We'll likely give good reasons for it. "I want my husband to be a better husband." "I want my kids to be the best they can be." "I want my wife to be a great wife." It will sound right. It will sound noble. It will sound great.
Keep telling yourself that. The truth is that it's close, likely, but too often it's not nearly as noble. The truth is slightly different. "I am not happy with my spouse and want them to change so I can be happier." "My kids cause me stress and I don't want to be stressed." So while we sound grand and tell ourselves it's for them, the truth is something different ... something selfish.
Check your motives. It likely would be good if your wife was the best wife she could be, if your husband set aside his bad habits, if your children were better children, if your coworkers were nicer people. But until you are able to approach them with their best interests at heart (rather than your own), perhaps you ought to stay out of it. Perhaps. You know ... "log in your own eye" kind of thing.
7 comments:
You missed the end of the 'beam' verse:
Luk 6:42 Either how canst thou say to thy brother, Brother, let me pull out the mote that is in thine eye, when thou thyself beholdest not the beam that is in thine own eye? Thou hypocrite, cast out first the beam out of thine own eye, and then shalt thou see clearly to pull out the mote that is in thy brother's eye.
At the end of getting the beam out of your eye, you can see clearly to pull out the mote that is in thy brother's eye.
Unless I misread you, you seem to be denying the active work of sanctification that each of us is supposed to be doing toward the other.
Yes, absolutely, I deny that anyone should be sanctifying anyone ...
Of course, if that's what you think I was saying, then why would I be suggesting that people do something different than what they are doing??? Aren't I participating in the active work of sanctification of others when I suggest they change?
I am telling people to check their motives. I am not telling them not to "turn a brother from sin". I'm warning about the fact that most people try to "turn a brother from sin" for selfish reasons, not out of love. Wait ... that's what I said: "... until you are able to approach them with their best interests at heart ..." That is, "Once you get the log out of your own eye, then you can participate in ..." well, what you said.
Hmmm. I missed that bit, true, but I still disagree.
An accident, a drowning child, three men:
The first jumps in because people are watching and saves the child.
The second jumps in because the child is drowning and saves the child.
The third realizes that he is motivated by vainglory and chooses not to jump in until he gets his motives straight.
The first is a hero (with a problem with pride).
The second is a hero.
The third is a coward and no man.
Three fathers:
One trains his son in obedience because he likes the way it makes his house, and makes him look good.
The second trains his son in obedience because that is what God commands.
The third neglects the training of his son.
The first two are fathers, the last treats his son like a bastard.
If I am going to help you with a sin of pride, then I had best get my own pride under control (with the Lords help) before my help will be helpful. But sanctifying my wife and children is a positive command, and may not wait on me getting perfect in any are before I act.... or I walk in disobedience and am no husband or father.
Okay, I thought the suggestion that I denied our job of sanctification of others was a bit over the top, so I don't want to do the same thing here to you. I am saying, "You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother's eye" (Matt. 7:5). I am saying, "Check your own motives." It appears you are saying, "Ignore any logs, don't worry about motivations, and just do it." Now ... what am I missing?
1) You will notice that I gave the caveat 'unless I misread'... which I did.
2) I am saying several things, perhaps too many :)
a) I am saying that 'the beam' is not necessarily referring to 'motivation' but to actually engaging in the sin concerned. So someone involved in Adultery had best cease before counseling others on their watching R rated movies etc.
b) 'check your motives' is great... if you still do the right action. Your sentence of: "But until you are able to approach them with their best interests at heart (rather than your own), perhaps you ought to stay out of it." sounds like you were saying to not do the right thing 'until' you get the right motives. Whereas stopping a sin is (in theory) something that can be stopped at will, a 'motivation' is more like a feeling, much more tricky. So it sounded like you were saying that 'until' (weeks later) I finally get my motivation 'right' I shouldn't lead my family.
c) I don't believe that this verse applies at all to relationships where we have mandatory leadership: such as husband and father, at least in the negative sense. We need to do our best job leading our family against laziness... even if we are lazy. IE struggle simultaneously. It is not 'more right' to not lead (because our motivation is wrong) than it is to lead with wrong motivation... indeed it is more wrong.
I probably need to right an entire post to clarify.
A couple of necessary clarifications.
1. The point I was trying to make is that we can do things -- sometimes the right things -- for the wrong reasons. Check your motivations. Do you disagree?
2. I said, "perhaps". "... perhaps you ought to stay out of it."
3. You seem to think that changing your motives is a lifelong effort. I'm thinking, "Change it now." It may need to be repeated ... over and over ... but it (recognition and repentance) doesn't require a lengthy process.
1) I quite agree.
2) Ok
3) Hmmm. Think we are defining 'motivation' slightly differently. I will have to think about how you are defining it.
Von
Post a Comment