Your ID, please

 How often have you gone to an event, attraction, restaurant, or to purchase a product that you were asked for your ID. Certainly when you travel by air, your ID is mandatory. Much civil debate has occurred over the issue of voter ID. Your identification is a frequent and pervasive requirement to live a normal life. 

Then there is another way identity has been important. You've heard of people having an "identity crisis." You may have even had one yourself. In many ways identity is the beginning of mental health issues. You often hear about "identity politics" where race, sex, ethnicity, gender orientation, political affiliation, and other factors divide society into political tribes. In many ways identity keeps people in disunity.

Identify seems to matter a lot. Its referenced frequently and in a variety of contexts. Identity is a common, simple word. On the other hand, not a word that is well understood for all it's implications on us. The purpose of this blog is to try to shed light on its role in the human condition.

So, what do we know about identity?

In human psychology one's identity is the starting point for all thoughts, feelings, and choices. I'd say that's pretty important, wouldn't you?

You might say your identity is your psychological selfie. 

Your identity is your self concept. It drives self-esteem.

You make sense of yourself in many ways. Each has different effects on you and can change across time and situation. Your identity has key influence on how satisfied you are, how you are motivated, and your overall sense of being OK.

Let's examine some of what human psychology has found makes up your identity. 

You have a social identity, constructed by your family, your work place, where you live or where you are from. You have a personal identity. Some aspects of you come at birth, such as color of eyes, hair, and skin, personality (the tendencies you have to satisfy your needs), mental and physical abilities, physical attributes of size, and many more. Some aspects of you relate to what you do over your life. Mistakes can define you. Professional choices and achievements can define you and so forth. There is a particular movement to have purpose define you. Thirdly, you have a natural identity. You are a human being and not a plant or animal. Being only human brings a number of influences on how your mind works. Biases and flaws in reasoning come to each person when they identify with their human nature.

Because of how identity naturally works to influence the human mind, it's no wonder the forces of this world assault identity to deceive humans from what is true. Likewise, it's no wonder Saint Paul admonishes the Christian church to "be transformed by the renewing of the mind." It's no wonder that the main consequence of the redemptive work of the cross is a new creation (identity), an identity in Christ. 

A transformed believer with a renewed mind will naturally reason from an identity in Christ that brings a completely different influence on how to think, feel, and choose than the natural reasoning coming from a human identity. Paul calls this walking according to the Spirit rather than walking according to the flesh. "According to" means identifying with.

What does all this mean? Basically it means that an identity in Christ is a loving relationship where 

1. the influence of the Spirit satisfies us based on the provisions of the Kingdom willfully and graciously bestowed on us by Christ versus a satisfaction where the flesh requires us to successfully exchange what we do to gain what we need from the world  ,  

2. the influence of the Spirit motivates us to receive and reflect the light of Christ versus a motivation where the flesh requires us to pursue and produce goals that the world finds favorable,

and

3. the influence of the Spirit declares we are OK based on Christ's actions on our behalf versus an acceptance where the flesh demands us to conform to the demands of the world to be OK.

You should understand your identity, why the Prince of this World wants to contaminate it, and how the Gospel of Jesus Christ resolves all of the self concept distress we have by identifying in any way other than in Him.

A Bucket List to die for

 I have spent much of the day today with what feels like a "heavy heart." This is a phrase often used to refer to some burden that we are carrying around at the time. Often it is a sense of deep regret, disappointment, failure or many times a deep sense of grief. I found out this morning that a long time friend and former colleague has cancelled chemo for his pancreatic cancer and called in hospice. The end of this life is near. He's brave, he is a Christian and has handled this illness and its prognosis with great human courage. He doesn't seem depressed at all about imminent death.

So, why am I or should I be burdened in my soul for him and this situation? He and I both know that physical death is simply a step along the way of eternal life. To get a more proper perspective and not feel burdened by a heavy heart but lifted up by a rejoicing heart, I have pondered, how should I think about my friend and this time of passing?

One of the more endearing ways people view the passing of life is through the notion of "bucket list." This represents places or things someone aspires to as they age and find life closing in on them. Kind of a final wish list.

So, I let my mind turn to my friend. This time I pondered what would be a good bucket list if I were in hospice care. After all, this means there are only days left on this earth. This is about as final as things get. A perfect time for a bucket list.

By pondering what my bucket list might be, my soul was light, not burdened. I found that a "heavy heart" is not necessarily a heart that is under the weight of negative forces, but simply a heart that finds most of it's attention on one thing. In this case, my heart was fully attending to how my friend must be feeling and what words of encouragement could I give him.

My spiritual practice for the past 20 years has been to stop in the midst of what I am doing and ask, "God, what does this look like to you?" He never fails to provide a thought, an insight into truth that transforms my moment.

And He didn't fail me this time either. The thought He gave me was this, "at the top of any Kingdom dweller's bucket list is resurrection life." That's it. The most significant thing I want is RESURRECTION LIFE. Right when God gave me this word for my heart, I heard the words of a song which went something like this, "The great I AM makes all things new."

I now have words to share with my friend and a new number one item on my bucket list. My heart is still heavy, but not burdened. It's heavy because it's full of, actually obsessing over, trusting His promise.

"on the other hand"

There is a frequent segment on CNBC financial shows called, "On the Other Hand." Here, John Fortt presents an argument for a popular issue in business. Once it seems he has convinced you of one view on the issue, he stops and says, "on the other hand," as he argues the counter position on the same issue. I find it fascinating in how this approach can disarm divisiveness and conflict. 

I was walking to the stadium today when I passed this sign. In every other week the signed said, "parking $20". I began to ponder. This home had a large yard that could park some 100 cars. It seemed that the owners of this land understood capitalism. Today was Auburn vs Ala football game, the biggest crowd of the year. Maybe for these folks, supply and demand suggested higher prices for parking cars at the game. On the other hand, the demographics of those who lived here suggested they were likely Democrats, who would not see capitalism as a preferred way to operate. Maybe their loyalty to Auburn suggested they wanted to stick it to those Ala fans coming in from out of town by jacking up the prices.

Some say this is a way capitalism is not fair. It takes advantage of those who have no options but to buy. On the other hand, those who support capitalism claim it is fair to charge what the market will bare. It's hard to say which of the two views is the real reason for jacking prices today.

I heard someone say this week that we should never use "but" or "however" when discussing two opposing views on an issue. When we use these terms to introduce our perspective, we are in a sense rejecting the opposing view. This is divisive, maybe even condescending. If we say "on the other hand," we are suggesting simply there is another way to consider the issue. 

While reading the Apple News feed, I saw back to back articles that were discussing important issues of our times. One article was debunking the myth that "if you try hard enough, then you can build the life you want." Many believe our country is the land of opportunity. The author of the article was rejecting that idea by labeling it a myth. The article claims Matt Black's book, "American Geography," however dispels the myth. Every place Black visited that had poverty rates above 20% revealed structural obstacles to success. Black "belies the idea of opportunity." As far as I am concerned, Black did not advance the discussion of this question about opportunity in society because he has a "but" argument and not an "on the other hand" discussion.  

This was the next article. This points out how a Dr. who had sought to solve problems with dementia found himself a patient. He chose to build an "on the other hand" view of the disease as he examined what he saw as a patient and not what he knew as a doctor.

 

Maybe you don't consider the difference between "but" and "on the other hand" to be significant. When I pondered it, I begin to feel that this change in how we advance conflicting ideas might transform much of the discourse in the public arena and maybe even in our business organizations and families.

 

Fear "of" and fear "to"

 We are in a time where an admission of failing mental health (primarily anxiety) is seen as a positive development in someone's life. The culture seems to honor a person who drops out because they admit they suffer from a mental health issue, especially a celebrated athlete of entertainer. I came from a background where we were encouraged to push through anxiety and do what we are committed to do, especially in performance situations. I grew up in a "get over it" world where anxiety was not to be condemned, but was not an acceptable distraction from doing what we should.

Life is full of anxiety, along with its stronger big brother, fear. It's not new. It's not an issue for people because of recent events. Maybe it would be helpful to examine anxiety and fear and identify it's source. Maybe learning to deal with the reasons for anxiety and fear is a better option for our culture than giving in to it and demonstrating tolerance by celebrating it.

The most common source for anxiety is fear OF the future. By definition, the future has not yet occurred and is thus uncertain. The inability to control the future to eliminate uncertainty is part of the futility of being human. Anxious about what might happen grips the human soul and stresses mental health. Fear in the moment, like performance anxiety, is really about controlling the future because the moment is the immediate future until it happens and then it is the past. Guilt and shame from what has happened can stress mental health as an anxiety. Fear about how past failures will affect the soul's uncertainty of its future acceptability is stressful.

So, one view of fear is the fear "OF "the future. This ever present anxiety is most commonly dealt with by therapy centered on a hope or assurance of the future. This is an especially common approach in Christian circles.

A less considered view of anxiety is a fear "to." This is more profound than just a play on two little words. What do I mean by fear "to"?

    

    Let's explore this.

There is a condition of the human soul that is even more pervasive than the desire to control the future to eliminate uncertainty.

What might that be?

You may or may not have heard the term "metaphysical." The word sounds complex, maybe even scary. It's really not. It's just a fancy word for the unobservable, the invisible. Understanding what we cannot see with our physical eyes has stressed humans from the beginning of time. 

For thousands of years, philosophy has been man's way to explore rational models to understand the unseen. Yet, philosophy fails to establish conviction because it is impossible to prove a metaphysical fact. Everything man knows about the metaphysical is speculation. Trusting what we cannot see is problematic to the soul. The soul is not made to rely on unobservable knowledge.

That's why faith is what God requires of His people. Faith is trusting what we cannot see with our physical eyes. The fear that may be a greater mental health problem for humans is the fear "to" trust what we cannot see. Overcoming the fear "to" trust unseen evidence does not involve therapy, but transformation. For many, both Christians and secular, trusting what they cannot see (which everyone does in some way) lacks an assurance and thus seeks therapy. For some Christians, fear "to" trust the unseen is dispelled by revelation of God Himself to humans by the Holy Spirit.

This may be why fear "to" trust the metaphysical is seldom dealt with well, even when theology or proper beliefs about God are present.

Just some random thoughts on mental health that come to me in my quiet time. I give them to you to ponder .....

Which is it?

 

Are outcomes in life the result of systems of injustice or independent choices of "we the people"?

Although this is quite relevant in public discourse today, this is really an ageless question.

What do I mean and why does it matter?

When I visited Niger West Africa years ago, I found this question to be a matter of life and death. Periodically, drought would come and famine would result because agricultural practices could not produce the food society needed. Food would come form various government's around the world to feed the people. This became a main mission of the United Nations. We were introduced to a missionary from Australia, who knew how to grow food in sub Sahara conditions. He was raised in the Outback. What was his story in West Africa?

He found that tribes would naturally cut trees down as soon as they would grow big enough for firewood. Wood was the major source of energy. The immediate need for energy meant trees never grew to any size. No trees meant serious soil erosion when hot windy days arrived. Instant gratification was the root cause of failed agriculture during droughts, resulting in famine. This missionary convinced some tribal leaders to NOT CUT the trees and let them grow. He would build trenches around the base to hold more water when it did rain. Trees stopped soil erosion and crops grew 10 fold over what the traditional methods were producing. Better choices along the way produced better long term outcomes.

Were the tribes better off over time making better choices about farming or relying on govt aid to rescue them in times of need? This question plays itself out all the time in places not as desperate as Africa.

Recently I read two news articles. One said the govt had failed seniors in the US because Social Security did not provide enough income for many to live as they needed. The other article said that the over 70 crowd in the US had accumulated a record $35 trillion in net worth. Their challenge was how to give it away before they die.

Which is it? Is life for US citizens in their 70's a result of a failed system where govt must respond to fix injustices of an economic system or is it the result of choices people made over many years to build financial security? 

  WHICH IS IT?

Society divides over the answer ... That's why it matters ..... 

Worth some collective pondering I would think...

P.S. The two choices I've discussed here do not take into account people who fall victim of health and peril not of their own making. Certainly society through its government should provide safety nets for people who are true victims. The difficulty comes in distinguishing between those who are the victims of their own choices and those who are not. These two groups often get lumped together and understanding the difference also belongs in collective societal pondering. 

"stand in the way of sinners"

 

"Blessed is the man who does not stand in the way of sinners"

This is a verse from Psalm 1. What do you think it says?

It could mean, "when you see a sinner, get out of their way, let them go along as they please, don't try to stop what they do or change them."

Or, it could mean, "don't anchor or orient your own life the same way a sinner does."

This blog is not about this verse per se. It's not about how you should live or a statement about sinners. But rather, it struck me as I heard it read out loud that understanding what the Bible says is not exactly straightforward or simple.

I hear people say, "I just read the Bible and do what it says." or "truth is what the Bible says."

Those out in the world who are not subscribers of this idea just look at Christians and say, "well, that's your opinion. The Bible can mean whatever you want it to. How can you be sure it means what you think?"

Christians huff and puff and say, "God's word is truth no matter what anyone else believes." That is an accurate position for Christians to take. The problem is interpreting God's Word as expressed in God's words.

This gets tricky because its our human nature to interpret something in light of what we already believe. Even teachers and pastors do this. Certainly, if Christians are capable of confirming what they already believe, then non Christians always will do this. Thus, Christians are capable of advancing what they believe Scripture says when it may say something very differently. Non believers ask, "How can you be sure?"

It is possible, even rational, to interpret Psalm 1 in 2 ways. The way you first think about what it says is influenced by what you may already believe God is saying.   

So, what is the answer?

It's not what you know that matters but who/what you trust. Unless the Holy Spirit enlightens the reader of God's Word about God's words, he/she will likely view what they read in the Bible as a confirmation of their existing beliefs. Is it possible, maybe even likely, Christians miss the transformative nature of revelation?

what makes a "hardship" hard?

I recently heard some teaching from James 1, one of the most popular scriptures dealing with the believers' response to trials. I was taken by how the teacher naturally and comfortably used the term "hardship" instead of trial. This implied that the idea of trial in James applies to circumstances or situations in life that are difficult. But is that what the word used in scripture for trial really means? Further, what difference does it make if the teacher and student view James 1 as a way to deal with pain and suffering Christians experience?

What happens when we don't see a word as it is meant to be seen? Can subtle error creep in that has profound implications?

Let's see what happens when applying James' word about trials to the church. Is he talking about "hardships" and if so, what makes them HARD?

The Greek word for trial used in scripture is peirasmos. This idea of trials applies to a test or experiment. What is being tested and why?  James 1: 12 says, "blessed is the man who endures trials." This literally means, "How fortunate is the person who is not distracted from their intentional purpose by tests."

What is being tested? Faith

Faith in what?  that one's identity is found in their loving relationship with Jesus and not in their experiences from life on this earth. 

What happens? fortune

Trials are not synonymous with "hardships" as we normally think of hardships. It can be very difficult to pass the test of identifying with situations in our life In this case, trails are "hardships."  But, not for reasons we think. Trials are difficult not because they are situations that are uncomfortable or unfavorable to us. Consider this, isn't it also difficult to pass the test of faith (trial) when situations are great, when we are successful and winning in this world, when we get that promotion we want, or find favor from others from what we do?

Regardless of whether our situations are positive or negative, it is very unnatural to identify with Jesus and His love for us, which is unseen. The world yearns to hijack our identity through our physical circumstances. This is why Jesus says its very difficult, if not impossible, for people to enter God's Kingdom. Man's nature requires he/she relies on (trusts) identifying with how they fit in with the visible world's view of them.

So, it's not error when the Bible teacher uses "hardship" instead of trial when explaining James 1. However, does every hearer of the word get what James is saying. It's highly likely the teacher is not thinking about "hardship" as being hard because of our nature. It's highly unlikely the hardship is independent of how positive or negative the situation we attach to the trial. I would expect that many of the hearers don't see "hardship" independent of circumstances.

This is where error occurs. Why does this matter?

This error is fundamental to why so many church services and Christian counseling are seen more as therapy. This is why so many Christians fail to see the essence of the Gospel. This is why the testimony of the Christian is flickering light, barely noticed by the world. This is why the joy that is set before us feels lacking.

Why is a trial a "hardship? 

Because everything about human nature, even for Christians, wants to identify with their situation in this world and not with the eternal, invisible loving relationship we have with Jesus. 

All situations and circumstances TEST our trust (faith) and fortune lies with the Christian who is not distracted from this relationship by their situation. In summary, trials are "hardships" not because the situation is troublesome, but because we naturally gravitate to identifying with our situations, regardless of whether they are positive or negative.

What happens when we don't see a word as it is meant to be? 

It means we need to ponder the word until its true meaning is revealed ....