Skip to main content

The Value of Labels

This will be the second time I've posted regarding a quote from my General Psychology textbook. Regardless of your thoughts on psychology, these quotes are quality. In discussion about mental handicaps and disorders, the author of the book said, "Labels are debilitating at best." He is referring to the assigning of labels to kids or adults with seeming handicaps. He is not speaking of people who actually are mentally disabled, but rather of people who receive a label and consequently act a certain way because that is "who they are" now.

The more I talk with Christians, the more this truth is apparent in Christian circles. It almost becomes a game of "Which came first: the chicken or the egg?" with their beliefs. Corresponding Question: Does our being a _____ make us believe a certain way, or does the fact that we believe a certain way (based on Scripture, I hope) make us have a certain label in others' eyes. For the sake of many things, I hope the latter is true. Labels can be debilitating in Christianity. If a fundamentalist calls me a "new evangelical," is that what I am? If a conservative calls me a liberal, does that make me a liberal? You see, not only are labels debilitating, they are also highly subjective.

Case Study:
John and Gary (general names) pastor churches in the same city. Because of a certain, controversial topic, John calls Gary a "new evangelical." Steve, a friend of the two, hearing from John that Gary is a new evangelical, must now separate from Gary since the Bible 'clearly teaches' separation from 'disobedient' brethren. Unfortunately, situations like this do exist.

I often say, "I don't care what you call me. Your label changes nothing about what I believe." If someone says, "You're a Calvinist, because you believe in this," then maybe I am Calvinist. However, my point is that that won't change my beliefs. We can't be menpleasers, seeking to placate people who "are in our circle." Realizing that we are "Christians,"We must live according to principles of Scripture that have been personally studied out and applied.

Popular posts from this blog

SportsDesk - 06.25.09

It's official. Shaq is a Cleveland Cavalier. Let the Cleveland nickname offerings begin! Here are some thoughts to consider with this move: The NBA East has officially become as interesting and exciting as the West. The Magic, Cavs, Celtics, Heat and Sixers are as fun to watch as the Lakers, Nuggets, Blazers, Mavs, and Hornets. This trade is the last straw for Cleveland to land LeBron in Summer 2010. If the Cavs don't win the title, LBJ will become a NY Knick next Summer. It's a done deal. The Shaq acquisition doesn't solve any long-term problems for Cleveland. He'll be there one year. Shaq doesn't have 3 years of productivity left. If he wins a title next year, he should retire a champion. I don't see Cleveland giving him a 2-year contract at the end of next season. If LBJ and Shaq "leave" Cleveland next summer, which big free agent star comes to Cleveland in the wake of LBJ? I don't see Wade doing it. Bosh doesn't fit the mold. If Clevel...

No Zion, No Problem? Not So Fast.

Everyone in the media has wanted their piece of the pie with Zion this year. Each highlight reel dunk and spectacular block has only increased the media fervor and number of followers. As Duke looks to face Syracuse, and presumably Virginia Tech as well, without Zion, let's consider what Duke looks like without Zion, and what it must do against Syracuse to leave the Carrier Dome with a W. DUKE WITHOUT ZION Duke without Zion is not a cart without a horse. But it might be a sports car without its turbo. Or maybe a chef without her secret sauce. Here are the main points to consider: MAIN POINTS - A Five Spot 1. Without Zion, Duke can’t play “position-less basketball” since all bench players have limitations. Not only is Zion our best two-way player (offense and defense), but he also allows the greatest roster flexibility in terms of building around him. He wreaks havoc wherever he is on the floor. We don't have another player like that, certainly not from the bench...

Don't be 'Joe Fan'

The response from Wednesday's USA last minute thriller versus Algeria felt like the crest of a crescendo that had been swelling since 2000 or so, or maybe even 1996 at the outset of MLS. My favorite US Soccer fan type is 'Joe Fan' who only watches soccer for 1 month out of every four years. He knows general soccer lingo. He even knows the favorites to win the tournament. None of these, though, is his calling card. You'll know Joe Fan by this very one thing -- as the World Cup is discussed among him, he'll whip out his anti-USA soccer spiel that he's been working on all week, or worse -- the one he heard from Michael Wilbon on PTI the previous afternoon. Most Joe Fan-types have these things in common: They think soccer is boring because there isn't much scoring. Soccer isn't even as big as hockey in the US, so it must not matter much. He thinks that since the USA isn't a top 10 favorite to win the World Cup, they must not be any good. He sees the USA ...