Making dangerous assumptions

I admit, I've long had a problem with assumptions.

In the early years of our marriage, this caused no small amount of misunderstanding.

I would assume that Danny would automatically know how I really felt about something and make his decisions based on that knowledge.

We lived in a one-bedroom alley house in Worland, Wyo., during my pregnancy with Ben. It was a cute little place, close to Danny's work, the grocery store and the laundromat, which was a good thing, because we didn't own a car. The price was right as well. We paid just $75 a month for the cozy little cottage.

Danny used to play a blues harp. I loved to listen to him. He wanted to amplify the sound and one day found a decent speaker for sale that could be used in building a homemade amplifier. He knew money was tight - so he checked with me first before laying out the $5 asking price.

When he came back, with speaker in hand, I came undone. I had given him the answer he wanted, but I had spoken it in words meant to lead him into making a different decision. To this day he blames the resulting tirade on out-of-control hormones caused by my advancing pregnancy, and perhaps there is some validity to that assumption.

But actually, I was just mad. He was supposed to know, in spite of my words to the contrary, that a $5 outlay on something as useless (in my opinion) as a speaker was not a reasonable purchase at the time.

He was so taken aback by my reaction, he took the speaker back. We both remember the incident clearly 28 years later.

There are more examples, but none quite as vivid as this one. I try to remember now that mind-reading isn't one of Danny's natural talents, nor would I want it to be.

I applied that same assumptive logic to my readings in the New Testament about the end times. Repeated warnings about false teachers, churches falling away from the truth, congregations giving heed to those that tickle the ears rather than to deliverers of true doctrine ... I thought, who couldn't see that coming? And, if they saw it coming, I reasoned, they'd recognize it straight away and do something about it.

I applied that same assumption to the warnings of wars, rumors of wars, and the increases in natural calamities such as earthquakes, fires and flooding.

And certainly, I thought, any kind of worldwide identification plan would immediately meet with strong opposition, too close in resemblance to the "mark of the beast" that appears in Revelation for anyone to allow it to go beyond the planning stages.

I'm kind of having to rethink things. The assumptions I assumed would be made aren't holding up.

Surely the apostasy revealed recently at the General Conference for the Episcopalians is just one example of a falling away from the truth.

These are educated people, well-versed in Scripture, virtually raised on the bread of life. Yet they have made a decision that flies in the face of God and all that they have ever learned of him or from him.

Unfortunately, it isn't an isolated incident. Each time a body of believers departs from a spiritual truth the church that Christ formed suffers the loss.

Whether it is embracing homosexuality as an acceptable alternative lifestyle, no-fault divorce, or sacrificing the unborn on the altar of convenience, each departure from truth wounds the church Christ died to save.

I know all of the arguments favoring these and other issues that face the church. In each case proponents bring up the most extreme examples of why it couldn't possibly be wrong, at least or especially in this (read "my") case.

The homosexual, who for years looked to environment as the cause of his affliction, now makes the argument that they have been made this way, by God, no less, and have no choice. Abortion proponents always trot out the rape victim; the malformed baby or the threat to the woman's health. And what about the abusive spouse or the spouse who is emotionally distant or simply impossible to live with? Divorce is the only reasonable solution, for surely "God wants me to be happy."

To each I would counter -- if God has said something is wrong, such as homosexuality, divorce or abortion, no amount of human justification can make it right.

As to the person who is inexplicably attracted to members of their own gender I would suggest celibacy. Contrary to the world's view, sexual activity is not a necessary component of a satisfactory life, nor will you die without it.

To the woman who fears the birth of a child due to the nature of conception, the condition of the child conceived or the threat to her own life, I would counter with the argument that God has numbered our days and we cannot add to them. He also knits the baby together in the womb and always with purpose, including those who it seems, in the world's view, have no measurable quality of life.

And to the one who would divorce without scriptural cause, I would counter with the reminder of how seriously God takes our taking of vows and how precious family is to him, demonstrated most vividly when he sent his only begotten son to a cruel death. That's how much he longs to be father to the fatherless. To purposely make children fatherless through divorce is untenable in the eyes of God.

This erosion of truth is a dangerous thing. Each time we concede a fundamental truth -- whatever the expedient justification at the time -- it becomes easier to concede the next truth, and then the next and so on, until we wake up one day to discover that we have conceded every issue of faith and faith, the defining element that made us different from the world, is dead.

-- "For it is time for judgment to begin with the family of God; and if it begins with us, what will be the outcome for those who do not obey the gospel of God?" I Peter 4:17