Theodoros Blog

Courage

G.K. Chesterton on Courage:

Courage is almost a contradiction in terms. It means a strong desire to live taking the form of a readiness to die. “He that will lose his life, the same shall save it,” is not a piece of mysticism for saints and heroes. It is a piece of everyday advice for sailors or mountaineers. It might be printed in an Alpine guide or a drill book. This paradox is the whole principle of courage; even of quite earthly or quite brutal courage. A man cut off by the sea may save his life if he will risk it on the precipice.

He can only get away from death by continually stepping within an inch of it. A soldier surrounded by enemies, if he is to cut his way out, needs to combine a strong desire for living with a strange carelessness about dying. He must not merely cling to life, for then he will be a coward, and will not escape. He must not merely wait for death, for then he will be a suicide, and will not escape. He must seek his life in a spirit of furious indifference to it; he must desire life like water and yet drink death like wine.

 

Courage

Tim Keller on Courage:

The coming of the Spirit is almost always associated with courage. Keller shows how the story of David points to true courage. He does so by subverting the majority reading of the text. Real courage, he claims, is not based on mustering enough confidence in oneself. Rather, it is the presence of joy. Real courage, Keller notes, is slowly kindled, not based in adrenaline, and is borne from wonder. His message is based in three sections: Saul (missing courage), Goliath (counterfeit courage), and David (true courage).

Like the rest of Israel, Saul had lost courage in the face of Goliath. Courage, notes Keller, is being able to do the right thing regardless of the danger and regardless of the consequences. Saul buckled in fear. Some say that our day is not in need of courage. Keller disagrees. Do you want to know about fear? Look at your nightmares. Courage is facing your greatest nightmare. Some are scared of death. Others are scared of loosing face and of humiliation. Some are people-pleasers based in their fear that they will not be loved. Our cowardness is everywhere. Fear, thus makes us self-absorbed and is the opposite of love.

Next, Keller outlines Goliath. He begins by overturning the majority interpretation. Most, says Keller, try to say that David is the example of courage and that if we just muster up enough faith in God, then we can beat him. No, he says. If you are really dealing with fear, and someone says, ‘Be like David’, you know it is a way too simplistic reading.

Modern readers, says Keller, have a problem with this text, because we expect the detail-filled genre of the modern novel. Ancient Hebrew literature was quite the opposite; it worked hard to be narrativaly sparse. Yet, Goliath is given a very detailed description. Goliath, says Keller, moves into battle armored and as a mechanical definition of power. Thus the author of I Samuel outlines two different approaches to courage and dealing with fear in order to help the reader know the right way to be courageous. Goliath shows the world’s standards: he has physical strength, he is high tech, and he has self-esteem. Banishing fearful thoughts, like Goliath, and looking at yourself with confidence, is the example of what not to do. But this is defiantly the way the world does it. Visualize success. Think positively. But this type of thinking, says Keller is out of touch with reality and does not perceive danger well. Furthermore, he says, this type of adrenaline courage will not get anyone through a long-term experience that takes courage to make it through. We need something that overwhelms our fears, offsets our fears, and gets us to do things well in the swift moments of decisions.

Thus Keller lifts up David, as the author’s good example of true courage. David says, ‘I come against you in the name of the Lord almighty. It is true that we must have a David-like faith, but this is unhelpful. To choose this route, says Keller, would actually be a spiritualized version of Goliath’s faith.

Keller advises that we enter the story at the right place: not as David but as the cowardly Saul and all Israel. We are the cowards. Thus, God does not send an example for the cowards, but God sends a savior. In this way, the story is totally subversive from the usual interpretation. And this story lays the foundation for the future messiah. A savior is weak, and he is successful not in spite of his weaknesses but through it. He saves us through his weaknesses. Furthermore, the savior is representative fighting as them not for them.

The author of Hebrews points out that we should remember David, but we should fix our eyes on Christ (the champion). Jesus went to the ultimate valley of death and faced the nightmare beyond nightmares: having to face God with all the sinfulness and selfishness of humanity. Some would say, ‘If I’m brave, God will save me’. No, says Keller. This is the opposite of what the story is trying to tell us. Courage is not the absence of fear but the presence of Joy. If Jesus can face the ultimate fear, then we can face our tiny ones. Thus, Real courage is slowly kindled, not based in adrenaline but is borne from wonder.

All about Him

“Then beginning with Moses and with all the prophets,

He explained to them the things concerning Himself in all the Scriptures.” (Luke 24:27)

• Jesus is the true and better Adam who passed the test in the garden and whose obedience is imputed to us (1 Corinthians 15).
• Jesus is the true and better Abel who, though innocently slain, has blood now that cries out for our acquittal, not our condemnation (Hebrews 12:24).
• Jesus is the true and better Abraham who answered the call of God to leave all the comfortable and familiar and go out into the void “not knowing wither he went!” to create a new people of God.
• Jesus is the true and better Isaac who was not just offered up by his father on the mount but was truly sacrificed for us. While God said to Abraham, “Now I know you love me because you did not withhold your son, your only son whom you love, from me,” now we can say to God, “Now we know that you love me, because you did not withhold your son, your only son, whom you love, from me.”
• Jesus is the true and better Jacob who wrestled and took the blow of justice we deserved, so we, like Jacob, only receive the wounds of grace to wake us up and discipline us.
• Jesus is the true and better Joseph who, at the right hand of the king, forgives those who betrayed and sold him and uses his new power to save them.
• Jesus is the true and better Moses who stands in the gap between the people and the Lord and who mediates a new covenant (Hebrews 3).
• Jesus is the true and better Rock of Moses who, struck with the rod of God’s justice, now gives us water in the desert.
• Jesus is the true and better Job, the truly innocent sufferer, who then intercedes for and saves his stupid friends (Job 42).
• Jesus is the true and better David, whose victory becomes his people’s victory, though they never lifted a stone to accomplish it themselves.
• Jesus is the true and better Esther who didn’t just risk losing an earthly palace but lost the ultimate and heavenly one, who didn’t just risk his life, but gave his life to save his people.
• Jesus is the true and better Jonah who was cast out into the storm so that we could be brought in.
• Jesus is the real Rock of Moses, the real Passover Lamb – innocent, perfect, helpless, slain so the angel of death will pass over us. He is the true temple, the true prophet, the true priest, the true king, the true sacrifice, the Lamb, the Light, the Bread.

The Bible is not about you — it is about him. (Tim Keller)

California Calling

 

Even before I finished law school, I never thought I’d be in the profession for very long. At the time I thought it’d be a good way to develop some skills and a possible “stepping stone” to another career. The stats I’d heard were that over 75% of lawyers leave the profession within the first 3yrs of practice; and I was sure I’d be one of them. Both at school and at work I just sort of “got by”. I’ve never been too driven with my work, I don’t like confrontation, and I’ve got a terrible memory. Nevertheless, I’ve been in legal practice now for almost 16yrs. At first I stayed in it because it was exciting and interesting at times (I started off in litigation). Later when I wanted to leave it, I didn’t know what else to do, so inertia kept me there. Now looking back, I think I’m finally recognizing that God’s hand was involved all along, and that I’ve been given something by Him to do.

Some evidence of God’s fingerprints in my career path: In 2000, after quitting my last job in Vancouver, I flew down to the San Francisco Bay Area to look for work. After sending out my resume and cold-calling over 50 law firms during my two-week stay, I received an invitation to interview with the top firm in the country in my area of practice (patent law). Every other firm flatly rejected me. The interview went well and surprisingly, they made me an offer. I was ecstatic and couldn’t help but ask myself: Why would the top firm in the country want to hire some Canadian guy with zero experience and no recognizable school pedigree? I didn’t ask these questions aloud and needed a pay check, so I gladly accepted the offer. I moved to Palo Alto, California in September 2000.

Soon after starting work in California, I needed to sit for the California Bar exam. As a foreign attorney educated outside the US, I was at a significant disadvantage with many subject areas (e.g. constitutional law and criminal law). The California Bar exam covered 14 different subject areas and was known as one of the hardest in the country. The pass rates were around 35% at the time. Up until that time, I had never sat for more than 3hrs at a time for an exam. The 3-full-day, closed-book exam was as much a test of physical stamina as it was of mental endurance. At the end of the first day, I realized that I had misunderstood the main question on the afternoon portion of the exam and had totally blown it. I was shell-shocked and ready to toss in the towel. I figured that in order to pass, I would have to score nearly perfect in all the questions for the rest of the two days. After getting killed the first day, the thought of facing the next two days with such odds stacked against me seemed hopeless. I felt like Rocky Balboa in the last round, but there was no Adrian to root for me or to fight for. Why bother going on to sit for the next two days to torture myself? I was sure I had failed anyways. That night I sat in my hotel room and turned on the tv. I saw an old Bruce Willis movie called “Last Man Standing”. In it there was a scene where after getting all beat up and shot up, he managed to pick himself up off the ground and keep going. So I decided to keep going too. I sat through the next two days thinking that I’d likely failed, but kept going anyways. About two months later, I got the results and discovered that somehow I had passed. I triple checked the results to make sure I was reading it right and when I was sure of myself, I quietly jumped up and down in my office for about 2 minutes. Not only that, but the results showed that out of all the foreign attorneys that took that California Bar exam in Feb 2001, there was only one foreign attorney that had passed.

Fast-forward to early 2011 – the middle of the economic meltdown. After getting laid off in December 2010, I networked with and applied to over a hundred companies in search of similar work (in-house pharmaceutical patent law) both in California and in Toronto. Not a single response, except for one: the top specialty pharma company in the world, which happened to be located in Orange County California, where many of our friends lived and where we were hoping to eventually move to. There were over 200 applicants for the position, and somehow I was invited for an interview and offered the job. A familiar question arose in my mind: Why would the top specialty pharma company be interested in some Canadian guy, who doesn’t have a Ph.D. (most pharma patent attorneys have Ph.D.’s in Bio or Chem), with no Ivy League pedigree, no local California contacts/network, and who requires an international relocation? My best answer to that question is that God wants me here. Now I’m looking high and low for reasons why He wants me here – How can I be faithful to his calling? Who would He have me speak to? Who is it that I should be helping/giving to? What is it that I should do? Holy Spirit help me.

"Here I am. Send me!" Isaiah 6:8

Adopted for Life

 

Adopted For Life

This book comes highly recommended for anyone that has ever considered adoption or has been involved in the adoption process. But the book goes beyond promoting adoption. In the author's words:

“In this book I want to call us all to consider how encouraging adoption—whether we adopt or whether we help others adopt—can help us peer into the ancient mystery of our faith in Christ and can help us restore the fracturing unity and the atrophied mission of our congregation.” As Moore explains, “The gospel of Jesus Christ means our families and churches ought to be at the forefront of the adoption of orphans close to home and around the world.” It is the gospel that calls us to adopt but it is also the gospel that teaches us how to understand adoption. In fact, “as we become more adoption-friendly, we’ll be better able to understand the gospel... I want to ask what it would mean if our churches and families were known as the people who adopt babies—and toddlers, and children, and teenagers. What if we as Christians were known, once again, as the people who take in orphans and make of them beloved sons and daughters?”

I see the adoption of a child into a loving family as a beautiful reflection of the gospel. Like the orphan, we were once outcasts and strangers to God, but because of the sacrifice of Christ, we are welcomed with open arms into God's family and provided an eternal home. I hope to read this book soon and report back with more thoughts at a later time. 

Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world," - James (1:27).

Just Do Something

Just_Do_Something

 

Recently I've been thinking about the issue of "finding God's will", and came across this book. It offers a refreshing perspective that counters the paralyzing notion of waiting for God to directly guide us in all of our major life decisions that aren't clearly addressed in the bible.  Here's a quote:

"...when it comes to most of our daily decision, and even a lot of life's "big" decisions, God expects and encourages us to make choices, confident that He's already determined how to fit our choices into His sovereign will. Passivity is a plague among Christians. It's not just that we don't do anything; it's that we feel spiritual for not doing anything. We imagine that our inactivity is patience and sensitivity to God's leading. At times it may be; but it's also quite possible we are just lazy. When we hyper-spiritualize our decisions, we can veer of into implusive and foolish decisions. But more likely as Christians we fall into endless patterns of vacillation, indecision, and regret. No doubt, selfish ambition is a danger for Christian, but so is complacency, listeless wandering and passivity that pawns itself off as spirituality. Perhaps our inactivity is not so much on God as it is an expression of the fear of man, the love of the praise of man, and disbelief in God's providence."

- Kevin DeYoung, Just Do Something, p. 51, 52

In response, someone might push back and say that it sounds like he is advocating for a cavalier approach to decision making. I'm sure he has heard that objection before and I think he addresses it in his book. Nevertheless, I tend to agree with him that for every 10 Christians that are too reckless in how they make decisions, there are 100 who over-spiritualize their passivity and fail to do anything.

Parenting continued ...

 

 

Parenting

(2nd post - taken from my notes from a parenting course we took in 2007 called "Growing Kids God's Way")

The Parent Factor

Unfortunately, many adults parent in response to their own unresolved childhood fears, conflicts and disappointments. As a result, they sometimes parent their own past more than their children. For example, if the growing-up years were pleasant, there is a strong tendency to employ training techniques similar to those by which you were raised. If your childhood years were stressful, the tendency is to swing to the opposite extreme of your parents' methods when rearing your own children. For example, parents brought up under unfair, restrictive or even abusive methods often unknowingly move toward permissive parenting, allowing their children to become self-centered. These parents in many ways become more concerned about their children's feelings than about their actions. They elevate psychological health above moral health, and any standard of right and wrong is subject to how their children feel, not what they do.

Parenting Extremes

Permissive/child-centered parents fear inhibiting the child, so they go to the extreme of creating an environment of unrestrained freedom, resulting in an under-controlled child. On the other hand, authoritarian parents fear spoiling their child, so they see their salvation in the power of rules and limitations; resulting in an over-controlled child. Both extremes deprive the child of basic skills necessary for healthy adolescence.

Authoritarian Parenting

• predominantly concerned with restraining evil, and little attention paid to elevating good
• although children typically conform and do virtuous acts, they do so out of the fear of reproof, not because of the love of goodness. The child hears "You will do it or else." The "or else" becomes the motivation for right behaviour, not a resident principle of the heart

Permissive Parenting

• predominantly concerned with creating the right environment for the child, and not behavioural results
• for them, child-rearing is reduced to avoidance of all the negative emotions and pursuit of all the positive ones. Thus right and wrong training are measured by how parents think their child feels rather than by the end product - their child's behaviour

Parenting

Parenting

My son Benjamin recently turned 2yrs (Feb.23) and has since made it clear to us that he is now in a new stage of life - the "terrible twos". His will of defiance is constantly testing the patience of his parents. Although his vocabulary has increased exponentially over the past year, the one word we still constantly hear from him is ... "NO!" (in a loud disobedient tone accompanied by hand flailing). As such, I will soon be investing more time in learning about parenting/discipline.

Jeanie and I took a parenting course a few years ago called "Growing Kids God's Way" and found it to be very helpful. It was a big investment in time and energy (we travelled to Aurora, which is about 1&1/2hrs from Toronto, every Fri night for about 5months in the middle of winter), but we both received valuable paradigm-shifting life-lessons - both from the perspective as parents and as children. I'll try to share some of what we learned in the next few posts. Here are a few points from the introductory session:

• The primary consideration in early parenting is the child's heart and not simply outward behaviour
• The heart is the center of all of life and behaviour, and is that portion of man that God looks upon and searches  [Ps 139:23; Proverbs 4:23]
• The general goal of heart training (the portion that parents can impact) is to help a child gain personal self-control
• In early parenting, external pressure is necessary to bring about acceptable behaviour even though a young child has no cognitive understanding of the reason for the behaviour. With adults, beliefs precede actions; with children the opposite is true - actions precede beliefs.
• If the child does not learn to resolve conflict early in life, it will be much more difficult to do so later in life.
  
  

Sacrifice in Parenting

Here's a helpful nugget for parents taken from a recent Tim Keller sermon:

• When we are raising children, if we push them away and keep them at arm’s length in order to preserve our freedom and independence, they will grow up emotionally dependent and damaged. The only way our children can grow up with freedom and independence is if we sacrifice our freedom and independence, for years on end. Once again, it’s them or you.

 

Choose Life

 

Choose Life

I have a good friend, Peter, who recently took up the cause of defending the unborn in the Vancouver pro-life movement. He has been raising awareness about abortion in his community and has committed to approaching every church in the greater Vancouver area in order to challenge the pastor/leadership to give at least one message each year that addresses this issue. He's also mobilized some of his friends to stand up for this cause. I'm wondering if I'm going to be one of them.

I've always been burdened about abortion, but just never made the time to do anything about it. There was always something else that demanded more of my attention (school, work, family, friends etc). But now that I'm almost middle-aged and running out of time and excuses, I'm wondering if I should be doing something about this too. Having become a father of two young children in recent years has only increased this burden for me. 

With an aim of highlighting the gravity of the issue, some have compared abortion to the issue of slavery in the 19th century - in that although some of us may believe it's wrong, we still allow ourselves to live with it because of the extreme inconvenience and "collateral damage" that would result otherwise. The abolitionists fought against slavery even though it was clear to everybody that to end slavery would lead the country into economic suicide; and that's exactly what happened for a whole generation of the British empire. To quote Tim Keller:

"When the abolitionists finally had British society poised to abolish slavery in their empire, planters in the colonies foretold that emancipation would cost investors enormous sums and the prices of commodities would skyrocket catastrophically. This did not deter the abolitionists in the House of Commons. they agreed to compensate the planters for all freed slaves, an astounding sum up to half the British government's annual budget. the Act of Emancipation was passed in 1833, and the costs were so high to the British people that one historian called the British abolition of slavery 'voluntary econocide'. Rodney Stark notes how historians have been desperately trying to figure out why the abolitionists were willing to sacrifice so much to end slavery. He quotes the historian Howard Temperley, who says that the history of abolition is puzzling because most historians believe all political behaviour is self-interested. Yet despite the fact that hundreds of scholars over the last fifty years have looked for ways to explain it, Temperley says, 'no one has succeeded in showing that those who campaigned for the end of the slave trade ... stood to gain in any tangible way ... or that these measures were other than economically costly to the country.' slavery was abolished because it was wrong, and Christians were the leaders in saying so."

As such, I wonder what future generations will think of the decisions we make today as a society in regards to abortion. The stats show that over 1.2 million babies are aborted each year in the US. It's a tough and complicated issue with plenty of inconvenience and potential "collateral damage" if we ever succeeded in abolishing abortion. But I can't think of a more clear wrong than to take the life of an innocent unborn child for the sake of convenience or a woman's "right to choose".