Month: August 2026

We sometimes say that our mouth has a life of its own. Usually, we mean that something came out before we had time to stop it. We spoke in anger, repeated something we should not have repeated, or made a remark we immediately regretted.

But a recent scientific discovery gives that expression another meaning. In 2024, researchers reported finding a previously unknown class of RNA elements in the human microbiome. They named them Obelisks because their RNA appears to fold into a long, rod-like shape. Each Obelisk is only about 1,000 nucleotides long. Yet researchers could not match them to any known virus, viroid, or other biological agent.

After searching databases from around the world, they identified nearly 30,000 different Obelisk sequences. In the original study, Obelisks were detected in 17 of 32 oral microbiome samples. They were also found in approximately 7 percent of the stool samples examined. At least one type of Obelisk appears to live within certain strains of Streptococcus sanguinis, a bacterium commonly found in the mouth. Obelisks also contain instructions for making a previously unknown family of proteins. The researchers named these proteins Oblins.

But scientists still do not know what Obelisks do. They do not know whether they help or harm the bacteria that contain them. They do not know whether they affect human health. They do not even know whether Obelisks should be considered alive. They know they are there. They just do not know what they are doing. Something had apparently been present in our mouths for a very long time, but we had never recognized it. The mouth really does have a life of its own.

But this discovery made me think about something else associated with the mouth—something James warned us about nearly 2,000 years ago.

The tongue.

And the tongue is a fire, a world of unrighteousness. The tongue is set among our members, staining the whole body.
James 3:6 (ESV)

The tongue is small, but its effects can be enormous. A few words can encourage someone who is ready to give up. They can also humiliate someone we claim to love. A careless remark may take only seconds to speak, but the person who heard it may remember it for years. A rumor can travel through a family, a workplace, or a church before anyone stops to ask whether it is true. That is why James compares the tongue to a fire. A small flame can spread far beyond the place where it began.

James also writes:

But no human being can tame the tongue. It is a restless evil, full of deadly poison.
James 3:8 (ESV)

“Restless” is an interesting word. James describes the tongue almost as if it has a life of its own. That is often how we excuse it. “It just slipped out.” “I was angry.” “I didn’t really mean it.” But Jesus would not allow us to blame our mouths as though they were acting independently.

For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks.
Matthew 12:34 (ESV)

The mouth does not create what is inside us. It reveals it. If I have been holding on to anger, eventually anger will speak. If I have been feeding resentment, resentment will find its voice. If my heart is filled with gratitude and grace, those things will also come out. Controlling the tongue, therefore, is not simply a matter of choosing better words. We must also ask what has been growing in our hearts.

Scientists may spend years trying to understand what Obelisks are doing inside the human mouth. Perhaps they will eventually discover that they help their bacterial hosts. Perhaps they cause harm. Perhaps their presence has no meaningful effect on us at all. For now, we do not know.

But we already know what the tongue can do. It can comfort or condemn. It can tell the truth or spread a lie. It can reconcile people or divide them. It can praise God and then injure someone made in His image.

Scientists have discovered something unfamiliar hiding inside our mouths. James asks us to consider something much more familiar coming out of them. The question is not only, “What is living in my mouth?” It is also, “What has been living in my heart—and what happens when I allow it to speak?”

Love and trust the Lord; seek His will in your life.

#faith #trustinggod #christianity #jesuschrist #bible #seekinggodswill #truth #sanctification #godisincontrol #godhearsourprayers #salvation #providenceofGod #Obelisk #Mouthhasalifeofitsown #James3:6

YouTube@theBereansblog

In 1934, Albert McMakin worked on the Graham family dairy farm outside Charlotte, North Carolina. Most people have never heard of him. He was not an evangelist. He did not have a large ministry. There would be no stadiums filled with people waiting to hear Albert McMakin preach. But he knew a 15-year-old boy named Billy Graham.

That year, evangelist Mordecai Ham had come to Charlotte for a series of revival meetings. Billy’s parents wanted him to attend, but Billy was not particularly interested. He had grown up around church, and another religious meeting apparently held little attraction for him. What finally got his attention was something quite different. Ham had developed a reputation as a forceful preacher, and rumors were circulating that some students might come to one of the meetings and cause trouble. McMakin reportedly described Ham to Billy as a “fighting preacher.”

Now Billy was interested. McMakin offered to take him. So one evening, a farm worker and a teenage boy headed into Charlotte to hear Mordecai Ham preach. There was nothing about that trip that would have suggested that history was being made. Billy did not walk into the meeting knowing that God was about to change the direction of his life. From his own later recollections, he initially went largely out of curiosity. And he did not become a Christian that first night. He went back.

As the meetings continued, Ham’s preaching began to bother him. Billy had always considered himself a fairly good person. He went to church. He was not someone whom most people would have looked at and thought desperately needed to change his life. But increasingly, Billy felt as though Ham was speaking directly to him. On November 1, 1934, Billy Graham responded to the invitation and committed his life to Christ.

We know the rest of the story, or at least part of it. Billy Graham eventually preached the Gospel to nearly 215 million people in live audiences in more than 185 countries and territories. Hundreds of millions more encountered his preaching through radio, television, films, publications, and other media. Presidents sought his counsel. Stadiums filled to hear him preach. Generations of people came to associate Billy Graham with one simple message: that they needed Jesus Christ.

 

But go back to the beginning. Before the stadiums, before the television broadcasts, before the presidents and crusades and millions of people hearing the Gospel, there was Albert McMakin. He invited a teenager to a meeting. I doubt Albert climbed into the vehicle that evening thinking, This may be one of the most consequential things I will ever do. Why would he? It was an invitation. A ride into town. Something easily forgotten. Yet that is often how God seems to work.

Paul wrote:

I planted, Apollos watered, but God gave the growth. So neither he who plants nor he who waters is anything, but only God who gives the growth.
1 Corinthians 3:6–7 (ESV)

Albert McMakin did not convert Billy Graham. Mordecai Ham did not create Billy Graham’s future ministry. Albert invited him. Ham preached. Billy responded. God gave the growth.

I think that is why this story matters even if none of us will ever preach to millions of people. We tend to imagine that if God is going to use us for something important, we will know it at the time. The moment will somehow announce itself. We will recognize that this conversation matters, this invitation matters, this person matters. But perhaps that is not how it usually happens. Maybe the important moment looks like asking someone to come with you. Making a phone call. Introducing two people. Encouraging someone who is ready to quit. Speaking when remaining silent would be easier. Showing up when you almost stayed home.

Albert McMakin could not see what would come from his invitation. Neither can we. That does not mean every small decision will change millions of lives. Most will not. But we also do not know which seemingly ordinary act God may use in a way we could never anticipate.

Albert invited one teenager to hear a preacher. The teenager’s name was Billy Graham. Could you be standing in one of those moments right now?

Love and trust the Lord; seek His will in your life.

#faith #trustinggod #christianity #jesuschrist #bible #seekinggodswill #truth #sanctification #godisincontrol #godhearsourprayers #salvation #providenceofGod #theinvitation #billygraham #albermcmakin #1Corinthians3:6–7

YouTube@theBereansblog

I was watching television when a commercial appeared for a gambling app. It had everything one would expect: excitement, competition, the possibility of winning, and the suggestion that placing a bet would make watching the game even more enjoyable.

Then I noticed a message scrolling across the bottom of the screen:
*If you have a gambling problem, call this number.*

I found myself paying more attention to the warning than to the commercial. These messages are often required by state regulations, and there is a good reason for putting one there. If you want to reach people who may have a gambling problem, a gambling commercial is a logical place to do it. The people who need help are probably more likely to see that advertisement than almost anyone else. Someone who realizes he is losing control might notice the number, make the call, and receive the help he needs. I certainly would not want the warning removed.

Still, the commercial seemed strangely contradictory. Nearly everything on the screen was designed to make gambling attractive. The music, images, promotions, and excitement encouraged the viewer to place a bet. Meanwhile, the small line at the bottom acknowledged that gambling could become destructive. The commercial seemed to be saying, “We want you to gamble, but if gambling becomes a problem, here is someone you can call.”

Most people who gamble do not become addicted. Adults are responsible for their own choices, and a company cannot be blamed for every poor decision made by someone using its product. That is a reasonable argument. But does personal responsibility remove all responsibility from the person or company encouraging the choice?

As a physician, I regularly explained the risks of medications and procedures to my patients. Providing that information was important, but the warning did not relieve me of my other responsibilities. I still had to decide whether the treatment was appropriate, whether the possible benefit justified the risk, and whether a particular patient might be especially vulnerable to harm. A disclosure was part of responsible medical care. It was not a substitute for it. A gambling company is obviously not practicing medicine, but the underlying principle is similar. A warning may be necessary and helpful without settling the larger moral question.

Jesus said:

Temptations to sin are sure to come, but woe to the one through whom the temptation comes!
Matthew 18:7 (ESV)

Jesus was not speaking specifically about gambling, and the Bible does not say that every wager is sinful. His statement addresses a broader issue. We are responsible for the choices we make, but we also bear some responsibility for the influence we have on others. The person placing the bet cannot blame the commercial for every decision. At the same time, the company creating the commercial cannot pretend that its influence ends when the required warning appears at the bottom of the screen.

The same issue appears in our own lives. We repeat a damaging story and add, “I don’t know whether it is true.” We encourage someone toward a questionable decision and then say, “It is entirely up to you.” We make a hurtful remark and excuse it with, “I was only joking.” We place something tempting in front of another person and assume that whatever happens next is solely that person’s responsibility. Sometimes those qualifications are sincere. We may genuinely want the other person to be careful. At other times, they allow us to participate while distancing ourselves from the consequences.

The gambling helpline belongs in the commercial. It may reach someone at exactly the moment help is needed. But displaying the number does not answer every question about the way gambling is being promoted.

It is easy to notice the contradiction in someone else’s advertisement. The more difficult question is whether I ever do the same thing. Do I encourage something through my words, conduct, or example, then rely upon a small disclaimer to excuse my part in what follows?

Sometimes the most revealing part of a message is found in the fine print.

Love and trust the Lord; seek His will in your life.

#faith #trustinggod #christianity #jesuschrist #bible #seekinggodswill #truth #sanctification #godisincontrol #godhearsourprayers #salvation #providenceofGod #gamblingads #Mathew18:7

YouTube@theBereansblog

Someone once asked me to do something I did not want to do. Instead of simply declining, I gave a reason that sounded better than the truth. It was not a complete fabrication. There was enough truth in it that I could defend what I had said. But I also knew the impression I created was not entirely honest.

I called it a little white lie.

No one was injured. No money was lost. The other person probably forgot about it almost immediately. Compared with all the dishonesty in the world, mine seemed inconsequential. Surely God would overlook something that small. Then I came across this question in Job:

If you have sinned, what do you accomplish against him? And if your transgressions are multiplied, what do you do to him?
Job 35:6 (ESV)

Elihu spoke these words while responding to Job. His point was that my sin cannot diminish God. It cannot make Him less powerful, less holy or less sovereign. Bible teacher J. Vernon McGee said, “My little life is not affecting God.” Then he added, “The wonder of it all is that it does affect Him.”

My lie did not weaken God. But that did not make it meaningless to Him. Sin is not measured only by how much visible damage it causes. It also matters because of the One against whom it is committed. A lie matters because God is truth.

When I could no longer dismiss the lie as harmless, I found another defense. Yes, I had shaded the truth—but I was generally honest. I had never defrauded anyone, lied under oath or constructed a deception that ruined another person’s life. Surely a lifetime of relative honesty should count for something.

Warren W. Wiersbe, the longtime pastor, Bible teacher and author of the widely read “Be” series of Bible commentaries, illustrated the problem with a motorist who deliberately drove through a red light. When a police officer stopped him, the driver began listing the laws he had obeyed. He had never robbed anyone. He had never killed anyone. He had never cheated on his income taxes. The officer continued writing the ticket. As Wiersbe observed, “No amount of obedience can make up for one act of disobedience.” All the other laws the motorist had obeyed did not turn that red light green. In the same way, all the times I told the truth could not make this lie true.

Paul warned the Galatians about relying on obedience to the law as the basis for being right with God:

I testify again to every man who accepts circumcision that he is obligated to keep the whole law.
Galatians 5:3 (ESV)

I had tried two ways to excuse myself. First, I decided the lie was too small to matter. Then I compared it with worse things I had never done. Neither changed what I had done. That is why I need grace.

God does not forgive my lie because it was harmless. He does not erase it because my good behavior outweighs it. He forgives me because Jesus Christ bore the guilt I could not excuse or cancel.

If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.
1 John 1:9 (ESV)

Confession means that I stop editing the description. I stop calling dishonesty tact, a convenience, or a little white lie. I agree with God about what I did—and trust what Christ did for me. No sin is too small to need forgiveness. And no amount of goodness can purchase it.

Love and trust the Lord; seek His will in your life.

#faith #trustinggod #christianity #jesuschrist #bible #seekinggodswill #truth #sanctification #godisincontrol #godhearsourprayers #salvation #providenceofGod #littlwhitelie #Job35:6

YouTube@theBereansblog

Mary was pregnant, and Joseph knew the child was not his. We know how the story turns out. We know that Mary had conceived by the Holy Spirit and that the child she carried was Jesus. But when Joseph first learned that she was pregnant, he did not know any of that. Imagine what he must have thought. The woman he planned to marry appeared to have been unfaithful to him. Whatever future he had imagined with Mary was suddenly gone. He must have felt hurt, embarrassed, and probably angry.

Joseph could have made the matter public. He could have defended his honor by telling everyone what Mary had apparently done. At the very least, he could have made certain that no one blamed him. But that is not what he did.

And her husband Joseph, being a just man and unwilling to put her to shame, resolved to divorce her quietly.
Matthew 1:19 (ESV)

Joseph still planned to end the relationship. That is understandable. Based upon what he knew, Mary had betrayed him. Yet there is something about this verse that I had never fully appreciated. Joseph decided not to shame Mary before the angel explained anything to him. His mercy did not come after he learned that she was innocent. He showed mercy while he still believed she was guilty.

What if Joseph had chosen differently? This is not a question about whether he could have stopped God’s plan. Mary had already conceived Jesus. God did not need Joseph’s permission to send His Son into the world. But Joseph could have made Mary’s situation much worse. He could have exposed her to her family and community. He could have added humiliation and condemnation to the burden she was already carrying. He might even have convinced himself that he was simply standing up for what was right.

That is what makes his decision so relevant to us. There are times when we are certain that someone has wronged us. We have seen the evidence. We have reached a reasonable conclusion. We may even be right. And then we have a choice. Do we need other people to know what happened? Do we tell the story in a way that protects our reputation and damages theirs? Are we seeking justice, or do we also want the satisfaction of seeing that person embarrassed?

Joseph did not ignore what he believed Mary had done. He intended to divorce her. But he saw no reason to make her suffer publicly. Then, while he was considering what to do, God revealed what Joseph could not possibly have known:

Joseph, son of David, do not fear to take Mary as your wife, for that which is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit.
Matthew 1:20 (ESV)

Joseph’s conclusion had been perfectly reasonable. It was also wrong. How often do we act upon a reasonable conclusion before we have the whole story? Once accusations are made public, they cannot always be taken back. Even when we later learn the truth, the damage may remain. Perhaps that is why Joseph’s first decision matters so much. He left room for something he did not yet understand. Because he did not act out of anger, he was still able to listen when God spoke.

Mercy does not require us to pretend that wrongdoing does not matter. It does ask us to consider whether every wrong must be exposed, every accusation repeated, and every offender publicly humiliated. Joseph could not determine whether God’s plan would succeed. But he could determine the kind of man he would be while that plan unfolded. He believed Mary had betrayed him. He had no idea that God was doing something extraordinary. And before he knew the truth, Joseph chose mercy.

The next time I am certain that someone else is wrong, I hope I will remember that. I may understand what I have seen. I may not understand everything God is doing.

Love and trust the Lord; seek His will in your life.

#faith #trustinggod #christianity #jesuschrist #bible #seekinggodswill #truth #sanctification #godisincontrol #godhearsourprayers #salvation #providenceofGod #whatifjosephshamedmary #Matthew1:19

YouTube@theBereansblog

American farmers were struggling. Foreign products were competing with American goods, and many believed other countries enjoyed access to the American market while keeping American products out of theirs. The proposed solution seemed reasonable. Raise tariffs, make foreign goods more expensive, and encourage Americans to buy American. This would protect domestic industries and save American jobs. Canada responded by raising tariffs on American products. Other countries prepared to do the same. Each nation claimed that it was only defending its own workers and economic interests.

This sounds like the current trade war between the United States and Canada. But it happened in 1930.

The legislation was the Smoot–Hawley Tariff Act, signed by President Herbert Hoover on June 17, 1930.

It began as an effort to help American farmers, many of whom had struggled throughout the otherwise prosperous 1920s. As the bill moved through Congress, other industries asked for protection. The final law raised tariffs on thousands of agricultural and manufactured products.

The problem was real. American farmers were suffering, and some countries maintained barriers against American goods. Supporters believed the United States was allowing foreign producers to benefit from the American market without receiving equal treatment in return.

More than a thousand economists asked Hoover to veto the bill. They warned that other countries would retaliate and that American farmers and manufacturers would lose foreign customers. Hoover signed it anyway.

Canada was among the first countries to strike back. It placed new tariffs on American products and strengthened its trading relationships with other countries. Other nations raised barriers, organized boycotts, or found new suppliers.

American tariffs made foreign goods more difficult to sell in the United States. Retaliatory tariffs made American goods more difficult to sell overseas. From 1929 to 1933, American exports fell from approximately $5.4 billion to $2.1 billion. Countries that formally retaliated against Smoot–Hawley reduced their purchases from the United States by an estimated 28 to 32 percent.

American farmers who had asked for protection lost customers. Manufacturers that depended on imported materials faced higher costs. Exporters watched foreign markets close. Smoot–Hawley did not cause the Great Depression. The economic collapse had already begun, and banking failures, monetary contraction, debt, and falling demand were more important causes. However, the tariff war made the crisis worse by further restricting trade when the world economy was already in serious trouble. By 1934, the United States had begun reversing course and negotiating agreements to reduce tariffs. 

Nearly a century later, America and Canada are exchanging tariffs again. President Trump argues that Canada has been taking advantage of the United States for years. Some of his complaints are legitimate. Canada closely protects its dairy, poultry, and egg industries. Once certain quotas are exceeded, American cheese and butter can face extraordinarily high tariffs. American businesses have also objected to Canadian restrictions involving agriculture, government contracts, automobiles, alcohol, pharmaceuticals, and digital services.

These are real trade disputes. Countries should be able to challenge unfair practices. Tariffs may sometimes be useful in protecting industries important to national security or gaining leverage during negotiations. However, a trade deficit does not automatically mean that one country is cheating another.

The United States imports more goods from Canada than it exports there, but much of that difference comes from energy. America buys large quantities of Canadian crude oil, natural gas, and electricity because American consumers and industries need them. The United States also sells more services to Canada than it purchases from Canada. The concern, therefore, is not that America wants to protect its own interests. Every government has a responsibility to protect its people. The concern is what happens when one interest is protected without adequately considering who else may pay.

A tariff may help an American steel producer while increasing costs for an American manufacturer that uses steel. It may protect one farmer while causing another to lose Canadian customers. Some of the expense may eventually be passed on to American consumers. Canada then responds with tariffs of its own. American exporters lose sales, and pressure builds for the United States to answer again. Once the cycle begins, neither government wants to appear weak by backing down. Protection itself is not the problem. The problem comes when our field of vision becomes so narrow that we see only what we are defending and not what our defense may damage.

This can happen in our personal lives as well. When someone hurts us, our first instinct is often to protect ourselves. The injury may be real. Trust may have been broken, and boundaries may be necessary. But self-protection can gradually become a wall. We stop speaking honestly because honesty might make us vulnerable. We keep our distance so that we cannot be hurt again. We become determined to prove that we were right, even if winning the argument causes us to lose the relationship. The other person responds by building a wall of his own. Before long, two people who once cared for each other are separated by defenses that each believes are necessary.

Paul wrote:

Let each of you look not only to his own interests, but also to the interests of others.
Philippians 2:4 (ESV)

Notice that Paul did not say we have no right to consider our own interests. He said that our interests should not be the only ones we consider. That is a much harder standard. It requires us to ask not only whether we have been wronged, but whether our response is wise. It asks us to consider how our attempt to protect ourselves may affect our spouse, children, friends, coworkers, or church.

God does not ask us to deny real injuries or remain in dangerous situations. Looking to the interests of others does not eliminate justice, accountability, or appropriate boundaries. It does prevent our own pain from becoming the only factor guiding our response.

The people who supported Smoot–Hawley were not necessarily motivated by evil. Many sincerely wanted to save American farms, businesses, and jobs. Yet their protection produced costs they did not anticipate, including costs borne by some of the people they hoped to help.

We cannot know whether the present conflict with Canada will follow the same course. The circumstances are different, and not every tariff produces the same result. Still, history gives us reason to look beyond our immediate interests. Before building another barrier, imposing another cost, or striking back, we should consider what our protection may cost someone else.

That applies to nations.

It also applies to us.

Love and trust the Lord; seek His will in your life.

#faith #trustinggod #christianity #jesuschrist #bible #seekinggodswill #truth #sanctification #godisincontrol #godhearsourprayers #salvation #providenceofGod #canadastruckback #smooth-hawley #tarrifs #philippians2:4

YouTube@theBereansblog

“Beam me up, Scotty.”
“Luke, I am your father.”
“Elementary, my dear Watson.”
“Play it again, Sam.”

Most of us immediately recognize these quotations. They have appeared on shirts, mugs, posters, memes, and countless lists of famous lines. In order, we associate them with Star Trek, Star Wars, Sherlock Holmes, and Casablanca. There is only one problem. None of them appears in the original source exactly as we remember it. 

Captain Kirk gave Scotty many commands involving the transporter, but he never said, “Beam me up, Scotty.”

Darth Vader did not tell Luke, “Luke, I am your father.” He said, “No, I am your father.”

Sherlock Holmes frequently called his deductions “elementary,” and he certainly addressed his companion as “my dear Watson.” But Sir Arthur Conan Doyle never combined those words into the famous sentence attributed to him.

In Casablanca, Ilsa tells Sam, “Play it, Sam. Play ‘As Time Goes By.’” Rick later says, “You played it for her, you can play it for me.” No one says, “Play it again, Sam.”

I was surprised when I learned this. I could almost hear the characters speaking those familiar words. Yet what I remembered was not what had actually been said.

Culture has a remarkable ability to condition our minds. When we hear something repeated often enough, it begins to feel true. Eventually, we may no longer remember where we first heard it. We simply assume that it must be correct because everyone seems to know it.

That danger is not limited to movie dialogue. Ideas about God can also be repeated so frequently that we assume they came from the Bible. “God helps those who help themselves.” “Just follow your heart.” “God will never give you more than you can handle.”

These statements may sound encouraging, but sounding biblical is not the same as being biblical. If repetition can alter our memory of a movie, it can also distort our understanding of God.

This is what made the people of Berea remarkable. When Paul and Silas taught them, they did not dismiss the message. They eagerly listened. But neither did they accept it merely because a persuasive teacher had spoken it. They returned to the source.

Now these Jews were more noble than those in Thessalonica; they received the word with all eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see if these things were so.
Acts 17:11 (ESV)

The Bereans understood that truth is not determined by familiarity, popularity, or repetition. Even teaching that sounds right must be examined in the light of Scripture.

We face the same responsibility. Sermons, books, social media posts, traditions, and even our own long-held beliefs must be tested against God’s Word. The question is not merely, “Have I heard this before?” The question is, “Is this what God has actually said?”

Four famous quotations remind us how easily repeated words can become accepted reality—even when no one originally spoke them.

Let us be equally willing to examine what we believe about God.

Love and trust the Lord; seek His will in your life.

#faith #trustinggod #christianity #jesuschrist #bible #seekinggodswill #truth #sanctification #godisincontrol #godhearsourprayers #salvation #providenceofGod #FourFamousQuotesNobodyActuallySaid #Acts17:11

YouTube@theBereansblog

For most of my career, my name appeared at the bottom of every pathology report I signed. Anyone reading the report might have assumed that the diagnosis was entirely my work. It wasn’t. Before I ever looked through the microscope, someone received the specimen and confirmed the patient’s identity. Someone prepared the tissue, embedded it in paraffin, cut sections thinner than a human hair, placed them on glass slides, stained them, labeled them, and made sure everything matched. If a case was especially difficult, I might ask another pathologist to look at it or order additional studies before concluding.

I was responsible for the final diagnosis, but I could not have produced the report alone. Many people, most of whom the patient would never know, had contributed to it.

Today, we might loosely call that crowdsourcing. We crowdsource all kinds of things. We read restaurant reviews before deciding where to eat. We ask other travelers where to stay. Online encyclopedias are built from the contributions of countless people. Difficult problems are sometimes solved by bringing together individuals with different experiences and areas of expertise.

That got me thinking about Jesus. Did He crowdsource His mission? The comparison is not exact. I needed other people because there were things I could not do alone. Jesus had no such limitation. He did not need more information, another opinion, or someone to supply what He lacked. He healed with a word, calmed a storm, and knew what was in the human heart.

Still, He repeatedly chose to involve people in His work. When more than five thousand people needed food, Jesus could have provided it without anyone’s help. Instead, a boy offered five barley loaves and two fish. Jesus gave thanks and multiplied the food, but then He gave it to His disciples to distribute.

The miracle came from Jesus. Yet the lunch came from a boy, and the bread reached the crowd through the hands of the disciples. Jesus allowed them to take part in something they could never have accomplished on their own.

He followed that pattern throughout His ministry. He called fishermen, a tax collector, and other ordinary men to follow Him. He sent the Twelve out to preach and heal. Later, He sent seventy-two others into the towns He intended to visit. Women supported His ministry. People whose lives had been changed told others what God had done for them. Then, after His resurrection, Jesus entrusted His followers with something far more important than distributing bread. He told them to carry the gospel into the world.

Go therefore and make disciples of all nations.
Matthew 28:19 (ESV)

In that sense, the spread of the gospel may be one of history’s greatest examples of shared work. Across continents and centuries, the message has been carried by millions of ordinary people—pastors and parents, missionaries and teachers, writers and musicians, physicians and laborers. Many of their names were never recorded. They simply told someone else what they had received.

But Jesus did not ask the crowd to decide what the message should be. The crowd did not make Him the Son of God, and public opinion did not raise Him from the dead. His followers were not permitted to revise His words whenever the culture changed. The truth came from Christ. Their responsibility was to carry it faithfully.

This may be where the modern idea of crowdsourcing falls short. Jesus was not looking for better ideas or trying to fill gaps in His knowledge. He involved people because He was making disciples, not merely completing a project. The disciples saw the bread multiply in His hands. Then they carried it to hungry people. Later, they would learn to depend upon Him as they carried the gospel far beyond the places they knew.

Christ still works through people. That can be difficult to understand because what we have often seems so small. We may think we lack the knowledge, ability, influence, or courage to be useful to God. Surely someone else is better qualified. The boy’s lunch really was too small to feed the crowd. Jesus never pretended otherwise. But He did not ask the boy to perform the miracle. The boy simply made available what he had.

That is a far more manageable picture of faithfulness. Christ does not ask us to create our own truth or manufacture spiritual power. He asks us to place what we have in His hands and be faithful with whatever part of the work He gives us. Perhaps Jesus was not a crowdsourcer in the way we use the word today. He did not need the crowd. Nevertheless, He chose to include ordinary people in work that only He could make possible.

The message still belongs to Him. So does the power to change a life. But for reasons of grace, He continues to place the bread in ordinary hands—including ours.

Love and trust in the Lord; seek His will in your life.

#faith #trustinggod #christianity #jesuschrist #bible #seekinggodswill #truth #sanctification #godisincontrol #godhearsourprayers #salvation #providenceofGod #crowdsourcing #Matthew28:19

YouTube@theBereansblog

Warren Wiersbe, a longtime pastor, Bible teacher, and author best known for his Be series of Bible commentaries, asked a question that caught my attention:

“Have you ever, like Job, wished for God’s judgment even on yourself? If so, when?”

I had to stop and think about that. I have asked God to defend me. I have wanted Him to expose an injustice, correct someone wrong, or vindicate me when I felt misunderstood. I suspect most of us have prayed something similar. But have I ever said, “God, if I am the wrong one, show me. If I am guilty, hold me accountable.”? I am not sure how often I have dared to do that.

After Job lost his children, his wealth, his health, and his reputation, his friends were convinced that he must have committed some terrible hidden sin. Why else would God allow him to suffer so severely? Job repeatedly denied their accusations. Then, in Job 31, he placed his life before God and invited Him to examine it.

Let me be weighed in a just balance, and let God know my integrity!
Job 31:6 (ESV)

Job went through his life almost as if he were testifying under oath. He spoke about honesty, sexual purity, the treatment of his servants, compassion for the poor, the influence of wealth, and his conduct toward his enemies. He even addressed sins that could have remained hidden from everyone else. If he had done these things, he was willing to accept the consequences.

As I read through Job’s list, Wiersbe’s question became increasingly uncomfortable. When someone disappoints me, I can usually explain what that person did wrong. I remember the words that were spoken and the actions that seemed unfair. I can organize the evidence and make a convincing case—at least in my own mind.

Examining my own response requires more honesty. Perhaps pride influenced what I said. Perhaps I was more interested in being proven right than in understanding the other person. Even when I remained silent, my silence may not have come from grace. It may have been resentment expressed without words.

Job was willing to say, “Let me be weighed in a just balance.” Those words make me wonder what God would find if He examined my motives as carefully as I examine the behavior of others. He sees the thoughts I never express, the pride that can hide beneath a good deed, and the private compromises that no one else knows about. Job was confident that the particular charges made by his friends were false. Yet he never claimed to be completely without sin. When God eventually revealed Himself, Job responded:

Therefore I despise myself, and repent in dust and ashes.
Job 42:6 (ESV)

Job had wanted an opportunity to present his case. His encounter with God gave him a clearer understanding of both God and himself. I know that I cannot stand before God and establish my own innocence. My confidence rests in Jesus Christ, who bore the judgment my sins deserve.

There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus.
Romans 8:1 (ESV)

That promise gives me the freedom to be honest before God. I do not have to conceal my sin, justify it, or pretend it is insignificant. I can confess it and ask God to change what He reveals in me. Integrity does not require me to pretend that nothing is wrong. It requires me to be truthful about what is there.

Wiersbe’s question has stayed with me. I still want God to defend me when I have been wronged, and there is nothing improper about seeking His justice. Job 31 reminds me to leave room for God to examine my heart as well.

Before I ask, “God, will You deal with them?” perhaps I should first say:

“God, examine me.”

Love and trust the Lord; seek His will in your life.

#faith #trustinggod #christianity #jesuschrist #bible #seekinggodswill #truth #sanctification #godisincontrol #godhearsourprayers #salvation #providenceofGod #GodPunishMe #Job31:6

YouTube@theBereansblog

I was getting a document notarized. The notary checked my driver’s license, looked over the document, and watched me sign it. He then opened his journal and asked me to sign again. Finally, he placed an ink pad in front of me so I could leave my thumbprint.

I had done this many times before. It was all routine. Then a strange thought occurred to me. “What would you do if the person were a double amputee? They wouldn’t have any fingerprints.”

The notary stopped and smiled. “You know, that was actually a question on our exam.”

He explained that there was a procedure for it. The person’s identity could still be established, and the notary would record that the person was physically unable to provide a fingerprint. The system had made provision for someone who could not leave the expected mark.

As I pressed my thumb onto the ink pad, I began thinking about why the fingerprint was needed in the first place. It was another way of confirming that I was really the person named in the document. Our fingerprints are considered uniquely ours. They can distinguish us from billions of other people. Yet a fingerprint says very little about the person who left it. It cannot reveal whether I am honest. It cannot show what I love, what I fear, or what I regret. It cannot record the private choices that have shaped my life. It cannot tell anyone who I am when no one else is watching.

A fingerprint can help confirm my physical identity, but God already knows everything behind it.

O LORD, you have searched me and known me!
Psalm 139:1 (ESV)

God does not need a driver’s license, a signature, or a fingerprint to identify me. He knew me before I could speak my name. He sees the thoughts I never express and the motives I sometimes hide even from myself.

That realization is both comforting and sobering. It is comforting because no physical loss could ever make someone less visible to God. A person without hands has lost neither identity nor worth. Every human being still bears the image of God. No disability can erase that.

It is sobering because I cannot create a false identity before Him. I may be able to persuade other people that I am someone I am not. I may even persuade myself. God sees the person beneath the appearance.

The Lord knows those who are his.
2 Timothy 2:19 (ESV)

That simple statement carries tremendous assurance. Those who belong to Christ are never misplaced, overlooked, or confused with someone else. Our security does not depend upon leaving the right mark in the right book. It rests in the One who knows us completely and calls us by name.

The Bible gives us an image more powerful than any fingerprint:

Behold, I have engraved you on the palms of my hands.
Isaiah 49:16 (ESV)

I had placed my fingerprint in the notary’s journal as evidence that I had been there. Scripture describes something far more personal. God speaks of His people as engraved upon His own hands. Fingerprints can be smudged. Records can be lost. Our bodies can be injured and changed. But no one who belongs to Christ is ever unknown to Him.

Love and trust the Lord; seek His will in your life.

#faith #trustinggod #christianity #jesuschrist #bible #seekinggodswill #truth #sanctification #godisincontrol #godhearsourprayers #salvation #providenceofGod #nofingerprints #Isaiah49:16

YouTube@theBereansblog