GAINESVILLE, Ga. –Just a few years ago, I sat in the University of Georgia football stadium as my son Todd walked across the stage to receive his college degree. As the ceremony ended with the traditional toss of the graduation caps, my wife Anne and I also were celebrating that Todd was beginning his new life with no student loan debt.
 
As the head of an organization that helps people get out of debt and develop financial skills for lifelong success, I could not help wondering the number of those students launching their careers anchored to debt. Turns out, quite a few.
 
An estimated two-thirds of the class of 2010 has student debt, according to The Student Debt Project, and the debt level is increasing each year.
 
During the 2007-08 school year, 39 percent of college students borrowed money for school, up from 34 percent four years earlier, according to the U.S. Department of Education’s National Center for Education Statistics. The numbers include private, federal and Parent PLUS loans. At the same time more students, 35 percent compared to 32 percent, borrowed Federal Stafford loans, the center reported. The Federal Reserve Bank of New York indicates student debt has surpassed not only total credit card balances, but also total car loan balances.
 
It gets worse.
 
Graduates left college in 2010 burdened by an average of more than $25,000 in debt, The Student Debt Project reported. Total college loan debt in this very tight market is nearly $1 trillion.
 
Ironically, the willingness to borrow becomes an incentive for schools to disregard cost-cutting measures. While the economy has sputtered along with 1 percent to 3 percent growth, the cost of a four-year public college education has gone up 25 percent over the last three years. An emotional blackmail of sorts is taking place, in which colleges raise their prices disproportionate to market events, holding the hope of the American dream over the heads of increasingly desperate teenagers and their parents.
 
I recently received an email solicitation from an ambitious high school senior asking for donations to sponsor her to the elite private school of her dreams. She was accepted based on her academic and leadership abilities but faced a four-year college cost of $165,000. These numbers look more like a mortgage bill to me.

Most disturbing is the government recently proposed a number of policy changes that will continue to fuel the bubble. The Obama administration has advocated moving more and more of the underwriting for these debts to the public sector, i.e. the taxpayer, while modifying the terms for repayment, shortening the time required for loan forgiveness and seeking to adjust interest rates irrespective of market forces. All of these measures would help current borrowers but also encourage borrowing as an expected practice.
 
It’s time to discuss the better solution: earning a college degree without debt. Not only is it possible, it is a prudent decision that parents, students and educators should champion.
 
Begin by evaluating students’ gifts and skills to direct them to a profitable field of study. Gone should be the days of changing majors midstream or graduating with an unmarketable degree.
 
Rather than only preparing for the SAT or ACT, students should pursue personal evaluations to determine what kinds of work could inspire them for a lifetime. A suggested tool is Crown’s Career Direct, an extensive personal assessment that discloses God-given skills and interests. For some, postponing college, getting a job and carefully choosing a major would be time well spent.
 
But for those ready to begin a college career, here are some steps to consider:
 
– Attend a community college for the first two years while living at home. It dramatically lowers the cost of a college education while allowing students to graduate from their chosen schools.
 
– Treat high school as the place to earn the grades that will garner scholarships and grants. High school is the highest paying job for anyone age 14-18; financial rewards can surpass $100,000.
 
– Take as many advanced placement classes as possible in high school. Earning college credits there saves money.
 
– Attend community college while in high school to earn credits and avoid freshman basic courses.
 
– Attend an affordable undergraduate institution, saving money for a master’s degree.
 
– Participate in a 529 plan, if available, for in-state institution.
 
– Open a Coverdell Educational Savings Account to save for college. Have relatives contribute to it as birthday and Christmas gifts.

– Participate in U-Promise, a program which uses consumer spending to generate money for college.
 
– Put a teenager’s Web browsing skills to good use looking for scholarships off the beaten path. Many big box stores like Walmart and Target offer a large number of small, general scholarships, $500 to $1,000 each, for local children. Every little bit helps.
 
– Get a part-time job. A student should be able to work at least five to 10 hours a week. Studies prove that students with jobs perform better in class.
 
– Consider the military. Reserve and active military students can earn money for education.
 
– Play for cash. Sports scholarships have long been a path to college for talented athletes.
 
Choosing debt should be done with a calculator and a good understanding of marketing your skills. In general, only 5 percent of after-tax income should go to debt repayment. When student debt devours more than 8 percent of available income, parents can expect a knock on the door, as their offspring return to the nest.
 
No student should come home from college ignorant of the high cost of debt as a drain on their lives for years to come. For parents and students considering their options, understanding debt – and avoiding it – should be part of College Prep 101.
 
(EDITOR’S NOTES – Chuck Bentley is CEO of Crown Financial Ministries. The S.A.L.T. Plan, How to Prepare for an Economic Crisis of Biblical Proportions, is his latest book. Get Chuck’s free weekly e-newsletter, “Handwriting on the Wall,” at Crown.org/handwriting or by calling 1-800-722-1976.)

NASHVILLE, Tenn. – Having been a Child Protective Services (CPS) worker and later an adult probation officer with a specialized sex offender caseload, I can assure you that child abuse in the form of sexual molestation is very real. I conducted hundreds of investigations and interviews with victims, child molesters and numerous mental health counselors over the course of 10 years. And yes, such child abuse actually exists in our churches – which should not come as a surprise because our churches are made up of fallen human beings who live in a fallen world.

As I reflect on my experiences in Texas with CPS and as a probation officer, several thoughts occur to me that should help Southern Baptists address this critical issue.

The reality
First, we must recognize that the problem is real – not just “out there,” but even in our churches.

I faced this reality one day at the probation office when, much to my surprise, a man who had just received felony probation for sexual abuse of a minor walked in – and he was from my own church! He had been a schoolteacher and very active in the life of the church. Even with all my years of experience, my initial reaction was to not believe this was really true, but it was. Not only did the terms of his probation state he could no longer teach, but it was made clear to him that he could never again have any role at church or in the community involving work with children.

I wish this were the only case I had encountered involving members of evangelical churches, but it wasn’t.

The trust factor
Children are taught to trust their parents, other family members, their teachers, ministers, those in authority over them. Children are abused most often by people they know, people they trust, not usually by some stranger in a dark trench coat.

There are various terms used to describe individuals who sexually abuse children, such as child molester, predator and perpetrator. Each term represents the image of an individual who attempts to exploit someone else for personal gain using deception to carry out his or her purposes. And these predators use the victims’ trust to gain access to their bodies.

The Bible says children are a gift from God. We are responsible to protect them from being treated as mere possessions to be controlled by the whims of the persons they have been taught to trust.

No discrimination
Studies clearly show that child molesters are from all walks of life – there are no ethnic, economic, religious, educational or gender barriers. Both men and women are abusers, and both girls and boys are victims. Child molestation is an equal opportunity destroyer. Given the opportunity, it will destroy children and families from all walks of life.

Recidivism
From my own interviews with perpetrators, victims and mental health counselors, it is undeniable that many perpetrators have multiple victims and abuse them multiple times. It is clear that when given the opportunity, a significant percentage of those – Christians as well as non-Christians – with a past record of sexual abuse will repeat that offense. A person who has used his or her position of trust to sexually abuse a child simply should not be allowed to remain in that position of trust.

Accordingly, we must hold the actual “perpetrator” responsible for the behavior he or she has chosen. This is not denying the sincerity of a person’s genuine repentance or withholding forgiveness – perpetrators can and should be forgiven. But they should never be allowed to work with children again in any capacity. That is part of the consequences for their actions. Their lives can still be useful and productive but their activities must be steered to other areas of their giftedness, particularly as it applies to work in the church.

Cooperate within the system
Sometimes the various government agencies are scorned and demonized, but I worked alongside many fine and dedicated social workers and probation officers. I personally prayed over my jobs and specific cases throughout those years asking for discernment to make good casework decisions for families, but in particular for the innocent children. I knew plenty of other workers who shared my faith and my commitment to families and children.

Consistently, the Department of Human Services’ goal was to either keep families together or restore families whenever possible. Even with the best expertise, sometimes professionals are not able to protect children. The authorities do not expect church staff or other laypeople to have perfect discernment. However, you should follow your state’s laws in reporting child abuse, and greater still, you should go beyond man’s law and follow God’s law in how we are to treat one another.

The Scripture tells us to be wise as serpents. We dare not fool ourselves into thinking that child molestation would never happen in my home, in my child’s school, in my church or in my community.

Child abuse is a tragic reality – but we can take steps to dramatically reduce the number of incidents and the shattered lives that result, and we have the responsibility to do the best we can to that end.

(EDITOR’S NOTE – Janice LaRoy is an office and editorial assistant in the SBC Executive Committee’s office of convention relations. This article first appeared in SBC LIFE, journal of the Executive Committee.)

Related story
Protect your church’s children against sexual abuse nightmare
Background checks are on the rise, LifeWay reports

LYNWOOD, Wash. – According to the Declaration of Independence, our Founding Fathers held certain truths to be self-evident. By my understanding, that means that there were some things we could agree were true even if millions of dollars had not been spent studying the subject.

For many of us, that list would include the idea that drugs are bad, nice people have more friends, and that it’s a good thing for kids to have a mom and dad.

Curiously, what used to be self-evident is apparently quite controversial. In March I was part of a forum during which I was accused of bearing false witness for saying it is preferable for kids to have a mom and a dad.

On one hand it concerns me that otherwise intelligent adults would argue that it isn’t at least desirable for kids to be connected to their mother and father. But as someone interested in winning a public debate on the marriage issue, it encourages me when the other side forced to defend the absurd.

The other side counters the idea that kids should have both a mom and dad by pointing out that some moms and dads are bad parents. While unfortunately true, this response misses the point. The point is not that every man and woman are great parents, but that it is ideal if the great parents we hope for are that child’s biological mom and dad. If that is impossible, an adoptive mom and dad are the preferred alternative. Historically, this has not been an outrageous thing to say.

Many people don’t feel passionately about the same-sex “marriage” issue. They may be sympathetic to the so-called gay rights movement because they think everyone deserves to be treated fairly. But fairness cannot be defined as the right to marry whomever you want, because not even those pushing to redefine marriage believe there should be no restrictions on who can get married.

In their pursuit of fairness, I don’t think the average voter is willing to abandon the idea that it is preferable for kids to have a mom and a dad.

Unfortunately for them, supporters of same-sex “marriage” must make that argument. In order to argue that marriage should be redefined, they argue that homosexual relationships are in every way the equivalent of heterosexual relationships. In order to believe that, you must conclude that it is unimportant for children to have a mother and father – otherwise, the presence or absence of both a mom and a dad would represent a relevant difference between the relationships.

But because their position requires them to deny any meaningful difference, they are forced into arguing that moms and dads, and men and women, are interchangeable and independently insignificant.

Logic suggests that when one conclusion requires you to believe something that is obviously untrue, you should reconsider your conclusion. But for those who disagree with us on the marriage issue, they don’t have that option. Yet for the casual observer of the debate, I still believe logic can prevail.

So stick with what works. Moms and dads are preferable. Most people recognize that. And once people come to terms with the fact that the redefinition of marriage requires people also to conclude that moms and dads are simply one of many acceptable options, I think we win. After all, most people still understand that some truths really are self-evident.

(EDITOR’S NOTE – Joseph Backholm is executive director of the Family Policy Institute of Washington, online at fpiw.org, where this column first appeared. Citizens in Washington likely will vote on the definition of marriage in November.)

JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. (BP) – By now we’ve all read or heard too much information about the Secret Service prostitution scandal. At least 20 women were in hotel rooms with U.S. agents and military personnel just before President Obama arrived for a summit with Latin American leaders.

Eleven Secret Service agents and 10 military personnel are now under investigation. The 11 Secret Service agents were recalled to the U.S. from Colombia and placed on administrative leave after a night of partying that allegedly ended with at least some bringing prostitutes back to their hotel room. On Monday, April 17 the agency announced that it also had revoked the agents’ security clearances. The 10 U.S. military personnel staying at the same hotel also were being investigated for their role in the alleged misconduct.

As with all immoral sexual encounters, a lack of truth is evidenced by multiple stories about who the women were. Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee stated, “Some are admitting [the women] were prostitutes, others are saying they’re not. They’re just women they met at the hotel bar.” A lie to yourself and others almost always accompanies sexual sins.

This incident is despicable enough. However, the vast majority of the commentary by national media is further evidence that we are a nation in trouble. On more than one occasion and on more than one channel, collectively we have heard the commentators attempt to justify the sexual immorality with phrases like, “boys will be boys,” or “they deserved some down time and de-stressing,” or “the women were simply providing services.”

Obviously, from the national media perspective, the potential national security threat was of greater concern than the immoral behavior of the agents, service men or the prostitutes. There were those who used the word “shame” to speak about the breach in national security. However, the word was rarely attached to the immoral behavior of those involved in the incident.

This is clear evidence that the moral fabric of the United States is ripped apart. Be assured, our enemies know it. The only reason we don’t confess it is because we prefer denial to reality and authenticity.

After decades of parading hedonistic behavior on the networks and in the movie houses, after decades of affirming self-indulgence (what happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas), after decades of social experiments on our young through amoral educational processes and the affirmation of fatherless families, we are reaping a whirlwind of disaster.

The only hope for my great-grandchildren to experience the freedoms that we so love in our nation is a mighty movement of God. How can that happen? It starts in us when we value the purity of a relationship with God more than the sirens’ song of our culture. It starts with God’s people when our children and our friends see that we believe spiritual disciplines are better than entertainment, power or making the next buck. It begins when we use words that depict our authentic relationships and personal responsibility instead of cultural words of pleasure and individual rights.

Such a movement continues when the people of God embrace His agenda of transforming lives through the gospel of Jesus our Lord. When thousands of churches are less concerned about themselves and begin to see the true condition of people’s lives, we will know that God is moving across this land. When the altars of our churches are full of people shedding tears of repentance and calling out for the salvation of the people they know and love, then we will know that God is restoring the fabric of our nation.

Lord, bring us back to You.

(EDITOR’S NOTE – John Yeats is executive director of the Missouri Baptist Convention and recording secretary of the Southern Baptist Convention.)

NASHVILLE, Tenn. – After both Vice President Joe Biden and Secretary of Education Arne Duncan pushed for acceptance of same-sex marriage May 6, North Carolina reversed the trend and became the *30th state to amend its constitution to define marriage as an act between one man and one woman.

Now President Barack Obama has affirmed his support of same-sex marriage. The president’s statements should come as no surprise.

His refusal to defend the Defense of Marriage Act and his comments about “evolving” on the issue both pointed toward this event. I Tweeted recently that I expected such a move from the president. The only remote surprise is the timing of his announcement. I, like many others, expected this announcement after he had won a second term in November. This announcement accelerated the timeline of an inevitable conversation.

So how do we as evangelicals respond?

Last year I wrote a brief post on the future of the evangelical response regarding homosexuality after Starbucks’ Howard Schultz withdrew from speaking at the Willow Creek Leadership Summit. In that post, I listed five principles to consider about the issue of homosexuality and evangelical churches. Those principles still apply today.

The issue is not going away, and you cannot ignore it or seek to downplay your views. Since Stonewall, the gay rights movement has continued to gain influence. Evangelicals have responded poorly at times and earned a reputation for intolerance. Now, as they seek a more biblical and grace-filled response, we cannot erase our past mistakes. However, we can control our attitudes and responses in the future by being clear and gracious at the same time.

The culture sees this as a “justice” issue – Christians discriminating on the basis of immutable characteristics.

Christians have always believed and taught that God’s standard and intent is a man, a woman, a marriage and a lifetime. To us, that just makes sense, but to an increasing number in our culture, this is simply discrimination. President Obama clearly justifies his reason for supporting gay marriage because of the Golden Rule – the idea that we should treat others justly, as we would want to be treated.

Though it is easy to make the case in the church that homosexual practice (and marriage) is incompatible with scripture, it will be an exceedingly difficult case to make in today’s culture.

I mention in “Subversive Kingdom” an example of running for school board. A half a century ago you would not have been considered for public office in most communities without a strong record of service in and loyalty to a local church. Today that same qualification, if the church teaches biblical truths about homosexuality, is a detriment to one’s candidacy in many areas of our country. This will become more of an issue in days to come.

Building bridges and showing grace and love is lacking, needed and essential when dealing with people with different views and values.

Many Christians are more concerned that they take every opportunity to clearly condemn homosexuality. Simply put, I do not think you or I need to begin every conversation with a statement of our opposition to homosexuality. We can, indeed, show some grace to those who struggle while believing what the Scriptures clearly teach.

At the end of the day, all evangelicals will still have to deal with an issue on which the evangelical view is perceived as narrow and bigoted.

Evangelicals will continue to be pressured to accept a worldview rooted in cultural acceptance rather than biblical revelation. While President Obama’s thoughts on certain issues may evolve, the biblical teaching has not. We can listen to Dan Savage and decide to “ignore” the Bible’s teachings on homosexuality, or we can live with the fact of what the Bible teaches and recognize that, because of such, our reputations will suffer.

Christians have said a lot of unhelpful things about the subject over the years – but that does not mean we cannot say helpful things now. The most helpful truth is the biblical truth. In the midst of a complicated issue, we need to admit to poor engagement in the past, speak of the complexities of the issues involved, but always point to biblical truth and change that can be found in Christ.

(EDITOR’S NOTE – Ed Stetzer is president of LifeWay Research. This column first appeared on his blog at EdStetzer.com.)

*While N.C. became the 30th state to amend its constitution to define marriage as an act between one man and one woman, it became the 31st state to vote in favor of a marriage amendment to its constitution.

LOUISVILLE, Ky. – Mother’s Day is a particularly sensitive time in many congregations, and pastors and church leaders often don’t even know it. This is true even in congregations that don’t focus the entire service around the event as if it were a feast day on the church’s liturgical calendar. Infertile women, and often their husbands, are still often grieving in the shadows.

It is good and right to honor mothers. The Bible calls us to do so. Jesus does so with his own mother. We must recognize, though, that many infertile women find this day almost unbearable. This is not because these women are (necessarily) bitter or covetous or envious. The day is simply a reminder of unfulfilled longings, longings that are good.

Some pastors, commendably, mention in their sermons and prayers on this day those who want to be mothers but who have not had their prayers answered. Some recognize those who are mothers not to children, but to the rest of the congregation as they disciple spiritual daughters in the faith. This is more than a “shout-out” to those who don’t have children. It is a call to the congregation to rejoice in those who “mother” the church with wisdom, and it’s a call to the church to remember those who long desperately to hear “Mama” directed at them.

What if pastors and church leaders were to set aside a day for prayer for the infertile?

In too many churches ministry to infertile couples is relegated to support groups that meet in the church basement during the week, under cover of darkness. Now it’s true that infertile couples need each other. The time of prayer and counsel with people in similar circumstances can be helpful.

But this alone can contribute to the sense of isolation and even shame experienced by those hurting in this way. Moreover, if the only time one talks about infertility is in a room with those who are currently infertile, one is probably going to frame the situation in rather hopeless terms.

In fact, almost every congregation is filled with previously infertile people, including lots and lots who were told by medical professionals that they would never have children. Most of those (most of us, I should say) who fit into that category don’t really talk about it much because they simply don’t think of themselves in those terms. The baby or babies are here, and the pain of the infertility has subsided. Infertile couples need to see others who were once where they are, but who have been granted the blessing they seek.

What if, at the end of a service, the pastor called any person or couple who wanted prayer for children to come forward and then asked others in the congregation to gather around them and pray? Not every person grappling with infertility will do this publicly, and that’s alright. But many will. And even those too embarrassed to come forward will be encouraged by a church willing to pray for those hurting this way. The pastor could pray for God’s gift of children for these couples, either through biological procreation or through adoption, whichever the Lord should desire in each case.

Regardless of how you do it, remember the infertile as the world around us celebrates motherhood. The Proverbs 31 woman needs our attention, but the 1 Samuel 1 woman does, too.

(EDITOR’S NOTE – Russell D. Moore is dean of the school of theology at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, Ky. This column first appeared at russellmoore.com.)

RICHMOND, Va. (BP) – Don’t look back.

That is one of the worst pieces of advice you’ll ever hear. Naturally, you hear it all the time. “Positive thinkers” and pop psychologists love it. Forget the past, they say. You can’t change it, so why dwell on it? Move on. Sunshine will follow the rain. Tomorrow will bring a new you. The next shot will fall. Insert your own cliché here.

“Waste not fresh tears over old griefs,” recommended Euripides, the great Greek dramatist, more than 2,400 years ago. Now that’s good advice. But regret is a response to memory, not memory itself. To forget our past is to forget who we are – individually and collectively.

Yes, the Apostle Paul urged believers to lay aside the past in their pursuit of knowing God: “(F)orgetting what lies behind and reaching forward to what lies ahead, I press on toward the goal for the prize of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus” (Philippians 3:13b-14). And he’s right. We should not obsess about past sins and failures, but look to God, rejoice in His patient mercy and relentlessly follow Him toward glory.

But Paul never forgot where he came from, what he had thought as a Pharisee and what he had done as a one-time enemy of the gospel. He never forgot the long, dangerous, often discouraging road he had walked as an early apostle of Christ. And he never forgot the many ways God’s grace had pulled him from the pit to the mountaintop. Those experiences forged Paul into the man he eventually became. They stayed with him, informing his future attitudes, decisions and actions.

“The past is never dead,” William Faulkner wrote. “It’s not even past.”

Nor should it be. The Lord gave us memories for a reason. Even the painful ones. The Divine Physician has a way of healing us without removing our memories entirely. If we forget the pain, how can we minister to the hurting? If we forget the darkness, how can we lead others toward light?

Memories are precious things. As Saul Bellow observed, “They keep the wolf of insignificance from the door.” Who are you without the memory of who you have been, what you have thought and done, the people you have known? That’s why memory-killing afflictions such as Alzheimer’s are so heartbreaking, both for the people who experience them and their loved ones. Alzheimer’s is a thief that steals whole chunks of who we are.

A recent movie, “The Iron Lady,” is a meditation on memory. It is about former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher and won actress Meryl Streep her third Academy Award. It might be Streep’s greatest performance in a long line of them. The film itself, however, has been criticized for focusing not on Thatcher the world-changing political leader of the 1970s and ’80s but on Thatcher the lioness in winter, elderly and infirm, confused, engaging in imaginary conversations with her late husband, Denis.

I found it deeply moving. Streep as Thatcher reflects on past events large and small: a girlhood working for her grocer father, meeting her future husband, challenging a male-dominated political world as a young member of Parliament, motherhood, triumphs and defeats, war and terrorism, national turmoil and progress, doubts, questions, resolution.

Looking back is an inward journey we all must take as our earthly lives approach the farther shore. Memory helps us along the way.

Memory is a gift from God. More than that, it is a command and a sacrament. “Do this in remembrance of Me,” Christ told His disciples as He introduced the Lord’s Supper on the last night He spent with them (Luke 22:19-20).

“Bless the Lord, O my soul, and forget none of His benefits,” David sang (Psalm 103:2). Remembering who God is and the glorious things He has done is part and parcel of worshipping Him.

In his great farewell address to the children of Israel as they prepared to enter the Promised Land, Moses thundered: “Hear, O Israel! The Lord is our God, the Lord is one! You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might. These words, which I am commanding you today, shall be on your heart. You shall teach them diligently to your sons and shall talk of them when you sit in your house and when you walk by the way and when you lie down and when you rise up. You shall bind them as a sign on your hand and they shall be as frontals on your forehead. You shall write them on the doorposts of your house and on your gates” (Deuteronomy 6:4-9, NASB).

Why go to such lengths? To remember – from one day to the next, from parent to child, from generation to generation and age to age – who God is and what He has done. Review the tragic history of the ancient Israelites to see what happened when they forgot. Remembering God is as important as obeying Him; indeed, it is part of obedience.

Look back. Remember. Praise God for His marvelous grace and mercy. Then look ahead without fear or regret.

(EDITOR’S NOTE – Erich Bridges is IMB global correspondent. Visit “WorldView Conversation,” the blog related to this column, at http://worldviewconversation.blogspot.com/. Listen to an audio version at http://media1.imbresources.org/files/150/15063/15063-83366.mp3.)

Sometimes I am asked how the North American Mission Board (NAMB) is prioritizing its work in North America. There are probably a few different ways we could do that, but I tell people we are letting the numbers draw our map and letting God be our guide.
 
Here’s what I mean by letting the numbers draw our map. One of the best ways to gauge spiritual need in North America is to look at the ratio of congregations to population in a particular area. Missiologists tell us it is best to have at least one congregation for every 1,000 people in an area. One to 500 would be even better.
 
With that ratio in mind, Southern Baptists are doing pretty well in some areas. For instance, we have one congregation for every 1,404 people in Mississippi. In Alabama it is one for every 1,451. And in Arkansas, one for every 1,922.
 
Those numbers are very encouraging. We should celebrate how effective Southern Baptists have been in these states and others in the South. But let’s look elsewhere.
 
Our congregation-to-population ratios change dramatically when we look toward other regions in North America. In Iowa there is only one congregation for every 30,464 people. In Michigan it is one for every 34,318. In the Pennsylvania-South Jersey state convention it’s one for every 40,132 people. In New York there are 62,362 people for every one SBC congregation.
 
In the Minnesota-Wisconsin convention, there is only one SBC congregation for every 75,799 people. That means there are 54 times more people per SBC congregation in Minnesota-Wisconsin than there are people per SBC congregation in Mississippi. What a difference a few hundred miles can make!

In Canada, Southern Baptists have only one congregation for every 117,212 people.
 
These needs are huge and as believers we want to do all we can to give people in all of these areas better access to the gospel.
 
But still, we need a strategy as we approach such a large task.
 
With that in mind, NAMB has identified states and provinces in the United States and Canada based on the level of need, which is based on these congregation-to-population ratios.
 
Red states – those with the highest need – are any with ratios higher than 1-to-20,000.
 
That includes all of Canada, virtually all of the Northeast and some states in the Midwest and West.
 
Yellow states are those with between 10,000 and 20,000 people per SBC congregation.
 
Green states have better than a 1-to-10,000 ratio between people and churches. It won’t surprise you to learn that all of the 13 states in the South region fall into the green category. But you might be surprised by some of the others that show up.
 
Missouri, West Virginia, Alaska, Montana, Wyoming and New Mexico all fall into the green category.
Does this mean NAMB will ignore the needs in green states?
 
Absolutely not.
 
We still want to help make churches there stronger and help our partners start churches in population centers where our ratios are lower. But as we seek to penetrate lostness at its highest levels in North America, we have to look at sheer numbers.
 
That’s where the red, yellow and green list will help.
 
As we look at where most of our funding and church planting resources will go, NAMB must look at red states first.
 
We have to start closing the gap in areas where congregation-to-population ratios are the highest. To impact lostness, we have to give people in those areas better access to the gospel.
 
Of course, there are other considerations as we chart this course. In some areas, other evangelical churches are proclaiming the gospel effectively.
 
The presence of these churches cuts congregation-to-population ratios considerably.
 
And we also must realize that just because a church exists, doesn’t mean it is reaching its community. So these numbers can only serve as a map as we become more familiar with a particular area.
 
NAMB’s Send North America strategy is informed by these numbers. We are especially concentrating on large cities where Southern Baptist congregation-to-population ratios have slipped the most in recent decades. But God is our ultimate guide.
 
That’s why we are keeping some of our budget flexible, so when we see God’s activity in a particular state or region, we can move quickly to get more funds and more missionaries to that place.
 
If we let the numbers make our map and let God be our guide, I believe Southern Baptists will be on a better track for penetrating lostness where it looms largest in North America.
 
(EDITOR’S NOTE – This article is one of a series Kevin Ezell, president of the North American Mission Board, is writing about NAMB strategy and direction. To read the entire series, visit kevinezell.com. To learn how you or your church can become involved in reaching North America for Christ, visit namb.net and click “Mobilize Me.”)

Numbers are neither the reason the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC) exists nor the best thing we do together. However, the Annual Church Profile (ACP) process exhibits the voluntary cooperation between local churches, associations, state conventions and the national entities.
 
Therefore, the participation rate among churches each year is an indication of our level of cooperation. Unfortunately, the indicators of cooperation are not heading in the right direction.
 
Last year, the ACP participation rate was the lowest ever recorded, and the national totals were reported later than ever before because of a delay in reporting. And the 2011 national statistics, which LifeWay reported in April, included fewer common items than any previous year.
 
These changes may be an indication that some churches no longer value their connection to the SBC, but I am guessing it is because many do not see the importance of the ACP.
 
The most basic product of the ACP is an annual list of who we are as a group of churches who voluntarily cooperate with each other. I recall in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, local associations and state conventions, with the support of national entities, were able to check on every Southern Baptist church in the affected areas. The value of our cooperation was never more evident than when we saw independent churches with no one coming to their aid or even knowing to check on them in those first critical days.
 
The second primary benefit the ACP provides is statistical measures and benchmarks. Facts are our friends, and they help us hold ourselves accountable. Accurate measurement says something about the church, the association, the state convention, and the SBC as a whole. Clearly the items reported on the ACP do not measure everything that matters in a church, but it is hard to argue that the types of information requested don’t matter. In fact, most churches already compile the requested statistics for their own use.
 
Every week SBC churches are counting attendance and offerings. Every month they are checking their membership totals. And, each year most churches note their VBS attendance and missions participation.
I am aware some pastors question why they should share their church’s information with the convention. But, I am also aware that what we measure points to what we value. If we want SBC churches to grow, want new SBC churches to be added, want more individuals to be involved in Bible study and missions, and want churches to cooperate in Great Commission giving, we should be willing to measure our progress.
 
For 2011, a list of 14 common items was requested from every state convention. Common items worded the same in every state allow these statistics to be combined as national totals. Some states also ask supplemental questions based on the needs of their state convention.
 
Unfortunately, every state did not ask all of the 14 common items in 2011, so the national totals will include additional calculations and footnotes where the item cannot be determined for the entire SBC. Over the next few weeks many validation checks will occur on data from each state convention, looking for items that appear to be a mistake or are inconsistent. LifeWay notifies each state convention of items that need to be checked and even prioritizes the oddities to ensure those that would most impact national totals are addressed first. The later the data is received, the less time is available for validation and follow-up.
 
In most cases this checking involves the state convention contacting the local church or association to make sure information is correct. This is not always easy, but timely trouble-shooting by the state conventions makes for more accurate data and allows national totals to be reported on time. When one group is late the entire process must wait.
 
When LifeWay reports the 2011 statistics, we will no doubt highlight which numbers have increased and which have decreased. But don’t miss the other story in these numbers – the story of cooperation. Each number is a symbol of our cooperation, each total a sum of our unity. So, pastor, please lead your church to report in 2012. State convention leaders, please lead your convention to report in a timely and common fashion (for 2011 and 2012) so that we can report these numbers sooner – and better – to more effectively serve us all. And, thanks for the opportunity to cooperate with you each year in this process.
 
(EDITOR’S NOTE – Ed Stetzer is vice president of research and ministry development at LifeWay Christian Resources. LifeWay Research coordinates the Southern Baptist Convention’s Annual Church Profile reporting system.)

The question of plagiarism in sermon preparation is rather tricky, primarily because we are interpreting a document (the Bible) which has been interpreted by thousands of people for the last 3,000 years. Almost everything we say, especially relating to Christo-centric interpretation, Greek and Hebrew linguistics or historical context, comes from commentaries and other sermons.
 
A while back I did a study of the official “rules” of plagiarism in preaching. They’re really hard to nail down. There are lots of articles written about it. People seem to agree that you don’t have to acknowledge every single instance when you gain an insight from someone else – after all, there is nothing new under the sun. On the other hand, we can’t copy another’s work and ideas and represent them as our own.
So, I generally operate by the following rules for myself:
 
1. If I ever preach the gist of another person’s sermon, meaning that I used the lion’s share of their message’s organization, points, or applications, I give credit. I don’t ever think it’s a good idea to preach someone else’s sermon. In those rare times when you feel like you just can’t help it, you have to give credit. A sermon is a major thought unit. If it’s not yours, you have to acknowledge where it came from.
 
2. If I glean an interpretation of a passage from someone, but the organization of the points, application and presentation are my own, I generally do not feel the need to cite. After all, if it is a ‘new interpretation,’ it is probably heresy. We should be generally clear, however, that we are learning from others (this is the tricky part – how much and how often so to be honest and yet not overly cumbersome). Usually, I do not cite which commentary or author gave me the interpretation of a Greek or Hebrew word. Thus, I did not feel the need to explain when I learn a Hebrew or Greek nuance from MacArthur, Carson, Keller, Kidner, Kittel, or whomever.
 
[John] Piper says it this way: “To base the structure of your sermon on someone else’s sermon, but to use your own words, is plagiarism. The author on whose work you are basing the structure of your sermon would need to be cited.”
 
3. When I take a direct point or a line or the creative wording of a truth from someone, I feel like I should cite. I obey this rule usually. The first 19 times I said “God is most glorified in us when we are most satisfied in Him,” I cited Piper.  Now I only cite him on that phrase every other time. People at my church know where I got it from. A newcomer might think I am trying to imply that I made it up. But I would annoy my congregation to death if every time I mentioned it now I said, “As John Piper says …”
 
4. When I give a list that someone else has come up with or offer some piece of cultural analysis, I feel like I should cite. Again, a list or an organizational scheme is a thought unit. The truths inside that structure may not be unique to that person, but the organization of the presentation of those points is.
 
5.   If I hear a story told by someone else that reminds me of a story of [my] own, and I tell that story from my own life, I don’t think I need always to identify where I got the idea for that story from originally. I frequently hear intros and applications for which I find corollaries in my own life. Sometimes I feel the need to cite where the idea originated, and sometimes I don’t.  It’s kind of a gut thing that depends on how truly unique the idea was.
 
I try to be as transparent as I can with my congregation that I am heavily indebted to some particular theologians and teachers, and even some friends. Recently these have included Keller, Lewis, Piper, Kreeft, Packer, MacDonald, Luther, Edwards, Powlison, Welch, Stanley, Driscoll, and others. We also publish a manuscript each week in which I try to be a little clearer about sources I am drawing from about various points. I’ve found that most of these guys are heavily indebted to their own set of people they draw from.
 
I want to be zealous so as not to represent myself as more brilliant and original than I really am. The truth is I have had only three truly original ideas in my life, and they were not really that good. Almost all the others have been learned from the historic church, both ancient and modern.
 
(EDITOR’S NOTE – J.D. Greear is the pastor of The Summit Church in Durham. Because of limited space, Greear’s column was not run in its entirety. Check out his April 13 post at jdgreear.com to read the complete article.)