Rest and Reflect

Page 12-13

Those who take pains to call attention to their good works, constantly talking of their sinless state and endeavoring to make their religious attainments prominent, are only deceiving their own souls by so doing. A healthy man, who is able to attend to the vocations of life and who goes forth day after day to his labor with buoyant spirits and with a healthy current of blood flowing through his veins, does not call the attention of every one he meets to his soundness of body. Health and vigor are the natural conditions of his life, and therefore he is scarcely conscious that he is in the enjoyment of so rich a boon.

Thus it is with the truly righteous man. He is unconscious of his goodness and piety. Religious principle has become the spring of his life and conduct, and it is just as natural for him to bear the fruits of the Spirit as for the fig tree to bear figs or for the rosebush to yield roses. His nature is so thoroughly imbued with love for God and his fellow men that he works the works of Christ with a willing heart.

All who come within the sphere of his influence perceive the beauty and fragrance of his Christian life, while he himself is unconscious of it, for it is in harmony with his habits and inclinations. He prays for divine light, and loves to walk in that light. It is his meat and drink to do the will of his heavenly Father. His life is hid with Christ in God; yet he does not boast of this, nor seem conscious of it. God smiles upon the humble and lowly ones who follow closely in the footsteps of the Master. Angels are attracted to them, and love to linger about their path. They may be passed by as unworthy of notice by those who claim exalted attainments and who delight in making prominent their good works, but heavenly angels bend lovingly over them and are as a wall of fire round about them.

If the curtain could be rolled back, and each one could discern the constant activities of the heavenly family to preserve the inhabitants of the earth from Satan’s seductive wiles, lest in their careless attitude they should be led astray through satanic strategy, they would lose a large degree of their self-confidence and self-assurance. They would see that the armies of heaven are in continual warfare with satanic agencies, to obtain victories in behalf of those who do not sense their danger, and who are passing on in unconscious indifference (MS 32, 1900).

Ellen G White, published in the SDA Bible Commentary, Volume 6, page 1120

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/article1131051.ece

In response to the query, “what if Ellen White’s visions were the result of temporal lobe epilepsy?”

John Surridge, communications director for the Seventh Day Adventist Church at its British headquarters in Watford, Herts said:

“If God chose someone with epilepsy or any other predisposing mental factor to reveal Himself, it doesn’t substantially change the nature of the revelations. If we look to the Bible, Moses was said to have a mental condition, and maybe that’s just the way God chose to work. In any case, while Ellen White was very influential, our beliefs don’t hang on just her writings. Our beliefs are based on the Bible.

“But some people may use this to reduce religious experience to merely activity in the brain, and remove God completely. We would object to that. Religious experience is an encounter with God, not just a product of the brain.”

I really hope, no matter what happens, that humankind does not find a way to reduce emotion, love, memories, happiness to merely chemical activities in the brain. That would be sad. It would be like trying to learn about something very beautiful by breaking it down into small and smaller parts, until you lose the beauty of what you were trying to understand in the first place. And the saddest part is, although you have all the parts and so badly want to restore the beauty, you don’t know how to put the parts back together again.

A cloud is just water vapour. A diamond is just carbon. Yet both are infinitely so much more beautiful.

The beauty is not in the parts, but in how they fit together.

Yes. Just as we can choose to sin, we can choose to not sin, and we can choose to do good. (See Genesis 4:7)

To say otherwise would be to say God isn’t able to keep us safe from sin.

So, now that we have Christ, sin should no longer have control over us. (See Romans 6:14)

But old habits have to be unlearned. And learning takes time.

So don’t get disheartened when you slip up. Get up and try again.

Remember, God is able to save forever and to the uttermost (Hebrews 7:25)

Any strongly held idea (whether it be based on evidence or not; whether it be religious or not) has the potential to inspire great acts of virtue or great acts of evil.

Consider a man who believes his wife is cheating on him. He may go out and shoot his wife and her supposed lover. Or he may change his life completely in the hope of winning her back.

Don’t let the argument that “Faith is a dangerous thing” be an argument against believing in anything (even/especially God).

A belief in a God has the potential to cause irrational (even evil) acts according to the “will of God”. And there are many examples of that.

A belief that there is no God has the potential for evil because of the lack of accountability to a moral standard. And there are many examples of that.

It is not down to whether to believe or not. It is down to “what exactly do you believe” and most importantly “what will you DO” because of it!

Micah 6:8
“He has told you what is good… Act justly, love to show mercy, and live humbly, with the Lord your God.”

Richard Dawkins Interview of Alister McGrath for “The Root of All Evil”

http://richarddawkins.net/video/AlisterMcGrathNEW.mov

Very good interview. Probably the best arguments I have ever heard from Richard Dawkins. Here he is (on the whole) very logical, thoughtful and a great listener. Sadly, although Alister McGrath made some good points, on the whole he failed to answer Richard Dawkins’ questions (or at least not in a way that I could understand with satisfaction). In particular McGrath struggled with the concept of why God allows suffering, giving God credit for miracles, but not when he does not miraculously rescue. I don’t think he was able to justify that view of God.

From the Biblical viewpoint, a few points I feel could have been emphasised:

1. God intends for the world to be a perfect place and that is the way it was when he created it (according to Genesis). God’s promise is that he will make the world perfect once again and there will be no more suffering (Rev 21:4).

2. This world/universe is not self-sustaining and everlasting. It derives its vitality and health from God. Without God the world is undergoing a gradual decay (Romans 8:20-21). The Sin problem (that is the lack of a moral standard, or in other words each person doing their own way [Isaiah 53:6]) has resulted in a separation from God (Isaiah 59:1-2). Why?

If it is not clear, consider a sheep wandering away from its shepherd. As long as the sheep stays close to the shepherd it will be safe, as soon as it wanders (i.e. it is separated) it falls into danger.

The Bible uses that same metaphor to present the Good News. The Good Shepherd – one of the metaphors for God – went out in search for the lost sheep (John 10:11-18; Luke 15). This explains the statement in Isaiah 59:1 “God’s hand isn’t too short that he can’t save us, or too deaf to hear (our cries for help).” In other words, the reason our sins separate us from God is not that He is too angry to forgive, but that we are too stubborn to be willing to return.

As a result of the Sin problem all of nature has degenerated from the original design.

3. Bad things happen because of the degenerate nature of the physical world itself (natural disasters), the degenerate nature of human morality (crime and atrocities), and (sometimes) the external influence of God’s Enemy, Satan (see the story of Job).

4. God can intervene to remove all suffering (e.g. recreate the world in its perfect natural state, remove all the causes for suffering, destroy or decorticate Satan, or manipulate everyone’s actions so that they do only what is good.) However, the God of the Bible chooses not resort to total annihilation or brainwashing (although some may argue that such was the behaviour of the OT version of God – that is another long conversation – refer to the work of Alden Thompson).

He is left with the long, hard, but more permanent solution. In this solution He must convince the universe, particularly humankind, to defect from the Sin rebellion before he makes things new. In Isaiah 45:23, God makes an oath that all that he has said is “righteous” and that he will see to it that everyone will once again be able to “swear allegiance” to him. Revelation 4 and 5 describes a scene when all of Creation progressively cries “Worthy” to God as Creator and “Worthy” to the Lamb (a symbol of Jesus) because he was “slain”. Jesus death and ministry to his Creation is evidence that God truly is worthy to be God. Jesus died to reveal God’s righteousness and therefore His ability to make good on His promise to save those who trust Him (Romans 3:26). (How does Jesus’ death achieve this? A long conversation for later – but refer to the works of Ellen G White.)

In other words, before he can make the universe a perfect place again, he has to ensure the Sin problem won’t arise again. Otherwise he would just be patching the holes in a parachute on fire.

5. That doesn’t mean that God ignores all our suffering. God is concerned with our suffering on earth, but this “temporal” suffering is not his priority. There would be no point making everyone’s physical life as pleasant as possible if it meant the (spiritual) “loss” of many souls. See Isaiah 53. Jesus is acquainted with our grief, and our sufferings, and died for our (spiritual) healing.

Some will argue that the concept of a sinless man being punished by God for the sins of many, and thus somehow bribing God’s forgiveness is abhorrent. I agree! I believe that is not what the Bible teaches. Although the significance of Jesus’ death is that we are forgiven; Jesus’ death did not “cause” God to forgive, rather Jesus died because God had already forgiven us. That is another long conversation – refer to the work of Graham Maxwell.

6. So God is directly involved in this world! The record of Jesus’ life and ministry makes it clear that the majority of what He did was to relieve suffering (Matthew 4:23). Rev 7:1 describes God’s angels having been holding back the “winds of strife” all this time, until the very end of the world. God has been protecting the world and in a way Nature and Satan need God’s “permission” to cause havoc. Which is why in the Old Testament we see God taking credit for the bad things that happen.

The good news is although God may not necessarily miraculously end your suffering, he is there to protect and support you through it (Psalm 23:4 is David’s description of God’s forever presence). Isaiah 51:4-16 was written to God’s people in a time of suffering. In it He appeals to his people not to give up hope and to remember He, the world’s Creator was on their side. Therefore there was no need to fear the things other people (and even natural disasters) could do.

In the end God will make amends for all suffering and injustice (Deut 32:35).

7. God does not intend humankind to be spectators or passengers in the Universe-wide Plan of Redemption and Reconciliation. It is clear throughout the Bible that God expects those who follow him to do “His will.” No where is this better illustrated than in Jesus’ life. As stated earlier, the majority of Jesus’ work was to relieve suffering – and he sent his disciples to do the same (Matthew 10:1). Those who claim to follow God have the responsibility to actively seek those in need and to help them both physically, emotionally — and also spiritually! (See Isaiah 58:6 where God describes social service as the way to worship God.)

It is the combination of all the above that makes me feel that the Christian picture of God is wonderfully positive and yet consistent with the suffering we see all around us.

As in Isaiah 45:18-25, God says (paraphrasing):
I am God. No one else is.
I didn’t hide out in secret. Or stay far, far away so you would have to look high and low to find me.
I work in the open. I came to talk to you. And told you what was right and set things right.
So get together and come, let’s talk! Look at the evidence. Make your case.
Who told you all about the world and about me all those years ago?
Wasn’t I the one?
It had to be me. I’m the only God there is.
The only God that can be trusted, willing and able to save.
If you would just turn to me and trust me, I will save you. All of you. Even those of you that live at the edges of the planet, so far you’d think no one could reach you.
I promise it. I won’t take back one word.
In the end, everyone will realise that I am God, and worthy of allegiance.
Everyone is going to end up saying “Yes! God was right! God does save!”
And all those who were angry with me will realise they were wrong.

[That’s not to say God does not allow people to reap the consequences of their wrongful actions, or discipline His children when they wander away from morality, or “test” His children to build their faith. He certainly does that. But I would never say that (all or even most) personal tragedy is somehow God’s will.]

From Gordon Mackley a reviewer on Amazon.co.uk:

If Dawkins’ atheistic naturalistic view is to hold water then his base assumptions must be supported by good hard objective evidence and his logic impeccable, as both are an absolute requirement for any conclusion to be proved true. This type of ‘proof concept’ seems to be absolutely essential in Dawkins’ worldview in order to believe in anything (which must make relationships somewhat difficult!)

That essentially is the problem with Dawkins’ world view. In the attempt to be completely scientific and purely logical, it eliminates anything that cannot be “proven,” anything you cannot be absolutely sure of. And as Mr Mackley states, love in relationships is a great example. If we applied Dawkins’ reasoning to our relationships we would find it very difficult to trust our loved ones. Interestingly, a belief in God (at least for most Christians) is very much like a relationship, and not so much a theoretical construct.

In his talk, titled, “Queerer Than We Suppose: The strangeness of science” (Oxford, July 2005) Dawkins suggests that the true nature of the universe eludes us, because the human mind evolved only to understand the “middle-sized” world we can observe. I would suggest that is exactly the reason why our human minds cannot fully understand God. Although I do not believe in evolution, I am certain that our minds have learned to think and perceive in “middle-size” – and are not capable of fully explaining God. God needs to step into our “middle world” of matter and energy for us to get, perceive or understand him at all. Christian theology purports that that is exactly what He did.

Bring ye all the tithes into the storehouse, that there may be meat in mine house, and prove me now herewith, saith the LORD of hosts, if I will not open you the windows of heaven, and pour you out a blessing, that there shall not be room enough to receive it.

Why does God give primarily to those who are faithful with their tithe? Well, if you were God and you wanted your investment to have the best outcomes would you give your money to the person who keeps it for himself or the one who uses it to bless others? The answer is obvious.

is God adapting an expression of Grace to human need

Thoughts from the Mount of Blessing p 189
Patriarchs and Prophets p363-4, 305, 311
No exercise of arbitrary sovereignty… given for the good of Israel

Matthew 19:7-8
Galatians 3:19
Jeremiah 31:31-4
Mark 2:27 (man was not made so that there would be someone to follow God’s law, the law was made as a blessing and safeguard for man)

Alden Thompson, Escape from the Flames, page 132-135

A few years ago while on sabbatical in Scotland, I was putting the finishing touches on my book Inspiration: Hard Questions, Honest Answers when I happened by the office of a well-known Old Testament scholar and we chatted about our various projects. When he asked me what I was doing, I frankly told him that I was writing a book to help my students see more clearly what never changes in Scripture. I said I was sick and tired of seeing my students lose their faith when they discovered things in the Bible they didn’t think were supposed to be there. Here’s a brief summary of what I said:

The unchanging anchor of Scripture consists of the great principle of love, its more specific definition through Jesus’ two great commands (love to God, love to your neighbor), and their even more specific application in the Ten Commandments. You can draw a double line around those laws, marking them off from everything else, for they never change. The rest of Scripture simply illustrates and applies them in particular times and places, an interpretation suggested by Jesus’ summarizing comment on the two great commandments: “On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.”

While the two great commandments are certainly enduring, the Ten Commandments represent an additional layer of stability. They, too, “hang” on the two great commands, but they never change. Draw your double line after the ten. Everything else in Scripture – all the laws and stories – “hang” on the two, illustrating how we are to understand and apply the fundamental principle of love, the two great commands, and the Ten Commandments in many and various circumstances.

So I thought to myself, that’s my good Adventist Bible study on the law.

To my surprise, he replied without hesitation, “Of course that’s where the bible draws the double line. Look at Deuteronomy 4:13,14.”

Incredibly, our next few moments together still sounded like an old-fashioned Adventist Bible study on the law!

“Note the difference between verses 13 and 14,” he said. “In verse 13, God is addressing Israel directly, not speaking through Moses. According to this text, God gave the people His covenant and described what He gave them as the Ten Commandments. Furthermore, the text states that God Himself wrote the commandments on two stone tablets.

“But,” my professor friend continued, “note the changes in verse 14. First, God is addressing Moses, not the people. Second, to Moses, he gave statutes and ordinances, not His covenant or the Ten Commandments.

“In short,” he concluded, “you’re quite right. The double line comes after the Ten Commandments. That’s where the Bible itself puts it.”

I was astounded that he would respond so spontaneously and so quickly with that solid “Adventist” exposition of the Bible. It’s not just Adventist, of course. It’s just a simple and straightforward reading of the Bible, a reading that should be evident to any honest person.

To make the “Bible study” complete, we would simply need to add two additional points. First, that the “statutes and ordinances” were written down by Moses in a book and placed beside the ark, not in the ark; and second, that the penalties for breaking the Ten Commandments are not included in the Decalogue itself but in the additional legislation, thus given the Decalogue a more enduring quality.

I might note that penalties are much more likely to be shaped by time, place, and culture, and thus vary considerably, even in the Bible. In the Old Testament, for example, the additional Mosaic legislation assigns the death penalty to every one of the Ten Commandments except the last one (don’t covet), an application matching the violent needs of the violent people who had come out of Egypt.

Jesus, of course, coming to earth as God in the flesh, points us toward the nonviolent ideal, with the story of the woman taken in adultery being the most famous example: “Neither do I condemn you. Go your way, and from now on do not sin again.” Thus, in striking instances, Jesus could omit the penalty while still affirming the command as enduring.

In conclusion, I say with passion: Some things never change. God has spelled them out in Scripture with remarkable clarity – the one great principle of love, Jesus’ two great commands, and the Ten Commandments. Everything else, all the “cases” He has ever given through inspiration and revelation, simply illustrate and apply these great principles , these great commands.

The capstone to this whole process of helping us know God’s will is found in the revelation of Jesus Christ. He is the embodiment of God’s law of love, the law pyramid in human flesh, so to speak. Through Him and through His example we learn best of all how we are to live.

But what is most important is the realization that all our good efforts to live out the law of love can never earn salvation. That is God’s gift. And it is always a gift, never something that we earn by our efforts. Indeed, if we are really serious about living out God’s law of love we will discover the painful truth of the paradox noted in Ellen White’s Steps to Christ: “The closer you come to Jesus, the more faulty you will appear in your own eyes; for your vision will be clearer, and your imperfections will be seen in broad and distinct contrast to His perfect nature.”

That is when we stand side-by-side with Brother Paul, and for all our talk about the “good news” version of law, we cry out with him: “Wretched man that I am! Who will rescue me from this body of death?”

But Paul didn’t stop with wretchedness. Nor should we. We must move on with him from the anguish of Romans 7 to the exuberance of Romans 8: “There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus.”

Yes, the law is good news. It is our anchor, protecting us from a host of evils and helping us to know what is good. But if you will pardon the mixed metaphor, we will never go anywhere at all if all we have is an anchor. The law is indeed our anchor, but Jesus is the wind in our sails. He is our strength, our power, our motivation. And it is because of Jesus that we can say with Paul:

I am convinced that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor rulers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor powers, nor height, nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us fromt he love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord. — Romans 8:38,9

(based on Chapter 9 – From Codebook to Casebook to Jesus, from his book Escape from the Flames)

I wouldn’t dump my friends for one error. Why should I do that with my Bible? I don’t want to live with the fear that should I look too closely at my Bible, I might find something I would wish I had not seen.

Why is the God of the OT so violent? He needed to speak the language his people (then) could understand. God needed to take responsibility for everything – the good and the bad. Otherwise his people, raised in the midst of polytheism, may worship the “God of destruction” instead of the “God of love”. God needed to emphasise that he was the ultimate authority, the only God (see the first commandment). 2 Sam 24:1 and 1 Chron 21:1 (one of the last books of the OT to be written) show how the understanding of God’s people evolved and how Satan began to get his rightful dues.

Now of course the OT God has his tender moments and Jesus is not always gentle Jesus, meek and mild. So the actions of the OT God and the NT God are really the same. But why does God SEEM so fickle? Perhaps this will help explain. The central issue of the Great Controversy has always been worship. More specifically: who to worship, how to worship, and why worship? Or put bluntly: who deserves to be the boss? [Authority] In the OT, especially around the time of the Exodus, there was a polytheistic culture, idolatry and a distinct lack of reverence for God. That is why God appeared to them as a continual pillar of fire and cloud. In the early NT, especially around Jesus’ time, there was a monotheistic culture, legalism and a deep seated fear of God. That is why God appeared to them as a gentle man who mingled with the meek and holy – and oft said “Don’t be afraid.” God certainly meets people where they are. What about today? How would our OT+NT God appear to our post-modern third-millennial world? Well, I think He appeals to us individually based on our needs, but on the whole, our world is quite secular (even religious types) and recognises no real need for God. Which is why Revelation “reintroduces” us to the powerful side of God again, reminds us he’s the creator, and stresses the impending judgment day when everyone will be held accountable (Rev 14:7). It even has a lake of fire (reminiscent of Noah’s flood)! But need we be afraid? Don’t forget, that some God is gentle Jesus, meek and mild. It’s pretty obvious his intention is not to scare you if he can persuade you by more graceful means (Isaiah 33:14-16; Psalm 91; Revelation 7:1-4; 9:1-4).

The attitude of unbending faithfulness to the authority of written rules sometimes leads to much worse sin (e.g. 2 Sam 21; Judges 19-21).
1. Sin distorts our view of authority (e.g. the Pharisees and the Law)
2. Jesus came to reveal a proper view of Authority (Matt 5)

It is a fact of life that you become like the object of your worship (Psalm 135:18; 2 Corinthians 3:18)

The concept that God comes to KILL (punish) leads to fear
1. Fear
2. Violence/punishment/Vindictiveness
3. False worship

The concept that God came to DIE (save) leads to love
1. Love in place of fear (1 John 4:18)
2. Forgiveness instead of punishment (Matt 20:25-28)
3. True worship

People are more important than ideals
– to those who are “conservative” (Romans 14)
– to those who are “liberal” (1 Cor 8; 9:19-23; 10:23-33)

The best way to serve God is to serve humanity (Isaiah 58)

The Desire of Ages, page 641

Those who minister to others will be ministered unto by the Chief Shepherd. They themselves will drink of the living water, and will be satisfied. They will not be longing for exciting amusements, or for some change in their lives. The great topic of interest will be, how to save the souls that are ready to perish. Social intercourse will be profitable. The love of the Redeemer will draw hearts together in unity.

…

Love to man is the earthward manifestation of the love of God. It was to implant this love, to make us children of one family, that the King of glory became one with us. And when His parting words are fulfilled, “Love one another, as I have loved you” (John 15:12); when we love the world as He has loved it, then for us His mission is accomplished. We are fitted for heaven; for we have heaven in our hearts.

The Bible is not a rulebook but a casebook through which we must exercise “sanctified reason.”

Review & Herald, 7 Feb 1893, paragraph 13

Conservative traditions received from educated men, and from the writings of great men of the past, are not safe guides for us in these last days; for the great struggle before us is such as the world has never seen before. Those who have not acted a part in this work in the past, need to move with great caution in regard to accepting or refusing what may be presented to them as truth. They need to penetrate much deeper than their limited spiritual knowledge, or their present habits or opinions would lead them to do. We are not one of us safe unless we live as seeing Him who is invisible, even with past experience in the work; and we certainly are not safe, if we have not had that experience. Daily, hourly, we must be actuated by the principles of Bible truth,–righteousness, mercy, and the love of God. He who would have moral and intellectual power must draw from the divine source. At every point of decision inquire, “Is this the way of the Lord?” With your Bibles open before you, consult sanctified reason and a good conscience. Your heart must be moved, your soul touched, your reason and intellect awakened, by the Spirit of God; and then holy principles revealed in the word of God will give light to the soul. The true source of wisdom and virtue and power is the cross of Calvary. Christ is the author and finisher of our faith. He says, “Without me ye can do nothing.”

Testimonies for the Church, Volume 3, p132-4

The education of children, at home or at school, should not be like the training of dumb animals; for children have an intelligent will, which should be directed to control all their powers. Dumb animals need to be trained, for they have not reason and intellect. … The master is mind, judgment, and will for his beast. A child may be so trained as to have, like the beast, no will of his own. Even his individuality may be merged in the one who superintends his training; his will, to all intents and purposes, is subject to the will of the teacher.

Children who are thus educated will ever be deficient in moral energy and individual responsibility. They have not been taught to move from reason and principle; their wills have been controlled by another, and the mind has not been called out, that it might expand and strengthen by exercise. They have not been directed and disciplined with respect to their peculiar constitutions and capabilities of mind, to put forth their strongest powers when required. …

There are many families of children who appear to be well trained while under the training discipline; but when the system which has held them to set rules is broken up, they seem to be incapable of thinking, acting, or deciding for themselves. These children have been so long under iron rule, not allowed to think and act for themselves in those things in which it was highly proper that they should, that they have no confidence in themselves to move out upon their own judgment, having an opinion of their own. And when they go out from their parents to act for themselves, they are easily led by others’ judgment in the wrong direction. They have not stability of character. They have not been thrown upon their own judgment as fast and as far as practicable, and therefore their minds have not been properly developed and strengthened. They have so long been absolutely controlled by their parents that they rely wholly upon them; their parents are mind and judgment for them.

On the other hand, the young should not be left to think and act independently of the judgment of their parents and teachers. Children should be taught to respect experienced judgment and to be guided by their parents and teachers. … Then when they go forth from the guiding hand of their parents and teachers, their characters will not be like the reed trembling in the wind.

…

Those parents and teachers who boast of having complete control of the minds and wills of the children under their care would cease their boastings could they trace out the future lives of the children who are thus brought into subjection by force or through fear. These are almost wholly unprepared to share in the stern responsibilities of life. When these youth are no longer under their parents and teachers, and are compelled to think and act for themselves, they are almost sure to take a wrong course and yield to the power of temptation. They do not make this life a success, and the same deficiencies are seen in their religious life. Could the instructors of children and youth have the future result of their mistaken discipline mapped out before them, they would change their plan of education. That class of teachers who are gratified that they have almost complete control of the wills of their scholars are not the most successful teachers, although the appearance for the time being may be flattering.

God never designed that one human mind should be under the complete control of another. … These scholars may, upon certain occasions, appear like well-drilled soldiers. But when the restraint is removed, there will be seen a want of independent action from firm principle existing in them. Those who make it their object to so educate their pupils … to make men and women of firm principle, qualified for any position in life, are the most useful and permanently successful teachers. Their work may not show to the very best advantage to careless observers, and their labors may not be valued as highly as are those of the teacher who holds the minds and wills of his scholars by absolute authority; but the future lives of the pupils will show the fruits of the better plan of education.

We must go no faster than we can take those with us whose consciences and intellects are convinced of the truths we advocate. We must meet the people where they are. Some of us have been many years in arriving at our present position … If we should allow the people as much time as we have required … we would be very patient with them, and allow then to advance step by step, as we have done, until their feet are firmly established … we should be very cautious not to advance too fast … In reforms we would better come one step short of the mark than to go one step beyond it. And if there is error at all, let it be on the side next to the people.
(Testimonies for the Church, volume 3, page 20)

(with apologies to C. Mervyn Maxwell)

1. Hunger for solid spiritual food
The need for truth. Not the watered down sludge we accept as our weekly dose of God’s word; but honest, raw truth in good measure, pressed down, shaken together and running over. Clear, comprehensive understanding of doctrine with application for our lives and relationships. (Oh, and “clear” doesn’t mean complicated. There is so much that could be made simpler and more fully understood at the same time.)

2. Hunger for harmony in the family (or love in the home)
All families have disagreements, but that doesn’t mean they can’t love each other or enjoy each other’s company. The enemy is not your brother. Instead of throwing stones at each other, we need to be licking each other’s wounds (and love those outside our church family too!). If you cannot love your brother who is next to you, how can you love a God you cannot see.

3. Hunger to be Real
God needs to become real in our lives, our beliefs need to be relevant in our day to day drudgery, we need to be able to relate to our communities. What is the point of a church that doesn’t bring blessing to the world in any way?

4. Hunger for Jesus’ return
We need a restored sense of urgency and hopeful expectation. We need to remember why we’re doing all this in the first place.

But remember. A church isn’t changed from the top down. Rather it is changed from the bottom up. It starts with you and me.