Computer Software, Cat Herding, and Fruit Trees

By Robin G. Jordan

Does God create us with pre-installed software for faith, which he later activates? Or does he create us without any software for faith and then installs the software and activates it later on? Does it make any difference? In either case we have the software and it has been activated. We have faith. The faith is not our doing. It comes from God. We do not create the software, install it, or activate it.

Humans being what they are, are likely to divide into different schools of thought over when God installs the software of faith, how does he install it, when does he activate it, and how does it activate, and so on. Some may argue that God has installed that software in all human beings and with it the capacity to activate it ourselves. The positions that a school of thought might take boggle the mind.

Presumably the day will come when computers are so sophisticated that they recognize their need for a particular software, create it, install it, and activate it. Human beings, however, do not appear to have this capacity. The awareness that we are lacking in faith appears to be itself God-given.

With a computer two competing software systems can interfere with each other’s operation and keep each other from working properly. In some ways the Holy Spirit and “the flesh,” this is, the human proneness to do evil are like two competing software systems. They war with each other, “the flesh” resisting the Holy Spirit. Calvinists posit that the Holy Spirit invariably wins the battle in the long-term; Arminians posit that “the flesh” can resist the Holy Spirit to the point that a human being may fall from grace and lose his salvation. He is no longer in good standing with God despite having “believed on Jesus Christ for everlasting life.”

A number of programs, particularly viruses, can take advantage of another program, exploiting it for their own purposes. The Holy Spirit does not appear to work this way. Human beings are not exactly automatons. God does appear to permit them a degree of freedom of choice.


The Holy Spirit and “the flesh” are not software systems or programs and consequently this analogy has limited usefulness. But it does raise some thought provoking questions.

I must admit that my orientation is pastoral. I suspect that God wired me that way. I trained as a teacher in university and worked as a social worker for 27 years. There are many similarities between social work and pastoring. As a social worker I taught but it was not the kind of teaching that you find in a high school classroom, a university lecture hall, or a church sanctuary. It is more like mentoring except the person being advised and counseled was often not being mentored by choice. It is also like shepherding a flock of sheep with a pronounced inclination to wander in every direction than the one I hoped that they would go. “Herding cats” is another way of describing it.

A social worker does not set a particular direction albeit he may realize that those with whom he is working need to go in that direction. Rather he negotiates a direction with them. If the court is involved or may become involved, there is an element of coercion but the direction is nonetheless negotiated. The involvement of the court or the threat of court involvement may facilitate the negotiations. It may not.

A social worker spends a good part of his time in encouraging, reinforcing, and urging movement from point A to point B. In some instances it may be absolutely necessary that the client move from point A to point B. If the client does not, he or she may not only lose custody of their child but also all parental rights. In other cases it is only necessary that the client move closer to point B and show indications of even moving closer in the immediate future. What may be as important if not more important is that the client gives no signs of returning to point A. The changes that the client has made will be lasting. The time has come for the social worker to remove himself from the client’s life.

One of the consequences of having a pastoral orientation is that I look at Scripture from this perspective. When I read the epistles of James, John, Jude, Peter, and Paul, I read them with a pastor’s mind. These apostles were writing their letters as pastors. When Paul writes the believers in Corinth, Ephesus, Galatia, Philippi, and Rome about how God has chosen them, he is not so much teaching them about predestination but affirming them as believers. He is also using this affirmation to point to their attention the inappropriateness of what they are doing.

A social worker usually has a number of objectives when working with a client. The needs and problems of the client, the safety and well being of a child, or the court may determine these objectives. A pastor also has a number of objectives when working with the congregation in his care. God sets these objectives and has laid them out in the Bible. One objective is to see the unbeliever come to faith. Another objective is to help new believer to become a fully functional disciple of Jesus Christ. A third objective is to assist the believer to pursue holiness and practice godliness, to grow up in all things in Jesus Christ the Head. These are not the only objectives but they are important ones.

The pastor is an instrument through which God accomplishes His objectives. However, he is not the only instrument that God uses. He may use the members of the congregation themselves. He may use a visiting preacher. He may use a child. God may work through those whom we might regard as the last choice for being his instruments. God’s ways are not our ways. God also recognizes that we have a tendency to become puffed up with self-importance. The Scriptures tell us that He humbles the proud.

Among the objectives that God sets for a pastor is teaching sound doctrine. “Doctrine” simply means “teaching.” Whatever a pastor teaches should be sound. It should be found in the Scriptures or be provable by the Scriptures. It should not contain any “strange and erroneous doctrines contrary to God’s Word.”

When pastors are faced with teaching doctrine, they are apt to do one of two things. They become so wrapped up in the minutiae of doctrine that their teaching is of no real benefit to their congregation or they neglect to teach doctrine altogether. Instead they focus upon helping their congregations solve the problems of life and lead happier and more productive lives. This, however, is not one of the objectives that God has laid out in the Bible.

The Bible is certainly full of practical wisdom and this wisdom should be shared with the congregation but for the purpose of enabling its members to be better followers of Jesus Christ. Indeed the whole purpose of teaching sound doctrine is to achieve this objective. If it does not serve this purpose, if it does not help to form them into more faithful, more mature disciples, it is pointless. The Biblical measure of faithfulness and maturity is fruitfulness.

It is here where we all would benefit from studying what the Bible means by fruitful. It is quite clear that it does not mean just doing good deeds. Fruitfulness also takes the form of movement toward greater and truer holiness and godliness. The fruit of the Spirit are changes in our character and temperament that make us more Christ-like. We also bear fruit in that through us others come to know God and Jesus Christ. These are just some examples of biblical fruitfulness.

A tree, our Lord tells us, is known by its fruit. We, his point is, will be known by our fruit. Will that fruit be sparse, wizened and bitter? Or will it be abundant, weighing down our branches, and succulent and sweet?