Face

Hide your face from my sins . . . 

 - From Psalm 51

If we could just boil every human behavior and attitude down to its very essence:

Is that selfish?

Or is it not?

I think that's really where it all starts. Are you doing that for yourself, because it feels good? Have you put any thought into the effect that what you're doing will have on others? Is it good for children, or does it just make you feel good, or smart, or important . . . or "bad"?

In 2021, we've just about made the transition complete, to a society and culture that actually prefers the bad; that prefers mediocrity. You know . . . stuff that doesn't require a lot of work, nor the inconvenience of being honorable; nor to think about others. 

If I feel good . . . then I must be good. 

What will people think of us, seven generations from now? Oh that's right, we don't care what they think. Just like we couldn't care less about our ancestors and their sacrifices. They're dead anyway. 

Our definition of "love" itself, has been mashed down into a tingly feeling we get when our chemicals and hormones get swirled around, just so. 

Does it put others first? Or yourself?

Scott Peck defines evil as fully-developed narcissism. Selfish acts feed selfish attitudes, and selfish attitudes grow into self-aggrandizement and the pursuit of what feels good. What makes me feel good.

You really can simplify the root cause of every bad thing . . . back to whether people are serving themselves, or others. 

The entire Psalm 51 (almost) is a sustained plea that God forget about our sinfulness. You cannot improve, you cannot gain real goodness, or the ability to express real love, without getting yourself out of the way.  In Scripture, God reveals His full face, to those whom He blesses. A covered face is a defensive face, an untrusting face. A face that is not interested in connection with others . . . at least . . . for the right reasons. 

The unselfish act is symbolized by showing one's face. It is an act of trust and vulnerability. It's the first step to meaningful human interaction. If we would cover one another's faces, we must do so with a full understanding of the possible repercussions, in expressing ourselves to one another, in this way. 

Uriah

David wrote a letter to Joab, and sent it by the hand of Uriah . . . 

 - From II Samuel 11

I'm going to assume that the reader is familiar with the account of David, Bathsheba, Joab, and Uriah the Hittite, so that I do not have to summarize it. 

It would be interesting to have some Bible students put together a list of the most infamous human deeds in all of Scripture. I would think that David's treatment of Uriah rises to the top three of such a list. 

Lust, sexual immorality, deception, and even pre-meditated murder. There's a sense that people rather enjoy focusing on this biblical episode. They get to say "Look at what David did, and yet he was a 'man after God's own heart!'" This statement is often delivered via a sly, slightly mischievous grin. "My, but I'm on the edge!"

The Uriah matter represents base, horrible human behavior. When you let it sink in, it becomes very difficult to see King David in a good light, at all. He would not make it through a 21st Century gauntlet of American public opinion, let alone the American criminal justice system.

And then the king goes and has Uriah himself deliver the order, that he be sent to the front lines, to the General, Joab. Why was Uriah chosen to be the messenger of his own fate?

 . . . Because Uriah had proven himself just, pure, and devoted to the king, and to the men in the field of battle. 

If one of the Bible's greatest heroes can sink to the level of such treachery, imagine what modern, ambitious, political characters are capable of. 

Mary Stayed

 . . . but she did not know that it was Jesus.

 - From John 20

Mary Magdalene was inconsolable. She stood outside the tomb of Jesus, crying. She had been there all of one day, and over two nights. 

I'm reading my own imagination into it. I believe she followed along, and did not leave the side of the Lord, not even once, from the moment He died until His resurrection. I picture her in her constant grief. She cried as Jesus did, when her brother, Lazarus, died the first time. 

The cry of grief, from the death of a loved one, is distinct and unique. It's a cry that you expect. There is nothing odd about it. Families gather around the loved one that has just fallen into the sleep of death.

They might take the hand of the departed, noticing along the way as the skin becomes cooler, and cooler, to the touch. For some time, the loved one appears to be only in a deep sleep . . . with the exception that, while living, a sleeping person still is making some exertion to prop him or herself up, in some form. Even in deep sleep, the body may move slightly, to get more comfortable. 

But the dead person is in complete surrender. Inertia, or gravity, is the single force operating upon the corpse. 

Mary followed the dead Lord throughout those days. 

But if I say she wept, inconsolably, that is not to say she was a weak person. It is not to say that she should, hopefully soon, pick herself up and move on. Her commitment to follow the Lord, even in death, bespeaks a strength of character. She stayed. She showed up and didn't leave. She remained, when all the others left. Her audible cries were more like hymns of praise than shrieks of despair. 

When she turned away, for a few moments, Jesus took a deep break, and stood up. He could move like a thought, now, as His body was now eternal, unworldly. He slipped around behind Mary as she peaked in and noticed the tomb empty, except for two shining Angels. 

At first glance, she did not recognize Him. Yes, it was definitely Jesus, all right. But now His essence was changed into, maybe, pure energy (albeit operating still, in a physical, touchable Being). It was obviously Jesus, but she had never seen Him like this, and it took some adjusting. 

But here's the point - - - you can spend every waking and sleeping moment with Jesus . . . with Him all along, right there within reach. And yet when He rises up and soars into a higher realm, we miss Him, for a moment. It may take faith, even, to recognize the Lord in His eternal state. 

And He's standing right near you, even now. 

Divisions

For he is our peace; in his flesh he has made both groups into one and has broken down the dividing wall, that is, the hostility between us.

 - From Ephesians 2

You can't have peace with divisions. 

Paul is talking about two groups of humanity. The two fundamental divisions. The actual, root, down-to-the-core source of all human strife: divisions. 

It's not really about race. Race it just one expression of the problem. It's not about nationality. That too, is a smoke screen that hides the real problem. It's not the beautiful against the ugly. Not the athletic versus the artistic. Not the rich against the poor. Not the powerful against the weak. Not even, really, the wedge between human religions.

Although, these are all part of it. They are part, but not the whole. They are an outward manifestation, albeit a crude one. (Judge not by appearances). 

Simply put: It's the haves versus the have-nots. And it's fueled by jealousy. 

Prideful ignoramuses on the one hand. Petulant children on the other. 

And they're all just woefully human, doing what we should not be surprised that they do. 

We saw it on the school yard, ages ago. A bully . . . a kid bigger than the others, athletic, maybe from a wealthy family, probably blessed with a glib manner and a cute smile; this bully, having his way while the other kids pretend to like him. 

Or we might recall the forming of youthful gangs, practicing that most primitive of human traits: groupthink. The mob forming around a sense of anger towards one or two of the others; the gang developing its own character out of the unconscious movements of its individual parts. Moving inevitably towards a malicious purpose, until someone, or something, slaps some sense into enough of the kids, to cause the breaking up of the gang. 

We remember how Cain resented Abel. Ishmael resented Isaac. Esau hated Jacob. Joseph was loathed by his brothers. Saul feared David. And the Pharisees dreaded the growth of Christ's movement. 

We have every reason to recognize it for what it is . . . and yet, here in this "advanced" year of 2021, we see, playing out, the most baldly insidious fomenting of division in human history. We have division, for division's sake. We seem to want to be divided, simply because we like being divided. It's a fake and malicious sense that we become important if we are divided. 

The Apostle Paul articulated the most fundamental form of human division: Those in God's Kingdom (and possessing eternal life), versus those outside of it (mortal). 

And Paul says that God wishes to break down this barrier between us and them. 

If that is the case . . . shouldn't we actively, and aggressively, topple the superficial walls between us today, that have such potential to yield irreversible catastrophe?

Mercy, etc.

Mercy and truth have met together; righteousness and peace have kissed each other. 

 - From Psalm 85

Look at these concepts that are grouped together. They belong together. They cannot be separated out, and merged back into other concepts, that are inconsistent with any of the other words in the group. 

Mercy

Truth

Righteousness

Peace

We find here, two words that are probably overused in our time. Or rather, they are used too much, without consideration of the two other words in the list. 

Yes we should have mercy, all right. We have been lacking mercy, and it's a systemic problem. The problem of merciless humans predates the foundation of the United States, since before recorded time. And when all that's left of the USA is ashes, still there will be a problem, a systemic problem, of a lack of mercy among humans. 

Racism derives from lack of mercy. Divorce. Abortion. Poverty. Homelessness. If people were merciful, as they should be, they would take care of these things. But you can't legislate mercy. You can't force people to be merciful. Yes, for a finite period of time, you may tax, and then force people to act as though they have mercy. But that doesn't change what's in their hearts. Real mercy proceeds from hearts that actually feel, and willfully choose, mercy. In fact, government coercion to act merciful probably creates more systemic mercilessness . . . because what it really does to many human hearts, is create resentment. 

It also would be nice to have peace. We all want peace. But this is the same as saying, we want to be left alone. We want to be able to pursue happiness in our families, success in careers, pleasure in our hobbies. Just leave us alone . . . that is peace for all of us. But when our peace is mandated from outside us, we are no longer at peace. Being forced to do something you don't want to do, is not peace. And of course, people in want, the hungry, the homeless . . . it can never be said that they are at peace. Their daily path is too dictated by their circumstances. When we start committing violent and destructive acts, out of frustration for the lack of "peace," we're only making the problem worse. We're making it eveb more systemic. You can't advance peace by being violent. You can't tear things down, and get in the faces of innocent strangers, out on the street. You can't tear symbols down, that have positive meaning to uncountable hosts of good people. That's not peace. 

There's a whole lot more to it. 

Truth, and Righteousness.

You can't get to Truth, if dialogue is shut down. We humans are too error-prone. We need each other, to check our assumptions and challenge our theories. We have to have open minds and open community discourse. When you insist on your truth, you're promoting anti-truth. (And I realize that I have just made a hot-button statement that will make some people recoil. Please share your thoughts in the comments section and let's go deeper.)

Your Mercy, Peace, and Truth are null and void, without righteousness. Case in point: the problem of politicians getting a blank check to say whatever they want, and do whatever they want, because of their "side's" skill at circling wagons. We're great at rooting out corruption on the other side, but horrible when it comes to our own side. Corruption should not be tolerated! Ever! 

Righteousness means honesty, integrity, ethics, morality. And if you want to know whatever it is you might be doing, that, frankly, doesn't "look good" or pass the "smell test," just ask someone else to level with you, honestly. Ask someone on the other side. And then make a covenant with yourself, to avoid doing what looks bad, even when your opponent is the one noticing it!

Mercy, Peace, Truth, and Righteousness. You can't have one without the other three. Not really. 

Conspired

Amos has conspired against you . . . 

 - From Amos 7

What is this fascination with the word "conspired"?

We don't handle correction very well. Differing opinions are challenging enough. We think it's cool when someone says something like "I aim to comfort the afflicted, and afflict the comfortable." But we get mad when, in our comfort, someone afflicts us. 

How we hate being wrong. We hate it so much we'll fight back any time someone suggests a different, better path for us. We'd rather continue in error than admit that we were wrong on something. 

One of our tactics is to accuse the person troubling us, of "conspiring." Again . . . what's the big deal with the word "conspiring"? And what makes it such a horrible thing to be accused of?

When people won't listen to reason, maybe conspiring is the only option left, to fix things!

If I ask questions dealing in ethics, or morality, or criminality, or even basic wisdom, it is not "conspiring." It isn't trading in "conspiracy theories." 

Most people starting off to point out ethical or process problems are not trying to get someone in trouble. They're not trying to stir the pot, or show off how smart they are. Most of the time, they're sincerely just trying to make a correction, so that later on . . . good people don't get into trouble. 

But people get defensive, they push back . . . they even fight back . . . and it's on. Heals are dug in, and it becomes more about saving face than getting to something better. 

We need to stop using the word "conspiracy" so much. People get to ask questions. 

Ascending Together

Those who have clean hands and a pure heart, who have not pledged themselves to falsehood,  nor sworn by what is a fraud. 

 - From Psalm, 24

As my readers know, I like to break biblical statements down into their individual components, to see what simple points are made, and to let the stark meanings of words, emerge to the forefront. 

The passage is answering some basic questions: Who will get to ascend God's holy hill? Who is worthy for fellowship with the Almighty? Who gets to enter into eternal rest and reward?

The requisite requirements are clean hands and a pure heart. Nothing new there. 

But it's these other words in the selected phrase that should be a little awkward, in 2021, to consider:

• Not pledged
• Falsehood
• Sworn
• Fraud

I could stop right here, and the people that have the most to worry about, when these concepts are suggested, will be the ones that immediately go on the defensive. 

Rather than agree that, yes, of course we do not want to pledge, or promise, or align with falsehood. or yes, we certainly should not covenant with fraud; they will launch into a rant against this or that political leader, or political philosophy, or race, or position of privilege. For whatever reason, a commitment to truth, or a resistance to fraud, is considered parallel to other ideals, in their minds, which they believe to be personally threatening to them, or to their loved ones, or to some other group that they do not know, but that they believe aligning with is the same as being a "good" person. 

But shouldn't we all just agree that, yes, we will NOT endorse lies. And Yes, we do NOT want fraud to prevail? 

And then, go from there . . . together?

By what bizarre eternal sleight-of-hand, would it be deemed right, for lies and fraud to have a seat of honor at a Heavenly table?

Let us begin with the realization that, as humans, we all do not deserve such a place in God's realm. It is such an understanding, and the owning of it, that is the first step towards being worthy of such a status. 

It should be so simple to agree - Lies are bad. And we don't want fraud. 

Period. 

 . . . rather than to get our feelings hurt by the mere suggestion of it . . . 

Leaders vs Winners of Popularity Contests

For some time, while Saul was king over us, it was you who led out Israel and brought it in. 

 - From 2 Samuel 5

The word "democracy" gets tossed around a lot these days. Everybody claims it, but in the end they only prefer it, when they get their way. When someone else, or another idea, wins the vote, these people will claim that Democracy itself is under attack. 

That's a fail of the Education System.

Democracy is just the rule of the majority, that's all. And the majority can be corrupt. Based on my memories of the schoolyard, Democracy usually is corrupt. A band of kids can decide to isolate one of them - we used to call it "ganging up" - and for a period of time, shun the poor kid. They might even engage in physical violence against the kid. There was no rhyme or reason to it. It strictly proceeded from Groupthink gone awry. 

Let's face it: Adults do the same thing. In the workplace. In clubs and associations. Even when it comes to youth sports, as coaches - adults engage in the same childish behavior. We are, at our root, insecure. If we can band with others, we are willing to dispense with some ethical parameters that we know are good, in order to keep the crowd together, and pleased with us. 

Bullies operate, by manipulate crowds, in this same way. But even a bully can be turned on by the crowd. 

Here we have the nation of Israel. It's boundaries and laws had not been fully codified yet. There was a king - Saul - that had titular reign. He had been popular once, but his weakness of character, over time, showed him to be an ineffective leader. 

David, however, based on his life of humility and genuine connection with others, had the permanent trust and esteem of the people. Saul was the official king. But David was the true leader of the nation. 

Democracy may get us a titular "leader." But it very well may be that the true leaders are out among us. They do not seek power. They do not desire lordship over others. But the people grant them that level of trust, anyway, based on other things. 

There are a lot of reason why someone may win an election. We err in thinking that the winners of these political games are, in fact, "leaders." 

Especially in these times of civic discord, we should be careful to find the ones of great character: humility, gravitas, integrity, honesty, genuineness; and treat them as the true leaders they are. We are not required to follow, blindly, the winners of popularity contests and their acolytes.