I found this article very interesting.

Most students of the New Testament will easily conclude that God loves unity.  This awareness puzzles most observers as Christians tend to be quite fragmented; the very opposite of being unified.

As they say, you don't get to choose your family.  We should attempt to act like family, even if we don't see eye to eye on everything.  (Can you tell me any family that does?)

One of the unexpected byproducts of our Praise & Harmony workshops has been an impressive show of unity among the cities where we travel.  Churches who never fellowship with each other or cooperate on anything else are coming together for the purpose of singing and worship.  I can't help but think that God is smiling.

Is pushing away the power of the Information Complex do-able in today’s world? How would you teach this concept to teenagers?

I have asked Latayne Scott to compose these questions for discussion on this important topic.  KL

Read Romans 12:1-3

What elements of the Information Complex do you find here? What does this passage say about making decisions?

I have asked Latayne Scott to compose these questions for discussion on this important topic.  KL

“The more complete and comprehensive the agreement among the elements of the Information Complex, the more necessary it is to seek the will of God in a situation.”

Do you agree or disagree with this statement after reading the Gibeonite story? Support your answer.

Secondly, What decision have you made recently? To what extent did the Information Complex inform that decision?

I have asked Latayne Scott to compose these questions for discussion on this important topic.  KL

We can see several factors in Joshua chapter 9 which Joshua and the people used in coming to the conclusion that they should make a treaty with the Gibeonites. We can call the totality of those factors, just for convenience, an “information complex.”

Last week we looked at “expert opinion” and “personal experience.” Here are three more: “empathy,” “risk assessment,” and “personal confidence in the ability to assess a situation.”

What are the details in Joshua 9 that fit in these three categories?

I have asked Latayne Scott to compose these questions for discussion on this important topic.  KL

We can see several factors in Joshua chapter 9 that Joshua and the people used in coming to the conclusion that they should make a treaty with the Gibeonites. We can call the totality of those factors, just for convenience, an “information complex."

Let’s look at two of those factors this week and three more next week.


What are the details in Joshua 9 that fit in these two categories?

I have asked Latayne Scott to compose these questions for discussion on this important topic.  KL

My friend, Shane Coffman has shared a well-worded blog article about his beliefs here.  I'm impressed by how he effectively communicates core Gospel truths without using ecclesiastical terminology. 

I have asked Latayne Scott to compose these questions for discussion on this important topic.

What can we learn about Joshua’s experience with the Gibeonites (Joshua chapter 9)  that demonstrates the importance of valuing instructions from God above one’s own assessments of reality?

I have asked Latayne Scott to compose these questions for discussion on this important topic.

Which part or aspect of reality is supposed to “carry more weight” for a Christian in lifestyle, decision-making, and other thought, speech and behavior?

I have asked Latayne Scott to compose these questions for discussion on this important topic.

How do the three elements that make up reality (the seen, the unseen, and the link connecting them) reflect the Godhead?

I have asked Latayne Scott to compose these questions for discussion on this important topic.

What links the two parts of reality? (Try to answer this without the following hint, which you may use if you need to:  1 Corinthians chapter 2.)

The topic of which translation to use has brought many heated discussions (surprised?).  I enjoyed this article by Bobby Valentine entitled Living Oracles.  What's your favorite Bible translation?

I have asked Latayne Scott to compose these questions for discussion on this important topic.

Can it be accurately said that reality has (at least) two parts?  According to the Bible, what are they?  (Try to answer this out of your own Bible knowledge; but if you get stuck, read 2 Corinthians 4:16-18.)

People find it unusual how I go about singing spontaneously on a daily basis.  Victor Knowles doesn't.  Check out this article from a wonderful man.

I really enjoy learning brief lines that contain powerful distillations of theological wisdom.  I'd like to share some from time to time and would love to hear the ones you have collected.  This phrase was included in Charles Hodges book:

According to Bobby Valentine, the Psalms are the blues.  Check out these quotes from his article:


Read the full article, Psalms: Singing The Blues at the Stoned-Campbell blog.

You may have heard it said that the church or body of Christ is an organism, not an organization.  If that is true, what should be our attitude and approach to leadership?

I recommend you read Gary Kirkendall's post on "Leaders & Mobs."

Here are some excerpts:

"Leadership” is not the same as being able to walk by faith.

Leaders who trust in their own strength are not worthy to be followed.

Spiritual leadership and walking by faith often means swimming upstream.

A mob always responds emotionally and poorly.

God blesses those who trust in him.  God brings down those who trust only in themselves.

It is impossible to make up for faithless actions.  All you can do is repent and trust in God’s power.

He (God) doesn’t need our “brain power” or our own efforts to accomplish His will.  God desires our partnership in the obedient faith that brings all glory to Him.  We are a lot like the wanderers.  The issue isn’t whether or not God has brought us this far.  The issue is whether or not we believe He can lead us all the home.

Remember — walk by faith, lead by faith, avoid the mob — they are the masters of bad ideas.

This week, a friend asked me this question and I'd like to hear your thoughts:

Are you acquainted with people who know the Bible and don't know Jesus?

Radiance Bible Studies
Lesson Four

“THE DECISION COMPLEX”

Song Lyrics:

BE DEVOTED
Words & Music by Keith Lancaster
©2005 Anthony K. Music ASCAP

Carry each other’s burdens
Carry each other’s burdens
And in this way you will fulfill
The law of Christ

Be devoted to one another in brotherly love
Be devoted to one another in brotherly love
Honor one another above yourselves
Never be lacking in zeal
But keep your spiritual fervor
But keep your spiritual fervor
Serving the Lord

Love one another
Serve one another
Pray for each other
Encourage one another
And build each other up

Scripture Source:
Galatians 6:1-5; Romans 12:9-21; 1 Thessalonians 5:11


PART ONE  -- THE DECISION COMPLEX

This graphic illustrates an important principle, one that could be called “the Decision Complex.”  Note that:

1.    God is at the center of it all.  The decision complex starts with God, the invisible reality -- not with people, situations, personal desire, personal inclinations nor sociological habits.
2.    The next ring is the Word of God.  Scripture is true knowledge, the authority for space and time and transcendent intelligence. 
3.    The next ring is human will.  Here the self is disciplined to conform and consciously obey the word of the Lord.  To do this, one must perhaps contradict social traditions; and certainly violate the rule of the self.
4.    The next ring is resolved action.  Such action is purposeful and meaningful.  Because of where the action really begins-- which is with God-- it is eternal in character.
5.    From this point we move to out to quite a different realm, the realm of effects.  No one, really, can guarantee outcomes in any situation.  The ideal effect, though, is ideal brotherhood. 

These four rings and the square that represents the realm of effects thus comprise the graphic presentation of the Decision Complex.

The scripture passages on which the song is based require action – action that must be preceded by a decision to comply.   One must decide to carry each other’s burdens, to be devoted to one another and to love one another -- or not.

However, some people – even among Christians – don’t look primarily at the decisions that underlie the actions that create unity.  If you ask many people, “How do you know that you have made the right decision in a situation?” they will answer according to their assessment of the results.  In other words, effects trump principles of right or wrong.  All of the things to do mentioned in these texts require conscious action and a conscious decision to do so.

The Four Dynamic Rings

Look again at the four rings.  Each requires a dynamic.

a.    The move from God to the Word is dynamic, because when the Lord put His will in writing, it involved men who suffered to participate in this purpose of the Lord

b.    Moving from the Word to human will is dynamic, because the will must fight it out, it must reason to a point that the will must be compelled to conform. This is a tough inner struggle.  It is not automatic.  It is the result of personal exertion.

c.   Moving from will to resolved action is dynamic, because one must isolate and determine the action to be taken.  This is a highly conscious action.

d.  Moving from action to effects is dynamic.  Though we may not be directly involved in producing effects -- we are willing to accept the effects whatever they may be – the process itself is an active, dynamic one.

Any decision, we discover, is an expression of either God or the self.  A decision reveals a person’s starting point.  But when God is at the center, decisions are part of a chain of divine expression – they are rings of expression in just this way.

Where do decisions start?  Do they begin with pro/con assessments, looking for projected effects?  Do they begin with comparing cost to benefits?

To the contrary, a decision is a shared phenomenon!  If we look at the rings again in the decision complex, we see that we participate with the Lord, but He leads the way.
Any decision a Christian makes must be a shared phenomenon.  Some will say:
•    “I am not going to live that way because it’s too painful” -- (an effect) 
•    “I’ll lose too much” -- (an effect)
•    “I’ll look like a fool to my peers”  -- (an effect).

Therefore we Christians do not make personal decisions uniquely based on our wants, needs or inclinations.  Every decision that we make must be reached in direct relation to the expressed will of the Lord.  It is in this way that decisions that we make are shared between us and the Almighty.  What we might call private decisions have been left behind according to this standard.

However, Jesus shows us that effects must not countermand the dynamics of the godly decision complex.  For instance, in Luke 9:23 Jesus says that to be His disciple, we must take up our cross and follow him.  A cross is hardly a desirable effect. Make no mistake:   He asks us to put up with all kinds of undesirable effects to follow Him to heaven.

By symbolizing our following Him by means of a cross leading to death, Jesus told us that inherently effects are not applicable in our decision process.  Effects, thus, are not a fundamental consideration in the decision complex.  Jesus went to the cross and the personal result for Him was a merciless death.  The Lord understood that all decisions that believers make – even His – were based upon the elements in this very same decision complex.  Christ did not make the decision to go to the cross due to immediate outcomes for Him.  Therefore Jesus by His personal sacrifice teaches us that effects are non-applicable in the Biblical decision complex. 

Such a concept is heretical to the world.  Jesus might as well have said that effects are lifted out and away from the decision complex!  It negates “real world decision theory,” and violates the underpinnings of the world’s law of decision making which depends on the assessment of effects. 

So if we ask what is the relation between the decision process --------and effects?  We find that there is NO relation between them at all.  For the obedient Christian, effects become the province of God. Only He mitigates them.

Therefore effects/results/consequences are subject to at least two modalities.  Modalities are the way in which something comes to us or happens to us.  In this case there is….

a.    Modality #1 – a happy or pleasant effect
b.    Modality #2 – an unhappy or unpleasant effect

We acknowledge that these effects exist.  They are inevitable.  Yet God calls us to refuse to let them influence our decision process.  He calls us to factor them out of the decision process.

This means, in terms of decision making, that there are no temporal or worldly elements in the decision complex.  Indeed, for a Christian, all of the elements that bear consideration are eternal.

The weight of the decision complex rests upon two things:

1)  Its starting point, which is God
2)  And, what we must exclude from the process, which are temporal elements.  Temporal elements refer to things of this world and the consequences that we must face.  But all of the elements in the decision complex are purely spiritual.

Here’s the crux, one that is addressed in the song:  Building relationships depends upon a decision process!  This is true in every relationship—in the church, in friendships, in marriage, in business.   Dr. Phil is wrong – relationships are not negotiated.  The Decision Complex tells you what to bring to the table or to the relationship.  And it tells you what you must exclude.

If two married people use this decision complex, then that is what each one brings to the relationship.  That is how they make decisions about everything.  This is a true picture of compatibility.  A shared decision complex takes care of other problems.


Discussion Questions for Part One

1.  Describe the elements of the Decision Complex and their relationship to one another.

2.  List any scriptures you can think of that describe or explain any or all of the elements of the Decision Complex.

3.  If someone makes decisions without consideration of effects, he
 or she is often accused of “painting themselves into a corner” or “putting God in a box.”   How would you answer such a charge?

4.  If a married couple does not use the Decision Complex and instead they make decisions on the basis of projected outcomes or effects, do you think this will produce unity or friction?  Explain your answer.

5. What scriptural support do you see for active reliance upon the power of God versus the seeking of a desirable outcome?



PART TWO – THE LEVELS OF SCRIPTURE

We find that examining passages that tell us such things as, “be devoted to one another” demonstrate levels of Scripture. 

LEVELS OF SCRIPTURE:
A.  THE PRAGMATICS
B.  THE FUNDAMENTALS

The pragmatics (A) are the things that we are supposed to do, the behaviors listed and reiterated in the song.  These can include both the scriptures themselves, such as the Galatians passage; and the behaviors those scriptures would evoke.  There would be a unity between the words and someone’s actions, for instance.  In fact, one of the ways we express this unity is through such thoughts as “Just do it,” or “It says to be baptized, so I was baptized.”  We might characterize pragmatics as “surface findings,” because they’re visible to an observer.  They are required but reflect only one level of reading the Scripture and understanding obedience.

However, these pragmatics open a door to a deeper level below, one we might call the level of fundamentals (B).  At this level is the inspired rationale for what emerges on the pragmatics level.  These might be referred to as “fundamental findings.” The fundamental findings are the explanations for the surface findings.

This inherent structure of Scripture – the pragmatics with an underlying fundamentals level – is seen not just in the Galatians, Romans and 1 Thessalonians passages that are the basis for the song.  This structure is seen throughout all of the Bible.  All passages can be accessed on the pragmatics level, but they point to something, below something richer.  In these texts under consideration – all three of them – we can recognize these two levels.  The pragmatic level comprises the “what to do” statements.  We call them pragmatics because they must be practiced.  But that level points to yet another level – the fundamental level – where we detect the idea of the decision complex.  Nothing is stated directly in the passages about any decision complex; and yet it is there in the underlying logic of the teaching.  

This structure transcends Biblical genres and literary criticism.  Seeing the pragmatics/fundamentals connection isn’t a method for interpretation, but rather an acknowledgment of the way that Scripture provides meaning.

The relationship between the pragmatics and the fundamentals yields an even richer truth when one considers a further insight.  The pragmatics lead one to search for the fundamentals.  That’s why a non-believer would be attracted to the “surface findings” he or she sees in a believer and asks, “Why do you do that?”  Such an unbeliever won’t be swayed by the explanation of mere obedience to commands – he or she will want to know why?   The pragmatics are symbolic of something deeper and compelling. 

But in a marvelous, reflexive way, the fundamentals level is demonstrated in the pragmatics.  One symbolizes the other (pragmatics to fundamentals); and one demonstrates itself in the other (fundamentals to pragmatics.) 

This tells how the Bible actually “works”; how it functions for our greater benefit. The Book reflexes in just this way and obliges the mind to follow in its wake.  So the mind must become a reflexive system as well, constantly calling the body and speech to demonstrate the pragmatics – which themselves point to the deeper level of the fundamentals.

Thus we acknowledge the symbolic power of pragmatics.  We must read the pragmatics as symbols or doorways to the fundamental truth.  If not, we will never discover that layer.  It means that the language on the pragmatic level symbolizes the fundamental and the fundamental truth is demonstrated in the pragmatics.  Both layers or levels constitute the Word of God.  Someone might object to this as nothing more than “Gnosticism.”  But this structure does not smack one bit of the Gnostic heresy.  This is not private esoteric teaching, open and available to only a chosen few.  To the contrary, it is open to all who read the Scriptures looking into the symbolizing power of the pragmatics of the Text. 

A third level sits atop the reflexive two layers of pragmatics/language and the fundamental truth.  It is a level we might call commitment.  Commitment means an acknowledgment of the pragmatics/language level that will be carried out deliberately, considering all that underlies the words.  It’s the integration of all that the pragmatics/language has and is into daily thought, speech, and behavior

The three levels would look like this: 

1.    Commitment:  Thought / Speech / Behavior
________________________________________

2.    The Pragmatics / Language
________________________________________

3.    The Fundamental Truth

Look at the symbolic chain or sequence.  The Pragmatics is our starting point which opens the door to the fundamental truth; and then it’s back to the pragmatics which becomes the springboard to the upper level.  In the three texts on which the song is based, Paul in essence urges us to not break that chain.   In the commitment level we force onto our thought, speech and behavior all of the substance of the two previous layers of study and insight.  Because no matter what we discover in the word of God, if we do not obligate our thought, speech and behavior to conform to the truth thus discovered then we are hollow and empty vessels.  All of our reading of Scripture has come to nothing.  It has produced nothing of eternal consequence.

We can identify these three layers, but when people look at us, they see first the commitment.  They ask the reason why, and we point them to the level of the pragmatics – “We follow what the Bible says” – and often that opens the door for us to show them the fundamentals beneath the commandments.


Discussion Questions for Part Two

1.  How does the command to “keep your spiritual fervor” require looking at the fundamentals level?  How about “never be lacking in zeal?”  How do commandments like this, which require an inner effect, differ from those which are more outward actions?

2.  Someone recently observed that young people leave the church because they haven’t been taught that there is more than one level to the understanding of Scripture.  They are taught pragmatics almost exclusively.   Do you agree or disagree?  In what practical ways could a Bible school program include the fundamentals level?

3.  Explain how the pragmatics and the fundamentals are reflexive.

4.  In what way is the pragmatics level symbolic of what underlies it?

5.  How would stem cell research, the teaching of atheistic evolution, and gay marriage all illustrate an emphasis on effects?   What could an understanding of the fundamentals level contribute to a Christian’s understanding of such issues?


Part Three:  THE-THREE STEP READING OF THE TEXT OF SCRIPTURE.

Once we see this three-part structure, it leads logically to a three-step reading of Scripture itself. 

Step One:  Because it’s most observable and accessible we begin to read Scripture at the pragmatics level.  Such readers, those who stay simply at this level, will factor in the effects that Biblical obedience might imply.  In most cases, people who stay at this level do not want to run risks or take a chance that they might be bringing on themselves some potential unpleasant effects. 

Such a “pragmatics” reading of the Bible cannot build stable fellowship.  Look at all of the churches that divide.  Then they call for conflict resolution to try and hold the church together or put it back together.  Conflict resolution started in the law schools, and not in the Word of God.

Nor will this level of reading alone deal an effective blow to depression and discouragement.  It might enforce better behavior, but without an explanation provided by the underlying fundamentals level, it is difficult to sustain.

Step Two :  This step begins with re-representing the pragmatics level.  The words of Scripture and the behaviors it entreats must be seen as symbols, pointing us to something else, that level of fundamental truth.  Second-level readers say that such a reading of the Text generates great wisdom and insight.  

However, those who stay just at that level of reading, though enriched and helped by this fuller view, often are still enslaved with the fear of potential unpleasant effects.  They understand what Scripture says, can acknowledge the underlying inspired rationale, but aren’t willing to go to the level of commitment  -- a level that must be free of all fear of effects.  As necessary as these first levels are they are not the end of the story.  There is something else.

Step Three  brings with it the projection of commitment onto one’s thought, speech and behavior – regardless of the outcomes or effects.  This Commitment Level of Reading produces real students of the Word. Such will force the Biblical ideas upon the expressions of the self-- like thought, speech and behavior.  Such readers are not content with the pragmatics and not content just with listening to and simply learning about these things.

No one can go directly to Step Three.  Nor will exegesis nor historical analysis produce these three steps.  We start, as we must, with the pragmatics, delve into the fundamentals, and then bring these two up to the level of committed, transformed thought, speech and behavior. In the final analysis, our decisions become extensions of our reading of the text!

Discussion Questions for Part Three

1.  How does James 1:22-25 illustrate the commitment level of the reading of Scripture?  What does it say about thought, speech and behavior?  What does it say about effects?  

2.  Moses in Exodus chapter 3 decided not to go to Egypt because of the effects.  What did the Lord do that took care of Moses’ fears? 

3.  We could apply this “layered reading” to Abraham in Genesis chapter 16 and to Israel in Numbers 13 and 14.  Can you draw a structure that illustrates the three levels in either of these cases? 

4. How can someone’s location in or identification with any one of the three levels of the three-part reading reveal his or her acceptance or rejection of the decision complex?

For further reflection: “The Second Singing”   

Now that you’ve studied in depth some of the implications of the scriptures on which the song is based, what do you understand and think as you hear the song again?