“No human being should ever evaluate another human being” (W. Edwards Deming).
If leaders obeyed this maxim alone massive transformation would occur within our communities, mainly because people would suddenly find themselves liberated from the crushing and debilitating weight of condemnation. If people are willing to gather together with us, no matter what our differences are, then who are we to evaluate them, rank them, and finally exclude them from our company? This is one reason why people are reluctant to surrender themselves to fellowships. It means the relinquishing of freedom and self-control and submitting themselves to coercive and destructive relationships and systems. Rather than regarding the voluntary gathering as a means to eventually shape a person to the standard, I consider this willingness to fellowship together, in spite of our profound differences, the demonstration of the beautiful idea of community. Community is not a means to an end, but the end in itself. I say this confident that true community, the glue of which is love, is profound, dynamic and transformative, and provides happiness to its members.
twitter me
Check out my t-shirts HERE. I’m growing my inventory all the time. And check out my contemplative art here.
Contributions to nakedpastor are greatly appreciated.
David Hayward is a pastor artistically stripping to the essential.
Even though I attend a local church, I think I am going to refer to you as my pastor.
send your tithes to… (haha, just kidding!)
LOL, now you sound like a traditional pastor.
just scaring (scarring) you!
Christianity is rooted in community – isn’t it? I’ve been reading Acts lately – goodness knows they didn’t get along all the time. Our differences aren’t as important as the things that bind us together, so we might as well have fun and some fellowship!
brad: i concur.
If leaders obeyed this maxim, there wouldn’t be a Nicene Creed.
fearsome comrade: so, in your opinion, is that a good or a bad thing?
“No human being should ever evaluate another human being” (W. Edwards Deming).
—————What utter drivel. That is an anathema and complete distortion of what the Bible teaches.
Psalms 1:1 Blessed is the man who does not walk in the counsel of the wicked or stand in the way of sinners or sit in the seat of mockers.
——In order to obey that scripture there must be evaluation.
1 Cor. 5:9-11 9I have written you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people— 10not at all meaning the people of this world who are immoral, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters. In that case you would have to leave this world. 11But now I am writing you that you must not associate with anyone who calls himself a brother but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or a slanderer, a drunkard or a swindler. With such a man do not even eat.
——In order to obey that scripture you must evaluate.
If people are willing to gather together with us, no matter what our differences are, then who are we to evaluate them, rank them, and finally ****exclude them from our company?*****
————-I do believe scripture spells that out. It is Paul that says, “…You must not associate…,” and I will take the apostle Paul over Deming any time.
2 Thess. 3:6 has a little something to say about the company we keep.
Oh yes, Jesus ate with sinners and such, but you don’t see him including them within the worship circle. Judas was there for a purpose and is not a valid example for total inclusion.
Confused–depressed–feel trapped. No wonder.
fishon
Oops, fishon, are you hot under the collar.? Oh yea.
Funny, I read this post just after I finished my sermon “Following a broken compass.” Man, my sermon sure fits if Deming and his philosophy is followed.
fishon: is it possible to consider that the story of Judas reveals that he actually was totally included, but that he excluded himself in the end? i think so. i think Deming’s quote reflects Jesus’, “Judge not lest you be judged.”
I keep getting stuck on John 3:16…but just the first 6 words. It’s funny how we tend to focus so much on the words that follow. He so loved the world. I am having such a hard time with the condemnation we cast upon this world that He so loved. And I am most definitely part of the “we”. Lately it just hurts my heart. Thanks, NP, for another call away from selfrighteousness & Phariseeism.
David,
I suppose that is possible. But he was surely evaluated by Jesus, and most certainly would have been by the apostles if they knew “he was a thief from the start.” You wouldn’t suggest that the apostles would not have evaluated and judged? Beside, you know that “Judge not lest you be judged” has many nuances to it. You know full well that that statement does not stand by its self. And you do know that Jesus judged?
By the way, do you think Judas was excluded from the Lord’s Supper as he was dismissed?
But my friend, you have ignored the scripture that is very clear about “No human being should ever evaluate another human being” (W. Edwards Deming). They plainly teach that Deming was/is wrong. Oops, I just evaluated [some would say judged].
Apparently it is you who wrote::If people are willing to gather together with us…who are we to evaluate them, rank them, and finally exclude them from our company?
———So what do you say to Paul’s direction in 1 Cor. 5:9-11? I would be very interested in that. Surely we can not dismissed it; we may ignore it, but then I would suggest that is a dangerous thing to do. Dangerous for the community and dangerous for the one Paul is talking about.
I say this confident that true community, the glue of which is love, is profound, dynamic and transformative, and provides happiness to its members.
————-I or no community can provide happiness [joy is better] to its memebers. Joy comes from within. Just like folks believe that to have enough money will bring them joy, and it doesn’t, but may bring TEMPORARY comfort, community has NEVER PROVEN to bring joy. Temporary happiness, yea, for a while, but then the spirit and the mind come back to all that they dismissed when they thought they are found the perfect community.
Enough. Off to a picnic with my wife and dog to celebrate my 62 birthdays.
jerry
Hi David, thanks for the post… and I think Jeff may be on to something …
AnywayIn light of the day I had at work; I took the liberty to re-word your post. It helped
No human being should ever evaluate another human being” (W. Edwards Deming).
If leaders obeyed this maxim alone massive transformation would occur within our workplace communities, mainly because people would suddenly find themselves liberated from the crushing and debilitating weight of condemnation; which is frequently used as a motivation technique in the corporate world.
If people – our colleagues, peers, customers, clients – are willing to work together with us, no matter what our differences are, then who are we to evaluate them, rank them, judge them and finally exclude them from finding a holistic solution?
This is one of the main reasons why people are reluctant to surrender themselves to leadership – in general. It means the relinquishing of freedom and self control and submitting themselves to the coercive and destructive relationships and systems which permeate most workplaces.
The worker becomes ineffective, in one way or another, as they are eventually shaped to a ‘standard; a standard that is continually in flux, resulting in a lack of confidence in themselves and a lack of trust in others, presenting a false bravado.
The demonstration of a functioning diverse workplace is our willingness to work together, in spite of our profound differences; not expecting or wanting to mold another into a version of our perceived self, the standard.
The workplace is not a means to an end, but the end in itself. A functionally diverse workplace built on good-will and trust will be dynamic and transformation.
I would add that COMmunity has to be built around something other than people agreeing to show up more than once. The very idea that these people in Acts, suddenly alive with the life of the Holy Spirit, who couldn’t stop talking about the resurrection of Jesus and the utter futility of the OT law to give them merit, would simply say, “you’re HERE and that’s all that matters” is ludicrous.
No, that doesn’t justify a truly judgmental, harsh, condemning attitude toward anyone who is different. But for Biblical community to exist, it must do so at the very least under the banner that Jesus is Lord. Otherwise, let’s just pass out Sam’s or Costco membership cards and be done with it.
“No human being should ever evaluate another human being” (W. Edwards Deming).
—————What utter drivel. That is an anathema and complete distortion of what the Bible teaches. (fishon)
If only you did what the Bible says fishon, then nobody would have to listen to you teach everyone else.
Hebrews 8:10-13 (English Standard Version)
For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel
after those days, declares the Lord:
I will put my laws into their minds,
and write them on their hearts,
and I will be their God,
and they shall be my people.
And they shall not teach, each one his neighbor
and each one his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’
for they shall all know me,
from the least of them to the greatest.
For I will be merciful toward their iniquities,
and I will remember their sins no more.”
In speaking of a new covenant, he makes the first one obsolete. And what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.
This is one of my biggest beefs with a number of the post-Christian (post-God?) collectives is there seems to be a sense of radical community but only if you’re willing to prescribe to the perceived coolness. It’s just as cliquey as an InterVarsity gathering. When I stand up to protest, I am accused of passing judgment when in fact, I’m just asking “WTF?” I don’t want to “evaluate” others but I’m also torn for how to deal with dysfunctional behavior that creates a clique not a community. When I try to caution people (many of whom are my friends or at least I thought they were) against drinking the Kool-Aid, I am treated in the same manner as though I was trying to wrestle a drink from an alcoholic.
becky:: yup, the new standard!!
I’m wondering why,when Fishon replies,he seems to think that Paul cdn’t possibly be mistaken and even if he’s not,do we really think that that particular context(Corinth) can be so easily transferable to our own? Does this not reduce those writings to a Rolidex of ya’s and nay’s?
TforT,
English Standard Version {New Testament} “18And Jesus came and said to them, (V) “All authority(W) in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19 (X) Go therefore and(Y) make disciples of(Z) all nations,(AA) baptizing them(AB) in[b] the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20teaching them(AC) to observe all that(AD) I have commanded you. And behold,(AE) I am with you always, to(AF) the end of the age.”
You might concentrate on verse 20.
Oh, by the way, I wait expectantly for you to repuke the NP and tell him::If only you did what the Bible says (NP}, then nobody would have to listen to you teach everyone else.
And I too wait in anticipation for you to respond to your own teaching in your post to me.
fishon
i HATE being repuked!
faithless,
Come on, you know the answer to your question about my belief that Paul could NOT be mistaken.
YOU:and even if he’s not [mistaken],do we really think that that particular context(Corinth) can be so easily transferable to our own?
——-I don’t know who you mean by “we,” but there are untold numbers that believe it is intended to be transferable. They call us conservative, fundementalists. Now I know that the terms ‘conservative and fundementalist’ is now being used by the media and the liberal so-called christians as terms of slander. But to pin on us the new definition of those words does not take away from the truth of God’s word.
YOU::Does this not reduce those writings to a Rolidex of ya’s and nay’s?
———–The Bible is full of ya’s and nay’s. Jesus had a few ya’s and nay’s, too.
***Go and sin no more*** But today, Jesus would be thrown out of more than a few churches for saying such a thing.
***Love the Lord your God….*** Ooo, if some churches find out which God Jesus mean—out on his ear.
***It would be better to have a millstone tied around your neck…,.***
***If your brother sins against you, go and show him his fault.***Oh my, if we dare point out sin going on in thousands of churches today or to a brother/sister, we are labeled and judged judgemental.
***But I tell you that it will be more bearable for Sodom on the day of judgement than for you.***
fishon
Oh don’t we all, NP.
fishon
This is my last day near a computer for about a week, so you will loose the token fundy for a short time. It’ll be a nice break for the community on this blog.
Dang, not leaving for a vacation–but business. Heading back to my old stomping grounds. Ouch, as a fundy, ’stomping grounds’ might have left open the door for some great comments. I will let it stand.
fishon
Interesting that many agreed with “No human being should ever evaluate another human being” (W. Edwards Deming),” but not much agreement [wow-mostly silence] that the Bible scriptures I gave argues against Deming’s statement.
The only arguement against scripture was faithless’ arguement that Paul might have been mistaken. Are there no defenders of Paul and scripture viewing this blog sight?
And if Paul was mistaken in one thing, he is suspect in everything when it comes to scripture.
fishon
well fishon, there’s no mistake that paul was mistaken in at least one thing! even he sometimes admits that what he is saying is his own opinion’s and not the lord’s. so… having established that… maybe the silence comes from people feeling the truth of deming’s statement, but that it doesn’t jive with what they’ve been taught about scripture, so they are confused into silence; or, because they agree with deming, they are afraid to admit it on a pastor’s blog; or, they simply believe that scripture itself is always transforming to meet the needs of the human race; or… fill in the blank.
For Paul to come straight out and acknowledge something he is writing is of his own opinion gives even more validity to all the rest he writes. I can assume that what is not of his opinion is words given him by the Holy Spirit. You make my point stronger.
As far as Deming statement–as far as scripture is concerned, “he is wrong.”
And yes, I agree with you–some are confused. Most anyone is when they do not have a solid standard to hang on to. Ah yes, I believe the Bible says something about “tossed about by ever….”
As far as the need for scripture to be changing to meet the needs of the human race; pray tell, what needs of the human race has been raised since scripture has been written?
I believe that the need for many to have scripture changed is to meet the needs of their sin and life style. So I ask again, what needs of the human race has been raised since scripture has been written that makes the need for the transforming of scripture?
fishon
Fishon and NP:
I find myself wondering if there is a difference between being “evaluated by another human being” and being “evaluated” (which perhaps is not the best word) by the Written Word?
I agree that the church must have standards, “entrance requirements” so to speak. But there is a tension between this and human evaluation, it seems to me. I pastor a church in a denomination which has become known by what it is against more than by what it is for. That translates, at least roughly, into a good deal of judgmentalism and guilt trips–often over interepretations rather than by “black letter law” as a lawyer might put it.
We have to live in the tension; but aren’t there too many times when we ere on the side of human interpretation?
John Fariss
A man came to our meetings who has been known to have a sexual attraction towards children. I got to know him and tried to be a friend to him. When I saw him approaching children at a meeting I asked him not to do that and to leave them alone. He waited until I had walked away and a few minutes later was right over chatting with a couple other children. He and I mad a quick “evaluation” meeting and he decided that I was too judgmental (and a few other names) and he left. “Reject a factious man after a first and second warning.” really is in the Bible and it really is good advice for any community to follow. At some level I would call what I did with the guy in our meeting an evaluation and I’m sure the second from the Bible requires evaluation. Do I mean something different when I use the word “evaluation” than you or Demming do NP?
John,
For sure there is tension because of Biblical standards that call for evalution of each other, from time to time. I believe that the wise Christian balances the tension with grace and mercy as taught by God.
No doubt, each side, liberal and conservative have moved so far from God placed natural tension in a church community that what both sides propose and teach are not recognizable as biblical.
One of the big tensions is the judgmentalism and guilt-trips crowd, you mention, and the almost anything goes, no judgement [evaluation as defended by many in this blog] crowd. How that tension is put back into its proper place, I have no idea.
And yes, there are far too many times we ere on the side of human interpretation. And I have no idea how to overcome that, either.
My biggest complaint when things pop up like “No human being should ever evaluate another human being” (W. Edwards Deming), is people who call themselves Christian latch onto that ‘rose-colored’ saying and claim it and defend it by saying::”"If leaders obeyed this maxim alone massive transformation would occur within our communities, mainly because people would suddenly find themselves liberated from the crushing and debilitating weight of condemnation.”"”
The fact is, I know of NO ONE who does not ‘evaluate’ everyone they meet. It is normal, it is natural, it is a safety issue. David defends what he does not do. He evaluates just as you and I do. And as a leader of Jesus’ Church, he is called to continually evaluate. If one of his congregation is slipping into sin, how can he help them with grace and mercy if he does as he defends?
Enough of me.
fishon
Brianmpei,
Oo, very good post, Brianmpei. Excellent illustration. And I look forward to NP’s answer.
fishon
brian: i understand your story. but there’s no judgment of the man necessary. there really is no need for evaluation. it is like my daughter who has not learned to drive: she cannot get in my car and take off. that doesn’t take judging her. same with your man. he cannot be trusted with children. that is not judgment. it isn’t even discernment. it’s just the application of knowledge.
Ok, fine, NP. From now on I will use your definitions and when the subject of homosexuality comes back up, I will just “discern” that it is sin, based on the application of knowledge.
By the way, I thought biblical judgment was based on the application knowledge!
I suppose this discussion is about over, at least for me, as I will be leaving in the morning, and since you are a few time zones in darkness [opps, double meaning--its a joke, son] you will be off to bed soon.
MAKE IT a great next week.
fishon
When Deming uses the term “evaluate”, I’m sure he means “judge” in the biblical sense. In terms of Brian’s man with children, it is not an evaluation to say he cannot be trusted alone with children. It is an evaluation to say that he is less of a human being and not worthy of love or community because of his issues. Evaluation proposes value, and no human being is more valuable or less valuable than any other. Including gays fishon.
Evaluation/Judgement does not devalue a person either.
Jesus said that Judas was a thief from the start—according to your analysis of evaluation/judgement, based on Deming’s meaning that you seem to agree with, Jesus then put more value on the other apostles than Judas. Your analysis, not mine.
Glad that I am out of here–you are playing too many word games.
See ya later.
fishon
no word games fishon. just not saying the ones you want. i think i was clear.
There is good judgment which is righteous, and there is fleshly judgment, which is not.
1Cr 6:2 Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? and if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters?
1Cr 2:15 But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man.
The “judge not” scripture from Matthew refers to those hypocrites who judge others harshly, when they have the same sin themselves.
Fishon….NP makes a statement defending the ‘fundamental’ worth of every human being…you, as a Fundamentalist(yr words),disagree with his premise because of a doctrine of scripture.
What’s more important….The fundamental worth of every human being or a Fundamentalist’s view of scriptural worth?
I admit it. I am and addict to the NP blog. Had to peek in before I left for the week.
Glad I did because I get to read the insane discription of faithless interpreting what I said.
Faithless, you need to re-read what I said. And you need to stop twisting what I write. No where do I lower the worth of ANY human being. You make that little diddi up in your mind, and probably believe it. The fundamental worth of all people was on display at the cross. Some will go to heaven, some will go to hell, but that doesn’t not set aside their worth. Each has a choice.
Well, you won’t have to put up with me for a week. Make it a great week.
fishon
“No human being should ever evaluate another human being” (W. Edwards Deming).
Boy, this statement hits me right between the horns as I’m in the middle of doing report cards at school. It’s gotta be one of the worst parts of the job. Also, made worse in recent years as school divisions try to be more accountable and try to come up with ways of ensuring that. More and more, they want some uniformity and somehow try to do math with words and people. Hard to make things add up in a tidy fashion.
Gotta admit that I would want my surgeon to know his stuff and to have been a good student. On the other hand, there is an element of creative thinking that sometimes gets squeezed out when we go overboard trying to streamline evaluation. There’s not a lot of time for flights of fancy when you’re busy learning/teaching to get good scores.
It’s one of those eternal struggles, isn’t it? We want to live efficient tidy lives that work out just the way we want. Give us the rules, God, so that we know just how to plan our strategies. But we don’t get the rules given to us in a clear fashion, do we? For every argument for or against anything, we could probably find something to support it in the bible.
Rest in Him. That’s we’re to learn how to do. It seems that the only way we will ever do this is if our best laid plans are foiled. In those moments when we don’t know what to do next, we have very little choice left. Find another rule to apply or trust that we will be led.
Evaluate or not evaluate? I do it all the time and probably mostly for all the wrong reasons, God help me. And I trust that He is trying.
Happy belated birthday fishon.
I realize the arguments are about the intent of nakedpastor in posting that quote. However, just because this was up my particular alley of knowledge, I’ll toss in a little addendum of background to that quote.
Deming is the grand-high Pubah, and rightfully so, of process evaluation and improvement. Using the quote in the way it is being used is way outside of what he intended when he said it.
This was intended as part of a general admonition that people should not be judged on their specific results, but that their results are 90% due to the system and environment in which they are working. Specifically he is talking about work process evaluation results.
While it’s possible that the statement is true even as a general application to the human world of relationships (which is what is being discussed above), using the statement that way is WILDLY outside what Deming intended.
“No human being should ever evaluate another human being”
It’s sentiment like that that gives us high school graduates that cannot read.
I think the key is to ‘rank’ people – or ‘label’ them – its when this happens that it gets tough for someone to ‘change their spots’. I really have little problem with discusssing problems I may have with people – or them with me – as long as its being done in a way that doesnt belittle the person struggling – or puts a label on them (which I think can be disastorous).
About the guy who was ‘evaluated’ for being a paedophile or whatever you choose to call him. Obviously you have to protect young children in your church or, apart from anything else, you can get sued. Do you also have to protect adults? What else should they be protected from? Whose job is it to do this?
I was quite shocked when you said the church has to ‘have standards’ and ‘entrance requirements’. What is it some kind of posh school?
Test case – What if a single woman who goes to a church gets involved with another single woman sexually. Do the leaders of her church have a right to coerce her to leave? Is this something you would do? Just curious….
Tiggy: no.
Well that was a short answer! My friend was chucked out of her church because of her she was in a relationship with a woman and I think that’s quite common. Even if you’re not chucked out, you’re made to feel so bad that you’re forced to leave. I go to a church now that’s full of people who were forced to leave other churches. Bit hard to go to a place where people are saying you’re ‘an abomination’ and ‘perverted’ and where people worry that you’re a corrupting influence.
Mind you, I’ve been in churches where if you’re a reasonably attractive single woman then you’re seen as a threat to married couples. Once you’ve got past the Youth Group age, it’s like there’s no place for you. There’s the Mother’s Union (not appropriate) and then there’s the ‘Men’s Group’ (note – not the Father’s Union). Men are men and women are mothers, unless they’re not of course and then they’re …. no one.