thoughtsbeliefaction

In the circles that I am in, it seems I am often being taught that what we think about drives our beliefs, which in turn drives actions. The model looks like a triangle with the word "thoughts" in the bottom left corner with a diagonal arrow pointing up to the word "beliefs" and a diagonal arrow down pointing to the word "actions." I've heard it taught in business circles and in church circles. Perhaps I am just not understanding it and am missing the thought it or perhaps we are playing word games, but it is not even close to being a statement that makes sense to me. Think about it, do you know God is good and believe He will take care of you and yet you find yourself worrying or do you believe that it is really important to spend time with God and yet struggle to do so? Now, I definitely agree that what we think on does affect us. I understand that what we believe can and should have a profound effect on our actions. However, in our cultural climate, that logical progression does not play out. You have to assume that people will live on the basis of their convictions to be able to buy into the thoughts/ beliefs/ actions progression. All people have basic assumptions about the major questions of life (origin, meaning, morality and destiny), whether by design or default, but in our postmodern society many people do not live on the basis of what they believe to be true. Our culture does not place a value on being consistent between our beliefs and our actions. Many people own basic assumptions that, when examined, contradict themselves. Now to bring it back to practical life, on a very basic level, I could say, I know eating fruits and vegetables is good for me, and I believe carrying excess weight poses many health threats, but that knowledge and belief, in and of itself, is not enough to make me change my eating habits. I can think about it 3 hours a day and yet not allow it to change my actions. In fact, a little over a year ago, I did decide to change my eating habits. My beliefs had not changed, I had not received any new revelation about nutrition, I just decided it was time to become more disciplined in what I provided to my body in terms of food. (I still have a long way to go, but am better off than I was a year ago) The action I took was a result of a choice to be disciplined - nothing more. In living that out, the question that came up was not one of belief but one of what did I really want? Is my desire to enjoy these moments of satisfaction of eating ice cream (or whatever) more important, or is my short and long-term health more important? If I choose the right choice will I lose out on all the good stuff, or will the pay off for making the right choice be so big that the ephemeral pleasure will pale in comparison? We all know the right answer right off the bat, but again, it is a whole lot easier to know and believe that, than it is to act on. Belief is important, but belief on its own does not dictate action.
When it comes to faith issues, it is an even more difficult challenge to think through because as Christians we know that our effort and discipline only goes so far. I don't buy the thoughts/ beliefs/ actions paradigm, but I am still curious to see what it is that does drive us to change our actions?

SLAMMED!

Immeresed in the Maximum Impact Simulcast (http://www.maximumimpact.com/Events/MIS/
Back next Thursday, slammed or not :-)

Today Matters

This week I have been trying to come up with my philosophy of life. I sell Juice Plus, and one of my mentors in the organization was sharing how she had been pondering her philosophy of life. She has worked with a variety of personal trainers, and their differences prompted her to realize they were guided by different philosophies of life. The trainers never explicitly shared their philosophies of life, but as she interacted with them their philosophies became evident. Her first trainers view of life could be summed up as, "life is hard, push on," the next trainers motto was, "life is a war, win it," and the current trainers philosophy is "life is an adventure, live it." My friend challenged us to think through what others would say our life philosophy was based on the actions they see in our lives, and then to think through what it is we would intentionally want our life philosophy to be. She thought for a few days and came up with "life is a gift, unwrap it." I have thought about it all week and have settled on something else - "TODAY MATTERS." I'd choose to with Today Matters as my philosophy of life for many reasons:
1) Today does matter. Success is found in our daily routine. We do not wake up one day and realize we are successful, one day we are successful because we chose to follow a daily routine that set us up for success. (Admittedly, a concept I learned in John Maxwell's "Today Matter's" Book.)
2) I want to be intentional and I want to be a good steward of my time, talents, treasure, and relationships. What better way to do that, than by valuing every day and being intentional in all facets of my daily walk?

Specifically, I break it down into the things I want to see reaped at the end of my life. I have made a decision of what I want my life to look like, now I must daily manage those decisions. At the end of the day, I want to go through and evaluate how I did in the following areas:

Health - Did I provide my body with the nutrients it needs, and get some exercise?
Money - Did I spend my money wisely?
Spiritual - Did I spend focused time with God, as well as remember Him through the day?
Family - Did I show love, respect and support to my husband?
Did I spend time in my son's world?
Did I help him develop the things he needs help with?
Work - Did I add value to the mission, vision and people of my organization?
Personal - Have I spent time learning this week?
Have I tried to connect with and value typical people?
Have I shared life with those I love?

Choosing to be intentional does not mean I can never have fun or relax, it just means I make a choice to have fun and relax rather than doing something (or nothing) by default, rather than by design.

Having said that, I'll admit I have been trying to live this way for the last several months and it is harder than I would have guessed. First off, I have to remember what it is I am aiming for and secondly, some things are more natural than others. I hope the knowledge of why I am doing what I am doing is enough to help me ingrain these principles in my life long term.

LA Times, our Times and Hell

I recently read an article in the LA Times regarding hells fall from popularity. Actually, I doubt hell was ever a popular topic but at one time in the Christian community hell was a relevant threat spiritual leaders felt the need to warn their parishioners about. Hell was spoken of from the pulpit in vivid detail as a painful, lurid place where those who were not reconciled to God went, and of course an invitation to accept Jesus Christ as ones Lord and Savior followed as the solution. Accept Jesus and you will live forever in heaven with God and all of His angels on streets of gold, or live eternally damned among satan, his demons, and weeping and gnashing of teeth. Hmm, what's your choice? It gave rise to the idea of salvation as a form of "fire insurance." The idea of what hell is has even changed. Hell used to be described as a place where souls were tormented forever by burning flames. Read sermons by the preachers of ages past and you can almost hear the wailing of people in agony in hell. Now when hell is brought up it is described as eternal separation from God. Not a good thing, but certainly not a terrorizing place of dreadful pain.

Christians are still preaching a need for salvation and Christians still believe in hell so why is it that hell is no longer taught on in the churches, preached on, or written about in today's churches and Christian circles? Why is hell so out of fashion? Has existentialist philosophy, emphasizing the here and now, effected Christianity to the point that Christianity now proposes salvation as a means to live a higher quality life in this world? Does hell even need to be discussed from the pulpit, and if so in what terms shall hell be described? The church is becoming less propositional, and more relational and so maybe the concept of hell does not fit in our talks about being invited into a relationship with a loving creator. If the church has so much room to maneuver on such a pivotal issue as where we spend our eternity, then what else may change over the next fifty years or so?

Most people would agree that the philosophy of postmodernism prevails today. Postmodernism elevates tolerance to the highest of all virtues, and what could be more antithetical to the idea of tolerance than the concept of hell, which punishes people who are unrepentant sinners? Postmodernism would have a hard time defining something as sinful, much less as worthy of sending someone to eternal damnation over. Postmodernist reject the concept of a shared reality, and the concept of hell, an unbending and unapologetic negative reality for all people who do not fit into one certain category would be unfathomable.

Hell does not fit in with our current zeitgeist, and so churches are not preaching on hell. They still believe in it, but it is not the focus of our plea for conversion, and if pressed to talk about hell, the definition will be toned down. (In fact, pleas for conversion aren't nearly as prevalent as they used to be, but that is another story.) It is easy to hear this and be sad that we have allowed culture to be the influencer rather than the other way around, but if the bottom line is that we want to offer Christ to people desperately in need of him, then where is the balance? All of church has been adapted to fit in with current culture. Consider the preacher, minister or pastor is now the moderator, speaker, CEO, or environment architect as one mega church pastor puts it. Consider sin used to be touted as wrong because it grieved a holy God, and now sin is something we should steer clear of because it will end up having negative repercussions in the here and now. To remain relevant as a church some things must change and we must always present the Gospel within the cultural context but where is the balance? I understand that, in general, theology is not taught a whole lot in churches any more (when is the last time you heard a sermon on sanctification?), but if we do believe hell exists it seems odd to me that there is no place for it to be taught on. I have no desire to criticize pastors who provide a service I could never aspire to, but the approach to hell I would want to suggest would be to tell the Truth about it. Frances Schaeffer talked about the need to pre-evangelize. He said the cultural climate produced people who didn't even realize their need to be saved. For the good news of the Gospel of Jesus Christ to be good news, one must first understand the bad news and hell is part of the bad news, which the gospel provides an antidote to. Shouldn't pastors find a way to provide an environment that teaches about the reality of hell? I am sure it will not be a favorite subject to teach on, but neither is stewardship but out of necessity it is done. I'd pray hard that the Holy Spirit would allow me to communicate the Truth and the Truth in love and then I would want to fulfill my obligation to the congregation I am accountable to God for by telling them that there is a hell and one needs to keep that in mind when choosing a belief system to live under.

Even among evangelicals, what is taught about hell from the pulpit may vary but I would want to make sure the basics were covered. Eternity is forever; we are either in heaven or hell. Heaven is with God, hell is eternal separation from God. Hell may literally be a place of weeping and gnashing of teeth as some places in the Bible describe it or it may be more like the trash heap at the edge of town that other parts of the Bible describe it as, but either way it is existence completely apart from and without aid from our creator. This notion raises the question of what salvation is. Is salvation escaping eternal damnation or is it walking with our creator for all eternity beginning the moment we first believe? I would answer the question with a resounding BOTH! If you accept Jesus as your salvation merely for the "fire insurance" then you miss out on participating with Him in what He is doing in the world here and now, you have missed out on walking with a best friend who is big enough to handle anything. If you walk with Christ because you want to experience the here and now with almighty God and absolutize that, you have left out a big part of the equation. It is so much easier to walk this life when you have a view that gives perspective to life in this world for our limited number of years.

In seeing this shift, I do wonder how much more things will change. I wonder what ideas are subtly changing in my very lifetime that I do not even notice because I am apart of it. I pray that God will give me the strength and courage to be diligent in thinking, even, or especially in spiritual matters. May we find the balance of questioning and searching for Truth and still live a life of faith.