Random thoughts from a seeker of Truth.

Be sure to look for my books, too!

Monday, May 24, 2010

May 24, 2010 Airing out the Dirty Linen

“We have all become like one who is unclean, and all our righteous deeds are like a filthy cloth. We all fade like a leaf, and our iniquities, like the wind, take us away. There is no one who calls on your name, or attempts to take hold of you; for you have hidden your face from us, and have delivered us into the hand of our iniquity. Yet, O Lord, you are our Father; we are the clay, and you are our potter; we are all the work of your hand (Isaiah 64:6-8 New Revised Standard Version).”

The passage is quoted often, many times in conjunction with a teaching about the necessity of salvation by grace, rather than works. Even our righteous acts, the very best deeds we have to offer God, in comparison with his holiness, are “like a filthy cloth.”

Once when I was a little girl, my family was visiting the couple in the apartment a few doors down from us. While the adults played cards at the table, I entertained myself by drawing. I’d seen several variations of a magazine ad that impressed me—beautiful women in expensive gowns, elegant above a particular phrase that, at about six or seven, held no meaning for me. When I sketched my own rendition, getting the lady’s hair and makeup just so, I printed the phrase at the bottom and handed it to my mother, expecting praise. Instead, she burst out laughing and handed it to her friend, who also laughed. Under the drawing of an elegant woman, I had carefully written “Modess…because.” Modess was, of course, a manufacturer of feminine hygiene products- I was completely clueless.

Scholars point out that the phrase “filthy cloth” is from the Hebrew meaning soiled menstrual cloths—a word picture some might find offensive or shocking. Even today, when "female" products are routinely displayed on television with much less subtlety than in those old Modess ads, there are those who regard such discussion as unfit for “polite” company.

Certainly there are plenty of other words he could have used for filth—from rusty to excremental. There’s even a specific word for “morally corrupt” which is what most people think when they read the passage. What was he thinking?!

Get over it. Isaiah used the phrase he wanted, for good reasons.

The concept of being unclean comes from the Law of Moses. A Jewish woman was ceremonially unclean during her monthly period (or if she had an issue of blood at other times). She was not to be touched, and anyone touching her would also be unclean. Her bed was unclean, wherever she sat was unclean. Many of the laws were, in effect, a health code, similar to rules we see posted today (e.g. “employees must wash hands with hot water”).

The children of Israel lived in the wilderness, away from large quantities of running water. Precautions were taken so that disease did not spread. (Keeping a woman isolated from contact until after days after her period was over was also a strategic method for maintaining a growing population.) Just as not every skin spot was leprous but each was treated as being so, so as to prevent the spread of leprosy, every monthly period was treated as a potential germ threat.

From one perspective, Isaiah was saying that all of the good things we do apart from God, in our own strength, are potential disease-carriers. Self-righteousness can spread quickly, with devastation in its wake, among the people of God. When we get the idea that we are responsible for good results, blessings, answers to prayer, ministry, etc. trouble is sure to make an appearance, because God actively opposes the proud in heart (James 4:6). It isn’t enough to know this and try to keep self-righteousness to a minimum; Isaiah wants us to consider it all “unclean” so as to avoid potential problems.

Recently, though, I was reading an author’s take on this passage, and another thought struck me. The writer, a man, said that he couldn’t think of anything more disgusting than Isaiah’s word picture. As a woman, who has dealt with God’s design for women on an up close and personal basis for many, many years, I disagree. How can something that God designed be disgusting? I personally would have likened our good works to a diaper full of diarrhea (pee-ew) or towels that have wiped up vomit (gag), but I understand that many folks (at least the men folks) would catch Isaiah’s drift from his analogy.

Being disgusted at the author’s disgust, however, started me thinking in another direction. What else does a monthly flow of blood signify? In the culture of Isaiah, women were regarded more lowly when they were barren. Every month, they hoped that the flow would not come—not because they wanted to avoid PMS jokes—but because it meant they were pregnant. For the woman who had prayed for years, each month’s period must have been incredibly disheartening and discouraging, proof of her fruitlessness once more.

Think about good deeds. Obviously people—even those who are far from God and have ulterior motives—are capable of such deeds. When tragedy strikes around the globe, armies of helpers from every walk of life join hands to render aid. There are multimillionaires who have profited from sin and lawlessness who nevertheless “do good” with some of that money. The starving man doesn’t care that the food offered to him is tainted by “man’s righteousness.” A dying child isn’t concerned that the surgeon working to save her life is not a Christian.

“Good” things are done apart from Jesus, but only from an eternal perspective will the complete and final fruit of those deeds be seen. It reminds me of James 1:19’s command to be slow in anger, because the anger of man doesn’t bring about God’s righteousness. He doesn’t say it, but it’s true: the anger of man may not result in godliness, but it does get results. An angry mom can whip a household into a flurry of activity…voila! clean house…but also wounds. Scars. Fear and resentment. In the same way, an angry boss may scream his way into increased production from his employees, but he has also lost their respect.

Man’s anger gets results but not the results God intended. Man’s acts of righteousness get results too; however, the fruit of these good works is nothing like the fruit of God’s righteousness. Compared with God’s holiness and purity, the best we can offer is lifeless and barren, good only to be thrown away. And yet, when we come before him, wrapped in our dirty linen, the rags that prove there is no new life, he washes us with the blood that is life, the shed blood of Jesus. He invites us to participate with him in acts of righteousness that will yield lasting fruit.

Jesus…because. Now there’s a phrase that won’t ever be dated.
Permission to reprint with acknowledgement of source.

Monday, May 10, 2010

May 10, 2010 The Freedom to Un-Box

Recently I was answering questions on a study guide for a Bible study, and I got mad at one of them. The two-part question went something like this—

A. Which are you more likely to do tonight: (1) watch television, (2) read a book, or (3) spend time with the Lord? (My answer? “TV.”)

B. What does your answer tell you about yourself and your walk with God?
(My answer? “Not a dadblame thing.” Actually, I used a shorter, more colorful word to reflect my attitude, and I was sort of looking forward to discussing it at Bible study. For some reason, it never came up.)

The question’s offensiveness was the implication that one standard for behavior exists, an idea that is not only unbiblical, but which also fairly reeks of man’s thinking and religiosity. The writer stopped short of calling anyone spiritually shallow or inferior if they didn’t attend nightly prayer meetings, but the whole concept of putting people into boxes, to presume to put God into a box, gets my knickers in a twist. So to speak.

But let’s think about it. If God were truly first in your life, wouldn’t you be on your face before him, every opportunity you had? I think not. Jesus, during his time on earth, was one with the Father and full of the Holy Spirit. He also spent a lot of time with other people— tax collectors, prostitutes, fishermen, teachers of the Law, little children. In John 5:19 Jesus said he only did what he saw the Father doing. Which means those “nonspiritual” things…sitting around the campfire at night with the sons of Zebedee, enjoying a meal with Lazarus… were on the Father’s heart as well.
Obviously Jesus drew apart for times of personal communion, but I doubt he kept a prayer journal or felt guilty if he didn’t start at 6:30am every morning. (Not that there’s anything wrong with journals or early prayer. It’s just that we have this annoying human tendency to regard our personal convictions as the Best Method For Holy Living, maybe even write a book about it, and miss the whole point.)

Paul had a tent-making business. Peter had a family. The jailer who was converted in Acts 16 showed up for work the next morning. If we’re walking in peace with, and obedience to, God, aren’t we spending time with him whether we’re standing behind a pulpit or a sitting behind a steering wheel? Whether we’re on our knees praying to the Lord or on our knees cleaning a floor? If we are called to “Do all to the glory of God” (1 Corinthians 11:7) doesn’t it follow that all our actions falling within the scope of obedience (i.e. not sinful) and done with thankful hearts do, in fact, bring him glory? Taking the kids to school, studying for a test, enjoying an afternoon nap, sitting down to a meal, having sex with your wife….for the believer, these all have the potential for glorifying God.

A French monk in the 17th century by the name of Brother Lawrence discovered that devotion to God didn’t have to ebb and flow according to circumstances. Even when he stumbled (physically, he was crippled; spiritually, he was imperfect), he found that with practice, he could maintain an equally strong focus on and fellowship with God when he washed dishes alone and when he worshipped corporately. He realized he could freely converse with God within his heart regardless of what he was doing physically, seeking to maintain that communion always. A little book of his letters entitled The Practice of the Presence of God, published after his death in 1691, continues to challenge and inspire today.

Could a constant flow of relationship with the Creator of the universe really be that simple? That all-consuming?

Brother Lawrence would, no doubt, have responded differently to that pesky study question than I did. To part B- what do your choices tell you about yourself—he might have said, “Anything about myself is of no consequence…it is only God and his glory that matter.”

Do all to the glory of God. Whatever he leads you to do at the moment. I’ll try not to judge you; you try not to judge me.

Deal?

Permission to use with acknowledgement of source

ellenofgillette1@aol.com


Monday, April 26, 2010

April 26, 2010 What Would Jesus Do...About Television?

I grew up with sitcoms like “The Andy Griffith Show,” “Hazel,” “Leave it to Beaver,” and “Father Knows Best.” (Actually, when I was very young, we lived in a valley that had spotty reception, so my experience with the shows came in later incarnations as reruns.) Whereas at one time there was quite the scandal about Jeannie’s belly button (“I Dream of Jeannie”) and Rob and Laura’s sleeping arrangements (“The Dick Van Dyke Show”), things have taken a much more graphic turn these days. Only the laugh track is the same.

Those who know me know that I’m no prude—if anything, I probably err in the opposite direction in terms of openness about certain issues. As an adult, I can handle adult conversation and adult themes, even adult beverages, within the appropriate contexts. This week, however, I became convinced that if I never see another sitcom again, it won’t bother me a bit.

When my teenagers became faithful followers of “Friends,” I watched with them. The writing was tight, the actors believable, and the jokes were actually funny. It didn’t portray a godly lifestyle, but at least there were positive story lines. Compared with what I heard Monday night last week, “Friends” was mild indeed. (Sort of like watching the Beatles at the beginning, when everyone thought they were so wild-looking then and they seem so clean-cut now).

Flipping through the channels, it amazed me how—with a gazillion channels available—there was really nothing I wanted to watch. “House” was over and I’ve never seen “24”, so what was the alternative? Sadly, I stopped in to visit “Two and a Half Men.” I haven’t seen males giggle over the names for female body parts since 8th grade. I couldn’t stomach more than about five minutes before switching over to “Romantically Challenged.” Apparently Hollywood thinks spanking fetishes are hilarious. Dishonesty and promiscuity…oh, what fun!

Perhaps it was because of those distasteful, albeit brief, forays into popular television that beckoned me to try “Glee” out two nights later. I’d seen a few of its shows at the start but when teenage pregnancy, deception, homosexuality, and outright meanness began overshadowing the excellent musical numbers, I’d closed the curtain. (Those are important issues to address, no question—just not what I look for in a bit of light escapism.) The “Madonna” episode had been promoted so heavily, however, I took the bait.

Other than the ongoing feud between the girls’ PE teacher and the Glee Club director, the episode revolved around three individuals struggling with sexuality, two of whom were underage. The adults involved (the man still married to someone else) never followed through, and the caring man encouraged the woman to get therapy for her “problem.” Apparently not-wanting-to-have-sex now equals mental instability. Viewers were left hoping that surely, surely, the young female lead and the young male lead will eventually get back together, regardless of with whom they had sex or with whom they’re not ready to have sex yet or who thinks they should have sex with whom. Do they ever have time for homework?

We’re not in Kansas any more, Toto.

Then they pulled out the WWMD bracelets. “What Would Madonna Do?” …that’s right…even though the “What Would Jesus Do” phenomena eventually reached the hokey stage, at its heart the intent—asking ourselves what Jesus would do in every situation--was wonderful…obviously something Hollywood needs to ridicule.

Laughing at ourselves isn’t all bad; Christians tend to take themselves far too seriously, in my opinion. But how did we get from wholesomeness and moral lessons told with humor and sensitivity (and much better writing), to making fun of sacred ideals?

A friend of mine once shared a story of a pristine white church building. Satan knew that if he poured black paint on it, everyone would be in an uproar. Instead, he took a spray bottle of paint and just spritzed it a little each day. Spritz. Spritz. In time…and it took a long time… the white took on a slightly gray tinge. Then a darker gray…by the time it was black, everyone was used to it.

My mother uses the word “jaded” to describe this…we’ve been introduced to alternatives to what we know is true in small doses, with expert subtlety. If I’d been watching the particular shows I mentioned all along (just the thought of wasting that much time makes me shudder), I may well have missed the message. Seeing them “fresh”…and so close together…the underlying error screamed with in-your-face hostility.

What Would Jesus Do? It’s not as simple as saying he wouldn’t watch television, or even that he wouldn’t watch “Two and a Half Men.” He might watch things you couldn’t pay me to see (horror movies, for example). I don’t presume to know what he would or wouldn’t do. I’m just saying that if I’m watching something that (a) isn’t even funny/helpful/uplifting (b) isn’t really entertaining, and/or (c) goes against all I believe, I can always just turn the darn thing off.

Or at least look for Andy and Opie on “Nick at Nite.”

Permission to use with acknowledgement of source.
ellenofgillette1@aol.com

Monday, April 12, 2010

April 12, 2010 A New National Pastime

“If we had no faults of our own, we should not take so much
pleasure in noticing those in others.”
Francois de La Rochefoucauld


“Why do you see the speck in your neighbor’s eye, but do not notice the log in your own eye? Or how can you say to your neighbor, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,” while the log is in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the log out of your
own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your neighbor’s eye.”
Jesus
Reality television has been around awhile, its roots in such shows as “Candid Camera” and game shows, increasing with writers’ strikes in 1988 and 1997. Whatever its origins, however, it shows all signs of being here to stay. What started with “Big Brother” has mushroomed into everything from “Trading Spouses” to “Intervention.” From the comfort of our couches or bedrooms we peer into the lives of those hoping to become the next celebrity dancer or vocalist, hoping to survive, hoping to win the race. We look at the nitty gritty details of the world’s dirtiest and most dangerous jobs. We go with scientists on expedition, doctors into surgery, ride with police officers arresting an endless parade of bad boys, bad boys, whatcha gonna do…

Our taste for so-called “reality” appears to know no bounds. Why, exactly, are we entertained by “Hoarders”? Each program introduces viewers to individuals or families currently burying themselves in their own squalor. They may be facing eviction, divorce, losing children to Social Services, or other crises because of their accumulation of…stuff.

We came across “Hoarders” not too long ago and have watched it a few times since. The first time, though, it was immediately clear what the draw is. None of us lives in a perfectly kept household (at least no one I know). One of my favorite magnets is the one that says “Dull women have immaculate houses”—and I’ve never been accused of being dull! When we see examples of extreme untidiness, larger than life (literally) piles of debris that confound even the professionals called in to help, it reaffirms what we knew all along: I’m not THAT bad.

Judging and comparing ourselves to others has become, with reality television, a national pastime. During “American Idol” auditions, we cringe at the poor unfortunates who think they’re on their way to stardom but who couldn’t carry a tune in a bucket. When they show up, buckets run the other way. “I’m not Idol material,” we think, “but at least I know it. And I sing a lot better than he/she does.”

We…yes, all of us…have dysfunctional families to some degree or another, but we “objectively” watch drama unfold with nannies and spouses and unfaithfulness and rebellious kids and we breathe a sigh a relief. Yes, we’ve got our share of drama on the home front, but at least it’s not like theirs.

The danger is obvious, in light of the quotes above. If we were perfect, we would be more tolerant of those who are not. If we followed Jesus as we should, we would take care of our own problems before “helping” others with theirs. Our focus should begin in our own hearts, with our own sins and failures. “Let him who is without sin, cast the first stone,” Jesus told the crowd who wanted to punish the woman caught in adultery (see John 8), an interesting and immediate way to thin out the would-be accusers. No one, in fact, threw a single pebble. Each person felt the conviction in his words; each thought of a secret sin he or she would not want publicly aired.

With reality television such as “Hoarders” we see people at their most vulnerable. Their “secret” sin is anything but, splashed across our widescreens in high definition. To reach that point, they must be desperate indeed. Not only do they realize they must get help, but they suffer our participation in the painful recovery process as they come to grips with why they feel it necessary to hang on to a gazillion rotting stuffed animals…or worse, rotting food with all the accompanying vermin associated. Professional counselors and organizers try…sometimes successfully, sometimes not…to bring lasting solutions.

Some believe that where John 8 mentions Jesus writing in the sand, he was writing the individual sins of the woman’s accusers for everyone to see. Today, the sins of the crowd become our “entertainment.”

Just keep that camera turned the other way, please.
Permission to reprint with acknowledgement of source.


Monday, March 29, 2010

March 29, 2010 The "S" Word

Years ago, our family was invited to vacation with owners of a home on Scotland Cay in the Bahamas. Snorkeling in the crystal clear ocean was incredible—everything so colorful and vibrant. Obviously in the open sea, there is always the potential for danger as well; so that the younger ones didn’t get frightened, it was suggested that we refer to shark sightings as spotting an “S” fish.

Although it’s a cultural taboo—people in other parts of the world where it’s not considered a “bad” word use it routinely—you’ve probably instructed your children not to use a certain “S” word. Why? Because you don’t want your child’s teacher or other parents knowing that (1) you use the word yourself in times of frustration or pain, or (2) allow your children to watch television where it pops up frequently. Kids don’t usually say things they never hear!

And not even horrendous side-effects and possible arrest dissuades amateur and professional athletes from taking “Vitamin S” (steroids) to enhance their look or performance.

There is another S word that carries negative connotations even among Christians, although it comes straight off the pages of the Bible and straight from the heart of God: Submission. Because the idea of submission to authority has been used to manipulate and control others, it’s no wonder some people roll their eyes at the mere mention.

For example, Paul’s directive in Ephesians 5, and Peter’s in 1 Peter 2 are two of the verses historically pulled out whenever there is conflict within a marriage:

22 Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. 24 Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything (Ephesians 5, NIV).

1 In the same way, you wives, be submissive to your own husbands so that even if any [of them] are disobedient to the word, they may be won without a word by the behavior of their wives, 2 as they observe your chaste and respectful behavior…
6 Thus Sarah obeyed Abraham, calling him lord, and you have become her children if you do what is right without being frightened by any fear (1 Peter 3, NIV).



The implication is sometimes that if a woman will submit, everything will be hunky-dory. Wrong…husbands have instructions as well - to love their wives as Christ loved the Church (in my opinion, a much more difficult concept).

However, the Bible doesn’t make one party’s obedience to God conditional on the other party’s. It doesn’t say, “Husbands, love your wives when they are submissive” or “Wives, submit to your husbands if they are loving.” Each one has a specific command from God, and we are to submit to him first.

Early in our marriage I remember asking my husband to pray about whether or not I should help with the youth group at our church. “Pray about it yourself,” he said. “You can hear from God.” This was important because as a teenager I was part of a church that walked through a very strong submission teaching—strong in a worldly, carnal way, not a spiritual one. A group of people who sincerely wanted to submit to God and honor him was led down a path of error. Trust was abused to an alarming degree, yet God protected his people because of their hearts; I would venture to guess that the majority of that congregation is still serving God today.

My husband knew instinctively that I might have a tendency to blindly revere his authority, even as I had been taught to blindly follow church leadership. He made it clear that although he took his role as my husband seriously, he would not become a substitute for God himself.

Submission is God’s idea, and his ideas are always loving, and best. Just because Satan is constantly trying to twist God’s ideas and use them for harm doesn’t mean that the idea itself is anything but pure and holy.

Submission is about more than marriage, obviously. And there will always be challenges—our government is not perfect. Our church leaders are not perfect. Our husbands are not perfect. Our parents are not perfect. The world systems which we must obey (or suffer the consequences) on a daily basis are not perfect. God, however, is perfect. His ways are higher than our ways, we see in Isaiah 55. His thoughts are not our thoughts. He uses his government to teach things like humility, honor, respect, love, compassion…

Not a bad word in the bunch.




Permission to reprint with acknowledgment of source.

Ellenofgillette1@aol.com

Monday, March 15, 2010

March 15, 2010 Less is More

Maybe we’re going about it wrong.

By “we” I mean the Church. By “it” I mean the programs geared toward growth.

In Judges 6 we find the nation of Israel in trouble. Because of their sin, the Lord has handed them over to the Midianites for a period of punishment living in poverty and fear. It’s a familiar pattern in the Old Testament (as in our own lives)—sin, refusal to repent, consequences, repentance, deliverance and blessing, sin, refusal to repent, etc.

Gideon is confronted by an angel who appears as a man, as he works in hiding. Instead of pointing out the obvious (that he’s afraid and living in defeat), the angel calls him a “mighty warrior” and says that God is with him. Not only that, he commissions him to deliver the entire nation. This would impress most of us, but Gideon is so down-trodden by his circumstances that he has trouble believing it. His clan is small. He’s the youngest in his family. But when he asks for a sign, the angel is very convincing. His faith restored, Gideon obeys in a relatively small act of defiance—he pulls down an altar of Baal.

Before he’ll take on the entire nation of Midian, however, he needs to be really, really sure God will have his back. He lays out a sheep fleece and asks God to make it wet in the midst of dry ground. Done. Just to make sure, he lays it out again and asks God to make the fleece dry and the ground wet. Done. (God is so patient with us, isn’t he?)

Filled with confidence and faith, Gideon musters 32,000 men to fight with him. It’s not as many as he would like, but it will have to do. Wrong—God tells him to send home anyone who is afraid. Gideon’s probably thinking, Who wouldn’t be?! Amazingly, he still ends up with 10,000. Still too many. God engineers a test whereby the number drops to 300. That’s not even a tithe of the original group. It’s a tithe of the tithe! Despite this, God uses Gideon and his army of 300 to rout 120,000, and the eventually successful revolt against Midian is on.

Why such a little army? Judges 7:2 says, “The Lord said to Gideon, ‘The troops with you are too many for me to give the Midianites into their hand. Israel would only take the credit away from me, saying, ‘My own hand has delivered me.’”

We’ve been called to evangelize the world. Tell sinners to repent. Pray for more laborers for the harvest. God desires that all men will be saved. Etc. Etc. But maybe…just maybe…sometimes less is more. Maybe our attempts to get bigger and bigger building programs and more numbers and fill the seats and pack the house have been, at least in one respect, counter-productive. Maybe we have watered down the gospel to make it more palatable so much so that it fails to quench the real thirsts in peoples’ lives. Maybe we’ve lost focus on the task of building God’s kingdom and are tempted to think that our “own hand” has been responsible for building our own kingdoms.

Maybe we don’t need more soldiers in God’s army, but better soldiers. Maybe we don’t need to make Christianity so socially pleasing and acceptable, but use the same tactics as Jesus, who said things like:

· “If your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off” (Matthew 5:30).
· “Do not give what is holy to dogs; and do not throw your pearls before swine, or they will trample them under foot and turn and maul you” (Matthew 7:6).
· “If any want to become my followers, let them deny themselves and take up their cross and follow me” (Mark 8:34).
· “Do you think that I have come to bring peace to the earth? No, I tell you, but rather division” (Luke 12:51)!
· “Whoever loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; and whoever loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me” (Matthew 10:37).
· “Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you” (John 6:53).

Jesus sometimes seems to have gone out of his way to deliver a hard word, a statement few would understand, a command that no one in his right mind would rush to obey. He chose to make it difficult to come to him. “For the gate is narrow and road is hard that leads to life; and there are few who find it” (Matthew 7:14).

Following Jesus…being a true Christian…is simple, but it perhaps it shouldn’t be as easy as the Church in 2010 sometimes makes it out to be, at least in the United States. Fellow believers around the world (a relatively smaller number than in attendance at mega-churches of the West) who face persecution and hardship, even death, on a daily basis, might find little in common with our level of complacency and comfort every Sunday morning, but I have a gut feeling that those beleaguered “300” are accomplishing far more.

Of course, it’s not really about the numbers at all, is it? It’s what’s in the hearts of those who come to the battle.
Permission to use with acknowledgement of source. Quotations from New Revised Standard Version of the Bible

Monday, March 1, 2010

March 1, 2010 Led into the Wilderness

According to Wikipedia, “Lent, in Christian tradition, is the period of the liturgical year leading up to Easter. The traditional purpose of Lent is the preparation of the believer — through prayer, penitance, almsgiving, and self-denial— for the annual commemoration during Holy Week of the death and resurrection of Jesus, which recalls the events linked to the passion of Christ and culminates in Easter, the celebration of the resurrection of Jesus Christ."

Conventionally Lent is described as being forty days long, although Sundays are not counted (songs and focus are more somber and reflective during Lent in many churches, but each Sunday throughout the year is considered a smaller-scaled Easter, commemorating the resurrection). The forty days represent the time that, according to the Bible
, Jesus spent in the wilderness before the beginning of his public ministry where he tempted by Satan.

I’ve been thinking about being in the wilderness lately, probably because I’m going to a James McDonald Bible study (“Lord, Change My Attitude”) that deals with “wilderness” attitudes and focuses primarily on the 40 year wanderings of the children of Israel. Recently, we looked at the attitude of doubt, which can disguise itself in different ways. One of these is withdrawal—from loved ones, from church, from the Word, from God.

Because doubt can be so deadly—just a hop, skip, and jump away from turning into despair, McDonald points out—we need to be around people of faith. Withdrawal helps keep doubt alive; being among those who will consistently and persistently speak words of encouragement and faith into our lives soon drives doubt out of the darkness and into the light that will dispel it completely.

When a person withdraws, then, it is easy to make assumptions about their spiritual maturity or present walk with God. I submit to you that this is a dangerous assumption (as most are, in the final analysis).

The children of Israel wandered in the wilderness because of their disobedience and unbelief, but what about Jesus? Scripture tells us that he was “led by the Spirit in the desert, where for forty days he was tempted by the devil. He ate nothing during those days, and at the end of them he was hungry” (Luke 4:1-2, NIV).

Did you get that? The Holy Spirit led Jesus into the wilderness. He wasn’t there by accident, or by Satan’s invitation. He wasn’t there because he was in a snit or had gotten mad at the disciples. He hadn’t disobeyed, choosing to run from conviction. The Holy Spirit led him into a dry, rocky place where he was alone. He led him there to do without normal interaction with others and normal sustenance from food. Jesus, fully God and fully man, experienced weakness in the flesh—he was hungry. His strength was sapped.

At his lowest point, Satan arrived, hoping to trip the Son of God up—which just shows you how ridiculous he can be. With every temptation, Jesus countered with the Word of God (since he IS the Word, this is understandable…what boggles the mind is that Satan thought he had a chance!).

There is encouragement for us in this account on so many levels, but what it speaks to me at this particular moment, fresh on the heels of hearing someone talk of another person’s “devastating” withdrawal is that we should be very careful not to judge another person’s wilderness experience.

A good friend of mine was in and out of the wilderness for some time, but was, throughout the experience, able to focus on, worship, and trust in God. Certainly it was a trying “dark night of the soul” for this individual, loving friends, a caring family…and yet, God spoke throughout the darkness, teaching new lessons there than couldn’t, apparently, be learned in the light. There had been a rather stubborn dependence on others, rather than depending solely on God. Things—good things, even—had drained spiritual energy a jealous Father wanted spent in other directions.

Humans have a tendency to equate perkiness with blessing, but scripture clearly reveals that even those with the deepest relationships with God—David, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Paul…Jesus himself…went through their own wildernesses at God’s bidding.

Lord, help us not to judge others when they withdraw or seem lost in the desert, knowing that if you lead us there one day, we will also respond better to a cup of cold water than to harsh opinions. Let us be faithful to pray for them that they will learn quickly all that you have to teach them. And let us be mindful of attitudes and actions that might force us into the desert…may the only wildernesses we wander in be those led by the Holy Spirit, for your purposes and your glory.

Permission to use with acknowledgement of source.

ellenofgillette1@aol.com.