Leaders vs Dictators

Leaders vs Dictators 

A good leader believes in and respects the ¹rule of law and seeks to enforce it. He/she sees truth and law as objective realities, not something they create. 

A strong leader is unwavering in the enforcement of the law and is guided by the ¹rule of law. Unyielding enforcement of the law is not a dictatorship. 

A dictator considers themselves the law and seeks to overthrow objective morality and true law, so they can become the law-giver.

A good leader recognizes the law and acknowledges there is an ultimate ¹law-giver (God) who is the highest (ultimate) authority and not them. 

In the dictator's eyes, they see themselves as the highest authority. This, in large part, is why they seek to be a dictator i.e. to gain power. 

Ironically, this is why a dictator will accuse a law enforcer of being a dictator. The law and those who enforce it are a direct obstacle and threat to dictators who are lawbreakers seeking to establish themselves as the only absolute authority and ruler over others. 

This is also why dictators despise followers of any religion, because followers of a religion see themselves as answering to a higher authority other than those who seek to rule over them. 

Dictators do not recognize that law comes from a source outside of themselves. They believe instead they are the law or should be if they are not.

For a discussion on the basis of morality, click here.

For a discussion on what it means to "obey the authorities" in Romans 13 Click here

____________________________________________

Footnotes:

¹To understand the founding of the United States of America and what distinguished it from all other governments up to that point, we must understand common law, it's historical, philosophical and theological underpinnings. If you do not know this background you can not truly understand the USA and how it has drifted away from its original moorings but seeking to return.

What did the founders of the United States mean by common law? 

The founders of the United States—figures like Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, John Adams, Alexander Hamilton, and others—understood  "common law" primarily as the English legal tradition they inherited as colonists. This was the body of unwritten law developed over centuries through judicial decisions (precedents), customs, and practices in England's courts, rather than through comprehensive statutes or codes. It stood in contrast to "statute law" (enacted by legislatures) or civil law systems (like those derived from Roman law on the European continent). 

* Core Meaning to the Founders

Common law embodied principles of justice, rights, and procedures that were seen as ancient, customary, and rooted in reason and immemorial usage. Key aspects included: 

- Rights and liberties — Protections like trial by jury, due process ("law of the land"), habeas corpus, prohibitions on unreasonable searches, double jeopardy, and safeguards for property and contracts. Many viewed these as "birthrights" of Englishmen, traceable back to documents like Magna Carta (1215), which the founders often invoked. 

- Judge-made development — Law evolved case by case through court rulings, guided by precedent (stare decisis), but judges were ideally "finding" or declaring existing law based on custom and reason, not inventing it arbitrarily. 

- Limited government and rule of law — No one, including the king or Parliament, was above the law. This included remedies in equity (fairness where strict rules fell short) alongside common law courts. 

The founders were steeped in this tradition. William Blackstone's Commentaries on the Laws of England (1765–1769) was enormously influential in America as a systematic explanation of it; many lawyers and statesmen studied it. 

* Context in the Founding Era

Before independence, colonists repeatedly appealed to common law rights against British policies they saw as violations (e.g., in petitions and the Declaration of Independence's list of grievances). The First Continental Congress in 1774 declared that the colonies were "entitled to the common law of England." After the Revolution, there was debate:

- Many saw it as their inheritance, adapted to American circumstances (e.g., rejecting feudal elements or monarchical overreach).

- Others, especially Jeffersonians, worried about federal judges imposing a national common law, fearing it could undermine republican government or states' rights. The Supreme Court later ruled in cases like United States v. Hudson and Goodwin (1812) that there was no general federal common law of crimes—federal power was limited to statutes and the Constitution. 

States generally received (adopted) English common law as it stood around the time of independence or settlement, modified by local conditions, statutes, and constitutions. The U.S. legal system remains a common law system today (with exceptions like Louisiana's civil law roots). 

* Relation to Founding Documents

- The Declaration of Independence (1776) grounded rights in "the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God" and "unalienable Rights" (life, liberty, pursuit of happiness). Founders often saw natural rights as underlying or harmonious with common law protections, not in conflict. Grievances against King George III frequently referenced violations of English constitutional and common law norms. 

- The Constitution and Bill of Rights built on this foundation. For example: 

  - The Seventh Amendment preserves the right to jury trial "in Suits at common law." 

  - Criminal procedure rights in the Fourth through Sixth Amendments (searches, self-incrimination, confrontation, jury, etc.) drew directly from common law practices. 

  - Terms like "judicial power" in Article III were understood against the backdrop of common law courts deciding "cases" and "controversies." 

Founders like James Wilson and John Adams emphasized common law as a bulwark for liberty under popular sovereignty, not parliamentary supremacy (which they rejected). They adapted it: America had written constitutions as supreme law, appeal to natural rights for justification of independence, and republican institutions. 

In short, when founders referred to "common law," they meant this inherited English system of customary, precedent-based law that protected individual rights and limited arbitrary power—viewed as compatible with (and informed by) natural law principles. It was not "judge-made law" in the modern pejorative sense of activism, but a reasoned evolution of customs and decisions serving justice. This background deeply shaped how they designed the Constitution and understood its terms. Debates persisted (e.g., federal vs. state application), but the core tradition endured as the foundation of American jurisprudence. 

In referring to "the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God" what did God have to do with law in the mind of the founders 

In the minds of the American founders, God had everything to do with law—specifically as the ultimate source, author, and authority behind the moral order that undergirds legitimate human government and rights. The phrase "the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God" in the Declaration of Independence (1776) was not a vague or purely secular reference. It reflected a widespread founding-era understanding, drawn from classical, Christian, and Enlightenment-influenced natural law traditions, that law is not merely a human invention but rooted in a divine moral framework discoverable by reason and, for many, confirmed by revelation. 

* What "Laws of Nature and of Nature's God" Meant

Founders distinguished (yet saw as harmonious) two closely related ideas: 

- Laws of Nature: These were the moral principles and rules of human conduct implanted in creation—accessible through reason, conscience, observation of human nature, and the "moral sense." They included self-evident truths like equality in natural rights, the wrongness of harming innocents, obligations of justice, and the duty to pursue happiness without violating others. These were not primarily physical laws (like gravity) but ethical ones governing free human behavior. Thinkers like Cicero, Locke, and Blackstone influenced this view. 

- Laws of Nature's God: This emphasized that these natural laws derive their binding authority from God as Creator and Lawgiver. God established the moral order of the universe, including human relations. The phrase pointed to God's will as expressed in creation (nature) and, for many founders, also in Scripture (revelation). As James Wilson (signer of the Declaration and Constitution, Supreme Court Justice) explained, God's law for humans is communicated "by reason and conscience, the divine monitors within us, and by the sacred oracles [the Bible], the divine monitors without us." 

In short, God was the supreme Legislator. Human laws (including the adapted English common law) had to conform to this higher law or lose legitimacy. Violations of natural law—such as tyranny—justified resistance, as the Declaration argued against King George III. 

* Key Influences on the Founders' View

William Blackstone's Commentaries on the Laws of England (widely read by American lawyers, including many founders) was pivotal. Blackstone wrote that the law of nature is "the will of [man's] maker" impressed upon creation. When God created humans with free will, He laid down "certain immutable laws of human nature" discoverable by reason. This law is "superior in obligation to any other" and "dictated by God himself." Positive (human) law contrary to it is invalid. Founders adapted this to reject parliamentary supremacy in favor of higher principles. 

Other figures reinforced this: 

- James Wilson: Natural law flows from God as the source of justice and moral obligation. Only God deserves absolute obedience; governments derive just powers from consent and must align with divine moral order. Wilson saw common law as ultimately rooted in this framework. 

- Thomas Jefferson (primary drafter of the Declaration): Rights come from the "laws of nature" and are "endowed by their Creator." In earlier writings, he affirmed God as the giver of life and liberty together. While Jefferson was more rationalist and skeptical of orthodox Christianity than some peers, he still grounded rights in a Creator who designed human nature with moral capacities. 

- John Adams and others: They viewed politics as a "divine science" and saw the common law as arising from the laws of nature and dictates of God. Alexander Hamilton described an "eternal and immutable law" constituted by the Deity from human relations to God and each other. 

The Declaration mentions God four times overall ("Nature's God," "Creator," "Supreme Judge of the world," "divine Providence"), showing a theistic framework where God is active in moral governance and the affairs of nations—not a distant clockmaker who abandons creation. 

* Connection to Common Law and Government

This understanding tied directly to the founders' view of "common law" (as discussed previously). Common law was seen as an inheritance of customary rights and procedures that, at its best, reflected or at least did not contradict natural law. Judges were to "find" law aligned with reason and justice, not invent it against God's moral order. Human governments exist to secure God-given rights (life, liberty, pursuit of happiness). When they become destructive of those ends, the people have a right and duty to alter or abolish them—because ultimate sovereignty rests with God, not kings or majorities. 

Founders were not uniform in theology (some leaned toward Christian orthodoxy, others toward rational theism or "theistic rationalism"), but virtually all agreed that: 

- Rights are unalienable because they come from a source higher than government (the Creator). 

- Moral law is objective, universal, and authoritative because it reflects God's design for human flourishing. 

- Just civil law must conform to this higher standard; otherwise, it becomes tyranny. 

This provided the philosophical foundation for independence, republican government, and limited power. It was "common sense" to them—not novel invention—drawing on a long tradition where God, nature, reason, and (for many) revelation converged on justice. 

In essence, to the founders, God was not incidental to law but its origin and sanction. Without this divine grounding, rights would be mere grants from government (revocable at will), and law would lack transcendent moral force. This belief helped justify revolution and shape the constitutional order that followed.

Words of life or death?

All God's commandments are given so we might find, expand, and preserve life. God calling us to obey Him is an invitation to advance, grow, and multiply life i.e. God - through His commandments - is calling us to flourish, not: 

Decline — gradually becoming weaker or less successful 

Wither — shriveling, fading, or losing vitality (often used for plants, success, or energy) 

Fail — not succeeding or collapsing 

¹Struggle  — having great difficulty or barely managing 

Languish — losing strength, growing weak, or remaining neglected 

Deteriorate — becoming progressively worse 

Stagnate — showing no growth or development; staying stuck 

Wane — decreasing in strength, power, or prosperity 

Flounder — struggling clumsily or failing to make progress 

Perish — dying, decaying, or coming to an end 

But when we trust and obey God, it often looks and feels like death (i.e. the above list) when in reality it is the path to life. 

"For the sake of Christ, then, I am content with weaknesses, insults, hardships, persecutions, and calamities. For when I am weak, then I am strong." - 2 Cor 12:10 

When I am weak in my natural strength, I am strong in the strength God gives me.

Christ told us that if we wish to find our life, we must lose it. If we are to live as He designed us to, we must die...i.e. die to seeking life on our own terms; outside of or apart from God. 

The fact that we bristle so much at God's commandments reveals and exposes how much we distrust him and are in rebellion to Him. When we trust and love God, we gladly embrace His direction (commandments), not avoid them. 

"For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments. And his commandments are not burdensome." - 1 John 5:3

It is our rebellion that Christ came and bore the consequences of, with all its harm and destruction we see all around us. When we trust the work that Christ did on our behalf, we are no longer in Adam, who rebelled, but in Christ, who obeyed. 

In Christ, His obedience is assigned to us as if we were perfectly obedient to God as Christ was. We are now the righteousness of Christ i.e. we are in Christ (who obeyed) and no longer in Adam (who rebelled).

For a further discussion on going from Adam to Christ, click here.

______________________________

Footnotes:

¹Struggle is the natural consequence of our rebellion and disconnection from God, the source of life, love, and all things.

After we turned away from the Creator (Source) in rebellion, nothing worked properly as designed and intended. 

Advancing in pain

The age-old question is if God is good, why is there so much pain. 

But maybe that's the wrong question and the answer is not what we usually think. Maybe God allows pain to remain to humble us and help us see our need for Him, with the long-term goal of our spiritual advancement and ultimate gain. 

Christ said, "...What does it profit us if we gain the whole world but lose our own soul?"

Isn't the opposite also true? What if we lose the whole world and gain our eternal soul? Is this not far more valuable than having the things of this world? How we answer these questions may determine our ultimate destiny and therefore well worth asking.

While pain is ultimately the fruit of our rebellious distrust of God, He still uses it for our good. If God could not bring good out of evil, evil would not exist. Christ's death would be the ultimate example of this profound paradox. 

Acts 2:23 "this Jesus, delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God, you crucified and killed by the hands of lawless men."

What a mystery that God used lawlessness to bring to us the greatest gift of eternal restoration to the Father who is the Source of life! 

Therefore, we must not allow suffering to discourage or shame us, or ¹cause us to fall into self-pity e.g. "You're a loser! Why keep trying? Just quit!..." etc. 

But we must embrace pain and embrace God and His love for us in our pain and failures for our advancement to occur (God is for us, not against us. Nothing separates us from God's love...Rom 8:31-39). 

"...Through him we have also obtained access by faith into this grace in which we stand, and we rejoice in ²hope of the glory of God. 

Not only that, but we rejoice in our sufferings, knowing that suffering produces endurance, and endurance produces character, and character produces hope, 

and hope does not put us to shame, because God’s love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit who has been given to us..." - Romans 5:2-5 ESV 

As long as we look at loss, failure, or mistakes as losing and not stepping stones to advancing, we will not embrace them with thanks, learn from them, and let them develop our maturity and advance our walk with God. When we recognize our losses, failures, and mistakes are vital to our spiritual advancement, we embrace them with gratitude and experience God's grace, mercy, and love in them. 

Having our identity and value rooted in God as the bedrock of our existence - and the very Source of love itself - frees us from seeing failure or loss as losing. The whole mindset of the Bible is that ³failure is a necessary stepping stone to progress and maturity. 

"When all kinds of trials and temptations crowd into your lives my brothers, don’t resent them as intruders, but welcome them as friends! Realise that they come to test your faith and to produce in you the quality of endurance. But let the process go on until that endurance is fully developed, and you will find you have become men of mature character with the right sort of independence..." - Jas 1: 2-8. J B Phillips translation. 

This is foundational to understanding and embracing pain with thanks instead of becoming disillusioned, angry, or bitter over suffering and seeking to manipulate our circumstances to avoid it. 

The importance of humility

Another vital key to the value of loss or failure is humility. To understand we will never reach the maximum potential we were created for without God (which failure or loss helps us to see) causes us to look to Him in greater dependence. Greater dependence on God as the Source of life, love, and all things is the essence of humility. Only through humility can we reach the potential God intends and designs us for.

Christ himself, who deserved far better, did no less... i.e. he experienced the greatest suffering and humility. And that for our benefit as well as His Father's glory.

"...Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus, who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, by taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name, so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. - Philippians 2:5-11 ESV

How do we discover God's love in our pain? click here

For a further discussion on the primary role of pain click here

For a further discussion of how God uses evil for our good click here...and here.

The greater the evil the greater the opportunity for healing/

grace click here.

For a discussion on the key lesson from the book of Job, click here.

For a discussion on the value of paradox, click here.

For a discussion on the necessity of humility, click here

____________________________________

Footnotes:

¹nor let pain embitter us. At the root of anger is the belief that we know what is best for us - and/or the world - better than God. Yet we are finite, not all-knowing or all-powerful. Only God is infinite in these things. 

And not only so, but he is also all-loving. He not only knows what's best (all-knowing) and does what's best (all-powerful) but wants it for us also (all-loving).

But many object and say, "How can God be all-loving and continue to allow all this pain in the world? What proof do we have that He is all-loving?" 

Glad you asked! He became a man just like us and fully embraced our pain so that we might ultimately be free of it forever.

² "...we rejoice in hope of the glory of God..." What a curious expression. What is it about the glory of God that gives us hope. To explore this further click here.

³This is contingent on our seeing failure as a means by which God can ultimately advance us. If we do not, it will embitter us.

The claims of Christ and His return!!

Christ did everything necessary to completely ¹unwind and reverse all that is wrong in the world. 

Yet the world remains a mess.

Why?  

The reversal Christ gained is not automatic. Humanity must now take advantage of what is offered to experience something of it in this life. 

Plus, it is not 100% complete. Full restoration of all things will occur upon Christ's return.

 

Why don't people take advantage? 

Because they (we) either don't understand what Christ did and offers, don't believe it is true, or think it is necessary. 

However, the mess the world is in clearly indicates how necessary this reversal (renewal) is. 

We also refuse to acknowledge and receive what Christ has done and offers. We are too distrustful, arrogant, and self-absorbed. To use a Biblical description... we prefer being "our own god." We believe we can be our own savior, deliverer, and provider. 

How's that working so far? If we are honest with ourselves, it isn't.

Christ's claims

This reversal is not only necessary but also very real, if only because Christ said it was. But he didn't just say it, He did all that was necessary in history and time to reverse our mess and resolve our problem individually and collectively. 

But it was also because he made these ²claims, he was put to death.

The irony is that Christ making the claims He did resulted in the very solution needed to fix things i.e. he was sentenced to death and died for making those claims so we could be free from death. I encourage you to ponder how ironic this is... and do it often.

This is the great paradox of Christ's message i.e. life comes through death. A paradox the nation of Israel missed and one we also miss today. People look for deliverance from difficult circumstances first - i.e. physical or political deliverance - when our need for spiritual deliverance is far greater. As Christ asked, what does it profit someone if they gain the whole world but lose their own soul? 

One of many of Christ's ²claims and predictions was he would be put to death but would also ³raise himself from death on the 3rd day. Which ⁴he did. No other religious leader ever predicted, much less did this before or since. His coming back to life was ³unique and only He accomplished this. 

His resurrection confirmed and verified everything he said about Himself was true. Either all of it was true, or none of it was. God would not support or acknowledge a fraud or liar, much less bring one back from the dead!

Christ's resurrection is why His claims should be heeded above anyone and everyone else's. 

What were Christ's other key claims? 

He made several, including: 

• Being the Son of God: 

Christ claimed to be the divine and eternal Son of God, equal in power and nature to God the Father (John 1:1-3,14,18, John 10:30, Philippians 2:6). 

• Being the Messiah: 

He claimed to be Israel's long-awaited Messiah or the Christ - the anointed one - i.e. sent by His Father to save humanity from ultimate death and destruction...spiritually first but literally in the future (John 4:25-26, Matthew 16:16-17). 

• Being the resurrection and the life: 

He claimed that He has the power to conquer death (which He did first by His own resurrection) and grant eternal life (resurrection from death) to anyone who believes in Him (John 11:25-26, Romans 6:9). 

• Being the only way to God: 

Christ claimed that He is the exclusive way to God, His Father and that no one can truly approach God except through Him (John 14:6, Acts 4:12). 

Why? Because He alone did what was necessary to restore us back to good standing with our Creator. Our seeking to be our own god cuts us off from experiencing all He is and offers as well as all we were designed to be. Something God warned about at the very outset of our existence. Christ did what was required to reverse all of this - our rebellion and all the fallout that has since followed.

• Being the true vine: 

Christ claimed to be the source of spiritual life and nourishment for believers, comparing Himself to the vine and believers to the branches (John 15:1-5). 

These claims, along with His teachings and miracles, formed the basis of His followers' belief in Him as the divine Son of God, our Savior and the only way back to God. 

Christ also claims to be alive today and that he will return to literally rule the earth and everything in it with truth, love, justice, and abundance. 

Because he is alive and said he will return, it is wise to ⁵study all he did and all he claimed to be. If what he said is true, our (your) present and eternal state and happiness depend on it. Something worth exploring, wouldn't you agree?

For a further discussion on why Christ must be the only way to God, click here and here

For a discussion on Christ's central message, click here 

What is the "good news"? Click here.

____________________________________ 

¹So when will he fulfill the complete restoration he promised? 

For now, he reverses the legal consequences of our rebellious distrust of His claims i.e. there is no longer any judgment or condemnation for anyone who believes His claims and accepts his offer of forgiveness and restoration to His Father. 

"For you know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that though he was rich, yet for your sake he became poor, so that you by his poverty might become rich." - 2 Cor 8:9

What is fully extended to those who believe His claims is perfect acceptance by Him and His Father and their infinite love for us that can never be taken away. 

And ultimately, he will eliminate the practical and physical consequences of the mess the world is in as well. These promises will be fulfilled when Christ returns to establish heaven on earth under his literal, physical reign. 

There will be no more pain or tears or death in the new life He will set up on earth. There will only be perfect flourishing, abundance, and the perpetual progression of joy, adventure, and creativity for His honor and glory. 

We will enter into a never-ending, increasing state of bliss and fruitfulness without barriers or limits, for we will be fully engaged and partake in Him, who is the source of life, love, and all things. 

²And what were the primary claims that resulted in His death? He was God who took on human form to live among us. He was the promised and long-awaited Messiah; the Christ; the only Anointed of God. It is in and through Him alone, we are restored back to good standing with God, His father and our Creator.  

Religion and "good" deeds do not and can not restore us to the Father. Only He could and does if we believe him and the claims he made about himself. He invites us to come and believe. 

³No other religion or religious founder made this claim, much less fulfilled it. NO ONE! 

⁴You may find the movie "A Case for Christ" helpful regarding this. It is a true story about an atheist named Lee Strobel who set out to debunk Christianity and Christ's claims.

⁵This blog may also help. I elaborate on most if not all points made here in other posts. 

 

Why the honeymoon doesn't last

How does a believers walk with God change after that initial honeymoon period when they first came to Christ?

Not long after becoming a believer things actually get harder for most believers. In some cases much harder.

Why is this? Doesn't God promise great or greater circumstancial blessings in a believers life when we walk with him? Yet life often gets harder not easier. Why?

Because the greatest blessings God promises are spiritual, not circumstantial (He doesn't promise there will be no "bumps in the road,") financial (good money), or physical (good health).

The ¹main blessing he wants to give us is a deeper relationship with him - who is life itself and giver of all things. This blessing is spiritual because it strengthens our dependence, walk, and joy in Him. To the extent we pursue Him in this way is the extent we may also experience circumstancial blessings as well. 

He seeks to wean us from the

¹pleasures of this world and our dependence on them - not necessarily give us more of them. He does this so we might grow deep spiritual roots into him and find Him our greatest joy, ¹instead of created things.

For things to get better (in Him) they often must 1st get worse (in life). Or as Christ said, "to live we must die." 

We must be weaned from ¹that which keeps us from the best thing - God himself, and a closer walk with Him - not grant us pleasant or comfortable circumstances.

The following quote by John Newton (author of the song "Amazing Grace") captures the essence of this in the following quote.

"Everything is needful that He sends. Nothing can be meaningful that He withholds."

__________________________________

Footnotes:

¹It is not that he doesn't want us to enjoy and appreciate his creation. He absolutely does. But when the pursuit of the pleasures in this life become greater than our pleasure in God, we actually lose in the long run and miss out on the greatest pleasure of all; knowing and walking with God. 

The best thing God can do for us is deepen our walk with him and our joy in Him, not necessarily make our circumstances better or easier.

No shortcuts to maturity

Pain is a ¹necessary part of ²growth. We either experience it through... 

³Self-denial and submission to God's ⁴directives - necessary because of our brokenness and inclination towards ⁵rebellions distrust of God.

or 

As a result of living in a broken world among others who are also broken from their rebellion to God. 

There is no way around pain. It comes to us through the offenses of others in this broken world. There are also no shortcuts to being weaned from our own ⁶brokenness and the pain it causes.

"I have said these things to you, that in me you may have peace. In the world, you will have tribulation (The meaning of tribulation in the original Greek - persecution, affliction, distress, pressure). But take heart (i.e. do not be fearful or lose hope); ⁷I have overcome the world.” - Jesus in John 16:33

The good news is God knows and understands our pain because Christ stepped into our broken world and suffered far more than we ever will - and for our benefit. 

And not only so but he also uses our pain and struggles for our good. In knowing this, we find peace - i.e. "...in me you may have peace." 

Though pain continues in this life, it no longer disturbs us in the way it did before. We now see how God uses it for a good purpose if we love and trust Him.

In Christ, we therefore live with ⁷hope in the midst of pain, not despair, anxiety or fear.

How do we discover God's love in our pain? click here

For a further discussion on the primary role of pain click here

For a further discussion of how God uses evil for our good click here...and here.

The greater the evil the greater the opportunity for healing/

grace click here.

For a discussion on the key lesson from the book of Job, click here.

For a discussion on the value of paradox, click here.

For a discussion on the necessity of humility click here

___________________________________

Footnotes:

¹Pain reminds us that we were not designed to operate without God. The more we come to see and understand this the more we look to God for true life, and not to creation with all it's "creature comforts."

Coming to see and know God as the true source of life, love, and all things is at the heart of our transformation - growth. Pain often is a - if not the - primary means  by which this occurs if we receive it by faith as such, i.e. we do not become angered or embittered by our suffering, pain, or struggles but welcome them as our friends to help us grow deeper roots into God and find Him more and more as our true life and joy.

"When all kinds of trials and temptations crowd into your lives my brothers, don’t resent them as intruders, but welcome them as friends! Realise that they come to test your faith and to produce in you the quality of endurance. But let the process go on until that endurance is fully developed, and you will find you have become men of mature character with the right sort of independence..." Jas 1:2-3 JB Phillips

²We are so blinded by our selfishness we will never see how deep it runs until we are pressed beyond our ability to handle the pain it causes.

³God actually calls us to go through pain to advance us spiritually. We don't think of self-denial as a form of pain. However, self-denial is a call to turn away from those things we use to find comfort in and ease our pain, so we might pursue God as our comfort.

To expand on this, Christ says we are to take up our cross and follow him. The cross is a symbol of pain and death. Christ is calling us to take on and embrace pain in the same way He did in order to follow him. At first, we might think this is insane. Why would God call us to willingly take on and embrace pain when we spend all our lives trying to avoid it!?

When the world asks how can God be good and just, when He does not relieve all the pain and suffering in the world (including our own), it reveals the depth of our rebellion towards God. Pain is the organic fruit of our rebellious distrust and independence from God, not as deliberate punishment by some angry supernatural being. It only remains to wean us away from inappropriate dependence on the creation and turn us to dependence on the Creator for true life where it belongs and where we will flourish and experience life most. 

If we allow pain to do this, we will be saved in, by, and through our pain and suffering, i.e. It remains for the exact opposite of what we assume. God ultimately uses it to advance us spiritually, not harm us. But only if we receive it as from His hand for our advancement, not our harm. If we believe it is only for our harm we will not gain from it the good God intends.

⁴The primary directive is that we love God with all that we have and are and our neighbor as ourselves.

⁵Pursuit of something other than God for life is at the heart of our rebellion. This says these other things are more important or valuable than God i.e. they become our God. 

⁶The heart of our brokenness - selfishness - is our rebellious commitment to being our own god. We put greater trust in ourselves into gaining what is best than trusting God to do what is best for us. This is due to not believing God is who he claims to be... the Source of life, love, and all things. The result is the pursuit of creation itself and making it our god. 

How's that working for you so far? 

"For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them.

For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse.

For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. Claiming to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things." - Rom1:18-23

Of course, today we do not worship birds, animals, and creeping things as they did back when Paul penned this. But these are representatives of creation. We naturally ascribe to created things - i.e. anything from our earthly existence - the value and glory that can only be ascribed to God. That is the application and underlying truth of this passage for us today, not the primitive worship of animals.

⁷How did Christ overcome the world? He embraced the world's pain and suffering (including ours) and allowed it to kill him so that we might not have to remain in pain and die. Then He overcame that pain by resurrecting so that we might also resurrect one day if we put our trust in Him.  

Pain and death do not have the final word, life does in and through Christ demonstrated and confirmed by his resurrection. Because he resurrected, we will also in him. This is our hope in our pain.

The necessity of dependence

The very acts of eating, drinking, and breathing are daily reminders that we ¹depend on things outside ourselves for life. 

They also remind us of how fragile life truly is when we can not access these basic essential resources.

When we stop to consider it, the most basic things necessary for life comes to us from ²without, not within. If we do not partake of these physical resources, we die. We usually don't give this much thought until the threat of their absence presents itself.

This is not only true physically but spiritually as well. Without God - and these physical resources which are created, sustained, and provided to us by Him - we cease to ³function as we were designed to. But we are not just physical beings but spiritual also. Why? Because we are created in God's image and He is Spirit.

So we are sustained by God through the material things we must have for life. Without God, these things would not exist, and neither would we.

No amount of resistance to dependence or the desire to be ²independent - "free" - of our physical or spiritual needs (or limits) will change our dependence. We may ignore, resist, or deny it, but to do so ultimately leads to death - physically and spiritually. 

To continue receiving and benefiting from what we must have for life requires acknowledging our ongoing need for and dependence on them and their Source. Otherwise, it will lead to continued separation from the very Source of life and ultimate separation from all created things after this present existence.

Even though we often despise ²dependence, in the above examples dependence is good, not bad, because it helps sustain our lives.

Every day and every breath are gifts. They are not guarantees or rights we can demand or become angry over losing. Without God and all He provides, only death is certain, not life because He alone is the Source of life. 

But humanity by and large ignores or rejects God. Instead we should be grateful for our life and all it offers and seek to use it to honor the Giver of all we have and are. To Him belongs all honor and respect.

__________________________________
Footnotes:

¹Even though eating, drinking, and breathing are activities of dependence, we all love a good meal when hungry, a cold refreshing drink when thirsty, and fresh air when we are suffocating or couped up in a place where the air is stale or unpleasant. We grow to love and appreciate these even more when we have gone through a period when they were not readily available or temporarily unavailable. 

This is why suffering the temporary loss of these gifts gives us a whole new perspective on life and appreciation for these basic needs and the gifts offered to meet them. Who hasn't heard of someone's entire outlook and approach to life forever changed because of a near-death experience from the lack of one or more of these resources? This kind of event causes a major shift in our view of life and the world. 

This is true of hard circumstances as well. Those who have lost their freedom of some kind - e.g. politically, physically, healthwise etc. - (or some other gift of life) appreciate it all the more when they get it back. 

Eating, drinking, and breathing are so much a part of our lives we do not see or treat the use of them as "acts of dependence." But this doesn't make them any less so. It simply indicates how much we take for granted the good things we have. It is only when we do not have them that we fully appreciate their value and the reality of our absolute life-or-death dependence on them.

In fact, isn't this the value of suffering? It humbles us and makes us aware of our true status of being dependent creatures, i.e. it brings our self awareness and understanding of who we are more in line with reality - a "reality check" if you will. 

Reality is good, however, not bad. Living in the "real world" maximizes our flourishing and minimizes harm to us and others. Living in a delusional world eventually leads to permanent loss of the good gifts we enjoy each day but take so much for granted.

Embrace the reality of your dependence. In the long run, your life will flourish more because of this. This, in part, is what the bible means when it says we find life through death. Death to a false sense of independence, leads to life. To truly live we must die first.

No one likes pain or suffering and many use its existence to justify being angry at God, when in truth these are the organic result of rejecting dependence on our Creator and His creation. Pain is designed to bring us back into alignment with our Creator and remind us of our absolute dependence on Him for our very breath. There is actually a very good reason suffering and evil remain in this life. 

It is not the gifts we despise, but our general dependence we dislike. We wish to be free of all "restraints." However, wouldn't we all be better off if we learned to embrace all the ways we are dependent in the same way we do these everyday gifts (breath, air, water, food etc) we usually take for granted, i.e. with gratitude?

It is worth noting that Christ characterized Himself as the bread and water of life. This implies we need far more to experience real life than just what this physical life offers. As believers, these are comforting promises, and we gladly embrace this truth about Christ.

²We are told in scripture that our very breath comes from God. Not only our breath but everything we are and have are gifts from our Creator, regardless of whether we acknowledge this or use them as God intends and designs.

Unfortunately, not acknowledging this ultimatetly leads to the permanent loss of these gifts and all blessings of life. If we reject the Giver of these things, we eventually lose both the Giver and the good gifts He gives. Why would he continue to extend them to us, if we refuse to acknowledge they come from Him?

To continue having and using the gifts without acknowledging the Giver would be living in a delusion or lie. To stay on or abandon this path is our chosing, no one elses.

³When not aligned with our Creator, we not only cease to function well, but we ultimately go into eternity on this same course - i.e. without Him - but also without access to the creation we presently enjoy. For more on this click here.

Broken yet fully loved

We are far more ¹broken than we are willing to admit but also far more loved than we can ever imagine or hope for - or are usually willing to believe.

Why do we struggle to believe that we are both broken and fully loved at the same time?

We fear if someone knew ²all our faults they would reject us and no longer love us. Why? Because admitting to or being seen with all our flaws usually results in rejection. 

We so greatly long to be fully and deeply loved, we fear ³losing it if we ever find it. We believe it's better to never be loved than to powerfully experience love and lose it.

The more we know we are loved - regardless of our flaws - the more we can admit ("own") them - not only to the one who loves us but to ourselves as well. 

Why does love free us? We are no longer concerned that admitting our brokenness will result in rejection. We know we are loved regardless of how broken we are. 

Love is the fuel of growth and change. Why?

Admitting our faults to ourselves and others is vital to our maturing. 

We can't and won't fix something if we don't think it's broken. And we can't admit our brokenness until we know we will not be rejected for it. Once we feel safe to admit our brokenness, we can be more honest with ourselves (and others) about our shortcomings.

We can admit our faults only to the extent we know we are loved despite them.

When we are loved in ⁴this way we desire to bring joy and honor to the only One who loves us this way. We delight in doing all we can to honor them. When this is for God, He in turn feels honored to be in a relationship with us.

For a discussion on loving yourself click here and here.

For a discussion on what it means to be broken click here. 

_____________________________________

¹We are not broken in the sense that we no longer have natural abilities, talents, or resources but in how we use these, i.e. do we use them to self-comfort instead of bringing comfort to others as we were *designed to?

Self-comforting is so common it is considered normal, not broken. We not only embrace it but applaud others who do this as well. "Loving ourselves" has become a cultural mantra in the West when it is actually the primary evidence and expression of brokenness. 

Our need to love ourselves is only because we have rejected God, the very source of love. How? Whenever we look to or go to something other than God for love, we are telling God we can do better at finding and experiencing love on our own than we can from Him, when in fact only God is the source of love, life, and all things. 

*We are in God's image, designed to be like God, which is to be other-focused - i.e. to give, not take. The more we give, the more we are like God, and the more we partake of and experience Him, i.e. experience love flowing to and through us to others.

We justify getting or taking because we think it will make us happy, more complete, and whole. Short-term it may, but the ultimate solution to our need for love is not taking it but receiving it from the Source, which enables us to pass it on to others. 

God is primarily what we need, but we refuse to receive what he offers, i.e. His infinite affections offered to us in and through His Son Jesus.

We reach the highest level of our design - God's likeness - when we give. But not to get but simply for the joy of seeing others receive life through us. And we can only give as God does when we are receiving love from the One who is the ultimate source of love, God himself. 

²This is what makes our family of origin so unique and significant. No one sees our flaws and strengths as much or as well as family. If we come from a loving family, this is where we feel safest... Or "more at home" to use a common expression. If we come from an unloving family, this is why for some thoughts of family are most painful. And also why we may fear letting others see us the way we truly are. 

³This approach believes you can't lose what you never had to begin with.

There is a saying that it is better to have loved and lost than to have never loved at all.

But what if you never love again? All you have is the painful memory of not having something (love) you still need and long for. Is this not the essence of hell itself? I'm not suggesting we avoid love for fear of never experiencing it again. I am saying no human can love us in the way we are designed for, i.e. perfectly and continuously loved, without interruption. Only God is perfect, perpetual, and endless love. 

⁴God alone consistently loves us in this way. He alone is perfect and infinite love.

Does cryptocurrency have value?

Cryptocurrencies are a very hot topic these days, in great part because of many stories we may have heard about early Bitcoin owners becoming multimillionaires. Some are ¹kicking themselves for hearing about Bitcoin but not "getting in on it." Therefore they are looking for the next big crypto coin to "²cash in" on. 

But this is also due to out of control government spending and the instability of the finacial system i.e. our money.

Yet some are trying to tamp down the "hysteria" saying cryptocurrencies are smoke and mirrors and they have no intrinsic value i.e. it's just another "tulip mania" craze (a common example and analogy used).

So which is it? A great opportunity, a hedge against inflation, an alternative to a fake money system, a hyped-up scam, or maybe even a CIA/bankster honey pot?

The argument is often made that since Bitcoin (or other cryptocurrencies) hold no physical assets, they also have no intrinsic value. This assumes only tangible assets have value. 

However, many things have value that are not physical/tangible.

Intellectual property would be a classic example. Why do folks pay consultants? Because they offer information (knowledge) that can help them do business more effectively, efficiently, and easily, thereby enabling their business to become more profitable with the same effort. Is this not valuable? Apparently, some think so since business consultants make a very good living. As the saying goes in business, time is money. Consultants can run upwards of hundreds and in some cases even thousands of dollars an hour e.g. Tony Robbins. Why? They bring value to you or your business, yet no "tangible asset" is involved. Or maybe we should consider the consultant, with their knowledge and expertise, the tangle asset.

A computer app such as Microsoft's Word is nothing more than digital information programmed in such a way that it enables you to write and edit whatever you need to electronically. No more need for Whiteout or endless crumpled papers in the waste basket. This saves time as well as cost of materials.

Microsoft also paid billions of dollars for Skype - a direct messaging platform. Why!? Neither of these are physical/tangible products but ideas applied in the digital arena that offer very significant functional value to the users. 

 

You might even argue a digital program (app) is a tangible asset in the sense that it exists and has valuble benefits when used as designed, like electricity itself. No one would argue electricity doesn't have an effect or value even though it's not tangible/material in the way we normally think. 

The bottom line is anything that allows us to function more efficiently, effectively, securely, and profitability is valuable whether it's a "tangible" - i.e. a physical asset - or not. 

To say it simply, we value anything that saves us time and money. The better it does, the more we value it. 

So here are some questions to consider regarding this digital technology called cryptocurrency. 

Is there value in offering folks a way to do business transactions privately and securely, thereby preventing detection and theft? If there wasn't, we wouldn't have safes or banks (physical/tangible assets) to store our money in, would we? They are called "safes" for a reason. Just because it is a "digital safe" doesn't make it less of a safe storage of value. 

This is also why we don't like to carry around large amounts of cash, and also why there are security features for credit cards. Privacy and security are important - i.e. these features have real value - because they help us keep the hard-earned fruit of our efforts safe. Both of these are an inherent part of cryptocurrency. 

Is it valuable to have a system where everyone is able to see and verify the amount (though not necessarily the parties doing the transaction) so if anyone tries to make a fraudulent transaction (e.g. "write a bad check") it's detected and rejected by the system/technology itself i.e. no need to trust the sender or have a central "overlord" to verify things if the funds can be 100% verified (unlike an overextended credit card or bad check) by the technology itself before you send your goods or provide services? 

Who we are doing business with may be important but often only to determine if we can trust the funds are there and the payment will be good. If there is a foolproof way of knowing the funds are good, who we are doing business with doesn't really matter as far as the validity of the transaction is concerned.

Aren't we finding ourselves increasingly leery of trusting strangers? The fact is you can't do business without trust. In fact, to have any mutually beneficial relationship, both parties must be trusted or we simply won't transact with them. No trust, no business or relationship.

So what if you have a way to pay for goods and services where you didn't have to trust the one offering the funds because the nature of the transfer had features built-in assuring it was exactly the amount you were told and the funds were 100% good i.e. you knew you were getting exactly the amount you asked for or were offered when you were offered it? With cryptocurrency, the technology verifies the availability of the funds and the amount of the transaction. It is built into the coin itself (it is the nature and backbone of blockchain technology) and doesn't require the trust of the party sending it or a central party confirming its validity such as a bank. It simply needs to be sent.

Is it valuable to enable folks to be able to trust that a transaction is legit without having to take our time, energy, and financial resources to do so because we know with absolute certainty the funds are "good" no matter who they are coming from i.e. we know the "check will clear" so to speak, allowing us to utilize the funds quickly which results in being able to use our time elsewhere resulting in greater? Who hasn't lost money, credibility, trust, or customers due to a delayed transfer of funds?

Is it valuable to enable transactions to occur with minimum to no fees (most crypto transactions are strictly peer-to-peer, without using an exchange (exchanges are used to buy and sell, not necessarily transfer funds? Most transaction fees are very low allowing us to do our financial transactions at a much lower cost per transaction than with traditional institutions such as banks? You can do a transfer of literally millions of dollars from one crypto wallet to another often for less than $5 within only a few minutes, sometimes as quick as a couple of minutes. Ever had to wait for days, much less minutes, waiting for "funds to clear" with an ACH transfer or wire? Zelle is great, but you can only send under 2k at a time.  

If you can reduce your cost of a transaction by cutting out the middleman and go directly to the party you are doing business with i.e. peer to peer (because you no longer need the "middle man" due to the inherent built-in verification of the digital transaction) is that valuable? Banks, brokers, and exchanges are merely middlemen who get a piece of the action i.e. money moving from one party to another, and can take days to do so.  If you can move the money directly to the intended party, no middlemen are needed. 

Is it valuable to be able to do a transaction almost instantly with anyone in the world who accepts cryptocurrency? Especially for the one receiving the funds.

What about all the "unbanked" around the world, particularly those in 3rd world countries. Even they have cell phones. As long as you have a "smartphone" you can do all your financial transactions through your wallet installed on your phone. (Wallets are free to install). You can send or receive funds from anyone else, anywhere in the world who has cell service and a wallet on their phone. No bank is necessary because you in effect are the bank sending money to another bank i.e. another phone with a wallet app installed. 

People want privacy, security, protection, ease of use, and the most cost-effective and quickest way of doing transactions. These are all very valuable to all of us. What best provides these things will have the greatest value. True cryptocurrency (not CBDC) does all of these and more. 

If you probe a bit you will find those who scream the loudest about the lack of value of cryptocurrency are those who stand to lose the most, not unlike those who criticized the combustible engine (such as horse-pulled buggy makers) or the internet (the news business and phone companies). No one has newspapers delivered anymore. Magazines are also going by the wayside. Who uses landlines anymore? You can talk to anyone anywhere in the world for a reasonable monthly fee (or a free connection at a Starbucks or the like) through an internet connection. 

Who would be the ones who have the most to lose with cryptocurrencies? Banks, Brokers, Wall Street, and any middleman whose livelihood is tied to traditional financial services. But the biggest losers may be the Central Bank (the Federal Reserve system in the US) and the governments that depend on the collection of revenues through the traditional money system. I don't give tax advice. However, any system that could possibly allow people to bypass taxes poses a real threat to the system and the powers that be. Using government-controlled transactions via fiat currency feeds the beast of the central banking system. If you've ever tried to take food from a hungry dog with a huge appetite (and lots of puppies to feed) you'll get the idea. 

The fact that cryptocurrencies are still relatively new (only around 4% are involved with or use crypto in some way as of this article. However, with a 500% + increase in usage in 2022 (and 27% on average) it is clear that more and more people are finding cryptocurrency has real value, especially on the most remote areas without any banking available at all. 

How many would have liked to have invested in the printing press, the automobile, and the light bulb before their actual value was fully recognized? Can I see a show of hands?

What is fiat currency, and what is its value?

While many express concern over what backs crypto's value, few ask what assets back the US Dollar.

The US dollar is a fiat (money by law or decree) currency, which means it is not required to be backed by any physical commodity or asset, but rather by the faith and confidence of its users (we could legitimately call this a "con" - confidence - game). The value of the US dollar is not pegged to any specific asset or commodity (though it was tied to silver at one time up until 1971).

  

Now it is actually an IOU i.e. a "bill" which is a debt instrument. "We the people" and our labor are the pledged collateral. You could say that by using their "legal tender," we are slaves on a federal plantation. 

The US dollar is widely held and accepted as a means of exchange, store of value, and unit of account among governments, institutions, and individuals around the world, and yet, it is backed by less than nothing... it is a "Federal Reserve Note" - written across the top of every piece of paper "money" - which is not federal and has no reserves but is a "note"

i.e. a debt instrument.  

Once you understand how our current paper money system works and why crypto has actual intrinsic (if not tangible) value, I predict you will be jumping on the crypto train yourself if you aren't already on board.

For a discussion on what exactly is currency click here.

_______________________________

¹I was actually given 1/10 of a bitcoin when it was around a dollar per coin just to open up a virtual wallet. I had forgotten about it until years later when Bitcoin jumped past $60000 a coin. During that time my computer crashed and I lost the password to my wallet. So somewhere in cyberspace is a wallet (with the missing key to open it) worth 1/10 of a bitcoin at whatever the price currently is.

²This mindset of cashing in on a coin is why so many people lose their shirts. That is not a strategy it is more like gambling. But that's a separate topic for another article.

 

³another argument against crypto is it won't work without electricity, which is true but the actual data - "physical bits of information" - remains intact (just like the letters and words on a page) whether you have the power to view or transfer it or not. Once you have electricity you are back in action. Plus no one seriously thinks electricity will go away long term. Even if we had a major EMT event, solar (and other alternatives) could have us back up and running in time. If we ever had a total electricity blackout we'd have far greater issues than not being able to use cryptocurrency. 

We run on electricity - brain signals for example. The point is, electricity is all around us and we will always find a way to harness it without the system being the gatekeeper.

 

Possibly the most significant and maybe least understood feature of all cryptocurrencies is they are limited i.e. there is a fixed number of coins issued and no more. If not, it is not true crypto but only a digital alternative look alike, such as the government-proposed CBDC i.e. central bank digital currency (personally I wouldn't touch their digital currency if my life depended on it. And if you don't look into how to acquire and use true crypto, it may). 

One of the key principles of economics is supply and demand. If there are a set number of coins, as they become more scarce and their value becomes more and more recognized, they are used more and more and the price will go up because demand will go up, so you never have to be concerned over a coin being devalued through the creation of new coins. This is the opposite of our smoke and mirrors paper money (and the proposed CBDC) that can be fractionalized into oblivion. This drives the value down eventually to nothing as more "dollars" are printed. This will also be the case with a centralized and controlled "fed coin" or fed digital currency that is now being floated about. The simple solution is don't use their crap. To say it simply, true cryptocurrencies eliminate inflation (and often do the opposite i.e. go up in value). So-called inflation is actually the devaluation of paper money by increasing the supply - i.e. printing more - so it takes more of it to acquire the same goods and services over time.