The Wonder

REALLY MAKES YOU WONDER

Occassionally people say things to me quite innocently, but end up having a profound effect upon me. Sometimes it is something they have learned. Other times it is simply a part of their story which lingers in my mind. Things that linger in people's minds can be profound, thought-provoking, and fruitful - but sadly they are sometimes horrific, invasive, haunting, and traumatic. Our minds are created to wonder and this design feature can be one of the most aspects of being human if harnessed appropriately.

¶ Finally, brothers, whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is commendable, if there is any excellence, if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things.
Philippians 4:8

It's called cognitive behavioural therapy ("CBT"). Trained therapists show their troubled clients how to think differently. Thinking is now regarded as a behaviour - that is, just like any other behaviour, it is something you can control. While this might be the latest discovery in psychology, the Bible revealed this before these modern psychologists by about two thousand years! Not only does the Bible reveal that we can manage our thought-life, it prescribes what should ponder - and even wonder about.

Even before a word is on my tongue,
behold, O LORD, you know it altogether.
You hem me in, behind and before,
and lay your hand upon me.
Such knowledge is too wonderful for me;
it is high; I cannot attain it..
Psalm 139:4-6

The Psalmist was pondering the wonderful greatness of God. Pondering the nature of God and His dealings with a person, causes a person to deeply wonder. The conclusion of the Psalmist was that this was too wonderful for him to process. I sometimes hear people say that they think too much about spiritual things. I'm sure this Psalmist would like to gently correct them and say that the nature and acts of God cannot be thought about too much - rather these our minds do not have the capacity to fully ponder them! The same Psalmist goes on to reveal that he had been pondering the bodies that God had made for us (vs. 14). He's not the only one to do this. We are perfectly designed for life on earth (and the earth is perfectly designed to sustain our life here).

I praise you, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made.
Wonderful are your works;
my soul knows it very well."
Psalm 139:14

Every part of the human body is designed by our Creator for a specific purpose - to primarily fulfil a specific purpose. Our body parts are designed to be treated in a certain way. Respect this, and we generally enjoy good health. Disrespect this, and pain and discomfort often result. The Apostle Paul had apparently been pondering this as well. He wrote-

Since we have these promises, beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from every defilement of body and spirit, bringing holiness to completion in the fear of God.
Second Corinthians 7:1 ¶

The prophet Isaiah was also struck by the wonder of God and His works. With hands lifted and knees bent, he said-

¶ O LORD, you are my God;
I will exalt you; I will praise your name,
for you have done wonderful things,
plans formed of old, faithful and sure.
Isaiah 25:1

The Psalmist of Psalm 139 pondered this and was filled with wonder. God wants us to consider, ponder, explore, think about, what He has done, and to particularly ponder what He has done for us. We are designed by God towonder. It seems that God glories in our wonderment - that is, our wondering about God and His works glorifies God.

THE ULTIMATE WONDER

Jesus is the Ultimate Wonder. The prophet Isaiah used four very precise and powerful titles of the coming Messiah and the first these titles was Wonderful.

For to us a child is born,
to us a son is given;
and the government shall be upon his shoulder,
and his name shall be called
Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God,
Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.
Isaiah 9:6

A quick read through the gospels leaves the reader struck by how often wonder marked Christ's ministry. He performed "wonders". Those who saw and heard Him, wondered (eg. Mark 1:27). And today, we wonder still. Jesus is still the greatest source of wonder for artists, musicians, philosophers, social entrepreneurs, poets, pastors and Tasmanians. If you're mind could do with some positive CBT ("Christ Based Thinking"), then take the time to wonder about Jesus, His Father, and their Agent on earth - the Holy Spirit, and what this God has done for you, in you and through you. This kind of "CBT" is what helps a person's mind to overcome those sad things that often haunt them. This kind of CBT leads you to conclude that Jesus is indeed: wonderful. It really makes you wonder.

Ps. Andrew

The Duty of Legislators

DEVELOPING REASONABLE
PUBLIC POLICY

By Dr Andrew Corbett, September 28th 2012

Legislators are charged with an office to formulate and review public policy as it potentially becomes legislation. They must consider arguments for and against each piece of potential legislation in order to discharge their office. Classically, there are six filters that must be passed in order for an idea to be considered 'logical'. These are listed and briefly described below and followed by the three general categories of all legislation which should be used to determine public policy.

1. Distinguish the rhetoric from the reason.

"Rhetoric" sounds good. It employs emotive language designed to move a listener. It connects the speaker with their audience by using experiences common to us all.

Examples-

"It is my firm conviction that…"
"I find this proposal to be the most offensive and dangerous idea that I have ever heard…"
"To go ahead with this would hurt the feelings of a good many people…"
"We must do this!"
"The time for change is now! … The time for this idea has now come."
"Even the President of the United States and the Prime Minister of England support this…"

None of the above examples convey a reason though. Distinguishing rhetoric from reason involves answering the why question. A reason may not be good, strong, or popular, but it may still be right.

2. Ground a moral decision.

Moral decisions determine what is right ("moral") and what is wrong ("immoral"). As such, every legislative decision is a moral decision. The question isn't whether legislators can legislate morality, the question is whose morality will they legislate? Natural Law Theory is the idea that just as there are certain physical laws which govern the universe (Gravity, Decay Rates, Newtonian, Speed of Light) there are also certain appreciable moral laws which govern human conduct. Professor J. Budziszewski (Professor of Government & Philosophy, University of Austen Texas) points out in his book, What We Can't Not Know, that these Natural Laws are readily identifiable, widely acknowledged, and timeless. The Natural Law is frequently encoded by most religions into their ethical frameworks and is often confused with "religion". Metaphorically, it serves as the 'horizon' for an aircraft pilot. Remove sight of the 'horizon' and a pilot can not always be certain which way is up and which way is down. For those who claim that morality is relative, we are left wondering, relative to what? Morality needs to grounded beyond the whims of public opinion, fashion, or a legislator's personal preference.

3. Establish the connection between an idea, a premise, and a conclusion.

A logical reason is grounded in an idea which has a premise that leads to a conclusion which follows. Some ideas masquerade as logical reasons but have a faulty or an unrelated conclusion. An example of faulty logical reasoning-

IDEA: This group of people should be granted this privilege.
PREMISE: Not giving everyone the same privilege is discrimination.
CONCLUSION: Therefore, everyone should be given this privilege.

Analysis-
The idea, "This group of people should be granted this privilege" does not answer the why question. Why should this people be granted this privilege? Apart from being inadequate, this idea is also faulty because it confuses a "privilege" with a "right". A privilege is by its very nature only granted to some. It is a privilege for someone from outside of Australia to be granted entrance to Australia. It is a privilege for any immigrant to be granted Australian citizenship - not a right.

The premise, "Not giving everyone the same privilege is discrimination" is a faulty premise for two immediate reasons. Firstly, a privilege is only a privilege if it discriminates. It is a privilege to be awarded a Knighthood from the Queen - but it necessarily results in most people not being granted a Knighthood. Secondly, the term discrimination is misapplied in this instance. Discrimination may be reasonable and fair. When it is, it is generally referred to as differentiating, or, distinguishing. Discrimination is only unreasonable and unfair when it can be demonstrated that a Natural or deserved right has been violated. This might be the case when one suitably qualified employee among several is not considered for a promotion because of their colour of their skin.

The Conclusion, does not follow on from either the idea or the premise. Many policy agendas have an unreasoned idea, a faulty premise, and a conclusion that is without logical support.

Example-

IDEA: Not giving coloured people or women the vote was wrong.
PREMISE: Not allowing Same-Sex Marriage for homosexuals is like not giving coloured people or women the vote.
CONCLUSION: Coloured people and women now have the vote, therefore same-sex couples should be allowed to marry.

This syllogism is quite illogical because it confuses something that is intrinsic to something, with something that is not intrinsic with something. Voting is intrinsic to democracy.

4. Distinguish the who from the what.

Some ideas are rejected not because of the idea, but because of who proposed the idea. Rejection of a person's idea is often done in the form of ridicule. Name-calling and labelling are tell-tale signs that there has been a failure to distinguish between what an argument is, and who is making the argument. Rather than dismissing an argument as "the rantings of an extreme right-wing / left-wing fool", the idea's logical validity should itself be what's considered. Rejecting an idea because of its genesis rather than its merits is referred to as the Genetic Fallacy.

5. Discern fact from opinion.

A fact is verifiable and usually demonstrable. A "fact" is the appropriate response to the question- How do you know this? When a person's response does not adequately answer this question it may be that they have stated their opinion about a matter rather than given a fact to substantiate their idea.

Example-

"Our society is ready for this social change."
"One day we will colonise Mars."
"I believe people are born homosexual."
"If two people really love each other their relationship is equal to any other."
"The unborn are not fully human."
"You cannot impose your views on another."

The above statements could all be factual if they have a supporting set of facts to undergird them. Facts must be verifiable, non-contradictory, and demonstrable.

6. Avoid identifying motive.

Some people reject an idea because they feel that the motive behind the idea is disagreeable. The problem here is that it is next to impossible to fully know another person's motive for their idea. To assume knowledge of another person's motive is often considered arrogant and reveals a shallow ability to respond to the idea itself.

Examples-

"You think this because…"
"I know why you want this…"
"You are hateful…"
"You promote this idea because…"

But these six filters are not the exclusive responsibility of legislators. Whenever we hear a politician or an activist promoting an idea, we should filter our response to this idea at least through these six filters. By doing this we may more readily recognise an illogical idea and treat it appropriately. For example, when a politician says, "This is the right thing to do", he rarely demonstrates why it is the right thing to do - other than with a cliché that satisfies those not acquainted with thinking more deeply. This contrasts with, "This is the right thing to do because we can demonstrate that it will save lives" was the reasoning behind the legislation to make seat-belts in cars compulsory, and this simple reasoning was validated and the legislation passed. "They did not vote for this legislation because these politicians are out-of-touch with the rest of society" is not a logical idea. It violates the principle of Avoid Identifying Motive. "Because of a small group of white, middle-aged men, this legislation did not get up!" is not a logical idea because it commits the Genetic Fallacy of confusing the who with the what.

THE THREE CATEGORIES OF PUBLIC POLICY CONSIDERED FOR LEGISLATION

If a public policy idea passes through these six filters of reasonableness, it then must be determined into of these three general categories it falls.

1. Promotion

That which can be demonstrated is in the public benefit should be promoted and invoke certain privileges. For example, it can be easily demonstrated that children always fair best when raised by their married biological parents in a low-conflict loving home. There is great benefit to a society in having well-reared children. Therefore, biological married parents should be granted certain privileges in legislation to promote this.

2. Permission

Some legislation will permit some things which although not in a society's beneficial welfare would be too cumbersome to either regulate or prevent. Various levels of legislative deterrents may be used instead, such as Taxation laws. For example, smoking. It is clearly not in the public benefit. Prohibiting it now would be extremely costly and impractical to enforce. Thus, most Australian States have legislated for smoking to be permitted but highly regulated.

Some relationships are not morally acceptable but do not warrant legislative prohibition - but neither should they be privileged.

3. Prohibition

It is necessary for legislators to enact some laws which prohibit certain activities. This is necessary even when enforcement of these laws is (at times) impractical. For example, murder. Murder is clearly not in the public benefit. Laws prohibiting murder serve to restrain this immoral behaviour to some extent and constrain civility within a society. Yet, laws prohibiting murder do not prevent some immoral people from still committing murder. But murder is so heinous that despite the difficulties with enforcing the laws against it, it is still enforced. There are some relationships that are so immoral that the State legislates to prohibit them because the welfare of those involved is harmed. One example of this would be a paedophiliac relationship where young children were being sexually abused. The State has legislated to intervene in such instances and remove the child involved and charge the perpetrator with criminal charges.

After legislators have evaluated the reasonableness of a policy idea for its logical rigour and found it worthing of enacting, they must determine it should be promote, permit, or prohibit certain behaviour.

Dr. Andrew Corbett
28th September 2012
www.findingtruthmatters.org

MIND YOUR HEART

THE CONNECTION BETWEEN THINKING & FEELING

It's a commonly held belief that we cannot control either what we think or feel. But both of these assertions are false. We can most definitely control what we think - and we can most control how we feel. And learning to control one actually affects the other (the Bible reveals that the heart and the mind are intrinsically linked.) It takes practice though. But here's some tips that can help you cultivate the way you think and therefore which thoughts most fill your mind.

Matthew 16:23 But he turned and said to Peter, "Get behind me, Satan! You are a hindrance to me. For you are not setting your mind on the things of God, but on the things of man."

Feelings follow actions. Do something and you'll soon feel something. Conversely don't do something and you won't feel something. Those who struggle with exercise understand this. When you just "do it" you start to willingly do it and some say that they even enjoy it. But if you stop (or never start) it's likely that you won't feel like doing it.

Therefore, don't be surprised if your heart is turned toward the one who does something for you. The actions of others for you has an affect on your heart. If you can realise this, you can harness it to improve your marriage. When you feel as if the passion has gone out of your relationship - do something. Husbands, buy your wife flowers; take her out on a date; buy her a gift; do what she's been asking you to do, and then marvel how it will change her heart.

Feelings follow actions. What you do affects how you feel. But your thoughts follow what you feed your mind.

Your mind is like a pianist and your brain is like a piano. Scripture tells us to renew our minds (Romans 12:2) and guard what we think (Romans 12:3) and to take every unhelpful thought "captive" (2Cor. 10:5). When you find yourself thinking about something that is unhelpful, you can stop this train of thought and switch to thinking about something beneficial for you.

Philippians. 4:8 ¶ Finally, brothers, whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is commendable, if there is any excellence, if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things.

Of course, the best way to feed your mind is by feeding it what it needs. It is designed to think on the Word of God. It actually craves to be filled with the Word of God. The Bible actually instructs us to think about the works of God (natural sciences), others, those things which will draw our focus more clearly onto Christ (such as: good books, sermons, films, art).

Second Timothy 2:7 Think over what I say, for the Lord will give you understanding in everything.

How you think affects what you do. What you do affects how you feel. This is the conncetion between the Mind and heart. And this connection is emphasized by God in response to the question about the greatest commandment- You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart ... and mind. Interestingly, the Bible says as a man thinks in his heart.

The next time you find your mind wandering into unhelpful thoughts, take those thoughts captive by an act of your will and deliberately choose to think on beneficial things. Some time ago I was injured deeply the actions of another person. By the time I came home and Kim saw me, it was obvious that something serious had happened. She asked what had happened. I told her the facts. She enquired how I was handling it and said that I needed to focus on something else right now rather than dwell on the pain I was feeling. It was difficult. As I went to bed that night it was still in the forefront of my mind and again I had to deliberately think on something else. I asked God for help. I asked Him to fill my heart with peace. That night I slept well. I awoke thanking God that He was in control and resting in His Lordship. Remarkably by midday the next day, the entire situation was redeemed. I can't begin to tell you how much easier it became at that point to thank God compared to my feeble efforts to thank Him the night before.

I know that training my heart and mind does not come naturally. The most natural thing I can do with my heart and mind is to let it wander where ever it wants to go. To train my mind and heart takes discipline and practice. I like the word "practice" because it's different to "doing". "Doing" leaves no room for failure. "Practice" gives me permission to try and fail. I love that God expects me to practice before I do.

Philippians 4:9 What you have learned and received and heard and seen in me—practice these things, and the God of peace will be with you.

Practice feeding your mind with godly songs, books, Scripture, advice from brothers and sisters in Christ. Practice doing the things that will train your heart to love. This is how we can mind our hearts.

Psa. 34:8 ¶ Taste and see that the LORD is good.
Oh, the joys of those who trust in him!