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.
Showing posts with label Christian. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Christian. Show all posts
Thursday, October 8, 2009
Sunday, October 4, 2009
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.
-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.
Wednesday, June 3, 2009
The self-righteous don't need a doctor...
What is the one greatest thing that I have going for me spiritually?
I know that I am a sinner. I confess that I have messed up each day of my life in some way and that, often, I am unaware of many more sins that I commit.
Like the allegation levied against the blind man by the Pharisees, I was steeped in sin from birth. Unlike the Pharisees, however, I admit it. I believe it, and I recognize that I need forgiveness. This confession is not a weakness but a strength. A sick man can get help only after admitting to himself that he needs to seek it.
"On hearing this, Jesus said, 'It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick'" (Matt 9:12, NIV) (emphasis supplied) .
The Pharisees could not understand why Jesus ate with tax-collectors and sinners because they were self-righteous, convinced in their mastery of the old law. They were so convinced of their own righteousness, attained through their own work and efforts, that they could not see the point in associating with anyone unlike themselves. They could not see the great commission because they were interested in ministering only to those like themselves.
The difference between the Pharisees and the sinners Jesus was eating with was that the sinners were not convinced of their own righteousness. For that reason alone, they could received treatment from the master physician.
How many reading this are proud or think that they know all the answers? How many are too quick to point a fingers at the faults of others rather than pointing a finger at their own sins? Will you point an accusing finger at yourself? If you cannot do that, then you are not prepared to receive all that Christ has to offer for your life.
Yes, we all mistakes. Yes, we all sin. The sooner we all accept this, the sooner Jesus can get to work performing his soul-saving medicine.
None of us are righteous by our own efforts. Only by the blood of Jesus are we made righteous.
"...not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which comes through faith in Christ, the righteousness from God that depends on faith" (Phil 3:9, ESV).
I know that I am a sinner. I confess that I have messed up each day of my life in some way and that, often, I am unaware of many more sins that I commit.
Like the allegation levied against the blind man by the Pharisees, I was steeped in sin from birth. Unlike the Pharisees, however, I admit it. I believe it, and I recognize that I need forgiveness. This confession is not a weakness but a strength. A sick man can get help only after admitting to himself that he needs to seek it.
"On hearing this, Jesus said, 'It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick'" (Matt 9:12, NIV) (emphasis supplied) .
The Pharisees could not understand why Jesus ate with tax-collectors and sinners because they were self-righteous, convinced in their mastery of the old law. They were so convinced of their own righteousness, attained through their own work and efforts, that they could not see the point in associating with anyone unlike themselves. They could not see the great commission because they were interested in ministering only to those like themselves.
The difference between the Pharisees and the sinners Jesus was eating with was that the sinners were not convinced of their own righteousness. For that reason alone, they could received treatment from the master physician.
How many reading this are proud or think that they know all the answers? How many are too quick to point a fingers at the faults of others rather than pointing a finger at their own sins? Will you point an accusing finger at yourself? If you cannot do that, then you are not prepared to receive all that Christ has to offer for your life.
Yes, we all mistakes. Yes, we all sin. The sooner we all accept this, the sooner Jesus can get to work performing his soul-saving medicine.
None of us are righteous by our own efforts. Only by the blood of Jesus are we made righteous.
"...not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which comes through faith in Christ, the righteousness from God that depends on faith" (Phil 3:9, ESV).
Thursday, April 16, 2009
NEWS: Barack Obama tries to silence God.
Check the news story out for yourself here.
" Georgetown University says it covered over the monogram 'IHS' --symbolizing the name of Jesus Christ—because it was inscribed on a pediment on the stage where President Obama spoke at the university on Tuesday and the White House had asked Georgetown to cover up all signs and symbols there. As of Wednesday afternoon, the “IHS” monogram that had previously adorned the stage at Georgetown’s Gaston Hall was still covered up--when the pediment where it had appeared was photographed by CNSNews.com."
So.... Barack Hussein Obama, President of the United States, asked Georgetown to cover up the name of God? He professes to be a Christian, so why would he do this?
Many good Christians voted for President Obama. Some did so because they believed, legitimately, that a black president was long overdue. Others voted for Mr. Obama because they believed his economic policies would end economic turmoil. Both were legitimate reasons to vote for a political leader. Also, this junior senator claimed to be a Christian.
Setting aside, for the moment, the issue of whether BHO truly qualifies as black and can, therefore, truly be our nation's first black president, setting aside the issue of whether BHO is even a true US citizen, and also setting aside whether the junior senator was qualified to accept the nation's most important office, what of his last promise? The one in which he claimed to believe in an all-powerful God that created all that exists?
How can a man, who claims to believe in God, be so bold as to actively conceal God from others? Why would a believer not want to be associated with God during a speech given at a university? Would his speech at Georgetown not provide a wonderful opportunity to affirm his association with Jesus Christ? Why did he feel this small reference to God was a threat to him? Even if he were an atheist, why would the mention of a deity he doesn't believe in be a threat?
As a believer, I fear angering God. I fear angering my Lord, because I know God is supreme and perfect. I am thankful that God is merciful, because I fear God's wrath. His power is unchallenged, both in this world and beyond. I cannot believe that anyone who really believes in God would seek to cover up God's name in a building. A true believer fears God, and this sort of active rebellion against the name of God should have been prevented by BHO's fear of the Lord.
President Obama does not fear God. He does not want to be affiliated with God. It is time that believers stopped and asked themselves, why is this? It is no secret that I am no fan of BHO's policies and political platform. However, I never dreamed he would make so public a contradiction of his own stated faith.
If our president does not believe in or fear God, then why has he lied about it? If he lied about this, then what else has he lied about? And, how many of you believers will excuse this lie as though it doesn't matter?
" Georgetown University says it covered over the monogram 'IHS' --symbolizing the name of Jesus Christ—because it was inscribed on a pediment on the stage where President Obama spoke at the university on Tuesday and the White House had asked Georgetown to cover up all signs and symbols there. As of Wednesday afternoon, the “IHS” monogram that had previously adorned the stage at Georgetown’s Gaston Hall was still covered up--when the pediment where it had appeared was photographed by CNSNews.com."
So.... Barack Hussein Obama, President of the United States, asked Georgetown to cover up the name of God? He professes to be a Christian, so why would he do this?
Many good Christians voted for President Obama. Some did so because they believed, legitimately, that a black president was long overdue. Others voted for Mr. Obama because they believed his economic policies would end economic turmoil. Both were legitimate reasons to vote for a political leader. Also, this junior senator claimed to be a Christian.
Setting aside, for the moment, the issue of whether BHO truly qualifies as black and can, therefore, truly be our nation's first black president, setting aside the issue of whether BHO is even a true US citizen, and also setting aside whether the junior senator was qualified to accept the nation's most important office, what of his last promise? The one in which he claimed to believe in an all-powerful God that created all that exists?
How can a man, who claims to believe in God, be so bold as to actively conceal God from others? Why would a believer not want to be associated with God during a speech given at a university? Would his speech at Georgetown not provide a wonderful opportunity to affirm his association with Jesus Christ? Why did he feel this small reference to God was a threat to him? Even if he were an atheist, why would the mention of a deity he doesn't believe in be a threat?
As a believer, I fear angering God. I fear angering my Lord, because I know God is supreme and perfect. I am thankful that God is merciful, because I fear God's wrath. His power is unchallenged, both in this world and beyond. I cannot believe that anyone who really believes in God would seek to cover up God's name in a building. A true believer fears God, and this sort of active rebellion against the name of God should have been prevented by BHO's fear of the Lord.
President Obama does not fear God. He does not want to be affiliated with God. It is time that believers stopped and asked themselves, why is this? It is no secret that I am no fan of BHO's policies and political platform. However, I never dreamed he would make so public a contradiction of his own stated faith.
If our president does not believe in or fear God, then why has he lied about it? If he lied about this, then what else has he lied about? And, how many of you believers will excuse this lie as though it doesn't matter?
Sunday, April 5, 2009
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.
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
Free Legal Tip No.2: what type of help do I need?
Do you need legal advice? Do you need counseling? Do you need pastoral care? Do you need a mediator/arbitrator? Do you need a financial or tax advisor? This post is about how to determine what type of professional services you may need.
We all hope that we will never need "professional help." Most of us, however, will need professional help at some point in our life. Since professional services rarely come free, most of us would prefer to pay for only those professional services we actually need, but how do we really find out what those are?
First, it would be wise to start by identifying and examining your needs/desires. If you are starting a business, then you probably do not need emotional or trauma counseling (unless you are really stressed out by the prospect of starting a new business), but you will likely need legal, business, and/or financial advice/services. On the other hand, if you are a soldier returning home with post-traumatic stress disorder, then trauma counseling may be just what you need most.
Second, it would be wise to research who offers professional services/counseling that addresses the needs/desires that you have identified. If you are suffering from a heart attack, then an attorney will rarely help with your physical symptoms. If, however, your heart attack began when your vehicle was struck by a drunk driver, then an attorney may be able to help you obtain funds to cover your medical expenses and vehicle damage from either the drunk driver, his insurance company, or from your own insurance company (under an uninsured/under-insured motorist claim, for instance).
Third, it's always a good idea to decide which professionals to see in what order. In our heart attack example, it's probably a good idea to see a heart doctor at the hospital to address your medical needs and stabilize your condition before you go see an attorney about getting money to
pay your medical bills.
This may all seem obvious, but we have used clear-cut examples. Sometimes the line between the services offered by professionals is blurry. For instance, what if your spouse served you with divorce papers because he mistakenly believed you cheated on him? Believers might seek pastoral counseling to decide what God's Word encourages them to do. Marriage counselors also may try to help married couples deal with the emotional and psychological situation, and attorneys (legal counselors) may try to help the couple negotiate the terms of their reconciliation or separation. Anytime a couple reconciles, separates, or divorce, there are legal issues involving their material possession, wealth, and how to share or divide them (depending on whether they are reconciling or separating). Mediators are also useful to facilitate agreements between the couple, and financial/tax advisors can help deal with economic considerations.
Does every married couple need the services offered by all those professionals? The answer is that, while it is not necessarily true that they will need all the aforementioned services, it is possible that they will need some or all of them. How does our married couple know which professionals they need to consult about their issues? Remember our 3 steps above, and give careful consideration to them: (1) identify and examine the issues/problems; (2) research what professionals offer relevant services; and (3) decide who to see in what order.
A few tips on the first step:
We all hope that we will never need "professional help." Most of us, however, will need professional help at some point in our life. Since professional services rarely come free, most of us would prefer to pay for only those professional services we actually need, but how do we really find out what those are?
First, it would be wise to start by identifying and examining your needs/desires. If you are starting a business, then you probably do not need emotional or trauma counseling (unless you are really stressed out by the prospect of starting a new business), but you will likely need legal, business, and/or financial advice/services. On the other hand, if you are a soldier returning home with post-traumatic stress disorder, then trauma counseling may be just what you need most.
Second, it would be wise to research who offers professional services/counseling that addresses the needs/desires that you have identified. If you are suffering from a heart attack, then an attorney will rarely help with your physical symptoms. If, however, your heart attack began when your vehicle was struck by a drunk driver, then an attorney may be able to help you obtain funds to cover your medical expenses and vehicle damage from either the drunk driver, his insurance company, or from your own insurance company (under an uninsured/under-insured motorist claim, for instance).
Third, it's always a good idea to decide which professionals to see in what order. In our heart attack example, it's probably a good idea to see a heart doctor at the hospital to address your medical needs and stabilize your condition before you go see an attorney about getting money to
pay your medical bills.
This may all seem obvious, but we have used clear-cut examples. Sometimes the line between the services offered by professionals is blurry. For instance, what if your spouse served you with divorce papers because he mistakenly believed you cheated on him? Believers might seek pastoral counseling to decide what God's Word encourages them to do. Marriage counselors also may try to help married couples deal with the emotional and psychological situation, and attorneys (legal counselors) may try to help the couple negotiate the terms of their reconciliation or separation. Anytime a couple reconciles, separates, or divorce, there are legal issues involving their material possession, wealth, and how to share or divide them (depending on whether they are reconciling or separating). Mediators are also useful to facilitate agreements between the couple, and financial/tax advisors can help deal with economic considerations.
Does every married couple need the services offered by all those professionals? The answer is that, while it is not necessarily true that they will need all the aforementioned services, it is possible that they will need some or all of them. How does our married couple know which professionals they need to consult about their issues? Remember our 3 steps above, and give careful consideration to them: (1) identify and examine the issues/problems; (2) research what professionals offer relevant services; and (3) decide who to see in what order.
A few tips on the first step:
- Be thorough in identifying the issues (sometimes it is human nature to ignore painful issues);
- Examine them carefully to see whether they are physical/medical issues, emotional issues, psychological issues, spiritual issues, financial issues, business issues, and/or legal issues;
- Be certain not to try and limit issues to being just one type of issue when it might fall under several categories; and
- Prioritize the issues by importance.
Once the first step is complete, keep the following in mind when handling step no. 2:
- Research does not have to be complicated - check first with people you trust that may be able to refer a professional s/he used in the past that provides the services you need;
- The Internet can be a valuable resource, but it should not be the end of your search - try to talk to the professionals you find in person or at least on the phone before retaining their services;
- Your insurer/employer can often provide referrals, especially to professionals covered by any insurance policies/employment benefits;
- Don't forget to research professionals for each type of service you may need;
- Research price upfront;
- Ask questions of any professional you hire;
- Be wary of professionals recommending other professionals (i.e. are they paid for their referrals by the recommended professional?);
- Get second or even third opinions/estimates;
- Get your agreement with the professional in writing; and
- Seek wise counsel.
Regarding step no. 3:
- Make certain you are in a healthy physical/spiritual position first;
- Prioritize your goals - sometimes certain things (especially in the legal and financial/business realms) have to be done within a certain time-frame or you lose/waive some right or thing, while other things that may seem most important to us can be handled just as well after seeing to things that involve time constraints;
- Keep an eye on the cost of services you receive (it rarely helps to get half of the services you need because you failed to budget for or negotiate services that you can actually afford or finance);
- While counseling for your mental and emotional health is great, do not let your legal rights go unprotected or otherwise expire while seeing a mental health professionals (otherwise you are just going to add more stress to your already impaired mental condition - remember that your psychologist does not necessarily understand that your legal rights may be waived by inaction or delay);
- Try, if you can, to think ahead and plan for the long term.
Example1: If you are chemically dependant on drugs, you may not want to get into trouble with the authorities, but you need to seek medical help first. Legal advice does little to help dead people (even estate planning must be completed, typically, while you are still alive). However, if the doctor says your condition is stable, you might want to delay checking into that rehab clinic for substance abuse counseling until you have spoken with an attorney (you might want to know, for instance, whether entering rehab will constitute a confession of illegal drug use that can subject you to criminal penalties or cost you your job). Also, talking to a financial advisor might be a good way to find out if financing that rehab clinic will put you into bankruptcy. There may be more cost-effective alternatives to that clinic in Beverly Hills you heard about on Entertainment Tonight. Also, will your treatment expenses be deductible on your next tax return?
Example 2: If you have kids, one of whom is disabled, and you are not in good health, then you probably need to consider estate and tax planning (I don't advise anyone to wait until their health is bad to do estate planning). First, you need to be alive long enough to do the planning, so check with your physician first. Second, your condition (and also the disability of your child) is a red flag that you might need to do some medicaid planning (tricky stuff). Attorney offer estate and medicaid planning advice/services. Some estate planning attorneys will do your gift/estate tax and other tax planning themselves, especially if it is a smaller estates. Other times, the attorney may need to consult a tax professional or accountant when planning your estate. However, accountants and tax professionals cannot do your estate plan alone, so it's best to go to the attorney first. If the attorney will need to consult with another professional, then you may want to inquire about the costs involved. Perhaps you can negotiate the fees or even recommend a more cost-effective provider. Finally, you may need to consult with a mental/emotional care provider (i.e. counselor, therapist) to deal with the stresses and anxiety of planning your estate (some people are really disturbed by the process of planning for death). Your church elders/pastors, if wise and faithful, can likely help you in different ways at every step of this process (by recommending professionals, by praying with you, and by helping you weigh the options).
***Disclaimer: I am an attorney, but I am not YOUR attorney, meaning that the advice in this blog post is general advice for the masses and not tailored to anyone's specific needs/concerns/issues. I advise anyone with a legal question or a conflict to speak with an attorney and give that attorney the benefit of all the facts. Obviously, the best legal advice will come from a skilled and trustworthy attorney fully acquainted with the situation you are facing rather than someone offering legal tips on a blog.
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
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.
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.
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
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.
"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.
Thursday, January 29, 2009
Sinners as Leaders: Follow-Up
I had some thoughts on John's post from the other day that I thought I'd write down.
The reaction of society at large to Christian leaders' sins when they're revealed publicly is often to think that, if every Christian is not better than every non-Christian, then Christianity must not be true. An agnostic coworker of mine saw this as a major reason not to believe in Christianity: its adherents claim to be in communication with an all-powerful, perfectly good God, but most of them don't seem particularly better or worse than others around them. If it makes no difference in their lives, if it doesn't make them remarkably different than everyone else, then what good is it? How can it be so powerful if its effects are so invisible?
This is a subtle logical fallacy that I would address with an analogy. Let's say James and Rick are both in the same field. James goes to college for a degree in the field, and Rick does not. Rick, without a degree, is more knowledgeable about the field than James is with his degree. Therefore, college is not valuable: people who did not go are still smarter than people who did go.
The false implication here is that in order for college to be acknowledged as valuable, every college graduate must be smarter than every person who did not go to college. This is an improbable condition to meet: Rick could be a genius, and no amount of education would elevate James over him. In this light we can see that this is not a necessary condition for college to be valuable. In what way is college valuable, then, if James is not smarter than Rick at the end of it?
The answer is this: college's value is not about making James smarter than Rick. Its value is solely in improving James. Its value can only be measured in terms of how much smarter the college experience made James than he himself was beforehand. Rick's intelligence is irrelevant and distracts us from what's truly being measured.
Christianity works the same way. Jesus doesn't promise to make you objectively better than the best non-Christian: if you let Him, He promises to make you better than you are. Thus, Christianity can have tremendous value without meeting our arbitrary standard of making every Christian better (in some objective sense) than every non-Christian. It would certainly be a momentous change for a murderer to be brought to the point where he is as good a man as his neighbors!
Returning to John's post, I have perhaps more reservations than John about those who have sinned publicly continuing to lead. I want very much to forgive them their sins; if we as Christians can't forgive each other then we don't really know our faith. I agree wholeheartedly with that sentiment. Nor is it easy to show forgiveness while revoking a leader's position; fair or not, necessary or not, it will feel like a punishment to the individual and may make him feel that his church does not truly forgive him. For instance, it feels very cruel to remove a pastor from his position because he's getting divorced. It feels like kicking him when he's down, wounding him when he needs support the most.
However, there are some kinds of sin which to me would seem to preclude the possibility of effective leadership. It's important to consider the circumstances. There are a few situations which could be outside the pastor's control -- his wife has decided to leave regardless of whether he grants a divorce, or she has committed adultery. On the other hand, what of the ever popular "irreconcilable differences"? What if he simply feels that "it isn't working anymore" and that both parties should move on, as is common in society at large?
I don't cite this example to indicate that those who divorce are the worst of sinners, or any such thing. "The wages of sin is death," big or small, public or private. However, some sins lead us into a place where everything we do is sinful; where simply leaving things as they are for another day takes us farther from God; where we cannot draw close to Him. We cannot be washed clean when we're standing in the mud.
If a man divorces his wife without Biblical cause, every step he takes which is not a step towards reconciliation with her in recognition of his sin is a step away from God. There can be no neutrality: everything he does, he does instead of doing what's right. In this state, how can he lead God's church?
We must forgive those who repent; our God commands it, and He knows I've needed that forgiveness many times and will again. I simply think it's important to recognize a man who has fully turned away from his sin and has turned back toward the light from one who has simply walked away from the sin. Leadership of God's church is too important not to consider it.
The reaction of society at large to Christian leaders' sins when they're revealed publicly is often to think that, if every Christian is not better than every non-Christian, then Christianity must not be true. An agnostic coworker of mine saw this as a major reason not to believe in Christianity: its adherents claim to be in communication with an all-powerful, perfectly good God, but most of them don't seem particularly better or worse than others around them. If it makes no difference in their lives, if it doesn't make them remarkably different than everyone else, then what good is it? How can it be so powerful if its effects are so invisible?
This is a subtle logical fallacy that I would address with an analogy. Let's say James and Rick are both in the same field. James goes to college for a degree in the field, and Rick does not. Rick, without a degree, is more knowledgeable about the field than James is with his degree. Therefore, college is not valuable: people who did not go are still smarter than people who did go.
The false implication here is that in order for college to be acknowledged as valuable, every college graduate must be smarter than every person who did not go to college. This is an improbable condition to meet: Rick could be a genius, and no amount of education would elevate James over him. In this light we can see that this is not a necessary condition for college to be valuable. In what way is college valuable, then, if James is not smarter than Rick at the end of it?
The answer is this: college's value is not about making James smarter than Rick. Its value is solely in improving James. Its value can only be measured in terms of how much smarter the college experience made James than he himself was beforehand. Rick's intelligence is irrelevant and distracts us from what's truly being measured.
Christianity works the same way. Jesus doesn't promise to make you objectively better than the best non-Christian: if you let Him, He promises to make you better than you are. Thus, Christianity can have tremendous value without meeting our arbitrary standard of making every Christian better (in some objective sense) than every non-Christian. It would certainly be a momentous change for a murderer to be brought to the point where he is as good a man as his neighbors!
Returning to John's post, I have perhaps more reservations than John about those who have sinned publicly continuing to lead. I want very much to forgive them their sins; if we as Christians can't forgive each other then we don't really know our faith. I agree wholeheartedly with that sentiment. Nor is it easy to show forgiveness while revoking a leader's position; fair or not, necessary or not, it will feel like a punishment to the individual and may make him feel that his church does not truly forgive him. For instance, it feels very cruel to remove a pastor from his position because he's getting divorced. It feels like kicking him when he's down, wounding him when he needs support the most.
However, there are some kinds of sin which to me would seem to preclude the possibility of effective leadership. It's important to consider the circumstances. There are a few situations which could be outside the pastor's control -- his wife has decided to leave regardless of whether he grants a divorce, or she has committed adultery. On the other hand, what of the ever popular "irreconcilable differences"? What if he simply feels that "it isn't working anymore" and that both parties should move on, as is common in society at large?
I don't cite this example to indicate that those who divorce are the worst of sinners, or any such thing. "The wages of sin is death," big or small, public or private. However, some sins lead us into a place where everything we do is sinful; where simply leaving things as they are for another day takes us farther from God; where we cannot draw close to Him. We cannot be washed clean when we're standing in the mud.
If a man divorces his wife without Biblical cause, every step he takes which is not a step towards reconciliation with her in recognition of his sin is a step away from God. There can be no neutrality: everything he does, he does instead of doing what's right. In this state, how can he lead God's church?
We must forgive those who repent; our God commands it, and He knows I've needed that forgiveness many times and will again. I simply think it's important to recognize a man who has fully turned away from his sin and has turned back toward the light from one who has simply walked away from the sin. Leadership of God's church is too important not to consider it.
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.
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.
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
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:
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.
Monday, January 26, 2009
NEWS: Obama v. Rush...
See President Obama's attack on Rush Limbaugh here. See Limbaugh's response here.
Apparently the new administration feels that Rush Limbaugh is a threat: "You can't just listen to Rush Limbaugh and get things done," Obama told top GOP leaders at the White House. Of course, the truth is that Republicans can't listen to Rush if they want to get Obama's agenda accomplished, but should that be there goal?
Minority parties have but one power in our country: to represent an opposing viewpoint and to force a deadlock on actions that strike a partisan tone. BHO's agenda, as our earlier posts elaborate, is a completely partisan one. He seeks special treatment for homosexuals, increased hate crime legislation, and the expansion of US taxpayer-funded abortions both at home and abroad. Why would any sound-minded Republican want to "get things done" when the things Obama wants to accomplish are so far from the GOP platform? If the GOP stopped listening to Rush and signed on with President Obama, then we would effectively have 1 party in this country rather than 2.
Most people I meet in my daily life would prefer that, if we change our political system, to have multiple, viable political parties - not fewer. Effectively, Obama is asking Republicans to admit defeat, tuck their tales, and join the victors. Well, certainly the DNP has won the battle for America this term, but there will be other elections, and the war is hardly over. I don't care what your party affiliations are: no man can honestly love the Lord and hate the unborn child. This isn't just an economic debate we are having. By prioritizing our pocket books, even with good cause, America has sold its soul for "economic stimulus." That has never been more apparent to me than when I read Obama's agenda at http://www.whitehouse.gov/. Unfortunately, what America will see is a taxation on employers that drives up the unemployment rate and increased government spending that will give away our future as a nation, weaken us, and leave us broken.
It is no wonder President Obama is condemning Rush. I don't love the big guy. He's rude and crass at times, but then, he is speaking the truths Obama does not want you to hear. Read his response to Obama's attack, and you will have the opportunity to see what this administration does not want you to know.
Apparently the new administration feels that Rush Limbaugh is a threat: "You can't just listen to Rush Limbaugh and get things done," Obama told top GOP leaders at the White House. Of course, the truth is that Republicans can't listen to Rush if they want to get Obama's agenda accomplished, but should that be there goal?
Minority parties have but one power in our country: to represent an opposing viewpoint and to force a deadlock on actions that strike a partisan tone. BHO's agenda, as our earlier posts elaborate, is a completely partisan one. He seeks special treatment for homosexuals, increased hate crime legislation, and the expansion of US taxpayer-funded abortions both at home and abroad. Why would any sound-minded Republican want to "get things done" when the things Obama wants to accomplish are so far from the GOP platform? If the GOP stopped listening to Rush and signed on with President Obama, then we would effectively have 1 party in this country rather than 2.
Most people I meet in my daily life would prefer that, if we change our political system, to have multiple, viable political parties - not fewer. Effectively, Obama is asking Republicans to admit defeat, tuck their tales, and join the victors. Well, certainly the DNP has won the battle for America this term, but there will be other elections, and the war is hardly over. I don't care what your party affiliations are: no man can honestly love the Lord and hate the unborn child. This isn't just an economic debate we are having. By prioritizing our pocket books, even with good cause, America has sold its soul for "economic stimulus." That has never been more apparent to me than when I read Obama's agenda at http://www.whitehouse.gov/. Unfortunately, what America will see is a taxation on employers that drives up the unemployment rate and increased government spending that will give away our future as a nation, weaken us, and leave us broken.
It is no wonder President Obama is condemning Rush. I don't love the big guy. He's rude and crass at times, but then, he is speaking the truths Obama does not want you to hear. Read his response to Obama's attack, and you will have the opportunity to see what this administration does not want you to know.
Monday, January 12, 2009
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:
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!
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!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)