52 Sermon Illustrations on Self-Esteem

Rabbi Marc Gafni recalls one of the first bar mitzvahs he ever performed. It was for a boy named Louis. Louis was awkward and sad. His insensitive parents did little to encourage his self-esteem. They implied that he was too dumb to learn the traditional Hebrew passages a boy recites for his bar mitzvah.

Rabbi Gafni was determined to bring out the best in Louis. He spent extra time teaching him the songs and prayers. He discovered that Louis was smart, and had a fantastic singing voice. On the day of his bar mitzvah, Louis performed beautifully. At the end of the ceremony, Rabbi Gafni stood and spoke directly to Louis. He said, “Louis, this morning you met your real self. This is who you are. You are good, graceful, talented, and smart. Whatever people told you yesterday, and Louis, whatever happens tomorrow, promise me one thing. Remember ... this is you. Remember, and don't ever lose it.”

A few years later, Louis wrote to Rabbi Gafni. The boy whose parents predicted that he was too dumb to perform a traditional bar mitzvah was studying for his medical degree at an Ivy League university. He was also engaged to be married. Louis ended his letter by saying, “...I kept my promise -- I always remembered my bar mitzvah morning when you said that this is who I am. For this, I thank you.”

________

Marc Gafni, THE MYSTERY OF LOVE (New York: Atria Books, 2003), pp. 120-121; Source: Illustrations, http://www.cybersaltlists.org

*

[Original illustration at this number was deleted for being obsolete]

MY DECLARATION OF SELF-ESTEEM

The following was written in answer to a 15-year-old girl's question, "How can I prepare myself for a fulfilling life?"

I am me.

In all the world, there is no one else exactly like me. There are people who have some parts like me but no one adds up exactly like me. Therefore, everything that comes out of me is authentically mine because I alone choose it.

I own everything about me - my body, including everything it does; my mind, including all my thoughts and ideas; my eyes, including the images of all they behold; my feelings, whatever they might be - anger, joy, frustration, love, disappointment, excitement; my mouth and all the words that come out of it - polite, sweet and rough, correct or incorrect; my voice, loud and soft; all my actions, whether they be to others or myself.

I own my fantasies, my dreams, my hopes, my fears.

I own all my triumphs and successes, all my failures and mistakes.

Because I own all of me, I can become intimately acquainted with me in all my parts. I can love me and be friendly with me in all my parts. I can then make it possible for all of me to work in my best interests.

I know there are aspects about myself that puzzle me, and other aspects that I do not know. But as long as I am friendly and loving to myself, I can courageously and hopefully look for the solutions to the puzzles and for ways to find out more about me.

However I look and sound, whatever I say and do, and whatever I think and feel at a given moment in time is me. This is authentic and represents where I am at that moment in time.

When I review later how I looked and sounded, what I said and did, and how I thought and felt, some parts may turn out to be unfitting. I can discard that which is unfitting and keep that which proved fitting, and invent something new for that which I discarded.

I can see, hear, feel, think, say and do. I have the tools to survive, to be close to others, to be productive, to make sense and order out of the world of people and things outside of me.

I own me and therefore I can engineer me.

I am me and I am okay.

_______________

By Virginia Satir from Chicken Soup for the Soul, Copyright 1993 by Jack Canfield and Mark Victor Hansen

*

Are you SPECIAL? To anyone besides your mother? I think all of us want to be significant in life. Not that we are better than anyone else, necessarily, but more than just another driver on the freeway, more than a featureless form moving through the checkout line. We want to matter, to be significant. We want others to care about us -- personally and individually. We each want to be loved. When I was a student at Wheaton College one assignment was to attend a meeting of Rev. Jesse Jackson's "Operation P.U.S.H." in downtown Chicago. We watched as everyone chanted with the preacher,

"I! AM! SOMEBODY!!"

Who doesn't want to believe this?

Margery Williams goes to the heart of this human hunger in her classic children's book, "THE VELVETEEN RABBIT." Williams pictures the stuffed toys talking among themselves in an effort to learn the secret of becoming "real."

"What is Real?" asked the Rabbit one day, when they were

lying side by side near the nursery fender, before Nana

came to tidy the room. "Does it mean having things that

buzz inside you and a stickout handle?"

"Real isn't how you are made," said the Skin Horse.

"It's a thing that happens to you. When a child loves

you for a long, long time, not just to play with, but

really loves you, then you become Real."

"It doesn't happen all at once," said the Skin

Horse. "You become. It takes a long time. That's why

it doesn't often happen to people who break easily, or

have sharp edges, or who have to be carefully kept.

Generally, by the time you are Real, most of your hair

has been loved off, and your eyes drop out and you get

loose in the joints and very shabby. But these things

don't matter at all, because once you are Real you can't

be ugly, except to people who don't understand.

(The Velveteen Rabbit; New York: Holt, Rinehart &

Winston, 1983).

That's precisely what is behind most modern activity, behind most of the wild rush of the fast lane: we, too, are desperately trying to become "Real." There is an ache in modern souls to count, to leave a mark on life. The sad thing is, unlike Margery Williams' Skin Horse many people today don't seem to know how to become Real - it is love, deep and genuine love, that makes us Real. God knows that. He made us. That's why the core of the good news for humans has always been, "For God loved the world so much that He gave his only Son so that anyone who believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life" (John 3:16, Living Bible).

God doesn't care how successful or famous you are. As a matter of fact, these things are usually a hindrance. God wants you to acknowledge his claim on you, to accept his love for you. His love is so powerful that nothing - NOTHING - can ever separate us from it (Romans 8:35-38). Only God can make us really Real and he will never disappoint us.

[see #4335 for original article summary]

The question of the true identity of the Christian has been the topic of discussion for some time. Although not directly framed as a question of identity, the issues of self-love, self-esteem, and self-worth all relate in some way to the question, "Who am I?" This question has been posed more sharply in the alternatives, "Am I as a Christian basically a sinner who is forgiven, or a saint who sins?"

The first of these alternatives may be associated with what Warfield favorably termed "miserable-sinner Christianity." He referred to it this way because similar terminology runs through Protestant confessional formulas and catechisms. Luther's Short Catechism, for example, teaches the believer to say, "I, miserable sinner, confess myself before God guilty of all manner of sins." A Lutheran Confession of Sin reads:

I, poor sinful man, confess to God, the Almighty, my Creator and

Redeemer, that I not only have sinned in thoughts, words and deeds,

but also was conceived and born in sin, and so all my nature and

being is deserving of punishment and condemnation before His

righteousness. Therefore I flee to His gratuitous mercy and seek and

beseech His grace. Lord, be merciful to me, miserable sinner.

A similar expression is found in the prayers of the Church of England. After acknowledging sinfulness and declaring that "there is no health in us," the prayer closes with the petition, "But thou, O Lord, have mercy upon us, miserable offenders." One of the most rhetorical expressions of the concept of "miserable-sinner Christianity" is given by the Scottish minister, Alexander Whyte, in his work BUNYAN CHARACTERS.

Our guilt is so great that we dare not think of it... It crushes our

minds with a perfect stupor of horror, when for a moment we try to

imagine a day of judgment when we shall be judged for all the deeds

that we have done in the body. Heart-beat after heart-beat, breath

after breath, hour after hour, day after day, year after year, and

all full of sin; all nothing but sin from our mother's womb to our

grave.3

It would be wrong to take such a statement as necessarily signifying "miserable Christianity" rather than "miserable-sinner Christianity." Many of those who confessed their situation in this way knew how to flee to the grace of God and find the joy of forgiveness. But such statements would also seem to color the self-understanding of believers as to their basic nature.

An example of the alternative understanding of Christian identity as a "saint who sins" is a statement by Neil Anderson in one of his popular books.

Many Christians refer to themselves as sinners saved by grace. But

are you really a sinner? Is that your scriptural identity? Not at

all. God doesn't call you a sinner; He calls you a saint - a holy

one.... Why not identity yourself for who you really are: a saint who

occasionally sins.4

If the word "occasionally" is excluded from Anderson's statement, there is truth in both alternatives of the question. Believers are sinners in that they continue to sin, but Scripture also refers to them as saints. Believers therefore are sinners who by God's grace are forgiven, and they are saints who sin.

Thus in a sense Christians have a kind of double identity. But this does not mean they are schizophrenic or multiple persons. Each believer is one person, one ego or "I." The Apostle Paul wrote, "I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God" (Gal 2:20). There was only one "I" and one Paul throughout this transition. The question of the believer's identity is therefore the question of the identity of that ego or "I." And it would seem that that identity must be related to the actual nature and behavior of that ego. If the nature and activity of the person is primarily sinful, then it is difficult not to see his core identity as a "sinner." On the other hand if the believer's nature and activity is primarily holy, then that person's real identity is that of a "saint."

THE BELIEVER'S POSITIVE IDENTITY

Consideration of the scriptural description of the believer and his activity obviously reveals a mixture of sin and holiness. But when the focus is on the actual description of the person's identity, the picture is decidedly positive. Even in the Old Testament, believers are described as living with a heart of integrity, soundness, and uprightness (e.g., 1 Kings 8:61; 9:4 {1 Kgs 9:4}; Pss. 78:72 {Ps 78:72}; 119:7 {Ps 119:7}). This of course does not mean that they were sinless or unaware of their sin. But they had a heart and life that was fundamentally devoted to God. Turning to the New Testament, Christians are frequently addressed as "saints" (e.g., Acts 9:32; Eph 1:1; Col 1:2). This surely has reference to their status in Christ, but other descriptions reveal that it also denotes something about their nature. Believers in the Lord are "sons" and "children of God" which, along with speaking of position or status, also depicts something of the nature of believers who are now oriented toward righteousness (1 John 2:29-3:2 {1 John 3:2}). Those in Christ are also called "light" (Eph 5:8) and "sons of light" (1 Thess 5:5), which means "they are characterized by light" as a result of the "transformation that takes place when anyone believes."5

The believer is part of the "new creation" (2 Cor 5:17). He has put off the "old man" and put on the "new man" (Col 3:9-10; cf. Rom 6:6). This transition refers to the believer's transference from the old corporate humanity under the headship of Adam to the new humanity with Christ as Head. But it also has reference to a change in the individual. Pointing to the imagery used of putting off and putting on clothing, Lincoln rightly explains that this "change of clothing imagery signifies an exchange of identities, and the concepts of the old and the new persons reinforce this." Since the appellation "new man" also has reference to the individual, the descriptions of it as "created in righteousness and holiness of the truth" (Eph 4:24) and "being renewed - according to the image of the One who created him" (Col 3:10) both have reference to the individual believer. Thus Bruce says, "The new man who is created is the new personality that each believer becomes when he is reborn as a member of the new creation whose source of life is Christ." Putting off the old man and putting on the new are related to the teaching of the believer's death and resurrection with Christ (Rom 6:4-6). In codeath and coresurrection the individual's identity is radically changed. The old "I" dies and the new "I" rises in newness of life (Gal 2:20).

These descriptions of the Christian clearly indicate a positive identity and refer not only to status but also to the nature of the believer. This conclusion is borne out by the fact that the apostolic exhortation to new ethical behavior is made directly on the basis of the believer's new identity. The apostles were not grounding their hope for a new behavior simply on a new position or status, but on a new nature which can produce new actions. True, these actions are due to the life of God in the believer and are called "the fruit of the Spirit." But at the same time they are the product of the believer even as the fruit of the vine is the fruit of the branches (John 15:2-5,16). The exhortations to new ethical life are based on the principle Jesus taught that "good fruit" is borne by "good trees" (Matt 7:17). The nature as well as the identity of the believer is therefore seen as primarily "good."

These descriptions of the believer point in the direction of the root identity of the Christian as "a saint who sins," rather than "a sinner who is saved." But that is not the whole of the matter. Practical experience as well as biblical teaching still relate the believer to sin. Consideration of the identity of the believer therefore cannot avoid discussion of his relationship to sin.

THE BELIEVER'S RELATION TO SIN

Believers Still Sin

It is not difficult to convince most believers from Scripture as well as from experience that sin is still a part of their existence. They sometimes act carnally (1 Cor 3:1-3). The promise of continual cleansing of sin as they walk in the light (1 John 1:7) as well as the present tense used for the confession of sins (1:9 {1 John 1:9}) suggest that sin is continually present with believers. To say "we have no sin," John wrote, is self-deception and impossible for believers (1:8 {1 John 1:8}). Although the personal identity of the believer is in Christ, and thus in the new man which is being transformed into His image, the manner of life of the old man remains a part of the believer's experience. This is why Paul directed believers to put off the practices of the old man (Eph 4:22; Col 3:8-9).

Calvin's statement of what Christians ought to be should convince any believer that he or she has not attained sinlessness. "Since all the capacities of our soul ought to be so filled with the love of God," he said, "it is certain that this precept [to love God with all our heart, soul, and mind] is not fulfilled by those who can either retain in the heart a slight inclination or admit to the mind any thought at all that would lead them away from the love of God into vanity. "There remains in a regenerate man a moldering cinder of evil, from which desires continually leap forth to allure and spur him to commit sin."11

Does this true but rather bleak perspective make the identity of the believer a "sinner" as well as a "saint" so that he or she is actually both? Interestingly, although the New Testament gives extensive evidence that believers sin, it never clearly identifies believers as "sinners." Paul's reference to himself in which he declared, "I am foremost" of sinners is often raised to the contrary (1 Tim 1:15). Guthrie's comment on Paul's assertion is illustrative of a common understanding of Paul's statement and what should be true of all believers. "Paul never got away from the fact that Christian salvation was intended for sinners, and the more he increased his grasp of the magnitude of God's grace, the more he deepened the consciousness of his own naturally sinful state, until he could write of whom I am chief (pro,tos)."12

Despite the use of the present tense by the apostle, several things make it preferable to see his description of himself as "the foremost of sinners" as a reference to his preconversion activity as an opponent of the gospel. First, the reference to himself as "sinner" is in support of the statement that "Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners" (1 Tim 1:15). The reference to "the ungodly and sinners" a few verses earlier {1 Tim 1:9) along with the other New Testament uses of the term "sinners" for those who are outside of salvation13 shows that he was referring to "sinners" whom Christ came to save rather than believers who yet sinned.

Second, Paul's reference to himself as a "sinner" is followed by the statement, "And yet - I found [past tense] mercy" {1 Tim 1:16), clearly pointing to the past occasion of his conversion. Paul was grateful for God's mercy toward him, "the foremost of sinners." A similar present evaluation of himself based on the past is seen when the apostle wrote, "I am [present tense] the least of the apostles, who am not fit to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God" (1 Cor 15:9). Because of his past action, Paul considered himself unworthy of what he presently was by God's grace and mercy, an apostle who was "not in the least inferior to the most eminent apostles" (2 Cor 11:5; cf. 12:11).

Declaring that he was "the foremost of sinners," the apostle also declared that Christ had strengthened him for the ministry, having considered him "faithful" or "trustworthy" for it, to which He had called him (1 Tim 1:2). As Knight concludes, "Paul regards this classification of himself as `foremost of sinners' as still valid (eijmi, present tense); though he is fully forgiven, regarded as faithful, and put into service, he is still the notorious opponent who is so received. Thus the apostle was not applying the appellation "sinner" to himself as a believer, but rather in remembrance of what he was before Christ took hold of him.

James' reference to turning "a sinner" from the error of his ways is also best seen as bringing someone into salvation rather than restoring a genuine believer to repentance (James 5:19-20). Though the erring one is described as one "among you," the resultant outcome of saving the soul of the turned "sinner" from "death," which is most likely spiritual death, suggests that the person was not a Christian. Scripture surely teaches that unbelievers can be "among" the saints (cf. John 2:19).

This is not to say that in the Scriptures believers did not see themselves as sinful. Confrontation with the righteousness and holiness of God frequently brought deep acknowledgment of an individual's own sinful condition. Peter's recognition of himself before the Lord as a "sinful man" is not uncommon among the saints (Luke 5:8; cf. Gen 18:27; Job 42:6; Isa 6:5; Dan 9:4-20). The believer is sinful, but Scripture does not seem to define his identity as a "sinner."

BELIEVERS ARE OPPOSED TO SIN

Instead of being identified as a "sinner," the real person or "I" of the believer is opposed to sin. Before salvation the "I" or the "ego" of the believer, like the "I" of all "sinners," was in radical rebellion against the true God. Now the "I" of the believer is on God's side seeking to mortify the rebellion that is still present in the believer. Several truths combine to teach this new identity of the believer and his change of nature.

First, death and resurrection with Christ severed the believer from sin. The believer's participation in Christ's death and resurrection is a way in which Paul expressed the change that takes place when one becomes a Christian. According to the most extensive explanation of this truth in Romans 6, the primary significance of this transaction is the change of dominions over the believer. Christ's death and resurrection signify (a) death to the old age of sin and its dominion and (b) resurrection to a new sphere ruled by God. These objective realities take place in Christ as the Head of the new humanity much like His actions as the Head of the corporate "new man. But also like the transfer from the "old" to the "new" man, Christ's death and resurrection apply subjectively to the person of the believer who participates with Him.

In Rom 6 Paul is not simply concerned with the two dominions, but

with the decisive transfer of the believer from the one dominion to

the other. The believers were enslaved to sin, but now they stand

under a new master. This change has taken place through dying with

Christ... Dying with Christ means dying to the powers of the old

aeon and entry into a new life under a new power.17

The believers' union with Christ in His death and resurrection transforms them not just legally but also personally. As the person's "I" previously had a nature that willingly chose to serve sin, now he or she is a new "I" who willingly chooses God. Paul's testimony was that having been crucified with Christ, he now lived in such union with Him that his "I" could hardly be separated, not just legally but morally. Paul's "I" was willingly united with Christ, who continually and willingly obeyed the Father's will. As Bonar said, "The cross, then, makes us decided men. It brings both our hearts and our wills to the side of God." Second, the transformation of the believer in the change of dominions over him through dying and rising with Christ is further seen in the biblical concept of having a "new heart." As Jewett explains, "A characteristic of the heart as the center of man is its inherent openness to outside impulses, its directionality, its propensity to give itself to a master and to live towards some desired goal. This characteristic stems from the fact that Christians as finite persons can live only in "radical dependence on otherness."20

Most significantly, as Jewett noted, what the heart takes in becomes its master, stamping the heart with its character. What truly determines the heart and consequently the person is therefore the nature of the desire of the heart. After defining the heart as "our center, our prefunctional root," Kreeft adds, "at this center we decide the meaning of our lives, for our deepest desires constitute ourselves, decide our identity."21

According to Scripture the deepest desire of the believer has been changed. This truth is seen in the apostle's words to the Galatians: "And because you are sons, God has sent forth the Spirit of His Son into our hearts, crying, 'Abba! Father!'" (4:6 {Gal 4:6}). The cry, "Abba! Father!" is typical of a son and represents the believer's most basic relationship with God. This cry is determined by the presence of the Spirit who brings Christ the Son into the center of one's personality to live within his or her heart. "The center of man is thus his heart; the heart's intentionality [or desire] is determined by the power which rules it. In the case of Christian[s], the direction of the heart's intentionality is determined by Christ's Spirit."22

The desire or intentionality of the human heart is in reality its love. As Augustine noted, love is what moves an individual. A person goes where his love moves him. His identity is determined by his love. The identity of the believer is thus a person who basically loves God rather than sin.

The presence of sin in the life of the believer indicates that remnants of the old disordered love of self remain. But those remnants now stand at the periphery of the real core of the person who is redeemed, God-oriented, and thus bent toward righteousness in his nature. "God begins his good work in us, therefore, by arousing love and desire and zeal for righteousness in our hearts; or, to speak more correctly, by bending, forming, and directing, our hearts to righteousness."23

This core of the new person is often not evident in conscious life, but it is nevertheless the dominating aspect of his being. As Delitzsch notes, there is a kind of will of nature that is basically self-consciously unreflected. This deep will of nature precedes the conscious actions of the person. The will of the believer has been changed through regeneration despite the fact that remnants of the old life still remain and continue to express themselves. The action of regeneration is directed not so much to "our occasional will, as to the substance of our will, i.e., to the nature and essence of our spiritual being."24

Thus the regenerate individual in the depth of his heart is changed; he has a nature oriented toward God. Although the person can still sin, this sin is related to a more surface level of his being which can still act contrary to the real person of the heart. But these surface actions do not change the real nature of the heart and thus the person's identity. The relationship of the real core nature of the human heart to its more surface activities is seen in Pedersen's discussion of the "soul" or what is perhaps better termed the heart.

It [the soul] is partly an entirety in itself and partly forms an

entirety with others. What entireties it is merged in, depends upon

the constant interchange of life.

Every time the soul merges into a new entirety, new centres of action

are formed in it; but they are created by temporary situations, only

lie on the surface and quickly disappear. There are other entireties

to which the soul belongs, and which live in it with quite a

different depth and firmness, because they make the very nucleus of

the soul. Thus there may be a difference between the momentary and

the stable points of gravity in the soul. But none of the momentary

centres of action can ever annul or counteract those which lie

deeper.

The deepest-lying contents of the soul are, it is true, always there,

but they do not always make themselves equally felt.25

This understanding of the human heart helps explain the practice of sin in the believer's life as well as the "good" in the life of the unbelieving sinner. The true nature of the person does not always express itself fully in actual life. But the basic identity of the individual is still there, and in the case of the believer it is positive.

Third, this same truth is seen in the positive nature of the ego or "I" of Romans 7:14-25. Paul's description of the "I" in this passage suggests that it refers to someone who has experienced the regenerative grace of God. Also this person is viewed in relation to the law of God apart from the empowerment of the Spirit of God. It could thus have reference to a Christian living according to the flesh in his own strength,26 or more probably to the experience of the pious Jew living under the Mosaic Law viewed from a Christian perspective.27

Of interest in this passage is the description of the "I" which is solidly on God's side. If what is said of this "I" or ego could refer to a pious Jew living under the Old Covenant, how much more would it be fitting for the believer of the New Covenant as part of the new creation through union with Christ. Considering the actions of the "I," all three dimensions normally seen as constituting personhood, that is, thought, emotion, and will, are all oriented toward God and His righteous law. Regarding the element of thought, the apostle wrote in 7:15 {Rom 7:15}, "For that which I am doing, I do not understand," or perhaps better with Cranfield, "I do not acknowledge" or "approve." In other words his thinking was opposed to his action of sin. This is also seen in verse 25 {Rom 7:25}: "I myself with my mind am serving the law of God, but - with my flesh the law of sin."

His emotion is likewise seen to be on God's side in opposition to sin. "I am doing the very thing I hate" (Rom 7:15). As Dunn puts it, "he wholly detests and abhors what he does. If hatred is the opposite of love, then his love is directed toward righteousness. A further expression of emotion is indicated in Rom 7:22: "I joyfully concur with the law of God in the inner man."

Also his will or volition is for God and against sin. "What I want [or `will,' qevlw] to do," Paul wrote, "I do not do... I have the desire [qevlein] to do what is good" (vv. 15,18 {Rom 7}, NIV). The verb qevlein is used seven times in the passage, the last when he described himself as "the one who wishes to do good" (v. 21 {Rom 7:21}).

These descriptions of the personal attributes of the "I" clearly define it as one with a positive nature. But more than this, the apostle went so far as to absolve, as it were, the "I" from sinning: "if I do the very thing I do not wish to do - no longer am I the one doing it, but sin which indwells me" (vv. 16-17 {Rom 7}; cf. the same thought in v. 20 {Rom 7:20}).

Since the same passage clearly shows the "I" as the subject of sinful actions as well as being opposed to sin, the apostle was not trying to evade the personal responsibility of the "I" in sin. But when the "I" is related to sin, it is never described in terms of the functions of personhood. There are no equal statements of thought, emotion, and will on the side of sin. Paul did not say, "I want to do the will of God, but I also want to sin." Nor did he say, "I love the law of God, but I also love sin." Thus the "I" that is positively oriented toward God is the person in the deepest sense of his personhood or identity. He is the "I" of the "inner man" (v. 22 {Rom 7:22}), the "I" that is the subject of the "mind" (v. 25 {Rom 7:25}). The assertion that it is no longer "I" but sin that actually does the sinning is similar to other apparently contradictory statements of the apostle when he was referring to the dominating power that mastered him: "it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the life which I now live - " (Gal 2:20); "I labored even more than all of them, yet not I, but the grace of God with me" (1 Cor 15:10; cf. Matt 10:20). In these statements Paul was not intending to disavow responsibility, but to affirm the existence in himself of a power that exercised a dominating influence on him. The real person of the believer willingly assents to this dominating power, but in the case of sin as in Romans 7 the real "I" opposes it and can thus be set against it. Here the ego or real "I" in the believer is viewed as so opposed to sin that they can be isolated from each other. And the actual committing of sin, instead of being the action of the ego can be regarded as the action of the sin that enslaves the ego contrary to its will. As Delitzsch says, "the Ego is no longer one with sin - it is free from it; sin resides in such a man still, only as a foreign power."30

Romans 7 thus presents the real person of the believer as positive. To be sure, he commits sin both in thought and act but he also does righteousness. Sin and righteousness, however, do not characterize the real person of the believer in the same way. The believer is capable of experiencing a double servitude expressed in the apostle's words, "on the one hand I myself with my mind am serving the law of God, but on the other, with my flesh the law of sin" (v. 25 {Rom 7:25}). But as this statement, along with the entire passage, indicates, the real person of the believer willingly serves God.

The description of the believer in Romans 7 thus fits the same picture of the believer seen in the teaching of his death and resurrection with Christ and his new heart. The Christian has been radically changed in his relationship to sin and righteousness from what he was before salvation. And this change is more than simply positional or judicial consisting in the forgiveness of sin and the imputation of righteousness. It includes a radical change of nature. The Christian is a new person. He has a new heart which is the real identity of the person.

CONCLUSION

The full picture of the believer's relationship to sin and righteousness is obviously beyond the scope of this study. But when the question of his identity is posed - is the Christian a saved sinner or a saint who sins? - the Scriptures seem to point to the latter.

There is truth in the following explanation of so-called "miserable-sinner Christianity" expressed by Luther:

A Christian is at the same time a sinner and a saint; he is at once

bad and good. For in our own person we are in sin, and in our own

name we are sinners. But Christ brings us another name in which

there is forgiveness of sin, so that for His sake our sin is forgiven

and done away. Both then are true. There are sins - and yet there

are no sins... thou standest there for God not in thy name but in

Christ's name; thou dost adorn thyself with grace and righteousness

although in thine own eyes and in thine own person, thou art a

miserable sinner.32

Christians are sinners who are forgiven. But there is more to it than that. They are regenerated persons whose root core has been changed. They are forgiven, but also their heart - the spring of their life and their true identity - is new.

To confess as present-day Anglicans do that "there is no health in us" or that "all my nature and being is deserving of punishment," as also stated in the old German Lutheran confession, is contrary to the biblical picture of the believer.

All the apostles' ethical imperatives are addressed to believers on the premise that their natures are now on God's side and have a new ability to obey God. The very assumption that Christians should grow demonstrates a belief that the positive dominates over the negative in their being. For a Christian to grow, there must be a stronger inclination toward God than toward sin.

Although the terminology "miserable sinner" does not adequately define the true identity of the believer, several truths at the heart of so-called "miserable-sinner Christianity" must be retained even when viewing the believer as a "saint who sins."

First, despite the truth that the believer's heart and thus his or her

identity have been transformed to an orientation toward God and His

righteousness, one's acceptance before God is only on the basis of

Christ's righteousness. One's salvation is complete in Christ's

righteousness alone.

Second, the believer who sins must experience misery over sin. If a persons'

affections have truly been changed so that he or she is now on God's

side, then that one must hate sin and experience a godly sorrow over what

grieves and wounds the One who loves believers deeply. Fisher's

description of sorrow over sin should be the experience of all believers.

When faith hath bathed a man's heart in the blood of Christ, it

is so mollified that it generally dissolves into tears of godly

sorrow; so that if Christ turn and look upon him, O then, with

Peter he goes out and weeps bitterly. And this is true gospel

mourning; this is right evangelical repenting.34

Third, even though God in His grace has created in believers the germ of a

new nature which gives them a new identity, their focus in life must be

not on themselves, but on Christ. Dying and rising with Christ means the

end of self-trust. Therefore, even though they are new persons, their

source of life and growth is not in their own identity but in Christ.

Their focus must be on Him and not on their own new identity. In Him

they are new creatures (2 Cor 5:17).

#4437

*

"Nothing is more fairly distributed than common sense: no one thinks he needs more than he already has."

- Descartes

- _Instant Quotation Dictionary_, p. 63.

[Jewish perspective on self-esteem. -Holwick]

Another Jewish value is that a person must respect oneself. For example, a great Talmudic sage asserted: "Be not wicked in thine own esteem". And a recent scholar amplified this as follows:

BE NOT WICKED IN THINE OWN ESTEEM.

This saying preaches the duty of self-respect. Do not think yourself so abandoned that it is useless for you to make "an appeal for mercy and grace" before God. "Regard not thyself as wholly wicked, since by so doing thou givest up hope of repentance" (Maimonides). Communities, like individuals, are under the obligation not to be wicked in their own esteem. Achad Ha-am wrote: "Nothing is more dangerous for a nation or for an individual than to plead guilty to imaginary sins. Where the sin is real -- by honest endeavour the sinner can purify himself. But when a man has been persuaded to suspect himself unjustly -- what can he do? Our greatest need is emancipation from self-contempt, from this idea that we are really worse than all the world. Otherwise, we may in course of time become in reality what we now imagine ourselves to be."

*

"If there was such a thing as a self waiting to be found, undoubtedly by now someone would have come along and found it. You would expect that out of the hundreds of thousands of young people who take time off to find themselves, one of them would come back and say, "Hey, Doc, I did it. I looked and looked and finally found myself!"

But the reason this doesn't happen is that no such thing as a self is waiting to be found. Rather than waiting to be discovered, the self is waiting to be created. And there is only one way to create a self, an identity, a meaning to one's life, and that is through commitment. Show me somebody with a clear-cut commitment and I'll show you somebody who knows who he is and what life is all about. I have yet to meet a person who has dedicated his life to Jesus Christ without reservation who lacks an identity or a purpose for being. I have yet to meet a person who has said, "For me to live is Christ, to die is gain!" who doesn't have a definite image of who he is. The problem is that most people would rather play the game of self-discovery than make a genuine commitment, for commitment costs everything a person is and has. -- Anthony Campolo, from: A Reasonable Faith

Tony Campolo tells of a friend who had an adorable 4-year-old daughter. If tryouts were held for a modern-day Shirley Temple, this girl would win.

One night there was a terrible thunderstorm. Loud, lots of lightning. Campolo's friend ran upstairs to see if his daughter was frightened. He found her standing on the window sill, spread-eagled against the glass. He shouted, "What are you doing?"

She turned and happily replied, "I think God is trying to take my picture."

Would that we all felt that good about ourselves.

______________

Tony Campolo, "20 Hot Potatoes Christians Are Afraid To Touch," (Dallas: Word Pub. Co., 1988, p. 23)

================

Another version:

A friend of mine has an adorable four-year-old daughter. She is bright, and she is talkative. If tryouts were being held for a modern-day Shirley Temple, I think she would win, hands down.

One night there was a violent thunderstorm. The lightning flashed and the thunder rumbled- it was on of those terrifying storms that forces everyone to stop and tremble a bit. My friend ran upstairs to his daughter's bedroom to see if she was frightened and to assure her that everything would be all right. He got to her room and found her standing on the windowsill, spread-eagled against the glass. When he shouted, "What are you doing?" she turned away from the flashing lightening and happily reported, "I think that God is trying to take my picture."

Why don't most people feel that important -- that good about themselves? Why don't most people like themselves as much as that little girl likes herself? Why are so many people down on themselves, and why do some even hate themselves?

I find that there is not too much correlation between people's circumstances and accomplishments and their self-concepts. I know people who definitely are socially successful, having achieved a significant number of worthwhile things in their lives, and who despise themselves. Contrariwise, I know others who by societal standards have not accomplished much at all, but who think themselves as worthwhile and valuable.

___________

Tony Campolo in John Van Diest, Answers To Life’s Most Perplexing Problems, Multnomah, 1998, p. 166.

*

James Dobson tells of a poll he took with a large group of women. Most were married, in excellent health, and said they were happy. He gave them a list of things that might contribute to depression and asked them to rank them from 1 to 10. They were: absence of romantic love in marriage, in-law conflicts, low self-esteem, problems with children, problems with finances, loneliness, sexual problems in marriage, health

problems, fatigue/time pressures, aging. No. 1 was low self-esteem--it wasn't even close!

Andrew Lloyd Webber’s musical The Phantom of the Opera, which after several years is still one of the toughest tickets on Broadway, is in Washington. The score and the production are marvelous, but above all there is a moving tale told here.

The Phantom is a man who has been terribly deformed by an accident. He calls himself a “loathsome gargoyle,” wears a mask to hide his deformity, and lives in dark, damp subterranean caverns far below the great opera house. Yet he loves beauty, loves music, and loves especially a young soprano named Christine. He becomes her secret benefactor. Eventually he kidnaps her and takes her to his cavernous world below, where they have this poignant exchange:

Phantom: “This face, the infection which poisons our love ... This face, which earned of others fear and loathing ... Pity comes too late, Turn around and face your fate: An eternity of this before your eyes!”

(He removes his mask to reveal painfully distorted features.)

Christine: “This haunted face holds no horror for me now. It’s in your soul that the true distortion lies.”

The image of ourselves that we carry in our souls can get terribly twisted and distorted -- by destructive messages from long ago, by false cultural standards of unredeemed guilt. So we wear masks and live in the shadows. We avoid real connections with others, haunted by the fear that we are too unlovely to deserve their love or acceptance.

But in Christ, that distorted self-image is itself ... a phantom! The real self, the authentic person, is the one God sees, and counts beautiful. His eternal purpose is that we be conformed to the delightful likeness of his Son (Romans 8:29). Not only do our Father’s eyes look past our unloveliness, his grace removes it forever: we are cleansed from the guilt, and washed pure of the sin (Hebrews 10:22). And our fate? An eternity of acceptance before his eyes.

________

Ken Durham; Falls Church, Virginia

WHICH HOUSE DO YOU LIVE IN??

"""

This House??

*"I got two A's," the small boy cried.

His voice was filled with glee.

His father very bluntly asked,

"Why didn't you get three?"

*"Mom. I've got the dishes done!"

The girl called from the door.

Her mother very calmly said,

"And did you sweep the floor?"

*"I've mowed the grass," the small boy said,

"And put the mower away!"

His father asked him, with a shrug.

"Did you clean off the clay?"

*The children in the house next door

Seem happy and content.

The same things happened over there,

But this is how it went:

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Or This House??

*"I got two A's," the small boy cried,

His voice was filled with glee.

His father proudly said, "That's great!

I'm glad you live with me!"

*"Mom I've got the dishes done!

The girl called from the door.

Her mother smiled and softly said.

"Each day I love you more."

*"I've mowed the grass." the small boy said.

"And put the mower away!"

His father answered with much joy.

"You've made me a happy day!"

*Children deserve a little praise

For tasks they're asked to do

If they're to lead a happy life.

So much depends on you.

According to a recent study, young men with high self-esteem shared

some common childhood influences. There were three major

characteristics of their families. (1) The high-esteem group was

clearly more loved and appreciated at home than the low-esteem group.

(2) The high-esteem group came from homes where parents had been

significantly more strict in thier approach to discipline. By

contrast, the parents of the low-esteem group had created insecurity

and dependence through their permissiveness. Their children were more

likely to feel that the rules were not enforced because no one cared

enough to get involved. (3) The homes of the high-esteem group were

also characterized by democracy and openness. Once the boundaries were

established, there was freedom for individual persnalities to grow and

develop. Thus, the overall atmosphere was marked by acceptance and

emotional safety. July 1994, Dr. James Dobson's Focus of the Family Bulletin

THE BEASTS of the forest gave a splendid entertainment at which the

Monkey stood up and danced. Having vastly delighted the assembly, he

sat down amidst universal applause. The Camel, envious of the praises

bestowed on the Monkey and desiring to divert to himself the favor of

the guests, proposed to stand up in his turn and dance for their

amusement. He moved about in so utterly ridiculous a manner that the

Beasts, in a fit of indignation, set upon him with clubs and drove him

out of the assembly.

It is absurd to ape our betters. Indeed, it is better to be yourself

than to pretend someone you are not.

Our friends bought a new horse lately. Her name is Peanut. Now, what kind of horse does that suggest to your imagination? Maybe a cute little Shetland Pony? Nope. Try again. Peanut is the biggest horse in their pasture. If you've ever seen those big Clydesdale horses in commercials, you'll have some idea of the size of this big mama. She's part Belgian, part Morgan. Which means she's so big my body's probably not big enough to ride her. And she's named Peanut! Something is wrong in this picture.

Well, I'm Ron Hutchcraft and I want to have A Word With You today about “Bigger Than You Realize.”

So when it comes to horses, what you're called obviously doesn't always tell how big you really are. And when it comes to people, too. We've all been called a lot of things in our lifetime - some of them not very complimentary. Some of them really damaging, and many of them totally wrong.

The problem is we start to believe we are what other people have called us, what they've said about us. If you've been hurt a lot, abused a lot, put down a lot, you really start to believe that you can't be worth much. Or maybe it isn't what people have called you - it's the way they've treated you. So many of us feel ignored, invisible, abandoned, or betrayed by someone we thought we could trust. We start to buy lies about who we are and what we're worth. The fact is, the people who've talked about you and mistreated you have no idea who you really are. Maybe you don't either.

There's only one person whose evaluation of you really matters - the person who created you in the first place. He really knows you. Now, listen to what God calls you in our word for today from the Word of God in Ephesians 2:10. He says, “We are God's workmanship, created in Christ Jesus to do good works which God prepared in advance for us to do.” Wow! God's workmanship! That's the right name to call you. And nothing you've been through, nothing that's been done to you or by you, can change who you really are. And you don't need to miss who you are or what you're here for any longer!

The sad thing is that we've missed those “good works” that “God prepared in advance for us to do.” We haven't followed the Creator's plans for us. We've made up our own, which has left us separated from the very One who gives us our worth. And that's why it all feels so hollow, so lonely so much of the time. God had every right to let us live and die like this, away from Him by our own sinful choice, but He didn't. He loves us too much. In the Bible's words, “God so loved you that He gave His one and only Son” to die for you, to take all the punishment for all the stuff you've done that broke His heart.

And the day you open up to the “unloseable” love of Jesus Christ is the day you begin to experience how much you're really worth. He thought you were worth dying for. The question is: do you think He's worth living for? Especially since the Bible says He's the One you were made by and made for. (Colossians 1:16) Your personal love relationship with the One who loves you most begins when you tell Him, “Jesus, I resign running my own life. I'm Yours from this day on.”

He made you. You're His workmanship. He paid for you with His life. Isn't it time you finally belong to Him? He's the home your heart's been looking for.

________________

Copyright © Ron Hutchcraft Ministries, Inc., PO Box 400, Harrison, AR 72602. Used by permission. Written by Ron Hutchcraft. "Practical Answers to Real Life Issues"

*

[Original illustration at this number was a duplicate of HolwickID #15297]

The gospel of Jesus Christ needs to point sinners to the intrinsic majesty and glory of God and away from the self-esteem of man, according to John Piper. Piper, pastor of Bethlehem Baptist Church in Minneapolis and a noted author, drew on the title of one of his best-known books, "Let the Nations Be Glad! The Supremacy of God in Missions," unpacking the title's two premises with an exposition of Christ's high priestly prayer in John 17.

Piper addressed a luncheon sponsored by the Arkansas-based group in conjunction with the Southern Baptist Convention's annual meeting in St. Louis.

"The gospel in America is the gospel of self-esteem," Piper said, describing a gospel "that defines love as 'making much of me. If you want to love me, make much of me.' That's the definition of love in America. You feel loved because you are contaminated by this gospel in which you feel loved to the degree that you feel made much of.

"We raise our children that way, we educate them that way, we motivate people in business that way -- get people to feel made much of and they will feel loved."

Defining the gospel merely as forgiveness of sins and avoidance of God's eternal wrath is part of the good news, Piper said, but it fails to account for the genuine ground of a sinner's joy in salvation through Christ -- the glory of God.

A critical error that typifies this faulty gospel is seen most clearly in its unbiblical definition of love, Piper said. In his high priestly prayer, Christ defined love by placing himself as the supreme object of all affections, even those of God the Father.

Instead of seeking satisfaction in loving Christ as the greatest and highest of all beings, much of what passes for the gospel in contemporary Christianity defines loving another person as exalting them so that they feel good, not about God, but themselves, Piper said. It is a man-centeredness that reaps deadly eternal repercussions, he said.

When Christians view love of God as seeking his glory, Piper said individuals, churches and global missions will be radically transformed.

"Do you feel more loved when God makes much of you," Piper asked, "or do you feel more loved when God enables you by the power of his Spirit to enjoy making much of him forever? That's a very damning question in America. Because we have virtually defined love as to make much of our children, to make much of our students, to make much of our spouse, to make much of people so they feel made much of and thus feel loved.

"I believe Jesus is praying [in the high priestly prayer] that there is a totally different essence of what love is from God to us and that is: God loves us to the degree not that he makes much of us, but that he gives us the capacity by regeneration and sanctification to enjoy making much of him forever."

Piper illustrated man's fulfilling his chief end in glorifying God through the illustration of a trip to the Grand Canyon. People do not visit this great wonder of nature to increase their self-esteem, he said, but rather to marvel at something that is infinitely massive and outside themselves.

Similarly, the full-orbed expression of the gospel satisfies people's deepest longings in a way that a man-centered pseudo-gospel cannot.

"Most people don't go the Grand Canyon to enhance their self-esteem because there is an echo of the image of God on our souls that we were made to enjoy making much of God forever, not made to be made much of forever," Piper said.

"We were made to enjoy mirroring the glory of God, and when people go to the Grand Canyon there is something that happens in the human soul standing on the edge of that expanse that draws them out of themselves and in a moment, there is a precious gift of self-forgetfulness in which they swell with wonder.

"That's why they're made and they all need positive echoes of it and they go to big crazy movies and they buy big books to put on their coffee tables with pictures of mountains and rivers because they know that their joy really comes from outside themselves and not by standing in front of a mirror. You were not created to find joy in a mirror no matter what you see there."

Piper called for missionaries, evangelists, church planters and all ministers alike to proclaim this full-orbed biblical gospel, which places love within the context of God's glory. Human beings who are made in the image of God both need and desire this message, he said.

"We must bring together the gladness in the glory of God so that his glory gets its due and we get our love," he said. "The world wants this, but nobody wants to tell them. We just help them to feel made much of and that is deadly."

*

Lawyers for a man accused of taking part in a triple-murder had his defense all ready: They planned to say that twenty-two-year-old Darwin Godoy had a defective personality. He suffers from low self-esteem.

This is just another example of how deeply the self-esteem movement has infiltrated our culture. But according to a prominent psychologist, there's no real evidence that self-esteem, or lack thereof, has any such impact on behavior.

Paul Vitz is the distinguished author of the book Psychology as Religion: The Cult of Self-Worship. Low self-esteem, he says, has been blamed for everything from drug abuse, to teen pregnancy, to murder. Self-esteem programs have deeply infiltrated our schools, where educators believe that if they can just raise the self-esteem of our kids high enough, their problems will go away.

So, teachers tell students (over and over again) how important and special they are. And the curriculum reinforces this sugar-coated message. Students are told to say and write positive things about themselves. The only problem is, it doesn't work.

Self-esteem, Vitz says, is "a complex notion, defined and measured in many different and ambiguous ways." But no matter how you define it, the evidence does not support the idea that high self-esteem, by itself, benefits anything. In fact, psychologists often find that an inferiority complex is a much greater motivator for high achievement.

Gloria Steinem, for example, a high-achieving leader of the feminist movement, freely admits that she suffers from low self-esteem. But self-doubt didn't slow her down any more than it has slowed others who've achieved success.

And then there's the study that compared mathematical skills of children from different countries. As reported in the national media, the kids who ranked the highest -- the Koreans -- scored lowest in self-esteem, while the kids who scored highest in self-esteem -- the Americans -- ranked lowest in math skills. Clearly, all those self-esteem lessons didn't help the American kids add and subtract better.

The fact is, the best ways to raise self-esteem is through genuine accomplishment. That's because, according to Vitz, self-esteem is "primarily an emotional response to what we have done, and to what others have done to us." If you want to feel good about yourself, Vitz writes, then "Do good to others and accomplish something for yourself."

As Christians, we ought to have a high sense of self-worth, because we know God made us in his image, and sent his own Son to die in order to save us.

Worth, or self-respect is one thing, but the self-esteem movement is something altogether different. It promotes self-worship. It teaches that, unless we love ourselves, we will be unhappy. But this assumes, Vitz warns, that God will not love us as we need to be loved. It's a form of "practical atheism" -- and can lead to some sobering consequences. As Samuel Johnson once said, "He that overvalues himself will undervalue others, and he who undervalues others will suppress them."

We need to be wary of the phony praise choruses that come from the self-esteem movement. Remember, our talents and abilities come from God -- and it was Christ himself who taught us, "Blessed are the meek" [Matthew 5:5].

For further reference:

Vitz, Paul. Psychology as Religion: The Cult of Self-Worship. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1994.

“Narcissism is increasing,” concluded W. Keith Campbell, head of the department of psychology at the University of Georgia, “notably in the form of grandiose narcissism and NPD [narcissistic personality disorder].”

Campbell made those observations in a recent article for the British newspaper The Independent, titled “Are we more narcissistic than ever?” He noted that American college students in the 2000s were more likely to be narcissistic than their counterparts in the 1980s.

Narcissism, according to the Oxford English Dictionary, is “an excessive self-admiration; excessive self-love; and exceptional interest in and admiration of yourself.”

Campbell, who along with Jean M. Twenge wrote the book “The Narcissism Epidemic: Living in the Age of Entitlement,” believes there are three types of narcissism.

“Grandiose narcissism is the outgoing, extraverted form,” Campbell wrote in The Independent. It “starts with an inflated image of oneself. The narcissistic individual believes he or she is smarter, better looking and more important than others. And, of course, deserves special treatment for this fact.”

The second form, “vulnerable narcissism,” is “harder to see than grandiose narcissism. Vulnerable narcissists think they are entitled to special treatment ... but actually have low self-esteem and are not typically extraverted,” Campbell observed.

A vulnerable narcissist is likely to be argumentative and is a prime candidate to become an Internet troll who is hyper critical of others. The vulnerable narcissist seeks to display expertise without the risk of criticism or failure, Campbell wrote.

“The third form of narcissism occurs when narcissism is extreme and causes clinically significant problems in a person’s life -- marriages fall apart, friends are lost, a career gets derailed,” Campbell wrote.

“When this occurs narcissism can be diagnosed as a personality disorder, narcissistic personality disorder (also known as NPD),” he wrote. “NPD contains a mix of both grandiose and vulnerable narcissism, but researchers are still debating the ideal grandiose/vulnerable ratio.”

Few would argue with the professor concerning the prevalence of narcissism. Evidence abounds to support his conclusions.

However, the Bible first pointed out the reality that academics refer to as narcissism. Scripture used a much more succinct term to describe man’s adoration of himself: sin.

I believe the Bible goes further than psychologists and psychiatrists in describing man’s propensity for self-love. I believe it depicts men and women as addicted to self. They live for self in every way possible.

While Campbell believes narcissism is on the increase, I believe its rate of incidence has held steady for thousands of years. Indeed, every single person must contend with the siren song of self. Sin infects every person from the moment they are conceived.

But I do believe the unabashed, unashamed display of narcissism is on the rise. One reason for this is that social media has provided more outlets than ever to parade self-absorption. Self-addicted people saturate social media with constant comments, photos and videos about one thing -- themselves.

Another reason for the increased display of narcissism is that people encourage it. Parents used to discipline toddlers for their self-absorption. Now too many view self-centered behavior as cute, video it and share it via Facebook and Twitter.

What is the answer to the rising tide of narcissism in our culture? How can it be stemmed?

Socialization of toddlers can help keep narcissism in check, and we can try to ignore adults who take pride in their self-addiction. But the only remedy, according to the Bible, is the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

People must confess that their sin and selfishness are destructive and offensive to God. They must repent of this addiction to self, seek the forgiveness of the Lord and cry out for deliverance and change.

Jesus died on the cross to set people free from an addiction to self, which academics call narcissism. The Bible calls it sin.

*

[Original illustration at this number was deleted for being obsolete]

"It's remarkable to see how surgery can make a profound difference in someone's life," gushed an excited 23-year-old in an interview with Newsweek magazine. The young lady was reflecting on a medical procedure that had worked wonders in her life. What was the surgical sensation the young lady was so enthused about? Was it a new technique to treat heart malfunction? Perhaps a better way to combat cancer? No, the procedure that so impressed this young woman was nothing new -- it was plastic surgery. She simply had a bump removed from her nose.

Last week Fox News Channel's Greta Van Susteren put plastic surgery back into the limelight after unveiling the effects of a procedure that removed bags from under her eyes. Van Susteren's motivation for going "under the knife" seems to have been competition as much as vanity. Indicating that audiences expect even 47-year-old women to have the countenance of a 25-year-old she said, "I can't get through the day without someone mentioning it. I'm not going to out anyone, but every person on television has had it done."

Plastic surgery, which derives its name from the Greek word plastikos that means to mold or to shape, is nothing new. It traces its roots to around 600 B.C., when Indian surgeon Sushruta recorded his method of reconstructing a patient's nose from the skin of the cheek. In the late 1500's, Italian Gasparo Tagliacozzi -- known as the father of plastic surgery -- pioneered new surgical techniques for treating those injured in the street brawls of Bologna.

Plastic surgery was not widely practiced until World War I when it became an important means of repairing the gnarled faces and bodies of soldiers. Today, what began as a tool for treating disfigurement due to injury has become a multi-billion dollar industry performed mainly on those in good health, without medical necessity.

In the Untied States, plastic surgery is one of the largest and fastest growing medical specialties. Currently, the greatest percentage of those going for certain procedures, such as nose jobs and breast augmentation, are between the ages of nineteen and thirty-four. You read it right, nineteen and thirty-four!

In her book, "Venus Envy", Elizabeth Haiken points out that cosmetic surgery (plastic surgery performed for aesthetic reasons) was once considered a violation of the Hippocratic Oath sworn by all medical professionals, to "do no harm" to their patients. It was a mark of vanity, because perfectibility was understood to lie within the spiritual, not the physical, realm. Wrinkled faces, imperfect noses, thin lips, broad hips, and sagging bodies were realities of this earthly life, to be borne with dignity and honor.

The phrase, "I buffet my body and make it my slave," penned by the Apostle Paul has been reversed. We are now slaves to our bodies, buffeting our souls with every foolish rational for altering our physical selves in order to be more appealing to others and to feel better about ourselves.

Once character and competence were cultivated as the keys to self-esteem and success. Now image enhancement has taken their place. The emphasis is now placed on the package and not its contents.

When the creature is the focus of worship rather than the Creator, the emphasis is on the physical. Unnecessary cosmetic surgery becomes a sort of salvation setting us free from a "body of death". Os Guinness, a philosopher and apologist, said it well, "Worshipers of false gods, prideful mortals: who will give us absolution? Our plastic surgeons."

*

HELSINKI, Finland — Turo Herala is the first to admit that his mission to teach Finns how to get angry and make a scene, or even to feel joy and happiness is, in all likelihood, bound for failure.

Three months ago, Mr. Herala, a theater director with a yen for therapy, took it upon himself to bring “anger venting” classes to Helsinki on the theory that his famously silent and stoic compatriots were about to combust from repressed emotion.

Finland, while infinitely livable and likable, suffers from some of the world's highest rates of suicide, depression and alcoholism. “How to control and express anger safely,” read his classified advertisement in a local newspaper.

He has had few takers. An organization that handles domestic violence called to enlist, as did a smattering of individuals. But it was so odd a notion — tutorials in how to get angry — that Mr. Herala made headlines in the largest daily newspaper here. “Yes, it has been difficult to get people to sign up,” he said over a glass of white wine at a local bar, pleased nonetheless at all the attention. “Anger in Finland is a bigger taboo than sex.”

Psychologists and academics here said they were not surprised that Mr. Herala's advertisement would attract attention as a novelty, and then go largely ignored. “Self-control is very important in Finland,” said Dr. Liisa Keltikangas-Jarvinen, a professor of psychology at the University of Helsinki. “You cannot show anger; it means you can't cope. If a person is very temperamental and alive, expresses emotions like anger and happiness, the person is seen as infantile.”

Even among Nordic peoples, the Finns' stolid nature stands apart.

Ben Furman, a psychiatrist who until recently was the host of a popular, but very serious, television talk show here, was pilloried last year for suggesting that the government should stop paying for psychotherapy sessions. As he prepared to defend himself in interviews, over and over again, Mr. Furman said the one piece of advice he consistently got was “don't get angry, no matter how much you are provoked.”

“People would assume I was guilty if I got angry,” said Mr. Furman, co-director of the Brief Therapy Institute here. “I had to rehearse and behave in a way where no emotion was shown. A normal person would react emotionally to these charges. If I was in Italy, I believe I would receive the opposite advice. You must be guilty because you are not reacting emotionally enough.”

Here, experts say, a car accident brings, not blame and insults, but a polite exchange of information. A bus breakdown causes no complaints; rather, the Finns on the bus will file off and try to push it to the next stop. It is no coincidence that 80 percent of women who give birth here refuse pain-killing epidurals, according to one study. In America, 90 percent of women ask for them.

But Dr. Keltikangas-Jarvinen said suppressing anger in Finland was only one piece of the country's entrenched cultural code.

Here, it is not unusual to walk into a restaurant and spot most people eating dinner in silence, content to chew and not chatter. Silence is a sign of wisdom and good manners, not boredom and half-wittedness.

Some would say this taciturnity has served Finland well, particularly during the cold war, when the Soviet Union was literally a short tank roll away. “For 30 to 40 years there,” Dr. Keltikangas-Jarvinen said, “it was politically very wise to be silent.”

Finns also cringe over compliments. They don't dole them out and they don't take them in. As part of a group therapy exercise, Dr. Furman asked the participants to name one thing they each could do well, he recounted. No reply. Then, he asked the people in the group to give someone else a compliment. They couldn't.

Stumped, he broke them up into groups and asked them to say one nice thing about someone outside the circle. Finally, they did. “We needed to back up a couple of steps, to teach people how to talk positively about one another,” he said.

Ingrained with modesty, Finns are almost physically unable to boast or show off. In an era of unattenuated hype, they cannot self-promote. “It is considered a sin,” Dr. Furman said, with a laugh.

Dr. Keltikangas-Jarvinen said she receives American résumés, and sometimes cannot help but view them suspiciously. To her, they throb with hyperbole. “I feel shame when I read these 'excellent portfolios,'“ she said.

The flip side of this modesty, Dr. Keltikangas-Jarvinen and others say, is that Finns, despite their many advances, particularly in the technological field, seem to suffer from a self-esteem crisis. Theirs is such a consensus-driven, homogenous culture that a free exchange of ideas sometimes proves difficult.

“I mean, the president has something like a 90 percent approval rating — please,” Dr. Furman said. “For our country to keep up with competitiveness, we need to respond differently.”

Mr. Herala, the “anger teacher,” said much would be solved if people could just learn to say what they think and express their emotions, be it “I am angry because,” or “I love you because,” he said.

“We are,” he said, “the Finnish version of the Japanese character.”

*

CNN founder Ted Turner once remarked, “If I only had a little humility, I would be perfect.” In a strange and almost perfectly ironic sense, this statement encapsulates the spirit of our age -- an attitude that gives lip service to humility while celebrating self-promotion. Humility is hardly a hallmark of our age.

From the playing fields of athletics to the trading floors of Wall Street, humility appears to be an accessory few persons believe they can afford. The dominant personalities and cultural icons of our day are most often individuals adept at self-promotion and projection. Sadly, this confusion about the true calling of humility is found even in the church, where humility is too often seen as a gift granted to the few, rather than as the command addressed to all.

C. J. Mahaney seeks to set the record straight in his new book, HUMILITY: TRUE GREATNESS. The leader of Sovereign Grace Ministries -- a group of highly-committed gospel churches -- C. J. served for twenty-seven years as pastor of Covenant Life Church, located in the Maryland suburbs of Washington, D.C. C. J. is a friend from whom I have learned much, and in his newest book he has much to teach us about the nature of true humility.

One of the central problems of our times is the fact that our reflex is to define humility in basically human terms. Thus, humility can dissolve into an endless and pointless process of comparing ourselves with others. C. J. understands that this is just not the right place to start.

Instead, C. J. defines humility as “honestly assessing ourselves in light of God's holiness and our sinfulness.” That sets humility in an entirely new light. “That's the twin reality that all genuine humility is rooted in: God's holiness and our sinfulness,” C. J. explains. “Without an honest awareness of both these realities ... all self-evaluation will be skewed and we'll fail to either understand or practice true humility.”

From the onset, C. J. admits the awkwardness of writing a book about humility. “If I met someone presuming to have something to say about humility, automatically I'd think them unqualified to speak on the subject,” he observes. So, just why did C. J. write this book? “I'm a proud man pursuing humility by the grace of God,” he explains. “I don't write as an authority on humility; I write as a fellow pilgrim walking with you on the path set for us by our humble Savior. I can only address you with confidence in the great and gracious God who has promised to give grace to the humble.”

The eclipse of humility can be traced to our celebration of human pride. “The sad fact is that none of us are immune to the logic-defined, blinding effects of pride,” C. J. instructs. “Though it shows up in different forms and to differing degrees, it affects us all. The real issue here is not IF pride exists in your heart; it's WHERE and HOW pride is being expressed in your life. Scripture shows us that pride is strongly and dangerously rooted in all our lives, far more than most of us care to admit or even think about.”

In making this argument, C. J. is solidly within the Western tradition of theology, perhaps most magisterially represented by Augustine, the greatest of the Church Fathers. According to Scripture, pride is not simply one sin among others. In a very real sense, it is the very root of all sin -- demonstrating the ambition of the human heart to assert the human will over God's will.

C. J. helpfully defines pride as “when sinful human beings aspire to the status and position of God and refuse to acknowledge their dependence upon Him.” Of course, pride did not begin with human beings. C. J. helpfully points to Satan's rebellion as explained in Isaiah 14:13. “Led by the prideful Lucifer,” C. J. explains, “powerful angelic creatures possessing beauty and glory far beyond our comprehension arrogantly desired recognition and status equal to God Himself. In response, God swiftly and severely judged them.”

Thus, pride stands at the very core of sin. As C. J. explains, pride is directed towards one solitary end -- self-glorification. “That's the motive and ultimate purpose of pride -- to rob God of legitimate glory and to pursue self-glorification, contending for supremacy with Him. The proud person seeks to glorify himself and not God, thereby attempting in effect to deprive God of something only He is worthy to receive.”

The knowledge and confession of pride is rare in our times. Most modern persons would be hard pressed to identify with Jonathan Edwards, who once acknowledged his own sin by confessing, “What a foolish, silly, miserable, blind, deceived poor worm am I, when pride works.” To the modern prophets of self-promotion and self-esteem, this looks like a sick-souled individual in need of therapy. To the contrary, Edwards understood the deadly danger of pride and his own inclination to self-deceit.

In our day, C. J.'s assertion that humility makes for true greatness runs against the very maxims by which our culture measures greatness. In essence, this is just one more indication of how deeply pride has infected humanity. In the culture at large, pursuing greatness amounts to a projection of the self. In C. J.'s words, this comes down to individuals who are “motivated by self-interest, self-indulgence, and a false sense of self-sufficiency,” who are pursuing “selfish ambition for the purpose of self-glorification.” This is contrasted with true greatness which is biblically defined as “serving others for the glory of God.”

The awareness of sin is a necessary corrective. “That's why we need to stay close to the doctrine of sin -- because it helps us to see the presence of pride and protects us from those hardening effects,” C. J. explains. “The doctrine of sin was specifically designed for this, and it's sufficiently potent to put pride to death in our lives by the power of the Holy Spirit.”

Of course, sin is a problem we can't solve. The only antidote to the problem of sin is the grace and mercy of God demonstrated in the cross of Jesus Christ. “Our situation couldn't be more serious,” C. J. reminds us. “Prior to our conversion we were sin's prisoners, and even after our conversion we continue to fight the presence of sin, though we're freed from the power and penalty of sin. And if you aren't aware of this danger, you'll never sufficiently appreciate the significance of His death. It's this captivity to sin and continued tendency to sin that necessitates the Savior's death as a RANSOM FOR MANY. That's the price the ransom requires: the life of God's only Son.”

Throughout the book, C. J. offers helpful suggestions about how Christians can seek and find true humility. With wonderful pastoral advice, C. J. suggests that believers should begin and end the day in a spirit of gratitude to God. “I found that it's possible for me to charge into my day motivated by self-sufficiency,” he admits. “But I've also learned that the very act of opening my Bible to read and turning my heart and mind to prayer makes a statement that I need God.” Likewise, the end of the day “offers us a unique opportunity to cultivate humility and weaken pride, as well as to sense God's pleasure. How? By reviewing our day and carefully assigning all glory to God for the grace we've experienced that day.”

Most helpfully, C. J. also points to the necessity of finding humility through participation in the life of the local church. “We're all in need of grace. There's no one you know who doesn't need more of it. And God has so composed His church that when we're together in a larger corporate gathering or in a small group or even in casual conversation, we can both receive grace and communicate grace through the exchange of edifying and appropriate words.” Christians inculcate humility by giving and receiving correction as a demonstration of God's grace.

“Never forget that others see what you do not,” C. J. advises. “Where you're blind to sin their vision is often twenty-twenty. And by God's grace they can impart clarity to help protect you from the hardening effects of sin. Others can exhort you, encourage you, and correct you. They are a gift from God in your battle against sin. And you never grow out of this need. Never.”

One of the most important sections of HUMILITY: TRUE GREATNESS focuses on the need of parents to call out humility in their children. Readers will note that C. J. has dedicated this book to his twelve-year-old son, Chad, in whom he finds obvious delight. At the same time, C. J. understands that the Christian parent's responsibility is not to make their children into objects of pride, but rather to prepare them for the demonstration of true humility. “If humility is to endure in our families and churches, it must be cultivated by parents and pastors and passed on to our families and churches,” C. J. helpfully instructs.

Far too many parents fall into the trap of making their children into projects of self-expression. These children are pampered, pushed, and transformed into objects of their parents' self-projection. C. J. gets right to the heart of the problem: “Do your ambitions for your son or daughter include a certain vocation or a certain level of education? Graduation from a certain college? Professional or athletic or artistic recognition? If so, let me ask this: Are any of these ambitions in line with true greatness as defined in Scripture?”

In this new book, C. J. Mahaney has given his fellow Christians a real gift, even as he has dared to confront the self-delusions of our times. To know C. J. is to know that God has prepared him to write this book and to serve as an example of the very humility he commends. HUMILITY: TRUE GREATNESS is truly a tract for our times.

________

This article was originally published on November 10, 2005.

*

Oprah Winfrey is not only a television entertainer, she is an entire industry, and her massive following has made her one of America’s richest people with a net worth of $1.3 billion. Called “the Queen of Talk,” her secret is the self-esteem philosophy that encourages people simply to believe in themselves and follow their heart.

Earlier this month, in a conversation with Naomi Judd over weight issues on her television program, Winfrey said:

“When you’re really inside yourself -- you don’t need a book, you

don’t need a psalm, you don’t need a song, but you know that you

are worthy because you were born. The moment you get to the

point where you really do feel worthy and, ‘I deserve it, I

deserve all the happiness and abundance that God is willing to

give me,’ it will be over.”[1]

The Bible, on the other hand, says that each and every one of us have sinned against God and that we deserve eternal hell, but through repentance and faith in Jesus Christ (and through nothing else and nothing less) we can receive God’s grace, which is the opposite of what we deserve. Beware of Oprah Winfrey’s self-esteem, “follow your heart” philosophy. The Bible warns: “The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?” (Jeremiah 17:9).

________

1. “Oprah Winfrey Told Naomi Judd Her Life Changed for Better Once She Came to Realization that She Deserved It,” Best Syndication, Oct. 2, 2006.

When Derrydown Public School in North York, Ontario, Canada, announced its annual food drive for needy people, third-grader Stephanie Templeton, 8, paid attention. “I want to help people who are suffering without food,” she said. “We have lots of food and it makes me feel good to give it to people.”

But she was told she brought in too much food. “The teacher said she was showing up the other kids,” said Stephanie’s father, Frank, and sent the girl home with cans of food in her backpack. The teacher, confirms Principal Yvonne Castello, “didn’t want any of the other kids to feel pressured,” but Castello overrode the teacher’s decision and accepted the food, noting that this year’s food drive was the most successful the school has held.

________

Toronto Sun

My local hardware store has a way of putting its customers in their place before they even enter. The sign posted on the door reads: "Shoes required, because you might hurt yourself. Shirts required, because you're not as good-looking as you think."

Specifically among believers, let’s consider for a moment how popular it has become to promote a positive self-image, to affirm personal identity in self and to uplift confidence in one’s own ability.

Whether a mother uplifting her daughter’s self-image or a speaker proclaiming a message to make people “feel better” about themselves, is it biblical to promote high self-esteem for those in the body of Christ?

I’ve wrestled with this question in my early years of the faith. Uplifting and encouraging others always seemed to be a noble task the church should champion. In fact, why would anyone get upset at people promoting self-esteem among other Christians, making them feel good or uplifting them in their abilities?

This, however, is not a matter of what sounds best; rather, we must consider whether promoting high self-esteem lines up with Scripture. As believers, we have the blessed assurance of knowing our faith is firmly grounded in the absolute truths of Scripture (Psalm 1:1-3). In the Word, we find life (Proverbs 4:4), hope (Titus 2:13) and ultimate fulfillment (Psalm 3:2-6) because we find each page saturated with Jesus. Thus, if we are striving to be biblical, let’s hold the phrase “high self-esteem” up to the Bible and ask: Is promoting self-esteem a biblical concept?

Self-esteem can be defined as the subjective self-measure of an individual’s worth and value. According to psychology, when every humanistic need is met, mankind can reach their ultimate fulfillment, or “self-actualization.” Therefore, a self-actualized individual is one who has fulfilled all humanistic needs -- one of those being high self-esteem. Psychology teaches that the good in self can help one attain ultimate satisfaction. At its very core, this is not a biblical concept, but a psychological construct.

Why does this concept of esteeming self pose a problem for believers? Let me use a personal example. I may not remember the specific date the Lord saved me, but I will never forget what happened that day. I was lying on my bedroom floor, mourning the sinful life I was choosing to live. Granted, at the time I was about 8 years old, but the impact of God’s Word resonated so deep that it pierced my callused heart.

God’s Word showed me that I was a foul sinner (Romans 3:23), completely helpless in my current state (Romans 5:6) and fighting to see the destruction of God’s Kingdom (Galatians 5:17). The Spirit brought about my brokenness, and without a miraculous change (2 Corinthians 5:17) from God’s own choosing (John 6:44), my life was destined for destruction and death (2 Thessalonians 1:8). The constant teaching of Scripture depicted me as an individual always in this perpetual state of dependence and brokenness.

One thing is certain: once I understood this, I did not feel very good about myself or my abilities. In fact, none of the believers I know who fully grasp their depravity regard these truths as a boost to their self-esteem.

That is because our confidence, hope and fulfillment are not found in what I discover deep within myself. Even if there were a way to bring the deepest depths of my heart to light, I would only be deceived by the wickedness that comes from within (Jeremiah 17:9). Therefore, that which I choose to esteem should not be myself; rather, I exalt the God who is able to save.

Promotion of the self-esteem psychological construct deviates from Scripture because everything psychology suggests for man’s ultimate need is contrary to God’s Word. While psychology seeks to exalt man, God places believers on a completely opposite trajectory. God is glorified when man takes on a posture of decreasing self (John 3:30). The ultimate goal of seeking to promote high self-esteem is to teach man to depend on man, whereas the ultimate goal of Christianity is show man that, apart from God, he can do nothing (John 15:5). Therefore, may our churches always turn our hearts towards the ultimate fulfillment -- Christ.

But wait a minute....

Are you saying it’s unbiblical to promote confidence within my children, family and friends? How is it unbiblical to uplift their spirits by encouraging them?

Let’s be on the same page when it comes to defining the word “confidence.” According to Scripture, we are to “put no confidence in the flesh,” but only “boast in Christ Jesus” (Philippians 3:3). It’s true that we, as believers, are called to pursue mutual uplifting (Romans 14:19), encouraging one another (1 Thessalonians 5:11) and stirring our brothers/sisters toward love and good deeds (Hebrews 10:24). However, notice that we are to pursue these godly acts in order to point believers back toward the greatest fulfillment, which can only be found in Christ.

It is not unbiblical to uplift, encourage and instill confidence within fellow believers that will stir their affections toward Christ. It is contrary to Scripture when we turn those affections to our own abilities. Confidence and encouragement should always be found through the weakness of self, which points us to our hope of being eternally satisfied in Jesus Christ alone.

WHICH HOUSE DO YOU LIVE IN??

"""

This House??

*"I got two A's," the small boy cried.

His voice was filled with glee.

His father very bluntly asked,

"Why didn't you get three?"

*"Mom. I've got the dishes done!"

The girl called from the door.

Her mother very calmly said,

"And did you sweep the floor?"

*"I've mowed the grass," the small boy said,

"And put the mower away!"

His father asked him, with a shrug.

"Did you clean off the clay?"

*The children in the house next door

Seem happy and content.

The same things happened over there,

But this is how it went:

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Or This House??

*"I got two A's," the small boy cried,

His voice was filled with glee.

His father proudly said, "That's great!

I'm glad you live with me!"

*"Mom I've got the dishes done!

The girl called from the door.

Her mother smiled and softly said.

"Each day I love you more."

*"I've mowed the grass." the small boy said.

"And put the mower away!"

His father answered with much joy.

"You've made me a happy day!"

*Children deserve a little praise

For tasks they're asked to do

If they're to lead a happy life.

So much depends on you.