(You should know: I am expressing thoughts and opinion I am not an expert on this subject. Nor do I ever plan to be. I am not going to quote the bible as evidence to why I am right or wrong but I may quote it as to why I feel one way or another. I am not prejudice against homosexuals. I know a few personally and will continue to be friends with them.)
Lately I have been thinking about why Christians are against homosexuality and wondering why I myself think its wrong. Its not an easy answer. Christians will say that it is wrong because of: Nature and what is natural. Marriage is supposed to be between a man and a woman. What might happen if they adopt a child? What is the purpose of life? So on and so forth. There are several reasons. Mine personally derive from: what causes a person to be homosexual. Is it caused by culture, family, genetics, abuse, trauma, wanting attention ETC...
If it is genetics then we are designed to be that way. Therefore it wouldn't quite be wrong, fundamentally speaking. Personally, I am not sure I will ever think its quite beautiful but thats because I don't find men to be attractive in any form sexually. However, I would not have a case that it would be sin or evil because it would be what God designed some of us to be. If it were because of anything else then I would have a case, then it becomes a matter of choice and the result of sin.
If it was abuse, culture, family issues, trauma, etc... then it is no longer a situation that we can say God built us to be this way as well. If that is true then homosexuality is more a cause of sin. We may very well be wrongly placing the blame on the homosexual and not the person or thing that caused them to become the way that they are. It's a tricky situation with no easy answer. Do you condemn the person being homosexual or the cause of their plight?
People constantly want to know how to approach a person they feel is in the wrong. I believe most people say this in the best of intentions. They want to say "Hey this is wrong and will lead you astray. I want you to be happy therefore I am saying something." However I know some people just want to be better then the other person(which is a sin if you didn't already know that).
If we look at what homosexuality is, it is a person desiring to be loved. No matter what we must look at it that way, rather then condemning the person for being evil. If its the result of tragedy and trauma we must love the other person and not expect to change them. Encourage them to seek therapy for the tragedy for the trauma. If its the result of abuse, we must love them and encourage them to seek therapy for the abuse. (Not to seek therapy for the homosexuality. That would be treating the symptom) If its the desire for attention then its still a matter of being loving and meeting them where they are at.
In every single one of these situations it still comes down to the persons choice. The most important thing is if you believe God gives us free will then honor that individuals right to free will. Love them for who they are and "do not judge lest thou be judged"(Matthew 7:1).
If its a genetic thing then we must love them for who they are and we can not condemn the act or try and change them. Just as they likewise should not try to change us. The issue of genetics is the very thing that needs to be proven. This is necessary to make a claim that we are born homosexual. I have not personally seen any studies that conclusively point to a gene or code that proves people are "born that way". Even in that case though some homosexuality may be a cause of abuse, culture, family, trauma, ETC... In that case as I stated before it is still the result of sin. In such situations its a way to find healing. It may be the wrong way to seek healing because its not seeking God but rather "human" comfort as a solution for our pain.
In any case if it is the cause of sin "Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him if a great millstone were hung around his neck and he were thrown into the sea."(Mark 9:42) This means that retribution comes to those who leads others astray. We can take solace in that fact and not feel like its our burden to fix those who sin. It is called faith to trust God that he makes all things right.
Either way: "Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength. ' 31 The second is this: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no commandment greater than these." (Mark 12:30-31) "Love" is what we are called to not to change people. That is Gods job.
Wednesday, June 6, 2012
Sunday, April 15, 2012
Death and Justice
An eye for an eye. A tooth for a tooth. How is it that many people believe in this concept as justice?
Justice by definition means:
Just behavior or treatment : a concern for justice, peace, and genuine respect for people.
Justice by definition means:
Just behavior or treatment : a concern for justice, peace, and genuine respect for people.
• the quality of being fair and reasonable : the justice of his case.
• the administration of the law or authority in maintaining this : a tragic miscarriage of justice.
• ( Justice) the personification of justice, usually a blindfolded woman holding scales and a sword.
In no part of that does it say "equal" or "punishment". This is a concept much like the words "liberal" and "conservative" that for the most part are largely misunderstood by most people. In the case of death wherein murder was the crime, there is no equality. Now people might argue against me on this but I am ready to take a stance that "taking a persons life does not equal the crime committed".
First of all: the fact that killing a person does not bring the other person back to life. Therefore what is being done is not equal as far as give and take. In fact it is another murder which in turn causes more pain then relief.
Lets put this in perspective. Say the individual that was killed has a family and friends. Each one of these people are impacted by the persons death. Now we look at the person who committed the crime. The individual that committed the crime also has a family and friends. Upon execution, each one of those people are affected by the persons death. So often we think that by enacting "equal punishment" we are only doing it to the person who committed the crime but the fact is we are enacting punishment upon every person that knows them as well. People that have not committed a crime are being punished for a person that did commit the crime. This is not justice as justice is not "vengeance with no regard to others".
Which brings us to the second point: If it is against the law to take a life then if the "law" takes a life it breaks the law. Killing someone is against the law. So, if the death penalty is there then it ignores its own rule and is no longer upholding justice.
Putting it into perspective. If you tell someone not to do something and then do it yourself why should they not do it as well? I view this as an adult who says "don't swear its bad" to their child and then goes and swears because they have "authority" to do so. If you give directive then you should also follow that directive. If people from the IRS started not paying their taxes and short changing people, there would be several people that figure "If they can do it so can I". The law must be the law no matter who it is. Even if you are part of that law.
The third point is: The death penalty is not a deterrent. This is often an argument that "if there is equal punishment for the crime then people won't want to do the crime."
Putting it into perspective. This works only if you have a small crimes for people that are not desperate or in need. Speeding is illegal but lets face it, people are going to speed no matter what. However if they have a good reason not to like punishment for doing so they are less likely to do so. Does this stop people from speeding? No. Will it stop people from speeding? Maybe a few but say they are late for work and will get fired if they don't make it, not a chance.
How does this equate to murder? Throughout history we have had public executions and has that ever deterred a person from killing another person? Not really. People who are willing to kill are most often desperate and not actually thinking with logic. They are not thinking about the consequences until afterwards. A person can plan it out and think that "maybe" they can get away with it however our bodies fill with adrenaline. This makes it difficult to think or act rationally.
How does this equate to murder? Throughout history we have had public executions and has that ever deterred a person from killing another person? Not really. People who are willing to kill are most often desperate and not actually thinking with logic. They are not thinking about the consequences until afterwards. A person can plan it out and think that "maybe" they can get away with it however our bodies fill with adrenaline. This makes it difficult to think or act rationally.
Its like being in line for your first roller coster. You know its going to be scary and maybe you don't really want to go on to it. The line is crowded with people so its hard to turn back. You are anticipating it and hearing other people scream so at this point your body starts to get "excited". People are getting off so it must be safe. Your heart rate speeds up just thinking about it and now you are strapped in and you didn't even notice that you got into the seat. Its now or never and even if you were hesitant to go forward at first your body and brain trick you into believing you can get off alive. The ride starts to move by itself and its no longer in your control. Getting off you are on a high. But do you remember what you did while on the ride? Maybe you screamed? Did you raise your hands? What did you say? Your head might hurt did it bang against the side of the seat holding you on? Or was it whiplash from the turns?
I could equate it to other events. Kissing going too far, before you know it you went further then you wanted. Or drinking too much even though you didn't want to drink as much as you did. My point is you are not thinking anymore when you are at the edge of murder. So why would you even consider the consequences at that point?
Forth point: It doesn't bring closure. By killing the person who killed someone close to us it doesn't change the fact that the person died. The pain is still there the questions still burning in your mind. But hey, the person that killed them is gone right?
Perspective, life still goes on. You don't gain anything by the other person dying. You might feel better on a superficial level but that person you loved is still dead. The emptiness will not go away. Vengeance gives us a momentary relief maybe but really does nothing to change anything that happened. Instead what you get is another person dead, another family mourning, and another loss with nothing gained. Justice means more and is more then a thirst for vengeance. Revenge is bitter and produces no fruit but poison. Revenge is not the point of justice.
Justice is a desire for peace, not a thirst for punishment. It is requiring a person to admit the wrong doing and change themselves. It is seeking a betterment from what has been done. It does not mean that the other person will suffer as much as the suffering they inflicted. You can not fight evil with evil. It doesn't work because you are just left with evil at the end. Justice does seek payment and payment in full however that payment is not gained or collected when we take a life. If life is valuable then we are destroying a priceless individual when we kill. We devalue life in general when we do not respect it.
People are not owned like property. They can not be claimed in equity. Its not like when property has been damaged or stolen. So to say we have any right to another persons life is false. You can not replace people.
We thirst for justice though, for everything to become right again. So what is the proper payment? I am not sure I have an answer for this... It assuredly is not death. I am not sure its even prison. I am at a loss because the price is so high. There is no easy answer to this and nor should there be.
My way of justice may be a little strange but would it not be fair for the murderer to serve the family of whom suffered the loss. Maybe I am young and naive, (I already know I am idealistic) however this might be true justice. Let me be clear I am not talking slavery because we are not entitled to another persons life. I am saying that the murderer and the victims family should look upon each other. The murderer would have to serve and support the family for the rest of their life. To understand grief one must be in the vicinity of grief. To find healing, forgiveness is the best solution. To forgive someone they must look upon them. To understand loss you must see it. Its an impossible scenario and, by my own admission, a little half baked. But I believe its closer to justice then what we have so far.
We thirst for justice though, for everything to become right again. So what is the proper payment? I am not sure I have an answer for this... It assuredly is not death. I am not sure its even prison. I am at a loss because the price is so high. There is no easy answer to this and nor should there be.
My way of justice may be a little strange but would it not be fair for the murderer to serve the family of whom suffered the loss. Maybe I am young and naive, (I already know I am idealistic) however this might be true justice. Let me be clear I am not talking slavery because we are not entitled to another persons life. I am saying that the murderer and the victims family should look upon each other. The murderer would have to serve and support the family for the rest of their life. To understand grief one must be in the vicinity of grief. To find healing, forgiveness is the best solution. To forgive someone they must look upon them. To understand loss you must see it. Its an impossible scenario and, by my own admission, a little half baked. But I believe its closer to justice then what we have so far.
Wednesday, March 28, 2012
Poetry
So I was at a artsy event a few nights ago and they asked me to write something for it. I figure its not terrible so I might as well share it on my blog.
Crucify him!
With that phrase we killed God’s son. We didn’t just kill him. We mocked him. Stripped him bare. We took the skin off his flesh. We forced him to carry his execution block for miles. We gambled for his belongings. We were so brutal you could almost say we relished in his suffering.
My God, My God, Why have you forsaken me?
He said in his suffering. He is covered with grime. Sweat and blood pouring down his face. Blood flowing from his hands and feet. This is God’s son. The God that created the universe, life and us. This is his son. His body broken. His blood shed. Behold your king.
Father forgive them they know not what they do.
I used to think it was so different in currant times. I never would have been in that crowd giving up my lord and saviour. They gave up our lord, our king in exchange for a murderer and thirty pieces of silver. I wasn’t there, I never did that. I never would have denied my king. And yet, in every sin I make, the actions I do not take. I do it every day.
It is finished!
The earth shook and the sky darkened. The temple’s curtain split in two. Truly this was the son of God. Seeing this the crowd turns silent. By all rights this should have been the end. After all, it is finished. However the world did not end.
So that brings us to “The Crux”.
So what was the point? Why die for us? We who tortured him in unimaginably cruel ways. He knew it was coming so why not speak up for his own defense? In my humanity I ask, what did dying accomplish? I know volumes more about how the world works then people 30 years ago. I know the science behind how a person dies. I have access to every detail of the death of Jesus Christ. If all I know is what has been taught to me. If all I know is by my experience alone. If that is my humanity then in my humanity I see how little I know, because I believe.
I believe that Jesus overcame death. I believe that Jesus was resurrected on the third day. I believe that even though we sealed his tomb with a stone and placed a guard on him he got up and walked out on his own accord. I believe that He died for me. That his death was necessary to save my soul. That death was only part of his journey. That by him dying he took my sins and washed them away with his blood. His body broken for me his blood poured out for me. Me, who still to this day denies him and rejects his love, his sacrifice for me. He died for a broken people. A foolish people. And death could not conquer him. Behold he makes ALL things new.
Saturday, January 28, 2012
Republicans Linked to Unintelligence. Democrats Linked to Bad Studies.
What would you do if I said "I have defining proof that republicans are racist and not very smart"? I recently read this article about how conservatives are more likely to be unintelligent and racist. It helps continue this false two-party dichotomy we live with. I recommend skimming it and not taking any of it seriously.
Click here to read the article
This article disturbed me. Maybe its just me but this just screams bias to me. Its a blatant stereotype, lazy writing, and false argument. Everyone holds prejudice even/especially liberals. Intelligence has nothing to do with the issue and it is plain insulting. Most people probably know me as a liberal so it may be shocking to see me defend conservatives, but that article is sick. I am disgusted with the two party rhetoric that people seem to be obsessed with.
It seems that people only see two sides to an argument. In philosophy this is called the "Horns of a Dilemma" argument which offers two choices of A or B but ignores C, D, or E. You're either for "rampant unrestricted capitalism", or you're a "socialist". You're either an "enlightened atheist", or a "dumb Christian". If you are a "pacifist" then you are "not patriotic". If you want to keep your second amendment right to "keep and bare arms" then you are a "racist hick".
Liberal a word that means great things is spat upon by the conservative politicians. Also apparently the word conservative is equivalent to "warmongering, racist pigs". Does anyone know what those words actually mean anymore? Look them up if you don't because you should be informed. Neither one of those traits are bad and both can be, and should be, seen as respectable.
People don't talk about politics with others anymore because the conversation is just one argument after another without, actually listening or thinking. Its touchy and way more emotional then it should be. People get a single sound-bite and run with it because it "sort of", fits their personal views. Its like a "one size fits all" shirt that sort of fits but doesn't actually fit you. We are stuffing ourselves into labled boxes figuring that because someone in the party we affiliate ourselves with says something, we should believe that.
The media itself promotes this charade. Read the article above. Look at how many TV debates have happened for the republican nominee hopefuls. Now look at the independent party? Or green party? *Cue Cricket Sounds* Huh, I would have thought there would be something. Oh wait the senate is filled with "republicans and democrats" I forgot we need to keep things simple for people. After all how are they supposed to control public opinion if they present more then two choices?
Rather then working together even our senate has gotten wrapped up in its lie. They fight amongst themselves blocking the other side and can't come to a responsible decision. Twice in the last two years they have filibustered on the budget till the very last instant. Delaying decisions on making solutions all while raising their own paychecks, passing bills that contradict the constitution, and making sure that pizza is recognized as a vegetable so that food industry lobby interests are met. How can people support either side at this point?
I am not and have never been one hundred percent liberal. I don't really know anyone that is. If someone claims to be they are full of it. Its just the same with conservatives. The mentality that we are so different needs to change. This shouldn't be a war between democrats and republicans. People should seek solutions not this power grab that politics has become. As citizens it is our responsibility to say enough is enough. No means no. If the people we elect can not make decisions regarding our country's future they do not deserve to remain in office. If the only thing they can decide on is that they need more power then they are failing the principles this nation was founded upon.
I am very conservative regarding the constitution. The protection of individual rights inherent in all people. The government in my opinion needs some serious housecleaning. Our representatives need to know that they represent us. If they can't do that then they need to step down and resign. We need people in office with a mind to serve rather then self-serve. The evidence is all around us that slowly and surely we are no longer a free people. Don't believe me? Just ask when was the last time when the last time the government did something that effected you personally and not a corporation's interest? It might have been this: The Military has the right to detain you, without, your right to due process.
You feeling proud to be an American? Cause at least you know you're free.
No you are not stupid to be republican. No you are not stupid to be a democrat. Neither side is anymore prejudice then the other. There is no defining study that says being either one is the more "evolved" human. What is foolish is demonizing and discounting other people because of their political beliefs.
We need more perspective then the two present. Promote the moderates. Promote the people that stick to their beliefs. Listen to the other side and don't discount it as being stupid. Pay attention to politics. Our representatives get away with so much because we don't pay attention. Vote them out if they can't lead or make a difference. Quit fighting the war that distracts us from the reality: That our government is not working and this needs to change.
So be a conservative and bring back traditional values. Be a liberal and seek meaningful change that improves upon our tradition's and values without contradicting them. Be both liberal and conservative. Quit the nonsense that you have to be one or the other. Above all demand integrity, in all instances of the word, from ALL our leaders.
Click here to read the article
This article disturbed me. Maybe its just me but this just screams bias to me. Its a blatant stereotype, lazy writing, and false argument. Everyone holds prejudice even/especially liberals. Intelligence has nothing to do with the issue and it is plain insulting. Most people probably know me as a liberal so it may be shocking to see me defend conservatives, but that article is sick. I am disgusted with the two party rhetoric that people seem to be obsessed with.
It seems that people only see two sides to an argument. In philosophy this is called the "Horns of a Dilemma" argument which offers two choices of A or B but ignores C, D, or E. You're either for "rampant unrestricted capitalism", or you're a "socialist". You're either an "enlightened atheist", or a "dumb Christian". If you are a "pacifist" then you are "not patriotic". If you want to keep your second amendment right to "keep and bare arms" then you are a "racist hick".
Liberal a word that means great things is spat upon by the conservative politicians. Also apparently the word conservative is equivalent to "warmongering, racist pigs". Does anyone know what those words actually mean anymore? Look them up if you don't because you should be informed. Neither one of those traits are bad and both can be, and should be, seen as respectable.
People don't talk about politics with others anymore because the conversation is just one argument after another without, actually listening or thinking. Its touchy and way more emotional then it should be. People get a single sound-bite and run with it because it "sort of", fits their personal views. Its like a "one size fits all" shirt that sort of fits but doesn't actually fit you. We are stuffing ourselves into labled boxes figuring that because someone in the party we affiliate ourselves with says something, we should believe that.
The media itself promotes this charade. Read the article above. Look at how many TV debates have happened for the republican nominee hopefuls. Now look at the independent party? Or green party? *Cue Cricket Sounds* Huh, I would have thought there would be something. Oh wait the senate is filled with "republicans and democrats" I forgot we need to keep things simple for people. After all how are they supposed to control public opinion if they present more then two choices?
Rather then working together even our senate has gotten wrapped up in its lie. They fight amongst themselves blocking the other side and can't come to a responsible decision. Twice in the last two years they have filibustered on the budget till the very last instant. Delaying decisions on making solutions all while raising their own paychecks, passing bills that contradict the constitution, and making sure that pizza is recognized as a vegetable so that food industry lobby interests are met. How can people support either side at this point?
I am not and have never been one hundred percent liberal. I don't really know anyone that is. If someone claims to be they are full of it. Its just the same with conservatives. The mentality that we are so different needs to change. This shouldn't be a war between democrats and republicans. People should seek solutions not this power grab that politics has become. As citizens it is our responsibility to say enough is enough. No means no. If the people we elect can not make decisions regarding our country's future they do not deserve to remain in office. If the only thing they can decide on is that they need more power then they are failing the principles this nation was founded upon.
I am very conservative regarding the constitution. The protection of individual rights inherent in all people. The government in my opinion needs some serious housecleaning. Our representatives need to know that they represent us. If they can't do that then they need to step down and resign. We need people in office with a mind to serve rather then self-serve. The evidence is all around us that slowly and surely we are no longer a free people. Don't believe me? Just ask when was the last time when the last time the government did something that effected you personally and not a corporation's interest? It might have been this: The Military has the right to detain you, without, your right to due process.
You feeling proud to be an American? Cause at least you know you're free.
No you are not stupid to be republican. No you are not stupid to be a democrat. Neither side is anymore prejudice then the other. There is no defining study that says being either one is the more "evolved" human. What is foolish is demonizing and discounting other people because of their political beliefs.
We need more perspective then the two present. Promote the moderates. Promote the people that stick to their beliefs. Listen to the other side and don't discount it as being stupid. Pay attention to politics. Our representatives get away with so much because we don't pay attention. Vote them out if they can't lead or make a difference. Quit fighting the war that distracts us from the reality: That our government is not working and this needs to change.
So be a conservative and bring back traditional values. Be a liberal and seek meaningful change that improves upon our tradition's and values without contradicting them. Be both liberal and conservative. Quit the nonsense that you have to be one or the other. Above all demand integrity, in all instances of the word, from ALL our leaders.
Friday, January 13, 2012
Religion VS Jesus
So a popular video hit about a guys poetry.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1IAhDGYlpqY&sns=fb
Apparently it is quite the controversy. Some people love it and others hate it. I have seen arguments about the meaning and reason of it as well as an atheist attempting to use it to prove there is no God. For me this is fascinating and deserves a look, because, I actually like a lot of what it says.
Here are some links to some of the arguments.
Atheist that swears a lot(You have been warned that 15 minutes of your life are about to be waisted):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yBo7Z_abiLE&feature=related
Catholic blog that has an interesting interpretation:
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/badcatholic/2012/01/why-i-hate-religion-but-love-jesus-the-smackdow.html
When people interpret poetry I am not sure you can take it literally like a philosophical debate. Poetry is spoken through the heart and leaves a lot of the argument out. The things that make sense are not always logical but come from the emotion or truth that is spoken. This makes it difficult to take it literally, because it is not literal.
So I want to argue from the meaning that I can understand that comes from it.
Religion according to the definition is(This is word for word out of the dictionary):
So to take Jesus out of the equation we would not have a religion called "Christianity". The very belief in Jesus is religion by definition. So at the very start I feel the poem makes a misstep by stating "What if I told you, Jesus came to abolish religion?". However thats is IF we take a poem literally which I have already stated we can not.
I feel this "abolish religion" is actually directed at the "religious". Now, please don't take that out of context I am not saying religious people are wrong after all I am religious for even talking about God. Religious people tend to be overly vocal and state things which tend to separate people rather then unite them. Jesus openly said don't be like the hypocrites. The people that were very vocal about the dedication that they "personally" had. They would proclaim when they were fasting to look better then everyone else. They were the Pharisees that told people what to do and didn't follow it themselves.
Want proof? The poem makes the next statement "What if I told you getting you to vote republican, really wasn't his mission" Have you seen or heard some of the rhetoric that I have that Republicans are the only Christians? That liberalism is Anti-Christian? Even my pastor has made an argument in the past that stated God upheld "Republican" values. Its a pointed response towards individuals. Why? The very next line "Because republican doesn't automatically mean Christian".
I might take it a step further and say that being "Christian" doesn't automatically mean Christian. Just because you say you are something, if you don't act it, it doesn't mean anything. The book of James states that works follow true faith. Faith without works is DEAD.
However, I believe the "religion" part is still important because Religious institutes promote separation and try to make outrageous statements that they have the "one true faith". Such as the article above posted from a member of the Catholic church. Now I am an Ex-Catholic and I am not trying to bash the Catholic church in anyway but the audacity of a statement like that is outstanding from a church still attempting to recover from their own leaders being all too human.
A person might find more truth in it then they do in a Protestant church however the Catholic church is far from perfect. There is not one true religion, there are truths in religion. We are human and by definition, imperfect. Meaning that religion is separate from God. Religion is a belief by definition. God is who we believe in, not the belief of God. God is separate from our belief because our belief is flawed. God however is perfect. The argument is not focused towards any church in particular its focused at ALL of them. I know from personal experience people in the Catholic church are discriminated against by other Christians and vice-versa.
Church is a corporate form of worship it only survives the way it does from money. The money is used for many things. Building large buildings that shelter people on Sundays or giving to charity. It still fails to do everything it can to help people and that is because it is flawed.
Religion is flawed: this is the the over all meaning of the poetry. It takes interpretation to get to that meaning but it is poetry its not a literal argument. If it was it would look a lot more like what I have said rather then a catchy rhyme.
Religious are flawed: We are people, not anyone is perfect and having battles over which church is better or worse is just proof of the overtly religious.
Jesus is the answer to both: This is a constant argument throughout the poem. It comes back to faith. We should be united by Jesus not separated because some people take one interpretation in the bible and others take another. Jesus is the constant and that should bring people closer to one another and this is where religion butts in and says you can't. People destroy relationships because they are going to different churches. Rather then rejoicing in the differences we have and using different strengths to spread Gods word we spend it bickering about the semantics of who is "saved" and who is not. The arrogance of man to decide for God what should be done.
Jesus did not come to abolish religion his coming evolved it. By his coming we became Christian. By his love we were saved. We so often take God out of the equation. Limit his power and authority over all things in Heaven and on Earth. Religion is important because it spreads Gods word to those who might otherwise be unwilling to listen. The poem itself does not abolish religion as being evil. Statements like "I love the church" and "Religion is man searching for God, But Christianity is God searching for man". He does resent it however. The falsehoods it preaches and division it creates.
Then again this is poetry not, philosophical debate.
Its up to interpretation not, just for hate.
It calls you to think
That religion can stink
That religion becomes our God, that hides us from the truth
But God is our saviour, the source of all truth
(P.S.) Please forgive me for my bad poetry.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1IAhDGYlpqY&sns=fb
Apparently it is quite the controversy. Some people love it and others hate it. I have seen arguments about the meaning and reason of it as well as an atheist attempting to use it to prove there is no God. For me this is fascinating and deserves a look, because, I actually like a lot of what it says.
Here are some links to some of the arguments.
Atheist that swears a lot(You have been warned that 15 minutes of your life are about to be waisted):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yBo7Z_abiLE&feature=related
Catholic blog that has an interesting interpretation:
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/badcatholic/2012/01/why-i-hate-religion-but-love-jesus-the-smackdow.html
When people interpret poetry I am not sure you can take it literally like a philosophical debate. Poetry is spoken through the heart and leaves a lot of the argument out. The things that make sense are not always logical but come from the emotion or truth that is spoken. This makes it difficult to take it literally, because it is not literal.
So I want to argue from the meaning that I can understand that comes from it.
Religion according to the definition is(This is word for word out of the dictionary):
the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, esp. a personal God or gods : ideas about the relationship between science and religion.
• details of belief as taught or discussed : when the school first opened they taught only religion, Italian, and mathematics.
• a particular system of faith and worship : the world's great religions.
• a pursuit or interest to which someone ascribes supreme importance : consumerism is the new religion.
So to take Jesus out of the equation we would not have a religion called "Christianity". The very belief in Jesus is religion by definition. So at the very start I feel the poem makes a misstep by stating "What if I told you, Jesus came to abolish religion?". However thats is IF we take a poem literally which I have already stated we can not.
I feel this "abolish religion" is actually directed at the "religious". Now, please don't take that out of context I am not saying religious people are wrong after all I am religious for even talking about God. Religious people tend to be overly vocal and state things which tend to separate people rather then unite them. Jesus openly said don't be like the hypocrites. The people that were very vocal about the dedication that they "personally" had. They would proclaim when they were fasting to look better then everyone else. They were the Pharisees that told people what to do and didn't follow it themselves.
Want proof? The poem makes the next statement "What if I told you getting you to vote republican, really wasn't his mission" Have you seen or heard some of the rhetoric that I have that Republicans are the only Christians? That liberalism is Anti-Christian? Even my pastor has made an argument in the past that stated God upheld "Republican" values. Its a pointed response towards individuals. Why? The very next line "Because republican doesn't automatically mean Christian".
I might take it a step further and say that being "Christian" doesn't automatically mean Christian. Just because you say you are something, if you don't act it, it doesn't mean anything. The book of James states that works follow true faith. Faith without works is DEAD.
However, I believe the "religion" part is still important because Religious institutes promote separation and try to make outrageous statements that they have the "one true faith". Such as the article above posted from a member of the Catholic church. Now I am an Ex-Catholic and I am not trying to bash the Catholic church in anyway but the audacity of a statement like that is outstanding from a church still attempting to recover from their own leaders being all too human.
A person might find more truth in it then they do in a Protestant church however the Catholic church is far from perfect. There is not one true religion, there are truths in religion. We are human and by definition, imperfect. Meaning that religion is separate from God. Religion is a belief by definition. God is who we believe in, not the belief of God. God is separate from our belief because our belief is flawed. God however is perfect. The argument is not focused towards any church in particular its focused at ALL of them. I know from personal experience people in the Catholic church are discriminated against by other Christians and vice-versa.
Church is a corporate form of worship it only survives the way it does from money. The money is used for many things. Building large buildings that shelter people on Sundays or giving to charity. It still fails to do everything it can to help people and that is because it is flawed.
Religion is flawed: this is the the over all meaning of the poetry. It takes interpretation to get to that meaning but it is poetry its not a literal argument. If it was it would look a lot more like what I have said rather then a catchy rhyme.
Religious are flawed: We are people, not anyone is perfect and having battles over which church is better or worse is just proof of the overtly religious.
Jesus is the answer to both: This is a constant argument throughout the poem. It comes back to faith. We should be united by Jesus not separated because some people take one interpretation in the bible and others take another. Jesus is the constant and that should bring people closer to one another and this is where religion butts in and says you can't. People destroy relationships because they are going to different churches. Rather then rejoicing in the differences we have and using different strengths to spread Gods word we spend it bickering about the semantics of who is "saved" and who is not. The arrogance of man to decide for God what should be done.
Jesus did not come to abolish religion his coming evolved it. By his coming we became Christian. By his love we were saved. We so often take God out of the equation. Limit his power and authority over all things in Heaven and on Earth. Religion is important because it spreads Gods word to those who might otherwise be unwilling to listen. The poem itself does not abolish religion as being evil. Statements like "I love the church" and "Religion is man searching for God, But Christianity is God searching for man". He does resent it however. The falsehoods it preaches and division it creates.
Then again this is poetry not, philosophical debate.
Its up to interpretation not, just for hate.
It calls you to think
That religion can stink
That religion becomes our God, that hides us from the truth
But God is our saviour, the source of all truth
(P.S.) Please forgive me for my bad poetry.
Thursday, January 5, 2012
Proving Grounds
So I was looking at the forums on Yahoo(don't do this its depressing) the other day and naturally there was an argument going on between people attempting to prove Gods existence and others saying hogwash.
When something like this happens I feel its almost like a bar fight movie scene in Ireland. Everyone is happy to just jump in. I include myself in that group. Its funny how a small thing brings out such passion in us. "What someone doesn't believe?!" or "How can you believe that fairy tail?!".
Everybody wants to be right and somehow we feel that it is up to us to prove it. A witty comment here a sharp retort there and on it goes. Thus far the best arguments I have seen neither prove or definitively disprove Gods existence, they are great arguments none the less. Its funny how we push ourselves into these "proving grounds" as if God needed our help to prove he exists. How little faith we have. These arguments I feel only are pushing to prove a point that we have so often repeated throughout history "How very fickle we are".
If God wanted to prove his existence he would. In an instant every person on the planet would know he was there. Going back to the bible it constantly talks about having something called faith. Believing without seeing, feeling, or touching. Even Thomas who had seen amazing miracles did not believe unless he stood before Jesus resurrected. There is something important to say about Thomas in this instance. Even though he did not believe Jesus gave him grace for the impertinence of his lack of faith.
John 20:29 Jesus said to him, "Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.". The other disciples never could have made him believe, only God could. Is it so bad to question? Is it so bad to say "I will believe it when I see it"? I don't think we are called to it but I am not sure its our job to prove our point. We have so little faith that God will prove himself in his own time.
There is a difference between this and missionary work. Missionary's don't go to places to argue that God exists. They go to live for God and teach others about him. Not to prove him, or rather, themselves right. I have been very mistaken about my purpose. Its conflicting at times to hear someone say "There is no God". They have lost their way in the grand scheme of things and I desperately wish to bring them back. Sometimes its because I feel insulted. Other times its because I want to help them see truth. In both cases maybe I am right or wrong. However, by speaking out I am doing it wrong...
Consistently the bible calls people to LIVE their faith. Actions speak louder then words. With faith comes works. St. Francis of Assisi said "Live the gospel everyday, if necessary use words". Its a last resort to use words, not the first. The problem is not that people are not Christian, its that people that are Christian don't act like they are. If we did there would be a whole lot more of us.
My "proving grounds" are not to argue and show how smart I am. Not to fight to prove God right. Rather to live in faith. To believe in God and trust that he really is the authority of all that is in heaven and earth. After all He is with us always.
When something like this happens I feel its almost like a bar fight movie scene in Ireland. Everyone is happy to just jump in. I include myself in that group. Its funny how a small thing brings out such passion in us. "What someone doesn't believe?!" or "How can you believe that fairy tail?!".
Everybody wants to be right and somehow we feel that it is up to us to prove it. A witty comment here a sharp retort there and on it goes. Thus far the best arguments I have seen neither prove or definitively disprove Gods existence, they are great arguments none the less. Its funny how we push ourselves into these "proving grounds" as if God needed our help to prove he exists. How little faith we have. These arguments I feel only are pushing to prove a point that we have so often repeated throughout history "How very fickle we are".
If God wanted to prove his existence he would. In an instant every person on the planet would know he was there. Going back to the bible it constantly talks about having something called faith. Believing without seeing, feeling, or touching. Even Thomas who had seen amazing miracles did not believe unless he stood before Jesus resurrected. There is something important to say about Thomas in this instance. Even though he did not believe Jesus gave him grace for the impertinence of his lack of faith.
John 20:29 Jesus said to him, "Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.". The other disciples never could have made him believe, only God could. Is it so bad to question? Is it so bad to say "I will believe it when I see it"? I don't think we are called to it but I am not sure its our job to prove our point. We have so little faith that God will prove himself in his own time.
There is a difference between this and missionary work. Missionary's don't go to places to argue that God exists. They go to live for God and teach others about him. Not to prove him, or rather, themselves right. I have been very mistaken about my purpose. Its conflicting at times to hear someone say "There is no God". They have lost their way in the grand scheme of things and I desperately wish to bring them back. Sometimes its because I feel insulted. Other times its because I want to help them see truth. In both cases maybe I am right or wrong. However, by speaking out I am doing it wrong...
Consistently the bible calls people to LIVE their faith. Actions speak louder then words. With faith comes works. St. Francis of Assisi said "Live the gospel everyday, if necessary use words". Its a last resort to use words, not the first. The problem is not that people are not Christian, its that people that are Christian don't act like they are. If we did there would be a whole lot more of us.
My "proving grounds" are not to argue and show how smart I am. Not to fight to prove God right. Rather to live in faith. To believe in God and trust that he really is the authority of all that is in heaven and earth. After all He is with us always.
Wednesday, January 4, 2012
My Mother and Technology
The day has come! My mother finally has a device that is more technologically advanced then a cell phone from 2000. She was afraid to touch it. Once she did though she giggles, delighted at the new found power. Things that I have taken for granted like e-mailing she finds to be a fascinating and worth while. She exclaims loudly in a voice proud of a new accomplishment, paying for something online with a credit card! I can hear my Dad sighing in his office. What was he thinking giving her an Ipad...
I never would have thought I would see the day when my mother would not be afraid of touching technology. Before if the computer did something she might gasp thinking she broke it. Still she is impatient with the Ipad. If something doesn't work right she gasps indignantly at the audacity. How dare this not work the way it should. Its amusing to me however she has an air of excitement that comes with it a new found amazement for me about the things I take for granted. I can't wait to see what she does with it next!
Life really is full of adventure. We make new discoveries in our lives that opens new avenues of possibilities. Its really a shame that we forget what made this stuff so cool in the first place. Things that made our lives easier become a chore and common place. Its like elk or deer at my house in Evergreen. I never thought I would get tired of them. Cool looking, interesting creatures then, now are just pests to me. They eat the flowers and are obstacles on the road that could total my car. Not quite the fury pets I wanted them to be. Maybe thats the problem. I wanted them to be something they were not. They still are cool looking and interesting creatures.
Maybe our stuff turns into something its not meant for. Maybe we just say "thats great and all but wouldn't it be cool if it did this?" I need to stop looking at stuff like that and be grateful for what it is. Cause after all, not everything is meant for me. That doesn't mean I can't and shouldn't appreciate it though.
I never would have thought I would see the day when my mother would not be afraid of touching technology. Before if the computer did something she might gasp thinking she broke it. Still she is impatient with the Ipad. If something doesn't work right she gasps indignantly at the audacity. How dare this not work the way it should. Its amusing to me however she has an air of excitement that comes with it a new found amazement for me about the things I take for granted. I can't wait to see what she does with it next!
Life really is full of adventure. We make new discoveries in our lives that opens new avenues of possibilities. Its really a shame that we forget what made this stuff so cool in the first place. Things that made our lives easier become a chore and common place. Its like elk or deer at my house in Evergreen. I never thought I would get tired of them. Cool looking, interesting creatures then, now are just pests to me. They eat the flowers and are obstacles on the road that could total my car. Not quite the fury pets I wanted them to be. Maybe thats the problem. I wanted them to be something they were not. They still are cool looking and interesting creatures.
Maybe our stuff turns into something its not meant for. Maybe we just say "thats great and all but wouldn't it be cool if it did this?" I need to stop looking at stuff like that and be grateful for what it is. Cause after all, not everything is meant for me. That doesn't mean I can't and shouldn't appreciate it though.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)