Ontological reality concerns what is; lived reality concerns how what is is experienced; and formative reality concerns what a person is becoming through attention and choice over time.
In the next few posts, I’m going to discuss spiritual abuse. To kick things off, here’s a primer, the definitions pinning the foundations of spiritual abuse.
Why These Distinctions Matter
Understanding the distinctions between these reality categories helps to:
Prevent spiritual abuse.
Protect individual agency.
Honor trauma reality without resorting to mysticism.
Enable growth without moral judgment.
Integrate theology and neuroscience in a coherent way.
Recognize the differences among these realities.
Ontological Reality
Definition
Ontological reality refers to what exists and is true independently of human perception, interpretation, or belief.
Key characteristics
Exists whether or not it is perceived.
Is not created by thought, emotion, or belief.
Includes facts, events, moral truths, and historical occurrences.
Provides the ground against which all experience is measured.
Examples
A harmful act occurred.
Gravity operates.
God exists.
A boundary was violated.
A contract was breached.
Common errors
Denying ontological reality by appealing to perception (“that’s just how you feel”).
Treating belief as causative of truth (“if you believed rightly, this wouldn’t be true”).
Lived / Perceptual Reality
Definition
Lived or perceptual reality refers to how reality is experienced, interpreted, and embodied by a person through perception, memory, emotion, and meaning-making.
Key characteristics
Subjective but real.
Mediated by the nervous system.
Shaped by memory, trauma, culture, and expectation.
Determines what feels true or threatening.
Does not define what is true.
Examples
Feeling unsafe despite being physically safe.
Experiencing shame after a boundary violation.
Interpreting silence as rejection.
Trauma memories activating fear in the present.
Common errors
Dismissing lived reality as imaginary or sinful.
Elevating lived reality into ultimate truth.
Formative / Volitional Reality
Definition
Formative or volitional reality refers to what is becoming true over time through attention, choice, habit, practice, and repetition.
Key characteristics
Developmental and process-oriented.
Shaped by volition and sustained practice.
Influences identity, character, and future behavior.
Bridges present experience and future outcomes.
Neither fixed nor instantaneous.
Examples
Neural pathways being rewired through grounding.
Character formed through repeated choices.
Trust rebuilt over time.
Patterns of avoidance or engagement becoming habitual.
In Jewish law, not all slaps were equal. The Mishnah tells us that if you slap a man with your palm, there’s a fine. But if you backhand him—well, now you’ve doubled it (Mishnah). Why? Because the backhand wasn’t just about sting, it was about shame. It was a master’s way of saying, “You’re beneath me.”
That little detail sheds a lot of light on Jesus’ words. When He said, “Turn the other cheek,” He wasn’t telling people to stand there and take a beating. He was telling them: don’t play their game of humiliation. Offer the other cheek, and suddenly the insulter can’t treat you like an inferior anymore without breaking his own code of conduct.
Josephus and the Weight of Insult
To Josephus, the Jewish historian who lived through the Roman wars, being humiliated was nearly the same as being wounded. He gives us story after story about how insults sparked violence.
One Roman governor, Florus, took money from the Temple treasury. When the Jews begged him not to commit such sacrilege, he mocked them and sent soldiers to beat and crucify the petitioners (Flavius Josephus, Wars 2.224–227).
Another story, from Antiquities 17.163, shows men punished severely for insulting Herod by tearing down one of his dedications. Insult was rebellion. Shame was a wound to the whole community.
That’s the world Jesus spoke into. That’s what makes His words so jarring.
Other Voices of the Time
And Josephus wasn’t alone. Seneca, the Roman Stoic, said it was small-minded to count up insults—better to ignore them. Philo, the Jewish philosopher, praised those who endured wrongs instead of inflicting them (Dialogues, Cato)
In other words, there was a countercurrent of thought in the ancient world: real strength is shown not by striking back, but by refusing to be ruled by insult.
4. The Subversive Message of Jesus
Put it all together, and you see the sharp edge of Jesus’ teaching:
The Mishnah shows us just how shameful a backhanded slap was.
Josephus shows us how honor and insult could lead to bloodshed.
Seneca and Philo remind us that endurance was seen as a higher way.
But Jesus didn’t echo philosophers. He turns the notion on its head and teaches something contrary to popular doctrines.
In going further, He says, “Turn the other cheek,” don’t play their honor-shame game. Instead, expose the injustice by refusing to accept the terms of humiliation.
That’s not a weakness. That’s a dignified, honorable display of defiant strength. It’s the quiet word of someone who knows their worth in God’s eyes, not in the approval of men.
Side-by-Side Comparison
(Josephus, the Mishnah, and contemporaneous voices)
Source
Content
Emphasis
Mishnah Bava Kamma 8:6
“If he slapped him on the cheek with the back of his hand, which is more degrading than a slap with the palm, he must give him four hundred dinars.”
A backhand is twice as humiliating as an open-palm slap. Insult, not injury, is the main issue.
Josephus, Wars 2.224–227
Florus robs the Temple, mocks the Jews’ pleas, unleashes soldiers to kill and flog, and crucifies many.
Humiliation as a tool of domination. For Josephus, insult is as intolerable as physical attack.
Josephus, Antiquities 17.163
Rebels insult Herod by destroying what he had dedicated. He punishes them harshly.
Honor and insult drive political response. Public shame is treated as rebellion.
Jesus, Matthew 5:39
“If anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also.”
A radical command to refuse humiliation without retaliation. Dignity is preserved through nonviolent resistance.
The Teaching At that Time
In Jesus’ world, the backhanded slap was the ultimate way to belittle someone. The Mishnah shows us the legal weight: it cost double the fine of an ordinary slap. Josephus shows us that insults could spark riots, even war. To be shamed in public was as serious as being wounded.
And yet when Jesus said to “turn the other cheek,” He was not suggesting our popular notion and doctrine of becoming passive doormats. He’s not saying abuse is okay. He’s telling His followers: ‘Don’t live by the old honor, don’t play another man’s game.’
A Comparison
Someone tries to embarrass you, cutting you down with a sarcastic remark
Popular doctrine: shy away, be passive, don’t confront, allow them to hit you again – just hide away and pray for them.
Jesus’s teaching: confront with dignity and honor; be angry, but don’t sin.
The idea of being angry without sinning feels strange to many of us. Why? Because somewhere along the way, we were taught that certain emotions—especially the uncomfortable ones like anger, grief, or frustration—were automatically wrong. They couldn’t be displayed, voiced, or even acknowledged. So rather than learning how to handle these emotions honestly, we learned to bury them. We suppressed instead of expressed, mistaking silence for holiness. But suppressed emotions don’t disappear; they simmer. Over time, the pressure builds, and the body keeps score. We wear our “badges of courage” not as medals of faithfulness, but as ulcers, anxiety, sleepless nights, and other disorders that remind us: ignoring what we feel is not the same as overcoming.
Final Thought
Josephus and the rabbis show us that a backhanded slap was more than pain—it was about stripping someone of their honor. Jesus flips the script: our honor doesn’t come from men, but from God. When we turn the other cheek, we demonstrate that we know who we are in Christ. That’s why we don’t have to fight insult with insult. We can stand with dignity, even when the world tries to put us down.
In short: turning the other cheek is not weakness—it’s faith. Faith that God will vindicate us, faith that our worth is secure, and faith that His Kingdom operates on different rules than the world’s.
Understanding His teaching in the context of history sets the common doctrine, ‘I am but a worm,‘ on its head.
Why Readiness Isn’t About Salvation, But It Still Matters
The Bible is full of people saved by God’s grace who had to make real decisions to prepare themselves for what was coming. Noah built an ark. Lot fled Sodom. Israel crossed the Red Sea and later the Jordan. Each story is unique, but one theme echoes: God saves, but the wise prepare.
Too often, we reduce readiness to moral effort or religious performance. But actual biblical readiness is something else: it’s prophetic insight. It’s the capacity to perceive what God is doing in history and act in faith before the moment comes.
Jesus called us to be ready, not because He wanted us to fear being “left behind,” but because He wants us to live in alignment with His kingdom now. Readiness doesn’t secure your salvation. Salvation influences your readiness if you choose to walk in it.
Just as Revelation pictures the saints enduring, witnessing, resisting the beast, and standing with the Lamb, we are called to live as those who know what’s coming and prepare accordingly.
Are you saved? Good.
Are you ready? Maybe, maybe not. That’s the next question.
Ready or Not: A Biblical Theology of Readiness Beyond Salvation
I. Introduction
Define: the distinction between salvation and readiness.
Emphasize: Salvation is a gift; readiness is a prophetic response.
Key Scriptures: Matthew 24:42-44, 1 Thessalonians 5:1-8, Revelation 3:2-3
II. Biblical Case Studies in Readiness
1. Noah (Genesis 6-9)
Saved by grace (Gen. 6:8), but “ready” because he obeyed.
Hebrews 11:7: “By faith Noah… prepared an ark.”
Readiness = long-term obedience based on faith that you are 1) hearing God’s direction, 2) God is speaking.
2. Lot (Genesis 19)
Not portrayed as morally exemplary, yet delivered.
“Ready” when he obeyed the angels and fled.
Readiness = responding to urgent divine instruction.
3. Israel at the Red Sea (Exodus 14)
Saved by God’s deliverance, but had to choose to leave Egypt.
Readiness = willingness to step into the unknown in faith.
4. Israel at the Jordan (Joshua 3-5)
The new generation sanctifies itself and follows God.
Readiness = preparation and courage to inherit the promise.
5. The Foolish Virgins (Matthew 25:1-13)
All were invited, but only the prepared entered.
Readiness = spiritual vigilance, not last-minute scrambling.
III. Readiness in Revelation
1. The Saints (Rev. 12:11, 14:12)
Described as those who keep faith and endure.
Readiness = perseverance and spiritual alertness.
2. The Two Witnesses (Rev. 11)
Symbolic of the “One New Man” (Eph. 2:15): Jew and Gentile Church.
Readiness = prophetic witness in a hostile world.
3. The 144,000 (Rev. 7, 14)
Symbolic totality of God’s people, sealed and standing with the Lamb.
Shows us the One New Man in two tribes (Gentile and Jew) complementing each other (12 squared) and then multiplied by 1000, which is God’s overwhelming empowerment.
Readiness = sealed identity, obedient and powerful Saints following God.
The Thief in the Night (Matt. 24, 1 Thess. 5)
In no way is a thief in the night a good time, even when you’re ready to confront him.
Readiness = the awareness of the difficulties associated with Christ’s return: the rise of the Beast, the deception of the False Prophet, and the trials of the tribulation period.
IV. Overcoming the Beast: A Biblical Profile of the Saints
1. Daniel 7:21-22 – The beast wages war, but judgment is rendered for the saints who then possess the kingdom.
2. Daniel 11:32-35 – The people who know their God stand firm and instruct many during persecution.
3. Revelation 12:11 – Saints conquer the Beast by the blood of the Lamb and their testimony.
4. Revelation 13:7-10 – The beast is permitted to conquer saints physically, but spiritual endurance is their victory.
5. Revelation 14:12 – Saints are defined by their obedience and faith in Jesus amid tribulation.
6. 2 Thessalonians 2:3-4 – The man of lawlessness is revealed, but the faithful are not deceived.
These passages show that the saints do not overcome by escaping the world, the Beast, or the False Prophet, but by faithfully enduring and conquering with insight, courage, and hope.
V. Theological Implications
Salvation = Position in Christ.
Readiness = Prophetic alignment with God’s purposes.
It is not about works or righteousness, but sanctified awareness and action.
Summary: Readiness is not what saves us, but it shows we have understood what God is doing. It is the mark of mature faith.
Easy believism ignores and discounts the requirement of personal responsibility. It says, “I can just believe and be saved.”
“So also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead. But someone will say, “You have faith and I have works.” Show me your faith apart from your works, and I will show you my faith by my works. You believe that God is one; you do well. Even the demons believe—and shudder!”
Faith is the confluence of belief, trust, and expectation. These three working together produce fruit. In the context of salvation by grace through faith (Eph. 2:8-10), the fruit (or works) of faith is repentance from sins.
Without trust and expectation, there is no accessing the Works (salvation) of the One who says, I can, and I will do as I promise. Without trust and expectation mixed with belief, there is no basis to act in repentance from sins, which are non-refutable qualities of the gospel of the kingdom of God.
So, to button it up: Is Jesus key? Yes. Can we access the salvation that Jesus provided through is death, burial and resurrection without repentance? No.
Would you like to learn about the Five Stages of the Miracle Experience? If so, read on.
Just as with the Five Stages of Grief, encountering a genuine, unexpected miracle compels one to navigate through these five stages. Similarly, akin to the stages of grief, it is possible to become trapped in any phase and prematurely terminate the process without full resolution.
Surprise
The initial shock and amazement at witnessing the impossible.
Denial
This is where we first deny and attempt to shift responsibility for what has just occurred in our presence.
Uncertainty
This stage is predominantly occupied with the question of “Why,” and doubting our memory of the events surrounding the miracle. We explore plausible, alternate scenarios to explain the miraculous.
Reasoning
In our struggle to comprehend the nature or meaning of the event, we attempt to stabilize our psyche through understanding and comprehension. We seek or construct answers as we develop a framework about its meaning and significance.
Acceptance
We accept the miraculous event as literal and natural for our relationship with God; we find peace and awe in the experience. Most importantly, our faith grows as a result. In other words, our “God Box” gets bigger.
You can ask me how I know, but I’m not telling. When you do experience yours, those steps above are generally how it will play out for you. And like grief, we don’t progress through these stages one after the other but jump between them during the process.
The Unexpected
This quality is important: the unexpected nature of the event pushes us into this processing framework.
Many of us have experienced what we may have called a miracle. But because of faith or disinterest, we immediately had a framework in which the experience was quickly processed, categorized, and perhaps even discarded.
When a person gives their life to Jesus, that person will be changed, never wanting to go back to their old sinful ways.
I wish it were that easy and simple. It never was for me. I became aware of some things—literally overnight—and some behaviors changed immediately. But through no fault of my own, others hung around for a lifetime.
Being a good Baptist, I learned how to thrive on the condemnation routinely spewed like raw sewage from the pulpit. I doubted my salvation; I prayed the sinner’s prayer weekly, if not daily, and confessed the same sins over and over, but nothing changed. So, I embraced the sewage and self-condemnation, figuring this was what I needed to keep me straight.
At some point in my journey, I had begun to learn Father’s voice—thanks be to God because the Baptists I hung out with couldn’t teach that if their lives depended upon it—when during one of my groveling confession sessions, Father spoke so clearly that had it been any louder, I would have heard Him with my ears, bellowing in the room: “Never confess those sins to me again. Don’t bring it to me if you don’t remember when it happened or remember doing it.”
For you see, I knew—as aptly taught—that I was just a worm, a sinner saved by grace, so it didn’t really matter what sin I confessed because, at some point, I’d certainly done it in some fashion. Hence, repeat, ad nauseam.
After that encounter, I didn’t pray again for two weeks because I had nothing else to say or talk about.
That was probably the turning point in my learning who I am in Christ.
It has been suggested that the definition of faith is believing in something without proof or evidence to substantiate said thing: a typical Evangelical Christian definition based chiefly on a verse found somewhere in the book of Hebrews (chapter 11, verse 1, to be precise).
However, I would suggest that there’s not only archeological evidence but also other tangible evidence that God is and keeps His word—the Bible, right?
After all, some say that today, God only speaks to us through the Bible.
So then, how is the Bible used, and what does it have to do with blind faith?
We use it as a historical record illustrating that God is trustworthy and His nature is Good. By any definition of the word, the Bible becomes our record of evidence of His existence and nature. But therein is the rub.
Using their definition, that faith must be blind, that faith must not rely on tangible evidence, then believing in and trusting God solely based on what one has read in the Bible does not constitute an application of faith, because – according to them – the very essence of faith must transcend the need for empirical validation resting instead on a profound sense of trust and conviction that is literally based upon nothing:
Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen.
What we see, then, is that these people try to define faith as empty and convince you that faith is blind. They take Hebrews 11:1 out of context and propose a new, seemingly better definition.
However, in adhering to their wishes and using their own definitions, we discover their blindness to the very nature of their origins.
What do they possess, then? Nothing more than a commitment to a logical conclusion drawn from historical evidence found in both the Bible and extrabiblical sources – because their faith must be blind and based upon no observable evidence at all.
Really Understanding Faith
While our reference to the text of the Book of Hebrews is correct, and the words found therein are true, we must move beyond blind, unsubstantiated faith. Perhaps a further reading of the text will bring elucidation:
For by it {faith} the people of old received their commendation.
By faith we understand that the universe was created by the word of God, so that what is seen was not made out of things that are visible.
By faith Abel offered to God a more acceptable sacrifice than Cain, through which he was commended as righteous, God commending him by accepting his gifts. And through his faith, though he died, he still speaks.
By faith Enoch was taken up so that he should not see death, and he was not found, because God had taken him. Now before he was taken he was commended as having pleased God.
And without faith it is impossible to please him, for whoever would draw near to God must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who seek him.
By faith Noah, being warned by God concerning events as yet unseen, in reverent fear constructed an ark for the saving of his household. By this he condemned the world and became an heir of the righteousness that comes by faith.
In all of the examples provided, each one is backed up by tangible evidence.
The Word of God was spoken throughout history so that those from Adam and beyond knew from whence they came, this being the evidence of testimony.
How did Able know what to bring as an offering? Not through the Bible, but by having a living conversation with God – trusting and believing His testimony.
Enoch believed and trusted God that he would not see death but be taken up instead. He had reason to believe and trust God’s word.
Noah acted on God’s tangible word after being warned and instructed.
A Better Understanding of Faith
In any court, testimony is considered evidence. Even so, without trust there can be no faith.
Suppose you want to hire Yardman to mow your grass, as you have an acre of grass to maintain. To that end, you interview a few people.
The first person arrives with scissors and promises to show up on time every week. He asserts that he will cut your grass with his scissors and be done in about an hour. The second person you interview arrives with useful lawn equipment that seems to be seldom used. Your neighbors have warned you that he’s unreliable and may not show up but only once a month, if that. The third person arrives looking tattered, hot, and with grass clippings stuck in his hair. He provides, like the others, a fair price for the job.
Which one do you hire, and why?
You avoid Scissor Man because you don’t believe he can do the job.
You avoid Seldom Man because you don’t trust him to do the job.
You hire Tattered and Dirty Man because you believe he can do the job and trust that he will keep his word.
So, you hired the Tattered and Diry Man, because why? Because of the faith generated by the evidence provided.
The Scientific Method
Whether supernatural or natural, faith is always based on the evidence provided. It is generated and grows by believing the evidence and trusting its Maker. As such, the Scientific Method is the best example of our generation of natural faith.
Something is observed, and a curiosity is formed along with an idea of why the thing is. Tests are devised and investigated for their applicability and trustworthiness. The tests are performed, and the results are evaluated as conforming to the qualifications previously devised. Once the results are confirmed, we let someone else run the same experiments. The more times they’re run, the more times they show the same results, the more our belief in the original hypothesis and theories increase, along with the trust in the validity of the devised tests. All because of trust placed into the original systems of belief and the qualities of trustworthiness of the tests performed.
We have faith because we know the One who speaks, and we believe because we have found Him to be Trustworthy.
Thus, faith is never blind, regardless of how often someone removes Hebrews 11:1 from its context.
So, the next time someone tells you that faith is blind, ask them if they believe the Bible provides evidence of a Creator, Moral Giver, and Judge. If they assert that as true, then remind them they have simply believed a logical construct, seeing that their faith must, by their definition, be blind.
The Protestant churches I attended did a mediocre job of teaching that guilt of sin was transferred to the cross.
But they all excelled at keeping people in bondage to shame.
My therapist helped me work through shame by helping me understand that guilt is understanding that “I’ve done something wrong,” and shame is “I am badly made” or “I am wrongful in who I am,” either through my actions or the actions of others against me.
Guilt carries remorse, but shame carries anger and disgust against oneself or another.
Given the context of my therapy, I had a few problems with guilt, but boy, howdy, did I ever feel shame. Once I learned and accepted that I had done nothing wrong (no guilt), I then had to learn that I was not bad (or wrong), nor was I the cause of what happened to me because of who I am (or was).
I did not ask for, condone, or do anything to deserve my assault, and it was wrong for me to carry anger and disgust against myself resulting from that action against me.
We have a Savior that eliminates guilt – but perhaps does not remove you from the earthly consequences thereof. Shame, however, has no place in our lives: our Savior removes all of it.
Who among you fears Adonai? Who obeys what his servant says? Even when he walks in the dark, without any light, he will trust in Adonai’s reputation and rely on his God.
But all of you who are lighting fires and arming yourselves with firebrands: go, walk in the flame of your own fire, among the firebrands you lit! From my hands this [fate] awaits you: you will lie down in torment.
Isaiah 50:10-11 CJB
—-
A person’s name is their reputation, character, and personal qualities.
Taking the name of God in vain is not using it as a curse word.
Taking the name of God in vain is connecting yourself with Him and subsequently refusing His qualities, power, and desires.
Adhering to cessationism is taking the name of God in vain.
A Recovering Legalist 