Interpreting our Experiences

It is interesting to see the conclusions people draw these days from the news or from their own experiences and then, claiming to understand the motives of others, make broad generalizations and theories about society, culture and even history. This may be partially due to the immediate access most people have to the news and how that is shaped by the biases and perspectives of those channels we choose to use to receive that news.

Books are also being written at a furious pace about our personal experiences and how these have shaped our understanding of reality. And, of course, we can't deny the experiences of others because we have not walked in their shoes. We must be gracious and sympathize with the challenges they have faced, acknowledging their reality is not necessarily accepting their reality as mine. But, in the name of compassion, we must let it impact us at least at an emotional level and let it begin to shape our interactions with people who have experienced something similar. Are you struggling with keeping all this together? Are you trying to absorb all these experiences into your thinking and live in a manner that allows harmony and congruency between conflicting ideas and experiences? Really, I'm struggling with this myself.

I was reading a post the other day and comparing it to my current studies in 1st Timothy. You can read the post here: https://www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2021/08/dogma-drives-the-christian-life

But it is a good reminder of several things...

In 1 and 2 Corinthians, Paul shows us that his experiences (or testimony) do not provide the framework for understanding the faith. Rather, the faith provides the framework for understanding his own experience. The post-modern (or post-Christian) tendency is to interpret everything in terms of our personal (or our group’s) experiences. But this is folly and leaves us nearly blind to the realities of life and the bigger picture of Who God is and what He is doing. When I see myself first as an American man or first as a member of any group instead of first as an image bearer of God, fallen and yet redeemed by Christ, then I have made my experiences or my community more important than the reality of what God has established and what He has done in Christ. But when I honor who God is and what He has done first, then I find myself in the place He has put me for His purposes and for His glory, not mine. This then allows me to appreciate my suffering as a tool to learn dependence on Him, my work as an opportunity to participate in His redemptive purposes, my relationships as a molding process toward godliness, my physical and material blessings as a gift from His hand to in turn practice generosity with others.

Paul’s experiences do not provide the framework for understanding the faith. The faith provides the framework for understanding his experience.

Paul summarizes this well in his letter to Timothy. Even when Timothy was struggling to deal with false doctrine in the church in Ephesus, establishing godly leadership, programs to care for the needy, to develop focused vision and godly character in a dramatically secular culture, Paul reminded him of his overriding priority to honor God first. First Timothy 3:16 is a hymn to honor Christ’s identity and His work, the centerpiece of the faith, not our own experience.

My identity and faith must be first in Christ, anything else is insufficient for understanding who I am, why I am alive or how to live moment by moment.

Are you interpreting the faith (Christian life and practice) based on your experiences in life, your interactions with the church or individual Christians, your suffering or your disappointments? Or are you interpreting your experiences in light of who God is and what He has done in Christ for a world in desperate need of Him?

Society - 11 years later

A few days ago I found my notes on "A Healthy Society" which was the basis for many of the posts I wrote on this blog in 2010. You might read the original post titled Society part 1. But now, after 11 years, I see a much deeper application of these ideas which addresses the current trends in our society, the dangers of an unhealthy society and the potential for healing in broken societies.

The current challenges are very complex, but at the root it is essentially a breakdown in both the family and the church which has left the government (or the secular, non-familial community) as the primary building block for all of society. We can dig into this more and recognize that the family was the first to be attacked by our society, destroying the role of the father, then the mother and even the role of gender as a defining element of being human. So, for some, this means that the traditional family is only "a relic of an oppressive construct" even as studies show that children with both a mother and father have the highest potential for emotional, social and economic stability. Our deepest human desires center on fathers who are present and engaged at meaningful levels with our mothers and with us. And we know, looking at the spiritual impact of this shift, that our experience with our own fathers is one of the greatest influencers of our view of a heavenly Father. Does my father value me or not and why? This, above everything else, provides me with my identity as a person.

Of course the impact of these realities regarding the family have metastasized into a social and political nightmare that is not just unhealthy but incredibly destructive. In fact, now we are even encouraged to ignore the science which identifies the human distinctions between male and female and applaud those who have challenged and "overcome" these distinctions to become "something new". Those who are unwilling to recognize the "power and beauty of these transformations" are viewed as oppressive and unloving while those who suffer severely from these transformations (against all wisdom) are ignored.

In my original post, I noted that "there is no circle/community in a healthy society which primarily honors SELF. The individual is very important in a healthy society but he or she always exists in a community where God, parents/family and others are honored." The trend that is resulting in the destruction of the family and the church as primary building blocks of society seems to place self at the center, the place of utmost honor. However, it does this in a way which is quite deceptive because it provides no context for the individual apart from political connections. There are no meaningful relationships which give the self identity except those relationships outside the family or the church. This is furthered by new fissures and fractures within the church that serve to promote a new concept of the self outside the identity that God has given us or our shared identity in Christ.

Now, not only is honoring our parents (by honoring their role and responsibility) and honoring God (through the worship and service of the church) minimized, but also the societal and political constructs no longer protect the value of the individual and his or her foundational relationships which provide each one with identity and purpose. This essentially leaves us with no purpose at all except for trying to define ourselves or redefine ourselves and demanding that everyone recognize this self-imposed identity. Self has truly become the center but is now the center of an empty and meaningless universe because there are no meaningful connections.

But, there is always hope! Our first hope is forever in Christ, who is our peace. He is able and willing to address the deep needs of our heart for identity and purpose. He is able to heal the hurt that seems to consume us, even when no one else is willing to identify that hurt. The next step, however, is to restore the role of the family in our own relationships. How am I honoring my own parents, even with their faults, and recognizing the life and value they have given me? This can be very painful, but it is the first step to forgiveness and healing in my own life. How am I taking responsibility as a father for the spiritual and emotional health of my wife and my children? Am I doing this with the understanding that I am under the authority of Christ and must submit to Him in my own heart in order to care for those around me? Am I willing to do what is right and do I have the courage to stand for truth and address with grace the lies of the world in my own life, in my work and all my conversations? It is only when we address these issues that the church will have any hope of restoring its influence for good in our broken society. It can then defend and support the values of the family because the families within the church understand and live out the values that honor God and truly value others. When the family and church take again their proper role, society is transformed and government takes its proper place and influence for the good of every individual. It is at that point that society can again honor others, giving the individual the value that God has given them as made in His image, responsible to care for others and accountable to our Creator and the purpose He has given us.

Jesus' words in Matthew 22:37-39 again take a deeper meaning, "Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind... Love your neighbor as yourself." These commands free us from the emptiness and slavery of self-definitions and establish meaningful relationships which give us both identity and purpose.

Meditate on it day and night

“Meditate on it day and night” (Psalm 1) - this is a reference to continual thinking, processing and discussion over a lifetime as you dig deeper into the symbolism and ambiguities of Scripture in light of the bigger picture of life. This means that any one part of Scripture, taken as a single entity, can lead us the wrong direction because it is so different from our current perspectives and cultural orientations. We tend to ask the wrong questions and come to the wrong conclusions because we are not thinking in the same direction, have not processed it adequately, want to fit it into our current theories or simply don’t have enough information. There is a compelling need to see the full scope of the Bible and its story of God in relationship with humanity in an intimate and personal way. This Story becomes my story because I see myself in the struggles, the failures, the rebellions of others. This is a very helpful, transformative and hopeful process when it develops in us a profound sense of humility, responsibility and fear of God.

But, this phenomenon of “letting this story become my story” is also happening in the postmodern, post-truth world. This extreme version is called “narratology” and can be a very powerful and sometimes very subversive tool for creating a new thought process in others. It began with Satan in the garden of Eden when he told Adam and Eve a story that they adopted as their own. But, as it was only part of the truth, it led them to disastrously wrong conclusions.

Which stories are you listening to these days? Are there cultural stories being told that are focussed primarily on emotional connections? Are there stories being told which are intended to make you feel guilt or shame? Are there stories that purposefully ignore the issue of original sin or emphasize our differences as the root source of conflict? Are there stories that blame certain groups of people instead of our individual (or humanity’s) rebellion against God? Are there stories which make God in man's image instead of man in God's image? Beware of these stories! These are usually meant to manipulate and always point us in the wrong direction even as they contain elements of truth. These stories lead us away from recognizing and honoring the image of God in every person. They lead us to think we have the answers ourselves apart from our repentance and God’s forgiveness. These stories lead us away from the sufficiency of Christ and into slavery and hatred. They lead us to depend on religious, philosophical, financial, works based or even political solutions to society’s struggles. They lead us to manipulation and fear-based control of others. But in the end, it is me who is deceived.

This brings us back to the original idea, “Meditate on it day and night.” Unless we let God’s Word impact every area of our thinking, asking to “be transformed by the renewing of our mind”, we may be trapped in the same way that Adam and Eve were trapped. Every morning my prayer is, “God, open my eyes to see as you see, to love others as you love me, to reject the lies of a broken world so that I can honor you and value others.” I don’t have all the answers, but I know where they can be found and they are not in the ideas of those who do not know God and have no desire to honor Him. Truth is always rooted first in God’s revelation through His Word and confirmed by the leading of His Spirit at work in my heart. “Your Word is truth.”

If you want to learn a bit more about Jewish Meditation Literature, see the Bible Project's video on this topic at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VhmlJBUIoLk

Discrimination and gender identity

Ok, I know this is not in line with my usual topics! But it is an important issue because it is central to human rights, education and especially to viewing others with compassion and love. Everyone bears the Imago Dei whether they realize it or not. So, in that sense, it is very important to talk about.

In the US there is debate in 2021 about new proposed legislation, commonly termed the "Equality Act". You may or may not agree with the premise and I don't dismiss your opinion. But it is also important to think and discuss such things beyond the political or economic implications in order to think more deeply about how such ideas are good (in the deepest sense) and how they contribute to or detract from human flourishing in a global and timeless, universal sense.

I read recently a piece by the Washington Post titled "Dozens of LGBTQ students at Christian colleges sue the U.S. Education Dept., hoping to pressure Equality Act negotiations". You can find it here. This article provides a perspective on a situation where those outside of a biblical worldview might respond with “How can Christians possibly think that discrimination against those in the LGBT community is right or acceptable?” And, speaking from a biblical worldview, I completely agree. But there are at least 2 serious incoherencies that the article is unable to identify.

The first is that the so-called Equality Act ("equality" is another topic for another day) is purported to be the best solution because it would restrict or terminate state funding for any universities which hold to a biblical and historical view of marriage and sexuality. But in fact it is not the best solution. No law will terminate discrimination nor will it give people new values or motivation for caring for others or valuing people for who they are. Laws do not change beliefs, they simply reflect the beliefs of those who vote for them. (They may not even do this well because people may be uninformed or deceived regarding the intent or outcome of the law.) Of course this does not excuse those who have been cruel or uncaring to these students who felt discriminated against in these universities! Very few will nor have excused their unkind words or unhelpful actions. But we have to ask ourselves, “Are there individuals who have been discriminated against because of their views on gender or sexuality at non-Christian universities? Was that discrimination a result of government funding or the written policies on behavior or dress codes at those universities? Would limiting or terminating state funding at state institutions solve these cases of discrimination?” The answers are obvious. So, the only possible and logical conclusion is that financial or legal punishment of a university for its standards of behavior and stated views on marriage and sexuality does not benefit anyone who claims to be discriminated against because of their sexual views.

The second is that the Equality Act creates new victims of those who are trying to be a blessing and support to current victims of a destructive social narrative and furthers the damage to those currently victimized by this destructive narrative. Is it true that a man can be a woman? Is it true that the very nature of my identity can and should be changed by social constructs or by how I feel about myself today? If so, then we are living in a social mirage where nothing is real or as it seems. Is it fair that those most vulnerable in our society, those suffering from gender dysphoria, children and teenagers, those suffering from sexual or emotional abuse resulting from dysfunctional family contexts should be lied to about the value and the nature of being human? Our value does not lie in our sexual orientation, what we do or how we think. Our value lies completely in being made by our Creator who loves us and made us for a purpose. When we attempt to destroy or redefine our identity, the image of God in us, it only results in tragedy, unrealistic expectations of ourselves and others and, eventually, self-loathing. It also promotes a society which does not value human life, does not value the mothers and fathers responsible for creating human life or value the children who are best able to flourish in a home with both a mother and a father who love them most and know them best.

There is another issue that is less important but no less valid. Consider for a moment my options when choosing a university or a coffee shop or an online vender. It might be wise for me to do some investigation to see if their values agree with mine or if they don't. If I plan to spend money, especially several thousand dollars at a university, I would want to know who is benefiting from my investment and the educational philosophy that guides their teachers and course content. If I don't agree with their values or don't want to advance their values with my hard-earned dollars, then I will choose somewhere else to spend my money. There is always another option! Let me be clear that I still am not condoning anyone's unkind or discriminatory actions or attitudes as individuals. But I am always discriminating against certain businesses or organizations because either I refuse to read their material, promote their ideas or buy their products. Is this wrong? Absolutely not. Did these students have a choice about where to go to school? They are free to choose just as they might choose to go to McDonalds or to Chick-fil-A. So I am a bit confused as to why, when they knew the values of their chosen institution, they are not abiding by the agreements they signed to honor those values before they spent their money there. This is similar to nearly every other case of supposed gender identity discrimination when trying to place blame on institutions and not on individuals.

Is it right to deny valid funding or accreditation status for those universities whose values and programs are in line with and serving the needs of thousands of students and American citizens? I don't believe so. All organizations have values and they are entitled to those values when they are not purposefully destructive, promoting hatred or violence against a group of people. When we assume that value statements promote hatred, we are actually doing ourselves a disservice by intentionally or unintentionally interpreting beliefs as aggressive when they simply define boundaries. When I say "You are not my wife" I mean this as a boundary which defines reality, not as an aggression against anyone who is not my wife. If they misinterpret this as hatred, the problem lies with them and not with me. Of course, truth can be communicated in unloving or harsh ways, but truth is always the most loving and helpful for us because it helps us truly understand ourselves and the world around us.

I am currently on the board of an international organization and helped to develop recent additions to their Statement of Values. All board members, staff and volunteers must sign off on this every year, which is a normal procedure to ensure that the values of the organization are understood and will guide beliefs and actions within the organization. I should also mention that this is an organization that serves the educational needs of Christian families in a global context, so everyone involved already has an understanding of these truths. Here are the 2 statements:

• The Bible upholds the value of the individual as well as biological gender, both male and female, as stewards of the image of God. We hold to the biblical and historical definitions of gender as essential to a healthy understanding of our God-given identity (Genesis 1:27).
• The biblical definition of marriage, exclusively between one man and one woman in a committed, lifelong relationship, is the only relationship within which the gift of sexual intimacy is properly expressed and where children are best nurtured and prepared for life (Genesis 2:24, Matthew 19:4-6, Hebrews 13:4, Ephesians 6:1-4).

If you want a statement from me, I will provide it here. But I warn you that taking it out of context is lying to yourself and lying to others about what I have said. Here it is:

• I am unwilling to sign any document or knowingly support any project or organization that promotes the fallacy that men can be women or women can be men. I will not lie to myself, our society, our children or further complicate the suffering of those with true gender dysphoria by claiming otherwise.

One more thought for us. Relationships can be difficult, irregardless of our values. Christians are called to the 'ministry of reconciliation' as described in II Corinthians 5:17-20. This is not an easy calling but it is essential for me to understand this as it relates both to those within the church and outside of it. Sometimes reconciliation is really hard in my own house between my wife and me because we are so different but have most of the same values. Sometimes reconciliation is really hard with those who have no idea of their value in God's eyes because our values are so different. But working in both these settings and everything in between is a moment by moment task that brings glory to God and a deeper purpose to my life as a follower of Christ. "We love because He first loved us." (I John 4:19)

If you are interested, you can find a good article on other potential impacts of the Equality Act here.

Recognize and evaluate assumptions

 How do I recognize and evaluate my own assumptions?

This is a question which I believe has always been important but is becoming important in a new way now. Having worked in education now for so many years, the importance of critical thinking has continued to receive more attention. However, critical thinking in public conversation seems to be highjacked by a tendency to ignore our own assumptions and to devalue the thinking of others. This is sadly not accomplished by reasoned arguments but by emotional reactions and even attacks on the other's person or character. Unfortunately, this may be partly due to the social media phenomenon which moves us away from personal relationships and accountability where people would value the relationship as much as the content of the conversation.

Now, in order to evaluate my assumptions and the assumptions of others, we must learn to ask good questions. Here is one to begin with. Is critical thinking important? And, if true, is a growing ability to think critically necessary for everyone in a society? I don't want to make this assumption without a way to back it up, but I have found no valid rationale for answering these in the negative. Certainly there are differing values about education and beliefs about what type of education is important and who should be educated. But if a community values education for its members, and not simply a process of indoctrination and behavior modification, then critical thinking is an essential ingredient of that process. The elements of education would be to develop an understanding about how we learn, what is valuable to know or do and why those are valuable for the individual as well as the community. The product would then be a member of that community who understands the values of that community and is able to contribute in meaningful ways to improve and even to lead that community through its internal and external struggles and successes.

If we take a look at a particular example, we can see a deep divide between critical thinking and non-critical thinking in relation to assumptions. This example is taken from the Smithsonian Institution in its recent "guidelines for talking about race". You can read more in the Newsweek article, but I will not post the "guidelines" here. Go to https://www.newsweek.com/smithsonian-race-guidelines-rational-thinking-hard-work-are-white-values-1518333 My comments will deal with the "guidelines" themselves and not the article about the guidelines by Marina Watts. Note that these were later removed from the display.

After reading the content, my first questions should be "What are my assumptions about this information? and How do these assumptions impact how I read and interpret this information?" Only after doing this, can I begin to ask questions such as "What assumptions does this information make? Are these valid assumptions, providing proof of their validity? Why or why not?"

In a brief examination of my assumptions, I must recognize several things. First, I come from a background of European immigrants to the US around 1900 who worked hard to make a living and did not depend on a government or system to supply what they did not earn themselves. I also must recognize that my constant and intense exposure to the Bible has set a standard for my thinking about life which is not common to the majority of those in the US, although a biblical perspective has had a major impact on the structure of American society and government over the last 400 years. I must also recognize that my experiences and education, living extensive periods in 4 countries, an intercultural marriage, work in ministry and education and much more, gives me a different view of life than many of my peers with a European ancestry. I recognize that I am opposed to ideas which set one system of values above another simply because they come from a group that is different than me. I am also opposed to the idea that the "rightness" or "wrongness" of any set of values makes that people group of less or more value. Finally, I am strongly in favor of the idea that when a group holds a particular set of values, those must still be questioned and never assumed to be "right". This is because I believe in a God who provides absolute standards against which all human values can be evaluated, not for the advantage of one group over another but for the blessing and benefit of all.

But now I will also need to evaluate the assumptions of the authors of these "guidelines" and possibly the assumptions of those in the Smithsonian Institute who allowed the publication of these "guidelines". I hope I am not too critical here, so I encourage you to evaluate my perspectives and share yours! We cannot learn and grow in our understanding if we are unwilling to consider other perspectives - especially of those who disagree with us!

Let me first examine the title. It reads "Aspects and Assumptions of Whiteness and White Culture in the United States". So, the information which follows is ASSUMED to be authoritative and somewhat complete on the topic. In addition, since it is provided by the Smithsonian Institution, the reader would ASSUME that it is not only authoritative but historically accurate and based on quality testing and peer-review, otherwise it would have no place in an institution of such quality. But we can see from a cursory reading of the information that this is not the case, nor is any proof or reference to academic studies provided for our consideration. 

Actually, the title is quite confusing when we ask ourselves a simple question such as "Is the color of one's skin a major determining factor of their values and culture?" A simple study will show that values are determined by the family background, education, social structure and language of each person, not their skin color. We must also recognize that many values shift over time for both individuals and people groups. Further complicating the issue is the increasing multiculturalism and cross-cultural relationships within our society. If a person has a French father and Indian mother, their values will be different than a peer with a Nigerian father and German mother. Which of these 2 people is white? How has their "whiteness" impacted their values and culture? "Whiteness", if there is such a thing, has no significance here at all.

Another problem with this title is the phrase "in the United States". We would ASSUME that the author knows at least something about people of European ancestry currently living in the United States. But this is not evident in the document. The first clue is that the designation of "white culture" is used in place of a more descriptive and precise term such as "European culture". This would at least provide a distinction between the more individualistic values of western society from the more collectivist values of African, Asian or Middle Eastern societies. But, of course, there are varying degrees of so called "whiteness" in all of these societies and significant differences in values between each of the European countries (many of which do not match these "guidelines").

So, we already have many reasons to doubt the validity of the content. But when we take a look at the content itself, we begin to wonder "How could this serve to significantly describe any group based on color? and How could this provide a foundational context for talking about race?" The only possibility is if these guidelines somehow transcend skin color to describe a group of people (whether caucasian or not) and classify these values in a category called "whiteness". This begins to lose all meaning because it is really not about color at all but something else entirely. Another follow-up question might be "What is the motivation or agenda behind providing such misleading information?" Let me provide just one observation.

In the first category, rugged individualism, it is said that in white culture "individuals [are] assumed to be in control of their environment, 'you get what you deserve'". I would recognize that no one is fully in control of their own environment, even if they think they are. Our skin color has no influence on the actual control of our environment, but this is not really what is being communicated here. So what is the author trying to communicate? I believe the statement has more to do with how one interacts with their environment and the responsibility they might, or might not "own" in order to change their circumstances. If you feel you have no control over your level of education, your job prospects, your relationships, your personal contribution to society, then you are less likely to try to change it, believing that your actions will have no impact on the outcome. If you feel that your actions do have some impact or that the more effort you put into changing your circumstances, the more likely they are to change, then you are more likely to try. We can also examine the statement "you get what you deserve" and try to think of what other options there are to this perspective. Here are a few: "You don't get what you deserve. You get what you don't deserve. You don't get what you don't deserve". None of these statements are always true for any group of people or for any individual. There are statements that could be shown to be more true, such as "Many people get what they earn but few get what they deserve." Is this closer to a "white" assumption, as described by the author? I don't think so - this assumption still has nothing to do with the color of one's skin but rather on their family background and their perception of reality.

But all this begs the question, "What is the purpose of providing such misleading information?" This is much harder to evaluate without knowing the author, their background and their personal values. Without that information, we can easily move to more dangerous and uncertain conclusions. But I believe I am safe in assuming that there is a serious misunderstanding of how multiple cultures and value systems have contributed to American society and how all of us, from every background, have benefited from this blending and exchange of cultural ideas. We learn the most from those who are most different from us. It is not clear to me if the author is judging "white culture" as bad or good and maybe that is not the purpose of these "guidelines". However, I am making the assumption that whatever the author assumes "white culture" to be, its values are ASSUMED to be different than the values that are held by every "non-white culture" - whatever that means!

I might make some further assumptions in the form of questions, and these are a bit more disturbing. Who is the intended audience for these guidelines and why? Is it possible that the intent in these guidelines is to divide and alienate people of one skin color from another? Is it possible that the color of one's skin is so important that there are people who would reject the values others hold simply because they have a different skin color? What is the purpose of promoting any division between groups within a society except to gain political power or material advantage?

What are your assumptions regarding these "guidelines"? How does your background and experience influence those assumptions? Are you willing to evaluate your assumptions as they relate to this information? Why do you believe (or not believe) that this process of critical thinking is important in developing an understanding of our world and how we interact in our society?

Connecting faith and life

I few posts back I wrote about "Real Value in Christian education" and mentioned several aspects of a Christ-centered education that provide unique and powerful connections between life and learning. We can now look more closely at the first of these connections:

1. Christ-centered education connects faith to life (God's law is central to all learning and to all decisions because I know He desires what is best in the long term.)

First, it would be helpful to have a clear understanding of what is meant by "faith" and by "life". Faith, in particular, is a difficult term these days. It can refer to a set of beliefs about God or about anything else. It can also mean that you "trust" something or someone in the sense that you believe it will happen or that person will be true to their promise. This is the context of the Greek word πίστις (pístis), which can also be translated as "belief", "faithfulness", or "trust". Webster's definition is 1 a : devotion to duty or a person : LOYALTY b : the quality of keeping one's promises. 2 a : belief and trust in and loyalty to God b : belief in the doctrines of a religion c : firm belief even in the absence of proof d : complete confidence. This is not quite the same as Mark Twain's comment that "Faith is believing what you know ain't so".

But, as I read the Bible, I see a deeper context for understanding faith. First, real faith always results in action. This is what led Abram to leave his home for a land that God had promised and even to risk everything to obey God's direction to sacrifice his son. This is faith that sees beyond the material and the short-term for something much bigger. Of course there were serious problems and mistakes along the way because those people who tried to live by faith did not always accomplish this. But God was gracious and provided what was needed, sometimes at the last moment. God is faithful even when we are not. In this sense, faith is the living out of our beliefs in our daily activities and relationships.

There is another aspect of faith that is connected to the word "fear". When we fear that something will go wrong or we will get hurt, this is also a "confidence" that our actions or the actions of others will have a certain consequence. Therefore, it is wise to avoid those situations or people who will cause damage because we have a healthy fear of them. So, when we read in the Proverbs that "the fear of God is the beginning of wisdom", we can be confident that God is always able to do what He says He will do. Sometimes this is a promise for our good and at other times it is assurance that those who do evil, who are unjust, unmerciful or mock God's name, image or character, will receive appropriate punishment from Him. Faith in God, much more than faith in man, directs us to do what is right in God's eyes and is also a blessing to us and to others. This faith comes from a righteous "fear of God" and overrules any "fear of man" because we know that God always has the greater power and will judge men by their motives as well as by their words and actions.

When we define "life", we must mean more than life in the physical sense. Animals and plants are alive, and may have a certain sense of satisfaction from living, but they don't contemplate or celebrate life in a spiritual dimension. Life should be more than survival, but rather a joyful, purposeful state of mind and heart, a knowledge and appreciation of growth in every area while in community with others who share that knowledge and appreciation.

This leads us to Isaiah 55, a rich example of the connection between faith in God and life in the context of learning.

Ho! Everyone who thirsts, come to the waters; and you who have no money, come, buy and eat. Yes, come, buy wine and milk without money and without price. Why do you spend money for what is not bread, and your wages for what does not satisfy? Listen carefully to Me, and eat what is good, and let your soul delight itself in abundance.

This is also the message of the Gospel: God is calling us out of our pain, our alienation, our confusion, our sin, into a full and deep understanding of Him and His truth. This truth stands in sharp contrast to the voices of our culture and the conflicting voices of our own soul about who we are. It is only in the recognition of His truth (as made clear in Scripture) that we can understand that His grace reaches even to us, who live so far from that truth.

Here we see that God's intention is for our good and our blessing. But it is not for us alone. We are blessed fully when we are also a channel of blessing for others. This can be seen in the 10 Commandments or "10 Words" which God has provided for us and are also summarized in Matthew: Love God and your neighbor. You can read more about how the 10 Words are a foundation for blessing on my post and I would also suggest Dennis Prager's book or video for an introduction to further study.

God's Law is not restrictive in a harmful sense but provides boundaries and direction in life in order to guide and stimulate our growth and our reinvestment into His Creation and every aspect of life and relationship. When these boundaries and truths graciously underpin the context of learning, they provide meaning and purpose in the learning process, leading us to a life of blessing and productivity with an eternal purpose.

Comparing the scope of faith and science

Introduction

When we discuss faith and science together, we might encounter seemingly incompatible concepts and perspectives, but this should not be the case! Instead of having to decide between faith and science, we need to come to the discussion with a clear understanding of how they support each other. This approach demands that we know which questions to ask and where to go to find the answers.

Here are the basic questions that must first be dealt with: What questions does science ask and how does it find the answers? What questions does theology ask and how does it find the answers? How does each area of study evaluate conclusions and measure the accuracy of those conclusions? And maybe even more important, which questions cannot be answered authoritatively by each area of study? (This Worldview chart outlines the primary differences between 6 dominant worldviews.)

Note that here I will refer to faith, theology and philosophy interchangeably, although they are not strictly equal. Theology is the study of what is known about God. Philosophy is the study of fundamental questions of existence, which are heavily influenced by what we know or assume about God. Faith is simply how one lives out their beliefs about God and the world.

Remember that "science" simply means "knowledge" (Latin: scientia / know) and that each area of knowledge has its own scope which we commonly split into various "sciences" such as sociology, chemistry or philosophy. (See my chart outlining some of these categories.) But many people take a more limited definition of science while assuming that the natural and applied sciences have the ultimate authority in every area of knowledge, which is precisely the fallacy that must be addressed.

Background

Some of my motivation for addressing this subject came after watching Ken Ham host Bill Nye in a tour of The Ark Encounter. (see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V2t_bAg8Abo) This is almost painful for me to watch because neither one of them seem very concerned about listening to the other's questions or providing clear answers, only proving their own point. What makes this more difficult is a lack of real intellectual connection because their foundational beliefs are so radically different. It seems as though they are speaking different languages. It may be that if Ken would simply give clear answers to the science questions from Bill while clarifying which other questions are really issues of worldview, it would help to direct the conversation and provide boundaries for each of them. Ken's questions to Bill could then be limited to how worldview impacts the interpretation of science because worldview is Ken's primary area of strength.

Which circle is bigger?

Since many people consider science more authoritative than faith, let's begin there. The areas of biology, geology, physics and the like are considered "hard sciences", which means that they deal with measurable and observable data. The hard sciences include the natural, formal and applied sciences. Common questions include what is the median temperature of Santa Monica from 1950 to 2000 A.D.? or what are the anatomical differences between the gorilla and the spider monkey? or what is the speed of light? All of these investigations are accomplished with the use of measurement and can be repeated and recalculated for near absolute accuracy. The challenge for scientists then is to take measurable data and draw conclusions about patterns. These patterns are then grouped into theories about historical data and potential trends for the future. Science has beautiful and useful applications which have led to a huge increase in the storage, processing and retrieval of information, productivity, communication, health, longevity of life and care for our planet.

Faith is actually an application of our worldview which does not deal directly with measurable data but with philosophical questions that draw information from many fields of study including science and philosophy. Philosophy (which depends heavily on theology) is not a "hard science" and is traditionally included in the social sciences. This is the study which is most directly related to our worldview. Common questions include who is God (or is there a god)? who or what is man? is there a purpose to the universe and our existence? is there a good and evil or right and wrong? and how can we know anything at all? Note that all humans deal with these questions at some level because it is part of our built-in thought process and requires us to draw conclusions from many areas of study as well as from our personal experiences and interpretation of those experiences. If we agree that we can know anything, we can also know that these questions must be important. Why? Because we can examine records from every civilization addressing these questions and how their conclusions impacted their society.

The diagram below illustrates the 2-way interaction between knowledge and faith. What we believe is influenced by our knowledge, but our beliefs also have the power to override our interpretation of new data and experiences to fit them to our current worldview. Those beliefs then determine our actions, which is the outworking of our faith.

Notice that faith (the application of our theology) impacts every area of study, incorporating concepts from many areas of thought. It does not depend on the details of science alone but must consider scientific data as a viable source for confirmation of certain conclusions. Science, however, has a more limited scope and can draw philosophical conclusions only as theories because philosophical concepts such as love, morality or existential purpose cannot be measured directly. This means that science, by definition, cannot ask certain questions while faith has a right to claim scientific perspectives as long as they are not directly refutable by scientific data.

Potential problem areas

This is precisely the area where many people become confused. Does scientific data show the Bible to be in error? Is evolution or a random origin of the universe already proven as true? Is creation, the flood or the existence of God even possible? These are good questions but they must each be evaluated by filtering out what science can or cannot authoritatively address. By definition science can only speculate about origins of the universe, creation or the existence of God. Evolution is also not a proven fact because it is classified as theory and there is no hard evidence for macro-evolution (the gradual and randomly selective change from one species into a difference species).

This leaves us with the questions about supposed scientific errors in the Bible and potential errors in the historical accuracy of the Bible. Science can address both of these questions. The question of historical accuracy has been addressed at length and the Bible has profoundly and authoritatively proven its accuracy in every area that can be measured. Those events that are supernatural such as the virgin birth and the resurrection of Christ, and therefore beyond the scope of science, cannot be either proven or disproven by science. But it is also clear that some supernatural events, specifically the resurrection of Christ, have an amazing quantity of historical proofs that cannot be denied by thoughtful investigators. If we investigate the supposed scientific errors contained in the Bible, we see that more and more of these have been resolved in recent years to show that the Bible had the correct information before scientists "discovered" them. One example is the common human genome that identifies one common ancestor for all of humanity, although this was not thought to be possible just a few years ago. The global flood is another interesting study and, as it has not yet been proven false by scientific data, theologians can continue to assume that it is accurate, having sufficient data to support this perspective.

It is also important to remember that the Bible is not a scientific textbook. It is a historical record that also includes poetry and accounts of visions and prophetic messages. It was written by 40 different authors including shepherds, priests, poets, fishermen, lawyers and a physician, between 1900 and 3400 years ago. Theirs was a very different culture than ours in a time with very different values, technology and perspectives about life. This requires that anyone who studies the Bible does so with a knowledge of that culture and the ability to interpret the text in that light. Those who believe the Bible to be the authoritative and inerrant Word of God have a foundation for life and knowledge that is beyond value because the Bible provides wisdom from our Creator about every area of life. Those who do not trust the Bible to be authoritative or inerrant are limited to a human perspective on life and the natural world. It is that simple.

Conclusions

If you have followed the logic so far, you can now come to some conclusions about the seeming contradictions of faith and science. First, according to logic, faith and science cannot be both contradictory and true on any given piece of scientific data. I would add that the existence of logic is evidence of order and purpose in the universe and that logic is dependent on faith, not faith on logic. Second, it is not possible to build a theological perspective (or worldview) on the basis of scientific data alone because there are questions that science simply cannot answer. Third, any theological perspective that claims to be true must be willing to address or explain the data common to human understanding and experience including scientific data. Fourth, one's philosophical perspective will always be more complex and broader than their area of expertise and have a tendency to color or filter their interpretation and application of data into patterns that fit that perspective.

If one claims to have a biblical worldview, then the acceptance of biblical truth provides a foundation for each area of study and gives that study meaning and purpose within the bigger picture of God's design and purpose. If one has an atheistic or materialistic worldview, then the assumption that nothing exists outside the measurable and material universe always overshadows their approach to each area of study and only gives each study a practical or utilitarian purpose. In this sense, a person with a materialistic worldview has no concern with or basis for an opinion on the existence of God except by the fact that it raises objections to their assumptions about the world.

We are like children playing on the floor, each one with their own toys. Suddenly one of us looks up and says, "Hey, you can't play with that! Give it to me!" But then the parent comes in and says, "Okay, time to put away the toys." Who has the greater understanding? It must be the parent who gives the children the toys to play with while there is still time to play. The "toys" of the scientist or the philosopher no longer have value if no one is around to play with them anymore. It's not the toys that matter, but each of us who are loved and cared for by our Creator in spite of our ignorance or misinterpretations of reality.

Isaac Newton, the father of modern physics, has said:

He who is presumptuous enough to think that he can find the true principles of physics and the laws of natural things by the force alone of his own mind, and the internal light of his reason, must either suppose the world exists by necessity, and by the same necessity follows the law proposed; or if the order of Nature was established by the will of God, the [man] himself, a miserable reptile, can tell what was fittest to be done.

In a study of many lives of great scientists, it is evident that faith in the Creator God informed both their worldview and their scientific discoveries since they "knew" the reality of a God who had created the world with order and purpose and enables us to know Him partially through a growing understanding of His creation. All of modern science is founded on this reality and a continued "trust" in the laws of nature and logic established beyond our own power of reasoning. Faith informs the natural sciences and enables us to interpret and apply them with an assurance of certain outcomes whether or not we choose to believe in God.

Debates on Religion

Every few weeks I happen upon an interesting article and then waste a few minutes looking through the comments to see what people have to say about the content. Sometimes this is slightly enlightening but it often just reinforces my belief that people have a long way to go in their ability to understand truth and communicate that truth in a graceful and convincing manner. And so, once again, I decide to not comment there but to consider people's arguments for myself and develop my own response...

Anyway, an Australian publication, ABC, published an article "If you want kids to be happy, try religion". First, I have a few problems with the title, but studies seem to indicate that both young and old can benefit from contemplating and subscribing to a meta-narrative that instills a sense of purpose and hope in their lives.

But the comments of course turn very quickly to the debate between those who claim that religion is a detriment to society and those who don't. I think you are familiar with many of the arguments:

1. The Bible cannot be trusted because of its dubious authorship and myriad errors and contradictions.
2. If there is a god, he cannot be good because of what he allows now and because of the horror he promoted through the Mosaic Law and through the activity of the O.T. nation of Israel.
3. Religion and especially Christianity has no connection with reality and scientific data and certainly cannot prove the existence of a god.
4. There are many people who are good and kind and generous in the world without any commitment to a religion or a deity.

Then, there was a comment near the end which caught my attention:

Yes, you can argue that the teaching of religion might present some of worthwhile values, and hence wellbeing, to students, but so too should ethics classes. I think that this whole debate is missing the most important issue about the teaching of religion in schools. I firmly believe that the ability to think critically and rationally (or, indeed, just think) is the greatest benefit a student can gain from an education. Religion, by its very nature, is the antithesis of this and for that reason alone should not be taught in schools, unless in a course on critical thinking.

So, how can we respond to these claims and, in particular, the comment? Let me deal with the comment, because this calls into question the source of our ability to reason. It is also the great lie of secular society which purposefully ignores the foundation of education and critical thinking. Without the Bible and the worldview that it promoted, it would be hard to imagine what our society would look like. Certainly there would be very little cause to read or to question the decisions of our kings and tyrants or to help others through humanitarian efforts or technology or health care. There would be no respect for the individual or his ideas or desires or feelings. There would be little accountability as nations or people groups for the harm done to others and no retribution for wrong doing except in the most brutal fashion and by the people with the bigger army or most powerful weapons. We must remember that the very ability to question the intentions, actions or beliefs of others comes from an appeal to a higher authority. In some cases this is our own reasoning, which is entirely fallible and incomplete. In other cases, it is the authority of the Scripture, which has never been proven false either in authorship or in content. So our friend's comment above is true in that "the ability to think critically and rationally is the greatest benefit a student can gain from an education". But it is the Christian worldview, and the Bible in particular, that encourages this approach to life and even provides the foundation for what we call "critical thinking" in our society and in the scientific method.

But, there is a bigger concern which is almost never addressed in these debates, the concern of the heart. It is more difficult to put into a rational argument but it is unavoidable if we want to be honest. Am I loved, do I deserve the love of others and is it worth loving others? God has answered this question not in arguments but in the Word made flesh, God with us, Emmanuel. What is buried beneath the foundation of the Universe? The love of God for us. Jesus' death on the cross demonstrates His desire for us to be with Him, our value to Him and our purpose in and through Him. Without this foundation, we have nothing and are less than nothing. Praise be to Him who has loved us with an everlasting love, not because of who we are or what we might do, but because He has made us to be His own, the recipients of His love and grace. That is the only real source of JOY and it has very little to do with 'religion' and everything to do with Jesus!

Real value in Christian Education

What is Christian Education and why is it important? From much study and experience it seems that the real difference is the focus on character, the heart of the person, not just the brain or the thought processes. Character formation is integral to learning because a person of character is one that is prepared for life and finds real purpose in both learning and in serving others. As we prepare for life we need to see the big picture of what life is and how we fit in. We know that we have been created by God to be 'image bearers' (Genesis 1:26-27), this means we reflect the character of God; but sometimes we are able to reflect it more clearly than at other times. Rick Warren says:

God wants you to develop the kind of character described in the beatitudes of Jesus (Matthew 5:1-12), the fruit of the Spirit (Galatians 5:22-23), Paul’s great chapter on love (1 Corinthians 13), and Peter’s list of the characteristics of an effective and productive life (2 Peter 1:5-8).

But how can I develop this kind of character which is a real reflection of who God is and who He wants me to be? This is the essence of the Christian life and what God is constantly working toward through my walk with Him, through my relationships, through my family, through my church, through my daily circumstances, trials and learning experiences. This is preparing for life and living out my purpose! So the calling of the Christian school is to support both the family and the church in this process of understanding and applying Truth from a God-centered perspective!

Now, why doesn't public education develop this character in our children? First of all, this character is not the stated goal of public education. Character is simply outside the scope of an academic approach to life where people "learn to earn", although there are schools that attempt to address character without a biblical foundation. But more importantly, there are several conflicting issues in modern society which directly impact the public education environment: a disparity between religious belief and popular belief, a secular vs. sacred concept of life, relativistic morality, and the false assumption that some people have more value than others. These concepts can be summarized in the differences between a God-centered worldview and a self-centered worldview.

In the self-centered worldview, I am my own purpose. I exist as a product of the chance fusion of genes from my parents. My character is formed by my circumstances and how I react to those circumstances based on my predisposition and my attitude. My choices are determined by what I think is best for me. Doing the right thing means doing what is right for me or maybe benefiting someone else (usually someone I value). If I am religious, I may make some choices based on how God may or may not punish me as a result, but the focus is still on my own well-being.

In a God-centered worldview, I exist for God's purposes. I exist because God has planned for me to be born with certain genes in a certain place at a certain time. My character is formed because of the people that God puts in my life to teach and train me and I learn to recognize His hand in this process. Often my attitudes and actions do not reflect the character He desires, but I am learning to do this through the difficult things He brings my way. My choices are determined by what God says is best for me as I learn Truth from His Word and by His Spirit living in me. When I don't make correct choices, I need to deal with the natural consequences and trust Him to use everything for His glory.

So the Christian school, ideally, has an approach to life and learning which results in beautiful and purposeful connections in the following areas:

1. God-centered education connects faith to life (God's law is central to all learning and to all decisions because I know He desires what is best in the long term.)
2. God-centered education connects work to service and ministry (Work is a process of using what God has given me to bless and serve others, to care for His creation and to communicate a knowledge of Him.)
3. God-centered education connects morality to absolutes (Right and wrong is not determined by the limited scope of what is right for me or my community but because God is Holy and God is Good.)
4. God-centered education connects people to purpose (My life has purpose because I am part of His big plan. But, just as important, each individual around me has purpose too and our interactions need to communicate their God-given value!)

We can take a look at these connections in more detail later, because they are unique to the Christian school. But remember that we as parents and as teachers are an integral part of highlighting these connections in how we live and in how we teach. What a joy and privilege God has given us!

Called to Lead

There are many reasons to answer God's call. The first might be very clear to you if you think about the events of world history and then look around at our society today... We are the connection to the next generation of Christians! Every generation is responsible to reach the next generation with the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

from: http://teachersjourneytolife.blogspot.com

We know that Christianity has been a huge movement that has impacted billions with the blessings of modern society. Most of the advances in science, medicine, social work, music, education, government and many other areas of study are based on the premise that there is an absolute Truth and an order to our universe because of our Creator God. Even many of the most notable advances in these areas were made by people who understood this premise of Truth and acted out of Christian love. God has made our universe for a purpose and we have the capacity to discover the laws of nature and understand how things work - there is no randomness or purposeless activity in God's Creation. We also see that Christianity focuses on the dignity of human life, whether you are female, from another race, unborn, poor, sick, old or disabled, each person has value and potential for a meaningful and fulfilling life. Of course this has not always been practiced, but it is the reality of Biblical teaching and Jesus teaching, life and death in payment for our sin.
As Christianity spread through Europe, Europe became the center of faith and the base for spreading the Gospel to the rest of the world. America took its turn and now east Asia, even with countries dominated by Communism and religious persecution, is the center of the missionary movement. How can this be? Because the real Truth of the Gospel is a living hope and freedom that brings dignity and purpose to human life. God has shown His love to us in the giving of His Son in our place to restore an eternal relationship with those who previously rejected Him. (See Ephesians 2!)

So even though Europe had been the center of Christianity, it eventually became spiritually dead and did not teach grace or forgiveness but a social conformity to religious rules. So we see the result of that in modern society: knowledge without wisdom, good deeds without love, things without thankfulness, health without happiness, leaders without values, ethics without morality, social programs without sacrifice, relationship without commitment, even religion without Jesus!

But true Christianity does exist and it does not depend on us; it depends on the reality of God and His gift in Jesus Christ! God will use people to be a part of His plan to reach everyone but I must choose to be a part of it. I want to answer His call to live in such a way that others can understand His love and want a restored relationship with Him. We must become students of Christian leadership because there is a world we must lead to the foot of the cross of Jesus. (This comes from my post on another of my blogs: christ-like-leaders.blogspot.com)

Kingdom of God

Let's look together at "The Kingdom of God". This is a concept explored much in Scripture but we still don't have a handle on what it means in our daily life. Jesus says, "Seek ye first the Kingdom of God and His righteousness, and all these things will be added unto you." I admit that I have been quite interested in 'all these things' but not so much in 'His righteousness' for most of my life. But this also demonstrates my ignorance of what 'all these things' are, or at least their ultimate value.

Looking at the context of Jesus' words, we see that the temporal things were important to people. The people wanted food, shelter, clothing, those things Jesus calls 'additions' or non-essentials which are provided AFTER we search for His Kingdom. How do we get there? First is a recognition of the value of His Kingdom over the value of temporal things. The righteousness of God is infinitely more valuable than what we think we need every day, a good meal, a comfortable bed or even safety! What we can't comprehend is the eternal nature of the Kingdom of God. It does not consist of food, money or even power. It is a relationship based first on God's eternal, everlasting, profound love for us and then on our response to that love (a reciprocation, a reflection of God's love). This may be the essence of God's Kingdom.

The Kingdom is not defined by rules or standards, it is defined by a relationship. This goes completely against the normal flow and understanding in our society. Jesus puts it most clearly in the form of parables. In the parable of the workers in the field, the owner hires workers at different hours of the day. Each worker contributes different levels of effort and time but they are all paid the same. So the twist here is a new set of values: all of them agreed to work, all of them came to work, all of them completed the work they were contracted to do, all of them had a relationship with the owner of the field, so they all receive the same wage, a relationship to the owner of the field and a new understanding of how to live. The generous monetary payment is just extra, an addition to what is really necessary.

So what does it mean for me to be a member of the Kingdom of God? Certainly it requires no social status, no position of power or responsibility, no amount of wealth. It is not even following a set of rules or being a member of a group of people or a religious organization. So what is it? Jesus says, "If my kingdom were of this world...". So is there any overlap between the eternal and spiritual nature of God's Kingdom and our earthly existence? It appears that the connection exists in the direction our life takes. This brings us back to "seek ye first", a value that consumes my heart and mind and that carries over into every other area of my existence. I must desire God's Kingdom to the extent that it impacts my choice of a wife, my choice in entertainment, my choice of education and work, my choice of words, even my choice of thoughts. This seems like an impossible task, which in our fallen state it is! But the journey toward God's Kingdom begins at the cross of Jesus.

Literature teaches that conflict exists in 4 areas: against God, against self, against nature and against others. But the key to resolution is addressing our conflict with God first, then we are in a position to truly resolve each of the others. If we don't settle the conflict with God, we will never be able to resolve the other areas of conflict in our lives. So this search for the Kingdom of God is the beginning point of our search for global peace, our search for the end of class warfare, our search for resolution in marital conflict, even the search for self-worth and personal significance.

Which road leads to significance and value? In a careful study of history and humanity, it seems to be the road leading to the cross of Jesus Christ. The cross is the center of human history, the focus of the eternal time-continuum and the point of decision in every individual life. This is the great "crossroads" of life, taking the path toward God's Kingdom or away from God's Kingdom. I must come to a place of surrender, recognizing that my life has little significance in the scope of eternity unless I surrender my will, my hopes, my loves, my values to the purposes of the eternal God, the Creator and Sustainer of both the spiritual and the physical universe. I lose everything of true value in turning away from the cross of Jesus or I recognize the only thing of real value in surrender to Christ and the Kingdom of God at the cross.

Practical use of resources

I've been writing on the value of time, energy and financial resources in the last few entries. So, how does this translate into a practical model for my personal daily investment of resources? First, remember that our goal as followers of Jesus is to use all our resources for His glory – never just a tithe and never divided into a sacred vs. secular dichotomy. As spiritual beings, everything we do (or don't do) has a spiritual facet or consequence. So, we need to take time to evaluate as a family what God is calling us to do with each of our resources. There are many ways to do this but each family needs to find a focus for ministry that fits with the talents, interests and convictions of each family member. If this is done well, each family member will be able to follow God's calling while being part of a team that is working together to achieve something significant in the Kingdom of God. In this way the education of the children, the jobs of the parents, the household responsibilities, the activities of choice and the use of time and money for the whole family revolves around a common purpose.

Though each family's situation is different, I would like to propose a possible distribution of resources using a drawing and then an explanation.

The inverted triangle shows the correlation between the level of importance a particular item has and the amount of resources that are allocated to it as a result. Some explanation may be required for my categories.

• Family always includes one's self and the other people that you are directly responsible for or to. Obviously, if you are a single adult you have less responsibilities in this area, giving you more time for other things and maybe less money to work with. Consideration must also be taken for older families or wealthy families which may have either more time or more money. My model may be most applicable to a husband and wife with a few children at home and a modest income of less than $60,000 per year. Unfortunately, many people have gotten into debt and this eats up income faster than anything else, forcing the family to focus nearly 100% of their financial resources on themselves. This, along with a lack of personal vision for ministry, has hindered the growth of the church, world evangelization and help to the needy in our modern era. Just when both time and money are more 'disposable', we have tied up nearly all our resources in paying off debt.
• I have combined the church and community into one category because the church should be heavily invested in the well being of its community, meeting its spiritual and physical needs. As it preaches the Word of God and testifies to the power of God to change lives, it should draw everyone in because of the daily demonstration of the love of God for everyone within reach, helping, healing, forgiving, teaching, feeding and caring for individuals.
• Focus ministries are those people and programs which most embody your family's personal ministry vision. If your primary concern is orphans, you might adopt children, help others adopt children, volunteer at an orphanage and give to an orphanage in another part of the world.
• World evangelization is probably the most important thing we can ever do, but this category refers to work beyond the walls of our house and the reach of our local church. We are to be involved in the Great Commission which calls for our prayers and gifts so that people of other languages, cultures and even future generations can understand the Good News of Jesus Christ.
• Our government as well as other charities take responsibility to care for extreme needs and disaster victims at times. Taxes also provide aid, protection and infrastructure beneficial to our families and communities. These may be worthy causes, though they are mismanaged and often unjust in their allocation. I believe that except in extreme cases, the needs of a modern community can and should be met by the families and churches of that community, not by an impersonal and wasteful government hundreds or thousands of miles away.

So, our own family's current objective is to live on a reasonable amount necessary for our personal needs and completely avoid debt so that we can invest our remaining resources in the ministries and people that are of value to us (i.e. Christian education, multi-cultural youth ministry, leadership training and support).

Creativity

This is my 14th year teaching Humanities at ECA and, unfortunately, it will be my last for a while... It has been one of my favorite subjects to teach and I will definitely miss this interaction with my students as we observe and respond to art in its various forms and also create art together. I have certainly learned as much as they have and my understanding of art has deepened over the years. One important concept is that our capacity to create comes from our Creator and when we create using the images, ideas and talents that He has given us, we honor Him and His gift of creativity. Hopefully we also challenge others to think about aspects of life and Truth as well as entertain them with beauty, humor, drama and passion. Of course when we destroy or deface the creativity of others, we are rebelling against the creative gifts God has given us and dishonoring Him and ourselves.

One assignment I've given students these last few years is to create a piece of art at the end of the year which communicates some aspect of Truth. There are really only 5 categories of Truth and each one forms part of a person's world-view: 1) What is the nature of God? 2) What is the nature of man? 3) What is the nature and origin of the universe? 4) What is the purpose of life? 5) What is good (and/or evil)? The Christian world-view takes a particular stance on each of these questions and has fancy words for the study of each: Theology, Anthropology (with Sociology & Psychology), Biology (with Chemistry, Physics, Astronomy, Mathematics, Geology), Teleology, and Ethics. Mono-theists believe that one all-powerful spiritual being created everything and gave humans the responsibility to enjoy and care for it. Other world-views are based on other presuppositions (one being that humans are the products of chance, contrary to the first 2 Laws of Thermodynamics, and that any perceived purpose or morality in the universe is a biological or social malfunction of the human brain).

When the students complete their work of art, which might take a variety of forms, I have them present their project and the class analyzes the piece based on what they observe in it and how it makes them evaluate their beliefs. The project here was done in this year and shows how we perceive order and design and our desire to recreate it for others to enjoy as well.

Financial Resources

Finances are the third resource after time and energy. Some may consider money to be the most important or even the only resource, but they are mistaken. Money is actually the least valuable in the sense that it is the most easily renewed. When all your money is spent, a simple investment of time and energy can again provide for your needs with some left over for others. In a wealthy society, money is easily wasted or can be invested in others for their good. This is the true benefit of money, its facility for providing for others who may be struggling to provide for themselves. The danger is when the giver just gives money without any true concern for the persons receiving or when the receiver becomes dependent on the giver with no intention of providing for their own needs in the future. This is why the giver must give wisely so that their gift is not creating a bigger problem down the road. The missionary, pastor or full-time Christian worker is an interesting exception. They actually are freed to invest all of their time and energy in ministry activities because others are 'employing' them and empowering them financially to do what God has called them to do.

Regarding the poor, I do not want to trivialize their situation. More than 50% of the world's population does not make enough money to provide for their basic needs. This is a huge problem that is not usually a result of their personal choices. Many times the government is to blame because they administer their resources poorly or actually steal from their people instead of serving their needs. More people could also be helped by Christians who put their faith and resources into action – but Jesus has clearly stated that the poor will always be with us. This gives us an opportunity not only to care for the needy, the orphaned, the sick, the outcast, teaching them to provide for themselves and others, but also for all who most certainly need the forgiveness and hope that is found in Jesus Christ. The church demonstrates the love of God when it acts in a way that reflects His concern for both the spiritual and physical needs of those outside the church.

Energy

After time, the second most important resource we have is energy. Where does our energy come from? It is generated by the food we eat; but efficient use of that energy depends on our physical and emotional well being. If we simply eat without training our body and mind to use and focus the energy properly, much of it is wasted or at least inaccessible. The really interesting thing about energy is that we have access to all of it at any time. So I can teach all day at 100% and play with my little boys at 100% for several hours in the evening (if I'm in shape). We don't need to 'save' 50% of our energy for when work is over, only working at 50% for those 8 hours. For this to work, we need activity that puts us in condition mentally and physically to access that energy AND we must decide to invest all our energy all day long in the people and activities of value to us.

There may be activities which involve very little or no energy - watching TV for example. Though I enjoy it once in a while, I realize that if it does not demand much energy, it is probably not worth my time either. Remember that mental energy - conversation, problem solving, critical thinking, analysis - is just as valuable as physical energy. But we need to train ourselves daily in both areas because our tendency is always toward laziness. I don't have any studies to support my ideas here, sorry. If someone has data which supports or refutes me, I would love to hear it. I guess I will have to invest more time and energy here - when I have some to invest...

A walk in the garden

Time is definitely the hardest thing to manage because no mater how many times I try to reorganize my time, it actually changes very little. There are always demands on our time that seem impossible to minimize no matter how little value we place on them. And in talking to retired people, they seem to be much busier now than when they had a job. Some of this is a matter of perspective.

For example, there is a saying in Kenya that goes, "Africans have time but no watches. Americans have watches but no time." Our culture is constantly aware of the present. Technology has augmented this with a constant supply of information - GPS location, stock quotes on our smart phone, FaceBook status updates, and the list is endless. History is only alive if it was after the last election. Even last year's memories fade faster than ever as we fly from one adventure, to another business deal, to the next text message and virtual meeting. And the 3 elements of time that force our constant attention are precision, coordination and pressure. . . . STOP! . . . I think I hear Someone calling my name. He called to Adam and Eve in the Garden, "Where are you?" Do you ever wonder what they talked about on their evening walks? Can you even imagine? After a busy day of naming animals, playing in the stream and eating the freshest, most delicious fruit, they meet with God for a walk. Do they discuss Quantum Physics and internal medicine or just chat about the glorious changing colors as the sun fades behind the hills?

I think the answer to our time dilemma is the One asking that question, "Where are you?" I think His presence is the only thing that gives meaning to our existence and value to our time. The only real purpose for time is to understand the weight of His glory, the power of His love, the uniqueness of His holiness in the joy of His presence. Psalm 32 gives us a glimpse of how to get back to the enjoyment of His presence. Verses 1-5 are a recognition of our sorry condition. We must turn from our sin and our slavery to time or our body will waste away! Verses 6-7 contrast the flood of waters where there is no salvation to the hiding place found in the Person who surrounds us with songs of deliverance. Verse 8 is a steady walk, a purposeful walk under the counsel of His eye, not a bridle or whip. This is the walk of one who responds to the slightest movement, even the mood of the Guide. Verses 10-11 is a life filled with worship. The groaning, loneliness and silence is gone and the joy of communion and community is pervasive. We are walking again in the Garden in the cool of the evening.

Time as a resource

An evaluation of resources: I plan to discuss, in the next 4 or 5 posts, the concept of what some might call 'stewardship' but really it is just using well what each of us have at our disposal. Stewardship concepts that deal only with finances are sorely missing out on the true richness of the resources available to us. I will save environmental issues for another time, but 'stewardship' also refers to our care and management of creation, which is God's very first command to Adam and Eve in Genesis 1:28.

There are really only 3 resources available to us – Time, Energy and Money. I suppose that education or experience could be considered resources, but time and energy and sometimes money must be spent in the process of getting them so I won't consider them here. So, which is the most valuable of the three?

I believe that time is our most valuable resource and should be used with the most care simply because it is not renewable. When a day or even a minute is used, it can never be retrieved again. All of us only have a certain number of days and they seem to go faster as each year passes. I am not promoting a life of endless work nor of endless amusement, but we must carefully consider how we use our time. Some might promote a 'tithing' of our time so that we give an appropriate amount to God or the church, but this is a very weak and inconsistent view of stewardship. All of our time must belong to God or none of it is really His at all. God set aside one day in seven to rest and commands us to keep that day holy or 'set apart' as a special day for worship, but I do not believe that other days should be unholy or void of worship! All our days are a special gift from God. All days are ordained by Him to worship and live out our calling of service to Him and others.

So how should we divide our time? I believe that God has first called us to care for our parents, spouses, children and ourselves and this demands the greater part of our time and our financial resources. I Timothy 5:8 says that those who do not care for their families have “denied the faith”. Between 6 and 8 hours of every day is needed just for our personal rest. Of course all of us must eat and work so that we can buy food and provide a place to sleep every night. All this takes time – probably 70-80% of most days for the rest of our lives. And the time spent here is blessed by God as a part of His original plan for us. Even before the Fall, Adam and Eve were to care for the Garden and the animals in it as well as for each other while being fruitful, bearing and raising children to do the same after them. Work and providing for our household is the very first commandment in Scripture (Genesis 1:28) and implies a blessing from God. There is a warning, however, that “those who want to get rich fall into temptation” (I Tim. 6:9) and “If we have food and covering, with these we shall be content.” (vs. 8) So caring for yourself and your family must be balanced with contentment in an attitude of humility, not a constant striving for more or better or bigger, which characterizes our materialistic society.

Faithfulness

Faithfulness is a playful interaction between the past, present and future. Let me explain: If I make a promise to you today then it is because I see the completion of that promise to be beneficial to both of us. But when I look back at that promise at some point in the future, I must make a decision to honor my promise or not. When I made the promise I was postulating that I would still see the benefit of its completion in the same light. Now, as I look back, many things have changed and I may not view it as the most beneficial to me or to you! So, do I follow through with my promise? Faithfulness dictates that I follow through regardless of my current frame of reference.

We often think of faithfulness in terms of the marriage contract. It is a promise to love and honor one person above all others. It is a promise to care for the other "for better, for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health, until death do us part." This vow is often taken at a point in time without any conception of what will take place and how each person will change over their years together. This vow is also taken without any reservation and absolutely no intent of breaking it. But, sadly, it is broken all too often. How does this happen?

We need a new understanding of faithfulness, one that transcends time, endures the unthinkable and renews itself daily in every circumstance. I want to reflect on God's faithfulness for a moment, a faithfulness without equal.

Christ is the embodiment of God's faithfulness. All the promises of the Old Testament come to rest, are completed, in the person of Christ: our Redeemer, our sacrifice for sin, our perfect priest, our mediator of a new covenant, the righteousness of God and the victor over death. All God's promises are fulfilled in Christ. Not one word of what God says is lost or incomplete because of the birth, life, work, death and resurrection of Christ.

I am also reminded of God's faithfulness to me. When I was lost in sin, He found me and convicted me of my need for His forgiveness and restoration. When I am rejected by others, He reminds me that He has accepted me without any qualifications. When I am in need, He provides in practical ways for those needs and even for some desires. When I am concerned for others, He provides practical ways that I can reach out to them in love and with generosity.

When I begin to understand and depend on God's faithfulness, I begin to be transformed. He works a miracle in me. I am moved to reflect faithfulness in my own life. It takes practice and many times it is very difficult. We also need each others help to be accountable, to forgive and to restore relationships. Maybe you can help me...