It is crucial for you to know that excellence is not the same as extremism. Just because God expects you to be excellent, He doesn't expect you to be an extremist. Setting high standard for yourself is good but demanding perfectionism is being extremist. Perfectionism is different from excellence. Perfectionism does not allow for mistake. Each time, it is not good enough and you blame yourself for not getting it right. Being an extremist can lead to depression, being suicidal and low self-esteem. This is not excellence.
Source: "Thinking With Excellence - Part 8: HOW DO WE APPLY IT?" by David Seragih. Sermon Alive. May 14, 2008.
David's site is on our Blogroll. I'm a member of his community of readers on MyBlogLog. I receive regular emails from him letting me know when he's posted a new series. He writes in series, which is fine.
Now, I like David's efforts. He works hard in trying to open the scripture for others and for himself. He lives in Indonesia, from my understanding, the most heavily populated Muslim nation in the world. However, he openly professes that he is a practicing Christian. [Correction: He lives in Singapore but visits Indonesia to do volunteer work.]
David focuses a great deal upon Christian principles in the capitalist workplace. (Let me add that David is aware and has written as such that money isn't needed in Heaven. So let us pray, "in Earth as it is in Heaven!)
Concerning the snippet above from one of his posts, I'd like to take the opportunity to point out how terms as they are used today must be qualified to fit them with terms as Jesus used them.
I'd like to address the following terms from a plain and clear scriptural standpoint: Excellence, extremism or extremist, perfectionism, and self-esteem.
Let's read Jesus's own words.
Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect. Matthew 5:48
Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me. Matthew 19:21
He that loveth his life shall lose it; and he that hateth his life in this world shall keep it unto life eternal. John 12:25
Okay, so we know that Jesus said to be perfect. He also said how to do it.
Jesus said be perfect. Perfection is the extreme. It is excellent: The highest, the finest: God Most High, God in the highest.
Obviously David is using the terms more as they have come to be used today. I say to you that how the terms have only come to be used today if we adhere to them, will cause us to fall short. We will not be moved to give all and share all with all for all in the fullest spirit of righteousness. We will rather hoard for self, which is error. It is selfishness that is inherent in capitalism, commerce, business, and love of mammon.
As for low self-esteem, we are to hate ourselves in the worldly world. However, we are to persevere. At the same time we are to hate ourselves, we are to love others as we love ourselves. This presents a paradox to most, but it need not. It is why we have the term love/hate. We say such and such is a love/hate relationship. This is proper. We hate evil and we love goodness. We seek to overcome evil and to have it removed from our hearts while we love the goodness that is already there displacing that evil. We also hold the same concerning all other souls.
The way in which "low self-esteem" is commonly being used comes out from antichrist psychology. Not all that passes off as psychology is antichrist mind you. Psychology's true meaning is the study of the soul after all. Jesus was a psychologist in that sense of course.
Many (and it's obvious that David isn't calling for this) use the existence of "low self-esteem" as proof of the wrongness of whatever it is that is giving rise to a guilty conscience. Many psychologists and psychiatrists (certainly not all) use this method to promote via their so-called expert opinions, supposedly proven by or backed up by scientific studies (often bad methodology and especially bad interpretation — lack of greater comprehension), that all sorts of harmful behaviors, such as homosexuality, aren't harmful but even beneficial to the self-esteem of the one acting out.
It's obfuscation. Homosexuality is harmful, always. "Homosexuals: What they ignore."
Therefore, low self-esteem is the exact right emotional state if one has been doing exactly what the conscience convicts them not to do.
So, what is one to do then? Well, pray, ask for God's guidance, repent. Forgive others for their trespasses, as we want to be forgiven for our own. Atone. Spread the good news about right versus wrong, unselfishness versus selfishness, giving versus greed, and peace versus violence and war. Spread the good news about turning, repenting, forgiving and being forgiven, atoning, and saving and being saved.
It's not depressing at all in that light. It's glorious. It's beautiful. Be encouraged. Be enthusiastic about it. It's Heaven bound.
If you finish reading David's series, you will see that much of what I've said here ends up fitting.
The following should appear at the end of every post:
According to the IRS, "Know the law: Avoid political campaign intervention":
Tax-exempt section 501(c)(3) organizations like churches, universities, and hospitals must follow the law regarding political campaigns. Unfortunately, some don't know the law.
Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from participating in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. The prohibition applies to campaigns at the federal, state and local level.
Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes. Section 501(c)(3) private foundations are subject to additional restrictions.
Political Campaign Intervention
Political campaign intervention includes any activities that favor or oppose one or more candidates for public office. The prohibition extends beyond candidate endorsements.
Contributions to political campaign funds, public statements of support or opposition (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of an organization, and the distribution of materials prepared by others that support or oppose any candidate for public office all violate the prohibition on political campaign intervention.
Factors in determining whether a communication results in political campaign intervention include the following:
- Whether the statement identifies one or more candidates for a given public office
- Whether the statement expresses approval or disapproval of one or more candidates' positions and/or actions
- Whether the statement is delivered close in time to the election
- Whether the statement makes reference to voting or an election
- Whether the issue addressed distinguishes candidates for a given office
Many religious organizations believe, as we do, that the above constitutes a violation of the First Amendment of the US Constitution.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
That said, we make the following absolutely clear here:
- The Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project not only do not endorse any candidate for any secular office, we say that Christianity forbids voting in such elections.
- Furthermore, when we discuss any public-office holder's position, policy, action or inaction, we definitely are not encouraging anyone to vote for that office holder's position.
- We are not trying to influence secular elections but rather want people to come out from that entire fallen system.
- When we analyze or discuss what is termed "public policy," we do it entirely from a theological standpoint with an eye to educating professing Christians and those to whom we are openly always proselytizing to convert to authentic Christianity.
- It is impossible for us to fully evangelize and proselytize without directly discussing the pros and cons of public policy and the positions of secular-office holders, hence the unconstitutionality of the IRS code on the matter.
- We are not rich and wouldn't be looking for a fight regardless. What we cannot do is compromise our faith (which seeks to harm nobody, quite the contrary).
- We render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. We render unto God what is God's.
- When Caesar says to us that unless we shut up about the unrighteousness of Caesar's policies and practices, we will lose the ability of people who donate to us to declare their donations as deductions on their federal and state income-tax returns, we say to Caesar that we cannot shut up while exercising our religion in a very reasonable way.
- We consider the IRS code on this matter as deliberate economic duress (a form of coercion) and a direct attempt by the federal government to censor dissenting, free political and religious speech.
- It's not freedom of religion if they tax it.
And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. (Matthew 17:24-26)