Work In Progress

Mike Erre, teaching pastor of Rock Harbor Church in Costa Mesa, CA, and noted author, wrote a book titled, Why Guys Need God. This book has much to say about the innate struggle that there is something wrong with man (more specifically men), why they chase after things (bigger paychecks, better homes, women) to define who they are as men. I realize not everyone struggles with these issues, but maybe you have at one time or another. I know that I'd be lying if I said that these issues weren't still a constant tug-o-war for me personally.

Before I begin, let me say that it is only recently (unfortunately) that I realized everything pales in comparison to Scripture when looking for true answers, true direction and true healing. I find myself drawn to Scripture more these days than prior, but only because I realized that most of the secondary resources I turned to only offered a shadow of the real thing. Nevertheless, I believe God has given His people the ability to write and share their hearts. It's through those writings we find ourselves and it is in those places we share commonality with others who have been where we are now and maybe where we once were.

Erre quotes psychologist Larry Crab (The Silence of Adam: Becoming Men of Courage in a World of Chaos) who argues men generally relate to others in one of two fundamental patterns. Some guys are ruled by a passion for neediness and others by a passion for toughness. This idea says first that men who are ruled by neediness require something from people and relationships in their lives. Secondly, men ruled by toughness go the opposite extreme and pretend not to need anyone at all. Immediately, the image of these two men look something like a twenty-five year old "emo" kid who is still waiting around for his garage band to make it big (meanwhile writing sad songs that are so artistic nobody understand them) while the other is a mixture William Wallace (Braveheart) meets Maximus Decimus Aurelius (Gladiator). Who doesn't want to be the latter?

Erre argues that both types are controlling and manipulative.......and both need the redemption of Jesus to reorient themselves to others. Things have changed these days since it seems like today men are supposed to be more sensitive, tenderhearted, caring as opposed to the days my dad grew up in that said real men don't need anyone and they definitely don't cry. This guys' need is obvious and has not chosen to mask it. Nevertheless, Erre states that both men are needy.

"The tough guy is needy because he demands something from his relationships Something within them is broken or missing, and they insist that others meet that need. They require those around them to treat them or respond to them in a certain way. These men manipulate others (consciously or not) in order to get the desired response from them. They may appear incredibly masculine, or come across as having it all together, bu their aim is the same regardless of their appearance: They want to get something from another person" (p. 149).

Prior to this I would have never described myself as needy. I know it's hard for people to believe that I'm not the typification of masculinity, but I've never been needy or dependent on any particular person for affirmation (or at least I thought). While reading this book, what began to hit me was that I want approval. For one reason or another, and for as much as I fend it off now, I don't feel as if I ever have enough. Growing up I wanted the approval of my parents, my teachers, my coaches, my friends, and girls. Now, it falls mostly on my wife and maybe some people I deem the need to be considered worthy. If you're like me, you've probably bought the lie that says the desire to rule over others only plays itself out in the form of abuse (emotionally, verbally, physically, sexually) that demands submission. What I've realized is that I too have abused power and control.

Erre says, "When we are weak, broken, and needy, we desire, above all else, to escape and feel differently" (p.152). In essence, when we encounter areas of weakness, we quickly move to areas of strength. This kind of strength is not a place where we're built up, but rather it's the place in which we feel we can control, manipulate, and have power over the situation. These areas are often avenues for sin. It's why men compete. Well, it's probably not the only reason, but through competition we finally get to measure ourselves up against others. This can be a good thing, but it most definitely can be a bad thing. Just last night I was sharing with my wife how I feel like I'm always comparing. I compare my life, my age, my job, my hair loss, my car, you name it....I compared it. It's often the reason why some guys shy away from it all together. The fear of never measuring up can be frustrating and ultimately leave you insecure about the thing in which men are concerned with most around other men...........their manhood. Erre says that, "Somewhere deep within his soul, every man struggles to feel adequate. Manhood is made, not born" (p.152).

In essence, the natural tendency of a man's heart is to run from weakness into some form of strength that always turns out to be a shadow of the real thing. Until I noticed my weakness is not what defines me or that it isn't a mark against my masculinity, did I began to strive less to control my situation or have power over things and people. I'm the first to admit that I haven't arrived. In my mind I've barely even progressed, but I know that my source of strength, as a man, comes only through Christ who has set me free from being enslaved to my sin as well as the need to feel adequate because in Him is my identity found.

If this post seems at all scatter brained, it's because it was. I just knew I had to get what was going on in my head out of me so that just maybe I could make any sense of it. I guess I just needed to see the work in progress. Romans 8:28

Happy St. Patrick's Day!

I like food! There, I said it in case anyone thought otherwise. Growing up you would have thought I didn't since I was such a picky eater (don't judge me). Everything I ordered was plain, dry, or sweet. Those were the standards in my younger years. I can't say why I was this way (other than the fact that my mom let me), but I do know to this day I have issues with texture (cursed coconut with your delicious flavor and flaky texture!). If it doesn't have a good consistency, I usually don't like it. However, since my wife has been in my life she's introduced me to many different foods (mostly against my will). I can't say I like everything, but my horizons have definitely been broadened (Jessica: "That's debatable.").

All that to say, most people who celebrate St. Patrick's Day will be enjoying the Irish-American tradition of eating corned beef and cabbage. A meal to which I do not like. I can deal with the cabbage and the potatoes and carrots, but it's that corned beef that I cannot stand. I'm not much of a brisket eater since I do not like fatty (sponge-like) portions of meat, so it could be the reason I have such a distaste for corned beef. I can honestly say that I never had it growing up since my mom never made it and I can't ever recall going to someone's house to eat this nasty meat (to which I most assuredly would have declined).

(Interesting fact: In the late 1800's corned beef was originally used as a substitute for bacon by Irish-American immigrants because of the limited supply and cost of pork.)

(Interesting thought: If this were the case, then why not switch back to pork? I mean, I liked Top Ramen noodles back in the day because they were cheap and everywhere, but I'm not eating them anymore if I don't have to. I'm just saying.)

Now, I like pastrami, which I know is the same meat cooked and prepared differently. If that were the tradition I would definitely eat it then. Or maybe if it were bacon and cabbage, like the Irish eat it, then I'd definitely have my portion. But for some reason corned beef doesn't make my list of most desirable food (it's one below eggplant, and two below chile rellenos). So, last night at our regular "Tuesday Night Dinner @ Nana's", we brought our own dinner..........the oh so deliciously tasting......In-N-Out! I know it must be a sin or something to bring your own dinner to a place that 51 out of 52 weeks serves amazingly prepared food, but we did.

So, I think our new St. Patrick's Day traditional meal will now be In-N-Out. I don't think it's such a bad idea. And if In-N-Out would just supply bacon to their burgers it would be perfect!

Detachment

I think most of us like to be detached of things in which bring about negative associations or simply things that might cause others to think poorly about our character. I read many blogs, but not many blog replies. This was a reply that I read today that I wanted to share.

"If sin is just "doing bad things," then the cure is behavioral modification. But if sin is "being a bad thing" then the *only* cure is the gospel."

I think misguided Christians painstakingly attempt to modify behaviors simply so that the outer appearance is changed, but in essence leaves the inner part (the most important part), completely unchanged. I'm reminded of this as the house that I rent continues to fall apart. It's been raining off and on and I happened to go into the garage (which I never do) and there was a puddle of water gathered in the middle. I walked into my wash room and the roof was leaking there as well. In the past we've found termites, mold, and even a rat! I know it sounds like we live in a slum, but you wouldn't think so by looking at the outward appearance. Painting over and over again only masks the symptoms and true problems my house faces. Oh the similarity to most of our lives (believers and unbelievers).

I think we have completely detached the fact that we sin because we are sinners and not sinners because we sin. If we operate with the notion that sin is something like a bad habit, well then it doesn't take a supernatural healing to be free from it. People who do not know Christ do it all the time. But if sin is an outcome of our rebellious heart, then the real issue has nothing to do with modifying behavior but with submitting to the fact that we are in desperate need of reconciliation. We can't see our desperate need of a Savior if we don't first recognize our fundamental sinfulness that encompasses who we are internally without Christ.

So, we detach it because it seems to work. It seems to work because people are being fooled by it. But the real question is: Who really is the fool?

I Doubt It

Doubt seems to be in all of us, yet we don't like to admit it. The questions of "why" are masked with the "pretend like they don't exist" because we don't want to look foolish or maybe simply because we want to have all the answers. There is this belief that the opposite of faith is doubt. It makes sense.......if doubt were not the opposite of certainty. I submit that faith is not the opposite of doubt, but rather the opposite of sight.

Hebrews 11:1 says, "Now faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see." "So, if faith is trusting in what you cannot see, then the opposite of faith is sight - only trusting in what you can see (The Jesus of Suburbia, p. 84)." 2 Corinthians 5:7 says, "We live by faith, not by sight." What's the implication? The implication is that to live by sight requires no faith at all. No trust in God, whom we cannot see, but rather trust in ourselves and our own eyes, which we use to make many of our decisions.

I think what Christianity has done on a large part is say that faith and doubt cannot coexist. You either have one or the other. What I think that's done is caused many people, believers or not, feel like they're wrong for having questions, wrong for doubting, and even unbiblical for not having "enough" faith.

Tim Keller (The Reason for God) says that, "A faith without doubts is like a human body without any antibodies in it. People who blithely go through life too busy or indifferent to ask hard questions about why they believe as they do will find themselves defenseless against either the experience of tragedy or the probing questions of a smart skeptic. A person's faith can collapse almost overnight if she has failed over the years to listen patiently to her own doubts, which should only be discarded after long reflection (p. xvii)."

A man who's child was possessed by an evil spirit comes to Jesus in Mark 9 and pleads with Him to heal his boy. Jesus says anything is possible for those who believe. His response was that he did believe, but his plea with Jesus was to help him with his unbelief.

Charles Spurgeon once said, "While men have no faith, they are unconscious of their unbelief; but, as soon as they get a little faith, then they begin to be conscious of the greatness of their unbelief.”

I believe in all cases, believers should acknowledge and wrestle with doubts. I believe that it should be a regular thing. To understand an infinite Being with a limited and finite brain is utter mystery. I also believe Jesus knew the man's faith in Mark 9 for it was evident by the fact that he even came to Him for help. This man may not have understood Jesus fully, but He did believe (although unexplainable as to why other than what he heard) Jesus had the power and even desired it so that his son might be saved. A statement like "help my unbelief" can only be said by faith. If you didn't have any, why would you ask for the impossible?

All that said, I believe faith and doubt can coexist. I believe it allows for honesty and authenticity. But what I believe it allows for the most is growth. Growth in the saving knowledge of Jesus Christ so that we too may learn to trust Him even when we don't have all the answers and even when we cannot see.