Have you considered your past today? · 6:13am Sep 22nd, 2016
I'm in a weird mood tonight. Heck, it has to be one - I have done three blogs here ever, before, and all of them have been brief blurbs about stories or Bronycon or something. Tonight that ends, in that I am going to wax somewhat philosophical.
This is brought on by two things. First, a blog post in The New York Times : The Cost of Holding On. This is basically pointing out that holding onto old wounds - anger, grudges, pain - serves us not at all. That though we may wish for justice, or closure, sometimes we may not get it; sometimes the only thing we can do is let go, and the only real choice we have is when we choose to do so. It then advocates that we should let go sooner than later, because otherwise we are just investing emotional energy in our own pain, and that investment will only reap more sorrow.
The second : Cynewulf's story Have You Considered My Servant, Twilight? which is a loose interpretation of the Book of Job, with Celestia, Luna, and Twilight playing the paramount roles. In particular, the latest two chapters of such, as well as reader comments on Celestia's state of mind throughout it. I've linked the first of these two chapters, but I heavily advise reading from the beginning - and wholly recommend the story in general.
At any rate, the combined effect is thus: It got me thinking about my own past. I interpret Luna in Cynewulf's story is melancholy, burdened heavily by regrets, by guilt, by many things. She speaks to me in that regard. I've had many, many years within which depression had me deep in its thrall; my happiness was found in entertainment sources, but much of that was in an effort to flee the deeper hurt.
I struggled with thoughts of suicide for years. It wasn't so much a desire to kill myself; I always feared the pain. I also felt guilt; what I wanted was to die in a way I was faultless. To get cancer, or to be caught in the crossfire of a shootout, something in which I could slip out of life without bearing the burden of choosing to do so. Catholic guilt is a powerful thing, even when you have left the Church.
It culminated, eventually, in an evening where I was testing to see if I could cut myself. I still bear the two tiny scars on the underside of my right arm where I nicked myself with scissors. Just shallow cuts, really; certainly nothing truly harmful. But as I stood there in the shower that day and watched the ruby begin to trickle forth, that was my bottom. That was the moment I realized that deep down, I did not want to die.
Once I had finished showering, cleaned up and so forth, I told my mother we needed to take a walk, and confessed my mental state, and asked for help. I still remember my father calling after that and me having to explain to him that no, I was not immediately suicidal and did not need to go to the ER.
But that did get me in line to see the first therapist in my life who was smarter than me where it counted. Previous ones, I was able to outwit without meaning to; I didn't want, on some level, to confront my deeper issues, and so they would accept the smokescreens and never truly push.
She was different. She did push. And over the years that followed, I began to truly improve. Nowadays?
Nowadays, I am better. The depression is not gone. I don't believe it ever will be; it is rather like an old companion that, even though walking together hurts, it is a bittersweet hurt. There is something I somehow find meaningful and beautiful in the melancholy when it wells up, and if I am honest I do not want it to go away forever.
I don't know the best way to describe it. It is like we are at a mutual understanding; there is the melancholy side of me, and she needs to come out walking now and again, but as long as she gets that, most of the time she is content to slumber. Most of the time, I am happy. My life is going well. I look forward to the future and see an ever-brighter tomorrow for myself, and for all of us collectively.
Anyhow, part of this depression was born from wounds growing up - bullying, as is all too common here, but also familial squabbles. One family member in particular stands out; the anger I hold for them I have never been able to fully let go of. As I describe it - I love them. But I do not like them.
But I want to let it go. And so we come to tonight : After finishing the latest chapters of said story, I found myself feeling odd. And so I sat, and reflected. And then I got up away from my desk at work, for I work the graveyard shift, and into our break room. Shut my eyes. Visualized the various old wounds like a ball - a ball of black and red roiling emotions, pulsing with its own heartbeat. One that physically feels like it sits in my chest, constricting me; even now I can feel the tightness there it brings, thinking about it.
Then, with eyes shut, I reached into myself and pulled it out. Had it float in front of me. Breathed in, out, deeply. Felt ...peaceful. Let the mind's eye take it in. It wanted to get back inside - imagine a tendril twisting it from it, letting it reconnect, trying to draw itself back in.
Then I began to pull pieces away; examine individual strands. See what bits festered, and why. And in the end, I walked away recognizing a few things I could do, conversations I can have with people that I hope will let some of that resentment fade away. Even if it doesn't, that mindfulness, the awareness of the roots lessens its hold over me.
I could only keep the ball outside of me for so long before it sank back into place. Most of the time, like the melancholy, it lies dormant. Think about it, and it awakens; and even when not thinking, sometimes it pulses, affects me in ways I wish it would not.
But by pulling it out, by playing with it tonight, it feels a little smaller. I think I will have to bring it forth again, soon, because by doing so I can slowly lesson its hold on me.
There's a story in here, I believe - I have notes I wrote down as well, that perhaps will form something eventually.
But the parting thought for all of you is the title of the post : Have you considered your past today? What is there that you would like to let go?
I'm curious to hear anyone's thoughts, be they on my words, or their own. Please feel free to share, either here or in PMs.
This is quite inspirational. It's always good to see someone tackling emotional baggage. Such things are big projects, and are never easy. But keep moving forward, and someday you'll feel emotionally lighter.
It's also good that you're planning on turning it into writing. I can testify to its effectiveness. I liken it to the draining of an abscess: It's not pleasant, but you're better off afterward.
I second Morning Sun's experience with bullying. I'm fine now, don't worry. I'm in college, and the faces that hurt me in high school and middle school are long gone. My experience culminated five or six years ago with a knife in my room behind a locked door. A new episode of MLP was out, Cutie Mark Chronicles. My intent was to watch the episode, my one true joy in life, and then end it all. Let's just say Fluttershy's backstory hit a little close to home. It probably helped that even before that, I'd seen more of Fluttershy in myself than any other character in the show.
But the reason I'm here typing this response instead of rotting in some casket is because of Rainbow Dash's backstory, and where it intersects with Fluttershy's. I never finished that episode, at least not that day. I knew, even though I didn't know how, that I had a Rainbow Dash out there somewhere. Maybe I couldn't see him/her, but the hope I grasped hold of was powerful enough to drive me to unlock the door and return the clean knife to the kitchen.
Fast forward to last year. I found out that a girl who I'd grown up with practically my whole life, who was in the same tiny Christian school and who graduated with me, was attending my college. We met up and started doing lunch each Monday. As my closest friend, I confided in her my love of the show, which she took remarkably well and even admitted to being a fan herself. It came to light through other conversations that she was defending me behind my back all along. She was my Rainbow Dash.
I've been influenced by the show more than even I can understand. I've taken on Kindness as the Element I choose to portray, again, because I'm a Fluttershy type of person. I know I should forgive them, and that it's what God would want me to do as a Christian, but sometimes I wish it were easier. Especially when I consider that one of the ones who did the most damage on social media was the quietest one in class. She just sat there, giving off the impression that she was perfect and innocent, all the while saying unspeakable things about me to my other "friends!"
I can sort of bring myself to forgive the others because several of them apologized to me in person once they saw how much damage they'd done to me, but even then, I struggle. My mind, my emotions, my psyche are scarred and damaged now. I have intermittent depression. I have social anxiety. I turtled inward for years, building a shell behind which I could hide, to the point that they didn't even know how bad their words hurt. Behind that game face I had to put on day in and day out, I was just a shell, hollow, empty, and hurting inside. And I wouldn't have any of these problems if it weren't for them! How much better could I be if I were unbroken? If I were normal?!
*deep breath* Sorry. I just needed to get that out. It's important to remember where we've come from.
I know that about half of them asked me to forgive them after I finally broke down completely and just sat there crying on a park bench at the camp we attended as part of senior trip. (Pretty much, I was Pinkie from Party of One for a day. I knew they were talking, and whenever I got close, they'd stop or lower their tone. I knew my way around the camp better than they did, so I decided to intercept them. I heard them talking, then they rounded a corner and saw me, and... well... let's just say it took a super awkward turn. Saying much more will bring up emotions I don't want to remember.) That makes it easier to forgive some of them. One of the girls I acually talk to on occasion, another I don't, though in her case, it's more because we have so little in common than anything else. I've distanced myself from the others, but one of the guys is here at my university this year, and he's even in my dorm. He was never the Diamond Tiara; he was more like the Silver Spoon, kinda just along for the ride. I just have to trust he's changed.
Bringing this full circle, I know a lot of you know about the scandal that happened with YouTuber ILoveKimPossibleAlot. Well, I've been spamming links to "My Past is Not Today" on her channel's discussion page. I really want to believe that the message of the song is true, but it's still not easy to overcome the hurt. It's so easy to preach redemption and forgiveness or "love your enemies" until you have to apply it to yourself. As a Christian and a brony, I am doubly told to not believe that anyone is beyond redemption. (Except Sombra. Screw him. But seriously...) Nevertheless, I've come a long way. Now, departed from those people and events by a couple of years, I can finally think of those names and faces without visibly becoming angry. It's a small step, but a step in the right direction.
My past does not define me
'Cuz my past is not today!
4222138
Planning, but no guarantees. I've at least got ideas jotted down from it that hopefully a Writeoff can shake loose!
4222340
This I can relate to. For me it was Age 10 when everything changed. It was like, when I came back after Summer Vacation, a ton of people had become different inexplicably. That was when the cattiness started - and I was the oldest child in my family, and sheltered, so all the...street smarts, I guess, I lacked. And for years I retreated inward into my books and video games and so on because the world in my head was richer than the world outside - and because I had been bruised enough I wanted nothing to do with the rest of the world. I had my misanthropic phase, I had my 'better than everyone else' phase, and so on. All defense mechanisms. It sucked. It still hurts to this day - but...well. We can slowly move past the hurt, given time.
Damn. That's some rough history, Morning Sun. I've never struggled with life to the point of suicide (I consider myself unbelievably fortunate in that regard), but I have close friends who have and do. Just last week I answered a call from a best friend and the first thing they said was "I'm staring at the suicide prevention website's open chat box". It wasn't the first time, not by a long shot. So I'm elated to hear you're not where you used to be.
Forgiveness isn't easy, but it's so so inportant. Unfortunately, people rarely tell you that it's for you, not for the person you're forgiving. It frees you. I can't say I'm super great at it, but I try. And lord, that's with an easy emotional life growing up.
Yes, it is. And not just with Catholics, sadly, though they're probably among the worst.
I'm curious, if you don't mind: what are your beliefs now? I'm always interested in people who grew up in a church and have since left.
4222952
I consider myself something of a deistic agnostic. I have faith there is something benevolent out there that set the wheels in motion but has been hooves off since then; but, that perhaps after the final sleep, we will be reunited with whatever identity one may wish to give to her or it or him.
The biggest thing is that the entity in question I don't feel gives a damn about worship. The purpose of creation is for us to grow, to become something more, to - change and evolution and constant harmonic chaos. To spend all eternity giving thanks, or burning in hell, or one of the other popular views - well, it's so static and unchanging.
4225813
Sorry for the long delay Morning Sun! D:
You mean our perception of the deity/creator will be subjective, right?
Man, I know exactly how you feel. If I had to spend eternity the way many Christian worship services are held, I think I would shoot myself. I remember being little and imagining heaven as just standing around singing forever, and I thought that was so...boring.
As I got older, I began to see that everyone worships something, and that I even asked it of others too. Because I mean, what is it really? It's giving respect to something, devoting time and energy and care. It's talking about your favorite band and hanging up posters, or writing fanfiction. It's asking your boyfriend not to look at the waitress, or feeling he spends more time on his video games than he does you. It's writing love poems to the girl or guy you love. We all ask for attention and devotion from our friends and loved ones--when they don't give it, we think they don't love or care about us, right? And that hurts. When I really think about it, Jesus doesn't actually ask for anything different than what I ask for from others on a daily basis. And he walks away when I say no.
It's just, you know, all these religious services that have twisted worship into something it really isnt, which is lifeless and hollow because they have no real love in all these practices and traditions, just religious obligation.
So girl I don't blame you one bit.
4231173
Well, I would love if the creator-entity is something akin to Pratchett's Death, or rather Afterlife, wherein our own views have power, but I more meant that I have no idea if said entity takes on any sort of gendered identity; like, the Christian God is usually described as male, but when you think about it, where does that make sense? Gender is a construct primarily for reproduction and am omnipotent creator would presumably be sexless if anything, unless omnipotent creators reproduce - or came from more humble beginnings.
On worship - I think we all have things we devote our cares too, certainly. But worship? I don't know. Perhaps it's just you and I have different interpretations of the word? I understand the relationship aspect with the divine; I understand there would be asymmetry there, but - yea. It's something I'm not particularly good at verbalizing; just that so much of it is sterile, and I suppose a proper relationship is a reciprocal one which much of Judeo-Christian religious doctrine fails to do a good job of painting particularly in the afterlife sense.
4231439
It's funny, because God does identify as male (and Jesus was a guy), but so often he behaves very female. Personally I would have expected the opposite.
Hmm, maybe. It's tricky. You can't just look at how religious christians worship God, or think "worship" is something that only occurs in religion. After all, how is it worship when I write a song about God, but suddenly something different when I write a song about a girl I love? Aren't I doing the same thing in both cases?
It is tough to verbalize. D: Don't ask how long I've spent writing this! And you're right, doctrine fails in many ways, because it's man-made. After all it was the Pharisees, the experts of religious law and doctrine, who hated Jesus the most, not the unreligious. And Jesus told them "you don't know the scriptures (funny thing to say to guys who probably had them all memorized) and you don't know god."
Jesus never said, here accept this list of thirty doctrines. He said follow me. Come to me. Trust in me. Very person-centric things. He also said "and this is eternal life: to KNOW you, Father, the one true God, and the one you sent, Jesus."
Funny, isn't it, that he pins eternal life not on having the correct mental information or doctrine, but on a relationship with someone, like you might have with Bob or cousin Joe, or your family.
I think what God wants is far, far closer to what Celestia wants with Twilight, or Luna, or what Twilight wants with both of them, or what is between Cadance and Shining, than we think. That desire to be close and to share yourself. To love and be loved.
But, you know, I don't know everything, or anything, really. :p So keep that in mind.
4233243
See, that's Christian theology I can empathize much more with, in the end. Still, I doubt I will ever have faith in that regard; not that I do not want it, but - well, it is like there's simply something not there. Not sure how best to articulate it, and definitely still groggy / half-asleep at the moment.
And, I guess, on the other bit - I feel like worship and devotion are two separate things; the girlfriend case is one I'd feel is more...devoted to, rather than worshipping? That's why I was saying it may be a definitional gap; that, or perhaps we simply see things through different shades of passion.
4234880
I don't blame you, Morning Sun. I mean that. I haven't lived your life. I don't know what you've been through. I mean, I remember back in highschool one morning talking to a friend in the library, who said very seriously and very honestly, "If God is real then why did he let my mom die when I was eleven?"
Hm. I guess I haven't asked you: what do you consider real worship then? I say real, because God does mention the fake stuff: "These people say they are mine. They honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me. And their worship of me is nothing but man-made rules learned by rote." (Isaiah)
And I think I was confusing, too: I didn't mean to elevate devotion to the level of worship, but rather lower worship to the level of devotion. In other words, that God is very human in his desires. What we want, he wants.
4237849
It's not really a trauma thing, though - more a feeling of 'Every time I focus on it, what I feel of the divine doesn't fit Christian doctrine at all', I suppose. Gonna answer part 2 first afore coming back to this.
To me, Worship, Devotion, Love, and Affection are all related, but still separate.
Worship can come in several definitions; one is the extreme of blind zealotry which I do consider dangerous. Another is a little more nuanced; something akin to ritualized devotion, I suppose, a subsuming oneself and one's own identity before the desires of someone else; then the third is the pageantry we often associate with church services, as well as all the rule following associated with it. While I'm well aware that the the more you dig into Christrian doctrine, the less likely #3 is, most often when you talk to people it's one of the 3 that they interpret worship as being, and different sects will likely pick one over the other.
Like, I would argue Jehovah's witnesses fall close to the zealotry camp; Catholicism is a combination of #3 and #2, Fundamentalist Christianity has a healthy dose of #3 with bits of #2, and so on and so on - many of the Protestant denoms are going to only be shades of #2 for example.
Devotion, then, would be a deep commitment and valuation of something. The Jesuits tend to be good examples to me of ones who I think exhibit devotion; it can go hand in hand with worship, but I would say devotion is about a deep, personal commitment to a set of principles. The difference, I suppose, is that devotion is a source of strength from within. Devotion is not necessarily a good thing; I would argue, for example, that though she was devoted to her principles, if you dig into it much of Mother Teresa's efforts towards healthcare ended up creating unnecessary suffering, to put it gently.
Love is - well, love is something we could spend forever trying to define. Love, after all, can vary in strength, can vary in intensity, can vary in meaning. I think, at its core, its about caring so deeply for someone that you gladly sacrifice for them, that you value their needs to the degree of oft gladly putting them first. It's what keeps you up at 3 AM caring for a sick child and knowing how much it will hurt at work the next day and still gladly paying the price. It - one can go on and on.
And affection is, in some ways, a lesser shade of love; it's caring for someone, wanting them to be happy, but, well - it's a difference of degree; there's a bit more selfishness in affection, at least in some shades of it.
Anyhow, to me? What I sense out there? I feel it as closest to a maternal love; I like to think of her as female, but not due to any evidence, only because on some level it feels more comforting, so I'm going to use feminine pronouns for the rest of this. To me, she's the parent letting the children play in the garden; there, distant, watching from a second floor window, but not interfering even when we stumble and fall. And while she desires the children to love her back, ultimately it is not about that; it is about allowing them to grow and become the individuals they are meant to be. In the end, they will likely be more fulfilled if they can achieve a good relationship with her, but failure to do so won't cause them to be locked in a closet in the basement.
And I know for some shades of Christianity, that is what they consider worship; not subsuming oneself before God, but rather simply achieving a deep relationship with one another; it isn't about worship in the sense of #1, 2, or 3 above; rather, it is simply about giving and reciprocating that love, and drawing strength from it, and really everything the same as if we did it with another human, but perhaps on a somewhat deeper level.
And that God, if that is the one out there? That God to me doesn't care one whit about the doctrine and pageantry we've formed up against it; I doubt that God even really sees 'sin' in the same light we do, because our collective obsession with morality and divine enforcement thereof blinds us to the truth. The purpose of being good to one another isn't about crime and punishment, it's about the fact that when we hurt others, we also cleave out a part of ourselves. We become less for our actions - and said God wants us to be as whole as possible.
That God? I cannot believe for a moment that God would ever damn anyone to hell. I cannot believe such a God could ever view any mortal crime as meriting an immortal punishment. A need for reflection, for growth, to learn from mistakes and become better for it? Certainly.
But never any lake of fire, or endless frozen blackness, or oblivion. To do such would be in the end as cruel and heartless as the parent locking their children in a dark room for years and only ever tossing in the barest scraps of food they need to live.
4238489
Ack, sorry for the delay again!
I'm glad we're talking about this, because you're right, this is how people the world over worship in their religions. And that's important. But I guess what I'm after is what God actually yearns for--and for me the question is: are the things humans tend to consider worship actually the kind of worship God seeks?
But you're absolutely right in how people approach it religiously.
In fact, am I correct in saying you confine worship to religion? It seems so, but I could easily be misunderstanding you.
Would you say this includes devotion to a spouse, or friend--i.e. persons?
Yeah, love really can be hard to define. As powerful and, really, simple as it is, it encompasses so much. I would argue all of morality comes from it. It's somehow simple and profound at the same time.
I guess if I had to try to sum it up myself, I would say...to love is to give yourself. A little vague, I guess. There's a surrendering, a submission.
I really like what you say about sacrifice and putting others first, because it's true. I mean, that's basically Jesus right there.
I know I've been saying this a lot, but I don't blame you, I know exactly how you feel. Like, really. Hell is extreme. It's really the worst thing you could ever imagine (that's basically the definition). It's as extreme as the idea of paradise, only in the opposite direction. Even before I was old enough to think on my own I never liked the idea. I don't think there's a single person, religious, agnostic or atheist, who doesn't struggle with it at some point.
There's a lot to say here, but I want to ask: if God were to seek intimacy, should he honor consent or trample it? -and- If I tell God to leave my universe, what then should that universe look like?
4242275
Well, one could argue there's forms of worship in one of the definitions I gave that aren't religious - certainly perhaps some forms of totalitarianism (See like the cult of personality around Mao, for example), but it's largely a religious thing at its core.
Re: Devotion - Potentially, yes? Depending upon the nature of one's attachments, I suppose.
As for the final question : I liken it to Parent & Child. You try to help your children learn and grow, but sometimes they stumble and fall, even run away. But a good parent never truly says 'That's it, you are gone forever'; there's always, always the possibility of rekindling things.
It's why I totally find purgatory a way more legit concept than hell. I firmly believe that there is no possible mortal crime that merits an immortal punishment.
4242386
True...until you or the child dies. We understand that to be a barrier we cannot bridge. How do we know it is not the same also, or very similar, for God? Even so, reconciliation here on earth depends just as much on the child as the parent, doesn't it--what if the child persists in saying no?
I feel the same way, but what if our crimes are immortal?
But if punishing people was really what God was interested in, why would he send Jesus to take our place?
4242963 If mortality is all there is, then God is not omnipotent. If God is omnipotent, God makes the rules on what there is. Given Christian doctrine is pretty heavy on the omnipotence angle, I'm going with 'The deity has the power to change the ruleset and chooses what it is' under that setup
4243433
You bring up a really interesting point, because what is omnipotence exactly? This sounds like a silly and useless question, but it's important I think.
Does it mean the freedom to do anything without consequences--God can violate you without violating love, or commit evil and still be good? Or does it mean he can make himself not God, or make a round peg fit into a square hole? Maybe.
Or perhaps God's omnipotence exists within a context, like love. That is, he is bound by love. Though whether by nature or choice I do not know.
4244152 In the definition I am using it I mean 'literally all powerful; limitless'; the only time you run into problems is the 'Can God make a rock so heavy even they can't lift it?' (And the answer to that is : Thanos can. He can also lift the rock anyways).
In that sense it'd be the freedom to completely write the rules of reality however you wish to script it - including, arguably, defining morality itself.
4244162
Well, we have to make sure we are talking about the God of the bible and how he defines himself, right? Otherwise, we may end up talking about another God entirely. We may expect the fish to climb the tree, when the fish clearly tells us, "I cannot climb the tree," or "If I did, I would no longer be the same fish."
...teensy detour: I just found out about the season 7 confirmation (
). When we chatted at bronycon, didn't you say you thought s7 would be the last?
4244745
Well, I'd argue the God of the bible isn't always a consistent individual either - I mean, new & old testament could be argued as different deities even.
And nah, I definitely didn't say that. S7 is the last one I am 100% certain was happening; I'd love S8 and beyond (I still need my Tia episode damnit! She really deserves two now for how often the show just shoots her)
4244794
Another good point! That's a classically uber-tough topic, and there's a lot to be said. Here's a short video that does a better job than I would at being concise, but I will say this-- i think Jesus is the sticking point, who both affirmed the authority of the old testament, and yet said "if you've seen me you've seen the father".
Only two celestia episodes? How about FIVE, plus another two from interest rates! I mean jeez! But you know what I bet they'll never even do one
I really want more pony seasons too...but, like, I also feel the show decaying ever more from the elements that made me love it, and man I hate slow deaths. I hate fast ones too! Just death in general really. So shoot me if I know what to do. :p
4245847
That video is good for those who have the Covenant, yes - but this is the same God who, well :
I mean, that's ordering genocide there. Being tough on your followers? Sure. But Old Testament God is also ordering death and destruction upon other peoples who dare attack his chosen ones.
And, well, it's a huge, big world. And God is omnipotent. Why not, you know, reveal oneself to everyone? It just - well, to me, it's a child burning ants. It's fun for the child. But the ants don't understand. How could they? They're ants, and all they know is the magnified sun burns.
4245890
I know, it really does appear that way. I don't blame you. I've felt that way myself. I still come across things where I'm like "...What." It can get very, ah, uncomfortable.
But I wonder...do you believe God didn't try to prevent those people from having to die--that he never tried to warn them, to send them angels and visions and dreams, for years and years and years? Why do we assume he wanted their death, instead wanting the opposite? God himself asked the Israelites, "Do you think that I like to see the wicked people die? Of course not! I want them to turn from their wicked ways and live." (Ezekiel 18:23).
What of the story of Jonah--do you know why he ran away from God after he was told to go preach to the people of Nineveh? After God decides to save the city, here is how Jonah reacts. This is the final chapter of the book:
Can we say God didn't do likewise for every individual and tribe and city that was destroyed in the Old Testament? Do we know? Earlier in the book of Jonah it says, "Those who worship false gods turn their backs on all God's mercies."
The problem can seem to be with God...but is it really? I dunno.
But he has. Early in Genesis people still spoke directly to God--sadly that didn't stop Cain from killing his brother. God would have gladly stopped the visibly miraculous plagues on Egypt after one, but they pushed him all the way to ten. God literally came down onto Mt. Sinai in a huge cloud of fire and smoke, lightning and thunder, and spoke personally to all the Israelites--and they told him to stop, because they couldn't bear it. (Exodus 20) Many of them even saw him--literally saw him. Aaaaand then they immediately went and made a golden calf and sacrificed to it. :P
Jesus came, and look at everything he did. He healed everyone and raised people from the dead, and loved everyone. And they killed him for it.
4249236
I think, in some ways, we are nearing an impasse on where we might well have a rift we can't quite bridge, which is okay. To me - ultimately - the difference in that case is that plants do not think, nor feel, nor suffer pain as we consider it. People do. And ultimately, the omnibenevolence that is ascribed does not follow from the actions then committed, at least not in my eyes; perhaps someday I shall come around, but - at this time - I think it not likely. More likely I shall continue to evolve in mine own way and continue to touch the spiritual in what small way I do. I don't know, however.
And, in the end, I suppose I worry little; there are many, many religions that invoke a hell or hell-like state for failure to follow them. Barring Sir Terry being correct, or some similarly weird universe, we can presume they are not all correct. I think, in many ways, the presence of divine punishment is more a desire from humans rather than any form of need by the divine.
4249639
Aww no worries Morning Sun! I've had a lot of fun sharing ideas with you here. You're a lot of fun to talk to. I know what you mean by "touching the spiritual"; honestly, it is what I have always had even while specific beliefs rose and cleaved asunder. If ever you get comfortable with the idea, I hope you might someday ask Jesus to really reveal himself to you as a living person, and I think you may find him more than able to fulfill that need for spiritual contact. :)
Also, am I the only one who whenever I see the word "impasse" I think of this?
)
t.qkme.me/3qyx0g.jpg
(spongebob why did you have to become so baaaad
4242275 I think if I told God to leave my universe, it'd look pretty damn similar to the one I live in now but probably less confusing. Because I never told God to leave. And no, I didn't ask him to leave. I prayed and fasted and God in their infinite mercy - if we assume preordination - laid me on a path that led to me walking away from the church. I've never walked back.
I've been where you are. I have said what you are saying. I felt what you feel. And that's why, as an older sister of sorts, I want to please caution you.
Do not be tempted by the doctrine of hell.
If we embrace hell, we must embrace God as a being who is unworthy of worship. If God's presence sustains the quality of life and is the sole factor separating eternal torment from eternal bliss, if God is omnipotent and thus capable of providing all things with no personal cost or effort, if God is omnipresent (presumably everywhere except the hell dimension), then if God condemned even one person to suffering or annihilation then God ceded any sort of moral authority long ago and heaven is just where the people who are afraid to stand up to the cosmic bully live.
i spent nineteen years naively accepting hell. They made me a worse person to my friends. To my neighbors. Ultimately, to myself.
I want those nineteen years back.
4233243
Well of course the pharisees hated him.
If Bill Gates claimed to be the messiah, you'd probably have an opinion about him too. Didn't help that Jesus literally insulted them in public.
Throwing Shade circa 1 CE: Jesus v. pharisees. You unwashed tombs, etc. etc.
4249639
Been there too. ^^
You and I seem to have a lot in common actually, albeit I'm a lapsed Presbyterian.
Actually wait I can share this here, you two might appreciate it!
So the Baptists, the Pentecostals, and the Presbyterians are having a joint revival meeting. The Presbyterian delegation has taken the pulpit and their leader is about to speak when, suddenly, a fire breaks out among the pews.
The Pentecostals leap up and shout "Fire, fire!"
The Baptists leap up and shout "Water, water!"
And from the pulpit the Presbyterian denomination look out and shout in a booming voice, "Order, Order!"
[/my pastor told me that one]
As a larger point to the discussion I think just never came up, it's worth noting that we have no way of knowing what God has ever said about himself, or herself, or themselves. Yes we can date the gospels and yes there is some evidence indicating that Mark, at least, was written within maybe three to six decades of Christ's death with earlier versions possibly existing, and Luke's more scholarly and historical account emerging later and using Mark as a basis (Matthew and John almost certainly did the same thing, particularly John since it's a gnostic gospel rather than a historical account and more a retelling-with-emphasis-on-divinity-and-spirituality than an attempt at straight historical recounting). But the thing is, the gospels are about all we can date as being perfectly close to the events. While church tradition holds that the Pentateuch was produced earlier, scholars tend to agree that the creation account and Exodus story were written during the era of the two kingdoms of Israel. There's a lot of interesting meat to be found here, particularly when you realize that Judges and Kings are both retellings of cyclical rises and falls.
(also worth noting here is that the Bible is, functionally, not even a book. It's an anthology containing multiple authors, viewpoints, etc. After nineteen years spent trying to reconcile it as "oh, but there are no discrepancies" I've come to realize it's actually a far more interesting document when you realize humans have compiled, written, and curated it.)
The larger point here though is regardless of when any of these accounts were written, none are firsthand accounts literally written by god. Divine Inspiration is church teaching, but that's based largely on an interpretation of several verses which kind of have nothing to do with the Bible itself. "All scripture is god-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting, and training in the paths of righteousness?" Kay there, author of Second Timothy, but you know, you're the one saying that. Nothing about the scriptures has ever suggested that they're in any way privileged information.
I know this is sort of a contentious thing to propose, but I'd argue the Bible is far richer when you accept it as something humans made than something God on high decreed. For one thing, God no longer has to account for why they'd ever lie to me about various things.
I've been shouting at God for years and I've never had an answer yet that wasn't filtered through my own perception. Seems to me that the world, as a whole, works that way.
And hey, Morning, thank you for this post.
It's good to know I'm not the only one with regrets and pains.
EDIT: To my eternal shame as an AWANA kid I mis-cited which Timothy the lines I originally referenced were from. The full verse is, of course, 2 Timothy 3:16, the second most famous 3:16 in all of evangelical-dom. I am deeply humbled and apologize to every single Sunday School teacher I've ever had.
4251011 I have, but it hasn't led to any revelation as of yet!
4251183
Lots in common, yep, yep. Life is strange and funny that way. And lots of interesting thoughts laid out although I think Axis will have much more to say on the subject than I shall!
Regret sucks but hey, I figure I have good odds of sticking it out to the end of death itself and darn if I don't want to be there for that!
4251452
Hm, well I will stand with you then, Morning, in asking. :) I will be praying. Let us see if two may stir the Almighty.
You know me so well already
4251183
Thanks for joining in Scarlet!!
I really appreciate your comments.
Before I respond to anything, I would like to clarify something to both of you about what I've said, and whatever I'm going to say: I am not defending the church. You'd have a hard time dragging me into a lot of churches in America. I am not defending myself either. Don't think I am a good Christian! Don't think I attend church every Sunday or read my bible every morning. I wish I did. And don't think I am a good person, either. I learned years ago there is no goodness in Axis of Rotation. If you want to speak to someone who hasn't failed to lead a Christian walk, you'll have to find someone else. I am not a good friend to Christ...but he is a good friend to me.
And PLEASE do not think that I am advocating religion. I do not like religion. I know that doesn't make sense, but it's true. I am not saying that as a rhetoric tool.
So...leaving the church? Praying to God and hearing nothing, getting angry at God, feeling there is no God or can be no God? I don't blame you! Please believe that.
Oki, now how to respond to your thoughtful comments? Hrm. First, I'd like to ask: do you still believe in God? At first I thought no, but then as I read closer, it wasn't as clear to me. Perhaps you maintain more of an agnostic position, like Morning Sun?
I've been there Scarlet. I've been there.
Though I suppose for me, hell had very little to do with it. In my case, I was self-righteous (I still fight against that), reliant on my own goodness (I still fight that, too), did not understand how to really love people, and was, in a way, trying to earn my way to heaven in a legalistic framework. I cared so much about doing the right thing for my own sake that I have done or failed to do things to friends and family alike (even my little brother!) that were not moral like I thought, but utterly stupid and hurtful.
Hell is a very very difficult, ugly topic. Some people almost seem to like it, I know, but I do not. It has not gone untested with me. I maintain its validity for a number of reasons. First, scriptural, and then (I understand this will be hard to believe) philosophically and morally, particularly in accordance with love (when combined with the nature of God). There's a lot to be said here.
If you and I as honest skeptics can establish a clear and systemic inconsistency between hell (as we ought to first agree on a definition) and a loving, omnipotent God as defined by scripture (as scripture claims to accurately depict him), then believe you me, I will gladly admit we have a severe issue, and that something must go.
Since you have (very fairly) called into question the authority of scripture, do you want to first see if between ourselves we can establish a case for that authority, or take it for granted in order to discuss the God of the Bible and the idea of hell? You brought up a lot of fascinating thoughts concerning both topics. I don't want to dive into hell (heh!) if your concerns about scriptural authority and accuracy make the whole thing a mute point anyway. But we can, for a time, take them as true in order to have a discussion within that bubble.
Which do you prefer? :)
4252514 If it's all the same to you, I don't want to take the authority of scripture for granted. Albeit ,that depends very much on what you mean by the authority of scripture. Do you mean by that the position of most mainline evangelical groups that the Bible was written via Divine Inspiration and thus while having human authors can be considered to directly reflect divine will and opinion and is literally true in all aspects? Or do you mean the milennia of church teachings focused on the texts both before and after their compilation into a single anthology, and how they've formed a series of guiding principles for believers for - as historians put it - "a long-ass time"?
Because Scriptural authority in terms of "scripture is the unfiltered word of God" is unbelievably hard to establish or defend. You would have to basically convince me that there is good reason to believe that God is not only one hundred percent truthful and not pulling some sort of divine prank (which is possible but not necessarily provable and requires making assumptions) but also that he directly appointed many specific men (and women) as mouthpieces who, unfettered by their own humanity, wrote words about God that result in a clear and specific meaning despite all evidence of history fighting against that last bit. I'm not sure if there's even an argument to be had there, unless it's arguing that the Bible presents a harmonious picture of God regardless of divine origin (which is also possible and requires a lot fewer leaps to discuss).
As for taking the authority of scripture for granted, well, no. That's never something I feel can be taken for granted. Otherwise I must now explain that one time that God accepted a human sacrifice and that one time God turned down a confrontation because the enemy had chariots of iron or even that one time God struck people dead because they lied about how much they tithed. The last one being in the New Testament, actually. Yes they were jerks but let's be real here: If God struck us down for being jerks the human race wouldn't have made it half a century.
Oh, I should probably mention - I describe myself as a lapsed Presbyterian for good reason. It's far easier for me to talk about my experiences from that level than from the label "agnostic" because religious folk, particularly evangelicals, tend to associate agnosticism with a level of spiritual apathy or disinterest or non-exclusivity. I confess to a bit of the last - I'm not, strictly speaking, monotheist by default - but I'm certainly not disinterested. God knows where I live. And I still report having religious experiences. They're just usually more in the vein of sitting alone in a room and asking God things and wondering if the answers I get back came from me or somewhere else.
4252708
Well, this turned into a lot but I haven't said much yet.
In all of this my goal is to be an honest skeptic, and I hope if you think I'm erring in this you point it out, and we can discuss it and get at the truth of things. :)
Oh, by that all I meant was "let's temporarily assume for the sake of argument scripture is trustworthy so we can talk about God and hell, a discussion which will rely on scripture". I didn't mean we should always just assume it. ^.^
Closer to this. I suppose a good adjective is "accurate" or "trustworthy". There's historical accuracy, under which--besides the obvious--I think falls what God or Jesus has spoken to the author or those the author is writing about ("Thus says the Lord" or "Jesus turned and said," and whatnot). So everything that pertains to real events, physical and spiritual (angels did that, demons did this, Bob had a vision). This to me does not require inspiration by the Spirit (unless it's to invoke remembrance) so much as accurate recording skills.
Then there's those passages and books of commentary or poetry or song, like the Psalms or epistles. The idea of authority or accuracy here being that when David calls God his strong tower, though God is not quoted as saying this, we would count it as an accurate descriptor. And, I think, this does require inspiration by the Spirit, or close enough personal knowledge of God or Jesus, the same way I would trust a wife to more accurately describe her husband than his friend of two years.
And of course, all the prophecies had to be inspired. Accuracy here obviously means they came to pass or will come to pass.
Besides all of this, consistency is required. This one is a bit trickier, because as an anthology, the bible presents itself as a "revelation in many parts" of God--or Jesus, if you want to get specific--meaning confusion or lack of detail in one place may be satisfied in another. This seems unique to me, until I go read a textbook on physics (or any field of study), which necessarily breaks its topic into many individual, consumable pieces. I may study Mechanics or Electromagnetism separately and solve homework problems which involves one or the other, but the truth of reality is that all these parts are connected into a single whole affecting one another every second (hence the physicist's love for reducing things to spheres and ignoring friction and other complicating forces
).
I may not like that this is the way Jesus is revealed in scripture, but I can't establish it as grounds for dismissal, unless I want to dismiss my textbooks too. The possible reasons justifying the anthology style of scripture might range from "God had no choice" to "God had very good reasons I just don't have access to" to "it reflects God's personality or some aspect of him", or more besides. I don't currently have any information to lead me to any one reason over the other, and I can imagine ways in which they are all justified, or none are, and so on this point I think I am forced to remain neutral.
There is also the matter of the spiritual power of scripture: items like Jesus saying "my very words are life and spirit", or where it states "the sword of the spirit, which is the word of God", or the asserted literal power of the spoken name of Jesus to cast out demons and chase away the devil. This strikes me as something we can test via direct application.
That's a (weak) summation of "authority" or "accuracy/trustworthiness", which as you would have already realized, doesn't yet touch on how to establish it, though I think it gives plenty of hints.
Do you find it acceptable, or have anything to add?
Reading your comments, it seems you take particular issue with these:
-God's character (as presented in various places in scripture)
-The very idea of inspiration, the issues here being:
--WHY would God do it this way--it seems stupid and, let's be honest, inefficient.
--the fallibility of human kind, i.e. even a crystal clear day will be distorted by a bad lens in a camera. How can we know these authors accurately recorded events or listened to God? Especially given personal experience.
Would you say this is accurate?
I know how you feel. I don't really like to use the label "Christian", because it can mean so many things, and there's no way to tell what ideas that word engenders in the minds of those who hear it. And I hardly listen when people use the label themselves. Much better to ask specific questions ^.^
Wow. This has been my experience literally most of my life. Or private life, I should say, when trying to listen to God. Very difficult to directly discern words or thoughts as coming from him. Now as regards only myself here, I own the blame for this. My reasons are many, and since we are being open and honest with each other Scarlet I will go into them with you, if you're curious.