Asking for the Salt Shouldn't Be a Big Deal

In the last post we discussed why we should aim for happiness. Our suffering comes from our rejection of our here and now. This rejection is characterized by emotions that don’t feel pleasant: boredom, anger, frustration, despair, and so on --- emotions that we feel when we do not like what’s going on. These are painful emotions. And they often distract us from doing the wise thing. Or they sap the energy we would otherwise have for doing the loving thing. Or, as in the case of anger, they unleash energy that often is then channeled into doing the harmful thing. Happiness gives us an equilibrium --- a balance or centeredness --- that allows us to focus on doing right. Happiness and obedience go together (Ps. 119:1-2). But what can we do to reprogram our responses to life so that we are not caught in the trap of focusing on security, pleasure and power? 

There is no harm in trying to get what we want provided we don’t demand it. Demanding is an emotional event, not usually verbal. It is what Paul says love is not (I Co. 13:5b). When we don’t get what want and our response is to be caught up in feelings of rejecting that circumstance, then we have effectively demanded that things be different. Maybe we ask for a raise and are turned down and feel unappreciated or angry. Those are emotions that separate us from our here and now: it’s us refusing to accept what’s happening and those emotions are painful. They turn us in towards ourselves and are a barrier to the outward flowing of love. If love is our objective, a more effective tactic would be to take steps to get what we want, but emotionally accept the situation if we don’t get it. In fact, Jesus tells us to ask for what we want (Mt 7:7), and Paul counsels us to request from God when we want something (Ph 4:6). 

The first step in getting something is to seek it. We can also ask people. If we ask for it, there is a higher chance of getting it than if we don’t. Yet sometimes we don’t ask. Why? Perhaps the reasons we fail to ask God are not the same reasons we fail to ask people. 

When we don’t ask God, sometimes it is because our request isn’t important to us, but more often it is because we don’t believe asking him will make a difference. But Hebrews 11:6 reminds us that he rewards those who seek him. 

We fail to ask people for what we want, and it may be because we think they’ll be angry (we don’t want to be rejected: it is us being run by our security addiction). Sometimes we think they already know what we want, but that is God’s power (Mt 6:8). People usually can’t read our minds.

Life is simpler if we just ask for what we want. Let’s be direct. Don’t tiptoe around the issue. Don’t try to butter up the potential benefactor. Just ask. Don’t accuse them inwardly if they say No. That is their prerogative. And if they do say No, we don’t have to retreat. We don’t have to suffocate the relationship by playing the silent victim. We can simply ask….without stress in our voice….without playing games….without making threats….without emotionally demanding that we get what we want. No, let’s just ask. Be specific. Be definite. We need to ask in the same frame of emotions from which we ask for things that don’t matter a lot to us. “Please pass the salt” is not likely to trigger painful emotions if the request is ignored or denied. We need to learn to ask for everything in that way when we are asking people. With God, we can plead, we can reason, we can cajole. In fact we ought to be fervent with him (Jms 5:16). He is not people. People can get their own security, sensation and power addictions triggered by us. God cannot. 

The point is that we ought to ask other people for things with the same tone of voice as “Please don’t forget to pick up the eggs.” No stress. No big deal.  We can ask for money, sex, no sex, assistance of all kinds clearly and specifically without making a big issue out of it. This takes practice, but it can be done. This doesn’t mean hinting. It doesn’t mean beating around the bush so people have to guess at what we want. It doesn’t mean moping until someone asks what’s wrong. It doesn’t mean not asking today because the answer was No yesterday. 

What if the answer is No? In that case, if we are to have the happiness that energizes love, we don’t emotionally demand that it be Yes. We don’t have a demanding frame of mind. We don’t play the “if you love me” game nor the guilt trip game. No sharp tone of voice. No pouting silence. Only vibes of friendly acceptance. Demanding --- feeling those separating emotions that show we don’t like what’s going on --- saps our happiness and consequently our energy and our ability to think clearly without filtering what’s happening through our security, pleasure and power addictions. In short, demanding impairs our love, joy, and peace, but also our wisdom and insight, and even our good humor. Things do not go better with demanding. 

The way to stop demanding is to trust God to take care of things (Ph. 4:6). I know that’s hard.  I mean why pray when you can worry, right?  

Producing Happiness

Most of us would like a change in our lives. We are unhappy about something. This unhappiness presents as a variety of unpleasant symptoms such as anger, anxiety, boredom, fear, frustration, hatred, headaches, high blood pressure, jealousy, loneliness, resentment, restlessness, ulcers --- an unease about something or maybe many things ranging from credit to climate. We blame others; we blame ourselves; we even blame God. Yet maybe somewhere in you lies the suspicion that your thought patterns set you up for unhappiness. If so, you are right. This essay is about becoming aware of what you are doing to yourself and how to stop it.

What is Happiness?

Happiness occurs when what we want equals what we have. Want = Have. We keep trying to work on the right side of the equation, aiming to dynamically affect what is going on so that we have more. The Bible counsels us to not neglect the left side (Philippians 4:11). This concept was driven home to me when I heard someone say “Now being in this wheelchair would be a problem for me……..if I wanted to walk.”

What Keeps Us From Being Happy?

I am going to direct you to three principles from the Bible that you can use to vanquish unhappiness. There is only one thing that will stop you from applying them to specific circumstances in your life when you need them. That one thing is you! Not you, really. It is your mind’s habits --- models of how you think things are, pride, and ego’s urge to be right rather than happy --- all motivated by seeking after security, pleasure, and power.

The Bible recognizes these drives in diverse passages. We see this recognition in the very first woman as she was tempted to eat the only prohibited fruit in the garden where she lived.  Genesis 3:6a: “The woman saw that the tree had fruit that was good to eat, nice to look at, and desirable for making someone wise.”  This fruit seemed good to eat (security), pleasing to look at (pleasure), and it seemed it would make her wise (power).

The gospel writers, Matthew and Luke, each tell us, in their fourth chapters, of three temptations wherewith Jesus was tested by Satan.  First, he was urged to turn stones into bread after he had been fasting almost 6 weeks.  This appeals to the security drive.  Then an appeal was made to the pleasure drive when Jesus was urged to jump from a high pinnacle. This was followed by an appeal to the human drive for power: he was offered rulership over all the earth.

Later, in the Parable of the Sower and the Seed, the master teacher is recounted at Luke 8:14 as describing a man’s motivations: “…worries, riches, and pleasures of life…”   Worries have to do with security, riches with power, and the term “pleasures” is just that.

John describes the motives of the world (I John 2:16): “For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh and the lust of the eyes and the boastful pride of life, is not from the Father, but is from the world.”   There’s our pattern again: security (lust of the flesh), pleasure (lust of the eyes), and power (pride of life). I know each of these well: the fear of being hurt, the yearning for sensations, and the pride of life, one manifestation of which is going out in the morning without having prayed first --- a sense of self sufficiency.  All are illusory.  All are addictions.  They aren’t needs. They’re addictions --- attachments to what I don’t need, but which cause unpleasant symptoms if I am deprived of them.

What Keeps Us From Loving?

The security, pleasure and power drives act as filters when I am viewing and interpreting the circumstances of my here and now. For example, when I am operating with the security programming running, the security aspects of a situation get magnified out of proportion. The result is feelings or emotions that lead to unhappiness. Thoughts trigger feelings, and those feelings are determined by how I am filtering incoming information. If my security filter is active, my feelings about what I am hearing and seeing may be fear, even anxiety, and hatred (since it is easy to hate what I fear). My drive for pleasure will often result in feelings of boredom and restlessness. My drive for power can triggers feelings of resentment or anger.

All of these emotions are my mental programming rejecting my here and now, and they are all painful. The pain saps the energy I need for loving, and turns me inward. Love doesn’t thrive in that emotional environment. In all these cases, my ability to love is compromised. Instead of operating in the spiritual centeredness of love, I am being pulled and pushed away from it by my addictions to security, pleasure, and power.

Moving Beyond the Addictions

Interestingly, the first three fruits of the holy spirit, listed by Paul at Galatians 5:22, combat and replace the three basic psychological drives. If I have love, I am secure. Knowing I am loved, especially by God, takes care of fear (I John 4:18). If God loves me, what matters anything else? I don’t need to fear what’s going on because God is protecting and sustaining me. I don’t need to fear the future because my loving God is already there waiting for me. The second fruit of the holy spirit is joy, and if I have joy, I am not driven by my pleasure. The third fruit in Paul’s list is peace, and with it, my attitude towards power is “Who needs it?”

Clearly, we need to exercise God’s spirit in us to be relieved of the three impediments to love --- security, pleasure, and power. In subsequent articles, we will explore strategies for doing this, and we will do it within a framework of three principles or perspectives that lead to practical healing action.

 

With training and through the exercise of God’s spirit in you, these obstacles to happiness can be handled.

The Gap Theory Fails to Explain Genesis 1:2

I have not posted anything here for some time. Bigger fish to fry; bigger battles to fight. Or maybe not. Maybe I have my priorities mixed up. 

I spent many years in a church that taught that the account of creation in Genesis 1, upon which Genesis 2 elaborates and expands, is really an account of a re-creation. The thought was that the earth came into being a very long time ago and its surface was destroyed. Then God, brought into being new species. The teaching was that between the first two verses of Genesis is a big time gap. I was reminded of that now when someone directed my attention to a discussion involving Victor Kubik of the United Church of God and found at https://www.ucg.org/members/united-news/inside-united/inside-united-podcast-093-steven-britt-sound-science-and-the-bible-part-3. 

I have a problem with the teaching, otherwise known as the gap theory. The theory has a history. So far as I know, it was first promoted by Thomas Chalmers a bit over 200 years ago. And about120 years ago, Bullinger took the baton and ran with it. The chief voice of the gap theory in the twentieth century was Herbert Armstrong. 

Supporters of the gap theory are trying to reconcile the Bible to what they think science has proven. In doing so, they contradict the Bible. Based on notes I gathered years ago (largely from David Hocking I suspect), I will now provide detailed comment on Genesis 1:2: the gap theorists say that instead of being rendered “Now the earth was…..” the correct reading should be “the earth had become….” I bought into that teaching for almost 40 years until I realized that had become is an impossible translation of the Hebrew text of that verse. Some versions start the verse with and instead. The point is that there is a conjunction, signified by a waw. ‘Waw’ is the name of the Hebrew letter which is used as the conjunction. It can mean ‘and’, ‘but’, ‘now’, ‘then’, and several other things depending upon the context and type of waw involved. It occurs at the beginning of Genesis 1:2 and is translated in the KJV, ‘And [waw] the earth was without form, and void.’ While gappists use their own translation to support the gap theory, the most straightforward reading of the text sees verse 1 of Genesis 1 as the principal subject-and-verb clause, with verse 2 containing three ‘circumstantial clauses’. This is what Hebrew grammarian Gesenius terms a ‘waw explicativum’ [also called waw copulative or waw disjunctive] or explanatory waw, and compares it to the English ‘to wit’.’

Such a waw disjunctive is easy to identify in the Hebrew, because it is formed by waw followed by a non-verb. It introduces a parenthetic statement, i.e.: it’s alerting the reader to put the succeeding passage in brackets as a descriptive phrase about the previous noun. It does not indicate something following in a time sequence. This would have been indicated by a different Hebrew construction called the waw consecutive, where waw is followed by a verb [the waw consecutive is in fact used before the different days of creation . Thus the Hebrew grammar shows that a better translation of Genesis 1:2 would be, ‘Now the earth …’, and it could be paraphrased, ‘Now as far as the earth was concerned …’

 
It is as if the author of Genesis (under God’s direction), by the use of such a joining word, is going out of his way to stress that there is no break between the two verses. ‘Was’ [Hebrew “Hayah” (haw-yaw)] in Genesis 1:2 is translated ‘became’ by gappists, giving the reading, ‘And the earth became [or had become] without form and void.’ Gap theorist A.C. Custance devotes nearly 80% of his book Without Form and Void, including 13 Appendices, to advocating this translation, especially with the pluperfect, ‘had become’. However, recognized grammarians, lexicographers, and linguists have almost uniformly rejected the translations ‘became’ and ‘had become’. It is a basic exegetical fallacy to claim that because Strong’s Concordance lists ‘became’ as one of the meanings of haya, it is legitimate to translate it this way in the particular context of Genesis 1:2. It is simply grammatically impossible when the verb haya is combined with a waw disjunctive. In the rest of the Old Testament, Waw + a noun + haya (qal perfect, 3rd person) is always translated, ‘was’ or ‘came’, but never ‘became’.
   
Moses could have chosen to employ a noun-clause (omitting a verb) in place of the disjunctive clause of verse 2. However, he chose (under the supervision of God) not to employ a noun-clause. The verb he chose is hayetah (“it was”). The qatal (perfect) of the stative verb indicates that the force of the verb involves a state of being (a static stative). In other words, the focus is on the existing condition of the earth. Had Moses employed a yiqtol (imperfect), the force of the verb would have been on a state of becoming, transition, change, or occurrence (a dynamic stative). Ultimately, the text depicts the earth as it existed following the act of creation in verse 1.
   
Interestingly, the choice of Greek verb in the Septuagint translation of verse 2 demonstrates that the Jews 250 years before Christ understood that the qatal (perfect) of hayah in the Hebrew text is equivalent to a form of the Greek eimi (“to be” = static stative) rather than an equivalent to a form of ginomai (“to become” = dynamic stative). This confirms the observation that the Hebrew verb refers to existence rather than to change. 

The Bible has another beef with the notion that the earth was made and then billions of years later the stuff on it was made --- Exodus 20:11, which plainly says that God created the heavens, the land, the sea, and everything in them in six days.  

The efforts to reconcile science and the Bible are wasted on the gap theory. Another approach is needed.