Second Mile

I appreciated some of Brian McLaren’s comments on Jesus' statement, "If someone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles." (Matthew 5:41)The context was that a Roman soldier (the occupation force in Palestine) could at any time order a Jew to carry his pack up to one mile. The Jews hated being in subjugation, but Jesus' point was that "by willingly taking the pack the second mile, you walk free - transcending your oppression." (to use McLaren's words.)


Although we are not living under subjugation by occupation forces, we daily have the opportunity to apply this principle at home, in the workplace, and in the community. How many times have we felt imposed upon by someone in our own household expecting us to do some chore. Yet the same task done willingly, for example at someone else’s house, might seem like fun. What drudgery in the workplace when the goal is to just be there until quitting time. Sadly, organized labour has done harm to its constituents by even enforcing the practice of doing only the minimum required by the terms of the contract. But by doing more than is required, we have a sense of freedom, that we are doing this because we choose to, or even enjoy it. By doing only the minimum required, we always feel imposed upon and taken advantage of. When we grasp every penny, we feel we never have enough money; when we only work for self we never have enough time. By giving money away, we feel rich, by giving our time to someone else we feel that we have extra time; by doing more than is required, we become free. -philw

Parable of the Trucks

A successful trucking operator wanted to take some time away from the business. He called in three of his drivers to give them responsibility to manage things in his absence. To one, he gave five new Kenworth trucks, to the second he gave three, and to the third he gave one. Then he went on a world tour, leaving the business completely to them. The first, with the five trucks, hired five experienced drivers to carry on and expand the owner’s enterprise. He took some risk, but carefully oversaw the dispatching and maintenance of the equipment. Five years later, the trucks were well used, and he sold them, but by that time boasted a fleet of 10 new Kenworth trucks. The second driver also did well with his part, and worked up to a total of six new trucks full time on the road. The third however, seeing the instability in the economy, the price of fuel, and the unreliability of drivers, parked his one Kenworth in the shop.
After a few years the owner returned to see how his company was faring, and again called in the three drivers to see how their efforts had gone. The first driver presented the owner with his fleet of ten trucks, introduced him to the drivers, and reviewed how he had successfully expanded the business. The fleet owner was impressed, and gave him 25% interest in his company, with freedom to manage it how he would. He was also impressed with the second driver, who had done well now managing a fleet of six. He gave him a 20% interest in the company, also with freedom to manage it how he would.

The guy with the one truck was feeling a bit outclassed, but tried to defend his actions. “You don’t know what it’s like,” he said. “Energy costs were through the roof; Ministry of Transport is out to get you every time you’re on the road; the forest industry is so unpredictable; and it’s impossible to find reliable help. But here’s your Kenworth, good as new, and ready to go.” “Get out of here, you idiot,” roared the fleet owner. “At least you could have driven it yourself, and done something useful. Give it to my first man who already has ten trucks on the road. He’ll know what to do with it.”

So the one who has used well what has been given, will be given more. And the one who only hung on to what he had, will lose even that. The fearful driver lost his truck, and his job, and his reputation. He went out and read Matthew 25:14-30, understanding it for the first time.  -philw

Blessed Fruit

BEATITUDES - THE FRUIT OF THE SPIRIT


What place do the "beatitudes" taught by the Lord Jesus have in the Christian's life? Are they impossible laws to keep, general ideals to aspire for, the outline for some kingdom other than that to which believers belong, or something deeper? Perhaps comparing these nine promises of blessing with the fruit of the Spirit listed in Galatians will help give a healthy perspective.

BLESSED ARE THE POOR IN SPIRIT: God gives grace to the humble. The kingdom of heaven belongs to the poor in spirit. Unless one humbles himself as a child he will not enter the kingdom of heaven, and unless one is born again he will not see the kingdom of God. Humility or being poor in spirit is not a lofty ideal, but a requisite for all who would enter into life. Similarly, the sum of the law and the prophets is to love God whole heartedly, and to love one's neighbour as oneself. If we are captivated by the Spirit of God, then His character will be evident in us, as it was in Christ, as we consider others' interests above our own. This is love in action. Whoever does not love, does not know God.
THE FRUIT OF THE SPIRIT IS LOVE.

BLESSED ARE THOSE WHO MOURN: There is no proof of God's presence when one perseveres only as long as things are going well and good feelings prevail. Those who know God also learn to grieve and hurt deeply, knowing that patience leads to experience, and experience gives hope - knowing that the Comforter is never far away.
THE FRUIT OF THE SPIRIT IS PATIENCE - bearing under suffering.

BLESSED ARE THE MEEK: Those who believe on the Lord Jesus Christ have placed their confidence in God. They do not have to scheme and strive for mastery over their fellow men. They can afford to be yoked together with their Master, who promised that all who came to Him and learned from Him who was meek and lowly of heart would find rest for their souls.
THE FRUIT OF THE SPIRIT IS MEEKNESS.

BLESSED ARE THOSE WHO HUNGER AND THIRST FOR RIGHTEOUSNESS: To be a follower of God, a child of the Father, a citizen of His kingdom, predestined to be conformed to the image of Jesus Christ, is not just a matter of believing the right things. It is the righteousness of God lived out in visible action through the disciple. One in whom the Spirit of God dwells will have a hunger to do what He does.
THE FRUIT OF THE SPIRIT IS GOODNESS.

BLESSED ARE THE MERCIFUL: Those who are relying on God's grace and not their own righteousness do not hold themselves as judges to condemn others. Those who recognize God's undeserved forgiveness of them, cannot hold a record of wrongs against another. Any irritation or offence must be displaced by a concern and desire for the welfare of the other.
THE FRUIT OF THE SPIRIT IS GENTLENESS.

BLESSED ARE THE PURE IN HEART: No one can serve two masters. We cannot claim to have placed our faith in God while our true interest is in grasping for ourselves. A double-minded man should not think he will receive anything from the Lord. God will bring to light what is hidden in darkness and will expose the motives of men's hearts. Trials come so that faith, like gold refined by fire, may be proved genuine.
THE FRUIT OF THE SPIRIT IS FAITHFULNESS.

BLESSED ARE THE PEACEMAKERS: We were reconciled to God because He Himself, who is our Peace, destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility, creating one new man, making peace. To all those who participate in that new creation is given the responsibility to bring this reconciliation to others. Jesus' prayer for all those who would believe was that we should experience the same kind of unity with God and one another as He Himself did with His Father.
THE FRUIT OF THE SPIRIT IS PEACE.

BLESSED ARE THOSE WHO ARE PERSECUTED BECAUSE OF RIGHTEOUSNESS: Those who call on the name of the Lord are called to follow in His steps - when they hurled their insults at Him, He did not retaliate; when He suffered He made no threats. Those who suffer according to God's will should commit themselves to their faithful Creator and continue to do good.
THE FRUIT OF THE SPIRIT IS SELF CONTROL.

BLESSED ARE YOU, REJOICE AND BE GLAD WHEN PEOPLE PERSECUTE YOU BECAUSE OF ME: The joy of the Spirit is not a natural animal reaction to being well fed and comfortable. It is always mentioned in the presence of hardship, disappointment and opposition. We are called on to endure hardship as discipline, fixing our eyes on Jesus, who for the joy that was set before Him endured opposition from sinful men. Consider it pure joy when you face trials of many kinds.
THE FRUIT OF THE SPIRIT IS JOY.

As we see the Lord's description of life in the Kingdom of God, we see that it is no less than the character of God Himself put into action in the lives of those in whom He dwells. -philw

Diabolos

Diabolos (Greek)

1) prone to slander, slanderous, accusing falsely
1a) a calumniator, false accuser, slanderer,
2) metaph. applied to a man who, by opposing the cause of God, may be said to act the part of the devil or to side with him.
Satan the prince of the demons, the author of evil, persecuting good men, estranging mankind from God and enticing them to sin, afflicting them with diseases by means of demons who take possession of their bodies at his bidding.

from diaballo
1) to throw over or across, to send over
2) to traduce, calumniate, slander, accuse, defame
                                                           (Strong’s Revised Lexicon)

It is odd that those who would stumble at the existence of a good and powerful personal God because there is too much evil in the world, seem to have even more difficulty with the existence of a supernatural evil being. Like many Biblical names, Diabolos is a description, with the imagery of throwing things. God (Father, Son, Spirit) is pictured in such terms as the Creator, Author, Finisher, Sustainer, Builder, or Advocate. Diabolos, on the other hand, does not create, but merely accuses and twists / perverts what has already been created. There is no evil in the world that is not merely a perverting of something that was originally good.

Mankind has a unique ability to imagine something that never was, plan how it might become a reality, and then work to make it so. The resulting creation becomes an expression of the person/s who did it. They are identified with each other, and for better or for worse, we take ownership of what we have done. Possibly one of the greatest senses of satisfaction comes from carrying through on such a creative plan, and some of the most acute disappointments at seeing it crash and burn.

Children start out as imitators. Most of our kids’ actions that appear cute to us, are actually just attempts to do what they see us doing. The first signs of the dawn of adulthood (“adolescence”) are often marked with a newfound ability to criticize. Growing children feel freedom to move beyond mimicking the parent, and proceed to find fault, and to add their own twist to how they perceive things. Done well, this process leads to a deeper understanding of how to function as an adult, and to dream and create what even their parents could not have imagined. Gone awry however, it can get stuck on looking for more ways to pervert and break down what others have risked to do. This may happen when early attempts to dream and build were met consistently with criticism and smashing down by parents or others who never learned themselves to move beyond this stage. At the other tip of the horseshoe from adolescent whining is senescent bitterness. In practice there is not much difference, the former feeling overwhelmed at the challenges life is throwing at them, and the latter despairing that they cannot do anything about it anymore.

Criticizing and accusing is about as easy as breathing. If we don’t speak it, we likely have thought it anyway. We are immersed in it. The workplace and media ooze with it. Acknowledged, it is not without benefit. Dreams without critical analysis are folly. Diving in without consultation is reckless. The very act of criticizing is part of our creative ability. But most criticism and accusation is not that. It is only tearing down what someone else is building. And it is done as a cheap attempt to make ourselves feel more important, to feel better about our own failure to do what we should be doing, or from jealousy of someone with the imagination and courage to follow through.

How can we respond to this? First, with a good dose of humility before we arrogantly presume to be the authority on someone else’s observations. It is possible to look for the constructive element contained in any criticism, and the truth communicated by any accusation. That gives us an opportunity to move on to the next step we might not otherwise have seen. When we feel the irritation of someone else just wanting to tear down, we can see that as an expression of an emptiness in them, rather than a signal for us to lash out in self defense or to despair and give it up. When a thought of criticism or accusation comes to us, which it will do by the hour, we can pause and consider our own motive before we express it. Is it from Diabolos, who comes to “steal and kill and destroy”, or from our God-given ability to build up? Then, if we do let our criticism be known, it can always come with a realistic suggestion of how things might be better. -philw

Motivation

Considering Paul’s early experiences with the church in Damascus and Jerusalem, I was impressed at the importance of the church in our motivation to carry on. Motivation is one of the most important elements in one’s success or demise. I think of people with whom I grew up and went to school. Their success depended less on how gifted they were than on their willingness to stick to the task at hand. Much of that depended in turn on their examples at home, social supports, and view of life.

The absolutely easiest thing in the world (like exercising more, or eating less) is impossible without continuing motivation to press on. We have all started undertakings like this, pleased and satisfied at how well we do, only to get distracted before we see any lasting result. When it comes to core issues like character maturing, dealing with personal pride, mean-ness, laziness, lust, greed, we really need the Christian community to keep us motivated, with the Spirit of God to show us what is true.

As evangelicals, we emphasize that the Spirit of God lives in us and gives us the will and the power to please God. And he does. In fact, he is right there with us all the time. Yet despite that, we doubt and disobey, because at least at some level we don’t believe he is. At the other end of the spectrum is doing right and abstaining from evil only because some influence, such as family or police, or religious body, rewards and punishes in some way.

Too often, we are motivated by pride and shame. These are actually two sides of the same coin (Prov.11:2). They do produce impressive short term results. They work especially well for modifying those behaviors that others can see. But because they are all about making self look better, they are pulling us in the wrong direction where a Christian virtue is concerned. And for the same reason, when we let pride and shame be our motivation, we will find ways to do our evil, while trumpeting our good deeds for all to see.

In contrast to pride and shame, motivation by love is focused on someone other than self. The love of Christ controls us (2Cor.5:14); The love of Christ surpasses knowledge (Eph.3:19); We love because he first loved us. (1Jn.4:19). Jesus motivated by being a servant, by washing his disciples’ feet, by laying down his life, by inviting us to join him in his yoke. Love of a spouse, child, or friend can lead us to do the same. Similarly motivation within the Christian community comes from a willingness to serve, give, and come along side to share the load, rather than from laying more burdens on others.

Why do we need a Christian community?  Much of the time we could do the right thing in and of ourselves, but in the end, by ourselves, we don’t. The spirit of life in Christ gives us the will and power to please God. But he has made us to joyfully do this as a part of his visible Body, encouraging and being encouraged to go ahead with what his Spirit is leading us to do.  -philw

Root of Evil

Paul’s admonition to Timothy that “the love of money is the root of all evil” was in the context of caution against greed, and to be content. This wisdom has long been recognized even in secular society driven by greed. During the last federal election campaign in Canada, it occurred to me that the underlying assumption was more like “Poverty is the root of all evil”.

While the government approach to social ills for years has been to increase funding to whatever social ill is identified, the entity of “poverty” is now more specifically labeled as the problem. This overlooks the fact that poverty is more often a symptom of the problem, which finds its roots more in the sin of mankind that leads to family breakup, violence against one another, abuse of property, dishonesty, and dreams of getting rich without labor or sacrifice. Funding an environment such as that does not bring prosperity and happiness, but only more of the same problems. Instances of sudden wealth coming to historically poor people graphically illustrate this. As someone pointed out to me, giving money to someone only helps them get where they were headed faster. Viewing poverty rather than the love of money as the root of all evil is a foolish philosophical shift which will only exacerbate the disease which brought us to it in the first place. -philw

Moral Superiority

Most people believe there is a G(g)od of some sort, that there is good and evil, and some kind of reckoning for what we’ve done. And there is plenty of Christian Scripture to show that God does in fact reward and punish according to the deeds we have done while in this life. Accordingly, most people again, whether in our professing Christian church circles, or post-Christian non-church culture, or of other philosophical/ religious persuasion, believe that if they are going to some reward after death, it will be on the basis of some combination of how good they have been, and a kindly forgiving great spirit. That is so strongly rooted in their minds that the only conceivable alternatives might be that there is a benevolent God who forgives and receives everybody except the most vile, willful perpetrator of atrocities, or that there is no conscious afterlife at all.

So when an Evangelical claims confidence in going to heaven on the basis of faith in Christ’s work on the cross and God’s grace, what is heard is that he must think he is morally superior to most people around him. That very idea is not only repugnant to the whole Gospel of Jesus Christ, it is also disgusting to the non-Christian world, whether they consider themselves to be no worse than the next person, or the vilest of sinners. Evangelicals are so accustomed to the vocabulary of “saved by grace” and “not of works” that it does not occur to them that others are hearing self-righteous arrogance, whether of superior knowledge or of moral character. Even the Evangelical himself must be constantly on guard against unconsciously feeling superior in understanding and good works, despite his claims otherwise.

What can we talk about then? There are the admonitions of John and James, as well as the Lord Jesus, to show our faith by our works, and be more sparing with our words. Christians are seldom faulted for actually doing good works. When we do speak of God, it can be more of his character, and of the truth of the Jesus Christ of the New Testament. When we speak of the sinfulness of man, it must always be “us” and not “them”. When we become aware that we are feeling superior in understanding or in moral fabric to the next person (which professing non-Christians seem to do just as easily as professing Christians) we must confess that to God, and to anyone else that was affected by it, and remind ourselves of what we know to be true. And we can ask God to open the eyes of those around us, as well as ourselves, to the extent of his goodness and our need. –philw

To Taste Death for Everyone

The understanding of the Son of God dying for the sin of all people is the most central, unique, and pivotal of Christian doctrines. It is also the most difficult and offensive. How could one person dying have any benefit beyond that of martyr or example? What kind of God would be so vengeful and bloodthirsty that he would demand his own son be offered for a cruel sacrifice? While Christians get so accustomed to this basic tenet of their beliefs that the awfulness of it loses its impact on them, it remains incomprehensible and repulsive to those considering Christianity from the outside.

The introduction to “The Letter To The Hebrews” directs our attention to this issue as the basis for the rest of the argument contained in the book (all quotations taken from The English Standard Version of The Holy Bible 2002). God is, and God has spoken, in many times and in many ways, as the author begins his discussion, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son. And then he goes on to define who this Son is, and how he has spoken. In the first paragraph he (is) heir of all things … created the world… the radiance of the glory of God… the exact imprint of his nature… upholds the universe by the word of his power…(made) purification for sins… sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high.

I see two causes for offense in the doctrine of atonement. One is the cruelty of a father having his son murdered to appease his own wrath. The second is that I do not naturally feel that I am bad enough that anyone else should have to die for my shortcomings, let alone the Son of God. While the first offense is most often put forward as the insurmountable one, I suspect the second is the true root of our difficulty. In response to these anticipated concerns, the author establishes the relationship between this Father and Son. At first we see it is as intense and close as any human father and son, You are my Son… I will be to him a father, and he shall be to me a son… anointed you with the oil of gladness… sit at my right hand. It is not lack of love for the Son that releases him to his torturers.

But the relationship is more profound than any human one. God says of the Son, Your throne, O God, is forever and ever… You, Lord, laid the foundation of the earth in the beginning, and the heavens are the work of your hands; they will perish, but you will remain… they will be changed. But you are the same, and your years will have no end. The important picture here is not a vengeful father sending his son to the gallows. It is the Creator of the universe, my Creator, dying for me. The notion of a benevolent first century Jewish rabbi allowing himself to be put to death to demonstrate love and forgiveness is remote, warmly touching, and not an offense. The caricature of an enraged self-absorbed “god” finding pleasure in torturing his son is rightly obnoxious. But the living, personal, passionately feeling, all-powerful immortal creator of the universe and every living thing, becoming a mortal creature to restore relationship with a rebellious creation – that is beyond human thinking. Failing to recognize Jesus of Nazareth as Immanuel, God in the flesh, leads us to question the validity of God as well as the Christian paradigm. Allowing ourselves to see the unthinkable, that this ordinary appearing human, destined to die like all humans, was the Creator of all, brings us to see the act as more awesome than awful.

And it also confronts us with the second “offense”: “Surely I am not that evil!” And the author takes us there as well, Therefore we must pay much closer attention to what we have heard, lest we drift away from it. For since the message declared by angels proved to be reliable and every transgression or disobedience received a just retribution, how shall we escape if we neglect such a great salvation? Most of our difficulties with the teachings of the Bible stem from underestimating both how great God is, and how serious our own problem is. The unique beauty of the Christian “Gospel” is Jesus, the bridge between those otherwise irreconcilable poles.

The author goes on, We see…Jesus, crowned with glory and honor because of the suffering of death, so that by the grace of God he might taste death for everyone. For it was fitting that he, for whom and by whom all things exist, in bringing many sons to glory, should make the founder of their salvation perfect through suffering… Since therefore the children share in flesh and blood, he himself likewise partook of the same things, that through death he might destroy the one who has the power of death, that is the devil, and deliver all those who through fear of death were subject to lifelong slavery…Therefore he had to be made like his brothers in every respect, so that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in the service of God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people.

The outlandishness of this claim sets apart the message of the New Testament as either the only way for all mankind, or else as delusional madness. Next time we are tempted to find fault with God for being unfair or unloving, we can be reminded that our sin problem is indeed “that bad”, and that it was the only, living, creator, God who gave himself to overcome it and reconcile us to him. -philw

A View From The Middle

In one of our church experiences in my twenties, I was intrigued by a segment of the congregation a couple decades older than I. They attended fairly regularly, but didn’t seem to have any enthusiasm for things of the Lord. Why did they bother coming? At another church, in my thirties, there was a similar group, the “back row bunch” we called them because of their preferred Sunday morning location, seldom participating with the activities of the fellowship. In each case I later found that these people had formerly been very active in the Lord’s work – church builders, youth workers, pastors, and missionaries. What happened? I sincerely hoped this would not be my own experience.


It is not uncommon to start out well and falter in the middle. Enthusiasm and dreams fly high at the outset, but disillusionment, failures, distractions and fatigue set in long before the end is in sight. In the first miles of our long journeys by road, the distance was quickly gobbled up with readily visible progress. The same was felt near the end as each familiar landmark was reached. But those many hours between seemed to hold us suspended in a half-dream of tedium. A little book in the middle of my Bible speaks to this issue.

WISDOM

The Teacher opens his monologue of “Ecclesiastes” with a discouraging commentary on the pointless repetition of life. “All things are wearisome,” sums it up. He then gives an account of the sort of things we all do to make life work out. He applied himself to learning and acquiring wisdom and understanding. Much of our Christian experience is focused on schools, lessons, teachers, seminars, and books. These may lean towards “how-to” live like a Christian in a given area, or just delve into deeper spiritual mysteries and truths. Maybe if we just discover some new key or method, it will all come together for us. The problem may be, however, that of a student always studying but never getting around to applying it, or a tradesman always preparing his equipment or tools, but never using them. It soon loses its attraction and fulfillment. Despite wisdom being a good thing (7:11) we realize that “despite all his efforts to search it out, man cannot discover its meaning.” (8:17). “There is no end to making books” (12:12) and “with much wisdom comes much sorrow.” (1:18)

PLEASURE

If there is no way to fully answer the “Why’s” of life, then what about just squeezing whatever pleasure and satisfaction we can out of it? “I will test you with pleasure to find out what is good.” (2:1) Jeremiah pictured it as digging your own wells, that won’t hold water, when the Lord has already given us real water. Pleasures can help us feel better for a while, but boredom and enslavement are never far away. “All man’s efforts are for his mouth, yet his appetites are never satisfied.” (6:7) Instead of the popular adage of putting on a happy face, his conclusion is “Sorrow is better than laughter, because a sad face is good for the heart” (7:3) It reminds me of the Lord’s very unintuitive teaching: How deeply happy are those who mourn!

ACHIEVEMENTS

A strategy that might relate better with mid-lifers is described in 2:4-9, “I undertook great projects… I amassed silver and gold.” If life seems meaningless and relationships fall apart, then I’ll just do more of what I do well. Not only does this keep us busy and produce some visible results, but it also brings some degree of pleasure and usually causes others to think well of us. As we give up on dreaming about what we’re going to be when we grow up, we start to think more often about our retirement, what am I going to do when I don’t have to work any more? All the stuff and “silver and gold” we can accumulate does give us a sense of security if we don’t think too much about the Rich Fool in Luke 12. Despite the enticement of what it would be like to win the lottery, “Whoever loves money never has money enough; whoever loves wealth is never satisfied with his income.” (5:10) So when the Teacher surveyed all that his hands had done and he had toiled to achieve, he was left with that nagging emptiness that “everything was meaningless, a chasing after wind.” (2:11)

"I HATED LIFE"

Somewhere the realization hits us, “I can’t take it with me.” Finally it’s all gone anyway (2:17-18). And we feel tired. “What a burden God has placed on men!” (1:13, 3:10) Though not likely to the same degree, we have tasted some of the things the Teacher laboured for: leisure time, money, security, knowledge, power. And we have also felt some of the negatives –loss of optimism, motivation, enthusiasm, and touch with what’s “in”. Our expectations have been lowered; we wonder if we will have made a difference, or if it matters. We might ask, “What about ‘Me’?”

WHAT THEN?

How do we accept reality without cynicism? How do we have our illusions shattered without being disabled by “dis-illusionment”? The Teacher concludes with the anti-climactic, “Fear God and keep his commands” (12:13). A few things have helped me with this. I have to go back and re-examine the foundations. What is true? What do I believe? Why? What are the alternatives? Since God and His Word are true, I am not afraid to hold any other philosophy up against it and see what stands. Is my believing a matter of analyzing and accepting facts about Jesus, or is it trusting in Him? It’s easier to trust in things we can handle – knowledge, methods, systems, pleasures, achievements, wealth. God is invisible. The Lord Jesus is “not a tame lion” as Lewis noted. Do I really trust Him to be “good”? I am more aware of time as a non-renewable resource. It’s interesting to read chapter 3 with the thought that “There is time for…” whatever activity the Lord needs us to do. Am I a healthy functioning organ in The Body? By midlife the time is past for having a vague notion about sometime getting around to what needs doing. While we are always students as Christians, if we aren’t doing what we already know, then we aren’t really students. While we will never be arrived (see Phil.3:12) until we are resurrected, we can check our direction now. Like on the long road trip, it is worth reviewing the map once in a while to make sure we are going the right direction on the right road. Then we can enjoy the view and see that “He has made everything beautiful in its time” (3:11). -philw

A "Wanted" Child

“Every child a wanted child” sounds like a self-evident good cause. As I thought about this slogan however, it occurred to me that it carries with it some greater problems than what it intends to cure. It fits well with the Planned Parenthood philosophy, and can nicely be used as an argument for abortion on demand, as well as birth control for everyone. But the legacy of Planned Parenthood has not been a nation of happy “wanted” families, but a continuation or even acceleration of family breakup.
A more traditional assumption especially in a day when contraception was not a practical option for married couples, was that every child deserved the rights and privileges of the home and society to which it was born. It was not up to the community or the parents to plan their families. Children were a natural and common part of life, and were seen as a blessing, with the exception of extreme hardship, such as times of famine or war.
But “Every child a wanted child” revolves the issue around the parent and community. It assumes that I should have a child when I want one, for my gratification. And only that child deserves my love and nurturing. But if I do not choose under what circumstances this child comes into my life, then I am not obligated to provide the same nurture. Thus a purported claim to enhance the lot of children, actually undermines a previous God-given position, and makes provision for prevention or destruction of children. It can even rationally be extended to justify sex-selection abortion: if I only want a specific gender, then I shouldn’t, by this slogan, be forced to have the other.

I recently read an interview with an author who was trying help couples who chose to remain childless just from personal preference not to feel guilty. The situation that has actually developed is that most of the industrialized world is not having enough children to maintain our populations, help us have a balanced view of what is valuable, work, pay taxes, or carry on the culture that has been passed down to them. Rather than having “wanted” children, the “progressive” members of our society are opting more frequently just to not have any. It was significant that in a recent Canadian federal election, the two key issues identified by the media were the “rights” to same-sex marriage and to kill our unborn. To quote Mark Steyn, “The future belongs to those who show up for it.” It seems that what some of our culture is proposing is that it is not worth it. -philw

Freedom From Virtue

“Freedom from Virtue leads to slavery to vice”.


This observation was made by someone in our men’s Sunday School class to describe what the cultural revolution of the 60’s and 70’s offered. It reminded me of Romans 6, where the terms Righteousness and Sin are used instead of Virtue and Vice. The worldly wise social liberal so readily offers us “freedom”, and the assumption is that we don’t need to be nearly so concerned about prudish restraints of the previous generation. But when those restraints were there to reflect timeless virtues, there is no freedom in throwing them off. Of course the world will not claim it is throwing off virtues, but it will redefine what is virtue and vice in a way that appeals to the flesh. This was brazenly portrayed on a heterophobic radio broadcast I heard, in which the hosts argued that “debauchery” was in fact a good thing, since it is basically what we all want to do anyway. As the passage in Romans made so clear, we will be servants to something, and it is to whatever we choose to submit ourselves, either to virtue, (to use the current terminology) leading to life, or to vice, leading to slavery and death. –philw

Not having to be good…

THE trouble with socialism, T. S. Eliot said, is that it's an attempt "to design a system so perfect that no one will have to be good." I read this quote ascribed to Eliot, and it resonated with some observations I’ve had on child-rearing. The emphasis has shifted from training children how to behave in a corrupt world to creating an environment where it is nearly impossible for the child to get hurt or confront a hostile barrier. This is a luxury available to an urban middle class family with few children. Children growing up in primitive conditions, or in a rural setting must learn at about the time they learn to walk that many things are off limits. On a farm there are animals (unlike the Disney caricatures) which bite and scratch and kick and may cause serious harm, there are fences, woods, ponds, machinery, wood stoves, all of which are obviously dangerous. And there are many surplus injuries to children growing up in this environment. With each injury reported, especially in a school or public playground setting, there is a trend to another law to make these places more fool-proof.
But the other side of that coin raises the question of whether we might just be fostering more fools. When a parent fully “baby-proofs” the home such that anything the child might desire to do is OK and within limits, there are no opportunities to make mistakes, and fewer opportunities to learn. I recall reading in training of horses it is necessary to allow the horse to make mistakes. That is the only way they learn. I believe that in this principle we humans are not different. The “baby-proofed” home is carried on into an insulated world where they are encouraged to be “hands-on” everything. So many of the old fashioned admonitions, such as, “No, “ “Don’t touch”, “Be quiet”, “Keep off” are assumed to be excessively stifling for growing little minds and bodies. It is a grotesque irony that this obsession with protecting these little ones has come along with a regular indoctrination in every form of selfishness, lust, violence, materialism, pride, and cruelty that can be portrayed via audio-visual devices.

The thought is that children will learn more if allowed to touch, take, manipulate, break, run about, chatter or shout, whatever and whenever they choose. I am not convinced of the evidence of this. We are living in the most successful civilization in human history, provided for us by generations of people who learned self-control through those out-moded restraints and an environment that was seldom safe and insulated beyond infancy. Children, who have not had to learn restraints at home, are presented to teachers who need to expend more energy in keeping some sort of order than in teaching. Far from corporal punishment, which again our benefactors in previous generations had to endure, the child in school today is to be protected from any words which might damage self-esteem, from any assessment of failure, from any allusion to being wrong or bad.

The problem is that the world cannot be like that. It is full of dangers, of people who laugh at us and deride us, of times when our very best efforts bring humiliating failure. And it is full of restraints about where we walk, or drive, or park, or when we talk or what we can say, and things we may or may not touch or have. Ultimately there is, as C.S. Lewis argued, a natural moral law of right and wrong, and an all-seeing God above it, to whom we must eventually give account. It appears to me that it would be much less traumatic and more productive for children to be allowed to learn these lessons in their simplest and least harmful form, in the home, with loving parents to allow enough mistakes from which to learn. -philw

Cleaning My Own House First

One reason things don’t work as well as they should is that many people put more effort into pressuring other people to do more than into simply improving their own act. This is to be expected of a young child who is dependent on its parents for everything, but it can be seen in prolonged adolescence when a young adult continues to blame parents for whatever is not working out. It is inherent in socialist thinking where the state is expected to provide whatever is needed. It is seen in our governmental system of rule by media and popular opinion when there is a perpetual demand for more services, and when “something must be done” (ie by somebody else) whenever an injury occurs. It drives union thinking which puts more effort into pressuring management into providing than into what the union should be providing for the business. It is more prevalent in urban thinking than in rural, since more can be done by rallying the community than by just doing it oneself. It is one thing that aggravates people about preachers and teachers who are seen to be telling others how to live rather than showing them, or not heeding the Lord’s caution about dealing with the log in one’s own eye first.

What to do about this? Before getting up and crying about what needs to be done, I can consider what I need to be doing, and be ready to give an answer if someone asks me about it. When injury occurs, I need a repentant attitude to be ready to see how my own action or inactivity may have led to it, or if I was uninvolved this time, how the same thing might happen in my house if I do not change. When I hear others clamoring for how the system must change, I can encourage them to look at what else they are doing to make a change. My prayers can be more about how the Lord is showing me my need to obey him than on what I expect him to be doing for me. philw

Knowing, or Knowing About?

Believing something vs in someone
The keyword of the evangelical message is "believe". "Believing" can be centred on content, as in "believing certain facts", or on a person, as in "believing in someone". The meaning of these two applications is so different that it seems a different word would be appropriate. The translation of a Greek word to "faith" (KJV) or "faithfulness" (NIV) is a similar issue - those words have significantly different meanings in English, although some thought can show that one virtue does not occur without the other.

We come to believe in a person by various routes: their credentials, someone else's confidence in them, consistent experience with them, naivite. We come to believe in information also by various means: the word of a person we believe in, repeated hearing or speaking ourselves, experience, logic, gut feeling, impressive presentation, greed, fear, and so on. So they are similar processes. To convince me to believe in a person that I doubt, requires observation of that one's performance, either by myself or someone else that I have confidence in. To convince me of facts that I doubt, requires persuasion, further information, discussion, some experimenting.

It seems that "believing in Christ", although suggesting the confidence in a person sort of belief, has come in evangelical jargon to mean assenting to information about Christ. This is more concrete and easier to impart to and test in others. It is true that one cannot meaningfully believe in the person of Christ without knowing any information about Him. Paul's preaching, as recorded in Acts, addressed both aspects. But one can know (and believe) a great deal of information about Him without believing in Him. Most of the Lord Jesus' teaching focused on the nature of His heavenly Father, himself as Immanuel, and living in the Kingdom.

What do we learn in church?
It is common to say that one goes "to church" to learn about God. That is primarily through the sermon, or the Sunday school. These media are well suited to inculcating information. They are however weak regarding bringing one to know a person. That comes more from living together - working, solving problems, laughing, crying, feeling tension and relief, or just spending time. While our evangelical tradition has perfomed well at teaching us about the Bible, theology, and Christology, it would seem to have failed at bringing us to "know Him" as Paul shared his longing in Philippians 3. That is not to say that many within the evangelical tradition are not having a healthy knowledge of and relationship to the Person, but only that when it does occur it is through other avenues than the preaching and teaching and meetings and conferences and seminars and books that are supposed to achieve this. It is through spending time with God - working with Him and seeing Him work, solving problems with Him, laughing and crying with Him, feeling tension and relief with Him.

What difference does this make?
We expend much time and resource on those things which impart information but only peripherally bring us to know the Person. The harm in this is that it can actually obstruct our knowledge of Him. It can lead us to put our faith in a formula for salvation rather than on the Author of our salvation, to see salvation as having arrived at grasping the formula rather than experiencing the working of it in our lives. It may actually foster pride in having arrived rather than the broken and contrite spirit without which no one comes to God. It arrogantly builds thick walls between elements of the Body of Christ, defined by splitting hairs of nebulous doctrine, when His great work of grace was to break down those walls. In place of a glorious Body, it sees only its own sect as being accepted in the beloved, and the rest as being apostate. It presents growth in Christ as the ability to split those hairs ever finer rather than an increasing love and submission toward Him. It can measure maturity by testing knowledge, but does not know how to measure love, so extols the one and fears the other. Rather than grace and love for those with differences, it promotes deadly hate. Rather than presenting the power and Person of God to a blind world it presents circuitous arguments, pride, self-centeredness, and mind-numbing jargon.

What can we do?
Put knowledge in its place. I do not come to know my wife better by memorizing all her vital statistics, studying her genetics and physiology, and writing endless theses on how these all fit together. I simply need to spend the kind of time with her that was mentioned above. As I do, some aspects of these details about her will become relevant, but only as part of the picture and not something to agonize about as though trying to treat a disease. I wonder if our dissection of God is not more about trying to control Him than to know Him. Perhaps our gatherings as believers could keep this more in perspective by holding knowledge in the same sort of humility that is needed to approach God in the first place, by recognizing love and relationship above correctness, and by sharing the power and presence of the Living God in our lives above how much we can talk about our doctrinal models. This will need less of schools, teachings, seminars, and books, and more of Him. May we encourage one another to know Him. -philw