"that offends me"

We live in a day where none of us want to hear this dreadful claim made about something we said or did or even associated with. Culturally selected people can claim that a word, a symbol, a song, a person from the past, an image or just about anything can disturb them, make them feel uncomfortable and cause them emotional pain. I, in no way, wish to diminish the feelings of anyone who hurts, or excuse mistakes of history, or make light of ever present stereotypes that put humans into a bondage that produces biased thoughts.

It appears that weaponizing the idea that someone offended someone is the most efficient way to shame people into submission. Shaming is especially attainable if you include the oppressed and those who are a target of injustice. This has formed "the cancel culture." Anyone can be fired, kicked out of school or off a team, and ostracized by the mainstream powers of society if you are guilty of offending the wrong person or people group. Heck, others can shame you not only for what you say but for being silent and saying nothing at all. There exists an ever present fear, not only in the oppressed but anyone deemed an oppressor.

People are expected to be empathetic and love everyone who are different from them. Culture demands inclusion. You cannot be an intolerant defender of offenders in any way. Having an openness to those who are different is a good goal for society. The problem lies in what should empathy should look like? Sometimes it seems the shamers view love as being complicit in the demands of the offended. Please, in the name of love, give anyone who is offended what they want. It often seems shamers view the issue of offending others as a way to get some of their power. This causes tensions to rise for everyone.

This tension puts many well intended people in a pickle. There are those in our society who value their history, the founding fathers and the US Constitution. These values don't lack an understanding that institutions, who have systematically oppressed others, have structural sources of injustice that should be reformed. The problem comes when the shamers demand that these endearing values be abolished and eliminated, not just fixed. If you are one to push back, or even hold your tongue in defense of your values, you are now guilty of being unjust and unloving.

The problem lies in how human nature weaponizes IDENTITY. Humans operate foremost from the way they see themselves. Psychologists call this self concept. Minority identities get in their corner and attack majority identities as a threat. This is why identifying by race, sex, sexual orientation, socioeconomic class, and such are popular identities. These are seen as the oppressed, who have the right to take from those they identify as privileged, those who have the resources and power to oppress. The oppressed uses the morality of justice as their justification. Being seen as unjust is where all humans are the most vulnerable to shame.

The Christian is in a much bigger pickle. Love is the mantra of identifying with Christ. Being unloving makes Christians really open for guilt and shame. Christians should be the biggest purveyors of justice, shouldn't they? Isn't justice just love in action? The world wants everyone to think so. After all, justice is their ace in the hole.

Let's take a closer look. Going straight to the Bible is always a good option.

First of all, Jesus speaks often of the injustice you will experience carrying His identity. "Turn the other cheek." "Go the second mile."  "Eye for an eye" is NOT your go to option. "Love your enemy." Wait, where is the justice in forgiveness. Isn't forgiveness JUST tolerance? The accounts of Paul's missionary journeys reminds us that as he was received in the synagogues from city to city, he was welcomed until he preached the resurrection. That offended the leaders and he was then run out of town.

Peter says Christ is the cornerstone of God's Kingdom. This makes Him a stumbling block to the world. Stumbling blocks offend all opposition. Jesus says He is the light of the world and that darkness hates light. Light is pretty intolerant of darkness, wouldn't you say? Light is quite a threat to darkness. Darkness fears light, but does light fear darkness. Maybe there's something here for us to ponder. Oh, btw, we are called to let His light shine in our life. Does the light of Christ in us make us intolerant of other identities? Does this offense give the world the right to shame Christians?

Jesus does say we will be rejected because of our identity in Him. He does say the world will hate us when we put our trust in Him. Is it possible to both love others and offend them at the same time?

What a pickle Christians are in? How can we ever testify to the hope that is in us if we are destined to offend those who don't identify with Christ? What is the answer?

Identifying with Jesus means love is way different than the world's idea of inclusion and complicity. Reflecting Jesus' light sees others as no threat at all. There is no competition for power. There is no bondage to needing the approval of others. There is no fear. There is no shame. Motivation is from generosity, not fair exchange nor entitlement. All that our soul needs is found in our identity in Christ. We are then free to love all kinds of people somewhat oblivious to their claims for power and attempts to shame us.

"Fear not, little flock, for your Father has chosen gladly to give you His Kingdom." Competing with the world for material goodies is not the end game of Christians. "This is how they will know Him, that we have love for one another." A love, which does not compete with and has no fear of those who identify with the world, likely will either draw those in darkness to the light or the light will offend them. But, it's Jesus who attracts, and its Jesus who offends. After all, the world has already had its shot at shaming Him.

"the moment you measure"

This blog's title is my next and yet to be written book.
Usually, if I blog about a topic, I get a vision for a book so maybe that's what's happening here.


Over 25 years ago I was heavy into data analytics before it was cool. I started a company called DataVentures that performed advanced analytics on retail scanning data to get a more insightful view of consumer behavior.

Having a Masters in Math and spending several decades in applying data technologies to business problems, I became increasingly aware that human behavior was the end game of all of this work. If somebody didn't do something differently in a value creating way, then what was all the data fuss about anyway.

Throughout the years I bumped into business professionals who are steeped in trying to develop and apply metrics to their processes, products and markets. I continue to see the same attempts to "do science," but for what purpose? Today I witness an entire society going in so many different directions because the caretakers of metrics use their data to manipulate the behavior of the public in ways that meet their needs.

There is one thing for sure:

the moment you measure, people will behave in a direction that the metrics suggest

What's happening? How do benign metrics taken from impersonal data have such a huge behavioral influence? Well, that's what the book WILL one day be about.

For now, let me share the subtitle. The book will ultimately be titled
"The Moment You Measure: The intersection of science and faith"

What does the subtitle add to the conversation? The end of the story is that the science of measuring things must ultimately be interpreted or understood. The secret to this is that what a person believes deep down in their soul forms a set of biases or lens by which the processing of metrics occurs inside the person. It's ultimately not what you know that maters, but who/what you trust.

I mentioned I had a Masters in Math, but I also have a Ph D in Organizational Psychology. Here I learned that the final authority on perceiving and interpreting events (data) lies with biases or assumptions people have they generally don't even know they have, but trust.

I eventually saw that these deep seated biases are actually one's faith (assurance of unseen evidence). Too often "faith" is left to the theologians. I think that is a mistake. Faith is not subordinate to science. Faith does not compete with science. Ultimately, science is man's attempt to use physical senses to confirm their faith. This is true for every human person.

Data tells you what has happened, your biases tell you WHY and WHAT to expect in the future.

This is the intersection of science and faith and occurs THE MOMENT YOU MEASURE.

I'll leave you to ponder this until I write the book. My guess is, however, the book will add to your pondering, not reduce it (unfortunately) .....

Making sense of "hate"

The culture despises hate. If you want to put someone under the jail, accuse them of a "hate crime." Have you ever pondered, "How is hurting or killing someone worse if we add hate to the motive?" The current movement in society is to stamp out hate everywhere it exists. If you don't denounce hate, then you are despised by everyone that matters. Yet, we use the word hate all the time in acceptable ways.
"I hate broccoli."
"I hate snakes."
"I hate Trump."
"I hate people that lie to me."
"I hate people that hate."

Also, if we condemn "hate speech," what do we do with the Bible?

Jesus once said, "If anyone comes to me and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and sister and brother, and yes, even his own life, he cannot be my disciple." Then what about the hateful things He said about the Pharisees. He called them evil hypocrites and more.

Jesus expected to be hated. He says, "don't be surprised if the world hates you. it's because of me."

But then Jesus says, "if anyone says he loves God, but hates his brother, then he is a liar."

So what gives? Jesus seems to use the notion of hate is different ways. Why is "hate" so despised? Why is hate used to shame people?

The world has adopted the idea that hate means to despise. Hate is seen as the presence of a negative, such as the presence of great dislike. In the Bible the word hate was used as a comparative word. If I hated something, it just meant I loved it less than something else. Hate is then the presence of a higher positive. Hate is simply choosing one thing over another. It is not a negative motive.

For you, is hate a condemning judgment or is hate a prioritization?  Isn't it interesting how the world wants to take words and conform them to their own image. This is just one of many, many instances where making sense of the words of Jesus is beyond our flawed natural purposes.

So, when we say, "we want a world with no hate." What do we mean? .....

and then it's too late

The current times. Can you be cancelled?
Let's step back and see what is going on from 40,000 ft. There are a lot of similarities worth noting to the pandemic and the #blacklivesmatter movement. There is also a historical perspective worth noting. There's a massive and effective grab of power to restrict the liberties of WE THE PEOPLE. 


First, let me say that there are many, many well intended people who sincerely support the prevailing advocacy of caution due to the virus and justice for those who have been oppressed. These are reasonable views of reasonable people. There are changes that should be supported. However, there is a much bigger picture that these same reasonable people need to see.

People have lost businesses that they dreamed about and worked for all their life. At no fault of their own. Athletes lost participation that otherwise consumed their passion. Trips have been cancelled that celebrated special events in people's lives. Families are kept apart due to imposed travel restrictions. Schools and colleges are in chaos. Buildings are being renamed, statues coming down, fight songs banded, emblems that have endeared people to institutions for many years are now offensive. People groups are being pitted against people groups. Identity politics rule the day. I could go on and on accounting the losses to WE THE PEOPLE at no fault of their own. So, why are people losing at the hand of authorities? Why can't the peoples' voices be heard over a severely biased media elite? What's really going on? Has this happened before? Is there anything we can learn?

For example, look at Germany in the 1930's. Leaders gained the favor of the people by using fear to convince them they need to give away personal power to those that could protect them and make things right. People slowly relied on experts and their leaders to control who got what, who thought what, and so forth. Certain classes of people were considered a threat to the majority and consequently demonized. It seemed the thing for good people to do. Yet, fear, guilt, and victimization was being weaponized to distract the people and take control of their lives by those consolidating power.  

You know the story. When the people realized what was happening, it was too late.

The same thing happened again following WW2 with eastern bloc European countries. The USSR slowly grabbed control over the lives of people in Hungary, Romania, Poland, Czechoslovakia, and other countries that lost their freedom to the Soviet Union. At first there was no need for military power. The authorities endeared themselves to the people through morality, fear, and victimization.

I see many similar characteristics of current times in the USA to those times.

Many good people are trusting experts and authorities, those exercising power to seize control from WE THE PEOPLE. Many citizens are trading freedom for safety. It all feels right until THEY come for you and yours.

Then IT"S TOO LATE 

Worth pondering ...... 

Jesus and injustice

Events in our country, like failures of our justice system, heighten people's sense of injustice. Because the human condition is oriented towards fairness and rights, justice violations create outrage in most people. Also, because it is natural for the human condition to seek justice over most all virtues, reactions of Christians are put under the microscope. The world wants to know if the people who put their faith in Christ will rise to the occasion and be superheroes of justice.

The problem is, that is not why Jesus came for us. Bringing justice to the land and stamping out all injustice is not what Jesus is about until He comes again. Oswald Chambers writes in his daily devotionals, "Looking for justice is actually a sign that we have been diverted from our devotion to Him.... We put our common sense on the throne and then attach God’s name to it."

So, why is it that Christians and the church fall into this trap? Why is it that the witness of a Christian is supposed to be about justice when that is not what Jesus called us to?

The first part of the answer I have already alluded to. The human assumption is that the world we live in right now, the one we experience with our physical senses (our physical life) is the end game. Jesus came to invite us into a new and amazing life, an eternal one abiding in the Heavenlies. This is not only a future realm we live in but a present reality made possible to us by Jesus.

The second part of the answer is looking more closely at how Jesus viewed injustice.  

 

Paul tells us that Jesus "emptied Himself of the privilege of being equal to God." That doesn't seem fair. Why would He choose to do that? Why would He give up full time residency in the Heavenlies for you and me? The short answer is love. But, what did this love require of Him?

 That He suffer injustice

Wait a minute, Jesus endured injustice? Why didn't He fix the system so people would treat Him properly?


Not only did Jesus willfully give up His number one right to be forever dwelling in Heaven with God, He subjected Himself to many injustices while here in this realm called earth. He was run out of every place He preformed miracles and announced who He was by the authorities. On His final day the Jewish and Roman justice system failed Him by violating many of the rules and laws they are supposed to be guided by.

Jesus experienced injustice as a dominate theme of His life. In fact, God's grace behind the crucifixion isn't justice. It doesn't seem to me that ridding the world of injustice is what had Jesus' attention. This should be no surprise since He told everyone right off the bat that He was not here this time to be a purveyor of justice, but rather to provide a pathway for us back to our original purpose. God intended for His creation to be in proper fellowship with Him. But, none of us had a way to do that until Jesus arrives in a full array of injustice.

So, if Christians are the witness to the world who Jesus is and why He came, it seems like we should be dealing with injustice like Jesus. If we are to show everyone who God is, it may be by how we deal with injustice rather than how we produce justice. As I study His greatest sermon to His disciples, that seems to be what He is wanting us to know. The notion that Jesus "suffered" injustice means that Jesus' deepest emotion when facing injustice glorified God. 

It appears to me that "partaking in His sufferings" simply means that expressing the deepest emotions we have in the midst of injustice like Jesus is our Christian witness and what glorifies our Father.

Maybe that is the lesson we should ponder when it comes to JESUS AND INJUSTICE ....