Confessions
St. Augustine
Ch. 1
God seeks the truth.
Ch. 2
God sees all. Hiding something from Him is futile. Rather than hiding something from God one merely hides God from one's self.
Ch. 3
Why not confess solely to God rather than making it public? It can encourage others to hear of someone freed from past sins.
Ch. 4
Augustine hopes his confessions can be an example for others, to aspire to what he has achieved through God and to avoid what he failed in through himself.
Augustine asks God to continue the work He begun in him to completion.
Ch. 5
Hope comes from understanding that what we see now we see dimly and that we will see face-to-face one day.
Ch. 6
Augustine claims nothing made is God but that God made all. He knows this rationally by listening to the created universe. Their order proclaims that he who made the orderliness is God.
Ch. 7
One does not reach toward God through the senses, not even through the soul which uses the sense.
One reaches God through that which God gives.
Ch. 8
Augustine talks about the immense power of memory and what marvels it can do.
Ch. 9
Memory takes in things, other than sense perceptions, like learning.
Ch. 10
Augustine gives a defense of innate ideas by showing that he knew things prior and separate to the senses detecting them because they were already in his memory.
Ch. 11
Memories of learning need to be recalled often or they will slip back into the recesses of the mind from where they will have to be recalled again.
Ch. 12
Numbers as a concept are innate.
Ch. 13
The memory can also store things that are taught to it, even if the teaching is wrong.
Ch. 14
The mind is one thing, the body is another.
There are four basic emotions of the mind: desire, joy, fear and sadness.
These emotions of the mind are innate concepts.
Ch. 15
"I name memory and I know what I name. But where do I know it, except in the
memory itself? Is it also present to itself by its image, and not by itself?"
Ch. 16
Forgetfulness is a privation of the memory. It must be innate because if it were learned then recalling forgetfulness would cause the mind to forget and then where would the person be? In order to understand what it means to forget one must know forgetfulness. If forgetfulness is known only through experience then it would be unknowable. But, Augustine (and us) obviously know what forgetfulness is. Therefore, it must be innate.
Ch. 17
To reach God to where he can be reached Augustine must move beyond memory.
But if Augustine reaches God beyond memory, how will he remember that he reached Him?
Ch. 18
What is lost is retained in the mind. This is how we recognize that which we have lost.
Ch. 19
A lost thing that we have not remembered was missing cannot even be searched for. How would we know to look for something if we didn't know it was missing.
Ch. 20
Happiness is an innate concept.
A concept that is understood outside of language is something that is "held in the memory" for Augustine.
Ch. 21
There is no physical sense data that we perceive of a happy life in other persons.
The memory of joy is similar to happiness. All men seek it and find it in their own ways.
Ch. 22
"Forbid it, O Lord, put it far from the heart of thy servant, who confesses
to thee--far be it from me to think I am happy because of any and all the joy I have.
For there is a joy not granted to the wicked but only to those who worship thee
thankfully--and this joy thou thyself art. The happy life is this--to rejoice to thee, in
thee, and for thee. This it is and there is no other. But those who think there is
another follow after other joys, and not the true one. But their will is still not moved
except by some image or shadow of joy"
I quoted the whole chapter, but it's short, clearer and more to the point then my notes would have been.
Ch. 23
"A happy life is joy in the truth"
Even those who purposely deceive others do not wish to be deceived. They want the truth. They love the truth.
All men love the truth, those that don't seek it out though they love it and want it only don't do so because they are more enthralled with the physical which only leads to misery and not to happiness.
"Thus, thus, truly thus: the human mind so blind and sick, so base and illmannered, desires to lie hidden, but does not wish that anything should be hidden
from it. And yet the opposite is what happens--the mind itself is not hidden from the
truth, but the truth is hidden from it. Yet even so, for all its wretchedness, it still
prefers to rejoice in truth rather than in known falsehoods. It will, then, be happy
only when without other distractions it comes to rejoice in that single Truth through
which all things else are true"
Ch. 24
Augustine has found many innate things in his memory, but not God.
Ch. 25
God is immutable, yet he has decided to dwell in the minds of men. Augustine, now that he knows God, finds him in his memory but cannot find where it has come from.
Ch. 26
All hear from God, but not all hear clearly.
Better is the man who wills to hear what God is saying than he who hears what he wants to hear when God speaks.
Ch. 27
God was with Augustine when Augustine was not with God.
God chased away Augustine's blindness.
"Thou didst touch me, and I burned for thy peace".
Ch. 28
Augustine will have real life when he is wholly filled by God.
Augustine is sick; God is the doctor. Augustine needs mercy. God is merciful.
"In adversity, I desire prosperity; in prosperity, I fear adversity. What middle place is there then, between these two, where human life is not an ordeal?"
Ch. 29
Augustine's whole hope is in God alone.
"For he loves thee too little who loves along with thee anything else that he does not love for thy sake"
Ch. 30
It is by God that Augustine's diseases of the soul are healed.
Augustine is confident God will perfect Augustine, "when death is swallowed up in victory"
Ch. 31
Augustine prays for strength to overcome gluttony and to eat for health and not to excess.
This chapter makes Augustine really seem like he was prone to excesses and that he knew it. I think this might be a bit why I like Augustine. I understand this tendency. His words, though far superior to mine, reflect my thoughts and prayers on these types of subjects.
Ch. 32
"Our sole hope, our sole confidence, our only assured promise, is thy mercy"
Ch. 33
Augustine recommends a middle road with singing in church. The words of the Psalms must be cherished more than the melodies of which they are sung (in Augustine's time).
Augustine gives a tacit approval for church music because it allows the weaker minds attending church to find a place to come to God.
Ch. 34
Augustine prays that the beautiful things he sees, those things that God has made, do not possess his soul in the way he wants God to.
Augustine wants to rely on God rather than his sight.
Ch. 35
Curiosity and knowledge too can be a temptation like the senses if they become loved in a way that ought to be reserved for God.
Knowledge for the sake of knowing is not a good thing. Knowing something to praise God for it is good. But, a curious mind will slip into this temptation often and the only hope is in God's mercy.
Ch. 36
It was God who overcame Augustine's pride and placed the yoke upon him. Now under God's yoke he relates how light the burden is.
Men who take pleasure in being esteemed by other men or praised by other men are vain. Those who are praised are worse off if they don't accept that what is praiseworthy in them is a gift from God than those doing the praising that have not received that gift from God.
Ch. 37
Temptations are daily things for men.
To be liked and to avoid being admonished by other men is a natural thing to do. Again the only hope is in the mercy of God that this doesn't become so habitual that it interferes with the true life in God.
Ch. 38
Vanity is a constant struggle with pride. One must be on guard against both vigilantly.
Ch. 39
Envying another man's grace from God is something a proud man does, something a vain man does and is a sin.
Ch. 40
Truth instructs what to desire and what to avoid.
In all his searching Augustine notes, "I still do not find a secure place for my soul save in thee".
Ch. 41
Augustine had to give up all lies to attain God because the Truth cannot be joined to a lie"
Ch. 42
"But a mediator between God and
man ought to have something in him like God and something in him like man, lest
in being like man he should be far from God, or if only like God he should be far
from man, and so should not be a mediator.
The devil tries to play this mediator role if we would allow him, but the only thing he truly shares with man is sin and the wages of sin is death".
Ch. 43
The true mediator is Jesus Christ.
Jesus was mortal as men are mortal and righteous as God is righteous. The reward of righteousness is life and peace.
For us sinners God became both the victor and the victim, becoming the victor by being the victim.
The diseases of the soul are great, but the medicine of Christ is greater.
Showing posts with label Jesus. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Jesus. Show all posts
Monday, September 9, 2019
Saturday, September 7, 2019
Notes on Confessions Book VIII
Confessions
St. Augustine
Ch. 1
In order to fully embrace Christ Augustine's heart, "had to be purged of the old leaven".
Something held Augustine back. That something was temporal (the idea of marriage) and it left him at unease.
Ch. 2
Augustine visits Simplicianus, the mentor of Ambrose.
Simplicianus thanks God that Augustine had received philosophical instruction from the Platonists and not other philosophers. The Platonists' teachings lead to the path that leads to God.
Simplicianus relates the conversion of the Roman philosopher, Victorinus. This conversion had a powerful impact on Augustine.
Ch. 3
The Lord rejoices more in the repentance of the one than in the just of the ninety-nine who do not need repentance.
"The greater the peril of the battle, the more joy of the triumph".
Ch. 4
"For when many rejoice together the joy of each one is fuller, in that they warm one another, catch fire from each other; moreover, those who are well-known influence many toward salvation and take the lead with many to follow them".
Ch. 5
Victorinus gave up teaching when Emperor Julian made it illegal for Christians to teach literature or rhetoric. Augustine claimed that Victorinus was not so much brave in this act as he now had a reason for giving his full time to God.
"For out of the perverse will came lust, and the service of lust ended in habit, and habit, not resisted became necessity"
Habit became Augustine's enemy: "because I had willingly come to be what I unwillingly found myself to be"
"The law of sins is the tyranny of habit, by which the mind is drawn and held, even against its will"
Ch. 6
Augustine meets Ponticianus, who relates to him the life of St. Anthony and introduces Augustine to Monastic Christianity.
Ch. 7
The search for God and truth is worth more than all the kingdoms of this world.
Augustine still struggled to convert wholly for both love of earthly pleasures (though he knew by now that they eternal ones were far superior) and because he was fighting against habit.
Ch. 8
Augustine became frustrated that even through 10 years of striving he had not achieved the peace that less educated men and women had attained by following Christ.
The distance to God is not great. It is at hand. One only needs the will to go and be unwavering in that will.
Ch. 9
Augustine had two will fighting in him and could not fully commit because of it.
Ch. 10
Two wills does not mean a good will and an evil will. That is a false, Manichean doctrine.
When the goods of heaven attract man from above and the earthly goods pull from below then the man without a single will, will find himself in torment of the soul. His will is partial and incomplete and moved only by custom or habit.
Ch. 11
"I hesitated to die to death and live to life. And the worse way, to which I was habituated, was stronger in me than the better, which I had not tried.
Ch. 12
In his deepest sorrow Augustine read Romans 13:13. Alypius was with him and read further on through Romans 14:1. Both were converted fully in that moment and went and told Monica. She rejoiced in God's answering her prayers for Augustine's salvation
St. Augustine
Ch. 1
In order to fully embrace Christ Augustine's heart, "had to be purged of the old leaven".
Something held Augustine back. That something was temporal (the idea of marriage) and it left him at unease.
Ch. 2
Augustine visits Simplicianus, the mentor of Ambrose.
Simplicianus thanks God that Augustine had received philosophical instruction from the Platonists and not other philosophers. The Platonists' teachings lead to the path that leads to God.
Simplicianus relates the conversion of the Roman philosopher, Victorinus. This conversion had a powerful impact on Augustine.
Ch. 3
The Lord rejoices more in the repentance of the one than in the just of the ninety-nine who do not need repentance.
"The greater the peril of the battle, the more joy of the triumph".
Ch. 4
"For when many rejoice together the joy of each one is fuller, in that they warm one another, catch fire from each other; moreover, those who are well-known influence many toward salvation and take the lead with many to follow them".
Ch. 5
Victorinus gave up teaching when Emperor Julian made it illegal for Christians to teach literature or rhetoric. Augustine claimed that Victorinus was not so much brave in this act as he now had a reason for giving his full time to God.
"For out of the perverse will came lust, and the service of lust ended in habit, and habit, not resisted became necessity"
Habit became Augustine's enemy: "because I had willingly come to be what I unwillingly found myself to be"
"The law of sins is the tyranny of habit, by which the mind is drawn and held, even against its will"
Ch. 6
Augustine meets Ponticianus, who relates to him the life of St. Anthony and introduces Augustine to Monastic Christianity.
Ch. 7
The search for God and truth is worth more than all the kingdoms of this world.
Augustine still struggled to convert wholly for both love of earthly pleasures (though he knew by now that they eternal ones were far superior) and because he was fighting against habit.
Ch. 8
Augustine became frustrated that even through 10 years of striving he had not achieved the peace that less educated men and women had attained by following Christ.
The distance to God is not great. It is at hand. One only needs the will to go and be unwavering in that will.
Ch. 9
Augustine had two will fighting in him and could not fully commit because of it.
Ch. 10
Two wills does not mean a good will and an evil will. That is a false, Manichean doctrine.
When the goods of heaven attract man from above and the earthly goods pull from below then the man without a single will, will find himself in torment of the soul. His will is partial and incomplete and moved only by custom or habit.
Ch. 11
"I hesitated to die to death and live to life. And the worse way, to which I was habituated, was stronger in me than the better, which I had not tried.
Ch. 12
In his deepest sorrow Augustine read Romans 13:13. Alypius was with him and read further on through Romans 14:1. Both were converted fully in that moment and went and told Monica. She rejoiced in God's answering her prayers for Augustine's salvation
Wednesday, September 4, 2019
Notes on Confessions Book VII
Confessions
St. Augustine
Book Seven
Ch. 1
Augustine struggles to move from a materialistic view of the world to get to a perfect God.
Ch. 2
Augustine struggles with how to understand the Incarnation with an adherence to materialism. It can't be done though because it would inevitably limit God to some extent, which is impossible.
Ch. 3
Augustine struggles with the problem of Evil. If God made the angels and an angel can fall to become the devil then is God the author of evil? No, that is self-evidently false.
Ch. 4
Augustine is convinced that God is incorruptible. He comes to this by a sort of ontological argument. Thus, from God's incorruptible nature he defines evil as a corruption of nature.
Ch. 5
Augustine still struggles with the problem of evil but the faith of Jesus Christ at the heart of Catholic Christianity began to take root in his heart.
Ch. 6
Augustine argues against astrology and reduces it from an art to a mere game of chance.
Ch. 7
Pride separated Augustine from God.
Ch. 8
The Lord is compassionate and heals the broken man.
Ch. 9
Augustine studied the Platonists and while he found wisdom in them he didn't find the gospel message, the Truth.
Ch. 10
Augustine came to the Truth about God's being through a mystical experience. Augustine asked a question, what is truth? God answered, "I AM" and Augustine understood that God is Truth and Truth is real.
Ch. 11
All things not God are both real and unreal. They are real insofar as they are created God. They are unreal insofar as they are not God.
Ch. 12
All things, insofar as they exist are good. They cannot be all-evil because then they would not exist. Evil then is a corruption resulting in the privation of a good in something.
Ch. 13
Augustine states it is above our station to critique the things that exist because while we can pray that our surroundings be better the very fact of having surroundings at all should move us to thank God.
Ch. 14
"There is no health in those who find fault with any part of thy creation". That's a strong statement, but one that bears true.
Once Augustine stopped critiquing creation he became contented in it and no longer struggled with these material distractions.
Ch. 15
God exists outside of time.
Ch. 16
"And I asked what wickedness was, and I found that it was no substance, but a perversion of the will bent aside from thee, O God, the supreme substance, toward these lower things, casting away its inmost treasure and becoming bloated with external good"
Ch. 17
Augustine struggled with having mentally arrived at the truth and now bending his will to it.
Ch. 18
It took the mediation of Christ to truly connect Augustine to God. Try as he could, he could not reach God through mental activity.
One must forsake pride, lowering it, so that love may be heightened in order for one to throw one's self upon God and be lifted up.
Ch. 19
Augustine struggled then with Christological heresies. He and Alypius each embraced opposite ends of the nature of Christ that were heretical, focusing too much on either the human nature or the divine nature in Jesus before both finally being converted to the Catholic faith.
Ch. 20
Augustine followed the Platonists in searching for the incorporeal Truth. It led him to note that the invisible things of God were made visible to him by Creation.
The Platonists sort of primed the pump for Augustine to study Scripture.
Ch. 21
Augustine found he now enjoyed the Scriptures, especially the writings of Paul.
In reading Paul he found the truth he read in the Platonists had been elevated with the exaltation of God's Grace.
Augustine seems to have held the Platonists as being on the right track but insufficient because of their lack of Christ.
St. Augustine
Book Seven
Ch. 1
Augustine struggles to move from a materialistic view of the world to get to a perfect God.
Ch. 2
Augustine struggles with how to understand the Incarnation with an adherence to materialism. It can't be done though because it would inevitably limit God to some extent, which is impossible.
Ch. 3
Augustine struggles with the problem of Evil. If God made the angels and an angel can fall to become the devil then is God the author of evil? No, that is self-evidently false.
Ch. 4
Augustine is convinced that God is incorruptible. He comes to this by a sort of ontological argument. Thus, from God's incorruptible nature he defines evil as a corruption of nature.
Ch. 5
Augustine still struggles with the problem of evil but the faith of Jesus Christ at the heart of Catholic Christianity began to take root in his heart.
Ch. 6
Augustine argues against astrology and reduces it from an art to a mere game of chance.
Ch. 7
Pride separated Augustine from God.
Ch. 8
The Lord is compassionate and heals the broken man.
Ch. 9
Augustine studied the Platonists and while he found wisdom in them he didn't find the gospel message, the Truth.
Ch. 10
Augustine came to the Truth about God's being through a mystical experience. Augustine asked a question, what is truth? God answered, "I AM" and Augustine understood that God is Truth and Truth is real.
Ch. 11
All things not God are both real and unreal. They are real insofar as they are created God. They are unreal insofar as they are not God.
Ch. 12
All things, insofar as they exist are good. They cannot be all-evil because then they would not exist. Evil then is a corruption resulting in the privation of a good in something.
Ch. 13
Augustine states it is above our station to critique the things that exist because while we can pray that our surroundings be better the very fact of having surroundings at all should move us to thank God.
Ch. 14
"There is no health in those who find fault with any part of thy creation". That's a strong statement, but one that bears true.
Once Augustine stopped critiquing creation he became contented in it and no longer struggled with these material distractions.
Ch. 15
God exists outside of time.
Ch. 16
"And I asked what wickedness was, and I found that it was no substance, but a perversion of the will bent aside from thee, O God, the supreme substance, toward these lower things, casting away its inmost treasure and becoming bloated with external good"
Ch. 17
Augustine struggled with having mentally arrived at the truth and now bending his will to it.
Ch. 18
It took the mediation of Christ to truly connect Augustine to God. Try as he could, he could not reach God through mental activity.
One must forsake pride, lowering it, so that love may be heightened in order for one to throw one's self upon God and be lifted up.
Ch. 19
Augustine struggled then with Christological heresies. He and Alypius each embraced opposite ends of the nature of Christ that were heretical, focusing too much on either the human nature or the divine nature in Jesus before both finally being converted to the Catholic faith.
Ch. 20
Augustine followed the Platonists in searching for the incorporeal Truth. It led him to note that the invisible things of God were made visible to him by Creation.
The Platonists sort of primed the pump for Augustine to study Scripture.
Ch. 21
Augustine found he now enjoyed the Scriptures, especially the writings of Paul.
In reading Paul he found the truth he read in the Platonists had been elevated with the exaltation of God's Grace.
Augustine seems to have held the Platonists as being on the right track but insufficient because of their lack of Christ.
Tuesday, September 3, 2019
Notes on Confessions Book VI
Confessions
St. Augustine
Book VI
Ch.1
Augustine's mother, Monica, is portrayed as a devout Christian, unsurprised by God answering her prayers yet still devoted to praying for the final salvation of her son.
Ch. 2
Again Monica is shown to be a devout Christian, giving up a custom that involved her venerating the saints (as she had learned in North Africa). She gave it up because Ambrose had forbidden it, for fear it would lead other, living saints into sin (drunkenness) and that it appeared to close to other pagan traditions.
Ch. 3
Augustine learns that some of his mistrust of Christian theology stemmed from his own misconceptions of what Christian's believed, not the true faith in Christ.
Ch. 4
Ambrose preached the spirit of Christianity, invoking 2 Corinthians 3:6, "The letter kills, but the spirit gives live".
Augustine uses an analogy of a bad and good physician to illuminate the status of his soul at this post-Manichean, pre-Catholic experience: It was as if having been to a bad physician (Manichean teaching) he was afraid of the cure (faith) lest he believe again in error. Thus, having had the experience of the bad physician he was hesitant to place his fate in the hands of a good physician (Christianity) and thus, refusing to accept the cure (faith in Jesus).
Ch. 5
Augustine gradually accepted the Catholic faith, choosing to listen more to the pious believers who felt assured of things rather than the faithless who asked blasphemous questions for the sake of being blasphemous.
At this point Augustine begins his transformation and changes his view on the Holy Scriptures he once reviled. "Thus, since we are too weak by unaided reason to find out truth, and since, because of this, we need the authority of the Holy Writings, I had now begun to believe that thou wouldst not, under any circumstances, have given such eminent authority to those Scriptures throughout all lands if it had not been that through them thy will may be believed in and that thou mightest be sought"
Ch. 6
Augustine thanks God for not letting anything but God himself grow sweet in Augustine's acquisitions. Thus, he was forced to continue pursuing God.
Augustine relates an experience he had with a beggar. The beggar was happy, probably because he was full and drunk. Augustine at the moment of seeing him was miserable, wracked with struggles. He notes though, if one were to ask him whether he would prefer to be happy or miserable he would choose to be happy. Yet, if one were to ask him whether he would prefer to be himself or the beggar he would choose to be himself. Of course, he notes, that the drunkard would sober up and no longer be happy, but he had attained the momentary happiness by begging and in all of Augustine's struggles he had not achieved happiness. Was all his searching in vain? Was all his searching done from a standpoint of vanity?
Ch. 7
God uses the things we do both wittingly and unwittingly towards his ends.
Ch. 8
This chapter deals with how Alypius, a younger friend/contemporary of Augustine's became obsessed with the Gladiatorial games. It's a good section to look at on how one can slip into sin or even into addiction.
Ch. 9
This chapter deals with how Alypius was falsely accused of theft and how God brought about him being proven innocent with no witnesses.
Ch. 10
Alypius and Nebridius joined Augustine in Milan and all three sought the truth but were miserable because they sought it apart from God. They sought the beauty and truth of the created things not the creator.
Ch. 11
If life perished with the body then God would not have gone to such extremes to save the souls of men.
Ch. 12
Augustine argues with Alypius stating that he doesn't want to be celibate. Even though Alypius was correct, the lust in Augustine was too strong to be denounced and abandoned. He wanted to be married to satisfy his lust and give his lust a presentable veneer.
Ch. 13
Monica agreed that Augustine should be married but she didn't get the same conviction from God about it as she had received regarding her son's eventual conversion. She offered motherly advice but nothing forceful or strong, stating, "For she always said that she could distinguish, by a certain feeling impossible to describe, between thy revelation and the dreams of her own soul.
Ch. 14
Augustine tried to get his buddies up to about a group of ten to form a commune to study and learn the truth. This never made it past the planning stages.
Ch. 15
Augustine loses his mistress and mother of his child to prepare for a marriage. It grieved him and he soon took another mistress to satiate his lust.
Ch. 16
"Woe to the audacious soul which hoped that by forsaking thee it would find some better thing!"
St. Augustine
Book VI
Ch.1
Augustine's mother, Monica, is portrayed as a devout Christian, unsurprised by God answering her prayers yet still devoted to praying for the final salvation of her son.
Ch. 2
Again Monica is shown to be a devout Christian, giving up a custom that involved her venerating the saints (as she had learned in North Africa). She gave it up because Ambrose had forbidden it, for fear it would lead other, living saints into sin (drunkenness) and that it appeared to close to other pagan traditions.
Ch. 3
Augustine learns that some of his mistrust of Christian theology stemmed from his own misconceptions of what Christian's believed, not the true faith in Christ.
Ch. 4
Ambrose preached the spirit of Christianity, invoking 2 Corinthians 3:6, "The letter kills, but the spirit gives live".
Augustine uses an analogy of a bad and good physician to illuminate the status of his soul at this post-Manichean, pre-Catholic experience: It was as if having been to a bad physician (Manichean teaching) he was afraid of the cure (faith) lest he believe again in error. Thus, having had the experience of the bad physician he was hesitant to place his fate in the hands of a good physician (Christianity) and thus, refusing to accept the cure (faith in Jesus).
Ch. 5
Augustine gradually accepted the Catholic faith, choosing to listen more to the pious believers who felt assured of things rather than the faithless who asked blasphemous questions for the sake of being blasphemous.
At this point Augustine begins his transformation and changes his view on the Holy Scriptures he once reviled. "Thus, since we are too weak by unaided reason to find out truth, and since, because of this, we need the authority of the Holy Writings, I had now begun to believe that thou wouldst not, under any circumstances, have given such eminent authority to those Scriptures throughout all lands if it had not been that through them thy will may be believed in and that thou mightest be sought"
Ch. 6
Augustine thanks God for not letting anything but God himself grow sweet in Augustine's acquisitions. Thus, he was forced to continue pursuing God.
Augustine relates an experience he had with a beggar. The beggar was happy, probably because he was full and drunk. Augustine at the moment of seeing him was miserable, wracked with struggles. He notes though, if one were to ask him whether he would prefer to be happy or miserable he would choose to be happy. Yet, if one were to ask him whether he would prefer to be himself or the beggar he would choose to be himself. Of course, he notes, that the drunkard would sober up and no longer be happy, but he had attained the momentary happiness by begging and in all of Augustine's struggles he had not achieved happiness. Was all his searching in vain? Was all his searching done from a standpoint of vanity?
Ch. 7
God uses the things we do both wittingly and unwittingly towards his ends.
Ch. 8
This chapter deals with how Alypius, a younger friend/contemporary of Augustine's became obsessed with the Gladiatorial games. It's a good section to look at on how one can slip into sin or even into addiction.
Ch. 9
This chapter deals with how Alypius was falsely accused of theft and how God brought about him being proven innocent with no witnesses.
Ch. 10
Alypius and Nebridius joined Augustine in Milan and all three sought the truth but were miserable because they sought it apart from God. They sought the beauty and truth of the created things not the creator.
Ch. 11
If life perished with the body then God would not have gone to such extremes to save the souls of men.
Ch. 12
Augustine argues with Alypius stating that he doesn't want to be celibate. Even though Alypius was correct, the lust in Augustine was too strong to be denounced and abandoned. He wanted to be married to satisfy his lust and give his lust a presentable veneer.
Ch. 13
Monica agreed that Augustine should be married but she didn't get the same conviction from God about it as she had received regarding her son's eventual conversion. She offered motherly advice but nothing forceful or strong, stating, "For she always said that she could distinguish, by a certain feeling impossible to describe, between thy revelation and the dreams of her own soul.
Ch. 14
Augustine tried to get his buddies up to about a group of ten to form a commune to study and learn the truth. This never made it past the planning stages.
Ch. 15
Augustine loses his mistress and mother of his child to prepare for a marriage. It grieved him and he soon took another mistress to satiate his lust.
Ch. 16
"Woe to the audacious soul which hoped that by forsaking thee it would find some better thing!"
Notes on Confessions Book V
Confessions
St. Augustine
Book V
Ch. 1
The Lord sees into all hearts, even the hard and closed ones. He will soften and heal those hearts according to His will.
Ch. 2
The wicked flee God's gentleness to collide with His justice.
"Thou art near even to those who go farthest from thee"
"Thou art the Lord, who canst remake what thou didst make and can comfort them"
Ch. 3
Religious men ask, "what is the source of the intelligence by which they investigate?" The prideful discover many true things about creation without learning the Truth of the Creator.
Ch. 4
God isn't pleased by the man who knows a lot but doesn't know Him.
Ch. 5
Augustine attacks Mani for presuming to teach what he does not know. He condemns Mani for impersonating the Holy Spirit falsely.
Ch. 6
An eloquence, when unfettered from truth, is like a gaudy chalice with a drink that doesn't quench the thirst.
Ch. 7
Augustine's interaction with the Manichean Bishop, Faustus, and Faustus' inability to help Augustine understand why Manicheism was preferable to other belief systems served as the final breaking point between Augustine and Manicheism.
Ch. 8
Augustine leaves Carthage and heads for Rome.
Augustine points out that his mother's prayers were not answered in the way she hoped for (he still left Carthage for Rome). God did not let her temporary request undermine His work and end goal for Augustine.
Ch. 9
The fetter of original sin is that we all die in Adam. But we can be forgiven in Christ.
Ch. 10
Sin was all the more uncurable because Augustine would not confess it.
Augustine even rejected the true faith because of his dualistic leanings. That dualism caused him many numerous problems.
Ch. 11
The dualism and belief in a great evil that makes God finite allowed him to twist and to fall prey to twisted theology.
Ch. 12
Rome did not turn out to be the paradise that Augustine had hoped for.
Ch. 13
Augustine goes to Milan and meets Ambrose. He is attracted to Ambrose because of his nature, even if Augustine was unwilling as of yet to hear Ambrose's message.
Ch. 14
Ambrose's teachings slowly changed Augustine.
Augustine joined the Catholic faith because the philosophers, in all their wisdom, could not offer the cure, they had not the salvation of Christ.
St. Augustine
Book V
Ch. 1
The Lord sees into all hearts, even the hard and closed ones. He will soften and heal those hearts according to His will.
Ch. 2
The wicked flee God's gentleness to collide with His justice.
"Thou art near even to those who go farthest from thee"
"Thou art the Lord, who canst remake what thou didst make and can comfort them"
Ch. 3
Religious men ask, "what is the source of the intelligence by which they investigate?" The prideful discover many true things about creation without learning the Truth of the Creator.
Ch. 4
God isn't pleased by the man who knows a lot but doesn't know Him.
Ch. 5
Augustine attacks Mani for presuming to teach what he does not know. He condemns Mani for impersonating the Holy Spirit falsely.
Ch. 6
An eloquence, when unfettered from truth, is like a gaudy chalice with a drink that doesn't quench the thirst.
Ch. 7
Augustine's interaction with the Manichean Bishop, Faustus, and Faustus' inability to help Augustine understand why Manicheism was preferable to other belief systems served as the final breaking point between Augustine and Manicheism.
Ch. 8
Augustine leaves Carthage and heads for Rome.
Augustine points out that his mother's prayers were not answered in the way she hoped for (he still left Carthage for Rome). God did not let her temporary request undermine His work and end goal for Augustine.
Ch. 9
The fetter of original sin is that we all die in Adam. But we can be forgiven in Christ.
Ch. 10
Sin was all the more uncurable because Augustine would not confess it.
Augustine even rejected the true faith because of his dualistic leanings. That dualism caused him many numerous problems.
Ch. 11
The dualism and belief in a great evil that makes God finite allowed him to twist and to fall prey to twisted theology.
Ch. 12
Rome did not turn out to be the paradise that Augustine had hoped for.
Ch. 13
Augustine goes to Milan and meets Ambrose. He is attracted to Ambrose because of his nature, even if Augustine was unwilling as of yet to hear Ambrose's message.
Ch. 14
Ambrose's teachings slowly changed Augustine.
Augustine joined the Catholic faith because the philosophers, in all their wisdom, could not offer the cure, they had not the salvation of Christ.
Sunday, June 30, 2019
Norse Mythology - Gaiman
From Goodreads
Norse Mythology
Neil Gaiman
Combining Gaiman and Norse Mythology into an incredibly digestible history is like combining chocolate and peanut butter. It's just enhanced by the other.
The Norse myths are fascinating and just different enough to grab your attention. Loki is the obvious choice of the most interesting god, but there are great characters everywhere. Utgarda-Loki, THiazi and his daughter, Baldur and the master builder are fascinating characters in their own right.
I don't want to see things in ancient tales that aren't there, but it's hard not to see similarities that seem so universal that point my head into directions that are probably erroneous and definitely heretical. Apples, why are there always apples? Mass catastrophe with only two survivors left to repopulate the world always seem to come up. Ragnarok is an odd eschatological view, but Baldur plays a bit of a Christlike role and comes back to life at the end of time. The death and the resurrection of a god brings about a rebirth that has a familiarity to it. My question at this juncture is whether Baldur takes on a Christlike flavor because of my personal vantage point, because there is something foundational about the god who dies and his resurrection causing renewal to the religious experience of humanity or because the later writers have woven, consciously or not, Christian motifs into Pagan mythology? The similarities between all of humanity's myths and their variations of each other have always fascinated me.
Norse Mythology
Neil Gaiman
Combining Gaiman and Norse Mythology into an incredibly digestible history is like combining chocolate and peanut butter. It's just enhanced by the other.
The Norse myths are fascinating and just different enough to grab your attention. Loki is the obvious choice of the most interesting god, but there are great characters everywhere. Utgarda-Loki, THiazi and his daughter, Baldur and the master builder are fascinating characters in their own right.
I don't want to see things in ancient tales that aren't there, but it's hard not to see similarities that seem so universal that point my head into directions that are probably erroneous and definitely heretical. Apples, why are there always apples? Mass catastrophe with only two survivors left to repopulate the world always seem to come up. Ragnarok is an odd eschatological view, but Baldur plays a bit of a Christlike role and comes back to life at the end of time. The death and the resurrection of a god brings about a rebirth that has a familiarity to it. My question at this juncture is whether Baldur takes on a Christlike flavor because of my personal vantage point, because there is something foundational about the god who dies and his resurrection causing renewal to the religious experience of humanity or because the later writers have woven, consciously or not, Christian motifs into Pagan mythology? The similarities between all of humanity's myths and their variations of each other have always fascinated me.
Friday, September 29, 2017
Two verses from Acts 3
I've been rather neglectful of a number of things in my life recently. I've been intellectually, spiritually, physically and creatively lazy over the past few months. This is nothing new - and it tends to coincide with dips in form in my struggles. This in turn creates tension in my marriage, putting more pressure on my inability to overcome my baser desires and intentional forgetfulness. That in turn, makes me a bit depressed and I turn to my well worn stress relievers putting more tension on my marriage and the carousel continues to spin faster and faster, sucking me in deeper and deeper to the middle and everything seems to get worse and worse. And so on and so on. But, if I push through and am not intellectually, physically, creatively or most importantly, spiritually lazy than none of this happens. Mistakes are still made, but these are incidents rather than cycles.
I often work in platitudes or hastily announced, unachievable goals. This drives my wife insane and sets me up for failure. I'm trying not to do this again. I've ran or worked out the last three days, finished another book (40 of my 60 goal this year) and read some from Acts last night. I'm hoping to just make incremental progress this week and work on creating a more virtuous circle rather than getting sucked into the aforementioned negative merry-go-round. But - as you can see, that last sentence is rather close to a hastily announced, unachievable goal. Is it my own personal jargon? Who am I announcing these platitudes towards? I think I'm only saying them to ease my own unrest. But, I digress.
I read the first three chapters of Acts last night after finishing The Symposium by Plato and reading 20 pages of Ulysses by Joyce. It took me nearly a month to finish the Plato piece (which marks my intellectual laziness as of late). It will take me longer to finish Joyce (which is because it's a gargantuan 700 plus pages and difficult to read). But, two verses stood out to me from Acts 3.
Acts 3:16
"It is Jesus' name and the faith that comes through him that has given this complete healing to him".
I'm not sure that I'm ready or willing to call my self-inflicted frustrations a disease. It's more of an issue of will. But, there is definitely some healing that needs to take place in me. Whether it is biological or spiritual in nature is a question of semantics. There is something broken inside of me. And it struck me that my spiritual laziness is leading me to reject complete healing. What also struck me about this verse is that faith comes through Jesus. In order for man to have faith it must come through Jesus. It isn't a strength of a man reaching out to Jesus, but rather Jesus preceding the faith that the man can have. So I prayed for that faith that comes only through Jesus last night and I echo that prayer again today.
Acts 3:26
"When God raised up His servant, He sent him first to bless you by turning each of you from your wicked ways".
My struggles are my struggles. They have impacted my social life, my career life, my physical life to an extent, my spiritual life and my love life. To be blunt, they have sucked. Yet, I derive a weird pleasure while going through them. I know it's wrong but I do it anyway for the moments of escape they provide. However, this verse jumped out at me because I never thought of getting out of these struggles as a blessing. I just figured when I grew out of this struggle that I could return to a sort of base line normalcy. I now see it - when I am turned by Jesus from my wicked way, I won't be returning to some base line normalcy, but an elevated state of being blessed.
I often work in platitudes or hastily announced, unachievable goals. This drives my wife insane and sets me up for failure. I'm trying not to do this again. I've ran or worked out the last three days, finished another book (40 of my 60 goal this year) and read some from Acts last night. I'm hoping to just make incremental progress this week and work on creating a more virtuous circle rather than getting sucked into the aforementioned negative merry-go-round. But - as you can see, that last sentence is rather close to a hastily announced, unachievable goal. Is it my own personal jargon? Who am I announcing these platitudes towards? I think I'm only saying them to ease my own unrest. But, I digress.
I read the first three chapters of Acts last night after finishing The Symposium by Plato and reading 20 pages of Ulysses by Joyce. It took me nearly a month to finish the Plato piece (which marks my intellectual laziness as of late). It will take me longer to finish Joyce (which is because it's a gargantuan 700 plus pages and difficult to read). But, two verses stood out to me from Acts 3.
Acts 3:16
"It is Jesus' name and the faith that comes through him that has given this complete healing to him".
I'm not sure that I'm ready or willing to call my self-inflicted frustrations a disease. It's more of an issue of will. But, there is definitely some healing that needs to take place in me. Whether it is biological or spiritual in nature is a question of semantics. There is something broken inside of me. And it struck me that my spiritual laziness is leading me to reject complete healing. What also struck me about this verse is that faith comes through Jesus. In order for man to have faith it must come through Jesus. It isn't a strength of a man reaching out to Jesus, but rather Jesus preceding the faith that the man can have. So I prayed for that faith that comes only through Jesus last night and I echo that prayer again today.
Acts 3:26
"When God raised up His servant, He sent him first to bless you by turning each of you from your wicked ways".
My struggles are my struggles. They have impacted my social life, my career life, my physical life to an extent, my spiritual life and my love life. To be blunt, they have sucked. Yet, I derive a weird pleasure while going through them. I know it's wrong but I do it anyway for the moments of escape they provide. However, this verse jumped out at me because I never thought of getting out of these struggles as a blessing. I just figured when I grew out of this struggle that I could return to a sort of base line normalcy. I now see it - when I am turned by Jesus from my wicked way, I won't be returning to some base line normalcy, but an elevated state of being blessed.
Wednesday, June 28, 2017
The Screwtape Letters
I just finished The Screwtape Letters by C.S. Lewis for the first time as an adult. This is what I wrote in my Goodreads blurb: "Lewis is a wonderful read anytime of the day. That he can pack so much sound theology, care for his fellow man and relevant Biblical principles into a satire from a demon's point of view shows what a gifted writer he was. I think I read this when I was a child the last time (pre-high school). At that point I hadn't been faced with or succumbed to so many temptations. Now in my early 30s I understand the temptations and barbs out there. As a Christian it's easy enough not to commit most of the "big" ones; but, the more nuanced temptations to despair, or self-righteousness or "Christianity and ___" have often overcome me. This book came along to me at a fairly low time in both my spiritual and temporal life. It's not a fix all of course; but, it was a pick me up, slap me around and point me back in the right direction. Hopefully I'll be smart enough to keep heading in that way".
Some of the best parts of the book are the more nuanced sins we as humans can fall to. It's eye opening to say the least. In letter XXV Screwtape writes "The real trouble about the set your patient is living is that it is merely Christian...What we want, if men become Christians at all, is to keep them in the state of mind I call 'Christianity and'. You know - Christianity and the Crisis, Christianity and the New Psychology, Christianity and the New Order, Christianity and Faith Healing, Christianity and Psychical Research, Christianity and Vegetarianism, Christianity and Spelling Reform. If they must be Christians let them at least be Christians with a difference. Substitute for the faith itself some Fashion with a Christian colouring. Work on their horror of the Same Old Thing" (Lewis, 117).
There are two major things packed into here. First, it's a very pertinent thing to current events (and current events throughout the history of politics). Every election cycle we get to the point that I wonder if Christianity has been turned into the sub-category of some cause to be elected. Without beating a dead horse the farcical speech that President Trump gave at Liberty University is case-in-point of when Christianity has been used as a means and not the end itself. President Trump has been the punching bag from every political side. I'm not going to continue that trend. The only difference between Trump and most other modern politicians is how blatantly he donned Christianity for political purposes. Second, there is the horror of the Same Old Thing.
Throughout the book Screwtape instructs Wormwood to instill the fear of the Same Old Thing. This hits me more on a personal level than a theological one. I struggle heavily with this fear. I get easily bored and that's when I do stupid things. I fear the monotony of daily life. This leads into the next and final passage I'll share here. "But, if only he can be kept alive, you have time itself for your ally. The long, dull monotonous years of middle-aged prosperity or middle-aged adversity are excellent campaigning weather. You see, it is so hard for these creates to persevere" (Lewis, 130). How true that is! "The routine of adversity, the gradual decay of youthful loves and youthful hope, the quest despair (hardly felt as pain) of ever overcoming the chronic temptations with which we create in their lives and the inarticulate resentment with which we teach them to respond to it - all this provides admirable opportunities of wearing out a soul by attrition" (Lewis, 130). I am certainly neither as eloquent nor as learned as Lewis. I'll add nothing to this other than to hold my hand up and say, I know this feeling. But even in this season of self-inflicted trouble, or especially because of it, I am trying not to hit despair. Therefore, I won't end on that note. I'll end on a hope to persevere.
Hebrews 12:1-3
"Therefore, since we are surrounded by such a great cloud of witnesses, let us throw off everything that hinders and the sin that so easily entangles. And let us run with perseverance the race marked out for us, fixing our eyes on Jesus, the pioneer and perfecter of faith. For the joy set before him he endured the cross, scorning its shame, and sat down at the right hand of the throne of God. Consider him who endured such opposition from sinners, so that you will not grow weary and lose heart".
This is my prayer today. I am surrounded by a great cloud of witnesses. Lord, help me to throw off that which hinders me and the sin that has already entangled me. Give me the clarity to run the race and helped me to fix my eyes on Jesus. Let me consider Him so that I am no longer weary and my heart can be made anew.
Some of the best parts of the book are the more nuanced sins we as humans can fall to. It's eye opening to say the least. In letter XXV Screwtape writes "The real trouble about the set your patient is living is that it is merely Christian...What we want, if men become Christians at all, is to keep them in the state of mind I call 'Christianity and'. You know - Christianity and the Crisis, Christianity and the New Psychology, Christianity and the New Order, Christianity and Faith Healing, Christianity and Psychical Research, Christianity and Vegetarianism, Christianity and Spelling Reform. If they must be Christians let them at least be Christians with a difference. Substitute for the faith itself some Fashion with a Christian colouring. Work on their horror of the Same Old Thing" (Lewis, 117).
There are two major things packed into here. First, it's a very pertinent thing to current events (and current events throughout the history of politics). Every election cycle we get to the point that I wonder if Christianity has been turned into the sub-category of some cause to be elected. Without beating a dead horse the farcical speech that President Trump gave at Liberty University is case-in-point of when Christianity has been used as a means and not the end itself. President Trump has been the punching bag from every political side. I'm not going to continue that trend. The only difference between Trump and most other modern politicians is how blatantly he donned Christianity for political purposes. Second, there is the horror of the Same Old Thing.
Throughout the book Screwtape instructs Wormwood to instill the fear of the Same Old Thing. This hits me more on a personal level than a theological one. I struggle heavily with this fear. I get easily bored and that's when I do stupid things. I fear the monotony of daily life. This leads into the next and final passage I'll share here. "But, if only he can be kept alive, you have time itself for your ally. The long, dull monotonous years of middle-aged prosperity or middle-aged adversity are excellent campaigning weather. You see, it is so hard for these creates to persevere" (Lewis, 130). How true that is! "The routine of adversity, the gradual decay of youthful loves and youthful hope, the quest despair (hardly felt as pain) of ever overcoming the chronic temptations with which we create in their lives and the inarticulate resentment with which we teach them to respond to it - all this provides admirable opportunities of wearing out a soul by attrition" (Lewis, 130). I am certainly neither as eloquent nor as learned as Lewis. I'll add nothing to this other than to hold my hand up and say, I know this feeling. But even in this season of self-inflicted trouble, or especially because of it, I am trying not to hit despair. Therefore, I won't end on that note. I'll end on a hope to persevere.
Hebrews 12:1-3
"Therefore, since we are surrounded by such a great cloud of witnesses, let us throw off everything that hinders and the sin that so easily entangles. And let us run with perseverance the race marked out for us, fixing our eyes on Jesus, the pioneer and perfecter of faith. For the joy set before him he endured the cross, scorning its shame, and sat down at the right hand of the throne of God. Consider him who endured such opposition from sinners, so that you will not grow weary and lose heart".
This is my prayer today. I am surrounded by a great cloud of witnesses. Lord, help me to throw off that which hinders me and the sin that has already entangled me. Give me the clarity to run the race and helped me to fix my eyes on Jesus. Let me consider Him so that I am no longer weary and my heart can be made anew.
Sunday, March 5, 2017
Jesus' teachings as political policy
"The second thing to get clear is that Christianity has not, and does not profess to have, a detailed political programme for applying 'Do as you would be done by' to a particular society at a particular moment. It could not have. It is meant for all men at all times and the particular programme which suited one place or time would not suit another. And, anyhow, that is not how Christianity works. When it tells you to feed the hungry it does not give you lessons in cookery. When it tells you to read the Scriptures it does not give you lessons in Hebrew and Greek, or even in English grammar. It was never intended to replace or supersede the ordinary human arts and science: it is rather a director which will set them all to the right jobs, and a source of energy which will give them all new life, if only they will put themselves at its disposal" (Lewis, Mere Christianity).
I think in the course of this blog it is becoming clear that I am somewhat disgusted by the politicization of Christianity in the current state of affairs in the US. We have a leader, who uses Christianity as a way of garnering votes and favor. That is nothing new or even worse than others have done in the past. His reading of Two Corinthians only showed that he is less comfortable with using the language of Christians to win political favor with them than past politicians. What is worse and a more dangerous situation are the Christian politicization of their faiths. When you try to shoehorn your faith to fit in a box, be it socialism, liberalism, conservatism, libertarianism, etc., you are trying to put in a relationship with the infinite into a finite container. It's just not going to work. You're going to have to peel off a bit here, trim off a bit there to make it work. It isn't even like putting a square peg into a round hole - it's like trying to put the thing with the holes into the square peg. It just doesn't work and the results are divisive inside the Church.
The divisiveness in American politics has seeped into the American conscious so ravenously we can't have polite conversations about anything meaningful. That's sad. It's bad for the country as a whole because it's going to stagnate the country and most of its population. Divisiveness in the Church is far worse. It's going directly against Scripture:
1 Corinthians 1:10: "I appeal to you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree with one another so that there may be no divisions among you and that you may be perfectly united in mind and thought"
Romans 12:16 "Live in harmony with one another"
Galatians 5:26 "Let us not become boastful, challenging one another, envying one another"
I'm not saying that there won't be political disagreements between Christians. There will be because each side has elements that mesh with our Christian faith. Each side has things that are not exactly lined up with Christianity. Furthermore, the art of government has things that must be done that have absolutely nothing to do with our faith in God. Agree with one another on the things of God and the other stuff won't matter. The side that wins in an election should not be boastful. Don't challenge one another on everything. That's the way of the world. We're not supposed to be in the world.
Galatians 5:15 "If you keep on biting and devouring each other, watch out or you will be destroyed by each other"
We are going to destroy one another in the Church if we get to wrapped up in politics. People living in a modern state are going to have disagreements on what that Modern State should look like. The Modern State is pretty damn complex with thousands upon thousands of issues that could and are debated. But, if we as Christians keep on biting at each other, we're going to destroy ourselves. If we bicker like non-Christians do among ourselves then we are being controlled by the sin nature; we are living just like the people of the world (One Corinthians 3:3). If we can't come to an agreement on everything in the political realm that's ok, so long as we come to live in harmony with one another and agree on the salvation through Christ Jesus. If we can't speak about politics in a peaceful and harmonious way with one another then we ought to just cut political discussions out of the Church. Let's listen to the Proverbs.
Proverbs 17:14 "Starting a quarrel is like opening a floodgate, so stop before a dispute breaks out"
I think in the course of this blog it is becoming clear that I am somewhat disgusted by the politicization of Christianity in the current state of affairs in the US. We have a leader, who uses Christianity as a way of garnering votes and favor. That is nothing new or even worse than others have done in the past. His reading of Two Corinthians only showed that he is less comfortable with using the language of Christians to win political favor with them than past politicians. What is worse and a more dangerous situation are the Christian politicization of their faiths. When you try to shoehorn your faith to fit in a box, be it socialism, liberalism, conservatism, libertarianism, etc., you are trying to put in a relationship with the infinite into a finite container. It's just not going to work. You're going to have to peel off a bit here, trim off a bit there to make it work. It isn't even like putting a square peg into a round hole - it's like trying to put the thing with the holes into the square peg. It just doesn't work and the results are divisive inside the Church.
The divisiveness in American politics has seeped into the American conscious so ravenously we can't have polite conversations about anything meaningful. That's sad. It's bad for the country as a whole because it's going to stagnate the country and most of its population. Divisiveness in the Church is far worse. It's going directly against Scripture:
1 Corinthians 1:10: "I appeal to you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree with one another so that there may be no divisions among you and that you may be perfectly united in mind and thought"
Romans 12:16 "Live in harmony with one another"
Galatians 5:26 "Let us not become boastful, challenging one another, envying one another"
I'm not saying that there won't be political disagreements between Christians. There will be because each side has elements that mesh with our Christian faith. Each side has things that are not exactly lined up with Christianity. Furthermore, the art of government has things that must be done that have absolutely nothing to do with our faith in God. Agree with one another on the things of God and the other stuff won't matter. The side that wins in an election should not be boastful. Don't challenge one another on everything. That's the way of the world. We're not supposed to be in the world.
Galatians 5:15 "If you keep on biting and devouring each other, watch out or you will be destroyed by each other"
We are going to destroy one another in the Church if we get to wrapped up in politics. People living in a modern state are going to have disagreements on what that Modern State should look like. The Modern State is pretty damn complex with thousands upon thousands of issues that could and are debated. But, if we as Christians keep on biting at each other, we're going to destroy ourselves. If we bicker like non-Christians do among ourselves then we are being controlled by the sin nature; we are living just like the people of the world (One Corinthians 3:3). If we can't come to an agreement on everything in the political realm that's ok, so long as we come to live in harmony with one another and agree on the salvation through Christ Jesus. If we can't speak about politics in a peaceful and harmonious way with one another then we ought to just cut political discussions out of the Church. Let's listen to the Proverbs.
Proverbs 17:14 "Starting a quarrel is like opening a floodgate, so stop before a dispute breaks out"
More catching up with Lewis
The entire thing that Christianity offers is to become a little Christ. "The whole purpose of becoming a Christian is simply nothing else" (Lewis, Mere Christianity). In this way we can become sons of God, share in the kind of life that Jesus had and share in the glory that the Father has set up for him.
Jesus calls himself humble and meek. But, some of his claims, like, "your sins are forgiven" are not humble or meek at all if they come from a mere man. But, because Jesus is God, the act of forgiving sins, rather than punishing them is a testament to his humility and meekness.
Lewis has no time for people that allow for Jesus to be merely a great moral teacher. "Let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about His being a great human teacher. he has not left that open to us. He did not intend to" (Lewis, Mere Christianity).
If Jesus was just a moral teacher than he is not special. If we took Jesus' advice and set up the world based on it we would live in a happier world. But, that would be true if we took up Plato's, Aristotle's or even Confucius' advice. "If Christianity only means one more bit of good advice, then Christianity is of no importance. There has been no lack of good advice for the last four thousand years. A bit more makes no difference" (Lewis, Mere Christianity).
Jesus taught the Golden Rule of the New Testament - do as you would to others as you would do to you. It's not new coming from Jesus. It's not even new coming from Christianity. Really, as all great moral teachers do, Jesus is pointing out something that we all know already deep in our being what is the right thing to do. Just because Jesus is proclaiming something we already know doesn't negate his message.
Jesus calls himself humble and meek. But, some of his claims, like, "your sins are forgiven" are not humble or meek at all if they come from a mere man. But, because Jesus is God, the act of forgiving sins, rather than punishing them is a testament to his humility and meekness.
Lewis has no time for people that allow for Jesus to be merely a great moral teacher. "Let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about His being a great human teacher. he has not left that open to us. He did not intend to" (Lewis, Mere Christianity).
If Jesus was just a moral teacher than he is not special. If we took Jesus' advice and set up the world based on it we would live in a happier world. But, that would be true if we took up Plato's, Aristotle's or even Confucius' advice. "If Christianity only means one more bit of good advice, then Christianity is of no importance. There has been no lack of good advice for the last four thousand years. A bit more makes no difference" (Lewis, Mere Christianity).
Jesus taught the Golden Rule of the New Testament - do as you would to others as you would do to you. It's not new coming from Jesus. It's not even new coming from Christianity. Really, as all great moral teachers do, Jesus is pointing out something that we all know already deep in our being what is the right thing to do. Just because Jesus is proclaiming something we already know doesn't negate his message.
Wednesday, March 1, 2017
The Historical Jesus and The Political Jesus
I'm still playing catch up on my C.S. Lewis devotions, but I'm getting closer (only 20 days behind now...).
On two days in February the book references The Screwtape Letters and makes some pretty interesting points about the Historical Jesus and the commingling of Christianity and politics. On the former Lewis points out that what we know of the historical Jesus comes from one and only one source, the New Testament. Apart from that anything else is just conjecture and can be distorting to the message of the Scriptures. The demons in Screwtape are suggesting that they change the notion of what the historical Jesus is like every thirty years or so to match the age that is envisioning this historically more accurate Jesus. In the generations before Lewis they are seeing the historical Jesus as being a champion of liberal and humanitarian causes. In Lewis' time Jesus was being envisioned in a Marxist light. Because what we know of the historical Jesus comes from the Scriptures any reconstruction of a historical Jesus becomes very unhistorical very quickly. While Jesus probably would have championed some liberal and humanitarian causes and was as revolutionary as Marx was, any thesis stating that this was the message of the historical Jesus is a perversion of what the Jesus of the Scriptures taught. This is not only wrongheaded, it is dangerous for the spiritual well-being of the individual. Lewis writes, as the demonic voice, "The advantages of these constructions, which we intend to change every thirty years or so, are manifold. In the first place they all tend to direct men's devotion to something which does not exist" (Lewis, The Screwtape Letters). As Christians our duty is to become Christlike - to become like the Jesus of the Scriptures. By reconstructing an historical Jesus from extra-biblical sources we run the risk of trying to emulate something that doesn't exist and stunt our walk with the real Jesus Christ.
The political aspect Lewis writes about is very interesting to me mainly because of the nightmare political situation we in America have been living for the past year and a half (and I fear there will be no end in sight). Some Christians think President Trump was the only choice that Christians could make while others thought President Trump was the only choice that Christians could not make. Honestly, I don't think it mattered in the sense of how your Christian faith is concerned. Neither American conservatism nor its liberalism has a completely synchronized view with the Scriptures. But, that isn't what I'm writing about today. What I'm writing about is the distraction that politics plays in the Christian life.
Lewis notes that the demons would certainly fear a true coalescence of Christian faith and governance because it would mean the establishment of a truly just and truly godly society. But, they do want "and want very much, to make men treat Christianity as a means; preferably, of course, as a means to their own advancement, but, failing that, as a means to anything - even social justice" (Lewis, 45). Much of the haranguing and bickering and nastiness surrounding the Christian embracement or rejection of President Trump has had the effect of making Christianity the means to something. President Trump himself is using Christianity as a means to his ends. I think it is perfectly reasonable for two devoted Christians to have entirely different ideas on how America ought to be governed. I think it is perfectly impossible to have this much animosity towards fellow Christians if Christianity is being seen as the ends of our walk in this political atmosphere.
Our faith necessarily must guide our political beliefs. And because Christianity was not designed as a political system for the governance of the United States and neither the current Republican platform nor the current Democratic platform (nor the historical platforms of either party, the Green Party, the Libertarians, the Socialists, the Communists, the Federalists, the Constitutionalists, the Progressives, the No-Nothings, the Populist party of Maryland, the Tea Party, the Secessionists, the Whigs or, and this is especially important, the Founding Fathers of the United States) were solely derived out of Scriptural context they are not going to be perfectly mirrored. Christianity is the vehicle through which God reached down to man to offer him salvation. The political agenda of party x, y or z is the vehicle in which the ideas of how a nation ought to be governed. The mission and scope of these two things are drastically different. There will, of course, be overlapping between them because things like caring for the poor, the widows and the needy are both tenants of Christianity and the function of Government. There will also be overlap with things like theft, murder, and other things we are not to do as Christians and things that are illegal to do. But, the fact of the matter is there are plenty of things that do not overlap. Whether the government mandates that everyone purchase healthcare or decides to have a massive tax break for the wealthy fall clearly outside the scope of Christian theology.
It is my strong belief that the Christian can decide that their understanding of God's call to take care of the needy informs them to elect someone who favors universal healthcare. Their faith in the Scriptures can inform their political belief. It is my strong belief that the Christian can decide that it is their duty and not the duty of the government to take care of the needy and are inclined to vote for somebody that doesn't believe in universal health care provided by the state. Their faith in the Scriptures also informs their political belief. It is my even stronger belief that those two Christians can have political disagreement without the toxic environment that is currently suffocating the United States and causing strife between Christians if both these Christians are treating their faith as the ends instead of some kind of means to fulfilling their political vision for the United States.
On two days in February the book references The Screwtape Letters and makes some pretty interesting points about the Historical Jesus and the commingling of Christianity and politics. On the former Lewis points out that what we know of the historical Jesus comes from one and only one source, the New Testament. Apart from that anything else is just conjecture and can be distorting to the message of the Scriptures. The demons in Screwtape are suggesting that they change the notion of what the historical Jesus is like every thirty years or so to match the age that is envisioning this historically more accurate Jesus. In the generations before Lewis they are seeing the historical Jesus as being a champion of liberal and humanitarian causes. In Lewis' time Jesus was being envisioned in a Marxist light. Because what we know of the historical Jesus comes from the Scriptures any reconstruction of a historical Jesus becomes very unhistorical very quickly. While Jesus probably would have championed some liberal and humanitarian causes and was as revolutionary as Marx was, any thesis stating that this was the message of the historical Jesus is a perversion of what the Jesus of the Scriptures taught. This is not only wrongheaded, it is dangerous for the spiritual well-being of the individual. Lewis writes, as the demonic voice, "The advantages of these constructions, which we intend to change every thirty years or so, are manifold. In the first place they all tend to direct men's devotion to something which does not exist" (Lewis, The Screwtape Letters). As Christians our duty is to become Christlike - to become like the Jesus of the Scriptures. By reconstructing an historical Jesus from extra-biblical sources we run the risk of trying to emulate something that doesn't exist and stunt our walk with the real Jesus Christ.
The political aspect Lewis writes about is very interesting to me mainly because of the nightmare political situation we in America have been living for the past year and a half (and I fear there will be no end in sight). Some Christians think President Trump was the only choice that Christians could make while others thought President Trump was the only choice that Christians could not make. Honestly, I don't think it mattered in the sense of how your Christian faith is concerned. Neither American conservatism nor its liberalism has a completely synchronized view with the Scriptures. But, that isn't what I'm writing about today. What I'm writing about is the distraction that politics plays in the Christian life.
Lewis notes that the demons would certainly fear a true coalescence of Christian faith and governance because it would mean the establishment of a truly just and truly godly society. But, they do want "and want very much, to make men treat Christianity as a means; preferably, of course, as a means to their own advancement, but, failing that, as a means to anything - even social justice" (Lewis, 45). Much of the haranguing and bickering and nastiness surrounding the Christian embracement or rejection of President Trump has had the effect of making Christianity the means to something. President Trump himself is using Christianity as a means to his ends. I think it is perfectly reasonable for two devoted Christians to have entirely different ideas on how America ought to be governed. I think it is perfectly impossible to have this much animosity towards fellow Christians if Christianity is being seen as the ends of our walk in this political atmosphere.
Our faith necessarily must guide our political beliefs. And because Christianity was not designed as a political system for the governance of the United States and neither the current Republican platform nor the current Democratic platform (nor the historical platforms of either party, the Green Party, the Libertarians, the Socialists, the Communists, the Federalists, the Constitutionalists, the Progressives, the No-Nothings, the Populist party of Maryland, the Tea Party, the Secessionists, the Whigs or, and this is especially important, the Founding Fathers of the United States) were solely derived out of Scriptural context they are not going to be perfectly mirrored. Christianity is the vehicle through which God reached down to man to offer him salvation. The political agenda of party x, y or z is the vehicle in which the ideas of how a nation ought to be governed. The mission and scope of these two things are drastically different. There will, of course, be overlapping between them because things like caring for the poor, the widows and the needy are both tenants of Christianity and the function of Government. There will also be overlap with things like theft, murder, and other things we are not to do as Christians and things that are illegal to do. But, the fact of the matter is there are plenty of things that do not overlap. Whether the government mandates that everyone purchase healthcare or decides to have a massive tax break for the wealthy fall clearly outside the scope of Christian theology.
It is my strong belief that the Christian can decide that their understanding of God's call to take care of the needy informs them to elect someone who favors universal healthcare. Their faith in the Scriptures can inform their political belief. It is my strong belief that the Christian can decide that it is their duty and not the duty of the government to take care of the needy and are inclined to vote for somebody that doesn't believe in universal health care provided by the state. Their faith in the Scriptures also informs their political belief. It is my even stronger belief that those two Christians can have political disagreement without the toxic environment that is currently suffocating the United States and causing strife between Christians if both these Christians are treating their faith as the ends instead of some kind of means to fulfilling their political vision for the United States.
Tuesday, February 28, 2017
Some thoughts on the Trinity
Lewis makes some interesting and unique points on the trinity at the center of the Christian faith.
First, he points out that God is love. Many people, even non-Christians love to claim that God is love. In reality however, they are making the claim that love is God - whenever, however and to whatever end, when love arises in man we ought to regard that as sacrosanct and adore it. The Christian claim that God is love is vastly different than the world's same vapid pronouncement. When a Christian claims God is love, the Christian is claiming that a "dynamic activity of love has been going on in God forever and has created everything else" (Lewis, 41).
Second, by pointing out that God is love he notes that God must at least be two persons. If He were only one person, then He would not have been love prior to creation. The fact that God is love is evidence for at least a two-personed God, and in the case of Christianity, a triune one.
He makes an interesting point about the Father and the Son. The New Testament paints a good picture of the relationship between the Father and the Son. It is clear and gives a good idea of what that relationship is. When we try to go further and give more in depth we struggle because we end up painting a picture of two separate things rather than one thing with two persons. "Naturally God knows how to describe Himself much better than we know how to describe Him" (Lewis, Mere Christianity).
Lewis calls the Son, "the self-expression of the Father". He states that relationship between God the Father and Jesus the son is simple, "The Father delights in His Son; the Son looks up to His Father" (Lewis, Mere Christianity).
On the subject of the Holy Spirit, Lewis makes a startling analogy. When you get a group of individuals together like a family or a club you hear people talk about the 'spirit' of that family or club. That spirit is a naturally developed way of talking, a developed way of behaving and other qualities that wouldn't have developed had not it been for that union of individuals. The spirit of the family or club is like another member. Of course, it is not a real entity in the case of the family or club. But the union of Father and Son in love creates a Spirit and because Father and Son is God that Spirit is a real entity and the third person of the Trinity.
I'm not entirely sure how I feel about this analogy. On the one hand it's a good description of the Spirit. But on the other hand, it almost makes it seem like the Spirit is a created being. I'm on the fence about this one.
"If you think of the Father as something 'out there', in front of you, and the Son as someone standing at your side, helping you to pray, trying to turn you into another son, then you have to think of the third Person as something inside you, or behind you" (Lewis, Mere Christianity). Because the Holy Spirit works from inside you or behind you, he is harder to understand, harder to pin down.
First, he points out that God is love. Many people, even non-Christians love to claim that God is love. In reality however, they are making the claim that love is God - whenever, however and to whatever end, when love arises in man we ought to regard that as sacrosanct and adore it. The Christian claim that God is love is vastly different than the world's same vapid pronouncement. When a Christian claims God is love, the Christian is claiming that a "dynamic activity of love has been going on in God forever and has created everything else" (Lewis, 41).
Second, by pointing out that God is love he notes that God must at least be two persons. If He were only one person, then He would not have been love prior to creation. The fact that God is love is evidence for at least a two-personed God, and in the case of Christianity, a triune one.
He makes an interesting point about the Father and the Son. The New Testament paints a good picture of the relationship between the Father and the Son. It is clear and gives a good idea of what that relationship is. When we try to go further and give more in depth we struggle because we end up painting a picture of two separate things rather than one thing with two persons. "Naturally God knows how to describe Himself much better than we know how to describe Him" (Lewis, Mere Christianity).
Lewis calls the Son, "the self-expression of the Father". He states that relationship between God the Father and Jesus the son is simple, "The Father delights in His Son; the Son looks up to His Father" (Lewis, Mere Christianity).
On the subject of the Holy Spirit, Lewis makes a startling analogy. When you get a group of individuals together like a family or a club you hear people talk about the 'spirit' of that family or club. That spirit is a naturally developed way of talking, a developed way of behaving and other qualities that wouldn't have developed had not it been for that union of individuals. The spirit of the family or club is like another member. Of course, it is not a real entity in the case of the family or club. But the union of Father and Son in love creates a Spirit and because Father and Son is God that Spirit is a real entity and the third person of the Trinity.
I'm not entirely sure how I feel about this analogy. On the one hand it's a good description of the Spirit. But on the other hand, it almost makes it seem like the Spirit is a created being. I'm on the fence about this one.
"If you think of the Father as something 'out there', in front of you, and the Son as someone standing at your side, helping you to pray, trying to turn you into another son, then you have to think of the third Person as something inside you, or behind you" (Lewis, Mere Christianity). Because the Holy Spirit works from inside you or behind you, he is harder to understand, harder to pin down.
Monday, February 27, 2017
Some Notes on Christianity from C.S. Lewis
C.S. Lewis states that the three things that spread the Christ-life (the new life in Christ) are baptism, belief and communion. Lewis states he doesn't know why this is the case, but he knows why he believes it is the case: Jesus says so. Lewis trusts the authority of Christ. He then makes a good apologetic for doing so. We trust things on authority all the time. Even though he had never been to New York, he trusts that there is such a place by the authority of others that have been there. "Every historical statement in the world is believed on authority... A man who jibbed at authority in other things as some people do in religion would have to be content to know nothing all his life" (Lewis, Mere Christianity)
It is pointless to seek comfort in Christianity as the first step. He believes that in the long run Christianity is a thing of 'unspeakable comfort' but to seek something out for its comfort rather than for its truth is both wrong and futile.
Lewis compares the Christian religion to reality. Both are slightly odd. They are not what you expect. The fact that Christianity, like reality, in being something that is not what you would've guessed, is one of the reasons he believes Christianity is true.
On goodness Lewis writes, "Good, as it ripens, becomes continually ore different not only from evil but from other good" (Lewis, The Great Divorce)
Lewis notes that there is a qualitative difference between Christians and those who are trying to be good people. "That is why the Christian is in a different position from other people who are trying to be good. They hope, by being good, to please God if there is one; or - if they thing there is not - at least they hope to deserve approval from good men. But the Christian thinks any good he does comes from the Christ-life inside him. He does not think God will love us because we are good, but that God will make us good because He loves us; just as the roof of a greenhouse does not attract the sun because it is bright, but becomes bright because the sun shines on it" (Lewis, Mere Christianity)
It is pointless to seek comfort in Christianity as the first step. He believes that in the long run Christianity is a thing of 'unspeakable comfort' but to seek something out for its comfort rather than for its truth is both wrong and futile.
Lewis compares the Christian religion to reality. Both are slightly odd. They are not what you expect. The fact that Christianity, like reality, in being something that is not what you would've guessed, is one of the reasons he believes Christianity is true.
On goodness Lewis writes, "Good, as it ripens, becomes continually ore different not only from evil but from other good" (Lewis, The Great Divorce)
Lewis notes that there is a qualitative difference between Christians and those who are trying to be good people. "That is why the Christian is in a different position from other people who are trying to be good. They hope, by being good, to please God if there is one; or - if they thing there is not - at least they hope to deserve approval from good men. But the Christian thinks any good he does comes from the Christ-life inside him. He does not think God will love us because we are good, but that God will make us good because He loves us; just as the roof of a greenhouse does not attract the sun because it is bright, but becomes bright because the sun shines on it" (Lewis, Mere Christianity)
Myths that mirror the Christ story are good dreams sent by God
A couple of days ago I wrote about a post I titled as Myths as a basis for believing in Christ as a note about my (sightly behind schedule) daily readings in A Year With C.S. Lewis. January 22nd's post (I know, I'm more that slightly behind schedule) follows up on this. I'm not sure when I first came to think that Christianity was foreshadowed by earlier myths or even partially understand as a part of our human nature, but it might have been with C.S. Lewis. It also might have been in college when I became interested in exactly what the Imago Dei meant to us. I think that I believe that being made in the image of God, we have an innate understanding of who God is. While this innate idea is neither perfect nor complete, it allows us to have, at least at a subconscious level, a deep understanding of even some of the finer points of Christian theology. While Lewis doesn't necessarily point to the whole being made in the image of God as a reason, I don't think he would disagree either. He talks more about what God has done, rather than what we can glean from being made in the image of God. In this post he writes:
"And what did God do? First of all He left us conscience, the sense of right and wrong: and all through history there have been people trying (some of them very hard) to obey it. None of them quite succeeded. Secondly, He sent the human race what I call good dreams: I mean those queer stories scattered all through the heathen religions about a god who dies and comes to life again, and by his death, has somehow given new life to men" (Lewis, from Mere Christianity).
"And what did God do? First of all He left us conscience, the sense of right and wrong: and all through history there have been people trying (some of them very hard) to obey it. None of them quite succeeded. Secondly, He sent the human race what I call good dreams: I mean those queer stories scattered all through the heathen religions about a god who dies and comes to life again, and by his death, has somehow given new life to men" (Lewis, from Mere Christianity).
Thursday, February 23, 2017
Myths as a basis for believing in Christ
One of the things that many detractors from Christianity love to throw out there is the similarity between things from the Scriptures and other ancient religions that may have been older than what happened in the Scriptures. Recently, I've seen lots of posts about Horus or Osiris and how their stories both predates Christ's and are very similar. I've always wondered wether this is a valid criticism of Christianity, maybe they are correct in assuming that Christianity has just borrowed concepts from older religions. But, being a believer, I've always thought that there had to be another explanation.
I've wondered if the reason as to why many of the Biblical stories mirror other myths is that God has used those myths as a way of preparing the way for all peoples to have some sort of base so that they can more easily accept the truth of God. Lewis seems to think something similar as he notes in Is Theology Poetry?
He notes that theology offers special revelation, but also a general one too. "We should, therefore, expect to find in the imagination of great Pagan teachers and myth makers some glimpse of that theme which we believe to be the very plot of the whole cosmic story - the theme of incarnation, death and rebirth. And the differences between the Pagan Christs (Balder, Osiris, etc.) and the Christ Himself is much what we should expect to find. The Pagan stories are all about someone dying and rising, either every year, or else nobody knows where and nobody knows when" (Lewis from Is Theology of Poetry?). Lewis points out that comparing the myths to Christianity is "like watching something come gradually into focus; first it hangs in the clouds of myth and ritual, vast and vague, then it condenses, grows hard and in a sense small, as a historical event in first century Palestine".
When Christ came down to earth he partly emptied himself of his glory. Lewis points out that all things come down from heaven to earth (general revelation) and in doing so they too have been emptied partially of some of their glory. That is why myths are partially correct. In and of themselves, the myths can't lead to salvation; but they can provide the basis for coming to understand the truth that leads to salvation.
I'd love to explore this topic further.
I've wondered if the reason as to why many of the Biblical stories mirror other myths is that God has used those myths as a way of preparing the way for all peoples to have some sort of base so that they can more easily accept the truth of God. Lewis seems to think something similar as he notes in Is Theology Poetry?
He notes that theology offers special revelation, but also a general one too. "We should, therefore, expect to find in the imagination of great Pagan teachers and myth makers some glimpse of that theme which we believe to be the very plot of the whole cosmic story - the theme of incarnation, death and rebirth. And the differences between the Pagan Christs (Balder, Osiris, etc.) and the Christ Himself is much what we should expect to find. The Pagan stories are all about someone dying and rising, either every year, or else nobody knows where and nobody knows when" (Lewis from Is Theology of Poetry?). Lewis points out that comparing the myths to Christianity is "like watching something come gradually into focus; first it hangs in the clouds of myth and ritual, vast and vague, then it condenses, grows hard and in a sense small, as a historical event in first century Palestine".
When Christ came down to earth he partly emptied himself of his glory. Lewis points out that all things come down from heaven to earth (general revelation) and in doing so they too have been emptied partially of some of their glory. That is why myths are partially correct. In and of themselves, the myths can't lead to salvation; but they can provide the basis for coming to understand the truth that leads to salvation.
I'd love to explore this topic further.
Tuesday, November 8, 2016
Notes from Tao Te Ching
I finished Lao Tzu's Tao Te Ching the other day and given that I'd never had any experience with the work before I was a bit befuddled. The commentary and notes in the Penguin edition were enlightening in that they stated that some of the sections were intentionally vague to allow for interpretation. That said, I probably need quite a bit more commentary reading to get me to any level of competency with the text. That said, there were a few passages that really stood out to me.
The first one that stood out to me is ironic given that it is the night of the election. The rhetoric of Trump resounding in my ears regardless of my wishes might have made this one stand out to me.
From IX -
"There may be gold and jade to fill a hall
But there is none who can keep them.
To be overbearing when one has wealth and position
Is to bring calamity upon oneself" (Tzu, 13).
Firstly, it mirrors the Biblical passage Matthew 6:19 "Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moths and vermin destroy, and where thieves break in and steal". It would seem that the wisdom of ancient China and the wisdom of Jesus have a bit of universality of it. But this reflection came later, initially I thought of Trump. As Trump seems to be coming in with a bunch of surprising victories it seems that wisdom might not always be factually based...
From XIII - Taoism seems to have a dualistic philosophy
"The reason I have great trouble is that I have a body. When I no longer have a body, what trouble have I?" (Tzu, 17).
From XVIII - Again, my reading might have been shaded by current events, particularly the election of 2016 when this passage stuck out to me.
"When cleverness emerges
There is great hypocrisy" (Tzu, 22).
Frankly, the overbearingness of wealth and power seemed perfectly suited to Trump, but this passage seems to fit both Clinton and Trump perfectly.
From XXIII - It seems that Lao Tzu has a bit of nominative determinism about him as well in his philosophy.
"A man of the way conforms to the way; a man of virtue conforms to virtue; a man of loss conforms to loss. He who conforms to the way is gladly accepted by the way; he who conforms to virtue is gladly accepted by virtue; he who conforms to loss is gladly accepted by loss" (Tzu, 28).
From XLII - Addition by subtraction - a bit of wisdom from ancient minimalists?
"Thus a thing is sometimes added to by being diminished and diminished by being added to" (Tzu, 49).
From XLIV - Again some mirroring of Jesus' words in Matthew 6
"Know contentment
And you will suffer no disgrace" (Tzu, 51).
Matthew 6:28-34 has a bit of contentment and a lack of disgrace in it.
Paul talks about contentment in Philippians 4:12-13
Hebrews 13:5 also preaches contentment.
From XLVI - Contentment is preached again. This was a very good saying/poem.
"There is no disaster greater than not being content" (Tzu, 53).
From LVI - Just a good thought
"One who knows does not speak; one who speaks does not know" (Tzu, 63).
A lot of the sayings in this book are good, solid wisdom that is hard to argue against. The one that I found most foreign to my thinking and one that I couldn't quite get along with was the thought of following tradition and not breaking new ground. "Let your wheels move only along old ruts" (Tzu, 63). This thought was expressed numerous times in the book and I simply can't fit that into my thinking without fundamentally changing my thought process. That said, as I stated above, I'm so unfamiliar with this text I might be reading into it something that it wasn't intending.
From LXIII -
"Lay plans for the accomplishment of the difficult before it becomes difficult; make something big by starting with it when small. Difficult things in the world must needs have their beginnings in the easy; big things must needs have their beginnings in the small. Therefore it is because the sage never attempts to be great that he succeeds in becoming great" (Tzu, 70).
This is just sound, practical wisdom.
LXXIV seems to me (again pardon my misrepresentation if I'm reading it wrong) to be a questioning of capital punishment. "In chopping wood on behalf of the master carpenter, there are few who escape hurting their own hands instead" (Tzu, 81).
From LXXVII -
"It is the way of heaven to take from what has in excess in order to make good what is deficient. The way of man is otherwise. It takes from those who are in want in order to offer this to those who already have more than enough" (Tzu, 84).
This is a pretty damning indictment of the greediness of man.
From LXXVIII - That's just an example pretty excellent writing to end this part.
"Straightforward words
Seem paradoxical" (Tzu, 85).
From LXXXI - It seems that Lao Tzu could have easily stepped in to back Plato up against the Sophists...
"Truthful words are not beautiful; beautiful words are not truthful. Good words are not persuasive; persuasive words are not good" (Tzu, 88).
The first one that stood out to me is ironic given that it is the night of the election. The rhetoric of Trump resounding in my ears regardless of my wishes might have made this one stand out to me.
From IX -
"There may be gold and jade to fill a hall
But there is none who can keep them.
To be overbearing when one has wealth and position
Is to bring calamity upon oneself" (Tzu, 13).
Firstly, it mirrors the Biblical passage Matthew 6:19 "Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moths and vermin destroy, and where thieves break in and steal". It would seem that the wisdom of ancient China and the wisdom of Jesus have a bit of universality of it. But this reflection came later, initially I thought of Trump. As Trump seems to be coming in with a bunch of surprising victories it seems that wisdom might not always be factually based...
From XIII - Taoism seems to have a dualistic philosophy
"The reason I have great trouble is that I have a body. When I no longer have a body, what trouble have I?" (Tzu, 17).
From XVIII - Again, my reading might have been shaded by current events, particularly the election of 2016 when this passage stuck out to me.
"When cleverness emerges
There is great hypocrisy" (Tzu, 22).
Frankly, the overbearingness of wealth and power seemed perfectly suited to Trump, but this passage seems to fit both Clinton and Trump perfectly.
From XXIII - It seems that Lao Tzu has a bit of nominative determinism about him as well in his philosophy.
"A man of the way conforms to the way; a man of virtue conforms to virtue; a man of loss conforms to loss. He who conforms to the way is gladly accepted by the way; he who conforms to virtue is gladly accepted by virtue; he who conforms to loss is gladly accepted by loss" (Tzu, 28).
From XLII - Addition by subtraction - a bit of wisdom from ancient minimalists?
"Thus a thing is sometimes added to by being diminished and diminished by being added to" (Tzu, 49).
From XLIV - Again some mirroring of Jesus' words in Matthew 6
"Know contentment
And you will suffer no disgrace" (Tzu, 51).
Matthew 6:28-34 has a bit of contentment and a lack of disgrace in it.
Paul talks about contentment in Philippians 4:12-13
Hebrews 13:5 also preaches contentment.
From XLVI - Contentment is preached again. This was a very good saying/poem.
"There is no disaster greater than not being content" (Tzu, 53).
From LVI - Just a good thought
"One who knows does not speak; one who speaks does not know" (Tzu, 63).
A lot of the sayings in this book are good, solid wisdom that is hard to argue against. The one that I found most foreign to my thinking and one that I couldn't quite get along with was the thought of following tradition and not breaking new ground. "Let your wheels move only along old ruts" (Tzu, 63). This thought was expressed numerous times in the book and I simply can't fit that into my thinking without fundamentally changing my thought process. That said, as I stated above, I'm so unfamiliar with this text I might be reading into it something that it wasn't intending.
From LXIII -
"Lay plans for the accomplishment of the difficult before it becomes difficult; make something big by starting with it when small. Difficult things in the world must needs have their beginnings in the easy; big things must needs have their beginnings in the small. Therefore it is because the sage never attempts to be great that he succeeds in becoming great" (Tzu, 70).
This is just sound, practical wisdom.
LXXIV seems to me (again pardon my misrepresentation if I'm reading it wrong) to be a questioning of capital punishment. "In chopping wood on behalf of the master carpenter, there are few who escape hurting their own hands instead" (Tzu, 81).
From LXXVII -
"It is the way of heaven to take from what has in excess in order to make good what is deficient. The way of man is otherwise. It takes from those who are in want in order to offer this to those who already have more than enough" (Tzu, 84).
This is a pretty damning indictment of the greediness of man.
From LXXVIII - That's just an example pretty excellent writing to end this part.
"Straightforward words
Seem paradoxical" (Tzu, 85).
From LXXXI - It seems that Lao Tzu could have easily stepped in to back Plato up against the Sophists...
"Truthful words are not beautiful; beautiful words are not truthful. Good words are not persuasive; persuasive words are not good" (Tzu, 88).
Sunday, November 6, 2016
Plato's Ethics and Politics
(Originally written November 6, 2016 in Book 26)
It's been a bit since I've delved into Plato. Sorry about that guys. I'll try and give this a little more attention over the next few weeks.
The Classical Mind
W.T. Jones
Chapter 5: Plato - the special sciences
Ethics
Ethics was Plato's primary concern.
"Since he was convinced that the Sophistic attack on moderation and the other traditional virtues had been one of the main causes of the Athenian debacle, he was chiefly concerned, not with a knowledge of the physical world, but with a knowledge of values" (Jones, 153).
The denial of objective knowledge in ethics is extremely paradoxical. A straightforward denial of objective ethical truths would allow for absurdities like being unable to say that Jesus was a better man than Hitler. The consequences of of rejecting the possiblity of objective ethical truths is so great the burden of proof lies with those who wish to prove there are not objective ethical statements, not with those who affirm their existence.
Analysis of the form "courage".
As with his physics, Plato calls the virtue courage in the real world through acts, as having some participation with the 'form' courage.
Two types of knowledge:
1) Experiential knowledge
2) Formal knowledge
Experiential knowledge: picked up through experience. An acquaintence with the particulars of the forms participate in, but not knowledge of the forms themselves.
Formal knowledge is knowledge of the form itself.
Formal knowledge develops out of experiential knowledge.
The forms precede the particulars which participate in the forms, but knowledge works backwards. One learns via the particulars and gradually learns of the form the particulars participate in.
The distinction between pleasure and the good
Plato set out to show that the Sophists were not merely good men with a confused knowledge, but bad men set out to teach erroneous ways. The Sophist's biggest error, to Plato, was their confusing of pleasure and the good.
A neutral state of equillibrium would be the best state for man in Plato's reasoning, but this is only for the gods who are above both joy and sorrow.
Plato distinguishes between 'necessary' pleasures and 'harmless' pleasures. The former being those that brought the body back to equillibrium and the latter being pure esthetic pleasures.
Plato viewed the majority of men as being hopeless egoistic hedonists. As such, he sought to teach that being a good man was the key to the life of highest pleasure.
"He set himself to try to prove that the pleasures of temperance exceed the pains and that the pains of intemperance exceed the pleasures" (Jones, 161).
Plato distinguished three types of goods:
1) Goods that are good because of their consequence
2) Goods that are good because they are good for their own sake (the harmless pleasures of esthetic enjoyment)
3) Things good for both their own sake and the consequences they produce.
Plato held the true good for men was not pleasure, but "Eudaimonia", often translated as happiness.
Analysis of the form Justice
Plato shows that the common man interacts with the form more than he knows when he describes justice as 'giving a man his due'
Justice (whether in a man or in a State) is a harmony where each element has its due. In a just man his life is balanced and the result is health, happiness and strength.
Man is an organism whose various functions must be balanced and in harmony. FOr Plato, this is not some private matter but an objective fact.
Health is the body functioning properly balanced and harmonious. The organs of the body are all interdependent.
Tripartite psyche: three urges that move man to act.
1) The Appetite - lowest, urges men to fulfill physiological needs
2) Spirit - passions and emotions
3) Reason - curiosity
The State and the individual parallel each other
Three types of activity in the State
1) The Rulers
2) The Guards
3) The Producers
The producers of the State are like the appetite. The Guards correspond to the Spirit; and, the Rulers correspond to the Reason.
The virtue or function of the producers is to produce the goods necessary and unnecessary for consumption in the State.
The virtue/function of the guards was to defend the State against enemies. Courage was therefore, its virtue.
the virtue of the rulers was to know the forms so they can make wise decisions for the State.
One of Plato's most profound beliefs: "There is a wisdom in the people that poet's express (often without understanding it) in the language of myth and metaphor. Philosophical analysis is a way of extracting this meaning and rendering it precise" (Jones, 169).
In parallel to the state, every individual has a producer part (the apetites that are satisfied to sustain life), a rational part to guide and direct his life (the ruler part) and the guards (a spirited part to keep his body in order).
Since the producers must be temperate in their consumption in order to produce for the other two classes who don't produce, so to must the appetites of the self be held in moderation.
The spirited part of the individual must act in accordance with the rational reason (ruler of the self). Otherwise the emotions will overcome the reason and cause chaos.
For Plato (This can be applied to Christianity if Christ is taken as the form of man), being and goodness are parallel. The more a thing participates in the form it corresponds to the more being it has and thus is better. Men likewise participate in the form of man. Those who participate more in the form of man do so by acting more in reason than in the spirit or the appetites. Thus, the individual man who partiicpates in the form of man on the level of reason is better than the individual man who participates in the form of man in the spirit or appetitie level primarily.
Political Theory
Man is a social animal. Thus, to achieve his happiness he must live in a well run State. The good life is only possible in communal living.
Plato held that most men are not ruled by reason sufficiently and are thus, insufficient to rule.
The many should therefore be ruled by the few wise men goverened by reason (and thus participating more fully in the form of man).
Plato condemns democracy because the art of ruling becomes the art of flattery and the art of appealing to the masses, not the wise governing of the state.
Plato's political theory held two assumptions: "first, the many, being incurably ignorant, are incapable of disciplinging themselves. Second, the wise, because they are wise, can and will provide external discipline as a substitute for the internal restraints that the many lack" (Jones, 177).
Plato thought a proper state would exist when kings became philosophers or philosophers became kings.
Since the excesses of the producer class would have to be reigned in Plato was not against doing so by force if necessary, but thought education (propaganda) more effective in the long run.
Each individual of the produceer class would be taught a trade that aligned with their natural abilities or interests, but also educated so that they were obedient to the ruling class. Loyalty and patriotism are to be instilled in this class by any means necessary. This level of education was to be aimed at an emotional level, not an intellectual one. Good emotions were to be stirred while bad ones (fear, greed, etc.) were to be avoided.
Plato generally held some sort of genetic heredity as being obvious. The producer class will have producer class children, a doctor has a doctor or a farmer will have a son naturally inclined to farming; and, so too, rulers will mostly come from the ruler parentage. But, it is not absolutely static. Ability determines proper place in society. If a ruler capable child is born of a farmer than he should be educated as such. If a ruler has a child who lacks the moral character necessary to rule then he should be placed in his proper place.
The radical nature of Plato's educational system comes into play on the ruler-level, not on the guardian or producer levels. Children who show the aptitude for ruling would be removed from their family and placed in a communal nursery to encourage loyalty to the state and not smaller family structure.
- No personal possessions beyond what is necessary
- Communal meals
- No access to gold or silver
- Women can be rulers too and must have equal education: "There is no occupation concerned with the management of social affairs which belongs to woman or man" (Jones, 181).
"Knowledge is a noble and commanding thing, which cannot be overcome, and will not allow a man, if he only nows the difference of good and evil to do anything which is contrary to knowledge" (Jones, 184). Knowledge is virtue. The good man knows what is good an can therefore never act against it. This is why rulers recieve such stringent education. To know the good is to do it. "No man volunatirly pursues evil, or that which he thinks to be evil. To prefer evil to good is not in human nature" (Jones, 185).
Plato believed that men who know the good can make mistakes of judgment by choosing a smaller good over a greater one but this is because of a perspective distortion - just like a smaller object may appear bigger because it is closer, a more easily obtained good may seem better than a more worthy, though harder to achieve good.
Interesting Quote on Democracy:
"They settle down in idleness, some of them burdened with debt, some disenfranchised, some both at once; and these drones are armed and can sting. Hating the men who have acquired their property and conspiring against them and the rest of society, they long for a revolution" (Jones, 189).
Seems eerily accurate to Bernie Sanders supporters in 2016.
Plato's description of democrarcy is fascinating. Jones says that Plato held that his theory was undoubtedly somewhat impractical but because his theory was supposed to be a description of a political form the fact that a State could only imperfectly participate in it is to be expected and not a valid criticism of it.
It's been a bit since I've delved into Plato. Sorry about that guys. I'll try and give this a little more attention over the next few weeks.
The Classical Mind
W.T. Jones
Chapter 5: Plato - the special sciences
Ethics
Ethics was Plato's primary concern.
"Since he was convinced that the Sophistic attack on moderation and the other traditional virtues had been one of the main causes of the Athenian debacle, he was chiefly concerned, not with a knowledge of the physical world, but with a knowledge of values" (Jones, 153).
The denial of objective knowledge in ethics is extremely paradoxical. A straightforward denial of objective ethical truths would allow for absurdities like being unable to say that Jesus was a better man than Hitler. The consequences of of rejecting the possiblity of objective ethical truths is so great the burden of proof lies with those who wish to prove there are not objective ethical statements, not with those who affirm their existence.
Analysis of the form "courage".
As with his physics, Plato calls the virtue courage in the real world through acts, as having some participation with the 'form' courage.
Two types of knowledge:
1) Experiential knowledge
2) Formal knowledge
Experiential knowledge: picked up through experience. An acquaintence with the particulars of the forms participate in, but not knowledge of the forms themselves.
Formal knowledge is knowledge of the form itself.
Formal knowledge develops out of experiential knowledge.
The forms precede the particulars which participate in the forms, but knowledge works backwards. One learns via the particulars and gradually learns of the form the particulars participate in.
The distinction between pleasure and the good
Plato set out to show that the Sophists were not merely good men with a confused knowledge, but bad men set out to teach erroneous ways. The Sophist's biggest error, to Plato, was their confusing of pleasure and the good.
A neutral state of equillibrium would be the best state for man in Plato's reasoning, but this is only for the gods who are above both joy and sorrow.
Plato distinguishes between 'necessary' pleasures and 'harmless' pleasures. The former being those that brought the body back to equillibrium and the latter being pure esthetic pleasures.
Plato viewed the majority of men as being hopeless egoistic hedonists. As such, he sought to teach that being a good man was the key to the life of highest pleasure.
"He set himself to try to prove that the pleasures of temperance exceed the pains and that the pains of intemperance exceed the pleasures" (Jones, 161).
Plato distinguished three types of goods:
1) Goods that are good because of their consequence
2) Goods that are good because they are good for their own sake (the harmless pleasures of esthetic enjoyment)
3) Things good for both their own sake and the consequences they produce.
Plato held the true good for men was not pleasure, but "Eudaimonia", often translated as happiness.
Analysis of the form Justice
Plato shows that the common man interacts with the form more than he knows when he describes justice as 'giving a man his due'
Justice (whether in a man or in a State) is a harmony where each element has its due. In a just man his life is balanced and the result is health, happiness and strength.
Man is an organism whose various functions must be balanced and in harmony. FOr Plato, this is not some private matter but an objective fact.
Health is the body functioning properly balanced and harmonious. The organs of the body are all interdependent.
Tripartite psyche: three urges that move man to act.
1) The Appetite - lowest, urges men to fulfill physiological needs
2) Spirit - passions and emotions
3) Reason - curiosity
The State and the individual parallel each other
Three types of activity in the State
1) The Rulers
2) The Guards
3) The Producers
The producers of the State are like the appetite. The Guards correspond to the Spirit; and, the Rulers correspond to the Reason.
The virtue or function of the producers is to produce the goods necessary and unnecessary for consumption in the State.
The virtue/function of the guards was to defend the State against enemies. Courage was therefore, its virtue.
the virtue of the rulers was to know the forms so they can make wise decisions for the State.
One of Plato's most profound beliefs: "There is a wisdom in the people that poet's express (often without understanding it) in the language of myth and metaphor. Philosophical analysis is a way of extracting this meaning and rendering it precise" (Jones, 169).
In parallel to the state, every individual has a producer part (the apetites that are satisfied to sustain life), a rational part to guide and direct his life (the ruler part) and the guards (a spirited part to keep his body in order).
Since the producers must be temperate in their consumption in order to produce for the other two classes who don't produce, so to must the appetites of the self be held in moderation.
The spirited part of the individual must act in accordance with the rational reason (ruler of the self). Otherwise the emotions will overcome the reason and cause chaos.
For Plato (This can be applied to Christianity if Christ is taken as the form of man), being and goodness are parallel. The more a thing participates in the form it corresponds to the more being it has and thus is better. Men likewise participate in the form of man. Those who participate more in the form of man do so by acting more in reason than in the spirit or the appetites. Thus, the individual man who partiicpates in the form of man on the level of reason is better than the individual man who participates in the form of man in the spirit or appetitie level primarily.
Political Theory
Man is a social animal. Thus, to achieve his happiness he must live in a well run State. The good life is only possible in communal living.
Plato held that most men are not ruled by reason sufficiently and are thus, insufficient to rule.
The many should therefore be ruled by the few wise men goverened by reason (and thus participating more fully in the form of man).
Plato condemns democracy because the art of ruling becomes the art of flattery and the art of appealing to the masses, not the wise governing of the state.
Plato's political theory held two assumptions: "first, the many, being incurably ignorant, are incapable of disciplinging themselves. Second, the wise, because they are wise, can and will provide external discipline as a substitute for the internal restraints that the many lack" (Jones, 177).
Plato thought a proper state would exist when kings became philosophers or philosophers became kings.
Since the excesses of the producer class would have to be reigned in Plato was not against doing so by force if necessary, but thought education (propaganda) more effective in the long run.
Each individual of the produceer class would be taught a trade that aligned with their natural abilities or interests, but also educated so that they were obedient to the ruling class. Loyalty and patriotism are to be instilled in this class by any means necessary. This level of education was to be aimed at an emotional level, not an intellectual one. Good emotions were to be stirred while bad ones (fear, greed, etc.) were to be avoided.
Plato generally held some sort of genetic heredity as being obvious. The producer class will have producer class children, a doctor has a doctor or a farmer will have a son naturally inclined to farming; and, so too, rulers will mostly come from the ruler parentage. But, it is not absolutely static. Ability determines proper place in society. If a ruler capable child is born of a farmer than he should be educated as such. If a ruler has a child who lacks the moral character necessary to rule then he should be placed in his proper place.
The radical nature of Plato's educational system comes into play on the ruler-level, not on the guardian or producer levels. Children who show the aptitude for ruling would be removed from their family and placed in a communal nursery to encourage loyalty to the state and not smaller family structure.
- No personal possessions beyond what is necessary
- Communal meals
- No access to gold or silver
- Women can be rulers too and must have equal education: "There is no occupation concerned with the management of social affairs which belongs to woman or man" (Jones, 181).
"Knowledge is a noble and commanding thing, which cannot be overcome, and will not allow a man, if he only nows the difference of good and evil to do anything which is contrary to knowledge" (Jones, 184). Knowledge is virtue. The good man knows what is good an can therefore never act against it. This is why rulers recieve such stringent education. To know the good is to do it. "No man volunatirly pursues evil, or that which he thinks to be evil. To prefer evil to good is not in human nature" (Jones, 185).
Plato believed that men who know the good can make mistakes of judgment by choosing a smaller good over a greater one but this is because of a perspective distortion - just like a smaller object may appear bigger because it is closer, a more easily obtained good may seem better than a more worthy, though harder to achieve good.
Interesting Quote on Democracy:
"They settle down in idleness, some of them burdened with debt, some disenfranchised, some both at once; and these drones are armed and can sting. Hating the men who have acquired their property and conspiring against them and the rest of society, they long for a revolution" (Jones, 189).
Seems eerily accurate to Bernie Sanders supporters in 2016.
Plato's description of democrarcy is fascinating. Jones says that Plato held that his theory was undoubtedly somewhat impractical but because his theory was supposed to be a description of a political form the fact that a State could only imperfectly participate in it is to be expected and not a valid criticism of it.
Monday, October 31, 2016
Assessment of the Chronicles of Narnia
October was an especially fruitful month for my reading challenge. I finished thirteen books after completing only two in September. Among them were the seven books of the Chronicles of Narnia. I loved C.S. Lewis' works as a young child and decided to reread them as an adult and was not disappointed. I gave them all three stars on Goodreads other than Prince Caspian, which I gave four stars. Honestly, the best part of this series is that Lewis is such a great storyteller, you feel right in the middle of the story. I really enjoy how he weaves non-Christian myths into his allegorical telling of Christianity.
As far as ranking the books, currently from favorite to least I give this order:
Prince Caspian
The Horse and His Boy
The Last Battle
The Silver Chair
As far as ranking the books, currently from favorite to least I give this order:
Prince Caspian
The Voyage of the Dawn Treader
The Magician's Nephew
The Lion, the Witch and the WardrobeThe Horse and His Boy
The Last Battle
The Silver Chair
I think I enjoyed Prince Caspian the best because it was interesting to think of the four children, who had once been the Kings and Queens of Narnia, returning to the land they ruled in the golden age as children again, far into the Narnian future. I enjoyed the time differential in our world and in Narnia and how it was utilized. The Voyage of the Dawn Treader came next simply because it was such an interesting story on going to the edge of the world. The Magician's Nephew I enjoyed only slightly more than The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe simply because I remembered the latter more clearly than the former and it was like reading The Magician's Nephew for the first time again. The Horse and His Boy is an excellent one too and I would consider the five I mentioned above as considerably more enjoyable to me than the last two. The Silver Chair I enjoyed the least simply because I found Eustace less interesting as a character than the other four children, and I felt that it was aimed at slightly younger readings and thus lost some of its universality.
The Last Battle has some interesting theological points in the follower of Tash coming to the final Narnia. I won't go to far into it, but there is an interesting idea of grace that I get from it. Personally, I think that the way to Heaven is laid out scripturally, no one comes to the Father but through Jesus Christ the Son. I don't think doctrinally or theologically a Christian can stray too far from this to embrace any kind of universal salvation for mankind, but I do think there is something to be said of admitting that the grace of God is larger than our ability to understand it. It's not something I would want to build a system of theology on, but something I would offer about any theory of God I would offer. It's good to admit one's limitations when describing God without limiting Him.
Saturday, February 13, 2016
365 Day Bible Catch Up Matthew 10 - 14
Matthew 10
Jesus gives power to his 12 disciples to heal and drive out demons. These are the twelve - Simon-Peter, Andre, James & John, Philip & Bartholomew, Thomas and Matthew the tax collector, James son of Alphaeus, Thaddaeus, Simon the Zealot and Judas Iscariot.
Jesus sent them out like sheep among wolves, instructing them to be shrewd as snakes and innocent as doves. He told them to freely give because they had been given freely.
He warned them that there mission would be tough and they would be arrested. He told them not to worry about what to say because the Spirit of the Father will speak through them. He warned "All men will hate you because of me, but he who stands firm to the end will be saved" (Matthew 10:22).
Matthew 11
The disciples went out into Israel to perform the work Jesus had instructed them to do. Jesus went on to preach in Galilee. John the Baptist was in prison and sent his disciples to go and ask Jesus if he was the one who was to come. Jesus replied to go back and report what you see, the blind see, the lame walk, the lepers are cured, the deaf hear and the dead rise.
Jesus then proclaims that John the Baptist was the greatest of all men born to woman, but less than the least in the kingdom of Heaven. He told the crowds that John the Baptist was the Elijah who was to come. That was an interesting verse:
"And if you are willing to accept it, he is the Elijah who was to come. He who has ears, let him hear" (Matthew 11:14-15).
Jesus proclaims the truth, but acknowledges that there are some who would be unwilling to accept this truth. He denounced the generation because they are fickle. John was fasting and the people said he had a demon. Jesus wasn't fasting and they called him a glutton.
Jesus denounces the cities where he performed most of his miracles because they had not repented. He stated that the gentile cities in the area, if he had performed his miracles there, would have already repented.
Jesus offers rest to the weary.
Matthew 12
Jesus' disciples are then decried by the Pharisees for picking up grain and eating it on the Sabbath. Jesus rebukes them because they do not understand the words 'I desire mercy, not sacrifice'. He then reminds the Pharisees that David and his men ate consecrated bread and that the Priests of the Temple work on the Sabbath but they are innocent. Jesus then healed a man's hand on the Sabbath. The Pharisees plotted how to kill Jesus.
Jesus then drove out a demon and the Pharisees tried to convince everyone he drives out demons by the power of the devil. Jesus denounces this and warns everyone that they will be forgiven of all sins except the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit.
12:35 "The good man brings good things out of the good stored up in him, and the evil man brings evil things out of the evil stored up in him". Lord, help me to store good things in me.
Jesus calls those asking for signs wicked. He had already performed signs and they did not believe. Jonah preached in Nineveh and they repented, but God's own people won't repent when someone greater than Jonah is here.
12:43-45 "When an evil spirit comes out of a man, it goes through arid places seeking rest and does not find it. Then it says, 'I will return to the house I left'. When it arrives, it finds the house unoccupied, swept clean and put in order. Then it goes and takes with it seven other spirits more wicked than itself, and they go in and live there. And the final condition of that man is worse than the first. That is how it will be with this wicked generation". This is an interesting thing to think about. Jesus is out here at the moment casting out demons, healing people, sweeping up the house and putting it in order. But, they aren't fully accepting him in and the house remains unoccupied. The driven out spirits are unable to find rest and come back to find their old house unoccupied and return with their buddies to make things worse. I've had a few unclean spirits in my time Lord, sweep out and put my house in order. But, live in it so that the unclean spirits won't find it unoccupied and leave me off worse than I was before.
12:46-50 is a hard little passage, a 'difficult verse'. Jesus doesn't go to his mother and brothers who want to speak to him, instead he points out whoever does the will of the Father is his brother, mother and sister. It seems a bit harsh on his family.
Matthew 13 - The Parables
Parable of the sower
The seed that fell upon the path was eaten by the birds. These are those who hear the message of the kingdom but don't understand it.
The seed that fell upon the rock places grew quickly, but was scorched by the sun. These are those who accept the message of the kingdom with joy but quickly fall away at the first sight of trouble.
The seed that fell among the thorns was choked out. These are those who hear the message, but 'the worries of this life and the deceitfulness of wealth choke it, making it unfruitful.'
The seed that fell on good soil grows and produces a crop. These are those who hear the message and understands it and produces a crop.
Parable of the Weeds
A farmer plants good seed, but his enemy plants weeds in the same field. When the crop starts to grow the servants ask if they should rip up the weeds. The farmer says, no, wait until harvest then the weeds and the crop can be separated, otherwise removing the weeds might damage the growing crop.
I hadn't thought of this now, but the harvester is not the servants, but the farmer. I think that the Church has often sought to rip up the weeds, maybe even in good intentions, but this has damaged the roots of the crop. It isn't my job to weed the field. The angels will harvest and throw the weeds into the fire at the end of the age.
Parables of the Mustard Seed and the Yeast
-The kingdom of heaven is like a mustard seed. Small when planted, but it grows to become a tree.
-The kingdom of heaven is like yeast, mixed into flour and worked throughout the whole dough.
Parables of the Hidden Treasure and the Pearl
-The kingdom of heaven is like hidden treasure. A man finds it and sells everything he has to buy the field where he found it.
- The kingdom of heaven is like a great pearl, when the merchant finds it, he sells everything he has to buy it.
Parable of the Net
- The kingdom of heaven is a net, it will catch all kinds of fish, both good and bad. When it is brought ashore the angels will collect the good fish and the bad will be thrown away. Thus, the wicked will be separated from the righteous.
13:52 "He said to them, 'Therefore every teacher of the law who has been instructed about the kingdom of heaven is like the owner of a house who brings out of his storeroom new treasures as well as old". What are the old and new treasures?
Jesus did not do miracles in his hometown because of their lack of faith. Lord, let me have faith so you will not refuse to do your miracles.
Matthew 14
John the Baptist is beheaded and Jesus is told of his death. Jesus withdrew to a solitary place, but crowds followed him.
The disciples wanted to send the crowds away, but Jesus told his disciples to feed them with only five loaves of bread and two fish. Jesus fed around 5,000 men plus women and children with that food after praying to God.
Jesus then walked out on the water to his disciples, throughly terrifying the disciples in the process. Peter then walked out on the water to meet him, but became afraid and began to sink. Jesus saved him and walked him out to the boat where the disciples bowed down and declared him to truly be the Son of God.
Jesus then healed all those who came to him on the other side of the lake.
Jesus gives power to his 12 disciples to heal and drive out demons. These are the twelve - Simon-Peter, Andre, James & John, Philip & Bartholomew, Thomas and Matthew the tax collector, James son of Alphaeus, Thaddaeus, Simon the Zealot and Judas Iscariot.
Jesus sent them out like sheep among wolves, instructing them to be shrewd as snakes and innocent as doves. He told them to freely give because they had been given freely.
He warned them that there mission would be tough and they would be arrested. He told them not to worry about what to say because the Spirit of the Father will speak through them. He warned "All men will hate you because of me, but he who stands firm to the end will be saved" (Matthew 10:22).
Matthew 11
The disciples went out into Israel to perform the work Jesus had instructed them to do. Jesus went on to preach in Galilee. John the Baptist was in prison and sent his disciples to go and ask Jesus if he was the one who was to come. Jesus replied to go back and report what you see, the blind see, the lame walk, the lepers are cured, the deaf hear and the dead rise.
Jesus then proclaims that John the Baptist was the greatest of all men born to woman, but less than the least in the kingdom of Heaven. He told the crowds that John the Baptist was the Elijah who was to come. That was an interesting verse:
"And if you are willing to accept it, he is the Elijah who was to come. He who has ears, let him hear" (Matthew 11:14-15).
Jesus proclaims the truth, but acknowledges that there are some who would be unwilling to accept this truth. He denounced the generation because they are fickle. John was fasting and the people said he had a demon. Jesus wasn't fasting and they called him a glutton.
Jesus denounces the cities where he performed most of his miracles because they had not repented. He stated that the gentile cities in the area, if he had performed his miracles there, would have already repented.
Jesus offers rest to the weary.
Matthew 12
Jesus' disciples are then decried by the Pharisees for picking up grain and eating it on the Sabbath. Jesus rebukes them because they do not understand the words 'I desire mercy, not sacrifice'. He then reminds the Pharisees that David and his men ate consecrated bread and that the Priests of the Temple work on the Sabbath but they are innocent. Jesus then healed a man's hand on the Sabbath. The Pharisees plotted how to kill Jesus.
Jesus then drove out a demon and the Pharisees tried to convince everyone he drives out demons by the power of the devil. Jesus denounces this and warns everyone that they will be forgiven of all sins except the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit.
12:35 "The good man brings good things out of the good stored up in him, and the evil man brings evil things out of the evil stored up in him". Lord, help me to store good things in me.
Jesus calls those asking for signs wicked. He had already performed signs and they did not believe. Jonah preached in Nineveh and they repented, but God's own people won't repent when someone greater than Jonah is here.
12:43-45 "When an evil spirit comes out of a man, it goes through arid places seeking rest and does not find it. Then it says, 'I will return to the house I left'. When it arrives, it finds the house unoccupied, swept clean and put in order. Then it goes and takes with it seven other spirits more wicked than itself, and they go in and live there. And the final condition of that man is worse than the first. That is how it will be with this wicked generation". This is an interesting thing to think about. Jesus is out here at the moment casting out demons, healing people, sweeping up the house and putting it in order. But, they aren't fully accepting him in and the house remains unoccupied. The driven out spirits are unable to find rest and come back to find their old house unoccupied and return with their buddies to make things worse. I've had a few unclean spirits in my time Lord, sweep out and put my house in order. But, live in it so that the unclean spirits won't find it unoccupied and leave me off worse than I was before.
12:46-50 is a hard little passage, a 'difficult verse'. Jesus doesn't go to his mother and brothers who want to speak to him, instead he points out whoever does the will of the Father is his brother, mother and sister. It seems a bit harsh on his family.
Matthew 13 - The Parables
Parable of the sower
The seed that fell upon the path was eaten by the birds. These are those who hear the message of the kingdom but don't understand it.
The seed that fell upon the rock places grew quickly, but was scorched by the sun. These are those who accept the message of the kingdom with joy but quickly fall away at the first sight of trouble.
The seed that fell among the thorns was choked out. These are those who hear the message, but 'the worries of this life and the deceitfulness of wealth choke it, making it unfruitful.'
The seed that fell on good soil grows and produces a crop. These are those who hear the message and understands it and produces a crop.
Parable of the Weeds
A farmer plants good seed, but his enemy plants weeds in the same field. When the crop starts to grow the servants ask if they should rip up the weeds. The farmer says, no, wait until harvest then the weeds and the crop can be separated, otherwise removing the weeds might damage the growing crop.
I hadn't thought of this now, but the harvester is not the servants, but the farmer. I think that the Church has often sought to rip up the weeds, maybe even in good intentions, but this has damaged the roots of the crop. It isn't my job to weed the field. The angels will harvest and throw the weeds into the fire at the end of the age.
Parables of the Mustard Seed and the Yeast
-The kingdom of heaven is like a mustard seed. Small when planted, but it grows to become a tree.
-The kingdom of heaven is like yeast, mixed into flour and worked throughout the whole dough.
Parables of the Hidden Treasure and the Pearl
-The kingdom of heaven is like hidden treasure. A man finds it and sells everything he has to buy the field where he found it.
- The kingdom of heaven is like a great pearl, when the merchant finds it, he sells everything he has to buy it.
Parable of the Net
- The kingdom of heaven is a net, it will catch all kinds of fish, both good and bad. When it is brought ashore the angels will collect the good fish and the bad will be thrown away. Thus, the wicked will be separated from the righteous.
13:52 "He said to them, 'Therefore every teacher of the law who has been instructed about the kingdom of heaven is like the owner of a house who brings out of his storeroom new treasures as well as old". What are the old and new treasures?
Jesus did not do miracles in his hometown because of their lack of faith. Lord, let me have faith so you will not refuse to do your miracles.
Matthew 14
John the Baptist is beheaded and Jesus is told of his death. Jesus withdrew to a solitary place, but crowds followed him.
The disciples wanted to send the crowds away, but Jesus told his disciples to feed them with only five loaves of bread and two fish. Jesus fed around 5,000 men plus women and children with that food after praying to God.
Jesus then walked out on the water to his disciples, throughly terrifying the disciples in the process. Peter then walked out on the water to meet him, but became afraid and began to sink. Jesus saved him and walked him out to the boat where the disciples bowed down and declared him to truly be the Son of God.
Jesus then healed all those who came to him on the other side of the lake.
Friday, February 12, 2016
365 Day Bible Catch Up (Matthew 5 - 9)
Matthew 5:27-48
A couple verses stand out.
First, "If your right eye causes you to sin, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to go into hell" (Matthew 5:29-30). What a strong verse. I've always wondered if this is to be taken literally. I mean, in all honesty there is nothing worse than being thrown into hell. If any part of you is doing something that warrants damnation than surely losing a body part is less worse than being thrown into hell. But, is this to be taken as an absolute literal command? I don't know, this is one of those difficult verses.
The part about the eye for an eye is easier to swallow and obviously meant literally. "If someone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you" (Matthew 5:41-42). Give freely of yourself to those who ask. And not just to your friends or brothers. Even the wicked and pagans do that.
Matthew 6
6:1-4 is something that American Christians really need to understand. Don't do your 'righteous acts' in front of people for a reward. Give your gifts in secret, then the Father who sees what you're doing will reward you.
6:5-15 is chalk full of things that are important. Obviously, there is the Lord's prayer. This is well trodden and written about so I'll gloss over it for now. What stands out to me is the words before it.
"And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by men. I tell you the truth, they have received their reward in full. But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you. And when you pray, do not keep on babbling like pagans, for they think they will be heard because of their many words. Do not be like them, for your Father knows what you need before you ask him" (Matthew 6:5-8).
There is a lot here so bear with me. First, let's use the context of contemporary America. Depending upon where you live, you live in a post-religious society or a still relatively religious society. Here in the south I live where Christianity is still the norm and fairly prevalent in even the secular society. So, men praying on the streets might get some praise and they would have their reward in full. But, in other sections of America, when men pray on the streets they are derided as fools, or crazy. So I think taken in context that matches Jesus' day we have to take these verses in relation to the Christian community. At this point, I must admit I could be extremely wrong and ask for forgiveness if I am. I think some of the religious prayers and babbling that Jesus is condemning here shines through in modern, post-denominational churches that I've visited. These are where people get up in frenzy and pray and pray to be admired by their peers rather than raising a prayer to God. Of course, I'm not in a position to judge a man's heart so, I could be totally off base. But, this is how these verses stick to me at the moment.
I think some of the most pressing verses of this chapter to me come from verses 19-21. "Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy, and where thieves break in and steal. But store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where moth and rust do not destroy, and where thieves do not break in and steal. For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also". I struggle with this. I definitely store treasures here on earth and need to refocus my attention to store treasures in heaven. Verse 21 is so on point when it states where your treasure is, so there too is your heart. I need to take 6:33 to heart "But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well".
Matthew 7
What is the meaning of Matthew 7:6?
"Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs. If you do, they may trample them under their feet, and then turn and tear you to pieces".
7:12 sums up the Law and the Prophets - "So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets".
A tree and its fruit is an interesting passage. "A good tree cannot bear bad fruit and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit" (7:18). We are known by our fruit. But, if a good tree cannot bear bad fruit what of when Christians mess up? What about me when I screw up and have a disaster fall on my head? Am I a bad tree?
Matthew 8
- Jesus heals a man with leprosy. But, he tells the healed man not to tell anyone.
The Faith of The Centurion:
"When Jesus heard this, he was astonished and said to those following him, "I tell you the truth, I have not found anyone in Israel with such great faith. I say to you that many will come from the east and the west, and will take their places at the feast with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven. But the subjects of the kingdom will be thrown outside, into the darkness where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth". Matthew 8:10-12.
I always think about this story and the story where Jesus will not, initially help the Samaritan woman. He says its not proper to take food from the children to give to the dogs and yet the woman persists. Jesus was definitely Jewish, but he was expanding what it meant to be a part of the kingdom of Heaven with the Centurion and seemingly restricting it initially with the Samaritan woman. I know I've heard that Jesus was testing the woman's faith, or possibly the faith of his disciples. And if that's the case I guess it's consistent. But, it is sometimes strange to see Jesus' logic.
- Jesus heals Peter's mother-in-law
- Jesus heals many and drove out the demons of the demon-possessed.
- The story of the pigs is also an odd one. Two demon-possessed men come up to Jesus and the demons ask if the Son of Man has come to torture them before the appointed time. Then Jesus gives the demons their wish and sent them into a herd of pigs, who subsequently died by drowning. The townsfolk came out and pleaded for Jesus to leave their region. What does this story mean? Are the townsfolk to blame for valuing their possessions (the pigs) more than their souls?
Matthew 9
- Jesus heals a paralytic and causing a major controversy by forgiving the sins of the paralyzed man.
- Jesus eats with Matthew, sinners and tax collectors
- Jesus raises a girl from the dead and heals a sick woman
- Jesus heals two blind men and tells them not to tell anyone about it (but they do anyway)
"When he saw the crowds, he had compassion on them, because they were harassed and helpless, like sheep without a shepherd" (Matthew 9:36). Jesus has compassion for the helpless.
A couple verses stand out.
First, "If your right eye causes you to sin, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to go into hell" (Matthew 5:29-30). What a strong verse. I've always wondered if this is to be taken literally. I mean, in all honesty there is nothing worse than being thrown into hell. If any part of you is doing something that warrants damnation than surely losing a body part is less worse than being thrown into hell. But, is this to be taken as an absolute literal command? I don't know, this is one of those difficult verses.
The part about the eye for an eye is easier to swallow and obviously meant literally. "If someone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you" (Matthew 5:41-42). Give freely of yourself to those who ask. And not just to your friends or brothers. Even the wicked and pagans do that.
Matthew 6
6:1-4 is something that American Christians really need to understand. Don't do your 'righteous acts' in front of people for a reward. Give your gifts in secret, then the Father who sees what you're doing will reward you.
6:5-15 is chalk full of things that are important. Obviously, there is the Lord's prayer. This is well trodden and written about so I'll gloss over it for now. What stands out to me is the words before it.
"And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by men. I tell you the truth, they have received their reward in full. But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you. And when you pray, do not keep on babbling like pagans, for they think they will be heard because of their many words. Do not be like them, for your Father knows what you need before you ask him" (Matthew 6:5-8).
There is a lot here so bear with me. First, let's use the context of contemporary America. Depending upon where you live, you live in a post-religious society or a still relatively religious society. Here in the south I live where Christianity is still the norm and fairly prevalent in even the secular society. So, men praying on the streets might get some praise and they would have their reward in full. But, in other sections of America, when men pray on the streets they are derided as fools, or crazy. So I think taken in context that matches Jesus' day we have to take these verses in relation to the Christian community. At this point, I must admit I could be extremely wrong and ask for forgiveness if I am. I think some of the religious prayers and babbling that Jesus is condemning here shines through in modern, post-denominational churches that I've visited. These are where people get up in frenzy and pray and pray to be admired by their peers rather than raising a prayer to God. Of course, I'm not in a position to judge a man's heart so, I could be totally off base. But, this is how these verses stick to me at the moment.
I think some of the most pressing verses of this chapter to me come from verses 19-21. "Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy, and where thieves break in and steal. But store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where moth and rust do not destroy, and where thieves do not break in and steal. For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also". I struggle with this. I definitely store treasures here on earth and need to refocus my attention to store treasures in heaven. Verse 21 is so on point when it states where your treasure is, so there too is your heart. I need to take 6:33 to heart "But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well".
Matthew 7
What is the meaning of Matthew 7:6?
"Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs. If you do, they may trample them under their feet, and then turn and tear you to pieces".
7:12 sums up the Law and the Prophets - "So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets".
A tree and its fruit is an interesting passage. "A good tree cannot bear bad fruit and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit" (7:18). We are known by our fruit. But, if a good tree cannot bear bad fruit what of when Christians mess up? What about me when I screw up and have a disaster fall on my head? Am I a bad tree?
Matthew 8
- Jesus heals a man with leprosy. But, he tells the healed man not to tell anyone.
The Faith of The Centurion:
"When Jesus heard this, he was astonished and said to those following him, "I tell you the truth, I have not found anyone in Israel with such great faith. I say to you that many will come from the east and the west, and will take their places at the feast with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven. But the subjects of the kingdom will be thrown outside, into the darkness where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth". Matthew 8:10-12.
I always think about this story and the story where Jesus will not, initially help the Samaritan woman. He says its not proper to take food from the children to give to the dogs and yet the woman persists. Jesus was definitely Jewish, but he was expanding what it meant to be a part of the kingdom of Heaven with the Centurion and seemingly restricting it initially with the Samaritan woman. I know I've heard that Jesus was testing the woman's faith, or possibly the faith of his disciples. And if that's the case I guess it's consistent. But, it is sometimes strange to see Jesus' logic.
- Jesus heals Peter's mother-in-law
- Jesus heals many and drove out the demons of the demon-possessed.
- The story of the pigs is also an odd one. Two demon-possessed men come up to Jesus and the demons ask if the Son of Man has come to torture them before the appointed time. Then Jesus gives the demons their wish and sent them into a herd of pigs, who subsequently died by drowning. The townsfolk came out and pleaded for Jesus to leave their region. What does this story mean? Are the townsfolk to blame for valuing their possessions (the pigs) more than their souls?
Matthew 9
- Jesus heals a paralytic and causing a major controversy by forgiving the sins of the paralyzed man.
- Jesus eats with Matthew, sinners and tax collectors
- Jesus raises a girl from the dead and heals a sick woman
- Jesus heals two blind men and tells them not to tell anyone about it (but they do anyway)
"When he saw the crowds, he had compassion on them, because they were harassed and helpless, like sheep without a shepherd" (Matthew 9:36). Jesus has compassion for the helpless.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)