"Nowhere in the Bible does it say..."

...that some action, inaction, thought, or activity is right or wrong solely because it isn't expressly mentioned by name in the Bible. What do I mean?

Yesterday in church, a male friend of mine made the point that, "Nowhere in the Bible does it tell husbands to hold their wives accountable to submit," the implication being that husbands are not permitted to hold their wives accountable for their duty to submit. This gentleman agreed that wives have a duty to submit, but he argued that it is the Lord's place alone to hold the wife accountable.

This issue, of submission, is but one example of the dangers associated with my friend's flawed method of interpreting the scriptures. Guess what else the Bible does not expressly say:

• The Bible does not say that “abortion is wrong” (it does, however, say that murder is wrong);
• The Bible does not say that “a pastor may discipline his flock” (it does however provide for church leaders holding the members accountable and for church resolution of conflicts between believers – see Matt 18);
• The Bible does not say that women must “separate and cleave” from their families (though this is implied by that same message to men);
• The Bible does not say “thou shalt not lie” (but it does say not to “bear false witness/give false testimony”);
• The Bible does not say that men and women must “obtain a legal certificate of marriage from the secular government” (but it does say that believers must subject themselves to the secular authorities – see Rom 13:1).

There are myriad of activities the Bible does not expressly permit or forbid, at least not in so many words. For instance, the Bible does not expressly tell us to refrain from water-boarding small children or from eating poison ivy.  The Lord obviously intended the Bible to give us principles by which we can live our lives and know the Truth, and it is up to us to apply these principles to new situations.

The Bible identifies the nature of sin and the opposing nature of righteousness. Certainly, examples were included to help our understanding, but the Ten Commandments were never intended to be the end to all moral judgments. They were the beginning – the genesis of our understanding of sin and righteousness.

We must take what we have learned from the Bible and apply it, logically, in our own decision-making. To simply state that, “The Bible doesn’t say…” as evidence for any conclusion, is insufficient. That can never be the end to our thinking process. Otherwise, we will commit a host of sins with the flimsiest of excuses, “The Bible didn’t say I couldn’t leave that man to die in the streets – I didn’t kill him.” What of the Good Samaritan? Do the principles in that story not require us to aid those in need?

We are under a duty to ask the question, “Does this activity or thing we are contemplating align more with our understanding of sin or our understanding of righteousness as taught by the Bible?” Applying this logic to my friend’s argument, we must seek God’s intention regarding the roles of husbands and wives in marriage. Saying that the Bible does not command husbands to hold their wives accountable for submitting does nothing to aid in the evaluation of whether husband should or should not be holding their wives accountable in this fashion.

In reaching my own conclusions, I cannot ignore that the Bible has given husbands authority over their wives, albeit with specific instructions and restrictions for how to exercise that authority. Often, I wish that I could ignore this reality. The world would be simpler for me, if I did not have authority as a husband: it comes with a never-ending array of duties and responsibilities. One of those duties, I believe, is being a spiritual leader in my home by holding my wife, family, and myself accountable for our Biblical duties. As Joshua said centuries before me, I am proclaiming that, “As for me and my house, we will serve the Lord” (Joshua 24:15). As a husband and father, men have the duty to make that proclamation a reality (more than words).

The Bible enumerates specific commands to husbands concerning how they treat their wives, and husbands must fulfill these duties. The Bible also enumerates specific commands to wives concerning how they treat their husbands, and wives must fulfill those duties. Along these lines, I will now explain my understanding of the scripture as it relates to submission between husbands and wives (with the understanding that all Christians are to have a submissive spirit, generally).

Simply put, the word "submit," as used in Ephesians 5 (just picking a relevant passage here), means to subject one's own will to that of another. When Christ submitted himself to the Lord, he subjected his decisions, judgments, and desires to the authority and will of the Lord. Certainly, Christ had reservations and concerns about going to the cross (e.g. “Lord … take this cup from me…”), but there was no sin, as Christ subjected his judgment and will to that of the Lord. Christ was crucified as a result of submission.

No one considers this to be a negative thing, likely due to the perfect nature of the parties involved (God the Father and Jesus Christ, the Son). However, the Word of God requires wives to submit to their husbands as to (in the same fashion as) the Lord:

"Wives, submit [ne subject] to your own [not necessarily other] husbands, as to [in the same way you submit to] the Lord. For the husband is the head [leader] of the wife even as Christ is the head [leader] of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit in everything [not just some things] to their husbands" (Eph 5:22-23) (emphasis supplied).

This passage is extremely difficult for me. I have struggled with it for years, trying to interpret it with the mind of a man who grew up in a post-modern, secular society that believes “equal value” requires “identical roles” and options. How can a man and woman be equal when one is the leader and the other the follower? Of course, I ask myself whether the president of the United States has more constitutionally prescribed civil liberties than do I as an ordinary citizen? Of course, not: the president is subject to the same Bill of Rights as the rest of us, but he is still our leader.  Why would it be different with husbands and wives?

Now the friend I mentioned earlier, he is a man I respect and admire. Like me, however, he is not perfect. This man’s flawed logic has resulted in what I believe to be an incorrect interpretation of the Bible in this specific instance. I have been guilty myself of using this same flawed logic in times past. “The Bible doesn’t say something is a sin, so I can do it right?” I used to (and sometimes still do) rationalize in this way.

My friend argues that, because the Bible does not tell husbands to hold their wives accountable to submit, that husbands are therefore prohibited from holding their wives accountable. The Bible also does not tell men to refrain from tossing their children out into the streets, but it says a man who does not take care of his family is a scoundrel (1 Tim 5:8). The flaw in his reasoning is taking the mere absence of an express scriptural provision in the Word of God as a prohibition or as a permission.

Let me explain with an illustration. Many of us know the children’s hymn, "I'm in the Lord's Army." How would this dispute concerning submission play out in the context of an army?

Let us imagine, for a moment, that there is a certain general. This general commands an army, and he decides to establish some written rules and procedures to be followed by the officers and troops under his command. He provides every officer and soldier with access to these written rules and procedures. One of the rules he establishes is that all troops are to submit to the commands of the officers in the same way that those officers submit to the general himself – in everything.

Now let us suppose that there is a battle to be fought over a certain bridge in the jungle that is critical to controlling the surrounding region. Suppose also that one of the officers orders the troops to take the bridge despite strong opposition from the enemy. Now suppose that, out of fear, the troops hesitate to charge the bridge and that they begin second-guessing the officer. Suppose that the officer listens to the concerns of the troops but, after considering their concerns and the need to take that bridge, he orders them to charge forward anyway.

Suppose also the soldiers refuse to submit to the order to charge the bridge. Lastly, suppose that nothing in the general's written rules and procedures says, specifically, that the officer is authorized to demand that the troops submit to or to hold the men accountable for failing to submit.

Does the officer need the express, written permission of the general to demand that the troops charge the bridge, or does the written authority granted to him by the general imply that the officer has the authority to hold the soldiers accountable for refusing to submit to the officer’s commands? Remember, the general’s written, standing order is that the troops submit to the officer in everything.

Of course, in the military, the troops would be required to follow their orders of the officers with the understanding that they could approach the general (or another superior) to discuss any strongly held objections. The general has the authority to countermand the orders of any officer or to affirm those orders. Of course, husbands and wives are not (always) military personnel, but the analogy holds just as true in God’s army.

As I see it, God does not have to expressly provide that husbands may hold their wives accountable to submit. God has placed the husband in a position of leadership and authority over the wife. That's not a popular belief or position, but I believe it is an accurate portrayal of the Biblical design ("wives should submit in everything to their husbands"). That position and authority confers upon the husband, as a leader, not only a right but a responsibility to hold his wife accountable, as his supporter and follower.

Leaders who do not exercise their authority are useless as leaders. However, it is important for a leader to know when and how to exercise authority responsibly and for the benefit of others.

God has placed restrictions on how husbands are to exercise that authority, always with a view to protecting their wives, and God has also ordered the husband to love his wife in the most complete way imaginable. If the wife has an objection to the husband's use of authority, then she has the option to approach the Lord and pray for an intervention, just as the troops in our example had the option to petition the general to intervene on their behalf with the officers. Ultimately, the Lord, just like our hypothetical general, has the authority to countermand the husband's leadership, or to affirm it. The husband cannot be a leader, logically, without exercising some authority and holding his wife accountable for respecting that authority.

The question is, when the wife prays to the Lord for intervention, and when the Lord does not choose to intervene (whether overtly or by convicting the husband to alter his judgment), will the wife submit to the Lord? Silence from the Lord is not abandonment or neglect. The Lord’s silence means that the Lord’s instructions stand: wives submit to your husband. Rather than changing this Biblical command, I believe the Lord answers the prayers of wives in this sometimes difficult position of being at odds with her husband by convicting the husband to reconsider his decisions. Other times, I believe the Lord convicts the wife to follow. Regardless, I believe that both husbands and wives occasionally ignore the convictions of the Holy Spirit when experiencing a spousal dispute. However, this is not cause for the aggrieved spouse to abandon his/her duty to the Lord. Wives should continue to submit, and husbands should continue to lead in love.

The Lord knows best, and when he does not seem to answer a prayer, his silence is the answer. That is not a technicality: the Lord knows when to intervene and when to let things play out. That is why the Lord is the general in our littler metaphor. If the husband or wife does not comply when the Lord convicts him/her, then I believe there will be consequences for defying a Holy God. The Bible tells us there is at least one negative consequence when a husband abuses his authority or mistreats his wife:

"Likewise, husbands, live with your wives in an understanding [i.e. patience, love, and grace] way, showing honor to the woman as the weaker vessel, since they are heirs with you of the grace of life, so that your prayers may not be hindered" (1 Peter 3:7) (emphasis supplied).

Wives, this is a scripture to share respectfully with your husbands. Submit to your husband, if not out of respect and love for him (which you are Biblically required to do), then for the Lord who has asked you to submit in this way. However, do be honest with your husband and remind him (holding him accountable) that he is commanded to love you as Christ loved the Church. Respectfully and lovingly, as a supporter, remind him that there are consequences to mistreating you, and that the Lord has decreed this: show him 1 Peter 3:7.

Difference in authority is not a difference in value. This is where many Christians miss the mark: the fact that a wife must submit does not mean she is less valuable to the Lord. That she, as the "weaker vessel," requires a strong leader does not mean the Lord loves or values her less than her husband. In fact, by providing her with a strong leader in her husband, the Lord has made additional provisions for her well-being beyond what has been provided for the husband. The Lord values all His children equally:

"There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus" (Gal 3:28).

God loves and values us all equally, and we are all one in His eyes. However, He has called us to different tasks and purposes. Husbands are called to lead. Wives are called to support and follow. Husbands are to love and protect, while wives are to respect and support. This does not mean women are less valuable. Leaders are worthless without their followers and supporters, unable to accomplish anything.

My friend's logic may have been flawed in concluding that a husband, as a leader, cannot hold his wife accountable to abide by her Biblical duty to submit, but he would be right to say that there are limits to how a husband may go about holding his wife accountable. 1 Peter 3:7 tells us, without reservation, that God will not hear a husband's prayers if he is failing to be understanding with his wife, to recognize her tender fragility, and to honor her accordingly.

This means that husbands may NOT use their authority as grounds to abuse their wives in any way. Certainly, a man should NEVER strike his wife, not with fists and not with words.  This is not Biblical.

Just as the Bible does not say that “husbands are permitted to hold their wives accountable for refusing to submit,” the Bible does not say that “husbands are prohibited from screaming at their wives in anger.” I believe, however, that the Bible prohibits men from screaming at their wives in anger (unlike screaming "look out for that bus," which is necessarily different). Husbands are called to, calmly and lovingly, be the spiritual leaders in their homes. We are called lead, first and foremost, by example. When our wives are failing in their duty to submit, we also have a responsibility to the Lord to see order restored in our home. We must hold our wives (and ourselves) accountable to abiding by the Lord’s design for family.

When leading by example is insufficient (and this is far less common than many husbands would care to admit), it is our duty to: (1) break out the scripture and discuss the matter, calmly and lovingly; (2) if our wives will not listen, then we must find and ask another believer, wise in the Word, to intervene; and (3) if that does not work, then we must take it before the church leadership (Matt 18). We do NOT harm, abuse, or take our wives to court seeking a divorce.

Christian counseling, mediation, or even arbitration may be necessary in extreme cases. The husband must remember to submit to the authority of a pastor, Christian arbitrator, or church leader who espouses a Biblical worldview and provides Biblical counsel/commands.

I hope this helps my friend and others with this difficult passage of scripture. It really isn’t all that complicated, but sometimes simple concepts are the hardest to swallow. After all, the terms “simple” and “easy” are no more synonymous than the terms “equality” and “authority.” Something can be simple and hard. Someone can have or lack authority and still be equal to another that has or lacks authority.

If nothing else, I hope those of you who read this will cease to argue what the Bible doesn’t say and start prayerfully considering and discussing what it does say, without preconceptions or agendas derived from social norms. Only then will we get to the Truth.

God really does help those who help themselves...

I have often heard the expression, "God helps those who help themselves," and recently I heard another believer say this is not Biblical.  I beg to differ.

Granted, the foregoing expression is not a Bible quote, but, depending on how you interpret that old saying, it is largely true.  Just read this passage from Galatians 6 (ESV), which I am so fond of quoting: 

"1Brothers, if anyone is caught in any transgression, you who are spiritual should restore him in a spirit of gentleness. Keep watch on yourself, lest you too be tempted. 2Bear one another’s burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ. 3For if anyone thinks he is something, when he is nothing, he deceives himself. 4But let each one test his own work, and then his reason to boast will be in himself alone and not in his neighbor. 5For each will have to bear his own load.


"6One who is taught the word must share all good things with the one who teaches. 7Do not be deceived: God is not mocked, for whatever one sows, that will he also reap. 8For the one who sows to his own flesh will from the flesh reap corruption, but the one who sows to the Spirit will from the Spirit reap eternal life. 9And let us not grow weary of doing good, for in due season we will reap, if we do not give up. 10So then, as we have opportunity, let us do good to everyone, and especially to those who are of the household of faith."

It is true that Christ called us to share each others' burdens (verse 2), but that does not undo personal responsibility, and, ultimately, we must all be responsible to bear our own burdens (verse5).  God not only will not be mocked, this passage teaches us that He cannot be mocked.

What does that mean?  It means that, if we make no effort at all to carry our own load and to fulfill our own obligations (sowing good things), then God will not cause us to reap something entirely different than what we have sown (verse 7).  However, if we keep doing (sowing) good, and if we do not grow weary (enduring in faith), then we reap our harvest in "due season" (God's time - not ours) (verse 9).

I read today about a set of parents who were part of the "faith healing" crowd and who, accompanied by their pastor, allegedly prayed over their sick infant for 30 hours without seeking medical attention. Click here to read the article.  Now, I do believe that healing comes by faith in the Lord, and I do believe the Lord performs miracles.  However, I do not believe that means the Lord wants us to ignore the wordly treatment options available to us (remember, Luke was a doctor).

Instead, I believe the Lord wants us to sow our efforts into doing all we reasonably can to resolve our own problems, trusting Him to bless our efforts.  In my own life, when I have had a problem or been confronted to the obstacle, I prayed hard for God to take care of it.  Sometimes, with no more sowing than a prayer, the Lord took care of the issue, but most of the time he required me to put some effort in.  I call this reaping/sowing principal "no deposit; no return."

God doesn't need our pitiful efforts - He is the all-powerful creator of the universe.  However, he does require our efforts, no matter how insignificant they may seem to us.  God designed the universe to work a particular way, and we are mocking both that creation and the nature of our God when we expect to reap something without sowing something (but our efforts to mock will fail when we inevitably reap what we sow).  That doesn't mean God cannot perform miracles, which is His right.  However, we do not get to dictate to Almighty God how he performs miracles, including the miracle of healing. 

I once had a large, non-malignant mass/tumor on my spine show up in x-rays.  My family and friends, in a tremendous show of faith, love, and support, prayed corporately for me.  By the time my MRI results came back, the mass was gone.  It didn't shrink: it was gone.  Some have said the x-rays were wrong - whatever.  I say, and I always will, that God had other plans for my spine.  Praise Him!  He healed me, and I believe the faith of my family and friends made a huge difference.

But I went to the doctor... 

That's right: I didn't sow nothing.  I prayed (a LOT), and I went to see a doctor.  I didn't sit around with excruciating, unnatural back pain for months on end begging God to heal me without taking any actions myself to pursue treatment.  I prayed, I went to the doctor, and God blessed those efforts with a harvest of healing, in His time, not in mine.

"Faith healing," is something I whole-heartedly believe in, but I don't see that as an excuse to avoid sowing our efforts toward the healing for which we are petitioning the Lord.  Going to the doctor is not a sign of lacking faith - it is a practical measure that the Lord can bless.  We go to the doctor, and we pray to the Lord, who will decide how to heal us - through an overt display of divine power, or through the doctors hands, or via whatever other mechanism He deems wise, in His time.

If you are sick - seek medical attention, but don't stop praying.  Also, don't pray that the doctors heal you.  That is a sign of lacking faith.  I suggest this prayer:

"Lord, I am not feeling well, and I know something is wrong.  Normally I would be afraid, but I am stepping out in faith and trusting you with my future.  I pray that you heal my broken body according to your Will.  In the name of Jesus I pray this, amen."

Say it.  Pursue it.  Believe it.  Receive it.  Just don't skip the pursuing - it is an essential element. 

A wise man seeks wise counsel (no.3).

"Plans fail for lack of counsel, but with many advisers they succeed."
-Proverbs 15:22, NIV.

This verse came to me in my email devotional, and I find it to be one of the best verses in the Bible when it comes to decision-making and dealing with confusion.  Frankly, in my own life, I have often been convicted with the reality that I cannot do everything myself. 

As an example, I broke my foot last week playing tennis.  Try as I might, I couldn't take care of myself, and I needed someone to nurse-maid me until I was back on my feet again.  I am pleased to report that I am recovering quickly, and I am even able to walk normally for brief periods with the crutches (as opposed to using only my good foot).  In a short time, I will be right as rain.  In the beginning, however, my wife was a God-send.  Were it not for her, I'd have had to hire a nurse or stay in the hospital until I was able to function again.

Similarly, we should not make important decisions all alone without seeking some wise counsel first.  I will not waste time rehashing previous posts dealing with the question of when to seek help and from whom (you may find the first two posts in this series here and here; you may also find the post "No Man an Island" to be relevant, which you can find here).  Instead, I just want to focus on the wisdom of the verse quoted at the top of this post.

My wife and I have a wonderful, happy marriage.  However, we do occasionally differ, and sometimes the decision of when to seek advice is an area in which we differ.  My wife is a very private person, and she would often prefer that we make important decisions alone (after consulting the Lord, of course).  I, on the other hand, feel like the best decision is made only after consulting others whom I consider wise and knowledgeable.  Is my wife wrong to want to keep matters private?  Not at all, and some decisions really do require discretion, especially in a marriage.

All the same, the desire for privacy is often related more to one's pride than to a desire for discretion.  My advice to you, believers, is to strike a good balance.  Seek not only wise counselors, but discreet counselors.  In my view, an advisor is not a very wise person to begin with if that person does not appreciate the value of discretion.  Certainly, we know that discretion and wisdom go hand in hand (see Prov 3:21, 5:2, and 11:22).  

Remember: the Bible teaches us that our plans fail for lack of counsel (lack of wise advice), but our plans often succeed if we have many advisors.  Of course, we shouldn't be too quick to get or take the advice of a drunkard or fool, but when a knowledgeable person offers you advice, I suggest that you consider it as a gift rather than a burden.

How often do we hear advice from parents or other elders and disregard it as outdated or as another "lecture?"  Don't be a fool: if you have wise parents or elders, then listen to their advice.  It is worth more than gold.  As an example, if you are experiencing marital difficulties, don't shrug off the advice of a happily married couple and tell them it is none of their business.  Perhaps you are right that it is not their concern, but if that couple is genuinely trying to help you, then making your business their concern is a sign of friendship, not intrusion.  The secrets to happiness in their own marriage may very well be the secret to happiness in your own.  That is just an example.

Businessmen, for another example, I advise you not to hastily shirk the advice of your more successful colleagues.  Successful business models are often reproduceable, and for a successful businessman to share his insight with you, well that is invaluable.  Seize the opportunity!  Don't let pride be your downfall.

And remember, ultimately every decision that confronts you is your right and responsibility to make, but, knowing the every decision has consequences, would you not prefer your decisions to be informed decisions?  Having many advisors means understanding the facets of the situation with insights beyond/in addition to your own.  Listening to advisors is no excuse to refuse the ultimate responsibility for the decision.  You cannot sacrifice your judgment without making a choice to do just that.  Wisdom is about listening and discerning.  There is middle ground between ignoring good advice and jjust taking whatever advice comes your way.  I advise you (wisely I hope) to find that balance.  

Be blessed.

Guarding your heart: it doesn't mean what you might think it means...

The following paragraphs are excerpts from a book I am writing, priumarily discussing dating, courting, and relationships from a Christian perspective. Indirectly, I touch on the issue of "guarding your heart," which is, perhaps, the finest example of Biblical misinterpretation one could find. I tthought that they might find a nice home here in this blog about truth.

The phrase “guard your heart,” while Biblical in its origins, provides a hint of truth upon which Satan has forged numerous lies concerning ourselves and how we relate to others. Certainly, Jesus (who is himself the Word of God), never advised use to hide from the world to guard our hearts. In fact he commanded us to go out into the world and bring the light to it (see Matt 28:18-19, the “Great Commission”).

I believe that the phrase “guard your heart,” much like the phrase “don’t settle,” is a tired and lonely expression that damages Christian relationships today. Quite frankly, this scripture has nothing to do with dating or relationships, and it is taken out of context more often than any other scripture with which I am familiar. Churches have been using this phrase, for years, to advise young men and women from engaging in activities that might cause hurt feelings, with dating being the chiefly prohibited activity.

Proverbs chapter four is a message from a father to his son concerning the need to get wisdom and live a life of light without straying from the path of righteousness and into a wilderness of evil. Verse 23, in the ESV, says, “Keep your heart with all vigilance, for from it flow the springs of life.” However, in the (less literal) NIV translation, it reads, “Above everything else, guard your heart. It is where your life comes from.”

This is great advice, but it is not advising Christians to hide from situations where our feelings might get hurt, and neither does it justify hiding from people we think might hurt us. It is certainly not attacking dating, courting, or relationships. The goal is to live our lives Biblically in those situations, to guard our hearts FROM EVIL and SIN. Even in the NIV, which is a less than literal translation (and therefore a less desirable translation in my opinion), the purpose for which this father advised his son to “guard your heart” can be concretely discerned by examining the verses that immediately follow. Here it is, in more detail:

“Above everything else, guard your heart. It is where your life comes from. Don't speak with twisted words. Keep evil talk away from your lips. Let your eyes look straight ahead. Keep looking right in front of you. Make level paths for your feet to walk on. Only go on ways that are firm. Don't turn to the right or left. Keep your feet from the path of evil” (Prov 4:23-27, NIV) (emphasis supplied).

What wonderful advice this is, and what a shame it is that so many misuse this chapter to advance agendas other than what the inspired author intended. No one will argue the merits of the author’s words, but he was not advising us to avoid interacting with the opposite sex or to hide in a hole from the things in this world that might hurt our feelings.

Christianity merits boldness, not fear. In fact, our slogan should be: "Fear not!" Remember 2 Timothy 1:7:, "For God gave us a spirit not of fear but of power and love and self-control." The Bible, in advising us to vigilantly keep our hearts (guard them) is referring to protecting them from sin, not from emotional suffering. In fact, to do God's work, sometimes we have to risk heartache. That's part and parcel of being bearers of the truth.

No deposit; no return...

In an effort to remember that this blog is primarily oriented on the Truth as applied to all areas of life (as opposed to just dating and relationships), I want to offer something different. First let me offer a confession to you:

I am not perfect. I do not give advice on this blog from a position of perfection. I have sinned many times already today, I am sure. If you are looking for advice or counsel from someone who has it all together, then you has better stick with the words of Christ. You won't find even the apostles to have been perfect or sinless, though that is the entire point of Christianity: none of us deserve mercy. God preserve us from justice. Praise God for grace.

That said, if you will listen to some advice from an imperfect man, then consider that you get a return, in this life, based primarily on what you invest. That is how God designed this world to work:

"Do not be deceived: God is not mocked, for whatever one sows, that will he also reap" (Gal 6:7).

If you want to reap a harvest, then you must sow a seed. I don't know about you, but I feel as though I am not sowing enough good seeds in my life. I sowed seeds in the area of dating, and I reaped an amazing wife worth more than gold or jewels, but in so many areas of my life I fail to sow enough seeds to reap the harvest I am seeking. Why is that? We, as humans, are wont to let our emotions and flesh govern our thinking rather than our logic, reason, or, most importantly, the Holy Spirit.

Guess what? If you want to reap that job: start sowing some applications and networking. If you want to reap an excellent wife, then start sowing some seeds in dating and relationships. If you want to reap good friendships, sow some time in that area.

God controls and delivers the harvest, but he calls us to plant the seeds. What are you planting in your life, and what are you not planting that you should? This simple verse is universal in its application. It is probably the basis for that old saying, "You can't get something for nothing." Though God occasionally blesses us with absolutely no effort on our part, He usually requires some effort on our part - not to earn a blessing, but to please Him and to work within His design for this world.

I am going to make a concerted effort to sow more, and I hope that you will all do the same in all the areas of your lives.

NEWS: Garden of Eden discovered?

This is an interesting article. It is all about a set of ruins believed to constitute a link to the Garden of Eden. What it is exactly, I don't know, but it is really fun to think about. Check out the article, and feel free to comment with your theories.

A Wise Man Seeks Wise Counsel (no. 2)

The point of this second post on the subject of following wise counsel is how to find it, how recognize it, and how implement it/put it into action in your life.

In the first part of this post (found here), I wrote about the wisdom of considering and following "wise counsel" (advice). I cited the following scriptures, which I will also refer to in this post:

"The way of a fool is right in his own eyes, but he who heeds counsel is wise" (Proverbs 12:15). "By pride comes nothing but strife, but with the well-advised is wisdom" (Proverbs 13:10). "The ear that hears the rebukes of life will abide among the wise. He who disdains instruction despises his own soul, but he who heeds rebuke gets understanding" (Proverbs 15:31). "Listen to counsel and receive instruction, that you may be wise in your latter days" (Proverbs 19:20).

I have a very simple method for finding/recognizing wise counsel, and I call it, "Defer to the superior pool of knowledge." This is not a Bible verse, so remember that when applying this principle: it's not necessarily fool-proof. However, it generally has worked for me (when I was wise enough to apply it).

Deferring to the superior pool of knowledge means, essentially, trust the judgment and advice of people who are speaking from a position of expertise greater than your own. To an extent, you do this already: when their automobile transmission goes out, most people don't try to fix it themselves unless they are transmission specialists. If a restaurant owner is a bad cook, then s/he will probably hire a chef/cook to work in the kitchen. Similarly, a manager at a software company who has no experience in coding software had better hire a good programmer (hint: I am nodding in Rob's direction with that one).

It seems so obvious that, when there is a fire, we should call the fire department, and when someone breaks into our house we should call the police. Of course, I think we can agree that the plumber is the man to call to fix the pipes in our house, but what about the ones in our chest? Who among us after a heart attack hires a plumber to perform open-heart surgery? Any takers on that one?

However, how many of us have tried to save a dime on a home improvement project only to find we made the problem far worse than it originally was? Ever had a problem cost more to fix because you made it worse by trying to fix it on your own? How many people have tried to resolve a legal dispute without consulting an attorney (wink-wink). How many of us have risked being found guilty (or actually been found guilty) of tax fraud because we thought we could itemize our tax return just as well as a tax pro (nodding at my wife)? How many people try to resolve dangerous marital disputes without consulting their pastor (hello - God invented marriage...)? Anyone without a degree in finance or economics feel like playing the stock market without first getting some good advice?

Sometimes, we human beings tend to think that we are an island unto ourselves, capable of tackling any problem. However, most of us don't know everything. I readily admit that there is always someone out there who knows more about a given subject than I do. My wife knows more about preparing tax returns than I could ever hope, and Rob definitely knows more about computers than I do. Neither of them, however, knows more about the law than I do. These differences in skills do not represent a competition between us. Rather, our different abilities represent an opportunity for us to help each other and provide each other wise counsel on different subject matter.

I know enough about income taxes to do my own, and I have done it before, but I would never think that I could do my income tax return better than my wife can. Rather than letting pride be my downfall (see Proverbs 13:10 above), I admit that she knows more than I do, and I defer to her on income tax issues because she possesses a "pool of knowledge" superior to my own on that subject. Similarly, while I know a little bit about computers and programming, if I have a computer problem, then I call Rob. His pool of computer knowledge is superior to my own.

Admitting that people know some things better than I do allows me to get the best information before I make a decision. I try to remember that, "He who disdains instruction despises his own soul, but he who heeds rebuke gets understanding" (Proverbs 15:31). I benefit from the knowledge of the wise, and listening to their advice, on their areas of expertise makes my life easier. Also, according to God's word, listening to this kind of advice is a wise decision on my part.

Perhaps this seems obvious to some, but I know there are many people out their who just do not know how to take advice. Anyone who refuses to listen to advice, however, despises his own soul - it is in the Bible. So, the next time someone who has been happily married for 50 years gives you a tip on how to make your marriage work well, consider listening. Even if you have been married for 60 years, listening does not hurt. After all, time is not the only measure of experience. I am a better attorney than some others who have been practicing much longer than I have, but there are some attorneys who have been practicing for fewer years than I have who are better. There is no shame in admitting that - it's just true.

Admitting and accepting the truth puts me in the best position to identify who has more knowledge or talent on a given subject or issue than I do. Listening to such people enriches my own knowledge on the subject. Even if I do not follow their advice, by listening to it, I will remember it when time reveals who was right. If I was wrong, then perhaps I should have listened and need to reexamine my decision-making process.

I realize that sometimes the cost of hiring an expert is more than some of us can afford. If it weren't for insurance, most of us could not afford the services and expertise of a heart surgeon. Sometimes, wise counsel comes at a high price. Being a good steward of our money requires us to evaluate whether the cost is worth the benefit. I usually handle those situations by considering whether it is possible that I could handle the matter alone successfully. If not, then the expense might well be worth it. If I simply cannot afford the advice of on counselor, then I shop around to find one that I can.

This is also where family and friends come in handy. Your dad may not be a plumber, but if he is 20-30 years older than you, then he has been around long enough to have lived through a few clogged drains. Even if he cannot fix your sink, there is a good chance he knows of an honest plumber who will cut you a deal. Similarly, your mother may not be a lawyer, but she may know of one who can tell you what to do about that traffic ticket you can't believe you received.

Just remember, if you call your dad about that sink and he says, "I have no idea, but you might try taking it apart to see what is wrong," then you might want to get a second opinion before taking a wrench to that sink. Anytime someone admits that s/he has "no idea" about something, the advice that follows should be taken with a grain of salt unless that person's advice is sending you to someone more knowledgeable.

This is all pretty intuitive advice, but just because we all know it is true, does not mean it is easy to implement/use in our lives. So here is the secret: check your pride. Pride is what comes between people and good advice. Second, while you need to be responsible with your money, remember that it isn't very responsible to spend money on unessential things when you "cannot afford" the wise counsel you so desperately need. How many of us would spend $30 on dinner out with our spouse but balk at spending $30 on a phone conference with an accountant to make sure we can afford that dinner? So, not only do we need to check out pride at the door, but we need to check our budgets as well. Plan ahead - we all need advice, but wise advice rarely comes free. I recongize that, even if we budget for it, some of us cannot afford to pay for wise advice. Here's a tip: "Legal Aid" offers low or no cost legal services to those who truly cannot afford them. There are also medical clinics and hospitals that take indigent cases. If you cannot afford wise counsel, then there may be a non-profit entity out there designed to help you get the advice you need at a price you can afford.

I will end this post with a story I heard about from a friend of mine that I think serves as an excellent example of the danger of failing to seek and listen to wise counsel. A medical student was given a very large house in her divorce. She neither hired an attorney nor an accountant to assist her in the divorce. Apparently, her friends told her not to worry about it because the divorce was "uncontested," and the woman could not "afford to pay for advice" while she was already paying for her med school tuition. She also assumed that the "divorce judge" would make her aware of any potential problems. So, this woman read the separation agreement for herself and decided that she was "taking her husband to the cleaners." Because she was a medical student and considered herself to be a very intelligent person, it never occured to her that she might be reading the paperwork wrong or that separation contracts cannot always be read literally as though they were a book in a library.

However, when the property tax and homeowner's insurance bills came due, she discovered that she could pay neither. Her husband also failed to remind her that the house was subject to a mortgage. A reference to the mortgage was buried in the separation agreement and divorce papers.

Had she consulted a wise accountant, he would have told her that a house is never free: there are always hidden costs like property taxes, insurance premiums, and repairs. He would also have told her, most likely, that the bills related to maintaining a house are more than the average full-time medical student can afford.

Had this woman consulted a wise attorney, he would likely have either performed or obtained a title examination of the house, which would have revealed the mortgage (which was also referenced in her divorce papers, which she misread). The attorney would also have told her that judges are prohibitted by law from giving legal advice in the cases over which they preside. She didn't even consider applying for nonprofit legal aid, which would have given her legal counsel at little or no cost, because she thought that she was "smart enough" to handle the matter herself.

This woman lost all the money she received in her divorce settlement trying to trying to pay bills for the house that she could never have realistically afforded. What is the moral of the story? The woman should have gotten some wise counsel, who would have told her not to take responsibility for a house she could not afford. The expertise she needed most was that of a good real estate agent. Had she demanded the house be sold during the divorce, an option she never considered, she might have been able to pocket the difference between the sale price and the outstanding bills.

Was this woman dumb? No. She was very smart. However, she was not very wise. She was too filled with pride and arrogance to seek help. She could not afford to pay for the wise counsel that would have saved her thousands of dollars. Bottom line, we often cannot afford to do without wise counsel.

Arrogance and pride always come with a price tag. Sometimes, "do-it-yourself" is the wisest, most cost-effective course of action. However, before I build a wooden deck or cement porch in my backyard, you had better believe that I am calling my parents and talking to somebody who has done that kind of work before. I may be smart, but when it comes to home improvement, I know that I am not wise. Good thing I know some wise counsellors.

UPDATE: see the next article in this series here.

A wise man seeks wise counsel (no. 1).

I found a website discussing the relationship between wisdom and accepting advice from a Biblical perspective. In doing so, I found the following scriptures:

"The way of a fool is right in his own eyes, but he who heeds counsel is wise" (Proverbs 12:15). "By pride comes nothing but strife, but with the well-advised is wisdom" (Proverbs 13:10). "The ear that hears the rebukes of life will abide among the wise. He who disdains instruction despises his own soul, but he who heeds rebuke gets understanding" (Proverbs 15:31). "Listen to counsel and receive instruction, that you may be wise in your latter days" (Proverbs 19:20).

The point these scriptures make, when read together, is not to take every piece of advice that you receive as proven fact/truth. However, these scriptures send a solid message that it IS wise to listen to wise counsel. In other words, it is wise to consider the advice of those wiser or more learned than ourselves before we make decisions or take actions. That advice does not free us of the need to purposefully consider our decisions/actions before taking them. However, prayerfully contemplating the counsel you receive on a subject, make the wisest decision or take the wisest action.

Remember, wisdom often comes with age (Proverbs 19:20 - "...wise in you latter days"). I am smarter than some who are older than I am, but I am often less wise. Perhaps I am wiser than some who are older, but it is generally true that, the longer a person lives, the more experiences that person has, the more opportunities that person has to grow in wisdom. Granted, not every person older than me has seized the opportunities that he or she has received, and some of older persons may even be foolish. Remember, wisdom comes from the Lord first, so if you meet an older person who does not have the Lord in his/her life, then that person has chosen to avoid wisdom in every moment of his/her life. Always look for wisdom in the Bible first: if a person contradicts the Bible, how wise can that person truly be?

However, a person's age, at a minimum, is a good indicator of how much exposure that person has had to wisdom. Those who have lived long lives and accepted the opportunities for growth afforded to them by the Lord could be a wealth of wisdom and good counsel. While my parents, for instance, are reasonably intelligent people, I am sure neither of them has anything on Albert Einstein or Benjamin Franklin. It is my parents' wisdom that compels me to seek advice from them before so many others that may or may not be smarter. My father is a pastor, and my mother was my first Sunday School teacher. I know that every piece of advice they give me comes from a person who has sought wisdom from the Lord for many, many years. Those learned in the Word usually make the best advisors, meaning that they tend to give good advice.

Why does this matter? Whether you believe it or not, none of us knows everything. None of us has everything, and none of us can do everything. We all are imperfect, and we all need help from time to time. The Word of God teaches us that, "The way of a fool is right in his own eyes, but he who heeds counsel is wise." Why would anyone think that s/he is always right? Pride. "By pride comes nothing but strife." However, "... with the well-advised is wisdom."

Do you trust God? Do you trust the Bible? If so, then you should not trust yourself - not in all things. The Bible says that we do not know everything and that we all need to listen. Do you agree? If not, then there is no point in your reading any further - I cannot help you (only the Lord can). If you do agree, then ask yourself this: where do you go for advice? Who do you turn to with your problems? Who do you listen to? Are your advisors wise counselors? Are you willing to give heed to someone else's judgment before your own, even where you disagree?

In my own life, I recently sought advice from a church elder regarding how to handle a situation that I did not feel fully equipped to handle alone. The elder agreed to take over the situation, and my load was greatly decreased for seeking his advice. Other times in my life, I have chosen to follow my own judgment. Sometimes that was wise, and, at other times, it was just stubbornness.

At this stage in my life, however, I take comfort in knowing that I need to be intentionally considering whose judgment is wisest to follow, and the answer is not always mine. It really helps me to get through each day knowing that I am not trying to live my life by my wisdom alone. If you let it, that process will give you comfort. There is an expression that I am fond of: "no man is an island." I think that fits well here. All believers are connected together as the body of Christ. We are the Church - capital "C" - and we work best together. That is how we were made.

UPDATE: See the second article in this series here.

True religion in action.

As a followup to our post on what "true religion" is and why believers should be proud to call themselves "religious" (read it here), I'd like to point our readers to a minister who is practicing true religion. Take a look for yourself here.

Summed up, this minister put true religion into practice by selling his $50,000.00 Infiniti Coupe in order to save $600 a month. With those savings, he sponsors children through Compassion International. The idea is to live with less in order to give more.

So, what's the point? Do you need to sell your car and buy a clunker? That's not what I am preaching here, folks. However, I do support their idea: make reductions in your spending on material things and use it to ensure that the impoverished get to eat and sleep under a roof. James 1:27 teaches us that true religion is (1)being unstained by the world; and (2) aiding those in need. Isn't it interesting how those two things are related? It's easier to visit the needy when you've focused less on material gain.

So, you could buy that $50k car, or you could make do with one that costs $25k or even $15k. The $25-35k you save would do a lot for a ministry like Compassion. You don't have to sponsor a child - make a 1-time donation to the unsponsored children's fund. It doesn't obligate you to dfo more, and your money goes directly to support children who have no one to sponsor or support them.

If children aren't your conviction, then feel free to support Food For the Poor. Feeding the hungry is a powerful witness for the Christian faith.

Please, do not think that because you cannot give a lot that your donation won't mean a lot to organizations like these. If 100 people give a 1-time donation of $1, then these roganizations can use that $100 to provide food and shelter to many who don't have it. In many third-world economies, the US dollar still goes a long way. Ever dollar donated is a major victory for those in need. Please stop to consider their needa.

You do not need to be "convicted" to donate $1 or even $10. Do it because you know the Lord your God considers it to be true religion. Do it because you want to love as Jesus did: sacrificially. Do it because God considers it a loan that he will repay (Proverbs 19:17). Just don't do it to make yourself look pious or righteous in the eyes of others (Matthew 6:1-4).

Have a heart. There are many who are suffering in this world, and they need your help. Please, please, give to one of these organizations and practice the religion that you preach.

Update regarding our earlier post on sexual immorality.

I recently read a blog about the former Regent dean of students I referenced in our earlier post on sexual immorality. Cited below is a comment I made at that blog in response to the absolute hatred being slung at Christians by the commenters. The source of this hatred? Because one Christian, formerly a law professor and dean, has stumbled, the world believes that Christians are hypocrites. Please, if you read my response to the commenters below and have an opinion, feel free to express it in the comment section below.

"I think it is important to remind people that Christians (those who actually follow Christ's teachings) profess to be neither perfect nor without sin. In fact, to be saved, one must admit that he is a sinner in need of Christ's sacrifice to pay the penalty for that sin.

Every sin is an offense against God. Every single one, no matter how great or how small, and sitting in a jail cell does nothing to undo that offense in the eyes of the Lord. There is nothing a human being can do, on his or her own, to reconcile or "make amends" with God.

Stephen McPherson has admitted to sinning against God and to breaking the law of man as well. The jail time will pay his debt to society. Only Jesus could pay his debt to God.

Being Christian is not about being righteous or sinless. It is about admitting that you are a sinner struggling with temptation to do evil and accepting Christ's blood as the sacrificial price to cover each time you fail in that struggle.

Stephen McPherson is no hypocrite. By being a Christian he is a self-professed sinner. Though his sins may be reprehensible, they are not unforgivable. He was forgiven the moment he accepted Jesus.

I do not approve of what he had admitted to doing with those girls, but he will be punished, and it is not my place or your to judge him. Rather, we should forgive him because we know that we have also sinned, though perhaps in different ways. If you ever want to be forgiven, then you must first forgive. At least, that's the Biblical perspective."

Sexual immorality in the Church: should sinners be pastors or leaders?

Priests and pastors are accused of sexual immorality at an alarming and ever-increasing rate these days. I attended Regent University School of Law, a Christian institution, and one of its former dean of students has pleaded guilty to sex crimes. A newer minister at my church was recently dismissed after confessing to adultery.

So, what do we take away from this? From reading recent blog entries, it appears that the secular community views Christians as hypocrites because some Christians sin in the area of sexual immorality. How can this be when we know God is not fond of hypocrites (reference Matthew 23)?

I believe that every sin committed by a believer is evidence in support of the need for Jesus Christ. After all, why would believers need Christ's sacrificial grace if we didn't sin? We aren't hypocrites when we sin - we're just honest examples of Christians incapable of fulfilling the law on our own and in desperate need of God's mercy, which is new each day (Lamentations 3:22-23). So, when a man stumbles, even when he causes harm to a child, this is not an excuse to lose faith. Instead, it should renew our faith in God's message: that even the best man is fallen and needs the saving grace and mercy the Lord has provided through Jesus Christ.

So, do we punish evil? Certainly the laws of God and of men must be enforced, and justice must be done. However, does that excuse us to condemn/excommunicate/hate the sinners? I suggest that we show mercy to those who stumble if we expect to receive mercy ourselves. I believe there is a verse for that, but it escapes me at the moment.

It is when we believers attempt to cover up or hide the fact that we sin that we are truly being hypocritical. Instead, we need to accept that believers sin, and, when the secular world says: "See - the Christians sin too," we need to address that by saying, "you have better believe we sin, and we know it, but praise the Lord we have Jesus to save us from it!"

Lets not, as the Church, judge the sinners (unless we are also judges) or focus on appearing perfectly righteous (which we aren't). Rather, lets focus on admitting we all sin and struggle against it. Perhaps then non-believers, also sinners, will feel welcome in the church building, comforted by the knowledge that they are surrounded by other sinners looking for mercy, forgiveness, and especially grace - just ... like ... them.

So, lets be slow to judge, quick to forgive even the most controversial/taboo sins, and accepting of imperfect people. We all believe (supposedly) that even a murderer can repent and be saved, but how many would go so far as to invite them to church? What if the murderer came and felt called to preach? Can Jimmy Swaggart, who was caught with a prostitute, continue to preach?

Show me a perfect preacher. Show me a preacher without sin. My father is a pastor, and he would tell you that he is far from perfect, but he knows that the people he preaches to need to hear about his struggles/experiences overcoming temptation and sin. People don't need a "perfect" preacher any more than they need a Pharisee to stand behind the pulpit. They need honest, real ministers with real experiences who they can relate to, that have something relevant to say about their daily struggle to live a life accepting to the Lord, unstained by the world (James 1:27).

One of the most amazing messages I ever heard preached was from a former pornography addict named Gene McConnell who came close to raping a woman before the Holy Spirit convicted him to release her. He spoke at a Campus Crusade for Christ meeting I attended at WSU, and the power of his message gives real, genuine hope to the men and women afflicted by pornography and sexual crimes, made only more potent by his personal experiences and testimony. So, should a man with a weakness for sexual immorality be preaching to college students on that subject? You bet he should.

Just read the comments on this blog about his message at OSU here (not appropriate for children). Note that this blog may or may not be endorsed by Gene (I found it through Google). Some of the student comments are particularly alarming:

• "While I agree 100% with the basic message, I wasn't impressed with some of the content. Frankly, hearing about many of the disgusting things the speaker has done in his past was a bit more than I bargained for."
• "Everything and anything, if done to excess can be harmful. I enjoy viewing porn, just like I enjoy drinking alcohol and other such things. That does not mean I am addicted to either or that my behavior is harmful. People that go around the country preaching the evils of porn are just pathetic. "

It is scary that there are people actually defending porn after hearing Gene's message and that others, who are believers, are too fearful to face the truth. Gene is a man who loves the Lord and has checked his pride at the door to share his sinful past with those men and women suffering from the "Power of Porn." I know several men at WSU were released from bondage after Gene's seminar. I embraced one friend who cried for almost 15 minutes as we prayed with Gene. He was the last guy I would have expected to have a problem with porn: he could have had any woman he wanted, a Bible study leader, etc. Did I feel betrayed that he, a Christian, had sinned? Of course not. He was struggling, but he was also a true believer all the same. Condemning a man for sinning is the height of hypocrisy.

I agree most with this comment regarding Gene:

• "Powerful. transparent. A message to those who thing this is too much info: powerful battles require powerful messages, and this one delivers."

So, the next time you look down on a Christian, be it a priest, a pastor, or just a friend, for sinning in an area the Church finds to be taboo, consider this: what sins have you committed that the other believers would frown on if they knew of them? What if the tables were turned?

So, should sinners be allowed to preach/lead/teach? I sure hope so, or we are all going to be short a few pastors/leaders/teachers. Sinners like Gene have great testimonies, and Gene's message proves that there can be victory over sin for men, not just Christ. Sure, we all believe that Christ conquered sin on the cross, but he didn't do it just as an example. He conquered sin so that we might be free!

I charge you all: bring back the sinners you have cast out from your church buildings. Remember that the real Church is the body of Christ, composed of believers, who are all sinners. Casting out a man or woman for committing a sin, even a taboo/sexual sin, is hypocritical and a bit looney toons.

That's just my take, though. Listen to Gene's message and judge for yourselves whether you want sinners behind the pulpit and in the classroom.

God bless you all.

The View of Heaven from Earth

Thanks to John for the chance to post on his blog. This has been on my mind lately and I appreciate the chance to write some things down.

Our view of Heaven is an important aspect of our Christian life. As the Gospels of Matthew and Luke both say, "where your treasure is, there your heart will be also." Is Heaven our treasure?

I know until recently I hadn't given Heaven a huge amount of thought. Even now my thoughts go to the standard vision of puffy clouds and people in white robes with halos and harps. The sarcastic jibe "pie in the sky" is not so far from how I tend to think about Heaven.

The clouds-and-harps view may, for all I know, be close to literally accurate. However it's important to reflect on the idea of Heaven. Is it just a really nice place that we like so much we don't want to fight? I believe this had been my idea of Heaven for a long time: a place which has such lovely scenery and such nice music and activities that it will make us happy to reside there forever. War, pain and suffering would not exist there for the same reason that civil strife doesn't erupt on the beach in Hawaii.

However I've come to think of this as a very limited view of Heaven. How often have we ever been truly happen for very long? When has anything really made us happy for longer than a week or so? If a really fantastic resort is the best Heaven can offer, how long could it possibly be before we got bored?

The main impetus of my changed thinking on the subject has been the great 20th century Christian writer, C.S. Lewis. If you're thinking "The Narnia guy?" then you've got the right man. If you weren't aware he wrote a series of brilliant Christian books, you are now, and I recommend a visit to your local book store.

In The Problem of Pain, Lewis describes his view of Heaven like this:

There have been times when I think we do not desire heaven; but more often I find myself wondering whether, in our heart of hearts, we have ever desired anything else. You may have noticed that the books you really love are bound together by a secret thread. You know very well what is the common quality that makes you love them, though you cannot put it into words: but most of your friends do not see it at all, and often wonder why, liking this, you should also like that. Again, you have stood before some landscape, which seems to embody what you have been looking for all your life; and then turned to the friend at your side who appears to be seeing what you saw - but at the first words a gulf yawns between you, and you realize that this landscape means something totally different to him, that he is pursuing an alien vision and cares nothing for the ineffable suggestion by which you are transported. ... Are not all lifelong friendships born at the moment when at last you meet another human being who has some inkling (but faint and uncertain even in the best) of that something which you were born desiring, and which, beneath the flux of other desires and in all the momentary silences between the louder passions, night and day, year by year, from childhood to old age, you are looking for, watching for, listening for? You have never had it. All the things that have ever deeply possessed your soul have been but hints of it - tantalizing glimpses, promises never quite fulfilled, echoes that died away just as they caught your ear. But if it should really become manifest - if there ever came an echo that did not die away but swelled into the sound itself - you would know it. Beyond all possibility of doubt you would say 'Here at last is the thing I was made for.'

I find the idea of a "secret thread" connecting all the things we love to be very profound, and it rings true in me very deeply. I imagine a mosaic, in which every great beauty or love we've ever experienced is simply a tiny tile. We experience only the smallest glimpse of this mosaic at a time, and only in the most powerful of our experiences; yet if we were to see the whole we would know with certainty what it was.

This leads me to wonder, if humans are mere "moist robots" (as the atheist Scott Adams, of Dilbert fame, calls us) what need is there for this mosaic? Where does it come from? Why should we each have differing interests? Wouldn't society be easier to hold together if we all shared the same loves, if we could express ourselves fully and be understood fully? The Christian answer, as I see it, is this: We are each a unique expression of some infinitesimal part of God, unique and valued equally in the eyes of the Creator.

This mosaic, the perfection we yearn for, is not to be found on this Earth. What we desire is the fulfillment of our unique souls, to attain finally and fully the beauty and love we feel for these objects. And where do beauty, goodness, and love come from? They all find their ultimate expression in God, from whence they came. Thus to attain the beauty of the mosaic is for our uniquely shaped souls to be filled to the brim with the God who is the source of beauty.

I believe this answers a possible concern about Heaven -- what place or experience could constitute perfect happiness for everyone? Perhaps being with God uniquely satisfies each soul, in the way that is perfect for each. Lewis, in a different book, compares each soul to a lock which God fits into in a unique way. God represents an infinite set of keys, one for each soul.

I find this to be a truly amazing thought. Imagine the sense of awe you felt at the sight of an amazing vista, or the transcendental feeling you get from certain music -- if these are just glimpses through dirty glass at the source, how awesome must the source be!

Heaven, then, far from being a particularly nice resort, is instead the ultimate expression of the desires of each soul. This brings me to a few final questions that seem to be answered by this view of Heaven.

With the resort image in mind, I wondered why there would be no marriage or family in Heaven. Wouldn't you want to spend time in the perfect place with the people who you care about most? Now, though, I believe that there is no need for marriage or other sorts of special relationships because all the needs and desires which give rise to our most intimate relationships (the need for companionship, or to be special to another person) will find their complete and perfect fulfillment in God Himself.

I've also wondered how there can be people with no strife or pain between them. All acts of evil, however, come from some sort of need or desire -- the desire for money, or safety, or companionship, or even the desire for pleasure itself. If all our needs were truly fulfilled, then we would have nothing to fight about.

I certainly can't say for sure that this view of Heaven is the correct one; God grant me that if I'm wrong that I should find out. Still, I think it helps me to understand the ideas involved. A man lost in a cave who sees the tiniest spot of light is joyful for the light itself and the respite it provides from the darkness; but how much better to see the sun!

What is "dating" anyway?

Here is a deceptively simple-sounding question that many people get wrong: "What is dating?"

From dictionary.com:

"v. dat·ed, dat·ing, dates v. tr.
To mark or supply with a date: date a letter.
To determine the date of: date a fossil.
To betray the age of: Pictures of old cars date the book.
To go on a date or dates with" [emphasis supplied].

So, at a minimum, "dating" means to "go on a date or dates with" another. Wow - that is profound is it not? So, wait a minute - does that mean "dating" isn't the same thing as. say, a "relationship?" Well, relationships are another topic for another blog, but suffice it to say, people in relationships do go on dates, but it doesn't logically follow that everyone who goes on a date is automatically in a relationship.

You may ask, "What does a blog about 'Applied Truth & Interest' have to do with the proper definition of dating?" What wonderful question! Rather than redirecting you to my initial blog post, which covers the rather wide subject matter for this blog, which I call "ATI," suffice it to say that the Lord has truth for every subject, and it is my firm belief that the Church needs a strong does of truth on the subject of dating. To illustrate why, I am going to share a story with you, my plethora of readers...

My best friend is "single," but he periodically goes on dates with different women in hopes of, eventually, finding that one woman who will convince him to forever abandon bachelorhood. When he visits us from out of state, as he often does, my wife and I like to try to arrange a "date" for him with one or more Christian girls we know in the area. Why do we do this? First, because we are trying desperately to convince him to move to Georgia. Second, we do this because we believe that my friend is that rare sort of man who will actually make a good and Godly husband for his wife, when the time comes. We think our great female friends deserve a shot at an honest, hard-working, fashionable, and extremely intelligent friend, who we love like a blood brother. We also want to see our friends happy. After all, God himself saw that it is not good for man to be alone (Gen 2:18).

This sounds like a great idea, but here's the catch: modern Christian "religion" has come out very strongly against "dating." Illustration: on my friend's last visit (yes - I am intentionally avoiding the use of his name), my wife attempted to arrange a date with two different girls she knows. Both of these girls are, to the best of my knowledge, the real deal: single, avid lovers of Christ. One girl jumped at the opportunity (kudos to her). The other, however, said something very silly to my wife that I have been hearing more and more from other Christians in the past few years - Christians who are otherwise sensible, intelligent people.

The second girl, however, told my wife that, "I have never been on a date before, and I am very proud of that. I am waiting." Waiting for what? I don't know. I hope she is waiting for God to send the right man her way, which at least demonstrates that she has a rational grasp of what it is that she wants in life. Unfortunately, she has absolutely no idea of what she would do if God were to deliver that man to her doorstep tomorrow, because she has never been on a date...

Perhaps more to the point, this young woman was proud of her naivete. She was proud that she had no practical experience relating to men as potential suitors! If tomorrow God sent a genuinely great man to her doorstep, what would she do? Say this great man is truly the "one" that God has in store for her - what next? If they are destined to be married, I hate to disappoint, but odds are any decent guy is going to want to start small and go on a date before dashing to the altar and exchanging rings.

I credit a large part of the silliness surrounding dating to a very kind-hearted, well-intentioned man named Joshua Harris (check his entry out on Wikepdia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joshua_Harris). Please make no mistake, I am not attacking this dedicated man of God. However, his book, "How I Kissed Dating Goodbye," has sold over a million copies. His other book, "Boy Meets Girl," was also a hit (I myself was once given a copy of it by an ex-girlfriend shortly after breaking up with her). However, sometimes I think that all Christians ever read of Mr. Harris' book are the titles. Josh Harris never suggested that Christians avoid dating; rather, he wrote about a suggested, alternative approach, which he calls "courtship." I call it semantics, and I believe that "courting" is, essentially, "dating." What he did correctly was suggest that dating should be done from a Christian perspective, with goals and approaches that honor and glorify God.

Mr. Harris' mistake was in trusting people to read more than the front cover of a book. The title, "How I Kissed Dating Goodbye," when used by a Christian author, misleadingly implies that dating, in any form, is unbiblical or even sinful. Of course, a mere glance at Mr. Harris' quotes on the Wikipedia page for "How I Kissed Dating Goodbye"
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_Kissed_Dating_Goodbye) reveals that was not his intention. He was trying to help believers who have suffered the pains of secular dating find a Biblical alternative.

Here's the point: introducing the Bible to any situation is a positive approach. However, to suggest that there is a pain-free approach to dating is not Biblical. There is no such thing as a life with out pain or disappointment. There is a life of hope, however, that the Lord will NEVER leave you nor forsake you (see the latter half of Heb 13:5).

Jeremiah 32:17 proclaims, "O Sovereign Lord! You have made the heavens and earth by Your great power. Nothing is too hard for You!" How many of you believe that "nothing" includes guiding you safely through dating and relationships to marriage? How many are willing to believe that God will ease their suffering at rejection or disappointment?

Some of you aren't there yet, though. Like the girl from my story, you are "waiting." What are you waiting for? Are you waiting for God to do all the work for you? Maybe he will, but Ruth didn't bet on that. Read the 3rd chapter of the book of Ruth: when Ruth received a word of God-inspired counsel from Naomi, her mother-in-law from a deceased husband, Ruth seized it. Naomi saw that Ruth desired Boaz, so what was Naomi's advice? Check it out:

"Wash therefore and anoint yourself, and put on your cloak and go down to the threshing floor, but do not make yourself known to the man until he has finished eating and drinking. But when he lies down, observe the place where he lies. Then go and uncover his feet and lie down, and he will tell you what to do" (Ruth 3:3-4).

Ruth didn't just wait for God to do all the work for her. She accepted wise, Godly counsel, and trusted the Lord to walk with her as she followed through with Naomi's instructions. What happened? "At midnight the man was startled and turned over, and behold, a woman lay at his feet! He said, 'Who are you?' And she answered, 'I am Ruth, your servant'" (Ruth 3:8-9). Boaz told Ruth not to fear (3:11), and the next several passages reveal the story of their marriage and Ruth's redemption (another topic for another blog).

Naomi told Ruth to stop waiting and go to Boaz. She didn't tell Ruth to wait for God to deliver Boaz directly to the altar. Would God have just dropped Boaz in Ruth's lap had she not seized the moment and followed Naomi's advice?

I obviously don't know for certain what might have been, but I believe that God often uses means other than outright miracles to act. In this story, the Lord used Naomi, who encouraged Ruth to actively pursue Boaz (see Ruth 3:1-2). Obviously, this was well with the Lord, because from this union came Obed, then Jesse, and, then, David. That's right: without Ruth's willingness to approach a man, there would have been no David. Can you imagine the Bible without David the King, father of Solomon?

Lets not overstate the case, though. Every marriage does not result in the birth of a critical world leader, but I do believe that God has a plan for each of us. You will be hard-pressed to find many examples in the Bible of God acting without any participation from man. There are miracles, yes, but even with the parting of the Red Sea, God required some minimal participation from Moses in extending his staff (Exodus 14:16). Both Jonah and Elijah fled from tasks appointed them by the Lord, but the Lord would not act without them. Whatever else you might believe about God's plan, he has a role for us to play in it. Certainly, the Lord does not need our participation, but he obviously desires it.

So what does all this have to do with dating? "Dating," for purposes of the advice I am about to give, means "to go on dates," which simply means spending time with and getting to know someone of the opposite sex. Like Josh Harris, I encourage you to approach dating from a Biblical perspective and to put God's goals for dating, relationships, and marriage before your own, selfish desires.

Good advice on dating and relationships, for some reason, is a difficult thing for Christians to find. In my own dating experience, before getting married, I learned for myself that Christian advice on how to date (rather than how to avoid it), is in very short supply. My advice, and this comes from experience, is to always trust the Lord, and to always be bold like Ruth.

Granted, Ruth didn't have to look long for Boaz, but then she got really good advice didn't she? Naomi didn't play around - she told Ruth to go lay at a man's feet when he's in a good, rested mood. When I was single, that would have worked on me ;)

Get the best advice you can on dating. It may not be mine: talk to your pastor. Show him this blog entry, and ask him what he thinks. All I am advising with this post is this: don't stick your head in the mud and expect God to deliver the love of your life to your doorstep, hog-tied, and bearing an engagement ring. Instead, consider going on a date. Whether you are a man or a woman reading this, if you aren't willing to invite someone on a date, then at least be willing to say "yes" when asked. If you don't do the asking, then you'll obviously be limited to choosing from those who ask you.

Also consider that "dating" doesn't necessarily mean relationships or require any sexual immorality. It means meeting someone and getting to know him or her better, with the assumption that there is the potential (but not a guarantee) for something more later on. Sometimes the 1st date is the last one you will ever go on, but for most people it takes a little more than that. Consider, however, that you will ideally only marry one of the people you date, so don't go in expecting every date (or every relationship for that matter) to lead to marital bliss. That is setting yourself up for heartache and disappointment.

Instead, I encourage you to see dating as a chance to have some fun with someone while getting to know him/her better. Breathe easy, because you know upfront that the odds are against any given date being the one that leads to marriage, or even a relationship/commitment. Why would you expect that before you've even had a first date? There's a good chance you will be the one who doesn't want to go any further than date #1. Ergo, I am recommending that you remove the pressure by adjusting your expectations to a more realistic level.

If dating were gardening, then go on the date, have fun, and think of it as a seed planted. Don't plant just one seed, don't sit and obsess over the seed or wait on it to grow, and don't get mad at the seed if it never grows at all. All we can do is plant our seeds, water and feed them, then leave it to God to decide which seeds grow and how much. After we've done our part, we can rest easy knowing that the rest is in God's capable hands. Remember, this is the God that never leaves nor forsakes you.

I planted a few seeds in my time. I dated a lot, had a few relationships, and got engaged twice. I got married once. I believe now, looking back, that through those past dates, relationships, and through the one engagement that didn't result in marriage, God taught me things in each of those situations - things that he wanted me to learn before I could be a good husband to one of His daughters.

Don't be arrogant. We all need to learn things about relating to the opposite sex before we get married, some of us more than others. Dating is a tool. If you hit your thumb with a hammer, does it make sense to curse the hammer? Okay, so some of us have done that. Still, it makes no sense to condemn dating because we get hurt doing it. Ultimately, the pain has less to do with "dating" and more to do with the people involved.

And, if anyone reading this blog is a single Christian girl in need of a date, I have this great friend...



UPDATE (9/2009): an in-depth reply to the in-depth comment of Jessica below may be found here.