Dyck Quotes

It was politics and religion, in van Dyck’s private view, that made men dangerous. Trade made them wise.

If we had a vision of God like Isaiah did, I don’t think we’d be asking him for good parking spots.

I find it interesting that the Gospels record not one instance of Jesus or the disciples praying for physical safety.

And Dirk van Dyck the Dutchman realized that he never had been, and never would be, as proud of any child as he was of his elegant little Indian daughter at that moment.

Addicts are not an isolated subset of the population. We all have the potential for addiction.

A nail is driven out by another nail. Habit is overcome by habit,” wrote the sixteenth-century theologian Desiderius Erasmus.

Yes, God is dangerous. He’s not a house cat; he’s a lion. You’re free to deny his existence or pretend that he’s harmless. Go ahead and pet him if you’d like; just don’t expect to get your arm back.

We can’t truly appreciate God’s grace until we glimpse his greatness. We won’t be lifted by his love until we’re humbled by his holiness. Oswald Chambers wrote, “The Bible reveals not first the love of God but the intense, blazing holiness of God.

simply understanding how habits work makes them easier to control.

Self-control is like a muscle. The more you work it, the stronger it gets.

if you want to grow your willpower, start doing hard things. Read a challenging book. Go for a run. Learn a foreign language.

Willpower is limited. It runs out, leaving you vulnerable to sin.

using your willpower makes it stronger over time.

If you’re trying to build new habits in your life, introduce them one at a time.

The first job of self-control is resisting the temptation to put yourself first.

Ultimately, mastering yourself is only accomplished by being mastered by God.

What could you do if the pain of the past no longer effected you?

as my friend Skye Jethani says, “Boredom is a prerequisite to spiritual growth.

Without a healthy attachment to God, we’re more likely to fall prey to destructive thinking and behaviors.

The power of habit can be leveraged to build all kinds of healthy practices into our life, like regular prayer, Bible reading, and acts of service.

Wallowing in my guilt merely makes me sin more. Confession gives me a fresh start and I don’t want to mess it up.

Regardless of how much self-control you have naturally, it turns out there’s an awful lot you can do to improve it.

Dopamine directs your focus toward the desired object and urges you to pursue it.

We need to see this God of Israel both in his wrath and his infinite mercy. We need to learn a holiness that rejects all compromise with evil and a generosity that seeks and saves the lost. We need to learn to know God as he is.8

Does the kind of thinking that permits assisted suicide provide a moral basis for protecting the preciousness of human life or does it fail to provide a moral structure that will predictably protect individual and communal life? What

Moody was not unaware of the advantage his inscrutable grace afforded him. Like most excessively beautiful persons, he had studied his own reflection minutely and, in a way, knew himself from the outside best; he was always in some chamber of his mind perceiving himself from the exterior. He had passed a great many hours in the alcove of his private dressing room, where the mirror tripled his image into profile, half-profile, and square: Van Dyck's Charles, though a good deal more striking. It was a private practice, and one he would likely have denied--for how roundly self-examination is condemned, by the moral prophets of our age! As if the self had no relation to the self, and one only looked in mirrors to have one's arrogance confirmed; as if the act of self-regarding was not as subtle, fraught, and ever-changing as any bond between twin souls. In his fascination Moody sought less to praise his own beauty than to master it. Certainly whenever he caught his own reflection, in a window box, or in a pane of glass after nightfall, he felt a thrill of satisfaction--but as an engineer might feel, chancing upon a mechanism of his own devising and finding it splendid, flashing, properly oiled and performing exactly as he had predicted it should.

I have since been asked, ‘Which Bible verse helped and strengthened you in those circumstances?’ My answer is, ‘No Bible verse was of any help.’ Bible verses alone are not meant to help. We knew Psalm 23. But when you pass through suffering you realize that it was never meant by God that Psalm 23 should strengthen you. It is the Lord who can strengthen you, not the psalm that speaks of Him doing so. It is not enough to have the psalm. You must have the One about whom the psalm speaks.

Most artists, even some of the greatest (including the historians) have up to the present belonged to the serving classes (whether they serve people of high position or princes or women or "the masses"), not to speak of their dependence upon the Church and upon moral law. Thus Rubens portrayed the nobility of his age; but only according to their vague conception of taste, not according to his own measure of beauty — on the whole, therefore, against his own taste. Van Dyck was nobler in this respect: who in all those whom he painted added a certain amount of what he himself most highly valued: he did not descend from himself, but rather lifted up others to himself when he "rendered." The slavish humility of the artist to his public (as Sebastian Bach has testified in undying and outrageous words in the dedication of his High Mass) is perhaps more difficult to perceive in music; but it is all the more deeply engrained. A hearing would be refused me if I endeavoured to impart my views on this subject. Chopin possesses distinction, like Van Dyck. The disposition of Beethoven is that of a proud peasant; of Haydn, that of a proud servant. Mendelssohn, too, possesses distinction — like Goethe, in the most natural way in the world.

Whenever you lose control, someone else always finds it.” These were the words of my high school English teacher Mr. Sologar on our first day of class. They didn’t have anything to do with literature or grammar, but I guess he wanted to kick off the class with a life lesson. It was a good one. If we acted up at home, he explained, control of our lives would swiftly transfer to our parents in the form of lost privileges or being grounded. The same was true at school. If we abused our freedom in the classroom or in the hallways—and we did!—we’d find ourselves in the principal’s office or confined to detention. If we got really crazy and decided to break the law, the legal system would step in to curtail our freedom. “No, control is never truly lost,” he repeated in his thick Indian accent. “If you fail to control yourself, others will control you.

For the question as to when killing and being killed are to be practiced and condoned is an abiding question for communities as a whole, as well as for their individual members. The

At stake then in the debate over assisted suicide is nothing less than a shift away from a moral structure that is at once the expression of our shared humanity and also the source of the responsibilities and rights necessary to sustain individual and communal life. Or

Laugh at yourself. Of course, laughing at someone else works too, but somehow lacks the deep cathartic experience of being the centre of attention.

God may not call you to travel to a distant land or to die for your faith, but you are called to live wholeheartedly for him wherever you are, in whatever you’re doing. The specific places and vocations God calls us to are secondary. The important things are whether we walk with him, take risks where we are, and live as threats to the evil around us.

When we power down our devices and step outside into the natural light of God’s creation, our souls are restored.

Why do I say that love is balanced by self-control?” he once asked in a sermon. “Because love is self-giving, and self-giving and self-control are complementary, the one to the other. How can we give ourselves in love until we’ve learned to control ourselves? Our self has to be mastered before it can be offered in the service of others.

I have always regarded him as a descendant of those old German and Dutch painters, such as Van Dyck and Rembrandt, etc., whose works combine profound feeling, imagination, and persuasive power that is often impetuous, and are united with a wonderful sense of form. In certain works by Brahms, in the great cycles of variations, for instance, his relationship to the sensibility of the old German artists is particularly evident. His exceptional capacity to realize form expresses itself in everything he has left, from his most modest correspondence to his symphonies and lieder. The form Brahms possesses is a peculiarly German species, a form that never appears to be an end in itself, but is merely a function of “content” which is integrated with harmony of proportion and graceful clarity. “Brahms,” Ton und Wort, p. 48

Two thousand years ago management was seen as having three basic dimensions: (1) managing relationships within organizations (oikonomia); (2) managing money (chrematistics); and (3) managing relationships between organizations (benefaction/patron-client relationships).

In short, this is a parable about acquisitive economics, and thus of particular interest from a twenty-first-century understanding of management that is steeped in the ideas of profit-maximization and financial value-creation. Perhaps it is not surprising, then, that many modern commentators are quick to conclude that the parable seems to provide support for profit-maximization:

1.  The master in the parable represents Jesus.7 2.  The managers who increase the financial assets entrusted to them by their master are commended by Jesus. 3.  The manager who refuses to use his money to make money acted irresponsibly. Put differently, in most common twenty-first-century interpretations, the first two managers are heroes, while the third is vilified.8

With regard to earning interest from a bank, recall in that time there were no “banks” as there are today. The reference literally means to place the money “on a (moneylenders’) table” (compare Matt. 21:12; Mark 11:15; Luke 19:45; John 2:15). Recall also that charging interest was permissible only when Jews lent to non-Jews (e.g., Deut. 23:19–21) (Fitzmyer, 1985: 1237). At a more fundamental level, earning interest also seems to go against the Creation story, where God desires work to be inherently meaningful and for people to work as God worked. Does the desire to use money to make money reflect an attempt to avoid working by the sweat of our brow (Gen. 3:19)? In this light, perhaps it is no coincidence that the third manager had wrapped his pound inside in a soudarion (literally, “a cloth for perspiration”), which refers to a sweat cloth used for face or neck for protection from the sun (Fitzmyer, 1985: 1236; Marshall, 1978: 706). By using “money to make money” the managers in the parable were likely increasing the amount of literal and metaphorical sweat on the brows of the relatively poor.

Does the Master Represent Jesus? It seems that a first-century reader would be hard-pressed to think that the master in the parable represents Jesus, when the description of the master so clearly points to a different direction.9 The parable describes the master as a power-hungry, despised, and exploitive man who takes what he did not deposit, reaps what he did not sow, and promotes violating the biblical prohibition of charging interest. Moreover, the master explicitly agrees that this is an accurate description of himself, perhaps because for him (and among his peers) successfully exploiting opportunities to maximize one’s profits is considered to be a badge of honor.10 And indeed, this sort of behavior and oppression was commonplace in first-century Palestine for many people who were living under the thumb of absentee landholders and foreign rule. This is why the Jews were longing for a savior. Moreover, the story of the parable would have sounded painfully familiar to them. Commentators note that elements of this parable are strikingly similar to the history of the ruling family in that region as described by the historian Josephus (writing in the first century). After Herod the Great died in 4 BCE his then 19-year-old son Archelaus (brother to Herod Antipas, ruler of Galilee) went to Rome to confirm his kingship of Judea (as specified in his father’s will). Archelaus was followed by a delegation of 50 people protesting his appointment. He received the kingship, and went on to kill about 3,000 Pharisees who opposed his rule.11

Moreover, the usual rates of return at that time were 4–12 percent, and anything greater was considered to be oppressive.

It is the only parable in the New Testament that has an explicit oikonomos (“oikos manager”) as a central character. Nevertheless, this parable is rarely discussed by scholars who attempt to apply biblical passages to management theory and practice. For example, this parable is not among the more than fifteen hundred biblical passages cited in the first ten years of The Journal of Biblical Integration in Business. This oversight may be because this has been described as one of the “most difficult,” and “puzzling,” of Jesus’ parables to understand via a modern lens.2

First, with regard to managing relationships within an oikos, both parables point to exemplary managers as independent moral agents, enacting values that challenge conventional oikos relationships. The parable of the shrewd manager affirms the manager who acts as a countercultural moral agent by unilaterally redistributing his master’s wealth, and the parable of the ten pounds affirms the manager who counters his master’s wishes by refusing to exploitatively use money to make more money.

Third, and perhaps most surprisingly, just as the shrewd manager was praised by his boss, so also the religious managers in Senger’s study received the highest competency rating from their superiors. As far as I know, no one has ever attempted to replicate Senger’s study. Moreover, his counterintuitive findings are rarely cited or acknowledged in the literature. Perhaps, just like the first-century interpretation of the parable of the shrewd manager, the findings are ignored because they seem too countercultural and thus difficult to believe.

Aristotle described two approaches to chrematistics. Aristotle used the term “natural chrematistics” to describe using money to facilitate trade in a way that maintains holistic ongoing relationships within and between oikoi. This is called “sustenance economics.” And he used the term “unnatural chrematistics” to describe using money to make money, which he found to be morally repugnant. This is called “acquisitive economics.” There was an ongoing debate since the time of Aristotle through to the first century about the relative merits of acquisitive economics, which by then had become widespread among the Romans and among the Jewish elite.

First-century listeners would recognize the financial returns described in the parable as inherently dubious instances of acquisitive economic activity (i.e., using money to make money). Moreover, the usual rates of return at that time were 4–12 percent, and anything greater was considered to be oppressive.12 Recall also that in the first century the economy was seen as a “fixed pie” meaning that in order for one person to gain ten pounds (equivalent of three years’ labor), someone else would have to lose ten pounds. In other words, in order for the rich nobleman to get richer, someone else would have to get poorer.13 And finally, note that collecting interest on money went against the usury laws of Hebrew Scriptures, and that elsewhere Jesus is clearly opposed to the exploitive practices of money-changers.14 In sum, although the social elite may have found it commendable to amass riches via five- and tenfold returns on money, it seems likely that the vast majority of people in the first century would have found this to be morally and ethically reprehensible. Is it Responsible

Commentators note that elements of this parable are strikingly similar to the history of the ruling family in that region as described by the historian Josephus (writing in the first century). After Herod the Great died in 4 BCE his then 19-year-old son Archelaus (brother to Herod Antipas, ruler of Galilee) went to Rome to confirm his kingship of Judea (as specified in his father’s will). Archelaus was followed by a delegation of 50 people protesting his appointment. He received the kingship, and went on to kill about 3,000 Pharisees who opposed his rule.11 Taken together, it seems unlikely that first-century listeners would assume that the nobleman in the parable represents Jesus.

Jesus responds by essentially saying: “Woe to you who give into peer pressure and justify yourself in the sight of other members of the social elite: what is highly valued by conventional social norms is an abomination in the sight of God” (paraphrase of Luke 16:15).

The master had priorities other than maximizing the financial return on his possessions. One of those priorities, to gain honor, could be met by deemphasizing conventional patron-client relationships and instead practicing benefaction: While some modern people see it as unbelievable that a rich man would praise an employee for giving away his money, almost every scholar who employs the [ancient] honor-shame paradigm would dispute this. Many sociologically oriented critics have pointed to the frequency with which the rich engaged in benefactions and the spectacular amounts often involved as proof of their claim that honor is more important than money.12 Thus, from a first-century perspective it is entirely reasonable that the rich owner would commend the manager for his shrewd handling of the oikos resources.

In the first century most managers were slaves, and while being slaves was obviously not highly desirable, it often offered more security than being poor peasants who were unable to feed themselves.

When we fail to give people good answers to their questions, we become another reason for them to disbelieve.

We can’t fully appreciate God’s grace and love until we consider his holiness, his otherness.

The goal of education is to obtain the training that is needed to do a chosen career.

Getting a degree is like climbing a mountain. It takes a lot of training and a lot of hard work. At times, you reach obstacles and are not sure if you can continue. However, eventually you reach the top and the view is fantastic. That is when you realize that all of the hard work was worth it.

Students deserve to take courses that are well prepared and that get them involved in their studies so that they can more clearly understand the required material. They should never have to figure out things on their own. They must be shown which concepts are important and how to apply them.

As Francis Chan wrote, “The fact that a holy, eternal, all-knowing, all-powerful, merciful, fair, and just God loves you is nothing short of astonishing.

We picture God only as a God who provides mercy, not judgment. So of course we can get away with our sin, because God forgives.

Worship is the natural reflex of mortals to the presence of a holy God.

It is frighteningly naive to assume that when our guide to medical practice is "doing what the patient wants," we will escape the imposition of the physician's values on the clinical encounter. Personal values can he sequestered in the question not asked, or the gentle challenge not posed, when both should have been.12

The central argument of this book is that there is a solid moral and practical basis for the laws against assisted suicide that now exist in the United States and elsewhere. Furthermore,

boxes containing paintings by Rembrandt, Rubens, Caravaggio, Franz Hals, and Van Dycks.

which contained nine Rembrandts, two Rubenses, and four Van Dycks,

fifteen works by Van Dyck, and thirteen works by Rubens.

It included eight works by Rembrandt, four by Veronese, a dozen by Rubens, seven by Van Dyck,

in 1892 the fever for Vermeers had just begun to spike. Soon every millionaire worth knowing had thrown his checkbook into the ring. In 1900, Collis P. Huntington, the railroad tycoon, bequeathed Vermeer’s Woman Playing a Lute to the Met. In 1901, it was Henry Frick’s turn to buy, though the steel magnate kept his Vermeer for himself. This was Girl Interrupted at Her Music, which can be seen at the Frick today. In 1907, J. P. Morgan got in on the game. Morgan collected art and other valuables on the grandest scale—Rembrandt, Hals, Van Dyck, among countless others—and at such a pace that sometimes he himself lost track.

When I fail to confess my sins, I’m more likely to sin again What’s one more sin, I think. I’m already messing up. Researchers have a name for this phenomenon too. They call it the “What-The-Hell Effect.” Basically, it means that after messing up, we tend to mess up even more.

Self-control, then, is about listening and obeying. It’s not self-determined. It means submitting every decision we make to God. It’s about surrendering.

Jenkins asked Graham about his habit of searching the Scriptures. “Wherever I am in the world, in someone’s home, my home, a hotel room, here in my office, anywhere, I leave my Bible open where I’ll notice it during the day. Every time I see it, I stop and read a verse or two, or a chapter or two, or for an hour or two. And this is not for sermon preparation; it’s just for my own spiritual nourishment.

As the monk Thomas Merton wrote, “People may spend their whole lives climbing the ladder of success only to find, once they reach the top, that the ladder is leaning against the wrong wall.

we can only do what we love. When we succumb to sin, it’s because in that moment, we loved something else—pleasure, pride, comfort—more than God. We will always operate out of our loves. That means we must rightly order our hearts, taking special care to ensure we are not worshiping anything or anyone other than God.

It’s not that I pursue bad goals; I just have a tendency to leave God out of it. I go to church on Sunday, maybe even attend a prayer meeting or Bible study during the week—and then go back to living my “regular” life. Rarely do I pause to reflect on how everything I do—from attending meetings to returning emails to teaching my daughter how to ride a bike—connects to spiritual reality.

He who reigns within himself and rules passions, desires, and fears is more than a king.” —JOHN MILTON

There’s one task that takes a lot of willpower for me: writing. It’s hard! Some people say they love writing. But if I’m honest, I love having written.

Justification means we’re made right before God.

To Paul, the idea that we should keep sinning because of grace was silly, absurd, the equivalent of Bill Gates knocking off a 7-Eleven. Instead, forgiveness lays the groundwork for transformation.

the distractions, the noise. Life has gotten louder, chaotic, and more disruptive.

chapter 2 we looked at what researchers call sanctified goals—objectives that serve some ultimate end. Study after study has found that people who have some overriding purpose for their goals are far more likely to accomplish them. Motivations matter.

Books are written by people who have either mastered a topic or by those who desperately need to. I fall into the latter camp.

The Bible uses the term “double-minded” (James 1:8). Now scientists are using it too. “Some neuroscientists go so far as to say that we have one brain but two minds,” writes psychologist Kelly McGonigal.1

Desire isn’t bad, but it must be kept in check. There’s no getting rid of Homer. Just don’t let him run your life.

the early stage of forming a new habit is the hardest. For the first thirty to sixty days, any new routine will feel challenging, even unnatural. But once it becomes a habit, it requires less effort. So, for now, I’ll just keep blundering through these prayers. Perhaps over time my concentration will improve.

habit as action that becomes a pattern of unconscious behavior.

every habit has three distinct parts: a cue, a routine, and a reward.

The more often you run through this sequence, the more powerful the habit becomes.

Studies show that just teaching people about the mechanics of habit has a huge positive impact on their behavior.

In my research about habits, I learned about the importance of “cues,” physical signals that trigger a behavior.

Elsewhere Wright wrote, “Self control is like a muscle. It weakens immediately after use, but it strengthens with frequent use.

How can we strengthen our willpower? Just like we strengthen our muscles—with resistance.

When exercised, willpower grows.

Brooks believes that a failure to do this hard work has serious consequences. “If you don’t develop a coherent character in this way, life will fall to pieces sooner or later. You will become a slave to your passions.

by far the best use of willpower is to use it to initiate healthy patterns of behavior. We need to invest it in good habits.

Everything Satan dangles in front of Jesus is something Jesus is going to get eventually anyway. This doesn’t mean Satan’s temptations were easy to resist. Not at all. Their appeal lay in the promise that they could be obtained painlessly. Satan offers Jesus exaltation without the cross, vindication without faith. And it’s immediate.

IF MY RESEARCH HAS TAUGHT ME anything, it’s this: start small. Don’t do too much right away and don’t start too many things at once. The reason? It takes a lot of willpower to forge new habits, and your willpower is limited.

bright lines are valuable for limiting the influence of technology. Make hard-and-fast rules like “No email after 6:00 p.m.,” or “No internet on weekends,” or “No phones at the dinner table.” These bright lines are like levees, strategically placed in your life to guard against the flood of digital distractions that threaten to overwhelm your soul.

when self-control is functioning properly, it helps people avoid scandal and embarrassment. It’s an invisible virtue, operating behind the scenes to sustain a healthy, holy life.

Even if we never engage in the activities that land us in jail, the Bible tells us that all sin has an addictive quality. “Everyone who sins is a slave to sin,” Jesus said (John 8:34). That means we have more in common with addicts than we might think. And it means we need to take the same steps addicts in recovery take if we hope to get free.

Scripture warns, “Bad company corrupts good character” (1 Cor. 15:33). It also speaks of the benefits that come with hanging around the right kind of people: “As iron sharpens iron, so one person sharpens another” (Prov. 27:17).

The key is to align with a group of people with similar goals and similar struggles.

The worst thing you can do is battle temptation alone. When it comes to self-control, lone rangers are dead rangers. To control ourselves, we need others.