Shhh, the Pastor’s Coming!

Posted on July 3, 2017     1 Comment

Most of the time I love being a pastor, but there are some things about the role that can be very frustrating. One of them (speaking for myself anyways) is when people act differently around me than they do in normal life, simply because I’m a “pastor”. Being in youth ministry, I see this all the time. Students have their regular, day-to-day life that they live out with their friends and family. For the most part, they let their guard down and just are who they are without giving it a second thought. Then, as soon as they get around me, a switch happens. Suddenly their language is different, their interests are different, their perception of life is different, and it is all faker than a face-lift on an aging supermodel.

I hate fake. I don’t care much for fake anything—knock-off brand cereal, flopping in the NBA, or auto-tuned singers. But I get especially annoyed when people are being fake. I think that as a pastor, I tend to get the fake version of people more often than the average Joe. I guess the perception is that I’m supposed to be some kind of holy man and so people should act holy around me. Next thing you know, people who normally cuss like sailors are talking like Mother Theresa. People who normally don’t give God three seconds of thought in the day are great theologians. And people who are sleeping around and partying on the weekend are really into the Newsboys and want to make sure I know about it.

It’s really not much fun being around fake people. It can be quite lonely. Rather than actually having a meaningful conversation with someone, I have a pretend conversation with them. They play the part, I nod along, and then it ends. They never showed their true colours, I never got any real chance to show genuine love for who they really are, and the whole thing is a waste of time. Most of the time I can tell when someone is being fake, even if I never let on that I know. I just play the game and hope one day the jig will be up and we can actually have a relationship that is real.

That’s why I appreciate whenever someone is brutally honest with me. I don’t even care if they disagree with me on just about everything I believe in—at the very least we can have a real, meaningful interaction. No faking, no acting, just talk and see where it goes. I love that kind of thing. When I walk through the halls of a high school or the mall, I see students I know in their natural environment. I hear how they talk and what they talk about. I see who they are around their peers. And even though it may include a whole lot of stuff that I’m not a fan of, I would rather they be that way with me and show their true self than fake it and feel like somehow they’ve won themselves a victory.

There are some students that I know who let their guard down around me even though you might not expect them to. They aren’t Christians. They don’t pretend to be. They say things I would never say, listen to stuff I would never listen to, and do things I would never condone. And yet I don’t jump all over them for it, and they don’t feel like they need to hide it from me. They know where I stand, I know where they stand, and that is that. We just are who we are and we have earned each other’s respect. We might talk about those hard things from time to time, and we might agree to disagree. So be it. I actually love when people are like that with me. It’s the way it should be.

What good can come from being a phoney Christian? There is little to gain and much to lose. A faker forfeits meaningful relationships. They must pretend to be someone they are not. They must lie to cover up whatever they are trying to hide. They carry the stress of putting on the mask at a moments notice, depending on who is in the near vicinity. And worst of all, they feel a measure of peace at hiding the parts of themselves that they deem unholy—and yet this peace is never full because it is a false peace, and they know it. So you managed to fool the pastor (or so you think)? Congratulations! You have succeeded in tricking someone you are not ultimately accountable to at the expense of increasing your guilt before the One you are ultimately accountable to. You have deceived the courtroom, but not the Judge. What gain will come of that?

An old Puritan named Thomas Brooks says this about people who fake their Christianity around people but don’t truly live it from their heart:

“Know that it is not the knowing, nor the talking, nor the reading man —but the doing man, that at last will be found the happiest man. ‘If you know these things, blessed and happy are you if you DO them.’ ‘Not everyone that says, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven—but he who DOES the will of my Father that is in heaven’ (John 13: 17, Matt. 7: 21). Judas called Christ Lord, Lord; and yet betrayed him, and has gone to his place. Ah! how many Judases have we in these days, that kiss Christ, and yet betray Christ; that in their words profess him—but in their works deny him; that bow their knee to him, and yet in their hearts despise him; that call him Jesus, and yet will not obey him as their Lord.”

The one who plays Christianity before men but denies it with their life is no true Christian. That person knows this is true, and God knows this is true. If you succeed in fooling others, all you have done is held off what appears to be the negative consequences of rejecting Jesus in a public way…aka, showing your true colours. Sure, you won’t get judgmental glances from other believers or sighs of disappointment from hopeful parents. But you also will be forsaking the love and friendship and blessing of God, and severing yourself from the Source of true joy and life. In other words, you get sin instead of Jesus, a surefire recipe for long-term misery if ever there was one. Fake people aren’t happy people.

Why bother wearing the mask? Why bother trying to please people who’s approval you probably don’t even care much for? Why be someone you’re not? God sees. God knows. You haven’t fooled him one bit. And truth be told, his opinion is the only one that counts. So just be real and authentic and honest about who you are. You don’t have to be intentionally provocative or needlessly rude about it. But for goodness’ sake, don’t fake it. If you do, everyone loses.

When Christians Practice Witchcraft

Posted on June 22, 2017     4 Comments

Christians condemn witchcraft, right? In word, yes, but in practice, not always. I believe there are many Christians who engage in what can be called Christian witchcraft. Let me explain.

Witchcraft is an attempt to control, manipulate, or engage with the spirit world through various practices such as spells, incantations, and rituals. Typically, in the Christian world, witchcraft is viewed as delving into the demonic realm and therefore something to be avoided. Scripture levies several warnings against witchcraft:

  • Leviticus 20:27 prescribes the death penalty for those who are mediums or necromancers.
  • 1 Chronicles 10:13 says that God put King Saul to death for consulting a witch for guidance.
  • Galatians 5:20 lists sorcery among other damnable sins.

There is also no doubt that the Bible teaches the existence of spirit beings, both angels and demons. God forbids attempts to connect to the spirit world through any other means than by himself, and more specifically, through Jesus Christ (John 14:6). Therefore it should come as no surprise that Christians virtually unanimously denounce witchcraft and generally steer clear of it.

Except that I’m not so sure that really is the case. As I see it, many Christians have their own version of witchcraft that they practice. It doesn’t involve ouija boards, candles, horoscopes, crystal balls, tarot cards, and the like. But just because it doesn’t look the same doesn’t mean it’s not real.

In an interesting article, Kelsey Munger tells her story about growing up in a Christian family that was obsessed with the spirit realm. Her parents, both very devout Christians, had many different routines they practiced in order to combat what they perceived to be demonic attack. This included rubbing canola oil in the shape of a cross on their home’s doorpost, pouring canola oil in a barrier around the family property, praying over jewelry before wearing it, avoiding imported products for fear they were made by pagans and could carry demons, praying specific phrases repeatedly, and even scouring the backyard for objects that might have been placed there by a witch to curse the family.

You know what those practices are? They are not Christianity. They are witchcraft. They are attempts to control the spirit world through object-oriented rituals.

Some Christians might not go to quite that extreme but still demonstrate a similar pattern of thinking. They tend to blame everything on demons: headaches, a fender bender, lost car keys, a criticism at work, or a financial crunch. They might pray the demons out of a new car or new house. They tend to automatically assume the hippy next door is demon possessed. And they believe that rock music is from the devil.

Here’s why this is so problematic—there’s no Scriptural support for any of it. These are all beliefs and practices that find no basis in God’s Word. Instead, it is the result of taking the witchcraft mentality and applying it to Christian belief. It bears a closer resemblance to superstition than to biblical Christianity.

Back in 2014, a video made the rounds online of a Christian woman explaining why Monster energy drinks are of the devil. She points out that the Monster logo has some symbolism that can be interpreted as being references to the occult and the anti-Christ. At the end she concludes “this is how clever Satan is, and how he gets into the Christian’s home and the Christian’s life, and it breaks God’s heart. Jesus said, ‘My people perish for a lack of knowledge.'”

Let’s be clear: this is utter foolishness. This is Christian witchcraft. Satan does not enter people’s lives through energy drinks. He does so through sin and through unbelief. And though Jesus did say that people perish for a lack of knowledge, he didn’t have demonic symbolism on aluminum cans in mind.

This kind of obsession with the demonic is unhealthy and counter-productive. It does not lead to a life of godliness and fear of the Lord. It leads to a life of paranoia and fear of the devil.

Don’t get me wrong. Satan is real. Demons are real. The spirit world is real. Scripture says so and therefore we Christians ought to believe it. However, the Bible does not dwell on the spirit world the way we sometimes do. It does not emphasize it to the point where we should be on the lookout for demons everywhere we go. In fact, the pattern of the Bible is that overt demonic activity is at its most prevalent during the gospels and Acts, when Christ was on earth and the early church was just getting rolling. Contrast that with the entire Old Testament and the rest of the New Testament, where mention of demonism is very limited.

Although there is no doubt in my mind that Satan and demons are active in the world, and that they can and do manifest themselves in physical ways, that seems to not be the norm. In fact, it is the norm mostly among people who are already looking for it. Missionaries working in very pagan and spiritual cultures might encounter this more often. Those Christians who are obsessed with demonism are more likely to experience strange shadows on the wall. But this does not seem to be what Scripture paints as normal Christian experience. Satan and demons primarily work through deception, doubt, accusation, and the like. (Read an article I wrote about Satan’s tactics here.)

Some Christians will push back. You’re acting like Satan doesn’t exist! If you don’t guard yourself you will unintentionally invite demons into your life! To which I would ask, where does Scripture teach that? Where does it give such warnings? Yes, the devil is a prowling lion looking for someone to devour (1 Peter 5:8), but what is his access point to my life? Is it through the fortune cookies at the bottom of my Chinese takeout? Is it through the skull and bones on my child’s toy pirate ship? Or is it through my lack of Bible reading, my unconfessed sin, and my proud heart?

Far too many Christians focus on the former things while neglecting the latter ones. When believers begin to focus on material things as if they carry spiritual power, we are acting like pagans more than Christ followers. We have abdicated Scripture and become superstitious. And ultimately we will divert ourselves from the God to be glorified and the mission to be accomplished.

My point is this: when Christians find themselves constantly thinking about the devil and what they can do to ward him off, they have fallen into the trap of Christian witchcraft. They have taken their focus off of Christ, which is where it rightly belongs (Hebrews 12:2). They have begun to believe that power against demonic forces resides in rituals or objects and not in Christ alone. Recall that when demons encountered Jesus they trembled in fear and needed to ask for permission even to speak (Matthew 8:29, Luke 4:41). Christ rules over the spirit world, and since Christians are united to him by faith, he is the only weapon we need to face off against any forces of darkness that may oppose us.

What Bella Thinks Makes a Good Dad

Posted on June 18, 2017     Leave a Comment

This past week I was working on a sermon for Father’s Day when my daughter Bella walked into the room and asked me what I was doing. I told her that I was writing a sermon about being a great dad. Then I asked her if she could help me by telling me what she thinks a good dad would do. Little did I know she would take me so seriously! She sat down with me and compiled a list of 22 things that a good dad does. I share it here for your enjoyment!

  1. he’s helping
  2. he’s caring
  3. he preaches
  4. he works
  5. he does the dishes
  6. he drives
  7. he reads the Bible
  8. he uses the phone
  9. he shops
  10. he cooks supper
  11. he massages mom
  12. he plays
  13. he goes on daddy dates
  14. he prays
  15. he pays for things
  16. he plays pokemon games
  17. he goes to the park
  18. he waters the garden
  19. he goes to church
  20. he meets new friends
  21. he gives hugs and kisses
  22. he gives medicine

Not a bad list for a 6 year old! Now that I have an official job description I’d better get myself to work. Happy Father’s Day to all the dads out there!

Should Christians Date Non-Christians?

Posted on May 11, 2017     1 Comment

Few things in life can bring more joy—and, conversely, more pain—than a romantic relationship. Since it is such a central and important aspect of our lives, we ought to consider how God has designed for relationships to work best. They were, after all, his idea. Wouldn’t he know what is good for us?

If you are a Christian looking to date, you will inevitably need to answer the question: Can Christians date non-Christians? What does God think about it? The straightforward answer from Scripture is no, Christians should not date non-Christians. There are at least three reasons why.

1. Scripture says that Christians should only marry Christians

Technically the Bible doesn’t say Christians shouldn’t date non-Christians…because the Bible doesn’t say anything at all about dating. Dating is a modern custom that didn’t exist in biblical times. Yet that doesn’t mean the Bible can’t help us answer the question. Since the ultimate purpose of dating is marriage, we can look at what Scripture says about marriage to point us in the right direction.

The most common passage cited against a Christian marrying a non-Christian is 2 Corinthians 6:14, which says “Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers.” A yoke is a harness that hitches two animals together so they can plow alongside one another as a team.

The verse is saying that in relationships where people are bound to one another, Christians should not be “yoked” to unbelievers. This is because the pairing would be “unequal”. Why is that? Because Christians and non-Christians are on two completely different playing fields from each other.

  • Christians love Jesus, unbelievers don’t
  • Christians follow Scripture, unbelievers don’t
  • Christians have God’s Spirit living in them, unbelievers don’t
  • Christians are right with God, unbelievers aren’t
  • Christians are going to heaven, unbelievers are going to hell

It will be hard for two people this different to be on the same page about things, especially the big issues of life.

Some people point out that 2 Corinthians 6:14, in context, isn’t talking about marriage at all. It is referring to Christians in the church and how they should associate with each other. While this is true, there certainly is a wider application. Any context where Christians are “hitched” with another person should be considered, especially the more intimate a relationship becomes. What could be more intimate than marriage? Even if you reject this passage as restricting marriage for Christians, the rest of Scripture teaches the same thing.

In 1 Corinthians 7:39, the Bible says that a Christian widow can remarry when her husband dies, but “only in the Lord”, meaning that she can marry a believing man. “A wife is bound to her husband as long as he lives. But if her husband dies, she is free to be married to whom she wishes, only in the Lord.”

Later in 1 Corinthians 9:5, Paul argues that he has the right to marry if he so desires. However, it should be noted that he specifically mentions that the other apostles only marry “a believing wife”, implying that that is what is fitting for a Christian man. “Do we not have the right to take along a believing wife, as do the other apostles and the brothers of the Lord and Cephas?”

Proverbs 31 highlights what a godly woman is like. Verse 30 says “Charm is deceitful, and beauty is vain, but a woman who fears the LORD is to be praised.” Notice that the wife that is being praised in the passage is a believing woman.

Also, back in Deuteronomy 7:3-4, God forbade the Israelites from marrying foreign women. Despite what some say, this is not to prevent mixing races. Rather, it was to prevent the mixing of religions. God did not want his followers to marry those who worship other gods because it would cause their devotion to go astray. “You shall not intermarry with them, giving your daughters to their sons or taking their daughters for your sons, [4] for they would turn away your sons from following me, to serve other gods. Then the anger of the LORD would be kindled against you, and he would destroy you quickly.”

Lastly, perhaps the most pointed passage in the whole Bible on this subject is from Malachi 2:11-12 where God says “Judah has been faithless, and abomination has been committed in Israel and in Jerusalem. For Judah has profaned the sanctuary of the LORD, which he loves, and has married the daughter of a foreign god. [12] May the LORD cut off from the tents of Jacob any descendant of the man who does this, who brings an offering to the LORD of hosts!” God could not be more clear. He calls a believer marrying an unbeliever “faithless”, an “abomination”, and “profane”. Clearly God considers a Christian marrying a non-Christian a very serious sin.

2. Inter-faith dating lacks true intimacy

Christianity is (at least in part) a worldview. It is a set of beliefs and values that inform and guide a person’s life and decision making. If a Christian dates or marries someone who is not a Christian, they are linking up with someone who has a different worldview. This matters because our worldview guides everything we do in life. It will be impossible for two people to have true closeness and intimacy if they do not share common beliefs and values, especially on the most important matters.

Tim Keller points out how this works. As a Christian, the most important thing in your life is (or at least ought to be) Christ. Yet if you are with someone who is not a believer, they cannot understand or relate to the most important thing about you. The thing that most defines you (as a Christ-follower) won’t make any sense to them. As a result it is impossible to have true oneness.

One of two things happens as a result. Either the Christian will continue to keep Jesus at the centre of their life and force their partner to adjust, or the Christian will compromise their faith in order to get closer to their unbelieving partner. Either scenario is a lose-lose. If the Christian remains faithful to Christ, the unbelieving person will never feel close in the relationship. But if the Christian compromises, they may be able to get closer to their partner, but lose intimacy with Christ as a result. Neither situation is ideal in the least.

However, when a Christian dates a Christian, there can be incredible unity and intimacy. Since they both share a common worldview and a common love for Christ, they can pursue him together. They each are running after Jesus and can cheer each other on. There is no competition for devotion to the Lord, but rather that devotion to God actually brings them together. They can pray together, read Scripture together, serve together, attend church together. They both are living for the glory of God and loving others. They have a common view of sex, finances, friendships, family, and the like. And even when there is disagreement, there is a common understanding of how to deal with it. Scripture acts as the arbitrator. Repentance from the guilty party and forgiveness from the innocent party is a given. In other words, they have the tools they need to make a 50 or 60 year run at life together if God should allow them to live that long.

As someone who is married to a strong Christian woman, I cannot overstate how much I appreciate this. Life and marriage is hard enough even when two people are on the same page. I can’t imagine trying to make it work with a partner who fundamentally sees the world differently than I do. A truly great relationship in such a case is virtually impossible.

3. God desires for us to pass our faith on to our kids

Maybe as someone who is only dating, the thought of marriage and especially kids seems a long ways off. But the wise person thinks long-term. One day the person you are dating (now or future) will become your husband or wife, and not long after you are likely to start having children together.

As a Christian, I’m assuming that you will want your children to love Jesus too. You’ll want to pray for them, teach them the Bible, bring them to church, talk to them about life and love and God. You’ll want them to have their own relationship with Christ and know the joy and freedom that comes with it.

Doing this task of passing on the faith is a lot of work. It is not an easy job. How much harder it is when your partner is not on board with it! Bringing children up in a home with mixed faith can be awfully confusing for the kids and frustrating for the parents. This is exactly the kind of thing God has in mind when he commands believers to marry only believers. Returning to Malachi 2, the passage goes on to say in verse 15 “Did [God] not make them one, with a portion of the Spirit in their union? And what was the one God seeking? Godly offspring.” Part of God’s purpose in marriage is to bring children into the world. And the reason God is so against Christians marrying non-Christians is because their children are far less likely to be Christians. He desires godly children, and that is hard to achieve when mom and dad are not pulling together in the same direction.

A family unit functions much better when there is agreement. In my home, it doesn’t matter who puts the kids to bed—they will be prayed with. It doesn’t matter if my wife or I can’t be there for supper—the other one will still lead family devotions. My kids never have to wonder why only one of us go to church, because we go together. They know that we both put Jesus first. There is a kind of unity that is wonderful beyond words, and God desires for all homes to experience this. But it only comes from obeying God’s will in these matters.

What do I do if I’m dating a non-Christian?

The truth is you already know what you need to do. The relationship needs to end. Of course this might be incredibly painful, especially if the relationship has continued for some time. But I can tell you that the pain now will be better than the pain you will experience down the road. I know many Christians who are married to non-Christians, and while they put in a lot of effort to make it work, their marriage is very hard and lonely. Often they experience more closeness with a Christian friend than their own partner since they can’t really talk about their faith at home. They can’t pray together or read Scripture together. They are pursuing Christ alone, while also knowing that their loved one will perish without faith. What a tragic and difficult place to be. It is far better to prevent winding up there if you can do so!

Conclusion: God has great plans for you

The real issue is faith. Do you trust that God knows what he is doing? Do you believe that he has a great plan for you? God loves you and wants good for you. He wants to direct you into the abundant life he has for you (John 10:10). My plea is that you would believe that God can provide for you a partner that you can have a great relationship with, one whom you can grow in faith with and have a kind of closeness that brings great joy. Trust him, walk in obedience, and he will direct your paths!

Which Bible Translation Should I Use?

Posted on May 9, 2017     3 Comments

The Bible was originally written in Hebrew, Aramaic (Old Testament) and Greek (New Testament). Since then, it has been translated into hundreds of languages. English is one language that is fortunate enough to have many different translations of the Bible.

Translating from one language to another is a difficult task. Translators must take into account several important factors:

  • Words in the original language may not have direct equivalents in other languages.
  • Some expressions used in an ancient culture might not make sense in a modern-day culture.
  • The meaning of words change over time.

As such, Bible translations vary along a scale from one extreme to another. At one end you have what is called word-for-word translations, which aim to translate from one language to another using the exact wording from the original, or at least as close as possible. On the other end you have what is called thought-for-thought translations (sometimes called dynamic equivalency) which aim to translate not the exact words from the original, but rather the basic concepts. This allows the translators to update the language and expressions to fit modern-day understandings. The most extreme forms of a thought-for-thought translation are actually less of a translation and more like a paraphrase.

The chart below demonstrates roughly where several popular translations land in terms of being word-for-word or thought-for-thought in their approach.

The New International Version (NIV), which is the most popular English translation in the world, lands roughly in the middle of the scale.

Which translation is best for me?

It is wise to make use of several different translations. When doing careful Bible study, it is good to use a more word-for-word translation. However, for long reading and devotional purposes, a thought-for-thought translation is easier to read. You might use a very literal translation to lead a Bible study class, but a thought-for-thought translation when teaching the Bible to young children. It also depends on your own skill level in reading and the skill level of others if you are in a teaching setting. Combining several solid translations for various purposes tends to be one way to get the most out of Bible reading.

13 Reasons Why: Reflection #4 – Your truth, my truth

Posted on May 8, 2017     5 Comments

After watching 13 Reasons Why, there is much to be said about this wildly popular and controversial show. I will attempt to share some reflections in a series of posts over the next couple of weeks. I will link to other articles as they are published. Be warned, spoilers and tragedy ahead. 

Reflection #1 – Why so popular?

Reflection #2 – A world without God

Reflection #3 – Maybe there aren’t any good kids

Reflection #4 – Your truth, my truth

Reflection #5 – Not escape, but revenge

13 Ways to Prevent Suicide

One of the more interesting characters in 13 Reasons Why is Tony. At first, it is hard to know if Tony is a good guy or a bad guy, but as the show rolls on it becomes clear that he is well-intentioned. Tony was entrusted by Hannah Baker with the cassette tapes she recorded explaining her suicide, and she left him a final task: make sure that everyone responsible for her death listens to the tapes.

At one point in the show, as Hannah’s best friend Clay Jensen is struggling to make sense of the material on the tapes, he and Tony get into a lively exchange. Clay openly wonders if all of the things Hannah says on the tapes are true, or if perhaps she is misconstruing things or, even worse, flat-out lying. Other characters in the show certainly accuse her of misrepresenting their part of the story. Hannah says on tape 1, “If you want to hear the truth, just press play”….but does she really tell the truth?

The concept of truth and lies is an intriguing interplay in the show. Hannah’s tapes are intended to be a tell-all of what led her to take her own life. But those who are indicted on the tapes vary in terms of accepting their role in that event. Some fully admit that Hannah’s portrayal of them is accurate, but others accuse her of misrepresenting the truth. In several cases, only Hannah and the accused would be able to know the truth, and since Hannah is dead, how can anyone know what really happened? It becomes a matter of he-said she-said, and this turns the teens against one another.

Back to Tony and Clay. Clay questions the truthfulness of the tapes, including his own, and argues with Tony that Hannah isn’t being honest about what actually happened. “It’s not true!”, Clay contends, feeling frustrated about the whole matter. “She’s telling us her truth,” Tony retorts, trying to give him a different perspective of things.

Who can argue with that? Hannah tells us her side of the story, and now that she is dead and on record, it becomes hard to challenge her take of things. Who wants to accuse the girl who killed herself of lying? How can anyone prove her wrong? It’s no surprise that the characters all find themselves in a moral dilemma of sorts. On one hand, they all did things that contributed to Hannah’s misery. On the other hand, there may have been other circumstances to factor in that Hannah doesn’t bother to mention. She simply gets to tell her version unchecked, and everyone else must deal with it.

Scripture warns us about failing to consider both sides of the story. Proverbs 18:17 says “The one who states his case first seems right, until the other comes and examines him.” Problem is, Hannah Baker has made it next to impossible for the other side to share their version of events. She can’t be cross-examined. What she says goes, and because of that she paints many of her peers into a corner. Those listening to the tapes are left to wonder, do they deserve to be cornered? Or has Hannah manipulated the story to her own advantage?

Tony makes an insightful point when he says that Hannah is telling “her truth”. He implies that it doesn’t matter if her version seems off to you. Why? Because it was real to her. It is how she saw things, and no one can question it. People might not have tried to hurt her, but they did. Or, at least, she took it that way. How others see things doesn’t matter because how she saw them created the reality in which she lived…and it was something she didn’t want to be a part of any longer.

While Tony is absolutely right—Hannah was telling her version of the truth—it is very dangerous to suggest that such a notion is a good or acceptable thing. Is it right for Hannah to accuse someone of wronging her, even if they didn’t? Does how she take things override how things really were? In many cases, there is no doubt that Hannah was wronged by people in the show. But there are a handful of events where that is not necessarily so clear. Does she get to extend sweeping judgment in those instances just because she saw it that way? Or do those who are accused have a right to give their side of the story? Who’s truth can supersede someone else’s?

Pontius Pilate once posed this question to Jesus: “What is truth?” Is truth something that is objective, or is it subjective? Who gets to determine what is true when there is disagreement? If I see something one way and you see it another, who is telling the truth? You? Me? Both of us?

We live in a society that wants us to believe that truth is relative. What is true for you may not be true for me; we get to have our own versions of the truth. But this mentality is corrosive. When truth becomes untethered from reality and instead based on feelings, it becomes unhinged altogether. Truth ceases to be truth at all. All that is left are opinions and perspectives. And while opinions and perspective are useful, they are not solid foundations on which to build a life or a society.

Part of the reason there is so much vitriol in our culture is because we have lost the concept of real, objective truth. One of the most prominent examples of this in the show is when Hannah visits the school counsellor Mr. Porter as a last-ditch effort to reconsider suicide. She says it was her “one last chance at life”. She meets with him for only a few minutes and secretly records the conversation. She tells him that she is really struggling and does say at one point that she wants it all to end. It is a subtle suggestion at suicide, and Mr. Porter probes further, asking if she wants to hurt herself. Hannah refuses to talk about it, and Mr. Porter says that if she’s not willing to open up about things, there isn’t much he can do. Her only alternative is to try and move on. Hannah takes this as a rejection of help, leaves his office, goes home and kills herself.

Hannah clearly blames Mr. Porter for letting her down. The other students do too. Even Mr. Porter himself seems nervous when things go to trial that he might lose his job or be found to have broken the law. But I couldn’t help but notice that it is not so clear that Mr. Porter failed Hannah. It’s true that he could have perhaps tried a bit harder, but it is also true that Hannah shut down the conversation. In fact, she leaves his office and pauses outside the door, hoping he would come after her. He doesn’t, and Hannah blames him for giving up too easily. Yet it is worth asking, should he have chased after her? Is it a good idea to hound a student who is shutting down? I can say from experience that trying to have a student open up when they don’t want to can be counter-productive. Perhaps Mr. Porter was biding his time, hoping for a productive conversation soon thereafter. Little did he know it would never come.

Mr. Porter is legally obligated to report a student who he believes is in immediate danger of hurtful or suicidal behaviour. It is questionable if Hannah says enough to justify him doing so. Hannah seems to conclude on the tapes that he did fail her, but is that true? Just because Hannah wanted him to do more does not mean that he let her down. I feel bad for Mr. Porter. While I do think that he could have done more, it doesn’t help that Hannah was being passive-aggressive with him. When she comes to him for help and then shuts down the conversation, how is he supposed to overcome that? When she leaves his office but expects him to come after her, how is he supposed to know that is what she wants? This is one instance where Hannah is telling her version of the truth that might not be exactly as true as it ought to be.

The sum of the matter is this: Truth is real, and truth matters. People do not get to simply make up their version of the truth and then demand that others live by it. Hannah’s assessment of other people’s actions sometimes lacks a full and fair portrayal. Simply because she says she is setting the record straight does not mean that her perspective gets to go unchallenged. While her perception of the world around her is a painful one, that does not automatically assign blame to others. To be sure, many instances in the show are clearly sins against Hannah. But at least and handful are questionable. The truth might lie somewhere beyond her simplistic and one-sided viewpoint.

If we are going to make progress in helping hurting people find healing, the first step is to define reality as it actually is. Sometimes our perspective is what needs changing. To be sure, people need to be heard. They need empathy and understanding. But we ought not to allow people to define reality for themselves and then demand other people fall in line with it. Such a view of truth is destructive by necessity. It will breed only quarrels between competing “truths”. Rather, truth exists objectively outside of our subjective feelings, and we need to help each other pursue that. Your truth vs. my truth is a collision course that brings only casualties.

Hannah’s world was full of pain, but she believed that there was only one way out. She had defined her own truth, and needed someone to show her a reality that was different from the one she found herself enclosed in. The truth is that suicide was not the only option. It was not even the best option. But Hannah had boxed herself into her own version of the truth, and it killed her. Sometimes the best thing we can do for someone is challenge their sense of truth. But to do so begins by understanding that truth is not based on a person’s individual feelings. Such an idea just might suck a person into their own early grave.

13 Reasons Why: Reflection #3 – Maybe there aren’t any good kids

Posted on May 7, 2017     5 Comments

After watching 13 Reasons Why, there is much to be said about this wildly popular and controversial show. I will attempt to share some reflections in a series of posts over the next couple of weeks. I will link to other articles as they are published. Be warned, spoilers and tragedy ahead. 

Reflection #1 – Why so popular?

Reflection #2 – A world without God

Reflection #3 – Maybe there aren’t any good kids

Reflection #4 – Your truth, my truth

Reflection #5 – Not escape, but revenge

13 Ways to Prevent Suicide

It does not take long to figure out that there are some major problems going on with the characters in 13 Reasons Why. From the beginning of the first tape to the last, Hannah Baker unfolds detail after painful detail about how she was hurt, betrayed, bullied, lied to, lied about, disappointed, and even raped by those around her. The 13 episodes move almost like a conveyor belt of sins that lay before the audience some of the harshest sides of human nature. To one degree or another, everyone on the tapes has contributed to the mess they find themselves in through their own sinful choices.

Many of the characters, perhaps even all, struggle with feelings of guilt for what they have done. They are not only part of the reason for Hannah Baker’s suicide, but they have torn others apart in the process. They try various things to alleviate the consciences that constantly gnaw at them. Some turn to alcohol, some to blame shifting. Others experience denial, while another wants to confess and bring everything into the light. One girl, who was partly responsible for causing a car accident and successfully blaming it on someone else, actually goes after school hours to the victims house to visit and help out. The elderly couple thinks she is just being a nice girl, but they have no idea she is trying to atone for the fact that the man’s injuries are actually her fault.

What I find really fascinating is the difference in perspective between the students and the adults in the show. On a number of occasions, when a teen begins to express feelings of guilt, they are assured by their parents that it is not their fault. Rest assured, the parents say, “you’re a good kid”. This statement—you’re a good kid—seems to be the central truth claim that the parents use to try and make their kids feel better. This claim is repeated several times over until finally Clay Jensen snaps back at his mother “maybe there aren’t any good kids”.

Maybe there aren’t any good kids. Whether knowingly or not, the show has finally made its first correct diagnosis of the problem. While the adults try over and over to squash this notion, the teenagers’ inner voices speak too loudly. Clay, Jessica, Bryce, Alex, Zach, and the others all know better. They are keenly aware of their choices, and the idea that they are “good kids” is just way too superficial a notion to gloss over their horrendous actions. That they could be just “good kids” who messed up a little is a truth claim that they ultimately seem to reject, although it is never really made clear how they cope with the idea that they might actually be bad people.

I point this out because 13 Reasons is on to something. When Clay shouts in frustration that there might not be any good kids, himself included, it is the closest the show comes to a biblical worldview. Jesus himself says “no one is good except God alone” (Mark 10:18). Scripture does not teach that human beings are good at their core with some minor flaws that need adjusting. Instead, it says that we are sinners by nature, and that what we need is not self-improvement but inner transformation. It is too bad that Clay finally gets headed in the right direction with his assessment of the situation—there aren’t any good kids—but the show never comes back around to properly addressing it. By the end of the show, Clay seems to have learned from his mistakes and becomes a more loving person (he reaches out to a girl that needs a friend). But this, at least in my judgment, seems like an awfully superficial solution. If the kids truly are bad, can they just make that go away by making better decisions? How can they make good decisions from a nature that is broken?

The Christian answer is that they can’t. It is true that there are no good people. We are all self-centred by default. Sometimes even our acts of charity can be driven by selfish motives. What sinners (aka bad people) need is not simply to make better choices. What they need is a new nature. They need renewal, to be born again, to become a new person. This is the hope of the gospel, that by faith in Christ we become new creations (2 Corinthians 5:17). It is what the crew of 13 Reasons Why so desperately needed but never seemed to find. Because of this, the very thing that wreaked havoc in the first place goes on unchecked. The show implies a degree of progress has been made, but this is wishful thinking. If Clay is right that there aren’t any good kids (and he is), then the solution must come from somewhere outside of humanity, from above and beyond. The transforming power of Christ is the solution, it’s just a shame that this hope was never really given any consideration at all.

13 Reasons Why: Reflection #2 – A World Without God

Posted on May 6, 2017     5 Comments

After watching 13 Reasons Why, there is much to be said about this wildly popular and controversial show. I will attempt to share some reflections in a series of posts over the next couple of weeks. I will link to other articles as they are published. Be warned, spoilers and tragedy ahead. 

Reflection #1 – Why so popular?

Reflection #2 – A world without God

Reflection #3 – Maybe there aren’t any good kids

Reflection #4 – Your truth, my truth

Reflection #5 – Not escape, but revenge

13 Ways to Prevent Suicide

The world of Hannah Baker is a dark and depressing one. It is this way not only for her, but also for many of her classmates at Liberty High. The school has a major bullying problem, while also dealing with the standard teenage drama: drugs, alcohol, complicated dating relationships, and the like. Though a fictional universe, 13 Reasons Why reflects much of the high school experience for real-life teens. It is a place where sin runs rampant and the consequences are devastating.

It is worth noting that the show barely even addresses the existence of God. It hardly acknowledges religion in any form at all. If I’m not mistaken, there are only two times religion is really brought up. One is when Tony mentions in passing that he is Catholic—and even then, it is not hard to figure out that his Catholic self-designation is more of a family tradition thing than a real, active faith in God. The other is when a family sits around the dinner table to say grace over the meal, a scene which adds no real significance to the plot line at all.

This is not to say that God isn’t mentioned, because he is. Jesus is too. In fact, they are mentioned multiple times in pretty much every episode. Problem is, they are only mentioned in the form of curse words. And even though the show revolves around the death of a girl, talk about the afterlife is next to nil. A handful of passing remarks are included, but not with any real serious discussion or consideration. It seems that Clay and the rest of the 13 Reasons Why folks essentially find themselves in a world where there is no hope beyond themselves and the present life.

This worldview is important to note because it shapes and influences the rest of the show. For a story that wrestles with some of the most foundational aspects of our existence—life, death, hope, forgiveness, and justice—I can’t help but think that the absence of God and religion is entirely intentional. Even if the writers and producers do not hold to religious beliefs themselves, to completely ignore them in a show like this just doesn’t make any sense. Why is there not even one character who holds even moderately deep convictions of a religious nature? Why does not one person grapple with the question, Where is God?

It seems like a gigantic omission to me. I don’t expect shows like this one to promote a religious message, but to create a world that is so strikingly absent of any real concept of God at all seems imbalanced and unrealistic. However, I do think that this has its advantages. Because the world of 13 Reasons has no God, it is a painfully bleak place to live. Hannah feels as if her reputation as a slut cannot be changed and is incapable of finding hope or healing. Clay begins to take matters of justice into his own hands when he learns what others did to his friend, something which is surely motivated in part by the belief that there is no God to execute this justice instead. Other students struggle to forgive themselves or each other. Hannah’s parents try to alleviate their feelings of guilt by promoting anti-bulling campaigns in the school. In short, no one seems capable of true forgiveness or trusting in God to right all wrongs in the end. Everyone seems to assume that they must create these realities for themselves, otherwise they will never exist.

Here’s my point. 13 Reasons Why does a great job of portraying a world that has no hope. Without God, we cannot expect to receive any help from the outside. We are left to our own devices. This is the fundamental truth that ruins everyone’s lives in the show. Those who need an identity beyond what others have labelled them cannot seem to create one. Those who need healing seek it in the wrong places. Those who need forgiveness try to atone for their own mistakes. Those who need hope try to manufacture it on their own. It is sad and tragic because all of these problems can find their solution in God.

The main point by the end of the series seems to be that by caring for one another, the struggles experienced in the show would be resolved. Yet this is surely too simple of an answer. We know from looking at human history that unkindness is part of this world. We all contribute to this misery by treating others in ways we should not. To believe that the pain of life will be taken away by expecting that human beings can live together in peace and harmony is a pipe dream. That universe has not, and cannot, exist. At least not apart from God.

Though the show does not intend for its viewers to seek God, my prayer is that the hopelessness of the godless world of 13 Reasons will drive viewers to look for help from the outside. It is painfully clear that these high school students do not have the resources they need in themselves, each other, their families, or their schools in order to cope with the troubles of life. It is nothing but cycles of abuse, revenge, and misery. But a world that includes God includes hope.

Hannah needed to know that her reputation didn’t define her; God’s love does. She needed to know that when everything around her seemed hopeless, there was still hope; God is above and beyond her circumstances. Clay needed to know that he did not need to seek revenge for Hannah; God will execute justice in due time. The others needed to know that they could find healing from their guilty consciences; God forgives us of our sins.

A world without God has no hope. 13 Reasons shows this well. It is a good thing that 13 Reasons is just a work of fiction. The real world in which we live does have hope, because there is a God we can turn to in times of need, who has a plan and a future for anyone who trusts in him.

Resurrection: Reasonable or Ridiculous?

Posted on April 16, 2017     1 Comment

One of the core things I believe as a Christian is that Jesus Christ rose from the dead. This claim is central to the faith and absolutely necessary to the Christian gospel. Without the resurrection of Jesus, our Savior is still dead and so is any hope of forgiveness of sin or life beyond the grave.

Many skeptics accuse Christians of checking their brains at the door when it comes to believing the truth claims of the Bible. It’s assumed that to believe someone rose from the dead you must take an unjustified leap of faith or, even more extreme, just be a complete moron.

When I was 17 years old I began to question the faith I was raised with. I grew up in a Christian home and believed it all to be true my entire life. Towards the end of high school, however, I began to have my faith tested by people who were staunch atheists and could put forward arguments against Christianity which I could not refute. It became clear to me that I was a believer only because I was told by others I should be, and I lacked a personal faith of my own. As a result, I set out to discover for myself what I believed and why I believed it. Are there rational, reasonable reasons to believe in Jesus Christ? Or was I being a blind follower of a popular hoax?

Since the resurrection of Jesus is the main event upon which Christianity stands or falls, it became a focus in my investigation. In short, I discovered that believing that Jesus rose from the dead was not something only quacks affirm. To the contrary, I became convinced that it is the completely logical and obvious conclusion one would come to upon an honest examination of the evidence.

The following are some of the key evidences that convinced me to believe in Jesus and worship him as God.

1. The lack of a viable alternative explanation

The Bible teaches that after Jesus’ execution by crucifixion, his body went missing and he appeared to many people risen from the dead. The burden is on those who deny these events to provide explanations for how the resurrection was falsified.

For example:

  • Jesus never existed. Some believe that Jesus is a completely fictional creation, not a real historical person at all. Yet the plain historical evidence suggests otherwise. Very few historians question that Jesus existed, and those who do have their work cut out for them in trying to make sense of how Christianity got started in the first place.
  • Swoon theory. Some believe that Jesus never died on the cross but merely “swooned” and was later revived. If this is the case, how did Jesus survive the brutal beatings, whippings, and crucifixion? And even if he just passed out and was taken down before dying, how did he appear only three days later in full health? It would be impossible to convince people that he had risen from the dead if his wounds were still fresh.
  • Look alike. Some believe that Jesus didn’t die on the cross, but that someone who looked like him did instead. Then he just showed up a few days later, giving the appearance of a resurrection. But this theory is awfully weak. How could Jesus dupe so many people after having been a wildly popular public figure for three years? Surely someone would have been able to spot the difference.
  • The body was stolen. Some believe that the disciples stole Jesus’ body in order to fake a resurrection. If this is the case, it means they (1) would have to steal the body from the tomb which was under Roman guard; (2) hide it somewhere or dispose of it; (3) convince others that they had seen him afterward; (4) somehow falsify his appearances to other people; (5) be willing to die for something they knew to be a lie.

None of these refutations of the resurrection are very sound suggestions. To believe them is a stretch of the evidence, rather than an honest assessment of the facts. The truth is that it is harder to disbelieve in the resurrection based on the evidence than it is to believe in it.

2. The early church martyrs

Just because someone is willing to die for their faith doesn’t mean their faith is necessarily more valid. After all, few people take the beliefs of suicide bombers to be persuasive just because they were willing to die for a greater cause. But there is a significant difference between modern-day religious martyrs and Christians of the first century. The difference between the two is that modern martyrs are going on second hand information, while the first Christian martyrs were actually there to witness the events themselves.

Many of the apostles and first Christian converts died bloody deaths because of their belief that Jesus had risen from the dead. If the resurrection was a hoax, what would convince them to believe it? Or if they were in on the hoax, what would convince them to die for it? What was in it for them? To stand firm for Jesus meant torture or death. If you don’t believe in the resurrection, what is a reasonable explanation for why the early Christians were willing to die for their faith?

3. The explosion of Christianity

Jesus started with a group of 12 disciples. After his death, his number of committed followers numbered 120. About a week later (after the resurrection) that number had reached 3,000, and within a few decades it was in the hundreds of thousands, perhaps even millions. And all this expansive growth happened amidst great persecution of Christians. Why would a movement grow explosively in an environment that was trying to violently stamp it out? The most reasonable explanation is that was true. If you don’t believe the resurrection actually happened, what is the reason for Christianity’s early growth?

4. The conversion of Jesus’ brothers

I like to ask people, What would it take for you to worship your brother as God? I have three brothers; the chance that I would ever honour any of them as the Creator of the universe is a big fat zero. It just isn’t gonna happen. And yet we see that Jesus’ brothers went from believing their brother was crazy to worshipping him as God. Two of them even went on to write books of the Bible, and one became the main pastor in Jerusalem. What could account for such a drastic change of mind? A resurrection would!

5. The role of women as first witnesses

If you were trying to create an elaborate lie, you would be careful to craft your story in a way that makes it sound as believable as possible. In the Bible, the first people to see the risen Christ are a group of women who went to the tomb early in the morning. They see Jesus alive and run to tell others. Why is this significant? Because in the cultural setting of Jesus’ day women were considered untrustworthy. In many instances, they were thought of so lowly that their testimony was not admissible in court. Given this kind of view of women, the worst possible thing the early disciples could have done is base their lie on the reliability of women. No one would ever voluntarily make women the key witnesses in a story of such importance—unless, of course, they were simply recording the facts.

6. The public nature of the events

Most religions are founded in private. An individual claims to have some sort of divine revelation—a dream, a word from God, a visit from an angel—and then begins to tell others about it. Of course, there is no real way to verify their claims. They just say that God has spoken to them and begin a new religion, and inevitably others will believe them.

Christianity, however, is different. It was founded completely in public. Jesus taught publicly, performed miracles publicly, was killed publicly, and raised publicly. It is one thing to convince people of a lie that you made up in private. It is quite another to convince them of a lie that supposedly took place in plan view of thousands of people. The first can be done easily, but the second not so much. The fact that Jesus was such a public figure, and that his number of followers exploded during the generation in which he lived, gives a great amount of credibility to the claims of the New Testament. The resurrection would be nearly impossible to falsify, since it took place for all to see.

Conclusion

These are just a few of the key arguments that have won me over into a believer and follower of Jesus Christ. To say that he rose from the dead is an astounding claim, but in my estimation the evidence to support it is about as strong as it could be. As I see it, those who believe the resurrection of Christ to be a ridiculous notion are not giving a fair shake to the evidence. In fact, to believe that Jesus rose from the dead is probably the most reasonable conclusion to come to when one looks at all the data and simply follows it to where it leads.

 

8 Ways to Protect Your Children From Sexual Abuse

Posted on March 30, 2017     1 Comment

It is the God-given responsibility of parents to protect their children as best as they can from danger. Many children suffer the horror of sexual abuse and often experience life-long trauma as a result. One of the best ways we can love them is to take practical steps to help ensure their safety. Here are some suggestions to get that started.

1. Talk to them about it early and often

Children are by definition naive. They only grow out of it in two ways: someone teaches them or they learn it by experience. When it comes to sexual abuse, the former is much preferable to the latter. Children won’t know that there are potential dangers unless they are taught that it is so.

You might ask, how old should they be before I talk to them about it? My answer is: if they can talk about concepts at all, you should talk about it. Granted, you won’t broach the subject with a 4 year old the way you would with a 12 year old. But the reality is that most parents wait too long to talk about it rather than starting too early. There are age-appropriate ways to discuss what children can have done to their bodies and by whom. If your children are still quite young, consider buying a copy of God Made All of Me by Justin and Lindsey Holcomb. It’s a great starting place.

2. Consider ditching sleepovers

Focus on the Family’s James Dobson advocated decades ago for avoiding sleepovers. More recently, blogger Tim Challies shared why his family doesn’t do sleepovers. His article has been viewed more than 8 million times and elicited strong reactions both for it and against it (you can read some letters he received here). It is definitely worth considering.

My own experience with sleepovers is mixed. Most of them were innocent, consisting of me and my cousins or friends performing Hulk Hogan and Ultimate Warrior moves on each other while trying not to break the furniture. But there were a few sleepovers where I found myself in a situation that I didn’t want to be in. I was never threatened or abused sexually, but the reality is that bad things happen when kids are together relatively unsupervised. And the thing about sleepovers is that it is hard to find the escape hatch. It’s one thing to have a situation on the playground at school where you can just walk away. It’s quite another to be at someone else’s house at 2am.

3. Monitor their online behaviour

The online world is incredibly dangerous. Children are vulnerable in a number of ways, be it cyber bullying, viewing pornography, or chatting with people they don’t really know. Drawing on my experience as a youth pastor, let me just say this clearly: nothing good happens when children have digital lives that are totally unsupervised. A parent should have access to their child’s digital world. Not only should they have access to it, they should have degrees of control over it.

Consider that teen girls know that the more sexual they are online, they more they will be liked by peers. In a similar way, teens boys live dual lives, being a different person online than they are in real life. This means that parents who think they know their kids are often misguided, because who they are digitally is not the same as who they are personally.

Sexual predators practice what is known as “grooming”, which is building a relationship of trust with a child before even bringing up anything sexual in nature. It is scary to say but many young people are naive and do not realize that the person they are talking to online could actually be someone else entirely.

Again, Tim Challies has some helpful advice. Consider reading and implementing his Porn-Free Family Plan, as well as checking out helpful tools to manage online activity in the home, such as the Circle device. At the very least, do something. To do nothing at all is to invite the most vile parts of humanity directly into your child’s life.

4. Know that “stranger danger” is an exception to the rule

According to some research, 85% of abuse cases are perpetrated by someone known to the victim. Often times this is a family member or close friend. While most parents rightly teach their kids to stay away from strangers (more on this below), they think little about protecting them from those closest to the family.

Perhaps this is why stopping sexual abuse is a near-impossible task: assaults come mostly from people who are considered trustworthy. When most people picture a sexual predator, they imagine the creepy looking man handing out suckers from a van. What they typically don’t picture is their brother or nephew. It is sad but true to say that people are very good at hiding the darkest parts of their lives from others around them.

I’m not advocating for paranoia. If taken too far, some might think the only safe place for their children is directly by their side! While that could be true, it is not a practical option in real life. All I am saying is that parents should not be too quick to assume that the danger to their children is always “out there”. Sometimes it is closer to home. Caution and wisdom, not paranoia, should be exercised.

5. Find out what other people are doing to protect your children

Do your children attend church? Do they go to day care? Play in a sports league? Participate in boy scouts? Gymnastics? Other things like these? Of course they do! And just as parents are responsible to protect children, so are other child-care providers.

Parents should not be shy about asking these organizations, what steps are you taking to ensure my child’s safety? Any organization that works with children should have policies in place designed to protect children from sexual abusers. While it’s hard to stop it from ever occurring, is it a no-brainer that sound preventative measures should be in place.

My own church has a “Child Safety & Abuse Policy” that complies with our denomination and insurance company. It includes things like volunteer screening, criminal background checks, annual training, and specific rules such as no adult is allowed to be alone with a child in an enclosed area. If a church or other organization doesn’t have a policy in place that they can refer you to quickly, they are crazy, behind the times, and potentially dangerous. Avoid them.

The safety of children is important. As a parent, don’t be timid in finding out what safety measures are in place where your child is being cared for.

6. Show them this video and talk about it

While most sexual abuse happens at the hands of someone known to the victim, that is not always the case. The video linked above shows how easy it is for children to be swayed by a pleasant stranger who offers them something nice.

It might be a worthwhile exercise to watch the video together and then talk about it. Some points you might want to include are:

  • Who is a trustworthy adult to you? (Make a list of names)
  • If someone offered you _____ (name something your child loves), should you go with them to get it?
  • When is it okay to disobey an adult?

7. Empower your kids to protect themselves

You can only watch over your children so much. At some point they need to be able to defend themselves. Teach your child about their body and empower them to take control over it. Let them know that no one has the right to violate their own body. Teach them that it’s ok to be rude to an adult in some instances.

Also, aim to create an environment of open communication and honesty in the home. Children might be afraid to talk about sexual abuse for a number of reasons:

  • They are afraid because their abuser has made threats
  • They have been manipulated by the abuser into thinking it’s their little secret
  • They are worried that mom or dad will be upset with them
  • They are ashamed
  • They secretly enjoy the encounters

Other reasons could be mentioned. The point is that open dialogue between children and parents is vital. This means that parents:

  • Should talk about taboo subjects so children know they are not off limits
  • Should not freak out if their child confides in them about personal things
  • Should ask their children about secrets they might be keeping
  • Should consider sharing their own stories to age-appropriate children
  • Should listen and look for warning signs

8. Trust your gut

As a parent, remember that you are in charge. At times you may doubt yourself or be told by others that you are going overboard, but you are not accountable to them. Ultimately you are accountable to God, to your child, to the law, and to your own conscience. There will be times when you don’t necessarily have concrete evidence to back a certain decision, but in the end it is usually best to go with your gut. I don’t necessarily believe in magic parent vibes or anything like that. But often we are able to sense that something is not right before we can articulate why. In such cases, I think it is best to usually err on the side of caution. After all, you would rather have had nothing to worry about than regret that you didn’t listen to the alarms in your head.

Have any other suggestions? Comment them below. Let’s keep our kids safe out there!