Faith . . . Not as Hard as We Thought Pt. 2

Mark 6:35By this time it was late in the day, so his disciples came to him. "This is a remote place," they said, "and it's already very late. 36Send the people away so they can go to the surrounding countryside and villages and buy themselves something to eat."

37But he answered, "You give them something to eat."
They said to him, "That would take eight months of a man's wages^[e]! Are we to go and spend that much on bread and give it to them to eat?"

38"How many loaves do you have?" he asked. "Go and see."
When they found out, they said, "Five—and two fish."

My last blog was about something on faith that I had learned (or re-learned) from Mark 5 through the story about the woman with the blood problem. In Mark 6 we see a similar story. Not similar in its content but similar in its relevance to faith.

Earlier in chapter six, Jesus and the disciples had gotten on a boat to find a place where they could rest. (He had just sent them out to spread the Gospel and cast out demons, and they were reporting back to Him.) Anyway, because Jesus is such a celebrity at this point, finding a solitary place to rest is difficult and soon a crowd of over 5,000 people are there wanting to be spiritually fed from Him. Jesus has compassion on them and instead of running from them He decides to teach them. Well, eventually it gets late and the people are all hungry.

What I found so funny about this entire episode is the dialogue above. The disciples have seen Jesus do many miracles to this point. I mean, I know it's only chapter six, but to this point they've seen Him AT LEAST cast out demons, heal Peter's mother-in-law, heal leprosy, heal a paralyzed man, call Levi to be a disciple (this isn't supernatural . . . but in a way it is.), heal a deformed hand, calm a storm, cast demons from a man into swine, heal a woman of a blood affliction, and raise Jairus's daughter from the dead. All those miracles (and more) are recorded in chapters 1-5, and John tells us that Jesus did many more miracles than have even been recorded.

So for the disciples to expect Jesus to solve the hunger problem without a miracle, seems a bit strange to us. Let me factor in a few more variables that should have tipped them off that something miraculous was likely to happen. First of all, they were in the middle of nowhere, so food was not available. That's why they went to Jesus in the first place, because they were trying to be prudent; however, you'd think being in these dire straights would have earmarks of a possible miraculous situation. Secondly, they had just come from performing miracles themselves! Jesus had sent them out to preach and cast out demons. That's why they needed rest in the first place! So you'd think they'd be primed for the supernatural.

However, before I come down on the disciples for being simple-minded, I have to look at my own life. How many times have I just heard a great sermon and fervently prayed along with the pastor at the end that I would have more faith and then two minutes afterward complained about my job or my car or my future? Many times. It's an embarrassingly human trait. The disciples were just being human.

At least they wanted a solution to the problem, right? At least they were thinking of others, right? I think this is an excellent example of how "brotherhood of man" is not the highest goal. True they were thinking of others, but they forgot all about God at that point. This is a backwards mindset. If our minds are fixed on God first, the solution to help others becomes blindingly obvious, but not the other way around.

What I find downright hilarious about this passage is how Jesus answers them. They come to Him telling Him to send the people away for food and Jesus just goes, "You feed them." Jesus is the King of well-placed sarcasm. This was such a great thing to say for a few reasons. First of all, the disciples had JUST been performing miracles themselves, right? I wonder if Jesus is trying to remind them that they probably have this power too if they would just ask for it, "You have just cast out demons. You feed them." Secondly, their request--if they were dealing with a normal rabbi--would have been completely appropriate; however, they are dealing with Jesus. It sounds like Jesus is also chiding them for forgetting His supernatural divinity. "If you are going to come at this problem thinking horizontally, then deal with it horizontally. You feed them then."

Of course after hearing Jesus' instruction and not REALLY listening they all freak out because they don't have money and there are too many people.

Patiently, Jesus sends them out to see if anyone anywhere has any food to offer. What I think is particularly amusing is how he says it, "How many loaves do you have?" Now . . . maybe the word loaves is just a common word for food. Maybe the typical lunch back then was bread and this was a normal question, but I can't help thinking that Jesus is kind of leading them on. This situation reminds me of a mother with a child who can't find his toy. The mother knows the toy is on the top shelf, and the boy starts crying because he doesn't see it. Instead of getting the toy for him, the mother plays the "hot and cold" game with him until he finally looks up and sees the toy on the shelf for himself. This is how Jesus question seems. "How many loaves do you have? Go and see." I wonder if Jesus even looked at the loaves in question as he asked this.

The disciples come back with five small loaves and two fish. The pastor on this podcast study on Mark pointed out something really funny about this situation. According to similar accounts of this story in different gospels, it was probably Andrew who brought this little boy's lunch to Jesus. The pastor explained that the situation probably went like this:

Jesus: How many loaves do you have? Go and see.

Andrew: (seeing a willing little boy volunteer) Five!--

Other disciples: --Not now, Andrew! We're trying to solve a problem, man!

Andrew: ....And two fish.....?

I mean, think about it. There were well over 5,000 people there, and some little punk kid offers his meager little lunch. It's not even a man's lunch. It's a little boy's lunch. The only thing worse for this situation would have been a little girl's lunch.

And yet, Jesus not only fed the crowd, but also created a surplus of 12 full baskets.

Again, the point is not our quantity of faith or strength of will. As my pastor said, "It's not ability; it's availability." If we are but willing to be used, God can do incredible things with us.

Faith . . . Not as Hard as We Thought

So....I'm studying Mark right now, right? So...the pastor I've been listening to pointed out something interesting.

You know that lady with the "issue of blood" in Mark 5? Yeah . . . well . . . I'd never considered this before. Like, you know how the point of the story is that Jesus tells her that her faith made her whole and stuff, right? But I hadn't thought of what her faith really meant until going through this study.

Okay, so listen to this. The passage says that this woman had been EVERYWHERE to try to get healed of this disease. Nothing had worked, so she sees Jesus and touches the hem of His garment.

Now . . . let's think about what that faith entailed. It can't have been very big, because this woman had tried EVERYTHING. You know? Like, Jesus seemed like a good idea too. Of course she must have been ashamed of doing this, because when Jesus asks "Who touched me?" (in order to get her to fess up) she doesn't volunteer herself right away. This was probably because of Levitical Law and stuff about women who have blood problems being unclean. How dare she touch this Rabbi, right?

But anyways, think about how little faith she actually had. She was desperate. She'd been to all the doctors, healers, etc. that the area had to offer. Jesus must have been just one more try. I mean, what would it hurt? I think too often we attribute some kind of holy status to these people because of their being in the Bible. Like, that they were all great "Faith Warriors" or something when they were probably just people like you and me. She probably didn't have "beyond a shadow of a doubt" kind of faith.

Besides, "beyond a shadow of a doubt" faith is impossible for us anyway. Of course, a person may THINK they have complete faith in God, but . . . an HONEST person would say, "I WANT to have perfect, complete faith in God, realizing that I'm fallen, but also realizing that the process of sanctification draws me closer to Him" . . . but . . . mathematically speaking it's--at best with extreme optimism--like a point that approaches infinity. Until we get to heaven, we aren't going to love and trust God the way we completely should, and even then the Scriptures tell us that we will marvel about God for the rest of eternity. Not that marveling has to do with faith, but . . . He will still be awesome to us and we will never completely understand Him.

I guess for me this story really showed me two things. First of all, Jesus wasn't lying when He said you need faith like a mustard seed. Secondly, that we are TOTALLY without excuse to trust Him. We don't even have to be 100% SURE, you know? We just have to be willing to accept His gift--even if we don't understand what that gift totally means.

The woman in Mark 5 was willing to let Jesus heal her. That's all it took.

Intoxication Irony

A person can make a comfortable living by selling drugs
that can save life,

but

A person can become a millionaire by selling drugs
that can destroy life

?

Okay, now go back to catching up on Facebook.

Misplaced Militance: Proposition 8

I Cor 7: 15But if the unbeliever leaves, let him do so. A believing man or woman is not bound in such circumstances; God has called us to live in peace. 16How do you know, wife, whether you will save your husband? Or, how do you know, husband, whether you will save your wife? (NIV)

I Corinthians 7 is entirely about heterogeneous relationships, so it may seem a stretch to talk about gay marriage, but I believe there is an underlying lesson we can learn from these verses regarding this subject.

Recently, America had an election. One of the issues at stake in the election was voting for or against Proposition 8--gay marriage. The Bible is extremely clear on this whole issue. God intends for one man and one woman marriages. The Bible covers thousands of years of history, and within that history there are a couple things that change (or rather: seem to change) over time (sacrificing, God's methods of revelation, government, etc.) but Biblical marriage remains constant. The patriarchs and kings who had multiple wives could have stopped a lot of their pain if they would have just stuck with one woman, ya know? (Hagar, Bathsheba, Rachel, Leah, etc.)

So, when I start making my point here in a few sentences, I want you to realize that I believe the Bible and so I agree with IT'S point of view. I don't agree, however, with the going "Christian" point of view.

Do you know what I mean? It's that point of view that says it is our duty to make unsaved people conform to our faith. First of all, I don't understand how we are supposed to expect Non-Christians to behave like Christians. Isn't that entirely backwards? Doesn't the Bible say we are saved "unto good works" not by hoping that a "clean" life will eventually clue us into salvation?

Secondly, can someone please show me where it is written that our main duty is to fight for the "inerrancy" of Scripture? The Bible is already God's Word. It's Truth. . .Being ready to give an answer is an entirely different thing. We put on the armor of God to protect ourselves and those we witness to, not the Bible. To act like the Bible will somehow fall apart without our help of maintaining it is completely self-serving. It's the Spirit who works; we are only commanded to be willing to be used. We don't go around expecting Non-Christians to live like Christians! I mean, the verse doesn't read, "all Scripture is given by inspiration of God, but needs our help if anyone wants to reprove it or correct it." It speaks for itself. Our main goal is to glorify God, and we glorify ourselves when we get arrogant and act like the Bible will die if we don't uphold it. The God-sanctioned wars and fighting in the Bible weren't over protecting the fundamentals of faith, they were either over opposition to Israel's rightful claim to Canaan or after Israel was attacked first.

[*Note* I am not referring to people who have either died for their faith or died fighting to keep the Bible in tact. Those people actually had a cause. I'm talking about the mindset that says "The Bible is under attack by (insert your favorite left-wing forum) and it's up to us to protect it!" No. You aren't part of the Godhead. I'm sorry to break it to you.]

Said another way: Nothing we say makes the Bible any more or less inerrant. We can add stupid things to it or take things away from it when we talk about it, but anyone with half a brain can find out the truth of the matter if they just crack it open for themselves. So when we start spreading this paranoia in the name of Christ ("Our faith is in jeopardy! Gay s are stealing our churches!") we are actually showing that we have zero faith in God and have 100% of our faith in ourselves. The only reason the church is "being stolen" is because we are letting it. We are spending too much time promoting our Christian patriotism and no time at all in strengthening our minds with God's Word. The best defense is not a good offense. We are called to peace.

I mean, I suppose you could say that militant Constantine did a lot of good to save the cannon of Scripture, but . . . he also did a LOT of really bad things. Was that really Constantine being a shining light for the cause of Christ, or was it simply God working through a bad situation? I'm pretty sure there was a better way of going about preserving God's Word than persecuting Jews and putting Non-Christians to death. Ya know?

Okay, so how are we supposed to handle gay marriage? Well, how would you handle a child, with no knowledge of the monetary system? He swipes a candy bar from a drug store counter simply b/c he sees something he wants and sees other people walking out of the store with what they wanted. How do we treat this child? Do we call the police and throw him into jail? No. You just explain to him how to get the candy properly. I'm not calling gay people childish by any means, I'm simply using this analogy because like the child, they want a desire fulfilled and don't understand why Christians punish them so heavily for it. Christ realized how blinded people get of their sins while He was in the very act of paying for the sins of mankind: "Father! Forgive them! They don't know what they are doing!" Why do we do anything different if we are supposed to be like Christ? He suffered for the sin of homosexuality, but He also bled for the sin of being disgusted with another human being. Just because you've accepted the payment for your sin, doesn't mean it's a lesser sin.

I'll tell you why we act hateful. It's because we don't see the unsaved as unknowing. We see them as rejecting something they MUST know about, because we know about it. Now . . . this could be. These Non-Christians might have rejected Christ. But look at why. Why would a person have reason to reject their own Creator, Life-Sustainer, and Savior? Well, just look at the Christians around them. Every atheist conversation I have ever witnessed or found myself in starts out with truth being determined by observation and natural causes. However, talk to an atheist for a few minutes, especially asking him WHY he believes this and you will invariably learn that it was because of "the Crusades," or "the Church against Copernicus" or "Mrs. Smith next door who told me I was going to hell." They don't believe b/c of the people who do.

(People also reject God because of uncontrollably bad circumstances. A mother gets cancer. A family dies in an earthquake. Still, these things are a result of the fall of man. God does not stop them because the moment we chose death, we asked for them to happen in the first place--even after the warning. The fact that He now has to give us an alternative method to live in Perfection with Him one day, is because He loves us. This is a message that the unsaved needs to have explained to them, instead of having religious dogma forced down their throats.)

However, when discussing persecution, we Christians can easily turn it back around and talk about being thrown to lions and being used as human torches. But that doesn't really prove anything either. People suck. People victimize and are victims of just about anything. Some are choices; some are uncontrollable. It does no good to play the victim is what I'm saying, because as soon as it happens, someone else is victimized. This is because humans are not actually made to fight. We are supposed to live peaceably. And that brings me back to the passage in question.

Paul is talking in I Corinthians 7:15-16 about having peaceful relationships. Notice in verse 15 where he says that "God has called us to live in peace." My point is that if God has called us to peace and has given us guidelines on how we may avoid fights in our marriage without sinning, then we should probably live like that in all areas of our lives. The rest of chapter 7 explains that very point.

Voting on gay marriage became a political move when Republicans and Democrats found out they could get voting leverage from it. If you can get people angry and divided about a subject, then you can gain power from them and get elected. It's exploitation.

So what am I suggesting? Well, consider this: if we vote "yes" on gay marriage, then we act in agreement with something the Bible calls sin, right? However, realize that if we vote "no" on gay marriage, then we use our faith to attack people who need God. If the Truth is really Truth, it will stand up without our holding signs on the freeway. Does it sound like I'm a flaming liberal? Well, just think about it. When was the last time a gay rights poster made you go, "Oh! You know what! Homosexuality isn't a sin! That poster just proved it to me!" It didn't; it infuriated you, right? So, if we are supposed to be witnessing...then how is holding up an opposing sign helping the situation either? Is a "down with gays" poster spreading the cause of Christ or just making you feel good about yourself?

So what do we do? How do we vote next time? Well, I think this is part of our sanctification that every Christian needs to figure out with "fear and trembling" and not just take the easy way out. We need to realize that although America was originally a place of religious freedom for the Pilgrims, by the time our government was constituted, it was Deist at best with Greco-Roman democratic-republic ideals--not the Bible (otherwise we'd be a theocracy!).

Yes, America is going down. Yes, it's because we turn on God. Yes, we should be aware of this. But guess what! According to my Bible, the end is going to come no matter what! So . . . shouldn't our focus be on redeeming the time by spreading the Gospel? Focusing on America returning to a "Christian Nation" is wasting valuable witnessing time. America will only be a "Christian Nation" if all her people agree that Christ is the only way to heaven--not by voting Republican. Otherwise we are just fighting for America to be a moral place to raise children so we don't have to actually deal with teaching our kids right from wrong. If we can't handle raising our kids in a sinful world, then we shouldn't have kids. They are going to find out sooner or later and it would be best if they learned from parents who are honest about sin and righteousness rather than parents who hate that they actually have to explain what "gay" means.

If God thinks that a Christian brother should stay with his Non-Christian wife in order that the wife may possibly be saved, then He probably wants a similar reaction for Christians who come in contact with homosexuals. Isn't it God's desire that all people come to know Him? It's not that we tolerate sin, it's that we live as examples of Christ. Okay, so Christ overturned the tables of an institution that was corrupting the Synagogue, but those were people who should have known better. He ate at the tables of prostitutes and thieves--people who needed to know better. If we can't discern that "table" difference, then we are not following His example.

What I'm suggesting is that rather than keeping non-believers "under the thumb of what's right" by voting on something that gives us a good feeling, we actually school ourselves in the message of God's Word so that we can take it to those who are choosing to suffer. But that's so much harder, right? It's way easier just to yell and scream in the safe confines of our congregations, preaching to the choir, and getting souls all riled up against the evil people of this world. I am in no way suggesting the pendulum swing alternative of gnostic "Christian hedonism." Why is it so hard instead just to ask them questions, hear what they have to say, listen to how they are hurting, and finally show them how they don't have to hurt themselves anymore? Imagine the actual work that could get done if we could stop being so militant for a cause and actually be Christ-like. Maybe they will reject it . . . but they are less likely to reject a listening ear then they are an "anti-gay" poster. Can't we just care about them a little bit? Please? They are dying and don't know why.

If you think that sounds hard or uncomfortable, think about the Christian husband who converted after marriage and has to stay in a relationship with someone who has destined herself to a completely different eternity. Think of the struggles he has to deal with. Think of the agony he has to go through on a day to day basis knowing that his wife is not going to spend eternity with him. Think of how he'd rather have an easier life with a partner who at the very least has the same goals as he does. Think of how unfair it must seem to him that he actually desires to live for God, yet reaps no benefit from this life's marriage. . . Yet think of how much easier it is for the wife to accept Christ if the husband stays rather than walks out on her. Also notice how she isn't held responsible for the relationship staying together. Only the Christian partner is. That is because God expects more out of Christians. We have the Truth, so we have our eyes open. If we can't handle the expectations, then why did we sign up? Where is it written that Christians are supposed to have it easy?

Now think of what must have happened to a person for them to reject God's "standard" of marriage. How are they supposed to change their mind? By driving them farther away? Rather, like the Christian spouse, offer them what you have--even if it's hard to do. If you choose to vote against gay rights, make sure you are voting for the right reason and not because you hate gay people and want them to burn. We are called to peace.

Predisposed Genes

According to some scientists, homosexuality seems to be a predisposed gene. They also say that sociopaths have genes that make them behave that way. I watched something recently that showed that scientists can actually look at your DNA and see whether or not you will be Democrat or Republican.

So...the outcome of this seems to be: There can't be sin because it's just predisposed genes that we call sin. If we are born a certain way, then how is that sin? Why would God hold us to it if it's not even our fault.

But I think this is skirting a very important issue. That point being that sin IS genetic. We inherited the code problems the second Adam and Eve ate the fruit. It should be no surprise to us if there are certain sins that may be embedded into our persons so far that it's even coded into our DNA.

This means one of two things: (1) we either have to fight infinitely hard to change our very natures or (2) accept that Someone has already fought infinitely hard against our sin and follow Him in newness of life.

I Corinthians 15: 21 So you see, just as death came into the world through a man, now the resurrection from the dead has begun through another man. 22 Just as everyone dies because we all belong to Adam, everyone who belongs to Christ will be given new life. 23 But there is an order to this resurrection: Christ was raised as the first of the harvest; then all who belong to Christ will be raised when he comes back. (NLT)

God Saves the Sick

Did God save you from something, or did you become a Christian because that's what good Christians do?

Mark 2:13Once again Jesus went out beside the lake. A large crowd came to him, and he began to teach them. 14As he walked along, he saw Levi son of Alphaeus sitting at the tax collector's booth. "Follow me," Jesus told him, and Levi got up and followed him.

15While Jesus was having dinner at Levi's house, many tax collectors and "sinners" were eating with him and his disciples, for there were many who followed him. 16When the teachers of the law who were Pharisees saw him eating with the "sinners" and tax collectors, they asked his disciples: "Why does he eat with tax collectors and 'sinners'?"

17On hearing this, Jesus said to them, "It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners."

I've been going through a study on the book of Mark. (The entire study can be downloaded at: http://www.xenos.org/teachings/nt/mark/dennis/index.htm). The pastor through his exposition pointed out just how radical this calling of Levi (Matthew) was.

Tax collectors were hated by their own people. First of all, if you were walking down the road, and a tax collector saw you, they would make you pay. But you could run into another tax collector 20 minutes later and he would make you pay too. There was no checks and balances on this system. Furthermore, tax collectors were allowed to keep everything above the Roman quota they were required to collect. That means, they would cheat their own people in order to make money.

So you had these cheating low-lifes taking money from their own people; of COURSE the Jews hated them. Therefore any self-respecting Jewish religious person would not let a tax collector buy any of their merchandise. But that wasn't all. The Romans resented them for the same reason. Any person who could do this to his own people was not fit to buy from the Romans either. Think of the name "Benedict Arnold" and you start to get the feeling associated with publicans.

So here you have these guys who are getting filthy rich off their own people, who are not only forbidden to spend money among their own people, but also among the oppressive nation for which they work. So where do they spend money? Naturally, they would only be able to buy from people who were even lower on the "sin" level than themselves: prostitutes, pimps, and sinners. I love how paintings from the Renaissance give us this picture that Levi and the "sinners" at his house were these pious-looking scholarly male inquirers rather than the drinkers, revelers, and party animals they really were. Some of these pictures I find for this blog . . . they just make you laugh.

Jesus even going to Levi's house was a huge deal because of the "sin" he was infecting Himself with by being there. In that day, it was thought that after breathing the same air as a prostitute, you would have to undergo a full religious bath. Not for hygiene's sake, but because you might catch some of their sin through the air. What a terrible view of humanity, right? That there are "good" people and "bad" people? But we do the same thing today.

So this is the context of just where the Pharisees were in their spiritual dilemma. When they saw Jesus sitting there, they were appalled to the highest (or maybe lowest) degree. How could someone calling Himself equal with and a person of a Holy Godhead POSSIBLY think that this was appropriate behavior. Obviously, God wants all of us to live holy, pristine lives, right?

This is why Jesus brings up the point (I love when Jesus talks. He's just so dry and to the point.) If you are so healthy in your "goodness" then you can't be helped. When people realize their sin is the only time God can fix anything because they know they need fixing. If a person has a broken leg and they refuse to see it as broken and they continue to walk on it without medical help, they will never be fixed.

Blessings to God. If He is able to raise even Himself from physical death, He can surely save a spiritually dying people.

Anyways, as I listened to this teaching a rhetorical question popped into my head:

Did God save you from something, or did you become a Christian because that's what good Christians do?

Defiance Against Complaints

Apparently, I've been watching a lot of movies lately, because today I saw the movie "Defiance" and it made me think about something.

This movie is about a group of Jews trying to stay alive while hiding in a forest from the Nazis. It was extremely hard for them because food kept running out and their group kept getting bigger--especially since more and more of them were realizing that running away from the ghettos was their only real chance of survival. The main guys protecting them were three brothers who are sort of bandits, but they end up being in charge of the fighting and the general leadership of the whole group. Most of the men in the group were not this vigilante type. Most of the men were educated men and accountant types, so the brothers had a rough time transitioning these laymen into warriors.

Anyways, the food ran out quite frequently and every time it did, the people complained. Some of them said things like, "We should just go back to the ghettos." This logic of course is ridiculous to us today because we know what EXACTLY went on in the ghettos. Anyways, it totally reminded me of when the children of Israel would complain to Moses and say that they had it better in Egypt. Like, are you serious? You were making bricks and breaking your backs for those people! Are you kidding me? How weak can you get?

But then I realized . . . how often do I complain about things. And what do I even have to complain about? These are my biggest complaints: (1) I'm not married. (2) I miss living in America. (3) I miss my family and friends in America. And then I have all the other little complaints of: I have to work for a living, I have to make dinner tonight and don't want to, I have to go to tae kwon do or else I won't get my black belt but I don't want to and I don't think I'm very good anyways, I'm too tired, my students give me headaches sometimes. blah blah blah.

But none of those things are even close to being important or worthwhile things to complain about. For one thing, I know literally dozens of married couples who wish they weren't married. I have freedom. I get to live abroad and work abroad. When I am in America, there are things I miss about Korea. Living in Korea helps me at least appreciate America more. I do miss my friends in America, but I keep in touch with them. Who doesn't work for a living? And it's rewarding work. True, I'd love to be back in America, but I can't find a job there, and the point is I HAVE a job here. In this day and age a lot of people can't even find work. Dinner can be fun to make. How many people even get to take tae kwon do? Some people can't even walk. I'm too tired, because I stay up too late. My students are great people and I love them and they love me. So . . . all my complaints are either things that are totally self-inflicted or things that I should actually be grateful for.

So how would I stand up in a situation like this movie or the post-Egypt Israelites? Probably not so well. So I should probably never blame them for being so wishy-washy and weak. Besides, when your needs are met--when you are full--you forget what it's like to be starving. These people were starving, so of course they feel sorry for themselves. I was sick a few weeks ago and whenever I'm sick I just feel like, 'what if I never get better?' You start realizing that the times when you complained but you were totally healthy were foolish times.

I think it's similar with the Israelites. They forgot the pain and suffering they went through in Egypt because at least they were fed. You say things like that when you are starving even though it's ridiculous, because you don't know the future and the present seems hopeless.

So I shouldn't complain especially when all my needs are met.

Yes Man

This past weekend I saw a movie called "Yes Man." If you don't know the story, it is basically about a guy who commits to say "yes" to every decision he makes. This decision starts out getting him everything he's wanted in life until his close friends realize that he's just saying "yes" to decisions b/c of a commitment he made and not b/c he actually wants to. The point is made that while being agreeable and positive thinkers is usually good, if people are not maturely thinking through decisions, then they can actually do damage to themselves and others. Decisions are made based on weighing the morality and outcomes of the choices, not just b/c of a credo.

However, sometimes Christians do this very thing. We call it "the right thing to do." Why didn't you go swimming last night? Well, it wasn't the right thing to do. Why didn't you go to dinner with us yesterday? It just wasn't right.

Now understand that before I get into my main point, I'm not attacking people who have solid biblical reasoning for why they do what they do. If a person can systematically explain what they are doing and not just point to a verse out of context, then perfect. That's probably the way it should be done, eh?

I'm talking about the "I don't know, just think it's wrong"-ers. I'm saying this b/c for a long time, I was one of them. There is a danger in not knowing why something is wrong or right. Hopefully if you read that last sentence, you can readily see what the danger is. When we aren't sure, then we should probably make sure.

Paul teaches that not every sin is laid out in graphic detail in the Bible, and that for some things, the decisions are up to us to determine based on (a) what we know of Scripture and (b) the Holy Spirit's guidance--and it's that second one that I think becomes a huge problem if we simply "don't know" and "just feel it's wrong." Is the Holy Spirit's guidance vague and unclear to you? It's a big problem that's rarely ever addressed. That's basically what a person is saying when they don't know why something is wrong or right. Basically he or she is saying that the Holy Spirit isn't guiding them--or they aren't letting Him guide them. Instead, a burden of guilt is.

I think a lot of us forget that--like in Pilgrim's Progress--guilt is what brought us to Christ, but once we accepted, He took it from us. It's no longer ours. So why do we cling to it so much? B/c we feel that since God is Holy and the final Judge that He is judging every little move we make like a stern school marm. But that's not biblical. Yes, we should have the fear of God. Yes, God is Holy. Yes, He's the only True Judge. But all those facts are things that we already said we accepted. If we forget these attributes of God and constantly need reminding, then . . . there is a big problem with our spiritual life. How can we say we are growing closer to a God we keep forgetting is Holy??? And frankly, NOTHING we do is worthy of Him, which is why He paid our debt--which is the point in the first place! So . . . we are free to make right decisions and know why we make them and not chain ourselves back to guilt.

This is not to say that decisions should all be made in an instant, b/c sometimes the Holy Spirit wants us to think about things. I think we as Christians sometimes belabor decisions so long b/c we are afraid that every decision we make is a moral one, and so if we choose the wrong one we will end up ruined. I deal with this from time to time, b/c I am single. I struggle with my desire to be allowed to actually love and caress and care for one man for the rest of my life and being content with the freedom, privilege, and excitement of being single. I struggle with wondering if God actually wants me married, but I'm too hard to please. A wise friend pointed out to me once that as long as you are seeking God's Will, your decisions will be in God's Will. That's true. Take away your own selfish agenda and what else is there?

(However, I think it's important to point out that just b/c you really want something doesn't mean that God doesn't want you to have it. Your will and God's Will should actually match up. Another friend once pointed out to me that the saying "just two choices on the shelf: Pleasing God or pleasing self" is not really a good one. If your self is aligned with Christ as it should be, then when you please God, you will be pleased as well. Of course the coiners of the phrase probably meant "self" to mean "carnal self" but . . . I digress.)

There's really nothing to worry about. In fact, when we get to heaven, we probably will find out that either choice would have been in God's Will, but instead we allowed our souls to give over to the sin of worry and called it "discernment." A lot of our vices get that title, it seems.

It's important that we view our Christianity not as children in grade school afraid of what the teacher would do if she found out. We have brains; we are adults. We shouldn't make our God-given ability to make right decisions into a cop-out for something we just don't wanna do. "I just don't have peace about it." That becomes a sort of blasphemy, you realize. Do you really not have peace, or are you just being a baby? Just make a Christ-like decision. He's with you.