Colossian Blog
February 22, 2017 | Andy Saur

Growing Virtuous Youth through an Origins Symposium

Students at Front Range Christian School in Littleton, Colorado prepped for months to participate in the all-day Origins Symposium that was held at their school in late January. They met in their weekly small groups to discuss faith-and-science questions, worked through teachFASTly activities in their Bible and science classes, and registered for breakout sessions on topics as varied as “How would a young-earth creationist explain ape man fossils?” to “Is it appropriate to go to the Bible for scientific truth?”

But even with that preparation, many were unprepared for the experience of listening to TCF partners Darrel Falk and Todd Wood explain their different perspectives on human origins. How is it that two faithful Christians could disagree so significantly on such an important issue and still care for each other? Who had the “right answer” to the origins question?

When teachers heard their students voicing these questions, they knew the symposium was on the right track. As Kevin Taylor, director of the school’s Veritas et Caritas Institute, explains: “We want our community to be able to speak their convictions with boldness and courage, but also be able to hold love as part of the process too.”

To know one’s convictions, a person has to understand both what he or she is moving toward and away from. Even as the students began forming their own opinions on the origins topic through what they learned in preparation for and at the symposium, they also started developing an equally important skillset of holding in tension their growing opinion on the issue with their care for a Christian brother or sister who holds a different viewpoint.

This hard work of forming thoughtful disciples of Christ is at the heart of The Colossian Forum’s mission and we were delighted to partner with Front Range Christian School to continue this work among its student body through this symposium. And we whole-heartedly echo the words of Kevin Taylor: “When the world looks at the church, I’d like them to see it appealing because we behave virtuously and civilly in a world so polarized.”

Suggested Posts
The Joy of the Inner-Directed Life
November 15, 2017 | Jennifer Vander Molen
The Joy of the Inner-Directed Life
Lou Huesmann is the senior pastor at Grace Long Beach, which recently went through The Colossian Way training. He shared this excellent reflection and an article from Rabbi Sacks with us. Thanks, Lou!   Is character strictly personal, or does culture have a part to play? In other words, does when and where you live make a difference to the kind of person you become? These questions are raised by Rabbi Jonathan Sacks in a recent reflection on the classic book from 1950, The Lonely Crowd. The book's two sociologist authors develop the idea that particular kinds of historical circumstances give rise to particular kinds of people. In reflecting on The Lonely Crowd, Rabbi Sacks argues for the recovery of an "inner-directed" people for the sake of the world. In a culture largely comprised of "other-directed" individuals who find their direction in life from contemporary culture and winning the approval of others, the work of The Colossian Forum is vital. The Colossian Forum is providing groundbreaking training that has the potential to change not simply individuals but also the larger culture through its emphasis on developing the acquisition of virtues and practices that mark an "inner-directed" person. It's this inner-directedness that provides the security and courage to be different and the confidence to build a better, more life-giving future. Inner-Directedness, by Rabbi Jonathan Sacks. If you see something that sparks a connection with TCF's mission, we'd love to hear from you!
The Dying Art of Disagreement
October 25, 2017 | Jennifer Vander Molen
The Dying Art of Disagreement
This is the text of a lecture from New York Times columnist Bret Stephens, delivered at the Lowy Institute Media Award dinner in Sydney, Australia, on Saturday, Sept. 23. The award recognizes excellence in Australian foreign affairs journalism.  To say the words, “I agree” — whether it’s agreeing to join an organization, or submit to a political authority, or subscribe to a religious faith — may be the basis of every community. But to say, I disagree; I refuse; you’re wrong; etiam si omnes — ego non — these are the words that define our individuality, give us our freedom, enjoin our tolerance, enlarge our perspectives, seize our attention, energize our progress, make our democracies real, and give hope and courage to oppressed people everywhere. Galileo and Darwin; Mandela, Havel, and Liu Xiaobo; Rosa Parks and Natan Sharansky — such are the ranks of those who disagree. And the problem, as I see it, is that we’re failing at the task. This is a puzzle. At least as far as far as the United States is concerned, Americans have rarely disagreed more in recent decades. We disagree about racial issues, bathroom policies, health care laws, and, of course, the 45th president. We express our disagreements in radio and cable TV rants in ways that are increasingly virulent; street and campus protests that are increasingly violent; and personal conversations that are increasingly embittering. This is yet another age in which we judge one another morally depending on where we stand politically. Nor is this just an impression of the moment. Extensive survey data show that Republicans are much more right-leaning than they were twenty years ago, Democrats much more left-leaning, and both sides much more likely to see the other as a mortal threat to the nation’s welfare. The polarization is geographic, as more people live in states and communities where their neighbors are much likelier to share their politics. The polarization is personal: Fully 50 percent of Republicans would not want their child to marry a Democrat, and nearly a third of Democrats return the sentiment. Interparty marriage has taken the place of interracial marriage as a family taboo. Finally the polarization is electronic and digital, as Americans increasingly inhabit the filter bubbles of news and social media that correspond to their ideological affinities. We no longer just have our own opinions. We also have our separate “facts,” often the result of what different media outlets consider newsworthy. In the last election, fully 40 percent of Trump voters named Fox News as their chief source of news. It’s usually the case that the more we do something, the better we are at it. Instead, we’re like Casanovas in reverse: the more we do it, the worse we’re at it. Our disagreements may frequently hoarsen our voices, but they rarely sharpen our thinking, much less change our minds. It behooves us to wonder why. Read the rest of this lecture on The New York Times' website.