(Madison, WI) – The California State University (CSU) system has issued a nondiscrimination policy that requires InterVarsity to allow non-Christians to be chapter leaders. InterVarsity has always required chapter leaders to agree to our Doctrinal Basis, a summary of basic, historic Christian beliefs. While InterVarsity invites and welcomes all students as participants, we believe a Christian group should have the right to expect and even require their leaders to be Christian—just as any student group, club or Greek organization should be able to require their leaders to be like-minded.

InterVarsity Christian Fellowship is now developing a new style of campus ministry on CSU campuses where we have been banned from participating in campus life as a recognized student organization. In order to maintain a ministry presence with 23 chapters on 19 CSU campuses, InterVarsity is introducing creative new ways to connect with students and share the gospel message—though doing so as an “unrecognized” student group will prove considerably more costly.

Because we are no longer allowed to participate in campus organization fairs, InterVarsity will make contact with students by deploying new tools such as mobile banner stands, interactive displays, social media, and other techniques that don’t rely on established campus structures.

“Our campus access challenges give this generation of students an opportunity to campus ministry,” said Greg Jao, InterVarsity’s National Field Director. “Even as we use new tools and techniques, we remind students that effective ministry is ultimately relational. It’s about students inviting other students to follow Jesus.”

If your goal is to write the Great American Novel, I have bad news for you. Herman Melville accomplished that feat more than one hundred and fifty years ago when he wrote Moby Dick.

The greatness of Moby Dick is in its unparalleled theological symbolism that is sprinkled abundantly throughout the novel. For example, consider its use of biblical names for characters such as Ahab, Ishmael, and Elijah, and ships such as Jeroboam and Rachel.

Melville scholars disagree on the meaning of the central symbolic character of the novel—the great white whale, Moby Dick.

Many argue that he symbolizes the incarnation of evil. Ahab certainly holds this view, as he is driven by a monomaniacal hatred for this creature that took his leg and left him permanently damaged in body and soul.

Other scholars are convinced that the whale symbolizes God Himself. Thus, Ahab’s pursuit of the whale is not a righteous pursuit of God but natural man’s futile attempt in his hatred of God to destroy the omnipotent deity.

I favor this second view.

I believe that Moby Dick contains the greatest chapter ever written in the English language: “The Whiteness of the Whale.” Here we find insight into Melville’s profound symbolism as he explores how whiteness is used in history, religion, and nature. The terms he uses to describe the appearance of whiteness in these areas include elusive, ghastly, and transcendent horror, as well as sweet, honorable, and pure.

I remember playing with fire once when I was a kid.

Ok, I did it more than once when I was a kid.

But I remember one time when it almost got out of control. One day after the fourth of July a friend and I collected a pile of unexploded firecrackers. The fuses had burned off but the firecrackers had failed to explode. After trying a variety of methods to ignite them we decided to build a fire, throw them in and wait for the bang. When that failed to happen we decided to throw in the six or seven Bic lighters we had collected from around my friend’s house. That’s when the real pyrotechnics began.

Although the fireworks never ignited, the lighters did! Suddenly the lighters became fiery, molten plastic projectiles that were catapulted out of the fire into the surrounding woods. In a matter of moments we were confronted with a half dozen small fires that were in danger of burning out of control. The woods were too far from the house, so the garden hose wouldn't reach. We were forced to stamp out each individual fire before it spread too far. Whew!

In some ways I feel like I am in a similar situation over a blog post I wrote in June for Pete Enns. I suppose I was playing with fire again.

The post was an attempt to explain my faith perspective as a biblical scholar who encountered the complexity of the Bible, but still maintains a strong faith in God. But instead what has happened is that some have taken a small, yet significant portion of that post, and like those molten plastic projectiles from my youth, have begun a number of small fires. Since I can’t possibly stamp them all out, I will try to communicate here what I originally said and some further thoughts about the portion that others have used to start these fires.