About Romans 6:23

Lately, I have read several references to Romans 6:23 in which it was apparent the author gleaned a far different message from this verse than I do.

Each time, I resisted the urge to try to explain my own understanding… mostly because that is not easily done in a Facebook comment.  So, I have decided to attempt to explain here.

For the wages of sin is death, but the gracious gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord. (Romans 6:23)

For me, this much-loved and oft-quoted verse was one of the first scripture passages memorized as a child in Sunday School class right along with John 3:16.  I think that is true for many of us.

Perhaps the familiarity discourages paying close attention to what it says.  Perhaps explanations were given to us as children and we have simply accepted and internalized those explanations without really paying attention to what the words say.

So, I want to try to explain what this verse says to me and invite others to discuss what it means to you, and why.

I see this verse as very intentionally contrasting The Kingdom of Heaven versus the kingdom of darkness.  I see it as contrasting life under the old Adamic covenant with sin and death versus life in the new covenant in Jesus Christ.  I see this verse as a one sentence summary of what it means to be redeemed by Christ from the power of darkness.

 For the wages of sin is death…

This is what it means to serve the kingdom of darkness… to walk in the Adamic covenant with sin and death… to be enslaved by sin.

To quote a friend, “Sin will take you farther then you ever wanted to go, cost you more than you ever wanted to pay, and keep you longer than you ever wanted to stay.”

Sin enslaves.  Sin blinds.  Sin weakens our will and keeps us addictively coming back for more punishment.  Sin justifies injustice while blaming others for one’s own bad choices.  Sin kills trust and destroys relationships.

For the wages of sin is death…

Sin enslaves us, requires our servitude, demands we work hard in its service… then repays our service with death.

This is what it means to serve the kingdom of darkness… to serve sin.  It means a lifetime of enslavement reimbursed as death.

 … but the gracious gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.

What a glorious contrast!

Through the redemptive work of Jesus Christ, we are offered the free gift of eternal life.

For by grace you have been saved through faith; and this is not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not a result of works, so that no one may boast. (Ephesians 2:8-9)

It is a free gift, not something I have earned through my own works.  Only Jesus could accomplish my redemption and He did it for us.

Because I am redeemed by Christ, I am no longer a slave to sin.  I owe nothing to the kingdom of darkness… neither my works nor my life.  The chains of slavery are broken, and I am free to walk in newness of life.

 … but the gracious gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.

Free to enjoy His gracious gift!  Free to bask in His love!  Free to love others as I am loved by Him!  Free to become who I was created to be… an image bearer of God!  Free to enjoy relationship with God, both now and through all eternity!

This is what it means to walk in the new covenant in Jesus Christ!

This is what Romans 6:23 means to me.

Now… a brief word about what it does NOT mean to me… but seems to mean to some people…

For the wages of sin is death…

This does NOT say God doles out death as punishment for sin.  On the contrary, it says sin repays our servitude with death.  Then, it goes on to tell us what God does in contrast to what sin does.

 … but the gracious gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.

Sin reimburses our servitude with death.  In contrast, God offers us the free gift of eternal life in Jesus Christ our Lord.

Death and destruction are of the kingdom of darkness.  The Kingdom of Heaven is filled with light, life, love, hope, faith, and joy.

God does not condemn us to Hell.  God is working to deliver us from Hell.

Satan is our accuser.  Jesus is our advocate… and He has already paid the price of our redemption.

For the wages of sin is death, but the gracious gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.

Glory!  What a Savior!

Your thoughts?

Law, Grace, and Common Sense

Thou shalt not kill. (Exodus 20:14)

A direct command…very specific…straightforward and to the point.  It doesn’t leave much room for misunderstanding or misinterpretation.

In terms of importance, this is one of the Big Ten…the commandments written in stone by the finger of God, Himself…given to Israel as their covenant vows…placed inside the Ark of the Covenant.

Most pastors, preachers, and teachers today would agree this is an important commandment that is still as relevant today as when God gave it to Moses.

A high percentage of those same pastors, preachers and teachers also support the death penalty…believing the Old Testament laws calling for capital punishment set a standard that is still relevant today.  Likewise, many Evangelical pastors in The United States strongly support the right to bear arms…to carry lethal weapons for use in defense.  Most Christians also strongly support the need for an armed military to protect and defend our nation.

How can these men agree the very direct, very specific, very clear law written in stone by God, Himself, “Thou shall not kill,” is relevant today, yet support killing people…for any reason?

It is because they are able to look past the letter of the law to the principle behind the law of the sanctity of life.  They are able to apply common sense and realize that sometimes killing is necessary in order to preserve life.  And they are able to see the many biblical examples demonstrating that following the principle behind the law sometimes requires violating the letter of the law.

Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. (Exodus 20:8)

Another very direct command…very clear…very concise.  This one is also one of the Ten Commandments written in stone by the finger of God, Himself.  Surely, there can be no doubt as to the meaning, significance or importance of this command.

Fortunately, this command doesn’t carry as much moral dilemma as the previous.  This one should be easy to keep.

Yet, other than the Seventh Day Adventists, almost no Christian churches today keep the Sabbath.  We do not treat Saturday as a holy day set apart for worship.  We have no issue with working hard on Saturdays.

How can this be?  Why would one of the Ten Commandments written in stone by God, Himself, be treated so lightly by people professing to serve Him?  Why would people quick to declare the Bible as their guide…quick to say “God has not changed His mind”…quick to say “the Bible says” so easily treat this law as insignificant?

It is because we believe we are keeping the spirit of the law by worshipping on Sunday.  Yes, we realize Sunday is the first day of the week, not the seventh.  Yes, we understand the Bible is very clear that Saturday is the Sabbath and we are to keep the Sabbath holy.  However, since Christ arose on a Sunday, we feel confident we are keeping the spirit of the law by worshipping on Sunday.  After all, hasn’t the Christian church worshipped on Sunday for thousands of years?  And didn’t Jesus say, “The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath”?

So, once again, we choose to neglect the letter of the law to follow the spirit of the law…this time with no moral dilemma to justify the deviation…just traditions.  Yet, knowing we are under grace, not under law, we feel confident the letter of the law may be sidestepped in keeping the spirit of the law.

Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image… (Exodus 20:4)

Another very direct command with little room for misunderstanding.  Another of the Ten Commandments written in stone by the finger of God, Himself.  Surely, this command is clear and easily followed.

Yet, look at the number of statues and monuments we have erected.  Look at the current social and legal battles being waged over Confederate monuments.  Aren’t we fighting to preserve what God has forbidden?  Could the Bible be any more clear?

Yet, we justify these as cultural icons that have nothing to do with religion.  We argue these are not idols or objects of worship and, therefore, do not fall under the biblical prohibition.

But wait…isn’t the purpose of the Bible to affect how we live our secular lives?  Is it really a good idea to separate the spiritual from the secular to the extent we violate a direct biblical command under the justification it is a secular matter rather than spiritual?  And don’t the intense emotions and fierce defenses, themselves, bear witness to these monuments carrying some deeper meaning than simple artistic décor?

If we make defending a monument a higher priority than loving our neighbor, doesn’t that border on idolatry?

If we make defending a monument a higher priority than loving our neighbor, doesn't that border on idolatry? Click To Tweet

My home state of Arkansas is currently waging a legal battle over a Ten Commandments monument recently erected on the grounds of the state capitol.  Frankly, this one has me shaking my head.  Knowing it would almost certainly draw legal battles, our state legislature somehow decided it was important to have a Ten Commandments monument erected at the State Capitol.

How ironic that we would erect a stone monument engraved with the words, “Thou shalt not make to thyself any graven images.”

How ironic, our state legislators would consider The Ten Commandments to be so important they needed to be included in a monument at the state capitol…so important the monument is worth the expense of multiple legal battles…yet not important enough to actually obey the commandments.

To so revere The Ten Commandments that one would erect unto them a monument…in direct violation of the commandments themselves…I don’t get it.

To so revere The Ten Commandments that one would erect unto them a monument...in direct violation of the commandments themselves...I don't get it. Click To Tweet

Yet, whether I understand it or not, hundreds of thousands of my fellow Arkansans…my Christian brothers and sisters…strongly support the monument…and apparently see no contradiction in its erection.  The very clear letter of the law is shoved aside in eager support of what they believe to be the spirit of the law.

Do you see how readily we set aside the letter of the law while claiming to embrace the spirit of the law?  How easily, we justify a law as being of lesser importance under our New Covenant of grace?  How fluidly we apply common sense to biblical examples to justify violating the letter of the law?  We are quite adept at it…and very willing.  In fact, we may even feel a sense of pride in steering clear of legalism to pursue the intent of God’s heart.  Which is great…so long as we truly are pursuing God’s heart!

Let’s look at one more commandment:

Thou shalt not divorce.

Oh, wait…where’s the reference for that one?  Not one of the Big Ten?  Well, surely it’s somewhere in the Bible…

No.  It’s not.  There is no such commandment.

In fact, the law God gave to Moses very clearly makes provision for just divorce…very clearly tells how a divorce is to be administered…and very clearly declares both parties are free to marry someone else after the divorce is final.

Now, some may say Jesus prohibited divorce in the Sermon on the Mount recorded in Matthew chapter 5.  As I pointed out in this recent post, that interpretation contradicts the whole premise of Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount.

Besides, if we’re going to assume Jesus’ intent in Matthew 5 is to literally add to the letter of the law (in contradiction to what He said He was doing) then we should be throwing people in prison for being angry with one another:

“You have heard that the ancients were told, ‘You shall not commit murder’ and ‘Whoever commits murder shall be liable to the court.’ But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother shall be guilty before the court; and whoever says to his brother, ‘You good-for-nothing,’ shall be guilty before the supreme court; and whoever says, ‘You fool,’ shall be guilty enough to go into the fiery hell. (Matthew 5:21-22)

And we should be gouging out eyes and cutting off hands of people guilty of lust:

“You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery’; but I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart. If your right eye makes you stumble, tear it out and throw it from you; for it is better for you to lose one of the parts of your body, than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. If your right hand makes you stumble, cut it off and throw it from you; for it is better for you to lose one of the parts of your body, than for your whole body to go into hell. (Matthew 5:27-30)

Obviously, we know better.  We understand Jesus was not adding to the law, but rather was transcending the law by demonstrating righteousness cannot be attained by rigid adherence to external laws.  Righteousness can only be attained thru a new heart by the power of The Holy Spirit.  By applying common sense and understanding of grace, we are able to see past the letter of the written command to the intent and the character of God, and act accordingly.

Why is it then, that on the topic of divorce so many Christians do the opposite?

With very clear direct commands, “Thou shalt not murder”; “Thou shalt honor the Sabbath day and keep it holy”; “Thou shalt not make unto thyself any graven images” we are able to look past the letter of the law and apply the principle behind the law…pursuing God’s heart with an understanding of God’s grace and situational common sense.

Yet with divorce, in the absence of any clear scriptural prohibition, many theologians and preachers pluck verses out of context to create their own supposedly biblical understanding of a supposed prohibition…to rigidly apply to every situation with no latitude, grace, or common sense whatsoever.

This is precisely what Paige Patterson, John Piper, and others like them have done in telling abused spouses they cannot divorce.  They have fabricated their own commandment where there was none, then rigidly applied it with no grace or common sense whatsoever.

If we were going to be legalistic, shouldn’t we at least be legalistic on points of clear direct scriptural command?  If we were going to be rigidly legalistic on some topics and less rigid on others, shouldn’t we be less rigid on topics on which scripture provides no clear prohibition?

Why would we find latitude to skirt very clear scriptural commands, then rigidly apply man-made doctrinal rules where scripture provides no clear prohibition?

Why would we find latitude to skirt very clear scriptural commands, then rigidly apply man-made doctrinal rules where scripture provides no clear prohibition? Click To Tweet

Doesn’t that stance reveal a heart consumed with arrogantly defending doctrinal positions rather than humbly acting in love through faith by the leading of The Holy Spirit in accordance with scripture?

 

What do you think?

 

Rules of Relationship

Knockout sporting his new headstall

Saturday morning, I opted for a leisurely ride with Knockout before the rest of the family awoke.

I had a quick cup of coffee, took care of a few chores, grabbed a halter, and headed for the pasture. I greeted Knockout and talked about the beautiful weather as I slipped the halter on him.  Knockout seemed happy to see me and willingly followed my lead.  We exited the pasture gate and headed for the tack room, where I promptly dropped the lead line on the ground and opened the door.

Some folks say to never drop a lead line on the ground. The horse is liable to run off.  He may freak when the lead moves as he moves.  Or, he may step on the lead, trap his own head, startle, and throw a fit.  People and horses have been injured doing this.  It’s a really bad idea.

I reached inside the tack room to grab a handful of treats. I gave two treats to Knockout and shoved the rest in my pocket.  I handed out the rest of the treats at intervals during the grooming session.  Knockout made sort of a game of politely asking for a treat as I completed different stages of grooming.  Of course, I laughed and obliged him.

Some folks say to never give horses treats. Giving horses treats causes them to become disrespectful and pushy, always trying to grab treats from pockets.  Some people have been bitten or run over doing this.  It’s a really bad idea.

I fly-sprayed Knockout, then sprayed conditioner on his mane and tail, before combing out the tangles. I picked his hooves then thoroughly brushed him, working front-to-back down his left side, around his hind-quarters, then up the right side.

Some folks say to never walk directly behind a horse. You could get kicked.  People have been seriously injured doing this.  It’s a really bad idea.

As I groomed, Knockout stood calmly relaxed. Occasionally, he would drop his head to grab a mouthful of grass.  Sometimes, he would take a step to grab a particularly tempting clump of grass.  I simply applied soft pressure to guide him back to the original spot and went right back to grooming.

Some folks say to never let a horse eat grass while he has a halter and lead line on. The horse could form a bad habit of constantly stopping to eat instead of paying attention to the rider.  It is a hard habit to break and incredibly annoying.  It shows disrespect.  It is a really bad idea.

Next I stepped inside the tack room for the saddle pad and saddle, placing each on Knockout before flopping the stirrups and straps into place and tightening the girths and breast collar.

Some folks say to never saddle a horse without having the lead line secured. The horse could spook and run.  If the saddle gets knocked off he could panic and learn to fear the saddle.  It is a really bad idea.

Then I took Knockout’s halter off, set it aside, and slipped his bridle on.

Some folks say to always latch the halter strap around the horse’s neck while putting the bridle on. Otherwise, you have no way to control the horse if something happens.  The horse could run off and cause all sorts of problems.  It is a really bad idea.

I gathered the reins and mounted. Knockout stood still as I got situated and petted him.  Then he calmly walked off.

Normally, I’m pretty insistent on requiring a horse to stand still until I cue him to move. This time was interesting, though, as I was just ready to cue when he started moving.  It seemed like Knockout knew what I was going to ask before I asked it, and acted accordingly.

Some folks say to never let a horse walk off without a cue from the rider. It teaches the horse to do what he wants instead of following the rider’s cues.  It is very disrespectful, leads to bad habits, and can get dangerous.  It is a really bad idea.

Since Knockout started walking before I actually cued him, I decided to wait and see where he went. I planned to ride thru the arena gate, out the other side of the arena, and into the pasture.  But I was interested to see what Knockout had in mind.

Knockout walked calmly to the arena gate, turned to align his body with the gate, and stopped with the latch beside my stirrup. I reached down, unlatched the gate, swung it open, and we rode into the arena.  Then I prompted Knockout to turn, back up, and side-pass as I closed the gate.

I don’t know if Knockout somehow knew my plans through some subtle signal I unintentionally gave, or if we just lucked out with him wanting to do what I already planned to do. Either way, it was pretty cool!  I wonder if this is what Ray Hunt was talking about when he wrote, “Let your idea become the horse’s idea.”

Some folks say to never let a horse decide where to go. The horse should always follow the rider’s prompts.  If you start letting the horse make his own decisions under saddle, he could start ignoring the rider and just doing whatever he wants.  It is a really bad idea.

As we headed out of the arena toward the back pasture, Knockout walked toward the path we usually take. However, the cattle herd was on the east side of the pasture and I wanted to check on the young calves.  So, I gently asked Knockout to head that direction.  He promptly turned where I asked…then just as promptly started swinging back toward the familiar route.  So, I repeated the soft cue.  Again he promptly responded then started swinging back to familiar paths.

On the third prompt, Knockout stayed with the direction I asked for and simultaneously picked up into a trot. I’m not sure why he increased his gait.  Maybe he saw the cows and thought we were going to drive them…he enjoys pushing cows out of the arena.  Or, maybe he was just enjoying the nice cool morning and felt like trotting.  Either way, I decided to just go with him and let him set the pace.  Then, as we neared the herd, I slowed him to a walk so we wouldn’t startle the cows.

Some folks say to never let the horse change gaits without a prompt from the rider. The horse may start thinking he can do what he wants.  That leads to bad habits and you will soon have a horse who bolts uncontrolled.  The rider must always be firmly in control.

The young calves and the mama cows all looked healthy. I pulled out my cell phone and snapped a few pictures before we continued on.  As we left the herd, Knockout again picked up into a nice smooth trot which we continued all the way around the back of the pasture until I slowed him to a walk as we entered the woods.

Other than a pesky swarm of a gnats, we both enjoyed the freshly trimmed woods trail. Not far from the entrance, Knockout sort of half-stepped to the right toward a little cut-thru trail.  He wasn’t pushy or demanding about it…more of a tentative request, “Shall I turn here?”  I lifted my left stirrup to let him know I didn’t want the right turn.  As we continued on, I petted Knockout and told him I appreciated him paying attention and asking politely.  “We’ll take that path another time.”

As we neared a big mud hole I started looking to see the water level. If it is full of water, I usually ask Knockout to go ahead and walk thru it.  However, if it is just yucky, sticky mud I usually prompt him to cut thru the woods to the left.

This time, the mud hole was a sticky, muddy mess. But before I could prompt Knockout to turn, he made the decision himself, confidently turning left thru the woods.  I just went with him.  Why correct a horse when he’s making good decisions?  Yay, Knockout! 🙂

We stopped to trim a few vines from the cut-thru trail. Vines tend to dangle and swing with nothing to brace against.  So, I wound up dropping the reins in front of the saddle to stand in the stirrups, grasping the vine with my left hand while trimming with my right hand.

Some folks say to never drop the reins. The horse could spook and run.  The reins could fall over his head and tangle in his hooves, causing him to panic and resulting in an accident.  Horses have been injured doing this.  It is a really bad idea.

All went well and Knockout was calm throughout…except the time a leafy branch landed square on his head and hung on his ears, refusing to drop to the ground even with vigorous head-shaking combined with a little side-stepping. I laughed, leaned forward, grabbed the branch, and dropped it to the ground.

As we approached the creek crossing, I was looking at two possible routes, trying to gage which was better since the last rain. Before I decided, Knockout confidently turned to the nearest of the two and hopped across.  Hey…that looked like as good a decision as any…and he is the one who has to make the crossing after all.  Why correct a good decision?

The whole ride sort of went that way. I gave Knockout more liberty than usual, trusting him to do the right thing.  Knockout responded by becoming more confident in his decisions.  So long as he was going pretty much where I wanted, I let him decide.  If we needed to make adjustments, I let him know that, too.

My cell phone rang…summoning me back to the house.

I prompted a canter departure and Knockout responded with a nice smooth lope across the back pasture. As we approached the pond levy, I slowed him and we walked across and back to the arena.

Some folks say to never canter on the way home. The horse is liable to run away in over-eagerness to get back home.  It is a really bad idea.

As we entered the arena gate, Knockout turned right, walked past the roping chute into the roping box, turned around, and backed into the corner. “Dude, you have got this down!” I laughed, as he calmly waited for me to dismount, loosen the cinch, and lead him back to the tack room.

It was a pretty awesome ride…one I hope to build on as we grow in trusting each other and listening to each other in this partnership.

Did you notice how many times I disregarded various rules I’ve heard?

People have a lot of rules for handling horses. Most of them are good rules.  They’re important.  Most of these rules have been learned and passed on by people who have personal experience with just how quickly and how badly things can go wrong when working with horses.

Reading this post, you might get the impression I don’t have much use for rules. You might even think I recklessly flaunt rule violations.

That would be a false impression.

I’m actually quite safety conscious. I’m the only male western rider I know who regularly wears a riding helmet, for example.

Every rule I listed is a rule I have followed in the past. And I’m pretty sure I have passed most of those rules on to children, grandchildren, and guests who have visited our horses.  If I was handling a strange horse I didn’t know, I would carefully follow these same rules, at least until I got to know him better.  In fact, with our own horses who I interact with daily, I follow these rules to varying degrees, depending on what I’m doing with which horse.

As I see it, these rules have a time and place. They are important, but not as important as a relationship built on trust and mutual respect.

While working with horses, one must always be safety-conscious. Horses are big, powerful, fast animals with natural flight instincts.  We humans are quite fragile by comparison, and easily injured.  Those rules I mentioned are wisdom handed down to help keep riders safe.

The rules are an attempt to keep the rider in control, so as to be as safe as possible. The only problem is, the longer I work with horses the more aware I become that I am never truly in control.  The horse is so much bigger, faster and more powerful than me, I can never really control him.  I can ask all I want, but I can never really make him do anything.  I’m much too puny compared to his awesome strength.

To safely guide a horse, I need the horse to trust me. I want him to look to me as a leader he will willingly follow.  And when he is startled or frightened, I want him to look to me for guidance.  Otherwise, he will blindly follow his instincts to balk, bolt, or buck.

In other words, my ongoing safety in working with a horse is dependent on our building a relationship based on mutual trust and respect. And following the rules too rigidly interferes with the building of that relationship.  Following the rules too rigidly for too long can actually make the situation less safe by not letting the relationship of trust develop.

Rules are based on trying to control. Relationship is based on trust that doesn’t require rigid control.

The rules are important…but they have a time and place. The rules are important…but should not be rigidly applied to all situations with all horses all the time.

And the more the relationship develops into mutual trust and respect with clear communication, the less helpful the rules become.

In the beginning the rules are important, and things are more black and white. But once mutual trust and respect blossom thru consistency and clear communication, the rules have sort of served their purpose and become less important than the relationship.

The same is true in my relationship with God.

The Bible says “Thou shalt not commit adultery.” As Christians we have all seen respected leaders fall to the sin of adultery.  We have multiple examples in scripture of spiritual leaders such as Samson or King David committing adultery.  So, we create safety rules such as never be alone with someone of the opposite sex…even in a public setting.

The Bible admonishes to whole-heartedly live out covenant vows and to not treat a covenant partner treacherously. So, we create safety rules that divorce should always be avoided…no matter what.

The Bible admonishes against habitual drunkenness. We have all known folks who were addicted to alcohol and have seen the destruction it can lead to.  So, we create safety rules that prohibit drinking alcohol..ever..for any reason.

The list goes on and on. The Bible exhorts us to modesty…so we create rigid dress codes.  The Bible exhorts us to not neglect gathering together…so we set specific dates and times.  And the more a given group stresses the need to rigidly live by the rules, the more rules they come up with.  Every infraction is dealt with by adding a new rule to attempt to minimize temptation or maximize righteousness.

Much like the horse safety rules, these rules of Christian living are generally good rules based on wisdom someone gained through experience and passed on to others. They are intended to keep people safe.

The only problem is, trying to live by rules can never keep us safe.

Our safety can only be assured through a personal relationship with Jesus Christ, based on trust and respect, built on clear communication in the Holy Spirit. Trying to live by the rules actually interferes with the development of that relationship.

Rules are based on trying to control. Relationship is based on trust that doesn’t require rigid control.

In the beginning the rules are important, and things are more black and white. But once mutual trust and respect blossom thru consistency and clear communication, the rules have sort of served their purpose and become less important than the relationship.

Speaking to religious leaders who were experts in biblical rules, Jesus said,

You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; it is these that testify about Me; and you are unwilling to come to Me so that you may have life. (John 5:39)

Paul reinforced this principle in his letter to the Galation believers who were becoming focused on rigidly following rules,

But before faith came, we were kept in custody under the law, being shut up to the faith which was later to be revealed. Therefore the Law has become our tutor to lead us to Christ, so that we may be justified by faith. But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor. For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus. (Galations 3:23-26)

The rules are important…but they have a time and place. The rules are important…but should not be rigidly applied to all situations for all Christians all the time.

The rules are wisdom to help keep us safe as we develop relationship. Once the relationship begins to blossom in trust through clear communication, the rules are no longer necessary and become a liability, interfering with relationship building.

 

Your thoughts?

Miraculous Evidence

I recently read a Facebook comment lamenting the lack of objective proof of God’s existence. The guy seemed very sincere.  He mentioned his own personal crisis of faith and feeling disillusioned with his religious heritage.

I wrote a few words intended to encourage. I meant to come back to the post, but it was lost in my newsfeed.

It’s not the first time I’ve read or heard such thoughts…nor am I immune to such thinking myself from time to time. When faced with such questions, I mostly feel inadequate to meet the need.  I usually say much less than I would like to say, because I don’t want to come across as trite.  My head and my heart are full of potentially appropriate responses, but I struggle with how to express myself in a meaningful way…in a way that might be meaningful to the questioner.

The question reminded me of some of the ‘atheist challenges’ I’ve seen on the internet. One I read a few years ago challenged Christians to demonstrate just one objectively verifiable miracle.  I didn’t respond to the challenge…I did ponder the perspective of the author.

What, exactly, is a verifiable miracle? I assume ‘verifiable’ as used in the challenge means eyewitness testimony doesn’t count.  I assume it also means video evidence and photographic evidence don’t count.  Which drastically narrows the number of potential qualifying events.

On the one hand, I understand the reasoning. People have been known to falsify claims of miraculous events.  Eyewitnesses can lie or be misled.  Videos and photographs can be modified to show things that didn’t happen…or can be misconstrued to seem to show things differently from what actually occurred.  Someone feeling disillusioned is likely to feel very untrusting of such things and ask for more objective evidence of the miraculous.

Here’s where it gets tricky though. When we think of miraculous events, we’re usually talking about something extraordinary and transitory in nature, that cannot be reasonably explained or understood through natural laws or scientific explanation.  By definition, any transitory or temporary event we could name is already in the past…it has already occurred…which means the telling of the event now relies to some extent on circumstantial evidence.

Let’s say, for example, we’re talking about a miraculous healing. We could probably present the healed person for investigation to verify they are no longer afflicted with the reported health issue.  However, the reported health issue no longer exists and now relies on circumstantial evidence.  One could produce health records, scans, x-rays, test results and eyewitness testimony that the person had, indeed, previously been afflicted with the reported health issue.  However, all of these could be dismissed as not objectively verifiable.  Records can be altered.  X-rays, scans, and test results can have names and dates edited.  Eyewitnesses can lie or be misled.

This sort of evidence would likely be admissible in a court of law where the bar is “beyond a reasonable doubt” but would likely be insufficient for the person demanding absolute objectively verifiable scientific proof.

For the person requiring objectively verifiable evidence of a miracle before they will believe, no transitory miracle will suffice…because transitory miraculous events rely on circumstantial evidence for context and verification of facts prior to the altered state.

So, if legal proof is insufficient, what about scientific proof? Scientific investigation begins with hypotheses and theories that must be tested and verified.  The usual standard for scientific evidence is experimental verification that can be replicated by other scientists.

This is where we start getting into questions of the definition of a miracle.

Fire touched to dry gunpowder instantaneously initiates extremely rapid oxidation resulting in a highly explosive release of stored energy. I would call that miraculous.  It is also objectively verifiable and consistently repeatable.

However, I doubt the questioner would accept this as an objectively verifiable miracle. Why not?  It is certainly objectively verifiable…as well as extraordinary.  However, because it meets the scientific criteria for objectively verifiable evidence, he would likely not consider the explosive nature of gunpowder to be miraculous.  We can replicate the explosion at will and provide some level of explanation as to how it works.  Therefore, it is considered a natural phenomenon explained by science rather than a miracle.

sunrise through fog

Sunrise through Fog

Do you see the problem? We have no lack of evidence of the miraculous.  As I type these words I am looking out the window at a brilliant sunrise.  What a stunning miracle!

Yesterday, I visited my son and held my 4-month old grandson in my arms. I watched his sweet smile.  I heard his laugh and consoled his tears.  So much personality and life wrapped in such a tiny fragile package of humanity.  What a wondrous miracle!

Daily I am overwhelmed, awed and humbled by the miraculous. Most of these miraculous events are objectively verifiable by any scientific standard.  Yet, because they are objectively verifiable, they are dismissed as not miraculous enough.  The issue is neither a lack of scientific evidence nor a lack of miracles.  The issue is of a more philosophical nature…as soon as we are able to provide objectively verifiable proof we stop considering the event to be of a miraculous nature…because it is scientifically verifiable.

So, what if we could find a miraculous event that was scientifically verifiable but for which we have no scientific explanation…a verifiable phenomenon so outside our understanding of the natural universe that leading scientists are forced to admit it is beyond their understanding? Would that meet the standard of an objectively verifiable miracle?

If so, I have very good news for you. That miracle exists and is as close as the nearest light switch.

Light is truly extraordinary in nature. Light consistently defies our understanding of the natural laws.  Though not at all uncommon in our natural world, light obstinately behaves as though it belongs to some other realm outside our natural world. Every time we develop a new theory to try to explain the behavior of light, we make a new discovery that confounds the latest theories.

In trying to explain what light is, we may describe it as rays, or as waves, or as particles. Scientific evidence shows it is all three…and none of the above.  In some ways light behaves as rays…yet it also contradicts ray theory.  In some ways light behaves as waves…yet it also contradicts wave theory.  In some ways light behaves as particles…yet it also contradicts particle theory.

It seems as though we must use sometimes the one theory and sometimes the other, while at times we may use either. We are faced with a new kind of difficulty. We have two contradictory pictures of reality; separately neither of them fully explains the phenomena of light, but together they do. – Albert Einstein

In an effort to explain light’s stubborn refusal to conform to the normal scientific laws of relativity, Albert Einstein developed his generalized theory of relativity. The speed of light has been verifiably proven to be constant no matter the relative speeds of the viewer and the light source.  Einstein theorized that time and distance must, therefore, vary as a function of velocity.  Einstein’s theory nicely provides the required mathematics.  Yet, he clearly demonstrates that rather than learning how light fits into our understanding of the natural laws, we must instead adjust our understanding of the natural laws to conform to the behavior of light.

In more recent years, a whole new branch of physics called Quantum Physics has emerged to study another property of light. Even when light is carefully released one photon particle at a time, it still behaves in a wave interference manner, as though it were being continuously released as waves.  This behavior is objectively verifiable and repeatable, but virtually unexplainable.

Even more inexplicable, the behavior changes if an observer records the photon paths in real time…the observer influences the outcome of the experiment by simply observing.  Without an observer, the carefully controlled experiment results in wave-interference patterns.  With an observer recording the path of each photon, the exact same carefully controlled experiment results in random patterns as predicted by particle theory.

In an attempt to explain this behavior, quantum physicists have developed theories involving alternate parallel universes interconnected by probabilistic timelines.

space time continuum with duplicate earths

Alternate Reality – pic by Victor Habbick

Again, we find we cannot explain the behavior of light through our understanding of natural laws. We must, instead, adjust our understanding of the natural laws, including relying on hypothetical alternate realities we have no way of directly investigating or verifying.  We must rely, instead, on indirect observations based on the properties of light within our own observable universe.

I have heard a saying among quantum physicists, “If you think you understand quantum physics, you don’t.” So, here we have a scientifically verifiable phenomenon which the leading specialized scientists admit they do not understand, cannot explain, and must resort to hypothetical propositions of unverifiable alternate universes in an attempt to explain.

Surely, light qualifies as a verifiable phenomenon so outside our understanding of the natural universe that leading scientists are forced to admit it is beyond their understanding!

Light is, indeed, an objectively verifiable miracle which we encounter on a daily basis.

Light is an objectively verifiable miracle which we encounter on a daily basis! Click To Tweet

No wonder Jesus said of Himself, “I am the light of the world”! (John 8:12)

Jesus was in this world but was not of this world. Jesus did not conform to the natural laws of this world…the natural laws conformed to Him.

Born of a virgin…turned water into wine…walked on water…calmed a storm with a verbal rebuke…healed the sick…raised the dead…died and was resurrected. All verified by multiple eyewitnesses…carefully recorded for posterity…

Unbelievable? Not sufficiently objectively verifiable?

Surely no more unbelievable than the hypothetical alternate universes relied on in attempting to explain the miraculously supernatural nature of light…which is scientifically established as consistently objectively verifiable…

Confederate Monuments

I was born and raised in south Arkansas, and am still a proud resident of this beautiful state. I grew up with a sense of pride in my heritage, both as an American and as a Southerner.

My family history includes oral traditions of ancestors who fought on both sides of the Civil War…of men walking the picket lines at night seeking out a beloved cousin fighting on the opposing side, for the purpose of sharing news of loved ones back home. I was raised with a sense of respect for soldiers on both sides of that horrible war. Participants on both sides of that war were largely made up of decent men fighting to defend their homeland.

From the Union perspective, the Confederate soldiers were rebels fighting against their own country. From the Confederacy perspective, the Union armies were invading their homeland.

I’ve always struggled with discussions on the topic of what causes were represented by each side of that war. The oversimplified version in the history textbooks tended to express the causes as simply slave states versus free states…as abolitionists versus slave owners.  I always felt the need to push back against this view…to defend my Southern heritage.  It’s not that the slave –vs- free narrative is false…it is factually based.  Rather, it is that it fails to adequately express the complexities of the issues at the time.  More importantly, it fails to express so much of what is good about our Southern heritage.

General Robert E. Lee is a good example of what I’m talking about. General Lee was a product of his time and his culture.  Some of his views seem very oppressive by our standards.  Some of his views seem very liberal by the standards of his culture and historical period.  Before the war, Lee argued against the institution of slavery.  He also argued against secession from the Union.  Yet, when his home state of Virginia seceded from the Union to join the Confederacy, Lee chose to fight for his homeland.  There is something to be said for Lee’s sense of loyalty, honor, and duty to his homeland, regardless of the broader issues of his time.

In every earthly heritage (aside from our spiritual heritage in Christ) there is both good and bad. There are things worth honoring and things to be repudiated.  The South is often remembered for slavery, bigotry and racism…things to be repudiated.  However, the South also has a strong sense of hospitality, grace, honor and loyalty…things to be honored and remembered.

This is not true just of the South. America also has a history of slavery, as does Western Civilization in general…as well as World History.  We have many things in our various heritages to be proud of…and many things that should be repudiated.

I grew up with a strong sense of pride in my Southern heritage as well as my American heritage. I also was raised with a strong stance against racism in any form.  For me, these are not conflicting positions.  I find no contradiction in being both proud of my Southern heritage and strongly opposed to racism.

I was in second grade the year the public schools were integrated in my home town. My parents were very outspoken in favor of the integration and in support of Civil Rights.  My mother volunteered my siblings and me to help with cleaning, repainting, and maintaining the public school buildings in preparation for the integration.  Many of my second grade schoolmates informed me they had been instructed not to associate with me, because my family were “n*****-lovers, Jew-lovers, hippies and communists.”  I was forced to learn at an early age to take a stand on an unpopular position in the face of both name calling and physical threats.  I learned to smile at the name calling and respond, “Well, I reckon so…Jesus is a Jew and I love him with all my heart.  I love all His children, too…of all races.”

So, yes, I have very strong opinions in opposition to racism.

I also have pride in my heritage as a Southerner. I have a love of history and enjoy exploring historical sites while visualizing the scenes from long ago.  I am generally in favor of maintaining historical monuments and cultural symbols.

Lately, though, some of the symbols of the historical Confederacy have been confiscated for use by white supremacists as symbols of racist ideology. And lately, I have become more aware that some things that are, to me, simply symbols of a history and by-gone era are, to others, symbols of oppression, slavery, and racism.

In hindsight, I can understand why.

The Southern states seceded from the Union and formed the Confederate States of America for the explicit purpose of protecting and preserving the institution of slavery, as well as all the institutional racism that accompanied the institution of slavery. Yes, this is an over-simplification.  Yes, there were other issues involved…issues of a constitutional crisis…of state’s rights…of economy…of fear of a slave uprising…of violence perpetrated by abolitionists.  Yet, all of these to one extent or another were brought to fruition as a by-product of the slavery issue.  Slavery was the central issue at the time, and even a brief summary of the various constitutions of the states making up the Confederacy make this abundantly clear.

So, despite my personal view of embracing the good while repudiating the bad, it really was quite predictable that symbols of the Confederacy would be viewed by some as symbols of racism and white supremacy ideology.

This becomes even clearer as we recognize that the vast majority of Confederate monuments are not historical to the era of the Confederate States of America at all. The vast majority of those monuments were erected 60 to 100 years after the Civil War ended…for the explicit purpose of preserving symbols of a fading ideology.  I don’t know exactly what the erectors of those monuments had in mind at the time.  I would like to think they, like myself, were interested in preserving memories of the good of our heritage while repudiating the bad.  However, since that same era saw the rise of the Ku Klux Klan, the fact is that many of those monuments were, in all likelihood, erected for the specific purpose of instilling a sense of pride in a culture of institutional racism.

So, should the Confederate monuments go?

As sad as I would be to see them gone…and as a proud son of the Southland I would be sad…I would far rather see them removed than to see them used as symbols of hatred and racism…or to see them viewed as symbols of oppression and fear.

So, yes, it is time for them to go.

Some might could stay, such as those explicitly commemorating a battlefield or maybe those truly historic to the era of the Confederate States of America.  Some might could be recontextualized or moved to museums accompanied by explanations of why they were erected and why they were removed.  But any monuments erected during the Jim Crow period for the purpose of validating racism need to go, one way or another.

And all this rhetoric about slippery slopes and where to draw lines…rhetoric about are statues of George Washington and Thomas Jefferson going to be next…it is just that…empty rhetoric to support an unsupportable position.

Why?

Because, whether we like it or not, the Confederate States of America was founded for the specific purpose of protecting and preserving the institution of slavery. Whether we like it or not, the Confederate symbols have become symbols of racism, bigotry, hatred, and white supremacy ideology.

The same is not true of the United States of America.

Yes, slavery existed in the early days of American history…that is a historical fact. However, the United States was not founded for the explicit purpose of protecting and preserving the institution of slavery, nor are monuments of American Independence viewed as symbols of racism and hatred.

The slippery slope argument is an illogical argument…an attempt to equate two completely different things that simply are not equal…with the intent of shutting down reasonable discussion of the topic.

That’s how this proud Southerner sees it.

Narnian Abuse

Although fiction may not always be a reliable source on which to base major decisions, sometimes fiction can help us see things more clearly. Good fiction imitates real life. The simplified versions of real-life relationships depicted in fiction sometimes make it easier to recognize interactions of the various relational roles.

In his children’s fiction series, The Chronicles of Narnia, C.S. Lewis illustrates several examples of highly toxic relationships.

The White Witch in The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe, for example, was very abusive toward Edmund as well as all the Narnians, including her most loyal subjects.  In fact, she was very manipulative and deceitful toward Digory and Polly much earlier, in The Magicians Nephew, where it was revealed she had annihilated every living creature in her own world of Charn… one couldn’t get much more abusive than intentional worldwide annihilation of all life…just to satisfy one’s own pride.  Viewing her interactions with others from the perspective of abuser tactics can be somewhat revealing.

The relationship between Shift (the ape) and Puzzle (the donkey) in The Last Battle also illustrates some classic abuser tactics.  It is quite clear that Shift is in the relationship solely for what he can manipulate Puzzle into doing for him, while Puzzle remains out of a misguided sense of loyalty driven by low self-esteem.  Ironically, Shift continually reinforces Puzzle’s low self-esteem, telling him how stupid he is and that he should leave difficult things like thinking to Shift.  Puzzle’s low self-esteem prevents him from finding the strength and courage to leave the relationship, yet the relationship continually lowers his self-esteem.  For Shift, the constant put-downs to Puzzle not only inflate his own already over-sized ego, but also keep Puzzle enslaved to do his bidding through manipulative tactics of guilt and belittlement.

In my latest read through the series, the relationship that most stood out to me as a study of classic abuse was the story of Prince Rilian and the Queen of Underland (aka The Lady of the Green Kirtle, the Green Witch, or the Green Lady) who turned out to be the same green serpent who had killed his mother. Of course we have the obvious maliciousness (obvious to the reader, not obvious to Rilian) of having killed his mother, of holding Rilian captive, and of scheming to use Rilian as a tool to destroy his own home and kill his own family and friends.  But let’s take a closer look at some of the interpersonal tactics she used to accomplish these goals.

When the two children from our world, Jill Pole and Eustace Scrubb, together with their Marshwiggle guide, Puddleglum, first met Prince Rilian in Underland, he recognized having met them by the bridge on the border of Ettinsmoor where he was riding with the Queen of Underland. Eustace truthfully said the Green Lady was very mean to have intentionally sent them into a trap intended to kill them.  Rilian quickly jumped to the Green Lady’s defense:

“If you were not so young a warrior, Boy, you and I must have fought to the death on this quarrel. I can hear no words against my Lady’s honor.  But of this you may be assured, that whatever she said to you, she said of good intent.  You do not know her.  She is a nosegay of all virtues, as truth, mercy, constancy, gentleness, courage, and the rest.  I say what I know.  Her kindness to me alone, who can in no way reward her, would make an admirable history.”

See how quickly Rilian jumped to loyally defend his abuser? When a truthful specific charge of attempted murder is brought against his abuser, Rilian defends her intent. He then recites a whole list of virtues she supposedly possesses…yet falls short of providing any specific examples…because she doesn’t actually display any of them.

Later in the conversation, Rilian continues:

“You must understand, friends, that I know nothing of who I was and whence I came into this Dark World. I remember no time when I was not dwelling, as now, at the court of this all but heavenly Queen; but my thought is that she saved me from some evil enchantment and brought me hither of her exceeding bounty…and this seems to me the likelier because even now I am bound by a spell, from which my Lady alone can free me.  Every night there comes an hour when my mind is most horribly changed and, after my mind, my body.  For first I become furious and wild and would rush upon my dearest friends to kill them, if I were not bound.  And soon after that, I turn into the likeness of a great serpent, hungry, fierce, and deadly.”

Do you see how the Green Lady has used a manipulative fog of deceit to enslave Rilian? Underland is a dark and dreary world completely devoid of joy or happiness.  Yet the Queen has manipulated Rilian into forgetting how bright and joyful his life was before meeting her.  Notice how vague he is on any details.  She has convinced him that she has saved him from an evil enchantment and graciously adopted him into her kingdom.  Yet he cannot provide any specifics of exactly what was so horrible about his life before Underland…nor of any good in Underland besides the presence of the Green Lady…a questionable ‘blessing’ to say the least.

And notice how the Queen has manipulatively turned the truth upside-down for Rilian. She has convinced him he is in his right mind when he is under her spell (believing all her lies) and that he is not in his right mind when he see things clearly (recognizes her lies as lies).

She has convinced him that when he is in his right mind (recognizing her lies) he is a danger to his friends…when, in fact, she is making very specific plans to manipulate him into leading a charge against his true friends, the Narnians. In fact, his true friends…those friends from his former life…the life he led before meeting the witch…are his ONLY friends.  One must wonder what friends she was even talking about him being a danger to, as she has so isolated him from all associates other than herself that he no longer has any friends.

Then she delivered the manipulative capstone of deceit:

“And soon after that, I turn into the likeness of a great serpent, hungry, fierce, and deadly.”

What? Wait a minute!  Who turns into a serpent?  Certainly not Prince Rilian!  No, it is the Queen herself who turns into a deadly serpent…the same serpent who killed his mother.  Yet she has convinced Rilian he is the one who transforms into a monster.

This fog of manipulative deception is so typical of abuse! Some of you who have experienced abuse will recognize it.  The bitter clinging to vague imagined slights of friends from life before the abuser…the imagined virtues of the abuser based solely on their statements of intent that never actually come through in reality…the upside-down world of confusing one’s true identity with the abuser’s character and the abuser’s character as one’s true identity…it is a fog of deception much as Lewis has portrayed here.

This common abusive tactic, called gas-lighting, uses manipulative deceit to lead the abuse target to doubt their own senses, suspect their own memories, and question even their own sanity.  The goal is to make the target completely dependent on the abuser for their perception of reality.

Have you ever wondered why an abuse victim stays? This is often part of the reason.  The fog of deception is not easily penetrated.

Later, with the help of his new friends, Prince Rilian is able to pierce the fog of deceit and clearly see the witch’s enslavement for what it was. However, the witch manages to once again draw him into her web of lies, along with his new friends.  Through the use of illogical arguments, she soon has all four accepting her lies and falling under her fog of deception.  She asks questions as though she is interested in understanding…yet all she really wants is to convince them to abandon truth for her lies.  The more they try to convince her of the truth, the more deeply they succumb to her web of deceit.  Before long, she has them believing there is no such thing as a sun, moon, stars, trees, or green grass…that nothing exists outside the dark dismal world she rules in Underland.

Finally, at the last moment, Puddleglum gathered his strength and took a bold stand:

“All you’ve been saying is quite right, I shouldn’t wonder. I’m a chap who always liked to know the worst and then put the best face I can on it.  So I won’t deny any of what you said.  But there’s one thing more to be said, even so.  Suppose we have only dreamed, or made up, all those things—trees and grass and sun and moon and stars and Aslan himself.  Suppose we have.  Then all I can say is that, in that case, the made-up things seem a good deal more important than the real ones.  Suppose this black pit of a kingdom of yours is the only world.  Well it strikes me as a pretty poor one.  And that’s a funny thing, when you come to think of it.  We’re just babies making up a game, if you’re right.  But four babies playing a game can make a play world which licks your real world hollow.  That’s why I’m going to stand by the play-world.  I’m on Aslan’s side even if there isn’t any Aslan to lead it.  I’m going to live as like a Narnian as I can even if there isn’t any Narnia.  So, thanking you kindly for our supper, if these two gentlemen and the young lady are ready, we’re leaving your court at once and setting out in the dark to spend our lives looking for Overland.  Not that our lives will be very long, I should think; but that’s a small loss if the world’s as dull a place as you say.”

To quote Eustace and Jill, “Oh, hurrah! Good old Puddleglum!”

Puddleglum wisely stopped trying to convince the witch. He stopped debating with her.  Debating was playing right into her game plan.  She had no interest in understanding their perspective, nor of seeing the truth, nor even of using logical arguments in debate.  In fact, she already knew what they said was true and what she said was a lie…she was not in need of convincing nor open to being convinced.  But as long as she could draw them into a debate, she could continue to spin her web of lies, making them question their own sanity, their own memories, and the testimony of their own eyes.

Puddleglum chose to stop debating and to simply cling to what truth he could see. He took a stand and stated the truth he could see at the moment…in a manner that shut off all argument or debate.  Trying to convince the witch was futile and completely unnecessary.

It is important to confront lies with the truth. It is futile to try to convince a liar they are lying.  They already know they’re lying…and have already chosen to continue lying.  Debating just gives them more opportunity to spin their lies.

It is important to confront lies with the truth. It is futile to try to convince a liar they are lying. Click To Tweet

So stop debating. Stand firm in the truth and refuse to debate.  This is the best escape from the manipulative fog of deceit.

BUT…if you are in an abusive relationship…make sure you have a safety plan…ask for help from trusted friends…or make new friends who can be trusted.

When Puddleglum exposed the witch’s lies, she finally dropped all pretense and transformed into a deadly serpent, trying to kill them all. The same often happens when an abuser is confronted by a victim escaping their control…they become more dangerous than ever.

Cling to the truth. Take a stand.  Have a safety plan.  Ask for help.  Trust God…because He is trustworthy.

In the story of Prince Rilian, Aslan sent friends to help him in his hour of need. The friends helped free him from the Green Lady’s deceptive enslavement, and defended him when she tried to kill him.

If you are trapped in an abusive relationship, ask God to help you seek out friends who can help. One place to start may be by contacting a shelter near you.

Any abused woman located in central Arkansas can contact The Dorcas House at (501) 374-4022 for help and shelter for herself and her children.

Here is a web page with a list of resources to find help in other regions: https://cryingoutforjustice.com/resources/domestic-violence-agencies-us-and-canada/

 

[Linked to Messy Marriage, Redeemed Life, Tell His Story ]

 

Worse than Death

I slowly walked through the Holocaust Museum, taking time to read each placard, look at each picture and watch each video. I was familiar with the historical period.  I grew up hearing my father talk about his time as a soldier in Europe during WWII…and reading books such as The Hiding Place, by Corrie Ten Boom.  I’d seen the pictures of emaciated men from concentration camps.

Although I was very interested in the museum, I didn’t really expect to learn anything new.

Then, about halfway through, I saw the pictures of the mass graves in Poland filled with naked corpses of women and children. That did me in!

I was horrified…and a bit surprised at myself…and a bit ashamed that I was more horrified by this picture than by others. I had read about the mass graves with women and children…it wasn’t anything I hadn’t known.  And I had seen pictures of the emaciated prisoners…as well as pictures of the gas chambers and ovens.  And, yes, that was horrible.  But something about seeing the naked bodies of perfectly healthy women and children piled in a mass grave made it more real…more personal.  For the first time, I could picture my own wife and children in the picture…and I was horrified.

Even more horrifying was the realization that most of them were there through the treachery of their neighbors…neighbors who passively chose not to get involved…and neighbors who actively turned them in…for the crime of being Jewish.

This was a repeated message throughout the museum.  The Holocaust was largely made possible through the involvement (and noninvolvement) of citizens. The Nazis relied on people turning in their neighbors.  They relied on fear, preservation instincts, and familial protection to be stronger than love or duty toward people of a different nationality and religion.

Without treachery by neighbors (both active and passive), nowhere near as many Jews would have been rounded up and murdered before the end of the war.

I pondered these truths on the flight home. Then I sat down with my family and told them about it.

I told them I believed this sort of genocide would probably happen again at some time in the future…maybe in our country…maybe in their lifetime. I told them, If it does, whatever you do, stand up for the oppressed! Do not let anyone rule you out of fear.  Do what is right, no matter what.  It is better to die for doing the right thing than to survive by becoming complicit in murder.  It is better to watch your family be killed for doing the right thing than to see them survive by turning against their neighbor.

I told them, I love you and I would do anything for you. But I want you to understand, I love you too much to want you to survive through an innocent neighbor’s betrayal.  And I ask you, please do not let anyone use me to cause you to betray a neighbor.  Better that you see me die or that you die, yourself, than to betray an innocent neighbor.  I know where I’m going when I leave this world, and I know where you’re going.  When we see each other on the other side, let it be with clean hands, a pure heart, and a clear conscience, knowing we stood up for the oppressed.

That was about twenty years ago. My children are all grown now.  I’m proud and thankful they have each matured into adults who care deeply for other people…who stand up for the marginalized and oppressed…who are not afraid to take a strong stand on unpopular positions.

Reflecting on this experience, I realized this is one of the differences between my perspective and that of many of my friends.

I understand the dangers of the world and how important it is to stand against wickedness and evil. I understand the need for border security and vetting of refugees.  I’m all for providing necessary tools and personnel to the military and police departments.  We should take appropriate and reasonable precautions against the many forms of terrorism.

However, I also live with a constant realization of how very little control we really have. Ramping up security may help, but it can never guarantee prevention of terrorist attacks.  Tightening vetting procedures may reduce risk, but it can never eliminate risk.

This fallen world we now live in is, by nature, a risky place filled with much danger, sorrow and wickedness. We cannot completely shut that out thru military might nor thru closing immigration.

And I live with a constant awareness of the much greater danger…the danger of becoming the very thing we fear.

What if our fear causes us to betray our neighbor? Click To Tweet

What if we become participants in abusing and neglecting the marginalized and oppressed out of fear of terrorism?

What if our fear of tyranny causes us to become tyrants? Click To Tweet

We cannot always prevent evil men from doing evil things.  May God protect us from the danger of aiding them in their wickedness…from allowing ourselves to be ruled by fear…

That would be a thing much worse than death.

“Which of these three do you think proved to be a neighbor to the man who fell into the robbers’ hands?” And he said, “The one who showed mercy toward him.” Then Jesus said to him, “Go and do the same.” (Luke 10:36-37)

Your thoughts?

 

[Linked to Messy Marriage, Wild Flowers, Redeemed Life, Tell His Story ]

 

Guardians

As US Highway 82 runs through Greenville, Mississippi, the speed limit drops from 65 mph to 35 mph with a series of traffic lights. The traffic that flowed smoothly through the countryside bunches up and crawls in fits through the city of Greenville.

I was halfway through town, heading west toward the nearby Mississippi River, when I stopped for a traffic light. There was nothing extraordinary about the stop.  As I approached the intersection, the light changed from green to yellow, followed by red.  I began braking the moment it changed to yellow, and the light was red well before I reached the intersection to stop behind the white line painted across the asphalt highway.

The logging truck behind me was less responsive. A glance in the rearview mirror showed him bearing down on me while vigorously plying both brake and horn.  I punched the gas to jump across the spacious cross-walk and stop halfway into the cross-lane, leaving just enough room for cross-traffic to squeeze by.  The trucker took full advantage of the extra stopping footage, grinding to a halt a couple of feet behind my bumper.  Too close for comfort, but no harm done!  I relaxed into my seat, thankful a collision had been avoided.

Seconds later, the truck driver stomped up and slapped my window as though trying to break the glass, then proceeded to cuss me out. “What the h*** do you think you’re doing?  Do you think an eight hundred thousand pound load is easy to get stopped?”

Hoping to defuse the tension, I responded calmly, “The light was red, bud.”

“F*** the light!” he screamed, stalking back to his truck.

As the light changed to green, I pulled ahead of the heavy truck. A few blocks further, I stopped at another red light.  Glancing in my mirror, I saw the road-rage driver two blocks back in the left lane, abreast another logging truck in the right lane.  Both trucks barreled straight through a red light to stop where I was…one to my left and one behind me.  Both loudly revved their engines awaiting the light change.

That seemed like a pretty aggressive move, intended to intimidate. I wasn’t really scared, but I was concerned.  Accelerating through the green light, I reached beneath the car seat and retrieved my hand gun.  Placing it on the seat beside me, I breathed a prayer for protection and wisdom.  I wasn’t really expecting an altercation, but wanted to be prepared just in case.

As we neared the edge of town, the car in front of me turned right, and I saw a police officer signaling me to do the same. Something struck me as odd.  Traffic was rolling on down the highway, ahead.  There were no detour signs or flashing lights.  No police cars were in view.  Yet this police officer was looking straight at me, clearly signaling me to turn right, off the four-lane highway, onto a narrow residential street.

As I slowed for the turn I called, “Turn right?” “Yes, turn right,” he responded, then said something else about broken glass.  I’m not certain, but it sounded like he said, “Yes, turn right.  We want you to avoid broken glass.”

I made the right turn, thinking there must be a crew ahead cleaning broken glass off the highway. I glanced in my mirror expecting to see a line of traffic following, with the two logging trucks on my bumper.  Instead, I saw the police officer standing in the middle of the road, facing away from me as he watched the highway traffic roll by.  Nobody else was diverted.

It must be a mistake, I thought. I must have misunderstood something.  I needed to get turned around and back on the highway.  Then I saw another police officer two blocks ahead, waving me on.  “Go straight?” I queried as I eased past her.  “Yes,” she responded, “keep going straight.”

So I kept going straight. Three blocks further on, the road teed into another street at a stop sign.  I had to turn either left or right.  I looked around.  No more police officers to direct me.  Still no detour signs.  The car in front of me had turned right, but he appeared to be headed toward a specific destination within the residential neighborhood.  Right would take me back east…opposite my direction of travel.  I turned left.

Within a couple of blocks, I intersected a four-lane street at an oblique angle. This could be US-82 if it had curved right.  Or it could be another street altogether.  The street sign read Grand Avenue…not much help as I was watching highway numbers not street names.  Left would take me back almost to the point I was diverted, so I turned right.  Within five minutes a sign informed me I was traveling north on State Highway 1.  Knowing the next Mississippi River bridge was miles out of my way, I turned around to head back south toward US-82.

As I approached US-82, I glanced left. There was the street I’d been diverted onto, just a couple of blocks back.  There was no police officer in sight.  No signs, no flashing lights, no accident, no broken glass…just normal traffic flow.  I turned right and headed for the river as I pondered the strange occurrence.

By the time I was crossing the river, I was starting to feel a little peeved. Why did those officers divert me?  They wasted a good fifteen minutes of my time, for no good reason!

About the time I entered Arkansas on the other side of the bridge it occurred to me that those two logging trucks were now fifteen minutes ahead of me…with no idea I was still traveling the same direction.

Hallelujah! Thank you, Jesus!

Now, I’m pretty quick to see miracles in everyday events such as a pretty sunset or a baby’s laugh. I’m also fairly quick to give God credit for miraculous timing of events…things that come together with too much precision to be reasonably counted as random coincidence.  I am not, however, overly quick to call things supernatural if they can be reasonably explained as natural events.  I give God full credit for both natural events and supernatural events.  However, I don’t generally feel the need to label something as supernatural when it could be divine timing of natural events.

This one has me puzzled, though.

It really would not be reasonable to assume two police officers just decided to coordinate together to play a prank on a random stranger. It would be even less reasonable to assume they decided to single out one random vehicle out of a highway full of vehicles as the subject of a joke.  And it becomes even less credible to assume they would decide to play the joke without using any flashing lights or police cars.

Logic drives me to the conclusion that I was intentionally singled out to be diverted for a specific purpose. The most obvious purpose would be to separate me from the pair of road-rage truck drivers.  However, to accept this means I must also accept this was a divinely inspired plan for my protection…and that those were no ordinary police officers.

In the Bible, angels served two primary roles, as guardians and as messengers. Whether natural or supernatural, those two police officers acted as guardians and messengers on my behalf.  They were my angels.

Which means, I am greatly loved and under divine care.

Glory!  🙂

 

Your thoughts?

 

[Linked to Messy Marriage, Wild Flowers, Redeemed Life, Tell His Story ]

 

Unapologetic Apology

donald-trump-megyn-kellyI generally steer clear of political discussions on this blog. And it is not my intent to wade into political discussions in this post. However, as a blogger who frequently posts on the topic of abuse, I find Donald Trump’s recent interview with Megyn Kelly to be very troubling.

For the past several months, we’ve seen Donald Trump’s response to anyone who challenges him as typically being a personal derogatory attack, often of a vulgar demeaning nature. This is a troubling behavior pattern for anyone in a position of authority and especially for the apparent Republican Party presidential nominee. Trump’s supporters (and Trump himself) seem to brush such concerns aside as simple strategy for the rough-and-tumble party nomination politics. They say Trump’s behavior will become more conciliatory and less abrasive as he moves toward the general election.

Maybe so…or maybe not…

Even more troubling to me, than the demeaning attacks of the early campaign stages, is Trump’s supposed attempts at reconciliation. Here is a recent excerpt from an interview with Megyn Kelly, intended as a reconciliation after Trump’s very derogatory remarks about Kelly, across several months (USA Today, May 18, 2016):

During the FOX Broadcasting special Megyn Kelly Presents, Trump told Kelly that he expected she had gotten some pretty nasty tweets from his supporters when the two of them were in the middle of their spat. But he chalked it up to fans just showing their loyalty.

Kelly responded that it wasn’t just supporters who Trump retweeted. Over the past nine months the Fox reporter has been attacked repeatedly by Trump himself, as well as his followers via Twitter.

“You would be amazed at the ones I don’t retweet,” Trump said.

“Bimbo?” Kelly asked, referring to tweets that had appeared on Trump’s Twitter timeline calling her a bimbo.

“Well that was a retweet, yeah. Did I say that?” Trump asked.

“Many times,” Kelly said.

“Oh, okay excuse me,” Trump said. “Not the most horrible thing … Over your life Megyn, you’ve been called a lot worse. Isn’t that right? Wouldn’t you say?”

For myself, and likely for others who have dealt with abusers, Trump’s language here is full of red flags. In fact, his tactics clearly illustrate classic abuser default behavior patterns. Let’s break it down:

Trump told Kelly that he expected she had gotten some pretty nasty tweets from his supporters when the two of them were in the middle of their spat. But he chalked it up to fans just showing their loyalty.

Trump knows the primary purpose of the interview is to publicly reconcile issues between the two of them and demonstrate his ability to build interrelational bridges. As such, he understands he is expected to produce conciliatory language. But look at how he broaches the topic. He takes no personal responsibility for any of the verbal attacks on Kelly. Rather, he sloughs it off as overzealous supporters being a bit too defensive.

Kelly responded that it wasn’t just supporters who Trump retweeted. Over the past nine months the Fox reporter has been attacked repeatedly by Trump himself, as well as his followers via Twitter.

Good for Kelly! She calls Trump on his blame shifting, holding him accountable for his own repeatedly derogatory language across an extended time frame.

“You would be amazed at the ones I don’t retweet,” Trump said.

Classic minimizing tactic! Trump is attempting to make his offensive behavior seem less bad by comparing it to potentially worse behavior. Classic deflection…minimizing offensive behavior while shifting the topic away from the real issue of unacceptable behavior.

“Bimbo?” Kelly asked, referring to tweets that had appeared on Trump’s Twitter timeline calling her a bimbo.

Bravo to Kelly for keeping the conversation on topic! She did not fall for Trump’s redirection. Rather she pulled him back to the topic of personal accountability for his own abusive words.

“Well that was a retweet, yeah. Did I say that?” Trump asked.

Again, Trump plays the deflection and blame-shifting tactic. First he says it was a retweet, as though that somehow makes it okay. [Those weren’t my words. Somebody else said that. All I did was publicly repeat them numerous times.] Then he calls into question whether he actually said that, while knowing full well he did say it. In fact, his having said these things is exactly why this interview is taking place and why he broached the topic to begin with. Yet, when it comes time to apologize for his atrocious behavior and hurtful demeaning verbal attacks, instead he acts like it never even happened, “Did I say that?”

“Many times,” Kelly said.

Yay, Kelly! Way to go! She continues to calmly state the truth without letting herself react negatively to Trump’s denials, deflection, and blame-shifting.

“Oh, okay excuse me,” Trump said. “Not the most horrible thing … Over your life Megyn, you’ve been called a lot worse. Isn’t that right? Wouldn’t you say?”

And there you have it! After repeated attempts to shift the blame to someone else…to redirect…to minimize…to outright deny he even said it…as Kelly continues to hold him accountable for his own abusive language…this is the closest Trump comes to even admitting he did anything, much less apologizing for his behavior. A half-hearted sarcastic “Oh, okay, excuse me,” followed by yet another minimization.

Anything anyone else may or may not have said to Kelly across the course of her life is totally irrelevant! The relevant topic is what Trump said about Kelly.

And note how he follows the minimization with a question designed to elicit a positive response, “Over your life Megyn, you’ve been called a lot worse. Isn’t that right? Wouldn’t you say?” A positive response requires a change of body language, resulting in a change of posture. Again, it is a classic strategy designed to close the subject…to get Kelly to agree…so they can move to another topic while leaving the appearance that everything is resolved. Yet it resolved nothing. The only thing they agreed on is that Kelly has been called worse. That has absolutely nothing to do with Trump’s atrocious demeaning behavior toward Kelly!

This was not an apology. Rather it was both a continuation and an escalation of the abusive behavior Trump has exhibited toward Kelly for months. Except this was even worse…because this abusive behavior masqueraded as an apology and reconciliation.

Not once during the entire conversation did Trump ever take responsibility for his own words. Not once did he ever acknowledge his words were offensive, hurtful, or unacceptable. Not once did he acknowledge the lack of respect he exhibited toward Kelly, nor the false accusations he leveled against her. Not once did he recognize the hurt and harm his words and actions inflicted on Kelly. Not once did he apologize.

Folks, this is classic abuser behavior.

I don’t know much about Trump’s personal life. I’m not accusing him of anything beyond his exchange of words with Kelly. I am simply saying, this is an excellent example of classic abuser behavior. Trump is very fluent in abusereese.

I find that very troubling.

Your thoughts?

 

[Linked to Messy Marriage, Wild Flowers, Redeemed Life, Tell His Story ]

Life!

I don’t usually make a big deal about New Year’s resolutions, and I’ve never participated in the Word of the Year blogging trend.  New Year’s Day seems like a good time to start a goal with a twelve month cycle, such as reading through the Bible in a year.  However, most resolutions seem to me to be more applicable as daily life-style choices.

This New Year’s Day, however, I find myself very much contemplating lifestyle choices and what changes may be on the horizon.  It’s a matter of timing, really.  During the last two weeks of 2015 I received a cancer diagnosis and underwent two surgeries.  So, I am naturally starting 2016 with a certain level of new resolve.

In 2016…and every year thereafter, I choose life!

It’s not a new resolution…actually it’s been a daily choice for most of my life.  But current circumstances make it a fresher, newer, stronger resolution.

I’ve lived most my life with an awareness of both the brevity and fragility of this life.  Life is full of unknowns and unexpected turns.  We have much less control than we tend to assume.

The cancer diagnosis doesn’t change the unknowns, but it does put them front and center for me, right now.  My prognosis is very good.  I have every reason to expect a long, full active life after completion of treatment.  At the same time, there are numerous unknowns.

Right now, the right side of my lip sags, my right shoulder sags, and my right arm is weak.  No, it’s not a stroke…just post-surgery status.  Most likely, some or all of these symptoms will improve or disappear with time.  But there are no guarantees.  I’ve adopted an attitude of hopeful acceptance…I hope it improves, but see no reason to enjoy life any less if it doesn’t.

I still have radiation treatment coming up.  I don’t yet know exactly how that will play out…how often, how intense, how long, or how uncomfortable…nor what long-term effects may linger.  My intent is to make prayerful informed decisions then leave it in God’s hands.

I also don’t yet know what lifestyle changes may be required.  Advice from family and friends include everything from never drink another glass of wine to never eat another dessert…everything from slow down and taking things easier to throw myself into continual positively energetic activities.

Overall, I think I’ve lived a fairly healthy lifestyle thus far, and can’t see anything to point to as a source of cancer.  Post-diagnosis certainly merits more careful assessment.  I’m certainly willing to make whatever changes are likely to result in improved health.  I am not willing to live in unnecessary fear.

I choose life!

For me, choosing life means choosing Christ.  Jesus said,

I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live: And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou this? (John 11:25-26)

Yes, Lord, I believe!  I believe you are life.  I believe choosing you is choosing life.  I believe choosing life means choosing you.

I choose life! I choose Christ! Click To Tweet

I choose faith over fear.

I choose hope over despair.

I choose joy over sorrow.

I choose thankfulness over complaints.

I choose righteousness over sin.

I choose love over selfishness.

I choose forgiveness over bitterness.

I choose health over toxicity.

I choose life over death.

I choose godliness.

I reject Adam’s covenant with sin and death from which Christ has redeemed me.  I embrace the new covenant with God which Christ has enacted on my behalf.

I choose life!

 

Your thoughts?