Free Ourselves or Enslave Ourselves?

70 Responses to “Free Ourselves or Enslave Ourselves?”

1. Beth on March 16th, 2010 10:00 am

   This is a GREAT and timely post. Thanks for sharing…

2. Ray on March 16th, 2010 10:29 am

   Del,

   Take a look at the “Whats in it for Him” ministry and what they are doing. They are focusing on the “me addiction”.
   They have some very good things going on.

3. Kelly on March 16th, 2010 10:34 am

   Our new national symbol: J. Wellington Wimpy (from Popeye) exemplifies our govt AND a rising number of Americans-the sentiment that we can get whatever we want today with no idea how to (or who will) pay for it.

4. Janet D. on March 16th, 2010 10:35 am

   Del:
   I wanted to let you know how much I appreciate your Truth Project DVDs. We have been using them in our Anchor Groups on Sunday night. How amazing God is and how we see it (if we choose) in his creation. I love to set and watch nature in our back yard. By the way, you talked about the chicken egg in the last DVD that we watched. I never understood why a hard boiled egg was flat on one side. ) Now I do Thank you so much for that series.

   God Bless
   Janet

5. Pamela on March 16th, 2010 10:39 am

   First of all, I have to say I am still laughing as I think about you discretely trying to take a picture of a young woman’s shirt in Starbucks! That just tickles my funny bone.

   I am amazed at what is going on in our world and the idea that it is all “about me”. You hit the nail on the head as far as I am concerned. I don’t think it is just in the world, though. In every area we seek to see “what is in it for us” as opposed to “what can I do?” I am convicted of this and reminded that in every area I am not to grow weary in well doing, I am not to lay up for myself treasures on earth, I am to be light in a dark world.

   A year after sitting through the Truth Project 6 6 times (yes 6) I am still amazed at how life changing it was, how much truth was in it if for us, how timely it was and is.

   And today I am laughing at your Starbucks encounter.

6. Niecie on March 16th, 2010 10:53 am

   I agree w. you Dr. Tackett. I do after school child care in a local grade school and have seen students w. the phrase “It’s all about me” on “cute” t-shirts and book bags. Obviously some parents aren’t teaching their children this lesson. They’re probably the same ones who still have that mentality as adults.

7. Sara on March 16th, 2010 11:29 am

   Thank you so much for making me continually recognize this. My eyes have been opened to Jesus’ Truth and I see this “it’s all about me” mantra ALL around. I am able to call it out for what it is and am no longer enslaved to it. It makes me cringe and fills me with ill feelings. I pray that others will open their eyes too. I do remember Maslow’s hierarchy of needs being taught back in high school (some 20 years ago) and I remember thinking how bad I wanted to be one of the one’s who reach self-actualization. I can actually remember this! I know exactly where I was sitting too. Praise the Lord for putting me on the right path.

8. Sara on March 16th, 2010 11:33 am

   Kelly,

   “I’ll gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today.”

9. lana on March 16th, 2010 1:00 pm

   I loved listening to the truth project. God gives wisdom and you..Del.. have the gift of speaking the truth. I have heard about the me addiction but have not had the experience of listening in on it…one day I know God will have enough of me and put me to the task.I thought it was pretty funny that you would feel such a conviction for taking that picture. She probably would have let you taken the picture sure she is prideful in her own darkness to the truth as most are..Pray for Revival of our nation and that the majority can see that our country was built on the foundation of Justice. Jesus took a tax collector from his unjust position to demonstrate his desire for justice. I can’t discount the sin that was brought to this country but Christ was definitely part of the plan for our nation under God…Sure wish the majority could understand the truth.

10. Pat on March 16th, 2010 1:35 pm

    It is my opinion that much of the known-to-victim-shooting violence we see in the U.S. today is because of the frustration people feel when their “me” status is threatened/disallowed/negated, etc. And, because we (as a society) have not been taught how to deal appropriately with disappointment, conflict and disagreeable people, the only reasonable solution people see is often to shoot the offender – get rid of the problem so the “me” can have its way again.

11. Erik on March 16th, 2010 3:03 pm

    Certainly, there is no Truth that we can free ourselves. Generally, it’s difficult to consider one a “captive” in any form if we are able to free ourselves.

    Certainly the shirt, in light of Dr. Tackett’s cogent observations, is a little ironic.

    There is something relevant to the shirts however. Most people seem to understand there is a battle going on over Truth. The real issues seem to center upon what constitutes “enslavement” and what constitutes “freedom” or “emancipation.” There is a huge propaganda battle in the heavenlies going on in these two areas.

    I doubt that anyone who feels he can free himself has those two things proper discerned. Nice post. I like it.

    -eriks

12. Chris on March 16th, 2010 3:33 pm

    I’t would be amusing if it wasn’t going to doom our country in the end, but isn’t it funny that the only way it can really be “All About Me” is if it is supported by OPM (Other People’s Money).

13. Lorie on March 16th, 2010 7:21 pm

    Sometimes, it seems to me that the idea behind the quote on the t-shirt may not be completely wrong. I don’t believe that people can have true freedom in their minds or hearts without the help of the Lord, but I believe that people do have free will. In that sense, we do have to choose freedom or slavery in a conscious way. God won’t force His love, grace or even freedom on us–we must accept it as a gift. Couldn’t that quote be seen in that light? Yes, we must choose for ourselves who will be our God–who will be our savior.

14. Janet on March 17th, 2010 5:36 am

    When I read the saying on the shirt the first thing that came to mind is: That God gave us a mind to use and we have to renew our mind, to his way of thinking. So it is our choice, to do right or wrong, and if we choose wrong we pay the price, and if we choose right He rewards us with his blessing because He is a Great God! So we are our own worst enemies till we learn to follow after him. Yes, nowdays the selfishness is all around us yet we need to be strong in the Lord and live to please him and in the end we are pleased. I pray that the truth of our Lord Jesus Christ spreads like a fire so all can be saved in His name.

15. Barry on March 17th, 2010 5:55 am

    Very well said as usual. It is nearly impossible to believe just how many people are blind to so many truths – this being a very significant one for our time.

16. Tony on March 17th, 2010 6:16 am

    Dr. Del Tackett:
    Back in the 90′s when I was working on my degree in Business Administration, I was taught in various ethics and philosophy classes that what Maslov taught is good, having self actualization as the ultimate goal. In other words, it’s all about me. This is what’s in my text books. This is what was echoed by my instructors. This is being taught in a “religious” college. While going through these classes, I couldn’t help but think about Proverbs 14:12 and Proverbs 16:25 which says “There is a way that seems right to a man, but in the end it leads to death”(NIV).

17. Beth on March 17th, 2010 10:39 am

    I think Mr. Tackett could have delved deeper into what was really behind the quote and the messenger than his interpretation of what the quote meant. It’s not about gathering ‘things’ it’s about opening your mind to new thinking. To move away from the obsolete sheeple way of thinking and become MORE conscious not LESS. Because when we truly open to who we are we become more conscious of our duties as a human being to our society. We become a more aware individual that doesn’t judge every other human being by our standards but allow them to be do or have anything they can create on their own.

18. Dan on March 17th, 2010 12:45 pm

    The current Self Esteem movement that is so pervasive in our schools today has taught the youth of America that this is THE way it should be. Could it be that the students of today ARE learning what they are taught and applying it in their lives and writing it on their hearts?

19. Lee on March 19th, 2010 8:01 am

    This is so timely. Thank you. I expecially liked the quote by Margaret Thatcher. I am a student of The Truth Project for the second time. Thank you for stiring my thoughts and heart. I am saving to be able to buy the DVD’s.

20. Kyle on March 19th, 2010 11:38 pm

    What about the dangers of a capitalist society? Just one example, is mass consumption of goods good for people, environment, and countries including the United States? Imagine the impact that has on teens and adults mentally alone. Were we not asked to go shopping after 9/11? How crazy is that! Now the people, states, and federal government are spending into oblivion and massing amounts of debt unseen in human history. I am not a socialist but a supporter of capitalism however, a supporter should not equate to a mindless follower who never questions what he supports. Americans need to look at the whole picture and not simply blame the “left” or the “right” because both sides are at fault. No one is blameless. Corporations, unions, socialists, capitalist, republicans, and democrats are all at fault. I am not going to go any further on the issue unless address but it is time to go past the simple black and white framework and realize it’s not that simple. We must emancipate ourselves from mental slavery by thinking for ourselves or what the truth project calls for, critical thinking and seeking out the truth. God bless.

21. Ray on March 20th, 2010 3:01 pm

    As a again baby boomer I look back to the Desiderata poem revived and made popular by Les Crane in the early 1970′s. Although it’s orgin and authorship is mythical; it set the tone for the ME generation.

22. Denise on March 21st, 2010 12:25 pm

    God help us, so we can reach out & help others . . . it is a v-e-r-y slippery slope out there. We are thrilled & excited of what the TruthProject is bringing to light for us ~ THANK-YOU!!! What a powerful series!!! More need to hear it’s message . . . let’s get it out there folks May God Bless this project BIG! We need to take back our minds, guard them & our hearts ~ putting on the FULL armor of God ~ to fight this battle. It’s an all out WAR, here & now! Armor up the battle is on!!!

23. christie on March 25th, 2010 1:24 pm

    I just finished the book “The Shack”. Where the father wanted justice for the pain of loss of his daughter and her suffering. His lesson was, it wasn’t about him or his daughter but the value of love and forgiveness. The very values
    Jesus demostrated to the cross. Not His will but God’s… God has His eyes on the big picture, His plan,for us. The work has been done, we need to realize the only way we matter is to love, God and each other, and to forgive..especially when it’s hard to do. What about me…what about me!…yes it will hold us captive, unable to give, to care, to forgive. Oh yes, and to tell the world of the Good News…that we are free through Jesus Christ.

24. Rachael on March 30th, 2010 9:54 pm

    Del, I’m not a coffee drinker, but I do recall Christians being asked several years ago to boycott Starbucks because they are huge supporters of the homosexual lifestyle. I know one pastor who pulled their contract at the church cafe and replaced it with a different brand. I have heard they pulled the cups in question. Still, I was surprised to hear you were a customer.

    Our church presented The Truth Project twice and we have small groups still very much involved. My DVD’s have been such a blessing. I can’t thank you enough for making this series available to so many people. The Truth Project has enlightened us greatly. In light of the socialistic direction our country is going, we must ever remind ourselves that God is still in control.

25. Jim on March 30th, 2010 10:50 pm

    Del, What are you specifically referring to in the statement..”Unfortunately, this week may see us take another HUGE step down that road.”

    I am speculating that you are speaking of the new health care program.If this is your intent, you need to be explicit, and speak the truth boldly, and make your case.When you do I would encourage you to let the truth of scripture guide your assesment, as you did in The truth project.

    As a Canadian who has recently returned from short term Missions in West Africa,and led multiple “Truth Project” Small groups, I respectfully ask you to articulate your comments to the Global audience the Truth Ministry has cultivated.

    North America and the developed nations need to accept the fact that God is moving in the 10/40 window and that we live in UnChristian and Post-Christian nations.

    It follows that tee shirts with “Marlyisms” of the ilk you quote are just another flavour of New Age political correctness, another reminder that the label “Ichabod” applies to our bankrupt and economically struggling countries.

26. Ken on March 30th, 2010 11:07 pm

    “None but ourselves can free our minds”
    I have to agree with Lorie, what she wrote is the first thing that came to my mind…Romans 12:2 ..Dont copy the behavior and customs of this world,but let God transform you into a new person by changing the way you think. Then you will know what God wants you to do,and you will know how good and pleasing and perfect His will really is.

    In the world many try to tell you what to think and what to follow..from TV to the internet..In the schools…It begins with you to choose who or what to listen to. A lot of the youth that I talk to tell me that Christians have killed more people in history than all the wars put together. I dont know if that is true but I have a scense of where they are coming from. Many are so blinded by mans rituals and beliefs that they forget their relationship with the Lord. On some level the shirt makes sense to me, I dont know what Bob Marley meant when he wrote it but I am sure that the ones wearing it wouldnt have a clue as to what he meant either. Maybe you should have asked the person wearing it what it meant to them in thier own words. You might find that they have a pretty good reason for wearing it proud or you may find that it was just a cool looking shirt and that they didnt pay any attention to what it meant. I do think that I need to constantly renew my mind in the Lord or else the world slips in so slowly that I dont even recognize it.I noticed that it can happen right in the very place that you wouldnt expect it to happen…(in the church)… I have been meeting a growing number of people that used to go to church but stopped going, When asked what happened to cause them to stop going I get the same answer..They tell me they felt welcomed and loved at first but then people started to judge them and others to the point of gossip and backstabbing and a mild neglect. It got so bad that they got out!
    They told me there was freedom in leaving the church because now they dont feel the pressure to perform to keep others from judging and gossiping about them. When asked if they tried another church..Many told me yes and that they were just the same and some worse. Told me that if there was a church that wasnt like that that they would go. I was left without a reference to give them….however I did say that thier relationship with the Lord doesnt depend on others and when we stand before Him it will be as an individual and not in a group being judged. I could go on and on talking about this subject but I think you get the general idea. “We are surrounded by a great cloud of witnesses to the life of faith.. we must
    strip off every weight that slows us down especially the sin that easily hinders our progress.”
    Because others are watching as we judge others and gossip and look for the slightest details in a person that we can point our finger at them and say that is sinful. At the same time treating our closest of family as strangers while running to the call of the church and ministry passing by the person who is stranded on the side of the road because if I stop to help ill be late for church…..We need the Lord in our lives individually….I have to end by saying…Slow down!
    Submitted Respectfully,

27. Steveo on March 30th, 2010 11:35 pm

    Many friends in our church are basically saying: “Never mind, God’s in control.” That let’s them off the hook in understanding and influencing against the rising evil plagues. They are avoiding knowledge in the Truth Project. That makes me very sad. I pray everyday for God’s grace and salvation for His Church. Del, thank you for what you do!

28. Sheila on March 31st, 2010 5:23 am

    Why does this self-actualization surprise us? Man has not changed from the “self” focus of Adam and Eve in the Garden wanting to be LIKE GOD. Man still has a sinful heart. There is nothing good in me, it is only by the grace of God through the blood of Jesus. I am glad that God is God, I would not make a very good god.

29. Dawn on March 31st, 2010 5:53 am

    Wow, how insightful and true! I only wish that many more people understood and believed what you said and became more like Christ…it’s all about others, not ourselves! Thanks for allowing God to work through you Del, to show us how far we’ve gotten away from the Truth!

30. Andrea on March 31st, 2010 6:14 am

    I am in a thinking mode here (which sometimes can be dangerous!); but it seems to me that the whole “It’s all about me,” philosophy is the devil’s duplicate of personal responsibility. In other words, I have always been taught that whatever precept, gift, or responsibility the Lord gives us is demonically duplicated by Satan in order to deceive. While I totally agree with the precept that it is NOT all about me, I do see that in a Godly and healthy sense, some things do have to BEGIN with me. As a couple of others have noted, we do have a responsibility for what we choose. As adults, we can only be responsible for ourselves (I am speaking of our responsibility for other adults, not children). We can only CHANGE ourselves, with God’s help (i.e., I can’t MAKE someone else behave in a Godly or mentally healthy fashion). WE must make the decision to make ourselves available for the work of God. It is so interesting, because when I was in school, in Nursing, I also learned Maslow’s hierarchy. I was a 19 year old Christian at the time, but had been through some pretty rough seas and grown because of the Lord’s leading and guiding in my life. I simply viewed the concept as flawed…I pretty much immediately thought of self-actualization as an assumption of personal responsibility, NOT as Maslow originally meant it, that pleasing myself was the ultimate goal. Just goes to show how your “world view” colors everything you think…it is wonderful to think that it works both ways! Just as a godless world view shades your perception of a godly truth, a Godly world view also shades your perception of a godless assertion!

31. Donna Griggs on March 31st, 2010 6:48 am

    Thank you for your continued messages of Truth. Praying for our nation. Only in Him is found true freedom. Thank you, again.

32. Grace V. on March 31st, 2010 6:51 am

    Dr. Tacket, Thank you for this article. I have last two sentences and will use them, quoting you, at the end of my emails: “If I believe that freedom and happiness and truth all begin and end with me, then I will define right and wrong based upon what brings me the greatest happiness and pleasure. That is not only infantile, but deadly.” Dr. Del Tacket

    God bless your heart.

33. Michael on March 31st, 2010 6:56 am

    I also wonder if we’re not missing it at times, whenever we contemplate the purpose of the cross.
    He died to save us for HIS sake, not so we could simply enjoy a better life here, and to Heaven when we die.
    SO, it is ALL about Him, and He lets us in on the glorious benefits of His amazing grace. PTL!!!
    Another reason to share The Truth Project for a clearer picture in seeing the TRUTH in and about Christ.

34. Rod on March 31st, 2010 6:59 am

    I have learned an awful lot is the last few weeks and I believe that I need to listen more to “God” than my heart. This Teeshirt tells me a lot
    Thank You

35. Sherry on March 31st, 2010 7:09 am

    I think it according to the way you view “It’s all about me.” I view it as “It is all about me…do I chose to follow God or the Devil…do I want people to see me shine and give God the glory?” Yes, I do. Therefore, it is all about me making choices that are pleasing to God.

36. Carolyn on March 31st, 2010 7:13 am

    You are able to verbalize so well some of the thoughts I’ve had on this topic. What is so sad is living in a retirement community (55+) and seeing this still at work in people who are at the end of their lives, still looking out for Number One, and seeing it so deeply entrenched that there’s no getting through to them. This, if nothing else, has brought clearly into focus the reality that now, as always, God is the one who reveals truth to them and I’m learning to pray more now than ever before.

37. Chuck S. on March 31st, 2010 7:17 am

    Dear Del: I am a retired pediatrician and been a Friend of the Family for years. Unlike many of my colleagues, I read and followed Dr. Dobson’s philosophy in guiding my parents and patients in my practice. I saw thousands of two year olds and you are “right on”. Unfortunately, I also saw the failure of many of my patients to “grow up” and become adults as adolescence was prolonged. I also saw the failure of the “self-esteem” movement in our schools. I am now facilitating two small groups with the “Truth Project”. My eyes have been opened by your thoughtful lectures and I personally want to thank you for your all you do to serve the LORD. God bless you and your work! Sincerely, Chuck aka Dr. Chuckles Phil. 4:13

38. Eve on March 31st, 2010 7:22 am

    Thanks Del,
    It’s all about HIM! I must decrease so He can increase. When will we learn. Our group just finished tour 9 and boy did it stir up conversation…thank you for allowing God to use you. Great study!

39. James on March 31st, 2010 8:23 am

    It’s galling. The two words I hate most in any commercial is, “…you deserve…” I hear it more and more these days. The advertiser really doesn’t care if ‘you deserve’ it or not; they want your money, and they discovered they can separate you from it by making you think you’re entitled to what they’re selling.

    Grow up! I deserve hell. Whatever I get beyond that is amazing grace.

40. Amanda on March 31st, 2010 9:30 am

    This blog really resonates with a movie I saw recently. Entitled “The Answer Man”, the premise of the movie is about an author who 20 years prior wrote a book with all the answers everyone has always wondered about God. Since writing the book the author has ceased to believe any of it and spent the next 20 years searching for God again. The movie ends with an “epiphany” on the author’s part that maybe there really isn’t an answer from God and that maybe the answers lie within.

    As a Focus Leadership Institute Alum watching the movie with other FLI alum, of course a worldview discussion ensued afterwards (which was our purpose for watching the movie in the first place…Dr. Leland, be proud). This movie is indicative of exactly what you’ve discribed in this blog…we think we are all we need.

    O Lord, come and save us from ourselves!

41. Gene R on March 31st, 2010 9:34 am

    So enjoyed this about the shirt, but more about the attitude of this “once” great country. We truly are sliding downward and I feel it is so the plan of God. I am just finishing the minor prophets study and over and over again….God says you have disobeyed – and I said there would be consequences for disobedience – Your are still mine, but here comes the Locust. What a God we have – He loves us so much more than we will ever know…

    I have loved the Truth Project – went through it with many dozens of people and have so loved how God has used it in their lives…Thank You Del, and now the good news…Last week I found I am loaded with cancer and have 3-6 months, and so some where soon I will “See him as he is and be like Him.” Amen and Amen….Thanks again for all you have provided through this great project…

    Gene R

42. Ann on March 31st, 2010 10:39 am

    Atleast it didn’t say “none but the government (or corporate America) can save us”.
    I think Bob Marley was trying to encourage Blacks to stop waiting for some other human entity to release the chains/shackles from our minds. At the time he was singing, many people of color still felt the vestiges of slavery upon them, but we know as we do as believers, we have been set free. It’s a mind game that people and the devil tries to play with us. Maybe we can take some truth from that saying. Accept the work that has already been done, whether it’s the Emancipation Proclamation for the Blacks or the Gospel of salvation for Christians, we are free — no longer slaves. We need to wrap our minds around that truth.

43. Meghann on March 31st, 2010 10:59 am

    Del,
    This is so true! I can agree with Amanda who recently posted about a movie several past FLI (formerly FFI) students were watching together recently. The movie mentioned in Amanda’s post left us all in a quandry. We were eagerly discussing the subject of Truth after watching this movie. I began to realize that, slowly, more and more offensive things are being plugged into our brains. Much of this offensive material began with sexually inappropriate media and various other things that have attacked the morals to which the Lord has called us to adhere. But now, it’s not only morals that are being attacked, and perhaps morals isn’t even the right word – maybe just “right living.” Now what is being attacked is the very essence of Truth. And while the mentality of “It’s all about me,” or “I’ll believe what I believe, and you believe what you believe,” both seem to be self-depricating philosophies with nothing to offer but a dead end, they are both completely captivating our culture.
    I feel the weight that the Lord has placed on His people when He said, “But the one who does not know and does things deserving punishment will be beaten with few blows. From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded; and from the one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked.” Luke 12:48. We have been given a holy calling, and many of us have had extensive training in seeking Truth. And while the movie we watched the other night was a virtually uncharted Indy film, it’s only the beginning. We must love and serve the Lord with all our mind, strength, soul, and heart to prepare ourselves for the intense battles to come.
    Lord, may this not only be something I write here, but may this thought permeate my mind so I can’t sleep until I’ve done all I can for You.

44. Tim on March 31st, 2010 12:54 pm

    Ayn Rand’s classic ATLAS SHRUGGED comes closer and closer to be a non-fiction book. Who is John Galt?

45. Henry H. on March 31st, 2010 1:13 pm

    I quite agree. When we align with God’s Word. He is the plumb line, He is the standard.

    Why is it the church does not proclaim the truth? When “man” Adam ate of the forbidden fruit;he died spiritually and all he can reproduce are spiritually dead.

    God doesn’t “force” His love on us. He inables us “by grace” to know it. Faith is a “gift from God”! We can’t choose Him until we’ve been born again. John 3 God is sovereign. “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom.”

46. Laura Beth on March 31st, 2010 3:22 pm

    Del,

    I received the email link last night, and it spoke directly to what I have been wrestling with for the past few days. I had some fellow Focus alum over to watch AnswerMan. I had watched the movie by myself, and it just did not sit well with me AT ALL. I decided to have some fellow believers view it with me. It definitely sparked a conversation amongst us, which I thought was GREAT!! I will say that your blog entry sums of the theme of this movie.

    I just wanted to say thank you for being a critical thinker and sharing your thoughts.

    LB

47. William on March 31st, 2010 5:54 pm

    there are many things I want, but if God doesn’t provide the means, I go without. Many times I have asked for various things, many times I have been denied. what I do have works for now.

48. Margaret on April 1st, 2010 4:14 pm

    James…you wrote that whatever we receive beyond hell is grace. I so absolutely agree with you!
    But try to tell that to others today! Often we can’t even begin to suggest this. People are so full of themselves. They are so in control of their own lives, and they have it all figured out, and nobody needs to tell them anything. They certainly do not need us to tell them anything, nor do they want to read it in God’s Word, or hear it in church. Isn’t it incredibly tragic that there are even so many churches today where there is written above the door: “Please, do not disturb”? And how many then do think they are free in their own minds, and able to decide what to think? Yes, it is too true: even as believing Christians we need to be renewed in our minds. We need to be of the same mind as Christ, over and over and over again. And how even we fall short here! I suggest we do not judge the world, but increase our prayers for those who believe they can think independently of God and His Word.

49. sue on April 1st, 2010 9:46 pm

    “For what shall it profit a man if he shall gain the whole world and lose his own soul? Or what shall he give in exchange for his soul?”

50. Brian on April 1st, 2010 9:53 pm

    I agree with Jim and his post on the 30th. Great post – but why a reference to ‘this week’? Is there something in the culture that will be changing? As far as I know, Americans will be just as focused on themselves in april as they were in march.

    hope it’s not an attempt to throw in a political comment to an otherwise great devotion.

51. Don on April 3rd, 2010 1:32 pm

    “Clamor for more pods in our trough..!” What a picture! But there are many like that today: in jail, on Wall Street, in Congress, in our own communities. Where are the OTHER examples of men/women seeking HIS ways? If you can’t find them in your community, try the Founding Fathers (Geo. Washington, etc.) who weren’t looking for fuller troughs but fuller lives and an opportunity to serve their country through HIM. Abraham Lincoln was amazing that way; our most popular President; we see him going through spiritual struggles, his prayerful timing of the Emancipation Proclamation, his daily walk seeking God’s best. Read their lives; ask Him to help us do OUR part. One day we’ll see HIM face to face and He won’t ask us how well we filled our troughs, but how well we served HIM! I, personally, want to hear those treasured words, “Well done, my good & faithful servant!”

52. Katrina on April 3rd, 2010 4:40 pm

    Del, I completely understand where this quote took you mentally and I couldn’t agree more, although I’m sure whether I agree or disagree matters. haha! However, when I first read it I went entirely in a different direction. My brain is funny that way. haha!
    “EMANCIPATE YOURSELVES FROM MENTAL SLAVERY. NONE BUT OURSELVES CAN FREE OUR MINDS.”
    Oddly enough, there is truth to this if you look at it in a different perspective. My first thoughts were “who lives inside me” and “what is keeping us in slavery”? God is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow. Father has always loved us. We are the variables. We have to change how we “think”. We enter the “kingdom of heaven”, which is an entirely different way to live, not a geographical place. We do that by renewing our minds. Jesus furnished what was needed. He was an empty vessel, made of flesh where father could walk beside us and “perfectly” show us his love, all the way to death. Our father died for us and our big brother Jesus allowed him to. Wow! He brought the kingdom down to us. We know the way. Jesus told us we did. We have to change the way we think. We take the hand of Jesus and he will show us how to walk with Father, but we have to think differently.
    Col 1:24 “And you once being alienated, and enemies in the mind, in the evil works, yet now he did reconcile”
    We were “alienated” (non-participant) and “enemies” (adversaries) in our “thinking”, in the painful toiling to make a way for ourselves and now he has made that different. He has shown us how to “think” and how to see him not as an angry Father, but a loving one, in a way that makes who Jesus is, our “reality”. Wow! Now if we can think differently, we can “participate”, if not we continue to live under our own curse that is the fruit of earthly thinking. The answer does lie within us, just not in the way some believe.

53. Michael on April 3rd, 2010 4:54 pm

    Dr. Tackett,
    My wife and I have begun daily devotions from “the Love Dare” and it has challenged us in this too. All around us the crowds clamor for more, and protest not getting their needs met. Im marriage, it seems, the selfishness that says, “You’re not meeting my needs!” is deadly. Yesterday at our community Good Friday service, I had been praying that God would enlighten me about a couple of relationship challenges I have. One is with my daughter, to whom I recently sent a sum of money, namely $280 for her 28th birthday. I pray for her daily as we are not close, but she is struggling with a failed relationship where her live-in boyfriend abrupty ended it, and she is heart-broken. I hear her cry how he could not meet her needs. I don’t know how to say to her, hopefully in a way that might pave the way to a new way of life, that only Christ can meet all her needs. As a father, I would gladly have increased my gift to $2,800. or 28,000. if I could, but Christ’s spirit showed me that the amount might not ever be the appropriate remedy. God in his wisdom applied the appropriate remedy to meet our deepest needs, before we even knew we needed. I think you are saying in your article, that the appropriate remedy has been applied to the world’s selfish clamor for more, yet amazingly God has supplied the remedy, if we can but appropriate it.

54. Lynda on April 5th, 2010 7:23 pm

    I’m with Katrina on this one.Well said.

    I have watched the first 4 presentations of the Truth Project & though there is some interesting & helpful information, I find that there is an under tone of an ‘us vs them’ mentality that seems to sometimes jump to judgmental conclusions before doing a little thinking outside the box.
    In my opinion, this would be one of those times.

    Would this not have been an ideal opportunity to engage this lady in some dialogue before sneaking a picture of her T-shirt to use for more ammo for one of your points. Just another opinion……

55. Margaret on April 5th, 2010 10:50 pm

    God Bless You, Del.

56. Evan on April 6th, 2010 12:10 pm

    If we have everything we need in us.
    Then why can’t ANY of us get it right?
    Because some think it is the goo that will get it done.
    God has the plan.
    We just need the FAITH.

57. Dave on April 6th, 2010 8:18 pm

    Del,

    I appreciate your observations regarding the predominance of the “all about me” culture we live in, but I also wanted to encourage you and others to engage rather than just observe. Like Paul in Athens (sort of), ask the person who is wearing the shirt what it means and let that lead to a deeper conversation.

    Dave

58. Julie on April 9th, 2010 10:15 pm

    Mr. Tackett,

    I absolutely agree that the Gov’t and people of our nation are following an “all about me” mentality. However, I don’t believe that the healthcare law itself is a “me centered” issue. This is not a “I want it to make my life easier situation.” It’s a “I need in order to stay above water” situation. Now for some politicians, not necessarily meaning our President, have made it more of a notch in their career belt rather than passing a bill to aid millions struggling without health benefits. Fact remains that had the GOP not had a me centered approach this could have been reached in a much more diplomatic fashion. Perhaps then the bill would have looked more like what some people would have liked it to be. No one can deny that bipartisan efforts were made but failed due to both parties inability to take the “me” out of the decision. I believe healthcare reform to be a good thing. Is it the perfect bill? No. But do we accomplish anything by calling our President a Socialist? No. Is our nation made better when Christians show little respect to those whom God has chosen to lead our nation? ABSOLUTELY NOT! Our nation should ALWAYS be a matter of prayer. The church should rise for the TRUTH OF GOD. Not the truth of those who are leaders in the church but the truth that is the Word. Too many people of the church follow in the beliefs of the teacher rather than the Author and Perfector of our Faith. To Him be the glory and honor and praise.

59. Brent on September 14th, 2010 11:40 am

    What in the world could be more self centered than a belief in a personal deity? Preachers in mega churches getting rich tax free should worry about socialism, they should be terrified of it. They understand corporate greed and the subjugation of the masses better than most. They support it, they live by it, they have a symbiotic relationship with the multinational corporations. The money to fight health care reform didn’t come from God, it came from the corps. God was used to demonize socialized medicine and convince the people to act against their own self interest.

    [Brent, interesting comment. Sounds like you have a deep-seated angst against Christians. I actually understand that because we haven't always acted in accordance with our beliefs. It's possible you've experienced some of that and I'm sorry. However, is it possible that could be skewing your view a little? Honestly, I know a lot of pastors and none of them come close to the description you have leveled. Also, your comment that believing in a personal deity is obviously the height of self-centeredness doesn't seem to match the facts. Our beliefs call us to serve others, to help the needy, to care for the sick, to have compassion. It calls us to deny ourselves, to consider others more highly than ourselves, to practice self-control. That's not quite the definition of self-centeredness. On the other hand, when there is no God, then there can be no basis for ethics, nothing that would constrain me in seeking to gratify any and every desire that I can possibly fulfill. Is it possible, Brent, events or people in your past or your worldview are clouding your view somewhat? I really do thank you for writing. dt]

60. Brent on September 15th, 2010 10:07 am

    Well your most welcome and thank you for the response. While we certainly have very different worldviews I can assure you that as a person born and raised in a non-religious family I have no angst against Christians. I do however call things as I see them and frankly I find your response quite shall we say amusing.
    “Our beliefs call us to serve others, to help the needy, to care for the sick, to have compassion.” OK, so how does opposing affordable health care for all further that cause? Especially given the fact that we have examples of socialized health care working very well in other countries?
    “when there is no God, then there can be no basis for ethics” what an arrogant holier than though thing to say! My view is that Christian morality is extremely shallow and unsuited to modern civilization. After all your morality is based on pleasing a deity and not necessarily to benefit humanity. That is the reason Christians feel they have the right to interfere in the lives of strangers. Which is something that anyone who values real ethics would only do under highly unusual circumstances. Just because you believe in an old magic storybook does not make you a better person or more moral than anyone else sir.
    My worldview is based on that which I know to be true in reality, I’m sorry that as a child I missed being indoctrinated into believing I was born a worthless bad person who has to kowtow to a supernatural father in order to be a good person. That’s the big event in my past you are asking about. I find your rather childish view of non-believers naive.

    [Brent, I don't think the socialized medicine is working all that well. Any system where people can draw out benefits at little or no cost will eventually bankrupt the system. That is what happened to the settlers at Jamestown and the Pilgrims. So, I believe that it will actually hurt the health care industry in the end...which means it will not be good for people. My position regarding wanting the state to get out of this kind of work is actually a position that stems from a compassion for people. The state only makes people more dependent upon it. That works well for the power-hungry bureaucrat, but doesn't fare well for the needy. Regarding the statement on ethics, I was actually drawing upon Dr. William Provine, an atheistic evolutionist who says that there is "no ultimate foundation for ethics". So, it wasn't an "arrogant, holier than thou" statement, as you charged, it was simply a statement by someone who shares your worldview that there is no God. I think Provine is being very honest. If all is material, then everything is ethically neutral. Nothing can be declared morally right or wrong. Also, your charge that I somehow think I am better than you is wrong. I don't think that at all. I actually think quite the opposite. Thanks, Brent! dt]

61. Brent on September 15th, 2010 4:34 pm

    “I don’t think the socialized medicine is working all that well” The statistics say differently. You seem to be worried about bankrupting “the system” and ignore the fact the real people are being bankrupt by the current system every day. I guess they don’t matter to you? Why talk about pilgrims when there are example systems in place in Canada, England, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Spain, Sweden, South Korea and New Zealand right now?
    I hope you would understand that what someone else says who happens to be an Atheist has no effect on me. There is no Atheist worldview. The only thing we may share in common is a disbelief in Gods. Without reading his writings I couldn’t say if I agree or disagree with Provine. Which means that his opinion is irrelevant to our discussion. Who ever said “All is Material”?? not me. Your building a straw man and not addressing the issues I raised.
    I would be more than happy to engage you in a discussion of morality if you can do so openly and honestly, which means not trying to tell me what I think or expecting me to conform with blind acceptance to your dogma. In any event I do thank you for the reply and your tolerance of differing opinions.

    [I would love to do that. Let's discuss ethics, then. What is your view? dt]

62. Brent on September 17th, 2010 4:47 pm

    Cool, Thanks! My view is that morals are always relative to the person and situation. I say so because many religious people seem to think that God has provided absolute objective morals. If we ignore any argument about whether God exists I would maintain that there is no such thing as an objective moral with or without a God. In order for any moral to be objective or absolute there by definition needs to objective standards to judge whether an act passes or fails the moral test. I believe it’s obvious that unless the standards are objective(hard fast rules) then any moral can not be objective. After all it would make no sense to call a moral absolute or objective and then apply subjective judgments as a pass/fail test because that would make the moral itself subjective.
    Example1: A tries to rob B and in the process stabs B to death. No one sane would argue that A hasn’t committed a murder in violation of the law and Gods commandment. This might tempt one to say an objective moral has been used to judge A.
    Example2: Policeman A comes across B in the act of stealing something very valuable. The policeman orders B to stop but B flees with the item. A warning shot is fired but B still doesn’t stop. Policeman A tries to wound B in the leg but the bullet hits his back and kills him. The police consider the killing a justified accident. The friends and family of B say the policeman had no right to use deadly force in a non-violent crime. They see the death as a cold blooded murder. Now how is the Objective moral applied? What objective standard is applied to judge this situation?
    Laws in general are an attempt to objectify societies relative morals and in doing so can create many injustices.
    I hope this isn’t too long or too off topic for you. I have much more to say on the subject of morals and ethics but it’s best to get some groundwork laid.
    [Hey, Brent...I'm painting a house all day to day, but wanted to post your great comment first. I'll get back to soon... dt]
    [Back! Really enjoyed your comment and how you expressed it. Many Christians take a too simplistic approach to ethics when in reality it is both simple, yet complex. In your examples, the main issue is the issue of murder. From a biblical perspective, there is much that is said in addition to the command "Do not murder", which lays down the basic ethic that human life is sacred. However, the complexity is addressed as well. If someone accidently kills another human being (as well as an animal or destroys property), they are to make restitution to the family. This acknowledges the difference between an act of murder (A above) and an accident (B above). Also, authority has been delegated to the civil magistrate in which he can bear the sword and use that sword to punish evil. The general population cannot do this (lynch mobs are wrong). However, in the role of punishing evil, the civil magistrate is actually doing "right" when he uses that sword (properly) to punish evil. I want to hear more about your view of "absolutes" though and your thinking behind whether there are any or if all ethics are relative. Thanks, Brent! dt]

63. Brent on September 20th, 2010 8:16 pm

    Thanks for taking the time to reply, I’m sure you are much busier than myself, I’m semi-retired and have a lot of free time as I never watch TV. LOL.
    Yes, I believe all morals are relative to the individual and circumstances. In example 2 above the family and friends of B may very well not accept that the killing was an accident. They would point out that yes B was doing wrong but using deadly force was also wrong and two wrongs don’t make the killing right. From their perspective the killing is a murder and they will likely want the cop prosecuted. I see no room for the application of any absolute moral here as there is no rigid standard that can be applied to decide who’s right and who’s wrong.

64. Brent on September 20th, 2010 9:35 pm

    Oops sorry I accidentally hit some key combo that posted before I had finished.
    As I stated before if we ignore any argument over the source of an absolute moral we can, I think, agree that laws are an attempt by the state to impose absolute morals by setting objective standards in writing. Lawmakers hopefully write laws that reflect the subjective morals of the community. They do this because there are always some people in a society who hold to different moral values than the norm in one area or another. However in doing so we often find situations where these rigid standards create immoral and unintended judgments.
    example: We pretty much all agree the sexual abuse of children is very immoral. Laws are passed that define a child as any minor under the age of 18. A boy 17 but mature for his age lies to a girl 21 and they have sex. The boys parents find out and have the girl arrested. She faces harsh mandatory jail time and is branded as a registered sex offender for life. This may indeed be the application of an absolute moral with absolute standards but few would say the girl deserved her punishment.
    The problem is not that the moral is bad the problem is in creating an absolute set of underlying standards to impose an objective moral the flexibility that humanity needs in judging right and wrong is lost. Our legal system tries to make up for this by giving DA’s wide latitude in the decision to prosecute or not.
    If you take Gods commandment not to steal as an absolute then the cat burglar sneaking into your house is equal to the starving man stealing a crust of bread. Unless, like the law does you create a number of rigid standards to create classes of theft. In which case stealing $999 will get you 6 months but stealing one more dollar will get you five to ten years. I don’t really see that in the bible but I’ve been known to be wrong.
    I think I have explained why I believe absolute morals are a terrible idea imposed on what must basically be a subjective system. Real morals are always subject to the circumstance and our innate sense of fair play. They are tempered and biased by our point of view and personal experience. There is no one size fits all in morals, If we do not judge each act separately with non-rigid standards we are apt to render an immoral and unjust conclusion.
    Whew, I’m beat, time for bed.
    [LOL! I'm beat too. I'm posting this again until I can reply. Great comments. I'll get back to you soon! Get some rest! dt]
    [Brent! Sorry, I'm in Florida filming and the last two weeks have been a killer! I think I understand what you are saying. A couple of questions, though. If all morals are relative, then would it not seem logical that nothing is really "right" and nothing is really "wrong", except within the mind of the observer. The cold-blooded murder of an innocent child, from an absolute perspective, would be neither good nor bad. From what you have said, though, I have a hard time thinking this is what you believe. Or, are you possibly saying that you might believe it is wrong, but someone else might not. What about the murderer? What if he believes it is right? What if the child doesn't fit the culture's "mold" for some reason (skin color, level of intelligence, body health, etc). Aren't we then each making up our own ethical rules? It seems to me, practically speaking, that ethical relativism only leads to "right makes right". Those who have the political power or the longest sword or 51% of the vote determine what is right and what is wrong. Secondly, you made a good point that someone stealing a piece of bread versus breaking into your home and stealing your wife's wedding ring (I know you said "cat burglar" but I wanted to make it personal ) aren't the same. I would agree and biblically speaking, there is provision for the "degree" of offense. There is an absolute position that stealing is wrong, but how that act is carried out brings about an appropriate punishment (i.e. size of the restitution, etc.). By the way, if you are semi-retired, why are you "beat" at the end of the day? Are you like a lot of people I know who retire and then work harder than they did when they were working? dt]

65. Brent on September 28th, 2010 3:08 am

    Yes semi-retired means I don’t make a steady paycheck anymore so I pick up work where and when I can. Not to mention my hobbies have grown by leaps and bounds to the point they sometimes feel like a job all by themselves.

    As I tried to point out in my last comment morals are always relative. I tend not to use the words right and wrong or good and bad because of that. Isn’t what your really asking when you ask “would be neither good nor bad.” just another way of describing moral or immoral? How would you separate right and wrong from moral or immoral? If the child killer believes his act was “right” then he believes his act was moral, doesn’t he? True morals are derived from what benefits humanity as a whole and as we have seen can change over time. One only has to look at the history of woman’s fashion to see that.:-)
    I’m a little confused by your stealing argument, by position do you mean morally?” It seems to me that any society that doesn’t quickly come to some basic moral positions on stealing and murder can’t survive for long (Good for humanity thing) but I see no reason to call these morals absolute. As i have tried to point out there are no absolute standards to judge them by.
    Your comments on ethical relativism seem to me to be exactly the way things really work. From my perspective the government passes plenty of immoral, unethical laws meant to benefit the rich or corporations and not serve humanity. Yes, we each do make up our own ethical rules. It’s only because most people are rational and desire to live in peace the we can agree on so many morals and create a great society. Cheating on your spouse is a great example, many people do it even though it’s almost universally considered to be immoral. Yet we balk at making it illegal. why? I think it’s because each of us recognize our own personal moral vulnerability when it comes right down to it. We all know we are capable of violating our own ethical standards when stricken by lust.
    Now I’ll go on to a much more touchy subjects. If the bible is the source of morals then where do new morals come from? What in the bible makes e-mail spamming or non-malicious computer hacking immoral? What has made state execution by crucifixion immoral? I’d really like to get your thoughts on that subject.
    It is my belief that true ethics require us to carry a set of morals that benefit humanity. That view leads me into conflict with many Christians. I’ll set the subject as moral obligations to strangers. I believe that true ethics dictate we do not interfere in the lives of strangers without highly compelling reasons. I also believe that when we do interfere in the lives of strangers we incur a very heavy moral burden. An example of this may be running into someone with your car. We have physically harmed a stranger, both decency and the law dictate that we are responsible to that person for the harm we have caused. That’s why we carry car insurance, to cover that persons medical expenses, lost wages ect. It is this inescapable principle that I find lacking in many Christian positions.
    I do not like abortion, it is very repugnant to me. Yet I can not support the pro-life movement or laws to restrict it for a very simple reason. Should I interfere in some unknown woman’s life and prevent her from having an abortion, which is after all an elected medical procedure to terminate (kill) a fetus. I can not escape my acquired moral obligation to that unwanted child I have forced into the world. I must personally insure that innocent child receives all the nurturing and financial support it needs to grow into a useful member of society (remember my benefit humanity base for morality). Unless I am willing to do that I do not have the right to interfere in that woman’s decision. This is one of the reasons I call Christian morals shallow, as I understand it once the abortion has been prevented, God is happy and their obligation ends. I have never heard any pro-life stance that includes an ethical obligation to unwanted children. At best there is some vague talk about adoption, not the interferer adopting, just somebody else. I do hope you do not see this as any sort attack on your beliefs. I am not trying to demean the christian position on this issue, I am simply raising my view and saying why I think the christian position is immoral as it stands. I do not want to argue about whether a fetus is a baby or if it’s murder, it doesn’t matter what I believe, it only matters what the woman believes.

    Thanks again, I hope you can find the time to read this, much less respond to it. LOL

    [Brent, I not only read it, but, thankfully, even though it is early in the morning, I think I comprehend it! Now, if I can just find my car keys! LOL! When you say "True morals are derived from what benefits humanity as a whole", it seems that is a statement based upon an absolute. Also, doesn't the individual get lost in that? In other words, wouldn't humanity be benefited as a whole if we sterilized those with "bad genes" so that humanity would propagate the "fittest"? And speaking of "fit" how does this "fit" with your last statement "...it only matters what the woman believes"? That sounds like morality is based upon an individuals belief, rather than one that benefits humanity as a whole. Thanks, Brent. I hope you have a great day today! dt]

66. Brent on September 28th, 2010 8:02 pm

    Thanks for the reply. I wouldn’t call benefiting humanity an absolute since there are no hard standards to judge it by. I see it as more the underlying guiding principle of morals, much like “do onto others” is more a moral guide than an absolute.
    I’m again at a loss as to the “Bad Genes” argument. How and who has the right to declare a gene bad? Can there be such a thing as immoral genes? The obvious rebuttal to that would be Stephen Hawking, Itzhak Perlman, F.D. Roosevelt and many others all had bad genes, would humanity have been served if they where weeded from the gene pool? I think your view of benefiting humanity is a little simplistic. It has nothing to do with who is fittest. One can be completely unfit yet benefit humanity greatly. I’m actually a little shocked you raised the question.

    Here are a couple of examples to clarify my my last woman believes statement. I have a female friend that I have known since childhood. She confides in me and tells me she has made a mistake and gotten pregnant. Since I know her I have a good understanding of her circumstances, financial position, support system and beliefs. So when she tells me she is considering an abortion I try my best to talk her out of it. I point out that she would be depriving herself, her parents and her friends of a chance to have a beautiful child enter their lives. I would remind her that she can afford to have a child and that if she has the baby it will be life changing but in a good way. Her and the child would have plenty of support from her friends and family..ect. In this case I accept that if I succeed in preventing the abortion I have an obligation to the child but I am not worried about it since I feel the woman will become a fine mother. If I am wrong I will gather my troops and step in to do whatever I can for the kid.

    Now exact same situation only his time I know the woman is a hopeless drug addict on the road to self destruction. In that case my only option should I try to prevent the abortion is to tell the woman I will adopt the child if she has it. Even the option of paying for an arranged adoption by someone else is in my view not acceptable because I am arranging a situation where I can not guarantee the child’s welfare. In this case I would most likely stay out of her decision because my age and health would preclude adopting a baby. But it would grate on me horribly even though I consider it the moral position. I’d rather feel semi responsible for the death of a fetus than completely responsible for a neglected child.

    Finally we have the complete stranger. I do not know her circumstances, her financial position, her support system or her beliefs. I have no way to judge if she will be able raise that child well or not. In this case I refuse to accept responsibility for the child. It is not my place to interfere in her life. One can only hope her family and friends are involved enough to help her. In the first two cases I make moral judgments I can live with, in his case I must refrain from making a judgment altogether since I am not willing to pay the price.

    In the first two cases I have used my morals to benefit humanity as well as I could. In the last case it is unclear what would benefit humanity so I stay out of it. I never favor abortion but there are many circumstances where the moral thing to do is not to actively prevent it. Emotions and personal prejudices should not compromise our sense of responsibility for our actions.

    I’m quite sure you will have some things to say about all this and I’m prepared to get slapped down should I deserve it. One last thing I’ll say is that in my opinion most women who put themselves into a position of having to consider an abortion have acted against the best interest of society and therefore immorally. But unless human nature changes that’s never going to go away.

    Have a good one, all the best.
    [Back with you soon. Pray you have a great day! dt]

67. Del on October 10th, 2010 7:59 pm

    Brent, sorry to be so long in responding. I hope you haven’t grown old and passed on in the meantime.
    Couple of things. I brought up the “fittest” argument because it seems to me that when you make an appeal to an ethical criteria of benefitting humanity as a whole, it seemed logical to discuss the moral position of wanting to make the human species “better” through genetic “screening” so to speak. I know there have been many who argue that point from a utilitarian ethical position. That’s why I brought it up. It just seems logical if one begins with your ethical position. Maybe not and if so I would be interested in hearing your reasoning.
    It makes me happy when you talk about wanting not to see an innocent life ended by abortion. But I am confused by your arguments, so I need you to clarify. You gave three scenarios. The third one implies that since she is a stranger and you don’t know what might happen to the baby if she bore it, you find no ethical basis for seeing the abortion as right or wrong. Did I misread you? Does the issue of right and wrong come down to your knowing the circumstances or not, or whether or not you are willing to “pay the price”?
    We’ve read the stories of people being mugged or beaten and a crowd of people stood by and let it happen. Is there not something within us that says this is wrong? But if our criteria is whether or not they wanted to “pay the price” as you stated, when obviously they didn’t, are we to therefore conclude that their indifference was right?
    Oh, and by the way, when you said you were prepared to get “slapped down should I deserve it”…I had to laugh because that sounds like a moral absolute position…”should I deserve it”…HA! I’ll take your relative position on that and say that I don’t know if you deserve it or not!
    Thanks, Brent. Hope you have a great week. Any grand plans?

68. Brent on October 12th, 2010 11:07 am

    How does one link the ethical criteria of benefiting humanity as a whole with making the human race “better”? Are not people with genetic defects considered part of humanity? If so how would “screening them out” benefit humanity? Do you really not understand the difference between advancing the well being of everyone and making some “better” than others? I think that perspective comes from being a Theist and accepting the fact that God has “Chosen” people. So that when you hear a phrase like benefiting humanity as a whole you naturally carry over the concept of classes of people and try to apply it. Weeding people out of the gene pool simply can not benefit humanity because there is no correlation between the genetic fitness and the potential benefit to humanity of a person. I hope that explanation puts this issue to bed but if you have more questions feel free.
    “The third one implies that since she is a stranger and you don’t know what might happen to the baby if she bore it, you find no ethical basis for seeing the abortion as right or wrong. Did I misread you? Does the issue of right and wrong come down to your knowing the circumstances or not, or whether or not you are willing to “pay the price”? Yes, of course it does, unlike you I find nothing moral in arbitrary declarations of “right” and “wrong”. In my third scenario you have no means to judge if that woman’s abortion would be more or less beneficial to society. The real issue is the child and your moral responsibility to it should you interfere with her abortion. If you are in a position to guarantee the child’s welfare, offer it all the nurturing and financial support needed to insure that he/she grows up to be a functional adult and benefit to humanity then I say go for it, prevent the abortion! But if your just going to try to prevent the abortion and leave that child in whatever circumstances it finds itself in then you are not acting morally! Are you going to take responsibility when that unwanted and abused child decides to bring a gun to class and kill other people? No,because the time to take responsibility was the moment you decided to interfere. I understand as a Theist you would like to think God always looks after the child that the abortion prevented but I have no such luxury nor do I think that’s true. We have more than enough psychopaths without bringing more into the world under some shallow moral that declares an act is always so evil that the consequences can be ignored.
    “We’ve read the stories of people being mugged or beaten and a crowd of people stood by and let it happen. Is there not something within us that says this is wrong? But if our criteria is whether or not they wanted to “pay the price” as you stated, when obviously they didn’t, are we to therefore conclude that their indifference was right?” While this is surly an observed phenomena of group behavior I don’t see a link to my morals any more than there is a link to your morals, after all if it happened in the US then at least 80% of the people in the crowd where Christians. I’m willing to bet everyone in that crowd thought it was wrong but did not act on it. Or are we to assume that the Christians where praying the beating would stop and leaving the intervention to others? (Sorry I couldn’t help myself )
    I look forward to hearing from you again. I hope I’ve been able to clarify some of the points in my worldview of morality and dispelled some of your concerns. Have a good one.

69. Brent on October 14th, 2010 4:50 am

    Hi again; I left my previous reply a few days ago but after I sent it I began to think about new morals and where they come from. As culture and technology develop whole new sets of morals emerge around our new capabilities. Be they new laws like the Digital Millennium Copyright Act or the immorality of “dropping someones docs” on anonymous forums like YouTube. This is not a problem for my view of morality but I was wondering how one who perceives morality as objectively received from God explains where these new morals come from? Surely the bible says nothing about non-destructive computer hacking, Denial Of Service attacks or e-mail spamming. Remember when publishers sued Xerox because people could copy books on their new machines? How does one relate an absolute moral against stealing with making an exact copy of someones possession? The whole area of intellectual property rights seems missing from such a view of morality. Anyway you get the idea, I’d be interested to hear how you think new morals come about. Thanks a lot and have a good day.

70. Del on October 20th, 2010 5:04 pm

    Brent…back to you soon!

Leave a Reply

Comments are moderated and will not appear until they've been approved. While we are eager to facilitate conversation by publishing most comments, we may withhold one from time to time if we deem it to be inappropriate, i.e. offensive, vulgar, overly personal, cynical, disrespectful, irrelevant, redundant or unnecessarily contentious (what a list, huh?). Check it over for spelling and grammar before you submit so that nothing will hinder your eloquence!