(RNS)—In late 2023, Christopher Tackett posted a video on X (formerly Twitter) of a clip from the Heritage Foundation Leadership Summit.

Describing the video, he wrote: “The Heritage Foundation and a ton of other ‘conservative’ organizations created Project 2025. They want to dismantle democracy.”

The post came at the end of a lengthy thread in which Tackett attempted to share the pieces of a puzzle he and his wife, Mendi, had spent the past few years putting together.

The Tacketts are not politicians or journalists. They are a middle-aged couple who moved back to the small Texas community where they both were raised to raise their own children and found it had changed. Everywhere they turned, they saw an insidious influence they could not name.

They started following the money swaying their local politics and investigating what they found. As the full picture of what was happening emerged, they were able to assign a name to that insidious influence: Christian nationalism.

In recent years, scholars and journalists have coalesced around the term “Christian nationalism” to describe a nostalgic mythology that has taken hold on the American right. In the myth, conservative white Christian America—the “true” America—is under assault by a secular and multiculturalist left intent to destroy it.

Donald Trump’s slogan “Make America Great Again” was a call to restore this mythologized “true” America, which rests on a social order in which conservative white Christian men have dominion over all others, including women, nonwhite Americans and non-Christians.

In this society, white Christian men ought to be afforded maximum freedom (including from government), while others must be controlled (with the government’s assistance).

Advance of Christian nationalism

Understanding this worldview helped the Tacketts connect dots between the fights they saw fracturing their small Texas community and, increasingly, the entire country.

They created a website—“See It. Name It. Fight It.”—to educate others about Christian nationalism, how to identify its influence in their communities and how to fight back against it. Today, they have more than 20,000 followers on X.

They have repeatedly cited Project 2025 as an example of how national leaders are working to push a Christian nationalist agenda. As the hidden-camera video of Russell Vought revealed recently, this is precisely how Project 2025’s authors thought of it, too. The goal, in Vought’s own words, is to “get us off multiculturalism” and promote “Christian nation-ism.”

Though Project 2025 would not become a household name until mid-2024, many of its early critics were people like the Tacketts, who immediately recognized Project 2025 as a detailed blueprint for building the Christian nationalist society they were warning people about.

In the 2023 Twitter thread in which Tackett warned his followers about Project 2025, he concluded: “I’m sure in your community, the same things are happening. Christian nationalism is attempting to grab all levers of power. It’s up to us to stop it #SINIFI.”

Opposition to Christian nationalism

For the past year, I have been following and talking to people, like the Tacketts, who are working to educate others about the dangers posed by Christian nationalism.

Though it is difficult to measure how many individuals are involved in these resistance efforts, a recent survey by PRRI finds 30 percent of Americans wholly reject the ideas associated with Christian nationalism, and another 37 percent are skeptical.

With new campaigns to resist Christian nationalism continually emerging, it is clear many of those concerned individuals have joined organized efforts to fight back.

Those involved range from concerned citizens to scholars and journalists to people who lead organizations and campaigns devoting significant resources to resisting Christian nationalism.

Some speak and write publicly about what they learn in order to inform others. Some work more quietly to confront extremism and hate within their community or family. Some people join reading groups at their church.

Others attend seminars and gatherings hosted by local faith-based community organizing networks like Gamaliel or view webinars through organizations like Vote Common Good, Christians Against Christian Nationalism or the After Party.

Some mobilize politically. The Tacketts’ strategy of “See It. Name It. Fight It.” generally captures this wide range of activities.

Opposing Project 2025

When Project 2025 was released, it was the perfect test of this emerging movement’s capacity to see it, name it and fight it. And they did.

Last September, Guthrie Graves-Fitzsimmons of the Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Freedom, which leads the Christians Against Christian Nationalism campaign, published an MSNBC op-ed laying out Project 2025’s “underscrutinized” “theocratic elements.”

Soon after, the Global Project Against Hate and Extremism released a dense report on Project 2025 that included an entire section on “The Role of Christian Nationalism.”

In a December email to supporters, Doug Pagitt of Vote Common Good called Project 2025 a “blueprint for Christian Nationalism.”

In an early 2024 article in Salon, Andra Watkins, who describes herself as a “product of Christian Nationalism,” uses her insider knowledge to show Project 2025 is a “Christian Nationalist manifesto”—a topic to which she since has devoted an entire Substack newsletter.

Also at Salon, the Rev. Liz Theoharis of the Kairos Center and the Poor People’s Campaign writes of Project 2025, “the wholesale capture of the state is the ultimate goal of its Christian nationalist architects.”

Historians Kristin Du Mez, Jemar Tisby and Diana Butler Bass dedicated an entire webinar to Project 2025, which was covered by Baptist News Global with the headline “Scholars Warn: Project 2025 is a Christian Nationalist Blueprint.” Each individually had been sounding the alarm about Project 2025 for months.

Americans United for Separation of Church and State’s “Project 2025: The Christian Nationalist plan to take over America,” the Secular Coalition for America’s list of “Top Ten Project 2025 Attacks on Church State Separation” and others also critique Project 2025.

This sampling of the statements critiquing Project 2025 helps us to see the field of resistance to Christian nationalism in action.

A prepared resistance

This resistance movement did not emerge out of thin air. Resisters were only able to mobilize quickly and draw attention to the Christian nationalist impulses at the heart of Project 2025 because they had spent the previous several years seeing, naming and fighting Christian nationalism in various guises.

This work prepared them to make a swift and targeted rebuttal of Project 2025. It also appears to be preparing them for the long road of resisting Christian nationalism and promoting a pluralistic democracy that will extend far beyond the 2024 election.

Ruth Braunstein is an associate professor of sociology at the University of Connecticut and the director of the Meanings of Democracy Lab. This opinion article has been edited for length. The views expressed in this article are those of the author.

The Pokot and Turkana area of western Kenya is a mostly arid region, frequented by severe drought throughout the year, except for a few pockets that receive small amounts of rainfall but cannot produce a mature crop. Raising livestock is the backbone of this region.

Children here grow without going to school. The only education they receive is how to protect cattle from bandits and how to grow their own herds through cattle rustling. Cattle banditry is an old lifestyle among the pastoralists in many rural villages.

Cattle raiding is dangerous. Young bandits have been killed, as well as fathers and sons trying to protect the cows they own. The raiders kill them all and take the livestock. Family clans no longer cry for the cows but for the lives of their beloved.

Families seek revenge against neighboring tribes. In this way, innocent women, elderly people and children unable to protect themselves have been killed. This has birthed continued hatred among the different tribes living across the administrative boundaries of this region.

Transformed by God’s word

A satanic agenda is at work when Satan steals youth, makes them bandits and uses them to destroy neighborhood relationships through killing each other (John 10:10).

Saul had a satanic agenda of persecuting the saints. His transformation came through the word of God—the voice of Jesus Christ (Acts 9:1-5), the Word (John 1:1-5)—who stopped Saul, convinced him and transformed him from a satanic agenda to a minister of a heavenly agenda (Acts 9:15).

Like Saul, reformed bandits have been convinced and transformed by the word of God from a satanic agenda to ministers of a heavenly agenda. They have become preachers of Christ.

Since these former bandits know the names of active bandits in their villages, we document the names of unsaved people, including bandits. Then, we hold continued prayer for the identified people and start approaching them with friendly conversation to share the good news of Christ. This is an ongoing activity that may take several months.

Later, a preacher invites other fellow former-bandit preachers from different villages to his village. Together, they evangelize active bandit warriors. Then, we hold an open-air crusade. In this way, we have seen many bandit warriors turning to Jesus Christ.

The conversion takes place as the word of God is heard in their ears, minds, hearts and souls—just as it happened to Saul. Reformed bandit preachers are instruments to deliver God’s word. Christ himself, through the power of the Holy Spirit, brings each person into submission.

If someone who wasn’t a bandit comes into one of these villages, the bandits think that person is the police. They run and hide. But when a reformed bandit comes into a village, active bandits see that person as one of them and are more approachable.

Theological education

Since these pastors received salvation as adults and have not been to school, it is hard for them to access theological education because of the qualifications and requirements set by theological schools. This makes the region vulnerable and calls for a home-grown theological college.

Such a school would offer informal education in a local language, so these pastors will be equipped to continue ministering. It also would set a Christian foundation for future generations to preach the gospel of Jesus Christ.

All reformed pastors have started taking their children to schools to produce an educated generation who will use education as a tool for their livelihood, instead of using guns and banditry as tools for their livelihood.

Because of the poverty in the area, the village churches start under trees. Some continue gathering under trees for years, because they are unable to build. People don’t like to attend when it’s hot or rainy. They rely on God to provide constructions materials to build the church.

Most new village churches also start schools for children under trees. Most schools have been started and supported by churches. When or if a church building is built, churches will use it for the school until the government intervenes or God provides a donor to build another building.

Persecution and challenges

Some village elders resist and reject the gospel and church planting. To continue staying in their villages, you have to adhere to their lifestyle of banditry, drunkenness, polygamy, female genital mutilation, forced early marriage and more. They have mobilized bandit warriors to beat preachers, especially those who left banditry and became preachers.

A beaten reformed warrior moved from his village to an empty village nearby to start another life. It is only him, his wife and children. He visits his former village and has person-to-person evangelism with his close relatives and warriors. When one gets saved, he moves out before the elders chase him out.

Reformed bandit warriors now face a lot of challenges to provide for their family, educate their children, meet the physical needs of their churches, and travel long distances to preach. As a result, some pastors travel far away to harvest gold to earn a living to support their family.

Thus, poverty makes them miss some of the weekly fellowship of their churches and not be active in evangelism. Pray for these pastors, that God will enable them to stay close to their churches and provide for their families.

Boaz Keibarak is married to Sophia and blessed with three daughters: Hiemiah, Anastacia and Jannele. He is the pastor of Genesis Rock Baptist Church in Bendera, Kapenguria, Kenya. The views expressed in this opinion article are those of the author.

I was born in a rural area of the northwestern part of Kenya inhabited by the pastoralist tribes known as Pokot.

Hostile cattle-rustling bandits from neighboring pastoralist tribes invaded my parents’ village, raiding all the livestock. This made my parents migrate from their ancestral and inherited land to a distant and safer location where they bought a piece of land and settled.

A deep dispute arose in our family, and I was driven out and settled at a nearby small town as a street boy. A year later, God sent his servant, a missionary, Rev. George Kendagor. I eventually was rescued and welcomed by the Kendagor family and invited to stay at their home. I encountered love through that family, and I encountered Jesus as my hope and Savior.

As I grew up, the government of Kenya came up with a peace approach that needed community participation. They formed peace committees from the grassroots level, and I was elected by my villagers to be among the committee.

Later, I was elected to the District Peace Committee that played an important role in developing peace policy. It also restored a hopeful relationship among pastoralist tribes and the government agencies that opened and paved the way for development in the villages.

Learning peacemaking

While working for peace, I met with Rev. Dr. Dan Buttry, a global peacemaker working for peace and justice at International Ministries—or the American Baptist Foreign Mission Society. In 2013, he invited me to participate in conflict transformation training.

In this training, I received a lot of resources on biblical principles of peace that motivated my commitment in peacemaking work. I was able to facilitate mediation effectively among five tribes fighting over natural resources along administrative borders of each tribe.

I also have established peace committees in the conflicted areas, and I have trained them with the skills I received from the conflict transformation training. The peace committees are using the skills to pursue peace in their context.

I have facilitated peace dialogues and trained peace committees in Uganda and Zimbabwe, as well.

Because the training material is based on biblical principles, peace committees suggested the training needed to be persistent due to the dynamic nature of conflict.

We started weekly discipleship sessions. I introduced the salvation message into the training tool, which led to some peace committee members professing faith in Jesus Christ. Also, churches started under trees in the villages.

Leading village churches

As many men were converted from banditry to Christ, the churches increased, along with the need to have spiritual leadership for them. By God’s grace, those reformed warriors not only became attending members of church fellowships, but they also became vessels of God—pastors of those churches in the villages.

God is using them to reach other youth who still are active in cattle rustling and causing instability among elderly, women, children, persons with disabilities and all God’s creation.

Pastors with theological education don’t like to preach in these village churches under trees. They demand payment, but the church members cannot raise funds to pay pastors due to poverty in the area caused by drought, climate change and conflict in the area. This leaves the churches without educated pastors.

Currently, there are 78 local Baptist churches still gathering under trees. There are no buildings, because the poverty in the area doesn’t allow them to purchase construction materials. So, most of time, the services may be interrupted by the weather.

Equipping pastors

As I continued to minister alongside my Baptist brethren, the pastors unanimously asked me to provide leadership, electing me as the moderator of the West Pokot Region of the Kenya Baptist Convention. The region has 110 local Baptist churches.

Among 110 Baptist pastors, I am the only pastor with a diploma in theological studies. The rest are not trained. Some are seeking non-formal education and struggle a lot to pay the fees. This calls for starting a Bible school nearby to train and equip the pastors.

Rev. Buttry has visited and worked with me in my village and understands the financial challenge to fund the peacemaking ministry in villages with a high percentage of poverty. He introduced me to International Ministries, and in 2019, I was accepted as an associate missionary.

My wife and I now have three daughters. It has been really challenging to fund their education, to feed our family and to respond to church needs, such as purchasing construction materials or land.

Despite being raised in a vulnerable life, Jesus Christ has been my hope. He is the reason I keep ministering in these churches despite the challenges. He keeps me strengthened and encourages me to continue serving him in regional leadership by equipping pastors and mobilizing churches to continue evangelism and discipleship.

Boaz Keibarak is married to Sophia and blessed with three daughters: Hiemiah, Anastacia and Jannele. He is the pastor of Genesis Rock Baptist Church in Bendera, Kapenguria, Kenya. The views expressed in this opinion article are those of the author.

We all should denounce political violence unequivocally. In doing so, it is tempting to claim killing political leaders is un-American, to believe we are beyond such atrocities more common in developing nations and young democracies. History teaches this is not the case.

The assassination attempt on former President Donald Trump and killing of firefighter Corey Comperatore were tragic and reprehensible. A dark day in challenging times, indeed. I pray it does not prove to be a lit match thrown on the pile of dry kindling we’ve been stacking for years.

By many measures, we are as divided now as any time since the Civil War or the upheaval of the 1960s. If that’s true, then I’m afraid we may be in another American assassination season.

During those two eras, President Abraham Lincoln and President John F. Kennedy were killed. So, too, were Robert Kennedy, Martin Luther King Jr. and Medgar Evers assassinated, among others. In times of division, the country I love tends to get violent.

Social scientists have been warning of this current threat. In a survey from a few years ago, the Public Religion Research Institute found 23 percent of Americans agreed “because things have gotten so far off track, true American patriots may have to resort to violence in order to save our country.”

For Republicans, that number is 33 percent. Among Republicans who support Trump, that number rises to an astounding 41 percent.

‘Othering’ and political violence

As we approach the 250th anniversary of our independence, we like to claim the United States is the longest surviving democracy on earth, but this stretches the truth.

No woman could vote in the United States until just over 100 years ago. The Voting Rights Act was signed by President Lyndon Johnson in 1965. It was less than 60 years ago that non-white Americans truly secured the right to vote. That legislation was possible only when the nation witnessed the political violence perpetrated against John Lewis and other marchers on “Bloody Sunday” in Selma.

We’re not even 60 years into our attempt at a true multiracial democracy. The outcome of this uniquely American experiment is yet to be determined.

We all carry responsibility in the outcome of this democratic experiment, and we hinder it when we “otherize” our fellow citizens. By labeling those with different convictions as enemies and threatening political opponents with jail time, we have fanned the flames of violence.

By judging a neighbor’s worth based on their party affiliation and curating our social media feeds to drown out contrary views, we’ve fed a hyper-partisan culture that leads to dehumanization.

Once we acknowledge our own role in this context of violence, we also should recognize the attempted assassination of a politician is only one type of political violence.

Other forms of political violence

Driving through the night more than 600 miles to an El Paso Walmart to target and kill 23 Saturday-morning shoppers in an anti-Latino attack based on the racist, anti-immigrant, great replacement theory is political violence.

Joining a Bible study at an historic Black church, then gunning down nine Christians because they were “taking over our country” is political violence.

The State of Texas executing the poor, the abused, the mentally ill, the addicted and those with inadequate counsel is political violence.

Snatching nursing migrant children from the arms of their mothers hoping to deter others from fleeing to the United States is political violence.

Putting razor wire-covered buoys in the Rio Grande and other fortifications on the border we know will injure migrants or drive them to cartel coyotes is political violence.

Sending an endless supply of bombs and weapons of war used to kill children and civilians in Gaza is political violence.

If the truth is ever going to set us free, we first must be humble enough to recognize we’re not so exceptional. Our self-delusions need to die before another sister or brother becomes a victim of political violence. Only by living the truth that we’re all created equal in the image of God will we ever douse the rising flames.

Stephen Reeves is executive director of Fellowship Southwest. This article is adapted from where it first appeared on the Fellowship Southwest blog.

(RNS)—State officials in the South have reignited debates recently over teaching religion in public schools, with Oklahoma’s superintendent of schools issuing a mandate for schools to teach the Bible and Louisiana passing a law requiring schools to display the Ten Commandments.

The push ultimately is aimed at prompting the newly conservative majority on the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn a 1980 ruling on a similar law in Kentucky. Their argument is the Bible is a historical text as well as a religious one and should not be disqualified any more than founding documents that make references to God or a creator.

Referring to religious texts in terms of patriotism and history may prove effective in inserting them into classrooms. But the argument they are like any other aspect of American culture could backfire, paving the way for Christian texts and symbols actually to be treated like any other aspect of American culture.

As of now, Oklahoma’s rule stands, affecting all public schools in the state, though some districts are refusing to comply, and a federal judge delayed Louisiana’s measure after parents brought a lawsuit. Meanwhile, political analysts have portrayed both as culture war stunts—acts of political theater for a polarized election year.

Separation of church and state

But legal scholars have focused on the challenge these new directives pose for the separation of church and state, a policy contained in the U.S. Constitution’s establishment clause forbidding the government from establishing a religion.

While warranted, this focus puts a lot of stock in the idea the boundaries between church and state, public and private, religious and secular are clear. And this is where the unintended consequences could arise for the religious conservatives pushing the directives.

Louisiana’s bill, for example, places the Ten Commandments alongside the Mayflower Compact and the Northwest Ordinance, historical documents that also mention God or religious liberty. Ryan Walters, the Oklahoma state superintendent who issued the directive, suggests teaching one is no different from teaching the other.

But placing these documents in public schools alongside other historic yet obsolete documents may make these biblical texts appear historical and obsolete, too.

A case study

One case that illustrates this point is Lynch v. Donnelly, a famous 1984 U.S. Supreme Court church-state case that concerned a Pawtucket, R.I., Nativity scene included in a Christmas display on town property in a busy shopping area.

The court ruled the Nativity scene, or crèche, could remain because it was deemed a “cultural” symbol that depicted the origins of a national holiday, calling it a “legitimate secular purpose.”

Justice Harry Blackmun, a Methodist who wrote the dissenting opinion, warned the Nativity being seen as a secular item alongside Santa and Rudolph would backfire: “The crèche has been relegated to the role of a neutral harbinger of the holiday season, useful for commercial purposes but devoid of any inherent meaning and incapable of enhancing the religious tenor of a display of which it is an integral part. The city has its victory—but it is a Pyrrhic one indeed.”

Blackmun explained how placing baby Jesus next to Santa Claus ultimately contributed to the former being seen as a frivolous holiday character, like the latter.

He also noted the culture war spirit of the mayor of Pawtucket: “Not only does the Court’s resolution of this controversy make light of our precedents, but also, ironically, the majority does an injustice to the crèche and the message it manifests. While certain persons, including the Mayor of Pawtucket, undertook a crusade to ‘keep Christ’ in Christmas, the Court today has declared that presence virtually irrelevant.”

Blackmun recognized the intent indeed was to inject what we might call a devotional or overtly religious message in the town square, even if that is not how it was defended.

In addition to alienating some non-Christians, Blackmun further explained, a municipally sponsored Nativity scene creates a situation in which devout Christians would feel “constrained in acknowledging [the Nativity’s] symbolic meaning.”

“Surely,” he concluded, “this is a misuse of a sacred symbol.”

Unintended consequences

The prohibition against visible symbols, in other words, may protect public schools, town squares and other “neutral” spaces from religious bias. But the prohibition also protected items seen as religious, constructing them as sacred and, in many ways, placing them beyond reproach or critique.

Mandating the use of biblical texts in public schools by presenting them as neutral, historical and secular likely will prove counterproductive to the goals of the officials intent on putting them in public schools.

By making the Ten Commandments and the Bible “merely historical” and part of “national culture,” these bills actually contribute to their secularization. The separation of church and state, on the other hand, creates ideas of sacred things that deserve to be set apart.

These states eventually may claim a victory in the U.S. Supreme Court, but it could turn out to be an empty one.

Lauren Horn Griffin is assistant professor in the department of philosophy and religious studies and the department of history at Louisiana State University. The views expressed in this opinion article are those of the author.

From the beginning, God has worked through the church in Africa for theological development, mission growth and global influence. The church in Africa always has been integral to the global identity of the church and the global mission of God.

Both the Old and the New Testament incorporate Africa into its story. The church in Africa played an indispensable role in the development of the Bible, Christian identity and mission.

However, our understanding of Africa’s contribution to the Bible, Christian faith and Christian mission often has been underdeveloped, underappreciated and unarticulated.

God is at work in and through the church in Africa historically and today.

Africa in the Old Testament

Here are just a few highlights of Africa’s place in Scripture.

• Egypt is mentioned in the Old Testament 679 times in 602 different verses.

• The earliest definite mention of Africa is Genesis 10:6-7 as part of the sons of Noah via Ham.

• Hagar in the story of Abraham is African.

• Moses was trained and developed his leadership skills in Egypt.

• One of Moses’ wives was from Africa (Numbers 12:1).

• Queen of Sheba was possibly from Axum in northern Ethiopia (1 Kings 10).

• At various stages, people of Africa emerge as great warriors (2 Samuel 18:21, 2 Chronicles 12:3-4, 2 Chronicles 14:8-9, Jeremiah 49:9).

• Jeremiah the prophet was saved from death by an African who had migrated to Israel (Jeremiah 38:6-13).

• There are numerous prophecies about Africa, including Isaiah 18:1-2, Psalm 68:31, Psalm 87:4 and Zephaniah 3:10.

Africa in the Gospels

• Africa provided refuge for Joseph, Mary and Jesus for several years when they fled as refugees (Matthew 2).

• Simon of Cyrene—modern-day Libya—carried the cross for Jesus on the way to crucifixion (Matthew 27:32, Mark 15:21, Luke 23:26).

Jesus’ life is literally bracketed by the continent of Africa. It was Africa that welcomed Jesus as a baby and refugee. It was Africa that helped carry the cross. It was Africans present at those critical moments.

Africans ministered to Jesus at moments of his greatest need. Africans ministered when Jesus had been rejected by everyone else. The global church owes thanks to the African church for the way it served Jesus. And for the way it continues to serve Jesus today. Praise God for the African Church!

Africa in Acts

• Africans were present at Pentecost (Acts 2).

• One of the first recorded Gentile converts was from Africa (Acts 8).

• The first recorded missionaries—individuals who carried the gospel to Antioch, planted the first church and were among those first called Christians—included Africans (Acts 11:20).

Acts 13:1-3 reads: “Now in the church at Antioch there were prophets and teachers: Barnabas, Simeon called Niger, Lucius of Cyrene, Manaen (who had been brought up with Herod the tetrarch) and Saul. While they were worshiping the Lord and fasting, the Holy Spirit said, ‘Set apart for me Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them.’ So after they had fasted and prayed, they placed their hands on them and sent them off.”

Africans were key teachers and leaders in the church in Antioch. Did you notice the order of the names? First, is Barnabas. Second, is Simeon called Niger. Niger is a Greek term literally meaning “dark in color” and referred to individuals from Africa.

Acts 13 is clear that African leadership was essential to the church where people were first called Christians and the church that became the first great sender of missionaries.

The third is Lucius of Cyrene. Not much is known about Lucius but as the Holman Illustrated Bible Dictionary notes: “An African was one of the first Christian evangelists and had an important part in the early days of the church of Antioch and in beginning the Christian world missions movement” (p. 1056).

Multicultural diversity is healthy. It is biblical. Two of the five leaders of this incredible church were from Africa. What does it mean to affirm that the first church where followers were called Christian was led by African believers?

Would you picture that moment? They were gathered in a room worshiping and praying. Paul and Barnabas kneel as the other three leaders put their hands on them. Two of the three who commissioned these first missionaries were African. Two of the three who remained as leaders and teachers of this great church where the term Christian first was used were African believers.

To the African church, thank you. Thank you for your leadership. Thank you for commissioning these first missionaries.

I am grateful for African leadership who commissioned missionaries to carry the gospel to Europe. Thank you, to the church in Syria and to the church in Africa to whom we owe a debt of gratitude. God’s global mission calls for God’s global church.

Africa in the early church

The early churches in North Africa continued to play an important role in the early church. Just a few examples from the earliest years of the church after the New Testament include:

• Africans demonstrated faith in the face of persecution and death. It was Tertullian, an African, who first said, “The blood of the martyrs is the seed of the church.” He also coined and defined the term “Trinity.”

• Africa produced influential theologians Origen, Athanasius, Tertullian and Augustine. In Origen, Africa produced the first systematic theology.

• Africa birthed the earliest forms of monasticism.

• The order of the New Testament as it is in our Bible was suggested in a letter by Athanasius, who was called “the Black Monk” because he was from Africa. An African suggested the order of the New Testament as it appears today.

• The Council of Carthage—modern day Tunisia—confirmed the order of the New Testament and closed the biblical canon. The African church was essential to the establishment of the Bible as the Bible.

• Augustine, an African, wrote the first spiritual autobiography; developed the doctrines of individual salvation, predestination, original sin, and separation of church and state; and was used by the Reformers to embrace and emphasize justification by faith.

The African Church is integral to the development of Christian theology, identity and mission. God’s global mission always has called for God’s global church.

Celebrating the church in Africa

Baptist World Alliance commits to continue to celebrate the life and influence of the church in Africa and, with thanksgiving, to emphasize directly the role and influence of Africa in the shaping of Christian identity, theology, mission and leadership in our teaching.

BWA commits to continue to learn from and stand with the Baptist church in Africa today.

BWA commits to continue to be a family that celebrates, embraces and prioritizes that God’s global mission always has called for a global church praying, learning and in leadership together.

Elijah Brown is general secretary of the Baptist World Alliance. This article is adapted from his opening remarks at the 2024 BWA annual gathering in Lagos, Nigeria.

I don’t always feel like following Jesus. So, am I supposed to fake the feeling?

When my present circumstances don’t look so good, and the news tells me the world’s a mess, am I faking it to keep a positive attitude and working toward positive goals?

Or am I declaring war on the dark side and all the negative voices trying to keep me down? The voices tell me: “Nothing can be done,” “It’s impossible,” “Don’t even try,” “The darkness has won.”

Following Jesus can feel like faking it, but it’s based on the truth of our new life in Christ.

Negative vs. positive

Negativity and fear are everywhere. They’re all around us. They’re on every newscaster’s lips. Fear is the coinage of the day. People live in a constant state of stress and fear, but I am determined to be positive in this negative, problem-filled world.

Some say it’s not realistic to focus on the positive when our present society seems like one big hellhole. It’s like sticking our heads in the sand and refusing to face the negative reality. But constantly reminding myself and others of every lousy, wrong thing in our lives and rubbing our noses in it won’t remedy anything.

I’m not hiding under my blankets, wishing when I wake up all will be well. I acknowledge the problems are here, and something needs to be done. But I’m making a positive declaration to focus on the positive and on solutions instead of all the negativity and problems.

Everyone has their own choices to make in life, but wouldn’t it be easier for people to choose to live positive, compassionate, victorious lives if they saw others—you and I—living above the stifling, suffocating negative smog as examples of the positive truths we say we believe?

The world is waiting for enthusiastic, positively charged true followers of Jesus to take the world’s stage and bring light to the darkened landscape.

Calling vs. feeling

My calling, like yours, is to be an instrument of God’s love on Earth. That’s it. Everything we do should be to this end—to embody God’s Spirit on Earth as it is in heaven. God is calling us to be positive, because his Spirit is positive, life-giving, encouraging, uplifting, healing, joyful, loving and transformative.

But you think, “I’m a bummer, because I read all these wonderful words of Jesus, but I don’t feel like doing them.”

Maybe you don’t feel positive or loving. Maybe you feel like a hypocrite for doing things you don’t feel like doing. Jesus’ words are the true, real you God wants you to embody on Earth, even when you don’t feel like it.

Don’t you think Jesus had days when he didn’t feel 100 percent, when he was tired from walking or didn’t get enough sleep? Don’t you think even Jesus had times when his flesh didn’t feel like healing the multitudes, when he would rather have gone somewhere to rest?

Living by faith

Everything Jesus did—and everything we do to manifest his love—is by faith. We don’t have to feel anything.

We don’t have to feel compassion to be compassionate. We don’t have to feel like loving our mate to help wash the dishes or feel like helping our children with their homework to help them. We don’t have to feel faith to have faith. We don’t have to feel like doing what’s right to do it.

Every day, a great deal of the world’s work is done by people who don’t feel like doing it. It’s all by faith for us from now on. You praise and thank God by faith. You listen for his voice by faith. You pray by faith. You believe by faith.

We don’t measure what is true or false by how we feel. Our feelings and thoughts need to be brought into line with what Jesus taught, not the other way around.

Believing I am a new person in Christ is an act of pure faith, because often I don’t feel positive, loving or Christlike, but I step into the new me by faith that God’s promises are the new me I want to be.

Do you see it? Align yourself, your thoughts and actions with the new you—Christ in you, our hope of glory.

Robert Ritzenhein, after retiring from full-time missionary service, lives in Japan, organizing Christian programs for area rest homes, and is the yearly Santa at his city’s hospitals. The views expressed in this opinion article are those of the author.

“If you don’t share the gospel with someone, their blood is on your hands!”

I still remember that sermon like it was yesterday, even though it was almost 20 years ago. It’s branded into my brain as a memory that refuses to leave. I heard a pastor say those exact words while speaking about the importance of sharing the “good news,” but as a young child, I couldn’t help but feel like it was anything but.

Little did I know, it was these types of illustrations and metaphors that would cause me to develop a deeply harmful theology of God’s character—one that instilled in me a constant fear of condemnation and shame and cultivated a relationship with God that looked more like a child cowering from an abusive father than embracing a loving God.

I wish I could say these messages were isolated incidents, but it was far from that.

Fear-based evangelism

As part of their outreach strategies, the churches I attended in my youth often employed fear-based tactics regularly, such as Halloween “hell houses” designed to scare people into conversion. These practices both instilled a dread of damnation and encouraged children to spread fear among their peers.

Rather than sharing the “good news,” the bad-news approach led to confusion and concern among their parents when confronted with these dire warnings from their children when they got home.

The prophet Ezekiel warned, “If the watchman sees the sword coming and does not blow the trumpet to warn the people and the sword comes and takes someone’s life, that person’s life will be taken (Ezekiel 33:6).

Preachers frequently misapplied such biblical texts, suggesting that as God’s “watchmen,” if we fail to warn others of the coming judgment, God holds us accountable for their sins and, ultimately, their eternal fate.

Popular videos shown in youth groups, such as the “Letter from Hell” popularized by GodTube, propagated a viewpoint that placed the burden of one’s salvation squarely on the shoulders of friends or family members.

What we got wrong: Fear

The doom-and-gloom focus on evangelism has led many to a misunderstanding of Christianity’s core message. Such fear-based evangelistic methods make the goal to avoid hell rather than enter the communal relationship God has with his church.

The idea that Christianity is about avoiding a place reduces faith to a transaction aimed at escaping punishment, overlooking the opportunity to live a life anchored in God’s love.

At its heart, the gospel offers life enriched by the Holy Spirit. Life on this earth includes preparing for an eternity with God that transcends the mere avoidance of hell. Eternal life is about being reunited with the God of the universe here and now and looking forward to having a maximally intimate relationship with him in a perfected creation.

Unfortunately, the good intentions of church leaders in emphasizing evangelism fail to excuse the harmful methods employed. One way this fear-based view manifests in our churches is by emphasizing the “urgency” of the gospel, which, while well-intentioned, implies God needs human beings to accomplish his salvific work.

Scripture makes it clear salvation, from beginning to end, is a work of the Holy Spirit and a result of God’s grace and love for his creation. The responsibility for someone’s salvation rests on God’s shoulders rather than ours.

Instead, God invites us to participate in bearing witness to his redemptive plan without bearing the weight of the outcome. Francis Schaefer put it beautifully when he said: “We are not building God’s kingdom. He is building his kingdom—and we are praying for the privilege of being involved.”

We can get it right: Love

A love-focused approach to evangelism recognizes the unique journey of every human. Just as Jesus ministered to people from all walks of life, meeting them in the mess of everyday life, so too must modern evangelists adopt a posture of listening, empathy and patience.

Rather than wielding the gospel as a tool of judgment or coercion, believers must present Christ’s sacrifice as a gift of grace, an open invitation to explore the depths of God’s love without fear of rejection or condemnation.

The journey toward a healthier, more authentic evangelistic approach involves a deep, introspective understanding of the gospel’s true message. Such an understanding necessitates a move away from fear-based tactics and toward a model of evangelism rooted in love, relationship and the inherent value of everyone in the eyes of God.

How we get there

Re-educate. Education and discipleship play crucial roles in the fear-to-love paradigm shift. Believers need more than an understanding of the gospel’s core messages.

Relate. Christ-followers also need to gain the interpersonal skills necessary to engage in genuine, respectful conversations about faith.

By reclaiming the New Testament model of evangelism as relational and communal, Christians can foster communities that welcome questions, refuse to demonize doubt, and recognize the unique journey of faith for each person, marked by mutual support, learning and growth.

Adopt new metaphors. We must examine critically and challenge our cultural narratives that equate evangelism with conquest or coercion.

Instead of bearing the results-oriented nature of so many ministries today, we can focus on building relationships, leaving for God the preparation of souls to hear his message.

In embracing such a renewed vision for evangelism, the church can heal wounds inflicted by past abuses and misunderstandings.

As followers of Christ embody such an inclusive, relational approach to sharing their faith, they offer a compelling alternative to the narratives of fear and division that dominate much of our world today.

Through such a witness, the church can replace the image of a hell house with one of a lighthouse, serving as a beacon of hope, where inside a community exists where all can discover their identity and purpose as beloved children of God, and where the journey of faith becomes a shared adventure into the depths of divine love and grace.

Taylor Standridge is a Christian podcaster and producer who loves to help people understand who God is and how to live faithfully according to his goodness, grace and generosity. He is the production manager for FaithFi: Faith & Finance and holds a Master of Biblical and Theological Studies from Dallas Theological Seminary. The views expressed in this opinion article are those of the author.

I write today to express support and gratitude for the congregation and leaders of First Baptist Church of Alexandria, Va., considering their recent public dismissal from the Southern Baptist Convention.

First Baptist Alexandria has been a beacon of gospel ministry and a faithful congregation in the evangelical, global orthodox family for decades.

In the complex ministry environment of our nation’s capital, they also have not capitulated to the winds of progressive ideology as have many other “tall-steeple” churches, nor have they bowed the knee to country over kingdom in an effort to lift up party over the person of Jesus Christ.

They have served the kingdom faithfully both locally and globally and have been a catalyst for gospel expansion.

Gratitude for First Baptist Alexandria

I and the ministries I serve have benefited from their generosity of spirit. I can attest that thousands of people in North America have found new life in the gospel and a renewed engagement in the church family because of First Baptist Alexandria.

When the Lord opened the door to launch the Fresh Expressions movement in the United States nearly 15 years ago, First Baptist Alexandria was by our side. From 2012 to 2016, they hosted what would be foundational gatherings for our movement and set the course for gospel work that eventually would spill over into nearly 100 regional or national denominational families in North America.

They gave of their time, talents and treasures to seed that work, have done the same for others and will continue to do so in the days ahead.

I remember quite distinctly when the leadership of more than 30 denominational bodies gathered in 2016 to lay hands of blessing upon an evangelical charismatic Anglican, Bishop Graham Cray, who had been pivotal in working with us to develop Fresh Expressions work in America.

Afterward, someone remarked to me, “That kind of thing doesn’t happen in a typical Baptist church.”

Indeed, that is true of most. We owe a debt of gratitude to First Baptist Alexandria.

A vast fellowship

It is not surprising SBC messengers would oust First Baptist Alexandria, as doing so is consistent with the doctrinal stances and theological culture evident in the SBC.

After all, they made the same motion last year toward Rick Warren and Saddleback Church—other stalwarts of the global evangelical movement—for having a female teaching pastor who preaches roughly 25 percent of the time.

Now apart from the SBC, First Baptist Alexandria and churches like them need to know they are not alone.

In associations like the Ascent Movement, of which I am part, and other evangelical fellowships around the globe, there are thousands upon thousands of leaders and churches that support women in the life of church leadership in pastoral roles.

In fact, the Capetown Commitment of the Lausanne Movement, widely recognized as the global evangelical family of faith, makes room for such in their Confession of Faith and Call to Action.

In many parts of the globe, it is the movements that embrace the gifts and calling of women where the gospel is growing in power. FBC may have lost the SBC, but the truth is, they may be gaining much more.

My expectation is, in time, First Baptist Alexandria will experience growth in gospel vitality and power as a result of these circumstances.

A biblical witness

As was made clear in the public written response to the SBC, as well as Pastor Robert Stephens’ remarks during his opportunity to address the messengers in Indianapolis, the posture of First Baptist Alexandria is based on sound scriptural reasoning provided within the written witness of the Bible.

Throughout the world, the Holy Spirit clearly is blessing such approaches, and there is no “grievance” of the Spirit in taking such stands.

As I stated in reference to a person’s written response and Pastor Stephens’ remarks, “If you are going to go out, at least go out with good exegesis.”

In fact, it’s the same conservative interpretive method any of us who attended evangelical Bible colleges or seminaries were taught.

A few weeks ago, in response to Al Mohler’s continued perspective that the lifting up of women in ministry is a slippery slope into other progressive postures, Andy Miller III of Wesley Biblical Seminary—which holds to inerrancy—offered the perspective that if you consider the dialogue of Scripture instead of just the monologue of Scripture, you can see why solid evangelicals exegetically arrive at the support of women in ministry.

Or, as Julio Guarneri noted in a recent written update to the Baptist General Convention of Texas: “We do not believe the topic of women in ministry is a matter of scriptural authority. We believe it is an issue of scriptural interpretation.”

Women in ministry is not an issue such as current debates on human sexuality, where one clearly must import evidence into the text of Scripture. Scripture contains support for women leading in ministry, even if it does not contain such support in every circumstance.

This also is not a matter we should lay at the feet of the “autonomy of the local church.” Autonomy itself is a slippery slope and is a weak tie in binding a people together. After all, how compelling is a vision to “join one another” in “doing what you want?”

An opportune time

Applying nonlinear dynamics and chaos theory to the ouster of First Baptist Alexandria, as much as the SBC may wish for these exits to serve as a warning, they likely are to do the opposite.

Already, I am aware of more churches who will be more emboldened in their affirmation of women leaders.

I also suspect even some soft complementarians now will determine we are not in an age when we can afford to separate from fellow evangelicals over an issue many solid, Scripture-affirming leaders, theologians, missionaries and others around the evangelical world support.

For those of us coming from an SBC heritage of some kind, we are in an opportune moment of sorts. Saddleback may have signaled the beginning of this moment. First Baptist Alexandria has demonstrated the intensity of this moment.

Now is the time for those of us who believe women are called into ministry and those of us who believe this is a matter of scriptural interpretation to step into this moment.

Will we carry out the mission of God with only half the people of God fully engaged, or will we move forward, re-center the Great Commission and invite all those who are faithful to the teachings of our Lord Jesus Christ into carrying out the call of the gospel in a time when the need for the gospel to go forth and go deep is as important as ever?

Chris Backert serves as the senior director of Fresh Expressions North America and the Ascent Movement.

The Southern Baptist Convention’s recent resolutions against Palestine, widely regarded as profoundly anti-Christian, have ignited a critical reevaluation of the SBC’s theology and principles.

Despite the moral failure of forming in defense of slavery, the SBC grew to become the largest Protestant denomination in the United States, emphasizing evangelism, missionary work and biblical inerrancy. Historically, the SBC has shaped American religious and cultural life, advocating for various social and moral issues.

Their stance on Palestine is another moral failure.

Modern parallels of historical failures

Despite their longstanding support for Israel, in recent years, the SBC has intensified its pro-Israel stance, prioritizing it over Christian principles of justice, mercy and reconciliation. This shift is deeply troubling theologically.

Foundational to Baptist tradition are Jesus Christ’s teachings urging followers to “love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you” (Matthew 5:44).

The SBC’s unwavering support for Israel and Zionism mirrors their past backing of slavery, which they justified using biblical verses, thus contradicting core Christian principles. This stance neglects the plight of Palestinian Baptists and Christians, aligning with the SBC’s historical legacy of siding against justice.

During the Indianapolis convention, the SBC passed resolutions that starkly contrasted with their stated values. Of particular note was a resolution denouncing “anti-Israel activism” and affirming “solidarity with Israel.”

This highlights the SBC’s consistent pro-Israel stance over the years. By aligning with the Israeli government and settlers, the SBC continues to echo their rhetoric, potentially disregarding Palestinian aspirations for statehood and self-determination.

Theological error and ethical inconsistencies

These resolutions lack a biblical Christian perspective, condemning Hamas without addressing broader historical and geopolitical aspects. They fail to advocate for repentance, forgiveness and Christ-like reconciliation, rejecting “moral equivalence” and failing to acknowledge the suffering of all parties, particularly Palestinians.

True justice and lasting peace are found in Christ’s reconciling work, demanding humility, compassion and solidarity with the marginalized. The SBC’s resolutions contradict Jesus Christ’s radical teachings, lacking calls for enemy-love, forgiveness and nonviolent peacemaking that should define the church’s prophetic witness.

By uncritically affirming the just war tradition and endorsing the state’s right to wield the “sword,” the SBC conflates earthly nationalism with the kingdom of God.

Impact on Palestinian Christians

The SBC’s resolutions blatantly ignored Palestinian Christians and churches, callously neglecting them amid dire struggles against severe hardship, apartheid, occupation, ethnic cleansing, terror, genocide and discrimination.

This deliberate abandonment begs the question: Why harbor such deep animosity toward them? This stance not only repeats historical injustices, but also disregards international law and human rights abuses.

Over the years, Israeli attacks on Gaza have resulted in significant damage to Christian sites and properties, including churches and schools. The Gaza Baptist Church and its library, for instance, have been bombed and damaged multiple times.

The SBC’s resolutions also conveniently ignore the plight of Palestinian hostages, many of whom are Christians, focusing on Israeli hostages while disregarding the thousands of Palestinians languishing in illegal detention and facing torture. This double standard undermines the SBC’s moral authority.

Reclaiming the true spirit of Baptist Christianity

The recent actions of the SBC betray Baptist principles. Historically, Baptist churches have had a complex and varied relationship with justice and resistance against injustice.

While Baptists have been strong advocates for religious freedom and, in many cases, social justice, they also have supported and justified oppressive systems, such as slavery and segregation.

This contradictory legacy makes the SBC’s fervent support for the Israeli government’s occupation of Palestine even more troubling, as it appears to repeat past mistakes of siding with power over the powerless. Labeling opposition to Israeli policies as “antisemitic” ignores the systematic dehumanization of the Semitic Palestinians.

To realign with Christian principles, the SBC must reconsider its recent resolutions. This requires advocating for a just solution that respects the rights of all parties, especially Palestinian Christians.

Future generations and global implications

The SBC risks alienating a younger, globally aware generation that is critical of injustice. Young Christians, especially students, are seeking communities that reflect values of justice and equality.

The SBC’s stance on the Palestinian-Israeli conflict may lead to declining membership as congregants look for authentic Christian communities. Supporting policies that perpetuate oppression and conflict not only undermines Christian moral authority but also harms interfaith relationships.

Baptist tradition demands advocating for all oppressed, regardless of nationality or religion. It is crucial for the SBC to remember being Baptist means championing the marginalized and oppressed. This commitment transcends politics and strikes at the core of our faith. The SBC must pursue a Christ-centered, prophetic response that goes beyond political expediency.

This authentic spirit of Baptist Christianity requires confronting the moral lapses of our leaders and reclaiming our prophetic voice. The future of our faith hinges on this moment, demanding decisive action.

We implore the SBC to reconsider this resolution and commit to sacrificial love, forgiveness and the pursuit of true peace.

How can the SBC possibly defend its alleged commitment to justice and Christian principles while shamelessly endorsing a stance on the Palestinian-Israeli conflict that utterly betrays and abandons the suffering and rights of Palestinian Baptists and Christians?

When the SBC abandons its principles, siding with power over the powerless, what does it truly represent?

Jack Nassar is a Palestinian Christian based in Ramallah. He holds an MA in political communications from Goldsmiths University in London and possesses expertise across sectors, driving positive change. The views expressed in this opinion article are those of the author.

(RNS)—A lifelong Baptist in the Middle East, I have found myself in agreement with many of the resolutions coming out of the Southern Baptist Convention meeting in Indianapolis this week.

The resolution on the integrity of church leaders, the importance of the separation of church and state, and the call on church organizations to walk in the light and refrain from nondisclosure agreements all strike me as Christlike, and I and others in my corner of the Baptist world would happily sign on without any problem.

But two of the resolutions Southern Baptists approved—one concerning the idea of just war and another titled “On Justice and Peace in the Aftermath of the October 7 attack on Israel”— not only are contradictory, but are disappointing and dismaying.

Just war

In the first resolution, the drafters justify the necessity of war for defensive reasons, correctly calling for “discrimination between combatants and civilians,” so that “civilians may not be deliberately targeted for attack.”

In addition, “war must be fought with proper proportionality and the scale of death and destruction must be proportional to the scale of peace and justice at stake in the conflict,” and “military personnel should adhere to the principle of military necessity.”

Given everything we have seen in the last eight months in Gaza and the West Bank, this resolution debunks any attempt at calling Israel’s military action just.

The Israeli government’s actions have resulted in the starvation of an entire population, as well as deliberate attacks on schools, humanitarian workers, ambulances and journalists. These clearly are not in sync with the above-mentioned conditions for just war.

Unjust war

More astounding in light of the just war resolution is the second resolution, whose drafters appear to have taken a chapter from the Israeli military playbook and applied it without seeking the counsel of fellow Christians or even fellow Baptists in the Middle East.

The resolution fails in what it says but more in what it fails to say. It ignores the larger context of the conflict, which has seen 75 years of refugee status without the right of return, 57 years of occupation and 17 years of an illegal siege of Gaza. It didn’t just start on Oct. 7, as the resolution seems to want us to think.

Since Oct. 7, more than 5,000 Palestinians, including Christian Palestinians, have been detained by Israel without charge or trial, yet Southern Baptists focused solely on the Israeli hostages.

The Israelis, meanwhile, have engaged in civilian hostage taking, administrative detention and indiscriminate destruction of homes, businesses, universities, hospitals and houses of worship. The Israeli offensive action has gone far beyond its initial defensive justification, killing thousands of innocent Palestinians and displacing hundreds of thousands of others.

Christians in Gaza

This suffering—all publicly available information—did not earn a single word of recognition from Southern Baptists, not even the attacks on Gaza’s Christians, which have resulted in the loss of 3 percent of their already tiny population.

The Baptist church in Gaza, established by Southern Baptist missionaries, has been destroyed by Israeli missiles. Palestinian Christians who have taken refuge in churches have been left to die without the ability to get medical treatment. At the very least, Southern Baptists in Indianapolis could have offered words of compassion and solidarity.

Anti-hate

But more disturbing than what was ignored are the Oct. 7 resolution’s claims about the rise of antisemitism—much of it, of course, properly antiwar-ism, anti-Israelism and anti-occupation-ism. It failed to mention the increase in hate speech and hateful crimes against Palestinians, Arabs and Muslims.

Palestinian and pro-Palestinians have been bullied and fired from their jobs for expressing support for justice and a cease-fire, both in the Middle East and in the United States, where three Palestinian students, graduates of the Friends Quaker school in Ramallah, were shot at because they wore the Palestinian traditional kaffiyeh.

Southern Baptists apparently have swallowed the pro-Israeli narrative that protests at American universities were pro-Hamas, not anti-war. While some instigators made rare pro-Hamas comments, the protests were pro-peace and pro-cease-fire. There is nothing wrong with supporting the rights of Palestinians to self-determination.

Compassion needed

Most Christians in the Middle East ache with the pain of every death and destruction of any of our neighbors, whether Israeli or Palestinian. We hoped that, of all people, Christians in the United States would understand this pain. We hoped our fellow Christians would follow the Prophet Amos’ call for “justice to roll on like a river” and Micah’s call to all of us to “love mercy.”

Instead, our fellow Baptists’ words have poured salt on a deep wound. Showing compassion to Israelis killed and taken hostage on Oct. 7 is correct and biblical, but so is the need to show compassion to Palestinians who have suffered and continue to suffer. This one-sided resolution fails on all the tests of biblical principles and must be revisited.

Daoud Kuttab is a member of the Amman Baptist Church and publisher of Milhilard.org, a news site dedicated to the Christian community in Jordan and the Palestinian territories. The views expressed in this opinion article are those of the author.