Jesus Creed

Jesus Creed


iGens 1

posted by Scot McKnight

Twenge.jpgWhen it comes to grasping the big picture of what is doing on in culture, the single-most important book I have read in the last thirty years is Robert Bellah’s famous Habits of the Heart: Individualism and Commitment in American Life
. (Robert Putnam’s Bowling Alone : The Collapse and Revival of American Community
came next.)

But I have to put next to Bellah’s book the devastatingly insightful Generation Me: Why Today’s Young Americans Are More Confident, Assertive, Entitled–and More Miserable Than Ever Before
by Jean Twenge. I spend my time reading this in two poses: totally engulfed in what she says and staring into space pondering the implications of her conclusions.

I believe every parent, every youth pastor, every college professor, and every pastor ought to buy this book, read it, and then hold a series of conversations with others about (1) what it says and (2) what we can do to change the course of culture. This book is that important.


It is fashionable for 40 somethings and 50 somethings and 60 somethings and up to 90 somethings to decry the condition of our youth. So, it would be a complete mistake to read this book looking for ammunition to judge the 20somethings and 30somethings. By the way, iGens are 18-35 yr olds. One of Twenge’s observations is that the Boomers, formerly called the Me Generation, produced iGens or Generation Me. What we did is what iGens will do — only they’ll probably ramp it up some and that’s not good.

Twenge could have done some scolding of Boomers and could have done some figuring out what to do about the problems we’ve got, but her approach is to describe and decry. And she does this very, very well … and that’s all we need in order to create a conversation.

Here’s why this book is so signfiicant: Twenge and her associates have done longitudinal studies on tests taken for the last forty or fifty years and she has been able to observe major trends and shifts in such things as self-perceptions. And the results are showing increases in self-importance, leading not only to self-esteem but also narcissism. Here is her major conclusion:

iGens “speak the language of the self as their native tongue. The individual has always come first, and feeling good about yourself has always been a primary virtue” (2). But it is also a time of “soaring expectations and crushing realities.”

She also thinks when you were born may have more influence than the family who reared you. (She uses “raised” but I don’t.)

“GenMe is not self-absorbed: we’re self-important” (4). She’s one of them. This is not the same as spoiled or selfish.

One more: “we enjoy unprecedented freedom to pursue what makes us happy” (5).

Can’t resist; she quotes her mom: “In the early 1960s, most people would have said the most important things were being honest, hardworking, industrious, loyal, and caring about others. I can’t even remember thinking about whether I was ‘happy’. That’s not to say we weren’t happy — we just didn’t focus on it.” Then she quotes an iGen: “I just try to do whatever will make me happier, and think of myself first” (11). The two quotes express the central theses of Twenge.

This stuff is alarming. It’s our world. What can we do?



Advertisement
Comments read comments(30)
post a comment
Aaron

posted February 6, 2009 at 12:20 am


I am a youth pastor and I am going to read this book – I have a hunch I will be nodding in agreement with a lot of what this book is saying…



report abuse
 

Tom

posted February 6, 2009 at 1:40 am


Habits of the Heart is wonderful.
It’s also a very helpful primer for folks interested in understanding what motivates serious and inspiring Americans inside and outside the righteous nest.
Speaking as a recovering fundamentalist (evangelical), I highly recommend it.
And as I’ve mentioned here before, I’m all in with those who want to see ‘happiness’ downgraded. The bible promises joy and meaning at every turn to those who get with God but I’m not sure happiness–in our current conventional way of talking about it–gets a lot of verse space.
Re the rest of the post, in spite of your early disclaimers it seemed like pretty standard conservative fair.
‘Mom and dad got it. We didn’t get it and now our kids are suffering for lack of it.’
Ho hum :^)



report abuse
 

RJS

posted February 6, 2009 at 6:44 am


Tom,
I don’t think that “Mom and Dad” got it, neither did we, and our kids are not either. There is no golden age to look back to.
But there is change and difference in focus or attitude. What Bellah and his coauthors, and it appears now Twenge, see is a movement in culture. It is useful to look at and think about such movement.
But here is an interesting question – does our current emphasis on equal rights, nascent willingness to look at people beyond race for example – also come out of this same individualistic trend?
Does the success in civil rights movements go hand in hand with the fact that we no longer put “group” first?



report abuse
 

Scot McKnight

posted February 6, 2009 at 8:27 am


Tom,
It’s little more than dismissive to say what you do about “mom and dad.” I’ve not seen any of that in this book; she’s measuring change over time, and not judging who got it right. Here’s the oddities: (1) you’ve not read the book yet dismiss it as pablum; (2) you like Bellah and don’t like her. I suggest you read it.
RJS, she uses that mom and dad comment to compare change over time. She doesn’t think mom and dad got it right, except perhaps in some ways — more committed to community, etc. (An old theme from Bellah and Putnam.)
On diversity and multiculturalism, I don’t think this derives from GenMe’ers but from the Me Generation and, even more, from courageous leaders like ML King Jr.



report abuse
 

Chad Hall

posted February 6, 2009 at 9:25 am


Looks like a great read. Thanks for putting it on the radar, Scot.
I cannot resist noting the irony (I guess it would be irony) that the book is an expression of it findings: iGens find iGens so interesting, that iGens write entire books on how interesting iGens find iGens.
On another note… it seems (just from your review) that the iGen twin traits of inclusion/tolerance prevents Twenge from making any good-bad conclusions (at least from making them consciously). Thinking about the book as an expression of iGen, I will read the book looking for underlying signals from Twenge about what she deems right and wrong as the basis for true values among the generation that comes after me by only a few years.



report abuse
 

Bob

posted February 6, 2009 at 10:05 am


The iGen with their self inflicted body piercings and the pain that goes along with that is a way to feel important in a nihilistic age. They still long for love and meaning



report abuse
 

ChrisB

posted February 6, 2009 at 10:06 am


First, life is much better w/o the capchas. Thanks.
Anyway, this is something the church needs to discuss for more than one reason.
If this generation focuses first and foremost on what makes them feel good … well, the gospel doesn’t make you feel good. It requires facing the fact that you’re filthy with sin and stand guilty before God.
Yes, it gets better (in ways) after that, but not until you come face to face with this truth.
If we raise our kids in this mindset, they’ll have some of the same struggles those raised outside the church will.



report abuse
 

Michael W. Kruse

posted February 6, 2009 at 10:22 am


I’ll be interested to read the book. The extreme atomization of society strikes me as the final stop on the path of modernism. That is why books like this make me question whether we are truly in a postmodern era. Rather we are in a hyper-modern era. Thanks for the heads-up.



report abuse
 

Eric

posted February 6, 2009 at 10:33 am


Does Twenge get into the positive changes within IGen (in comparison to older generations like boomers)? From my experience, and from reading other sources, I think that IGen’ers are more inclined to strike a healthy work-life balance, are less materialistic, more humble and less judgmental, more likely to resist either-or thinking and more likely to embrace dynamic tension. Some of these positive things have the same root cause as some of the negative stereotypes identified above. I haven’t read Twenge’s book, and the description of what she has said above necessarily needs to be short, but I think the issues are much more nuanced than saying that IGen’ers are “self important.”
Has anyone else seen CT’s editorial this month titled “Who Do You Think You Are?” — it partly deals with the issue of why younger folks are leaving churches in droves. I found it offensive. My offense starts with the title. I’ve heard older folks say “Who Do You Think You Are” a fair amount (I’m 36), and its always a put down. (Although I understand there is a secondary meaning in the title of this particular article, the historical-put-down-nature of this saying is there too, obviously). The editorial also suggests things such as young folks are willing to leave the church at the drop of the hat because they have no commitment, and that what we really need to fix the problem is a better way to teach them systematics and doctrine.
Whatever the right answers are (and I’d suggest that CT’s answer is not only wrong, but itself a symptom of the problem), I get concerned that the dialogue on these issues isn’t healthy. Older folks like to throw stones and stereotype. Which leads younger folks to stereotype the older folks, and stop listening to them. Perhaps a more balanced way of looking at the cultural changes could help the unhealthy dynamic.
Here is a bit of stereotyping of my own: I have met very, very few boomers who I could consider a viable mentor (I’ve been looking for one for about 25 years). Part of the problem is the attitude described above. Its: I have all the answers, and your job is to listen and learn, and not question or engage in dialogue. I think this sort of attitude among many in the older generations is a significant cause of the (positive and negative) traits of IGen decribed above.
If we want a constructive solution, we all — boomers and IGen’ers alike — need to get past this.



report abuse
 

Erik Leafblad

posted February 6, 2009 at 10:51 am


I think Eric’s post (#9) is very suggestive. I too tend to find the label “self-important” a bit overly pejorative. There are certainly segments of the so-called Igen population that are bent towards me-ism, but that same notion of self-importance is likely responsible for the vast numbers of young people that are giving their lives to fight on behalf of justice in the world. They actually believe they can make a difference. They actually dream dreams and think those dreams can come to pass, and that they can be a major part of that. This is what continues to inspire me as I work with young people. Cynicism calls that self-importance. Faith and hope calls it vision.
BTW, that’s not a rebuttal of the book, but perhaps just some needed grains of salt in the conversation.



report abuse
 

RJS

posted February 6, 2009 at 10:55 am


Eric and Scot,
My rather cryptic suggestion that civil rights and the problems of individualism go hand in hand agrees in part with what Eric says. I think that the good and bad of individualism (and it seems to me that Twenge is describing the next generation of individualism, although I have not yet read the book) is both lack of commitment and lack of defined identity as part of a bounded group.
But Eric – your description in the penultimate paragraph is exactly the discussion of the 60′s early 70′s all over again. Go back and watch “Mod Squad” (it is on retro TV in places). I actually think that this is a strong indication that we all (young and old) need to learn the art of conversation – and it is a learned skill, essential for mentoring among other things.



report abuse
 

Scot McKnight

posted February 6, 2009 at 11:05 am


Chad,
I think I said she’s a bit relentless; I can live with that as long as she keeps giving us facts and reliable results on the basis of longitudinal studies. She does that.
Twenge is iGen but has a bit of the mindset of a Boomer, but I can live with that too because this book is not advocacy of a moral program but is instead mostly descriptive of what is going on. We need that.
ChrisB,
She could have done more finger pointing at Me Gens/Boomers. That’s obvious in reading her book and that means something we have to deal with.
Eric,
Not seen the CT piece. I know this: teaching the old stuff harder and more relentlessly is not the way to make the changes because the audience has changed. This requires starting in a different place.



report abuse
 

Randy

posted February 6, 2009 at 11:40 am


The focus of the iGens on themselves reminds me of a previous book about another self-focused generation: Christopher Lasch’s “The Culture of Narcissim.”
Actually I just returned from the Calvin Worship Symposium at Calvin College. We spent an entire day in a seminar on the Emerging Church. Jamie Smith, Kevin Cocoran, Peter Rollins and Jason Clark were panelists.
Jamie raised the positives of the Emerging Church: Less materialism, social concerns, care for environment, critique of old political evangelicalism, etc. But he also asked whether they are merely doing and becoming “the next big thing.” This is where this analysis of the “Me Generation” concerns me. Are they doing more than just consuming in hyper-modernism. And what will this mean in the emerging new economic context?
Peace,
Randy



report abuse
 

ChrisB

posted February 6, 2009 at 12:01 pm


Eric & Erik,
“Self-important” is probably not the right word so much as self-centered.
It’s not thinking that you’re more important than everyone else. It’s not even thinking about anyone else.
It’s not just this generation, either; it’s becoming the dominant American mode. We’ve taught people that they are the center of their universe. We’re born that way, but people used to grow out of it.



report abuse
 

Jim Martin

posted February 6, 2009 at 12:35 pm


Scot,
I actually started reading this book sometime around Christmas. You are right. This is an important book and will be helpful to anyone who ministers to this age group, either directly or indirectly.
The final two quote of your post really do sum up the book.



report abuse
 

Eric

posted February 6, 2009 at 1:17 pm


ChrisB,
Erik’s (#10) post demonstrates that this is not an issue of IGen being self centered. If they are not concerned about others, then why do they put more of an emphasis on fighting on behalf of the marginalized than boomers have? I have noticed this myself among those in the 20-30 age range, and others have written about it.
I also think that sometimes boomers misperceive IGen motivation, and misinterpret it as self centeredness. For example, in my profession, senior lawyers will often say that younger lawyers are not willing to put in as many hours and work as hard as lawyers used to, and they interpret this as a “me” focus. In reality, I think it is a recognition among younger folks that life is about more than just our careers and seeing how much money we can make.
Again, the issues are much more complex than just saying that the younger generation is “self centered” or “self important.” We need to move beyond simplistic stereotypes, of either boomers or IGens.



report abuse
 

Michael W. Kruse

posted February 6, 2009 at 1:28 pm


Randy #13
“Jamie raised the positives of the Emerging Church: Less materialism, social concerns, care for environment, critique of old political evangelicalism, etc. But he also asked whether they are merely doing and becoming “the next big thing.”"
I think this is a good question. I don’t want to overstate my case here but I perceive that much of the social justice and environmental action stuff is actually self-centered. Identification with these causes is a way of putting forth an identity and developing community. The enormously hard trade-off questions involved in these issues are trampled under idealistic banter and group solidarity. We become consumers of activism.
I was reading today in Bill Bishop’s “The Big Sort” about how politics used to be about consensus and coalition building. Throughout the last half century we have moved to lifestyle market segmentation in politics where we appeal to, and intensify, a market segment’s values. Then we market our candidate, party, or cause to that market instead of calling for a consensus. The justice causes fill a felt-need for a market that has soured on the identity products conservative marketers were selling. “The poor” become objectified and the actual consequences of our actions are peripheral to the “identity product” we are consuming.



report abuse
 

Eric

posted February 6, 2009 at 2:28 pm


Michael (#17) and Randy (#13),
Granted that concern over social issues can become “me-oriented.” But what evidence do you have that this is what is motivating a majority of emerging types? (Michael, as I understand it, your background is PCUSA and your concerns arise out of personal experiences dealing with people in that context (please correct me if I’m wrong), which isn’t an emerging generation sort of experience).
And, more broadly, are you suggesting that this is what is motivating the majority of IGen’ers who are interested in these issues? Again, what basis do you have for questioning the motives of an entire generation?



report abuse
 

RJS

posted February 6, 2009 at 2:36 pm


Eric,
Why do you think that this generation (18-35 year olds) is any different, fundamentally, than earlier generations, 20th and now 21st century Americans?



report abuse
 

ChrisB

posted February 6, 2009 at 2:40 pm


Eric,
1) I’m 33.
2) “why do they put more of an emphasis on fighting on behalf of the marginalized”
It makes them feel good.
It’s the in thing to do.
It makes them feel less guilty about what they have.
You can be self-focused without being completely blind to the rest of the world.



report abuse
 

Michael W. Kruse

posted February 6, 2009 at 3:57 pm


Eric #18
First, let me be clear that what I suggested about being consumers of activism and moving away from consensus goes back at least as far as the 1960s. What I?m suggesting is an intensification of this over the past two or three generations to the point it has become the dominant mode. I think Focus on the Family was in many ways an earlier version of this but each succeeding wave of groups is better honing their identity marketing skill. The sins of the fathers are being visited on the third and fourth generations, if you will. :-) Also, I wasn?t intending to critique emerging Christians directly but, being predominately of the iGen age, I do believe they are susceptible to their generations foibles, just as we all are.
As to me personally, I grew up in an evangelical Nazarene home before becoming PCUSA as a young adult. I?ve been in both these worlds. One of the earliest emergent churches (before the name ?Emergent? really emerged) was Jacob?s Well here in Kansas City. It formed in 1998 and met in space my Presbyterian congregation made available for them before we finally sold them the building in 2003. I?ve been to the Emergent Gathering in Glorietta, as well as other Emergent Village events. I have friends I?ve known for years who attend Jacob?s Well. I?ve read dozens of books by Emergent authors and read lots of blogs. Professionally, I?ve been in demography, competitive intelligence, and market research. I could go on here, but hopefully that gives a flavor of where I?m coming from.
Bishop in ?The Big Sort? says that the Mainline denominations reached a zenith in the ?50s and ?60s. Many of these congregations were communities that were politically split more or less equally on party politics but folks interacted with each other. But (and I put my foot in it here) Rick Warren and others developed their ?Saddleback Sams? and ?Saddleback Samanthas? approach where churches were built around homogenous communities. Bishop reports that the single most important value worshipers now say draws them to church is absence of conflict. You can?t have diversity without conflict. Thus, it is very difficult to find a congregation that isn?t heavily skewed toward some political expression. Despite statements of intention to be to the contrary, I don?t see Emergent groups as any significant departure.
I?d also reiterate my caution at the beginning of my previous comment which was I realize I?m likely overstating my case in order to be brief.



report abuse
 

Eric

posted February 6, 2009 at 5:30 pm


Michael,
Thanks. I agree that there is a tendency for churches to be homogenous — including emerging groups — and it bothers me as well. Its one of our greatest challenges as the church.
But that doesn’t suggest to me that IGeners or emerging folks are interested in social issues because of self interest. I have no doubt that some people are that way, but I’m curious: What specifically suggests that IGen’ers or emerging folks are motivated by me-ism when they talk about social issues?
RJS –
Is your question more along the lines of questioning that there is in fact a basis to say this generation is different from generations past? If so, it was my sense that the debate above was focusing on what the differences are — not whether there are in fact differences. Scot’s post suggests there are significant differences, as do the books he cites, the CT article, and many others across conservative and liberal groups. I think the changes are hard to deny, I would just like to see a little less simplistic stereotying by some.
Or, instead, is your question more along the lines of what caused the cultural changes? I am no expert on that (in fact, I’m no expert on any of this!) But I would venture a guess that this is the first generation where most of its members have a postmodern bent. People from all sides of the spectrum tend to agree on that point, from what I’ve seen. There are many other causes (some of which are probably also effects), including changes in forms of communication, the internet, suburbanization, reactions to prior generations, etc., but, again, I’m no expert.
I’m most interested in being fair about stereotyping, and promoting dialogue rather than labeling.



report abuse
 

RJS

posted February 6, 2009 at 5:57 pm


Eric,
It is a genuine question, why do you think that there are differences?
I will be blunt – I think most of the differences (and there are some) are surface not fundamental. At least when we look over a relatively narrow time window (say 100 years) and probably when we look over a longer time window.
Our view of others – racism, sexism, nationalism – is one place where there has been very real change. This almost certainly influences our view of self as well. I think that there are others – but altruism, social conscience – not at all.
I have not read the book yet – but I will, primarily with an eye to see if it is truly a useful longitudinal study.
And I am not decrying or judging, I just don’t see the younger generation (and I am not yet 50 – but will be later this year) as better or worse – but rather struggling with the same core issues in a somewhat different context.
So clearly you think I am wrong. That is a distinct possibility. So I am asking – a legitimate question – why? Reflectively – what is really different?



report abuse
 

M

posted February 6, 2009 at 7:23 pm


I’m 28. I think I might write a book now. The generation gap is clear. I deal with the public every day. I sense the divide. I have not read this book. I’ll have to put it on the list. I just hope and pray that before a generation is judged, that one continues to ask questions of a generation – rather than making observations. Sometimes…I feel the why may be just as important as the what.
I believe that my generation has been taught to question – everything. As a result, I have met many great thinkers. My generation has been given the gift of encouragement to pursue independent thinking. With that…comes confidence and assertiveness. Confidence in one’s ability to problem solve and assertiveness…naturally following.
One comment I’d like to make is: I don’t suppose the independence one pursues…is always because one cherishes self. Given the information age, many in my generation grow up “too early” through television and are faced with more than other generations have had to deal with at a young age. Not to negate there is corruption through all generations…but with the information age, so much more is available at much younger ages (before a child has the wisdom/ experience to face the information they are given.) With the breakdown of the family, the corruption in politics, scandals in/ amongst church leaders….many well-meaning souls in my generation do not necessarily pursue “me” because of selfishness…but, rather – given the legacy of previous generations leaders….it only seems natural to me, that members of my generation would rely on their own minds…who else are they to trust?
…and if you were given the situation where you are taught that all you can count on is yourself…family is not there, your government is not there, scandals in the school, church corruption…what would you do?
I often think…it may be survival as opposed to selfishness that my generation is pursuing. I think my generation may become less “me” centered…as it has been put – if they had more to rely on than themselves.



report abuse
 

Eric

posted February 6, 2009 at 9:59 pm


RJS,
Thanks for the clarification. There are about 1,000 things I?d like to say, but I will try to keep it (relatively) short, given the limits of blogs.
Starting with my personal experience: For about 20 years I have felt like I don?t even communicate in the same language as those in older generations. When I was younger, I could pass this off as my own immaturity. But I?m now 36, a father, part of the “establishment” in my profession, and, well, a full fledged adult (gulp!), so I can’t pass it off that way anymore. And when I do get past the communication barrier, I realize that I often can?t even relate to the thought processes of a majority of the older generations.
Then I started running into many other people from my generation that had the same problem. Take M(#24), for example — everything she or he says is something I relate very strongly too.
On top of it, you get people who have studied the issue — traditional conservatives, liberals, and others — and they say our culture is going through one of the largest shifts in at least a couple hundred years. Call it a shift away from modernism ? even call it a shift toward postmodernism (whatever that means!), but something meaningful is happening. It started before this generation (18-35 year olds), but this is probably the first generation where it is dominant.
It isn?t just that guy whose name starts with ?Mc? and rhymes with ?barren? who says this. When the Pope came to the U.S., he railed against modernism. When Mark Noll traced the historical roots of why evangelicals have had a weak life of the mind (including on issues such as evolution), he traced it to Enlightenment-style thinking. People like Scot point out the postmodern shift in their writings. When conservatives blast the younger generations, they like to throw around the “postmodern” term. And as N.T. Wright has been saying for at least a decade, this is a genie that isn?t going back in the bottle. There is a widespread consensus that something is going on.
So in the same way I trust scientists like you when you talk about evolution, I also trust these people when they talk about large scale cultural shifts. Particularly because it fits what I and many others in my generation have been experiencing.
What I?ve tried to say in my prior posts above is that, yes, there is a big shift in this generation. But let?s be fair about how we characterize it and label it. It is very complex, and the shift is running in many different directions. Its not accurate, fair or productive to label an entire generation as selfish or “self important.” It sounds like we probably agree on that point, which is probably the most important one to me.
The reason I care so much about this issue is because (like the CT article says) young people are leaving churches in droves. There may be all sorts of causes, but I suspect that this shift (whatever it is!) is a big part of it. We need a healthy, open dialogue about it, free from labels and put-downs (I’m not saying that you engage in that, but many, many do).



report abuse
 

Dan

posted February 6, 2009 at 11:01 pm


I would just like to point out that, at least in my opinion, focus on personal happiness is ethically, morally, and socially neutral. It is the means to attaining that happiness that can be negative or positive.
If iGens are pursuing happiness in destructive ways then I think we should be concerned, but what if their personal happiness is closely tied to the happiness of other? In that case, can’t the pursuit of personal happiness actually be constructive?



report abuse
 

RJS

posted February 6, 2009 at 11:16 pm


Thanks Eric,
Pejorative terms – “selfish” and “self important” (or many of the terms at times applied to earlier generations) are neither accurate nor productive. Basically they are caricatures – and only serve to alienate.
I’ve been sitting here thinking about what I meant – maybe it is this: Back when I was in graduate school I started reading as much old literature as I could (time always being at a premium), “classics” from all cultures all around the world (but mostly European) and what struck me, still strikes me, most was the universality of the human experience across millenia and across cultures. There are differences – and they are important – but they are small compared with the similarity. Cultural shifts are like the icing on the cake – but the cake remains the same.
And now I’m probably totally incoherent because it is late…



report abuse
 

RJS

posted February 6, 2009 at 11:20 pm


By the way – we watched an old Dick vanDyke show tonight during dinner (something we do on occasion) from the early 60′s (still in black and white – reference to Kennedy as president) and it focused on “happiness” and being “happy” using those terms.
What does this say of Twenge’s mother’s recollection (at least as a generalization of the time)?



report abuse
 

RJS

posted February 6, 2009 at 11:26 pm


By the way – we watched an old Dick vanDyke show tonight during dinner (something we do on occasion) from the early 60′s (still in black and white – reference to Kennedy as president) and it focused on “happiness” and being “happy” using those terms.
What does this say of Twenge’s mother’s recollection (at least as a generalization of the time)?



report abuse
 

Andy

posted February 9, 2009 at 2:39 am


This is something that my son then 11 put together in his head over dinner one day in 06. His generation have everything laid on for them in personal form: music, education, entertainment, fashion, food…. their life is about them. That’s not seen as selfish, not as a moral choice (or even amoral choice) it is just how it is. Check out the link for my thoughts from the time: http://kiwichronicles.blogspot.com/2006/04/generation-i.html



report abuse
 

Post a Comment

By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.



Previous Posts

More Blogs To Enjoy!!!
Thank you for visiting Jesus Creed. This blog is no longer being updated. Please enjoy the archives. Here are some other blogs you may also enjoy: Red Letters with Tom Davis Recent prayer post on Prayables Most Recent Inspiration blog post Happy Reading!  

posted 11:15:58am Aug. 16, 2012 | read full post »

Our Common Prayerbook 30 - 3
Psalm 30 thanks God (vv. 1-3, 11-12) and exhorts others to thank God (vv. 4-5). Both emerge from the concrete reality of David's own experience. Here is what that experience looks like:Step one: David was set on high and was flourishing at the hand of God's bounty (v. 7a).Step two: David became too

posted 12:15:30pm Aug. 31, 2010 | read full post »

Theology After Darwin 1 (RJS)
One of the more important and more difficult pieces of the puzzle as we feel our way forward at the interface of science and faith is the theological implications of discoveries in modern science. A comment on my post Evolution in the Key of D: Deity or Deism noted: ...this reminds me of why I get a

posted 6:01:52am Aug. 31, 2010 | read full post »

Almost Christian 4
Who does well when it comes to passing on the faith to the youth? Studies show two groups do really well: conservative Protestants and Mormons; two groups that don't do well are mainline Protestants and Roman Catholics. Kenda Dean's new book is called Almost Christian: What the Faith of Ou

posted 12:01:53am Aug. 31, 2010 | read full post »

Let's Get Neanderthal!
The Cave Man Diet, or Paleo Diet, is getting attention. (Nothing is said about Culver's at all.) The big omission, I have to admit, is that those folks were hunters -- using spears or smacking some rabbit upside the conk or grabbing a fish or two with their hands ... but that's what makes this diet

posted 2:05:48pm Aug. 30, 2010 | read full post »




Report as Inappropriate

You are reporting this content because it violates the Terms of Service.

All reported content is logged for investigation.