Timothy's Thoughts

1. Every motion requires a second While most motions require a second, when a member of a committee makes a motion on the behalf of the committee, no second is required. Also, in a small committee, motions do not require a second. 2. The chair isn’t supposed to vote As long as the chair is a member, the chair retains the right to vote. 3. The chair can break a tie vote Because the chair must maintain an appearance of impartiality, it is advisable for the chair to refrain from voting. The exception is when his vote matters, such as when there is a tie vote. But he isn’t really breaking a tie. When the vote is even, there isn’t a majority, so the motion would fail if the chair doesn’t vote. If he votes in favor of the motion, a majority is achieved and the motion passes. But likewise, if the vote has one more in favor than against, the chair can exercise his right to vote against the motion, thereby creating a tie and causing the motion to fail. 4. A motion is required to adjourn ...

R aising your voice is one of the worst things you can do when you are trying to persuade someone. We often see situations in which a company or someone in government does something that someone doesn’t like. Hoping they will reverse the decision, the person goes to them to state their case in a public forum. As they begin to talk, their emotions overwhelm them and they begin to yell. The natural reaction is to view this as a challenge. Consider a situation in which the decision maker made the decision without looking at all sides of the issue. The decision maker may not be attached to the decision he made. When presented with a well stated reason to reverse the decision, he might be easily persuaded. But suppose someone comes to him and says, “How could you be so stupid?” His natural reaction is to grasp for things that will support his original decision. Faced with a challenge, it becomes mentally painful for him to change his decision. To side with the challenger is equivalent to h...

N ot many years ago, I began hearing people say, “The word separation isn’t in the First Amendment.” They would then go on to explain how they believed the concept of a separation of church and state is the work of the Devil to keep churches out of politics. Christians have been shooting themselves in the foot by defining Separation of Church & State as something it is not. We see the words “separation between Church & State” in an 1802 letter. If you go back and read the letter Thomas Jefferson wrote to the committee of the Danbury Baptist Association, you’ll see that it says more than just that the First Amendment builds “a wall of separation between Church & State.” He also makes the statement, “religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God.” Thomas Jefferson goes on to define the powers of government with the statement, “the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions.” In Thomas Jefferson’s way of thinking, what a man beli...

A n recent poll asked the question, “What a quality do you value most in a leader?” The possible answers were: Builds effective relationships Delivers results Energizes the team Models personal excellence, integrity and accountability Shapes the future The results (from least to greatest) were: Shapes the future - 4% Delivers results - 8% Energizes the team - 14% Builds effective relationships - 23% Models personal excellence, integrity and accountability - 51% What fascinates me about these results is that the things the leadership gurus push the most are the things that are the lowest on the list. But a majority view integrity as the most important. And building personal relationships also is significant. That doesn’t mean we can say that the others aren’t important, but modeling personal excellence, integrity and accountability is just so important that most people favor it over all the others. Too often, we see leaders who want results, no matter what. Even if it costs them their i...

T he book Heaven is for Real came out a few years ago. Now, there is a movie based on the book. I won’t be watching it. If you read the review of Heaven is for Real , you’ll see why. In brief, I saw nothing in the book that I couldn’t attribute to the imagination of a four year old, and too much that was inconsistent with what God said about heaven. I’ve seen the trailer for the movie, and even if I’d liked the book, I don’t think I could stand sitting through the movie. But a lot of people have purchased the book and it is likely that a lot of people will watch the movie. In this age when so-called scientists are promoting the religion of evolution as proof that heaven isn’t real, people are looking for evidence of its existence. People are looking for the smoking gun that they can point to and say, “Look, we have proof that heaven exists.” That is why they turn to stories about people who have visited heaven and came back. Haven’t you ever asked, “what if?” What if we could look up ...

“Delight thyself in the Lord, and he shall give thee the desires of thine heart.” (Psalm 37:4) I don’t suppose there’s anyone who has looked at that verse who didn’t wonder why God hasn’t given them the desires of their heart. All of us have had something that we wanted more than anything else and though we prayed long hours with tears streaming down our faces, it didn’t come. Where was the Lord? Why didn’t he answer? Did we somehow fail to delight ourselves in him? How does one delight himself in the Lord anyway? If you read the rest of Psalm 37, you’ll see that even as he was writing this song, David was struggling with some of the same thoughts. Look at verses 1 and 2. Do you think he would’ve said something like that if he’d never questioned why evil people appeared to prosper, even as the just suffered at their hand? (Psalm 37:12) The saints of David’s day were facing the same problems as the saints of today. When we begin to look at it in context, we being to realize that the pr...

Y ou may have heard that Mark Driscoll is having problems right now. Without going into the details, his book marketing strategy has been seen as unethical, and perhaps, illegal. I’ll let others sort that out. Now, a letter of apology has been making its way around the Internet. I’ll let you read the letter, if you like. But what I find more interesting than the letter is the response that some people have given it. While my doctrinal views don’t completely align with those of Mark Driscoll, I felt the letter was very appropriate for the situation. Others did not agree. One person suggested that Mark Driscoll make himself accountable to someone outside his own congregation. While there may be people outside his congregation that deserve and apology and an apology doesn’t remove any legal obligations that might exist, you’ll be hard pressed to find anything in scripture that says a pastor must be accountable to anyone other than the church and the Lord Jesus Christ, who is the head of ...