, you Pharisees! Frauds! Your lives are roadblocks to God’s kingdom. You refuse to enter, and won’t let anyone else in either.

Hypocrites hurt the gospel.

The Truth About Non-Christians

* 80% (roughly) of non-Christians have attended a church for 3 months in their life
* 50% (roughly) of non-Christians have considered becoming a Christian

Many decided against Christianity because of their experiences in church. We are losing Christianity’s attraction in our culture.

Among Non-Christians Aged 16-29

* 3% have a favorable view of evangelicals
* 33% have a favorable view of homosexuals

Among Non-Christian Baby Boomers (born between ‘46 & ‘64)

* 25% have a favorable view of evangelicals
* 13% have a favorable view of homosexuals

Among Non-Christian Elders (born before ‘46)

* 27% have a favorable view of evangelicals
* 11% have a favorable view of homosexuals

What Churches Need to Do

Unfortunately, many churches are creating an arrogant image. Do we forget that it was God’s kindness that saved us? Instead of focusing on flaws, focus on potential.

The church needs to stop being “in your face� and start focusing on service, sacrifice, humility, and grace.

I have brought up some of these issues to Xians, but they have responded as if there is no problem and there is a unified front.

There are encouraging trends - I hope they continue.

[GrumpyMrGruff]

I have brought up some of these issues to Xians, but they have responded as if there is no problem and there is a unified front.

There are encouraging trends - I hope they continue.

Some Christians (wherever they may fall on various religious/social conservative-progressive spectra) seem to forget that vocal minorities have a disproportionate effect on outsiders' perceptions of Christians.

Often those vocal Christian minorities place emphasis on decrees like Romans 12:2 ("And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.") and purposely set themselves apart from their larger society. For good or ill, this nonconformity (sometimes accompanied by a sanctimonious attitude) enters the public consciousness as an attribute of all Christians. Just look at that list I previously posted. It's a compilation of atheists' stereotypes about Christians. Population statistics suggest that the majority of people an "average US atheist" meets in a day will be Christian. Clearly, most aren't morally superior Biblical literalists who want to stone gays and atheists. The stereotypes come from interactions with vocal minorities and color all Christians negatively.

Some Christians are certainly aware of this trend. The Barna Group is a good example. Their reports often contain interesting religious stats on different demographics and usually have comments about improving Christianity's PR. I may yet pick up unChristian, the book from which Kinnaman's blog statistics are culled. From what I gather, these Barna findings were never collated in a single report outside of that book.

Other Christians might not be aware of these extreme positions (or assume that their proponents aren't "True Christians"). Either way, they may fail to realize the impact the minorities have on public perception when they discuss Christians as presenting a "unified front" in the larger culture.

Though evangelism is often conflated with conservative fundamentalism (perhaps because fundamentalist evangelists are disproportionately vocal), it's interesting that some of the more successful evangelical pastors promoted progressive social interpretations of the Bible. William Wilberforce (when he wasn't threatening hellfire) was a proponent of the abolitionist movement in England. Billy Graham may seem dated and moralistic these days, but he was a proponent of civil rights in the 1960s. The prevailing stereotype of social conservatism in Christianity isn't as accurate as many outsiders (or conservative Christians) assume.

Though the podcast was targeted at all youth, parents, pastors, etc., it's audience will likely be self-selected for people who already agree with its message and with passages like Romans 12:2. Confirmation bias in action. You stuck with it to the end, but I suspect that most people who disagree with the message would simply stop listening.

In general, I don't think Christians are as out-of-touch as public perception suggests. Even if this is the case, however, it doesn't stop younger individuals (who are typically a more progressive demographic) from believing popular perception and leaving/ignoring Christianity.

[Choir Loft]

Xianity does this: it tells you over and over again that you are wretched, but then when they are about to lose you, they say - oh, but in God's eye you are special.

The standard method for inducting new members into a group which requires complete allegiance is to reduce the self-image to zero. After the inductee is persuaded that his way is wrong it is easier to impress that person with new ways.

This is the most efficient and time honored method for training. The military has used this sort of thing for centuries as for example, "there is the right way and the wrong way, and there is the army way". There is nothing unusual unique or dishonorable about it. Mostly it works and that's why it's used.

With regard to Christianity, there is a spiritual component much deeper than simple induction into a social group and it's belief system. When Jesus said that you can't pour new wine into old wine skins, that is essentially the method He was referring to.

They don't think that telling someone the Creator of the Universe is interested in them would increase their good feelings about themselves! In fact, isn't that what they claim: that when they found Jesus they felt good about themselves?

I must confess at this point that I am not familiar with the context of the church methodology that you are writing about. If I am out of order in this response, please let me know.

Without referring directly to the methods you examine, I can say that in a setting where life is much harder on a man than a need for selfconfidence Christianity provides a solution to a great need. I'm talking about real needs and real situations where people are in desparate need of direction and help. For example, a drug addict is in desparate need of something much more than good feelings. He's already got that in abundance, for a price of course. The addict needs a whole new life, if only he can grab onto it.....and only if he's really motivated to do so.

To listen to them talk about their method of attracting kids to the church is grotesque.

Anyhow, has anyone else heard this kid of slop from the Xian youth group leaders?

Again, I am not acquainted with the rubbish you are so opposed to. You make me reluctant to research the subject. It doesn't sound very palatable.

It's been my experience that the church isn't making ANY serious effort to attract young people OR older ones. Statistics on church attendance provide clues that indicate church leaders are only interested in developing real estate/mega churchs and not in building lives. Some of them do put on a good show on Sunday morning.

If you're looking for good cheap live entertainment and you aren't particular about a boring sermon, that's the ticket (you can always walk out on the speaker, THAT sends a message). Geez wouldn't it be cool if a couple dozen people stood up and walked out on a lousey sermon? Sort of an anti-sermon flash mob. hahahahaha

I can't really find much to argue against in your post. It paints a sad picture really and shows the condition of leadership lacking in basic goals.

I wish it were otherwise.

[amptramp]

Pull aside the sanctimony and check the motivation of evangelicals, which can be expressed in one phrase: maintaining status quo patterns of earthly dominance and submission. If you, as a preacher, preach "spare the rod and spoil the child", you will be rich because family patriarchs and matriarchs will pay good money for justification of oppressing their children. The family values I grew up with were secrecy and violence, but nothing like the violence my wife saw when she worked at the Childrens' Aid Society of Metropolitan Toronto. She got the letters everyone else was afraid to open from the coroner with the 8x10 colour glossies inside of a kid beaten until he was the colour of an eggplant. This occurred pretty much once a month. That's family values.

Anytime a politician talks about family values, my first gut instinct is destroy him before he makes it happen.

Evangelicals dislike technology because it enables people to find out things for themselves rather than hang on every word spoken by the minister. The evangelical bias against sex education is another issue - the results are that an objective sex education reduces unwanted pregnancies. But they don't want education, they want dominance. Forget that the age of puberty was 17 ro 18 in ancient times and 13 at my age and somewhat lower now. In Jesus' time, there was little sexual frustration - by the time you wanted it, you were ready. Now, children are being told to go through a decade of sexual frustration because the evangelicals want power over their children rather than what's good for them.

Could you imagine what would happen if parents were required to give sex education to their children? The same as if the auditor of a company was also an employee. The kid asks a question and THWAP! a fist to the side of the head. Or, "You want to know about that? That's it! You are grounded!" Or the lies: if you keep doing that, you are going to go blind.

My parents blew the trust fuse long ago. Not that they were the worst or even worse than average - but I never felt safe there. There was nothing i could discuss with them. Churches require you to check your brains at the door. Just a continuation of the status quo.

[Choir Loft]

Anytime a politician talks about family values, my first gut instinct is destroy him before he makes it happen.

Evangelicals dislike technology because it enables people to find out things for themselves rather than hang on every word spoken by the minister.

The evangelical bias against sex education is another issue - the results are that an objective sex education reduces unwanted pregnancies.

But they don't want education, they want dominance. Forget that the age of puberty was 17 ro 18 in ancient times and 13 at my age and somewhat lower now. In Jesus' time, there was little sexual frustration - by the time you wanted it, you were ready. Now, children are being told to go through a decade of sexual frustration because the evangelicals want power over their children rather than what's good for them.

I can't believe that you are expressing the desire to murder someone on these pages and no moderator is intervening. What sort of remark is considered a violation here anyway? Your answer to political disagreement is to kill someone? I think you need a really good doctor and a whole series of therapy treatments including some medications to help you quiet down.

Do the "evangelicals" want power over someone's privates? I see more (TSA) government fondling of those packages than all other groups combined. Teen pregnancy destroys the family. How the family goes, so goes the community and the nation. The teen boy who is part of the sex, where is he? He's probably gone somewhere. The girl is left to deal with it as best she can and guess who pays for it? THE COMMUNITY. In Biblical times teens were adults. They married and fulfilled their responsibility to each other and to the community. Anybody can make a baby. It takes a responsible adult to raise one. The fact that so many 'play the system' in the name of irresponsibility and poverty is one reason why this nation is in such big trouble.

I know of MANY folk who are NOT religious and who hate having to pay for slackers and parasites who suck public money just to 'play the system'. Yet you accuse Christians of wrong doing. Your bigoted scribblings have no basis in reality. The fact that you publicly state your desires to murder someone for their political beliefs is proof that you are deranged and that the moderators of this site encourage that sort of expression.

Christians hate technology? Christians are somehow keeping the rest of humanity from using it? Are you nuts?

Show by any method or rule or statement of fact that this is remotely true. Your technological tangential remark is completely unfounded and proves nothing except that you are a religious bigot and an ignorant one at that. I know of no Christian that is opposed to technology. Even the Amish use it where practical. Technology fails us every day in one way or another. Is that any reason to place guilt upon a particular group of people? Do you also wish to murder a Christian when your refrigerator defrosts all your food?


Murder for any reason is never justified, yet the moderators here seem to think it passes for entertainment. Personally, I find your remarks disgusting and irresponsible in the extreme. They are completely lacking in truth and are rotten with the stench of bigotry and violence.

but that's just me hollering from the choir loft...

[otseng]

Anytime a politician talks about family values, my first gut instinct is destroy him before he makes it happen.

I can't believe that you are expressing the desire to murder someone on these pages and no moderator is intervening.

Moderator Comment

RichardP, before you go to the conclusion that someone is actually condoning murder, it's better to ask for clarification. From how I read it, he did qualify it with "first gut instinct", so I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt.

Amptramp, it's fine to be honest, but it should also be tempered with the principles of this forum of civility and respect. If you actually do condone violence, it's better left unsaid. If you do not, then it's best to clarify your position so that others do not interpret your statement incorrectly.

Please review the Rules.


______________

Moderator comments do not count as a strike against any posters. They only serve as an acknowledgment that a post report has been received, but has not been judged to warrant a moderator warning against a particular poster.

[RobertUrbanek]

Even if you discount sexual morality, the survey still found that younger people were six times more likely to have lied (37% vs. 6%) and twice as likely as Boomers to have engaged in acts of retaliation (12% vs. 5%).

America is on the Highway to Hell, be it a secular or spiritual version.

[amptramp]

RichardP and otseng, thank you both for your comments, and in this case, the moderator is correct, I do not condone killing anyone because of their beliefs. My "gut reaction" is the same sort of panic I would have if I found a black widow spider carwling up my arm. I meant no uncivility or disrespect for anyone and I apologize for any misconception that it was intentional.

I once was in an evangelical church, so I am speaking from the inside, not the outside. One of our exercises conducted during one Saturday was to put all the men into one group to teach them how to dominate the family (they used the word "lead" the family) and another group of wives to learn how to be submissive. This was the fundamental motivation of the church - to enforce Biblical patterns of dominance and submission (although they stopped short of endorsing slavery).

The even darker side to dominance and submission came from my wife's work at the Childrens' Aid Society of Metropolitan Toronto. Their findings were that child sexual abuse was slightly more prevalent in families church elders. Having known one person for whom that was undeniably true (not myself in case that is what you are thinking) and three other "probables" and knowing that abuse comes from a desire for dominance, I will stand by that particular belief: evangelicals are driven by a desire for power.

I will address your other points once my spyware software gives me back complete control (and dominace over) my computer.