Do bullies have more fun?

"Bullies may get a kick out of seeing others in pain." So says a story in today's news, about a new study by researchers at the University of Chicago, who are basing their finding on brain scans of teens with a history of abusive behavior, recorded as these "bullies" watched videos of people being mistreated.

As a one-time target of bullies in my neighborhood, I could have saved the U. of Chicago some research dollars if they had asked me about such things. I didn't need a brain scan of my tormentors to know they were enjoying their pranks and assaults, as there was evidence enough on their faces and in their voices. And it's nothing new, as Solomon attested to such wicked pleasures when he referred to people, "Who delight in doing evil, and rejoice in the perversity of evil." (Proverbs 2:14)

The researchers said they were "surprised" by these findings, as they had assumed that bullying was a cold, unemotional pathology, not one likely to light up the brain on a scan. But that's what they get for confusing enjoyment with outward displays of emotion. I also could have helped them on that point as well, as I remember my own days of spiritual darkness (too well at times) when I practiced my personal sins with a delight that didn't always find expression in outward displays of feeling.

But there's still the chicken-and-egg question: Does bad behavior follow the tendencies of the brain or does the brain change to reflect bad behavior and the attitude behind it? Again, the Bible could help the researchers find that answer, by such statements on human actions as, "As a man thinks within himself, so he is." Proverbs 23:7

As unsettling as the truth may be to human pride and self-esteem, the Bible indicates in many ways that mankind, apart from the renewing influences of God's truth, has a capacity for evil that can't be blamed on the physical structures of the brain, nor on the environmental structures of human society. The sinful nature, so universal that Paul could rightly say, "All have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God." (Romans 3:23), is all the explanation we need to shed light on the behavior of bullies and every other kind of bad behavior.

What's to be done? The only change for a bully, and for every sinner, is a change of heart, a new man of the spirit made possible by a rebirth in the Spirit of Jesus. Again Paul puts it so well, when he said, "Thanks be to God that though you were slaves of sin, you became obedient from the heart to that form of teaching to which you were committed, and having been freed from sin, you became slaves of righteousness." (Romans 6:17)

A real change, or a different kind of same?

The new president, Barack Obama, was swept into power, some say, on little more than a promise to make changes in the status quo of government and society. Whether he can actually govern in a way to bring such change is now the challenge he must face and demonstrate to both his followers and his critics. Either way, his supporters will likely feel it's better than where we've been. His critics, meanwhile, will watch to see if his promises were more than political passion and eloquence.

But just how much real change can there be in a governmental system like ours? Some have been tossing out the "S" word (Socialism) to describe how they see the proposed changes in the tax code, as if to say that would be too much change for their tastes. And a new movement of civil benefits legislation wouldn't exactly be a change from previous administrations dating back to Roosevelt and several others. President Obama would have a hard time keeping up with the flurry of welfare bills sped through Congress by LBJ, at least until Vietnam consumed his attention.

Whether Democrat or Republican, the stated purposes of elected officials has been to bring benefit to the American people, to improve their daily lives and spread the rights of our Constitution to as many as possible. As to how that may best be done, there's the difference between them. And it always seems that each side accuses the other of being wrong-headed in their respective methods. But is either method a real change, or just a different kind of same?

A real change would be to alter the landscape of human endeavor altogether, to one centered on God's plan for humanity, instead of one focused on material and social goals entirely of this world's making. As long as mankind's objectives are aimed at a more satisfying life for men, there will be endless arguments about just what that means and how to get there. But if we were to take our cue from our Creator and Savior, Jesus Christ, we would realize there's a lot more to life than living.

There will be a new man in the White House come next January 20th, but, I'm grateful to remember, there will be still be the same God on the throne of the universe. And someday, when God has decided to bring that "new heaven and new earth" He's promised to those who trust and obey Him, now that will be a change we can believe in!

How would Jesus spend?

I've seen a lot of home remodeling and add-on projects over the years, especially in established neighborhoods. I guess the thinking there is: better to add a room than start over again with even more expense in a whole new house. But our economy would be in even worse shape today if everybody did it that way. Most of our current crisis seems to be connected, at least in the beginning, to the housing market. People aren't buying new homes fast enough; people wanted more of a new house than they could afford, and have now defaulted on the loan. People's home values have slumped to the point that they owe more than they could sell it for and buy a new one.

But our economy is more than housing, and yet the same principle applies: if enough people keep what they have and don't keep buying new things, there's going to be a slowdown in businesses that survive on new products, not fixing old ones. Sure, there's a portion of the economy that survives on the fix-it projects, but in a slowing economy there's a lot less money to spend on fixing and enlarging and remodeling.

And all this is part of a larger principle of our economy: growth doesn't happen by keeping what we have. If we aren't spending, we're ultimately losing. The holiday season will be upon us again, and, as usual, many people's livlihood will depend on consumers doing what they do best: consuming! There just aren't enough companies that depend on people saving their money or living the "simple life" to keep the ship afloat. And if John Q. Public isn't borrowing money to keep up his lifestyle, many financial businesses that survive on a credit economy will close their doors.

If the question might be posed, "What is an ideal economic principle for living?", you'd have to include the words of the apostle Paul to Timothy. His general principle was, "If we have food and covering, with these we shall be content. (1 Timothy 6:8) He knew that some were better off than others, but he warned in the next verse about the hazards of an uncontrolled profit motive, with his famous words, "Those who want to get rich fall into temptation and a snare and many foolish and harmful desires which plunge men into ruin and destruction." (1 Timothy 6:9) Riches aren't the problem, but rather the "want to" motive that makes us discontent with staying the same.

A nation's economy must continually grow, if only because there must be new jobs to those new to the job market. New homes must be built to accomodate those new to adulthood and home ownership. But we didn't get into this current crisis by companies and people content to grow "a little at at time." Whole industries have come into existence that urge us to continually upgrade and expand and thrust the profit line quickly and continually upward. Contentment, whether with houses or general lifestyles, seems to be, in economic terms, "bad business." Maybe that's why we're seeing a lot of "ruin and destruction" that spreads even to those more content.

But HOW did it happen?

Atheistic evolutionists seem to me like someone who finds an old Model T buried in the ground, and then proclaims, "Aha, now we know that modern Fords have evolved from this ancient fossil!" Of course, that's not only ridiculous, it's something no evolutionist would say, because we have enough historical documentation, not to mention understanding of the science of automaking, to know that someone made that Model T and every other car since then.

Yet evolutionists point to all kinds of other fossils buried in rocks and other previously hidden places, and say "See, there's a primitive form of a whatchamacallit that proves life has evolved from simple life forms to the present world. And it just happened by chance and time!"

OK, so they found a buried fossil; but HOW did a fossil bacteria become a fossil dinosaur or a fossil fern? And how did the amino acids, famously touted by evolutionists as a building block of life, turn slowly but surely into complex cells, full of DNA and lots of other very complicated things that all must work perfectly for life to function?

So they found a fossil skull that looks sort of human and sort of not. But HOW did that ancient man-like creature become a rational, analytical and skeptical scientist, who thinks himself able to challenge centuries of faith in the revelation of our Creator God; while some other distant "cousin" became an exhibit in the zoo? Since they don't really know HOW it happened, no one should rule out the possibility that, like the Ford, Someone made it that way.

God will never make a good science experiment, because He won't submit to the scientists' words and methods. He won't prove Himself to the skeptic or leave detailed notes on His creative process. He did, however, leave sufficient notes by His revelation to certain men and women who were ready to submit to His Word and ways. And someday all men, even the skeptics, will stand and be questioned. And He even left the Textbook to study for the big test.

Some thoughts about changing for good

Change can mean a lot of different things to different people. For some, it’s resisted as an unwelcome threat to the status quo. To others, it’s a breath of fresh air in a boring, outdated world. For still others, it’s a new start, a break from the past and a promise of a better tomorrow.

The difference in perspective on change is largely a matter of attitude toward our present situation. If I’m comfortable, or at least content with my life as is, change is less desirable than if I’m miserable. If I agree that a certain change (like physical fitness) would be ideal, but requires more effort and revamping of my life than I really want to take on, then my motivation to change is diminished.

For people with troublesome habits, whether behavioral, mental or relational, change is something that first must be seen as not only necessary but urgent, because any habit has a built-in inertia factor that makes it much easier to stay the same than to become something new. And that’s all them more true if that habit is still believed to be personally advantageous or useful.

In fact, any behavior that becomes habitual, customary, traditional, standard operating procedure, modus operandi or whatever is something that once upon a time was new, and was practiced with regularity because it was an action that was believed to be in some way beneficial. People may stumble over a shoe in the dark, but they don’t normally arrange their shoes in such a way as to create a hazard zone in a dark room.

As bizarre as it may seem to the objective viewer (and we can all be more objective about other people’s behavior than about our own), even self-destructive habits like chemical addictions, rage-aholism, pornographic obsessions or chronic irresponsibility are actions that began as a choice to do something that seemed necessary, useful, positive or just plain “makes-me-feel-good”.

A person who finds himself time and again in the grip of a troublesome habit may feel frustrated, unable to explain why he can’t seem to break free and make the needed changes. He may beat himself up and try to “repent” of his foolishness, only to fail again. But he should assume one fact about himself: There is a motivation within to do this thing (and perhaps very deeply and unconsciously within), not because it’s truly useful (as good health practices or being kind to others) but because there is still a place in his beliefs, attitudes or feelings where this action is believed to be emotionally necessary; a refuge of sorts from a world that is unsafe, unwelcoming, unkind or unpleasant.

Finding that hidden place, stripping away its defenses and denial, and dealing with it by God’s Word of truth, grace, love and power, is the only way I know to “change for good.” We may be able to “rearrange” the Titanic’s deck chairs, as many addicts switch from one “behavior of choice” to another to satisfy the same inner longings, but troublesome habits are still going to take us down or keep us down. Change of anything troublesome is never easy, but, with God’s power and wisdom, it’s at least possible.