the great heist

A common and popular concept of faith is captured in this Snoopy cartoon. The appeal of this idea of faith resonates with both Christians and skeptics of Christianity. Why so, would you think? Maybe its the ambiguity of what we're "holding on tight" to, what "the going" is, and what is the notion of "windy"? That about gets it. In other words, each person is left to fill in their own idea of the words used in this cartoon to fit their biases.

The world that is skeptical of Christianity sees the tree as a positive self concept - "I am powerful, unstoppable, beautiful, and so on. "The going" is our circumstances and they are windy when they challenge our well being or what we want for ourselves.

This is a very appealing idea of faith to the human condition.

Yet when the Christian claims to "hold tight" to their faith in Jesus, the world responds like this:

       “Refusal to think leads to faith. Blind acceptance and obedience leads to 
       faith. Faith is belief without evidence or in spite of evidence to the  contrary. 
      It’s wishing – nothing more."

In other words, its OK for me, the skeptic, to trust something I believe even though I cannot defend it through science, but its not OK for you Christians. The skeptic says, "I am reasonable, but you, the Christian, are just being emotional." The world's reliance on faith is evidenced in how often they claim, "you must trust your heart." In a recent Hall Mark Christmas movie the star said, "our heart can tell us more than any spreadsheet ever could." And everyone goes, "yeah!" Business people take pride in "trusting their gut." It's quite common for everyone to operate on faith.

But let a Christian's heart defend its trust in God based on an assurance of unseen evidence (their heart), then the world laughs and says he/she is just wishing. The truth is that the world's view of faith is therapeutic and not transformational. Its like taking medicine to make us feel better when the medicine doesn't cure anything.

Christians must view their faith differently, as transformational. Christian faith does not view "the going" as circumstances and does not view "windy" as something that is working against them. "The going" is being entrenched in an adoring relationship with the King of the Universe and the wind is to help us fly our kite. What the world fails to see is that the power of faith is in the object of the faith, not in the extent in which we believe.

Has the church let the world get away with a great heist. Has the world stolen the notion of faith so Christians don't readily and purposefully defend the hope that is in them? Why do Christians feel they have to prove their faith with physical evidence? That's the antithesis of faith (unseen evidence) and not even what skeptics do to support their own faith. When will Christians stand their ground and call the skeptics hand? Why isn't it enough for a Christian to say, "I trust God because my heart is sold out to Jesus and that's more clear evidence than any spreadsheet could ever provide."

"The things we think are the most important things theologically are not the most important things to God. He wants your heart."  Jon Tyson, pastor Church of the City NYC

Learning to articulate the Christian faith as a heart not based on physical evidence with the same confidence the world defends their own faith is something certainly worth pondering ...... 

"we hold these truths to be self-evident"

If truths are "self-evident", why is there so much confusion in our society over rights, justice and happiness over 200 years after the Declaration of Independence was written? If truths are "self-evident", how can truth be absolute given every self operates with a different perspective or set of biases, so to speak? How can any truth be self evident to many people who trust something different? What does "self-evident" mean, and why do we base anything of importance on the notion it is "self-evident"?

The founders of our country created a very successful form of governance as a rejection of the power held by monarchies in Europe. The source of ideas for our country comes from Greek philosophies of Socrates and Aristotle. Universal laws of democracy and virtue order lives of society. BUT, the problem of knowing truth has never been solved by humans.


It is a mistake to assume that the idea of inalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness is God's gift (endowment) to the world. This is not what Jesus said. What kind of country would we be if the Declaration of Independence said, "we hold these truths to be Bible precepts"? This takes away the "self evident" idea. Maybe the preamble would read like this:

One thing would be that the focus of folks in the US would not be on our rights in this world. We would not look to our circumstances for our well being. Justice would not be the preeminent concern. We would not be transactional with each other thinking our "fair share" matters. A heart of grace would be our barometer and guide, not virtuous behavior.

God desires that we view our selves as aliens and sojourners in this world, here for a moment to reflect the light of Jesus bestowed on us to glorify His Father. Biblical precepts exhort us to a transformed life that walks by faith, unseen evidence God reveals to us, not a life in this world that is influenced by experiences of our physical senses.

The USA is a wonderful country. One that is founded to allow everyone to flourish in a finite world according to their efforts and abilities. This is great for the human condition (for a while), but it is not the eternal realm of the Heavenlies God has made available to us NOW as we find our identity in Jesus.

What does this mean for you?  That's where pondering comes in .....

"then sings my soul"

"How Great Thou Art" is one of the most sung songs in recent history. It makes people feel so good down deep inside. Even those reluctant to raise hands in praise will find their hands go up. Singing this song, especially the chorus, seems to make all our troubles go away. Yet, how often do we ponder the song? What do we think we are really saying when we sing?

This popular chorus starts with a astounding statement, "then sings my soul." Interesting claim. How does a soul, which is non-physical, produce a song that is experienced through the physical sense of sound? Generally, when I ask such pondering questions, most people go, "I don't know and don't really care." Fair enough. Your life won't stop in its tracks if you don't explore what you are really singing. BUT, your life could be enriched beyond a feel-good song if you found life's treasures in the song you sing.

The soul is essentially your "self." It is who you really are, the center of thought, emotion, and will. When your soul sings, it is your deepest expression. This may be why the Bible references the soul over 100 times in the New Testament. In this song that ministers to so many in such a deep way, what is the soul expressing? Obviously, the soul is absorbing the greatness of God. But, what about God does the soul consider to be "Great"?

I have found there are basically two possibilities. The soul is relishing in God's greatness based on the basic bias of the soul. The natural bias is for the soul to identify with the body and outcomes in this physical world. In this case the stress, anxiety, frustration and pain of the human condition trouble the soul. Finding hope in a day when I am free from the bondage of the body is a therapy that transforms me.  "How great Thou art" is the soul's recognition God is in control and one day after I die I will be in Heaven and have no more pain. That's one way to approach our anxiety.

Another possibility is a bias where the soul identifies with the Spirit. Here the soul relishes in a reality where it is no longer subject to physical senses for satisfaction, motivation and acceptance, even while still in the body. The freedom comes as the soul is transformed and becomes a "new creation," or as Jesus says, "born again" of the Spirit. While the body is still subject to futility of this world, the soul experiences not one of suffering but blessings found in a passionate relationship with Jesus. God is "Great" because He has willfully and generously invited me into His Kingdom. His provisions and privileges of Grace transcend the human condition as it relates to my soul.

This may be what Paul means when he calls upon God's people to walk according to the Spirit, not according to the flesh. Understanding this difference may make all the difference in how the soul is nourished when it sings, "How Great Thou Art." This is a complete change of bias, not just thinking. This is what is called walking not by sight but by faith.

A song worth pondering in addition to singing....

the "narrow gate"

We are told in the summary of the Sermon on the Mount, "for narrow is the gate that leads to life and few will find it." This is quite familiar to Christians and provides for sound theology. BUT, in what ways does this truth infiltrate and influence lives of Christians in our culture today? In what ways do we try to widen the gate or maybe even go around it?


Here is what I have learned as my life's work these days focuses on how flawed human nature wars against the life that God desires for us. It is built into our very human nature to avoid the exercises and diets necessary to slim down for the narrow gate of the Kingdom. It's not natural and quite uncomfortable to shed excess baggage we carry around that feeds a soul comfortable with "walking according to the flesh."

This is true not only of us pedestrian Christians but of those who lead us, those who head Christian universities, churches, and ministries. As I have been a part of marketing b4Worldview to such institutions, what have I found that suggests this may be the case?

While most legitimate Christians and their leaders can readily profess sound theology about the Gospel of Grace and a life lived under God's sovereign love, virtue ethics seems to be the end game of Christianity that manifests itself to those "looking in." Maybe this is the way it is because many Christians and their leaders also emphasize right behavior and that the Gospel is a palliative remedy to human pain in their teaching, prayer and worship activities. Foremost, Christians are led to change the culture to an ethic they view as Biblical. Yet, in doing so they are no different than the rest of humanity, seeking a better way not a new way. Many young people brought up in these contexts abandon what they are taught only to seek an alternative virtue ethics.

Why are Christian leaders so protective of their message of virtue ethics and reluctant to explore ways to help their flock "be transformed by the renewing of their minds"? Why is "good" more about fitting into a prescription of what a person does to positively affect others rather than the intrinsic quality within them that comes only from intimacy with Christ? Why is purpose about what we can produce and not about faithfulness in our pursuit? Why is God's favor a righteousness of exchange with the Father rather than receiving a generous, willful action from the Father?

Here is a perspective I have found by working with Christians and their leaders for the past several years. The "market" for Christian products and services responds more to an Aristotelian view of life's goal where happiness is a personal pursuit and production of virtues such as justice, courage, kindness and such. This ideal is universal in the human condition and has BROAD appeal to people. Why? Because Aristotle captured the essence of human nature, the idea built-in each of us that humans have the power to produce the right life, and what we experience via physical senses is what determines reality. BUT, wasn't this the error of Adam and Eve? Isn't Aristotle's philosophy about the natural power within each person just an excellent account of our fallen nature? Might this be what makes an appeal attractive to many people, or a BROAD gate?

NARROW is the market comprised of those who are motivated to receive and reflect te light of God and trust only the power provided by the One they have a passionate love affair with, Jesus. This is a pure form of trust, not a trust underwritten by "our own understanding," not a trust dependent on outcomes but trust based on a relationship.

So, I have found that Christians and their leaders generally know the truth in their head, but worldly success depends on attracting customers with a market appeal which is BROAD and not one that is NARROW.

Might this be what Jesus wants us to know as He sums up His profound message to us?

Something worth pondering ......

The cultural con of diversity

Here you have two people, diverse in many ways. We can observe some differences. One is male and one is female. One can walk somewhat unaided. One uses a walker.

Some differences we cannot observe. They likely have different personalities, experiences, tastes in food and clothes. They probably are a married couple, but maybe not. Maybe neighbors or siblings? We don't know.


What we do know is they are working together to plant flowers. This is collaboration to accomplish a common goal. There is some coordination here. That helps collaboration. But how does appreciating each other's diversity contribute to their success?

That's the question diversity advocates really never ask. What makes diverse people collaborate? Is it shared experience? Is it a focus on valuing each other's differences? That's a possibility.

When two people demand their differences are what really matters, what generally happens? I suggest that collaboration anchored in diversity requires each participant to be aware of what they are giving up (sacrificing) to accommodate the other. This requires a sense of conditional love or respect based on social exchange. In other words, I give to the other in ways that results in reciprocal responses. The other person honors my giving by giving back in some sort of balanced way. This can be fulfilling and successful in many ways, as long as the joint efforts are fair.

Two people can be collaborating on a mutual goal, but there are limits to what each participant is willing to do based on justice.

There is another model for collaboration based on the idea of unity. You might say, "unity is accomplished in the above model of collaboration, isn't it?" I would say "NO." On what basis would I say mutual sacrifice based on diverse members committing to a common goal is NOT unity?

I go to model given to us in the Trinity. Throughout the Bible we read "the Father and the Son and the Spirit are one." We are called to be one with them. There is diversity, but in unity the diversity is not the point or focus of collaboration. Needs of the participants are not the issue. It's about like-mindedness. It's thinking EXACTLY the same way and a singleness of will. It's the same heartbeat, the same passion. It's not diverse parts considering what they are giving up for the others. In this model of unity, diversity dissipates, not intensifies.

The model in Scripture is the body. Yes, there is diversity in the parts. Arms are not like legs, which are not like ears. This is important. However, each part views everything through the lens of the head (Jesus). Each part never says to the other, "remember to value diversity - each of you that are different should consider me just as important as you. I will give myself (sacrifice) to the body, but I deserve to benefit somehow."

Total alignment of the soul of each member to the mind of Christ is what makes the body of Christ (the church) function in perfect collaboration for the glory of God.

That's a model of collaboration foreign to a culture that values the diversity, not the unity. There is no authoritative influence when honoring what is different is the point. This is a con perpetuated on the world fueled by a human nature that can only think that way, "by nature we are children of wrath."

"be transformed by the renewing of your mind."

This is probably worth pondering......

"beyond a shadow of a doubt"

Maybe with the exception of the Manson murders, OJ Simpson's trial may be the most famous judicial spectacle of my lifetime. I am not a lawyer, but the thing I remember most was that there was a criminal trial and a civil trial. In the criminal trial, the truth of murder had to be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt. When this failed to produce justice for the victims' family, they filed suit in civil court, where only a burden of probability of truth was required. 

This is an interesting example of how mankind gains the knowledge of what is true. This is called "epistemology." Rene Descartes, who many call the modern father of philosophy, explained finding truth this way (paraphrased): remain skeptical of what you think is true until you have removed all doubt and you are certain there is no more uncertainty. This sounds to me a bit like, "beyond a shadow of a doubt."

Descartes was a foundationalist versus a particularist. Now, don't check out on me here, this is not that complicated. All this means is that Descarte (foundationlist) believed you must peel away all the details that may obscure truth until you hit the bottom or root of something that you can trust to be true. This is much like scrapping away all the sand and debris that obscures solid ground until you hit pit gravel to trust with certainty you can lay the foundation for your house. This is opposed to those who believe there are no core principles, so they collect pieces of evidence until they have concluded there is a sufficient likelihood something is true (particularist). For something with significant consequences, like a murder trial, our legal system has decided we should be more foundationalist than particulaist. We must get to the core truth, "beyond a shadow of a doubt."

Descartes' ideas for finding truth have broad appeal and acceptance. It seems to work relatively well in finding truth in the physical world, but science can still be fraught with the limitations of particularists. So much so that any serious scientists knows that collecting details of evidence only demonstrates likelihood something is true under certain conditions, and nothing can actually be proved with 100% certainty.

Finding truth becomes much more problematic in dealing with the invisible, moralistic world. Many people are functioning particularists because they do not take the time or have the rational power to exhaust all doubt. So many become comfortable with their doubt. It's not practical to do otherwise.

However, some believe they are capable and willing to explore truth until they are certain of no more uncertainty. Eventually they find they are only fooling themselves and no one else. Even Aristotle, considered the most supreme philosopher, admitted that man can never be 100% sure using sensory perception and rational power to know what is true. Current behavioral economist Nassim Taleb calls this "epistemic arrogance," a condition that puts a person at great risk.

This is actually where faith comes in. Everybody has faith, but it seems to have been relegated to only religious circles. The truth is, everyone ultimately runs out of particulars and their faith becomes their foundation. Faith is the basic bias any person trusts while failing to remove visible uncertainty. A person's faith is the soul's sense of certainty there is no more uncertainty. Faith is our core trust in something. We have no more questions of "why?"

So, while much, if not all, of man's debate centers around what is true, maybe we should ponder more the question, "who or what do we trust?" Eliz Warren recently said, "my faith animates all that I do." This is true about faith, but not just for her, for everyone. What or who we trust deeply within our soul drives all that we are and do. Faith for each person is their "beyond a shadow of a doubt." 

It may be too scary to deeply ponder who/what you trust ....

"It doesn't really matter what I do"

Have you ever felt this way? You are told to set goals, try hard, make a difference, serve others - but at some point you question if what you do really matters. Life goes on, the people you try to help don't get better or maybe don't even listen. You feel in your heart you are serving others, doing good in this world  - but at some point you wonder if what you do really matters. I don't know about you, but this is one way my soul can throw its own pity party.




Of course there are times when it seems what we do is making a big difference. People tell us we are important in various ways. We seek feedback to signify to ourselves that we matter. You must admit that even when you say and believe that you are giving of yourself for nothing in return, that nothing doesn't include the notion that you still need to know - if what you do really matters.

When I was younger and working, it was built-in that my job mattered in some way. As a minimum, I was being paid by an employer for my work. Charitable giving and volunteer service was rewarding. I was always getting newsletters and hearing stories of how my giving was helping others. As a parent it mattered what I did to "produce perfect kids." Now, blogging and writing books is what I do. This is mainly a one way street. I throw my thoughts "out there" with very little idea of whether my words matter. Its easy for my mind and emotions to discover that what I do doesn't really matter anymore.

Its in times I throw my own little pity party that God reminds me that what I am writing and blogging does matter. It matters to Him. Its in my own pity party that God reminds me my main message to others is from my time with Him. What I generally write is what He has taught me - there are only TWO biases in the way we see life.

When I feel "it doesn't really matter what I do," I am trusting my human nature's idea that outcomes from what I do are what is important. Human psychology calls this Social Exchange. The Apostle Paul called this "walking according to the flesh." No matter how much I am serving others, I am in it for me. God has a better way. He desires that all my thoughts and feelings should flow from my intimacy with His Son Jesus. He chose me and acted on my behalf so that my soul is eternally fortunate (blessed) regardless of what I've done or is going on around me in this world. All I am supposed to do is reflect His glory by faithfully playing out what he calls on me to do. I do not need to ever question if it really matters as an outcome. This is His provision of grace. This is called "walking in the Spirit." Glory goes back to where it belongs.

How do I know? The Bible tells me so. 

You may have never thought about your life in this way. You may disagree with this in some way. Usually, all I ask of you is to ponder what I say. Today, I can't really even do that - that would be an expected outcome. What I do only matters because I faithfully give you what God has put in me, not because it will produce some great outcome. What God does with this in you is His business.

When I blog from my time with Jesus, there is a party but it never involves self pity.