Cautious Christianity v. Kingdom Christianity

I blogged about risk-taking in my last post, When Safe Sucks.  I’ve decided to camp out around this subject of risk-taking for a three-part series because I think it an important subject for Christians.

I think it important  for Christians because Christians, are, on the whole, one of the most conservative and cautious groups of people I know.  Maybe you can think of  a more cautious group.  Perhaps the financial consultants for AARP are more cautious. I don’t know.

It puzzles me though that the Church doesn’t produce more risk-takers. Think about it. You can only enter the kingdom of God as a citizen if you are willing to lose your life (i.e. to save it). (Matthew 10:39).  Kingdom citizenship is an all or nothing proposition. Jesus said, “No one, after putting his hand to the plow and looking back, is fit for the kingdom of God.” (Luke 9:62).

And yet, after risking it all to enter the Kingdom, once inside Christians are subjected to the culture of cautiousness that permeates the Church, and they begin to play it safe.  They opt for cautious Christianity over Kingdom Christianity.

I understand why it happens.  So much of morality is premised on restraint and moderation that it’s easy to see caution as a common denominator and virtue and therefore, its opposite, risk, as a vice.

But risk, like money, is amoral. It can be used for good or bad, to save or destroy. And to disavow it, like taking a vow of poverty, can be to place a roadblock on the path of one’s destiny. Sometimes the only way forward is across a dangerous stretch of road, or through a raging river. Unfortunately, too many Christians have stopped on the bank, having forgotten how to risk it all to go forward.

Christians should be known as the greatest risk-takers. They have the promise of a Divine Enabler (Philippians 4:13), a Divine Indweller (Romans 8:11) and a cosmic safety net (Romans 8:28).

When’s the last time you risked something for the kingdom of God? GS

When Safe Sucks

Safety is usually a good thing.  We like safe cars, safe airlines and safety locks on guns.  We seek safe investments, safe places to live and safe schools for our kids.  We seek more income because we believe it will make us more safe and secure.  We buy insurance in case the unexpected occurs.  We are constantly looking for ways to reduce risk, and that is usually a good thing.

There are times, however, when being safe is not a good thing, like when God is calling you to take a risk.  The Bible records that one Spring “at the time when kings go out to battle” King David stayed home in Jerusalem.  (2 Sam. 11:1).

Staying in Jerusalem was certainly the safe thing to do.  It was a lot less likely David would be run through with a spear or have his melon lopped off  in Jerusalem than on the battlefield, but it was “the time when kings go out to battle.”  It was a time for King David to take a risk and lead his people into battle.  It was his calling.  Instead  David played it safe by staying in Jerusalem, ended up being in the wrong place at the wrong time, which led to horrible moral failings.

Hebrews 11 contains a list of heroes from the Bible, people who out of obedience to God did things like leaving the security of a home to go to a foreign land without knowing where they were going or what awaited them; or others who left a life of luxury in the Pharaoh’s court to be a deliverer to an oppressed people; or others still who shut the mouths of lions, willingly endured torture and suffered death.

The Bible celebrates these men and women as having achieved greatness in the eyes of God and men, but they would not have, and they would not have been remembered, had they not been risk-takers.  Had they not been willing to take a risk they would not have fulfilled their destiny.

Being safe is usually a good thing, except when God calls you to take a risk.  Then safe sucks. GS

The Secret To Early Morning Devotionals

2010 © Gregory Scott

Today was a very productive day. I awoke at 4:00 a.m. (an hour earlier than usual), read the Bible, the New York Times, finished reading a book and began a new book. After doing all that, I was at the office by 7:30 a.m. (Yes, on a Saturday).

I know many Christians struggle to consistently spend time in morning prayer and Bible study. We know the morning is really the best time for a devotional because it gets one in the right frame of mind for the day.

There’s even support for it in the Bible: “O God, Thou art my God; early I will seek Thee.” (Psalm 63:1 KJV). But many find it difficult to get up early enough in the morning for a devotional before work.

Many years ago I learned the secret of having a consistent morning devotional. It’s not a gimmick or a teaching that merely tickles the ears.  It actually works, and it works pretty much every time.

It doesn’t take any practice to get it down, and it’s easy to remember and replicate. You won’t find it in many books because it’s so simple you couldn’t write a book on it; you couldn’t even write a chapter on it.

The secret is this:  Go to bed early the night before.

It is that simple.  Here’s how it works.  Figure out how much sleep you need.  When I was younger, I needed eight hours; now I’m good on six.  That means if I’m to get up at 5:00 a.m., I need to be in bed by 11:00 p.m. the night before.  That’s it.  And it works pretty much every time.  If you need eight hours sleep, you need to be in bed by 9:00 p.m.  People working the night shift and odd hours figured this one out long ago.

If you were expecting a deep teaching on how Christians have been given a Spirit of discipline (which is true), or how you can believe the Holy Spirit to wake you in the morning without an alarm clock, I’m sorry to disappoint.  But if you think me unspiritual, remember Jesus said, “Wisdom is shown to be right by its results.”  (Matt. 11:19 NLT).  Now get to bed. GS

Worldviews In The Jury Room

(c)iStockphoto.com/3pod

Yesterday I was in a CLE (Continuing Legal Education) course. CLE is how lawyers keep their skills honed and keep up on this latest changes in the law. Today was a day long mock trial conducted by some of the best trial lawyers in the country, complete with a jury who deliberated at the end of the day in the adjacent room while I and 200 trial lawyers watched via live video.

While the jury ultimately reached the right verdict (juries usually do), how they got there was a bit surprising to me. From the beginning I saw the jury divide in their deliberations according to worldview.

The conservative jurors were obvious and their remarks quickly revealed their inherent trust of companies and distrust of plaintiffs and lawsuits. On the other side were the liberal jurors, who have an inherent distrust for corporations and tend to side with individuals in such disputes. They all heard the same evidence, but they interpreted it very differently, not because of the quality of the evidence but the prism of their worldview.

This shouldn’t have surprised me. I’ve been picking juries for twenty years and have always conducted voir dire based on this assumption. I guess what surprised me was how blatant and conspicuous it was.

Now, here’s where I’m going with all this. There was an objective truth about the evidence, but that truth was distorted by the opposing worldviews through which the jurors viewed it. The key in reaching a true verdict was as much about having the correct worldview as it was about reason. Truth was as much about how they saw as what they saw.

In this respect, what’s true of juries is true of life in general. That’s why I write so much about worldview. If Christians want to see things the way they really are, they don’t need a conservative worldview or a liberal worldview but a Kingdom worldview. That worldview comes first from being obedient to Jesus, which enables one to have the proper worldview, to know Truth. (John 8:32-22).

If you can do that, you are ready to serve on a jury and in life. GS

What I Learned About God From My Cat

My Cat, Godfrey 2010 (c) Gregory Scott

My cat, Godfrey, was not happy with me.   It was time for dinner, he was hungry and I hadn’t fed him.  So, each time I walked into the kitchen he ran over to me, cried, ran back to where we feed him and then looked back over his shoulder at me.  I got it, but he didn’t think I got it.

I couldn’t feed him because he was going to the veterinarian the next day for an endoscopy.  You see, Godfrey tends to toss his cookies and the endoscopy was supposed to help us understand why.  The problem is Godfrey didn’t understand all that.

I tried to explain it to him.  I told him he couldn’t eat because if he ate, the endoscopy wouldn’t work, and if the endoscopy didn’t work we wouldn’t be able to see what was wrong with him, and if we couldn’t see what was wrong with him, he would keep barfing.  But I could tell he didn’t get it.  He just sat there staring at me, meowing plaintively.

I tried speaking very slowly. I’ve even spelled it out for him, e-n-d-o-s-c-o-p-y, but it wasn’t registering.  He knew I loved him and fed him every day, and it didn’t make sense to him why I was not feeding him this night.

The thing is, Godfrey is a smart cat. When he wants me to hold him he gets up next to me and taps me on the shoulder with his paw.  When he wants a certain type of food, he walks into the pantry and taps on the bag with his paw.  But he doesn’t see and think on the level of complexity that I, as a human being, can, and I can’t explain it to him in any way that will satisfy him.

I’m confident God is farther above us than I am above Godfrey.  If He wasn’t we would probably be disappointed in Him.  I suspect that also means there are some painful things we go through that, as much as God may want to explain, we are not capable of understanding.  He sees so much and understands the cause and effect of things on a much higher level of complexity than we could ever understand.  So, instead, at times, He just asks us to trust Him.

Now if I can just figure out how to explain that to Godfrey. GS