CWoznicki Think Out Loud

They are People too! – Getting to Know Your Campus

Ministry – whether its parish ministry, youth ministry, ministry in a mega church, or ministry in a community church – is all about getting to know your people.

When you do college campus ministry that truth does not go out the door. However, what you need to know about your people changes a little bit. Yes you still need to know your students personally. You need to know what makes those individuals tick. You need to know what their passions and likes are. You need to know where each student likes to hang out. You need to know what kinds of classes the students take, and who their professors are. However, knowing who your are ministering to goes a step beyond simply knowing students personally – you need to know the institution you are ministering in.

This might sound a bit strange, but its true….

College Campuses are a lot like people.

Yes, even though they are institutions, college campuses are a lot like people. They have history, they have tradition, they have a story behind why they were formed. They have little quirks about them that you can’t learn simply by reading up on them. They have things that they are passionate about and things that they really dislike. They have relationships with other schools. They have beliefs about what is right and what is wrong, what is valuable and what is worthless. Again this might sound weird – but college campuses are a lot like people so you better get to know your campus.

Much like people, college campuses also have beliefs about what is right and what is wrong, what is valuable and what is worthless.

As you do ministry on campus here are a few questions you should ask yourself and others about your college:

1- What is your college’s story?

When was the school founded?
Why was the school founded?
Who founded the school?
What has each president emphasized during their term at the school?
Did this school model itself after another school?

2- What cultural idols rule the school?

What one word best characterizes your school (party, tolerance, free thinking, etc.)
What are students passionate about?
Does the school care about sports?
What are the most popular majors?

3- How does the gospel address your school’s story and idols?

What does the school (not just the students) assume the world should be like?
What sort of behaviors does the school (not just students) deem as being wrong?
What does the school think the “good life” consists of?
How do they hope to accomplish or bring into existence the so-called “good life?”

As you go about ministering to students on campus, don’t forget, you don’t simply minister to students, you minister to an institution as well. That institution has its own story, its own idols, and its own version of the “gospel.” So ask these and many more questions about your school – doing so will help make ministering to your college a lot more effective.

Lost in Transition

“We are going to lose them…”

Those words often get tossed around when church leaders discuss high school students making the transition into college. To a certain extent this is a legitimate worry – there are many factors in play as to why students get lost in transition. This is especially a concern for churches that have both a high school ministry and a college ministry. Naturally there are cultural patterns that influence high school students to disconnect from church as soon as they graduate – but its not only their fault. The church should accept its responsibility and admit that it is partly to blame for why students get lost in transition.

As summer approaches my church faces the challenge (that many other churches face) of how we are going to help our high school seniors make a successful transition into our college ministry. But there are several things that we do to help them make this arduous transition; for instance we make sure that our college ministry and its leaders interact often with the High School ministry – that way the Seniors have some familiar faces when they come into the college ministry. We also encourage some of our college leaders to attend camps/events and hang out with the seniors during the few months before they graduate. These are just a few of many things that we do to help them make this transition, however there are some issues that the American church as a whole needs to address if this generation is going to make the jump from being believers as children and teenagers to being believers as adults. If the church doesn’t address these issues we will have a generation that gets lost in transition…

David Kinnaman, in his latest book You Lost Me, outlines six reasons why so many people in this generation get lost in transition:

Many see the church as overprotective and sheltered.
Many see the church as shallow, including its teaching.
Many see the church as anti-science.
Many see the church as repressive and judgmental.
Many see the church as exclusive.
Many see the church as an unsafe place to express doubt.

It would seem as though this is actually a perception issue, as though the Church has made some bad PR moves and all that needs to happen is that the Church needs to do a better job in how it portrays itself. However the issue is much deeper than that….

Some of these issues spring from the church acting in an un-Christlike manner, prioritizing religion over authentic faith, however some of these issues spring from a clash between the gospel and cultural norms. We know that the church cannot compromise the gospel for the sake of coming in line with cultural norms. However, as the church ensures that we don’t let this generation slip out of our hands we will need to reexamine ourselves and make sure that we aren’t pushing people away because we refuse to let go of religious norms and traditions.

In other words, we need to look at this list and determine which of these factors if any are the logical consequence of the gospel and which of these factors are birthed out of our own tradition and preference.

Book Review – Interpreting the General Letters: An Exegetical Handbook by Herbert Bateman IV

Over the years I have really come to appreciate all sorts of interpretive handbooks. One of my favorite is the “Handbook on the… prophets, historical books, wisdom books, etc.” series published by Baker Academic. But recently I was given a review copy of the General Letters volume of the “Handbooks for New Testament Exegesis” series. If the rest of the series is as good as this volume, it will soon become one of my favorite handbook series as well.

Interpreting the General Letters by Herbert Bateman IV, professor at the Cyber-Center for Biblical Studies, provides the reader with a step by step approach for analyzing and communicating the general letters.

The book is divided up into several sections:

Two chapters on “background” material to the general letters.
A chapter on the theology of the general letters
Two chapters on how to interpret the general letters using exegetical methods
Two chapters on communicating the general letters through expository writing and preaching
A chapter on other sources that can aid the interpreter in the exegetical task
An appendix with an annotated selection of NT Commentaries

Especially strong are the first few chapters which provide the background necessary for interpreting these texts. One interesting point that Bateman makes in this section is that Jude is actually written to address the issue of Jewish rebellion that permeated all of Judea and that it was not actually written to repudiate false teachers. In other words Jude is a political text. This was quite a surprising interpretation of Jude. Nevertheless it is an interpretation that is worthwhile thinking about.

Also, another strong part of the text is Bateman’s step by step instructions for moving from clausal analysis to preaching on a Sunday morning. Following his step by step instructions can be tedious and time consuming, but eventually those steps will become second nature for the preacher/teacher. Nevertheless, it was helpful to see those steps clearly explicated.

Overall this handbook for interpretation will be a valuable addition to any pastor, teacher, or student’s library. It is certainly a book that I will recommend to the students in my General Letter’s class. Also, I really look forward to reading the other volumes in this series.

(Note: I received the book for free from the publisher in exchange for an unbiased review.)

Why Ke$ha gets St. Augustine Right (Cultural Capital pt. 2)

A while ago we took a look at James’ call to believers – if you are a believer in Jesus Christ you don’t show favoritism. Period.

This discussion led us to think a little bit about “cultural capital.” Which are those things that we “exchange” or “reveal” in order to get some sort of cultural good i.e. favor, prestige, status, friends, followers, gifts.

We concluded by asking some questions:

So what contributes to what counts as cultural capital within any one particular culture? How do people come to learn what is worth something and what isn’t? Is it simply because somebody told us once that some thing is valuable and some other thing is not?

Today we take up this subject – how do we come to believe that something is “cultural capital” and something is not?

The answer is that we learn what is culturally valuable in a non-cognitive manner. Let me explain….

Human persons are defined by love (a very Augustinian thought) – as desiring agents and liturgical animals whose primary mode of intending the world is love which in turn shapes the imagination.

The things we grow to love and desire are shaped and directed by material embodied practices. These practices are fundamentally religious, but not necessarily spiritual. We might call these “liturgical acts.” These acts in turn shape our vision for what the good life is all about.

Our vision for the good life (the eudaimonistic life) is shaped and directed by aesthetic principles found in stories, legends, myths, novels and films rather than principles.

What are these acts? These acts usually revolve around participating in actions which stir our affections. The are the sort of acts which usually stir our affections are acts which participate in some sort of aesthetic stimulation.

Okay…. Maybe this is getting a bit complicated – what I’m trying to say is that: we are shaped to consider certain things valuable and other things as value-less through non-cognitive means. In other words, we aren’t explicitly taught to value certain things, we are shaped to value certain things.

Think for a second how we know we ought to value some sort of fashionable outfit – for instance “hipster style clothes.” Did anybody ever say “Hey this is what is in right now, you need to wear this…” I’m pretty sure that no one has ever said that. Instead what happens is that you get bombarded by images, which are usually aesthetically pleasing, and eventually you come to believe that you want that sort of outfit.

Some Coachella Hipster looking so "cool." — Some Coachella Hipsters looking so “cool.”

Or consider how everybody “knows” that they should have an IPad… Apple’s advertisements for IPad’s have never straight out said “hey this is a good tablet, you should buy it.” Instead, they rely upon knowing that humans are driven by aesthetic principles in order to convince people to buy their product. Consider Apple’s latest IPad campaign. Not once does say that this is a better tablet, rather the commercial tells a story that draws us in, it shows us that the Ipad can help us to live a good and valuable life. We are drawn to that. As this sort of story is repeated over and over, this belief is reinforced – without every saying a single word.

Apple does not rely upon making cognitive claims in order to sell the product instead Apple relies upon the non-cogntive functions of the human mind to convince you that life is better with their product.

Why does all this matter to our past conversation about “cultural capital” in Christian circles? It matters for two reasons:

First it matters because as Christians we need to realize that much of what we believe is actually caught not taught. The action of “catching” most often happens (or always happens) in the context of community. It is within a community that we learn what is valuable and what is acceptable, or what it is worthless and unacceptable. Sometimes we are right about these sort of things but other times we aren’t. For instance, in Christian circles we tend to value people who speak “Christianese.” Where the heck did we learn that speaking Christianese is a worthwhile thing to do? Why don’t we speak normal English? Is it because early on somebody taught us – hey you need to speak a certain way to be a part of this community – I don’t think so. Rather, its because we have been shaped by a community that includes a certain vocabulary and to be a part of that community requires one to speak a certain way. We just “pick up” on those things.

The church is always at risk of embracing anti-Kingdom cultural patterns

Second, it matters because the church is always at risk of embracing anti-Kingdom cultural patterns. Some are obvious but most are subtle. It’s the subtle ones that are more likely to non-cognitively shape us than some of the more obvious ones. Think some of the music we listen to. For just a second think about Ke$ha’s music…

We’re gonna die young
We’re gonna die young
Let’s make the most of tonight, like we are gonna die young
(Die Young Lyrics)

Or this other Ke$ha song:

I dont wanna I go to sleep,
I wanna stay up all night,
I wanna just screw around.
I dont wanna think about,
Whats gonna be after this,
I wanna just live right now.
(C’Mon Lyrics)

But Ke$ha is on to something that we Christians tend to forget, namely (as Augustine says) that 1) human persons are defined by love. And 2) that we learn what to love by means of acts which participate in some sort of aesthetic stimulation. Ke$sha taps into the power of non-cognitive affection stirring in all of her songs. She tells stories (by means of songs) that tap into our basest human desires….

Will any Christian explicitly affirm Ke$ha’s message – live today without reference to the future? Absolutely not. Its anti-Christian, Christians are called to live in light of new creation, because what happens in our embodied life now matters for our embodied life in the future.

However, we live in a culture where Christians live with exactly the sort of attitude Ke$sha sings about. Now most Christians aren’t going to live like Ke$ha (thank God), however they will live with a similar attitude. Most Christians will functionally live as though there is no after life – as though what matters the most is life in the present. Why do Christians live this way, even though Scripture teaches otherwise and sermons preach a contrary message? Its because we are shaped more by non-cognitive means than by cognitive (propositional) truths. Culture around us is full of stories, songs, movies, films, that portray a message contrary to the Christian worldview – these messages shape us in subtle but profound ways.

That brings us back to where we started. Why do we value certain things, i.e. why do we assign cultural capital, to certain things? Its because we are bombarded with stories, songs, film, t.v. shows that slowly lead us to believe that those sort of things are culturally valuable.

In other words – we are story shaped creatures – and the world is doing a better job of story-telling that the church is.

Our vision for the good life is shaped and directed by aesthetic principles found in stories, legends, myths, novels and films rather than propositions.

Summertime Shepherding (Pt. 1)

Ah Summer! Its every college student’s favorite time of the year. No homework, no waking up early for class, no crazy schedule to deal with. All that is on the agenda is late nights and warm beach days. Its the perfect time of year to be a college student, especially if you live in So-Cal.

The same thing goes for college ministers right? Summer is a time to step back and finally take a break. We have been running hard for nine months, so the three months we have off are a dream come true. Am I right? No. Not exactly

You see, one does not simply take a break from shepherding. Just because programed ministry takes a break (in some cases it doesn’t) that doesn’t mean that shepherds take a break.

One does not simply take a break from shepherding.

A few weeks ago I shared with some of my leaders that I was pumped on Summer. The reason I was pumped was because I finally would get to take a break from shepherding students. I would finally be able to get some time to myself. I wouldn’t have to worry about all of their problems or all of the drama involved in college life. I wouldn’t have to worry about discipling anybody and I wouldn’t have to worry about shepherding anybody. Yes I would still be the student’s friends, but I would no longer be responsible for them. It would be awesome!

All of my leaders gave me a horrified look. Rightly so.

After the leaders looked at me in disgust – I finally explained that I was trying to make a point. Imagine of Jesus shepherded us in that way? Imagine if Jesus ever said to us…

Man, can you just give me a break? Just a couple of months where I don’t have to stress out about all the crap that is going on in your life. Just give me a few weeks off where I don’t have to worry about discipling you or shepherding you. Yes I will still be your friend, I will even be friendly to you, but for a few weeks I am not going to be responsible for your spiritual well being.

The truth is that Jesus, the true and better shepherd, would never say anything like that to us. Jesus doesn’t take a break from shepherding us – if we want to be like Jesus we shouldn’t take a break from shepherding students either.

Just because the “programing” ends, that doesn’t mean that shepherding does too.

Next time we will take a quick look at a couple of passages in Scripture that are especially relevant to our role as shepherds during summer vacation.

Book Review – From Jesus to the Church by Craig Evans

Craig Evans was my first ever professor at Fuller Seminary – he was teaching a summer course on the gospels. That was my first ever exposure to historical Jesus studies, and I have been hooked ever since. So when I was presented with an opportunity to review Evans’ book From Jesus to the Church: The First Christian Generation I jumped on it.

When the Jesus movement started it was almost entirely Jewish – essentially it was focused on the redemption and restoration of Israel. Evans points out that during the first forty years of this movement, Jesus and his followers competed with the religious leaders and the temple establishment for the hearts of the Jewish people. So in its earliest days, Christianity was understood as a Jewish restoration movement. However, Evans points out, when James died, Jerusalem was captured, and the temple was destroyed, the relationship between the Jewish Christians and the non-Christian Jews rapidly deteriorated. This book chronicles the process of that deterioration and it does so through the lens of conflict. Evans understands the major conflict as lying between the “family” of the high priest Annas and the “family” of Jesus of Nazareth. This conflict culminates with the clash of a Christian also named Jesus, who takes a prophetic action against the temple right after James’ death and before the destruction of the temple, and the temple establishment.

As Evans develops the theme of conflict, he asks several questions which lead up to his understanding of the root causes of the Christian-Jewish split. First Evans asks: Did Jesus intend to Found a church? Evans concludes that the answer is yes and no. He did not intend to do so in the way we think of “church” today, however he did intend to assemble a community of disciples who would have embraced his teaching. In addition to these question, he asks about the relationship between the Kingdom of God and the Church of Christ. He asks, what was James’ role within the Christian community? Are James and Paul in conflict when it comes to faith and works? What role does the temple play in the conflicts between the ruling priests and the leaders of the Christian movement? Finally, what does the relationship between Jews and Gentiles look like in the letters of Paul and in the works of Ignatius?

As he concludes this short book, Evans explains that the Temple and competing understandings of the role of the temple was a primary cause of division between Jewish Christians and Jewish non-Christians. Yet there are also other reasons why this division developed. Among these reasons are:

Christianity’s aggressive Gentile mission and lenient requirements for entry into the Church
The divinity of Jesus
Gentiles’ failures to observe Jewish food law, purity laws, and Sabbath observance
The Bar Kokhba rebellion
Jewish nationalist interests
The fact that by definition a Messiah could not be crucified This final reason was the decisive factor for why Jews could not accept Jesus as Messiah.

Pros

Evans presents the reader with a very fascinating (and underutilized) lens for interpreting the series of conflicts between Jesus followers and Jewish Religious leaders – namely the Temple. Others, namely Nicholas Perrin, have written extensively regarding the role of the Temple in early Christianity’s self-understanding. Perrin has also made an argument that Jesus and the early church saw themselves as a counter-temple and/or temple restoration movement. This book makes a similar argument, but instead uses that argument to show why Judaism and Christianity ended up splitting.

One interesting chapter in Evans’ book was the chapter on “Phinean Zeal and the Works of the Law.” The role of Phineas and his actions in the Old Testament as well as in 2nd temple Judaism has been an under-explored topic when talking about early Christianity. In fact, even James Dunn only devotes a small section to this topic in his massive theology of Paul. This section will be a valuable resource for those interested in the topic of “Zeal” in Qumran literature and zeal for doing good works in Paul and James.

Also, there are a lot of cool side-bars and pictures of important locations for early Christianity.

Cons

This book is a very important resource for understanding the parting of ways between Judaism and Christianity – the very fact that he presents readers with a new lens for understanding that parting of ways makes purchasing this book a must. However the book does suffer from a few flaws. For instance, its not always clear how some of his topics fit into his over all thesis. I mean to say that although these topics are relevant to the parting of ways between Judaism and Christianity, they stray from his “temple” theme.

Another issue that I have with this book is that at times Evans tends to over-Judaize the early church in Asia and Europe. For instance, in a discussion of the seven letters Revelation, Evans says:

Given the Judaic orientation of much of the polemic in the letters to the seven churches, we should assume that the people whom make up those congregations are mostly Jewish. Their opponents are not Gnostics or Hellenizers: they are Jewish skeptics and members of synagogues, who reject the claims that Christian Jews make about Jesus. (132)

I grant the fact that the seven letters are steeped in Jewish categories and language – but one cannot infer from that the fact that the congregations are mostly Jewish. All one can infer for certain is that the author of those letters has a Jewish worldview steeped in the Hebrew Scriptures and other Jewish traditions.

Conclusion

It has been a long time since I have been as excited for a book on the history of early Christianity as I have been for this one. Evans thesis is original, and it makes a lot of sense of the facts. For that reason I believe that Evans’ argument is not only plausible, its is likely correct. Jewish leaders and Christian leaders clashed over the role of the Temple. This clash eventually became separation once the temple was destroyed, and this separation became animosity during the Bar Kokhba rebellion.

(Note: I received this book free of charge from WJK in exchange for an impartial review.)

Book Review – The Soul by J.P. Moreland

It seems as though believing in the soul is out of fashion now a days, even among evangelicals. But J.P. Moreland, an evangelical philosopher, has stood up to defend the traditional Christian belief in the soul in his new book The Soul: How We Know It’s Real and Why it Matters.

According to Moreland, there are four reasons why its worth spending time thinking about the existence of the soul:

First, the Bible seems to teach that consciousness and the soul are immaterial and we need to regard this teaching as genuine knowledge and not as faith commitments that we merely hope are true. (12)
Second, the reality of the soul is important to various ethical issues that crucially involve an understanding of human persons. (15)
Third, the loss of belief in life after death is related to a commitment to the authority of science above theology. But belief in the soul is being scientifically discredited. (17)
Fourth, understanding the immaterial nature of the human spirit is crucial to grasping the essence of spiritual growth. (17)

Building upon these convictions J.P. Moreland attempts to make a case for the immaterial nature of consciousness and the soul without using the Bible, instead he makes a case for the soul through philosophical arguments.

Summary

The book is broken up into five chapters. In the first chapter, Moreland lays some philosophical foundations for discussing the soul. For instance he introduces Leibniz’s law of the indiscernability of identicals, and he introduces the reader into discussions about neuroscience and philosophy. In chapter two, he summarizes what he takes to be key Old and New Testament passages that illustrate the mind/body dualism taught in scripture. This chapter doesn’t exactly argue for substance dualism, but it does argue that this is the biblical position. Chapter three makes a case for property dualism, while defending the position against several objections including the problem of other minds and the problems brought about by a Darwinistic conception of evolution. Moreland also devotes some space to arguing against physicalist accounts of property dualism. Chapter four is the core of the book. In this chapter he makes a case for substance dualism and the immaterial nature of the self. Moreland offers five arguments for the belief in substance dualism. Having established that substance dualism is the correct position regarding the existence of the soul, he makes some philosophical observations regarding what the nature of the soul might be like. He concludes the book with some philosophical thoughts on what the future of human beings might look like if they are in fact souls.

Pros

1-The Soul is a very clear introduction to the topic of dualism. Moreland’s clarity in presenting difficult philosophical positions is probably this book’s greatest strength. At the end of each chapter he provides a summary outlining what his points were and breaking down each argument into its individual parts. Because he does this it will be very easy for those seeking to use this book for apologetic purposes to learn these arguments and/or be ready to respond when people challenge their beliefs.

2-Although his discussion about the state of the soul after death seems a bit out of place, it was one of the most interesting sections in the book. How he handles the doctrine of Hell is philosophically sophisticated (he relies heavily upon Swinburne’s argument for Hell). This section will certainly help readers as they think about the spiritual implications of belief in the soul.

Cons

I believe in substance dualism. In fact I hold to a Cartesian account of substance dualism much like Moreland does. However I think that several of his arguments for this position are actually pretty weak. For instance, he makes an argument for the soul based upon belief in Free Will, Morality, Responsibility, and Punishment. Essentially he argues that if physicalism is true then human free will does not exist – thus determinism is true. If determinism is true then there is no such thing as moral obligation and determinism. This seems to be blatantly false to me. He argues as though the belief that determinism and moral responsibility are incompatible is blatantly obvious. The problem is though that it is not blatantly obvious. Any compatibilist will tell you that determinism and moral responsibility are compatible. Also he makes an argument for the soul based upon the idea that for agency to be meaningful identity has to persist over time, but if we are purely physical then agency is meaningless. Once again, it doesn’t seem so obvious to me that this point is correct. In fact, Jonathan Edwards seems to argue that identity does not persist over time, yet he holds to a strong notion of agency and moral responsibility. All this to say that even though I believe that Moreland is arguing for the correct position, I believe that many of his arguments in this book are quite flawed.

Conclusion

Should you read this book? Yes. If you are looking for some basic arguments for why it is rational to belief in the soul then this book is for you. The book essentially shows that belief in the soul is not irrational and he gives you some good reasons why this is so. However if you are looking for a book that establishes a strong case for the existence of the soul, then I would look elsewhere. There is quite a difference between arguing that a belief is rational and arguing that a belief is rational and correct. This book does the former. So if you are okay with that then pick up this book.

Get to the Greeks!

Are fraternities and sororities at secular universities hard to reach? Yes. But it is absolutely possible to make an impact in those communities.

I recently came across a video that shows how some campus ministers are doing that…

via Beau Crosetto

Spiritual Depression (Pt. 2)

Its pretty much guranteed – if you are a Christian you will experience “spiritual depression” at some point. Much like other forms of depression, “spiritual depression” is marked by an absence of feeling. You don’t feel like pursuing God and you don’t feel like pursuing community. Most importantly, you don’t “feel” God’s presence. Instead you “feel” his absence. I think that most Christians don’t want to admit it when they enter into this state – they feel like they are wrong to have these sorts of feelings. But the truth is, its normal. Almost everybody will feel that way at some point in their life. In fact, even Mother Teresa felt this way. Apparently she spent the last 50 years of her life in this state, yet she told nobody….

Here is how she felt, in her own words:

I call, I cling, I want — and there is no One to answer — no One on Whom I can cling — no, No One. — Alone … Where is my Faith — even deep down right in there is nothing, but emptiness & darkness — My God — how painful is this unknown pain — I have no Faith — I dare not utter the words & thoughts that crowd in my heart — & make me suffer untold agony.

So many unanswered questions live within me afraid to uncover them — because of the blasphemy — If there be God — please forgive me — When I try to raise my thoughts to Heaven — there is such convicting emptiness that those very thoughts return like sharp knives & hurt my very soul. — I am told God loves me — and yet the reality of darkness & coldness & emptiness is so great that nothing touches my soul.

Lets be honest and open with one another. You can’t face “spiritual depression” on your own. It needs to be done in the context of community – even when you don’t feel like bringing it before the people you do life with.

Spiritual Depression (Pt. 1)

Its pretty much guaranteed – if you are a Christian you will face a season of spiritual depression at some point in your life. Spiritual depression isn’t exactly like depression, but it bears a lot of similarities. It is marked by apathy towards all things spiritual – you don’t feel like pursuing God, you don’t feel like serving, you don’t feel like engaging with community. But it’s especially marked by a feeling of an absence of Gods presence. Often times this feeling will set in because of sin, something physiological, or an attack from the enemy; but often times it will happen immediately after some awesome experience with God. (e.g. a mission trip, a camp, or some spiritual breakthrough.)

Spiritual depression isn’t exactly like depression, but it bears a lot of similarities.

Scripture is full of stories of this sort of thing happening. You find it in the Psalms most often. But one very prominent example is Elijah in 1 Kings 18 & 19. Elijah was on top of the world, serving God, taking down God’s enemies, experiencing God’s power and God’s victory. But the next thing you know, he finds himself in a cave crying, whining, and wanting to die. It’s the classic case of spiritual depression. But in the midst of that God shows up to him. Not in the way you would have expected it. Not in a way that was obvious either. He had to pay really close attention to notice God’s presence in the midst of his world falling apart. Spiritual depression will come. Its guaranteed. But if you are in Christ, you can be sure of his presence – even if its in a way you would never have expected it.