However and Ever, Amen.
One of the (many) nails I'm always hammering is the idea of "balance". I believe the error most often lies in the extremes, and the healthy view is in the center. Of course there are plenty of exceptions, but it’s a good concept to keep in mind.
So I’ve recently discovered that, in my (or anyone’s) attempt to communicate a balanced view, I tend to use the word “however” constantly. So the entire remainder of this blog will now be dedicated to throwing at you all the examples I can find of the word “however” in my fair-and-balanced journalism. Here we go…
There are plenty of passages in the book of Acts, and the writings of Paul to substantiate a belief that “speaking in other tongues” is a spiritual gift that endures to the present day. HOWEVER, it is difficult to prove that there is enough evidence to say that tongues is the sole or primary evidence of “baptism in the Holy Spirit.”
As Christians, we should be doing all we can to reduce (hopefully to zero) the number of abortions that occur. HOWEVER, we must respect those who disagree with us as to whether that effort should involve a legal ban, or legal restrictions, on abortion.
The Bible makes it clear that drunkenness, like all overindulgences, is sinful. HOWEVER, there is no biblical reason to believe that the mere consumption of alcohol is wrong.
Fallen angels, known as demons, have the ability to tempt, and even possess, humans. HOWEVER, a demon cannot possess one who is already possessed by the Holy Spirit, and no one but God can read a person’s mind.
Denominations can be useful as organizations of specific groups of believers for the purpose of accomplishing the work of the Kingdom. HOWEVER, they become detrimental to the kingdom when they serve to divide us from one another and foster prideful loyalties among their members.
God hates divorce, and there has never been a divorce that was desired by him. HOWEVER, in his grace he permits divorce under the circumstances of adultery or abandonment (which some believe includes physical abuse.)
Over the span of its existence, each species has evolved and adapted to its environment, while some become extinct. This process is known as “microevolution” and has virtually no detractors. “Macroevolution,” HOWEVER, is the theory that all the species we know today have evolved from other, simpler species, and can be traced back eventually to single-celled organisms, and further back still, to a sort of biochemical soup.
This does not mean that all believers must agree on everything all the time. It does, HOWEVER, mean that we must “make every effort” to come to agreement on as many things as possible.
God never tried to entertain anybody. HOWEVER, He does work real and astonishing miracles in the world.
What’s true is true, no matter who challenges it. What’s false is false, no matter who believes it. HOWEVER, God is the only one with a monopoly on the Truth.
Labels: autobiography, words
Posted at 4:32 PM
View 23 comments made so far
Add a comment
Links to this post
23 Comments:
Generally speaking, I don't disagree with your statements (though I don't particularly like the denomination or evolution ones).
However, I've been pondering the opposite thing... that God is often in the extremes. Matt. 11:16-19 is the passage. I see the Pharisee arguing that John took the fasting and diet thing too far. "Locusts and wild honey, and nothing else?" Then Jesus hangs out with the riff raff and has no problem drinking and eating... and in fact doesn't fast at all. "He went too far in the other direction."
And the balanced Pharisees that fasted and drank wine were where God wasn't.
I don't think life has to be lived in balance. It just has to be lived to and through God.
Like I said, there's lots of exceptions. You can't really say which is better: balance or extremity. But we should be aware of the benefits and dangers of both.
In regard to denominations and evolution, you're just seeing one or two sentences in each case. Here's the entire paragraph for each one:
Denominations – Denominations can be useful as organizations of specific groups of believers for the purpose of accomplishing the work of the kingdom. However, they become detrimental to the kingdom when they serve to divide us from one another and foster pride among their members. We should remember to strive for unity in the secondary doctrines of Christianity.
Evolution – Over the span of its existence, each species has evolved and adapted to its environment, while some become extinct. This process is known as “microevolution” and has virtually no detractors. “Macroevolution” however, is the theory that all the species we know today have evolved from other, simpler species, and can be traced back eventually to single-celled organisms, and further back still, to a sort of biochemical soup. For hundreds of years, science has been trying to refute the Bible, and eventually, all such efforts fail. Even now, the evidence for Macroevolution is faltering, and fewer and fewer scientists are committed to it. Macroevolution is technically not science, since it cannot be repeated in a laboratory, and the same goes for Intelligent Design and Creationism. In the most accurate sense, the whole debate is a philosophical one. The Core Fellowship believes that God has vested his authority in the Bible, and thus it is true when it says that He created the earth in seven days. However, we should not cause divisions between those who believe those days to be literal, 24-hour periods, and those who interpret them as indefinite spans of time.
Balance is an odd thing. Everyone feels more comfortable when they compare themselves to others on both sides of their "balanced" position. Makes us feel like we aren't going off the edge, as long as there's someone who's gone further than we have. But if you think about those who have made a difference in their world, most of them were not balanced: artists, politicians, missionaries, sports figures, etc. Instead, they were embarrasingly unbalanced in many areas. Maybe their lack of concern about being balanced freed them to pursue their heart's desire in an unbalanced way. They spent too much time focusing on those things and not enough time on life's other things. Some of them were antisocial as a result. Others were pretty much psycho. Others were consumed by their passions. At least, that's what the critics would say. HOWEVER, a look at their accomplishments leaves one wondering about the wisdom of balance.
I think I'm going to side with the coreman here... to an extent.
Balance is perspective. People think that anyone who goes to an extreme that they don't is out of balance. The person on far right or left often thinks the centrist is off balance.
I think that Jesus was very balanced and it was those who had fault with him that were unbalanced. Supposedly extreme statements like "Love your neighbor" are much more balanced than the perspectives of the Pharisees.
I remember hearing someone in a Sunday School class say that God was offensive, so therefore he didn't mind offending other people. I completely agree, if the offense is about real truth. My experience is that people with those attitudes often have a hard time distinguishing Biblical truth from their own opinions. Those are unbalanced people.
There's a difference between balance and lukewarmness, i.e. cowardess.
But what is it?
It is my belief that we all have different purposes, therefore, some are meant to achieve exceptional things and to achieve those things, it may be necessary to become extreme &/or excessive.
Like, Guttenberg inventing the printing press - the most important invention of the last millennium. Michelangelo and the Sistine Chapel. Henry Ford ~ the auto, and the assembly line. Edison and the Light bulb.
People, such as these examples, were all excessive compulsive, and their lives were out of balance; however, they were meant to do something exceptional for the world, thus for the Kingdom of God (especially the printing press).
HOWEVER, not all people are meant to do anything of note. Some people are meant to live their life in a quiet way, while others (as my sister Sharon used to say) are constantly on the "front lines of the Battle Field."
Anyway, because we are all different, with different gifts and different places in the 'Body of Christ' who is to say?
Only God can determine this question of balance and it is not for us to judge.
On a personal note, I agree that, IDEALLY, finding balance in life is a good thing. And routines are good for people.
Sorry, this is completely off the subject, but speaking of inventions, yesterday, in zero degree weather, as I ran to the mailbox and ran home and stormed in the door, unzipped my coat – (the zipper from my mouth down to the top of the legs) unzipped my right boot, unzipped my left boot, unzipped various zippers on my clothes ~ it occurred to me that it is the ZIPPER that was the greatest invention of the last millennium… Can we even imagine the billions and trillions of hours the zipper has saved Mankind? Just think that less than 150 years ago, our ancestors, for eons, had to deal with clasps, and hooks, and ties, and so much garbage on the average garment, that getting dressed and undressed was the major project of the day.
So, maybe it is the ZIPPER, that was the greatest invention of the last millennium ~ not the Press! Just kidding... who is to say what the greatest invention was?
Again, sorry for changing the subject. just had to share my "Show & Tell" for the day...
..Now, back to BALANCE or lack of balance.
As if zippers weren't awesome enough, then along came...
ZIP-LOC!
I also wanted to respond to Beloved's comment.
I believe that, oftentimes, balance is the goal for those who strive for the utmost health in their lives. The healthiest (or the most extremelyhealthy person) is the one who has achieved the most balance.
Lukewarmness is to shrink back from the call to achieve that balance and healthfulness.
And it's true that many of our heroes of the past were eccentric and extreme. But it's also clear that they were unhealthy individuals. Would God ever call someone to a sick lifestyle in order to accomplish historic feats through them? Wouldn't the world be better off everyone were balanced (yet whole-hearted and passionate) and maybe we didn't have the Mozarts, the Einsteins and the Shakespeares?
But if not for the Mozarts, the Einsteins and the Shakespeares, the soul & spirit of the world would not understand the God-force within the Human Spirit. These are the people who showed us how truly miraculous the life-force within us -- actually is.
I don’t know about you, but I don’t think I could live without “Fur Elise” or “Moonlight Sonata” Granted I don’t listen enough, but I know they are there when I NEED them.
Had it not been for these eccentric people, I believe the Soul and Spirit of the World would still be in ‘Flat-Land’.
On the other hand, maybe it is possible to create great works of Art & Science and still find balance? I do not know.
Perhaps a society in which everyone managed to achieve a healthy balance in their lives would accomplish even greater things than Mozart and Einstein... but through teamwork.
Yes, I think you've got it..
Balance, teamwork, now ZIP LOC, later Disney Land Three! i mean, later ~ the Universe!
Does anyone remember the first Highlander Movie and the scene between Sir Sean Connery & Christopher Lambert when they are in the boat and Connery is teaching Lambert about balance – I think it is about physical balance though. I love that scene.
Teamwork is great...essential at certain times for certain things. Not for art. Not for the pure ingenuity that is a gift from God. As with any metaphor, the "body" metaphor can be taken too far. Paul wasn't saying that in order to have a healthy church, everyone had to work in small groups, committees, or even pairs all of the time. The truth he was highlighting (the only truth, I think) was that we each have unique giftings bestowed on us by God, that we must use to edify the Body, and not be jealous of others' gifts (except the "greater gifts" perhaps?). There was nothing--not a thing--democratic about the early Church. But there was respect. Lots of respect. And love.
Oh, and the "lukewarm" thing... Think of lukewarmness and balance on two different continuums altogether, running parallel. They aren't two polar ends. They're very close cousins, but both right smack dab in the middle, with extremes on either side. If you're not careful, balance can slip into lukewarmness (i.e. not taking a stand for truth or morality). But all in all, you know I'm a huge proponent of balance, in its purest form.
One example I would give to support Coreman's thesis is famed evangelist D.L. Moody. If you read his autobiography, you can't help but be sickened by the flagrant disregard he held for his family "in the name of the Kingdom". His wife never supported his endeavors to India, and she only survived a short time after he drug her there behind him. She went insane and then died. Because "God told him" to go to India. I'm not saying suffering doesn't accompany God's calling--it always does. But Dwight should've been the one who suffered (would have been, if the whole thing was God's will). So Dwight left quite a legacy, right? Not in my book. If I have anything at all to say about "fruits-based" evaluation of ministries, it's this: an impressive product is not how you measure success. God is equally, if not primarily, concerned with the process as the product. You may grow yourself a mega-church or an extremely influential ministry (Joseph Smith, Muhammed, Buddha...), but that doesn't mean it's because God blessed it. God's true blessing rests ONLY--not most of the time--ONLY on those who honor Him in the way they live their lives and minister in His name. Again, we could go on and on about His mercy when we screw up, but you get my point.
And the Church said... Amen!
I like the rhetorical presumption of “balance” as originally presented, however if we are to operate at “the core” of _____________ (fill in the blank) then lets look at rhetoric of the Master.
John 8 – If you don’t believe I am the Son of God you will die in your sins
Luke 14 – Hate your dad, mom, and wife, brother and sisters and follow me
Mat 8 – Follow me, let the dead bury their dead
Mark 12 – Love me with ALL heart,soul,mind,strength, and your neighbors too, no exceptions
John 6: 53-70 Jesus said we are to eat His flesh and drink His blood. Many were offended and no longer followed Jesus at this saying. He even challenged the twelve, knowing they were offended, and asked them if they would leave also. Was this a cute metaphor for the religious tradition we call communion? NOT! Eat my flesh, drink my blood, or GO AWAY! Any questions? (emphasis mine)
Please don’t respond with simplistic metaphorical meanings to the words of Jesus. He was NOT of this world. He represented heaven and it is required to see from that perspective to understand the meaning of what He says. John 8:23.
So, keeping in context to the rhetorical presumption of balance, we go along in this world making friends with all these people hoping to share the “love of Christ” with them while we appear reasonable and even tempered without offending anyone and their pet views. Presuming this method of growing the kingdom is scriptural, when do you actually tell your proselyte of presumption that Christianity is anything BUT balanced?
I am all about doing the right thing for the right reasons, and being everything to everyone so that some might be saved. (1 Cor 9) However you have to admit that Paul was anything but balanced. He preached against circumcision but made sure Timmy boy went through that “non invasive” procedure (can you feel what I am saying boys) to make sure he would not be rejected. (Acts 16) Where is the balance in that? He said one thing and then did something else. It was done with a kingdom perspective in mind and that is our example.
The presumptive “balance” addressed in the opening blog post, is only possible and is exemplified, when we as believers reach into heaven and bring to earth the Kingdom of God (Mat 6:10). Only then can we evidence the balance that exists between the now and the forever. Only Jesus can balance your encounters with others thus making the specific topic of discussion moot.
Beyond every “HOWEVER” the answer is Jesus.
-sgtomlins
From what I can see, I think that different people here are responding from different ideas of "balanced." I value objectivity, which is balance. I am most frustrated by a lot of people who push what I consider imbalanced doctrines (like the "fruit-based" doctrine mentioned earlier). Therefore I am going to side more with "balanced" than "unbalanced."
Perhaps the point is that sometimes you have to be balanced and sometimes you have to be unbalanced. Kinda like Mounds and Almond Joy.
The thing is, we have to keep a healthy balance between balance and imbalance...
:)
Really, though. As with any issues, what matters to the Body of Christ is not what makes the most logical sense, or what has the most "scientific" evidence to support it. What matters is what God teaches us through His word as it is studied and applied properly (yes, there are proper and improper ways). Coreman, your ideas are great. But after thinking about it for a while, I firmly believe that the Bible should speak for itself. If the Bible makes a clear case, all hermeneutical guidelines applied, for the practice of balance as we'd been discussing here, then it's obvious that we should obey it. The seargent gave us some pretty "unbalanced" scriptures. Would anyone venture to offer some balanced ones (without prooftexting)?
Qualifier: I still lean towards being balanced in many aspects of our lives and being radically distinctive from the world (extreme) in others, so I'm not putting anyone's ideas down. Just wanted to clarify that.
Nothin' but love.
All I can say is that I am soaking this up... and the discussion has been much smarter than the original post. I really didn't dive into this with anything profound to say about balance. I was just looking for a good excuse to cut and paste a bunch of "however" quotes into a blog.
But since then I have been blown away by the insights tossed back at me.
SGT - I feel ya. I just think we should not consider it weak to show respect to the views of those who are different from us. When Jesus is calling us to love our enemies, I don't think he's just talking about "tough love" (although that's undoubtedly part of it.) And so we bump back into the idea of balance. As Jesus said to the woman accused of adultery, "... nor do I condemn you. [HOWEVER] Go and sin no more." This is a balance between gentle love and tough love, and to do it like Jesus did is about as extreme as it gets.
This is what I think is funny... beloved addressed SGT as "sergeant", not knowing that SGT is actually his initials.
;-)
I have to be honest. I don't precisely know what would qualify as a balanced quote by the standards of the people reading this. I think that just about any quote could be made to sound unbalanced with the right tone. I have included a few off the top of my head that I interpret to be balanced.
Matthew 7:12 "So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets."
Matthew 17:27 "But so that we may not offend them, go to the lake and throw out your line. Take the first fish you catch; open its mouth and you will find a four-drachma coin. Take it and give it to them for my tax and yours."
Matthew 22:21 "Give to Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's."
Luke 13:2-5 "Do you think that these Galileans were worse sinners than all the other Galileans because they suffered this way? I tell you, no! But unless you repent, you too will all perish. Or those eighteen who died when the tower in Siloam fell on them--do you think they were more guilty than all the others living in Jerusalem? I tell you, no! But unless you repent, you too will all perish."
John 8:7 "If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone at her."
Great quotes, shakedust.
Who says I was being serious when I called him sarge?
The most evidence I see for Jesus exemplifying a balanced life is in the way he addressed different "types of sinners". If you really dig in your heels and read through the Gospels, you'll hear Jesus saying some very "contradictory" things to different people. Someone might get the impression that he makes different rules for different people. But that isn't it at all. For the self pious sinners, he strikes death blows to their pride. For the lowly, "immoral" sinners, he says "Neither do I condemn you" and "this man left justified". I could spent hours digging up more references, because there are plenty on both sides. In light of these examples (which I think are prototypical), I see Jesus not as balanced in a middle of the road sort of way, but in a balanced scales sort of way. He gives hyperbolic commands of seemingly paradoxical nature to people with different moral/spiritual weaknesses. He's extremely harsh to the proud, and He's extremely gentle to the meek. So, He's "extremely" balanced.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home