Tag: Personal Growth

Posted on

Christianity, Capitalism, and Purpose

by David Shaw

“If you work hard, you’ll succeed.” “If you put in the time, God will reward your efforts.” “God loves a hard worker”. These are all sayings that we’ve probably heard at least once in our life, and they’re all used to motivate us to continue to put in just a little bit more time, energy, or effort into our jobs because with just a few more inches of effort we’ll hit gold. We’ve been taught from a young age about the importance of hard work, of finding a job and being successful at it as the keys to wealth and prosperity, and that God wants that for us. The problem with this line of thinking is that this isn’t a universal experience, and depending on when and where you were born, what skin color you have, your gender or sexual expression, your physical or mental abilities, or how much money is in your parents bank account, the “hard work = success” equation isn’t true at all.

While this may be a reality we must accept in the secular world, the capitalistic contradiction has found its way into religion, particularly the American brand of Christianity. The effect that it has had on Christians for generations are present but they aren’t mentioned nearly enough, because for many it’s seen as Christian belief functioning normally. However, the truth is that there is nothing normal about a belief which creates a mindset that contradicts the teachings of the religion. If you want proof of this, ask yourself the question “what is my purpose in life?”

The purpose of life is a complicated and long question. Thousands of years of philosophy have gone by and we still don’t have an answer that can apply to all humans across time. Religions have attempted to wrestle with this question too, and have produced their own answers which are accepted by their believers as the true answer. Christianity’s answer to the question can be found all over the Bible, sometimes explicit and sometimes alluded too. The most accepted answer to the question was said by none other than Jesus himself in Matthew 22:36-40. Every other answer given in the Bible revolve around this “love God and love your neighbor as yourself” theme. So to put it simply, our purpose in life is to love God and love each other. 

But for many Christians, that answer isn’t satisfactory. If it was satisfactory then there wouldn’t be an entire industry of Christian self-help books dedicated to help Christian’s “find God’s purpose for their life”. If Christians believed such a simple answer as “love God and love each other” was truly their purpose in life, then Rick Warren’s “Purpose Driven Life” wouldn’t be one of the best selling books of all time. The reason that these books exist is because Christians don’t truly accept “love God and love each other” as their purpose in life, and they don’t accept this answer because “what’s my purpose in life” isn’t really the question they are asking. 

The question Christians, and most people in a capitalist society, really mean when they ask “what is my purpose” is “what job/career should I have”. This is because for our entire lives we have been taught and conditioned to believe that our purpose in life is to find a job to work and be successful at until we’re able to retire. We are conditioned to believe that our lives only have meaning or purpose when we’re working. Capitalism has tainted our idea of purpose. When we become uncomfortable in our jobs, when we aren’t getting adequate pay, when the job isn’t making us happy, or when we find ourselves unemployed for a period of time, many Christians find themselves going down the “what is my purpose” rabbit hole. And where do many Christian’s turn to? To sermons, seminars, devotionals, and “God’s purpose for your life” books.  All of the “find God’s purpose” outlets are popular because they teach how to be comfortable with our place within, or better yet survive in spite of, capitalism. And all it takes is a “change in mindset” or a “spiritual shift in our worldview”, or any religious code phrase for “see your current suffering as a test from God that we must overcome.”

But how did we get to this point? How did our idea of purpose become so twisted? There are three parts that have aided in correlating work and purpose. The youngest part is the American Dream. The idea that anyone who works hard will succeed. We already know that this isn’t true for everyone, and anyone that isn’t a white, Christian, able-bodied, straight, cis-gendered male will face more difficulty and their “success” will be less than if they fit the mold. But even knowing this, the dream is still pushed by marginalized communities that are searching for salvation from their oppression through capitalistic means. 

The next part of the puzzle is the “Protestant work ethic” which is the foundation of the American Dream. The Protestant work ethic was a name given for a phenomenon that had been going on for almost a thousand years, in which Christianity was contributing to the growth of capitalism through its teaching. The teaching in question was about predestination, particularly “how would one know if they were saved”. The answer: “if you are rich, take that as a sign that God picked you to get into heaven”. But what if you’re poor? Then if you work hard enough, your work ethic will be a sign that you’ll make it into heaven. This thinking would be the catalyst for greed and inequality. Business owners would cut corners and lower wages to increase their own profits, and in turn the employees worked harder just to make ends meet. But on the bright side, both groups could rest assured that they would make it into heaven based on nothing other than capitalistic exploitation. This was the underlying thought process of the Christian capitalist world, which venerated the rich and pressed the poor to enjoy their suffering. This was so accepted, that when union organizers or communists threatened the capitalist idea of work, they were labeled as atheists, because if you don’t believe in capitalism you must not believe in God.

The final piece of the puzzle begins even farther back in time, thousands of years in the past in fact. This piece is the idea of “divine reward and punishment”. Divine reward and punishment are easy concepts to grasp. “If you do something God/the gods like, then you’ll be rewarded. But if you do something God/the gods don’t like, then you’ll be punished”. How strong is this thinking really? Imagine you’re a Bronze Age hardworking farmer that diligently takes care of their crops. God/the gods will reward your hard work, and come harvest time your harvest will be bountiful. But now imagine you’re a lazy farmer that doesn’t care to their fields. God/the gods will punish your laziness with a bad harvest. Obviously, this kind of thinking ignores real world conditions. What if I’m a hard worker but the soil was bad there was a famine, will the gods still punish me? Or what if I’m not that diligent but the soil is excellent and there were favorable rains, are the gods still blessing me?

This “good human action = divine reward” and “bad human action = divine punishment” thinking can fit to almost an scenario. Any human action could be perceived as good or bad and anything could be perceived as divine reward or punishment. Maybe being a hardworking farmer wasn’t what the gods were judging us by. Maybe it’s if we treat our family with respect, or if we pay our tithes, or if we give honor to the monarch, or if we worshipped the right god in the right way, or it may be all of the above. What if the gods didn’t reward us with a good harvest, they just sent a lot of rain, or they didn’t allow our country to be invaded, or maybe they allowed our army to conquer another country. We can mix and match any good or bad human action with any perceived divine action it will make perfect sense, as long as we ignore all other material possibilities. 

Because the possibilities of “divine reward and punishment” are endless, it was incredibly easy for human beings to make anything fit its structure regardless of how much harm it produced. This was exploited by those with political, economic, and religious power to keep the lower classes in line. When those in power began to acquire and hoard more and more wealth through feudalism leaving less resources for those below them on the social ladder, the foundation of the“Protestant work ethic” was set. As feudalism evolved into capitalism, those of the lower classes that struggled to make enough money to survive were assured that if they just worked hard they could make it into heaven. All the while the rich lived in comfort, not having to worry about their salvation at all as their wealth was their ticket into the pearly gates. Later on in the United States, those in power spread that same message but changed it to match an ever-growing secular rhetoric. Instead of heaven/hell being the divine reward/punishment for our amount of work, it was now success or failure, ignoring the conditions many people live through and the multiple oppressions they may face. Just like the only escape that many had from their oppression a millennia ago was their belief that they might make it into heaven, many today believe that their only escape from their oppression is to be successful. And it is this capitalist idea of “being successful” that has become the purpose of our lives. 

Is there a way to solve the capitalist problem within Christianity in regards to purpose? Even at my most optimistic, my best answer is “maybe”. While individual people can come to the realization that God’s purpose for their life has nothing to do with a job or a career but has everything to do with faith and how we treat other people, there are more factors at work. As a whole, Christianity has survived by becoming a valuable tools to those in power to control the lower classes, this is undeniable. If Christian institutions were to make a real effort to make their members see that their purpose is to love God and love each other rather than stressing over work, who knows how the political and economic powers would react. Without diving into speculation, it would take a wholistic effort to untangle capitalism from Christianity, as their are too many variables at play that reinforce the relationship. Without total effort, a true solution may be hopeless. Even still, it would be a greater comfort for the oppressed and lower classes to come to the realization that God’s purpose for them is to beings full of love rather than being complicit in capitalist exploitation. 

“The end of the matter; all has been heard. Fear God, and keep his commandments; for that is the whole duty of everyone.”

Ecclesiastes 12:13 NRSV-CI

Posted on

Why I Left Christianity

Since I was a little girl, I’ve always loved reading. The way an author could weave words together to create a world my mind could escape to was always fascinating, and as I got older, words became even more meaningful. I learned that the purpose of vocabulary wasn’t just to know a lot of words for the sake of knowing them. The purpose was communication; to have the tools necessary to be able to say exactly what I was thinking or feeling at a given moment. As such, I try to be very intentional about saying what I mean and meaning what I say….and that is why I could no longer continue calling myself a “Christian.”

A label is “a descriptive or identifying word or phrase,”  and the purpose of any kind of label is generally to provide additional information about the person or thing it is being used to describe. A lot of people don’t like being “labeled”, and I get that. Labels can be restrictive and even inaccurate if applied incorrectly. However, I do think they’re useful when they’re used correctly because an accurate label can tell you a lot about a person without them having to say much at all. And I think, in the context of spirituality, calling yourself something is supposed to do just that: give context about who you are and what you believe in. So what exactly is a “Christian” and why isn’t that an accurate reflection of my beliefs? 

A Christian is “a person who has received Christian baptism or is a believer in Christianity.” I think this particular definition is important, because I think people like to classify themselves as “real Christians” based on a very broad conception of what it means to be a “follower of Christ.” However, what “following Christ” actually looks like in practice depends on who you ask, and I think we need to be more intentional about defining how much of “Christianity” is actually a reflection of Jesus. 

Christianity is “the religion derived from Jesus Christ, based on the Bible as sacred scripture, and professed by Eastern, Roman Catholic, and Protestant bodies.” Christianity is the largest religion in the world with over 2.4 billion adherents worldwide. There are 30,000 different groups, branches, or denominations that fall under the banner of “Christianity”, and more than 1,200 in the United States alone. 30,000 groups of people reading the same book, examining the same beliefs, and coming to very distinct conclusions about what it all means. Most, if not all, of those groups teach that they have a monopoly on “the truth” and anything that conflicts with “the truth” is inherently false. That in itself was reason enough to make me stop and think for a second, because using such a broad umbrella to describe the beliefs of that many people is bound to create some confusion. 

Further, I don’t think enough attention is given to the second half of the definition. I think a lot of people stop at “the religion derived from Jesus Christ” and don’t necessarily understand how much of what is “derived” from Jesus Christ gets filtered through the Bible as professed by Eastern, Roman Catholic, and Protestant bodies. Now, don’t get me wrong. Most people who read any kind of “holy text” just do the best they can to understand what someone who lived thousands of years ago was trying to communicate. That isn’t the problem. The problem is taking something that was originally communicated by an imperfect human being, translated multiple times by multiple imperfect human beings over a period of time spanning hundreds of years, interpreted by multiple imperfect human beings, millions (if not billions) of whom cannot reach any remote sort of consensus on what’s actually being communicated, and then calling any of of those interpretations “absolute truth” as it pertains to a supposedly infinite God. Even if all of that boils down to some basic belief in Jesus’ role as the Son of Man and His blood as atonement for sin, how that belief ultimately translates to the life one lives and the way one treats the people they encounter, particularly people who don’t identify as “Christian,” often presents a stark contrast to the Spirit of the Man that person is supposed to be representing. 

Let’s just be honest for a second, okay? If “just” believing in Jesus was really enough (John 3:16-17, anyone?), why is there a need for tens of thousands of different denominations and doctrines? Why isn’t it enough to just say “I’m a Christian” as a full expression of your beliefs? Or, if calling yourself a Christian only communicates that you believe in Jesus, why do so many people feel the need to follow up a statement of “I’m a Christian” with a long list of things they don’t agree with or subscribe to? If being a Christian were really just about Jesus, wouldn’t the teachings, the culture, and its standing in the world reflect that? 

A popular argument I encounter often (and one that absolutely drives me crazy) is that people are imperfect and any group of people coming together is going to have its flaws, which is true. However, you cannot have it both ways. You cannot believe in a theology that hinges on reaching a state of spiritual perfection and then blame your humanity for your group’s inability to achieve said perfection, especially as you put your “truth” on a pedestal over those who don’t aspire to the same standards you do. You cannot say “God is all-powerful,” “God can do anything,” or “God is not the author of confusion” and then argue that God is “still in control” of mediocre institutions that often cause more harm and damage than they do good. You cannot say “nobody is perfect” when someone tries to hold you accountable for your shortcomings as people fill your pews (or watch your services online) week in and week out just to hear how terrible they are and that they haven’t “overcome” yet because their faith isn’t strong enough. You can’t tell people to have a “real” relationship with God just to dictate what that relationship and the fruits of that relationship are supposed to look like. You can’t scare people into submission to what you believe is the truth by insinuating in any way, shape, form or fashion that disconnecting from toxic, dysfunctional people automatically means disconnecting from God. You cannot center yourself as a victim when people who have been marginalized, abused, and left spiritually destitute by your institutions aren’t interested in hearing your version of the gospel. You can’t call that “Jesus” when what you’re reaping isn’t something He would have sown.

You might be thinking, “So what’s the answer? If Christianity is so bad, what are people supposed to do?”, but that’s not a question I can answer for you. I don’t believe you can call yourself a “Christian” and separate a pure belief in Jesus and His sacrifice from the harm Christianity has caused and continues to cause so many throughout the world, but that’s me. I cannot call myself something that isn’t a truly accurate reflection of what I believe and the God that I worship. Personally, I just did the work to find a label that did accurately communicate what I believe. I’m a Christocentric Agapist, which means that I believe that love is the highest moral imperative and that my belief in love is centered around my belief in Jesus…and only that. There are no boxes I have to fit into. There is no long list of doctrines I have to adhere to. I can ask as many questions as I want and I don’t have to limit myself to one perspective in my pursuit of the answers. I can say, “I don’t know” if I don’t find the answers right away, or if I don’t find them at all. I can say, “I don’t think I need to change this,” or “I know this is a problem but I’m not ready to change it” without feeling like I have to stay away from my spiritual community until I’m ready to live my life on their terms. I don’t have to worry about whether I’m doing everything “right” or who is going to judge me if I do something “wrong.” My beliefs aren’t reflected in the clothes I wear, the day I worship on, the kind of food I eat, or the doctrines I claim. My beliefs are reflected in how I try to treat the people I encounter on a day-to-day basis, the kind of person I try to be, and the peace I have within. I’m not perfect, but it is a keen awareness of just how flawed I am that allows me to have compassion for the imperfect people I can relate to and that allows me to pray that God gives me compassion for the imperfect people I struggle to have compassion for. 

I do not believe in a theology that hinges on a state of spiritual perfection. I believe in a theology that teaches that Jesus lived a perfect life to pay the penalty for sin so that I could live a life of gratitude, compassion, empathy, and security in the fact that I am loved wholly and completely by an infinite, all-powerful, all-knowing God who has not only began a good work in me, but will see it to its completion. On God’s terms. In God’s time. All I have to do is let God be God.

Posted on

A Manifesto on Transparency

By Kara M. Young

I’ve been doing a lot of contemplating recently, and one of the biggest revelations has been that I have been tailoring my social media presence to people who are not my audience. I’ve been afraid to say certain things or post certain things because I’ve been afraid of being judged as “unworthy” or too flawed. I’ve been afraid of the sentiment being “You have a church, so how can you be doing x,y, and z?” But that’s a flawed way of thinking, for a number of reasons.


1. I live my life in alignment with my beliefs. I am very intentional about that. And the truth is that my beliefs do not fully coincide with those of Adventists, nor those of mainstream Christians. Further, I do not identify as either, because I believe both are irredeemably flawed and, to be perfectly clear, I do not believe that either entity is “the truth,” nor do I believe either entity has a monopoly on truth. I am an Agapist. A Christocentric Agapist, but an Agapist just the same. As such, I can’t be held to a standard that I don’t agree with, don’t believe in, and refuse to hold myself to because I genuinely and firmly believe that it facilitates an inaccurate and damaging depiction of the character of God.


2. I can’t preach unconditional love and acceptance while maintaining an unrealistic portrayal of my life. I can’t tell someone else to “be who you are” while simultaneously being afraid to publicly own ALL of who I am, especially when I am not ashamed of me. In fact, I’m really proud of the growth I’ve achieved thus far and the person I am continuing to become. I like me, and that’s something I have fought long and hard for.


3. I am aware that I am probably not “qualified” by many people’s standards to do what I’m doing, but I believe I’ve been called to it because I can’t be anything other than what I am. Life literally isn’t worth living to me if it means spending even one more second trying to fit myself into other people’s boxes. I have tried. My entire life, I have tried. And I’ve finally come to accept the fact that I can’t. That acceptance has opened my eyes to the fact that there are plenty of people out there who have had a similar experience and have ultimately opted to just be alone spiritually rather than compromise their liberty of conscience and liberty of thought for the sake of community. But those people…my people…need community, too.


4. Church as it stands isn’t designed for people who don’t “fit”. It’s not meant to accommodate people who want the benefit of community without the pressure to conform. So many people feel like you’re being disingenuous if you say you believe something and then don’t adhere to its tenets, and in a lot of ways, that’s not entirely untrue. If being a Christian means living my life like ________, and I don’t believe in that, am I really a Christian? And if I’m not, is that such a bad thing? I would call myself a Christian if doing so meant that the only thing anyone assumed about me was that I believed that Jesus is the Son of God and that He died to be the propitiation for sin itself. But realistically, saying you’re a Christian comes with a ton of other premises that MUST be relied on, otherwise your spirituality gets called into question, i.e. “How can you say you’re a Christian if you ________?”

The establishments that currently exist can only change or evolve so much before they become something they are not. And I realized some time ago that there’s no amount of change that could occur that would ultimately make room for me and all the other people that organized religion has either pushed to the fringes or excluded completely. So many of us wanted to belong, but even after the church began to say “come as you are,” it added, “once you get here, you’re supposed to change, and this is what your journey should look like, your questions should look like, your conclusions should look like….this is what you will look like. And if you don’t, something is seriously wrong.” There’s an underlying acceptance of certain fundamental “truths” that you are required to internalize and you literally cannot belong the the community if you don’t accept them. Some may call that “godly”. Some may call that “accountability.” Some may call that “the truth.” Personally, I call it presumptive, limiting, and unreflective of the God I have come to know and love. I want community that doesn’t require me to limit who God can be for me, doesn’t ask me to draw the same conclusions as everyone else, and gives me room to journey on God’s terms, not anyone else’s.

5. I’m not perfect, but I don’t think I’m supposed to be. I think that’s the point of real transparency…it’s the only way God’s strength can truly be made perfect in my weakness. If I’m too afraid to own that, how can I inspire anyone else to own it for themselves? How can I tell people that God is with them when they aren’t struggling, when they’re not wrestling, when they don’t feel the need to “repent,” when they’re asking questions other people don’t have answers for and drawing conclusions that other people condemn….and then be unwilling to transparent about how God does that for me every day? I know and believe in the depths of my heart that I am loved unconditionally and I know that because that love has been tested….tried with fire….and it hasn’t failed me yet. People think that they have to believe a certain way or live a certain way to experience God’s presence fully and I’m here to say that that simply isn’t true. Nothing can separate me from God’s love and my experience has been that God will always give as much of the Spirit as I am open to receiving. It’s in my darkest moments that God has shown up for me in the most profound ways and if God has done that for me, I have no doubt it can be done for you, too.

All of that being said, I am committed to doing my best to be more vulnerable and to live transparently. My target audience isn’t the people who think they have the truth. My target audience is anyone who is seeking truth, those who believe that truth-seeking is the journey of a lifetime. My goal is to be a part of a community that prioritizes love in a way that heals rather than does harm. And I just want to be myself. I want others to know that they really can be who they are and not be treated differently because of it. I don’t care who you are or what you believe. Boundaries are drawn based on how we treat each other. Do your best not to do harm. If you mess up (as we all inevitably do), acknowledge it, take responsibility for it, and try to do better moving forward, understanding that the love doesn’t change and grace is sufficient.

My hope and prayer is that we can all find freedom in the journey, and thus a greater sense of compassion, patience, kindness, self-awareness and acceptance, personal accountability, and unconditional love. -ky<3

Posted on

Biphobia, “Preferences” and Why Personal Accountability is the Answer

By Kara M. Young

If you’ve been on social media within the last couple of weeks, you know that Netflix’s “Love is Blind” has taken the internet by storm, not only because of “The Experiment”, but also because, *Spoiler Alert*, male bisexuality seemingly ruined one of the relationships. This sparked a Twitter firestorm and #BisexualMenExist has been trending. In particular, people have been debating whether or not it’s “biphobic” for people to “prefer” to date someone who is not bisexual. It got my wheels turning, and I think this discussion illustrates an issue a lot of us talk about, but few of us seem to fully grasp: preferences.

Society has taken a turn towards broader inclusion and representation of demographics who have previously been relegated to the fringes. This has been met with both praise and criticism, but one of the mostly hotly debated aspects of the conversation has been acceptance and inclusion on a personal level, particularly with regard to romantic relationships. Things that were previously viewed as mere “preferences” are now being associated with the negative stereotypes and biases against certain groups that have been perpetuated by society. On the one hand, many agree that it is important to address personal biases that cause one to have an irrational aversion to certain characteristics. However, many people feel attacked when what they feel are harmless preferences are labeled as being rooted in bigotry, patriarchy, misogyny, phobias, self-hate, ignorance, etc. Preferences in favor of marginalized characteristics are less likely to be criticized and, generally speaking, the most vocal opponents of a given preference are those whom the preference excludes.

The biggest question in my mind when I encounter these debates is, “What do we do about it?” I think a lot of conversations are had about a lot of things but, in my opinion, very few of those conversations end with practical solutions that make sense for everyone. For example, we can acknowledge that it’s wrong to mistreat or exclude people from entertainment and media solely based on what they look like or who they love, but how does acknowledging that and re-working the system ultimately change what people believe or feel towards others? Fun Fact: the Supreme Court kind of addressed this in Shelley v. Kraemer. In Shelley, a Black family sued after buying a house that came with a restrictive covenant that did not allow Black or Asian people to occupy the property. The court held that the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause doesn’t allow states to enforce racially discriminatory housing covenants. However, the court also held that private parties could abide by the terms of racially restrictive covenants. Essentially, the government isn’t supposed to be racist, but people can be, and while the government can protect its citizens to an extent, it can’t change what’s in someone’s heart or mind. Society can’t really do that, either. We can bully people into silence, but we can’t make them appreciate or agree with things they’re dead-set against supporting. If anything, bullying the bullies just creates resentment and makes them double-down on the negative views they already have.

So what can we do? For starters, we can inform ourselves and take the time to understand the differences between preferences and biases, phobias, bigotry, etc. Next, we can self-evaluate and figure out what about someone else’s opinion makes us feel insecure and what our own preferences and biases are. Lastly, we may not be able to change other people, but we can work on ourselves and impact the people around us and the spaces we occupy.

What are “preferences” versus what makes a person “phobic”?

Preferences and phobias are not the same thing, but sometimes they’re used interchangeably for the sake of making a point, so let’s clarify: phobic means “having or involving an extreme or irrational fear of or aversion to something”; a preference is “a greater liking for one alternative over another or others.” Now, let’s illustrate using the conversation surrounding biphobia as an example. Biphobia is an “aversion toward bisexuality and toward bisexual people as a social group or as individuals. It can take the form of denial that bisexuality is a genuine sexual orientation, or of negative stereotypes about people who are bisexual (such as the beliefs that they are promiscuous or dishonest).” A preference is a greater liking for heterosexuality over bisexuality, homosexuality, etc. There is a difference, however, it is possible for preferences to be informed by or based on an irrational aversion to certain characteristics based on negative stereotypes, bias, ignorance, etc. This is often demonstrated by people using negative stereotypes or other statements rooted in bias/ignorance as a basis for justifying or explaining their preferences.

Continuing to use biphobia as an example and based on the definitions we now have of preferences versus phobias, it’s fair to conclude that it is not inherently biphobic to prefer to be with someone who is heterosexual. However, it is biphobic to allow stigma and ignorance to inform your preferences, and that’s an important distinction to make. For example, saying “My religious beliefs don’t align with the beliefs of someone who feels comfortable living that lifestyle and being in spiritual alignment with my partner is important to me” or “I’m heterosexual and I want to be with someone who is heterosexual” is not the same as saying   “I can’t be with a bisexual man because he’s obviously a closeted gay man who’d probably end up cheating on me with men and infecting me with HIV (I know that sounds harsh, but it’s a summation of some of the more common myths associated with bisexual men).”

The takeaway is that you can have preferences and like who you like without perpetuating stereotypes and bigotry as a means of justifying your preferences. That applies to everyone and everything, not just biphobia.

The Big Picture

Taking what we just learned about preferences and phobias and applying them more broadly, I think it’s important to take a hard look at how and why we convolute the two. Often times, it appears that people immediately get defensive at any expression of a preference that doesn’t include them or any criticism of people they share certain characteristics with, automatically being offended by it….but that’s not really fair, is it? First, why do so many of us have such a “knee-jerk” reaction to hearing that there’s something about us that someone else doesn’t like? What causes that? And is it that person’s fault for saying how they feel, or is something going on inside of us that sparks a visceral response? Second, why assume the preference is rooted in something negative? Or, even if it’s clear that the preference is rooted in something negative, what does that mean for you? Are you bothered by it because this particular person’s preference actually impacts your life? Are you bothered by it because you’re taking it personally? Are you bothered by it because it speaks to old wounds caused by someone else? And what can you actually do about any of it? Are you managing your expectations and being honest with yourself about what is actually within your power to change/control, or are you investing your time, energy, and emotions into responses/solutions that ultimately won’t address what’s going on inside of you and/or make you feel better?

These questions are important to consider because the answers have serious implications on how we address issues of inclusion and what we require from others versus what we require from ourselves. Inclusion and acceptance are important, especially systemically, but taking it to extremes on an interpersonal level suggests that everyone has to be open to involvement with anyone who might be interested in having a relationship with them (this can apply to platonic relationships, too) because there aren’t any “valid” reasons for preferring one characteristic over other alternatives. That doesn’t sound like too much fun, does it? Because the truth is that, if we’re being honest with ourselves, we all have preferences. We all have biases. We all have things that we are and are not attracted to and things that we are and are not willing to bring into our everyday lives and spaces. And maybe most importantly, we all have things about us that someone somewhere probably doesn’t like. At what point do we decide to own who we are rather than looking for outside validation and start appreciating the people and the spaces that make room for us as we are? Or if those people or those spaces don’t exist, creating them rather than trying to force our way into places where we aren’t wanted?

It’s a lot to think about lol but that brings us to the accountability piece. How do all of the questions and all of the thinking translate to change? First, acceptance is the initial step. You have to accept that you aren’t for everyone and everyone isn’t for you and that is OKAY. Second, you have to ask yourself some questions and give yourself some honest answers, because those answers will give you clarity for the last step, which is: figuring out what you have to do to heal and move forward and then doing it.

The Solution: Personal Accountability

As has already been stated, You can’t change other people; you can only change yourself. It may seem a bit cliché to say, but it’s true. We can’t make other people be different or do better, but we CAN heal, we CAN set an example by holding ourselves to a higher standard, and we CAN show compassion towards others because we understand that personal accountability is a journey, not a destination.

Healing requires accepting that you’re responsible for your own healing. It’s nice to receive apologies or to have our feelings validated, but we can’t put our own healing on hold while we wait for someone else to acknowledge that they’ve mistreated us. That day may never come, meanwhile we’re stuck at a standstill because we’re looking outside of ourselves for something we can decide to overcome on our own. Personally, I usually only find myself getting defensive when someone touches on something I’m already insecure about. If I’m not insecure, I usually don’t care, because my emotions or my past pain aren’t clouding my view and I’m able to see that that person’s opinion isn’t personal, or even when it is, it has no bearing on my reality. I’ve really had to learn to be intentional about focusing less on what someone else said or did and focusing more on why it made me feel the way it did and what I can do on my end to avoid feeling that way in the future. Healing takes back your power. It allows you to refrain from getting defensive about things that aren’t personal and that most likely don’t actually matter in the context of YOUR life. It allows you to have clarity on situations where bias and phobias are exhibited, which enables you to address those things effectively, in a way that generates real solutions rather than mere catharsis. To be clear, I am NOT saying that we shouldn’t speak out against injustice, bigotry, hate, ignorance, etc. I AM saying that lashing out at people in anger/pain has proven to be ineffective. It often just serves to make things worse. There are ways to firmly and clearly communicate that something is wrong without attacking and alienating your audience. Also, keeping a clear head enables you to keep things in perspective, i.e. does it really matter if I don’t fit a specific person’s preference? Is this someone I really want to be involved with, especially given the information I have on their feelings toward characteristics that apply to me?

Personal accountability also means holding yourself to the same standards you hold others to. You can’t expect to receive a love and respect that you don’t give. You can’t perpetuate negative stereotypes or bigotry toward others and then be upset when someone else does the same to you. You can’t reserve the right to have your own preferences about what you do or do not like and then be upset when someone else has preferences that exclude you. Again, you’re not for everyone and everyone isn’t for you. The sooner you learn to own who you are and everything that comes with the territory of being you, the sooner you can stop worrying about the people who you don’t fit with and the sooner you can start focusing on the people who you do fit with.

Lastly, compassion is free. It takes nothing but intention and a little bit of effort to treat others the way you want to be treated. You never know what someone has been through and the world desperately needs people who are more committed to loving and setting the standard than they are committed to being “right” and giving an eye for an eye. You may not always receive compassion and you can’t control that, but you can choose to be kind to yourself. You can control what you put out into the world and how you choose to treat people. If you don’t like to be stereotyped or belittled or viewed as less-than because of someone else’s bias, don’t turn around and do that to someone else. Don’t be ashamed of being yourself and liking what you like, but be aware of what informs your preferences and always treat others with the kindness and respect you want to be treated with.

When we know better, we do better, so know better and do better because you CAN.

Posted on

Does “Original Sin” Nullify Free Choice?

This week, we’ll be examining the nature of humanity and how that impacts whether we are free moral agents. “Sin” is “an offense against religious or moral law.” Every culture has its own interpretation of what it means to commit a sin. In the Christian tradition, the concept of “original sin” is based on the premise that “the tendency to sin [is] innate in all human beings, held to be inherited from Adam in consequence of the Fall.” This western Christian concept was first alluded to in the 2nd century by Irenaeus, Bishop of Lyons. Other church fathers, such as Augustine (AD 354-430), also shaped and developed the doctrine. Theologians have characterized this condition in many ways, seeing it as ranging from something as insignificant as an inclination or tendency towards sin (referred to as a “sin nature without collective guilt”) to total depravity or automatic guilt of all humans through collective guilt. Moreover, as a further consequence of the first iniquity, humanity is hopelessly lost in a state of sin and is powerless on its own to obey the will of God. That said, does “original sin” nullify our ability to choose “right” from “wrong” without direct intervention/influence from God?

Here’s what we know:

  1. The concept of sinfulness being an inherent tendency in humanity is unique to western Christianity. For example, the Eastern Orthodox version of original sin is the view that sin originates with the Devil. They acknowledge that the introduction of ancestral sin into the human race affected the subsequent environment for humanity (see also traducianism). However, they never accepted Augustine’s notions of original sin and hereditary guilt.
  2. The doctrine of “inherited sin” is not found in most of mainstream Judaism. Although some in Orthodox Judaism place blame on Adam and Eve for overall corruption of the world, and though there were some others who believed that mortality was a punishment brought upon humanity on account of Adam’s sin, that is not the dominant view in most of Judaism today. Modern Judaism generally teaches that humans are born sin-free and untainted, and choose to sin later and bring suffering to themselves.
  3. The concept of inherited sin does not exist in Islam. Islam teaches that Adam and Eve sinned, but then sought forgiveness and thus were forgiven by God. Quotes from the Qur’an:
    • But Satan caused them to slip out of it and removed them from that [condition] in which they had been. And We said, “Go down, [all of you], as enemies to one another, and you will have upon the earth a place of settlement and provision for a time.” Then Adam received from his Lord [some] words, and He accepted his repentance. Indeed, it is He who is the Accepting of repentance, the Merciful.— Surah al-Baqara:36–37
    • Thus did Adam disobey his Lord, so he went astray. Then his Lord chose him, and turned to him with forgiveness, and gave him guidance.— Surah Ṭā Hāʼ:121–122

This question is important to consider because the concept of original sin implies that humans are incapable of making genuinely “good” choices without God being the direct source of that choice. But to be clear, the issue is less about whether humans are inherently “good” or inherently “bad” and more about whether we actually have the ability to choose one way or the other. If the bad things we do are ultimately the result of our “sinful natures” and the good things we do are the result of God’s influence rather than our own decisionmaking/will power, does freedom of choice even exist? Both the Qur’an and the Bible seem to suggest that it does. The Qur’an says this with regard to individual responsibility:

That no burdened person (with sins) shall bear the burden (sins) of another. And that man can have nothing but what he does (of good and bad). And that his deeds will be seen, Then he will be recompensed with a full and the best [fair] recompense

Surah an-Najm:38–41

Further, consider this portion of an extraordinary sermon delivered by Moses before his death as the Israelites prepared to enter the promised land:

“…when you obey the voice of the Lord your God, to keep his commandments and his statutes that are written in this Book of the Law, when you turn to the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul. For this commandment that I command you today is not too hard for you, neither is it far off.  It is not in heaven, that you should say, ‘Who will ascend to heaven for us and bring it to us, that we may hear it and do it?’ Neither is it beyond the sea, that you should say, ‘Who will go over the sea for us and bring it to us, that we may hear it and do it?’ But the word is very near you. It is in your mouth and in your heart, so that you can do it.”

Deuteronomy 30:10-14

What do you think? Does “original sin” nullify free choice? Is humanity inherently good, inherently evil, both, or neither? Do we have any control over the good and the bad things that we do? Let us know in the comments below!

Posted on

Fear and Faith

Most world religions teach some form of an afterlife. Further, the idea of “bad” behavior being punished, both in this life and in the “life” to come, is often used to discourage people from doing what is considered to be “bad”. For example, 58% of adults in the United States believe in hell (according to the Pew Research Center). The word “hell” usually describes “a place regarded in various religions as a spiritual realm of evil and suffering, often traditionally depicted as a place of perpetual fire beneath the earth where the wicked are punished after death.” If the wicked are punished, it stands to reason that people would want to avoid being wicked, right? So this week, we will look at the relationship between fear and faith. Is fear a useful tool that God uses to get us to obey?

Here’s what we know:

  1. Fear is “an unpleasant emotion caused by the belief that someone or something is dangerous, likely to cause pain, or a threat.”
  2. A deterrent is “a thing that discourages or is intended to discourage someone from doing something.”
  3. In the context of the criminal justice system, “deterrence — the crime prevention effects of the threat of punishment — is a theory of choice in which individuals balance the benefits and costs of crime.”
  4. The National Institute of Justice summarizes some of the research on deterrence:
    • The certainty of being caught is a vastly more powerful deterrent than the punishment.
    • Sending an individual convicted of a crime to prison isn’t a very effective way to deter crime. Prisons are good for punishing criminals and keeping them off the street, but prison sentences (particularly long sentences) are unlikely to deter future crime. Prisons actually may have the opposite effect: Inmates learn more effective crime strategies from each other, and time spent in prison may desensitize many to the threat of future imprisonment.
    • Police deter crime by increasing the perception that criminals will be caught and punished. The police deter crime when they do things that strengthen a criminal’s perception of the certainty of being caught. Strategies that use the police as “sentinels,” such as hot spots policing, are particularly effective.
    • Increasing the severity of punishment does little to deter crime.
  5. Most world religions teach that reaching “heaven” (or paradise, nirvana, etc.) and avoiding “hell” is at least somewhat dependent upon doing and/or being “good”.

In an experiment involving 61 ethnically and religiously diverse undergraduate students at the University of British Columbia, the participants were asked to use mental math to solve 20 addition problems. Before the test, a monitor explained that there was a glitch in the computer program being used to administer the test and that the participants needed to press the space bar key immediately after each question appeared in order to avoid seeing the answer. Cheating behavior was measured according to whether participants followed these instructions. Once the test was completed, the participants were asked to fill out a “View of God Scale,” which gauged their conceptions of God as “positive” (i.e. forgiving, loving, gentle, etc.) or “negative” (i.e. vengeful, harsh, angry, punishing, etc.). Next, the participants were asked to complete a suspicion probe, the Hoge (1972)
scale of intrinsic religiosity, a Views of God scale, and a set of demographic questions.

The results published in 2011 in The International Journal for Psychology of Religion indicated that the students’ differences in religious beliefs had no bearing on whether the students cheated or not, but the participants who applied more punitive attributes to God cheated less than those who attributed positive traits of character to God.

Fear can be a powerful deterrent, but perhaps we should be less focused on whether fear itself is a bad thing and more focused on who and/or what we are afraid of. For example, should the good things we do be motivated by a fear of going to hell? Or should the good things we do be motivated by a “fear of” (it may be better worded as “concern for”) how the negative things we do impact us, the people we love, and the world around us?

Further, is a fear of going to hell really an effective deterrent? Is the fear of what may or may not happen when we die or some other time in the future enough motivation to do good now? Is the threat of more immediate consequences even effective? Children disobey their parents all the time, knowing that they could be (and oftentimes are) caught and punished. Discipline works up to a point, but ultimately, each of us has to decide for ourselves what kinds of people we want to be and the kinds of choices we want to make.

What do you think? How does fear interplay with your faith? Do you think fear is an effective deterrent? If so, why? If not, what motivates you to be the best person you can be? Let us know in the comments below!

Posted on

Behavior Modification: Good or Bad:?

We all need to know where our beliefs stem from and why, but knowing what you think about something doesn’t mean much if you don’t spend time considering how what you think impacts what you do. Most, if not all, world religions/ideologies encourage us to be “good” people, but what does being “good” look like? Is being “good” based more on what we do (behavior) or on who we are (character)?

Here’s what we know:

  1. The word character refers to “the mental and moral qualities distinctive to an individual.” The word behavior refers to “the way in which one acts or conducts oneself, especially toward others.”
  2. Behavior modification is defined as “the alteration of behavioral patterns through the use of such learning techniques as biofeedback and positive or negative reinforcement.”
  3. Behavior modification utilizes the idea that good behavior should lead to positive consequences and bad behavior should lead to negative consequences.
  4. The four main techniques used to encourage behavior modification are:
    1. Positive Punishment – adding a consequence that will deter a person from repeating the behavior. Ex.: Giving a child an extra chore as a consequence for lying when asked if he cleaned his room.
    2. Negative Punishment – involves removing something from a person. Examples include taking away privileges or removing positive attention.
    3. Positive Reinforcement – giving a person something that reinforces good behavior. Discipline that relies mostly on positive reinforcement is usually very effective. Examples of positive reinforcement include praise or a reward system.
    4. Negative Reinforcement – a person is motivated to change her behavior because it will take away something unpleasant. Negative reinforcement can be less effective than positive reinforcement. Ex. a child who stops a behavior because her parent yells at her is trying to get rid of the negative reinforcer (the yelling). 

Most people would probably agree that positive behaviors are good things to encourage and be supportive of. Most people support things like donating to charity, being polite to everyone, giving a hug or a kind word to someone who is feeling down, etc. And individual communities and society as a whole provide both positive and negative reinforcement for all manner of things. That said, the question may be less about character development instead of behavior modification and more about how we go about finding a balance between the two.

Finding balance may seem pretty straightforward, but things can get tricky. Why? Because while there are positive and negative behaviors that most of us can agree on, there are some behaviors that most people can’t agree on. Some people believe certain things are okay, and other people believe those things are not okay. Further, some people disagree with certain behaviors to the extent that they believe that it’s society’s responsibility or their community’s responsibility to make sure no one engages in those behaviors. So how do we find that balance?

The important thing to remember is that love is the rule, so everything we believe AND everything we do should stem from the principle of unconditional love. In this context, love should perhaps lead us to ask ourselves questions, such as:

  1. What behaviors do I consider to be “good”, and why? Does my belief stem from my own understanding and conviction? Does my belief stem from someone else’s understanding/conviction and my concern for what they will think of me or do to me?
  2. How do I prioritize the behaviors I consider to be “good” (i.e. the positive behaviors that are the most important and have the most impact on the world around you may take priority over the positive behaviors that are less important because they have less impact)?
  3. When I do something I believe is good, what’s my motivation/intention? Do I do good because I want to be rewarded/viewed positively by other people? Do I do good because I’m afraid of receiving punishment/negative feedback from other people? Do I do good because I am convicted in my heart that I should?
  4. What type of punishment/reinforcement am I most responsive to? When I want to improve myself, what kind of feedback inspires me the most? Who, if anyone, do I feel safe and confident receiving feedback from? What makes me feel safe and confident in this person(s)?

And if you see someone exhibiting behaviors that you believe are negative:

  1. Is this behavior causing immediate and/or irreparable physical, mental, and/or emotional harm to this person, me, or someone else? Note: If the answer is yes, you may need to consider getting a family member and/or law enforcement involved.
  2. Does this person believe their behavior is negative?
  3. What is my relationship with this person? How well do I know this person? How well does this person know me? Have they explicitly invited me to give them feedback?
  4. What is my motive/intent in giving feedback? Are my intentions pure, unselfish, and genuine? Am I being honest with myself about my intentions?
  5. How does my feedback stand to benefit this person? Is there any way my feedback could potentially do more harm than good?
  6. What kind of punishment/reinforcement is this person most responsive to? Am I communicating my feedback effectively? Am I communicating my feedback in a way that reflects my understanding of the person I am sharing it with?

We don’t have the power to make people change or to force them to agree with us on what constitutes “good” or “bad”, but we do have the power to live our own lives consistently with what we believe and to support and encourage others in their pursuit to do the same. Loving means being present, being engaged, avoiding making assumptions, and putting our own egos and agendas aside in order to do what’s best for each other. We probably won’t always agree on everything, but being there for each other and working together towards being the best people we can be isn’t a bad start.

What do you think? Is behavior modification good or bad? What motivates you to change things about yourself: fear or conviction or both? Has anyone ever tried to change you? If so, how did that make you feel? What does being a “good” person or doing “good” mean to you? Let us know in the comments below!

Posted on

Journey to Forgiveness

Hello, my name is Paige Baxter. I’ve recently gone through a life-changing, personal healing journey. During that journey, my mindset, thinking, how I act, and even the things that I post on social media have changed. I was asked by my cousin to share my views with you all, not only on my journey, but on the power of forgiveness. First things first, though. I think it is important for you to know a little bit about my journey and how I got here……….

I’ve put tons of energy into myself in 2019. I’ve purposely invested time in myself in order to truly heal…heal my soul and my heart. Through my healing journey, I was blessed enough to find God again, and at a time in my life when I needed him the most. You see, I was at a place in my life where I needed to re-find my glory, remember whose child I was, and rediscover my true life’s calling. Finding God this time around was different than when I found him during my years in the church. Being able to reconnect with him on a spiritual level has given me the ability to not only understand certain things in the Bible, but to have a better understanding of how the universe, karma, vibrations, thoughts, and energy all work and flow together to create our reality. My faith and belief in God are stronger than ever before and it’s now a bond and a unique understanding that can never be broken. No, I’m not Christian, and I do not practice religion. I believe in spirituality, meditating, smudging, crystals, chakras, sage, and energy. I believe in the power of the SOUL and its ability to connect with God on a spiritual level.

As I poured energy into myself and God, beautiful things began to take place in my life. Once strained relationships began to heal all on their own, my spirit became lighter, my light began to shine brighter, my heart became happier, and my smile became infectious. I realized that in doing this I had begun to heal myself from the inside, which in turn manifested into my reality on the outside.

One day, I sat back and took the time to realize how healing my soul also allowed me to forgive, major key! We will all face hurt, pain, and trauma in our lives. It’s similar to death in that it’s inevitable. I realized that before I took the time and effort to heal myself, I had never been able to forgive the people who had hurt me throughout the years; the people that betrayed me, played me, abandoned me, tried to break me, and legit prayed for my downfall. I carried that pain with me every day and I took it everywhere I went. It became the unseen baggage in my life. It created an internal weight on me, causing me to become emotional every time I spoke about it. It made my soul heavy. 

It’s funny to me now because I used to preach forgiveness to my friends and family, but I didn’t even know what it was or what it even really felt like.  Through healing and through God, first and foremost, I was able to be made whole again, and in that, I was able to forgive all of those that spoke against or trespassed against me. Through loving God and myself, I was able to let go of the pain and the baggage, truly letting the past stay in the past; it was at that point that I realized that I was able to forgive EVERYONE! I did not carry them with me everywhere, and I no longer took that pain and anguish with me either. My soul became lighter and started to shine brighter and brighter.

What are the lessons about forgiveness that I have learned throughout my healing journey, you ask?

Recently, I was on social media and I ran across a post from one of the many people who have trespassed in my life.  I immediately began typing, preparing to point out their hypocrisy and decided to speak my “truth” and “expose” them. As I laid there trying to come with what I was going to say, how I was going to say it, and if it would be too many characters to fit in the comment box….something happened. A voice (God) came over me, and I felt a sense of calmness, and “exposing” that person was no longer on my spirit. Through forgiving them and a strong relationship with God, I realized that having the last word is not always needed. I know what happened, they know what they did, and no matter how it’s masked, in reality, there is also another person that knows, too: my mighty and faithful God. 

At the end of the day, we all have to answer for our sins, mistakes, shortcomings and wrongdoings. I won’t have to answer for what they did, but I will have to answer for what I did with my time on this planet. When I thought about my answer to “exposing” said person, I realized I couldn’t even use the “I didn’t know better at the time” excuse; I did know better, so I listened to God and decided against it.

Growth for me was walking away from an opportunity like that and keeping it between God and I. When I sat down and thought about it, I was able to do that through the power of forgiveness. When I realized the power that forgiveness created in my life, I realized the pain, hurt and the people that did those things no longer had power over me. For years, I’ve heard people say “you forgive people for yourself, not for them” and never got it…until I was today years old. Through the power of forgiving, I was able to release my traumatic baggage by relinquishing their power/hold over my life. 

All in all, my good people, don’t let the trespassers against you win. Believe in God, believe in yourself, in your light, and in love. If you don’t take away anything else from me and my journey, just remember, they failed because God WON! Peace, Prosperity, Positivity, Aśe! – Paigey B.

Paige Baxter was born and raised on the west side of Detroit. She has a BA in Psychology from Wayne
State University. Her love and passion for mental health and for working with children placed a calling on her life to be a social worker, a field she’s worked in for the last 3 years. She seeks to impact the world through her testimony, her ability to uplift, encourage, and inspire others to believe in themselves. She wants people to see the beauty within themselves and recognize their own worth and just how amazing and magical they can be. She takes pride in being blessed so that she may be a blessing to others. She believes that is the true meaning of being human and being a child of God.


Posted on

Rob’s Truth: The Bedroom God

If there is one thing I know, it’s church. My mother was a choir director when my brothers and I were very young. Consequently, we got an extra dose of church due to choir or praise team practice. Late into Friday night, we would sit on those hard pews as the choir worked out the selections for Saturday’s service.

I knew, like all the youth, every crack and crevice of that old church. I knew every exit, every closet and every stairwell. There was no room that I had not thoroughly explored. During those years, it was a vast magical world. Magical because every so often strange things would happen.

I’ve observed the ushers in white collect the morning’s tithes and offerings while the congregation sang “You Can’t Beat God’s Giving”. So often the choir sang until screams rang out in the sanctuary. The spirit caused folk to rock side to side and lift their hands. And when they couldn’t take it anymore, they would wail.  They would wail and they could not be comforted. An usher would have to lead them out of the sanctuary until the spirit turned them loose. 

I’ve seen the sanctuary filled with white smoke when there was no fire. I was taught that it was the Shekinah. It meant the presence of God had filled the sanctuary. I’ve watched with fascination as the preacher preached himself into a fit. He seemed to strain underneath the weight of delivering the word of God. I recall Pastor Penn, a deep baritone, would sing his favorite song before every sermon. James Cleveland’s, “I Don’t Feel No Ways Tired”. Bellowing,

“I don’t feel no ways tired

I’ve come too far from where I started from

Nobody told me that the road would be easy

I don’t believe He brought me this far to leave me”

Yes, I know church. And I know God. 

During my final two years of high school, I lived with my grandparents in Buffalo, NY. Life had become extremely complex overnight. I was faced with all the dangers and obstacles that most inner-city youth are faced with; drugs, violence, crime, sex, etc. I was trying to find myself in the midst of it all. 

One night, I prayed to God and asked him to reveal himself. I told him that if He didn’t, I would live my life on my terms. I didn’t set any parameters. I only asked that it be undeniable. I needed to know God was real.

A few hours later, around 5 am, someone called the house phone, which lay directly beside my Grandmother. She answered the phone, at first concerned, and then irritated when the caller asked for me. 


“Robert. Robert! It’s for you!” my Grandmother yelled with so much disagreeableness that I swore I would slap whatever fool thought it was a good idea to call the house phone this early. Everyone knows you don’t just call the house phone all willy nilly.
“Hello.”

“What do you want?” The caller asked in such an agitated tone you would have thought I’d woken him from his sleep.

“What? Who is this? You…you called me.” I responded confused and groggy.

“Its Paul. What. Do. You. Want?” He replied with increasing annoyance.

“Bruh.” I had to pause and collect myself. I wasn’t known for my patience or gentleness in those days. “Bruh.Yoooouuuuu called ME. What do YOU want???”

“Robert. What do you want?!?!”

“What in the world is…”

“Robert, God has been bothering me about you all week. He would not let me sleep until I called you. I have to work in a few hours. WHAT. DO. YOU. WANT???”

I felt the world shrink in that moment. I had communicated with the spirit or my conscience my entire life. “Robert, don’t do that.” “Robert, you should apologize.” “Robert, don’t say that.” I very rarely headed that voice. It was as if, in frustration, the voice stepped out of my head and spoke through someone else. It is very strange to hear the prayers you prayed in your bedroom answered through a man in another city. I felt very small and I’ve never really felt alone again.

Paul was my Mom’s friend. He was in that choir that I was telling you about. That morning, Paul and I had our first of many conversations. He prayed with me and he went to sleep. I spent the rest of the morning trying to wrap my mind around what had happened.

I don’t attend church much nowadays. I have my reasons. Reasons I know are valid. But that’s a story for another time. I’m like an Old Testament prophet. I only show up in church to teach and rebuke. I’m only slightly joking.

Anyway, for the past few years my relationship with God has existed primarily in the place we found each other. I’ve developed a rich and complex relationship with the God of the Universe, The Most High God, within the four walls where I lay my head at night. Our relationship is lit. And though he is called by many names, He never did tell me his. So I call him the Bedroom God. He doesn’t seem to mind.

That’s where my allegiance lies. That’s who I worship. That’s my truth. All praises due to the Bedroom God.

By the way, my name’s Robert. But call me Rob. I look forward to meeting you! We’ll talk more soon.

Robert Allen Bailey hails from Western NY and holds a BA in Theology from Oakwood University and two Masters degrees (Social Work and M.S. in Community and International Development) from Andrews University. He now serves as a Therapist at Beach Stone Counseling and the Urban League. He is also the founder and lead facilitator of 19E Training and Development. Robert stakes his hope and his work in the spirit of David when he said, “I would have fainted if I did not believe I would see the goodness of the Lord in the land of the living.”

Posted on

Jason’s Truth

“Upon this rock I will build My church; and the gates of Hades will not overpower it” -Yeshua (Jesus), Matthew 16:18b 

I admit, the implication of the above quote was lost on me for a long time. It’s a segment of a conversation between Jesus and his rambunctious disciple Peter. It’s sandwiched right between Peter’s victory moment of correctly identifying out loud that Jesus was the long-awaited Messiah (vs.16), only to lose sight of that in the next few moments and be rebuked with a stern “get behind me Satan!” (vs.23). These high drama moments would grab my attention, and if I did read the bridge between them, I would then be lost in trying to prove that the “rock” the church is built upon is not Peter himself, but his confession of the nature of Christ (vs. 17-18). With all this, I stumbled past the simple truth that would radically shift my faith walk and send me on a completely new path. 

You see, being raised a believer, I spent much of my life with an “us against them” mentality when it came to matters of faith. I had internalized the idea that Christians are under attack on all sides, so I should greatly fear being compromised, deceived, or defeated. Because of this, I would only feel safe amongst other completely like-minded believers, and I put high importance on not being tarnished by the world; seeking to avoid it at all and every cost. I went through phases of being terrified by secular music or television, demonic activity that could be found in party environments, or even playing Pokemon cards. 

Anything outside of a western Christian perspective was dangerous and potentially deadly, and anything popular must be the result of a deep-seated and demonic conspiracy. In all honesty, as an older teen maintaining this level of vigilance and fear within my faith became exhausting and deeply discouraging. It felt that God had abandoned us to a world of constant attack, and the penalty of a slight stumble or fall would be total annihilation. The power of Satan felt insurmountable and the path to redemption felt almost impossible. The mindset of keeping one’s head down and muscling through to the end of this life thing while keeping your fingers crossed that you would earn heaven became my MO. Little did I know that THIS was the deception; this whole concept was a trap that robbed me of life abundant. 

While pursuing a degree in theology, I began to actually read the teachings and stories in the Bible, and at the encouragement of some phenomenal teachers, I did so without the baggage of any particular perspective. Instead, I allowed the world and motivations of the writing to speak for itself. To my surprise, I did not see the terrifying world I had imagined when listening to various sermons over the years, but instead a gospel so sweet that it defied the mind. I saw a God so loving and passionate that the title of Father was not only fitting but natural and an astounding standard to inspire awe and to be revered. It was at this time that I re-encountered the above text and became floored by it’s simple and readily apparent meaning: When the Messiah depicts the nature of the church, the community of believers, they are not playing defense, but OFFENSE. Not against other people, but against the power of the enemy itself. 

Nobody carries a set of gates into battle to do war, but erects them outside a territory as protection. The imagery Jesus pulls from does not display the church as setting up gates of defense to hide behind for escape but showcases that hell itself is seeking protection from US. We are not saved through a test of endurance to be challenged by the world and reach some quota of righteousness by the end, but are birthed into a Kingdom that empowers us to storm the enemy camp on a mission of rescue. We are not the defeated, we are the conquerors. We don’t fear the darkness, for we are the light. The goal is to be immersed and spread amongst the world, not to run from it. To engage humanity and bring light to the fallen, to the hurting, to those trapped in darkness and death. Not with just a message, or recruitment to a side, but with LOVE. Spoken, yes, but also lived out through compassion and justice. The gates of darkness will not overpower us, so how can we fear? 

I put away my defensive weapons of judgment and fear. I picked up understanding, compassion, and empathy. I began to see others as people just like me. Who hurt, and were afraid, clinging to their own version of “us against them”. Now that I had tasted reconciliation and peace, I only sought to share it and set my fellow prisoners free. 

THIS is the church. This is what it is to believe. We have tasted, and seen. We now showcase and share in love. Hell doesn’t stand a chance. 

Jason Francis is a single father of three who has a passion for young people and showcasing the gospel to the unchurched. He is the leader of Kinetic (iamkinetic.org), an independent ministry dedicated to inspiring every believer to recognize and unleash their God-given potential to transform the world. Jason longs to see the birth of a new and simple church that is relevant and accessible to the average person of this generation.