Wednesday, December 2, 2015

Am I A Foot Coach?

 
 
 

I am in John 13 in case you did not figure that out. The second of Peter's replies to Jesus' attempt to wash his feet was "Never shall you wash my feet!." Impulsive Peter! He so often speaks without thinking, without realizing what he is saying (sounds like a possible presidential candidate to me). What he says sound noble. He recognized from day one that the sinful was in the presence of holiness. (Luke 5:8)  Here he recognizes greatness touching leastness. He knew who Jesus was. He had confessed that He was the Christ, the Son of the Living God. (Matthew 16) But somehow Peter thought it was up to him to manage the relationship. How could someone know who Jesus is, i.e. Lord, and think that Jesus needs to be managed? That somehow Jesus is going to do something inappropriate? Peter is treating Jesus like a very good man who in his naivete just did things that did not match who He was. Jesus did not need a handler, a manager or a PR person. He was more than capable of running His own life. And Peter-sinful man he was actually thought that he was capable of guiding and coaching Jesus. Peter thought this foot-washing thing was a dumb idea. Bless Peter's heart! He wanted Jesus to look good and this, he thought, was beneath Jesus' dignity and station. So Peter's going to stop this charade and get Jesus off His knees and back at the head of the table where He belongs. Notice that Peter does not say "let me do that Jesus-give me the towel-I'll finish the job." Was it Peter's humility that got in the way or his pride? Was he too humble to let Jesus wash his dirty feet or was he too proud to let Jesus wash his dirty feet? Literally Peter said, "By no means shalt thou wash unto me the feet unto the age." This was emphatic-never means never-but does it, or only never as long as Peter held on to the idea that he knew better than Jesus. This is a fundamental flaw that will pop up again in Peter's life. (Acts 10-11) Later Peter will use "never"-"I have never eaten anything unclean" implying "and I never will." He ate those words too.
 
This one single thought correction could save us so much struggle: Jesus knows what He is doing even when He is doing it to us. If we just stop talking and start receiving we surely will have a freer life.

Thursday, August 27, 2015

The Stream of Political Correctness

Image result for white hats black hatsThere is no hotter topic today than political correctness. It is a stream that is polluting the river of this nation. It is characterized by judgment (btw ironically another stream that pollutes our river is judging those who judge). The way it goes is that someone says something, uses a term, that is perceived to be offensive by someone else. The flag is thrown, the foul is described, and the penalty is set. However, once a person has failed the political correctness test, they are forever branded as a racist, or as insensitive, or as a bigot, or as incorrigible. In this political correctness game rules are being made up as the game is being played, and people are chastised for not knowing the rules. Snap judgments are made against the offender. A jury is convened in social media or in the news, a sentence is imposed, and off to political correctness jail. There is no possibility of parole because everyone knows that politically incorrect people cannot be rehabilitated. Think about what is happening here.

There is a sorting out process going on. There are now victims and offenders. You are one or the other. You either wear a white hat or a black hat (though I suspect by using this metaphor I have just committed some unpardonable politically incorrect violation. I suspect all hats have to be grey these days.) When things are sorted out, then division occurs. There are the good guys and the bad guys. This leads to polarization and strife. Labels are slapped on folks and good luck trying to peel them off.

Of course there are offensive things which most of us can agree should not be said or done. But, the landscape of political correctness is becoming increasingly complex. How does one break the code and figure out when they are in danger in stepping in something that is going to stink up their life?  This is made so much more difficult when the rules don't apply to everyone. One person can say a word and it is culturally acceptable. Another uses the same word and they are dragged out of the city and stoned. Another complication is there seems to be pretty awful things happening that I would think any human would conclude was detestable, but I am told by many that I am overreacting and that it is really ok. (E.g. Planned Parenthood killing babies and selling off their body parts for profit.) I am told that I shouldn't be offended by sexual misconduct because it is none of my business, but when millions are outed by someone hacking into a popular cheating website suddenly folks are committing suicide, getting divorces, and losing their jobs. Excuse me but is it ok for someone to do whatever they want with whomever they want whenever they want? I am confused. Is an affair politically correct or not?

It seems to me that we have a whole bunch of folks playing a politically correctness game who are totally unqualified to play. Controlling the thoughts of others is a pretty serious game. Some would call this cultist. Creating and managing a culture of fear is a high stakes game. Social pressure to conform to a norm created by people whose moral and spiritual compass seems woefully off is dangerous. It might sound a little too simplistic, but I will venture into the world of political incorrectness by suggesting that those who know the Creator of the Universe, have actually read and studied His word, and who have been transformed by His Son to become new creatures just might have a little better view of how flawed we all are, how much we need someone higher than ourselves to be doing the correcting, and to be sorting out who really are the good guys and bad guys, hats and all.

Friday, August 14, 2015

Streams of Thought

Did you see the orange water in the mine spill in Colorado as it colors the pristine waters of the west? It is sickening. You wonder what it is doing to the wildlife which depends on these rivers for life. It makes you wonder how people along those rivers and streams will be affected in the days to come. Will their drinking water be contaminated? Will they have respiratory problems? Is this just a temporary problem or will it have long term effects? Will there be more birth defects in the future? So many questions flood into our minds.
But what about the streams of thought that course through our land? What if we could visibly see these streams turn orange at the first sign of toxic thinking? Would we be shocked at what we see? Would we be afraid that our mental environment may be changed forever, and that the effects on our existence might be irreversible? What level of alarm would we experience? Can we agree on some things here?
1) Thoughts matter. Do they? Does it really matter what we think? Is one thought as good as another thought? Are all thoughts equally true? And do thoughts make any difference? Do the collective thoughts of a society affect the course of that society? Can we agree that thoughts do matter?
2) Thoughts have consequences. Do they? Does thought precede action? Do we think it before we do it? I know some say I did it before I thought, but is that really true? Perhaps we do things before we think it through, but can we do anything without first thinking it? Are the consequences of differing thought equally healthy, functional, and reasonable? Should we judge the validity of a thought by its outcome?
3) Thoughts are contagious. My thoughts can infect your thoughts. I can persuade you to think what I think. A thought can become a part of societal thinking, something commonly accepted. Thoughts rarely remain isolated. They are shared and often accepted, and believed. These thoughts become values, and these values change society.
 
In the days to come, I plan to share some thoughts with you about common thoughts we hear expressed today. I want to shine the light on these thoughts, inspect them, challenge them, and see if they are worthy of our great nation, and more importantly worthy of our Lord Jesus Christ. Those who will not allow their thoughts to be challenged are in grave danger of being close-minded, biased, and inbred with untested thinking. I will make my case clear. I believe the greatest mind is the mind of Christ. His thoughts above all thoughts are worthy to be a standard by which we judge all things. In fact, I believe all our thoughts will be one day judged by the standard of His thoughts. I hope you will take this journey with me, and share this with others. Come let us reason together!

Friday, February 13, 2015

What is possible?

Reflections on Matthew 21:21-22. (From my journal entry of 2/13/15).  The proof of what is possible is in the pudding. The fig tree withered at Jesus' word. So is God's power rooted in His ability to speak without doubt? Don't we do that in the earthly realm? We speak and act in dozens of ways daily with the expectation that what we say will come to pass because we understand the mechanism and since we do understand, we do not doubt. "Clicking" is a relatively new term. So when I click my mouse, which I have done several times this morning, and tell what I click on to do something, I don't doubt it will happen. I just clicked on a picture of an album of songs and the songs started playing. I had no doubt they would. But in this case, even though I did not doubt it, the "click" wouldn't know anything about it if I were skeptical, and wouldn't care. Why? Because it is mechanical. That was the way it was engineered.
 
But withering a fig tree is not, in this case, mechanical. The operation on it supersedes natural means. I could probably spray some chemical on a tree and wither it rather quickly, but just speaking to it would have no effect. But, is that because I just don't believe it will have an effect, and therefore I doubt? There is no apparent relationship between speaking a word and the result. This fact produces doubt. Jesus tapped into a supernatural mechanism that we humans cannot understand. No engineer can create it. No scientist can discover it because it is not of this world.
 
But is Jesus saying that one function of faith, which is essential to our relationship with Him, is to throw mountains into the sea? It is like these icons on my computer that I never click on because I do not understand what they do. So I am afraid what might happen. They are there and they will do something if I click on them, but not until. It is so difficult to grasp miracles, and how a common man can initiate one.
 
One thing seems to be clear in Jesus' words, i.e. there is much more possible to us as followers of the Son of God than we often see in our experience. It is either because we have not cultivated "faith without doubt" or God simply does not need us to do all that is possible, and limits us for practical reasons. Think of the chaos if we were randomly throwing mountains into the sea!

Wednesday, January 21, 2015

Stablizing Thoughts

As I was considering the prophecy and fulfillment of Zechariah 9:9 of Jesus riding into Jerusalem on a donkey's colt, a son of a beast of burden as Matthew puts it, one of the adjectives used to describe the rider was "gentle" (Greek:praus). It is best translated "meek" and used in Jesus' sermon on the mount. "The meek shall inherit the earth." (Matt.5:5) Peter uses it to describe the required demeanor of a woman married to an unbeliever, if she is to win him. She must have "a gentle and quiet spirit." The noun of the word is used in James 1:21 to describe the attitude we must have if we are going to receive the word planted in us. Those who do receive this word are wise and prove it by deeds done in the gentleness of wisdom. (1 Peter 3:13) This allows them to then given appropriate answers to those who ask for reasons for hope, an answer given in gentleness and reverence. (1 Peter 3:15)
 
Aristotle explained this word/concept as a mean between two extremes: getting angry without reason and not getting angry at all. Now this is where balance comes in. Finding such a fulcrum is truly a balancing act. If you want to know how difficult this is, as if it needed to be proven, then stand on one foot or walk a narrow board, or a tight wire if you are that brave. The struggle to maintain balance becomes immediately evident. Just as our brain, inner ear, and muscles work together to find some stabilizing force to keep us from falling over or off, so we wrestle internally with thoughts which flood into our minds when we feel unstable and threatened.
 
Here is Jesus balancing on the back of a donkey's colt, jostling about on a small untested beast of burden, one on which no man had ever rode, seeking to maintain His balance on the uneven streets of His day. But just as it may have been difficult to stay atop of this animal, what was happening in the mind of Christ, who was clearly focused on the events that would soon unfold? Surely He possessed a disturbed mind, one agitated with the circumstances surrounding Him. In fact when He arrived at the temple His meekness was tested as He observed, yet again, the money-changers and robbers who had broken into His Father's house. What is the appropriate response to a home-invader? We know what He did. But, more importantly what stabilizing thoughts guided His response?
 
Perhaps if we carefully consider Jesus in this scene we might learn how much more we need stabilizing thoughts, truths that keep us balanced and focused and free from the extremes of becoming angry for no reason and not being angry at all. One thing I have learned in my journey into Challenger Deep is that Jesus possessed a beautiful mind, one tuned perfectly and one calibrated to respond to any and all circumstances of life with just the right degree of love, justice, mercy, wisdom, and grace. He found the balance between grace and law, justice and mercy. But, it all began with the thoughts of His mind.

Monday, January 5, 2015

Redistribution Of Wealth


I have been in Luke 19 for a while. There is a parable that comes after the story of Zaccheus that the NIV calls "Parable of Money Usage." It is a difficult parable and MUST be kept in the context of Jesus' present circumstances. These circumstances included 1) Jesus is on his way to Jerusalem for the last time, to die; 2) as he passes through Jericho he heals two blind men who have enough faith to cry out for healing and mercy; 3) he also takes some time to visit Zaccheus' home and bring salvation to it; 4) Zaccheus takes his considerable wealth and redistributes it to the poor and the ones he has cheated in his tax collection business. Now with this as the immediate backdrop, the crowd has a supposition in mind, i.e. that "the kingdom of God was going to appear immediately." In response to that Jesus told this parable.

The parable was about a nobleman who had ten slaves. Before he left to go to receive a kingdom for himself he distributed ten minas (about 100 days labor's worth) to the ten slaves. He told them to "do business" with their mina while he was gone. On his return one had turned the mina into ten, another to five, and another had nothing to show because he hid the mina in a handkerchief assuming the master would punish him if he lost his mina. So what does the nobleman do? He redistributes the wealth. He tells bystanders to take the mina from the slave and give it to the one who has ten minas and has been put over ten cities within this new kingdom. The bystanders complain that this is not a fair redistribution of wealth because the first slave already has ten minas and, by implication, does not deserve more.

So what is the point? Verse 26 seems to be key: "I tell you that to everyone who has shall more be given, but from the one who does not have, even what he does not have shall be taken away." WHAT? This can't be right! Shouldn't wealth be distributed equally? Well that is not how things work in the real world nor in the kingdom of God. Now if everyone used what they were given equally then no one would lack anything they needed. But, people do not use what they have for the good of the kingdom. When the blind men used what they had, i.e. their voices to appeal to the Master Healer, they gained sight and the responsibility that came from it. When Zaccheus accepted Jesus' invitation to come to his home that day and he received salvation, he accepted the responsibility that comes with salvation, i.e. to use what he has for the good of the kingdom. He used his wealth to bless the kingdom of God and surely was rewarded for it. The slaves who multiplied their master's minas were rewarded with more responsibility (not more luxury).

So how is this redistribution of wealth supposed to work? Each person must access what they have received from God (see 1 Cor.4:7). Then they must use it to extend the influence of the kingdom of God throughout the earth, bringing everything under the King's control. By doing so they are blessed but also receive more responsibility. This kind of redistribution of wealth requires faith that is able to take a risk and character that is willing to receive the increased responsibility that comes with success. Merely moving money from one pocket to another is not God's means of redistributing the wealth! Think about it.