Do we harbor "healthy" sins?

[Not_Now.Soon]

What's the difference between putting your best foot forward, on a job interview, on a date, or any other occasion, compared to being boastful and bragging? I know if I share my weaknesses with an employer they would not hire me, or would not hire me for the good position I had hoped to have.

What about our human desire for respect? Is that a healthy attribute, to want or even try and demand respect from others? Or is that a trait that hinders us from being humble, and encourages us to be prideful or even arrogant? Perhaps this isn't an attribute everyone shares, but it's one I have in me. A desire to at least be respected by my thoughts, and to be counted as reliable and trustworthy, (among other attributes of being famed as great in some way or another).

I'm sure there are other attributes that we hold as healthy for everyone to have, and I bet there's a lot of cultural influence in those from where ever we live. But my thought is, how often do these attributes walk the line of sin, or outright are sinful?

Do we have a lot of "healthy" sins, that are really horrible and unhealthy? Or are we blind to sins of others as well as ourselves, because it's rationaized as healthy? Just some thoughts mingling on me this morning that walk on the idea the blind leading the blind, and of being more blind then we know.

 

[for_his_glory]

God is no respecter of person and we should not be either. It is we who need to fear (respect) God who judges us in all things. We are to humble our self before the Father and examine and judge our self so that others will not judge us and be condemned by the world, Proverbs 6:16-19; Acts 10:34; Romans 2:1-11.

 

[Christ_empowered]

I dunno. In the world, not of it. Still have to be "in the world" for a season, so what sort of behavior is OK for us to engage in, and what isn't...good question.

I think about a relative. Older generation...dude started middle-middle class and worked up a corporate ladder back in the day and got rich. Beautiful, sophisticated wife, all that good stuff. Church goer since childhood. But....the church they went to was pretty much for rich people. Their Gospel is different from what I believe. This man used his own resources to push to make his state a "right to work state," which basically cripples unions and keeps wages low(er). What does Jesus have to say about all this?

Point is...he had what it took, raw material, plus the ability+willing-ness to adapt, and he succeeded. The church he went to was for other affluent people, so nobody questioned his behavior all that much. Is that right or wrong? Was he a genuine child of God, or was he soothing his conscience by going to this particular church and plucking out select Bible verses to prop up his rich dude view of the world and morality? If someone fails to adapt, are they immoral, mentally ill, maladjusted, a loser, a misfit, or...?

And if one's interpretation of Christ's teachings, put into action, result in a simple(r) lifestyle, less stuff, fewer friends, maybe less security...is that immoral, commendable, neither?

I have no real answers, obviously. I've actually been pondering things similar to this lately, so I'm just...adding more questions, lol.

 

[smaller]

The flesh body never rids itself of indwelling sin and evil present. These are not removable conditions from the flesh. In Romans 7:17-21 Paul shows these matters remained with his own flesh after salvation (among many other scriptural citings.)

I might suggest that the survival instinct itself may be a result of indwelling sin, and would consider that critical for us to live as flesh components. So yes, many of the happy faces we paint upon ourselves to go along and get along with the world around us are part of the survival instinct. Even our adverse reactions can be part of our survival instinct of the flesh.

We also are demanded by the flesh to work to eat, to clothe ourselves, put a roof above our heads, etc. There is no release from these obligations and demands of the flesh. All of these stem from the survival instinct that is built into our flesh. There are many other such instincts of the flesh as well. Sexual lusts is unavoidable for the flesh to continue itself. Few, very few don't have this compulsion of the flesh. Again, a critical component for continuation of the human race. And these matters are in Gods Plans for man in the flesh, without any doubt. Even though many of the intricate features beneath these matters would in strict fashions, be considered "sins."

If we understand sin indwelling our flesh it is "required" for the Spiritual practice of "self hatred/abasement" to have this HUMBLING component of sin indwelling the flesh. HOW for example would we come to know and appreciate the Mercy of God Expressed in Christ to us without the NEED of same? God has demanded to have HIS MERCY. And has placed us quite purposefully with the need for same, because of sin indwelling and evil present within us all.

God has not commanded us to kill ourselves in the flesh, literally, such as in committing suicide or what have you over the conditions of sin dwelling in our flesh.

Were the Israelites of the O.T. really attuned to the facts of sin in their own flesh they may have very well lined up and mutually stoned each others on the spot. But fortunately for them and for us the flesh doesn't and can't listen to the Word of God in any case of sights. It is factually against and contrary to the Spirit. Gal. 5:17. Very few believers can even perceive this simple scriptural matter.

Believers will never see as well as they should Spiritually, unless and until the reconnoiter their own factual internal darkness in their own flesh.

I'll leave it at that.

 

[for_his_glory]

I dunno. In the world, not of it. Still have to be "in the world" for a season, so what sort of behavior is OK for us to engage in, and what isn't...good question.

I think about a relative. Older generation...dude started middle-middle class and worked up a corporate ladder back in the day and got rich. Beautiful, sophisticated wife, all that good stuff. Church goer since childhood. But....the church they went to was pretty much for rich people. Their Gospel is different from what I believe. This man used his own resources to push to make his state a "right to work state," which basically cripples unions and keeps wages low(er). What does Jesus have to say about all this?

Point is...he had what it took, raw material, plus the ability+willing-ness to adapt, and he succeeded. The church he went to was for other affluent people, so nobody questioned his behavior all that much. Is that right or wrong? Was he a genuine child of God, or was he soothing his conscience by going to this particular church and plucking out select Bible verses to prop up his rich dude view of the world and morality? If someone fails to adapt, are they immoral, mentally ill, maladjusted, a loser, a misfit, or...?

And if one's interpretation of Christ's teachings, put into action, result in a simple(r) lifestyle, less stuff, fewer friends, maybe less security...is that immoral, commendable, neither?

I have no real answers, obviously. I've actually been pondering things similar to this lately, so I'm just...adding more questions, lol.

What you have said here about your relative and his church reminds me of the Church at Laodicea in Rev 3:14-22 that God will spue out of His mouth.

 

[for_his_glory]

The flesh body never rids itself of indwelling sin and evil present. These are not removable conditions from the flesh. In Romans 7:17-21 Paul shows these matters remained with his own flesh after salvation (among many other scriptural citings.)

I might suggest that the survival instinct itself may be a result of indwelling sin, and would consider that critical for us to live as flesh components. So yes, many of the happy faces we paint upon ourselves to go along and get along with the world around us are part of the survival instinct. Even our adverse reactions can be part of our survival instinct of the flesh.

We also are demanded by the flesh to work to eat, to clothe ourselves, put a roof above our heads, etc. There is no release from these obligations and demands of the flesh. All of these stem from the survival instinct that is built into our flesh. There are many other such instincts of the flesh as well. Sexual lusts is unavoidable for the flesh to continue itself. Few, very few don't have this compulsion of the flesh. Again, a critical component for continuation of the human race. And these matters are in Gods Plans for man in the flesh, without any doubt. Even though many of the intricate features beneath these matters would in strict fashions, be considered "sins."

If we understand sin indwelling our flesh it is "required" for the Spiritual practice of "self hatred/abasement" to have this HUMBLING component of sin indwelling the flesh. HOW for example would we come to know and appreciate the Mercy of God Expressed in Christ to us without the NEED of same? God has demanded to have HIS MERCY. And has placed us quite purposefully with the need for same, because of sin indwelling and evil present within us all.

God has not commanded us to kill ourselves in the flesh, literally, such as in committing suicide or what have you over the conditions of sin dwelling in our flesh.

Were the Israelites of the O.T. really attuned to the facts of sin in their own flesh they may have very well lined up and mutually stoned each others on the spot. But fortunately for them and for us the flesh doesn't and can't listen to the Word of God in any case of sights. It is factually against and contrary to the Spirit. Gal. 5:17. Very few believers can even perceive this simple scriptural matter.

Believers will never see as well as they should Spiritually, unless and until the reconnoiter their own factual internal darkness in their own flesh.

I'll leave it at that.

Old man seeks those desires of the world that brings fleshly pleasures as they are condemned by the world. The new man seeks those things from above where Christ sits at the right hand of the Father as they humble themselves before the Lord seeking the goodness of God who provides all our needs as we are obedient to Him as we separate ourselves from this world and are no longer a part of it.. Colossians Chapter 3.

 

[Not_Now.Soon]

God is no respecter of person and we should not be either. It is we who need to fear (respect) God who judges us in all things. We are to humble our self before the Father and examine and judge our self so that others will not judge us and be condemned by the world, Proverbs 6:16-19; Acts 10:34; Romans 2:1-11.

It's intresting the verse you quoted in Acts 10:34. I hadn't heard it that way before, that God is no respecter of persons. Had to look it up to see how I missed that. In KJV it's written as you've quoted, For_his_glory.

KJV. Acts 10:34-35
34Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons:35 But in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him.

NIV. Acts 10:34-35
34 Then Peter began to speak: “I now realize how true it is that God does not show favoritism 35 but accepts from every nation the one who fears him and does what is right.

ESV. Acts 10:34
34 So Peter opened his mouth and said: “Truly I understand that God shows no partiality,35 but in every nation anyone who fears him and does what is right is acceptable to him.

In the NIV it's written as God does not show favoritism and in ESV it's translated that God shows no partiality. In each one the message is the same, but in the KJV it is harsher and possibly a little more eye opening and soul searching the way it puts it. Or maybe it does this for me because I'm not as use to the KJV, and any translation that I'm not use to might make me stop and reconsider a verse. Thank you For_his_glory.

 

[smaller]

Old man seeks those desires of the world that brings fleshly pleasures as they are condemned by the world. The new man seeks those things from above where Christ sits at the right hand of the Father as they humble themselves before the Lord seeking the goodness of God who provides all our needs as we are obedient to Him as we separate ourselves from this world and are no longer a part of it.. Colossians Chapter 3.

Yes, well, my flesh might certainly appreciate manna falling from heaven to feed itself, but that is not happening. And even if it did my flesh would whine for meat in any case.

There is no avoiding the obligations of the flesh, which is what I was observing. We don't have choices in these matters other than to attend to the flesh and it's demands. OR we would quite simply DIE. Which would be a sin. Thou shalt not murder applies also to our own flesh as well.

 

[Not_Now.Soon]

I dunno. In the world, not of it. Still have to be "in the world" for a season, so what sort of behavior is OK for us to engage in, and what isn't...good question.

I think about a relative. Older generation...dude started middle-middle class and worked up a corporate ladder back in the day and got rich. Beautiful, sophisticated wife, all that good stuff. Church goer since childhood. But....the church they went to was pretty much for rich people. Their Gospel is different from what I believe. This man used his own resources to push to make his state a "right to work state," which basically cripples unions and keeps wages low(er). What does Jesus have to say about all this?

Point is...he had what it took, raw material, plus the ability+willing-ness to adapt, and he succeeded. The church he went to was for other affluent people, so nobody questioned his behavior all that much. Is that right or wrong? Was he a genuine child of God, or was he soothing his conscience by going to this particular church and plucking out select Bible verses to prop up his rich dude view of the world and morality? If someone fails to adapt, are they immoral, mentally ill, maladjusted, a loser, a misfit, or...?

And if one's interpretation of Christ's teachings, put into action, result in a simple(r) lifestyle, less stuff, fewer friends, maybe less security...is that immoral, commendable, neither?

I have no real answers, obviously. I've actually been pondering things similar to this lately, so I'm just...adding more questions, lol.

Be careful Christ_emopwered, I think there are some very good consol in the verses to not judge one another (Mathew 7:3) and that if anyone calls themself a believer but doesn't love their brother or fellow believer they are lying to themselves (1 John 4:20). I honestly don't know about your relative, for good or bad, and it's probably a good thing I'm not sure enough to judge him because of the sins I know of I I've committed I can't be a judge of who is a good Christian. Who knows if these are things he doesn't know himself, or how many things we do that we're blind to them being good or bad in God's eyes. If you ever feel the need to point these things out to your relative, do it for their benifit so that they are aware of it and leave it be. If you don't feel the need to tell him, then be careful about the observations so it doesn't harm you because of the views you have about him. Either way, good thoughts and good observations. It's worth considering what church we go to and how we're being fed by it.

 

[for_his_glory]

Yes, well, my flesh might certainly appreciate manna falling from heaven to feed itself, but that is not happening. And even if it did my flesh would whine for meat in any case.

There is no avoiding the obligations of the flesh, which is what I was observing. We don't have choices in these matters other than to attend to the flesh and it's demands. OR we would quite simply DIE. Which would be a sin. Thou shalt not murder applies also to our own flesh as well.

Philippians 4:19 But my God shall supply all your need according to his riches in glory by Christ Jesus.
God will supply our need, but He is not going to hand us anything on a silver platter, but will make a way for those who are obedient to Him. God will always open a door, but it's up to us to walk through it.

 

[for_his_glory]

It's intresting the verse you quoted in Acts 10:34. I hadn't heard it that way before, that God is no respecter of persons. Had to look it up to see how I missed that. In KJV it's written as you've quoted, For_his_glory.



In the NIV it's written as God does not show favoritism and in ESV it's translated that God shows no partiality. In each one the message is the same, but in the KJV it is harsher and possibly a little more eye opening and soul searching the way it puts it. Or maybe it does this for me because I'm not as use to the KJV, and any translation that I'm not use to might make me stop and reconsider a verse. Thank you For_his_glory.

 

[Christ_empowered]

Be careful Christ_emopwered, I think there are some very good consol in the verses to not judge one another (Mathew 7:3) and that if anyone calls themself a believer but doesn't love their brother or fellow believer they are lying to themselves (1 John 4:20). I honestly don't know about your relative, for good or bad, and it's probably a good thing I'm not sure enough to judge him because of the sins I know of I I've committed I can't be a judge of who is a good Christian. Who knows if these are things he doesn't know himself, or how many things we do that we're blind to them being good or bad in God's eyes. If you ever feel the need to point these things out to your relative, do it for their benifit so that they are aware of it and leave it be. If you don't feel the need to tell him, then be careful about the observations so it doesn't harm you because of the views you have about him. Either way, good thoughts and good observations. It's worth considering what church we go to and how we're being fed by it.

You make valid points. I'm too judgmental, which is weird, considering how I focus on the compassionate and merciful aspects of Christ's ministry+character.

Its just...there seems to rich people Christianity, middle class people Christianity, working class people Christianity, and poor people Christianity. Why?!?!?

The exception, I guess, would be the RCC, but I don't know much about the RCC. It seems that some churches emphasize the social gospel and taking care of the poor, while others...don't (?).

 

[Not_Now.Soon]

The flesh body never rids itself of indwelling sin and evil present. These are not removable conditions from the flesh. In Romans 7:17-21 Paul shows these matters remained with his own flesh after salvation (among many other scriptural citings.)

I might suggest that the survival instinct itself may be a result of indwelling sin, and would consider that critical for us to live as flesh components. So yes, many of the happy faces we paint upon ourselves to go along and get along with the world around us are part of the survival instinct. Even our adverse reactions can be part of our survival instinct of the flesh.

We also are demanded by the flesh to work to eat, to clothe ourselves, put a roof above our heads, etc. There is no release from these obligations and demands of the flesh. All of these stem from the survival instinct that is built into our flesh. There are many other such instincts of the flesh as well. Sexual lusts is unavoidable for the flesh to continue itself. Few, very few don't have this compulsion of the flesh. Again, a critical component for continuation of the human race. And these matters are in Gods Plans for man in the flesh, without any doubt. Even though many of the intricate features beneath these matters would in strict fashions, be considered "sins."

If we understand sin indwelling our flesh it is "required" for the Spiritual practice of "self hatred/abasement" to have this HUMBLING component of sin indwelling the flesh. HOW for example would we come to know and appreciate the Mercy of God Expressed in Christ to us without the NEED of same? God has demanded to have HIS MERCY. And has placed us quite purposefully with the need for same, because of sin indwelling and evil present within us all.

God has not commanded us to kill ourselves in the flesh, literally, such as in committing suicide or what have you over the conditions of sin dwelling in our flesh.

Were the Israelites of the O.T. really attuned to the facts of sin in their own flesh they may have very well lined up and mutually stoned each others on the spot. But fortunately for them and for us the flesh doesn't and can't listen to the Word of God in any case of sights. It is factually against and contrary to the Spirit. Gal. 5:17. Very few believers can even perceive this simple scriptural matter.

Believers will never see as well as they should Spiritually, unless and until the reconnoiter their own factual internal darkness in their own flesh.

I'll leave it at that.

Maybe your right Smaller, that this is our condition. But I don't think it is something we should just accept. We should strive for the the fruit of the spirit, even if we are still stuck in our flesh. I think there are many good testimonies about people being changed because they followed the God. Being made perfect sort of testimony and perspective. That God isn't done with us yet sort of view.

 

[smaller]

Maybe your right Smaller, that this is our condition. But I don't think it is something we should just accept.

Think of it this way. It is from our present reality that God Himself placed us in that gives RISE to HOPE.

Hope in the Gospel is a Divine Matter. Is God justified in placing us in this condition in order to understand and have HOPE? To have and understand His Mercy? Yes, a thousand times, yes.

We should strive for the the fruit of the spirit, even if we are still stuck in our flesh. I think there are many good testimonies about people being changed because they followed the God. Being made perfect sort of testimony and perspective. That God isn't done with us yet sort of view.

I have exactly zero hope for my flesh. That much is certain. I understand it's temporal purposes for a greater eternal end result. But none of us are able or capable of 'escaping' the obvious in our current state.

God Himself planted us in weakness, corruption and dishonor in a natural body that is doomed to fail at the end. 1 Cor. 15:42-45. There is no way for us to "change" these conditions of fact. It is a fools folly to think otherwise. We do hold our heavenly treasures in earthen vessels and such, heavenly treasures are accumulated in these vessels, these very flawed vessels, and will not be lost.

 

[Not_Now.Soon]

You make valid points. I'm too judgmental, which is weird, considering how I focus on the compassionate and merciful aspects of Christ's ministry+character.

Its just...there seems to rich people Christianity, middle class people Christianity, working class people Christianity, and poor people Christianity. Why?!?!?

The exception, I guess, would be the RCC, but I don't know much about the RCC. It seems that some churches emphasize the social gospel and taking care of the poor, while others...don't (?).

Mathew 18:15-17 has some really good points on this matter, in my opinion. It is harder now a days to follow them completely with people in different churches but are still Christian, so the way I look at it is a three tier approach.

Mathew 18:15-20 (ESV)
15 “If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother.16 But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, that every charge may be established by the evidence of two or three witnesses.17 If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church. And if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector.18 Truly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed[f] in heaven.19 Again I say to you, if two of you agree on earth about anything they ask, it will be done for them by my Father in heaven.20 For where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I among them.”

Come to them privately is the first part and it says to do this with the intention it being for their benefit. In this time it is respectful and keeps the other person from harming their reputation with others. And in each of the other two tiers to bring the topic up to him again with two or three witnesses, and then bring it up to the church with him. In my opinion this is both a witness to the other person that you were right, as well as a test to see which person was right. If you have witnesses that then say no he's ok, then that would stop the progression, or if the church says he's ok, then that would be the decision. At least that's some of the aspects I see kind of playing out if we follow Jesus's direction of pointing out eachother's errors.

 

[for_his_glory]

You make valid points. I'm too judgmental, which is weird, considering how I focus on the compassionate and merciful aspects of Christ's ministry+character.

Its just...there seems to rich people Christianity, middle class people Christianity, working class people Christianity, and poor people Christianity. Why?!?!?

The exception, I guess, would be the RCC, but I don't know much about the RCC. It seems that some churches emphasize the social gospel and taking care of the poor, while others...don't (?).

CE, this is Gods pure religion: James 1:27 Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world. It has nothing to do with a mans wealth or lack of it, but what we do with what we have in helping others. Not to be prideful or boasting of helping others, but to be humbled before the Lord as we have compassion on those who are less fortunate than we are as we let the light of Christ shine through us.

 

[for_his_glory]

Think of it this way. It is from our present reality that God Himself placed us in that gives RISE to HOPE.

Hope in the Gospel is a Divine Matter. Is God justified in placing us in this condition in order to understand and have HOPE? To have and understand His Mercy? Yes, a thousand times, yes.



I have exactly zero hope for my flesh. That much is certain. I understand it's temporal purposes for a greater eternal end result. But none of us are able or capable of 'escaping' the obvious in our current state.

God Himself planted us in weakness, corruption and dishonor in a natural body that is doomed to fail at the end. 1 Cor. 15:42-45. There is no way for us to "change" these conditions of fact. It is a fools folly to think otherwise. We do hold our heavenly treasures in earthen vessels and such, heavenly treasures are accumulated in these vessels, these very flawed vessels, and will not be lost.

Being a new Spiritual creation in Christ we shed those things of the flesh as we set our sights on those things from above where Christ sits at the right hand of God making intercession for us. We are to subdue this flesh and walk in the Spirit who helps us with our infirmities as we have risen with Christ and seek those things from above, Colossians 3:1-17. Our religion becomes vain if we deceive our self and allow ourselves to be subdued by the flesh that will always sin and this is why we battle against the flesh daily, James 1:26, Galatians 5:16-26; Ephesians 6:10-18.

 

[WIP]

What's the difference between putting your best foot forward, on a job interview, on a date, or any other occasion, compared to being boastful and bragging? I know if I share my weaknesses with an employer they would not hire me, or would not hire me for the good position I had hoped to have.

What about our human desire for respect? Is that a healthy attribute, to want or even try and demand respect from others? Or is that a trait that hinders us from being humble, and encourages us to be prideful or even arrogant? Perhaps this isn't an attribute everyone shares, but it's one I have in me. A desire to at least be respected by my thoughts, and to be counted as reliable and trustworthy, (among other attributes of being famed as great in some way or another).

I'm sure there are other attributes that we hold as healthy for everyone to have, and I bet there's a lot of cultural influence in those from where ever we live. But my thought is, how often do these attributes walk the line of sin, or outright are sinful?

Do we have a lot of "healthy" sins, that are really horrible and unhealthy? Or are we blind to sins of others as well as ourselves, because it's rationaized as healthy? Just some thoughts mingling on me this morning that walk on the idea the blind leading the blind, and of being more blind then we know.

I don't think honest expression of one's capabilities has to be boastful. Suppose you're applying for a job as a taxi driver. Do you have a license to drive? Are you a competent driver? Are you a safe driver (i.e., if they checked would you have a record of driving violations)? Providing information to express the answers to these questions can simply be informative based on your experience. On the other hand if one claims to be the best, well, that's maybe stepping over the line.

 

[Not_Now.Soon]

I don't think honest expression of one's capabilities has to be boastful. Suppose you're applying for a job as a taxi driver. Do you have a license to drive? Are you a competent driver? Are you a safe driver (i.e., if they checked would you have a record of driving violations)? Providing information to express the answers to these questions can simply be informative based on your experience. On the other hand if one claims to be the best, well, that's maybe stepping over the line.

If a person is honest that I think helps boat loads. But there are many things that are part of interviews that play into the job market. One is the idea that confidance sales the person. So saying your the best rides the line of confidance a little too much even though confidance in itself might not be a bad attribute. There's also a question I've gotten in many interviews that I think ended my ability to get the job. I answered as honestly as I could, and looking back I think they are why I was never considered further for the job. Every job I've successfully had never asked, "what's your worst quality?" or "why did you leave your last employers?" If I was a little more tactful in my approach I could have skitted by without answering and saved face. Now, several years later I've come up with a few things I think I might say if given those questions that would be better. On that note I hope I'm never given the opportunity to do so.

Either way in some instances job interviewers look at many applicants and look at both questions "why should I hire you," as well as "why shouldn't I hire you." In order to get through that process there's a phrase. Put your best foot forward. It entails dressing nice, being professional. Being mature and possibly more mature then you are on a regular basis, and in some cases, don't express your weaknesses. It's that last little bit that I put the idea that putting your best foot forward might be something that harms our being humble, truthful, or resisting being prideful.

 

[jasonc]

I dunno. In the world, not of it. Still have to be "in the world" for a season, so what sort of behavior is OK for us to engage in, and what isn't...good question.

I think about a relative. Older generation...dude started middle-middle class and worked up a corporate ladder back in the day and got rich. Beautiful, sophisticated wife, all that good stuff. Church goer since childhood. But....the church they went to was pretty much for rich people. Their Gospel is different from what I believe. This man used his own resources to push to make his state a "right to work state," which basically cripples unions and keeps wages low(er). What does Jesus have to say about all this?

Point is...he had what it took, raw material, plus the ability+willing-ness to adapt, and he succeeded. The church he went to was for other affluent people, so nobody questioned his behavior all that much. Is that right or wrong? Was he a genuine child of God, or was he soothing his conscience by going to this particular church and plucking out select Bible verses to prop up his rich dude view of the world and morality? If someone fails to adapt, are they immoral, mentally ill, maladjusted, a loser, a misfit, or...?

And if one's interpretation of Christ's teachings, put into action, result in a simple(r) lifestyle, less stuff, fewer friends, maybe less security...is that immoral, commendable, neither?

I have no real answers, obviously. I've actually been pondering things similar to this lately, so I'm just...adding more questions, lol.

Since you mentioned right to work,I'm in a union .what does the bible say about sluggards.I have seen the union protect and save jobs for a men who should have been fired for that. One in my shop.he didn't show up for a week.