Praise the Child, Spoil the Child

Reid,

I think you've fallen for the same misconception that most people fall into when dealing with the issue of self-esteem. People hear stories about schools eliminating scores from soccer games or parents over praising their children without merit. These stories merely highlight how (generally speaking) people misunderstand how to appropriately develop one’s ego through increasing one’s self-esteem.

What is self-esteem? In it’s most basic meaning, it is one’s reputation with one’s self. One could have healthy self-esteem or unhealthy self-esteem. Wouldn’t you agree that it is important for one to hold oneself in high regard rather than low regard? After all, isn’t it a tenet of parenting that we teach children to respect their elders? Why not themselves? How can they respect their elders without first respecting themselves.

I find it very interesting that most Christians that talk about self-esteem have an aversion to it as if it represents an anti-Christian philosophy. They describe as if it was evil. They present it as the antithesis of Jesus’ message. I submit to you that this is one of the most egregious misunderstandings that many Christians have about their own “Christ’s” message. It is one of the most fundamental flaws that Christian believers have of their own religion. I also submit to you that love of oneself is one of the most important aspects of Christianity. In fact, I would also add that love for oneself is much more important than love for others. This is at the heart of Christianity.

Matthew 22:39 states “Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself”, and Matthew 22:40 states “On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets”.

It’s clear that one cannot love one’s neighbor without first loving oneself. The greater the love for oneself, the greater the love one can give to others. It’s poetic and it’s simple. Apparently, too simple.

Thanks Bert, I appreciate the post. Did you read the article in NY Magazine?

As to your thoughts on Christianity - I never said we should hate, despise, etc. one's self. Only that we do not find life and joy by working oh so hard on loving ourselves.

Jesus assumes that one cares about oneself - that is why he tells us we should love others in the way we love ourselves. He is not endorsing selfishness or self-centeredness. He assumes that we all will "love ourselves" he does not command it. There is no command in the Bible that says "love yourself!" Here the command is "love thy neighbor" - the same can be said of the golden rule, do to others as you would have them do to you. Jesus assumes that we are going to understand these commands because we are by nature "concerned with ourselves." The self-esteem movement makes the self the center, and this is a problem, as this place belongs only to God.

Scripture teaches much more on love. Here is some more passages:

Philippians 2
So if there is any encouragement in Christ, any comfort from love, any participation in the Spirit, any affection and sympathy, 2 complete my joy by being of the same mind, having the same love, being in full accord and of one mind. 3 Do nothing from rivalry or conceit, but in humility count others more significant than yourselves. 4 Let each of you look not only to his own interests, but also to the interests of others. 5 Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus, [1] 6 who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, 7 but made himself nothing, taking the form of a servant, [2] being born in the likeness of men. 8 And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. 9 Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name, 10 so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, 11 and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

1 John 4
13 By this we know that we abide in him and he in us, because he has given us of his Spirit. 14 And we have seen and testify that the Father has sent his Son to be the Savior of the world. 15 Whoever confesses that Jesus is the Son of God, God abides in him, and he in God. 16 So we have come to know and to believe the love that God has for us. God is love, and whoever abides in love abides in God, and God abides in him. 17 By this is love perfected with us, so that we may have confidence for the day of judgment, because as he is so also are we in this world. 18 There is no fear in love, but perfect love casts out fear. For fear has to do with punishment, and whoever fears has not been perfected in love. 19 We love because he first loved us. 20 If anyone says, “I love God,” and hates his brother, he is a liar; for he who does not love his brother whom he has seen cannot love God whom he has not seen. 21 And this commandment we have from him: whoever loves God must also love his brother.

Romans 12
3 For by the grace given to me I say to everyone among you not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think, but to think with sober judgment, each according to the measure of faith that God has assigned. 4 For as in one body we have many members, [5] and the members do not all have the same function, 5 so we, though many, are one body in Christ, and individually members one of another. 6 Having gifts that differ according to the grace given to us, let us use them: if prophecy, in proportion to our faith; 7 if service, in our serving; the one who teaches, in his teaching; 8 the one who exhorts, in his exhortation; the one who contributes, in generosity; the one who leads, [6] with zeal; the one who does acts of mercy, with cheerfulness.

Thanks again for the post, and do no that I do not encourage us to hate ourselves...but to loathe our sin and look to God to change us and mold us into new people. Transformation is good - I think it is a mistake to get stuck thinking - I am fine just the way I am.

Blessings

Blair,

You say “Jesus assumes that one cares about oneself - that is why he tells us we should love others in the way we love ourselves”. I think your assumption of what Jesus assumes is wrong. There’s no evidence to suggest that Jesus makes this assumption. Therefore, we should try to understand what he is saying simply and logically. “Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself “. Love for your neighbor flows from love for yourself, not the other way around. The greater love one has for oneself, the greater one’s capacity to love others (that’s why a sociopath has so much difficulty with others – his difficulties stem from is own personal problems, not the other way around).

The mistake most people make is to misunderstand self-esteem or self-respect for pompousness or pride or greed, among other things. Most of us love ourselves; it’s just a question of degree. This is an innate part of being human. You cannot avoid it.

Blair, you have the same misunderstanding. You state, “He is not endorsing selfishness or self-centeredness”. Yes you are correct. But to make this statement, you must be assuming that to have healthy self-esteem, one must be selfish and self-centered. Where did you learn this?

You say, “The same can be said of the golden rule, do to others as you would have them do to you”. Correct. So, is this an endorsement for rapists and murderers? Are you saying that it’s O.K. for rapists and murderers to do what they do, provided they are willing to have it done to them? (Of course you’re not). The golden rule states, in its’ most fundamental essence, that the greater respect one has for oneself, the greater respect one has for others.

You are correct in stating that, “The self-esteem movement makes the self the center.” However, this should not be misinterpreted to mean at the expense of all others, or that one can use this as a means to perform immoral acts. It doesn’t. People feel threatened by this in part because we’ve been programmed for centuries to put the group ahead of the individual. This kind of thinking has led to atrocities such as the Holocaust. President Bush on many occasions has said that people should commit to something “greater than themselves” in order to boost enrollment in the military (please not that I don’t mean to equate the Holocaust with Iraq).

Blair, you state that, “I think it is a mistake to get stuck thinking - I am fine just the way I am”. I couldn’t agree more. Healthy self-esteem requires us to constantly look at who we are from both subjective and objective points of view, and to make corrections and improvements. I’m sure Jesus would agree.

Thanks for this post and engaging in this conversation.

Sorry Reid, but as you can see, I've been calling you Blair. I meant no disrespect.

Bert, who the freak is Blair :) Just kidding. No problem.

You said that I am mistaken that Jesus statement "assumes" self love. I think that the only way to understand that sentence simply and logically is to know that Jesus assumed his hearer and reader would know what it is "to love oneself"

Maybe you in quoting the old KJV you are missing what the term "as" means. The greek term is ὡς (hōs) whihch means - how, in what manner; a marker indicating how something occurred. As yourself, means in the manner of which you love yourself. The command isn't - start loving yourself, then love can flow to others. It is a presupposition that people "do" love themselves and neglect others - the command would not needed otherwise.

Then you went on to say: "Most of us love ourselves; it’s just a question of degree." Isn't that my point? Jesus assumes it?

On the golden rule deal, again, even rapists and murders probably do not want to be raped and murdered. I think this is his point - most of us like to be treated decently. So Jesus tells us - treat other people like that.

Your use of the Holocaust is a bit of a fallacy. Group think is evil when it encourages evil. The ethical issues underlying Nazism is what caused the evil doing. It is not putting others first that causes evil doing. Please do not forget, I think we should put God first, the person and ethics of Jesus first. Sometimes that means you must say "to hell with the group" - here I stand.

As we look at ourselves it should not be a self centered process. But in view of a proper mirror. We should examine ourselves in light of who God is, realize we fall short, but he loves us and extends grace, so we realize our value. We also see ourselves in community and not autonomous individuals on a quest for self-realization.

Anyway, thank you for engaging as well. Important stuff.

Reid, the Greek translation supports my argument. Jesus is saying that we should love others in the manner that we love ourselves. I suppose that you are right in saying that Jesus presupposes that we love ourselves. I don’t imagine he would say this as a curse (that he would recommend people with no self-love treat others poorly).

By bigger point however is that Jesus is endorsing the concept of self-love or more appropriately, self-respect (one cannot love what we cannot first respect). He is endorsing the idea that one must work on developing the self. If he is presupposing the idea that we love ourselves, then let’s take that further and ask whether he is suggesting that we love ourselves to the fullest, SO THAT WE MAY LOVE OTHERS TO THE FULLEST.

We should not be afraid of the self. We should not be afraid of loving oneself. It doesn’t mean that we are placing ourselves above God. They are not mutually exclusive. If the kingdom of heaven lies within, then honoring the self is honoring God. There should be no conflict.

Aren’t Christians putting themselves ahead of all else? Are they not placing their own need for self-actualization and salvation ahead of everything else? Are they not serving the self by doing this? Is that not what god wants them to do? In that respect, can we not say that Christians are just as “selfish” as anyone else, no matter what their claims are regarding self-sacrifice? Can we not say that Christians place the self above everything (except god)? I believe these answers to be in the affirmative. The mistake is to believe that the self and god are mutually exclusive. If god gave you life, don’t you want to hold it in the highest possible regard? Don’t you want to nurture it, love and treat it with the greatest respect? I believe that god wants us to. Not doing so would be to disrespect and dishonor him. You’ve stated that, “we do not find life and joy by working oh so hard on loving ourselves”. Does that mean you do not find life and joy by pursuing your own salvation?

Let me explain the Holocaust analogy Reid. It’s my contention that the reason that the Holocaust occurred was not just because of the philosophical bent of the SS or of Hitler, and that they convinced the population that Jews were not human. Rather, it was because the population submitted to their authority, and to the authority of the group. They threw their own rational thought out the window, and submitted to the metaphysics of a higher authority. They believed that it was the government that understood the true nature of reality, rather than themselves. Therefore, they abdicated one of their most basic responsibilities as human beings: the responsibility to think for themselves. They allowed others to think for them. They placed themselves under the authority of the government. Stanley Milgrim’s famous study on obedience to authority (http://home.swbell.net/revscat/perilsOfObedience.html) makes this point very clearly. Milgrim himself states "For a person to feel responsible for his actions, he must sense that the behavior has flowed from "the self."” It wasn’t “the ethical issues underlying Nazism is what caused the evil doing”. It is because the population submitted to their authority and allowed it to happen.

Bert, I think you are missing the big picture. Many people take one verse of Scripture and read their own worldview into it. I am not saying that we should not value ourselves, but that there is no command to "self-love."

Let me give you another verse from Jesus, that if not balanced within the context of the corpus of his other teaching would be grossly misinterpreted.

This is also from Matthew (ch 16)
Then Jesus told his disciples, “If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me. Now, how do you interpret this? The cross btw is an instrument of death.

Again, Jesus says this about the human heart (self) in Mark 7.

20 And he said, “What comes out of a person is what defiles him. 21 For from within, out of the heart of man, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, 22 coveting, wickedness, deceit, sensuality, envy, slander, pride, foolishness. 23 All these evil things come from within, and they defile a person.”

Additionally, the apostle Paul teaches us that we need new "selves" and that we need to put off the old self (Col 3, Eph 4). In fact the old self needs to be crucified so that we can be reborn.

So the view of Jesus, the view of Scripture is a bit more complex than saying "love yourself."

Yes, salvation is the pursuit of joy in God, but it is not a pursuit that puts self in the center. It is a completely free gift from God (Eph 2.8,9). The reponse to this gift is joyful following and a denial of self and a transformation of the self.

I am simply wary of the movement that tells a person the main thing they should focus on is themselves, loving themselves, etc. Now if a guy is hating himself, I would ask him to focus on the love and grace of God, Jesus sacrificial death for his sorry self and then find peace in God's acceptance.

Human beings are both intrinsically valuable and depraved. We need to know that we are valued by God and we should see our depravity and need of forgiveness, salvation and transformation. We need a balanced anthropology. This I find in the gospel. You can read my little treatment of that here.

Group think like that of the Nazi's is dangerous of course. I don't agree. In that case it was because the people were evil doers. What if a big group thought the same way in order to reduce poverty? I think the ethics of the leadership is important...and you are correct, we as individuals have a duty to God and conscience to not follow a wicked crowd.

Thanks Bert. This has been a good discussion.

there is no command to "self-love. It is a presupposition that people "do" love themselves and neglect others - the command would not needed otherwise

Reid, I understand your point of view. But let me ask you, when Jesus says “Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself”, to what degree does Jesus presuppose one loves oneself? Is it to the fullest, or perhaps 20% of our capacity or perhaps 70%? Does he presuppose that all humans love themselves to the fullest? We know that many, many people suffer from low self-esteem and a lack of affection for themselves, and I think that Jesus was aware of this. After all, Mary Magdalene was a prostitute (although historically improvable). As such, one can make the case that she suffered from a lack of respect for herself and her body. Love thy neighbor as thyself for her would have meant that she first needed to respect herself. Otherwise, she would have gone around treating others the way she was treated - like a prostitute. The more respect she has for herself, the more she could give to others.

You may call it a command, a suggestion, a recommendation or anything else but the fact
remains: Jesus advocates love for the self. It is the basis of all healthy human relationships, including ones relationship with god. After all, if it were true that all life comes from god, then would you not respect your own life; your own body; your own mind? One cannot be afraid of this even thought in may sound conceited or subversive.

And he said, “What comes out of a person is what defiles him. 21 For from within, out of the heart of man, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, 22 coveting, wickedness, deceit, sensuality, envy, slander, pride, foolishness. 23 All these evil things come from within, and they defile a person.”

Reid, a one-dimensional understanding of this passage would make your point. However, one would have to presume a lot to believe that Jesus meant the ONLY things to come out of a person were the aforementioned. Come on.

Additionally, the apostle Paul teaches us that we need new "selves" and that we need to put off the old self (Col 3, Eph 4). In fact the old self needs to be crucified so that we can be reborn.

I agree. And when the new selves become the old selves, what then? Are they evil too? Man is doing this all the time. People are reinventing themselves all the time. What’s the problem?

The response to this gift is joyful following and a denial of self and a transformation of the self.

Reid, how can one transform what one denies. How can one deny the self and then transform it. It’s logically impossible. One must first accept the self, with all of it’s imperfections, perfections and everything in between. Only then can one transform and then transcend the self and become a new, more actualized self; one more capable of serving god (to put it in Christian terms).

I am simply wary of the movement that tells a person the main thing they should focus on is themselves, loving themselves, etc.

I am wary of the same thing. This goes back to my original point about people misinterpreting what self-esteem is and what it is not. People generally misinterpret self-esteem with conceit or an inflated sense of self. That is not what healthy self-esteem is. Healthy self-esteem begins with a truthful and accurate assessment of what one is at the present, be it positive or negative. The essence of healthy self-esteem is truth. And one cannot be truthful if one has an inflated or conceited sense of self. This understanding is essential if one is engaging in a discussion of self-esteem.

I also understand how loving the self flies in the face of Christian belief.

In that case it was because the people were evil doers.
Reid, it wasn’t the people that were committing the atrocities, but a relatively small group of SS. The public was complicit in the crimes but was not committing the crimes per se. My point for using this example however was merely to show that when one abdicates one’s responsibility for thought, one makes oneself less human. To think is to be human; not to think is to be less human Out of this disrespect for oneself, one allows others to determine one’s reality or one’s behaviour. In essence, this is what happened in Germany. The public allowed the few to determine the actions of the many. If there were more people thinking independently (and following up those thoughts with concrete action), perhaps the Holocaust would never have occurred.

This has been a good discussion.

Agreed. Let’s keep it going.

Quickly...

- On Mary of Magdala - she was changed because she was loved by God and forgiven, not that she learned to love herself. We love because he first loved us. His love validated her and of course this led to a changed view of herself. But it started with Jesus - not her telling herself lies about how wonderful she is. She was forgiven and then guilt and shame was lifted from her

- Of course all that flows from a person is not bad. But Jesus is clear that the self IS the source of our crap. We should not love that.

- On Paul - we agree :) But let me add that his view of old self and new self are not self created selves, but rather the old sinful nature and the new nature which has been "born, made alive" by God. We are literally "new creations" in Christ.

- Apologies for my poor use of language and producing a logical conundrum. I equivocated terms.

Deny self = deny our desires for our own way to follow God. We turn from our selfish desires, ambitions, plans, etc. to follow Jesus. We turn from our old way and follow his way. This is a volitional denial that I did not make clear.

Transformation of the self - this is a work of God by which we live more towards our new nature, leaving sinful patterns, and ways of life with the assistance of the Spirit.

- Bert, this quote is very helpful stuff...very clear and I agree:
Healthy self-esteem begins with a truthful and accurate assessment of what one is at the present, be it positive or negative. The essence of healthy self-esteem is truth. And one cannot be truthful if one has an inflated or conceited sense of self. This understanding is essential if one is engaging in a discussion of self-esteem.

I would only add we only know the truth of ourselves before the face of God. For it is only with God that we cannot hide and all pretense is gone. I hate it when Christians act as if they can put up some front that even God cannot see through. I love your encouragement towards authenticity.

- Lets finish the Nazi talk - I think we are both making good points. Remember though, the SS and Nazi leadership embraced a Nietzschian view that they were special individuals ruling above the herd. Deeply tragic.

Thanks again

Reid, it sounds to me like our major difference is that you believe change comes from an external source (god) and that I believe that change comes from within. Would you agree?

I am more of a deist (even though I’m not entirely sure that there is a god). I believe that I am the source of my change, my behaviour, my emotions and my thoughts. I don’t believe that god or anyone else has anything to do with it. I believe that I am responsible for my life, not anyone else (including god) I believe that if there is a god, and he is the creator of life, then the best way to live my life is to be the best human being I can be – not because he will punish me or reward me – but simply because that’s how I see life to be lived. At the core of my life is my ego (the “I” or self of any person). It is important for me to develop a healthy sense of self (healthy self-esteem).

If god gave me this gift of life, looking to him (rather than me) as a means of solving my problems or for ‘divine intervention’ or for anything else, is in a way a rejection of this gift. It’s saying that I’m not good enough and that I need your help. You’ve said this in your blog and I hear it from others as well. We keep looking to god to solve our problems when we should look to ourselves. If we are the problem, that we must also be the solution.

As a parent, my main purpose is to prepare my children for life ON THEIR OWN. I’m trying to teach them to solve their own problems, and to know that their destiny is in their own hands, not in mine or anyone else’s. I am trying to teach them responsibility. I hope they don’t come to me when they’re in their 40s asking me solve their problems the way they do now. That is not the purpose of parenting at that stage.

God gave us life – the rest is up to us. Why do we keep giving it back to him? Why do we keep telling him its not good enough, can you make it better? Why do we keep telling him that we’re not good enough.

Bert, yes your first line is accurate. I agree completely. You seek transformation from self to the self. I seek it from God, through the self, to the world. I would say it is God initiated, self participated, and guided towards a certain end...namely virtue or godliness. But it begins with God's initiative work in our lives to forgive us and reconcile us with him.

Please do not think that my position is that we should not work to solve problems. Yet problems need right diagnosis, and then they need right solutions. You are arguing that self can properly diagnose and then solve all its problems. Yet what if one of the problems is relational...that one's relationship with God and others is fractured, in rebellion etc. The Christian gospel contends that human beings are indeed in rebellion against their creator and consequentially have relationships and selves that are broken. Our rebellion against God can be expressed either overtly and stridently or passively and subtlety. To hell with you God! would be the former. I can do it without you, I do not need you or I do not want your guidance is the latter.

If he is Lord of life, and defines how he desires (generally speaking) human beings to live...ie, according to virtue, according to its design, and his ways. God has not designed us to live in autonomous, complete self-determination. As if we had that level of control in life anyway. This is an illusion that Western man has bought. We cannot control everything in life, not even the manner and day of our death.

We hold that God, rather, is the ultimate sovereign of all things and our selves find wholeness in reconciled relationship with God and others.

My contention is "learn to solve your problems" and yes I do not want my kids to be helpless at 40. But the problem of sin and death (dying) has been solved not by us, but by God on our behalf. He then architects and leads us in the ways which truly bring life, joy and peace.

We prefer life as a "choose your own adventure book" where we make the rules, we define our own right and wrong, we can dictate all paths and we fix all the problems. There is one major problem with this - the universe will not suddenly adapt to our individual whims. We are not the sovereign over all things and the human race has demonstrated empirically how horrible we have been on fixing things. Just think of the efforts in the 20th century by Stalin and Mao to recreate a new order and fix stuff. Look at all the problems in the world Bert, it is a big mess don't you think? Not all of it, it is a mess mingled with beauty and goodness as well.

The contention of Jesus is this: salvation is from the Lord. So this is our difference. I will use my God given intellect, emotions, and will to solve problems, but I will try to seek that from his ways which are seem and taught in the way of Jesus. First his death for my sin provides forgiveness and reconciliation with God from whom which we were under just condemnation. Second, he then calls us to a new way, which we live through complex situations, choices, and problem solving in life.

There is a hebrew proverb that all people should read: There is a way that seems right to a man but in the end it leads to death.

We are not our own best guides...but following Jesus we can solve some problems.

Thanks Bert,
Reid

PS - I did not grow up Christian, flirted with Deism in the 11th grade after reading Voltaire, but remained an agnostic until I was converted at 19 while studying Physics at UNC Chapel Hill.

I agree completely. You seek transformation from self to the self. I seek it from God, through the self, to the world. I would say it is God initiated, self participated, and guided towards a certain end...namely virtue or godliness. But it begins with God's initiative work in our lives to forgive us and reconcile us with him.

Reid, what of those who don’t believe in god, but still become moral, virtuous individuals. How do they achieve this without god?

You are arguing that self can properly diagnose and then solve all its problems.

Reid, I haven’t said this. The self is too subjective to accomplish this in many cases. The self sometimes requires objectivity. However, in most cases, one can determine if there is a problem by looking at oneself objectively or subjectively, as the case requires. Can one solve all of one’s problems by itself? Sometimes yes; sometimes no. It depends. The question I have is why should we seek god’s help when in many cases, god has empowered us to do it ourselves. Why throw it back to him? I don’t need god’s help if I am crossing the street do I?

We cannot control everything in life

Agreed. But we can control ourselves. We have ultimate responsibility over ourselves. Some people accept this responsibility, and some people do not.

We are not the sovereign over all things and the human race has demonstrated empirically how horrible we have been on fixing things.

Agreed. But if you think that I’m saying this, you’re missing the point. Why do you paint everyone with the same brush (because one human does something wrong, then the human race must be fundamentally flawed). Because people do bad things, one cannot say that the human race is intrinsically bad. Because some people place their selves over all else, one cannot say that the human self is intrinsically bad or good. Because Bin Laden is a terrorist, one cannot say that Islam itself is flawed because of his flawed interpretation (same for Timothy McVeigh).

Reid, everything we do flows from the self. We see god from the subjective I. We interpret the bible from the subjective I. We view the world from the subjective I. We pray from the subjective I. We do everything from the subjective I. Without the you Reid, there would be no Reid to believe in what you believe in. It defies logic to negate the I. If you do, tell me what is doing the praying. What is doing the virtuous acts? What is living the moral life?