For the gate is narrow and the way is hard that leads to life, and those who find it are few. (ESV)
But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it. (NIV)

It occurs to me that the “narrow path” may be envisioned as not only a road with forks and corners (as many of us envision the “straight and narrow”) -  but also as a sort of “foot path” – a straight and narrow foot path, making its way surely and carefully along the ridge of a mountain.

In the Badlands, and similar places, on one side of a path you will find a flat place – filled with cacti, sharp growing things, and maybe a few snakes and creepy crawly things.  On the other side is a steep and slippery slope.  If you step off the edge, you do not know how far you will slide.

In Michigan, on a Lake Superior cliff, I found a path.  On one side was a deep and dark woods, complete with poison ivy – a lot of it. On the other side, a steep slide into the pounding waves.

The path is there for a reason.  Somebody wise knew it was safe there.  The One who created the path gave us the Way.  Those who have gone before traveled the path safely.

On the path is safety.  Off the path is danger – and a slippery slope.

In a debate, “slippery slope” can be a logical fallacy (see here for “In Defense of the Slippery Slope“)

It may also be a pattern.

The thing is…life is not a debate and there are slippery slopes that are real.  And have real dangers.

For example…any guess where the likes of Todd Bentley might end up?

From “Howdie’s Theories“:

Some people believe that intelligence is innate. You are either gifted or you aren’t. Smart is a property of who you are. Others believe intelligence is malleable.

The first crowd is scared of tasks that cause hard work because expending effort implies you are dumb. If your intelligence is innate, and you want to be intelligent, then you will tempted to be defensive about the state of your intelligence. Not only will you tend to avoid tasks from which you could learn (because the effort expended might make you look/feel dumb) but you may also handicap yourself from success by purposely not putting forth all of your effort. If you tried and failed, but didn’t really care, then you cannot be faulted for being dumb.

I’ve always thought of it like this:

“Intelligence” is what you have; “smarts” is how you use it.

A person can have a very high IQ, score high in standardized tests, but have so little skill at applying that brain power that he/she ends up being not-very-smart.

on the other hand…

A person can have a very average IQ, hate standardized testing, but have so much “common sense” that she/he grows to be  one of the wisest people around.

It’s not what you’ve got…it’s how you use it.

This being Independence Day…

The British military was the pride of the king.  One of the most feared on earth.  Well trained, well supplied…and up against the colonies.

Admittedly they were far from home…but they were fighting a “home-grown” militia.

The minute-men.

Well-trained and skilled members of the military up against farmers who would grab their hunting rifles in a minutes notice.

The “red-coats”, using time-honored military “intelligence”

The “militia”, using ad-hoc “sneaky” techniques.

It’s not what you’ve got, it’s how you use it.
(This post is set for all comments to be moderated until I return from vacation)

This is sparked by a gender debate, but it became a philosophical question for me all on its own, with its own personal application.

There are three words (alphabetically):

• authority
• desire
• will

Authority simply is the means by which to carry out desire or will (or both).

My question ended up being:  what is the difference between a “will” and a “desire”  (I will put “will” in quotes to distinguish which will I will be writing about:  My “will” will win over my desire for chocolate.)

A desire is that which I want.  Carnal urges.  Feeling of “need” for that which is not a “need”.

“Will” is the resolve to follow a path, whether or not that path is that which I desire.

Within a church body (my own experience), the board has a “will” that decides the direction of a church.  A congregation member (me) also has a will that believes the church should be heading in a different direction.

The board “wills” that this particular church has no need for a singles ministry.  The congregation member’s “will” (a belief that the church should have a singles ministry conflicts with the board’s decision.  Who wins?  After examining self, the congregation members sees that the “will” to have a singles ministry is (in reality) a desire, not a need.  The board’s “will” will carry the day.  And that’s a good thing.

Another…

The same church board “wills” that a variety of speakers come into the church for special events – including Sunday morning service.  The same congregation member (me) “wills” that she be in a church where the speakers are in agreement with denominational beliefs.  After examining the speakers and topics, the congregation member discovers that roughly half of the speakers are anti-Trinitarian, Oneness Pentecostals and Kansas City Revival members.  Decides that this is not a mere “desire”, said congregation member confronts church leaders.  Getting nowhere, brings the matter to a higher authority (denomination leadership).

The first example is a “desire” for a singles ministry, the second is a “resolve” to see Biblical teaching in the church.

Could this have been different?  Sure, it was tempting to push (against the board) for a singles ministry and it would have been easier to cave in on the speaker issue.

Both of these issue illustrate the “will” within a hierarchy (church government)
How to apply this to on a more personal level?

I can apply it to my health journey in two (and opposite) ways.

I have a desire (want) to be more healthy.  The question becomes, do I have the “will” (resolve) to do what I need to do in order to have that desire met?

In the negative…I have a desire for (want) chocolate.  Snickers to be precise.  The question becomes, do I have the “will” to put down the candy bar and eat in a more healthy way?

Both of these  illustrate a struggle within one’s self.

Simply put, my “desire” conflicts with my “will”.  That which I should do, vs. that which I want to do.

A “feeling of I-want-to-have-that” vs. a lasting resolve to make it happen.

Within a couple?

I believe that Scripture gives a pattern of male leadership within the church and home.

Desires?  Each member of the couple should put the desires of the other in front of their own.  Desires are like preferences – a desire for chocolate cake vs. strawberry.  Vanilla cone vs. a twist.  Blue carpet vs. green.

“Will”?  A lasting resolve for the direction?  That (in a complementarian vs. egalitarian world), is stickier.  In a godly marriage, both spouses will study together and the direction of the home will be supplied by Scripture.  There are times when this will conflict.  Baptist vs. Methodist.  Infant baptism vs. not.
Slightly bigger, but not insurmountable…Pentecostal vs. cessation.   Reformed vs. Arminian.

These (although with great understanding) I believe that a wife can safely submit to her husband as the church submits to Christ (with limits:  I would not follow a husband to a One-ness church or to an Exclusive Psalmsidy  church.)

Larger issues:

• A spouse that converts to another religion – I would put this under the second illustration of the church board and me.
• A husband who wishes the wife to fall into sin.  If there is a difference of opinion of “sin”, call the pastor.
• An abusive situation (no matter which spouse and no matter who is being abused).  There is never a reason for abuse and every excuse is a bad one.

Does the husband have the right to “impose” his “will”.

The jury is out.  I tend to think “not” – for the following reasons.

• to have to impose his “will” means the wife is not being submissive in the first place.  If he is not leading into sin, then the wife is in sin.  If he is leading into sin, then the wife has every right to oppose him.
• Either way, the path is not open warfare…it is Matthew 18.  And counselors.
• If the “will” is abuse.  No excuse.  Get out.  Now.  Don’t wait.  Not for a ride, not for the kids to grow up, not for another day.

This will not solve any debate; it’s about definitions…

(This post is not moderated, but the entire blog is set for all comments to be moderated until I am back from vacation.)