Opinion

In 1979 Dr. Ellen Langer, a Psychology Professor at Harvard, designed a weeklong experiment for a group of 75-year-old men. The men knew very little about the nature of the experiment, except that they would be gone for a week. When the men arrived, they were told that for the coming week they were to pretend it was 1959 (not 1979) the time when these 75-year-old men were only 55-years-old. They were told to dress and act like they did at that time. They were given ID badges with pictures of themselves in their mid-50s.

Over the course of that week, they were instructed to talk about President Eisenhower (as though he were still President) and other events in their lives that had happened at that time. They were to talk about their old jobs like they were working in them now, and not as if they had retired from them. Copies of LIFE magazine and the Saturday Evening Post from 1959 were displayed on coffee tables. Everything was designed to make them see through the lens of their 55-year-old selves.

Before this retreat the men were tested on every aspect of life that we assume deteriorates with age. By the end of the retreat most of the men had improved in every one of these categories. For example, they were significantly more flexible, had better posture, and even much improved hand strength. Their average eyesight improved by almost 10%, as did their performance on tests of memory. In more than half the men intelligence increased as well. Their physical appearance changed. Random people who did not know anything about the experiment were shown pictures of the men before and after the experiment and asked to guess their age. Based on these objective ratings the men were described as looking on average three years younger than when they arrived.

Professor Langer demonstrated that even when objectively nothing has changed about us, simply having a different mindset can powerfully shape our reality.

Possible Preaching Angle:

In Ephesians 4:24-5:2, the Apostle Paul observed that when a person adopts a new mindset, not because they have been tricked into a different way of thinking because of their surroundings but, based on the reality of being made new creations, they can experience a profound transformation.

Grammy award-winning singer Billie Eilish says she has deleted her social media apps from her phone due to her complicated relationship with the internet.

In 2023 Eilish said, “I don’t look at it anymore. I’ve deleted it all off my phone.” She noted that the move was “such a huge deal” for her as a self-proclaimed “internet kid.”

I feel like I grew up in the perfect time of the internet when it wasn’t so internet-y that I didn’t have a childhood. I really had such a childhood, and I was doing stuff all the time. It was like computers and games on computers, but barely.

And then when I became a pre-teen, there were iPhones, and then I got a little older, there was all of what has become. But being a pre-teen and a teenager on the internet, those were my people, I was one of them. Anything I read on the internet I believe. And I know for a fact that’s stupid and I shouldn’t do that because I have proof that it’s not all true. Almost none of it’s true. It’s, like, little things, like small white lies that goes over everybody’s head, but everyone believes.

In a YouTube video, political commentor Konstantin Kisin reported:

They did an experiment with a group of women and they put scars on their faces. They told these women that they were going into a job interview and that the purpose of the experiment is to find out whether people with facial disfigurements encounter discrimination. They showed the women the scars in the mirror and the women saw themselves with the scars.

Then as they led them out of the room, they said, “We are just going to touch it up a little bit.” As they touched it up, they removed the scarring completely. So, the women went into the job interview thinking that they are scarred, but actually were their normal selves.

The result of the experiment is that those women came back reporting a massively increased level of discrimination. Indeed, many of them came back with comments that the interviewer had made that they felt were referencing their facial disfigurement.

This is why this ideology of victimhood is so dangerous. Because if you preach to people constantly that we’re all oppressed, then that primes people to look for that.

You can view this 60 second video here.

Possible Preaching Angle:

The Bible does recognize the reality of innocent victims, but it stops short of affirming a victim mentality. While the Bible promises that we will experience innocent suffering for the cause of Christ, it nowhere speaks of our being “victims” in the contemporary sense of the word. Rather, the Bible speaks of us as “victors.” You can overcome victim mentality through a relationship with Christ and the Word of God. Christ (1 Pet. 2:22-23), Paul (Phil. 1:12-14), and Joseph (Gen 50:19-21) all show us an example of someone who was victimized but overcame a victim mentality.

A clip from a Pursuit of Wonder video illustrates how man's ideas of what is true often turns out to be completely false.

In Peru in the middle of the 1400s, there was what is believed to be the largest known child sacrifice in the world, with about 140 children and more than 200 animals killed. The reason: attempting to appease the gods in response to unusually bad weather.

In Europe in the 17th century, just a few hundred years ago, it was widely believed that the earth was the center of the universe and everything else revolved around it. When the now famous astronomer Galileo Galilei published a work that showed that the sun was the center of the universe, and the earth revolved around the sun, the Roman inquisition banned his work and found Galileo guilty of heresy.

In the late 19th century, little more than a hundred years ago, doctors used what are now Schedule 1 drugs to treat common cold symptoms in children. Also, around this time, doctors believed it was foolish to wash their hands before delivering babies or during other medical procedures. Only eighty years ago, it was believed that cigarettes posed no health dangers.

And the list goes on. This Earth is not merely a cemetery of people that once were, but also a cemetery of ideas and beliefs once held to be true but are no longer.

You can watch the video here (2 mins 15 sec - 3 min 57 sec).

Wall Street Journal writer Joseph Epstein notes that the opinion poll has been around for more than a century. They gained authority in the 1940s with the polling methods of George Gallup. Now we put way too much stock in opinion polls. Epstein writes, “So endemic is polling that it feels as if what a politician does is less important than whether the public approves or disapproves.”

President Abraham Lincoln is an example of how to seek wise counsel and input from others without letting it run your life. Epstein writes:

Early in his presidency he set aside morning office hours to receive visitors, many seeking favors or attempting to exert influence, or merely wishing to shake the hand of the nation’s leader. … These visits … offered the president the opportunity, in these days before scientific public opinion polling, to get some idea of how ordinary people felt about him and his administration. Yet Lincoln, aware as he was of public sentiment, never allowed it ultimately to alter his policies or principles, which is one of the reasons he was a great man.

For instance, some critics blasted his 272-word Gettysburg Address for being too short. But Lincoln stood by the speech, and as we all know now, it became one of the greatest political speeches of all time.

In the year 1900, a German chocolate company released 12 postcards predicting what life would be like 100 years in the future. So how close were they to predicting our life today? Well, you decide based on these descriptions of the postcards from 1900:

• Personal airships (a picture of couples flying around in their personal hot air balloons).
• Watching a live drama performance while not in the theater. (You mean, kind of like television?)
• An X-ray machine for police officers. (To detect crimes in progress within buildings).
• A roofed city. (Like a football stadium under a dome).
• Underwater ships for tourists. (Like taking a Carnival or Norwegian cruise vacation in a submarine.)
• Easy excursions to the North Pole. (Hey, honey, let’s spend the weekend at the North Pole.)
• A machine for creating good weather.

Possible Preaching Angles:

The future is uncertain. Humans will always get some predictions right and some very wrong. But Jesus said he knows the future and he holds the future already.

A 20-year-old woman with cerebral palsy was pronounced dead by paramedics, and placed in a body bag. Three hours later, she was found alive. The ordeal started when Timesha Beauchamp was found by several relatives with pale lips and difficulty breathing, and called 911. When paramedics with the Fire Department arrived, they found her unresponsive and not breathing, according to family attorney Geoffrey Fieger.

After paramedics pronounced her dead, however, Timesha’s godmother, who works as a registered nurse, told the medics that she detected a faint pulse. Fieger said, “They told her the movements were involuntary. It did not change their opinion as to the fact that they felt she was dead … [but] when the body bag was opened and they were getting ready to embalm the body, Timesha's eyes were open and she was breathing.”

Fire Chief Johnny L. Menifee released a statement corroborating many of these details. "They checked multiple pulse points on the patient." He expressed disappointment that his medics missed the signs. Menifee said of the first responders, "They feel terrible that this happened. They can't imagine how this possibly happened. They're emotionally upset that this happened … and rightfully so.”

Possible Preaching Angle:

Even in situations that appear hopeless, there is always a possibility for a miracle. Don't stop believing just because experts tell you it's impossible.

Do some Christians harm their witness by falling into the trap of “moral grandstanding” or “virtue signaling”? Or do we convey the message that we are just as depraved as others? Clinical psychologist Joshua B. Grubbs writes about a study which asked 6,000 Americans questions about their most important moral and political beliefs and how they communicate them to others.

Almost everyone admitted they were occasionally guilty of grandstanding--sharing their beliefs selfishly for respect or status. However, habitual grandstanders experienced conflicts in their personal relationships:

People who reported grandstanding more often also reported more experiences arguing with loved ones and severing ties with friends or family members over political or moral disagreements. People who indicated using their deepest held beliefs to boost their own status in real life also reported more toxic social media behaviors. (These include) picking fights over politics on Facebook and berating strangers on Twitter for having the “wrong” opinions.

Grubbs advises all grandstanders to check their motivations: “When you enter into contentious territory with someone who differs in opinion, ask whether you’re doing so because you’re genuinely interested in communicating and connecting with your fellow human. Or are you just trying to score points? ... Do you find yourself trying to one-up the good deeds of someone else to make yourself look good to people whose respect you crave?”

Some people know that the musicians, Taylor Swift and Kanye West, had a very public falling out in 2016. What people didn't know until recently was why the incident affected Taylor so much that she hid from the public eye. The Washington Post reports what she said in a Netflix documentary: "When people decided that I was wicked and evil and conniving and not a good person, that was the one I couldn't really bounce back from, because my whole life was centered around it."

She even describes getting into the music business for the very same reason: "We're people who got into this line of work because we wanted people to like us, because we were intrinsically insecure, because we liked the sound of people clapping, because it made us forget how much we feel like we're not good enough."

Possible Preaching Angle:

It might seem that legalism is dead and gone in this "live and let live" world, but experiences like this tell us that legalism is still very much alive. Many, like Taylor, experience a relentless drive to prove themselves “good enough” to those around them.

Jesus’ resurrection either happened or it didn't. It is objective reality; and so it cannot be true for one person and false for another. To prove this point, Sean McDowell related the following experiment:

I placed a jar of marbles in front of my students and asked, "How many marbles are in the jar?" They responded with different guesses: 221, 168, and so on. Then after giving them the correct number of 188, I asked, "Which of you is closest to being right?" While they all agreed that 168 was the closest guess, they understood and agreed that the number of marbles was a matter of objective fact and not one determined by personal preference.

Then I passed out Starburst candies to each student and asked, "Which flavor is right?" As you might expect, they all felt this to be a nonsense question because each person had a preference that was right for them. "That is correct," I concluded. "The right flavor has to do with a person's preferences. It is a matter of subjective opinion or personal preference, not objective fact.”

Then I asked, “Are religious claims objective facts, like the number of marbles in a jar, or are they only a matter of personal opinion, like one's candy preference?" Most students concluded that religious claims belonged in the category of candy preference. I then opened the door for us to discuss the objective claims of Christianity. I pointed out that Christianity is based on an objective historical fact—the resurrection of Jesus. I reminded them that while many people may reject the historical resurrection of Jesus, it is not the type of claim that can be "true for you, but not true for me.” The tomb was either empty on the third day, or it was occupied—there is no middle ground. Before anyone can grasp the transforming power of the resurrection of Jesus, he or she must realize that it is a matter of objective fact, not of personal preference.

In an article having to do with the socializing of Supreme Court justices Justice Scalia shared some of his wisdom: Ruth Bader Ginsburg fondly recalled her closest friend on the court, who always gave her roses on her birthday and shared her reverence for the law. Scalia was once asked, she told the audience, how they could be such dear friends with such different views. Justice Scalia answered, "I attack ideas. I don't attack people. Some very good people have some very bad ideas. If you can't separate the two, you'd better get another job."

In the World Cup many of the matches will be determined by one of the tensest showdowns in pro sports: the PK, or penalty kick. It's over in about half a second, and you have a goal or you have a player who's a goat. I mean, how can you miss? The ball is placed only 12 yards away, and that goal is 8 yards wide and 8 feet high.

But here's an interesting stat about those kicks. Goalkeepers jump left 57 percent of the time and right 41 percent, which means they stay in the center only 2 times out of 100. In other words, it's a pretty clear bet that if you shoot right down the middle you'll score. But only 17 percent of the kicks are aimed down the center. Why? Because the keeper is standing right in the middle, and if you shoot it right at him, you will look like a complete idiot. In other words, according to Steven Levitt and Stephen J. Dunbar in their new book Think Like a Freak, the fear of shame prevents soccer players from considering a great option.

Possible Preaching Angle:

How about us? Does the fear of failure and shame prevent us from doing the right thing?

As a disciple, Peter was not the kind of guy you'd go to in the clutch, to use sports terminology. In his early years, whenever he opened his mouth, it was usually to change feet. He was the one who, when the spotlight pointed his way, ended up embarrassing himself.

On the day of Pentecost, a holy and historic moment in front of a large crowd, Peter had something to say--of course. But would it be something appropriate or totally off target? His track record wasn't good. Peter didn't have a history of rising to the occasion.

If I'd been there as Peter stood, I'd have cringed. Oh, no! What's he going to say now? But Peter said exactly what was needed. His powerful words pierced the hearts of the crowd, and (Acts 2:41) says that "those who accepted his message were added to their number that day."

It was the high-water mark of his ministry.

On the other hand, consider the man named Stephen, whom the Bible describes as "full of the Holy Spirit and wisdom." His character was deep and sound. In addition to his spiritual depth, Stephen was also an educated man. When he spoke in public, he was persuasive--so much so that those who opposed him "could not stand up against his wisdom or the Spirit by whom he spoke." This led those who opposed him to drum up false charges against him.

(Acts 7) contains Stephen's self-defense to the authorities who called him in for questioning. His message was every bit as direct, pointed, and scriptural as Peter's sermon at Pentecost. Like Peter, he was called upon to bear witness to Christ in a tough setting, and like Peter, he was equal to the task.

But unlike Peter, the results were far different. When Peter finished, the crowd responded with repentance and faith. When Stephen finished, the crowd responded by dragging him outside the city and killing him. As far as we know, no one accepted his message that day. In fact, (Acts 8:1) says, "On that day a great persecution broke out against the church at Jerusalem."

It doesn't seem fair! Peter's message led to mass conversion, while Stephen's led to mass persecution.

As a result of his sermon, Peter surfaced as the preeminent leader of the early church. As a result of his sermon, Stephen didn't surface--he ended up six feet under.

Ironically, Stephen is the one who had shows more spiritual maturity. He deserved success. He hadn't failed Christ as Peter had. He hadn't been a public embarrassment to his Lord. He hadn't displayed his pride and concern with "greatness." Stephen had agreed to assume the low-profile, no-limelight position of distributing food to needy widows. He was questioned by the authorities because he faithfully obeyed the mandate to be a witness. It was this faithfulness that killed him.

From surface appearances, we'd label Peter's ministry a success and Stephen's a failure. Peter got the response and the recognition. As far as we know, only one individual who saw Stephen die became a believer, and that not directly because of Stephen's witness.

It doesn't take much imagination to transport these two into the twentieth century. Peter would have his picture in magazines and be a keynote speaker at church conferences. Stephen would have his ministerial life summary in the obituary section of the denominational magazine. While we'd admire his willingness to die, a number of us would say, "You know, I always thought he'd amount to more than he did."

In the stories of Peter and Stephen, I learn a great deal about success in ministry--in God's eyes and in ours.

The production of art and entertainment for commercial reasons is an old story; what may be new is the elevation of this practice into a principle, and the establishment of a system based on it. ...

In classical political theory, the marketplace was a forum in which anyone who had anything on his mind could express it. According to this theory, the chain of events by which the public found out about the world began with the individual person looking out upon the world and reflecting on what he saw; then, perhaps after much labor, the person brought the product of his thought to the marketplace, there to be displayed with the work of others; and then the public picked and chose what it liked.

But in the new system the ends of the chain have been joined to form a closed loop. The individual, instead of looking out upon the world, looks out upon public opinion, trying to find out what the public would like to hear. Then he tries his best to duplicate that, and brings his finished product into a marketplace in which others are competing to do the same. The public, turning to our culture to find out about the world, discovers there nothing but its own reflection. The unexamined world, meanwhile, drifts blind into the future.

Belief that fashion alone should dominate opinion has great advantages. It makes thought unnecessary and puts the highest intelligence within the range of everyone.

Around a man who has been pushed into the limelight, a legend begins to grow as it does around a dead man. But a dead man is in no danger of yielding to the temptation to nourish his legend, or accept its picture as reality. I pity the man who falls in love with his image as it is drawn by public opinion during the honeymoon of publicity.

The abolishment of pain in surgery is a chimera. It is absurd to go on seeking it today. "Knife" and "pain" are two words in surgery that must forever be associated in the consciousness of the patient. To this compulsory combination we shall have to adjust ourselves.

That is the biggest fool thing we have ever done. The bomb will never go off, and I speak as an expert on explosives.

The population of the earth decreases every day, and, if this continues, in another ten centuries the earth will be nothing but a desert.

I have never heard of anything, and I cannot conceive of anything more ridiculous, more absurd, and more affrontive to all sober judgment than the cry that we are profiting by the acquisition of New Mexico and California. I hold that they are not worth a dollar!