Searching for Meaning

In February 2014 famed science advocate Bill Nye debated creation science advocate Ken Ham. They got together for a couple hours and threw point and counterpoint back and forth in an attempt to establish which position is correct. They wanted, each of them, to prove that they possessed the right answer. In some ways it doesn’t matter much what the questions were. They just wanted to be right.

Nye kept pointing to observations about the age of the earth that contradicted Ham’s young-earth theories. Ham repeatedly rebutted with the quotation of scripture. Neither one of them changed their positions and most of the people who viewed the debate came away thinking the same thing as they did when the debate started.

So what’s the point?

David, king of Israel, was a songwriter. He may have even been as prolific as Neil Diamond. David primarily wrote songs that were his prayers. Those songs, along with songs from other people in the history of Israel, were collected into a prayer/song book called the Psalms. Some of the psalms are declarations of the way the world works. Other psalms are pleading questions to God, trying to figure out where it all went wrong. And other psalms are like emerging from a mist to see clearly again.

But all the psalms are concerned with meaning. There’s a difference between meaning and answers. Another way to talk about it is the difference between wisdom and knowledge.

Both knowledge and answers are, usually, static. The answer is or it isn’t. It’s right or it’s wrong. You have knowledge or you don’t. If I ask how far it is from Portland, Oregon to Cork, Ireland there is a specific, unchangeable answer. Once you have that knowledge you have it and you don’t need to figure it out again (yes, I know the movement of the tectonic plates means that the distance is changing all the time, stay with me, I’m trying to make a point here).

Nye tried to use his answers -- observations about nature -- to answer Ham’s questions. Ham tried to use his answers -- an understanding of the bible -- to answer Nye’s questions. Neither one of them made headway because their answers and questions weren’t lined up with each other. The absurdist fiction example of this is from the book A Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy where a computer is constructed to determine the “The Answer to the Ultimate Question of Life, the Universe, and Everything.” Which is, of course, 42. Unfortunately they forgot to ask it the question for which 42 is the answer.

Meaning, on the other hand, is connective. Meaning takes answers and puts them together in a new and creative way. An answer is like a Lego brick, meaning is the castle made from all the bricks you’ve pilfered from myriad Lego sets. My castle has a rocket launcher.

So how do Legos and A Hitchhiker’s Guide connect with David and the Psalms? I’m glad you asked.

David had some rough patches in his life. There was the time when his friend, the king, tried to murder him (there were several of those). There was the time he had to hide among his enemies and pretend to be insane so the king didn’t murder him. There was the time when committed adultery and murdered his friend, and there was the time when his son deposed him as king and publicly humiliated him. There was a lot more that happened, but that’s enough to know that David had some bad stuff happen to him.

The answers to all of the things that happened to David are available. Saul was angry, the Philistines wouldn’t harm an insane person, blah, blah, blah. Those answers didn’t really help David, in the end. They didn’t give him a better path forward. They only helped to describe the past, not move forward into the future.

Answers are helpful and a necessary step in processing through questions, but they aren’t the final step. Answers are limited. Meaning, however, can go beyond the immediate question and look to the future. Meaning doesn’t describe the past, it gives purpose to it.

If you think of David’s most famous song-prayer, the 23rd Psalm, it doesn’t give answers. It doesn’t explain how God will provide, it doesn’t give reasons for trusting God, it doesn’t show how faith is supposed to help in the midst of the worst life has to offer. But it has been one of the most comforting and helpful pieces of literature in history.

Meaning is more than a pile of individual answers. It’s taking those answers and seeing the pattern behind them. It’s using that pattern to move forward.

Discussion:

Did you ever play with Legos growing up (or yesterday)? How do you like to play with them?

Do you think debates are helpful? In what way?

What has helped you to find answers? In general? In the bible?

What has helped you to find meaning? In general? In the bible?

Do you think answers or meaning are more important? Why?

Searching for Answers

Doubting Thomas is a warning figure to most people. He’s the disciple -- other than Judas -- that we shouldn’t emulate. He screwed up. Right?

In the 1980s an Australian doctor named Barry Marshall started to doubt. All his doctor buddies said that ulcers were caused by stress. That was the accepted theory so the treatment of ulcers called for a reduction in stress. Dr. Marshall started to notice a few things that called into question the standard ideas.

He noticed that everyone who had ulcers also had a certain bacterium present in their stomachs. He presented his information to the scientific community and they resoundingly ignored him.

Thomas was out when Jesus came to greet the disciples in the upper room. Maybe he was going to get some Pepto Bismal for all the stressed-out disciples hiding from the Romans, the Jews, and the cold, hard truth of Jesus’ death. When he got back everyone was shouting and talking all at once. They’d seen something -- a ghost maybe -- but Thomas wasn’t convinced. Maybe he went over to check the carbon monoxide detector to make sure the disciples weren’t loopy on fumes. He opened a window and waited.

Dr. Marshall was ignored by the scientific community. In desperation he infected himself with the ulcer causing bacteria, got ulcers, and then cured himself with antibiotics. That was in 1985, but for a decade the scientific community continued to claim that ulcers were caused by stress. In the mid-90s Dr. Marshall started to receive awards and, in 2005, he was given the Nobel Prize for his discovery.

Eight days after Thomas declared to the disciples that he would need some proof of Jesus’ resurrection, he got it. Jesus came in to the upper room and found Thomas. He walked up and offered the proof that Thomas asked for. In return, Thomas worshipped him as God.

Jesus didn’t condemn Thomas, but sought him out. Jesus didn’t tell Thomas that he was a bad person for questioning -- though he did praise those who “have not seen and yet believe.” (John 20:29). Thomas is singled out as the doubter of the crowd, but he’s the only one of the disciples who hadn’t seen Jesus up to that point. He asked for the proof that they already had.

Questions, both emotional and logical, give us a way to search for answers. They are a doorway to understanding. But the journey to answers will look different for each of us. Both Dr. Marshall and Thomas refused to accept the standard answers. They both doubted the establishment and asked questions despite the assurances of their peers that they didn’t need to.

But Thomas and Dr. Marshall used their questions to go in very different directions. Thomas was a confirmed skeptic until he had proof and Dr. Marshall was a confirmed believer in the midst of skeptics. Neither one was wrong in the way they searched for answers. They both took their questions and used them to fuel a search for answers.

Your search might stem from an emotional question: Why do bad things happen to good people? If God really loved me why would he allow this?

Or your search might come from logical questions: If God is omnipotent, then why doesn’t he just forgive everyone? How can the bible be true if it contradicts science?  

The real challenge is to not let questions lie fallow, but to work them and use them to search for answers.

If your questions are emotional, then sit with your emotions. Look at what you feel. Try to figure out why you feel that way. Use tools like journaling, conversations, counseling, meditation, and creativity to express and explore your emotions and the emotional root of your questions.

If your questions are logical, then study, research, learn, and grow. Learn how to process a logical argument. Study the origins of the universe. Dig into theology and philosophy. Look for the logical root of your questions and explore it.

The truth is that most questions have some logic and some emotion in them. You might find yourself bouncing back and forth between the approaches as you look for answers. One thing you will almost definitely discover is that the search for answers only leads to more questions. That’s okay.

Discussion:

Have you had everyone around you tell you that you’re wrong? How did that feel? What did it make you want to do?

Are you more of a skeptic or an optimist? How does that make you feel when you talk with friends and family?

Do you think it’s better to be a skeptic or an optimist? Why?

What has been a good way for you to find answers in the past? Have you found ways that don’t work for you? Why do you think that is?

How do you think the church would be different if people were encouraged to search for answers?

Asking Emotional Questions

Martin Luther was the founder of the Protestant Reformation, a teacher of theology, and a terrified soul. His decision to enter the ministry came out of fear. He was walking along and a thunderstorm erupted around him. He ran for shelter under a tree and cowered as the storm raged around him. In that moment he vowed to become a monk.

Gideon, from the book of Judges (ch.6-8) is found threshing wheat, which wasn’t too strange, but he was doing it in a winepress. The winepress was deep enough to hold all the grapes and allowed Gideon to do his threshing out of sight of the oppressive Midianites. He was terrified that they would come and take the food his family needed to live. When an angel came and talked to him he protested, saying that he was the weakest of a weak family from a weak tribe. By the way, Gideon’s name means: Mighty Warrior.

Luther went to live in a monastery and studied theology hoping to get rid of his fear. But he felt even more afraid all the time. He constantly worried about sin and confessed so much that his superiors got tired of listening to him. No amount of confession or penance could make Luther feel safe or saved.

When the angel spoke to Gideon he deflected, changed the subject and asked questions. He wanted to know why God would allow the Midianites to rule over Israel. He wanted to know why God would talk to someone as small and weak as him. Fear and doubt made him question everything, even to the point where he asked for proof -- not once but three times.

Luther eventually stopped trying to prove himself safe or saved and changed his focus to the saving power of Jesus. Luther’s doubts and fears were the spark that, ultimately, started the Protestant Reformation that swept through Europe in the sixteenth century. His fear changed the world.

Gideon is famous for putting out the fleece. When God told him to go and attack the Midianites Gideon wanted proof. He wanted assurance that God would be with him. So he put out some fleece and asked that it be covered in dew but the ground around it dry. It was. But that wasn’t good enough for Gideon. He asked for more proof. He asked that the next time the fleece be dry and the ground wet. It was.

Both Luther and Gideon lived with fear and doubt. It crippled them, in a way. But it also gave them the strength to ask questions. Gideon started asking why God would use someone like him, why God would abandon his people and if God would do what he promised. Luther asked questions about salvation, forgiveness and the work of Jesus in the lives of believers. Both of them, through their fear, helped countless others.

Fear, doubt, pain, confusion, mourning, loss and all the similar emotions can feel like a bad thing. They can feel overwhelming, and even wrong. I’ve been told, many times, that doubt is wrong. That we should not fear. If God is with us, we don’t have anything to fear, right? That’s what the bible says, right?

Yes and no. The bible does say that we don’t need to fear, but it does not say that it’s wrong to feel afraid. It says we don’t need to doubt, but it doesn’t say that it’s wrong to doubt.

Theologians talk about the kingdom of God as something that is already, but not yet. That is, it’s already a reality: God rules his kingdom, where his will is done on earth as it is in heaven. But it is not yet fully realized: sin, death and pain still exist in this world and prevent the complete realization of God’s kingdom right now.

We live in this in-between time where God has already made it so we don’t need to fear or doubt, but we are not yet at the time when doubt and fear are erased from the world. It’s not wrong to feel. It’s not wrong to feel doubt. And it’s not wrong to feel doubt toward God. Those feelings can spur important questions that can, like Luther and Gideon, help many people to walk through doubt and fear to find God.

Discussion

Do you have a phobia? If so, what is it? How does it affect your life?

Have you felt scared enough to hide? What happened?

Some people think that depression exists, in part, to force us to ask the questions of fear and doubt. Do you think that’s accurate? What has your experience been with feeling depressed?

How would it change your life if you saw fear and doubt as God given tools to help yourself and others?

Logical Questions

Rene Descartes wanted to be a soldier. He joined the military and learned engineering. But one cold night everything changed for him. He shut himself up into a small room with a heater to stay warm. In that room he had visions of (not sugarplums but) math, ethics, and philosophy.

Saul wanted to be a Pharisee. He trained under a famous teacher and respected Pharisee. In his training he learned how to debate, reason, and he likely memorized huge chunks of the Hebrew scriptures. Saul did everything he could to defend the Jewish faith from attack -- mostly from other Jews.

Saul had a vision too, but he was on the road to Damascus instead of in a heated room. Saul’s vision undercut the foundation of everything he was doing. Jesus demanded to know why Saul was persecuting him. The result -- eventually -- was that Saul ran away to the desert and hid.

When Rene Descartes left the military, he started writing about mathematics and geometry, but for him it was all connected to philosophy and philosophy could only be discovered through logic. He decided that the foundation of logic couldn’t be in his senses, since they were fallible, so he relied on his own ability to think.

“I think, therefore I am.”

That simple sentence was the beginning point for Descartes and from there he attempted to reason out everything else in philosophy, religion, physics, and mathematics.

After Saul ran away -- and got the new name of Paul -- he re-emerged into the Jewish-religious life of the first century, but not as a defender of the Jewish faith. At least not in the way the his old friends and teachers wanted him to. Paul started building a case for Jesus being the Messiah. His letters are orderly, logical arguments that leave very little leeway for the Jews to keep denying Jesus.

Logic and logical questions are awkward, cumbersome to some people while to others they are the path to truth. For Paul and Descartes logic offered the best path to understanding God. They both looked at the rationality of the world around them and saw that as the best and truest argument for the existence of God and for his working in the world.

Paul’s letter to the Romans is, perhaps, the most logical in the whole of scripture. He sets out a clear progression of thought that, in the end, leads directly to the need for Jesus to save and redeem us all. It feels like the end-product of his struggle to reconcile Pharisaical training with his vision of Jesus on the road to Damascus. Remember that Paul spent three years trying to figure everything out after his vision but before he started ministry. During that time he had to bring together his understanding of scripture with his vision of Jesus.

For him, the only logical conclusion was that scripture spoke of Jesus. Logical questions led Paul to tear down his whole belief system and rebuild it around Christ. Descartes did the same thing, but used logic to derive principles of math, geometry, and philosophy that are still in use today.

Logic gives us a path to walk and a way to trace and share our conclusions. Without the logic of Descartes spelled out in writing we may not have connected mathematics and geometry and we may have lost out on all sorts of applications, like space travel, 3D printing, and GPS navigation. But because Descartes decided to share all the steps on his logical path, we can follow along behind him and get to the same conclusions.

Paul’s world was realigned the moment Jesus appeared to him in a vision. He didn’t have to work through all the logic; he didn’t have to write it all down. But, he did so that others could follow along behind him. He probably also wanted to see where he’d been and where he was going.

Think of logic and logical questions like a breadcrumb trail. We can use it to help others follow and to help ourselves figure out where we’ve gone. Logic doesn’t give us the sense of adventure to step into the dark forest, but it does help us to make the trip safely and consistently.

Logic has its cousins that aren’t so helpful tough. Rationalization can seem like logic, but its purpose is to justify staying the same rather than explain change. If Paul had decided to reject the vision of Jesus and keep persecuting Christians, he would have had to rationalize quite a bit (he shouldn’t have eaten that burrito before going on a long trip) to justify doing the same thing.

Logical fallacies masquerade as logic, but lead to the wrong conclusions. They are dead-ends on the trail. For example, the slippery slope fallacy assumes that one thing will, inevitably cause another unrelated thing so we shouldn’t let the first thing happen. Or the no-true-Scotsman fallacy which say that no one who is a part of a group has certain characteristics to anyone with those characteristics must not be a part of that group.

Logic is powerful and helpful, but not only way to find answers or to ask questions.  

Discussion:

How did (do) you feel when you’re forced to show your work on math problems in school? Does it help you? Why do you think that is?

How do you feel about logical arguments?

In science?

In math?

In history?

In art?

In religion?

Does reading Romans help you? In what way? If not, why not?

Have you ever been convinced of something by logic? If so, what? If not, why?

Asking Questions

I remember being taught that there are no dumb questions. I took that lesson to heart as an elementary school student. One day, before classes started, several students were waiting by the door, huddled under the awning to avoid the ubiquitous winter rain of Tacoma. I overheard the conversation of a few older students and didn’t understand one of the words they’d used. I asked what it meant. They laughed at me. I think I was in the fourth grade.

We don’t know much about the life of Habakkuk. We think that he lived in Jerusalem during the rise of the Babylonian Empire and that he witnessed chunks of Judea being conquered. There’s also a strong suspicion that Habakkuk was a worship leader, possibly even at the Temple in Jerusalem. We don’t know for sure, but it makes sense in light of what he has to say and how he responds to God.

Despite what we’re told in an official capacity, it appears that there are dumb questions, at least according to the fifth graders who made fun of me. I wasn’t made fun of, but when I got to graduate school I was still the only one asking questions. I would sit in class listening to the professor lecture and be unable to resist asking a question -- either to clarify the point or challenge the conclusion. For some reason I believed that questioning was okay even though the other students avoided it.

As Habakkuk looked at the world around him he had only questions. He saw violence, death, destruction, and injustice and couldn’t help but ask the question: Why? Why would all this be happening? Why would God allow his people to suffer? Why would God use the evil Babylonians? Why?

God answered him.

We get the message loud and clear from our peers, from our bosses, from our teachers, and from our preachers that asking questions is not allowed. It’s as if we hit an age of no-more-questioning beyond which we just need to stop that part of our brain and listen to others who already have everything figured out. Schools are set up that way: take in information and regurgitate it onto a test. Jobs are set up that way: learn your task and do it forever without changing. Peer-groups are set up that way: don’t question what makes something cool or you’ll become uncool. Churches are set up that way: faith is the unquestioning adherence to what someone else has already figured out. There’s no need for you to ask questions anymore. You’re not a toddler. Grow up and get over that childish habit.

Habakkuk had the temerity to ask God why all these bad things were happening. He hadn’t learned his lesson. He hadn’t stopped questioning altogether.

God’s response: You wouldn’t believe me if I told you.

That’s it. That’s what Habakkuk got for his questioning. He heard that he wouldn’t be able to figure it out with his tiny brain. It makes me think of the fifth graders laughing at me because I didn’t know a word. Questioning didn’t work. God’s answer wasn’t one.

So Habakkuk asked again. The nerve. He got a response from God -- which I never have -- and had the nerve to ask again. This time he nearly accuses God. He tells God that the Babylonians are evil and that God’s goodness isn’t compatible with them.

God responds. Again.

This time God tells Habakkuk that he’s right. God still has standards. He still holds people to the commands he’s given. He still demands that people treat each other with dignity and respect. He still abhors abuse. God is still the same God that Habakkuk has been worshipping and leading others to worship.

In the midst of all this God tells Habakkuk: “The righteous will live by faith.” (Hab. 2.4).

The odd thing is that “faith” is often used to descry questioning. I’ve been told that my questioning about God and religion is the opposite of faith. But here is God responding to his servant and telling him to live by faith. You would think that if God thought questions were bad he would have either ignored Habakkuk or rebuked him for questioning. Neither happens.

The end of God’s response is this: “The Lord is in his holy temple; let all the earth be silent before him.” (Hab. 2.20).

That is the summary of God’s answer to Habakkuk’s questions. Not a rebuke, not ignoring him, but the promise of his presence.

Discussion:

If you were guaranteed to get an answer to one question, who would you ask and what would the question be?

Have you asked a question and then learned that it wasn’t okay? How did that feel? How has that affected your desire to ask questions?

Why do you think it’s not okay to ask questions in many environments? How is it helpful to limit questions?

Have you felt like it’s not permitted to ask questions of God? What caused you to feel that way (or to not feel that way)? Do you think your situation is the norm for most people?

If you were guaranteed to get an answer from God, what would you ask?

The Cycle of Learning

Learning doesn't happen all at once. We aren't like Neo in The Matrix able to have information downloaded into our brain so that we can learn Kung Fu in an instant (though that is my deepest and truest desire in life). Instead we have to earn our knowledge.

Moses thought he was living a charmed life. He didn't know much about the slaughter of children and the trip down the river that started his existence. He just knew that he'd grown up in a palace as the son of Pharaoh's daughter. He got that he was Hebrew -- possibly from his appearance -- but not much more than that. So when he saw an Egyptian and a Hebrew he decided to take matters into his own hands. He beat up the Egyptian and killed him. Instead of being celebrated as a hero he was shunned and ended up leaving the country for forty years.

As I'm writing this the world is mourning the loss of Nelson Mandela. He died a hero due to his peaceful work toward change. But he went to prison for acts of sabotage as a part of a militant resistance group opposed to apartheid in South Africa. Over the next twenty-seven years he languished in prison waiting for the end to racial oppression and it appeared that he wouldn't be able to do anything about it.

But were the years that Moses spent in the wilderness and the years that Mandela spent in prison wasted?

Here's where we need to look at the cycle of learning. We go through different steps to acquire knowledge and make it a part of our lives. Alan Mumford says the four steps of learning are Doing, Reflecting, Concluding and Planning.

When you do something you have an experience, it affects you, but you aren't sure exactly how. Your senses are involved. Moses killed the Egyptian. Mandela joined a militant group. Action is often the beginning of learning.

The next step is reflecting on the process. This isn't fun and it can take a long time. In some ways it took decades for Mandela and Moses to reflect on what they'd done. During reflection both emotion and reason work to help us process what happened and what the results were.

You shouldn't really jump to conclusions (even if you have a mat). They are hard-fought prizes that you get from wrestling with your emotions and reason. Mandela concluded that peace was a better way than violence. Moses concluded that trust in God was better than trust in himself. But they didn't make those conclusions easily or quickly.

After coming to a conclusion you can start planning what to do next. Here's where the cycle loops back on itself, because enacting the plan leads to another experience which starts the whole process over again. But without engaging in the process, without working through the cycle of learning there is no growth or change.

It's fun to play the what-if game and think it would be cool to instantly know Kung Fu, but if we don't learn it, if the knowledge is just downloaded into our brains, then we aren't prepared to use it. If I instantly knew Kung Fu, I wouldn't have the understanding of when to use certain moves or how my body would react to them. I wouldn't have the necessary muscles or calluses to keep myself from getting hurt. I wouldn't have the emotional calm to know how to avoid violence. In short I would lose just about any fight, badly.

It's easy enough to look at Moses' story as a series of before and after pictures. He was terrible and killed an Egyptian (before), he went to be a shepherd and talked to a bush (after). But we don't look at the hard-fought, decades-long process of learning that transformed him from a rash, prideful, youth into the leader of a nation. We don't often focus on the transformation that happened within Mandela during his nearly three decades in prison because that's not a fun story to tell.

But that's the true story. It's the story we can follow. It's the story we need to learn, and relearn.

Discussion:

If you could instantly have any knowledge, what would it be?

If other people could instantly have one piece of knowledge that you already possess (and be able to pull it off) which one would make you the most upset? Or to think about it from another perspective, what have you learned that you are most proud of knowing?

Why do you think most people don't focus on the time that Moses spent in the wilderness and Mandela spent in prison?

What helps you move through the cycle of learning? What holds you back in learning?

Why do you think God made it so we have to learn the way we do?

Cognitive Dissonance

Other than the fact that it's kind of an awesome band name, cognitive dissonance is also something we deal with on a regular basis.

But before we get to that we should talk about Peter. Peter was one of Jesus' three main guys. They spent a lot of time together, went on special trips to mountains to meet Jesus' friends, and in general got the most of Jesus' teachings. Peter wasn't afraid to jump in with both feet, even when it was literally jumping into the water and sinking. But he was also the only one besides Jesus to walk on water.

Peter was quick to act, but also quick to react. We get the story about Peter in Acts 10 being invited to the house of Cornelius, a Gentile. The Gentiles -- basically anyone who isn't Jewish -- were considered unclean by the Jews. Worse than that, if the Jews ate a meal or stayed in the house of a Gentile they would become unclean too. So good Jews would avoid both Gentiles and unclean food. Peter was a good Jew.

But he had a dream about unclean food. It looked like a giant sheet and it was filled with all sorts of food. Peter was hungry and there was probably some bacon on that sheet. He heard a voice telling him to eat the bacon. Peter, being a good Jew, said, "NO!" But the voice told him that it wasn't okay for him to call something unclean that God had made clean.

Huh?

At that point some Gentiles came to invite Peter to go and spend time at the house of Cornelius. Peter experienced cognitive dissonance. He had been taught, his whole life, that Gentiles and non-kosher food would make him unclean. Now he had this message that food and people weren't unclean.

Cognitive dissonance is painful. It's difficult to figure out which is right, what you've always known or what you just learned. Having to contradictory beliefs in your mind at the same time is uncomfortable. Our natural inclination is to figure out how to resolve the dissonance and avoid any more pain. Sometimes we'll use numbing techniques to avoid the feelings of discomfort or we might avoid people or situations that make us aware of the dissonance. It's just easier that way.

Peter went up to the town of Antioch, north of Judea, and spent time with the church there. He would eat and worship with the Gentile Christians. Paul came around to say, "Hi." While Paul was there Peter kept doing what he was doing, but then some other people came up from Jerusalem, some Jews that made Peter feel uncomfortable.

So Peter quit hanging out with the Gentiles and only spent time with the Jews. His cognitive dissonance got so painful that he did whatever he could to remove the pain. He avoided his friends and went back on what he had learned because it was uncomfortable.

Now, lest you get all mad at Peter, I'm sure that you've done something similar in the past. I know I have. It's okay as long as we don't keep running away all the time.

In some ways cognitive dissonance is like getting out of the hot tub and into the pool. At first it's really uncomfortable and you want to stop. You want to just go back and get in the hot tub again. It's warm and comfortable over there and your big toe is freezing as you dip it into the pool. But, if you keep going and stick with it you can get used to the pool and then you can have fun playing Marco Polo (which is way less fun in the hot tub).

Peter had gotten up to his shins in the pool when the group from Jerusalem came to town. He got cold and ran back over to the hot tub. Paul jumped out, grabbed him, and threw him into the pool again. After the initial shock he eventually got used to it.

So, you might be thinking that cognitive dissonance is awesome and you should supersize your portion. Probably not. That would be like jumping from a hot tub into the North Atlantic, not only would it be really uncomfortable, but it could also be harmful.

If we look at Peter we see him learning to accept Samaritans from Jesus -- they're half-Jewish -- and then he stays with a Gentile, but only years later. Then, years after that, he has his run-in with Paul in Antioch. It's not until years after that when he starts leading the church in Rome (a place chock full of Gentiles). He didn't go straight from fishing and being called by Jesus to leading the church in Rome. God took him on a journey of change that allowed his cognitive dissonance to resolve over time.

Discussion:
How did you feel when Ben Affleck was announced as the next Batman? Why do you think a lot of people were upset with that choice?

What have you changed your mind about in the past? What was the process like? What is comfortable or uncomfortable?

What have been sources of cognitive dissonance for you? Relationships? Information? Art?

What journey of cognitive dissonance do you think God is taking you on right now?