Opting Out of the Christian Faith

People coming to faith in Christ, people walking away from their faith, people out-growing the version of church or Christianity they grew up with, people exploring, people opting out; none of these things are new or novel. What perhaps is, in our contemporary Christian context, is the publicized advent of these events. Especially when one considers the obsession (at least in some quarters) for a glamorous and alluring type of Christianity modeled cat-walk style in mega-churches. One that celebritizes singers, songwriters, and preachers, who themselves then curate social-media profiles followed by thousands (and hundreds of thousands). When folk such as this step away from their faith it becomes a press-release statement, as much a stage-based moment as their Christian ministry has been.

In recent weeks we’ve had a couple of these publicized announcements followed by the inevitable reactions one would expect in the world of social-media and in the world of consumer-Christianity publishing. I know none of these folks personally and have no desire to judge them or pass comment on their particular journeys. With all sincerity I wish them Godspeed as well as God’s grace and peace. I have my own beliefs that it is in God that we (them included) live and move and have our being, and that the declaration of the Hebrew psalmist in Psalm 139:7-12 (see below) is as true for them as for anyone else; where can I flee from Your presence?

I do, however, want to highlight a couple of reasons one of these folks offered for calling time on the Christian faith and make some brief comments. Part of their Instagram post read…

“How many preachers fall? Many. No one talks about it. How many miracles happen? Not many. No one talks about it. Why is the Bible full of contradictions? No one talks about it. How can God be love yet send four billion people to a place [hell], all ‘coz they don’t believe? No one talks about it. I am not in anymore. I want genuine truth. Not the ‘I just believe it’ kind of truth.”

No one talks about it. Really? He’s mis-read the situation, surely? What bubble of the Christian world does he live in? Everyone is talking about these things! Aren’t they? Actually, not everyone is talking about these things. In certain contemporary church contexts ‘deeper’ issues of theology are rarely talked about. A clear statement of faith is produced that defines the boarders and discussion is dismissed.

I can well imagine this Christian minster feeling the need for robust conversations (very robust conversations) to be had in relation to each of these topics – over coffee, in church staff meetings, and in Sunday morning sermons – but finding that they are never addressed. They’re not glamorous topics that build organisation momentum or inspire people to greatness, so they are put to the side. As well, they are complicated topics and for many Senior Pastors (especially CEO types) fall in the ‘too hard’ basket. But for many people these are big issues that pastors in every context must address. Calling people to ‘just believe it’ isn’t enough.

In his book ‘A Churchless Faith,’ pastor and writer Alan Jamieson, points out that people who leave the Church have, on average, been congregants for sixteen years with 94 percent having been leaders. These people are not slackers who leave because they have been offended; rather they leave because of meta grumbles – deep rooted questions about the foundations of faith itself which are not being addressed.

Obviously, this is problematic. Left unaddressed, or worse when they are suppressed (which happens all too often), these issues become destabilizing. At best folk perceive the Church to have taken them as far in their faith journey as she can and opt out of a localized Christian community. Alternatively, they opt out of faith altogether.

Pastors (and everyone else), questions, doubts, suspicions and uncertainty are part-and-parcel of authentic Christianity. In fact, it is almost inevitable that there will come a season where these things serve as the primary catalyst for spiritual growth in one’s journey of following Jesus. What’s unfortunate is that the modern church doesn’t always make space for people to doubt or to question or to be suspicious. Organisational church growth tends to require unwavering commitment to the vision, the values, the mission and the culture of ‘the house.’ This tends to mean cultivating an environment of momentum, alignment, excitement and anticipation; an ‘atmosphere of faith.’ The demand therefore tends to be for uniformity and conformity. This becomes a pretty challenging context in which to ask big questions about faith, the nature of the church, Christian spirituality and what it means to follow Jesus. Questions and doubts can be wrongly interpreted as a “lack of faith,” “a bad attitude,” “divisive,” or even a clear indicator that someone is “backsliding.” This is problematic on so many levels. No topic should be off-limits, and space needs to be made to address the theological issues that are being wrestled with in our contemporary context. (You can read more on this here). 

Pastors (and everyone else), if you’re not sure where to start when it comes to thinking through some of these topics – have a look at these links. On miracles, this or this. On hell, this, or this, or this. On suffering this. On the Bible this, or this, or this. 

Finally, I think it is worth pointing out that what inevitably becomes a kind of minor Christian celebrity status for gifted singers, songwriters and preachers who are privileged (or perhaps inappropriately burdened) by the bright lights and big crowds of the main stage needs to be carefully managed. And by carefully managed I don’t mean stage managed by an artist development liaison officer; I’m talking about robust pastoral care. Most young singers, songwriters, and preachers promoted to the main stage are aware that they are their based on their gifts, talents and abilities rather than character, ministry experience and faithfulness to a long obedience in the same direction. Pastoral care is required in order to ensure their holistic development. But more is required than the character development championed by the adage ‘gifting will get you there, but character will keep you there.’

Character development is good, but more is required than gifts and character. Vocational Christian ministry needs to be appreciated as a professional vocation as it historically was (along with medicine and law). Too often though, professional contemporary church ministry parallels professional sport, a paid profession where skill and natural attributes bring you into the role. Instead (without discounting skill and natural attributes) it should be appreciated as a profession where professional training brings you into the role – theological training, professional ethics, a body or required knowledge etc. This won’t fix everything, but it should give rise to vocational Christian ministers more than capable of navigating issues such as those highlighted by this recent Christian minister opting out. Instead he’d be able to help others navigate these topics.

*Psalm 139:7-12. Where can I go from your Spirit? Where can I flee from your presence? If I go up to the heavens, you are there; if I make my bed in the depths, you are there. If I rise on the wings of the dawn, if I settle on the far side of the sea, even there your hand will guide me, your right hand will hold me fast. If I say, “Surely the darkness will hide me and the light become night around me,” even the darkness will not be dark to you; the night will shine like the day, for darkness is as light to you.

Epistemic Bubbles and Echo Chambers

Yesterday I read, “A Document on Human Fraternity for World Peace and Living Together,” a joint statement signed by both Pope Francis of the Catholic Church and Sheikh Ahmad Al-Tayyeb, the Grand Imam of Al-Azhar. I found it bold, honest, and hopeful – certainly attributes necessary in our world today. It is the product of inter-faith dialogue between one of Christianity’s senior leaders and one of Islam’s senior leaders and is well worth having a look at. Reading the document, I also found myself reflecting on what sometimes feels like a very fragmented Christianity. 

Someone I was talking to recently mentioned that Rotary International is the largest organisation in the world providing and financing humanitarian services around the globe. I commented, “surely the Christian Church provides more humanitarian services than Rotary?” His response; “Perhaps, but the Church isn’t one organisation.” Touché. Jesus declares that it will be by our love for one another that the world will know the Church to be Christ’s disciples, but the Church often feels very divided.

In our Western context (and elsewhere), for better or worse, we’ve a plethora of options in relation to the local church we choose to attend. Seven or eight Great Traditions have evolved over the centuries and a multiplicity of denominations and non-denominational branches exist within each. Even within denominations there is a wide-range of local church expressions with different churches celebrating different cultural values and methodologies of church. Too often, as folk already thoroughly discipled as consumers, our choice to fellowship in a particular church community can subliminally (though irreverently) feel like a consumer choice that is quickly followed by a form of confirmation bias or post-purchase rationalization. This form of rationalization is the tendency to retroactively ascribe positive attributes to the choice we have made for option A (our church), while simultaneously amplifying the negative attributes of option B that we didn’t opt for (the church down the road). There is no need for us to do that. More, when I do that (or you do that), it has the potential to be a form of anti-Christ. It has the potential to go against the way of being in the world that Jesus calls us into. We need to be careful here.
   

Unchecked, post-purchase rationalization within ‘church world’, especially among pastors and leaders can lead to the development of epistemic bubbles and echo chambers, (something I covered over a few pages in my final doctorate project, which if you like, you can read below and find references for). Epistemic bubbles come about when informational networks form but omit certain voices from the conversation. In my doctorate project, which is contextualized to Pentecostalism, the examples I offer in relation to epistemic bubbles focus on the way in which Pentecostalism has tended towards a relational tribalism that, historically, has omitted conversation partners such as the theological academy, the ever evolving historical and theological perspectives of Church history over the centuries, and current and varied ecumenical points of view. More specifically, as Pentecostalism has evolved as a ‘contemporary’ methodology and expression of church, there tends to be a singular set of voices guiding conversations pertinent to faith and practice – that of the various mega-church pastors who lead relational networks and speak at each other’s conferences, seminars, retreats and events. The conversation is thus very one-dimensional with perspectives, practices and opinions continually recycled and re-enforced rather than challenged to adapt and evolve as might be necessary.
   

More insidious than epistemic bubbles, echo chambers are formed when, in addition to relevant voices being disregarded, potential conversation partners are actively discredited. Whereas an epistemic bubble merely omits contrary views, an echo chamber brings its members to actively distrust outside voices. One shouldn’t be naïve in thinking this is not a reality within church contexts or the Christian community more generally. There are many possible scenarios, you’ll be familiar with some no-doubt; Protestants who are anti-Catholic, ‘small’ church folk who are against mega-churches, pastors with no formal theological training pre-supposing that those with theological training should be viewed with suspicion, charismatics who see deeper teaching as cerebral nonsense, exegetical preachers who see Pentecostalism as hocus-pocus. And each of these could be reversed. More damaging than epistemic bubbles, echo chambers have the potential to become cult-like, with members isolated from outside voices that are labelled as malignant and untrustworthy, with the framework of trust being narrowed to exclusively insider voices.

When this shift to a narrow set of voices occurs, the Church ceases to function as a genuine sub-community (an expression of the Kingdom of God) within the wider society. Rather than existing as a community of peculiar discourse with practices of memory, hope, and pain that keep healthy human life available in the face of all the ‘virtual reality’ now on offer in dominant culture, local churches runs the risk of becoming a separated sphere of existence with their own dominant culture, set of beliefs and behaviours that members must submit to in order to belong. The church thus becomes its own empire rather than a subversion of empire and a prophetic sub-community of alternative consciousness.

All of this being a long-winded preamble from which to note; to the extent that the Church and the Christian community fails to cultivate unity within her own diversity – putting aside such artificial dualisms as faith versus reason, science versus Scripture, intellect verses heart, spiritual verses material, Catholic verse Protestant, contemporary versus traditional, worship versus Word, my local church versus the other church down the road, and a thousand and one other such possibilities – it will also fail to be known by its love for one another. Further, if love for one another is problematic, you can be sure that love of neighbour will be difficult and love of enemy neigh on impossible. Though hoping to exist as a catalyst of healing and a broker of peace in the world, the Church – inappropriately divided rather than beautifully diverse – will likely perpetuate as much brokenness as what it does restoration.

Colossians 3:12-17
¹² Therefore, as God’s chosen people, holy and dearly loved, clothe yourselves with compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness and patience. ¹³ Bear with each other and forgive one another if any of you has a grievance against someone. Forgive as the Lord forgave you.¹⁴ And over all these virtues put on love, which binds them all together in perfect unity. ¹⁵ Let the peace of Christ rule in your hearts, since as members of one body you were called to peace. And be thankful. ¹⁶ Let the message of Christ dwell among you richly as you teach and admonish one another with all wisdom through psalms, hymns, and songs from the Spirit, singing to God with gratitude in your hearts. ¹⁷ And whatever you do, whether in word or deed, do it all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through him.

_______________________________

Below is a ‘cut & paste’ from my final doctorate paper, a couple of pages on epistemic bubbles and echo chambers. It may not make total sense disconnected from the rest of the project, but at the same time, might be of interest.

_______________________________

The Fruit and Consequences of Relational Tribalism

In the early days of Pentecostalism, relational tribalism was enacted via the voluntary association of faith missions and outreach projects – breakaways from established church structures and traditions. In the current contemporary context, tribalism is evidenced in the voluntary association of various leadership networks that associate around shared cultural values, modes of worship and methodologies of church – creating further insular subsets within and across Pentecostal denominational structures. It is not uncommon for pastors and churches to prefer participation in network events run by the mega-church ministries they aspire to become like, rather than gatherings organized by the official denomination or movement to which they belong.

In terms of fruitfulness, the tendency towards relational tribalism strengthened Pentecostal conviction and focus as the movement emerged and institutionalized in the first half of the twentieth century. Where other traditions viewed Pentecostalism with suspicion, like-minded cohorts allowed Pentecostalism to develop in its own identity while hedging against contrary voices. In a sense relational tribalism allowed Pentecostalism to find its sense of identity.

It must also be acknowledged, however, that relational tribalism is a strong contributing factor to the negative consequences of each of the other defining markers discussed in this paper [you’d have to read the whole paper for this to make sense]. A greater degree of ecumenical association and engagement with the varying perspectives of other Christian traditions in matters of theology and doxology throughout Pentecostalism’s history may have tempered or mitigated these negative outcomes. Foremost among the undesirable characteristics of relational tribalism is a narrow and even insular perspective on matters of faith and praxis that can lead to both arrogance and ignorance.

Echo Chambers and Epistemic Bubbles

In his essay Escape the Echo Chamber, philosopher C. Thi Nguyen suggests two specific ways in which communities wrap themselves within impenetrable networks of intellectual like-mindedness that are ultimately unhealthy: via epistemic bubbles and through the creation of echo chambers.[1] Nguyen defines epistemic bubbles as “informational network[s] from which relevant voices have been excluded by omission.”[2] Within Pentecostalism, relational tribalism fosters an epistemic bubble in which discussions of theology, doxology, ecclesiology, and the like, tend to exclude other relevant and wise voices. Broadly speaking, the theological simplicity inherent in Pentecostalism excludes such conversation partners as the theological academy, evolving historical perspectives of church history and varied ecumenical points of view. More specifically, within the relational networks of contemporary Pentecostalism, there tends to be a singular set of voices guiding conversations pertinent to faith and practice – that of the various mega-church pastors who lead these networks and speak at each other’s conferences, seminars, retreats and events.[3] [The conversation is therefore very one-dimensional].

More insidious than epistemic bubbles, echo chambers are formed when, in addition to relevant voices being disregarded, other conversation partners are actively discredited: “where an epistemic bubble merely omits contrary views, an echo chamber brings its members to actively distrust outsiders.”[4] In their book Echo Chamber, Kathleen Jamieson and Joseph Cappella describe an echo chamber as cult-like, with members isolated from outside voices that are labelled as malignant and untrustworthy, with the framework of trust being narrowed to exclusively insider voices.[5] While Pentecostalism has at times given rise to cult-like movements, it is not the intention of this paper to portray contemporary Pentecostalism as a cult. It should be noted however that, given the need for control embedded within pragmatic methodologies, the general lack of deeper reflection that comes with a bent toward theological simplicity and the propensity towards epistemic bubbles found in relational tribalism [again, you’d need to read the rest of this paper for that to totally make sense], Pentecostalism should be aware of the potential of echo chambers developing and the dangers inherent to such chambers. When the perspective of the mega-church pastor begins to function as the voice shaping faith and practice within contemporary Pentecostalism, it is only a matter of time before other voices begin to be disempowered and discredited to the detriment of Pentecostalism.

When this shift to a narrow set of voices occurs, the church ceases to function as a genuine sub-community (an expression of the Kingdom of God) within the wider society. Rather than existing as “a community of peculiar discourse with practices of memory, hope, and pain that keep healthy human life available in the face of all the ‘virtual reality’ now on offer in dominant culture,”[6] the church runs the risk of becoming a separated sphere of existence with its own dominant culture, set of beliefs and behaviours that members must submit to in order to belong.

In The Prophetic Imagination, Walter Brueggemann likens this establishment of a dominant culture requiring submission, to Israel’s movement away from the radically alternate way of being in the world that had been established under Moses and as a return to the pre-Mosaic imperial paradigm [Egypt], as reinstated under the kings of Israel.[7] This shift began under David but is more clearly evidenced in the life of Solomon: “the entire program of Solomon now appears to have been a self-serving achievement with the sole purpose being the self-securing of the king and dynasty… a program of state-sponsored syncretism, which if course means the steady abandonment of the radicalness of the Mosaic vision.”[8]

Brueggemann refers to this embrace of syncretism as the paganization of Israel, though in the context of a discussion about contemporary Pentecostalism, the metaphor serves to describe the potential for a secularization of the church.[9] In this instance, the size, reach and affluence of a large contemporary church, the culture and routinization of the church (which congregants are expected to buy into),[10] and the manner in which senior leaders are seen as God’s elected officials, serve to create a “controlled static religion in which God and his temple have become part of the royal landscape, in which the sovereignty of God is fully subordinated to the purpose of the king.”[11] The church thus becomes its own empire rather than a subversion of empire and a prophetic sub-community of alternative consciousness.

When the church becomes an empire, the less desirable traits inherent in relational tribalism tend to surface and flourish: theological errancy, ignorance, deception, blind-spots, self-righteousness, over-demanding expectations within the church, defensiveness, divisiveness, and a suspicion of any other opinion of, or expression within, the Body of Christ. All-in-all this amounts to a failure to reflect Christ’s wish in John 17 that his followers would be known by their love for one another. Thus, a re-imagined Pentecostalism needs to be mindful of the paradox that the church is called to difference – to be a peculiar people – at the macro level (i.e. in relation to the empire and the systems of the world) but not to tribalism at the micro level (i.e. within the Body of Christ).

---

[1] See “Essays,” on Aeon website, C. Thi Nguyen, “Escape the Echo Chamber” https://aeon.co/essays/why-its-as-hard-to-escape-an-echo-chamber-as-it-is-to-flee-a-cult (accessed July 30, 2018).

[2] Ibid.

[3] This tendency is seen in the work of contemporary Pentecostal pastor Paul de Yong, the pastor of LIFE church in Auckland, New Zealand. His latest book, God, Money and Me, includes ten endorsements of the book, its aims, perspectives, and conclusions. However, they all come from fellow mega-church pastors who are regular speakers at de Yong’s conferences (and him at theirs). There are no endorsements of support from recognized theologians or trained economists. See; Paul de Yong, God, Money and Me, (Auckland, NZ: Life Resource International, 2017), 3-6.

[4] See “Essays,” on Aeon website, C. Thi Nguyen, “Escape the Echo Chamber” https://aeon.co/essays/why-its-as-hard-to-escape-an-echo-chamber-as-it-is-to-flee-a-cult (accessed July 30, 2018).

[5] C. Thi Nguyen, “Escape the Echo Chamber,” refereeing to Kathleen Hall Jamieson and Joseph N. Cappella¸ Echo Chamber; Rush Limbaugh and the Conservative Media Establishment (New York: Oxford University Press, 2010).

[6] Walter Brueggemann, The Prophetic Imagination (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2001), xvii.

[7] Ibid., 24-25.

[8] Ibid., 23.

[9] Ibid., 24.

[10] See discussion in chapter three, Pragmatic Methodologies, in relation to this.

[11] Brueggemann, The Prophetic Imagination, 28.

Doctorate: Done and Dusted

I recently wrapped up my doctorate studies with Fuller Theological Seminary. It is a wonderful feeling to have finished the program and I'm looking forward to a study-free summer! Below are three paragraphs I've plucked out of the introduction to my final paper - Pentecostalism Re-Imagined: Reconfiguring Pentecostalism in Twenty-First Century New Zealand. If you would like a full copy of the paper please e-mail me and I'll send out a PDF copy. 

joseph@stlukeschurch.org.nz

_______________________________

The late Irish poet and philosopher John O’Donohue once stated, “It is essential for somebody who wants to have a mature, adult, open-ended, good-hearted critical faith, to conduct the most vigorous and relentless conversation that [they] can with [their] own tradition.” This project is an attempt to engage in such a conversation with my tradition(s) – Pentecostalism and the Assemblies of God movement in New Zealand. It is not a project of criticism – nothing life-giving or transformative is achieved by throwing stones. Rather, the aim is a critical-reflection – a careful and prayerful analysis of Pentecostalism in my twenty-first century context. It is an attempt to offer fresh perspectives on Pentecostal ministry that would assist Assemblies of God pastors throughout New Zealand to minister, with increasing fruitfulness, the life of Christ in a postmodern world.

_______________________________

Three realities within a twenty-first century context that necessitate a process of critical reflection. Firstly, “ministry today takes place in a world that is rapidly changing and extraordinarily multifaceted;” globalization, the information-age, and the progresses of science have awakened in the world a growing appreciation of the complexities inherent to every aspect of human life. This reality demands that the church exhibits a faith that is not only numinous but also rational and intellectual. This does not have to mean academic, nor does it have to be a capitulation to modernist ideals of logical positivism, scientism or some sort of biblical-rationalism. It does, however, ask that while Pentecostalism holds onto the mystery of faith – that God is unknowable in an empirical sense and is fundamentally ineffable – that it also attempts to speak of faith in a manner that is well considered, well formed and well argued. “The world cannot be ignored and isolation – intellectually, physically and spiritually – is not a viable option.”

_______________________________

The third factor prompting the need for a critical reflection in regard to the theological constructs and ecclesial expressions of Pentecostalism concerns the nature of Pentecostalism and what, in the first place, makes a church Pentecostal. As a younger generation of Assemblies of God pastors are ordained for ministry, appreciation should be given to the fact that they will likely enter ministry with a natural postmodern disposition that will implicitly include a tendency towards deconstruction, institutional suspicion and an incredulity regarding meta-narratives. Whether their points of view are appreciated by older Pentecostal ministers or not, this new generation of pastors is likely to conduct their own evaluations of Pentecostalism and the Assemblies of God as a twenty-first century expression of the Church. Rather than ignore or try and shutdown these postmodern sensibilities, this paper will attempt to create the space required for an honest process of both deconstruction and reconstruction – with the latter being an effort often overlooked in postmodernism. Thus, with Pentecostalism moving into its second century, a critical analysis will consider what should be preserved and what should be discarded; in the first instance, to use the metaphor of 1 Corinthians 3:12, preserving the gold, silver and costly stones of Pentecost and, in the second instance, leaving behind that which might be referred to as the wood, hay and straw of the various Pentecostalisms that have unfolded over time. 

_______________________________

If you would like to read the entire paper I'm happy to e-mail you a PDF version of the completed document, just send me an e-mail request: joseph@stlukeschurch.org.nz

Slow-Pastor

Busy pastor go, go, go,
Budgets and planning and projections to show.

Meetings, seminars, conferences, training,
Promoting and networking – next level he’s aiming.

Buildings to build, money to raise,
Overseas travel and some occasional praise. [Jesus]

How’s work? Busy, busy, no margins to bore,
Overloaded schedules that’s how you keep score.

60 hour, 80 hour work weeks even,
Advice I just read,
A successful pastor would have you believin.

But resist the desire to play that game,
A christian version of the rat race is surely insane.

We’ve no need on Sunday to be harassed and cajoled,
About some next level calling or in goal setting be schooled.

Slow down instead pastor and take a few breaths,
Let the truth of God’s Word rise up from the depths.

In stillness and prayer and quiet reflection,
You’ll discover a gentler pace from which to offer direction.

A non-anxious presence, and a more peaceful mind,
The wisdom of heaven, and of love you will find.

Walk-slowly dear pastor, please take your time,

Eyes open in wonder to see and to hear,
God’s alternate arrangement for human affairs.  

A poem I wrote for myself (and any who might appreciate it) post submitting the final project for my doctorate. I suddenly had space and margins that I've not had for a long time and people asking what I'm planning on filling that space with. There are lots of options. In one sense though, my major hope is to be slower, more present, more appreciative, more able to listen, more prayerful and considered.  

“How can I lead people into the quiet place beside the still waters if I am in perpetual motion? How can I persuade a person to live by faith and not by works if I have to juggle my schedule constantly to make everything fit into place?” Eugene H. Peterson, The Contemplative Pastor

On Books and Strategies for Reading

Have you ever thought to yourself, “I wish I read more,” or, “I’d love to be more of a reader,” or, “so many books, but so little time,”? If you have, I've got a couple of suggestions in regard to how you might become a more proficient and prolific reader. 

Firstly, I’d encourage you to start thinking about books as you do various Netflix or television shows. Picture a book as a series and the chapters within the book as episodes.

Secondly, select three books that you’d like to read. Think of them as three different television shows that you’d like to have on the go. Maybe get some recommendations from friends in regard to something they’ve read and thought was top shelf – just like you do with Netflix. Of course, don’t (when starting out) choose three ridiculously large or complicated books, rather choose something with approx. 200 to 300 pages in it and ten to twelve chapters.

Thirdly, pick a night of the week that your “show,” your book, is going to be on. Let’s say one on Monday, one on Tuesday and one on Thursday, and then choose what time your show starts each night (appreciating that it’ll be an hour long) – let’s go with 8:15pm.

Fourthly, be aware that reading is a discipline, far more so than watching television. It takes energy, effort, and concentration. Reading is in one sense a muscle that you have to exercise and develop. When you first start there might be some heavy lifting, but you will grow stronger. Commit to your hour reading each night, with each book. Don’t worry if at first you can’t complete a whole chapter in the allotted time, a whole episode, you’ll become a faster reader by simple perseverance.

Fifthly, if one of your books gets really good – feel free to binge read.

Sixthly, if you commit to the discipline you’ll get through between ten and fifteen 250-page books every year, between one hundred and one hundred and fifty books every ten years. And that’s not accounting for the improvements you’ll make in terms of becoming a stronger reader every month that goes by, nor for the occasional binge read. 

"Books shape us, dynamically molding our minds and souls. You are never the same person when you finish a book–even one that is read purely for escape or entertainment. A.W. Tozer has aptly stated that “the things you read will fashion you by slowly conditioning your mind”. What it means is that what we read matters and directly affects what we become. We are fortunate with the wealth of books at our fingertips.  - Scott Larsen