Here is something interesting to read. As far as i know there has been peace between Palestine and Israel since that 'tentative' treaty earlier this month. Methinks that maybe the way Palestine feels about the temple mount is gonna cause a problem. maybe.
Monday, June 09, 2008
Temple Mount '100% Islamic'
Jerusalem and the Temple Mount belong to the Muslims and any Israeli action that "offends" the Mount will be answered by 1.5 billion Muslims, declared the chief of staff for Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas. "Jerusalem is Muslim. The blessed Al Aqsa mosque and Harem Al Sharif (Temple Mount) is 100 percent Muslim. The Israelis are playing with fire when they threaten Al Aqsa with digging that is taking place," said Abbas' chief of staff Rafiq Al Husseini. Husseini was referring to Israeli plans to construct a new bridge from the Western Wall area to the Temple Mount. The old bridge was damaged two years ago. When Israeli workers tried to repair it, Palestinian leaders claimed the work was threatening the Al Aqsa Mosque, even though the mosque is located hundreds of feet away, the work did not tunnel under any Mount foundation or touch any structure connected to the mosque, and the repair work – which had been pre-approved by Jordan and the Mount's Muslim custodians – was conducted under the scrutiny of an accessible 24/7 webcam. "Any hurting of Jerusalem will explode the whole negotiations between us and the Israelis ... we must work to strengthen Palestinian ties to Jerusalem," al-Husseini said. Mainstream Palestinian leaders claim the Temple Mount is Muslim in spite of overwhelming archaeological evidence documenting the first and second Jewish temples. "Israel started since 1967 making archeological digs to show Jewish signs to prove the relationship between Judaism and the city and they found nothing. There is no Jewish connection to Israel before the Jews invaded in the 1880s," said Tamimi. "About these so-called two Temples, they never existed, certainly not at the [Temple Mount]," Tamimi said during a sit-down interview in his eastern Jerusalem office. The Palestinian cleric denied the validity of dozens of digs verified by experts worldwide revealing Jewish artifacts from the First and Second Temples throughout Jerusalem, including on the Temple Mount itself; excavations revealing Jewish homes and a synagogue in a site in Jerusalem called the City of David; or even the recent discovery of a Second Temple Jewish city in the vicinity of Jerusalem. Tamimi said descriptions of the Jewish Temples in the Hebrew Tanach, in the Talmud and in Byzantine and Roman writings from the Temple periods were forged, and that the Torah was falsified to claim biblical patriarchs and matriarchs were Jewish when indeed they were prophets for Islam. "All this is not real. We don't believe in all your versions. Your Torah was falsified. The text as given to the Muslim prophet Moses never mentions Jerusalem. Maybe Jerusalem was mentioned in the rest of the Torah, which was falsified by the Jews," said Tamimi. He said Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses and Jesus were "prophets for the Israelites sent by Allah as to usher in Islam."
17.6.08
me and kierkegaard, down by the school yard
So. I am at my parents house tonight. It is 10:30. They have gone to bed. I spent some time looking at old notebooks from art history, mainly for the pictures i drew that cover the margins and, sometimes, the notes. anyway.
Kierkegaard. Pretty cool. He kind of started existentialism, thinking about "stuff" in terms of each individual. This is a big shift from the concept of everything boiling down to universals, or forms. What's more important than the personal choices that one makes, conscious participation in life and the living of it? He says what's the point of all these general problems when in the end it's just you, needing to make a decision, regardless of what you know?
"The most poignant moments in life are personal, where one becomes aware of oneself as a subject." Not what do we have in common, but what makes me unique. It feels good to think like that, and that's probably why I like it.
"Truth is made."
"What is 'out there' is 'an objective uncertainty' - 'the highest truth attainable for an individual is simply an objective uncertainty held fast in the most passionate personal experience'"
Basically, the "truth" is something you can't prove, just something that you think (or believe) is right. Feeeelings, nothing more than feeelingsss...
Next is Kierkegaard explaining how we live, moving from our essential being to the existential condition. A person starts to get a move on when they sense that they are not what they ought to be, which, as we know, causes anxiety (a little bit). The individual tries to 'do something' to alleviate this, but, kierky says, the only thing worth doing is to try and relate oneself to God. The anxiety is caused by the awareness of our alienation from our essential self in God, and the drive to be returned to that. To get back to this, there are 3 stages, each coming about by a personal commitment. Yep, actualization of one's self by making choices.
The first stage is the aesthetic self, living by impulse and emotion, whose chief motivation is pleasure. In this a person still exists in that they choose to live as an aesthetic person, and in addition they are made aware that there is more - "that life consists, or ought to consist, of more than emotive and sense experiences."This awareness of these two possibilities is what triggers the movement into the next stage, that life is not fully actualized at this level and I need to choose to do something more than just do whatever I want all day. I am thinking it might take a very long time to realize that.
This brings on the Ethical Stage - accepting that there are, in fact, some things you shouldn't do, based on a moral understanding. It's a self imposed limitation, and brings with it the feeling that the bad things you do are caused either by ignorance or a lack of will (mostly a lack of will, from my experience). But what happens now is the individual who tries to do good finds out that they are incapable of doing it, that in fact they deliberately don't do the right thing (on occasion). What's this all about? If you cant do what you know youre supposed to do, you can either a) keep trying or b) respond to your new awareness that you are insufficient at living by yourself. You cant just think it, you have to do it - make a commitment (choice) - hey God who i'm estranged from, i'd like to not be, so much.
The final step he called the religious stage. The trouble here is that it is subjective - as individuals our relationship with God is unique, and "there is no way, prior to the actual relationship, to get any knowledge about it." There is no rational or conceptual or objective knowledge about one's relationship to God. An act of faith is the only assurance. That we must find our self-fulfillment in God comes about from our trying and failing to find it elsewhere. "The existence of God is suggested to us in our awareness of our self-alienation", that we aren't exactly who we think we should be. We can and do exist at all levels, and only through living at each do we realize that we aren't quite there yet. Kierk-a says that relating to God is the way.
So, we haven't proven anything. What goes on inside me is what goes on inside me, nowhere else, and it's the same for you. I just know there is someone who's going to say "wait, cant there be universals and personal uniqueness, together?" Sometimes I flip ahead in my 'Socrates to Sartre' book, which is why i'm at kierkegaard now, instead of aristotle. The self is important, because it's all i know. It's not that I learned something new from this, just that it was said in ways that made more sense than i had heard before. But how can you trust yourself if you are very much aware that you are inadequate at living a perfect life? What is the perfect life for the individual - to be completely actualized? to be happy? knowing that you did what you were supposed to do? The most important thing that's happened to me so far as that now when i say "that's something i should think about." i dont just say it, but i actually do it.
Kierkegaard. Pretty cool. He kind of started existentialism, thinking about "stuff" in terms of each individual. This is a big shift from the concept of everything boiling down to universals, or forms. What's more important than the personal choices that one makes, conscious participation in life and the living of it? He says what's the point of all these general problems when in the end it's just you, needing to make a decision, regardless of what you know?
"The most poignant moments in life are personal, where one becomes aware of oneself as a subject." Not what do we have in common, but what makes me unique. It feels good to think like that, and that's probably why I like it.
"Truth is made."
"What is 'out there' is 'an objective uncertainty' - 'the highest truth attainable for an individual is simply an objective uncertainty held fast in the most passionate personal experience'"
Basically, the "truth" is something you can't prove, just something that you think (or believe) is right. Feeeelings, nothing more than feeelingsss...
Next is Kierkegaard explaining how we live, moving from our essential being to the existential condition. A person starts to get a move on when they sense that they are not what they ought to be, which, as we know, causes anxiety (a little bit). The individual tries to 'do something' to alleviate this, but, kierky says, the only thing worth doing is to try and relate oneself to God. The anxiety is caused by the awareness of our alienation from our essential self in God, and the drive to be returned to that. To get back to this, there are 3 stages, each coming about by a personal commitment. Yep, actualization of one's self by making choices.
The first stage is the aesthetic self, living by impulse and emotion, whose chief motivation is pleasure. In this a person still exists in that they choose to live as an aesthetic person, and in addition they are made aware that there is more - "that life consists, or ought to consist, of more than emotive and sense experiences."This awareness of these two possibilities is what triggers the movement into the next stage, that life is not fully actualized at this level and I need to choose to do something more than just do whatever I want all day. I am thinking it might take a very long time to realize that.
This brings on the Ethical Stage - accepting that there are, in fact, some things you shouldn't do, based on a moral understanding. It's a self imposed limitation, and brings with it the feeling that the bad things you do are caused either by ignorance or a lack of will (mostly a lack of will, from my experience). But what happens now is the individual who tries to do good finds out that they are incapable of doing it, that in fact they deliberately don't do the right thing (on occasion). What's this all about? If you cant do what you know youre supposed to do, you can either a) keep trying or b) respond to your new awareness that you are insufficient at living by yourself. You cant just think it, you have to do it - make a commitment (choice) - hey God who i'm estranged from, i'd like to not be, so much.
The final step he called the religious stage. The trouble here is that it is subjective - as individuals our relationship with God is unique, and "there is no way, prior to the actual relationship, to get any knowledge about it." There is no rational or conceptual or objective knowledge about one's relationship to God. An act of faith is the only assurance. That we must find our self-fulfillment in God comes about from our trying and failing to find it elsewhere. "The existence of God is suggested to us in our awareness of our self-alienation", that we aren't exactly who we think we should be. We can and do exist at all levels, and only through living at each do we realize that we aren't quite there yet. Kierk-a says that relating to God is the way.
So, we haven't proven anything. What goes on inside me is what goes on inside me, nowhere else, and it's the same for you. I just know there is someone who's going to say "wait, cant there be universals and personal uniqueness, together?" Sometimes I flip ahead in my 'Socrates to Sartre' book, which is why i'm at kierkegaard now, instead of aristotle. The self is important, because it's all i know. It's not that I learned something new from this, just that it was said in ways that made more sense than i had heard before. But how can you trust yourself if you are very much aware that you are inadequate at living a perfect life? What is the perfect life for the individual - to be completely actualized? to be happy? knowing that you did what you were supposed to do? The most important thing that's happened to me so far as that now when i say "that's something i should think about." i dont just say it, but i actually do it.
12.6.08
answers to questions in comments, because the comment back was becoming very long
whoo. here's some things, which may serve as answers. thanks for thinking with me
i think there are always regrets, no matter who you are, and to be able to look back on your life and the consequences you brought on, or even see the possibilities of doing something different? wild child. how can a life that is such a small spot on your existence of forever (if you believe that sort of thing) mean so much?
"I am the way, the truth, and the life, no man comes to the Father except through me." i forgot to mention this ever popular Jesus quote in my posting, but will do so soon.
The way I understand it, prior to Jesus' appearance, people who worshipped God (and by this i mean only the people of God, The Israelites - yes i know, what about everyone else who existed during these, i dont know, thousands upon thousands of years) ... people who worshipped God were required to sacrifice a 'clean' animal in proportion to the sins they had committed in order to cover for them. Jesus came forward as the ultimate clean sacrifice because He had led a perfect life (no sin by way of being the son of God) and as such no more sacrifices were needed, just acceptance of that final sacrifice. This is what people mean when they say accepting 'Jesus as their Savior' - accepting that his perfect sacrifice is the end all and covers their ass for the rest of all of their sinning, which was inherent in them from birth (dont get me started on the idea of sin nature, or wait, do.)
Jesus did seem to say that it was His way or the highway in regards to believeing in anyone but Him. If you really think he was/is God, this seems like a justifiable thing, because hey, He can do what He wants, He made us. The sticky thing is that God also says He loves everyone that He has ever made, though He hates the sin they commit, the one thing He said - "hey guys, please dont do that." , and yet we did it anyway. I would be pissed as well.
It's God's nature to not be able to 'allow' sin in His presence, and anyone who has it, cannot be with God, and instead is forever separated (hell). "The sacrifice that covers your ass" takes away all of the sin and allows you to be in that presence (heaven).
Blind faith is difficult (extremely), if we are honest with ourselves. I think it's absolutely true that many people use Christianity as a fire escape from feeling lost in the world, esp. in the west. I would hesitate to say any of these people are not genuinely changed and /or 'saved'. But there is alot more to think about, and I think God wants us to question Him, wants us to try and figure out what it is He is up to, because in doing this we understand better the world and become closer with Him, the whole point of becoming a Christian in the first place.
Jesus was met with mixed reviews when he showed up. Jewish people were currently under Roman rule and were hoping for a warrior messiah to show up and kick them out. But what the prophets in the old testament meant when they said that a messiah was coming that would change everything, they didnt mean anything military, but someone who would change people and the way they live, which come on, is way more important. So naturally alot of people were like 'This Jesus cat is just some poor guy who's telling us we should love each other, come on.' and Him claiming to be God was kind of a problem if you didn't think He was, so they went ahead and killed Him. This was the sacrifice. Something innocent in exchange for someone like me. It was necessary for Him to die if we were to ever be completely free of ourselves, and it was necessary for Him to come back to life to prove that He was who He said He was and to show that things were changed.
.....So that's why Jesus was important, according to how my beliefs work. I was raised on this stuff since I was little, but when I hit college I saw that there was indeed alot of other things going on in the world . I started to back down off my high horse and realize that I wasn't quite so sure of what I thought I was while I had attended a conservative Christian high school, church and home. I think it's so important to know the world, and be a part of it, and to understand and empathize with everyone (isn't that what 'love everyone as yourself' really means?) These questions I have have been boiling in me for quite awhile and I have been struck with how very very important this information is recently (read last few posts). Pursuing God can never be a bad thing, I am thinking.
This probably did a bad job of answering the questions, or maybe it did a good job when I was wasn't looking. In the meantime, i'll keep reading about zoroastrianism (joke) and again thanks for keeping up.
i think there are always regrets, no matter who you are, and to be able to look back on your life and the consequences you brought on, or even see the possibilities of doing something different? wild child. how can a life that is such a small spot on your existence of forever (if you believe that sort of thing) mean so much?
"I am the way, the truth, and the life, no man comes to the Father except through me." i forgot to mention this ever popular Jesus quote in my posting, but will do so soon.
The way I understand it, prior to Jesus' appearance, people who worshipped God (and by this i mean only the people of God, The Israelites - yes i know, what about everyone else who existed during these, i dont know, thousands upon thousands of years) ... people who worshipped God were required to sacrifice a 'clean' animal in proportion to the sins they had committed in order to cover for them. Jesus came forward as the ultimate clean sacrifice because He had led a perfect life (no sin by way of being the son of God) and as such no more sacrifices were needed, just acceptance of that final sacrifice. This is what people mean when they say accepting 'Jesus as their Savior' - accepting that his perfect sacrifice is the end all and covers their ass for the rest of all of their sinning, which was inherent in them from birth (dont get me started on the idea of sin nature, or wait, do.)
Jesus did seem to say that it was His way or the highway in regards to believeing in anyone but Him. If you really think he was/is God, this seems like a justifiable thing, because hey, He can do what He wants, He made us. The sticky thing is that God also says He loves everyone that He has ever made, though He hates the sin they commit, the one thing He said - "hey guys, please dont do that." , and yet we did it anyway. I would be pissed as well.
It's God's nature to not be able to 'allow' sin in His presence, and anyone who has it, cannot be with God, and instead is forever separated (hell). "The sacrifice that covers your ass" takes away all of the sin and allows you to be in that presence (heaven).
Blind faith is difficult (extremely), if we are honest with ourselves. I think it's absolutely true that many people use Christianity as a fire escape from feeling lost in the world, esp. in the west. I would hesitate to say any of these people are not genuinely changed and /or 'saved'. But there is alot more to think about, and I think God wants us to question Him, wants us to try and figure out what it is He is up to, because in doing this we understand better the world and become closer with Him, the whole point of becoming a Christian in the first place.
Jesus was met with mixed reviews when he showed up. Jewish people were currently under Roman rule and were hoping for a warrior messiah to show up and kick them out. But what the prophets in the old testament meant when they said that a messiah was coming that would change everything, they didnt mean anything military, but someone who would change people and the way they live, which come on, is way more important. So naturally alot of people were like 'This Jesus cat is just some poor guy who's telling us we should love each other, come on.' and Him claiming to be God was kind of a problem if you didn't think He was, so they went ahead and killed Him. This was the sacrifice. Something innocent in exchange for someone like me. It was necessary for Him to die if we were to ever be completely free of ourselves, and it was necessary for Him to come back to life to prove that He was who He said He was and to show that things were changed.
.....So that's why Jesus was important, according to how my beliefs work. I was raised on this stuff since I was little, but when I hit college I saw that there was indeed alot of other things going on in the world . I started to back down off my high horse and realize that I wasn't quite so sure of what I thought I was while I had attended a conservative Christian high school, church and home. I think it's so important to know the world, and be a part of it, and to understand and empathize with everyone (isn't that what 'love everyone as yourself' really means?) These questions I have have been boiling in me for quite awhile and I have been struck with how very very important this information is recently (read last few posts). Pursuing God can never be a bad thing, I am thinking.
This probably did a bad job of answering the questions, or maybe it did a good job when I was wasn't looking. In the meantime, i'll keep reading about zoroastrianism (joke) and again thanks for keeping up.
11.6.08
universalism
"While the human mind and inclination occur in an innumerable variety, four broadtypes of men may be recognised for practical purposes : the man of action, the man of emotion, the mystic or man of spirit, and the philosopher or man of intellect. Religion must offer a path for each type to follow, suited to the nature of each type. Ancient religion in India offered four such paths, known as Karma Yoga, Bhakti Yoga, Raja Yoga and Jnana Yoga. These paths transform the selfish to the selfless and lead to Yoga or Union or Realisation of the ultimate Truth.
"It is imperative that all these Yogas should be carried out in practice. Mere theories about them will not do any good. ... Religion is realisation, not talk, nor doctrine, nor theories, however beautiful they may be. It is being and becoming, not hearing or acknowledging; it is the whole soul becoming changed into what it believes. That is religion"
-- Swami Vivekananda
The idea here is that there is such an enormous variety of people in the world, that it became imperative to have a variety of religions as well. So it is logical, then, that no one religion could "satisfy" every single person that has ever existed. Well, noone said God was logical.
http://www.wku.edu/~jan.garrett/urrd.htm
this is an interesting article to read, though with some flawed thinking. Here's what i learned:
exclusivism - my faith is the only true faith. All other's are totally and completely wrong
preparationism - all other faiths are good in some ways in that they are getting those people ready for the ultimate faith, which is mine. There are bits and pieces of good stuff but they do
not have the full understanding yet.
....what happens now is that you say "wait, if my faith is the ultimate one, and if that exists in the world, then what's the point in all these other 'preparatory' religions still hanging around?
It still leads you to the need to change other people and starts to lean right back into exclusivism.
relativism - seeking to find inhereent value or goodness in every religion, including your own.
I particularly liked this part:
"The Christian religion is in every moment a purely historical phenomenon." Thus "it is subject to all the limitations to which any individual historical phenomenon is exposed, just like the other great religions." For Troeltsch all religions were products of particular historical events "which gave them their unique substance and form"; therefore none could claim absolute legitimacy. Later he wrote,
Christianity could not be the religion of such ...mighty spiritual power and truth...if it were not, in some degree, a manifestation of the Divine life itself. The evidence we have for this remains the same . . . it is the evidence of a profound inner experience. This experience is undoubtedly the criterion of its validity, but . . . only of its validity for us. . . . It is final and unconditional for us because we have nothing else . . .According to Troeltsch, it is also possible that
other . . . groups . . . may experience their contact with the Divine Life in a quite different way, and may themselves also possess a religion which has grown up with them, and from which they cannot sever themselves so long as they remain what they are . . . .
Religion is at it's core a very personal journey. No two people can feel the same way about a God or about what it means to love. Wait, is this true? This has alot to do with philosophy, and the idea of universal forms (thanks plato from last night). Is there a universal idea of truth, or God?
...It goes on to talk about how religions have borrowed from each other all through history and how cultures are no longer exclusive to themselves.
sycretistic universalism - here's where things, i thought, got kind of hairy. The thinking here is that every religion can be melted down into particular ideas that are universal to all religions, that at the root they are all the same. As a result, we should be all smiles and rainbows.
....but we're not. Most of the critiques about universalism were good (i need to check some of the facts on the religionsthat I shamefully know very little about). I think the danger here is putting to much stock in yourself, and what you can understand. God is not something you should put in a box, because he does not fit inside of there. We are not the smartest of people and our own experiences are flawed through perception. It is not us but God who causes any change, who shows any glimpse of truth in a world of unsurety. But hey! How can we know for sure? Are we hooked on a feeling, that tingling in the back of your head when you think you're doing something extra-religious? I guess we'll just have to believe.... yeah im not satisfied either.
I dont want to give up control. I want to be able to understand the concept of infinity, and time, and being outside of time. Where is the line where you have to stop and say "i cant go beyond this." and give the wheel to your higher power? im glad that the heatwave is done because i can actually think now. anyway. more later on.
"It is imperative that all these Yogas should be carried out in practice. Mere theories about them will not do any good. ... Religion is realisation, not talk, nor doctrine, nor theories, however beautiful they may be. It is being and becoming, not hearing or acknowledging; it is the whole soul becoming changed into what it believes. That is religion"
-- Swami Vivekananda
The idea here is that there is such an enormous variety of people in the world, that it became imperative to have a variety of religions as well. So it is logical, then, that no one religion could "satisfy" every single person that has ever existed. Well, noone said God was logical.
http://www.wku.edu/~jan.garrett/urrd.htm
this is an interesting article to read, though with some flawed thinking. Here's what i learned:
exclusivism - my faith is the only true faith. All other's are totally and completely wrong
preparationism - all other faiths are good in some ways in that they are getting those people ready for the ultimate faith, which is mine. There are bits and pieces of good stuff but they do
not have the full understanding yet.
....what happens now is that you say "wait, if my faith is the ultimate one, and if that exists in the world, then what's the point in all these other 'preparatory' religions still hanging around?
It still leads you to the need to change other people and starts to lean right back into exclusivism.
relativism - seeking to find inhereent value or goodness in every religion, including your own.
I particularly liked this part:
"The Christian religion is in every moment a purely historical phenomenon." Thus "it is subject to all the limitations to which any individual historical phenomenon is exposed, just like the other great religions." For Troeltsch all religions were products of particular historical events "which gave them their unique substance and form"; therefore none could claim absolute legitimacy. Later he wrote,
Christianity could not be the religion of such ...mighty spiritual power and truth...if it were not, in some degree, a manifestation of the Divine life itself. The evidence we have for this remains the same . . . it is the evidence of a profound inner experience. This experience is undoubtedly the criterion of its validity, but . . . only of its validity for us. . . . It is final and unconditional for us because we have nothing else . . .According to Troeltsch, it is also possible that
other . . . groups . . . may experience their contact with the Divine Life in a quite different way, and may themselves also possess a religion which has grown up with them, and from which they cannot sever themselves so long as they remain what they are . . . .
Religion is at it's core a very personal journey. No two people can feel the same way about a God or about what it means to love. Wait, is this true? This has alot to do with philosophy, and the idea of universal forms (thanks plato from last night). Is there a universal idea of truth, or God?
...It goes on to talk about how religions have borrowed from each other all through history and how cultures are no longer exclusive to themselves.
sycretistic universalism - here's where things, i thought, got kind of hairy. The thinking here is that every religion can be melted down into particular ideas that are universal to all religions, that at the root they are all the same. As a result, we should be all smiles and rainbows.
....but we're not. Most of the critiques about universalism were good (i need to check some of the facts on the religionsthat I shamefully know very little about). I think the danger here is putting to much stock in yourself, and what you can understand. God is not something you should put in a box, because he does not fit inside of there. We are not the smartest of people and our own experiences are flawed through perception. It is not us but God who causes any change, who shows any glimpse of truth in a world of unsurety. But hey! How can we know for sure? Are we hooked on a feeling, that tingling in the back of your head when you think you're doing something extra-religious? I guess we'll just have to believe.... yeah im not satisfied either.
I dont want to give up control. I want to be able to understand the concept of infinity, and time, and being outside of time. Where is the line where you have to stop and say "i cant go beyond this." and give the wheel to your higher power? im glad that the heatwave is done because i can actually think now. anyway. more later on.
9.6.08
Is there such a thing as nothing?
some notes on the conversation i had yesterday and today (though today was with myself)
Everybody dies. It's a fact that noone would try to deny you. We all know it. No single person can escape their own death (unless you count elijah, and i susupect not many of you will). If you really think about it, consider it........ it's fucking scary as hell. I am going to die. I dont know when, or how, but i am absolutely certain, it's gonna happen. Now does this make me complacent about other people who die (like, everybody does it, big deal if you do it now or not)? Of course not, which brings me to the next point.
I am a Christian. I know, if you know me, you're like, yeah, we know, but who cares, youre not a crazy one. Well maybe that's my bad, but that's not what i'm getting at. In accordance with my beliefs, anyone who is not a christian will die, and will go to hell. forever. FOREVER. If any of my 'beliefs' were true at all, wouldn't i be running out on the street right now, grabbing people and slapping them and saying "holy shit dude, you've gotta believe this????" That might not be the best tactic anyway, but it makes me know how strong my faith is, and it always makes me want to be doing more. And that's good. My "tactic" has always been to live a good, happy life as the best evidence that my life is indeed changed by the grace of God. I realize that lately (read: last few years) I have not always been the best display of that. But ANYWAY.
To try to wrap your head around forever, whether it be heaven or hell, or just falling out of existence for all of the rest of time - to put it eloquently - What The Fuck?? I could be kept up all night every night trying to understand eternity, no matter where it is. Maybe I should for awhile. But how do we say "it's okay, i'll worry about it later." all of the time?? I know i'm going to die, and i dont know what will happen after that, at all. This should be my first and last thought every day of my life, as well as all of the ones in between. Seriously, what the fuck?
In addition - how can I tell someone I love " You know those people who you loved that are dead now, those great people who changed your life forever - that word again - those people are in hell forever, and ever." Life breaks my heart, so I sit and deny it, dont believe it, and it's convenient to live this way. It's convenient to be unsure of your beliefs because then you dont have to act on them at all. On top of it, how can I tell a devout Buddhist, or Muslim, or anyone - "you're condemned to eternal hellfire unless you believe in Jesus the way I do." ? This has been my problem for awhile now, and it's why i haven't moved in any direction, except for a few inches down into the ground.
Now, i know, we're all bad people. Everyone is not inherently good, in fact they are the opposite, and everyone, including me, deserves a hell if there is one. But that's so loaded too that I really need to think about it for a year or two. Maybe that's my problem - that I dont feel like some people deserve it. Or most people. And I know that if my God exists that He loves all these people way more than I love them, and I'm ready to let them all in to heaven right now. I know i'm not God, and I don't understand, but I want to so very much. And I know, I'm not really responsible for anyone else in the whole of history except for myself (another wild thing to consider) and i cannot know anyone else's heart, but that kind of feels like selfishness on the other end of the spectrum. I can really only look into myself to know how shitty or not shitty the human person is, and while I am not Dahmer, I can tell you that in my life, I have made a few poor choices that I would consider to be "one hundred percent wrong".
So what does it mean? I say all the time "I keep my religion because it works for me; I understand if it doesn't work for you." I cant say if what you believe is right or wrong, or maybe I should have the balls (or is it something else?) to say that every time. Is it about tact, or cowardice? And is anything going to change?
This is hard, but i'm going to try and address it - see what others have to say about it, if anyone has written anything about it, come up with some kind of pathway to a solution. I say pathway because in the end, there is no right answer. That's another thing I need to remember. I can't prove a damn thing. I cant know for sure, ever in time, if I was right or I was wrong. That's what we mean when we say "faith". I dont want a God that says "Just trust Me." and I know that I dont have one, everyone has logic and a ton of questions that we keep on asking. We're made for a reason and we all work singularly and as a group just so. I want this to be as real as possible.
Early philosophy said that there can be no nothing, because the idea of nothing is something. Then some other people said wait a minute, what?? That's as far as I've gotten in my studying of philosophy, i'll let you know what happens next. In the meantime - if you read this, and you have something to teach me, please do so. I want to start a big dialogue. I'll try not to do it for selfish reasons.
Everybody dies. It's a fact that noone would try to deny you. We all know it. No single person can escape their own death (unless you count elijah, and i susupect not many of you will). If you really think about it, consider it........ it's fucking scary as hell. I am going to die. I dont know when, or how, but i am absolutely certain, it's gonna happen. Now does this make me complacent about other people who die (like, everybody does it, big deal if you do it now or not)? Of course not, which brings me to the next point.
I am a Christian. I know, if you know me, you're like, yeah, we know, but who cares, youre not a crazy one. Well maybe that's my bad, but that's not what i'm getting at. In accordance with my beliefs, anyone who is not a christian will die, and will go to hell. forever. FOREVER. If any of my 'beliefs' were true at all, wouldn't i be running out on the street right now, grabbing people and slapping them and saying "holy shit dude, you've gotta believe this????" That might not be the best tactic anyway, but it makes me know how strong my faith is, and it always makes me want to be doing more. And that's good. My "tactic" has always been to live a good, happy life as the best evidence that my life is indeed changed by the grace of God. I realize that lately (read: last few years) I have not always been the best display of that. But ANYWAY.
To try to wrap your head around forever, whether it be heaven or hell, or just falling out of existence for all of the rest of time - to put it eloquently - What The Fuck?? I could be kept up all night every night trying to understand eternity, no matter where it is. Maybe I should for awhile. But how do we say "it's okay, i'll worry about it later." all of the time?? I know i'm going to die, and i dont know what will happen after that, at all. This should be my first and last thought every day of my life, as well as all of the ones in between. Seriously, what the fuck?
In addition - how can I tell someone I love " You know those people who you loved that are dead now, those great people who changed your life forever - that word again - those people are in hell forever, and ever." Life breaks my heart, so I sit and deny it, dont believe it, and it's convenient to live this way. It's convenient to be unsure of your beliefs because then you dont have to act on them at all. On top of it, how can I tell a devout Buddhist, or Muslim, or anyone - "you're condemned to eternal hellfire unless you believe in Jesus the way I do." ? This has been my problem for awhile now, and it's why i haven't moved in any direction, except for a few inches down into the ground.
Now, i know, we're all bad people. Everyone is not inherently good, in fact they are the opposite, and everyone, including me, deserves a hell if there is one. But that's so loaded too that I really need to think about it for a year or two. Maybe that's my problem - that I dont feel like some people deserve it. Or most people. And I know that if my God exists that He loves all these people way more than I love them, and I'm ready to let them all in to heaven right now. I know i'm not God, and I don't understand, but I want to so very much. And I know, I'm not really responsible for anyone else in the whole of history except for myself (another wild thing to consider) and i cannot know anyone else's heart, but that kind of feels like selfishness on the other end of the spectrum. I can really only look into myself to know how shitty or not shitty the human person is, and while I am not Dahmer, I can tell you that in my life, I have made a few poor choices that I would consider to be "one hundred percent wrong".
So what does it mean? I say all the time "I keep my religion because it works for me; I understand if it doesn't work for you." I cant say if what you believe is right or wrong, or maybe I should have the balls (or is it something else?) to say that every time. Is it about tact, or cowardice? And is anything going to change?
This is hard, but i'm going to try and address it - see what others have to say about it, if anyone has written anything about it, come up with some kind of pathway to a solution. I say pathway because in the end, there is no right answer. That's another thing I need to remember. I can't prove a damn thing. I cant know for sure, ever in time, if I was right or I was wrong. That's what we mean when we say "faith". I dont want a God that says "Just trust Me." and I know that I dont have one, everyone has logic and a ton of questions that we keep on asking. We're made for a reason and we all work singularly and as a group just so. I want this to be as real as possible.
Early philosophy said that there can be no nothing, because the idea of nothing is something. Then some other people said wait a minute, what?? That's as far as I've gotten in my studying of philosophy, i'll let you know what happens next. In the meantime - if you read this, and you have something to teach me, please do so. I want to start a big dialogue. I'll try not to do it for selfish reasons.
7.6.08
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7440472.stm
wtf. Israel is crazy, but at least they would probably win.
wtf. Israel is crazy, but at least they would probably win.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
