Why question everything?

Why not?

Okay, seriously - why should we question everything?

If you believe whatever people tell you (or if you believe what you read in your email inbox), you will believe many foolish things and, as an unfortunate result, you may make decisions based on lies which might ruin your health or cause you to lose money.  For instance, astonishingly, not only have people fallen for the famed "Nigerian scam," it has a long and successful history predating the advent of email, and it is rumored that some people have even died in pathetic attempts to recover their savings.

• Snopes debunks the Nigerian Scam
• Annals of Crime - The Perfect Mark:  How a Massachesetts psychotherapist fell for a Nigerian e-mail
• The Nigerian Scam on the Crimes of Persuasion website

(Note: I cannot find a reference to the supposed murder of an American in Nigeria in June of 1995 on any reputable news web site, nor can I find the actual name of the individual supposedly murdered.  So, have people actually died?  I don't really know.)

On a more spiritual plane, history is littered with sad examples of people who blindly trusted charismatic leaders.    In my lifetime alone, I can remember the 1978 Jonestown massacre in Guyana.  In the 1990s, national news reported that dozens died in the Branch Davidian compound in Waco, TX.  More recently, polygamist sects and child brides were the scandal of the Southwest. 

For me, these real-life tragedies raise two questions:  "Who you gonna listen to?" and more importantly, "Why should you believe them?"

Humility: a lesson for me to take to heart

This discussion of pride and its consequences reminds me that, whether Isaiah 14 refers to the fall of Satan or to the sad end of a mortal man, the lesson is one of humility.  I know I am not alone in this, but I struggle with arrogance and a judgmental attitude.  Humility is something I have consciously been working on for the last decade.

This brings to mind Jer. 10:23,14 (NASB):

I know, O LORD, that a man’s way is not in himself,
Nor is it in a man who walks to direct his steps.
Correct me, O LORD, but with justice;
Not with Your anger, or You will bring me to nothing.

Also this:

Therefore humble yourselves under the mighty hand of God, that He may exalt you at the proper time (I Peter 5:6, NASB).

And lastly, Micah 6:8, a verse that helps keep my heart and life on track:

He has told you, O man, what is good;
And what does the LORD require of you
But to do justice, to love kindness,
And to walk humbly with your God? (NASB)

Four deceptively simple lines sum up the entire Christian life - yet mastering these concepts can occupy an entire lifetime.  Whenever I get too full of myself, this little verse blows away the pride and the cobwebs, and gets me moving again.

Isa. 14:13 "But" clinches my argument

(This is long; sorry!)

There is one last reason why I feel Isaiah 14:12-15 does not refer to the fall of Lucifer, and that is the appearance of the coordinating conjunction but in vs. 13.

Consider this narrative describing the fall and subsequent career of Lucifer.  First, he becomes proud and says all this stuff about how he's going to be just like God.  Then God kicks him out of heaven; all of human history takes place, from creation and the fall of Adam to the visible return of Christ.  The story ends with a final judgment in which Satan and all the bad guys are relegated to eternal punishment in the lake of fire.  It's a neatly organized sequence, into which Isaiah 14 is inserted as a depiction of Lucifer's catastrophic fall from perfection and heavenly favor.

One problem:  Isaiah 14:12-15 does NOT describe a pride-followed-by-fall sequence.  Look at the verses again.

“How you have fallen from heaven,
O star of the morning, son of the dawn!
You have been cut down to the earth,
You who have weakened the nations!
“But you said in your heart,
‘I will ascend to heaven;
I will raise my throne above the stars of God,
And I will sit on the mount of assembly
In the recesses of the north.
‘I will ascend above the heights of the clouds;
I will make myself like the Most High.’
“Nevertheless you will be thrust down to Sheol,
To the recesses of the pit.

First, the "star of the morning" is cut down to earth.  You'd expect the next word to a word like because, a subordinate conjunction which indicates causation:  "You were cut down to the earth because you said in your heart…" 

Consider other similarly constructed sentences, and try replacing because with but.  It simply will not work. "I was rear-ended because [or but] the guy behind me was tail-gating and talking on his cell phone" or "I got a C on the test because [or but] I didn't study chapter 8."

Now think about but means in these sentences:  "I was badly injured in that car accident, but I decided that I would learn to walk again, no matter what."  Or, "I got a C on that test, but I don't care.  I'd rather fail than read that stupid textbook."  In sentences like these, but  suggests an event which is followed by reflection, decision, and/or consequences. It does not imply that one event causes another.

So,

(A)  Event 2 happens because Event 1 happens first.  

Or

(B) Event 1 happens, but then Event 2 happens.  

Assuming the translation into English is accurate, (B) is the chain of events in Isaiah 14. 

• Event 1:  the star of the morning is cut down to earth.  

• Event 2:  " But you said in your heart, 'I will ascend to heaven, I will raise my throne,'" etc.  In other words, there's been a set-back, but I'm going to be like God anyway. 

Is the star of the morning going to realize those lofty goals?  No, because God is going to take this guy down even further, beyond being cut down to earth, all the way to the bottom of the land of the dead.

These verses don't narrate Lucifer's pride and subsequent fall; these verses describe the unreasoning persistence of hubris.  Apparently, humans (and possibly angels as well) can be stupid and proud to the bitter end.  Unfortunately for us, an earnest belief in the certainty of our own success will not be enough to save us from judgment (or, if you prefer, failure and its consequences).

Isaiah 14 & the application of Occam's Razor

My experience in life suggests that Occam's razor is a good rule of thumb in science and textual interpretion.  Occam's razor, in its original form, basically states "Pluralitas non est ponenda sine necessitate," or "Entities should not be multiplied unnecessarily."  The rule is often paraphrased, more comprehensibly, as:

"If you have two theories that both explain the observed facts, then you should use the simplest until more evidence comes along"

"The simplest explanation for some phenomenon is more likely to be accurate than more complicated explanations."

"If you have two equally likely solutions to a problem, choose the simplest."

"The explanation requiring the fewest assumptions is most likely to be correct"  (Gibbs).

Yes, IMHO, the explanation requiring the fewest assumptions is most likely to be correct.  In the case of Isaiah 14, what is the simplest explanation?  That the passage refers to the King of Babylon. 

Is there any relevance to the idea that this passage refers to Satan as well?  Possibly, but if so, to what benefit?  What is gained by bringing angels into the picture?

The most important point of Isa. 14 is that God judges the cruel and the proud, and He judges them quite harshly.  "Pride goeth before a fall," so, whether you're an ordinary citizen, a powerful king, or an angel in heaven, be humble and kind.

Oh, and be consistent in your interpretations LOL.

(Journal, Jan. 13, 2012)

---

Gibbs, Phil. "What Is Occam's Razor?" University of California, Riverside, 1996. Web. 16 Feb. 2012. <http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/General/occam.html>.

Isaiah 14 v. Gen. 1-3: Inconsistency and Confusion?

Perhaps one might argue that there is an immediate, temporal aspect to Isa. 14:12-15, referring to the death and judgment of the King of Babylon; and a second, spiritual or prophetic aspect to this, referring to an angelic being who sinned and was/will be judged.  This raises the question of consistency in applying the rules of interpretation.

Why, in some passages (like the biblical account of creation, in Genesis), are we supposed to take every word absolutely literally (God created the world in seven, 24-hour days) and in other passages, we're supposed to say, "Yeah, this talks about two things, and one is obvious and the other requires interpretation.  This is about a fallen angel and events that happened before the creation of the world."

This lack of consistency makes no sense to me.

My scholarly training as a reader of literature (and I do have a B.A . in English Literature) is that one interprets a single text by a consistent and reasonable set of standards.  While differing interpretations are possible, valid interpretations can be supported from the text.  Good scholarship is not arbitrary.

(Journal, Jan. 13, 2012)

Isaiah 14: More on parallel structure

Similarly, Sheol appears in both sections.  The first part of the chapter talks about the King of Babylon going down to Sheol (the place of the dead): 

Sheol from beneath is excited over you to meet you when you come;
It arouses for you the spirits of the dead, all the leaders of the earth;
It raises all the kings of the nations from their thrones.
They will all respond and say to you,
"Even you have been made weak as we,
You have become like us." (Isa. 14:9,10)

In other words, "Hey, king, you're gonna die and all the ghosts in Hades are gonna gloat over the fact that you're dead too.  Ha ha ha!"

Then, in the second half (the part interpreted as a reference to Satan's fall), there is a description of a king going to Sheol:

Nevertheless you will be thrust down to Sheol,
To the recesses of the pit.
Those who see you will gaze at you,
They will ponder over you, saying,
‘Is this the man who made the earth tremble,
Who shook kingdoms,
Who made the world like a wilderness
And overthrew its cities,
Who did not allow his prisoners to go home?"  (Isa. 14:15-17)

Doesn't this sound like a recap of "Hey, King, you're gonna die and we're all gonna see"?

The rest of the chapter makes it clear that there is a physical death involved, with the king being "cast out" of his tomb because he's "ruined [his] country' (vs. 19-20).  People die; fallen angels don't.  So why conclude that this passage has something to do with the fall of Lucifer?

(Journal, Jan. 13, 2012)

---

Isaiah 14:12-15. New American Standard Bible. Web. 16 Feb. 2012. <http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Isa.%2014:12-15&version=NASB>.

Isaiah 14 and the Significance of Parallel Structure

Now, my thoughts on this passage, from the perspective of a person trained in literary and textual analysis rather than theology:  I have heard that Isaiah 14:12-15 describes the fall of Satan from heaven.  However, this interpretation seems flawed to me for the following reasons:

First, the passage as a whole is not a discussion of angelic rebellion, but rather, a taunt against the king of Babylon.  Earlier in the chapter, Isaiah writes that God will have compassion on Israel; the nation will "take their captors captive and will rule over their oppressors" (v. 2).  That's when the people will say to the king of Babylon, "How the oppressor has ceased, And how fury has ceased!" (v. 4).  This is obviously directed against a temporal ruler, not an angelic being. 

Significantly, the rhetorical construction of the first section parallels that of section two, in vs. 12:

How you have fallen from heaven,
O star of the morning, son of the dawn!"

Although "star of the morning" is sometimes interpreted as a reference to Lucifer, the parallel structure of the passage ("How the oppressor has ceased" and "How you have fallen") suggests that both refer to the same individual.  Same structure, same person; different structure, different person.

(Journal, Jan. 13, 2012)

---

Isaiah 14:12-15. New American Standard Bible. Web. 16 Feb. 2012. <http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Isa.%2014:12-15&version=NASB>.

Isaiah 14: Intellectual rigor and biblical interpretation

I need to step away from A Spiritual Formation Workbook for a few moments, and talk instead about intellectual rigor in scriptural interpretation.  We, as believers, are often guilty of sloppy thinking.  For me, the various interpretations of Isaiah 14 is a good example of how convoluted biblical "scholarship" can become.  I'll let you decide for yourself which interpretation is the most valid, and I'll tell you which one I think is best.

Before I say anything, read the verses that are associated with the fall of Satan:

“How you have fallen from heaven,
O star of the morning, son of the dawn!
You have been cut down to the earth,
You who have weakened the nations!
“But you said in your heart,
‘I will ascend to heaven;
I will raise my throne above the stars of God,
And I will sit on the mount of assembly
In the recesses of the north.
‘I will ascend above the heights of the clouds;
I will make myself like the Most High.’
“Nevertheless you will be thrust down to Sheol,
To the recesses of the pit (Isa. 14:12-15)

Now take a moment to read the entire chapter, and think about these verses in context.

(Journal, Jan. 13, 2012)

---

Isaiah 14:12-15. New American Standard Bible. Web. 16 Feb. 2012. <http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Isa.%2014:12-15&version=NASB>.

Should the government tell you what kind of light bulb to buy?

I just read this quote from a letter by Dianne Schram, and for a moment, I too felt enraged about my supposed loss of freedoms.  Then I started to think.

“Our freedoms of choice are slowly disappearing. The government is telling us what light bulbs to use, what kind of cars to drive, what to eat and what kind of health care is required.”

On the surface, it does sound as if our freedoms are being eroded.  However, ignore the emotional appeal and consider the facts.

Is the government telling me what kind of light bulbs to buy?  No.  The government is telling manufacturers what kind of light bulb to create, in an attempt to increase energy efficiency while reducing overall electricity usage, air pollution, and cooling costs.  Ultimately, the change should reduce your monthly electric bill as well as reducing the cost of doing business.   When I spend less per month on electricity, I can spend more on things I want or need.  And that additional spending will help the American economy just a little bit, and that extra spending might create or protect more American jobs.  Not a bad trade-off for a silly incandescent light bulb I never really liked anyway.

Consumer Benefits of Energy Star Certified Light Bulbs

More on LED's:
"The Advantages & Benefits of LED Lighting" from National Geographic
"Green Promise Seen in Switch to LED Lighting" from the New York Times (love the part about saving money in Buckingham Palace!)

So, if America can really "save enough energy to light 3 million homes for a year, save about $600 million in annual energy costs, and prevent 9 billion pounds of greenhouse gas emissions per year, equivalent to those from about 800,000 cars" (www.energystar.gov), why not switch to LED or fluorescent lighting? Why make such a fuss over a light bulb?

Well, maybe Schram has a point about automobiles.  After all, buying a car is a more significant choice that can affect my spending and happiness for years to come.  However, the government is not dictating my choice of vehicle, merely setting standards for energy efficiency and safety.   Who wants or needs an unsafe car?  Should Americans be forced to buy inefficient gas-guzzlers?  We're already hearing about "agony at the pump."  What would consumer choice be like now when gas prices are high, if car-makers weren't held to high fuel-efficiency standards.

A wide range of new and used vehicles appears to be readily available.  I can still buy a V-8 truck, SUV, full-sized sedan or high-performance sports car if I want one.  It's difficult to imagine what kind of car Ms. Schram requires, that the government will no longer allow her to purchase.

Unbeknownst to Ms. Schram, the real danger in the future is a lack of affordable energy, not lack of consumer choice.  This article does an excellent job of detailing the effect of rising gas prices on the U.S. economy in the year to come:

Can America adjust to higher gas prices?  (Brad Plumer, Washington Post)

Moving on to Schram's third point, I feel most keenly the pain of her last complaint:  increasing government control of food.  In 2008, I watched in horror as New York City has moved to eliminate trans fat from restaurant menus, imagining a future in which truly self-indulgent meals could only be painfully reconstructed at home.  Yet there are genuine reasons for governmental and individual concern over the American obesity epidemic:

Health Effects of Obesity (Stanford Hospital and Clinics)
Impact Of Childhood Obesity Goes Beyond Health

Overeating without exercising is literally crippling and killing us!  No wonder Michelle Obama was motivated to combat childhood obesity with her "Let's Move" campaign.  Helping the next generation to live better is a worthy cause.

Perhaps Ms. Schram sees incandescent light bulbs, big sedans and fatty food as an expression of freedom; I don't.  Ultimately, we're talking about preferences here, and preferring what destroys the planet and your own health is ultimately not freedom, but stupidity.  If every one of us 7 billion people on this planet exercise our preferences, the result will be chaos and destruction.  The reality is that all of us must limit our freedoms in order to survive.

Maybe we need to focus on our long-range goals like renewable energy and resources, energy independence, and national security.  Maybe it's more important to focus on clean air than the light bulb in my desk lamp; more important to conserve petroleum than drive an SUV; better to live longer and live well than to eat yet another carton of fries from the drive-through.

Photo from http://noahpinionblog.blogspot.com/2011/08/do-property-rights-increase-freedom.html

Nettles in the garden of my soul!

More on being a spiritual tourist and attempting to be an honest Christian intellectual:

I also try to remember that other people can be right and I can be wrong sometimes, but that concept's a bit difficult for me to swallow.  It's hard enough for me to understand that both of us can be right; admitting that I am wrong is even harder.

Being humble enough to admit that I need help with prayer is another challenge.  Dealing with pride is like trying to cut the head off a hydra or trying to keep weeds out of the garden - no matter how hard I fight it, my pride keeps coming back somewhere else. 

Hmmm….  Is that one of the reasons that God keeps calling me to be faithful in prayer?  Because my soul needs daily weeding?

(Reflection, Feb. 15, 2012)

Prayer, spiritual truth and denominational differences

The first contemplative exercise in The Spiritual Formation Workbook is this:  "Set aside five to ten minutes each day for prayer" (Smith and Graybeal 35).  My goal is to try each exercise for a week and afterwards, to reflect on the experience.

Day Three:  Last night,I went to Universalis Today.  I love praying through the Psalms, and the Office of Hours is full of Psalms!  When I'm tired and I don't know what to say, the Office of Hours reminds and guides me.  If I'm without the Internet and can't get to Universalis Today, I can open my Bible to any psalm, and discover the heart of God.

Maybe it's a little weird that I worship at a Baptist church but visit a Catholic website and read Catholic books on prayer.  However, I tend to consider myself a follower of Jesus rather than a Protestant or Baptist or ________ (fill in the blank).  Sometimes, I tell people that I'm a spiritual tourist, because I really do want do know what other people think about God, and how they worship.

If God is real, omnipresent and powerful, don't you think we should see evidence of God's work in many different times and places?  If we are all brothers and sisters in Christ, spiritual truths ought to be stronger than denominational lines.  We won't agree on every point, but you'd expect us to agree on a great many issues.

For me, seeing something from a different perspective helps me to understand and learn.  I like being a spiritual tourist because it challenges me to think and to grow, and it forces me to know what I believe and why.


(Journal, Jan. 6, 2012)

Smith, James Bryan and Lynda Graybeal.  A Spiritual Formation Wookbook:  Small-Group Resources for Nurturing Christian Growth.  New York:  HarperCollins, 1993.

Prayer resources and a plea for tolerance

This week's exercise from The Spiritual Formation Workbook is to spend 5-10 minutes a day in prayer.  That sounds pretty simple, but if you're as ADHD as I am, grasshopper mind cannot stay focused for 2 minutes, much less 5 to 10. Unless I give myself some kind of structure, my prayer life basically consists of, "Dear Heavenly Father, thank You for - squirrel!"

I have some resources I've discovered online that help me stay focused.  If you're a fundie,* you may find these links controversial and disturbing.  That's okay - we all need a little shaking up once in a while.

Getting upset or being argumentative about someone else's spiritual practice doesn't accomplish much, and who knows, in a few years, you might find yourself appreciating or even embracing that other person's position.  If there were only one approach to Jesus, there'd still be only one kind of worship service; instead, there are a lot of different worship styles.  One Lord, one baptism - but a beautiful diversity of prayer and worship.

Thus, I recommend being open, not judgmental, about new experiences.  If you visit a link, and the website is useful, use it.  If something in it sounds "off," compare it to scripture and figure out why it seems wrong to you.  If the practice is biblical but the activity doesn't bring you closer to God, don't get upset - just reflect on the experience and move on. 

Our constant focus should be on the two great commandments, loving God & loving one another.   How we get hung up on all this other stuff, I have no idea; but we are fallen, insecure people in the process of being redeemed and remade in the image of Christ.  We fall down a lot.

Please try to use these links to get closer to Jesus, and if you disagree, extend the rest of us a little grace.  Thanks!

*a strict, evangelical fundamentalist

http://www.universalis.com  "The Liturgy of the Hours (also known as the Divine Office) is the richest single prayer resource of the Christian Church. It provides prayers, psalms and meditation for every hour of every day. It has existed from the earliest times, to fulfil the Lord's command to pray without ceasing."

http://upperroom.org/methodx/thelife/prayermethods/  Ancient and contemporary prayer methods "to help you best speak and listen to God."  My personal fav - lectio divina.

Balance in prayer

First,  a caveat:  I'm not too good at balance.  As Bruce Cockburn says,

I hold my breath forever

I never lived with balance 

Though I've always liked the notion

I feel an endless hunger

For energy and motion ("Open")

So, with that in mind, I will summarize what I've learned from my experience in praying for revival:

When I tried to save the whole world through prayer, I wore myself out.  But the resulting prayerlessness was not restful either.  Although I didn't know it at the time, a balanced prayer life would have been a better solution.  Intercession and contemplation together make daily prayer possible.

Our prayer lives, in many ways, are like eating a balanced diet or practicing a healthy exercise program.  No person can live on only protein or only carbs; we need the nutrients from fruits and vegetables as well.  We cannot get in really good physical condition by doing sit-ups without using all our muscles and giving our hearts a good cardiovascular workout.

Similarly, my prayer life needs to be balanced.  I cannot focus only on intercession, or my prayer life will become dry and empty.  I also need adoration, confession and thanksgiving, to feed and refresh the wellsprings of my heart.

Sometimes we need to speak; sometimes we need to listen.  Yes, we must focus on the needs of others, but we must also and always focus on the glory and greatness of God.

I'm glad I'm getting back into the habit of daily, balanced prayer!

(Journal, Jan. 3, 2012)

Contemplation as a doorway to the presence of God

Psalm 131 (NASB)
    A Song of Ascents, of David.

O LORD, my heart is not proud, nor my eyes haughty;
Nor do I involve myself in great matters,
Or in things too difficult for me.
Surely I have composed and quieted my soul;
Like a weaned child rests against his mother,
My soul is like a weaned child within me.
O Israel, hope in the LORD
From this time forth and forever.

While praying for revival, I learned that intercession is warfare; it's work; it's strenuous and exhausting.  I eventually came to understand that intercession was not meant to be the focus of my prayer life.  Intercession must be balanced with restful contemplation - the practice of prayer that restores and fills the empty soul.

Contemplation is the antithesis of intercession.  It asks nothing of God.  Contemplation is the soul's communion with Him, resting in HIs presence, like a weaned child resting in her mother's arms.

When we contemplate an idea, we think about it:  what it is, what it is like compared to something else, what will happen if we do one thing and what will happen if we do another.  The spiritual practice of contemplation is similar, because it too involves reflecting on ideas and experience.  I contemplate the character and acts of God; I think about who He is and what He has done in history; I think about what He has done in my life; I pause to praise and give thanks.

So contemplation is all about being in the moment with God, about being with Him and being open to the Spirit.  Contemplation involves looking and waiting and listening.  It asks nothing; it receives everything.

Contemplation is the closest to experiencing transcendence and eternity that we non-mystical types will find in our mortal lives.  Contemplation is a very good thing, because it is the doorway to the presence of God.

(Journal, Jan. 3, 2012)

Why do I avoid prayer?

The first contemplative exercise in The Spiritual Formation Workbook is this:  "Set aside five to ten minutes each day for prayer" (Smith and Graybeal 35).  My goal is to try each exercise for a week and afterwards, to reflect on the experience.

Day One:  I turned off the computer and the television, and set aside time for prayer before going to bed.  It was healing and peaceful, which made me wonder why, so often, I avoid prayer.

Perhaps it is related to the period in my life, a few years ago, when I was praying daily for revival.  My prayers were fervent.  I felt so strongly about the need for revival that, as I prayed, I would find myself rigid with tension, my teeth clenched and every muscle in my body taut.  I felt like I was doing battle, and it was enervating rather than exhilarating.

Naively, I thought that, if I prayed hard enough, maybe God would do something astonishing.  I really wanted to see, in my lifetime, another Great Revival like that of the 1720s or the Jesus Movement  of the 1970s.  I believed that, if I just prayed hard enough, I could make it happen.

A year or two later, the world seemed unchanged by my efforts.  I concluded that praying for revival was too much work, and gave it up as a waste of my time.  But was it really a waste of time?  What did I learn as a result of those prayers?

(Journal, Jan. 3, 2012)

Smith, James Bryan and Lynda Graybeal.  A Spiritual Formation Workbook:  Small-Group Resources for Nurturing Christian Growth.  New York:  HarperCollins, 1993.

Challenge your stengths, support your weaknesses

"Three simple precautions:  First, do not be afraid to fail…. Second, keep your emphasis on God, not the method….  Third, feel free to modify any exercise to fit your needs…. Adapt the exercise you choose to challenge your strengths and support your weaknesses" (Smith and Graybeal, 35).

Take a moment to really think about that last idea.  "Challenge your strengths and support your weaknesses."  We are, paradoxically, often both too easy and too hard on ourselves.  We avoid real challenges, and castigate ourselves for every little failure, expecting too little and too much from ourselves.  Who do we think we are?  And who would I be if I stopped beating myself up, and started really growing?

The challenge, for me, is to change gradually and steadily.  In the sci-fi series Firefly, Captain Mal says something like this to the beautiful but deceitful Saffon, "I imagine when the pain fades, you'll go back to being what you are."  Sadly, that's what we usually do.  We have what we think are life-changing experiences, then go right back to being what we are.  We are, first and foremost, creatures of habit.

I want to re-establish habits of gratitude and prayer, and not slip back into habits of whining and spiritual laziness!

(Journal, Dec. 30, 2011)


Smith, James Bryan and Lynda Graybeal.  A Spiritual Formation Wookbook:  Small-Group Resources for Nurturing Christian Growth.  New York:  HarperCollins, 1993.

Think about why, not just what

"Three simple precautions:  First, do not be afraid to fail…. Second, keep your emphasis on God, not the method.  It is hard initially, but try to think about why you are doing an exercise rather than about what you are doing" (Smith and Graybeal, 35).

That's an interesting idea, to focus on why as well as what I'm doing.  In my everyday life, sometimes I am so involved in whining about how much I hate washing dishes, etc.  that I forget there's any benefit to doing chores at all.

However, my attitude changes dramatically when I remember that I'm doing these simple daily tasks to bless my husband, to be obedient to God, and to satisfy my personal need for cleanliness and order.  There are tangible and spiritual benefits to actually cleaning the house.  When I begin to focus on these outcomes - which are why I'm doing the work - the process of what I'm doing miraculously becomes pleasurable.

So this concept of thinking about why and not just what I'm doing has a spiritual application (i.e., helping me practice contemplation) as well as practical applications (getting me through the tedious or unpleasant moments in life). Woo-hoo!

(Journal, Dec. 30, 2011)


Smith, James Bryan and Lynda Graybeal.  A Spiritual Formation Wookbook:  Small-Group Resources for Nurturing Christian Growth.  New York:  HarperCollins, 1993.

Thoughts on Risk

"Three simple precautions:  First, do not be afraid to fail.  To reach a goal is not the reason you do a spiritual discipline; it is to experience God.  Even in failure, you are learning and experiencing new and valuable things" (Smith and Graybeal, 35).

That's a great point.  Like many former "gifted students," I am a perfectionist who struggles with the fear of failure, even when no human will ever see or know.   I fear failure even when I realize that God will not hold failure against me.

So much of our self-image and self-love is tied up in success or failure!  We are ridiculously hard on ourselves.

In an Archaeos0up video on YouTube, our resident archeologist says that, in science, you can sort of guess the outcome, and that you have some degree of control over your results; but in archeology, you have no control.  You can dig and find nothing.  Finding anything, well-preserved or not, is great.

Consider what would happen in my life if, instead of expecting absolute perfection from myself, I would see any positive results as a good outcome.  I'd be happier and more productive.  If I didn't achieve all my goals for the day, I'd still feel successful if I accomplished something.

If I didn't have high expectations for others (especially my own family!), I could rejoice in their successes.  I would be more encouraging, and less judgmental.

Thus I long for an archeologist's joy in finding anything in life, no matter how small or how broken it might be.  And I long for the confidence to try everything without fear of failure.

So once again, "don't be afraid to fail.  Even in failure, you are learning and experiencing valuable things."

Right on!

(Journal, Dec. 29, 2011)

Smith, James Bryan and Lynda Graybeal.  A Spiritual Formation Wookbook:  Small-Group Resources for Nurturing Christian Growth.  New York:  HarperCollins, 1993.

To become prayer-full, you have to pray

"You are trying to become 'full of prayer,' and to become prayer-full, you have to pray" (Smith and Graybeal, 35).

Yes, well, that does make it rather challenging, doesn't it?  I'd rather be the "armchair quarterback" of some National Prayer League, and never have to risk injury on the spiritual-warfare playing field.  Who wants to get knocked around by supernatural opposition?  Sometimes, I'd rather be selfish, lazy and cowardly!

Nevertheless, to become "full of prayer," I must learn to pray, and so I shall!

(Journal, Dec. 28, 2011)

Smith, James Bryan and Lynda Graybeal.  A Spiritual Formation Wookbook:  Small-Group Resources for Nurturing Christian Growth.  New York:  HarperCollins, 1993.

My latest adventure: bridging the gap between knowing and doing

For a couple of months now, I've been working my way through A Spiritual Formation Workbook,* because I found a used copy at a local thrift store, and it looked interesting.  I thought it might prove useful for a neighborhood Bible study - which it would, by the way. 

However, for me, it's been useful in providing me with a foundation and hands-on activities for daily practice.  When it comes to getting closer to God, knowing what I ought to do and actually doing it can be two very different things.  A book like this can help to close the gap between intellectual grasp and daily living.


*Smith, James Bryan and Lynda Graybeal.  A Spiritual Formation Workbook:  Small-Group Resources for Nurturing Christian Growth.  New York:  HarperCollins, 1993.