Some Thoughts on Apology by Aaron Hecht

I need to start by saying I'm sorry.

To anyone who clicked on the link to read this blog because they thought it was going to be about "apologetics," I am very sorry, but that's not what this blog is about. Christian apologetics is a VERY important topic, and maybe I'll write the next one about that, but this blog is about something which is also very important so no matter why you're here, I hope you'll read it to the end.

Apology, and the closely related topic of forgiveness, is a VITALLY important part of our lives. It is SO MUCH easier to forgive someone if they've sincerely apologized, and if they haven't, it can be very difficult to forgive them. Out of this difficulty can come other difficulties, including bitterness and resentment, anger and discontentment. Nothing good comes from any of these things.

That is not to say that we're allowed to not forgive people who don't apologize, but it IS to say that if we love one another as Christ loved us, that is "sacrificially"  than apologizing is a fairly small sacrifice to make in order to make it easier for someone to forgive us, and to bring reconciliation and peace between brethren and all the rest.

With that in mind, let's take a look at some relevant Bible passages (all taken from the NKJV)

1 John 1:9; If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

Psalm 51:3 For I acknowledge my transgressions, and my sin is always before me.

Matthew 5:23-24 Therefore if you bring your gift to the altar, and there remember that your brother has something against you, leave your gift there before the altar, and go your way. First be reconciled to your brother, and then come and offer your gift.

Now, the subject of "apology" and the very closely related topic of "forgiveness" are very much on my mind right now because I'm writing this blog a few hours before the sun goes down here in Jerusalem, and when the sun goes down today, then Yom Kippur will begin.

As most readers of this blog will no doubt be aware, the days between Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur are called the "days of Awe" and it is during these days that special prayers called "Slichot" are said in order to repent to God for all the sins one might have committed in the course of the previous year which one forgot to repent of, or maybe one wasn't precisely aware one had sinned, or whatever. It is also a time when people go around begging each other's pardon for offences they might have committed against each other during the previous year.

Now, again, "apology" and "forgiveness" are very much on my mind today for a deeply personal reason.

It's because four years ago, I sent an email to an old friend of mine to tell him that I had discovered that he had been dishonest with me about something. It wasn't just any old something either; it had caused tremendous damage to my life, and he had done it deliberately; it wasn't an accident or a slip of the tongue. It was a betrayal of our friendship, an abuse of the power he had over my life at the time and it was just, in general, a really rotten, lousy, despicable thing to do.

All of this, and a bit more, was in the email I sent him, and I was hoping it would make him feel convicted so he'd apologize and make things right between us.

I don't know if he felt convicted or not, because he simply didn't respond. He didn't write back to tell me I had it all wrong and try to make a bunch of lame excuses, or tell me to go jump in the lake, or anything else. He certainly didn't write back to apologize and ask for my forgiveness. He just ignored it, and he has made no effort to communicate with me in any way whatsoever over the four years since, although we have many mutual friends, and it would be easy for him to do so.

So every year as we approach Yom Kippur, I think maybe this year it'll be different. At a time when everyone in Israel is going around begging each others pardon, apologizing, repenting, making amends, reconciling, etc. that at this time, it would occur to him that he should finally call me and sort this out. That is not to even mention Matthew 5:23-24, which contains instructions regarding this kind of situation from the mouth of Jesus Himself.

By not responding to my message, my old friend was doing something called "adding insult to injury." The original injury here had been bad enough, but the insult of his not even bothering to respond when I told him I knew about it made it much worse. What that communicates is that he thinks the sin he committed against me is "no big deal" and there's no need to acknowledge it, much less apologize for it.

But what's worse than that is that this man, who is an ordained pastor and has been working for many years in a very prominent Christian Zionist ministry here in Jerusalem, has forgotten Romans 13:8; Owe no one anything except to love one another, for he who loves another has fulfilled the law.

This man owes me an apology, which isn't love, and so he's not only ignoring me, which is disrespectful to the point of being dehumanizing, he is also ignoring the Word of God, which is much worse.

Now, I'm not just writing this blog to splatter my angst about all this to the internet. I'm writing it because this experience of mine is not unusual. Almost everyone owes apologies to others and is owed apologies by others. Apologizing is something we human beings aren't very good at, and that's as true in the Church as it is outside the Church, perhaps even more so. This is, I believe, a leading cause of unforgiveness and all the negative things that follow from it, including bitterness, contentions, and all that other stuff that splits up churches, marriages, families, friendships, musical bands, sports teams, unions, corporations, etc.

So, as a public service, I have decided to give an example of the right way to apologize and a few of the most common wrong ways to apologize.

First, the right way.

When someone comes to you and tells you that you've committed some kind of offense against them, the thing to do is drop everything else and give that individual your full attention and ask them to explain, as precisely as they can, what the offense was, how it made them feel, and what they need from you in order to make things right. All of this has the effect of making them feel seen and heard, and thus, fully human. Anything less will make them feel NOT seen and NOT heard and if that happens, they'll feel disrespected and maybe even dehumanized, and that will add another layer to the original offense and cause all kinds of other problems.

Once they have told you everything, you need to respond by saying something like this; "You're right. I understand why you're upset about this." It was wrong for me to do that and I'm sorry. I will  do my best to make sure nothing like this ever happens again and I also want to thank you for bringing this to my attention and not just being angry about it without telling me why."

Now there's two sidenotes here that are very critical.

First, when you say these words, it's important to mean them. Don't just say them as a way of getting the person out of your hair, or getting out of the situation so you can move on and/or get back to what you were doing before they interrupted you. If that is even slightly on your mind, it will show in your tone and your body language, and once again, this will make the offended person feel disrespected and that will just make everything worse. That is the kind of thing that can turn a friend into an enemy for life, and it's the exact opposite of what you want. The person who feels like you're not taking them seriously, not respecting them, and not REALLY sorry at all, might just let it drop and walk away and quietly hate you for the rest of their life, or they might double down on their hostility right away, or worst of all, they might start, at that moment, to believe that they really ARE unworthy of respect, less than fully human, one inch tall, etc. and start acting accordingly. This kind of self-destructive attitude is SO very common in the Church, and the problems it causes take up far too much of every pastors time.

Now I need to say a this point that sometimes people's complaints against us ARE silly, petty, stupid or ridiculous. After all, Proverbs 19:11 says The discretion of a man makes him slow to anger, and his glory is to overlook a transgression.

But not everyone is on the same level of maturity, and the thing you want to keep in mind is that we're trying to help each other by being strong where others are weak and bearing each other's burdens. If someone is burdened by being really sensitive in an area so that when they get touched there, even lightly, it hurts, then don't tell them how stupid it is for them to be offended by something you wouldn't be offended by because you're less sensitive in that area. Just tell them you're sorry, and promise them you won't do it again.

The other sidenote is that you should NEVER, and I mean NEVER, EVER, EVER(!) not take someone seriously just because they're a child. If a child comes to you and tells you that you hurt their feelings when you knocked their stuffed animal off the chair and didn't pick it up, don't ignore them, or tell them "too bad" or anything else like that. Apologize for not respecting the things that are important to them, even if you think it's stupid or ridiculous or whatever. 

The idea that "children are resilient" is rubbish. Children are VERY sensitive and VERY fragile. They remember having their feelings hurt and being disrespected for the rest of their lives, and it can have devastating consequences. Just stop for a few moments and try and remember something that happened to you before you turned five years old that still hurts when you think about it. You'll probably be able to bring back one of those kinds of memories after thinking about it for less than 30 seconds, and you can probably also think of ways that it is still negatively impacting your life up to this very moment.

So, to quickly review, the RIGHT way to apologize is to stop what you're doing, give the person who is trying to tell you what they need you to apologize for your full attention, listen carefully to what they tell you, and respond sincerely. Don't tell them to "get a life" or "get over it" and DON'T disregard them just because they're a child.

Now, let's get into some of the WRONG ways to apologize.

We can start with the example my old friend gave me of just ignoring the complaint that gets brought to you. Once again, even if you think it's "no big deal," don't ignore it. That will NOT make the problem go away. The person who told you that you've offended them won't just forget about it. Instead, it will be an open wound in your relationship with that person that will get harder and harder to heal the longer it goes unattended. Something that could have been resolved with a five-minute conversation, if it gets sorted out immediately, will be much more difficult and possibly expensive to fix later on.

Next, there's the infamous "I'm sorry, but..." routine.

This non-apology starts with the right words but quickly gets into the weeds of all the reasons why it wasn't the fault of the person who is supposed to be apologizing; it's the fault of the person who feels like they're owed an apology. Once again, this does absolutely nothing to soothe the wounded feelings of the offended party and just adds another layer of disrespect to the original offense, fanning the flames of anger, bitterness, resentment, and outrage.

Maybe there WERE some legitimate reasons why the other person wasn't completely blameless in escalating the situation to the point where it eventually got to. So the way to talk about that is by saying, "can you do me the kindness of thinking twice before you say or do X next time? That will help me not make this mistake again."

Remember, it's not about who is "right" and who is "wrong," it's about who is already acting like a mature Believer and who needs help to become more mature.

We're not here to win arguments, we're here to win PEOPLE to the Kingdom. Never forget that!

With that in mind, by far, the worst of these non-apologies is the "I'm sorry you..." routine.

I'm sorry YOU feel that way.

I'm sorry YOU have a root of bitterness.

I'm sorry YOU didn't like what I said.

I'm sorry YOU had a bad experience.

I'm sorry YOU see things that way.

See, by saying this, you're not apologizing for the thing you did, which was out of order; you're merely expressing regret for a situation which you implicitly blame on the other person. You're saying, in effect, "there IS something wrong here, but you're the source of the problem, not me."

It's not hard to figure out when someone is doing that, and once again, it just adds insult to the original injury; it adds another layer of offense and does nothing to soothe the wounded feelings of the other person and put out the flames of the dispute between you and them. Quite the opposite, in fact, it actually pours gasoline on the flames.

So...don't do that.

To sum this up, if someone comes to you and tells you that you've done or said something to injure or offend them, you should be very grateful that they value your friendship enough to take that step instead of simply dropping you, or quietly resenting you. So don't get defensive and start making excuses, or dismissing their concerns, or telling them to "get over it" or otherwise not taking them seriously.

Instead, thank them for taking the brave first step of letting you know there's a problem, thank them for trusting you enough to expect that you'll do your part to solve it, give them a sincere apology that let's them feel like they've been seen and heard and otherwise taken seriously and respected, and THEN, actually try to not make the same mistake again.

Needless to say, this works both ways. If someone has offended or hurt YOU, take a moment to think about whether it should be overlooked. Are you ready to "be the bigger person" and just forget about it?

If not, or if you don't think this is something that even the bigger person should simply overlook, but rather it's a problem that needs to be dealt with, then go to that person privately and let them know what they did that you think they owe you an apology for. Don't expect them to know, because many times they don't realize they did something that violated your boundaries. Everyone has different boundaries, and they might be genuinely unaware that they did anything out of order.

So tell them, politely but firmly, what they did that you feel they owe you an apology for, and then be willing to accept their apology when they offer it. Forgive them, and forget about it, as best you can. Don't hold on to something once it's been resolved.

Doing all this will bring blessings to your own life, as well as the life of your family, your community, and ultimately, to the Kingdom of Jesus Christ that you belong to.

Colossians 3:12-13 Therefore, as the elect of God, holy and beloved, put on tender mercies, kindness, humility, meekness, longsuffering; bearing with one another, and forgiving one another, if anyone has a complaint against another; even as Christ forgave you, so you also must do.

In Defense of the Feasts

The Temple Mount in the time of Ezra and Nehemiah, courtesy of Ritmeyer

We're in the midst of the fall High Holy days, having just celebrated Yom Teruah (Rosh Hashana) last week and will soon be observing Yom Kippur. The Biblical holy days are on my mind! 

I was reading the book of Ezra this week when I came across something I hadn't noticed before. In chapter 3, Ezra describes the first order of business when Israel returned to the land. Here it is:

When the seventh month arrived and the sons of Israel were settled in the towns, the people gathered together as one man in Jerusalem. Then Jeshua son of Jozadak, his fellow kohanim, Zerubbabel the son of Shealtiel and his associates began to build the altar of the God of Israel, in order to offer burnt offerings on it as written in the Torah of Moses, the man of God. They set up the altar on its fixed resting place despite their fear of the peoples of the lands and they offered burnt offerings on it to Adonai, both the morning and the evening sacrifices. They also kept the Feast of Sukkot as it is written and offered the prescribed number of daily burnt offerings according to the requirement for each day.

A few things jump out at me in this passage.

First, it was of prime importance to the Israelites that they resume the sacrifices. Their business was rebuilding enough of the Temple to resume the sacrifices to God. They did this even though they were surrounded by hostile people. Why were sacrifices so important? I think it's because sin had to be dealt with. Sin state and purity were of utmost importance to restoring God's presence to Israel.

Secondly, Israel resumed sacrifices on the first day of the seventh month: Yom Teruah (Rosh Hashana). And this may contribute to why it is now called rosh ha-shana ראש השנה, head of the year. It might officially mark the end of the exile and the beginning of Israel's renewal. It is not likely a coincidence that God allowed for this to happen on Yom Teruah.

This might explain part of the mystery of Yom Teruah. The Torah commandment for Yom Teruah is that it be a zichron teruah זכרון תרועה, a memorial [shofar] blast. What are we memorializing? What are we remembering? The Torah doesn't say. Perhaps because this very act is the thing future Israel would remember: the rebuilding of the Temple, the resuming of sacrifices, and the end of the exile. (And, if I might put on my Judeo-Christian thinking cap, it may one day signal the return of Messiah.)

Thirdly, Israel observed and celebrated the Holy Days. 

This is noteworthy because I have often heard Christian critiques of Messianic practice saying, the Kingdom of God is not about eating or drinking (Rom. 14). 

Well, yes. 

But the Kingdom of God is about God's holy days. That too is part of the Kingdom of God. 

The prophets of the Bible foretell the arrival of Messiah where all the nations of the world will go up to Jerusalem to keep Sukkot (Zech. 14) -- that is Kingdom of God stuff. And it involves celebration with eating and drinking. 

Paul's words about the Kingdom of God being more than eating and drinking must not be a polemic against the Biblical holy days.

Nehemiah 8 gives more details to what went on when Israel returned from exile:

Ezra the kohen brought the Torah before the assembly, which included men and women and all who could understand what they heard. This happened on the first day of the seventh month...Ezra opened the scroll in the sight of all the people for he was above all the people. When he opened it, all the people stood up. Ezra blessed Adonai, the great God, and all the people answered, “Amen, amen!” as they lifted up of their hands. Then they bowed down and worshiped Adonai with their faces to the ground...Then Nehemiah the governor, Ezra the kohen-scribe, and the Levites who were teaching the people said to all the people, “Today is holy to Adonai your God. Do not mourn or weep!” For all the people had been weeping when they heard the words of the Torah... So he said to them, "Go! Eat choice food, drink sweet drinks, and send portions to those who have nothing ready. For today is holy to our Lord. Do not grieve, for the joy of Adonai is your strength." 

Taken together, we can sum up Israel's priorities when they returned from exile:

1. Rebuild the Temple
2. Resume sacrifices to God
3. Hear the Torah read
4. Humble themselves
5. Worship God
6. Celebrate the Feasts

There is more to God and the Kingdom than Feasts and Holy Days. But those Feasts and Holy Days were of great importance when the exiles returned to Israel. Maybe they should be important for us too.

Have an easy fast, dear Kineti readers. More importantly, turn your hearts to Him and get sin out of your lives. That's a fast that's pleasing to God (Is. 58)

Some thoughts on Catechism, Dogma, Excommunication and Tucker Carlson by Aaron Hecht

 

Most people associate the words "Catechism," "Dogma," and "Excommunication" with the Catholic Church, and there are some excellent historical reasons for this.

The Protestant Reformation, which started on October 31st, 1517 was in large part a (long overdue) reaction to the abuse of power by the Roman Catholic Church and these three concepts were widely perceived among the Reformers as devices that were, on the one hand, unsupported by Scripture and on the other hand, were making it far too easy for the Catholic clergy to abuse their power.

Because of this, the Protestant churches which emerged in Europe and later in other parts of the world largely did away with these things, and today, the results, for better and for worse, are all too evident for all to see.

I want to go through these three concepts one by one, and talk a little but about how each one applies to the fourth thing mentioned in the title of this blog, and that's Tucker Carlson.

First, Catechism.

The dictionary defines this word thusly;

catechism [kat-i-kiz-uhm]

noun

1. Ecclesiastical, 

a. an elementary book containing a summary of the principles of the Christian religion, especially as maintained by a particular church, in the form of questions and answers.

b. the contents of such a book.

2. a similar book of instruction in other subjects.

3. a series of formal questions put, as to political candidates, to bring out their views.

4. catechetical instruction.

With all due respect to the dictionary's thoroughness, most people think of the word "catechism" to mean essentially the constitution of the Roman Catholic Church. Some Mainline Protestant denominations have a catechism, but they usually don't call it that. The Anglicans, for instance, have a "book of common prayer" which is very comparable to the Catholic catechism.

Be that as it may, everyone who attends a Catholic church receives a tremendous amount of instruction (especially if they're a child being raised by parents who regularly attend Mass) in the "catechism" so that they will know what it means to be a Catholic and just as importantly, what it means NOT to be a Catholic.

So, what does that entail? To answer that question, we need to take a look at the next term, "dogma."

The dictionary defines this term thusly;

dogma [dawg-muh]

noun

1. an official system of principles or tenets concerning faith, morals, behavior, etc., as of a church.

Synonyms: philosophy, doctrine

2. a specific tenet or doctrine authoritatively laid down, as by a church.

Synonyms: law, canon, tenet

3. prescribed doctrine proclaimed as unquestionably true by a particular group.

4. a settled or established opinion, belief, or principle.

Synonyms: certainty, conviction

So, the "catechism" is the canonized list of "dogma" that an organization, movement, etc. holds to.

Once again, this term is mostly used when talking about the Catholic Church, although it also gets used quite a bit in reference to politics.

What does all this have to do with Tucker Carlson?

EVERYTHING!

Tucker has been in the news a lot lately because he spoke at the funeral of Charlie Kirk in Arizona on Sunday and told a "story" about a bunch of wicked, evil, corrupt Jewish people "sitting around eating hummus" and plotting to murder Jesus Christ in order to stop the spread of His message. It was very obvious that Tucker was making a comparison to that situation and his ludicrously absurd theory that Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was behind the assassination of Charlie Kirk because Charlie was starting to say some unflattering things about Israel, after years of being an ardent supporter of the Jewish State.

This follows an interview Tucker did a few months ago with Texas Senator Tes Cruz. Cruz said during the interview his support for Israel derived partially from his Christian faith, and Tucker responded with his trademark faux bewilderment, mixed with some really ugly expressions of scorn and contempt, asking Cruz to explain what he'd just said Biblically. Cruz badly flubbed his response, which was embarrassing for him and infuriating for millions of Christian supporters of Israel who would have loved to have watched Cruz give a coherent defense for Christian support for Israel.

Now at this point, I have to make a little side note, and I'll put it in the form of a question.

What IS the Biblical answer to Tucker Carlson's question to Ted Cruz about why Christians should support Israel?

Do you know? Can you open your Bible and find the passages that are most relevant to this discussion Has anyone ever taught or explained this material to you?

In other words, have you been "catechized"? Are you familiar with the "dogma" in regards to this issue?

Are you starting to see where I'm going with all this?

Back to Tucker Carlson, people who know him and know his family say that his father was a great friend of Israel and had many Jewish friends. It is very likely that he has, at some point, asked sincere questions about why Christians should support Israel from some very serious people.

There are therefore two possibilities.

Either he never got a good explanation from anyone, which is possible, but unlikely, or he DID get a good explanation and he rejected it, which I think is much more likely.

That brings us to the third term on my list, "excommunication."

Excommunication was (and still is) an official dogmatic rite of the Catholic Church and it was specifically abolished by the Reformation along with indulgences, Papal infallibility, etc. and I have long thought that this was a case of throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

Unlike some of that other nonsense, I think Excommunication absolutely IS not only supported but MANDATED by Scripture (specifically and most forcefully in I Corinthians chapter 5) and the result of its not being retained by the Reformation has been absolutely catastrophic. We can start with the fact that there are over 30,000 recognized Protestant denominations, which is bad enough. But then there's the fact that many of these denominations teach things that are mutually exclusive to what other "Protestant" denominations teach. I'm not talking about small issues either.

Words mean things, and the more specific their meaning is, the more useful they are, and the opposite is also true.

The word "Protestant" almost doesn't even mean anything anymore, because we've got a situation where there's no King and "everyone does what's right in their own eyes."

Some might say that the terms "Mainline" and "Evangelical" are somewhat helpful in this context, but leaving that aside, let's focus on the Evangelicals, because that's what Charlie Kirk called himself and that's what most of the people who came to his memorial service in Arizona would call themselves too, including Tucker Carlson.

Charlie Kirk was a fearless advocate for Israel, and he was very clear about his reasons, which were firmly rooted in the Scriptures. Not only was he strongly catechized and familiar with the dogma on this topic, he delighted in catechizing others and explaining the dogma to them.

In fact, I would imagine Charlie Kirk probably tried to explain it to Tucker Carlson at some point, as well as Candace Owens, as they were all good friends.

So, if Charlie Kirk was an "evangelical Protestant," and he was a supporter of Israel because he believed that the God described in his Bible expected him to be, and Tucker Carlson is also an "Evangelical Protestant" but he doesn't read that in his Bible and he feels free to be anti-Israel and some would even say anti-Semitic, then what's the explanation?

Obviously, something is very wrong with this picture.

If anyone is not sure where I'm going with all this, here it is in plain language.

It's long past time for "Evangelical Protestant" Christianity to agree on some principles of Dogma and establish a Catechism of our own. We need to set up some parameters and standards so that people know what it even means to be an "Evangelical" Christian, and just as importantly, what it does NOT mean to be an "Evangelical" Christian.

It is also long past time to bring back the principle of "Excommunication," so that anyone who wants to call themselves an "Evangelical" Christian but habitually violates the Dogma that is defined and codified by the Catechism can be dealt with in the way that the New Testament very clearly and unambiguously instructs us to deal with them.

The reason this is so important is that the Church of Jesus Christ is not just a social club that needs some bylaws to prevent feathers from getting ruffled.

The Church of Jesus Christ is the most important institution that exists, and it is engaged in the most important work that is being done in the world today.

There are many reasons we aren't doing such a great job, but one of the core reasons is that the "freedom in Christ" that the Apostle Paul talked about in Galatians 5:1 has been taken much too far and we've all but forgotten about something else he said on this topic in I Corinthians 6:12; "All things are lawful for me, but all things are not helpful. All things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the power of any."

Because of our lack of Dogma, and because what few things we do mostly agree on have never been codified into any kind of Catechism, and because everyone feels free to just do their own thing without having any fear of excommunication or almost any other consequences, a LOT of people don't take us seriously. What's much worse is that they don't take the Gospel we have to share with them seriously either.

There's one group of people who are less likely than most others to take us seriously, and that's Israeli Jews.

The proof of that is in the coverage of Charlie Kirk's memorial service in the Israeli media. Tucker Carlson's speech was portrayed as the main event at this service, even more so than the speech given by President Trump. Erika Kirk's beautiful (and Dogmatic!) message about forgiving her husband's killer was largely ignored, unless it was being contrasted with President Trump's message about hating his opponents and not wanting the best for them, which I'm sad to say resonated pretty strongly here, in the media and also on the street.

Despite the fact that Evangelicals have been supporting Israel for decades and, in fact, were on the ground supporting the Jewish community in this country for over 100 years before the State formally came into existence, there is still a great deal of distrust and contempt for Evangelicals here. Many people point to Tucker Carlson's speech as proof that there's no such thing as "good" Christians because they're all the same, they all hate Jews, they'll all turn against us in the end, etc.

Brothers and sisters, I really don't know what the solution is to all this. I know that it's probably far too late in the game to try and work out Evangelical Protestant "Dogma" and canonize it into a "Catechism" of some kind. But I don't think it's too late to excommunicate people who express unapologetic contempt for the Scriptures. That ought to be a perfectly legitimate reason for casting someone out of the Assembly, unless they repent and recant.

In Tucker Carlson's case, this step is long overdue, and not only because he's taken to speaking out against Israel publicly and often. He's not the only one, but he would be a good place to start.

If you've read this far, I have a bonus for you. There is a video on YouTube which you can watch by clicking HERE.

This video is entitled "Why Israel" and it's a teaching by Derek Prince, one of the greatest Bible teachers of the last 100 years. I commend it to everyone, and I encourage you to share it widely.