Being a “Peculiar” People Once Again - Sermon from December 27, 2015

Being a “Peculiar” People Once Again

(based on Romans 12:1-13; Galatians 5:16-27)

About a year ago, my phone stopped working. It would not charge, so I went to the Verizon store to see what could be done. I explained very plainly, “the phone was working fine until last night when I plugged it in, it was at 20% charged. I got the message ‘charging’ and I left it to charge overnight. This morning, it was down to 2%. When I plug it in to charge it, it tells me that it is charging, but it doesn’t.”

The person I spoke with asked me some very specific questions. First he asked, “Did you drop the phone on the ground?” My answer was “No.” He then asked, “Did you drop the phone in water or get it wet?” Again, I answered, “no.” I didn’t mind the questions, but as he inspected the phone, he said, “I don’t see any signs of physical damage from being dropped.” So I re-iterated, “I didn’t drop it, it just stopped working.”

Then he asked again, “did you drop it in water or get it wet?” So I said again, “Nothing happened to the phone, it just stopped working.” He went through all his diagnostics, that I also had tried (different chargers, jiggling the connector, resetting the battery, etc.) So then he says, “We’ll have to give you a new phone and send this one back.” I agreed.

Then his remark to my agreement was, “when they receive the phone, they will take it apart. If they find any signs of water damage, they will charge you for the new phone. Are you OK with that?” At this point, I was very upset. I have said over and over that I did NOT do anything to the phone, it just stopped working! Why will this guy not believe me. Doesn’t he know who he’s talking to?

But reflecting on the answer to that question, I realized, “no, he doesn’t know who he’s talking to. In his eyes, I am a normal customer, and apparently, he gets lied to ALL the time. So of course he doesn’t trust my word about what happened.” I was upset, because I felt my reputation was on the line. I feel I’m an honest person. I expect to be believed because I expect the same from others. But because I’m honest, it apparently makes me “peculiar” at the same time. Honesty, is not the norm in our society any more, otherwise, this situation would not have happened. To be "honest", is to go against the world’s way of operating.

Years ago, the Brethren were known as a “peculiar” people. What does that mean? It pretty much means the same thing that it means today. Back in those days, as today, they did not live by the accepted practices of the world. For example, a story is told of farmers who delivered their produce to market. All the wagons of the farmers were stopped at a checkpoint to have their produce weighed or counted. But for Brethren farmers, they got waived through the checkpoint, because it was known that they were delivering what they said they had… “as a minimum”. If they said they had 300 pounds of wheat on the wagon, they definitely had the 300 pounds, but it was probably a little bit more. They were known to never cheat or short anyone in the marketplace. Their word was their bond. No matter what words came out of their mouths, it could be trusted. That’s not how the rest of the world operated. That’s why the checkpoint was established in the first place. The world could not be trusted. The Brethren were “peculiar” because they could be trusted.

Let me ask, what is YOUR personal reputation? Are you known as someone whose word is never doubted because what you say can always be trusted? If you aren’t, may I suggest that you might need to do some self reflecting? Are you living as a representative of the world and the way the world does business? It doesn’t have to be business, it can be any interaction. Do those who know you believe every word you say, because you have proven to always be honest? Are you ok with telling a little white lie because perhaps it prevents someone’s feelings from getting hurt? Or maybe it prevents you from being seen as a failure because you made a mistake? I know people who have taken the “little white lie” to new heights. Actually, for some of them, they are in the “big, black, ugly lie” stage.

So why are the Brethren so “peculiar”? Paul writes in Romans, “Do NOT be conformed to this world”. That means “don’t do things just because everyone else is doing them.” A better rule of thumb might be, “if everyone else is doing it, you probably should NOT be doing it.”

Going against the world’s way of doing things is hard. You usually become the “outcast” of your circle of friends because they are all doing it. If they do something, and YOU don’t, no one understands why. And, if you explain why you won’t do it, it will normally sound like you disapprove of your friends’ actions. Being peculiar is always the best way to become an outcast.

So what are we supposed to do? Be unpopular because we are so disagreeable with the world? Paul didn’t stop with saying, “Don’t conform to the world’s standards”, he continues on by saying, “INSTEAD, be transformed by the renewing of your minds.”

First, what does being “transformed” even mean? And second, how do we “renew” our minds for this “transformation” to even happen? The Greek word for “transformed” is only used once in the 4 Gospels. It is when Jesus is “transfigured” (same word) on the mountain in God’s presence. Being in God’s presence “transformed” Jesus. It changed his physical being. Paul says we need to transform ourselves, by “the renewing our minds”. The type of transforming Paul is talking about goes far beyond modifying our behavior. You can change behavior with never being “transformed”. We see that all the time. We have laws that tell us proper behavior for living in our society. The laws require certain “do’s and don’ts”. You can follow those laws with not believing them to be good or right. Paul is not saying you need to follow a set of rules, he’s saying, “get into the presence of God and let God change you.” Seek God’s will in everything you do. Obey God, not just because it’s the right thing to do, but because you are striving to make those things a part of your very being. You want to renew you mind, or in other words, develop a mindset of always seeking God’s will in everything.

You need to be:

reading your Bible... daily,
praying... daily,
asking God to direct your path... daily,
looking for opportunities to serve... daily,
thanking God for your blessings... daily,
thanking God for your difficulties... daily.

If you keep yourself in the presence of God daily, your will be transformed. Your mind will start seeing things it never noticed before. Create the habit of seeking God every day.

I’ve read from several different sources that when you wake up in the morning, the first thing you should do is thank God for the good things in your life. When you live with a thankful attitude, your entire day will go better. Even if it should be a really bad day, starting with thankfulness will improve it from the get-go. When you start your day with dread, the rest of the day is going to be bad. If you start with thankfulness, the minor inconveniences will not matter to you. Many of the major ones will seem minor.

I don’t like clichés. When I hear someone use a cliché, I dismiss it and ignore it. But clichés actually come about because they started with some truth. For example, this little gem, “your attitude will determine your altitude.” I hear that and cringe. I always believed that many people who use clichés, don’t know what to say, so they fall back on something that sounds nice. But just because a cliché is overused, does not mean that it isn’t true. This one in particular is very true. If you have an attitude of thankfulness, your day is better, you can achieve more. If you have a bad disposition, you will always encounter more and more problems.

A question Paul’s letter addresses is this, people often ask, “how do I know what God’s will is?” Anyone ever ask that question? I used to ask it all the time. It’s a very good question. Paul tells us that the transforming of your mind is required. He says, “the purpose of being transformed by the renewing of your mind, is so that you may discern what is the will of God—what is good and acceptable and perfect.”

If you are trying to discern God’s will, but not doing what is necessary to transform your mind, how will you know when you found it? If you don’t know God’s will now, how will you know it, if you never change?

Paul has a few more words in Romans for us. He says, “everyone among you [should] not think of yourself more highly than you ought to think, but to think with sober judgment, each according to the measure of faith that God has assigned.”

I have a personal situation where I struggle with this one. Today, I get to stand in this pulpit and speak to you. It is seen by many as a place of authority. When I first started preaching many years ago, I was always tempted to desire people to say nice things about my sermons. I felt I was “better” than those who did not preach. It took a while, but over time, I learned that preaching is not being an authority OVER others, but being a servant TO others. Since I have been granted the opportunity to preach, I have the responsibility to deliver a message that will build others up, not build ME up. Sure I want to do a good job, and be inspiring. But it is not for me that I preach, but for God’s glory and the building up of His people. I am here to serve, not to BE served. The temptation comes because the preacher is the “face” of the service. But really, is that person the only one involved in making the worship service meaningful?

There are greeters, ushers, worship leaders, child care providers, the children’s story teller, the organist, the music director, the administrative assistant who put all our materials together, the persons who take care of the décor, the custodian who keeps it clean, the choir, the acolyte, and I’m probably missing some. But when it’s all said and done, who do you remember? The speaker.

So it can be tempting for me to feel “special”, when in fact, the speaker probably does less than all the others involved. Actually, without all the “unseen” servants, the speaker would be ineffectual. The service would be pretty chaotic and you could never center yourself to listen to the message. When I keep in mind all those who work to make this happen, it’s easy to understand my place among them, and it isn’t “over” them. Paul’s words are not just for preachers, but for everyone. No matter what your place is, remember that you are not better than anyone else. Sure you may have skills or gifts and be better at “something” than someone else, but they have their own gifts and skills that make them better at something else. But even then, we like to think OUR gift is more important than theirs. But like I said, the custodian cleans our sanctuary. Is my preaching MORE important? I could say “yes”, but if this sanctuary were covered in dust and spider webs, perhaps have mice roaming around, would you even pay attention to what I’m saying, or would you be watching out for spiders and rodents? Every gift is of equal importance, no matter how the world might rank them. And THAT refers back to not conforming to the world’s standards.

It may sound like I’m switching gears at this point, but bear with me and you’ll see how all this comes together.

In the Galatians passage for today, the author tells us that “the desires of the flesh are directly opposed to the desires of the Spirit.” He says the reason for this opposition is “to prevent you from doing what you want”. Talk about your wet blanket statements! How would that go over as a marketing tool for Christianity? “Become a Christian. It will prevent you from doing what you want to do.” Do I have any takers?

I pray for God to lead me to the scriptures He wants me to preach on. When I read this, I thought, “seriously? This is the message I’m supposed to deliver?” So, I’ve been pondering on what the author is getting at. The obvious message didn’t seem to click for me, because I don’t believe God doesn’t want us to enjoy ourselves, sometimes. The Bible talks about joy in spite of suffering, but this isn’t about suffering. This is about “choosing” between the Spirit’s desires and the flesh’s desires.

The author lists the “works” of the flesh, “fornication, impurity, licentiousness, idolatry, sorcery, enmities, strife, jealousy, anger, quarrels, dissensions, factions, envy, drunkenness, carousing, and things like these.”

Then he lists the “fruit” of the Spirit, starting with the statement, “By contrast”. So this is how they are different, “the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, generosity, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control.”

As I looked at the list of the “works of the flesh”, I thought, I don’t desire those things anyway, I do struggle with a couple of them, but I don’t desire them, so how does that “keep me from doing what I want?” And as for the “fruits of the Spirit”, of course I want those things, so again, “how does it keep me from doing what I want?”

Since I thought I only have a problem with a couple items on the “flesh list”, I thought perhaps I should go deeper into those few things and see what’s really there. So as I went through this exercise, I thought envy was the best example for me.

When someone has something that I don’t have and I want it, that’s called “envy”. So I am envious of someone and something. I don’t like feeling envious, but I do. I think about how unfair it is that I can’t have it, or because it’s so expensive or whatever, my mind is filled with thoughts about what I don’t have. So my mind is focused on a “thing” and obtaining that “thing”. If I am focused on what I don’t have, how can I be thankful for what I do have? How can I be generous when I know that takes away from saving up for that “thing”? How can I love someone I am envious of?

The idea that you can’t do what you want is not a problem. The problem is that what you want robs you of the things that make life good. The flesh’s desires control you and what you do. The Spirit is in opposition because it frees you to enjoy what God has in store for you. Envy makes you want more and more “stuff”. The more you have, the more you want. Someone will always have more than you, so if you are envious, you will never be satisfied and, like a drug, will be control you and you will become a slave to your fleshly desires. What you want to do in the flesh, leads to destruction. To live by the spirit is to live freely. You can still have nice things, or situations, but as long as you continue seeking the desires of the Spirit, you will not be controlled by the flesh, and therefore open to the joy God offers.

The desires of the flesh keep you from “real” joy that can only be found in God. When the author uses the term “what YOU want”, he does not mean a simple “that would be nice to have”, but an “I gotta have it”. Those who live a promiscuous life often report how lonely they are. But they use sex as the tool to obtain companionship, which in turn leads to more loneliness, because it is connecting only on a physical level. They desire a TRUE deep human connection only to receive a shallow one that quickly disappears. They live by their fleshly desire, not the Spirit’s desires.

So how does all this go together?

Living by the fleshly desires is how the world lives. We can see it more and more in our advertising. As an example, “buy this product and you will get this result.” All advertising feeds into our fleshly desires. Our television shows feed our fleshly desires. Everything we read about seems to be geared against the fruits of the spirit.

Look down the list:

“Love” vs “lust”
“Joy” vs “momentary happiness”
“Peace” vs “constant need of more things”
“Patience” vs “instant gratification”
“Kindness” vs “getting rid of those different from us”
“Generosity” vs “keeping it all for ourselves”
“Faithfulness” vs “anything goes”
“Gentleness” vs “force”
“Self-control” vs “do what makes you happy”

The only way to combat the world and the desires of the flesh is to be transformed through the renewing of our minds. We need to get into the presence of God and let God show us a new way. We need to become a “peculiar” people once again. If we are “peculiar”, others will notice us and take note. If we are able to blend into the world, because we aren’t that different FROM the world, I have to ask, have we conformed to the world? Are we actually living out the Christian life God desires for us? Being “peculiar” can be hard. But the other option is to never experience God’s joy and peace, or any of the other fruits of the Spirit. So you get to make a choice on how you want to live your life.

Can the News Media Lie and Get Away With It? - My Thoughts

So here’s what I’ve been thinking about over the past few days, “NEWS”. Here’s the situation that caused my wheels to turn:

The first report that came to my attention: A “news” service, Politico, reported that candidate for president, Ben Carson, lied about his past. An excerpt from his book was cited within the article. Just on a cursory reading, I realized that this “news” report was “twisting” the words to say something it didn’t actually say.

The second report that shortly followed: CNN reported that they interviewed people from Carson’s past who claim the angry man Carson claimed to have been, is not the same person they knew.

Here’s the problem, Carson fired back at Politico saying that in the cited passage, nowhere does he actually say what the reporter claims it to be saying. So Politico “changes” the headline to “soften” their accusation. CNN got called out by Carson, for interviewing people from his past who knew him AFTER he got his anger under control. His timeline is pretty well documented, so it should be apparent to anyone who actually read his book.

I have said many times that the “news” media no longer reports the news, but rather all “opinion” based on their political leaning. This is on both the “right” and the “left”. The Supreme Court has decreed that the “news media” has special privileges to protect sources, report things that may hurt someone’s career, etc., sort of giving the right to be the “whistle blower” without repercussions. So if they expose someone committing a crime, they cannot be sued for libel. This is an effort to allow fair reporting to prevent corrupt people from destroying the country, or taking advantage of people who cannot defend themselves, etc. I think it’s a very good thing.

But what happens when the reporters start expressing opinions, instead of the facts? As a child (this may be a naïve or even faulty viewpoint based on my age at the time, and the fact it is an old memory), I remember people like Walter Cronkite reporting facts, and NOT opinions. When the news got to the point of giving its opinion, the upper left corner said, “Commentary”. You knew it was an opinion and not a “news item”. They even had a special person appointed to do the commentary, so you always knew it was NOT facts being presented.

So here’s where my thoughts came in. If a media service is continually “reporting” news which is far more opinion than it is news, should they still be protected from libel lawsuits? I looked into the history of the reporter on Politico who claimed Carson lied, and his last 10 stories were on Republicans in the presidential race, and every article was negative opinions on their stances, or trying to say their facts are wrong, or they are lying, etc. Now I know that perhaps he is being assigned the articles he must write, so I looked at the website itself and their “news” items. There were many concerning Democrats as well. But the flavor was actually “high praise” for what Democrats are doing or saying. There was no slamming them for anything they may have done wrong. Now I will admit that I did not read every article, or scrutinize each one that I read to fact check what was there. I just read quickly to get a “feel” for the reporting. If this “news” outlet is leaning that hard to one side, and the news is very much “misreported” or “misrepresenting” the facts, as in the case of Ben Carson, does he have a right to sue them for libel? Would he have to prove that they do not, in fact, report news, but rather opinion? Or prove that they are trying to push an agenda, rather than report the facts?

When the “correction to the article was published, the article was not changed at all. An “editor’s note” was added to the end. So, unless you read the article AND the added note, it is still a smear of a man’s character.

How about the article you are reading right now? Do I have the right to claim myself as reporting the “news”, even though I do not work for an “official” news service? I am reporting things “as I see it”. I admit it is strictly “my opinion”, but many of the things I read on a lot of “news” websites, amount to nothing more than opinion also. So because they “sometimes” report the news, does that “protect” everything they print, even if it is a boldface lie? If the editor at Politico, read the article that was published and did not catch the “obvious” misinterpretation of the cited passage, can we say “it was nothing more than a mistake that fell through the cracks”? Why was the article itself not changed to properly state the facts, rather than an “editor’s note” being added to say “oops”? Perhaps the article should have been taken down completely since they admitted to the “mistake”, or as the Carson campaign called it, “the lie”.

CNN is considered a “legitimate” news source. But watching their handling of all things political, it sure comes across as “yeah Democrats, boo Republicans”. Many news sources slam Fox news for leaning to the right and telling lies, but how is what they are doing any different. I think ALL news outlets should strive for unbiased reporting. I don’t care if they lean left or right, they shouldn’t lean at all. In an interview with CNN, Ben Carson asked about their process to reporting. His main example (as I remember it) was, “you asked people who I went to high school with about my ‘anger issues’, but they didn’t know me WHEN I had those issues. They knew me after that.” So my question is, why did CNN report that he was lying when they did not have anything legitimate to report? AND they reported it in such a way that even though the people they talked to were not people who would have known about his anger issues, as if it somehow legitimized their claim because it was “close enough”.

One possible answer to this situation may be to require doing things how they were done in the past. When you are stating an opinion, mark it as such. State that “based on the facts (and list those facts), it is my/our opinion, that…”

Sometimes I fear it is too late for any type of correction. Many people who are listening to the “news” don’t know that news was at one time facts being reported and you were allowed to form your own opinion. Today, you have to pick a side and then listen to the media outlet that will tell you what you will agree with. I find myself reading the news about America on foreign news sources because they don’t have as much at stake to report the facts. They have nothing to gain or lose by being completely honest, instead of pushing an agenda for some sort of reward. Since our “news” reporters live here, they can push their ideas through the mass media which gives them a whole lot more power than the average citizen. So if they don’t like someone, or that person threatens their position or power or agenda, they have the means to destroy them and call it “news”, and then hide behind the “protection” the news media has from being held libel.

Don’t get me wrong, this happens on both left and right sides. It just happened that the Ben Carson/Politico issue brought it to my attention. I continuously see people putting down Fox News for their reporting from the left, and MSNBC being slammed from the right, but the Carson thing called out a real life example, instead of mere generalities.

As I research things for my blog posts, I often complain that I cannot find unbiased news sources to fact check the topics I am working on. I would like to just get the raw facts and draw my own conclusions. But today, finding “untainted” facts is a hard job. I spend a lot of time trying to find reliable information when I write.

Here’s my question to anyone reading this, what should/could be done to eliminate the constant media bias that seems to be running rampant in our society? Do you even think it’s a problem? How do you select a news source? Do you do it consciously, or do you turn on the TV and whatever is playing will be fine? Again, this is just me searching for answers.

Love and Marriage - My Thoughts

I never thought I would be writing an “advice” article on marriage. I think I am nowhere close to being an expert in this area, but I do have experience that I am willing to share.

I recently finished reading an article entitled something like “How to fulfill you husband’s 5 basic needs”. It was an article written to wives about how to make their husbands happy. The article was sort of “generic”, but the basic point was “give yourself freely to your husband.” It was not an article about sex, though that was one of the 5 basic needs. What disturbed me so much, was not the article itself, I totally agreed with the whole premise, but the comments left by so many women about having their own needs met. They took the idea of “fulfilling his needs” as meaning “being his slave.” Some of the comments were left by women whose photo pictured them kissing their husband (or boyfriend). So I got to wondering, “why are you with this person?” Do you actually love him, or are you using him to fulfill some need?

I should first explain what I believe love is all about. When you love someone, you will desire their happiness over your own. Love causes you to forget about yourself and focus on the object of your love. So, if you love your spouse, you will do whatever is best for him/her, no matter what the cost to you personally. The ultimate love will even move you to die for them, if necessary. I have met people who would die for their children, but not their spouse. So I again have to wonder, “do you actually love your spouse?” Love should be unconditional. If you will only love someone, provided you receive love in return, I believe you do not actually love them. There is no motive in love. You love simply to love. There is no expectation whatsoever of something in return.

For those in an unhappy marriage, whose fault is it? Most, in my experience, blame their spouse. I will hear things like, when we first got married he was so kind and loving and now he thinks only of himself. I do not doubt that may have happened. But I also wonder, “what changed to cause that?” Depending on your perspective, you may hate what I am about to say, but just consider this, is it possible that you stopped making your spouse your #1 priority? Did you stop trying to make them happy? If they lost focus on your happiness, did you in return change your focus on theirs? I’m not blaming anyone with these questions. I am only seeking clarity. How we respond to a situation is entirely up to us. So, if they are pulling back, or focusing on themselves, should your response be to also pull back? Or should it be to confront it and work it out? No one likes confrontation, but if you value your marriage, you will do what is necessary.

Again, I say, “love should be unconditional”. The moment you think, “what’s in it for me?” or “are my needs being fulfilled?” you are no longer loving your spouse. The only reason to fulfill your spouse’s needs is because you love them. What you get in return should not be considered. If you look for some sort of return, you are not loving them, you are simply being selfish. Now let me say, if your spouse has made it clear that they do not love you and they expect a slave and not a spouse, then maybe we’re in different territory… (or are we?)

When something changes in a marriage, it is up to YOU to figure out what it is and deal with it. If you take the attitude, “if my spouse won’t try to figure it out, or doesn’t want to work at it, why should I?” again, you are taking a selfish attitude. Sometimes, only one person sees that there is a problem. Don’t assume that you both see it.

I believe that marriage requires both people to work at making it great. If one starts slacking, the other may have to work harder to hold it together. We all go through stuff that makes us weak, or want to give up, or walk out, or whatever. The trick is to love unconditionally. Look at what that word “unconditionally” means. There are no conditions that will cause the love to stop flowing. So I ask, “under what conditions will you stop loving someone?” If you have a condition that could make you stop loving them, then you do not have unconditional love for them. Most of us have unconditional love for our children, but so many do not have it for their spouse. What’s wrong with that picture? Why do we put conditions on our spouse, but not our children? Are they not also human and prone to failing? Of course your spouse is going to screw up and disappoint you. If you thought otherwise, you need to seek some serious counseling. We know our children will fail us, but we’re ok with that. So why not allow your spouse the courtesy of knowing they’re not perfect? Every spouse is going to fail at some point. Get used to it! If THEY were perfect, why would they be with YOU?

Those who know me, know that I have spent a lifetime dealing with severe depression. Depression causes us to focus on ourselves. It does not make us selfish, but it somehow makes us focus on how miserable we feel. We can’t think about other people when we’re depressed. So how should my wife respond when I cannot even think about her during those times? I’ll tell you what she did. She loved me and supported me and sought to fulfill my needs as best she could. She never once told me that I was failing to meet her needs. She gave of herself fully to aid in my healing. Her own needs went completely unfulfilled. It would have been so easy for her to just walk away, but she remained completely selfless. Many times during the worst of it, I seriously considered suicide. But because of her love for me, I knew it was not the right answer to my problems. Her love was the only thread I was able to hang on to, it kept me alive (literally). It was the key to my healing. Today, I can freely give myself back to her. Yes, she was miserable during the worst stages. I was mean and cranky and would not communicate any sort of love for her. But she always returned love in response. She had to pick up all the slack left by me, because I stopped caring about everything. Her love for me was unconditional. If she required love in return, she would have left me, because it just wasn’t forthcoming.

I can see so many people saying that our case is the exception. Maybe it is. But if you don’t live it out, how will you ever know? Our entire society teaches us to care about ourselves FIRST. Love ourselves FIRST. While I believe we need to love and care about ourselves, I think the idea of that being “first” is wrong. It should be at the same time. When you marry someone, you become a part of a whole. What you do for your spouse, you are also doing for yourself. So if you love your spouse, you love yourself. When you put yourself ahead of your spouse, you are no longer working for the good of the whole and are actually creating a separation between the two of you.

So let me leave you with a couple of thoughts, part of my philosophy if you will:

You cannot receive love, unless you are willing to give it.

You cannot give love, if you expect something in return.

Living Out Your Faith - My Thoughts

As I prepared to teach my Sunday School class today, I had an opportunity to reflect on a few conversations that I have been involved in lately. One was a question posed by a pastor on Facebook. He was looking for a story of healing connected with the anointing service that the Church of the Brethren administers to those who ask for it. I asked for such a service during the worst time of my depression. Another conversation (similar in nature) was the question of using anti-depressants while holding to the belief that God can heal us from depression. And in the final conversation, I told my story of instantaneous healing of tonsillitis many years ago. All these conversations, though closely related were with separate individuals.

The scripture for the Sunday School lesson tomorrow is from Acts. The story is about Stephen, standing before the Sanhedrin, giving his speech that eventually leads to his being stoned to death. As I reflected on my day of these conversations, I had some realizations of what has been in the news lately.


The news item is about a woman who has a conviction of faith to not issue marriage licenses to gay couples. She is deemed a "hero" by some Christians, and a "disgrace" by others. She is also called a bigot by many. So I posed the question to myself, "what would I do if I were her?" This led me to an even bigger question, "what does God want us to do in situations where our duty violates our faith?" 

Whether or not I agree with her stand on gay marriage is immaterial. What matters is HOW I respond to situations based on my faith. If I oppose gay marriage, and find myself in a conflict between my civil duty (my job) and my faith, what am I going to do? In reality, the question is even bigger than that. Should we “fight” for our right to practice our faith without restriction? Should we just give in to public opinion? Should we keep quiet and “suffer”? Well, here’s what happened in this story: She chose to "fight" for her beliefs, which in turn created a situation that I believe damaged her message of Jesus' love. Let me explain that opinion. Rather than "fight", she could have chosen to "suffer" for her beliefs. What I mean by that is, she could have sacrificed her position, her job, her income, and resigned, stating that she could not uphold a law that violated her faith. It probably would have never made the news. But the impact on those few people, who witnessed her actions, may have had a tremendous change in their lives.

In the story I read in Acts about Stephen, he is asked to defend himself against the charges brought against him (in other words, “fight”). Instead, he makes a speech showing how the Christian movement was a continuation of God's plan (out of the Jewish tradition) for the world, and not a contradiction to it. In the process, he showed how his accusers were violating God's will, which was entrusted to them. His speech was only heard by the few who were present, but even after those few helped stone him, I believe his words had to ring in their hearts and minds well after the fact, eventually changing their lives to possibly accepting Jesus as the Christ.

Rather than constantly trying to preserve our "rights" as Christians against a government set on taking them away by "fighting", perhaps we need to live out our faith among those in our immediate influence. If they see God's love in us, and later see us suffer for expressing that love, our oppressors will be seen as the problem, not us. Those of us screaming about how we're being persecuted are seen as ignorant people who believe an outdated old book that contains racist, bigoted messages. What makes its way into the news might be the only encounter many people have with Christianity. And of course, it is all negative publicity. Is there any question as to why we are looked down on as Christians? So we scream even louder about how we are misunderstood and unfairly characterized, and all this screaming makes us look even more ignorant and paranoid. So how do we change it? I am going to suggest a different approach, try being quiet. As you read on, you will see what I mean.

Changing gears for a second, a government that does not have the support of its people cannot stand. "Fighting" against it only creates sides, either you are with us or against us. This is a "top down" approach. Fight the leaders to affect change that will trickle down. History shows us this approach never really works. When Christianity was mandated by a government, it didn’t change people’s hearts, though it may have changed some people’s actions. True change only comes when it affects people’s hearts. You cannot legislate this type of change. You can make non-Christian actions illegal, but you can only change behavior, not intent. To truly change someone’s heart, you need to make personal, one-on-one contact with them. That cannot be done at a high level, it can only be done at the grass roots. You have to get down on your knees and wash the other person’s feet. You have to enter their life and allow yourself to love them without reservation.

All this being said, let’s play out what I’m talking about. Let’s say you have affected many people’s lives by showing God’s love to them (As a Christian, I would hope we are all doing this.) You work a government job that requires you to issue marriage licenses. One day, gay marriage becomes legal and you are now required to issue those licenses. However, you believe this violates your faith, how do you respond? Well, if you fight and refuse to do so, you get hauled into court, speak your piece and get thrown into jail. A national controversy breaks out and some are with you and some are against you. Your co-workers can’t take your side because they can’t afford to lose their jobs. So they fear the power of the government that employs them. That government has the ability to throw them into jail beside you. (What follows is all speculation, but let’s see where it goes.) On the other hand, let’s say, you chose to quietly resign stating that you can’t do something that violates your faith. Since you have shown all your co-workers God’s love through your actions, your resignation will leave a HUGE imprint on their hearts and minds. They see that you are not only willing to talk the talk, but you are willing to walk the walk. They will see how deep your faith really runs. They know you NEED that job, but you are willing to give it up for something you believe that deeply about. They see that you trust God enough to take care of you to the point that you will walk away from a guaranteed paycheck, with only the trust that your God will provide for you. How many of their lives will be forever changed when they face difficult circumstances? Will they turn to God because of your example? We don’t know for sure, but I’m one who would hope that leadership by example is the strongest teacher.

I mentioned that a government cannot stand without the support of its people. In this scenario I painted, who will have the support of your co-workers, the government, or you? Your actions can plant the seeds that one day will turn people against the establishment when “true” persecution comes. If we are just “noisy”, the government will be glad to see us go. But if we changed lives, our persecutors will not be able to withstand a rebellion of their own making.

When we live by the law of love, we create change from the bottom up. Jesus never "fought" the government. He simply showed love to whomever he was around and the change that was created has not only lasted over 2000 years, it has perpetually grown and spread. Jesus’ love changed the people at the bottom. When that happens, change makes its way to the top. Sure, fighting can create change, but the change is only temporary. There is always someone bigger and stronger who will overpower the change. But when love is the weapon of choice, nothing is able to defeat it. So if you feel persecuted, live out your faith. Suffering may be the best way to effect change. “Fighting back” is the “expected” response. It’s so easy to say, “If I were them, I’d be fighting too”, and BOOM you are ignored! But to quietly suffer AND on top of that, show love to your oppressors, there is no way you can be ignored. Not only is it not expected, but it’s considered “insane”, but it is never going to be forgotten. And those who end up in difficult times, will remember your faith and perhaps accept Jesus as their savior, and begin a new life, because the seeds you planted began to grow and bear fruit. As a Christian, everyone is watching you. If you talk the talk AND walk the walk, people’s lives will be forever changed, whether you know it or not.

Proper Driving on American Roads - My Thoughts

Ever feel like this woman while driving? I was telling a friend that I was considering writing this article. After much thought, and wondering if I was just being too negative about other drivers, I decided to go for it and perhaps, if only one driver learned better driving habits, my job is complete. Every day, I encounter some sort of stupidity on the road. But certain events occur over and over, showing me that so many people do not know what is expected of them while driving. So I decided to list and explain proper driving on American roadways.

Proper use of turn signals

The purpose of the turn signal is to tell other drivers your intention to turn, or change lanes. This gives them the opportunity to avoid an accident because they are surprised by whatever follows.

For example: do NOT turn on your turn signal AFTER getting into the turn lane. Once you are in the turn lane, we know what you intend to do. The turn signal becomes redundant at that point. Put your turn signal on well before reaching the turn lane. That way, when you hit the brakes for no apparent reason, we won't rear-end you. If the turn lane is short, you will need to slow down before moving into it. If I have a warning that the turn is coming, I will also slow down, leaving you plenty of room to do what you need to do. This also applies to streets without turn lanes. Hitting the brakes without warning causes too many accidents.

If you have a center lane that is used for turning from either direction, put your turn signal on early. If you reduce speed, and I intend to turn also, I may get into the turn lane and catch up to you, possibly beside you. If you then proceed into the turn lane, an accident is very likely if you haven't checked on my position relative to you. If I know you intend to turn, I will not get in your way. I will match your speed, but prevent an accident. Also, oncoming traffic will know to not get into the turn lane early, because you will probably be there in a few seconds.

If you intend to change lanes on a highway, let other traffic know before doing so. While some drivers are jerks and will speed up to prevent you from changing lanes, most will offer you safe passage into the lane of your choice. But if we don't know you intend to change lanes, we won't slow down if required for you to do so safely. Personally, I will always let someone get in front of me if I know your intention. If I see you trying to change lanes without a turn signal, I may hit the horn to let you know I was not prepared to be so nice. Typically, that case occurs when the change is going to put you very close to my vehicle. I will aid your lane change if you extend the courtesy of informing me ahead of time.

Remember, the turn signal is the only communication device we have to let other drivers know what we are doing. If you fail to communicate what you want to do, do not get upset when other drivers are flipping the bird at you, or yelling out their windows "jerk" in your direction.

The "yield" sign: What does that mean anyway?

When you come to a yield sign, what should you do? First, the misconception (based on my experience) is that people believe this sign means "merge". IT DOES NOT!!! To yield, means that you give the right of way to any and ALL oncoming traffic in the lane you are trying to enter. So if 2 lanes come together, and you have the yield sign, you are to stop, unless there is no oncoming traffic. You do not need to stop if the lane is clear. This is not a "merge" where you "fit in" to the oncoming traffic. If your sight were to be impeded, this would have been a stop sign, where you would come to a complete stop, look for oncoming traffic and then proceed when clear. The only difference between a stop sign and a yield sign, is that you will have a complete view of the lane you are getting on to, so you do not need to stop unless there is traffic in the lane. Even if the 2 lanes seem to lend themselves to perfect merging, the yield sign removes your right to enter the lane if there is any traffic in it.

The 4-way Stop: Who’s Turn is it Anyway?

OK, you arrive at an intersection and all four roads entering the intersection have a stop sign. So who goes first? First rule of thumb is whoever arrived first has the right to continue through first. Whoever arrived second is next up, and so-on. But, what happens if 2 cars arrive at the same time? Well, that is going to depend on positioning. If the cars are approaching each other (head on) and both are going straight, they can go together. If one is making a left turn in front of the other, the car going straight has the right to go first. If the cars are perpendicular to each other, always defer to the vehicle on your right.

In the case that cars are lined up in all directions, take notice to the rotation currently being followed and stick to it. Changing the order creates confusion and it takes several moves to get order re-established.

AND by all means, NEVER, EVER wave someone through if it is YOUR turn to proceed. It may seem like a nice thing to do, but it creates chaos because no one will know what you intend to do next. For example, if 4 cars are there, and you are next to go, once you wave another car through, the driver that was to follow them now has to figure out if you intend to go next, or should they go next because that would be the proper rotation. If they proceed through, the next vehicle has to make that decision, etc. And when you finally go through, who is supposed to follow you? Does it revert back to the car behind you to get into a new rotation, or does it pick up where the last car BEFORE you was supposed to go, left off? Courtesy should be a standard in driving, but in this case, it is harmful to be too nice. Even writing this paragraph was confusing for me because YOU waved someone though!

One last thought, what happens when 4 cars all arrive at the same time? Well, I never saw that happen, so I’m guessing it would be a “free for all”!

Turning Right on Red

I had to do a little research on this one because I thought my opinion might not be the actual law. It was good that I did, because my opinion was strict as compared to the law. In order to make a legal right turn on a red signal, you MUST come to a complete stop BEFORE entering the intersection. Once you come to a complete stop, you may make the turn ONLY if it is safe to do so. To me, the law is a little nebulous on that point. WHAT is considered “safe”? My opinion is that if your turn causes any driver to have to use their brake, then you should not have made the turn in the first place. If the driver with the green light is speeding, YOU are probably still in the wrong. Of course, that may depend on how fast the driver is going because if they were so far away, no danger seemed to be present, extreme speeds could throw off your judgment. My personal rule of thumb is that if I want to turn right on red, if there are two lanes and ANY vehicles are coming, I will not turn. If it is 3 lanes, I will go if the only vehicle is in the far left lane. The reason (based on experience) is that sometimes drivers will change lanes, for whatever reason, and I don’t want to put myself in danger by being in the lane they intend to get in. If the intersection I am at is close to another intersection, the driver with the green may want to turn at the next, and I may end up blocking their turn by being in the lane.

Another scenario I’ve seen is turning on red and moving to the far left lane as part of the turn. For example, I’m traveling in the right lane approaching a green light. The driver turns right on red, but crosses my lane to get in a left lane. While my distance may have been far enough away to make that sort of turn safely (not impeding my driving), this one is illegal. The law states that you need to make the right turn on red and get into the right most lane to complete it. You are not permitted to turn any other way. After completing your turn, THEN you may move to the left with the proper use of turn signals.

You must also yield to ALL pedestrians, bikes and possible U-turns. Essentially, if you have the red light, you have no right to turn if there are ANY reasons why you shouldn't. If your action interferes in any way with anyone else, you are not permitted to proceed.

I like to follow the idea that if I do anything that inconveniences another driver, I am doing it wrong. Now if you are driving at excessive speeds, or weaving through traffic, I may inconvenience you unintentionally (and I will not feel bad about it), but in general, my driving philosophy is to never interfere with another person’s driving. If I pull out and it requires you to slow down to allow me to do it, then I should not have pulled out in the first place.

Emergency Vehicles

I was going to write about something else, but sometimes when you see it happen, you just have to change gears.

Emergency vehicles: If you hear a siren, or see the flashing lights, or God forbid you are at an intersection and the ambulance is trying to go through it, you are to get out of the way and yield to it! I watched a driver cut the ambulance off as it began making its way into the intersection because the driver had a green arrow! Not only was the siren loud, but in this case the ambulance was much higher than all the surrounding cars (so all flashing lights were visible) and it was at the head of them all to cross the intersection. You would have to blind AND deaf to miss it. And I'm guessing if you are, then you can't get a license. I was in the left turn lane and we just got a green arrow. The ambulance had a red light, but as we should all know, we let any emergency vehicle through if they have flashing lights and sirens on. But not the driver I watched actually caused the ambulance to hit its brakes. We all know that life and death can rely on seconds. Is it possible that this stupid driver was the cause of someone losing their life? I have to wonder what goes through people's minds.

When driving straight with an emergency vehicle coming up behind you, you must pull over to allow it to pass. Once it has passed you, you may get back on the road. But please be courteous to other drivers. They also pulled over, so don't use the situation to gain distance on them. I've had a situation where we all pulled over and some driver (in a rush), pulled out nearly causing 3 accidents because he thought he would get past us all by not allowing us back on the road before he went on by. Hey, it sucks to be late to something, but if you are late, perhaps you need to plan ahead and leave earlier. If it takes 30 minutes to drive there, don't leave 30 minutes before you need to be there. Leave 40 minutes before and if something happens (like maybe an ambulance caused you to pull over), you will still arrive on time.

The basic rule of thumb with emergency vehicles: ALWAYS yield to them and give them clear passage to get to the victims who need their help. If it was you needing them, you could die because some driver did not follow the rules and delayed their arrival. Think about others for a change!

That White Line at a Traffic Light

What is that white line all about? Most of you probably think this topic is rather stupid as we ALL know what it’s for. Well, based on experience, I’m guessing that we all DON’T know what it’s for, or perhaps don’t CARE.

That white line is an invisible barrier that is supposed to let you know that you MUST stop at that line if the light is red. Your car is not to break the vertical wall that extends upward from the line itself. Just yesterday, I was about to make a right turn on red at an intersection. My white line was about 6 feet closer to the intersection than the lines in the straight/left turn bound lanes. With that additional 6 feet, I was able to clearly see any oncoming traffic, making my turn safe and easy. I drive a Jeep Wrangler, so I sit rather high, but a Ford F250 has a hood that is even higher than where I sit. Even though the truck cannot turn left or go straight until the light turns green, the driver still felt it was necessary to pull up WAY over the white line, the front of his truck even with the front of my Jeep, making it impossible for me to see the oncoming traffic. What does pulling over the white line even do? Do you gain time or distance? Why is it so hard for so many people to understand that the location of the line was chosen with some reason behind it. For example, the left most lane will often be further back than those in adjacent lanes. The reason is for those vehicles making left hand turns from the right of your location. When they make the turn, being back further makes the turn easier for them, and safer for you. If you cross that line, you put your vehicle in their path and yourself in danger. Obviously, we ALL know what the lines are for. But why do so many people ignore them?

Merging

Some basic thoughts might be the place to start. If you are going to merge into traffic, always consider how you will affect the traffic flow you are merging into. For example, if you are merging onto a major highway, it is YOUR job to match the speed of the flow prior to merging. If I am on the highway, it is NOT my job to slow down to let you merge in. It is YOUR job to get up to the speed of traffic in order to merge.

Use of turn signals is also a very good tool. If the lane of the off-ramp is also an on-ramp to get back on the road you just came off, then the turn signal let’s everyone know that you are planning to merge rather than being in that lane to get onto the other road. Depending on several factors, I may not know that you are getting off the other road, and I may think you are getting on to it. So the turn signal is your way to let me know what is happening.

What about merging when going from a certain number of lanes down to fewer lanes? There is no real magic to this one. TAKE TURNS! If the right lane is merging into the left lane, use your turn signal to let them know you have reached the point of moving over. It is best not to wait until the very last second to do it though. If I had to drive at 5 mph for the last mile because I got over early, I am going to be ticked off if you blew past me only to try to get ahead of me. Take the best opening to merge early rather than force yourself in because your options are gone. Yes, it may add a few minutes to your drive, but leaving early is always the best way to arrive on time. Plan ahead for possible delays! The rest of us are also driving slowly. You are not the only one this delay is affecting.

If the car in front of you was allowed to merge into the new lane, don’t be a butt and try to get in right behind them. Get in behind the vehicle that allowed them over. It’s all about courtesy. Most drivers will co-operate IF you provide some courtesy to them.

If the merge lane is very short, then you need to be looking ahead and thinking about how you will merge BEFORE you need to do it. Actually, whether or not it is short, thinking about what to do before executing it is always a good thing.

When you plan your merge, if the vehicle where you planned to merge in won’t allow you to move over, fall back and merge BEHIND it. Trying to stay ahead just ticks everyone off and your chances get lower of finding a sympathetic driver to help you. If I see the vehicle in front of me deny your merging effort, I am more likely to allow you in front of me. But if you drive faster to just move over in front of me, there is no sympathy for your predicament, and now it’s a game of chicken.

Finally, if you are in a lane that becomes a “turn only” lane, or “this lane ends” type situation and you don’t want to be there, immediately use your turn signal to let others know you need to move over. Then look for the earliest opening to merge. Don’t go faster to find an opening, falling behind a vehicle will show you are not trying to gain time, but are willing to submit to the other drivers. Your chances of merging without incident go up dramatically.

For future consideration

There are many other traffic situations that can be talked about. I’m going to call this piece “Part 1” and if you leave comments as to what other situations you would like to see discussed, I’d be happy to create a “Part 2”.

Faith that will Conquer the World!

One day in 1939, George Bernard Dantzig, a doctoral candidate at the University of California, Berkeley, arrived late for a graduate-level statistics class and found two problems written on the board. Not knowing they were examples of unsolved statistics problems, he mistook them for part of a homework assignment, jotted them down, and solved them.

Later, when Dantzig was asked about how he solved them, he replied, “If I had known that the problems were not homework, but were in fact two famous unsolved problems in statistics, I probably would not have thought positively, would have become discouraged, and would never have solved them.”

The Bible is filled with stories of people who did great things for God simply because they believed that with God’s power they could. And we have other stories showing what happens when you don’t believe in God’s power. I want to point out two of those stories. The first is about Jesus’ disciples. They were given the power to heal and to cast out demons. But there was a boy who was possessed by a demon. Some translations say he had epilepsy. But the disciples couldn’t heal him. Jesus casts out the demon and then rebukes his disciples telling them that they lacked faith. They were given the power but doubted that they could in fact do it. The second story is about Peter. Jesus walks on the water to a boat that Peter and the other disciples are on. Jesus calls out to Peter to get out of the boat and walk out to him. Peter follows Jesus orders and walks on the water. But then, he notices that he’s doing something impossible and realizing that it’s impossible, begins to sink. Jesus asks him later, “Why did you doubt?” Peter was doing the impossible and still doubted while he was proving it could be done.

How many of us do the same thing? We look at something that needs to be done and we fail because we know it’s impossible. Or we say, “I can’t do that.” Or “others are better at that than me, so I won’t do it.” We make excuse after excuse because we fear failure, or worse yet, “what will other people think?” Or “that’s impossible, so why bother trying?” Did you know that some things ARE actually impossible, <pause> until someone does them. Sometimes there are people who are so stupid that they believe they can do something everyone else knows is impossible. And in there stupidity, they actually do it.

I’m going to talk about a few concepts that I sometimes think Christians have intellectualized away. As if we have become so “enlightened” that we don’t believe them because they don’t make sense to us anymore. The laws of the universe don’t conform to these concepts, so there is no way it is possible. But I contend that they remain true no matter how we might want to dismiss them.

One idea is the miracles reported in the Bible. We try to find “natural” explanations for how they could have happened. For example, the raising of Lazarus from the dead. Lazarus died and his family buries him. 3 days later, Jesus arrives, opens his tomb, and calls for him to come out. Lazarus comes out and Jesus says, “take his grave clothes off” Many people today believe that Lazarus was not in fact dead, but had fallen into a coma-like state that often appeared like death. As a matter of fact, in more modern times, Edgar Allen Poe feared being buried alive because of falling into such a state. He took many precautions to make arrangements for everyone to be sure he was dead before anyone was allowed to bury him. But why do modern day Christians see raising Lazarus as impossible? One reason is that it defies the laws of nature. People cannot come back to life once they are dead. We KNOW that. But why is it impossible for God?

That’s just one example. We can look at many other examples. Jonah in the belly of a fish defies all understanding. It must just be a metaphor because that can’t happen. The Great Flood, just another story to boost the ratings. Virgin birth, try to teach THAT in biology class. The list goes on and on.

So let me ask this, is God confined by the laws of nature? Who do you think wrote the laws of nature? I’m thinking it was the God who brought nature into existence. If we believe God created the universe, why do we think the God who created life, cannot restore it? This is one of those “being too enlightened to believe” moments I’m talking about. My personal belief is that God created the universe. It may have been in 6 days, just 6000 years ago. It may have been through the Big Bang. To me, it doesn’t matter. You can pick your favorite theory. To me it doesn’t matter HOW it was done, all that matters is that I know it was GOD who did it. God’s method doesn’t matter to me. In our enlightenment, we have made science and religion mutually exclusive. You either believe in what science tells us, or you believe in what religion tells us. For me, I believe there is a third option. I believe that God created and controls what happens and science will help us understand how all that works. Science does NOT have to be an enemy of religion, it can be an ally. My hope is that science will one day explain the universe so clearly that it will be impossible to deny that it was created by intelligent design, that it didn’t “just happen” by random accidents.

This is the faith that the writer of Hebrews talks about when he says, “faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen.” We say that we believe in God, and that Jesus is the Son of God, but we have become a society of “doubting Thomas’s.” Thomas would not believe that Jesus was raised from the dead until he saw it with his own eyes. We take a critical view of Thomas for his unbelief, but how are we any different? We cannot believe in things we can’t prove. We elevate science to a status where our faith should be. For many of us, our faith relies on science for validation. We won’t believe it, if it can’t be proven. And that includes God working in our lives. Maybe we WANT science to prove it wasn’t God because God’s power is scary to us. We can only manage what we can understand. So if it goes beyond our understanding, we can’t control it. If we can’t control God, what if He tells me to do something I don’t want to do? I might actually have to do it. And it’s scary.

So the faith I’ve been talking about so far has really been more of a “passive” faith, just believing that God can do things beyond our understanding. But I want to talk more about an “active” faith, a faith that causes us to do things that are way outside our comfort zone, a faith that moves us to action when we would prefer to do something else, or be somewhere else, a faith that can change the course of history.

Last week, I was at the Manassas Church of the Brethren. I got to hear Chris Bowman’s sermon on faith, based on Hebrews chapter 11. This chapter talks about the faith of Abel, Enoch, Noah, Abraham, Moses, and on and on. All these people had faith and God brought about these extraordinary results in their lives. But what was so good about his sermon, was when he got to verse 35. He mentioned that we often gloss over that part because we want to be on the first list. The list of all these great people who had faith in God and great things came from it. But in verse 35, the writer switches gears and says, “others”, others who were faithful, but their lives went a different route. Happily ever after wasn’t the outcome for them. This is how the last portion of Hebrews 11 reads:

By faith the people passed through the Red Sea as if it were dry land, but when the Egyptians attempted to do so they were drowned. By faith the walls of Jericho fell after they had been encircled for seven days. By faith Rahab the prostitute did not perish with those who were disobedient, because she had received the spies in peace. And what more should I say? For time would fail me to tell of Gideon, Barak, Samson, Jephthah, of David and Samuel and the prophets— who through faith conquered kingdoms, administered justice, obtained promises, shut the mouths of lions, quenched raging fire, escaped the edge of the sword, won strength out of weakness, became mighty in war, put foreign armies to flight. Women received their dead by resurrection.

So far all about great faith and the great results for holding fast to it. And now we read this:

OTHERS were tortured, refusing to accept release, in order to obtain a better resurrection. Others suffered mocking and flogging, and even chains and imprisonment. They were stoned to death, they were sawn in two, they were killed by the sword; they went about in skins of sheep and goats, destitute, persecuted, tormented— of whom the world was not worthy. They wandered in deserts and mountains, and in caves and holes in the ground. Yet all these, though they were commended for their faith, did not receive what was promised, since God had provided something better so that they would not, apart from us, be made perfect.

These people became martyrs for their faith. They did not receive a glorious parade to celebrate their faithful service and mark how God brought them through with flying colors. Their faith did bring them special blessings when they got to heaven, but it was not received here on Earth.

Peter is a good example of a good outcome. He was thrown into prison and the other disciples prayed and prayed and God sent an angel and he was released. How about John the Baptist? He was thrown into prison and his disciples prayed and prayed and he was beheaded. Not the outcome we like to think about.

We don’t know what the outcome for our faith might be. But the question is, are we willing to act on it no matter how serious the result may be?

The scriptures that Sarah read for us today might seem to be an odd mix of ideas to go together. The first scripture pretty much tells us that if we ask God to do anything for us and we have full faith that He will do it, then we can count it as done. He says, “Whatever you ask for in prayer, with faith, you will receive.” It seems very clear. Ask for it, believe you’ll get it, and it’s yours. Can’t be much plainer, can it?

The second scripture says that if we love God, we will obey his commandments. Again a very plain truth, if you love God, you show it by obeying His commands for your life.

I want to throw a third scripture into the mix. Matthew 7:11, If you then, who are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give good things to those who ask him!

So like the first, all we have to do is ask, and we will receive because God loves us.

So let me ask, what do you want God to give you?

Now, before we start thinking of God as our Genie in the Lamp, here’s where a little logic needs to be applied. We love God, so we do what we’re told. God loves us, so we get what we ask for.

First question, what does God tell us to do?

Well, we’re told to not covet what other people have.

We’re told to not love money.

We’re told not to rely on wealth for security.

We’re told to rely completely on God for our daily needs.

So what was it you wanted to ask God to give you?


How about this:

Someone we love is sick, maybe dying. Obviously we want them to be healed. So what do we ask God to do? We ask for healing, right? Why is that? Is it because we don’t want to lose them? Meaning it’s actually for us? Or they are suffering, so we want that to stop, but we don’t want death to be the method of stopping the suffering. Why?

As human beings, we ask God for something, but we also lay out our agenda of acceptable ways God to do that. We might have great faith that God is going to carry out the agenda as we prescribed it. But what if it doesn’t go that way? Do we stop having faith? What was our faith in anyway? Was it in God to do the right thing, or was it in our agenda for what we find acceptable.

When Jesus was praying in the garden about his death, he told God, “I’m not liking this plan you got going for me. Let’s talk about changing it up.” But as much as he didn’t want the plan to end in suffering and death, he still submitted and said, “not MY will, but YOUR’S be done.” His faith in God to do the right thing, overrode his own desires. He had the ability to change the plan, but he chose to follow God’s plan, not his own.

Jesus is the example of faith in action that we need to follow. I ask in faith for something, but I get aligned with God’s will. If I ask for selfish things, I am not aligned with God. I ask with the wrong motives. Asking in faith is not just asking and believing that I will get it. It’s about asking and having faith that God will give me what I need, not just what I want.

Faith is not for God. Faith is for us. Faith should be transforming us into the people of God. It’s our faith that allows us to have an anchor to get through some of the worst times in our lives. It allows us to weather storms that seemingly beat us up, but in the end, only make us stronger, provided we hang on to our faith. Faith allows us to be leaders, and not followers. If we follow the trends of the world, we can’t change the world, because we are part of the world. If we step out and lead with our faith in hand, we’re going to stand out and be different. We may not be popular at the time, but we leave an imprint on those who can’t figure out why we don’t just go with the flow. They go with the flow and feel safe, but often unfulfilled. When their longing for fulfillment grows, they will remember those that stood out and pick up where we left off. The seeds of faith we plant today, will one day grow. We don’t know where or when, but we can be sure that they will grow.

I’d like to close with a real life example of transforming faith. I know a couple who had a young daughter that developed an incurable illness. Death was certain. The couple prayed, their family prayed, their friends prayed, their church prayed. Everyone was praying for the healing of this little girl. And not long after that, she died. Asking God for healing, in faith, did not heal this little girl. But the change in the couple, the change in their family, the change in their friends, the change in their church was nothing short of a miracle. Their faith was stronger, their relationships were tighter, everything about them grew to whole new level. Of course they mourned and to this day fight back tears for their loss, but the power of God through their faith has made them new creations. They are out there fighting for children who suffer with diseases that take their lives too soon. They have opened an orphanage in a third world country for children who are otherwise forgotten. The world is changing because of their faith. They are on a crusade to help others who have to deal with the loss of children.

THAT is faith that changes the world!