Another step to understanding the real me, is understanding my depravity. Understanding the fact that I truly am nothing without the grace of God. Because when I can effectually grasp the concept of my depravity then the grace of God becomes so much more powerful in my life. This new piece of knowledge will also open the doors for learning.
Learning starts with me not feeling satisfied with where I am. It starts with frustration, and anger. However, to often does our society worry about my self-esteem, and my feeling good about my self, that when reality sets in it is almost unbearable. Hence the reason the education system is failing. Teachers and administrators are so worried about making the student feel good about him/her that they destroy the kid’s ability to learn. All of a sudden truth has been subjectified and is nothing more than something that feels good.
Truth is quite the opposite. It is freeing, but in a very painful way. People who ask for the plain truth are ignorantly arrogant. If the objectivity of truth and all that it encompasses was completely understood, our out look on life would be totally different. Our selfish desires and ambitions would come to a screeching halt, while our spiritual selfless lives would come alive.
Christ's life was not an easy one. Yet He knew the truth and was set free in the sense that His perspective of this life was much bigger. He didn't become bogged down in the dogmatic narrow views of His friends and family.
Most people don't consider being chained up in a prison as free, yet for Paul it was only a confirmation of his liberty in Christ. Mentally and spiritually.
It is so incredibly hard to hold on to the real me once I find it. Because as soon as I recognize and accept the truth of my depravity, the "god" inside me - that I have been so indoctrinated with by society - is trying to tell me "perk up your not so bad!". How deceived we are and how readily we accept it!! God have mercy on me!!
Saturday, December 31, 2005
Thursday, December 22, 2005
The Real Me
It seems that in every person there are two personalities. On the one hand you have the physical being (flesh), on the other you have the metaphysical being (the mind/soul). Contained in each person is two. The irony is these two different persons inside my head contradict themselves. One is telling me to live for the moment while the other is telling me to hold out for something better. One says not to worry about living the examined life while the other is saying that the unexamined life is not worth living. The latter is saying that there is an afterlife and what you do here does affect that life to some degree or another and the former is saying there is no life after death therefore live for yourself. One says "You are your own god," while the other says, "Humble yourself because you are insignificant and nothing you can do will ever change that".
How do we know which is the real me? Or is there a real me, and whatever that struggle is going on inside my head, is merely a figment of my imagination? The great thinkers struggled with this question and seemed to all come to the same conclusion. But why or rather how did they come to a congruent decision about the real self?
The metaphysical self seems to be the most improbable. Amongst our society, instant gratification is all that people care about. Therefore why take a chance and hold out for something I am not certain about? Why not indulge in the moment and live life for me? That'll make me the happiest won't it? The truth however, is quite the opposite. In Ecclesiastes, King Solomon experiments with both of his persons.
He lives for Himself. Indulges in every sort of thing that would seem to make him happy. Yet in the end, he finds that all is vanity and chasing after the wind. Nothing he did to satisfy his immediate wants were enough to make him happy. Ecc. 2:16-17 "I communed with my heart, saying, 'Look, I have attained greatness, and have gained more wisdom than all who were before me in Jerusalem. My heart has understood great wisdom and knowledge.' And I set my heart to know wisdom and to know madness and folly. I perceived that this also is grasping for the wind." It was impossible to satisfy his flesh, because everything he tried was unfulfilling, and merely chasing after the wind.
Solomon then states what is worth living for in Ecc. 12:13-14 "Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God and keep His commandments, for this is man’s all. For God will bring every work into judgment, including every secret thing, whether good or evil." If this truly is what is worth living for, then the metaphysical part of me is the real me. To fear God and obey Him is not instantly gratifying....In fact it is a lot of work! However, anything that is worth having is worth working for.
This is what Socrates meant when he said, "the unexamined life is not worth living". Because by not examining ones life and merely doing what "feels good" is only to become more frustrated with something one does not understand! The reason one does not understand is because one has not examined. This is why so many adults have a mid-life crisis. They have lived forty or so years of not examining their life and all of a sudden they have to face reality. All of a sudden they begin to involuntarily examine their life, which turns out to be a whole lot of nothing. They find out that what they have been living for either does not exist or was extremely childish.
It is this very fact of living an unexamined life that makes teenage peers so incredibly frustrating. They are ignorant of their ignorance.
So how does one, who has finally faced the reality of their nothingness, begin to find their true self? From the Christian stand point I believe C.S. Lewis put it best. In order to allow our true selves to be the most prevalent in our lives is to let Christ rule. To remove our physical selves that Christ might "move in". It is when we allow the creator to shape us and mold us into who He originally created us to be. "It is when I turn to Christ, when I give myself up to His Personality, that I first begin to have a real personality of my own....there are no real personalities anywhere else," -C.S. Lewis "The Buisness of Heaven". This rings so true, because when one looks at all of the evil leaders of history, they all were fairly much the same in their personalities (Hitler, Stalin, Lenin, Marx). However among the saints there was a glorious difference!!
How do we know which is the real me? Or is there a real me, and whatever that struggle is going on inside my head, is merely a figment of my imagination? The great thinkers struggled with this question and seemed to all come to the same conclusion. But why or rather how did they come to a congruent decision about the real self?
The metaphysical self seems to be the most improbable. Amongst our society, instant gratification is all that people care about. Therefore why take a chance and hold out for something I am not certain about? Why not indulge in the moment and live life for me? That'll make me the happiest won't it? The truth however, is quite the opposite. In Ecclesiastes, King Solomon experiments with both of his persons.
He lives for Himself. Indulges in every sort of thing that would seem to make him happy. Yet in the end, he finds that all is vanity and chasing after the wind. Nothing he did to satisfy his immediate wants were enough to make him happy. Ecc. 2:16-17 "I communed with my heart, saying, 'Look, I have attained greatness, and have gained more wisdom than all who were before me in Jerusalem. My heart has understood great wisdom and knowledge.' And I set my heart to know wisdom and to know madness and folly. I perceived that this also is grasping for the wind." It was impossible to satisfy his flesh, because everything he tried was unfulfilling, and merely chasing after the wind.
Solomon then states what is worth living for in Ecc. 12:13-14 "Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God and keep His commandments, for this is man’s all. For God will bring every work into judgment, including every secret thing, whether good or evil." If this truly is what is worth living for, then the metaphysical part of me is the real me. To fear God and obey Him is not instantly gratifying....In fact it is a lot of work! However, anything that is worth having is worth working for.
This is what Socrates meant when he said, "the unexamined life is not worth living". Because by not examining ones life and merely doing what "feels good" is only to become more frustrated with something one does not understand! The reason one does not understand is because one has not examined. This is why so many adults have a mid-life crisis. They have lived forty or so years of not examining their life and all of a sudden they have to face reality. All of a sudden they begin to involuntarily examine their life, which turns out to be a whole lot of nothing. They find out that what they have been living for either does not exist or was extremely childish.
It is this very fact of living an unexamined life that makes teenage peers so incredibly frustrating. They are ignorant of their ignorance.
So how does one, who has finally faced the reality of their nothingness, begin to find their true self? From the Christian stand point I believe C.S. Lewis put it best. In order to allow our true selves to be the most prevalent in our lives is to let Christ rule. To remove our physical selves that Christ might "move in". It is when we allow the creator to shape us and mold us into who He originally created us to be. "It is when I turn to Christ, when I give myself up to His Personality, that I first begin to have a real personality of my own....there are no real personalities anywhere else," -C.S. Lewis "The Buisness of Heaven". This rings so true, because when one looks at all of the evil leaders of history, they all were fairly much the same in their personalities (Hitler, Stalin, Lenin, Marx). However among the saints there was a glorious difference!!
Monday, December 19, 2005
Redeeming the culture
This has been a long time coming, and I have now recently finished this blog that I started in October!!! So here it is completely finished!! (Just because I started it in October does not mean it is going to be some GREAT blog. Fact is, is that I haven't worked on it since October. While I was going through some of my previous blogs I came across this one and decided I would try and finish it to the best of my ability.)
A couple of weeks ago I went to a Biola apologetics lecture. Its actually a 7 week class that I signed up for. Each Thursday night there is a different speaker. This weeks lecturer was Mike Erre. He is the pastor for Rock Harbor church and he talked about redeeming the culture. I am going to do my best and write up a readers digest version of what he talked about. Mike Erre brought up a lot of good points. He brought up so many obvious yet intelligent topics that the church tends to look over. He started the night out by talking about what culture is. Culture is the sum of everything - a set of ideas that are true, right, or ideal. One of the reasons why culture is drifting further and further away from the church is due to the fact that the church is no longer answering the questions that the culture is asking. The church is still stuck on the questions which are no longer relevant. We as Christians need to learn how to contextualize the scripture, yet still holding on to the main gospel message. He then gave three useful postures: 1. Observe 2. Engage 3. Incarnate For the first posture he gave the example of Paul when he was in Athens. Paul observed how the Greeks lived and began to make note of what a religious people they were. Taking notice of all their idols and graven images to Zeus, and Hera and the many other Greek gods. Paul also read some of their famous poets and philosophers. People like Plato who were very influential in the Greek culture. He then explained how Paul engaged the Greeks. In Acts 17 when Paul stood up and began to preach he didn't start off by preaching stuff that they did not understand. He began by talking about things that would put him and his audience on common ground. As his sermon progressed he began quoting their own writings back at them! Thus showing them that Christ is Lord of all truth. Its is during this time that one must then talk about Jesus. Christ was God incarnate. He overcame the world as we also are to overcome the world. However, He didn't conquer the world by making war, rather by sacrificing Himself. So we also must sacrifice ourselves for God. Whether it be by giving up an addiction or as the early church did, martyrdom. This is where Jesus differed from the Pharisees. There were three different types of Pharisees: 1. the ones who insisted on separating themselves. However, by separating themselves they were no longer able to affect the world for God. Christ did not seek to separate himself from the world, but rather He dined with the sinners and offered mercy and forgiveness for their sins!2. The zealots who wished to over take culture, but they also were ineffective because they left no room for forgiveness. Christ also did not try to take over the world the way the zealots attempted to. 3. Then there were the Pharisees who embraced culture as apart of their religion. Christ also did not embrace culture. He sought to redeem the culture! There is a balance between these three different attitudes towards culture. To be overbearing on one and then forget the other two is ineffective.
It’s about maintaining a balance. However, not a balance of mediocrity, rather of equal extremes (I hope you don't mind me quoting you Mr. Fry!). Redeeming the culture isn't a politically correct revolution. The disciples and the early church were brutally killed for trying to redeem the culture. Christ Himself suffered the worst death that any of us could imagine! If they had the guts to kill God Himself, how much more will they do to us? “18If the world hate you, ye know that it hated me before it hated you.” LORD strengthen me Your servant!!
A couple of weeks ago I went to a Biola apologetics lecture. Its actually a 7 week class that I signed up for. Each Thursday night there is a different speaker. This weeks lecturer was Mike Erre. He is the pastor for Rock Harbor church and he talked about redeeming the culture. I am going to do my best and write up a readers digest version of what he talked about. Mike Erre brought up a lot of good points. He brought up so many obvious yet intelligent topics that the church tends to look over. He started the night out by talking about what culture is. Culture is the sum of everything - a set of ideas that are true, right, or ideal. One of the reasons why culture is drifting further and further away from the church is due to the fact that the church is no longer answering the questions that the culture is asking. The church is still stuck on the questions which are no longer relevant. We as Christians need to learn how to contextualize the scripture, yet still holding on to the main gospel message. He then gave three useful postures: 1. Observe 2. Engage 3. Incarnate For the first posture he gave the example of Paul when he was in Athens. Paul observed how the Greeks lived and began to make note of what a religious people they were. Taking notice of all their idols and graven images to Zeus, and Hera and the many other Greek gods. Paul also read some of their famous poets and philosophers. People like Plato who were very influential in the Greek culture. He then explained how Paul engaged the Greeks. In Acts 17 when Paul stood up and began to preach he didn't start off by preaching stuff that they did not understand. He began by talking about things that would put him and his audience on common ground. As his sermon progressed he began quoting their own writings back at them! Thus showing them that Christ is Lord of all truth. Its is during this time that one must then talk about Jesus. Christ was God incarnate. He overcame the world as we also are to overcome the world. However, He didn't conquer the world by making war, rather by sacrificing Himself. So we also must sacrifice ourselves for God. Whether it be by giving up an addiction or as the early church did, martyrdom. This is where Jesus differed from the Pharisees. There were three different types of Pharisees: 1. the ones who insisted on separating themselves. However, by separating themselves they were no longer able to affect the world for God. Christ did not seek to separate himself from the world, but rather He dined with the sinners and offered mercy and forgiveness for their sins!2. The zealots who wished to over take culture, but they also were ineffective because they left no room for forgiveness. Christ also did not try to take over the world the way the zealots attempted to. 3. Then there were the Pharisees who embraced culture as apart of their religion. Christ also did not embrace culture. He sought to redeem the culture! There is a balance between these three different attitudes towards culture. To be overbearing on one and then forget the other two is ineffective.
It’s about maintaining a balance. However, not a balance of mediocrity, rather of equal extremes (I hope you don't mind me quoting you Mr. Fry!). Redeeming the culture isn't a politically correct revolution. The disciples and the early church were brutally killed for trying to redeem the culture. Christ Himself suffered the worst death that any of us could imagine! If they had the guts to kill God Himself, how much more will they do to us? “18If the world hate you, ye know that it hated me before it hated you.” LORD strengthen me Your servant!!
Saturday, December 10, 2005
Narnia
Absolutely refreshing!!
Going into the movie I was a little apprehensive due to the fact that Disney was helping with it. I thought maybe it had been built up to much, and disappointment would soon follow. However, after seeing it twice already, I have never been more pleased with such an incredible representation of a story. The characters were amazing! Peter’s transition from boyhood to manhood was inspiring. The display of courage he showed by leading the army of Narnia against the White Witch was a magnificent portrayal of his final step towards manhood. Susan who's smarts and logic almost handed over Narnia to the White Witch. Edmund who was all smiles at receiving his crown and the throne on which he was to sit, knew that this came at a price. And the ever adorable Lucy whose goodness to others never seemed to cease.
Once again Lewis portrays his ability to not only write about things complicated and over the heads of most people, but also his ability to write something as simple as a children’s story that is yet filled with concepts and allegories so genius that can only blow people (who understand) away! I am so thankful that Disney did not destroy or take away from the story the way I thought they might!
My advice: Go out and see it as soon as possible (assuming that you haven't already..)!! Remember while watching it though, that a movie is not a book therefore things will be left out and characters may be underdeveloped. With that in mind it makes the experience that much more enjoyable!
Going into the movie I was a little apprehensive due to the fact that Disney was helping with it. I thought maybe it had been built up to much, and disappointment would soon follow. However, after seeing it twice already, I have never been more pleased with such an incredible representation of a story. The characters were amazing! Peter’s transition from boyhood to manhood was inspiring. The display of courage he showed by leading the army of Narnia against the White Witch was a magnificent portrayal of his final step towards manhood. Susan who's smarts and logic almost handed over Narnia to the White Witch. Edmund who was all smiles at receiving his crown and the throne on which he was to sit, knew that this came at a price. And the ever adorable Lucy whose goodness to others never seemed to cease.
Once again Lewis portrays his ability to not only write about things complicated and over the heads of most people, but also his ability to write something as simple as a children’s story that is yet filled with concepts and allegories so genius that can only blow people (who understand) away! I am so thankful that Disney did not destroy or take away from the story the way I thought they might!
My advice: Go out and see it as soon as possible (assuming that you haven't already..)!! Remember while watching it though, that a movie is not a book therefore things will be left out and characters may be underdeveloped. With that in mind it makes the experience that much more enjoyable!
Sunday, December 04, 2005
Great CD
I haven't been able to think up anything worth blogging about as of late..... So I thought I'd take this time to tell you how great Sean Watkins new CD is!!
This is definitely different from his past two CD's however, one can still hear the old Sean in the backround. I've always liked the way Sean has incorperated the drum machine and the way he changes between time signature (btw camlost.. I think I've almost figured out the time signature for "I say nothing"). Very inspiring.....
He hasn't let out the cd yet but you can down load it from his site: http://seanwatkins.com
This is definitely different from his past two CD's however, one can still hear the old Sean in the backround. I've always liked the way Sean has incorperated the drum machine and the way he changes between time signature (btw camlost.. I think I've almost figured out the time signature for "I say nothing"). Very inspiring.....
He hasn't let out the cd yet but you can down load it from his site: http://seanwatkins.com
Sunday, November 20, 2005
Flummoxed
A question has slowly been taking shape in my mind and beginning to plague my eternal being. I find it troubling that I will accept and/or reject worldviews and personal beliefs without ever examining why or how I came to that conclusion. However, as soon as I begin to examine what I believe or hold to be good, I am soon flummoxed with the thought "how can one know the truth?" Obviously I am coming from the belief that there is an absolute truth, but as soon as I begin to survey the evidence of why I hold that belief my lack of education becomes ever so clear.
How does one educate oneself in truth, yet while educating must be able to decipher between fact and fiction? It sounds a lot like life in a way. We are living yet learning how to live every day. We are the blind leading the blind. Constantly striving to gain knowledge however, while gaining knowledge one has to have the wisdom to be able to decipher the truth (how does one gain wisdom?). It is while searching for knowledge about truth that we become discouraged because we soon realize that truth is much bigger than we anticipated. Truth is filled with mysteries that we can not solve much less understand. We have a tendency to dismiss that which we don't understand, which leads to the dangerous mind set of carelessness.
Truth is supposed to be factual, and straight to the point. Or maybe we don't comprehend what truth actually is. If God is truth, and our finite minds can't comprehend God, then maybe we can't understand truth. Christ was the truth incarnate full of mysteries that even now we don't understand. Yet people seem to think it rational to believe in His ability to forgive sins and save all of mankind. So also with truth. We may never completely understand it, but by acknowledging it our eyes are opened.
It is by acknowledging truth that the Greeks began to flourish. They had something to set all of their standards by and constantly refer to in case of a big decision. However, their logic self-destructed because they soon became skeptics due to the increase of new doctrines claiming truth, thereby freezing any new intellectual discoveries. They could not tell between the different doctrines which were right and wrong because they could not put their finger on what truth really was. So not only do we have to decipher the truth while learning about it, but also be wary that we do not become skeptics and destroy the logic that has brought us to where we are now.
Again my question is, how does one gain knowledge regarding truth? Is it through traditional education, or philosophy? Through life experience perhaps? Maybe its a combination of all of them. One thing that I do know is true, when I reach heaven all things will be revealed! It is then that I will see truth Himself and all that He encompasses.
How does one educate oneself in truth, yet while educating must be able to decipher between fact and fiction? It sounds a lot like life in a way. We are living yet learning how to live every day. We are the blind leading the blind. Constantly striving to gain knowledge however, while gaining knowledge one has to have the wisdom to be able to decipher the truth (how does one gain wisdom?). It is while searching for knowledge about truth that we become discouraged because we soon realize that truth is much bigger than we anticipated. Truth is filled with mysteries that we can not solve much less understand. We have a tendency to dismiss that which we don't understand, which leads to the dangerous mind set of carelessness.
Truth is supposed to be factual, and straight to the point. Or maybe we don't comprehend what truth actually is. If God is truth, and our finite minds can't comprehend God, then maybe we can't understand truth. Christ was the truth incarnate full of mysteries that even now we don't understand. Yet people seem to think it rational to believe in His ability to forgive sins and save all of mankind. So also with truth. We may never completely understand it, but by acknowledging it our eyes are opened.
It is by acknowledging truth that the Greeks began to flourish. They had something to set all of their standards by and constantly refer to in case of a big decision. However, their logic self-destructed because they soon became skeptics due to the increase of new doctrines claiming truth, thereby freezing any new intellectual discoveries. They could not tell between the different doctrines which were right and wrong because they could not put their finger on what truth really was. So not only do we have to decipher the truth while learning about it, but also be wary that we do not become skeptics and destroy the logic that has brought us to where we are now.
Again my question is, how does one gain knowledge regarding truth? Is it through traditional education, or philosophy? Through life experience perhaps? Maybe its a combination of all of them. One thing that I do know is true, when I reach heaven all things will be revealed! It is then that I will see truth Himself and all that He encompasses.
Tuesday, November 15, 2005
Its all the same
Something that has really become more obvious lately is the fact that sin is all the same.
As fallen human beings we have created different degrees of sin. God however, does not see sin in different degrees. It doesn't matter whether or not you told a little white lie, or committed adultery. Either one will keep you out of heaven, and nothing you can do will clear your plate.
I need God just as much as the next person. That next person could be a murderer and I may have stolen something minor. Because I did not physically murdered someone, my circumstances may not seem as extreme as his, but my condition is the same. The fact that I have sinned is going to keep me out of heaven. It doesn't matter how I sinned, the realization is I sinned and there is no getting around it! God's grace is needed in both situations.
May God continually bring to realization my need for Him and His ever abundant grace and mercy.
As fallen human beings we have created different degrees of sin. God however, does not see sin in different degrees. It doesn't matter whether or not you told a little white lie, or committed adultery. Either one will keep you out of heaven, and nothing you can do will clear your plate.
I need God just as much as the next person. That next person could be a murderer and I may have stolen something minor. Because I did not physically murdered someone, my circumstances may not seem as extreme as his, but my condition is the same. The fact that I have sinned is going to keep me out of heaven. It doesn't matter how I sinned, the realization is I sinned and there is no getting around it! God's grace is needed in both situations.
May God continually bring to realization my need for Him and His ever abundant grace and mercy.
Saturday, November 12, 2005
Narnia
Alright, I just came accross a blog of a guy who atteneded an interview with Douglas Gresham, stepson of C.S. Lewis. It is a live blog of the interview concerning Narnia the movie!!!
The movie sounds like it is going to be awesome!!! I think I'm going to go crazy!! Before I wasn't trying to get my hopes up but now after some of the things I've read and heard I'm pretty sure Disney is going to do a good job!! Gresham was even a little excited!! Here's the link to the blog if you're interested.
The movie sounds like it is going to be awesome!!! I think I'm going to go crazy!! Before I wasn't trying to get my hopes up but now after some of the things I've read and heard I'm pretty sure Disney is going to do a good job!! Gresham was even a little excited!! Here's the link to the blog if you're interested.
Wednesday, November 09, 2005
Pharasitical
I was reading a blog a couple of days ago about whether or not it was ok for a Christian to cuss. I'm not going to go into detail about it, however, I was kind of caught off guard when one of the guys posting said that it was to pharasitical to say that a Christian is not allowed to cuss.
He made mention that Christians have become oblivious to the fact that we are now the modern day pharisees. We have become so worried about the outside of our cup rather than the inside. In a sense I agree with him, not about the fact that it is alright for a Christian to cuss, but because so many Christians today have become blinded by their own hypocrisy.
We want people to feel comfortable around us even though we have the label "Christian". However, it has made us willing to compromise our beliefs in order to achieve that objective. The leading religious leaders of that day were not comfortable around Jesus. Why? Because He cared about up-holding His Father's truths in His own personal life which in turn relfected on His public life. Christ said, "Out of the heart your mouth will speak." Not everyone was/is comfortable with an absolute truth
The majority of the church today has turned into a lip service for Christ. We preach one thing but live another. Thus causing the non-believers to label us as judgemental, or legalistic. Legalistic because when it comes to pointing out others faults we leave no room for grace.
Aw grace, the magic word!! How sweet the sound!! God has shown us grace beyond anything we could have even hoped for! It is through grace that we are saved and nothing else we could've done would have been enough to get us into heaven. God gave us true grace that we might simulate it towards our fellow men and women. That we might instead of looking at a sinner in disdain rather look past the sin and see the lost soul that needs a friend. No matter how rough the outter shell of a person might be, grace is strong enough to tear down the barriers and allow sinners to have communion with our creator!
So often we forget about grace and become so hyperfocused on the law and our good works that we forget what an incredible gift that was given to us. Given to us not to be locked up and stored away, but that it might be shared with others. However, this period of grace will not last forever. There will be a day of judgement when God will judge those who did not accept His free gift, and for those who took His gift for granit.
Christ is once again the perfect example for us to follow regarding this issue. He knew when it was time to show grace and when it was appropriate to pass judgement. Thanks be to God who has shown both grace and mercy on a soul as sinful as mine.
He made mention that Christians have become oblivious to the fact that we are now the modern day pharisees. We have become so worried about the outside of our cup rather than the inside. In a sense I agree with him, not about the fact that it is alright for a Christian to cuss, but because so many Christians today have become blinded by their own hypocrisy.
We want people to feel comfortable around us even though we have the label "Christian". However, it has made us willing to compromise our beliefs in order to achieve that objective. The leading religious leaders of that day were not comfortable around Jesus. Why? Because He cared about up-holding His Father's truths in His own personal life which in turn relfected on His public life. Christ said, "Out of the heart your mouth will speak." Not everyone was/is comfortable with an absolute truth
The majority of the church today has turned into a lip service for Christ. We preach one thing but live another. Thus causing the non-believers to label us as judgemental, or legalistic. Legalistic because when it comes to pointing out others faults we leave no room for grace.
Aw grace, the magic word!! How sweet the sound!! God has shown us grace beyond anything we could have even hoped for! It is through grace that we are saved and nothing else we could've done would have been enough to get us into heaven. God gave us true grace that we might simulate it towards our fellow men and women. That we might instead of looking at a sinner in disdain rather look past the sin and see the lost soul that needs a friend. No matter how rough the outter shell of a person might be, grace is strong enough to tear down the barriers and allow sinners to have communion with our creator!
So often we forget about grace and become so hyperfocused on the law and our good works that we forget what an incredible gift that was given to us. Given to us not to be locked up and stored away, but that it might be shared with others. However, this period of grace will not last forever. There will be a day of judgement when God will judge those who did not accept His free gift, and for those who took His gift for granit.
Christ is once again the perfect example for us to follow regarding this issue. He knew when it was time to show grace and when it was appropriate to pass judgement. Thanks be to God who has shown both grace and mercy on a soul as sinful as mine.
Wednesday, November 02, 2005
Worship
Could we as a Christian society possibly have misunderstood the word worship?
In the old testament, worship was a type of sacrafice. Whereas praise was the actual act of singing and dancing to Jehova. The New testament rarely used the word worship because it actually meant to sacrafice something to God. However, because Christ was the ultimate sacrifice there is no longer a need for worship in its literal meaning.
Today worship has become a sort of concert. And at the end of the worship session we talk about how "good" it was. We use words and ask questions that we would use after watching a movie. "Worship was terrible today," or "It was really moving." There is no longer real worship, or praise for that matter, which comes from the heart. It has become a way of entertainment.
What is even more frustraiting is that worship songs have become so redundant and reptitive that the lyrics are borderline meaningless. There are no longer words which are filled with as much emotion and theology as there are in the old hymns. "Amazing grace how sweet the sound, that it would save a wretch like me." The song "Come Thou Font" is another perfect example of what is so prevelant in the Christian walk. "Prone to wander Lord I feel it, prone to leave the God I love!" To often Christian lyrics try to give solutions to problems that they refuse to face.
This I believe is an excellent example of the uninteligent Christianity that we face today. Theology no longer matters. Knowing what you believe is no longer a priority. Thereby giving people the liberty to justify what the Bible calls sin. Music has such a profound affect on people that is often underestimated. Worship more so because it is supposed to lead people into the throne room of God.
Now this is not to say that all worship is bad. There are some great worship tunes that I enjoy singing and playing too. It just happens to be that the vast majority of worship songs seem so watered down.
In the old testament, worship was a type of sacrafice. Whereas praise was the actual act of singing and dancing to Jehova. The New testament rarely used the word worship because it actually meant to sacrafice something to God. However, because Christ was the ultimate sacrifice there is no longer a need for worship in its literal meaning.
Today worship has become a sort of concert. And at the end of the worship session we talk about how "good" it was. We use words and ask questions that we would use after watching a movie. "Worship was terrible today," or "It was really moving." There is no longer real worship, or praise for that matter, which comes from the heart. It has become a way of entertainment.
What is even more frustraiting is that worship songs have become so redundant and reptitive that the lyrics are borderline meaningless. There are no longer words which are filled with as much emotion and theology as there are in the old hymns. "Amazing grace how sweet the sound, that it would save a wretch like me." The song "Come Thou Font" is another perfect example of what is so prevelant in the Christian walk. "Prone to wander Lord I feel it, prone to leave the God I love!" To often Christian lyrics try to give solutions to problems that they refuse to face.
This I believe is an excellent example of the uninteligent Christianity that we face today. Theology no longer matters. Knowing what you believe is no longer a priority. Thereby giving people the liberty to justify what the Bible calls sin. Music has such a profound affect on people that is often underestimated. Worship more so because it is supposed to lead people into the throne room of God.
Now this is not to say that all worship is bad. There are some great worship tunes that I enjoy singing and playing too. It just happens to be that the vast majority of worship songs seem so watered down.
Clarification
Just to clarify about my "another quote" post: it isn't really a quote. It is a definition of the word controversial that I had heard from Pastor Mike Erre. Hope that clears up any confusion!!
Friday, October 28, 2005
A good time?
What does having a good time mean?
Among my peers it seems that by having a good time you have to be getting into mischief. Stirring up trouble where ever trouble can be stirred. Why is it that getting into "trouble" is what makes something fun or enjoyable? Why isn't virtue "fun" anymore. When someone is considered prudent or virtuous in anyway they are automatically a "party pooper"! The things which are good, true, and beautiful are no longer worth aspiring to. "They are not exciting enough," one might say. We value the antagonist more than the protagonist!
Yet we fail to realize that by valuing evil, we are missing out on the long lasting joy of searching out the good, the true, and the beautiful. Because virtue is not instantly gratifing or "funny" we dismiss it.
The sad part about this is, because something is "funny" it is instantly justified. Making a crude joke isn't bad unless it is not "funny". When in actuality, the crude joke is just as bad even if everybody does laugh at it (or at you for that matter). Where is the line drawn?
I have a hard time enjoying the company of my peers because of this. How do I make them see that virtue is "fun". Anytime I try to bring up something related to this subject it is immediately rejected due to the fact that it is either, "to serious," or "who cares?"
How does one make others see? It is the question. Many great thinkers have pondered this question and if they did not come up with a definite answer then I certainly won't within the next five minutes!! However, it definately deserves some of my time. Paul said, "Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things."
Among my peers it seems that by having a good time you have to be getting into mischief. Stirring up trouble where ever trouble can be stirred. Why is it that getting into "trouble" is what makes something fun or enjoyable? Why isn't virtue "fun" anymore. When someone is considered prudent or virtuous in anyway they are automatically a "party pooper"! The things which are good, true, and beautiful are no longer worth aspiring to. "They are not exciting enough," one might say. We value the antagonist more than the protagonist!
Yet we fail to realize that by valuing evil, we are missing out on the long lasting joy of searching out the good, the true, and the beautiful. Because virtue is not instantly gratifing or "funny" we dismiss it.
The sad part about this is, because something is "funny" it is instantly justified. Making a crude joke isn't bad unless it is not "funny". When in actuality, the crude joke is just as bad even if everybody does laugh at it (or at you for that matter). Where is the line drawn?
I have a hard time enjoying the company of my peers because of this. How do I make them see that virtue is "fun". Anytime I try to bring up something related to this subject it is immediately rejected due to the fact that it is either, "to serious," or "who cares?"
How does one make others see? It is the question. Many great thinkers have pondered this question and if they did not come up with a definite answer then I certainly won't within the next five minutes!! However, it definately deserves some of my time. Paul said, "Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things."
Sunday, October 23, 2005
Friday, October 21, 2005
Quote of the day
"Saints love true peace. They also hate false peace, peace based on lies. Saints hate violence and intolerance against sinners. But they also hate tolerance of sin. Saints love sinners more, and sins less, than anyone else does. Both of these eccentricities puzzle people and often offend them."
~Peter Kreeft
~Peter Kreeft
Saturday, October 15, 2005
Faith
Faith described by James, in its essence is works. James primarily talks about faith in chapter 2:14-24, where he says,
"What does it profit, my brethren if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can faith save him? If a brother or sister is naked and destitue of daily food, and one of you says to them, 'Depart in peace be warmed and filled,' but you do not give them the things which are needed for the body, what does it profit? Thus 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 without your works, and I will show you my faith by my works. You believe that there is one God. You do well. Even the demons believe-and tremble! But do you want to know, O foolish man that faith without works is dead? Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered Isaac his son on the altar? Do you see that faith was working together with his works, and by works faith was made perfect?"
This being the case, then what Paul said in Romans 1:17 makes a little more sense. "as it is written, 'the just shall live by faith'." For it is by good works that the true believers will live and be justified. However, good works isn't what saves us, it is the fruit of our belief. This now erases even the slightest conception of using Christ as a crutch. It is by grace alone that we are saved. Not so that we can keep on sinning but that we would realize how wretched we truly are, and recognize the need for Christ in our lives.
Faith I believe also plays a part in our own personal conversion. Sheldon Vanauken in the book, "A Severe Mercy," describes to CS Lewis the frustraiting gap that he is dealing with. The gap between paganism and Christianity. In a letter to CSL he writes, "My fundamental dilemma is this: I can't believe in Christ unless I have faith, but I can't have faith unless I believe in Christ. This is 'the leap'."
Faith now has been established as an action. The paganist must then have faith to believe. After the initial act of believing, his faith will be stregnthend as he begins to grow and mature in his walk with Christ. God will slowly remove those desires for worldly things as long as the former paganist continues to keep his faith alive. Hence the reason why the Christian walk is so hard at times. It takes self-control and a self-will to supress the desires which are contrary to Christ's standards.
To summarize, faith is an action. It is the by product of our own personal relationship with Christ. Faith is not something one says he has, but something that must be proven over and over. "Faith without works is dead..."
"What does it profit, my brethren if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can faith save him? If a brother or sister is naked and destitue of daily food, and one of you says to them, 'Depart in peace be warmed and filled,' but you do not give them the things which are needed for the body, what does it profit? Thus 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 without your works, and I will show you my faith by my works. You believe that there is one God. You do well. Even the demons believe-and tremble! But do you want to know, O foolish man that faith without works is dead? Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered Isaac his son on the altar? Do you see that faith was working together with his works, and by works faith was made perfect?"
This being the case, then what Paul said in Romans 1:17 makes a little more sense. "as it is written, 'the just shall live by faith'." For it is by good works that the true believers will live and be justified. However, good works isn't what saves us, it is the fruit of our belief. This now erases even the slightest conception of using Christ as a crutch. It is by grace alone that we are saved. Not so that we can keep on sinning but that we would realize how wretched we truly are, and recognize the need for Christ in our lives.
Faith I believe also plays a part in our own personal conversion. Sheldon Vanauken in the book, "A Severe Mercy," describes to CS Lewis the frustraiting gap that he is dealing with. The gap between paganism and Christianity. In a letter to CSL he writes, "My fundamental dilemma is this: I can't believe in Christ unless I have faith, but I can't have faith unless I believe in Christ. This is 'the leap'."
Faith now has been established as an action. The paganist must then have faith to believe. After the initial act of believing, his faith will be stregnthend as he begins to grow and mature in his walk with Christ. God will slowly remove those desires for worldly things as long as the former paganist continues to keep his faith alive. Hence the reason why the Christian walk is so hard at times. It takes self-control and a self-will to supress the desires which are contrary to Christ's standards.
To summarize, faith is an action. It is the by product of our own personal relationship with Christ. Faith is not something one says he has, but something that must be proven over and over. "Faith without works is dead..."
Saturday, October 08, 2005
Interesting
There is a professor at Washinton University who wrote an essay called "In Defense of Homophobia." Needless to say this is making some people very unhappy.
I found this article to be very interesting. Interesting in the sense that the a student from W.U. who is fighting against what this professor has said, mentioned that there needs to be a discussion about tolerance. When in fact he is now the one who is intolerant becuase he does not agree with the professor. The hypocrisy is amazing!!
The professor brings up a lot of good points and even quotes the Bible regarding the issue of homosexuality. I'm not sure if he is a Christian or not.
This is the news article:
http://www.ksdk.com/news/education_article.aspx?storyid=85334
Here's Katz actual web page:http://wuphys.wustl.edu/~katz/defense.html
I found this article to be very interesting. Interesting in the sense that the a student from W.U. who is fighting against what this professor has said, mentioned that there needs to be a discussion about tolerance. When in fact he is now the one who is intolerant becuase he does not agree with the professor. The hypocrisy is amazing!!
The professor brings up a lot of good points and even quotes the Bible regarding the issue of homosexuality. I'm not sure if he is a Christian or not.
This is the news article:
http://www.ksdk.com/news/education_article.aspx?storyid=85334
Here's Katz actual web page:http://wuphys.wustl.edu/~katz/defense.html
Monday, October 03, 2005
Its coming.....
Yes the Chronicles of Narnia, "The Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe," will be out Dec. 9!! http://www.narnia.com I hope Disney does a good job....
On the Fringe of Reality
What is it about "teenagehood" that makes it so unbearable at times? The random mood swings, and the need to rebel? Those mountain peaks closely followed by very low valleys. I believe it has to do with reality.
As a kid (0~12) one has been pampered by their parents. There is literally no responsibility, and the world revolves around how one feels. And then around the teenage years something starts to happen. One begins to see glimpses of what it means to be self-sufficent. To have an income and have to pay for expenses. At first this all seems very fun, "Look at all the freedom I have!!" However, this "freedom" doesn't come without a price.
Work becomes boring, school seems to overwhelming, and ones parents won't get them out of doing what has to be done. All of a sudden the social life which seems to be SO important at the time must be put on the back burner.
When looking at this initially, it all seems so boring and wearysome. Where's the fun in providing for ones self and living on ones own? Should this be how we look at the future? Or is there something which is worth looking forward too?
Its as if one is stuck between reality and dream world. That feeling you have when you first wake up in the morning. Here you have just woken up, dream world is slowly slipping away while reality is about to hit you right in the face. You long to go back to dream world but you know that that is impossible. Reality must be met with fervence. It must be met with a readiness, knowing that the promise of once more going back to dream world is only a short time away. The better you deal with reality the better your slumber will be.
And so it is with the Christian life. We must take on the world, trying to further Christs kingdom. All the while remembering the promise of spending eternity with Him. Where He'll wipe away every tear and where everything will be perfect!! So take heart and run the race to win!!
As a kid (0~12) one has been pampered by their parents. There is literally no responsibility, and the world revolves around how one feels. And then around the teenage years something starts to happen. One begins to see glimpses of what it means to be self-sufficent. To have an income and have to pay for expenses. At first this all seems very fun, "Look at all the freedom I have!!" However, this "freedom" doesn't come without a price.
Work becomes boring, school seems to overwhelming, and ones parents won't get them out of doing what has to be done. All of a sudden the social life which seems to be SO important at the time must be put on the back burner.
When looking at this initially, it all seems so boring and wearysome. Where's the fun in providing for ones self and living on ones own? Should this be how we look at the future? Or is there something which is worth looking forward too?
Its as if one is stuck between reality and dream world. That feeling you have when you first wake up in the morning. Here you have just woken up, dream world is slowly slipping away while reality is about to hit you right in the face. You long to go back to dream world but you know that that is impossible. Reality must be met with fervence. It must be met with a readiness, knowing that the promise of once more going back to dream world is only a short time away. The better you deal with reality the better your slumber will be.
And so it is with the Christian life. We must take on the world, trying to further Christs kingdom. All the while remembering the promise of spending eternity with Him. Where He'll wipe away every tear and where everything will be perfect!! So take heart and run the race to win!!
Monday, September 19, 2005
Joy
I just recently finished the book "Orthodoxy" by G.K. Chesterson. Its a great book and I would highly recomend it to anyone who is interested in Christian theology.
One of the things Chesterson talks about towards the end of the book is the joy of a Christian. The joy of a Christian should be so overwhelmingly huge that words would be not strong enough to express the feeling. Yet we get caught up in the paganistic view that joy is only found in the small things. The pagan is happier the closer he gets to the earth, the Christian is happier the closer he is to the heavens.
Heaven is so overwhelmingly joyful that we in this mortal body cannot fathom just the slightest idea of how wonderful it is! We are deaf to the incredibly joyous sounds in Heaven. Chesterson uses the analogy, "we are sitting in a dark room deaf to the joyous sounds of the heavenly realm."
Chesterson goes so far as to say that Christ, who was unashamed to display His emotions, may have had in Him a thread of shyness. In that incredible personality who over threw the temple and its money changers, yet was so quickly moved to compassion for the multitude of five thousand, may have had a side to Him which He was unable to relate to us. Chesterson says at the end of his book, "I sometimes fancy if maybe it wasn't His mirth."
Of course this always brings about the question, "what is joy?" :~)
One of the things Chesterson talks about towards the end of the book is the joy of a Christian. The joy of a Christian should be so overwhelmingly huge that words would be not strong enough to express the feeling. Yet we get caught up in the paganistic view that joy is only found in the small things. The pagan is happier the closer he gets to the earth, the Christian is happier the closer he is to the heavens.
Heaven is so overwhelmingly joyful that we in this mortal body cannot fathom just the slightest idea of how wonderful it is! We are deaf to the incredibly joyous sounds in Heaven. Chesterson uses the analogy, "we are sitting in a dark room deaf to the joyous sounds of the heavenly realm."
Chesterson goes so far as to say that Christ, who was unashamed to display His emotions, may have had in Him a thread of shyness. In that incredible personality who over threw the temple and its money changers, yet was so quickly moved to compassion for the multitude of five thousand, may have had a side to Him which He was unable to relate to us. Chesterson says at the end of his book, "I sometimes fancy if maybe it wasn't His mirth."
Of course this always brings about the question, "what is joy?" :~)
Monday, September 12, 2005
Katrina
I've been hearing different views from people about Hurricane Katrina. So many people have said that, "This is a judgement from GOD!!" or "Its just like Sodom and Gomorrah." At first this all seemed very reasonable. When looking at this disaster from the surface it seems very probable. Louisianna has the highest murder rate in our country ranging from 2 - 3 murders a night. Fornication of every kind runs rampid.
However, I have also heard a different side which I tend to agree with more. When looking at examples in the Bible of when God punished country's and cities for their sins, He gave them every opportunity to repent.
The story of Jonah is a perfect example. God sent Jonah to Neneva in order that they would have a chance to repent of their sins and be saved from destruction. And they did! Therefore God spared them. When God sent the flood, He had Noah to set the example of how they should live, yet they rejected him and God destroyed every living creature except for Noah and his family. In Sodom and Gomorrah, Lot and his family were the examples, and when the city refused to turn from their wicked ways, God saved Lot and his family from the destruction that came upon the city.
Unless there was some type of messenger from God inside Louisianna that was unknown to us, then it was nothing more than a natural disaster. However, I do believe that the earth may be starting to have its birthing pains. Jesus talked about in the last days that the earth will be like a mother who is in labor enduring birthing pains before actually giving birth. When you start to compare this hurricane with the tsunami and 9/11 it begins to make one wonder.
However, I have also heard a different side which I tend to agree with more. When looking at examples in the Bible of when God punished country's and cities for their sins, He gave them every opportunity to repent.
The story of Jonah is a perfect example. God sent Jonah to Neneva in order that they would have a chance to repent of their sins and be saved from destruction. And they did! Therefore God spared them. When God sent the flood, He had Noah to set the example of how they should live, yet they rejected him and God destroyed every living creature except for Noah and his family. In Sodom and Gomorrah, Lot and his family were the examples, and when the city refused to turn from their wicked ways, God saved Lot and his family from the destruction that came upon the city.
Unless there was some type of messenger from God inside Louisianna that was unknown to us, then it was nothing more than a natural disaster. However, I do believe that the earth may be starting to have its birthing pains. Jesus talked about in the last days that the earth will be like a mother who is in labor enduring birthing pains before actually giving birth. When you start to compare this hurricane with the tsunami and 9/11 it begins to make one wonder.
Monday, September 05, 2005
School again....
Yes that time of year has come around again. The time when kids between the ages of 5 and 18 dread the most. A time when a schedual is reinforced and backpacks begin to feel heavy. Yes it is now the beginning of the 2005/2006 school year!!
While examining this upcoming school year I came across a question that really put the year into perspective. Have you ever wondered what it is about shcool that makes it so unappealing? Granted all situations are different, but what is it about the word school that makes us cringe? After examining this myself, (I am starting my junior year of H.S. btw) I have found that the essence of my sour attitude towards school is mere laziness. At first that seemed rather shocking but the more I thought about it the more it made sense.
Because we are humans, we are sinful by nature. And the nature of most sins is selfishness. I don't want to start school because its not what "I" want to do. "I" don't want to have to get up in the morning and put my brain to work. Laziness as you can see, stems from the fact that I can't get my eye's off of me.
As a Christian this is one of the hardest things we deal with. So much of the time we don't want to share our faith with others because it is not convienent. We lack the big picture. Instead of trying to see things from God's perspective, we become so tunnled visioned that we miss out on what He wants to do in our lives. If we would only keep our eyes on Him and constatantly be in communication with Him, would we truly live life to the fullest.
There is a reason why God has me where I am. He wants to use me, but so often I keep Him from using me because I refuse to get my eyes off myself.
When you start to have that sour attitude about school ask yourself where those feelings are coming from and then ask God for His perspective.
While examining this upcoming school year I came across a question that really put the year into perspective. Have you ever wondered what it is about shcool that makes it so unappealing? Granted all situations are different, but what is it about the word school that makes us cringe? After examining this myself, (I am starting my junior year of H.S. btw) I have found that the essence of my sour attitude towards school is mere laziness. At first that seemed rather shocking but the more I thought about it the more it made sense.
Because we are humans, we are sinful by nature. And the nature of most sins is selfishness. I don't want to start school because its not what "I" want to do. "I" don't want to have to get up in the morning and put my brain to work. Laziness as you can see, stems from the fact that I can't get my eye's off of me.
As a Christian this is one of the hardest things we deal with. So much of the time we don't want to share our faith with others because it is not convienent. We lack the big picture. Instead of trying to see things from God's perspective, we become so tunnled visioned that we miss out on what He wants to do in our lives. If we would only keep our eyes on Him and constatantly be in communication with Him, would we truly live life to the fullest.
There is a reason why God has me where I am. He wants to use me, but so often I keep Him from using me because I refuse to get my eyes off myself.
When you start to have that sour attitude about school ask yourself where those feelings are coming from and then ask God for His perspective.
Tuesday, August 30, 2005
Beauty continued...
There have been some interesting comments regarding beauty and I thought that I would post them as blog.
bucky said...
I suppose that poses the question of "is beauty good?" Does "beauty" inherently posses a quality of good or bad? If it does, then there is scriptural basis for what its standard is, but if it does not, then it would seem that the word "beauty" is only a synonym for "preferred" or "pleasant" (or "pretty" to the dismay of Coleridge regarding the description of a waterfall).
12:52 PM
Nick said...
Isn't beauty good? It seems that when you call something beautiful you are automatically inferring that it is good....
5:10 PM
bucky said...
We may infer, but are we right? When referring to beauty, our reference is positive, yes, but does that necessarily mean that beauty is inherently good; good in its essence?I suppose that would pose the question “what is good?"
6:23 PM
Nick said...
To pose the question "what is good?" would be a totally different subject... Could you give an example of when someone could be wrong in thinking that an object is beautiful?
7:07 PM
bucky said...
It appears we are speaking equivocally; the same word with perhaps two definitions?Is it possible that “beauty is in the eye of the beholder” is true if ones definition of the word beauty is the same as Webster’s: “The quality or aggregate of qualities in a person or thing that gives pleasure to the senses or pleasurably exalts the mind or spirit: loveliness”? If we were to substitute their use of the word “beauty” for our use of the word “pleasurable”, then this would be correct. On the other hand, if our definition of beauty is “something possessing a quality that demands appreciation, even if it is not granted it”, than their statement would be false. Perhaps the beauty that we consider objective, is just that. If, for instance, we consider beauty to be what God is delighted by, than this has nothing to do with what anyone of us beholds, but if we consider beauty to be what “one” is delighted by, than it doesn’t matter what the object is, it may or may not be beautiful depending upon who is looking at it.
11:42 PM
Nick said...
So which is it? Both definitions sound probable.. and since there can only be one definition, it has to be one or the other. A question that I think that needs to be taken into account is: What about the things that we can learn to find beauty in? If we can find the beauty in something we didn't orignally see, wouldn't that suggest that there is some kind of quality of beauty that the object must have in order to find it? And if there is a certain quality that everything must have in order to be beautiful or to find the beauty in, that would mean that there must be some kind of standard that it must fall on.
8:35 AM
bucky said...
I do think it possible for one word to have multiple definitions (i.e. the word “right” could mean “correct”, “the direction opposite of left”, or even “just” as in “near”, such as in something’s placement being “right around the corner”), but I see what you mean, and what appears to remain unresolved.To approach the real subject that you are referring to (not the definition of the word, but the quality and essence which the word is attempting to define) I would again go back to goodness. No one is good but God, yet He says when looking on His creation, that behold it was good. Not to be too meticulous here, but what exactly is “it”? What if the “it” referred to here is God’s action of creation itself? What if nothing inherently possesses goodness (except God, being Goodness Himself), yet as His creation, we exist for His good purpose, in very fact, His good pleasure? This brings me back to beauty: “the quality or aggregate of qualities in a person or thing that gives pleasure to the senses or pleasurably exalts the mind or spirit: loveliness”-Webster. God taking pleasure in us would seem to me to be the best example of objective beauty that I’ve seen yet (subjective to God in the sense that beauty is in the eye of the beholder, which in this case is Himself, but objective to man since God’s vision is Truth). If this makes any sense, it could perhaps define the standard or quality of beauty: that which God takes pleasure in.The reason we can learn to see the beauty which was once hidden from us, may very well be the same type of learning we undergo when we come to recognize Truth that we had formerly overlooked.Where man's art comes into play here, I don't quite know, but I would ask:what does God take pleasure in?
12:39 AM
Nick said...
So nothing is inherently beautiful, but the act of taking pleasure in something is beautiful(correct me if I misunderstood.)? That would mean that beauty is subjective, because people then can choose what they decide to take pleasure in and what they don't want to take pleasure in. If God is the essence of beauty, then us taking pleasure in Him is not what makes Him beautiful. Because He "is" beautiful. Whether or not we "choose" to take pleasure in Him does not make Him any more or less of what He is. Now where this plays into creation is not quite clear. However, if God made us in His image then we as humans are beautiful. And what He created within those seven days of creation must have beeen "good" (whatever that means! :~P). In something such as art, we are using what God had created within those seven days. This leads back the idea that there is some element of beauty in art, whether or not we instantly see it. However, the question now is: can we as humans distort Gods beauty? At first that question seemed simple, but now there seems to be a lot more to it (as usual)!!
bucky said...
I suppose that poses the question of "is beauty good?" Does "beauty" inherently posses a quality of good or bad? If it does, then there is scriptural basis for what its standard is, but if it does not, then it would seem that the word "beauty" is only a synonym for "preferred" or "pleasant" (or "pretty" to the dismay of Coleridge regarding the description of a waterfall).
12:52 PM
Nick said...
Isn't beauty good? It seems that when you call something beautiful you are automatically inferring that it is good....
5:10 PM
bucky said...
We may infer, but are we right? When referring to beauty, our reference is positive, yes, but does that necessarily mean that beauty is inherently good; good in its essence?I suppose that would pose the question “what is good?"
6:23 PM
Nick said...
To pose the question "what is good?" would be a totally different subject... Could you give an example of when someone could be wrong in thinking that an object is beautiful?
7:07 PM
bucky said...
It appears we are speaking equivocally; the same word with perhaps two definitions?Is it possible that “beauty is in the eye of the beholder” is true if ones definition of the word beauty is the same as Webster’s: “The quality or aggregate of qualities in a person or thing that gives pleasure to the senses or pleasurably exalts the mind or spirit: loveliness”? If we were to substitute their use of the word “beauty” for our use of the word “pleasurable”, then this would be correct. On the other hand, if our definition of beauty is “something possessing a quality that demands appreciation, even if it is not granted it”, than their statement would be false. Perhaps the beauty that we consider objective, is just that. If, for instance, we consider beauty to be what God is delighted by, than this has nothing to do with what anyone of us beholds, but if we consider beauty to be what “one” is delighted by, than it doesn’t matter what the object is, it may or may not be beautiful depending upon who is looking at it.
11:42 PM
Nick said...
So which is it? Both definitions sound probable.. and since there can only be one definition, it has to be one or the other. A question that I think that needs to be taken into account is: What about the things that we can learn to find beauty in? If we can find the beauty in something we didn't orignally see, wouldn't that suggest that there is some kind of quality of beauty that the object must have in order to find it? And if there is a certain quality that everything must have in order to be beautiful or to find the beauty in, that would mean that there must be some kind of standard that it must fall on.
8:35 AM
bucky said...
I do think it possible for one word to have multiple definitions (i.e. the word “right” could mean “correct”, “the direction opposite of left”, or even “just” as in “near”, such as in something’s placement being “right around the corner”), but I see what you mean, and what appears to remain unresolved.To approach the real subject that you are referring to (not the definition of the word, but the quality and essence which the word is attempting to define) I would again go back to goodness. No one is good but God, yet He says when looking on His creation, that behold it was good. Not to be too meticulous here, but what exactly is “it”? What if the “it” referred to here is God’s action of creation itself? What if nothing inherently possesses goodness (except God, being Goodness Himself), yet as His creation, we exist for His good purpose, in very fact, His good pleasure? This brings me back to beauty: “the quality or aggregate of qualities in a person or thing that gives pleasure to the senses or pleasurably exalts the mind or spirit: loveliness”-Webster. God taking pleasure in us would seem to me to be the best example of objective beauty that I’ve seen yet (subjective to God in the sense that beauty is in the eye of the beholder, which in this case is Himself, but objective to man since God’s vision is Truth). If this makes any sense, it could perhaps define the standard or quality of beauty: that which God takes pleasure in.The reason we can learn to see the beauty which was once hidden from us, may very well be the same type of learning we undergo when we come to recognize Truth that we had formerly overlooked.Where man's art comes into play here, I don't quite know, but I would ask:what does God take pleasure in?
12:39 AM
Nick said...
So nothing is inherently beautiful, but the act of taking pleasure in something is beautiful(correct me if I misunderstood.)? That would mean that beauty is subjective, because people then can choose what they decide to take pleasure in and what they don't want to take pleasure in. If God is the essence of beauty, then us taking pleasure in Him is not what makes Him beautiful. Because He "is" beautiful. Whether or not we "choose" to take pleasure in Him does not make Him any more or less of what He is. Now where this plays into creation is not quite clear. However, if God made us in His image then we as humans are beautiful. And what He created within those seven days of creation must have beeen "good" (whatever that means! :~P). In something such as art, we are using what God had created within those seven days. This leads back the idea that there is some element of beauty in art, whether or not we instantly see it. However, the question now is: can we as humans distort Gods beauty? At first that question seemed simple, but now there seems to be a lot more to it (as usual)!!
Friday, August 26, 2005
God Incarnate
I'm rereading the book, "A Severe Mercy" for the second time and came across an analogy that Sheldon Vanauken gave regarding how Jesus was fully human and fully God at the same time. It is a diaolgue that he and Davy had with a friend of theirs while in Oxford.
"Look, Richard," I said. "This afternoon Davy and I were talking about writing a novel of Oxford with the Studio in it, and us, and everybody. Now, assuming we could do it-"
"Assuming you could do it" said Richard, "I'd buy a copy. Not more than five shillings, though!"
"Listen" I said. "we're talking about the Incarnation. Okay, suppose I write it-its to complicated with two authors-and I put myself in it. There I am, walking down the High, wearing a Jesus tie-in the book. And let's say Imake up a lot of characters, in it, and I, the character, say whatever I would say in the various situations that occur in my plot."
"What abut the Incarnation?" said Richard.
"That's what I'm telling you, stupid fellow," I said with a grin.
"Don't you see? I am the incarnate in my book. I am out here writing it, so I'm like God the Father. But it's really me in the book, too, isn't it? So that's Jesus, the Son, right? The me in the book speaks my words - and yet they are speeches that I've probably never made in real life, not being in those situations. And yet can't you see that it's really me?"
"Um," said Richard. "Yes, right. I see. Go on."
"Well," I said. "All right. I'm out here, being the 'Author of all things' and I'm in the book, taking part in scenes of 'drammer' incarnate in my book. Now, the me in the book: he's all me, isn't he? And he's all character, too isn't he? Like the doctrine: all God and All man. It makes sense doesn't it? And one more thing, suppose the characters run away with the story - authors are always saying that that happens. It might be necessary, whatever I had originally intended, for me to get killed - um, crucified.......anyhow - you see?"
"You win," said Richard. "It does make sense that way. I'll have to thinkg aobut it."
"There something else, though," said Davy. "The other characters- made-up ones. Invented ones. If Van invents characters, they'll all, even the bad ones, have something of Van in them, won't they? So, you see? wea ll have something of God in us - God's spirit - but only the One, Jesus, is God Incarnate."
"Look, Richard," I said. "This afternoon Davy and I were talking about writing a novel of Oxford with the Studio in it, and us, and everybody. Now, assuming we could do it-"
"Assuming you could do it" said Richard, "I'd buy a copy. Not more than five shillings, though!"
"Listen" I said. "we're talking about the Incarnation. Okay, suppose I write it-its to complicated with two authors-and I put myself in it. There I am, walking down the High, wearing a Jesus tie-in the book. And let's say Imake up a lot of characters, in it, and I, the character, say whatever I would say in the various situations that occur in my plot."
"What abut the Incarnation?" said Richard.
"That's what I'm telling you, stupid fellow," I said with a grin.
"Don't you see? I am the incarnate in my book. I am out here writing it, so I'm like God the Father. But it's really me in the book, too, isn't it? So that's Jesus, the Son, right? The me in the book speaks my words - and yet they are speeches that I've probably never made in real life, not being in those situations. And yet can't you see that it's really me?"
"Um," said Richard. "Yes, right. I see. Go on."
"Well," I said. "All right. I'm out here, being the 'Author of all things' and I'm in the book, taking part in scenes of 'drammer' incarnate in my book. Now, the me in the book: he's all me, isn't he? And he's all character, too isn't he? Like the doctrine: all God and All man. It makes sense doesn't it? And one more thing, suppose the characters run away with the story - authors are always saying that that happens. It might be necessary, whatever I had originally intended, for me to get killed - um, crucified.......anyhow - you see?"
"You win," said Richard. "It does make sense that way. I'll have to thinkg aobut it."
"There something else, though," said Davy. "The other characters- made-up ones. Invented ones. If Van invents characters, they'll all, even the bad ones, have something of Van in them, won't they? So, you see? wea ll have something of God in us - God's spirit - but only the One, Jesus, is God Incarnate."
Wednesday, August 17, 2005
A Journey
This question seems to be popping up alot lately, "Am I enjoying the journey, or am I wanting to get to the destination so fast that I can't enjoy and learn from the journey itself?"
Personally I'm still trying to figure out what I am. However, I do believe that we do sometimes get so caught in wanting to reach the destination that we forget about the journey. Especially as a Christian I wonder why God even makes us endure the journey of life. It is so complicated and so hazy at times that I just long to be in heaven where everything will be cleared. I wouldn't have to worry about the everyday trials that we face consistently.
Its during those times when I wonder, "Why am I here, when I want to be there? Why can't I grow up faster?" But God has a divine purpose for everything.
The Bible says that God put eternity into our hearts. I believe He did that so that we would search out eternity. Not to just confirm our own preconceived opinions but rather to grow and to be willingly to hold our opinions loosely. To be willing to change your opinion is part of the journey. When you realize that you are wrong and then can change what you orignally believed is probably one of the hardest things to do. This is one part of the journey that I know I miss out on. I get so caught in my own opinions sometimes that I wrap a blind fold around my own eyes.
Rationality can also hinder us from truly enjoying the journey. Wanting everything to be rational will only lead to disappointment. As Chesterson said, its the most rational people that are most prone to ending up in a mental hospital. Not being willing to have faith the size of a mustard seed can sometimes keep us from enjoying the very thing that God has set before us.
The last question is, "Am I making the most of where I am?" With what God has given me, am I being a good steward?
These are just questions that I have been pondering lately and something that is worth thinking about.
Personally I'm still trying to figure out what I am. However, I do believe that we do sometimes get so caught in wanting to reach the destination that we forget about the journey. Especially as a Christian I wonder why God even makes us endure the journey of life. It is so complicated and so hazy at times that I just long to be in heaven where everything will be cleared. I wouldn't have to worry about the everyday trials that we face consistently.
Its during those times when I wonder, "Why am I here, when I want to be there? Why can't I grow up faster?" But God has a divine purpose for everything.
The Bible says that God put eternity into our hearts. I believe He did that so that we would search out eternity. Not to just confirm our own preconceived opinions but rather to grow and to be willingly to hold our opinions loosely. To be willing to change your opinion is part of the journey. When you realize that you are wrong and then can change what you orignally believed is probably one of the hardest things to do. This is one part of the journey that I know I miss out on. I get so caught in my own opinions sometimes that I wrap a blind fold around my own eyes.
Rationality can also hinder us from truly enjoying the journey. Wanting everything to be rational will only lead to disappointment. As Chesterson said, its the most rational people that are most prone to ending up in a mental hospital. Not being willing to have faith the size of a mustard seed can sometimes keep us from enjoying the very thing that God has set before us.
The last question is, "Am I making the most of where I am?" With what God has given me, am I being a good steward?
These are just questions that I have been pondering lately and something that is worth thinking about.
Friday, August 05, 2005
Two kinds of will
A friend and I came to an agreement the other day that there are two kinds of will. There is the will which is the action and the will which is the intention.
To have the will to do something could merely mean that you have the intention of accomplishing whatever it is you want to do. Whether or not you accomplish it is irrelavent. To will your self to accomplish something means you finish whatever it was you set out to do whether or not you feel like it.
This conversation was brought about by a definition I heard for the word courage: "To will yourself to do what ought to be done in the face of opposition."
After discussing this, we came to the conclusion that the will used in the definition is implying an action. You cannnot merely intend on doing something and be considered courageous. But then what does it mean to be courageous?
That was the main topic for the week at the Torrey camp. Needless to say we never came to a good enough definition of the word, however we had some excellent dialogue about it!!
To have the will to do something could merely mean that you have the intention of accomplishing whatever it is you want to do. Whether or not you accomplish it is irrelavent. To will your self to accomplish something means you finish whatever it was you set out to do whether or not you feel like it.
This conversation was brought about by a definition I heard for the word courage: "To will yourself to do what ought to be done in the face of opposition."
After discussing this, we came to the conclusion that the will used in the definition is implying an action. You cannnot merely intend on doing something and be considered courageous. But then what does it mean to be courageous?
That was the main topic for the week at the Torrey camp. Needless to say we never came to a good enough definition of the word, however we had some excellent dialogue about it!!
Wednesday, August 03, 2005
In-sane...?
I'm in the midst of reading a book by G.K. Chesterson called "Orthodoxy." It is a book talking about why he (Chesterson) chose Christianity and what led to his conversion. So far I'm only a chapter and a half way through the book. The first chapter talked about people who are in-sane and those most prone to someday go in-sane.
He mentions that people who are most prone to go in-sane are those who believe that everything must be worked out logically and/or reasonably. He backs this up by saying that not everything can be explained through science or pure logic. Because of this, those who depend soley on logic and reason will in the end go mad! Even some of the greatest thinkers in the world such as Socrates, or Aristotle didn't figure everything out!! They believe that if it can not be figured out logically then it is either not true or not worth talking about. However, knowing that there is something out there that they can not explain, will gradually begin to nag at them.
By adopting this type of thinking, they tend to live in this tiny universe where anything unexplainable is not allowed in. This eventually leads to the hospital for the insane.
The book has been great so far! I hope it only gets better from here.
He mentions that people who are most prone to go in-sane are those who believe that everything must be worked out logically and/or reasonably. He backs this up by saying that not everything can be explained through science or pure logic. Because of this, those who depend soley on logic and reason will in the end go mad! Even some of the greatest thinkers in the world such as Socrates, or Aristotle didn't figure everything out!! They believe that if it can not be figured out logically then it is either not true or not worth talking about. However, knowing that there is something out there that they can not explain, will gradually begin to nag at them.
By adopting this type of thinking, they tend to live in this tiny universe where anything unexplainable is not allowed in. This eventually leads to the hospital for the insane.
The book has been great so far! I hope it only gets better from here.
Beauty
Lately my Dad and I have been discussing whether or not beauty is objective or subjective. I tend to take the stance that beauty is objective and my Dad believes it is subjective.
When you say that something is beautiful, to me, it seems that you have to be comparing it to a certain standard. For an object to be beautiful, there must be a standard of beauty that something must fall under, in order for it to be beautiful. The reason I believe something may seem more beautiful than another comes down to preference. A lot of times the reason something may seem more beautiful than another is sometimes due to the knowledge you have of it, or you can relate to it in one way or another. An example that first comes to mind is this: to most guys, all girls are beautiful. However, what may draw a guy to a certain girl may be the fact that he can relate to her better than he could to someone else. They have more in common with each other and therefore are more attracted to each other. Thus making her seem more beautiful than any other girl who he may come in contact with.
As far as having more knowledge of an object, I'll use the example of me going to the Getty Museum. Like I said in the previous post, going to the Getty did not orginally sound exciting. Even during the first half hour or so of being there, it was not very exciting. However, after I began to converse with others about certain paintings, and learned more and more historical facts about the paintings, they became even more interesting. I began to see the beauty in them, because I had a better appreciation for them. Which seems to me that if you can teach yourself to find beauty in things that you did not orignally see but others did, then there must be some kind of attribute that they all have in common. Thus leading to a standard of beauty.
My Dad's arguement is this: If I find one thing beautiful but he does not, then to him it is not beautiful. He also raises the question, if there is a standard of beauty and God set it, where in the Bible does he say, "this is beautiful and this is not?" He also asks, "what about people who find war beautiful?" To him, just because I find something beautiful, doesn't mean that he finds it beautiful as well.
So as you can see, my reasoning for why I think beauty is objective, does not sufficently answer his questions. While I continue to search for better questions and answers, I'll be sure to keep the site updated!!
When you say that something is beautiful, to me, it seems that you have to be comparing it to a certain standard. For an object to be beautiful, there must be a standard of beauty that something must fall under, in order for it to be beautiful. The reason I believe something may seem more beautiful than another comes down to preference. A lot of times the reason something may seem more beautiful than another is sometimes due to the knowledge you have of it, or you can relate to it in one way or another. An example that first comes to mind is this: to most guys, all girls are beautiful. However, what may draw a guy to a certain girl may be the fact that he can relate to her better than he could to someone else. They have more in common with each other and therefore are more attracted to each other. Thus making her seem more beautiful than any other girl who he may come in contact with.
As far as having more knowledge of an object, I'll use the example of me going to the Getty Museum. Like I said in the previous post, going to the Getty did not orginally sound exciting. Even during the first half hour or so of being there, it was not very exciting. However, after I began to converse with others about certain paintings, and learned more and more historical facts about the paintings, they became even more interesting. I began to see the beauty in them, because I had a better appreciation for them. Which seems to me that if you can teach yourself to find beauty in things that you did not orignally see but others did, then there must be some kind of attribute that they all have in common. Thus leading to a standard of beauty.
My Dad's arguement is this: If I find one thing beautiful but he does not, then to him it is not beautiful. He also raises the question, if there is a standard of beauty and God set it, where in the Bible does he say, "this is beautiful and this is not?" He also asks, "what about people who find war beautiful?" To him, just because I find something beautiful, doesn't mean that he finds it beautiful as well.
So as you can see, my reasoning for why I think beauty is objective, does not sufficently answer his questions. While I continue to search for better questions and answers, I'll be sure to keep the site updated!!
Monday, August 01, 2005
Torrey Academy
Last week I went to the Torrey academy summer camp. It was probably the most amazing summer camp I have ever been too!! The Torrey Honors program at Biola University is a program that gets its students to read the classic books and then discuss them. It is a way of getting people to think for themselves, and to always question everything. As I learned while I was up there, when engaged in dialogue, its not about the answers its about the questions. The process of how one comes to a conclusion is more important than the conclusion its-self.
We had many lecturers (some lasting over 3 hours) about many different yet similar subjects. One of the lecturers that stuck out to me the most was one (of the many he gave) given by Dr. Reynolds, regarding how society is so caught up in instant-gratification. I'll try to summarize to the best of my ability.....
Our culture has lost sight of the things that are worth enjoying. Things such as having meaningful dialogue, reading great books (Plato, Aristotle, G.K. Chesterson etc.), listening to classical music. He said the reason for this, was due to our instant gratification. Because to truly enjoy things of this nature takes work. It often takes a lot more work than people are willing to do. If we don't receive enjoyment immediately, then its not worth the work. Another great example of our laziness is Art.
While at the camp one of the field trips we took was to the Getty Museum. I'll admit that going to look at art painted by some dead guys did not sound very exciting at first. However, after getting there, and discussing some of the art I found that it was very enjoyable. At one point there were about seven of us standing around one piece of art work by Rembrandt for over 30minutes!! I received so much insight and gained so much appreciation for that work of art that I was sad when it was time to leave. After having that experience I realized how much more enjoyable art could be. It was so much more satisfying than it would have been if I were to have stayed home and played Nintendo or something of that nature.
This is only one example of that real joy that is worth enjoying. So often we decide to substitute lesser joys for the real thing because they gratify us faster than a Rembrandt painting. We think that if we can just find more and more things to substitute it with, then in the end we'll be just as satisfied. On the contrary, we will be even more miserable. This is the reason why people don't like to learn or educate themselves either. It takes work!! But when one truly sees the joy of learning, the more he'll find it easier to enjoy things such as paintings, or great books. He'll have more of an appreciation for those things.
The hard question to answer now is, how does one bring our culture or our society to see that the things worth enjoying, are the things which take the most work? It is a question that has been circulating since the time of Plato and Socrates. I only hope that someday I can play a small part in giving people that glimpse of what experiencing true joy is. The Torrey Academy truly gave me the split second glimpse of what I was missing out on!!
We had many lecturers (some lasting over 3 hours) about many different yet similar subjects. One of the lecturers that stuck out to me the most was one (of the many he gave) given by Dr. Reynolds, regarding how society is so caught up in instant-gratification. I'll try to summarize to the best of my ability.....
Our culture has lost sight of the things that are worth enjoying. Things such as having meaningful dialogue, reading great books (Plato, Aristotle, G.K. Chesterson etc.), listening to classical music. He said the reason for this, was due to our instant gratification. Because to truly enjoy things of this nature takes work. It often takes a lot more work than people are willing to do. If we don't receive enjoyment immediately, then its not worth the work. Another great example of our laziness is Art.
While at the camp one of the field trips we took was to the Getty Museum. I'll admit that going to look at art painted by some dead guys did not sound very exciting at first. However, after getting there, and discussing some of the art I found that it was very enjoyable. At one point there were about seven of us standing around one piece of art work by Rembrandt for over 30minutes!! I received so much insight and gained so much appreciation for that work of art that I was sad when it was time to leave. After having that experience I realized how much more enjoyable art could be. It was so much more satisfying than it would have been if I were to have stayed home and played Nintendo or something of that nature.
This is only one example of that real joy that is worth enjoying. So often we decide to substitute lesser joys for the real thing because they gratify us faster than a Rembrandt painting. We think that if we can just find more and more things to substitute it with, then in the end we'll be just as satisfied. On the contrary, we will be even more miserable. This is the reason why people don't like to learn or educate themselves either. It takes work!! But when one truly sees the joy of learning, the more he'll find it easier to enjoy things such as paintings, or great books. He'll have more of an appreciation for those things.
The hard question to answer now is, how does one bring our culture or our society to see that the things worth enjoying, are the things which take the most work? It is a question that has been circulating since the time of Plato and Socrates. I only hope that someday I can play a small part in giving people that glimpse of what experiencing true joy is. The Torrey Academy truly gave me the split second glimpse of what I was missing out on!!
Sunday, July 31, 2005
First Post Ever
Wow!! I never thought I would actually have my own blog spot!! This post really is just a test to see how the whole site looks!! If someone happens to run across this then welcome! I hope to be posting more interesting and hopefully more thought stimulating blogs.... Until then!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
