After walking in and glancing at the nature of the photos, one student said, "I don't like looking at stuff like this," did a 180, and walked out.

In the World But

Not Of the World

We often mention social problems on this site -- things that need to be "fixed."

Early in life I realized that television was the most effective tool available for addressing such problems.

Some people are uncomfortable with that idea.

Here's just one example.

When I was teaching a video course at a university with a strong Christian mission, I decided to take the class to an exhibit of prize-wining photos. An award-winning photographer had traveled around the world documenting issues.

In part, I wanted show the conditions in the world that few of them (in this case from affluent Christian homes) seemed to know much about. I thought it might inspire them to use their talents to make a positive difference in the world.

Although the exhibit was a G-rated, many of the photos weren't "pretty." (Note the photo here of starving children.)

Upon glancing at the nature of the photos, one student said, "I don't like looking at stuff like this," did a 180, and walked out.

Although no other students walked out, I realized that many of these students had been able to insulate themselves from unpleasant realities in the world.

Christians often use the phrase, "In the world but not of the world.," to mean they don't allow themselves to become a part of the sin and depravity of the world. While that may be a worthy goal, can those who insulate themselves from such realities and simply enjoy the fruits of affluence ever hope to make a positive difference in the world? If everyone did that we would have ever had a Mother Teresa, a Buddha, or a Jesus?

And if everyone did that would there be any hope for a better world?

-Ron Whittaker

To Blog Index