howwerun

[howwerun]

The Imago Dei, the Image of God

Imago Dei is not something I was taught about, as such, but as I am studying it, I realize I have been taught indirectly through the liturgies of the traditions in which I was raised. Somewhere along the way, it was instilled in me that the imago Dei is a reference to the fact that I am human, as opposed to anything else in creation. As with most things in Churches of Christ (CoC), this was conveyed through negative comparisons. Just as we were CoC because we were not denominational and not Catholic, we were human because we were not dogs or cats or rocks, etc. Just as we were CoC because we did not have a written creed, we were human because we were not merely instinctual but intellectual.

To be the imago Dei is to be human, and to be human is to be physiologically and intellectually human. Therefore, all humans are necessarily bearers of the imago Dei, regardless of what they do or what they believe. It is an inherent, human quality that cannot be lost or gained. It simply is, because in the beginning, God made us so.

This essay will explore an alternative understanding of the imago Dei, one that challenges the traditions in which I was raised in increasingly complex ways and calls into question what it is that truly defines the imago Dei.

Defining Imago Dei

The short of it is this: I no longer believe that the imago Dei is found in our appearance, nor is it found in our being physiologically different from the rest of creation, nor is it found in our being intellectually “superior” to the rest of creation. The imago Dei does set us apart as humans from the rest of creation, but it is in a particular capacity that we find our “holiness” as the image of the one true God: we have been blessed with the capacity to participate willingly, however imperfectly, in the missio Dei. The divine work of the creator is open to us in a conscious, willful way, and that is not something I think anything else in all of this physical creation can claim.

This is, admittedly, a rather abstract interpretation, and it seems even more so when compared to the definitions I was taught growing up. Perhaps that is because it was necessary for me, personally, that I might “shift to the left a bit” and examine the imago Dei with fresh eyes. Regardless, I think it would serve all of us well who grew up in conservative CoC to stretch our imagination of Genesis (and all of scripture) a bit abstractly.

Imago Dei and the Trinity

A big part of this shift in the imago Dei is rooted in a consideration of the Trinity. I am assuming as a foundational posture that God operates out of, and in line with, God’s nature, and that nature is rooted in God’s Trinitarian identity. Because I hold that the Trinity is engaged in a constant and reciprocal, self-denying hospitality toward one another, creation, too, not only as an act but also in relation to the missio Dei, is rooted in self-denying hospitality. God is making room at God’s table for creation, and in Christ, creation is brought up to share in the life of the Divine.

The imago Dei, therefore, finds its roots in that same hospitable nature. More precisely, God has placed in creation a created being capable of expressing the nature and mission of God toward creation. It is not in humanity that God is manifest; it is through humanity that God is manifesting God’s image in creation. To be the imago Dei, we must engage in the missio Dei so that God’s image is made manifest among us and through us (and, I think Smith would argue, to us).

Imago Dei and Scripture

Initial hints of this Trinitarian, missio Dei-imago Dei are seen in Genesis 1, where God creates humans as male and female, precluding a gender-specific definition of the imago Dei and expressing a communal definition of being human (“male and female God created them”). God instructs them to have dominion over the earth and to be fruitful, and Genesis 2 tells us that God’s intention was for Eden to be tilled and kept, and it was not good that man should do this alone. Already, God’s Trinitarian nature is manifest in humanity, but not in their physical image. Rather, it is in their communal and hospitable identity toward creation (and one another) that shines forth the imago Dei.

As the story of God unfolds throughout human history, God continually invites people into deeper and deeper participation. God’s covenant with Abraham was aimed at the benefit of all peoples, and we see prophets essentially sitting at the decision-making table with God. They stand in the breach on behalf of the righteous and unrighteous, alike, and have “authority” to reason with God about the future of humanity. Even before Christ, humanity engages in the missio Dei; from the beginning of creation, humanity has the capacity to be the imago Dei.

Enter: Jesus. God reveals the heart of the missio Dei in the power of the cross. In conservative, CoC tradition, Jesus is the imago Dei in his being the physically manifested Son of God, but under this newer exploration of the imago Dei, it is, perhaps, in something else that we see the truest manifestation: “the Kingdom of God has drawn near.” Jesus’s life and ministry is the purest revelation of God’s Trinitarian nature, not only in his relationship with the Father and the Spirit, but also in his relationship with creation and humanity. Jesus is God incarnate, yes, but as a human, Jesus bears the imago Dei in his submitted participation in the work of God and his determined, self-denying, hospitable nature both toward and with his disciples and all those who come to him. The drawing near of the Kingdom might not be simply God come to earth (Jesus) but the imago Dei being lived out among those who follow Jesus.

Imago Dei and Human Identity

Another major shift in my imagination of the imago Dei comes from my understanding of what it means to be human. Rooting the imago Dei in human physiology or intellect places humanity at the center of the story; God’s image is rooted in us rather than in God. This takes a lot of the pressure off humanity by making God look like us from the get-go. Without any work, we start off connected to the divine in a majestic and glorifying way— we are made in the image of God.

Part of being human, though, is being a created being. If I see myself as created and God as divine, then I can no more bear the image of God inherently than can anything else in creation. Perhaps that is why it is so tempting to imagine that the imago Dei has to do with being a human as opposed to a dog or cat. It is simpler and cleaner and roots our inherent value in created nature.

When we allow ourselves to identify with creation, as creatures who are other than divine, we must find our inherent value in God’s undeserved love. The imago Dei, then, necessitates something beyond human nature, because God is beyond human nature. Thus, it is in our imitation of God that we begin to bear the image of God and not otherwise.

Imago Dei and Smith

Imaging God thus involves representing and perhaps extending in some way God’s rule on earth through ordinary communal practices of human sociocultural life.

This is perhaps the most succinct summary I have seen of the imago Dei, which I am attempting to describe. Smith continues, “The imago Dei is not a thing or property that was lost (or retained); it was a calling and a vocation that Adam and Eve failed to carry out.”

The significance in Smith’s argument is that he adds another characteristic to human identity, which I had neglected: embodiment. It is important to articulate that aspect of humanity, because, for Smith, the imago Dei is an embodied calling, and I agree. I have danced around the characteristic, thus far, but Smith attacks it head-on: “the shape of such image-bearing will be cruciform,” and the cross is an embodied act.

I think there is a tension, here. I have argued that the imago Dei is not a physical characteristic or trait, and Smith makes the same argument, but because embodiment is part of being human, any participation in the missio Dei is necessarily going to be embodied. The cross demonstrates that. Thus, while the imago Dei is not a physical characteristic, it is inextricable from our being physical. It must be made manifest in our very bodies. I believe this is what Paul means when he says we are

...always carrying in the body the death of Jesus, so that the life of Jesus may also be made visible in our bodies. For while we live, we are always being given up to death for Jesus’ sake, so that the life of Jesus may be made visible in our mortal flesh.

Ministry and the Imago Dei

If the imago Dei is an embodied participation in the missio Dei— a physical, sociocultural, communal practice— there is a fundamental shift in my pastoral paradigm. For most of my life, I saw humans as individuals whose ultimate goal was to transcend physical suffering to attain spirituality. We were each spirits with bodies, and true maturity was to focus entirely on the spiritual. In that paradigm, physical actions could only ever be means to an end; they were inroads to helping people see what was truly important. If, however, the imago Dei is an embodied practice rooted in the hospitable nature of the Trinity, the embodied practices are not simply hooks to draw people in.

Smith makes a compelling argument that we are not simply “thinking things” but being things. We are shaped primarily by doing and experiencing, not primarily by rationalizing and studying. It is precisely because of that distinction that the imago Dei challenges the old pastoral paradigm; embodied practices do not simply lead to pursuits of the mind. Rather, the embodied practices, themselves, are forming and transforming moments when the imago Dei is powerfully manifest.

The overriding goal of pastoral work, then, is to participate in the missio Dei in one’s congregation and communities such that the imago Dei is “made visible in our mortal flesh.” This means that evangelism is not just preaching and teaching. Nor is leadership simply telling people what to do, where to go, or what to believe. Worship is not just singing words or remembering Jesus by ourselves, in our own minds. Rather, evangelism necessitates sharing life with people— embodied participation in the realities of humanity that we might be cruciform in both mourning and rejoicing. Leadership necessitates communal discernment; what is the Spirit doing so that we might participate? Worship necessitates intentional, liturgical practices that are rooted in Trinitarian hospitality.

Conclusion

There is no room for buffered individuals in the imago Dei. I cannot reflect the Trinity on my own. I require embodied persons to interact with and dance with. Shared lives are required. Communal discernment is required. A sense of the calling is required. I keep hearing Matthew over and over in my mind: “For where two or three are gathered in my name, I am there among them.” God has invited us to the table of the Divine, and it seems the one requirement to stay is that we turn and do the same with a cruciform, embodied love.

Reference

Smith, James K. A. Desiring the Kingdom: Worship, Worldview, and Cultural Formation. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2009.

[howwerun]

A Great and Challenging Revelation

I've been absent because of many things—a return to school for my Master's, a new child, job changes, to name a few. I've had many significant philosophical and theological changes since my last part. Tonight, I only want to record one revelation about my own bias concerning scriptural metaphors:

I hate the abuse and misuse of purity metaphors so much in this season of life that I am continually tempted to abandon them altogether.

This is significant, because it represents the opposite of what I hate. Many have so overemphasized purity metaphors in scripture that the Gospel has been boiled down to a singular message: you are a sinner, and you need to be purified so that you don't go to hell. Love just means God is willing to spare you from hell. Justice just means Jesus died instead of you so that you can be purified. Compassion just means deciding not to kill you because your impurity. Salvation just means not being impure anymore. Having the Spirit just means being pure. Being in the Kingdom of God just means having been purified by the blood of Christ.

I'm not going to talk about The problems with overemphasizing purity metaphors over all other metaphors. I'm not going to talk about other metaphors for salvation, baptism, or the cross. The purpose of this post is to record a confessional revelation: if I, in response to the overemphasizing of purity metaphors, reject purity metaphors altogether, I will be inadvertantly making the same mistake in the other direction. It would be equally foolish for me to completely underemphasize a metaphor.

The Bible does say we are sinners and impure. We need to balance that with metaphors of healing, reconciliation, adoption, etc.

[howwerun]

Epicurus and the Problem of Evil

The Problem of Evil

A friend of mine posted the following:

Only two of the three can be true: 1. God is [all-]good 2. God is all-powerful 3. Evil exists. Discuss........

The premise is based on Epicurus’s argument from evil concerning the coexistence of an all-knowing, all-powerful, all-good God and evil in the world (that is, evil actions and events, such as people killing each other). Wikipedia has a nice summation of the argument:

Logical problem of evil Originating with Greek philosopher Epicurus, the logical argument from evil is as follows:

1. If an omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent god exists, then evil does not. 2. There is evil in the world. 3. Therefore, an omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent God does not exist.

This argument is of the form modus tollens, and is logically valid: If its premises are true, the conclusion follows of necessity. To show that the first premise is plausible, subsequent versions tend to expand on it, such as this modern example:

1. God exists. 2. God is omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent. 3. An omnibenevolent being would want to prevent all evils. 4. An omniscient being knows every way in which evils can come into existence, and knows every way in which those evils could be prevented. 5. An omnipotent being has the power to prevent that evil from coming into existence. 6. A being who knows every way in which an evil can come into existence, who is able to prevent that evil from coming into existence, and who wants to do so, would prevent the existence of that evil. 7. If there exists an omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent God, then no evil exists. 8. Evil exists (logical contradiction).

Problem of evil, Wikipedia

Preface

I’ll include a summary at the end, if you’re pressed for time, but keep in mind that if you don’t read the full text, you won’t really be equipped to discuss the matter later on or comment on the post. When we discuss philosophy and theology, definitions are important, and you’ll miss out on those if you jump to the end. I do hope that if this topic truly concerns you you’ll read through the entire post.

If you’re already familiar with the problem of evil and arguments made in favor of theism, you might not find anything new here, but, of course, you’re always welcome to read through and comment.

My Meditation

I haven't actually asked around or anything, but my feeling is that when most people say "all-powerful" they mean "can do anything that can be imagined, without restriction." I believe that God is all-powerful: can do anything that can be done. Some things cannot be done because they are logically outside the realm of possibility. An example was given: 2 + 2 = 5 is outside the realm of possibility, so God cannot just make it so. He could, I suppose, change everyone’s understanding of numbers simultaneously so that 5 was the new 4, but that doesn’t change the fact that 2 things plus 2 things equals the same number of things that we now call 4. He could, I suppose, change all of creation such that adding 2 things to 2 other things always yielded the spontaneous creation of a fifth of that thing, but again, that would be a whole new system of things, not an actual change in the function of the current system. However, I don't believe that this qualification of God’s all-powerful status is the reason God doesn't prevent evil. In other words, I disagree with Epicurus’s premise that the only reason for an all-good God not to prevent evil is because he is not all-powerful, which I'll mention later. I also do believe that God is all-good, and I believe that evil "exists" so far as it is a word we use to describe something that we have knowledge of.

Evil Exists

At this point in my life, I view good and evil the way I understand light and dark or hot and cold. Darkness is not a thing that God created but the absence of light, which is an actual thing (i.e. photons and reactions that cause magnetic and electric fields, etc.). Coldness is not a thing that God created but the absence of heat, which is a measurement of kinetic energy. Similarly, evil is not a thing that God created alongside good, or that even persists alongside good. Rather, God is good, and I believe that when he created man, he gave us some capacity to exhibit Godly nature. Specifically, God is love, which I think is the true baseline for goodness. However, free will also exists: the ability to choose our own actions. When we choose to act in line with God's nature or God's will (that is, love), we exhibit Godly nature (we do good), and when we choose not to act in line with God's nature or God's will, no goodness is present in the action. We call that action evil, absent of good. In this sense, evil "exists" the way the dark exists or the cold exists.

Side note: It gets tricky to define "good" as that which is in line with God's nature or God's will, because people aren't always convinced that God is consistent. Sometimes people think of God as being like humans in nature, prone to changing his mind unpredictably (I don't want to go too far into this, because God changing his mind is another can of worms). Still, I do believe that God is the measurement for love and, therefore, goodness, which does necessitate his being all-good. If God is the determining factor for what is good, then he is, by default, all-good.

All-Good and All-Powerful in the Presence of Evil

The existence of evil doesn't preclude God's being all-good or all-powerful, because being all-good doesn't necessitate always preventing evil. I find the idea of mutual exclusivity between “being good and powerful” and “allowing evil” at the root of Epicurus’s reasoning, as well as many people I’ve spoken with. I believe it to be a false premise that a good person (or God) must oppose evil at every opportunity. Moreover, I think Jesus’s Sermon on the Mount in Matthew 5-7 supports that the righteous will often submit to the wicked for the sake of love.

38 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’ 39 But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also. 40 And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well. 41 If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles. 42 Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.

43 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ 44 But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45 that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46 If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47 And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? 48 Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

Matthew 5:38-48, NIV

12 And forgive us our debts,    as we also have forgiven our debtors. ...

14 For if you forgive other people when they sin against you, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. 15 But if you do not forgive others their sins, your Father will not forgive your sins.

Matthew 6:12,14-15, NIV

This is how I reconcile the two: if there is some most important good thing in God's mind, and if pursuing that most important good thing is mutually exclusive to preventing evil, then it is the exact opposite of Epicurus's conclusion: God's all-goodness necessitates the persistence of evil and God's refusal to assert his omnipotence. In that case, God would choose not to exercise his power for the sake of pursuing that which is most important and good. I believe free will is the place where this becomes true.

I believe that free will is necessary in order to attain real love. Put another way, the kind of love that God wants from us, what I call "real love," requires a free will choice. I also believe that love is of utmost importance to God, since God is love. I think it's actually the only thing that God cares about. (Call it selfish on God's part, but since I believe that all goodness is born of love, I can't think of anything more appropriate.) Because of this, free will is more important to God than the prevention of suffering or even God's being in relationship with us. Happiness isn’t good if it undermines the cause of love, and our relationship with God means nothing if it wasn't chosen freely.

I also don't see how the prevention of all evil everywhere all the time could be anything but disruptive to free will. It would be like asking a child if they’d rather eat cake or carrots and then immediately preventing them from having their way. "Oh, you want cake? Too bad; I'm throwing it in the fire." Yes, they "chose," and I didn't stop them from "choosing," but it isn't really a choice if it's all a farce to begin with. Yes, they end up eating what’s healthier, but it won’t foster love if it destroys their will to choose. Because of this, a person's choice to be evil must be allowed to stand. That said, God can and does oppose evil, particularly when doing so is beneficial to attaining that real love he desires from us.

An Aside: Did God Create a World of Suffering to Teach Us?

I disagree with the premise that evil actions are ever brought about as teaching tools. That is, I don't think God ever forces people to do evil things for the sake of creating a teachable moment. Rather, the evil provides an opportunity for teaching, while the action itself is purely the result of free will. This might tend more toward Open Theism; there are evil actions coming, which God foresees and intends to use, but I don't believe he created them or that the doers of those actions are being forced by God. Rather, the doers are choosing it for themselves, and he has already decided to use those events for his good purpose, which is why Paul says he works all things for the good of those who love him.

Summary

Contrary to Epicurus, I believe: God is all-good and all-powerful and that evil exists because of free will, which is the most powerful evidence of God's goodness. Without free will, there is no human love for God, and there is no substantial relationship with him. God could stop evil, but it would interfere drastically with free will, which would threaten the development of real love. God’s greatest, if not only, desire is to enter into a loving relationship with his creation, so the allowance of evil action, which is born of free will, is necessary for the possibility of real love.

[howwerun]

Your Enemy is Your Neighbor

The United States seems to be experiencing a more public split than at any other time in my life (I turned 30 this month). My parents and grandparents may have experienced similar, if not far more intense, things, but for people in my generation and younger, everything that's happening politically and socially in our country right now is probably the closest thing to a civil war we've ever experienced. This is truer in some places than others, particularly those places where disagreements have turned into violence, or where racism and ethnocentrism and religious aggression are displayed openly. Still, the effects from those places ripple across the entire nation, and fear and anger and hatred are welling up in people who sympathize with one side or the other. And, while I would love to say that Christians have risen above such things, the reality is that we're right in the thick of it, on both sides. There are as many outspoken Christians justifying acts of hatred, fear, and prejudice with Scripture as there are Christians condemning such actions. We are as quick to judge and make rash decisions as anyone else, and the world will hold us more accountable for it. I know many people who have lost friends and had relationships destroyed over what's happening. I know people who have been persecuted or had family members and loved ones persecuted simply for being who they are. I have seen the fear in people's eyes and heard the hatred in their voices, and I have seen the confusion and dangerous acceptance in our children. So, I want to revisit what I believe is one of the most powerful passages, for believers, in the New Testament. I want to examine, with you, how God calls us out of our narrow worldview and commands us to take up a new position, a new stance, that is opposed to fear, rage, and hatred, because I believe that if Christians cannot master this one thing, we will only succeed in hurting the Kingdom and making the world a worse place.

Love Your Enemies...

43 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ 44 But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45 that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46 If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47 And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? 48 Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

Matthew 5:43-48, NIV

Love your enemy and pray for those who persecute you. This is such a fantastic passage. I think this is one of the most important ideas in the whole Bible. Understanding this passage isn't just about obeying a command to love and pray for people, it gives us powerful insight into the nature of God. I think people understate the significance of what Jesus is saying here, and I think that has a lot to do with how we understand the word "enemy."

The problem with thinking of our enemies as enemies is that it interferes with our loving them as human beings created in the image of God. What Jesus is pushing us toward is not just love for our enemies. It's an actual shift in our perspective. He draws a parallel between our neighbors and our enemies. "Love your neighbor as yourself" is a command his audience would have been very familiar with, and Jesus says, "Love your enemies." You have heard it said, "Love your neighbor, and hate your enemies," but I'm telling you that your enemy is actually your neighbor, and those who persecute you require your prayers. So, love your enemies, and pray for those who persecute you, and in this, you are made perfect in love as your heavenly father is perfect.

When I used to train in martial arts, we tried not to refer to anyone as our enemy. We used the word "opponent" for hypothetical situations, because the word opponent implies disagreement and opposition or resistance. The word enemy implies hostility. While an opponent may be openly hostile, we didn't want to feed on that hostility, and we certainly didn't want to assume hostility. What I noticed was that the more time a person spent imagining an enemy, hostility and all, the more likely they were to become angry and impulsive in their training, which is dangerous for everyone. Imagine how much more out of control they would become in a real confrontation. We did our best to avoid that even more in real life practice, where we didn't even want to use the term opponent for anyone in the room. We were all partners, even when we were fighting each other. It re-defined how we approached training. My goal is not simply to overcome you; I'm here to help you better understand yourself, even if that leads you to eventually overcoming me.

In the military, they use this concept to the opposite effect. Instead of nurturing empathy, they intentionally distance soldiers from their opponents as much as possible. They are always the enemy. They are always unified, not individualized. They are almost always given a nickname, which is often used in a derogatory way. Psychology studies have shown us that human beings don't like to kill each other, despite popular belief. In fact, humans are more resistant to killing humans than almost anything else that we do, so when soldiers are created, they make a conscious effort to overcome those psychological barriers. And, we know from decades of psychological studies, and thousands of years of experience, that how they talk about the enemy affects how they deal with the enemy.

Do you understand how the language we use and the position we take in our meditation and in our imagination can affect the way we act in practical application? How we imagine the world to be has a profound impact on how we act toward the world. Jesus doesn't just call us to be kind to our enemies; he calls us to an entirely new worldview.

The Good Samaritan

25 On one occasion an expert in the law stood up to test Jesus. “Teacher,” he asked, “what must I do to inherit eternal life?”

26 “What is written in the Law?” he replied. “How do you read it?”

27 He answered, “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind’; and, ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’”

28 “You have answered correctly,” Jesus replied. “Do this and you will live.”

29 But he wanted to justify himself, so he asked Jesus, “And who is my neighbor?”

30 In reply Jesus said: “A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, when he was attacked by robbers. They stripped him of his clothes, beat him and went away, leaving him half dead. 31 A priest happened to be going down the same road, and when he saw the man, he passed by on the other side. 32 So too, a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. 33 But a Samaritan, as he traveled, came where the man was; and when he saw him, he took pity on him. 34 He went to him and bandaged his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. Then he put the man on his own donkey, brought him to an inn and took care of him. 35 The next day he took out two denarii and gave them to the innkeeper. ‘Look after him,’ he said, ‘and when I return, I will reimburse you for any extra expense you may have.’

36 “Which of these three do you think was a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of robbers?”

37 The expert in the law replied, “The one who had mercy on him.”

Jesus told him, “Go and do likewise.”

Luke 10:25-37, NIV

Notice, in verse 36, that Jesus doesn't ask, "Who is the Samaritan's neighbor?" Instead, he asks, "Which of these three do you think was a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of robbers?" The question is posed from the injured man's perspective. not the Samaritan’s, and in verse 37, the expert in the law answers, "The one who had mercy on him," which Jesus implies is correct.

Who our neighbor is depends on who we show love to. Most people approach the command “love your neighbor as yourself” in the same way as the expert in the law: who is my neighbor? If I can identify who my neighbors are, then I’ll know who to love. Jesus doesn’t do that; he says, essentially, which of the three men passing by chose to be a neighbor to the injured man? The difference is this: instead of asking, “Who is my neighbor,” we ought to be asking, “Who have I loved?” When the question is dependent on us, all of the burden of responsibility falls on us. If someone is my not my neighbor, it is because I have not chosen to love them. Moreover, Jesus commands him to "go and do likewise." Now, Jesus puts us on the spot: if we thought we could simply turn a blind eye and pick and choose our neighbors, we should think again. The command is to go and do what the Samaritan did: make someone your neighbor without any clear personal gain. Love people for no particular reason, whenever the opportunity arises.

In Romans 12, Paul makes a similar plea.

Overcome Evil with Good

19 Do not take revenge, my dear friends, but leave room for God’s wrath, for it is written: “It is mine to avenge; I will repay,” says the Lord. 20 On the contrary:

“If your enemy is hungry, feed him;    if he is thirsty, give him something to drink. In doing this, you will heap burning coals on his head.”

21 Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.

Romans 12:19-21, NIV

Do we try to do good for one another, for our brothers and sisters? Of course we do. We do good for the ones we care about, those closest to us, the ones we feel love for. Paul says not only should we do that, we ought to do good for our enemies.

A lot of people like to focus on the line, “In doing this, you will heap burning coals on his head.” Let’s make something clear: if we do good for our enemies so that it will “heap burning coals on his head,” we are acting out of a vengeful spirit, not a loving one. That attitude would be the opposite of what Paul is advocating. In verse 19, he plainly states, “Do not take revenge, my dear friends, but leave room for God’s wrath, for it is written: ‘It is mine to avenge; I will repay,’ says the Lord.”

The emphasis is not on the burning coals. The emphasis is on verse 21, “Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.” In other words, we ought to be doing good for everyone, loving everyone, even our enemies, and Jesus says that in our doing good for others, we determine who our neighbors are. It is our mercy toward others that defines who our neighbors are, and we ought to be including everyone in that. Understanding this idea that our neighbor is anyone we choose to love, let's re-examine Matthew 5:43-48.

Your Enemy is Your Neighbor

43 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ 44 But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45 that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46 If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47 And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? 48 Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

Matthew 5:43-48, NIV

“Love your neighbor, and hate your enemy” cannot work, because our neighbor ought to be everyone. Since we choose who our neighbors are by how we love them, and since we ought be doing good for enemies, everyone ought to be our neighbor. Who is there left to hate?

“But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be children of your Father in heaven.” Moreover, “love your enemies, and pray for those who persecute you" is a part of our identity as children of God. It actually embodies everything that God does for us, which Paul points out in Romans 5:8-10.

8 But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us.

9 Since we have now been justified by his blood, how much more shall we be saved from God’s wrath through him! 10 For if, while we were God’s enemies, we were reconciled to him through the death of his Son, how much more, having been reconciled, shall we be saved through his life!

Romans 5:8-10

“While we were still sinners...God’s enemies,” God chose to love us and reconcile us to Himself through the death of Christ. He did for us exactly what Jesus commands us to do: love our enemies.

In fact, remember the conversation just before the parable of the Good Samaritan:

25b “Teacher,” he asked, “what must I do to inherit eternal life?”

26 “What is written in the Law?” he replied. “How do you read it?”

27 He answered, “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind’; and, ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’”

28 “You have answered correctly,” Jesus replied. “Do this and you will live.”

Luke 10:25b-28

The path to eternal life involves two things: loving God and loving your neighbor. Your enemy is your neighbor, and if we can't get to a place where we stop thinking of people as our enemies and start thinking of them as our neighbors, we're going to have a very difficult time with loving them.

Consider Jesus's crucifixion in Luke 23.

26 As the soldiers led him away, they seized Simon from Cyrene, who was on his way in from the country, and put the cross on him and made him carry it behind Jesus. 27 A large number of people followed him, including women who mourned and wailed for him. 28 Jesus turned and said to them, “Daughters of Jerusalem, do not weep for me; weep for yourselves and for your children. 29 For the time will come when you will say, ‘Blessed are the childless women, the wombs that never bore and the breasts that never nursed!’ 30 Then

“‘they will say to the mountains, “Fall on us!”    and to the hills, “Cover us!”’

31 For if people do these things when the tree is green, what will happen when it is dry?”

Luke 23:26-31

Even on his way out of the city to be nailed to a cross, Jesus's heart goes out to others. He warns the women of the coming suffering and tells them not to weep for him; he wasn't saying, "woe is me." Matthew 26 and 27 tell us that by this point, Jesus had already been abandoned by all of his disciples; spit on, beaten, and mocked by the Sanhedrin, as well as being accused of blasphemy; beaten by the Sanhedrin guards, disowned by Peter, flogged, stripped of his clothes and made to dress up, crowned with thorns, mocked, and beaten some more. As if that weren't enough, Luke 10:32-33 tell us that after everything, they crucified him between two criminals, at least one of whom also mocked him, according to the other gospels, along with the Jewish leaders, while he's hanging there dying on a cross! Yet, in Luke10:34a, Jesus said, “Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing.” In the midst of all of that, Jesus cries out to God, not on his own behalf, but on there's.

Christians Against Christians

I want to offer one last thought to meditate on: these ideas don't just apply to believers and non-believers. They apply to anyone and everyone in every context, including other congregations. I am often astonished at the amount of distance that Christians place between themselves and other Christians by doing exactly what the military does with their soldiers. We create categories that make it easy to label “us” and “them.” We lump other Christians into convenient, unified groups, like Baptist, Catholic, Church of Christ, Presbyterian... Some may argue that Christians place those labels on themselves, which is true, but we then use those labels in derogatory ways against each other; they don't just identify a person's place of worship. More often than not, we're calling to attention all of the things they believe that we think are wrong. “Those Baptists...” “Those Catholics...” “Those Church of Christers...” When we talk about Christians who believe something different than us, who have an opposing interpretation of some part of Scripture, it's often simply to point out differences between us and them. Yes, Baptist churches have a unifying creed that defines them as Baptist churches, but the members of those churches are individual people with as much variation in actual beliefs, perspectives, and worldviews as any other group of people. What’s more, we disguise this distancing language and distancing attitude as Scriptural purity, when really it's rarely more than interpretive superiority. We feel that our interpretations of scripture are correct; that’s why we believe them. Therefore, opposing interpretations are incorrect, by default. This is a foolish assumption of superiority.

Don't be deceived: there is selfishness and resentment toward other sects in every congregation I have ever been a part of, because, at the very least, I know I have been a part of it, and I am not proud of that. I have been to churches of many different denominations, and I have rarely, if ever, heard congregations refer to other denominations out of love and unity. I've also heard such things from the children, which suggests to me that they've heard it from us.

This is not okay, and today, more than ever before for young Christians, we need to strive for unity in our Father, unity in our belief that Jesus Christ was the son of God, who died for our sins and was raised from the dead, and unity in the Spirit. Now, more than ever for young Christians, the church, singular, needs to take a stance of love toward our neighbors. All of them.

There will always be people hostile toward others because of skin color, religious beliefs, gender, sexual orientation, ancestry... You name it, and there are people prejudiced against it. But, God calls us to completely reshape our worldview, and to take up a position of love where we choose to love every single person the way that God has loved us, to stop distancing ourselves from people with our language and our thoughts.

This week, I am challenging myself, and I invite you join me in this challenge: to make a list of every person or group of people who has ever been hostile toward you or who believes in something that you think is wrong, hateful, or built on fear and pray for them every day. It could be your boss, your coworkers, some protest group on the other side of the country... It could even be members of your own family; there are a lot of broken families in America. But let’s challenge ourselves to stop thinking of anyone as our enemy and start thinking of everyone as our neighbor.

[howwerun]

Love: Part 5 - 1 Corinthians 13:4b (cont.)

In this post, we’ll be continuing with our look at envy, boastfulness, and pride by examining pride in relationships. If you’re jumping into this series for the first time, you can find Part 1 here, or you can just keep reading. I do reference back occasionally, though.

...it is not proud.

1 Corinthians 13:4b (NIV)

Pride

Definition:

...arrogance, cynical insensitivity to the needs of others, and presumption. Pride is both a disposition/attitude and a type of conduct.

G. Betram, TDNT, 8:295-307, 525-29; V. P. Hamilton, TWOT, 1:143.

From http://www.biblestudytools.com/dictionary/pride/

Pride happens most often when we decide that being right is more important than being beneficial. It’s difficult to condense a discussion of pride. While it’s easy to say that arrogance, insensitivity, and presumption are not beneficial, we won’t always agree on what is beneficial. In fact, we may not always agree on what the word beneficial means.

Let’s remember what our definition for Love in Action is:

Love in Action –  An attitude toward someone that causes us to do what is best for them.

Love: Part 1

Even if we aren’t always in agreement about what “best for them” (beneficial) means, we should have firmly in our hearts that the emphasis is on “them” and not us. Most of the time, a little focus takes care of this. Most of us don’t generally have a problem holding the door for someone or helping someone who’s struggling to get a heavy box into their car or taking a break from what we’re doing to answer some questions. It could be as simple as reminding ourselves that helping others is good. The trouble tends to come when we find ourselves in unusual or highly emotional situations. Things that are out of the norm for us can catch us off guard, and situations where our emotions are overwhelming our reasoning often leave us following our instincts rather than the law of love. In those moments, it’s easy to rationalize or justify our pride.

We will only look at a couple of situations where pride can be an issue. It will be up to you to take the basic ideas and apply them to other scenarios. I will try to summarize those ideas in the Conclusion, but I encourage you to continue with your own study of pride in scripture. The better you understand it, the better equipped you will be to notice it and deal with it.

One of the most common ways I see people rationalize pride is by convincing themselves that they are right in their position. More accurately, they convince themselves that because they are right, their words are true, and they rationalize that speaking the truth (honesty) is part of love. Therefore, if I am right and what I am saying is true, it’s my responsibility to say it, even if it hurts someone. That last part is where things fall apart.

You may have heard this quote before:

Honesty without compassion is brutality.

Anonymous

Or, put another way:

Truth without love is brutality, and love without truth is hypocrisy.

Warren W. Wiersbe

And, remember our definition for Love as Emotion:

Love as Emotion –  That feeling which drives us toward Love in Action and from which compassion and empathy are born.

Love: Part 1

We should not be deceived into thinking that just because our words are true, we are being loving. Here is a cliché example: men, if your wife is pregnant and putting on weight because of it (which is normal) and she comes to you and asks if she looks fat in her outfit, I seriously hope you have the presence of mind to realize that “Yes” is not the correct answer. It doesn’t matter if it’s true or not; that isn’t relevant to how you respond. What’s relevant is that your wife knows she’s beautiful and that you love her, even when she may not feel great about herself. You don’t have to lie to her, but don’t just throw your answer out there carelessly, either, or you might hurt her feelings for no reason.

That was a bit lighthearted, but apply that concept to something weightier. Your boyfriend/girlfriend is angry at you for something you said or did. It wasn’t necessarily wrong, but it hurt their feelings. Perhaps they were already on edge because they were having a hard day. You did what you did, and it pushed them over the edge. Unfortunately, they’re now venting their frustrations out on you. You didn’t realize at the time that you had hurt their feelings, but the situation is quickly escalating. You find your own patience wearing thin, because you’re being verbally attacked for reasons that are mostly not related to you.

Is your partner wrong? At least in part, yes. They shouldn’t be taking out their frustrations on you. Are they being loving toward you? Certainly not. Love is patient, and love is kind. You might find that knowing this actually fuels your frustration. You’re not only being attacked, you’re being wrongfully attacked. Goodness forbid your partner says anything about love or treating people right or fairness. That would be completely over the line. Not only would you be under the gun unjustly, but now they’re being hypocritical!

Stop here, and breathe. Don’t let pride take hold of you. I know as well as anyone how easy it is to make the leap from “Wait, what’s happening?” to “I don’t deserve this!” I pointed out that pride is about arrogance, cynical insensitivity to the needs of others, and presumption. Your partner is angry and hurt. When we experience intense emotions, the reasoning portions of our brain don’t work so well. We shouldn’t presume they have a real understanding of what they’re doing or how they’re acting. In that moment, they probably don’t fully grasp how much they’re hurting us or whether they’re being hypocritical. They’re hurting. That’s what they’re thinking about. That’s what’s consuming them.

It may be tempting to shift the focus from your partner to you, but be careful. Arrogance says, “I don’t deserve this. I deserve to be treated better. I don’t have to put up with this.” Let’s get Biblical about it: Jesus lived a sinless life and resigned himself to being accused, spit on, and beaten by blasphemers who were supposed to be the caretakers of God’s people. Then, they handed him over to gentiles who, even though they knew he was innocent, flogged him, mocked him, beat him, and nailed him to a cross, where he hung and bled until he died, abandoned by his disciples, with his mother watching the whole time. Does that sounds like arrogance, cynical insensitivity, or presumption? Not at all.

In the moment where we come face to face with our partners and know we are “right,” that they are being hypocritical or unfair, the world says, “Stand up for yourself. Don’t let them walk all over you like that. Get angry. Get loud. Get even. Get justice. And, if they refuse to yield, get out.” But, Jesus’s example says, “Don’t let arrogance dictate your thoughts. Be sensitive to the needs of others; be without cynicism. Don’t presume to know their heart. Instead, leave room for compassion and self-sacrifice.” Isn’t that what the opposite of pride is? Being self-seeking versus being self-sacrificing? Being prideful versus being humble?

This is only one example, of course. As I mentioned before, pride is a huge topic that can’t be easily condensed into a short blog. I highly suggest doing a study just on pride. Not from a worldly perspective, but from a Biblical one. As with many other things, there isn’t a good English word that differentiates between acceptable pride and unacceptable pride. Study the scriptures, and discover where being proud of something becomes being prideful, because that line is where love ends and hate begins.

Conclusion

Love is not prideful. It is not arrogant. It is not cynically insensitive to the needs of others. It does not presume that it is perfect in knowledge or infallible. It does not justify brutality in the name of honesty. It does not forego compassion for the sake of dignity. That kind of pride has no place in love. Rather, true love humbles us and strengthens us to endure even unjustified hostility that we may be sensitive to the needs of others. Like Jesus, we set ourselves aside so that God can work through us to heal others.

Grace and Peace.

[howwerun]

Love: Part 4 - 1 Corinthians 13:4b (cont.)

I had to cut this section short, last time, so in this post, I’ll continue with boasting in relationships, and then I’ll cover pride in the next post. Keep in mind that we could easily devote entire books to each of the characteristics of love laid out in 1 Corinthians 13. I’m trying to give fairly brief examinations of each, but these posts are just starting points. The idea of love as a foundation for life, and the application of that core love to our relationships, is a life-long pursuit. We have to go into every relationship understanding that love is a constant growth process that may never truly end.

...it does not boast...

1 Corinthians 13:4b (NIV)

Boasting

Defintion:

To talk with excessive pride and self-satisfaction about one's achievements, possessions, or abilities.

Like envy, boastfulness is born from a self-seeking attitude. Often times, boasting is actually closely linked with envy in that people are trying to draw to themselves the attention of others, which is likely being given to someone else. In other words, if I’m envious of the praise other people receive for their accomplishments, I may be tempted to boast about my own accomplishments. Then, others will praise me, as well.

In my last post, I mentioned that entitlement feeds envy and clings to pride, which may manifest in boasting, but pride and boasting can also be fed in the other direction. Envy can give way to boasting, which may nurture an unhealthy sense of pride. Both are counter to love. Either we are so proud that we boast in ourselves, or we are so envious that we boast in ourselves.

All of this points to an attitude that we have about ourselves in relation to others. It isn’t about actual skills or accomplishments or possessions; it’s about how we see ourselves and how we see other people. For example: do Olympic athletes show up to events intending to lose? Of course not. In fact, no serious competitor shows up intending to lose. If that was their attitude, they wouldn’t have shown up, at all. Competitors show up to win. That means they show up intending to be better than the other competitors. When they win, is it okay for them to stand up and receive their gold medal? Of course it is! They earned it. They trained hard, focused, and performed better than everyone else who competed. They deserve their medal, and most of the world has decided they deserve some praise. What love is concerned with isn’t their skill or their winning or their being praised or their reward. What love is concerned with is how they treat others, even as they are training, competing, winning, being rewarded, and being praised. Do they lord it over others? Do they boast and brag about how wonderful they are? Do they go around telling others how pitiful everyone is compared to them? Or, do they humbly accept their recognition and reward? Do they use their position and accomplishments to inspire others? Do they encourage others to achieve their dreams? Do you see the difference between the two attitudes?

My best friend in high school was also one of the most talented people I’ve ever met. He played the harmonica, trumpet, piano, and guitar. He was a fantastic singer, participating in choir and madrigals, as well as doing contemporary performances. He competed on the wrestling team, the soccer team, and the cross-country team, and he played in the marching band. He was friends with just about everyone, from the athletes to the academics. He was an eagle scout. He danced. He did gymnastics. He taught music. He was a black belt in Tae Kwon Do, and he was my Tae Kwon Do instructor. As I mentioned, he was also my best friend. We did just about everything together, and he never once made me feel like I didn’t belong. No matter where we went or what we were doing or who we were with, he never boasted about winning or being more talented, he never boasted about his connections or his popularity, and he never diminished my accomplishments or skills. We competed, too. We competed in the dojo, and we competed at games, but even when he’d win, he never celebrated more than was appropriate.

Whether you’re great at things or terrible at things, remember this: love doesn’t boast, because love is not self-seeking.

One of the most common feelings in a failing boyfriend/girlfriend/marriage relationship is that the other person isn’t doing as much as I am. People tend to say things in counseling like, “I do [such-and-such], and all they do is sit around the house all day,” or, “I’m always working so hard to make them comfortable and happy, but they never do anything to make me feel good.” This is the kind of attitude that can easily give way to boasting, because we feel that we have something to boast about. “Look what I do and what I have done. Look what I have accomplished or attempted despite you.” Unfortunately, that kind of attitude isn’t born from love. It’s self-seeking.

Keep in mind that this isn’t about whether or not any of our complaints are true. Maybe you do work harder than your partner, and maybe your partner actually does just sit around the house all day. That doesn’t change the fact that when we boast over others, it is always for selfish reasons. There is absolutely no reason to boast except to elevate ourselves above others, and that isn’t love. Paul adamantly writes against boasting in his second Corinthian letter.

16 I repeat: Let no one take me for a fool. But if you do, then tolerate me just as you would a fool, so that I may do a little boasting. 17 In this self-confident boasting I am not talking as the Lord would, but as a fool.18 Since many are boasting in the way the world does, I too will boast.19 You gladly put up with fools since you are so wise! 20 In fact, you even put up with anyone who enslaves you or exploits you or takes advantage of you or puts on airs or slaps you in the face. 21 To my shame I admit that we were too weak for that!

Whatever anyone else dares to boast about—I am speaking as a fool—I also dare to boast about. 22 Are they Hebrews? So am I. Are they Israelites? So am I. Are they Abraham’s descendants? So am I. 23 Are they servants of Christ? (I am out of my mind to talk like this.) I am more. I have worked much harder, been in prison more frequently, been flogged more severely, and been exposed to death again and again.24 Five times I received from the Jews the forty lashes minus one.25 Three times I was beaten with rods, once I was pelted with stones,three times I was shipwrecked, I spent a night and a day in the open sea,26 I have been constantly on the move. I have been in danger from rivers, in danger from bandits, in danger from my fellow Jews, in danger from Gentiles; in danger in the city, in danger in the country, in danger at sea; and in danger from false believers. 27 I have labored and toiled and have often gone without sleep; I have known hunger and thirst and have often gone without food; I have been cold and naked. 28 Besides everything else, I face daily the pressure of my concern for all the churches. 29 Who is weak, and I do not feel weak? Who is led into sin, and I do not inwardly burn?

30 If I must boast, I will boast of the things that show my weakness.31 The God and Father of the Lord Jesus, who is to be praised forever,knows that I am not lying.

2 Corinthians 11:16-33

Paul repeatedly emphasizes that he is being intentionally foolish in boasting as he does. He does it to show how foolish it is to boast in earthly things – in status, heritage, accomplishments, sufferings, zeal... And, we know from Jesus that heavenly treasures are more precious than earthly treasures (Matthew 6:19-24), so we can infer that boasting over earthly treasures would be equally foolish. Jesus even rebukes the Pharisees:

16 “Woe to you, blind guides! You say, ‘If anyone swears by the temple, it means nothing; but anyone who swears by the gold of the temple is bound by that oath.’ 17 You blind fools! Which is greater: the gold, or the temple that makes the gold sacred? 18 You also say, ‘If anyone swears by the altar, it means nothing; but anyone who swears by the gift on the altar is bound by that oath.’ 19 You blind men! Which is greater: the gift, or the altar that makes the gift sacred?

Matthew 23:16-19 (NIV)

The Pharisees often boasted about their riches, knowledge, and heritage. They boasted about their statuses and titles, and they boasted in their gifts and sacrifices. But, remember what Paul showed at the beginning of 1 Corinthians 13: without love, there is no value in anything that we do. Love is essential, because love is what brings value to our lives and our accomplishments.

You may be wondering why some boasting seems to be okay for Paul, while I seem to be saying that all boasting is bad. Notice Paul’s statement above:

30 If I must boast, I will boast of the things that show my weakness.31 The God and Father of the Lord Jesus, who is to be praised forever, knows that I am not lying.

2 Corinthians 11:16-33

And:

Therefore, as it is written: “Let the one who boasts boast in the Lord.”

1 Corinthians 1:31

Paul uses the word “boast,” but he uses it loosely. By definition, boasting is self-proclaiming. Boasting is “to talk with excessive pride and self-satisfaction about one's achievements, possessions, or abilities.” Boasting in our weaknesses and boasting in the Lord are both self-demeaning, which is the opposite of actual boasting. Rather than glorifying ourselves, we divert attention to God and glorify Him. It is by God’s strength that we accomplish anything, so we “boast” in Him. In other words, we are not ashamed of our weaknesses, because God is our strength.

8 For it is by grace you have been saved,through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— 9 not by works, so that no one can boast. 10 For we are God’s handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.

Ephesians 2:8-10

So, we see that in reality, we are humbled so that we cannot boast, even in our salvation, because it is God’s grace that exalts us. If I “boast” that God is my God and Jesus Christ is my Lord and Savior, it is not to raise myself above others. Rather, I make those claims as an invitation, because Jesus died for the sins of the entire world, not just mine. Yes, God is my God, and Jesus is my Lord and Savior, and I want more than anything for you to share in what I have already been given. In this way, I seek to elevate others.

Conclusion

Love is always about others. We say that we ought to love ourselves, but the Bible tells us that we love because He first loved us (1 John 4:19). Our love for ourselves ought to be firmly rooted in God’s love for us, and that kind of love inevitably overflows to others.

Boasting is counter to love. It is born of envy or pride, and it seeks only self-glorification. When we boast, we break others down and demean them by acknowledging only ourselves. Boasting isn’t just stating our accomplishments; boasting is about diverting attention from others to ourselves. It’s an attitude we have that says, “I deserve this time, not you.” In relationships, boasting denounces any partnership in favor of the individual. Conversely, core love denounces self-glorification and seeks after what’s best for others.

Learn to see the temptation to boast for what it is: selfishness. Rather than asking ourselves, “What more have I done than this person?” we ought to ask, “What more can I do for this person?”

Grace and Peace.

[howwerun]

Love: Part 3 - 1 Corinthians 13:4b

J. G. Wentworth put out a series of commercials where the catch phrase was, “It’s my money, and I want it now.” All of the people in the video were angry and shouting out of their windows of houses and cars. They are surprisingly memorable commercials, and I may never forget that phrase, but they speak to an impatient and entitled culture. It is that culture, the one that believes it deserves something, the one that believes it is entitled to something, that feeds envy and boastfulness and pride. In this post, we’ll examine Paul’s claim that such characteristics have no place in love.

It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud.

1 Corinthians 13:4b (NIV)

The reasoning often follows something like this:

We’re all just human beings. Therefore, we’re all equally flawed. If you’re flawed, just like me, but you’re also “special,” I must also be special. As humans, we’re all equally flawed, but we all have potential and strengths, so we’re all also equally special.

That kind of logic is riddled with faults and leaps. Unfortunately, it’s becoming more prominent among younger generations. Love abandons the idea of entitlement. It doesn’t look to oneself. Rather, it looks toward others. Remember the two-fold love:

Love as Emotion –  That feeling which drives us toward Love in Action and from which compassion and empathy are born.

Love in Action –  An attitude toward someone that causes us to do what is best for them.

Love: Part 1

A core love that looks outward renounces inward self-glorification, which is the foundation of envy, boastfulness, and pride. A sense of entitlement is the opposite of that; entitlement feeds envy and clings to pride, which often manifests in boasting.

Envy

Definition: 

A feeling of discontent or covetousness with regard to another's advantages, success, possessions, etc.

Dictionary.com makes this distinction between Envy and Jealousy:

Envy and jealousy are very close in meaning. Envy denotes a longing to possess something awarded to or achieved by another: to feel envy when a friend inherits a fortune. Jealousy, on the other hand, denotes a feeling of resentment that another has gained something that one more rightfully deserves: to feel jealousy when a coworker receives a promotion.

I don’t know for certain if this restriction of the word envy in 1 Corinthians 13 is what the author intended, but I do believe it’s directly appropriate to American society, today. This kind of envy is born from the feelings of entitlement that have become so prevalent. The sense of entitlement is born from the idea that justice means fairness, and fairness means equality. Equality without qualification is what we looked at earlier: by virtue of being, I inherently deserve what others have; I am entitled as a human.

Let me say, here, that I am not contending with Thomas Jefferson. Most of you have heard this:

We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

This isn’t what we’re talking about. The New Testament makes it rather clear that Jesus came for all of humanity (a lengthier study, which we won’t get into here). From this, we can infer that all of humanity has value in the eyes of God. Entitlement isn’t about whether or not human beings have “unalienable rights.” Entitlement says, “If you have it, I also deserve it, because you’re not any better than me.” This is the attitude that claims everyone who competes should get the same prize, regardless of who wins. This is envy disguised as “fairness” and “justice.” Entitlement says, “If I can’t get ahead, then no one should be allowed to get ahead, and if anyone surpasses me, then they ought to feel guilty for not raising me up, as well.” As a society, we ought to move away from envy altogether. For Christians, this is especially true.

Remember the definition of envy: “a feeling of discontent or covetousness...” Covetousness is born from discontent; we covet what others have because we are not content with what we have. We counteract envy by practicing contentment. As Paul says:

10 I rejoiced greatly in the Lord that at last you renewed your concern for me. Indeed, you were concerned, but you had no opportunity to show it.11 I am not saying this because I am in need, for I have learned to be content whatever the circumstances. 12 I know what it is to be in need, and I know what it is to have plenty. I have learned the secret of being content in any and every situation, whether well fed or hungry, whether living in plenty or in want. 13 I can do all this through him who gives me strength.

Philippians 4:10-13 (NIV)

We see, here, that Paul’s contentedness is linked directly to his faith in God, who is his strength to endure. Because of this, Paul doesn’t lust after the things he doesn’t have; he doesn’t covet what isn’t his, so he escapes the temptation of envy. When we are firmly rooted in the love of God, we trust in Him to provide. Then, envy becomes unnecessary.

Note: contentedness is not the same as not wanting to better ourselves or our circumstances. Contentedness should never be used as a tool to put others down. When we choose contentedness over envy, we step deeper into love, and love equips us to bring others up. That’s the whole point.

Envy in Relationships

Relationships can be a tricky place when it comes to being envious or being content. It isn’t unusual for people to feel like there is inequality in a relationship. Some examples:

Being envious of the amount of attention you receive from someone else. This could be a friend or a boyfriend/girlfriend or even a spouse who appears to give more attention to others than to you.

Being envious of someone else’s schedule. Maybe a friend has more free time than you or appears to study less and still get the same grades. Maybe one person thinks they have much more difficult daily tasks or feels like the other person gets more help with their chores.

Being envious of someone else’s possessions. Perhaps you have a friend whose parents are make more money, so they your friend has newer clothes or more expensive toys. This could be siblings who asked for different presents and then became discontent when they saw what each other received. This could even be spouses: maybe one person works for a big business and drives a company car, while the other person drives the old car that they afforded with their own money.

Envy can show up in any relationship, not just with people we see from afar. In those situations, we need to take a step back and remind ourselves that part of love is choosing contentment over envy. Make no mistake: it is a choice that we make. It takes practice to recognize when we’re being envious, but once we learn to see it, we can choose to turn away from it. Once we can identify envy in ourselves, we can begin to practice choosing to be happy for others.

I want to emphasize one last thing about envy: in a marriage relationship, two people become one person. Our society ignores that principle entirely and treats a marriage as two people just living together. Christians need to set aside that earthly view of marriage and treat it with the gravity it deserves. “For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh” (Matthew 19:5, NIV). This is a huge part of eliminating envy from the marriage relationship. Even if each person handles different aspects of the marriage or household, everything is shared, even the victories, achievements, and successes. There is no room in a marriage for selfish ambition, because the marriage only truly succeeds when both people understand that they are as one flesh. I am not envious of my wife, because every time she is successful, receives praise, achieves a goal, or experiences growth, it is good for both of us. Moreover, I want her to succeed and to grow, and I want her to be happy. My love for her, my desire for what’s best for her, is in direct opposition to any envy of her.

Conclusion

Envy and contentment are opposing forces. Love rejects envy, because envy is self-seeking and diminishes the blessings others have received. Envy says, “I deserve what you have. If not instead of you, I at least deserve it as well as you.” Love says, “I am truly happy for you. I desire only what’s best for you, and I am happy when God blesses you.”

I had intended to continue with boasting and pride, but I’m out of time, so I will pick up those characteristics in the next post.

Grace and Peace.

[howwerun]

Love: Part 2 - 1 Corinthians 13:4a

Disclaimer: I rarely cite parts of verses, so I’m uncertain whether splitting the verse into sections generally refers to whole sentences or any separating punctuation. I’m going to use it to refer to whole sentences or thoughts (i.e. those separated by a period, question or exclamation mark, or semicolon).

In the last post, we looked at Love as a core element for our entire lives. We briefly examined what I consider to be the deepest form of love, that two-fold love that can be applied to everything we do and every relationship: Love in Action and Love as Emotion. We’ll continue into the first part of verse 4 and look start looking at the characteristics of true love. Remember: this isn’t about what the world calls love; it isn’t just about good feelings or intimacy or “being close to people.” We want to discover how to “love one another deeply, from the heart” (1 Peter 22, NIV)

“Love is patient, love is kind.”

1 Corinthians 13:4a

Patience

There isn’t anything confusing or tricky about most of these characteristics, and patience is the perfect example of that. Most of us know what it means to be patient. Most of the time, patience means waiting for something without becoming anxious or trying to rush things along – waiting without complaining or becoming frustrated or emotional. This can be especially difficult when the things we’re waiting on are related to people we care about or have relationships with.

Try as we might to let go of our expectations for others, most of us have them. We generally expect the people we’re with to act a certain way, especially in relation to us. Here are some examples of expectations I’ve heard from others about boyfriends and girlfriends:

A “good” boyfriend would compliment his girlfriend, treat her nicely, pay more attention to her than he does to his other friends, take her out on dates, or buy her gifts (flowers, chocolates, etc.). A romantic boyfriend would write her notes or poems or say things to make her feel special. A loving girlfriend would support her boyfriend in his hobbies and interests and encourage him and tell him how wonderful he is. A good boyfriend would remember special occasions, like birthdays, anniversaries (including exactly how long they had been together), and holidays. A good girlfriend would let her boyfriend go out with the guys without making him feel guilty about not spending every waking hour with her. Etc.

One of the most common places where I see impatience in relationships is when expectations aren’t met. We want people to be a certain way, but we don’t want to wait for that person to come along, so we expect the person who’s available to change for us. Then, we get impatient when they don’t change quickly enough. This doesn’t just happen with superficial things, either.

My wife and I are always finding areas where we’re weak as spouses and parents. We both want to be stronger, wiser, and more God-centered in our relationship with each other and with our children, but sometimes growth is hard and slow. Sometimes it’s painful, and we have to break down strong walls in order to press forward. It’s easy to become impatient and want each other to be better more quickly. If you find yourself experiencing spiritual growth that your spouse/boyfriend/girlfriend is not ready for, yet, you may feel distanced from them, or vice versa. Don’t fall into this trap; everyone walks their own path of growth. You can walk together, but that doesn’t mean you’ll mature at the same pace or come to the same conclusions at the same time. It may even be that you both agree on something, but one of you isn’t ready to take the next step.

Remember, also: all of these characteristics are part of that core love that feeds into all relationships, not just the boyfriend/girlfriend/spouse ones. They can be easily applied to friendships, family, and coworkers, or any other relationship you can think of. In college, my best friend decided that he wanted a break from his material possessions. He wanted to be able to put all of his things into one or two bags. He sold any book he didn’t need for class, and slowly donated or sold all of his other possessions. I completely agreed with his reasons, which I won’t go into here, but I could never bring myself to do the same. I wanted to; my room was filled with packed boxes of stuff. I had way too many things to even unpack them all in my small room, yet, I wasn’t ready emotionally to let them go. It took me many years to reach that point.

Patience is key in relationships, and, as we’ll see, it feeds into all of the other characteristics. Each one can be linked to the next, and patience is the first.

Kindness

Without patience, it’s almost impossible to truly be kind to people. We can fake it, or force ourselves to “be nice,” but that’s only as useful as our ability to act, and improving on acting kind ultimately only makes us more easily deceptive. Real kindness doesn’t coexist with frustration. That is, if I can be patient with someone, I leave myself room to be kind to them.

When I’m arguing with my wife, I’m not being patient. When I’m arguing with my wife, I’m not being kind. Some people may say the those things aren’t mutually exclusive, that you can still be kind even if you’re arguing, but I disagree. We have a completely different word for “kind arguments:” discussion. It carries a very different connotation than an argument.

Open and honest discussion and conversation is a backbone of strong relationships, and we’ll consider it more closely when we get to the characteristic of loving truth. Kindness is a pillar of that characteristic, and kindness is born from patience. When our patience is exhausted, our capacity for kindness quickly depletes.

Conclusion:

Love is kind, because love is patient. This is where healthy relationships begin. Practice patience with everyone, as often as you can. The more you build this ability, the easier it will be to practice kindness. From there, everything begins to flow, and we begin to see how powerful love can be in all areas of our lives.

Grace and Peace.

[howwerun]

Love: Part 1 - 1 Corinthians 13:1-3

Many of the coming posts will be part of this series on Love. It won’t be anything groundbreaking, but my hope is that it will be good for any younger readers who don’t have anyone to talk with them about what love really looks like. This series is actually a direct follow-up to my post about the most important relationship there is. In fact, this is all part of a study on healthy relationships that I’m going through with my teen Bible study class.

If you’re one of the kids in my Bible study class, this series of posts will be parallel to our discussions every week, so if you miss a week, you can just look here to catch up. (I’ll try to get the posts caught up as quickly as possible, and then I’ll post one per week.)

That said, here’s Part 1.

If I speak in the tongues of men or of angels, but do not have love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. 2 If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing. 3 If I give all I possess to the poor and give over my body to hardship that I may boast, but do not have love, I gain nothing.

1 Corinthians 13:1-3 (NIV)

This passage comes on the heels of Paul’s explanation of spiritual gifts. He mentions several spiritual gifts and discusses some of them, but here he makes a bold claim: nothing matters without love. People were bragging about speaking in tongues, both in other human languages, like what happened with the Apostles on the day of Pentacost (see Acts 2), and in the language of angels (1 Corinthians 14:1-25). Others were bragging about their gifts of prophecy or faith or charity and generosity or healing. Paul says, essentially, listen: none of those things matter if a person has no love. Without love, I am a resounding gong; I am nothing, and I gain nothing.

I believe this is true for all people, that love is essential to creating purpose and meaning in life, but I think it is especially true for Christians, who claim to follow the one true God. John tells us:

7 Dear friends, let us love one another, for love comes from God. Everyone who loves has been born of God and knows God.8 Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love.

1 John 4:7-8 (NIV)

We cannot call ourselves Christians if we don’t have love. John agrees with Paul: it doesn’t matter what gifts we have or how much faith we have or how generous we are unless those things are built around love. As James tells us:

18 But someone will say, “You have faith; I have deeds.”

Show me your faith without deeds, and I will show you my faith by my deeds.19 You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that—and shudder.

James 2:18-19 (NIV)

It is not enough to believe; we have to love, as God loved us.

9 This is how God showed his love among us: He sent his one and only Son into the world that we might live through him.10 This is love: not that we loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son as an atoning sacrifice for our sins.11 Dear friends, since God so loved us, we also ought to love one another.12 No one has ever seen God; but if we love one another, God lives in us and his love is made complete in us.

1 John 4:9-12 (NIV)

But, all of this begs the question, “What is love?” In English, we use the word love for just about everything. “I love my friends. I love my family. I love my wife. I love my kids. I love my dog. I love cookies. I love this movie. I love watching the sunset. I love it when that happens.” It can be a confusing word. I hope none of you love your spouse the way you love your dog or the way you love cookies. Sometimes we qualify love with a descriptive word: brotherly love, familial love, romantic love, etc. This is helpful, but I don’t think it ever quite reaches what Paul and John are talking about.

Remember, God is love, and without love all of our other accomplishments and talents are worthless. As I have already said, this points to something at the core of how we live. This isn’t a love that is specific to our spouse or our kids or our friends. This is part of what makes up the foundation of our lives. As such, it can be applied to every relationship.

I like to think of this love as having two parts: an action-oriented component (Love in Action) and an emotional component (Love as Emotion). Keep in mind, though, that these are really two parts of the same thing, like two sides of a coin. In reality, both together are what Paul calls love.

Love in Action

Definition:

An attitude toward someone that causes us to do what is best for them.

This is what I call the active part of love, or love in action. It stems from an attitude that we have toward others that shapes how we see them and treat them, and I believe it’s what we see all throughout Jesus’s ministry. Jesus continually emphasized the inward attitude that we have toward others. In his sermon on the mount (Matthew 5-7), he was always broadening the narrow focus of the Pharisees and teachers of the law. They wanted to focus on certain people, only, but Jesus keeps pulling them back into themselves and telling them that they ought to broaden their focus to everyone, even their enemies. All of the beatitudes are about one’s attitude toward God and the world (Matthew 5:3-12). Being the salt of the Earth and the light of the world re-frames our relationship with the world around us (Matthew 5:13-16). He says it isn’t about murder; it’s about hate. It isn’t about the offering; it’s about your heart when you bring the offering (be right with your brother). Rather than being in a rush to go to court, be earnest in settling matters with your adversary. (Matthew 5:21-26) The list goes on: adultery, divorce, oaths, revenge, enemies, charity, prayer, fasting, wealth, physical needs, condemnation, etc.

This attitude toward the world, toward our brothers and sisters, toward our enemies – this is all part of what Paul and John call “love.” It is part of the backbone, the foundation, of Jesus’s ministry and our relationship with God. If we want healthy relationships, if we want to reflect God in our lives, this is the attitude we must have at the core of who we are. Understand that this part of love is mostly intellectual. It is largely about which perspective we choose to take. That is, how we treat others is a choice that we make. We should choose to have an appropriate attitude toward them so that we can act appropriately toward them. This will become clearer as we press forward in 1 Corinthians 13. We’ll look at how it feeds into all of the things that love is and does, as Paul describes it.

Love as Emotion

Definition:

That feeling which drives us toward Love in Action and from which compassion and empathy are born.

As with all feelings, Love as Emotion comes and goes. Ultimately, our aim is to maintain feelings of compassion and empathy toward others, but don’t be surprised if sometimes you don’t feel anything toward people. Also, don’t be surprised if you feel something different toward people, like anger or jealousy. Emotions are difficult to master, and it’s often more about how we respond to our emotions than being able to cut them off preemptively.

The important thing to remember, here, is that this emotional aspect of love is not what people call “romantic love,” physical attraction, or infatuation. We’re not talking about “falling in love” with someone, and we’re not talking about any physiological reactions brought about by circumstance (e.g. the way a person smells or looks, how tired we are, what the context of the situation is, etc.). We’re talking about an intentional, conscious effort to empathize with another human being. This is a deliberate effort on our part to look at someone else and allow ourselves to desire to love them in action (to do what is best for them).

If Love in Action requires practice to do well, I think Love as Emotion requires even more practice to do at all. For most people, it isn’t second nature to love our enemies and pray for those who persecute us, even just as an action. It’s even harder, then, for us to do so with any real compassion or empathy. I used to believe it was enough to go through the motions of loving a person actively, but that isn’t what I see in Jesus. He truly loved humanity, even those who rejected him. He spoke harshly to them, at times, so people often justify speaking harshly to one another, but they forget that, ultimately, Jesus died for his enemies.

But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us.

Romans 5:8 (NIV)

And on the cross:

Jesus said, “Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing.”

Luke 23:34 (NIV)

God’s plan from the beginning was to reconcile the world to himself through Jesus, who offered himself willingly to die on the cross. Such was his love for us that even as he hung dying, he interceded for his accusers. Read through the gospels, and I’m confident you will see Jesus’s compassion and empathy for others.

Conclusion:

Love is an essential part of healthy relationships, but more than that, love is essential to a strong foundation in life. It is God manifest in us, and the purest form of love can be the foundation for every kind of relationship, not just romantic ones. It is two-fold: Love in Action and Love as Emotion. Both parts work together to help us reflect our relationship with God in all of our other relationships.

From here, we’ll look at a few characteristics of love per post, as laid out in 1 Corinthians 13:4-7.

Grace and Peace.

[howwerun]

What Is the Most Important Relationship You Can Have?

This is a question for Christians, really. For non-Christians, this tends to be fairly subjective. For some people it’s their relationship with their spouse or their children, yet, studies have shown that the relationships formed on the battlefield between soldiers are often stronger than the bond they have with their spouses. For people who are unmarried, it might be the one they have with a family member or close friend. For others, it might be the one they have with their online gaming buddies. For Christians, however, their is one relationship that ought to be (because some Christians haven’t quite gotten their yet) set above all other relationships: our relationship with God.

I am of the opinion that every relationship we have should emulate, as closely as possible, our relationship with our Father in Heaven. For starters, God is love (1 John 4:8). If we claim that we love someone (”I love you.”), John tells us we ought to be doing so from a Godly place; that is, we reflect God in our love for others.

7 Dear friends, let us love one another, for love comes from God. Everyone who loves has been born of God and knows God. 8 Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love. 9 This is how God showed his love among us: He sent his one and only Son into the world that we might live through him. 10 This is love: not that we loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son as an atoning sacrifice for our sins. 11 Dear friends, since God so loved us, we also ought to love one another. 12 No one has ever seen God; but if we love one another, God lives in us and his love is made complete in us.

1 John 4:7-12 (NIV)

And, Jesus tells us to “be perfect, therefore, as [our] heavenly Father is perfect.” That is, be complete. In the context:

43 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ 44 But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45 that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46 If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47 And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? 48 Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

Matthew 5:43-48 (NIV)

It is in our loving one another, even loving our enemies, that we are made perfect, as our heavenly Father is perfect, or, as John put it, that his love is made complete in us. So, before anything else, I think our relationships with each other, whether friend or family or spouse or comrade or anything else, should reflect love, that love which comes from God and is found in our relationship with him.

Moreover, we find every other important spiritual and emotional aspect of relationships in Him, as well. Patience, mercy, trust, forgiveness, gentleness, self-control, kindness, faithfulness, self-sacrifice... If you find yourself wondering what you can do or be to strengthen your interpersonal relationships, look to your relationship with God. Diligently examine His love toward you, and reflect that love onto others.

25 Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her 26 to make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word, 27 and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless. 28 In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. 29 After all, no one ever hated their own body, but they feed and care for their body, just as Christ does the church— 30 for we are members of his body. 31 “For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.” 32 This is a profound mystery—but I am talking about Christ and the church. 33 However, each one of you also must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband.

Ephesians 5:25-33

And, for those of you who may be single and wondering about potential spouses, be patient. Try to find someone who can love you with the love of God, even as imperfect as humans are, because this is true: you will hurt each other. Not intentionally (I hope), but simply because humans are all flawed; we can spend our whole lives seeking after Jesus and still have room to grow. Ideally, you should both be ready and willing to forgive each other and be patient with one another and help each other grow, even when it is hard and painful.

Remember this: God’s relationship with us is perfect, not because of what we do, but because of what He does. As we read in Ephesians, “love your wives, just as Christ loved the church...” In this comparison, we (the husband) are called to emulate Christ. This is a hard teaching for some, because what did the people do to Christ? Even his disciples abandoned him when he was arrested; even Peter denied him publicly and emphatically. Yet, what did Jesus do? He “gave himself up for [them] to make [them] holy...” In other words, be prepared to do what love demands regardless of what difficulties come your way, regardless of whether or not other people have the fortitude and self-control to do the same. Don’t think, either, that this is only for men. We read, earlier, Matthew 5:44-45:

But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be children of your Father in heaven.

It is in the loving of others that we become like our Father, that we may be called children of God, not in the way that others love us. This is true no matter who you are. Each one of us should be asking, “What should I do to love my friend/boyfriend/girlfriend/spouse/family/enemies the way God has loved me?”

Grace and Peace.

[howwerun]

Is It Possible... Part 2

In my last post, I wrote about the the question “is it possible…” For example, “Is it possible that God is actually female, and we have simply referred to her as male because that’s what a pro-male culture would have done back in the day?” Or, “Is it possible that Matthew 24 is actually about some future event that has been called ‘The Rapture’ rather than the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem in 70 A.D.?”

I made an argument for such questions being essentially useless, because the answer is almost always “yes.” The question “is it possible…” speaks to what we do not know, and because we don’t know, the possibility exists. In other words, if I knew the mind of God or had perfect knowledge of all things, I could say definitively, “The possibility does not exist,” or, “The possibility does exist,” but because I don’t have perfect knowledge, I can’t definitively deny the possibility of something. (You can read the post here if you’d like more of an explanation.)

I received a question about the post, but the wording was a bit confusing. I haven’t received any clarification from the asker, but I decided I want to address some thoughts that came about because of that question. To the original asker, I hope this post contains an answer to your question. Here is the question:

If this indeed is the case for the universal it solely biblical interpretation then in mark 10 and Matthew 19 when Jesus says, with man nothing is possible but with God all things are possible (paraphrasing not quoted) then is Jesus merely saying that mankind we can understand and are aware that it has not the capability for everything(all possibilities) and rather about God we will never know everything and everything is (seems) possible because we aren’t capable of fully knowing??

Let’s start with Mark 10 and Matthew 19. I believe the question is referring to the story of the rich man who wanted to know “what must I do to inherit eternal life?”

Mark 10:17-27 (NIV)

17 As Jesus started on his way, a man ran up to him and fell on his knees before him. “Good teacher,” he asked, “what must I do to inherit eternal life?”

18 “Why do you call me good?” Jesus answered. “No one is good—except God alone. 19 You know the commandments: ‘You shall not murder, you shall not commit adultery, you shall not steal, you shall not give false testimony, you shall not defraud, honor your father and mother.’[d]”

20 “Teacher,” he declared, “all these I have kept since I was a boy.”

21 Jesus looked at him and loved him. “One thing you lack,” he said. “Go, sell everything you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.”

22 At this the man’s face fell. He went away sad, because he had great wealth.

23 Jesus looked around and said to his disciples, “How hard it is for the rich to enter the kingdom of God!”

24 The disciples were amazed at his words. But Jesus said again, “Children, how hard it is to enter the kingdom of God! 25 It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.”

26 The disciples were even more amazed, and said to each other, “Who then can be saved?”

27 Jesus looked at them and said, “With man this is impossible, but not with God; all things are possible with God.”

Matthew 19:16-26

16 Just then a man came up to Jesus and asked, “Teacher, what good thing must I do to get eternal life?”

17 “Why do you ask me about what is good?” Jesus replied. “There is only One who is good. If you want to enter life, keep the commandments.”

18 “Which ones?” he inquired.

Jesus replied, “‘You shall not murder, you shall not commit adultery, you shall not steal, you shall not give false testimony, 19 honor your father and mother,’[c] and ‘love your neighbor as yourself.’[d]”

20 “All these I have kept,” the young man said. “What do I still lack?”

21 Jesus answered, “If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.”

22 When the young man heard this, he went away sad, because he had great wealth.

23 Then Jesus said to his disciples, “Truly I tell you, it is hard for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of heaven. 24 Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.”

25 When the disciples heard this, they were greatly astonished and asked, “Who then can be saved?”

26 Jesus looked at them and said, “With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.”

It is my understanding (not an expert opinion) that the most appropriate translation of Mark 10:27 is “with man it is impossible” (παρὰ ἀνθρώποις ἀδύνατον) and that Matthew 19:26 reads “with man this is impossible” (παρὰ ἀνθρώποις τοῦτο ἀδύνατόν ἐστιν). Both are notably different than saying “nothing is possible.” “It is impossible” and “this is impossible” both refer to Jesus’s previous statement that it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God. We should be careful about applying specific statements to other contexts without qualifiers. If we want to put a specific contextual definition on the word “nothing,” we can make the statement true. For example, saying, “Nothing that requires overcoming one’s deep attachments to the world is possible without God” could arguably be true. But, if we don’t qualify the statement, “nothing is possible” remains a blanket statement that is false.

In the story above, Jesus is specifically talking about the difficulty of a camel passing through the eye of a needle. With man, this is impossible. You can’t put a camel through they eye of a needle without killing it, and even then, how would you do it? Notice that although he uses the analogy in relation to wealthy people entering the kingdom of God, he doesn’t say that it’s impossible for wealthy people to enter the kingdom. Many wealthy people in the Bible did so, including Job, David, Solomon, and Joseph, to name only a few. Rather, he says, “…it is hard for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of heaven” (Matthew 19:25). Mark 10:24 tells us that the disciples were amazed when they heard this. Considering the culture they were in and the way the Jewish chief priests, elders, and teachers of the law (the members of the Sanhedrin) conducted themselves, they likely figured it was easier for rich people to enter the kingdom of heaven. The impossibility of the camel analogy speaks to their established misconception. “With man, this is impossible, but with God, all things are possible.” They, like most people, assume possibility and impossibility out of their lack of knowledge.

It was stated that the reference was being paraphrased (”with man nothing is possible but with God all things are possible (paraphrasing not quoted)”), but I think the paraphrase was different enough from the actual text that it warranted correction, especially since the remainder of the question seems to be feeding off the paraphrase.

…then is Jesus merely saying that mankind we can understand and are aware that it has not the capability for everything(all possibilities) and rather about God we will never know everything and everything is (seems) possible because we aren’t capable of fully knowing??

This seems to be the opposite of what I was saying in my last post. It isn’t our understanding of mankind that affects the question “is it possible…” In fact, it isn’t our understanding of anything that affects the question. “Is it possible…” speaks directly to what we don’t understand. That’s the only reason to ask the question in the first place. No matter what I understand of mankind, I will never ask “is it possible…” unless I’m talking about something I don’t understand. I also pointed out that we often have a completely incorrect understanding of even our own capabilities, let alone the capabilities of others. To say we are aware we do not have the capability for everything (if this is what the question meant) assumes that we are correct in our understanding.

Concerning God, we will never know everything, but Jesus knows the capabilities of his father, and God knows Himself even as we cannot know ourselves. When Jesus says, “…with God, all things are possible,” he isn’t speaking about possibilities the way we do. Where we speak out of a lack of understanding, guessing at possibilities, Jesus speaks from understanding without guessing. God can say of himself that all things are possible, because He knows himself. Is it possible that I’m wrong about that? Yes, but if you read my last post, you’d know this is a useless question with a useless answer.

Personally, I subscribe to the idea that God is infallible, unchanging, and perfect in knowledge. The idea that “is it possible…” is a useless question only applies to us as human beings with our imperfect knowledge. We should ask more beneficial and productive questions, such as “is it likely…,” “is it plausible/logical/rational…,” or “is there a way to…” Such questions point toward forward progress in ways that “is it possible..." does not.

[howwerun]

“Is it possible...” and different, slightly less useless questions.

I fancy myself a thinker. That is, I think about things, all kinds of things, because thinking is something that I enjoy doing. One of the most interesting questions to ask about things is, “Is it possible...?” It’s a question that can lead to new discoveries—discovery of new talents and skills, new ways of doing things, new styles of art, etc. But, the more I think about it, the more useless the question becomes. The question “is it possible...” doesn’t actually help me make any decisions or come to any understanding. It doesn’t tell me anything except what is impossible, and anyone who’s studied the “greats” of human history knows that impossibility is largely an illusion.

When most people say that something is impossible, what they really mean is, “I can’t conceive of any way in which such a thing could happen.” What they’re saying is that because no one has presented an idea they believe in, such an idea must not exist. So, first off, let’s establish this: our ability to believe in/rationalize/justify/accept an idea has nothing to do with possibilities. As they say, “The possibilities are endless.”

The question “is it possible...” speaks to what we do not know, and by definition, we can’t absolutely dismiss what we do not know. We can only speculate, and in speculation, anything is possible. Of course, I’m speaking in generalities, because I’m making a point. There are certainly times when I can say definitively that something is or isn’t possible.

If I’m seeing my friends’ child for the first time in years and say, “Wow! Your kid has gotten so big!” and they ask, “Are you calling my kid fat?” I can definitively say, “No. I’m just commenting on how much your kids has grown since I last saw him/her.” If you ask me, “Is it possible that you were actually calling their child fat?” I can say, “No, it is not possible, because I wasn’t.” However, if my friends tell you what I said later (when I’m not around) instead of asking me about it, and then you ask, “Did he just call your kid fat?” they would, philosophically, have to admit that it’s possible, because they don’t know what I was thinking.

Um...What’s Your Point??

Sorry, I tend to ramble. The point is this: the answer to the question “Is it possible...” is almost always “yes.” Congratulations. What did that tell you? Did it help you understand how it’s possible? Did you learn why it’s possible? Did it help you make a decision? No, it didn’t.

Is it possible to fall out of a plane without a parachute at over 10,000 feet and survive hitting the ground? Yes, but do you know how or why? If you do know how or why, it’s not because you asked if it were possible. If you found out on your own, it’s because at some point you asked the question “How does one survive a free fall from over 10,000 feet?” or some similar question. You may have asked that question because you found it that it’s possible, but the possibility question didn’t actually give you any answers. Did it help you decide whether or not to jump out of a plane at over 10,000 feet without a parachute? Of course it didn’t. The questions that lead to that answer are things like “am I willing to risk it?” or “do I think that I will survive that fall?” or “if I don’t survive, what do I have to lose?”

“Is It Possible...” and Understanding Scripture

One big mistake that people make when studying scripture is putting too much emphasis on the question “is it possible...” They fail to understand that that question doesn’t tell us anything about scripture. It doesn’t point us in the direction of truth or offer understanding or insight or, truly, tell us anything at all. It does allow us to exercise our imaginations, which is fine, but when we start building theological interpretations and doctrines around “possibilities,” things often spiral quickly out of control.

Here is only one example:

In Matthew 24, Jesus tells his disciples about the coming destruction of the temple, which we now know came along with the destruction of Jerusalem around 70 A.D. There are several things to consider when studying this chapter.

1. What is the context in which Jesus is speaking? That is, if we take all of the verses that take place during the same conversation about the same topic and examine them together, what can we learn about why Jesus is saying these things and what he might specifically be talking about? In case you’re interested, this passage is quite clean—Matthew 24-25. There seems to be a combination of present and future events throughout, but you can study that for yourself. Also, Matthew 26 is a continuation, according to Matthew’s account, of the same conversation, but the topic changes to preparations for the passover, so I don’t include it when examining the specific context of Matthew 24.

2. What is the context of the passage in the book as a whole? That is, why did the writer choose to include this passage in his book? If it helps you understand, reframe the question: why did the Holy Spirit inspire the writer to put this passage here? This comes with the assumption that God doesn’t do anything by accident and that each writer had specific goals in mind. Studying this context requires a study of Matthew as a whole, understanding what the major themes of the entire book are. What was the purpose of the book of Matthew? How does Matthew 24 serve that purpose?

3. What is the context of Matthew within scripture as a whole? I hope that it’s obvious that this requires extensive study of the entire Bible. At this point, it isn’t as much about themes as it is about coming to know God. All of scripture, if you believe it is consistent and inspired by God, speaks to the nature and will of God. Since we believe that God is unchanging, His inspired word must also be unchanging. Therefore, any interpretation we have of Matthew, including Matthew 24, must be consistent with the entirety of scripture. If an interpretation of Matthew 24 fits with our interpretations of every other book in the Bible except for one, then, somewhere, we have made a mistake. Perhaps in our interpretations of every book except the one or our interpretation of the one book or our interpretations of some combination of books or our interpretations of all the books.

I can ask, “Is it possible that Jesus, in prophesying concerning the destruction of the temple and Jerusalem, is also simultaneously prophesying about some future events that will take place concerning present-day or future Christians?” As mentioned above, the answer is “yes.” It is possible. But so what? That doesn’t tell us anything. We need to ask more useful questions, such as:

Is such an interpretation consistent with other passages in scripture? Is such an interpretation likely, given what we may know of God? In order to answer these questions, we need to examine many other passages in the Bible. If I think I have found another passage that supports one interpretation, I should study the new passage in the same ways I study Matthew 24: specific context, context within the book, and context within scripture as a whole. If using the second passage to support a certain interpretation of Matthew 24 causes the second passage to become inconsistent with its own context, the context of its book, or the context of scripture as a whole, then it is not a good supporting passage.

Philippians 4:13 reads, “I can do all things through Christ who gives me strength.” If I look only at this sentence, it says that someone gives me strength, and with it, I can do all things. If I stop there, I can say to my brother, “Do whatever you like, because you can do all things through Christ who gives you strength.” But is that what that passage says? No. In the specific context, Paul is talking about having “learned to be content whatever the circumstances.” If I want to apply it to any other situation, I must find other passages that support the idea that the strength God gives me will help me do those other things, and I must be able to support the connection through themes in both contexts, as well as in scripture as a whole. The possibility that the same idea applies to some other context is irrelevant without other contexts.

These are only examples. This idea is true for all of scripture. The question “is it possible...” is certainly an intriguing question, but understand that it isn’t helpful. Instead, ask something that will help with understanding or lead to beneficial answers. Ask if something is scriptural (that is, in line with the Bible as a whole). Ask if something is likely based on what you know of scripture and of God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit. Ask if something makes sense in a specific context. But please, let’s move away from “possibility” as our basis for entire interpretations.

Grace and Peace.

[howwerun]

How Old Are You?

I don’t remember how many times I have been asked this question. And, having children of my own, I understand this question differently than perhaps most single folks do.

If you ask me how old I am, I will tell you my age as of my last birthday. If my next birthday is coming soon, I might tell you something like, “I will be [this old] tomorrow/next week/next month...” If you ask me how old my children are, well, then how I answer would depend on how young my children are. Below 1.5 years old, parents will often speak in months (6 mos, 12 mos, 14 mos, etc.). Past two, parents will almost certainly speak in years (2 yrs, 4 yrs, 6 yrs, etc.). At some point, months become too cumbersome. No one wants to deal with answers like, “I’m 276 months old.” I don’t have time to do that kind of math, because I’m not that good at my number 12 multiplication tables. It’s practical for us to shorten our answers and use large units of measure, and, in case you haven’t noticed, we do this with all sorts of things.

I have [1-11, maybe 12] apples, but after that I probably have a dozen or a baker’s dozen or two or three dozen. I may even have half a dozen donuts instead of six, and when I don’t have the time or energy to count, I substitute for grouping words. I saw a flock of birds or a herd of cows or a litter puppies or an ostentation of peacocks (true story). Consolidating information is efficient and effective; it’s practical. Most of the time.

Ironically, people tend to use this same system of consolidation when they think about their walk with God, and it can cause some real problems of faith. It’s one thing to say that I’ve been a Christian for “most of my life” or that “I was baptized 11 years ago,” but it’s a whole different story when I start believing that, like with my age and my birthday, I’m only a “good Christian” once I pass some imaginary threshold. The day before my birthday, I speak as though I’m one year younger than I actually am (364 days, to be precise). If I’m turning 30 tomorrow, I’m actually 29 right now. Then, magically, I wake up, and I’m 30! People get to thinking that some day they’ll wake up, look around, and suddenly be a good person or a mature Christian. They look at their lives, take a quick inventory (particularly of all the mistakes they’ve made), and think, “Nope. I’m not a ‘good’ person, yet. Those vices are still there.”

We aren’t nearly so hard on others, most of the time. We look up to people, our role models or people we admire, and we take a quick inventory of their lives (usually all the “good” things), and we think about how wonderful and mature they are. Truthfully, they’re on the same journey as us. They wake up every morning and make mistakes. They say things they believe that are only partially true. They believe things other people say that aren’t true or reject truths because they misunderstand them. They falter in their walk, or they doubt, or they get distracted, or they have vices they don’t realize are there, or, perhaps, like Paul, they were “given a thorn in [their] flesh, a messenger of Satan, to torment [them].” (2 Corinthians 12:7)

You and I are not so different than Paul. You and I also have thorns, and I believe that, like for Paul, they are there to keep us grounded in reality, to keep us from becoming conceited, and to keep others from thinking too highly of us. Moreover, God tells Paul, “My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness.” (2 Corinthians 12:9) My friends, birthdays are a silly thing. They are fun, and they can easily mark milestones in our lives (16 yrs, 18 yrs, 21 yrs, 25 yrs, 50 yrs, 100 yrs), but somehow we have come to a place where birthdays don’t so much elevate our journey as dismiss 364 days of it every year. 364 days in 2016 that mean nothing when compared to the one day when I magically turn a whole year older.

I offer you a different perspective; don’t let your walk with God be a thing of milestones. Don’t sit around waiting for your “birthday” to come so that you can say to yourself, “I’m a good Christian, now. I have finally become mature.” I know that it’s cliche, but I can’t avoid it in this: don’t dismiss the journey as though the destination is all that matters.

You may know this song:

While we walk the pilgrim pathway, clouds will overspread the sky; but when traveling days are over, not a shadow, not a sigh.

When we all get to heaven, what a day of rejoicing that will be! When we all see Jesus, we'll sing and shout the victory!

But that’s silly. Jesus is already victorious, and as part of his body, so, too, are we! I don’t need to wait until I see Jesus face to face to shout the victory. I don’t need to wait until I reach Heaven to rejoice. It certainly will be a glorious day, but consider this: if I am traveling from California to Florida and someone asks me where I am, I don’t say I’m in California just because I haven’t crossed the border of Florida, yet. I also don’t just say, “I’m not in Florida,” because that doesn’t answer their question; it isn’t helpful to anyone, because in the mainland United States, there are 47 other states I could be in. They still have no idea where I am. Nor, in my walk with God, do I say, “I’m a new Christian.” I realize I have much more maturing and learning to do, but that doesn’t mean I have to ignore all of the maturing and learning I have already done. I am not a new Christian. Nor do I only list what I am not; if I only say “I’m not wise or mature or patient or humble or strong or learned or disciplined,” it’s about as useful to others as saying “I’m not in Florida” (and about as useful to ourselves).

Listen to me, my friends: when I woke up this morning, I was me, but when I go to bed tonight, I will be me plus one day, me plus one experience; me plus one step closer to Jesus, to my Father, and to the Holy Spirit. If I look back on my day and see failure and unfaithfulness, then I will be me plus one more opportunity to “boast all the more gladly about my weaknesses, so that Christ’s power may rest on me...” I will be me plus one more chance to, “for Christ’s sake...delight in weaknesses, in insults, in hardships, in persecutions, in difficulties. For when I am weak, then I am strong.” (2 Corinthians 12:9-10)

You will not wake up one day and be mature or good or wise or humble or patient or loving or sympathetic or compassionate or self-controlled or any other number of Godly things. No, you are, right now, becoming such things. Truthfully, you will never fully become those things in this life, so set aside the destination, set aside the milestones, set aside the preposterous expectation that you will someday, suddenly, magically realize you have become something Godly and pay attention to what God is doing in you right now. If you need evidence that God is willing to see you this way, pick an old testament character, and read his/her life story. I recommend Samson, David, Abraham, Moses, or Jacob, to name only a few. They never reached those magical milestone moments, yet God loved them and used them and their faith was credited to them as righteousness.

I pray that God will give you eyes to see yourself not in consolidated milestones of change but in days and steps that draw you ever-closer to our God and father of our Lord, Jesus Christ.

Grace and Peace.

[howwerun]

Today was one of those days...

...when I’m keenly aware of the complete lack of satisfaction I get from my day job.

...when I understand that I’m being entirely unproductive but can’t seem to find any motivation to be otherwise.

...when I notice that the few conversations I have with people during my mostly quiet day are all filled with complaining and cynicism.

...when I have no patience for my children.

...when everything I turn to for stress relief seems like such a waste of time.

The list goes on, but let’s just say that today was one of those days...

My parents were in a car accident today. They were driving home, and a lady, a girl, really, by the sound of things, pulled out of a gas station parking lot and smashed right into them. Neither car was drivable, but no one was injured. We’re not going to talk about that, though. We’re going to talk about the bold sentence above.

Consider it another way:

No one was injured, but neither car was drivable.

Or:

Neither car was drivable, and no one was injured.

In the first instance (the bold sentence), I would argue that the emphasis is actually on the lack of injuries. It’s as though I’m saying, “The wreck was bad, but before you get too worried, let me put at ease what is foremost in your mind: no one was injured.”

The second sentence seems to be the opposite. It’s as though I’m saying, “It’s true that no one was injured, but I’m more concerned with how much damage was done. The cars are so wrecked!”

The third sentence suggests to me that the speaker doesn’t know what’s important or doesn’t really care much. “And” suggests to me that the two are of similar importance, as though I’m saying, “’Both cars wrecked:’ check. ‘No injuries:’ check. Next accident.” One could argue that using “and” elevates both to equal importance, but that’s just a roundabout way of saying neither is important. My previous employer had a habit of doing this; everything is important. “Here’s your to-do list for the week, and you’ll notice that everything is listed as ‘High Priority,’ because I overextended your work load because I don’t actually know what the word ‘Priority’ means.”

Of course, all three of those sentences are being interpreted from my personal perspective, my own experiences, my own worldview. Most importantly, they’re all being interpreted based on how I imagine myself saying them. They don’t take into account the almost infinite variations in body language, inflection, or even specific contexts. This is not an exercise in grammar or interpretation, however. I want you to consider two things with me:

1. We do this all day long, often times without realizing it. We let our thoughts and, therefore, our words and our actions and our body language and our choices reflect our emotions. When I am having a bad day, or a day that I have decided is a bad day, I’m more likely to think, “No one was injured, but neither car was drivable.” I emphasize the negative aspects of things. I rearrange my thoughts to reflect a negative attitude. I wasn’t aware I was doing this until my mom was telling me about the girl who crashed into them.

The girl had no driver’s license, and the car wasn’t hers. The car belonged to her boyfriend. He told her he wouldn’t go to the scene of the accident, even though he was just down the street at his apartment, because he said she was going to go to jail, and he didn’t want to deal with the cops. Immediately, I realized how negative I had been all day. It was as though hearing about someone being so hard hearted toward another human being reminded me that I should be intentionally nurturing compassion within myself, and I can’t be doing that while I’m nurturing cynicism, while I’m letting negative thoughts and emphases run unchecked through my mind.

Even when things are dreary... No: especially when things are dreary, we should make a concerted effort to reframe our thoughts. I’m not talking about the idea that “someone has it worse than you.” I’m not talking about comparing our lives with other, supposedly less fortunate people. I’m talking about making a conscious choice to think positive things and say positive things and carry ourselves in Godly ways despite the world’s enticing us to be negative. Or, as is sometimes the case in my life, in spite of the world’s enticing.

2. We should always be willing to ask this question: is there a lesson here that can help me better understand my walk with God?

Point number one was a brief meditation on our thoughts and attitudes and how they affect our day-to-day living, which was based on a brief meditation on sentence structure. Those things may generally seem to have nothing to do with one another. Superficially, grammar and psychology and theology have nothing to do with one another, but often times, if we let ourselves explore an idea down to its roots, we will find underlying truths that cross superficial boundaries. God doesn’t live in “religion;” He is the creator of all things. The laws of physics were written by Him. The mathematical order of the universe is His design. The human mind and heart are reflections of the divine.

Don’t let yourself fall into the rut of “religion.” It isn’t a special subject, unique and set apart from all other knowledge in the world. It isn’t a special compartment in our lives that we need to keep in a sealed, little box. It is a living, breathing, and transforming Spirit within us that renews our minds, and when we give ourselves over to God, to Love, to our relationship with Him, He reaches out and touches every aspect of who we are and what we do. Whenever you learn something new in any subject, in any area of your life, something that is transforming or thought provoking, explore it to the truth it’s rooted in, and then ask yourself, “Where does this root touch my walk with God?”

If you’re having a hard day, I pray that God will help you refocus your thoughts and find whatever it is that renews compassion and hope in you.

Grace and Peace.

[howwerun]

Knowing the future vs. Controlling the future

One question that seems to cause struggles for people is “Does God know the future?” I understand that this can be a complicated issue for many, and I don’t have time, right now, to go into it in depth. There are at least half a dozen aspects that can be considered, and each of those could easily take up more than one blog post. I do, however, want to mention one thing: there is a notable difference between knowing the future and controlling the future.

At the risk of being too brief or over simplistic, consider these points:

1. Is God is restricted by time the way that we are? It seems to me that many people have trouble comprehending God outside of our concepts of time. I have to wait until tomorrow to see what tomorrow brings, but why would I assume that the creator of all things must do the same?

2. If God is not bound by time, as we are, doesn’t it make sense that He perceives events differently than we do? It’s my being restricted to the present that determines the way I perceive events. If God is not restricted, His perception of events would necessarily be different than mine.

3. "But understand this: If the owner of the house had known at what time of night the thief was coming, he would have kept watch and would not have let his house be broken into.” (Matthew 24:43, NIV) Does my taking action to resist the thief interfere in any way with his/her free will? If I have knowledge of the thief’s coming, I still control only my own choices. If God is outside of time, He might perceive events that we consider “the future” in a fundamentally different way than we do, but why should we assume that necessarily means He controls future events? Can He not simply respond to our free will choices without predestination?

The above are questions, not answers. I’m simply offering food for thought. It bothers me that people often think in “black and white” terms, as though there are only two options. There is the possibility of God’s omniscience combined with absolute predestination, as some people believe. There is the possibility that God does not know the future but is powerful and wise enough to bring His plans to fruition. Both are possible, but that does not make them the only two possibilities.

As a side point: just because a person understands something about the nature of God or an interpretation of scripture, that doesn’t mean they can prove it. If it is enough to convince that person of a position or perspective, that’s fine, but that doesn’t mean it will be enough to convince someone else. My understanding of scripture is not “proof” that it is true, and I hope you will not fall into that trap. I encourage you to be on guard any time someone says, “These scriptures prove [whatever].”

Grace and Peace.

[howwerun]

Do we avoid Greek and Hebrew because we have trouble understanding it?

I recently preached a sermon on “doing justice.” If you’re a church-goer, that might seem familiar to you:

He has shown you, O mortal, what is good.    And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy    and to walk humbly with your God.

Micah 6:8

Most commonly (in my experience), “act justly” is written “do justice.” It occurred to me that in present-day English the phrase “do justice” doesn’t really mean anything, and the phrase “act justly” seems reminiscent of Pharisaical righteousness. I wanted to know what it means to do justice and whether “act justly” was a translation that truly captured the idea of doing justice.

I can see how in the context of acting justly one could assume that’s all it means to do justice; that seems straight forward enough. If I decipher it that way, however, I am assuming that my understanding of English in a modern setting reflects the intentions of an author writing in Hebrew thousands of years ago, that his culture and words are similar enough to translate concisely. Or, I am assuming that my seeming mastery of modern English is sufficient to understand God’s words given to the Israelites whose culture was drastically different from my own. I dislike both of those assumptions. Instead, I attempted to study the Hebrew words in the hope that I could translate not just the words but also the ideas.

This post isn’t about what I discovered. Let me be transparent about the limits of my process: I am not a Hebrew scholar or a Greek scholar. My first language is English, and although I have had some education in ancient Greek, I consider myself hardly more than a novice, at best. I have had no formal training in ancient Hebrew. I rely heavily on scholarly works from other, more educated persons to guide me through these types of studies, and I have no real way of judging the accuracy of their work. I must do what all researchers do: attempt to judge the credibility of the source and make a command decision about whether to use the information. Isn’t this the same regardless of what language one is studying? If I study English as a native English speaker, don’t I still have to judge the credibility of the source? And, when I look up a word in an English dictionary, should I take it for granted that the definitions I find are the end all of a word’s meanings? Beyond that, don’t I also have to take into consideration common uses, idioms, and colloquialisms?

The word “irony” is most commonly used to mean “coincidence,” which is not at all what it means. I can learn that by using a dictionary, but does that help me to interpret what a speaker is intending to say? The phrase “it’s been a minute since I...” literally means “it has been one minute (60 seconds) since I...” but is most often used among teenagers to mean “it has been a while or some undefined, lengthy amount of time since I last...” The dictionary definition won’t tell you that. So, we see, there are serious problems with attempting to interpret words by simply looking up their definitions and smashing them together. How much more when we are doing this for an Ancient language without proper historical background?

On the other hand, if a word in one language expresses several ideas simultaneously, is it sufficient to study only the one or two English words that it has been translated into? If “doing justice” expresses ideas of actively pursuing justice for those who have none, being just in our dealings with others, and living a life that effects justice in the world, it seems to me that the translation “act justly” fails to capture what was being commanded? To the best of my abilities, I act justly toward everyone I meet, but if my day consists only of interacting with the same three or four people over and over again, if I don’t involve myself in anything other the basic necessities of living (make money, provide for my family, eat, sleep, shower, etc.), am I “doing justice?” Can I not, then, be acting justly without obeying God’s command? The translators of the Bible, as educated and proficient as they may be, do not always agree on translations, which is one reason we have so many. Even if they did, they can’t very well decide to translate Micah 6:8 as, “Live a life that seeks to create justice for the oppressed within your communities--the poor, the widow, the orphan, the foreigner living in your land--and treat everyone justly; [an equally wordy exposition on what it means to love mercy], and [let me explain to you what it means to walk humbly with your God].” Well, they could, but then people would just complain about how the original manuscripts don’t say all those things!

It has been expressed that I should avoid using Hebrew and Greek in my sermons for two major reasons:

I may be misinterpreting the ancient languages for myself, so I would be providing misinformation to others.

Others may feel I have access to information that is beyond their reach, so they may feel inadequate to interpret the Bible for themselves.

To the first point: I agree. I may well be, at times, misinterpreting the ancient languages in my rudimentary studies. I have read and heard more than a justifiable share of native English speakers doing that very thing with their own English language to know that it really doesn’t matter. One could argue that we have a hard enough time communicating in one language without attempting to add another. I say people have become so afraid of being wrong and appearing foolish that we have collectively decided foolishness should be the low standard by which we live. I find not evidence to suggest that God will guide me as He as always guided me and correct me as He has always corrected me.

When I was younger, I held many beliefs about God and scripture that I no longer hold. My understanding of compassion, mercy, forgiveness, love, hate, and what it means to be grouped with “the evil and the wicked” in most of the Bible have all changed drastically over the course of my life (and those only to name a few). There is no reason to assume that what I believe today is everything I will believe ten years from now. In fact, it would utterly foolish to assume that. Most people exercise only a rudimentary study of the Bible, anyway. How ridiculous it would sound to say, “You should stop relating information you have learned about the Bible, because you have only an eighth grade understanding of the English language and might relate something that isn’t accurate.” No, I study the Bible as holistically as I can, and I trust that the Holy Spirit will always push me toward maturity. My understanding will always be incomplete, but I will seek out knowledge wherever it is, and I will share that knowledge with whoever desires it. If I am wrong, I will be corrected, I will adjust my course, and I will press on.

To the second point: one of the most saddening things about being a preacher is that I am painfully aware how few people are willing to ask questions and have an earnest conversation about something they do not understand or agree with. I have preached many sermons, and I can count on one hand the number of people who have brought concerns to me. Yet, I know there are many who disagree with me or are confused about a statement I made. I have no doubt that when I talk about Greek and Hebrew words there are some who feel inadequate or disheartened. Why do you not seek me out? Why do you not seek others who can encourage you and guide you? Why do you not take it upon yourself to delve deeper into your studies?

I am not judging those people. I understand too well the power of fear. Fear of rejection, fear of embarrassment, fear of correction, fear of change... We often become comfortable wherever we are, and to seek out the unknown, to seek new knowledge and new considerations means change, inevitably. We may rather be quietly upset or confused than risk creating open tension within our congregation or friendships or family. I do not judge those people, nor will I shy away from my beliefs for them.

I became a preacher because I believed it was what God intended for me. Perhaps not forever, but at least for now. And while I am preaching, I have one mission: preach the Word, nothing more or less. It is not for me to convince anyone or call anyone out from the pulpit. I am here simply to preach the Word. I am not a therapist. I am not an entertainer. I am not an inspirational speaker. If you have inadequacies you wish to talk with me about, I will listen, but otherwise, what is it you expect me to do for you? If you are bored by my academic thoughts, what business is that of mine? Am I hear for your viewing and listening pleasure? If you want to feel good about yourself, then do as the hypocrites do: give to the needy with trumpets, pray on the street corners and in the churches to be seen by men, and make a show of your fasting so that others will praise you for your piety. Then, you will have your reward in the present, but I am not here to tell you how wonderful you are or make you feel adequate.

This is not written to be harsh or apathetic to the circumstances and feelings of others. Simply put, I desire to bring into the depths anyone who is ready and willing to go there. It will be a slow and difficult journey and will require the learning of new and challenging things, but it is better to journey together than alone. As for the rest, come in your own time, but I cannot wait for you.

[howwerun]

And Life Goes On...

I actually completely forgot that I had created this blog, as well as another blog I created. That's why my last post was forever ago. It's ok right now, because I think I only have one follower anyway, but I honestly never expected that having a blog would be so difficult to keep track of. They have it all stored on some magical cloud somewhere, so why should it be any real work for me. Oh, right, because I'm an "out of sight, out of mind" sort of person. Well, I suppose I'll just have to figure out how to keep track of this blog as part of my regular to-do's.

Anyway, I had a baby boy today. The pregnancy occupied a lot of my time, hence, my not remembering blogs are a thing. Truthfully, I preached a series on feeling stuck, which turned out to be synonymous with feeling depressed. Over the course of the first couple of sermons, I realized that where I had thought I was handling the quickly approaching due date quite well, God was actually preparing me to confront my own anxiety by preaching to myself. Now, I'm not saying it was all about me, because, of course, it wasn't. As it turns out, there are lots of other people who feel stuck or stressed or depressed or who are being tested in their faith. The series was well-received (praise God), and it wrapped up just in time for me to have my weekend off, which also happened to be this weekend when we discovered my wife would have to have a c-section. I want to slow down a bit and take a look at what happened, because I see God in it and through it.

My wife and I recently started playing cards at night after we put our little one to bed, particularly Rummy 500. She wins a little more often than I do, but she always says something about not having gotten anything good. I usually respond with something like "you don't know that." You can't know what's good and what's not, because too much of card games depends on what comes out of the deck. You may start with "nothing" and run the board on everyone else.

At the start of my series (which I hope to post later, at least in short), I talked about enduring our trials and the testing of our faith with joy, because it draws us nearer to God. I was "off" for a week, and then I preached on being prayerful while we endure, asking God honestly and specifically for what we want. It was then that I realized I was in the midst of enduring, but I had yet to ask God honestly and specifically for anything.

The following week, I preached about resigning ourselves in faith to whatever God's response would be. In essence, it was the "you don't know if your hand is good" principle, but with a slight twist: we do know that our hand is good, because we believe that God is good. If we endure in faith (believing in, and having knowledge of, things we cannot see), then we can be certain that whatever God is doing, it is good. Still, we can't always see what God is doing. So, we look at what we're dealt, and we see nothing. I was challenged to set aside my worries about the pregnancy and the delivery, about my work and everything that was going "wrong" there, about my ability to succeed or otherwise as a husband and a father, about everything that was testing and trying me. I was challenged to let it all go, to endure with patience and perseverance, and to resign myself to God's plan.

The following week, I preached about God's being present continually and His providence. God goes ahead of us, stands behind us, shields us on all sides, and covers us. If He is for us, who can stand against us? When we wonder "where is God in all of this" the answer is consistently "everywhere." It reaffirmed for me that I have nothing to fear, yet the fear and the worry and the doubt persisted in me.

This week, intra-office stress was reaching a new peak, and office morale was deteriorating quickly. I had been silent about much of it, but recently, people had become more apathetic. In one day, there were opportunities for me to reach out to three of my co-workers, and I was worried about what might happen. Sometimes, even when you tell the truth in love, people get upset or become defensive. In one instance, everything I had meditated on and preached about over the last 5 weeks was directly relevant. In another, I was able to alleviate some of the tension and hurt caused by careless words. In another, I received a positive and encouraging response when I rebuked someone concerning their treatment of others and their walk with God. Did everything turn out wonderful, all rainbows and butterflies? No, of course not. People aren't that simple, especially when they hold to different beliefs, but seeing God work so thoroughly and clearly in the events around me was a great relief.

Recently, I had prayed to God honestly and specifically concerning my wife and the pregnancy. I also asked several others to pray. Yesterday, I took my wife to see the doctor, and I was confident that God would answer my prayers. He did...with a resounding "No." It was difficult, at first, but then I thought back on everything I had preached about and how God worked through those things. I thought about how He brought those things together to reach out through me and touch the lives of my coworkers. I remembered that God had shown Himself to me powerfully in the last 5 weeks, and I sent out another prayer request concerning today's delivery.

Today, my beautiful baby boy was born, and as of yet, he and his mother are healthy. My wife is recovering quickly, and, so far, God has said nothing but "Yes" to me, today. My mom was able to take the day off, and since it's a Saturday, my dad was also off. They took our first child for the morning so I could go with my wife to get prepared for the operation. The timing on getting there, the timing on preparations, the timing of the operation...everything was perfect. The timing of my brother to see the baby was perfect. Our decision to let our first child spend the night with my parents worked out in ways we hadn't foreseen, and the timing of visitation hours seems to perfectly set up tomorrow evening into the following morning, and, God willing, by Monday afternoon, my wife and our new son will be at home and I will be working remotely on the new work site (which we also "successfully" launched on Friday afternoon).

I'm exhausted. This post might not even be coherent enough for anyone to make sense of what I'm driving at. I might not have written it well enough to show you how God was working all throughout my life in the last 5 weeks. You might be reading it and thinking, "What was that rambling nonsense all about?" If so, I apologize, but listen: what I'm really trying to get at is that you don't know what God is doing in your life. You don't know what He has planned. If you're afraid and worrying about this or that, if you look at what you've been dealt and think, "I've got nothing," do yourself a favor: decide that you don't know. Make the conscious choice to wait and see what God does with what you have, with what He's given you. You don't have nothing; you have exactly what you need, and everything else can wait.