Certain? Doubt?

On the supremely confidently certain to the major doubting continuum where are you?  Are you certain? What are you certain about? No doubts? No fears? Totally confident? Yes I realize it depends on the subject but is one or the other the major condition you find yourself occupying? Do/are you doing anything to 'move' yourself off of doubting to more certain? And are you open to questions about those things you are certain about?

Doubts are not necessarily 'bad' you know. Doubts can be steps toward certainty. The only time doubt is bad is if it is in cement and you've turned doubt into rejection. How do you handle your doubts? Are you 'comfortable' with doubt? You really can moved into greater understanding when you attempt to resolve your doubts. The 'truth' should be what you pursue because then you can accept doubts as a method to discover truth.

Certainty can become a prison too. Remember, it is not the final destination. When you are unwilling to listen to another person's questions, their doubts then you've become a closed person. Faith can always stand up to any challenge without being threatened. I would suggest that threat is the cause for people to hold up certainty as a shield against a different point of view. Actually it should be the basis for iron sharpening iron. Just as doubt can hold you in cement, certainty can too. If certain stays and doesn't 'grow' then you will never expand your understanding.

Contrary to what you may think, certainty is not the end of the journey, it's a path to faith. Many times anger, frustration is the path to doubt. Spiritually - what do you do when you are mad at God? He can handle your doubts, but can you? Doubt is not blasphemy.... unless that's how it is expressed. Both doubt and certainty can be paths to faith. That's the journey's end.

Miracles!

You are aware, aren't you, that miracles happen every day?  Miracles are all around you... if you open the eyes of your heart to see them. What are miracles? There are a myriad of definitions of the word but the simpler the definition the easier to recognize them. Webster seems slightly conflicted about the definition: 1- an extremely outstanding or unusual event, thing, or accomplishment and/or 2- an extraordinary event manifesting divine intervention in human affairs. Unusual, or divine.? If divine then there is a great deal more to the definition.

There's a scripture that keeps repeating itself in my mind. It's used a number of times, so much so that it tends to make you stop and look at what's being said. The phrase, paraphrased, talks about eyes that see and ears that hear. It isn't an idle phrase and its use should cause us to pause and consider. It's a warning and it's a directive. We need to be able to see and to hear but many times this will mean using spiritual definitions - remember the scripture that talks about calling those things that aren't as if they were. That's the kind of definition I'm talking about. Miracles fall into the same category.

I should probably acknowledge that the following definition of the word is solely mine - Webster may or may not concur. First, a miracle is something that is unexpected. Sometimes it's a matter of seeing what you're looking at. Examples: the laughter of children, that 'special' look of a couple in love, the feeling you get when you see the expression of delight when someone opens a gift that you took pains to give - all of these 'ordinary' activities are a form of a miracle. We need to define the word that is more encompassing - it truly is more than simply the extraordinary or the superlative.

And second - to repeat me...miracles are all around you... if you open the eyes of your heart to see them. But they don't fall into the category that there's something you can do to bring them into existence. If we want to follow Webster then the second definition is closer to my belief about miracles. It's God entering into the situation and bring joy to those experiencing it. It's His gift to us.

Thankful...

What does 'thankful' mean for/to you? Is it a phrase you toss out, a kind of 'gee, thanks' comment? Or is it something you have thought about and have experienced the result that causes a thankful spirit? Unfortunately thanks, thanksgiving, thankful are words that everyone 'knows' - but do we? Do you know how to express your feelings of thanks? Do you take the time to acknowledge your thankfulness?

Webster defines thanksgiving as: the act of giving thanks, a prayer expressing gratitude. Duly note the word 'act' - it isn't something you think, you act on it. But the action is also defined: expressing gratitude. How do you express thanks? Is it a quid pro quo basis? If it is, then the word has lost its meaning. Thankfulness is an attitude - an attitude of gratitude. Perhaps it is favor when you least expected it, or the knowledge of unexpected positive results, or a thousand other reasons but whatever causes the feeling it is based on something you know.

Thankful is an adjective while thanks and thanksgiving are nouns and verbs. And yes it does make a difference. In my world of definitions thankful is the attitude and the other two words are the actions that identify the attitude. I tend to think that none of us do a very good job of expressing our thankfulness. It's far more than a simple phrase. Thankfulness is as much a lifestyle as it is a mindset. Some people know how to be grateful, some know that the expression of the mindset is based in their lifestyle.

Many times the feeling of thanks originates from an unexpected (positive) experience and you simply have to share your feeling - the awareness of what has occurred is occasion for expression. Whatever the situation the fact remains that thanks, thanksgiving, thankfulness has to be expressed. And often in the sharing, this becomes cause for others' rejoicing with and for you. It has a ripple affect on those around you.

Rewards

I can't speak for you, but personally I always loved rewards. They were a kind of period on what I was doing and that what I did ... excelled. But to be honest, I really don't think it was so much what the reward was as it was the anticipation of a reward. Receiving a 'star' for some academic prowess in grade school to 'earning' the reward at work... all were plus marks to me. But I have to ask myself - was the reward the thing or the acclamation I received when I got the reward? What happened when I didn't get a reward? I was the over achiever type so it simply meant I tried harder the next time.

Don't misunderstand - a pat on the back or a 'well done' by those who you want to think highly of you is not misplaced. What can be a problem though is when that's the sole reason for doing something. A corollary question is: should you be rewarded for doing what you are suppose to do? Reward seeking  people would probably say 'yes' and use the rationale that rewards are positive motivators. Perhaps. But the older I get the more I see the value of doing what one should as reward in and of itself. No, not altruistic - I've made a sort of peace with reward.

If we focus on the reward itself I would argue that we lessen why we are doing what we do. Actually we need to have a commitment to what we are about or why do we waste our time. In this case the reward is like frosting on a cake - excellent but not always necessary. The sense of accomplishment that accompanies goal attainment is as much a 'high' as receiving a reward for it. A sign of maturity? It's all about self knowledge and what 'works' for you.

My 'definitions' of reward is that the reward should be related in some fashion to the goal and not expected behavior. If all you receive is a plaque of some sort for work you were assigned then what's the purpose - it certainly wouldn't motivate me. However if the reward was related to greater autonomy, responsibility, and input into work, then this would be very satisfactory for me. You need to know what type of reward works for you. And you need to not expect rewards for those things that are part of your 'job description'.

Understanding... yourself

Understanding yourself really begins with being honest concerning your motivations to do and to not do (fill in the blank). However, do you find that sometimes you surprise even yourself? Do you find yourself doing and saying things you never would have thought you would? Are you a conundrum.... to yourself? It really isn't all that extraordinary or uncommon. Most of us end up surprising ourselves at times - sometimes good, sometimes not so much. But this is rarely atypical behavior/speaking.

In scripture, Paul makes a similar comment when he says he does the things he doesn't want to and doesn't do the things he does. So finding your foot in your mouth is not unusual. We do and say things that on hindsight, we wish we hadn't. Why? The reasons are legendary. Part of the problem is that there are two things that need to be done in tandem: resolving the situation and understanding why what happened... happened. If you only respond to resolution then your greater learning is missed.

You need to understand your 'why'. In all my writings, certain themes seem to present themselves in various guises and one is definitely self understanding. It is never a question of liking or disliking the understanding... it's about understanding. While there are many good aspects about ourselves we need to acknowledge there are also the parts we need to 'work on'. Why did you do/say? This is another component in self understanding - don't fear... you.

To be somewhat skeptical, I would suggest that some people use mis-speak as an excuse to say what they actually believe. If so, then it's a form of self delusion. We all need to be honest with ourselves and self delusion is its simplest form is lying to yourself. Besides, if it really is an 'innocent' mistake then how did you become aware of it so fast? It may not be 'comfortable' but the more you understand you, the more you allow yourself choices about what you do, when and why.

Missed???

If you were suddenly to disappear do you think you would be missed? Would anyone care that you were no longer around? Regardless of your answer to this question - how does it make you feel? Before I ask any more questions, the reply to the first question is - yes! Yes you would be missed! Who you are, what you do, what you say, how you do all this... yes, you would be missed. Contrary to what you may believe, you would be missed. How does that make you feel? Or do you not believe it?

If you have low self esteem it would be difficult to accept that you would be missed partially because it would force you to re-examine your perception of yourself. If you don't value you how could you accept the fact that others do? Low self-esteem is a thief of the most vicious kind. It takes you from who and what you are to a fading, misty image. It incapacitates people and robs them of the most precious thing they have - their true self. But how do people get to this point?

I would argue that there are two paths to low self esteem: one is that who you are is denied and subjugated to such an extent that you accept who you are 'proclaimed' by someone else to be, the other is even worse - you give the right to someone else to define you, you abet in your own robbery... of you! Whether that is your talents, your freedoms, your expressions - you help others rob you of who you are and what you are capable of accomplishing.

You have been fearfully and wonderfully made. You are unique, special. And God don't make junk! Yes, we make poor choices at times and then think that we are unredeemable... the great news is that we aren't. I read somewhere that the best gift you can offer the world is you. And that is so true. There's only one you and only you can do what you do - and yes it is needed... and wanted.

Control...

Where are you on the control continuum? Are you a total control freak or do you find yourself in the I-don't-seem-to-ever-be-in-control category? Be honest... we all like to have our way, so what kind of controller are you? The: 'it's my way or the highway' or maybe you're a 'come let us reason together' or 'I value your input but I don't want to hear it just now'? Perhaps you are the subtle controller or maybe you are an in your face type... or... do you manipulate the people and activity to get your way?

A different question is what do you do when you are not in control? Will/Do you follow... or do you attempt to exert your position? A sub question: is controlling and getting your way the same? Obviously we follow good and effective leaders easier, but this isn't always the case. Sometimes we are/have to follow people who have the position but not the skills. In these cases do we try to help the ineffective leader? Do as little as possible? or do we sabotage the leader and provide our leadership as an option?

For some people control is an 'in all cases'. They attempt to control everything and everyone regardless of whether or not they have the ability to lead. Some people attempt to control by being disruptive in some fashion. There are multiple styles of control sabotage. But, do you look at the 'why'? Do you truly believe you would do a better job of leading? And even if you would, can you take a supportive role instead and help the leader to success? Perhaps you are a selective controller - when it comes to areas that you have expertise you feel that this is where you (always) should be selected as leader.  

Regardless of the dynamics, you need to be able to be an effective follower. No, you don't let them go down the 'prism road' if you know disaster is lurking but if you don't have the decision making authority then after alerting of the impending danger, you have to step aside. And no, that doesn't mean you have to go into the disaster - you can excuse yourself without controlling their decision. Control is like power - it can be harnessed only by integrity and honor, not deceit or manipulation.

Focus Readjustment

Focus readjustment is in the same family as 'attitude adjustment' but they really are not the same. With focus readjustment we need to reconsider what we're looking at - now. Sometimes we are so focused on the prize, goal that the means to attain it takes on little to no importance. In reality how (means) we attain the prize is critically important. Our 'how' either strengthens the satisfaction of attainment or taints it. And the 'at any cost' mindset is very destructive.

Another determination is the intensity with which we focus our attention and actions. Are we so intent on the prize that we don't see who and what is around us? If we do then we veer into the 'things are more important than people' territory. Even worse, in my estimation, is that our principles can become compromised. Is the reason we entered this journey still relevant? Is the goal still worthy? This is another reason why benchmarks along the way from start to finish are important.

The journey from point A (focus determination) to point B (goal attainment) is rarely a straight line. That is why I try to remember to put in assessment times to make certain that the focus is still the same, the goal is the same and the plan hasn't change due to a host of unplanned for impacts. Life is so dynamic that if we use static methods of assessing we run the risk of missing important components. And... it is people that should be the top of our list - are they still involved? Do they feel they have ownership and not just doer ship? Are there sufficient opportunities for them to make suggestions?

Ownership is not dictatorship. Regardless of who began this process, if you are team leader or team member, everyone needs to feel that they and their thoughts are valued. If this is a solo journey then it becomes even more important that you have someone that you can discuss what's happening on your quest and you can trust their advice. Is the focus the same as when you began? Is the method of attainment still valid? or.... Do you need to readjust?

Brother.?!

Have you ever read something multiple times but somehow missed something very significant? I know I have which is why I never consider I've gleaned everything I can from reading the Bible only once - it is a continual discovery. Today it was the word 'brother' that captured my attention (do read 'sister' as well). In Matthew 18:21 Peter asks Jesus how many times should he forgive his brother who sinned against him - 7 times? I've read this passage multiple times. Most of the time the focus is on forgiving and the emphasis is on Jesus's answer of seventy times seven - implying an unlimited number of times.

However, in reading this passage this time I saw 'brother'. Not an unbeliever, not a stranger, not an accident (since Peter asks - up to 7 times - thus indicating this was not the first time this happened to him), but a brother. (Your definition of 'brother' has to include close personal friends as well as your biological brother/sister.) Nickel drop. It's one thing to be 'sinned on' by a stranger or even an acquaintance... but a brother?! And then to hear that you are to forgive them ... basically, always?! Totally different mindset. Your frame of reference has just suffered an incredible paradigm shift.

I would argue that it takes far more strength of character to forgive someone who is close to you than it ever would be for someone who is more removed. It is the brother who is aware of your warts and shortcomings and they know how to really hurt you. So whether or not what was done/said or not done/said by your brother was intentional or an accident - you must forgive. But is there also an implied addendum?

Whatever happened may be something you forgive but do you go the step further and trust them again? Do you try and never hold it over their head? Do you still love them? As a Christian we are commanded to love so again there really isn't any question - but the 'how' is in our hands. Unconditionally is how the Lord acts toward us when we do this to Him - He continues to trust us and He always loves us. This is how we are to respond. Never easy. But not a question.

NOT my fault

I'm not the problem! It's not my fault. I'm just reaping the results! 'Feel' familiar? I must admit I do hate being blamed for something that wasn't my fault. And, we've all experienced this. Unfortunately there are too many times when the person hurling the accusation, typically your supervisor, does not want to hear that they singled out the wrong person. Have you noticed that it is also at this precise moment that the person making the accusation is totally uninterested in whatever you might want to say? They simply are highly irritated and you happened to be the target. Being a target is extremely frustrating.

It's at this moment we typically start thinking about what am I going to do? How do I exonerate myself? Wrong emphasis! Worry about exonerating later, seeing what can be done to resolve the situation should be our focus. Once the 'crisis' is resolved you can determine if you can effectively correct the mis-perception. And accept the fact that maybe you won't be able to - sometimes you just don't find 'justice'. Sometimes it's a situation that someone has to be the scapegoat and you drew the short straw. And sometimes you have to recognize that no one is really to blame.

So now the 'issue' is resolved and you've discovered that there is no opportunity to receive vindication. What do you do now? It is always difficult to continue working with someone who won't accept that what happened was not of your making. Do you quit? If you continue - how do you continue? My suggestion is that you won't be able to continue on your own - you will need to discover what the Lord wants for you. As difficult as it may be you need to turn and see what God expects from you. Do we even see His hand? Do we look for it? We can't just believe God is in control, we need to act on this. There's no reason to doubt.

This type of situation, which everyone experiences you really aren't the only one, is a time of discovering what you're made of. Do you remember the story of Job? Everyone around him was telling him it was his fault for the state he found himself in. They were telling him to curse God and turn from Him. What did Job do? He didn't understand 'why' what happened, he obviously didn't like what was happening, but he also refused to lay the blame at God's feet. He did not seek to blame. It is a case of rising above the situation. Not easy... especially if it was not your fault.

Happily ever after...

Does that even exist? Do you believe in it... for you? Or is this only a myth, a dream? One of the delights of childhood is the 'happily ever after' endings to stories, but is this only for children? Don't you, at least secretly, wish for this? When things get really difficult is when we think about those endings. Sometimes 'happily ever after' is not a possibility. Sometimes bad things do happen... and to good people.

How we emotionally and intellectually proceed is another measure of our character. We all know what won't work - blaming others, pouting, complaining - but that doesn't mean we don't indulge in it... at least for while. Attempting to find how and what we are going to do next is not always obvious. And sometimes we don't, or at least don't believe we do, have the luxury of time to determine 'next'. Now what? Stumble on? Keep going in the same way? Change... to what? And exactly what is 'happily ever after' for you?

We've all been in these situations and we've lived through them, albeit not always well. But our world did not end, changed perhaps, but not ended. Happily? Sometimes... we actually are surprised by 'happily'. I believe that we can make our own 'happily ever after', in fact... we are the only ones who really can. And this is more than just 'making the best of things' or 'try, try, again', it really is a character issue that becomes a mindset. How do we proceed when happily ever after seems impossible to attain? Are we willing to pay the price for 'happily'?

Unfortunately, there are no easy answers to this dilemma and my answer may not be yours. What you need is to know how you can emotionally and intellectually move on creatively. Because that's the key - continuing, though perhaps not in the same direction or in the same way. You have the choice to look at life and discover the silver linings (no, not through rose colored glasses) or see only despair and destruction and become devastated.  Realistically, you have to look at your situation dispassionately and decide what your 'next' is. Hope is believing that you can and will find your happily ever after.

Look

How do you look? Remember that looking and seeing may not be the same. Do you see what is... or what you want to see... or potential? Three different ways of looking. What, to you, would be important to see - what would you want? And personally, if you looked at you - what would you see? Part of what we see depends on what we are looking for? Fame? Fortune? Prestige? And part depends on where we are looking? About you? Within you? Third is: when do we look? Only when it's convenient?

Webster has a host of explanations/definitions about 'look' (which often means that the word is far more complex than we typically give it credit for) but the one I like best is: to make sure or take care. The reason I like it is that it has an intellectual component - looking is not mindless. 'See' has nearly the same amount of explanations/definitions. And the adjective most often used is - perceive... also requiring the intellect involvement. My point is that this is an act that requires your involvement not merely a passing 'glance'.

2Corinthians 4:18 gives us a spiritual definition of looking: "...we do not look at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen." 5:7 continues the thought, "For we walk by faith, not by sight." This is not implying that we ignore the things that are seen but it gives a heightened reason, faith, to look beyond what is. Looking at what is requires no faith - it is. Looking with faith requires you to believe what has been written about what is rather than simply what you are seeing. 

Why need a spiritual definition? A simple example will provide the purpose. You know you. You know all your warts, your selfishness, the pain you've caused - how can you possibly accept the fact that you are a new creation without looking at yourself with new eyes? You also have to have the faith to believe that even when you sin you can go to the Father and receive forgiveness (1John 1:9) and then pick yourself up and try anew. To look, to really see not just what is but what you can't see can only occur spiritually.

Lied to...

I may be wrong but I think one of the worst feelings in the world is to discover that you have been lied to. It gets worse when you discover it is someone you care for, someone you had trusted. (The caveat is that the lie was deliberate and that it was substantive.) What becomes a kind of perverse icing on the cake is when you discover that other than them saving face, there was no real purpose in their lying. How do you feel upon this discovery? Angry? Yes. Hurt? Yes. Confused? Absolutely.

When the person who lied to you is a family member, a spouse or a child or a parent, the emptiness inside is nearly crushing. You now don't know how to react around them. Do we tell the person that you know they lied to you? If so, how? And the host of other questions you never thought you'd be facing but will need resolving increases. Forgive? Well, if you are a Christian, you have no choice - you have to forgive. But forget? Trust again? What do you do with all your emotions? Ignoring or denying them will never work - you have to come to terms with your sense of betrayal.

How do you react around that person in the future? While you may want to eke out some revenge or give them a taste of their own behavior, those options are not even in the mix of options.When the perpetrator is family, the likelihood of interaction is heightened and you are forced to confront your feelings quicker than you may be prepared for. But what do you do? You really can't act as if nothing has happened because it has. Personally I've never had the desire to act so I don't but I also know that what has occurred will cause a change in the interpersonal relations. A riff has been caused. Repairable?

The whole 'realm' of lies, lying is much larger than anyone ever imagines. The ripple effect that a lie causes is truly immense and the liar rarely sees all of the destruction their lie causes. And the myriad of emotions cascade one upon the other. Being the recipient of a lie is difficult to live with. Then again, we don't know the motivation of the person who lied ... why did they lie to us? We just know they did. But you haven't been the first nor will you be the last person facing this quandary. And if nothing else... you now know how the other person feels when you are the perpetrator of a lie.

NO!

Have you ever thought about the word, 'no'? About how the word is said evokes different reactions? But also, regardless of how it is spoken, when it is said it stops everything? Those two letters are powerful and I sometimes think they are even more powerful then 'yes'. Think back... what is typically the first word spoken by a child? It's 'no'. Why? Probably because it is one of the first words that make a connection in the mind, the first word heard. And it says, loud and clear, do not under any circumstance do whatever you are doing!

Typically our response to how we hear the word depends on: how the speaker says it, the level of personal investment in whatever is being said 'no' to, the ability of the 'no' to stop us, and the 'status' of the speaker. There are other considerations, but these are the ones that flash through our mind nearly instantaneously before we consciously react. I think it is because my parents always, yes - always, gave me a reason when they said no that I won't accept a bald no. My personal reaction has typically been, 'why?'. And if there isn't a reasoned answer, I simply disregard it. Do remember who it is that determines the 'reasoned answer'.

In my more rational moments I believe that 'no' should be part of any action plan. 'No' test the viability of what and why of the plan. 'No' doesn't always mean no forever, it may only be a momentary check so that all options and ramifications are considered.  Knowing the reason for a no gives you data to consider with the other options. Regardless, how we react to hearing 'no' is critical. We need to take a moment and react rationally.

Granted that what I've said is a tad tongue-in-cheek, there is a very serious side to our reaction to the word. When you hear it do you automatically accept it and change your direction/project/thinking without analyzing for yourself? Or, do you rush headlong into what you were doing disregarding the (possible) warning? Neither is particularly wise or effective. Perhaps the wisest course is to stop long enough to analyze the new information (the why of the no) before deciding what your best action may be. No may become a yes upon further consideration... then again, it may remain - no.

Stagnant

Do you ever feel stagnant? Are you, or is this only a momentary ennui? Do you only have a case of the blahs or is it more serious? Do you feel bereft of creativity? Perhaps you don't feel you have any exciting challenges or maybe you don't know where/how to start on your current project. Regardless... nothing appeals, nothing is totally 'wrong' but nothing is right either. One thing you do know... you're not moving!

But are you sure you are in a stagnant place? What's your evidence? And, if you are, what are you doing to change this... or are you only moaning? We all tend toward at least a bit of moaning but the point is to move beyond this. But how do you motivate yourself into action? I know this may sound simplistic but sometimes it's merely the act to do something, anything that will be the impetus. The reason is that action tends to be a force all by itself. And if the action isn't the 'right' one, you can change but if you are doing nothing this also is a force but not a positive one.

There's a scripture in Revelations that talks about being neither hot or cold - that's a terrible place to be in. Being neither can also be seen in the stagnant.  And God doesn't approve of this - He'd much prefer one or the other. Does this describe you? Are you really neither 'good' or 'bad' you really are only... tasteless? To me that would be a fearsome place. When you consider God's preference (to spew you out) for those who are neither, then it is dreadful. For me, this is sufficient to begin to change.

I know we all have moments of stagnation, but that's the key - moments, not a lifestyle nor a mindset. Stagnation/neither hot or cold/mediocre all point to a lack of involvement and commitment - to anything! And lack of commitment can be caused by all sorts of emotions - and that may be the fundamental problem, your unwillingness to stand and be counted, which requires courage and belief.

Risk

Are you a risk taker? What 'kind' of a risk taker? Are you defiant? Because if defiance is the basis for your risking then you are headed for a world of hurt. Risk can be defined as: challenge. Or adventure. Webster defines the word as: peril, menace, danger, threat, trouble. Actually I would also define it as excitement. I believe it's the possibility of threat or danger that entices us because it adds zest to our lives.

I read (Jacqueline Winspear's blog) that we all live with our own level of risk. So how much of a risk taker are you? Personally I'm more of the calculated risk taker. 'Most' of the time I know what I will lose if I risk and use that as the basis to decide to risk or not. But I am a card carrying risk taker. Yes, there is a place for safety and security but there's also a place for risk because the prize to be attained is worth it.

Risk is not risk for risk's sake - that's stupid and leads you into peril and menace. Risk needs to be viewed as alternative thinking. My definition of risk would include looking at what is and looking for a different way of responding. This is especially true when the old ways of reacting really don't accomplish what you hope for. Risk should move you beyond the ordinary and perhaps introduce you to the extraordinary.

It would seem to me that a life without risk isn't a life worth living. It's important to be able to step outside of your comfort zone, do something you could be called crazy for, maybe even fall flat on your face... as long as you get up and try again. It is those times when you get caught up in (whatever), when you follow your instincts that molds you and defines you. You have to know that not all risks will turn out as you'd like and perhaps what you have to pay for your 'folly' is significant but you won't end up wondering.... what if....