Great stuff…
Bible Study
Logos 10 Bible Software Review – Portfolio
If you are a student of the Bible and seriously love to dig into the scriptures and get as much
Matt Dabbs
April 10, 2024
Helped by this? Tell a Friend! ---->
Subscribe To Weekly Newsletter!
Get updates and learn from the best
Read this Next!
Bible
You Cannot Understand Truth Without the Holy Spirit, Grace, and Love
In the Bible truth is often paired with other things like “grace and truth” or “Spirit and truth.” Maybe God
Matt Dabbs
February 22, 2024
Apologetics
Apologetics Part 3: Defending Our Faith
Once we understand who we are defending against (Part 1) and what it is we are defending (Part 2) we
Matt Dabbs
January 19, 2024
0 Responses
Chastising homeschoolers. Chastising what people give to the church. Teaching that we will be judged on our own merit and the “routine” of works we lived rather than on our faith in Christ? I disagree that this is great stuff. I have come to find that the most faithful and, in contrast to Chan’s belief, bravest Christians I know, choose to homeschool their children. I could turn this whole act around on Chan and chastise him on the fact that he is so scared of the scripture that he resorts to props. Just my opinion, not trying to pick a fight.
Dave,
I am guess you haven’t read Crazy Love then. It is quite clear in that book that Chan is very much in tune with scripture and is more scared of ignoring scripture than he is of reading it and actually trying to live by it. Would it be a stretch to say that if we actually lived by the scripture (that you seem to think he is so scared of) that we might actually put ourselves out there in faith more than we do, rather than less? I will have to watch this again in the morning when I have time. But my memory of this video is not that Chan is teaching salvation by works or being judged by our merit. It is possible to say we should be daring in our faith and put ourselves out there in faith and that God could actually be pleased by that. It is one thing to say that (which Chan is saying) and another thing to say those actions earn our salvation (which Chan is not saying). Again, I will watch this again in the morning and maybe see something I missed. Thanks for sharing.
One other point that I think it worth considering is found in Revelation 20:11-12,
“11Then I saw a great white throne and him who was seated on it. Earth and sky fled from his presence, and there was no place for them. 12And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Another book was opened, which is the book of life. The dead were judged according to what they had done as recorded in the books.”
“books were opened”…including the “book of life” and then the reference to the first books that had recorded in them what people had done. I am obviously not pushing at all for works or merit based salvation apart from grace. At the same time what we do in life really does matter to God.
Dave, I think you missed the whole point of what Chan is saying. I think you might have actually taken it a bit personally. You should listen to more of his stuff. He is by no means scared of Scripture. Check out Multiply.
I don’t know Chan. All I know is what I’ve seen in this clip & a few excerpts from his book “Crazy Love.” But from what I have seen, I am suspicious of him. Even if we assume the best about him, he is at best sloppy with his words, which is very serious for anyone who attempts to teach the things of God.
In this clip, Chan does bash homeschooling, whether or not that was his intention. He portrays homeschooling as if it is parents do this so they won’t have to interact with the world.
On the contrary, I wish more parents were intimately involved with their children’s education. I believe this to be Biblical. It is important to protect children until they are old enough to protect themselves.
Many teachers have an axe to grind against Christianity. After graduating from college, I went on to study the Bible & Christian apologetics. I later returned to college to study philosophy, as a well-informed, mature adult. All of my professors were either atheists or agnostics, & fully half of them were openly hostile to Christianity.
Having heard from other students, they were accustomed to bashing Christianity. They were used to pulling random verses from Leviticus & Deuteronomy in order to fluster the young Christians, in order to make the Bible appear ridiculous. Unfortunately for them, I had done my homework ahead of time, & I answered them to their face (in a manner as respectful as possible). Students would sometimes come up to me after class & thank me for showing to the class that Christianity can be defended as reasonable.
Now if that was going on in college, you can bet it is going on even earlier in education. I can’t speak from experience, since I was not a church-goer & was completely oblivious to these things as a child. Our children need every advantage we can give them before sending them out into this world. Chan is out of line to disparage homeschooling. Whether he intended to or not, that is in fact what he did.
T,
Responding to his statement,
“This is what people do. I’m just going to have my nice little family …we’re just going to keep to ourselves, live in a gated community, homeschool my kids, make them wear helmets everywhere. I’m not going to let them outside because the sun has bad rays.”
He isn’t saying having a nice little family is evil. You wouldn’t contend he meant every Christian who has ever lived in a gated community is sinful or evil. Making kids wear helmets is not evil. But he is saying homeschooling, all by itself, is evil? If you asked him if homeschooling your kid was always evil, all the time do you think he would say yes?
Take this in context. He is listing a whole litany of things that, when put together, would be an extreme response and even a potentially unChristian response to a hostile world. He is not preaching against homeschooling here just like he is not preaching against gated communities or having a “nice little family”. He is preaching against an attitude that would respond to a hostile world by taking every possible avenue to add to comfort and reduce risk and uncomfortability. If taken to the extreme that could become idolatry and unChristian.
I am glad you have had the experiences you have had and I pray that God continues to use you to open people’s eyes to the truth.
Yeah I don’t understand why he said that. =\ I’m homeschooled, I’ve listened to his sermons for a couple years now and read his book. Surprised to hear him say that…
A few days ago, I was responding to a post about Chan’s “Crazy Love” on Trey Morgan’s blog. Included was a quote from Chan that I found shocking. Either Chan is Biblically sound & just misspoke again, or he is seriously off. I found the following quote especially dangerous considering we have many powerful people in this country today trying to claim it is immoral, even unbiblical for one person to make a lot more money than another. That we ought to “spread the wealth around,” & it is immoral to make more than a certain amount of income over others. Here is the quote & my response:
“Which is more messed up — that we have so much compared to everyone else, or that we don’t think we’re rich? On any given day we might flippantly call ourselves “broke” or “poor”? We are neither of those things. We are rich. Filthy rich.”
Maybe I am completely out of line here, or am missing part of the context, but when I read this, it made me really angry. This seems to be pulling stuff out of context in order to make people feel guilty – in a word, manipulative.
Look at this: “Which is more messed up — that we have so much compared to everyone else…” As if it is messed up for one to be far richer than another. I see this sentiment all the time, & it is absolutely unbiblical.
Job & Abraham had staggering amounts of riches. They were generous, but notice they didn’t give themselves into the poorhouse. Chan’s line of thought has more to do with Judas than with Jesus (John 12:5-8).
Paul didn’t say it was wrong to “live in prosperity.” What the Bible teaches about money is 1. cling to God & not to things, 2. be content with what you have (rich or poor), & 3. use what you have wisely.
“Which is more messed up… that we don’t think we’re rich?”
“Rich” being a relative term, of course some of us aren’t going to consider ourselves “rich,” because in contrast to our immediate environment, we might actually be poor. Obviously, the poorest person in America is richer than most people in the world today, but who in America goes around claiming “I am poor, especially compared to the ‘dump people?’”
I have to agree with you on this one. Either he should have been more careful with his words or he is off base on this one. It is very, very popular these days to think having wealth is evil. And yet, many of those who espouse this point of view are extremely wealthy themselves. It is elitist and off base from a scriptural standpoint.
I am sorry to post soo long after the initial post but this is WAY WAY out of context. Go to youtube and search for Luke warm and loving it. Watch the full sermon.
Yet it is immoral to hoard wealth for one’s self – in whatever quantity – and not share with those who are not as wealthy. It’s wrong. it’s sin.
That’s what’s messed up about people who have so much more than themselves – not that they have more, but that they keep it. It’s messed up that we who have a lot think we’re too poor to give because there are others who have a lot more than we do. That’s just screwy, and if that’s what Chan means – and I believe it is – I have to agree.
I disagreed with you on Trey’s blog, Theophilus, and still do. We’ve both interpreted what Chan says, but we have done so very differently.
My guess is that we both need to read his work to get the meaning from the context of what he’s saying – and I know I haven’t done that. Until I do, I don’t feel it’s appropriate to judge that “Either Chan is Biblically sound & just misspoke again, or he is seriously off.”
What I find odd is the fact that many of you preachers on here, as Chan does, will gladly call hoarding wealth sinful, but maybe would never address with your congregation the absence of the mother in the home today. This is an act done today in the name of wealth and prosperity by “Christian” families today and what gives prop comics, errr, speakers, like Chan ammo to teach this camoflauged form of legalism.
Dave,
Unless you are living in a 3rd world country and living on less than $50 a month of income we all pretty much have logs in one or both of our eyes on this one. So where is your wealth stored up? Do you own a home? A car? Will you pay for your kids to attend college? Do you eat fast food? I am not condoning anything here and I can list you all sorts of things that would be on my list. That doesn’t make any of it right. It is easy to rail against me or Keith or Chan or whoever…but first how are you doing on this one? 🙂 If you want my list I can share it with you because I really need to do better on this one too. I eat out too much. I don’t give to guys on the street corner because I don’t trust what they are going to do with it. I rely too often on the benevolence budget to get things done rather than taking care of some things on my own. I could keep on going but the point is, we have to be humble about these things and realize just how spoiled we all are. But we also have to be realistic and biblical. For instance, should be rebuke the Proverbs 31 woman for being so industrious?
10 [c] A wife of noble character who can find?
She is worth far more than rubies.
11 Her husband has full confidence in her
and lacks nothing of value.
12 She brings him good, not harm,
all the days of her life.
13 She selects wool and flax
and works with eager hands.
14 She is like the merchant ships,
bringing her food from afar.
15 She gets up while it is still dark;
she provides food for her family
and portions for her servant girls.
16 She considers a field and buys it;
out of her earnings she plants a vineyard.
17 She sets about her work vigorously;
her arms are strong for her tasks.
18 She sees that her trading is profitable,
and her lamp does not go out at night.
19 In her hand she holds the distaff
and grasps the spindle with her fingers.
20 She opens her arms to the poor
and extends her hands to the needy.
21 When it snows, she has no fear for her household;
for all of them are clothed in scarlet.
22 She makes coverings for her bed;
she is clothed in fine linen and purple.
23 Her husband is respected at the city gate,
where he takes his seat among the elders of the land.
24 She makes linen garments and sells them,
and supplies the merchants with sashes.
25 She is clothed with strength and dignity;
she can laugh at the days to come.
26 She speaks with wisdom,
and faithful instruction is on her tongue.
27 She watches over the affairs of her household
and does not eat the bread of idleness.
28 Her children arise and call her blessed;
her husband also, and he praises her:
29 “Many women do noble things,
but you surpass them all.”
30 Charm is deceptive, and beauty is fleeting;
but a woman who fears the LORD is to be praised.
31 Give her the reward she has earned,
and let her works bring her praise at the city gate.
I meant to add…I still struggle with these things and my wife stays home with our son. Just because she stays home doesn’t mean we have it all perfect. So that is hardly the one criteria to tell if people really have it together or not. The real point here is addressing the heart. We aren’t going to preach people are evil if mom’s go to work. We aren’t going to preach people are evil for being employed or not giving 100% to the poor. But it is important to preach against greed, however that might show up in someone’s life.
I can see how you might see some of this as legalism. When I get some time I might address that because that is where this could head very, very easily.
Enjoy the convo. matt. I will say this is the first time I have seen a Christian use Prov. 31 in defense of the mother dismissing her role as mother and wife. My point is that we must, as church leaders, stop pretending that something is not a problem when it is in the church. To me, the most faithful thing a family can do in these times is to say that yes, the extra income would make this life easier, but I have faith that God will provide as we Seek Him (you know, like He promised). How dare we hold up a man who speaks negatively of people doing this (and I am assuming that would include you Matt). Perhaps if the church used the Lord’s money properly more families could do such things. Instead, we from what I hear in this clip of Chen, his listeners leave thinking they must need to work longer and harder hours so they can give more & be a “better” Christian (whatever that is).
Dave, let me clear a few things up. You are jumping all over this and I think we need to clarify some things here. In your last comment you wrote,
“I will say this is the first time I have seen a Christian use Prov. 31 in defense of the mother dismissing her role as mother and wife.”
Let me know where I said that in my statement. Let me quote myself here,
“For instance, should be rebuke the Proverbs 31 woman for being so industrious?”
Where in that one sentence, the only sentence where I said anything about the woman in Prov 31 did I say she had dismissed her role as a mother and wife? Point it out to me please? I love you as a brother but I don’t think we should make unwarranted accusations against each other here. So please show me from what I said where I said that. Then I quoted the proverb to let it speak for itself. This woman has it all together. She is able to work hard, make a profit, take care of her family and bring honor to them. She is buying fields and takes care of the needy. She is selling sashes to merchants. She watches over the affairs of her household (31:27). Notice, I didn’t leave any of these verses out! I believe a woman can be just as godly as this woman and be just as industrious. Don’t you? Or is she the only one who could do it and women lack faith today if they act like she did? That was my point. Sorry you missed it. I should have been more clear.
You wrote,
“My point is that we must, as church leaders, stop pretending that something is not a problem when it is in the church.”
I agree 100%. We have lots of things that fall into this category and you and I would probably agree on many of those things.
“To me, the most faithful thing a family can do in these times is to say that yes, the extra income would make this life easier, but I have faith that God will provide as we Seek Him (you know, like He promised).”
You say this would be the most faithful thing we could do. I am very interested to hear your answer to two questions: 1 – Does that mean there are no other faithful options? 2 – Does it mean a Christian woman who works outside the home is sinning? If she is, the Proverbs 31 woman is not as noble as scripture says she is. I hope by now you see the issue I am having with the points you are making. They aren’t backed up by scripture here. I say that in love and with an attitude of respect for you because I believe you are passionate about having a real and strong faith in God.
Last you wrote,
“How dare we hold up a man who speaks negatively of people doing this (and I am assuming that would include you Matt). Perhaps if the church used the Lord’s money properly more families could do such things. Instead, we from what I hear in this clip of Chen, his listeners leave thinking they must need to work longer and harder hours so they can give more & be a “better” Christian (whatever that is).”
Let’s get to the heart of what Chan, not Chen, is saying here. He is saying we need to be more daring in our faith toward God. That is also what you are saying. He never said people need to work more hours so they can give more. He never said taking on a second job or wives working outside or inside the home makes someone a “better” Christian.
Instead of you having to assume what I am holding up about this clip. Let me tell you what I am holding up about this clip. I believe there are some Christians who take such a protectionist attitude toward the world that they do a serious disservice to your faith. Do you agree these people exist? Are there families that homeschool as one symptom of a broader and more complex underlying faith issue? Yes. Does that mean I hate all homeschooling or think it is wrong? No. Are there families that send their kids to public school and have this faith issue? Yes. Does that mean all who send their kids to public school are evil or sinful? No. At the end of the day, God does want our faith to be real and lived out. But our salvation does not depend on how good our dismount was. Four salvation rests in the hands of God. That is the only thing this clip makes me worry about is, what you mentioned, that people would hear this (and we only have 3 minutes of a much longer presentation…so maybe he did cover this. We can’t assume he didn’t since we don’t know) and be lead toward a works based righteousness. But if you read and listen to more Francis Chan you will realize that is not the case.
Matt, in my first statement I stated that I was not trying to be argumentative. I will attempt to address the long list of questions you asked though.
1. Your usage of Prov. 31 in this context can hold no water until you can prove to us that the mother in Prov. 31 shipped her children off for 40 hours each week to be cared and nurtured by some other person. If you can do that, I will concede that point. Perhaps the mother did all those things while caring for her children. I have been doing a study of the term “alma mater” on my blog http://www.thispilgrimland.com, and it literally means “nurturing mother” and is derived from the worship of idols, specifically Roman goddesses. I suppose the question you need to answer for us is this: does a mother better honor God by caring for her children herself or by shipping them away in the name of prosperity?
2. You asked “Does that mean there are no other faithful options?” You have to show me the options in scripture before I can answer that question. Biblically, does God lay out the option for the mother to ship her children away for 40+ hours a week? If so, then yes, there are other faithful options, if no, then your question is redundant. I remember a Chris Rock bit (I wonder how often Chris Rock makes it onto Christian blog discussions) in which he discussed man being only as faithful as his options. I believe in this instance we have to ask ourselves from whence the options that we now believe we have came? If you really look closely to this issue and many others, the way God sets things up there really are not than many options and we don’t get to suspend what best glorifies Him just because the world dictates that we have different options. When we do that we see what we have now, the destruction of the American family. Honestly, this idea of “faithful options” is nothing more than post-modern language for relativism. Also, please don’t come back with the discussion of “what if the father leaves the home or dies,” because in that case, my response will fall back on the church. If the church was doing what it was meant to do, those women would have not the first worry in regard to this discussion.
3. You asked if a Christian woman working outside the home is sinning? That is not for me to decide. God gives us children to raise in the nurture and admonition of the Lord in honor to glorify Him. You tell me how you think God feels about people sending their children off to be indoctrinated with atheistic thought and science even while we parents know fully that they are being fed this. Look at the results since the mothers have left the homes. You tell me if our nation is reaping benefits or punishment since that time and you should have your answer. I don’t see the point you are making with the Prov. 31 verses. I honestly believe you are attempting to take those scriptures and make them relevant to goats of today and not the sheep who desire to show the world that Christ is worthy of their entire life and every aspect therein. That is not what we Christians are called to. We’re supposed to feed sheep, not herd goats.
4. My assumption about what you held up about the clip came from your writing beside the clip “great stuff.” Sorry Matt, but it would be logical to believe that you were referencing the entire clip when you don’t specify which parts are great to you and which ones are not. That was my original contention in the first place. This great stuff in your opinion is nothing more than a man standing before a crowd and alienating people who are faithful and who want shepherding. I take from your comments now that you maybe don’t find everything he said to be “great.” Perhaps there are people who are too “protectionist” in their outlook of the world, but for goodness sake, when did we get the authority to stop protecting our children from atheistic indoctrination and even more so, the authority to shun those who attempt to do so.
I enjoy the discourse Matt and find it funny and ironic that after you corrected me for calling him “chan” that you did the same in the last sentence of your last reply. Unless of course you did that on purpose. Humbly.
scratch the last part of my last reply about the “chan” thing. I think I misspoke there or I momentarily forgot how to read. My bad.
Your last comment made me laugh…I was thinking “oh no, surely i didn’t do that!” Ha!
I really appreciate when people set out to answer questions because when I ask them I really am interested in hearing an answer. This is a dialog rather than a diatribe and that is really great. That doesn’t always happen and eventually I have to give up because I address a bunch of points but then no one will address mine. So on the front end of this comment I want to say thank you for that. Thank you also for the tremendous amount of time you have spent in study on this. I am sure I have a lot to learn and would love to read your paper when it is completed.
You know there is no way to prove the woman in Prov 31 shipped or didn’t ship her kids off for 40 hours a week. You are asking me to prove points out of information that obviously doesn’t exist. But that doesn’t mean my point is invalid. All I can tell you about the woman in Proverbs 31 is that she was pleasing to God all while able to raise kids, be a good spouse, and bring in income for her home. How would we look at a woman today who is doing the same and think poorly of her?
You know what this all boils down to? It doesn’t boil down to where you go to school. This boils down to this question – “Are parents keeping up with their God-given responsibilities to raise their children in a godly manner?” If a family can answer that question with a “yes” in good faith why I don’t feel right tying heavy burdens on them. If a family is not, then let’s look at their situation and find out how they can do better. All parents need to be actively involved in teaching their children how to think about things, how to engage people who aren’t Christians, and how to respond to all sorts of wacky things being taught in most schools. That is a tremendous learning opportunity if parents will take advantage of helping their kids learn how to think.
Jesus or Solomon or Paul never said kids should be sent outside the home for 40 hours a week. You are right. But they also didn’t say all kids had to be homeschooled! We know that we should do all things to the Lord. We know that parents need to play an active role in raising their children (many in the OT actually had tons of help with this by people other than the mother). We know that we are to be salt, light and like a city on a hill. We know we are to be in the world but not of the world. We know that we are to always be prepared to answer any who ask about our hope. We also know that we are not to be in the business of tying heavy burdens on people as the Pharisees did.
There are two dangers here that we can get into. On one side we can be so laxadasical that we really don’t care and we sell out our kids and no one says anything. On the other side we can be so strict and rigorous, speaking where the Bible doesn’t speak, and adding all sorts of restrictions of what women can and cannot do that we end up as Pharisees. Neither of those options are okay.
Let me make an argument using your logic and see if it flies. This may totally blow up in my face but that’s okay with me 🙂 Couldn’t we make the contention that any real Christian should serve in full time ministry or at least in vocational ministry where they have giving 40 hours or more to the church each week? While we are on that we should really be meeting together every day just like the early church did. Would God want any less of us today? Jesus says we are to do everything for the Lord. God wants us to give our best. No one would argue that really having faith would mean we could devote less time to tv and more time to ministry. So why not just say real faithful Christians are those who are doing the very best thing they could do for God outside the home, be in ministry. Really to give less when we could have given more means we really could have had more faith or served more people or done better on this.
Hey Matt. Thanks for the kind words. I hope that if nothing else we can take from this exercise that insulting or condemning either side leads to nothing. That was my primary reason for making my initial post. Just as you felt the need to defend the ones who do send their children away, the homeschooling parent needs the same defense when the video attacked them. Honestly though, I believe we both know we can make a better Biblical argument for the mother being home raising the children then the other side of the debate. While there are homeschooling parents who are different than I, I do not believe we should judge parents who do not or “can’t” (I hate that word, we can do whatever we please). It would be nice though if the church supported those parents who do choose to make that commitment and decision rather than at times making them feel ostracized as the speaker in the video does.
Regarding your concluding questions, I would say that you and I both know that the church and all of our lives would be better off if we met with the saints daily and to boil down how much “ministry” each member should be doing to a hourly job is not feasible. Remember, God wants our whole lives and from giving that to Him, the N.T. church was able to send out a mission from which we know that every person on the face of the Earth heard the gospel message taught to them. Therefore, based solely on results, not commandments, yes, we should totally be doing those things today. Now ask yourself why we are not. A large portion of the answer will be found in the conversation we have been engaged in (agree?). What motivated those people to do that back then? The gospel and the shepherds who were not afraid to teach it and it alone. If the church would get back to that standard (and please don’t pretend we have not left it) then this discussion about the Christian wife and mother will be gone because true sheep follow Christ and the goats will walk away to find something that is satisfying to their ears, gathering up teachers for themselves. By catering to them and reading ourselves and our cultural context into scripture people are being lost, the family unit that God created is being destroyed, and the bride of Christ is raising up young men (those that are lucky enough to even have them in church anymore) who have no real true idea of what the gospel is.
Please take ten minutes to watch Paul Washer discuss this matter.
He sounds like the kind of guy who wouldn’t strap himself to the balance beam but stand up on it and take risks for the kingdom. He is talking about putting yourself and your faith out there for God to use. Sounds like a similar point to what Chan was talking about. I also appreciate Royce’s input because I had not heard Chan had done that.
That brings us back to the original reason I posted this video. I think it is good to be challenged to stand up for our faith and take God and our relationship with Him seriously. That means there are times we have to take risks and we have to put aside some comfort in order to follow him/be disciples of Jesus Christ. Chan said it, Washer said it, Dave said it, and I am saying it. We are all coming at it from different angles but it all boils down to agreeing on that central issue.
There is a good chance we will. We have already committed to having Missy home with the kids (a 21 month old and one on the way). She has a degree in education and a masters in reading. So we probably will. If we do, we will probably do it through elementary school and then get them in school for middle school-high school.
If you know much about Francis Chan it would be foolish to criticize him about his teaching on wealth. He, above almost all others I know of, puts his money were his mouth is. He and his wife took Scripture literally, sold their nice large house, bought one very much less expensive and gave the money to the poor.
He has lead Cornerstone Church to give huge sums of money to take care of the needy in their area. Unlike many of his critics, Chan lives what he preaches.
But does he homeschool his kids? Kidding!
Better question: Will you homeschool your kids???
I hope that when you do, you don’t have to endure persecution from inside the church as many homeschool families do.
The ten year class reunion is kind of boring when you are home schooled. I asked my sister, what have you been doing the last 10 years. She replies, “I was just over at your house yesterday!”
Seriously, would most homes be better with a full time mom for school age kids? Yes. And, almost every home could do it if they wanted to. You can’t do it and keep up with the Jones’s but you can do it.
There is no rationale that leads me to believe a child is better with a sitter or in daycare than in the home with his mom. Ahh, I’m old…and I suppose old fashioned.
Royce
Perhaps I’m missing something, but I’m having a hard time getting from what Chan actually said, in context, to the point of labeling it as “bashing”, “insulting”, or “persecuting” homeschoolers.
Has our culture influenced us so heavily that we must label any questioning or disagreement with our point of view with such negative terms?
What I hear is a man of God calling us to examine our motives for some of the ways we act and choices we make that “play it safe” and have the potential to isolate us from the rest of the world. Yes, he gave a few examples, but he could have given many more.
I appreciate his challenge. I need people to ask me these kinds of tough questions. If the motives to my actions are driven by fear of the world and fear of taking chances, then I need to make some changes in the way I live.
I pointed to the context of his statement a long time ago but it didn’t seem to matter on this one. People, myself included, have things they protect dearly and will go out of their way to defend them if they perceive anything to be saying anything negative about their issue. Thanks for the dose of common sense.
Well, I thought it was a fine video.
One of the principles of the parable of the talents that we gloss over is that we’re expected to take on a little risk. It’s the guy who made the “safe” move who was chastised.
Anyhow, thanks for sharing it, Matt.