Where does one start?

My biggest (that I can think of right now) weakness is in thinking about the big picture and preparing for things with it in mind. Meaning, I rarely think about the big picture. 

Examples:

My yard has a crapload of weeds in it because I wasn't thinking about the big picture when the time came for me to do some weed prevention before the spring.

I can't play guitar, although I've tried to learn more than a few times. I always assume that I'll suck at something forever if I don't start with it mastered, which leads me to quit. (see programming, website design, hip hop production, making shoes, woodworking, etc...)

I have, however, been honing the skill over the past two or three years out of necessity. As a teacher, I have to have the big picture in mind as I prepare lessons for my classes. There is a ten question test over each unit that I teach. I don't write the test, but I have to give the test to all of my classes. I've been told that I have to use this test to "backwards design" my lesson plans for an entire unit. Let me describe this another way: I plan over a month's worth of curriculum by looking at ten questions they will have to answer on one day at the end of the unit. I think a lot of people would read that and be taken aback by how terrible that sounds. All we teachers ever do is teach to the test, right? 

Right. And it's the greatest thing ever.

Why? 

My students' mathematical growth and mastery is based on the results of a test. It always has been and it always will be. That doesn't seem to be changing any time soon. As long as that's the case, I'll continue to plan with the end goal in mind. It's the nuance associated with this process that allows me to sleep at night, though. 

I tell every kid at the beginning of the year that they are NOT a test score to me. They will have a test score associated with them, but that is not their defining characteristic in my mind. I keep that in mind throughout the year as I work with kids. 

All that to say:

I was reading Ephesians this morning in preparation for college Bible study and I started thinking about the end goal affecting the beginning of a process.

verse 16-18 in chapter 2 says...

16 and [Jesus] might reconcile them both in one body to God through the cross, by it having put to death the enmity.17 ANDHE CAME AND PREACHED PEACE TO YOU WHO WERE FAR AWAY, AND PEACE TO THOSE WHO WERE NEAR;18 for through Him we both have our access in one Spirit to the Father.19 So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints, and are of God's household,

The end goal, like the ten question test, of this "Jesus Process" is to be reconciled, or returned to compatibility, with God. That's it. We exist to return to harmony with God.

If you aren't in a place where you want that, then you might experience some difficulty in the pursuit of Jesus.

I think, before somone can make the decision to follow God, they need to look into what it means to be reconciled to him, or to be returned to compatibility with him. If that's something they want, then they ought to pursue Jesus because that's what he provides.

There are questions for the interested parties to ask of themselves, though.

Do I want to be reconciled to God?

What has made me un-reconciled?

Do I see the need for reconciliation?

Is God worth being reconciled to him?

Is reconciliation worth the lifestyle implications that go along with it?

Am I willing to believe that Christ is the only way to obtain this reconciliation?

There are more questions, but I don't have them floating around in my head.

Thanks, my job, for helping with this insight.

Rather, thank you Lord, for giving me a job that would help me with this insight.

I walked the dog this morning.

Why do bad things happen to good people?

Because this question is asked by so many people, it should be considered irresponsible for a believer to not pursue and understanding of the answer to this question. 

So...Here are my thoughts on this question.

First, if one is going to ask this question, one must answer the following question first:

Where does your definition of good and bad come from?

If the answer is that one is a moral relativist, then we must stop the answering of the original question immediately. The moral relativist believes that the definition of good and bad referred to in the original question is debatable and that there is no way to concretely define good or bad. If there is no solid definition of good and bad, then the original question should not be asked. The truth of the matter is that it is asked and people still want an answer to it without allowing for their beliefs to be challenged. I cannot, however, answer a question without defined components. It would be like asking if the sky is blue without knowing what blue is.

If the person asking tells you that they are responsible for their own definition of good and bad, ask them to answer the original question for themselves. If they are the authority in their own lives of the definition of good and bad, then they should be responsible for arriving at their own conclusion. To be your own authority on such grand questions as to what is good and what is bad is to be your own authority on how good and bad work in your life.

If the person asking one who arrives at the definition of good and bad through another’s definition (culture, parents, faith, etc…) they should pursue the answer to the original question from that which gives them their definition of good and bad. If your culture says what is good and bad, your culture should be responsible for an adequate answer to the original question. The same is true for your parents, your faith, or anything else that has the audacity (probably the wrong word here, but I used it because of the vast implications of defining such a huge pair of concepts) to define good and bad. 

If you decide to allow your faith to define good and bad, you should allow your faith to tell you why bad things happen to good people.

As a Christian, my answer always starts with this: We need to define good and bad.

Good: 100% submission to the authority of God, who defines good because he created good and knows good better than anyone on earth. Good is doing what God or Jesus says. It is following his commandments.

Bad: Not doing, at any time, good. 


There is not partially good and partially bad. Water cannot be considered partially frozen and partially liquid. It is just ice floating in water.

After I define good and bad I respond with this: There are no good people. Done. 

Why are there no good people?

Romans 3:23 says so. Also, no one has ever been able to live a perfect life by Biblical standards, outside of Jesus (whom we will come back to in a minute).

By this logic, I should be able to take the word good out of the original question.

Why do bad things happen?

Again, what does the Bible say? (see the fall of man. All crap broke loose after that.)

If we ask why do bad things happen to good people, we should also ask the following questions too:


Why do good things happen to bad people?
Why do bad things happen to bad people?
Why do good things happen to good people?

We never ask why good things happen to bad people because we know deep down that we are bad on some level. Humans crave, whether we know it or not, the idea of grace. Grace, as in something good happening in a way that is totally undeserved (see Jesus and the cross and redemption).

If we get up in arms about bad things happening to good people we should get just as pissed when good things happen to bad people, which we do...whenever it’s not us.

Another reason why Christianity doesn’t need to answer the original question in some special, feel-good way is because there are so many examples in the Bible of bad things happening to people we consider good. Paul, generally accepted as a good man, was put in prison and was totally ok with it. Jesus, the only man ever to actually be good, was murdered for being exactly that: good!

Scripture may not have a section in the back to answer all the tough questions, but on this one, it speaks loudly, through a megaphone, with examples. Bad things happen to good people because they do and we have to trust that God is looking out for us.

There is no one good. Period. (except Jesus, of course)

Bad has happened since the fall of man. (if not Adam and Eve, then someone else would’ve done it)

Humans crave grace. (we want good to happen in spite of the bad).

The most magnificent, incredible, and perfect example of grace is the cross. (remember? Humans crave grace)

In spite of the crap we find ourselves in, God is gracious through Jesus.


Done, unless something else comes up and I have to add to this.