Ah, I got it to load this time. This diy is FUN stuff!!!
Uncategorized
-
Ok, so it's been months. Whew!!
Here's a question:
Is pastoral gossip justified?
The above question is simple and general on purpose, as I want good discussion.
What I mean is this: If a pastor grumbles privately with some of his parishioners about someone "who has a problem" or such, is it OK?
Any thoughts out there Xangaland?
Doug
-
There are many questions for which science can and should find answers. Below is just a sampling of the import of some of the questions:
Is homosexuality genetic?
Is depression a physical anomaly, or a psychosomatic anomaly?
Can evolution explain biodiversity and biocomplexity in the world?
Is a current-version Bible a reasonably accurate copy/translation of the original texts from 4,000-2000 years ago?
-
On science and pseudoscience
The foundation of science is reality. Science is nothing more than the observation of, description of, argument about, and finding application for, reality. Whether electrons, planets, mice, or men, true scientists observe, take notes, describe, poke, prod, test, describe some more, argue (or debate), then describe some more. While this description is grossly simplistic, it gets at a foundational truth: Unless scientists' theories and hypotheses correspond to an actual chunk of reality, they are dabbling in philosphy or theology, not science.
When science is practiced from this foundation, and is committed to accurately describing reality, it is powerful and helpful. Removed from this foundation, but still "promoted" as science, it becomes pseudoscience, manipulative and dangerous.
How do we know the difference when "4 out of five doctors recommend," or when "current research reveals?"
-
The implications are clear from the last two proverbs. When I'm the complainer, I'd best be ready to be wounded by a friend rather than kissed by an enemy. When I'm the counselor, I'd best be ready to wound as a friend rather than kiss as an enemy.
So when someone comes to you to complain about another's behaviour, I've suggested that your choice is simple: Minister or manipulate. Do what's best for the complainer, or do what'll get you something.
In 2 Sam 15:1-6, we can see an example of manipulation. People came discontent (seeking justice). Rather than minister to them on behalf of the king, he gave them what they wanted (verdicts, praise, honor). In 4 years, he "stole their hearts" from King David (his own dad).
-
Here's a puzzler for us:
Prov 27:6 Wounds from a friend can be trusted, but an enemy multiplies kisses.
Since I don't like wounds, and I love kisses, who am I likely to get close to? Since a true friend wants what's best from me, and an enemy actually wants what's worst for me, it looks like I'd best be open to wounds, and afraid of kisses.
Hmmm.
-
Whew, what a way to learn the true meaning and depth of scriptures!!!
Prov. 16:28 says that a perverse man stirs up dissension, and a gossip separates close friends.
When you are the victim of the gossip, you see long-term relationships vanish into thin air. Folks you've loved for years become distant, or even worse. But how does that happen? How does someone you care about, and who has cared about you, turn against you? With the help of a third party, the "perverse man" or the gossip, it becomes deceptively simple.
1, Take two friends who are human.
2. One friend fails the other (once or repeatedly doesn't matter here).
3. Wronged friend becomes discontent
4. Wronged friend complains or vents to a perverse man (the gossip). Now this becomes a test for this listener: He can choose to stir dissension (gossip), or he can minister to the complainer. I believe that the proverb uses the word "perverse" in this sense, that if the listener cared for the complainer, he would attempt ministry, but since he is perverse, he instead uses the situation for his own purposes (manipulation).
5. The "counselor" chooses badly. Rather than minister to the discontent, he affirms the discontent, and sets himself up as a "better friend" than the one who failed the counselee.
6. The complainer, liking the affirmation, and the offer of sympathetic agreement accepts the counsel, and is encouraged in his discontent.
The wedge is in place, and the relationship is aimed for the dustbin.
It is important to note, though, that the perverse man is not the only sinner in the group. The wrongdoer, the victim, and the "counselor" all play their parts badly. This means that I can fail in each of the three roles contributing to the demise of the relationship.
The ideal is that no friend would ever wrong another. If I never wronged another, the gossip would have to make up stuff to use for the wedge creation (which, tragically, some do). In the scenario above, had the friend not wronged the other, there would've been no occasion for the gossip to become involved.
As the wronged friend, I could also contributes to the destruction of the relationship by avoiding my responsibiliity to talk to my friend who wronged me. Sometimes percieved wrong was not wrong at all, but just a misunderstanding or misinterpretation of words or actions (or lack of words or inaction). Other times, when the wrong was real, not just perceived, the wounds of a true friend are faithful, that is they are a loving aspect of friendship. A friendly, godly, peaceful conversation between friends could clarify and heal any blockage in the relationship.
As the "counselor" I could play the perverse man simply enough: I stir. Like a pointed breath on a small fire, as a manipulator I could stir up people's discontents when they serve my purposes. When wrongs (perceived or real) aren't handled properly, then arn't allowed pass properly into history (learned from, forgiven, or forgotten), but instead are brought up, stirred up, and rehashed again and again, they fester into bitterness, grudges, or even hatred.
When a "counselors" (could be me) don't help people refocus their eyes on Christ or on His purposes for allowing the circumstances to come to the counselee, he (I) fail the counselee.
There are two ways that I can fail as counselor. The first, as above, is that
I can profiteer from the situation, selling myself as a better friend than the wrongdoer. The other is a callous "get over it" counsel that recognizes the responsiblity of the victim (counselee) to deal properly with the wrong, but does little or nothing to help the counselee actually move that direction.
We all need reminders that the God who allows us to be wronged actually allows the wrong as part of His loving plan. Even if the wrong came intended for evil from man, it comes from God intended for good. And every hurt person needs help actually assimilating that reality into his hurt so that it may return to joy.
-
Remember Joseph? That young brother who was sold into slavery by his other brothers? The one who eventually sat on Pharoah's throne and had the opportunity to pay his brothers back for their evil? Do you remember his words to the brothers when they realized who he was, and began to fear for their lives? His words have 3 parts:
"You meant it for evil . . ."
"But God meant it for good . . .
"For the salvation of many"
Without waxing to long on this (after all, this isn't the point of this post, hehe) think about how much revelation Joe possessed. His story is in later Genesis. He may have heard the stories of Gen. 1-30. He had strange dreams. And he had his family: A dad who favored him and a bunch of brothers who envied, begrudged, even hated him. Now you tell me how Joe came to the conclusion that God intended the brothers' evil act for good. He didn't have James 1, Romans 8, Phillipians 3, Hebrews 11-12, or the teachings of Jesus to guide his "interpretation" of the events. I can't answer my own question: How did Joseph come to the conclusion with which he comforted his brothers?
But the real point of this post is this: Doug, you DO have James 1, Romans 8, Phillipians 3, Hebrews 11-12, the teachings of Jesus, and several hundred other pages of revelation of God, His ways, His purposes, and His end goal.
It seems to me that I ought to be able to better do what Joseph did. By better, I mean that I should not only be able to view past evils thru the lense of God's uses for them in my life, but I should be able to process present evils as well. In fact, I should be able to process the evils that may come my way tomorrow, and come to the very same conclusion: Whatever evil comes, God intends it for my good, and for the salvation of many.
nuff said.
Recent Comments